The new "strategic partnership" announced yesterday between the U.S., Britain and Australia represents a reaffirmation of British geopolitics, with the U.S. again providing the muscle to enforce an imperial world order. This is not just about selling nuclear submarines to Australia. Despite claims that this targets no nation, the Chinese know better. That this occurs so soon after the U.S.-NATO withdrawal from Afghanistan lends credence to the charge that, while the decision to leave was right, using it to free up the allies to adopt a "Pivot to Asia" sends the signal to the Chinese that they should be prepared for war.

In her weekly dialogue, Helga Zepp-LaRouche blasted the U.K.-U.S. deal to incorporate Australia into a new strategic alliance, based on the sale of nuclear submarines to Australia. She said they claim that this "partnership" is not aimed at any country, but the Chinese know differently, and responded sharply -- as did the French, as the new deal scuttled an agreement they had to sell submarines to Australia.She provided an update on the humanitarian catastrophe developing in Afghanistan, contrasting the U.S.-NATO approach, of walking away from a catastrophe caused by their war, to that of Afghanistan's neighbors, which are mobilizing development aid. The problem in the West, she reiterated, is the kind of British geopolitics which underlie this new deal, which she described as a "No Good Deal." What is needed instead is a fundamental change in western attitudes and thinking.

In reponse to the announcement that Australia, the United Kingdom, and the United States are forming a new alliance called the AUKUS scarcely two weeks after withdrawing from Afghanistan after twenty years of disaster, Schiller Institute founder Helga Zepp-LaRouche said that this new alliance is a mindless extension of the policy of endless war. Instead of abandoning Afghanistan to the hell that twenty years of military intervention followed by a shutoff of international funds have created and leaping into a new and totally unnecessary escalation of conflict with China, the United States and other NATO countries must immediately act to do good, to repair the damage of Afghanistan and the other unjust military adventures of the past two decades, through a policy of real development.Zepp-LaRouche laid out the needed approach in her September 5 statement "Can ‘The West’ Learn? What Afghanistan Needs Now!"The needs are urgent; the situation today in Afghanistan is horrendous. Despite a much-hyped sum of $1.2 billion assembled early this week from donors conference, Afghanistan remains largely cut off from sources of funding that are required to keep its people alive. Over $9 billion of the country's banking reserves are frozen by the United States. The World Bank has shut down a major health program required to maintain the system of clinics and hospitals that serve the population. The World Food Program warns of tens of millions of people already facing food insecurity or threatened with it.But after withdrawing from Afghanistan following 20 years of disaster, instead of working to rebuild that nation, the United States has rushed into a new catastrophe — a new British Empire alliance targeting China as NATO already targets Russia. The Australia-United Kingdom-United States AUKUS alliance among what its imperial masters charmingly call "maritime democracies" was announced on Wednesday, focused squarely against China.

The book "Peril", authored by Woodward and Costa, raises disturbing questions about the role of U.S. military leadership in sabotaging President Trump's efforts -- and now those of President Biden -- to end the "endless wars." The same U.S.-British military-intelligence-corporate networks behind the 9/11 terror attacks, and the subsequent coverup, ran the attempted regime change coup called Russiagate, and continue to oppose replacing geopolitical confrontations and wars with peaceful cooperation. It is now an urgent priority that citizens get behind the demand for a full investigation of the coup plots, and support the shift to a new era based on multilateral efforts to achieve peaceful economic development.

