In discussions this weekend, Lyndon LaRouche emphasized that the current threat of thermonuclear war must be located in the long wave of history. The developments reported below, for example, of how NATO gave Turkey control of the Benghazi airport, the no-fly zone in Eastern Libya, and the sea lanes from Benghazi to Crete in March 2011, must be located in the context of the “Storm Over Asia” policy, which LaRouche exposed back in 1999. This policy was carried out by Bush Jr. after Bill Clinton had completed his second term in office. When the Russians approved the UN resolution in respect to Libya they were outflanked by their failure to realize that what was about to occur in Libya, which was reflected in the Turkish-Benghazi developments reported below, was actually part of the larger global policy of the British Empire targeting them. Fortunately, the Russians learned their lesson and along with the Chinese have not made the same mistake in respect to Syria which was and is a part of the same Storm Over Asia policy of the British Empire.
As LaRouche has repeatedly emphasized, the removal of Bismarck in 1890 is key to understanding the last more than hundred years of war. Bismarck’s policy was influenced by Lincoln’s defeat of the British Empire in the U.S. Civil War. Bismarck who became Minister President of Prussia in 1862, consolidated his role in opposition to the British imperial policy after Lincoln’s assassination. What he created was a bloc in Europe including Germany and Russia which resisted the British divide-and-conquer schemes and was oriented towards the American System policies of Lincoln in opposition to the British System policies. Precisely because the British saw Bismarck’s policy in these terms, they determined to oust him. His ouster unleashed not just World War I, but a world war which has continued over nearly a hundred years. Thus, Bismarck’s ouster was the beginning of a new Hundred Years War, which we have yet to exit.
See LaRouchePAC’s feature film, 1932.
Today, the conflict between the Trans-Atlantic world, which under the British Empire yoke is committed to Zeusian Green policies of genocide and the Trans-Pacific world, which is striving for Promethean American System policies of economic growth, is the fundamental divide in the world. The British are acting today like the Roman Empire before it and the Venetian Empire, which created the Dark Ages and the Hundred Years War of the 14th and 15th Century, before humanity was rescued by the Renaissance created by the likes of Nicolaus of Cusa. During those one hundred years, more than half of the population of Europe was eliminated.
Since Lincoln’s assassination and Bismarck’s ouster we have been involved in a process of war punctuated only by short breaks, which merely prepared the way for the next wave of even greater war. For instance, after Bismarck’s ouster from office in 1890, we experienced major wars within the context of the British Empire’s preparation for the actual outbreak of World War I. This was followed by more wars culminating in World War II. Since then we have been subjected to perpetual warfare in preparation of thermonuclear World War III. The only escape from this logic is the defeat of the British Empire and the liberation of the United States from its death grip.
How do you understand the refusal of Speaker Boehner and former FBI agent Mike Rogers to convene a Select Committee to investigate Benghazi? You have to look at the role of the British Empire. It was the British Empire along with its lackey Prescott Bush who bailed out Hitler and made the Nazi coup possible. The British backed Hitler, until Churchill decided that Hitler was a threat to the British Empire and reversed the British policy, only to carry out the same fascist policies of the British Empire after Hitler was defeated and Roosevelt had died.
Look at Cardinal Cushing’s reflections on John F. Kennedy and Pope John XXIII. Their mission was the creation of world peace in a time in which the greatest danger was that of thermonuclear war. That danger is even greater today with the assassination of John F. Kennedy, as LaRouche has stressed.
JFK Had a Constant Interest in the Higher Things of Life
On the eve of a memorial concert for John F. Kennedy in Boston on Jan. 19 sponsored by the Schiller Institute, we publish the following selections from an oral history on John F. Kennedy and Pope John XXIII that Richard Cardinal Cushing gave to Edward M. Kennedy in 1966.
RICHARD CARDINAL CUSHING:
…The first impression the future President made on me was his conviction that one’s education was never finished. That accounts for his constant interest in the higher things of life. …. [F]rom his deep familiarity with history, John Kennedy knew his country and its past better than most presidents. From his own experience in war, he knew the meaning of the phrase, “live for country.” From his own life in this century, he knew the nature of the dangers that faced his country. He deftly blended these areas of knowledge together to forge a guide for his actions. He loved America and its people. Seeing it as he did in the prime of its prosperity and power, he determined that he must do all that he could to preserve this image for its children and his. He had to reduce the threat of nuclear holocaust without resort to all-out war. This was his crisis as the first government under the Constitution had been Washington’s [George Washington]; the Civil War, Lincoln’s [Abraham Lincoln]; depression, Roosevelt’s [Franklin D. Roosevelt]. He knew from history that these men had met their problems with new ideas that drew criticism from friend and foe alike. He knew that contemporary popularity often evaded the innovator….
… [P]ermit me to say here there were two great men of the twentieth century who live forever in the hearts of those who endeavored to lives by the two greatest commandments of the Almighty, love of god, and love of neighbor. Both were named John. John F. Kennedy and Pope John XXIII.