A two-day summit meeting of the heads of state and government of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization begins on Sept. 16 in Dushanbe, Tajikistan, which will focus on how to stabilize and economically reconstruct Afghanistan. The nations of Asia are generally committed to working with China’s Belt and Road Initiative to bring infrastructure and related development to Afghanistan, and to make sure that international terrorism and the drug trade don’t carry the day.Not so the United States and Europe, whose governments are applying the British imperial policy of starving the nation into submission—or into mass death. The Western nations have frozen Afghanistan’s assets abroad, making it impossible for the economy to function and workers to be paid by their employers; sanctions are ensuring that elementary health care cannot be provided to the population, sanctions that now threaten to explode already widespread poverty into the outright starvation of millions. This is the actual strategic backdrop to the revelations contained in Woodward and Costa’s new book, Peril, which are receiving ample coverage in the mass media. The central fact—which is known to this news service totally independently of the contents of that book—is that there was a British-steered attempted coup d’état against President Donald Trump and the U.S. Constitution in and around the period of the Nov. 3, 2020 presidential election. That operation included efforts by leading figures of the military-industrial complex, reportedly including Gen. Mark Milley, the head of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, to unconstitutionally substitute themselves for the President in the role of Commander in Chief. It also included setting the trap of planned Jan. 6 violence orchestrated by agents provocateurs employed by the FBI and other intelligence agencies, and then ensnaring President Trump in that trap with the assistance of the likes of the seedy Steve Bannon. The underlying strategic issue, as the British and their minions such as Milley repeatedly made clear, was Trump’s active decision to pull American military forces out of Afghanistan, end the entire British imperial policy of perennial warfare under the phony flag of “fighting terrorism,” and work cooperatively with Russia and China. That is why that same British apparatus, including General Milley, reacted with shock and dismay when President Biden announced that he would carry out the Trump-initiated policy of a total pullout from Afghanistan and ending the decades of perpetual genocidal wars. Milley, who today is still head of the JCS under Biden, took to national television on Sept. 4 to openly contradict Biden’s stated policy, predicting that the American pullout would mean that Afghanistan would collapse into civil war, that widespread terrorism would erupt there—and, of course, that American troops would have to return to continue the war. Helga Zepp-LaRouche has presented a totally opposite policy for Afghanistan, and for the world. She issued a call for the United States and Europe to join with China, Russia and Central Asian nations in the economic reconstruction of Afghanistan. This approach can stop the perennial war policy, defeat the ongoing British attempted coup d’état in the U.S., and otherwise establish a new strategic alignment capable of replacing the bankrupt London-centered Western financial system. The current attempted coup is actually a continuation of what was unleashed 20 years ago, on Sept. 11, 2001. American statesman Lyndon LaRouche explained the matter in an interview he gave to the daily Al-Bayan, from the United Arab Emirates, on Nov. 16, 2001—scarcely two months after the infamous 9/11 attack. In it, LaRouche began by locating the recently-occurred events in their proper strategic context: “The currently ongoing monetary-financial collapse is far worse than a mere depression, such as that of 1929-1933; it is a systemic collapse of the world system set into motion by President Nixon’s actions of August 1971. That system could never be resuscitated from the present collapse. Our goal should be to eliminate the present system, so that we may resuscitate the world’s economy.” He then took up the question of fighting terrorism. "The reply to this question must be situated within a corrected view of what actually happened in the U.S.A. on Sept. 11. Those attacks could have been organized by nothing less than an intended coup d’état deployed from within very high levels of the U.S. internal military-security apparatus…. “Somewhere, during the evening of Sept. 11, there was a new decision made, to respond to the effect of the morning’s attacks by declaring a war on ‘terrorism,’ and, as I warned against this on a radio interview earlier that day, picking long-standing Anglo-American asset Osama bin Laden as the scapegoat for the case…. “Someone, at very high levels, within the U.S. command structure, unleashed an attempted coup d’état against the Bush government on Sept. 11. Had that crisis led to a nuclear alert escalation between the U.S.A. and Russia, the coup plotters would have succeeded, almost without doubt. President Putin’s Sept. 11 telephone conversations with President Bush, changed the situation in a radical, beneficial way. “Otherwise, nothing else has been solved. The coup d’état has been defeated, at least temporarily, but the nightmare rolls on….” LaRouche then pointed to the way to end that nightmare: “Without putting the present international monetary-financial system through a most drastic form of bankruptcy reorganization, the attempt to continue that system with most reforms, will plunge the entire planet into an early new dark age which will last for perhaps two or more generations…. Were the U.S.A. to become partner of such a Eurasian-cooperation system, the needed basis in economic interest for a peacefully developing world, is established.”

The moment of opportunity opened by the end of the war in Afghanistan, for multilateral cooperation for economic development, could close very quickly. A False Flag event, occurring in the midst of almost daily military encounters by U.S.-NATO forces with Russian and Chinese military forces, could lead to a devastating war, either by miscalculation, or intent! Dialogue is essential, as Gen. John Hyten, Vice-Chair of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff, expressed in a speech two days ago. We also present a preliminary report on the smashing defeat of the California Recall. Lyndon LaRouche famously warned, in 2003, that Recall is dangerous, as it is designed to manipulate momentary emotions, to undermine the American Presidential System, and replace it with a parliamentary system.

The remarks made by U.S. Air Force General John Hyten, vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, to a meeting yesterday of the Brookings Institution, are chilling in their implication. Hyten stated that he believed it to be all-too-possible that a shooting war between Russia and the United States, or between China and the United States, was a real danger. The build-up in new types of thermonuclear weaponry and deployment systems, and the lack of trust in negotiations, indeed the lack of any negotiations at all on matters of strategic weaponry between, for example, China and the United States, means that we are sliding, perhaps duped by computer-driven systems-analytical miscalculation, into “doing the unthinkable which nonetheless becomes inevitable.” “I know the President — President Biden — and President Xi have talked a couple times this year. That’s important, but I hope we can broaden that conversation all the way down to the military-to-military level as well,” Hyten said. “We’re having strategic stability talks with Russia to make sure we understand where we are, not just in the nuclear realm, but in space as well. We need to have that conversation start with the Chinese, we really do. We need to be able to sit down, I need to be able to sit down — Secretary Austin, the political leadership, the State Department — and talk about these issues with China. Because as different as we are, we do have a fundamental common goal, and that is to never go to war with each other.”Hyten stated that the other, non-negotiating approach might well destroy the world. He also observed that his Chinese and Russian military opposites, such as Ryabkov, assert that it has been the United States, through actions like placing thermonuclear weapons and “defensive platforms” in Europe, that has provoked this condition. Other than this and a few other important but singular calls for negotiations, however, so far, the United States has offered no known applicable strategic “reverse-paradigm” approach, or even insight into how such a reversal of outlook would be possible. The Afghanistan proposal of the Committee for the Coincidence of Opposites proposed by Helga Zepp-LaRouche has many applications which, taken together, could undo the present self-imposed geopolitical Gordian knot. That proposal can also provide a guide for the morally perplexed of the State Department and various European intelligence agencies that still cannot fathom why, or how they were militarily defeated in Afghanistan. It was not the Taliban, but their own “Project Democracy/”Permanent Revolution" obsolete axioms, postulates, and presuppositions about reality, especially in the new era of Covid, that defeated them there. Military force, history should have taught them, is the precise opposite of what must be deployed in order to ensure strategic victory in this circumstance. The Taliban must be the acknowledged negotiating partner; the people of Afghanistan must be fed and medically sustained; the governing institutions, particularly the financial institutions must not be assaulted by trans-Atlantic sanctions. Trusted negotiators like Pino Arlacchi who know the nation and its people should be given the authority to assist in beginning the process of reconstruction, including the transition away from the Anglo-American supervised opium production. The United States, absent a military presence, should seek, in the theater of Afghanistan, to engage particularly the Chinese, such that General Hyten’s desire for military negotiation is grounded on at least a demonstration of trust and collaboration between China and the United States in a non-military task in a post-war zone. The idea, the strategic-military conception, of the Committee for the Coincidence of Opposites is that the non-lethal-force branches of the world’s respective militaries (such as the Surgeon General’s Office of the United States), can be augmented by large brigades of youth deployed for a life-saving mission especially in the health-deprived sections of the planet. Ironically, this may very well now be the only way to prevent the outbreak of what one U.S. researcher has called “Bubonic Plague 2.0,” a mutation combining the infectious capabilities of the Delta variant of Covid with something as horrific as Ebola, the Marburg virus, or other diseases. In “Gandhi’s Vision for a New Paradigm in International Relations, a World Health System, and Direct Non-Violent Action in Times of Social Breakdown,” Helga Zepp-LaRouche states: "Since it is the young people of this world whose future is the most threatened by the combination of the pandemic and the economic crisis, there needs to be a perspective that addresses the problem of the pandemic, and simultaneously gives them a concrete way for productive tasks…. “[T]he COVID-19 pandemic and future pandemics can only be dealt with if every single country on the planet has a modern health system, and that requires a much larger cadre of trained medical personnel than presently available. There is presently an effort underway to set up a Committee in the U.S., Europe, and Africa to organize partnerships between universities, clinics, hospitals, and medical facilities. The task of these partnerships is to train unemployed youth, to first become medical auxiliaries and then medical personnel, on the model of Roosevelt’s Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC).” The present conditions in Afghanistan, whereas David Beasley put it at 14 million people in danger of immediate starvation (with another 14 million just behind them), and where so many nations—Iran, Pakistan, China, Russia, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, etc.—have a vested interest in not merely containing terrorism, but in creating economic development corridors. These can act as pathways of, not merely stability, but physical renewal. Afghanistan is today, at this moment, a “zone of negative curvature,” the best of all possible regions for potential application of the “coincidence of opposites” method. The underestimation of the war-avoidance implications of Nicholas of Cusa’s 1439 Council of Florence diplomacy, and of the strategic warfare conditions under which the De Docta Ignorantia came to be written, has meant that Cusa has been nearly inaccessible as a thinker to those that need to know him most. The “Teardrop of Grief” Memorial carried out in New Jersey on Sunday, Sept. 12, and the statements made by the participants, particularly the Americans Terry Strada and Kirk Wiebe, as well as the officials from the city of Bayonne, were the implicit statements of a policy intention which can in fact become hegemonic in the United States, and ironically, therefore in the world: respect for other nations, a passionate commitment to the health and general welfare of everyone on the planet, and a resolution of conflict through non-violent means. The opposition, in the form of the British Crown’s Tinny Blare and others, may know what they intend, but do not know what they are doing. The problem is somewhat accurately described by Caitlin Johnstone, in a Sept. 14 piece entitled “Our Gods Have No Heads”: "We’re on a planet-sized haunted hayride to Armageddon, and no one is driving. “Sure at first glance it looks like someone’s driving … Then you look closer still and … What’s ultimately driving things is not so much the people within those institutions as the institutions themselves, which operate based on motives of profit and growth that are built into them and are entirely divorced from normal human values…. And the problem of course is that these are not wise and beneficent gods, they are manmade conceptual constructs with no more intelligence or insight than that growth-at-all-cost values system held by a cancerous tumor. The modern gods are mindless devourers who are controlled by no one. The modern gods have no heads.” [Emphasis in original.]