Pope John XXIII was the first Pope in four hundred years who built, as it were, bridges of charity and mutual respect between Catholics and Protestants, Catholics and the Orthodox, and Catholics and Jewish and pagan people. When he was elected Pope as a successor to the scholarly, saintly Pope Pius XII, it was said by many that his election brought forth a “caretaker” of the Catholic Church for a few years and then a younger man would succeed him. On the contrary, he proved to be one of the most popular popes in all history, and the bridges he built between people of all religions were bridges of love, bridges of confidence and charity, tolerance, understanding, and kindness. As a result, the whole climate pertaining to the relationship between Catholics and non-Catholics has changed. No one in his wildest dreams would think that ten years ago we would be having dialogues with Protestant ministers, with Jewish rabbis, with peoples of all faiths. Dialogues are friendly conversations. They are not debates where one side wins and another side loses. Who would think that ten years ago, for example, that we would be having Bible vigils, services consisting of Bible readings and hymns and prayers acceptable to all Christians? Well, Pope John XXIII initiated all of this by his wonderful Christ-like spirit of charity.
I always felt that John F. Kennedy was a forerunner in this field of Pope John XXIII because he never allowed his faith to interfere in any way with his relations with others. He was the greatest representative of brotherhood, I think, that we had among the laity. The attitude that he took towards his religion and its relationship with all of the constituents that would be under him as president of the United States were the very attitudes that a man of the type of Pope John XXIII assumed when he became the Supreme Pontiff of the Roman Catholic Church. It is true that there were those who opposed Jack Kennedy as president on the basis of his religion, but I think they did so not out of any malcontent or any bigotry or bitterness. There surely was some prejudice against a Catholic president in the White House, but I think that those who opposed his election did so on account of ignorance and for that they are to be excused. But when he talked to the group of some five hundred ministers in Texas and subjected himself to all the questions they wanted to present to him relative to his religion, he respected and esteemed conscientious religious beliefs of all peoples. And at the same time he gave the entire country the assurance that as president of the United States, his first and most solemn duty was to fulfill the Constitution of the United States in its spirit and in its letter and under no conditions would he be influenced in any way by the Catholic Church or the Vatican in the fulfillment of his official duties. And as far as I know, while he was President no influence of that kind was ever brought to bear upon him.
Hence, I repeat, John F. Kennedy and Pope John XXIII were the great pioneers of what we now call the ecumenical spirit which is intended to wipe away all form of bigotry by knowing, respecting, and esteeming the religious beliefs of all peoples. From this same ecumenical spirit we pray, study, and carry on conversations, especially among Christians, with them hope of creating a better atmosphere within which all Christians will one day be united in one fold under one Shepherd.
… Pope John had great esteem for him. I was with the President at the Boston College stadium where twenty thousand people were commemorating the one hundredth anniversary of that institution. He was the chief speaker. He held in his hand a copy of Pacem in Terris, the famous encyclical letter of Pope John XXIII on the social order. This encyclical, written in simple understandable language, was received with much acclaim, so much so that even the Communists tried to make propaganda out of it, saying, “This is just what we are preaching to you people.” On the other hand, this is what the program of President Kennedy was aiming at. He realized that the objectives of the American Revolution were never fully attained. Hence he was spearheading the fight for human rights, Medicare, aid to education, the elimination of poverty and unemployment, and other legislation pertaining to a better social order so that every man, woman and child in the United States would share in the tremendous wealth and strength of their country. When President Kennedy arose to speak to the twenty thousand people at the Boston College stadium, he held a copy of Pacem in Terris in his hand and, having summarized its contents, he said, “Because of this encyclical, I proudly proclaim before the world that I am a Roman Catholic.”
Pope John XXIII was close to death at that time. From the Vatican they checked with me to confirm the statement of the President. I replied, “I was there. I know it was true. I sat alongside of him when he made the statement.” Pope John was so pleased that he hoped against hope that he would live to meet President Kennedy. But it was too late. He was dead when President Kennedy came to Rome after the tremendous reception he received in West Germany. Meanwhile, however, he gathered many personal gifts which he planned to give the President in addition to the official gifts that it is customary for a Pope to give to the Head of a State. Among these gifts were medals and other tokens of recognition received by the Holy Father. But the most precious of them all was one of three autographed copies of Pacem in Terris….
I have seen so many indications of the fact that he was what I call a forerunner of John XXIII. John XXIII could have done a great deal for John F. Kennedy because John XXIII was unique. I think he ought to be canonized because I, even now, pray to him as a saint. One reason I think he was a saint is he was about the only one who was ever in a high position who ever understood me and I don’t understand myself.
How does the British Empire operate? One of the things that it does is to carry out targeted character assassinations and/or actual assassinations as in the case of Kennedy and many others. The point that LaRouche made in discussion on Saturday is that the same kind of operation run by the British Empire against Sharon at the point that he threatened to break from their war policy, was and is still being run against LaRouche, who obviously represents a far greater threat to the British Empire. This is what happened after LaRouche’s initiation of the SDI. The British focus on a target. Just as Bismarck had to be removed from office, so the British targeted LaRouche. Look at the process going from the Boston trial to Alexandria. The evidence which was developed in Boston was effectively buried in Alexandria. Look at the operations of the right-wing so-called Catholics connected with St. Catherine of Siena in Northern Virginia against LaRouche. Are their operations any different than those of the right-wing rabbis who targeted Rabin and Sharon? This is how the British Empire operates.
With regard to Obama’s defense on Friday of the unconstitutional NSA spying program, LaRouche emphasized that our Constitution has been violated so many times and in so many periods that although the intent still remains, it is effectively “gone with the wind.” Therefore, our job is to restore the Constitution. Take one or two relevant points. Show the violation of the Constitution. But then don’t stop there. Once you have opened the gate with a solid case, then go for prosecution. Don’t take facts, but an array of facts, which is what FDR did when he instituted Glass- Steagall.
Lame heads want to be tacticians, not strategists. The root of the problem is always global, not located in the parts.