On Sunday, September 12, 2021, in Bayonne, New Jersey, the Schiller Institute, with the support of the Embassy of the Russian Federation in Washington, D.C., and the Russian Consulate in New York City, organized a memorial ceremony on the occasion of the 20th anniversary of the mass terrorist attack on the United States. It was held at the towering Tear of Grief monument, which sits just across the Hudson River from the site of the attack on the Twin Towers in Manhattan. The Tear of Grief monument, designed by Russian sculptor Zurab Tsereteli, was given by the Russian government and people as a gift to America in 2005, in sympathy and in support of the families and survivors of the 9/11 attack.

It is still unknown whether the withdrawal of U.S./NATO forces from Afghanistan is the end of the era of endless wars, or a move to a new phase of geopolitical confrontations, directly challenging Russia and China. The push for continued war comes from the onrushing financial collapse, for the same reason that the wars were launched following the 9/11 attack: wars are used, by the globalist financial and corporate cartels who fund the war hawks, to justify the imposition of emergency measures, including austerity economic policies and the surveillance state. That is why it is necessary that LaRouche's economic policies, for collaborative mutual economic benefit, represent the only real alternative to chaos.

The first 9/11 documents declassified as a result of President Biden's order show active involvement of Saudi officials in the events of 9/11. What must be answered now is 1.) Who in the U.S. government covered up the Saudi role for 20 years?; and 2.) Who benefited from the coverup? The place to begin to answer these questions is with Lyndon LaRouche's forecast on January 3, 2001, in which he warned that a "Reichstag Fire" event would be used by the Bush administration to impose emergency crisis management policies.

On September 11, the FBI released a declassified (but redacted) report from April 2016, which provides additional conclusive information of the involvement of agents of the Saudi Arabian government supporting the 9/11 hijackers. And this is only the first of a series of declassifications set to occur over the coming six months under Biden's Sept. 3 executive order. The full story of Saudi Arabian involvement in 9/11 will become increasingly clear, but this involvement itself poses larger questions.First, who within the United States acted to cover up Saudi involvement on 9/11? This question is intimately tied with such unresolved anomalies as the lack of air defense response after it became clear at the World Trade Center that an attack was underway, as well as abnormalities about the effects of that attack itself. Second, who promoted and financed the operation, and to what end? Asking "cui bono?" points us not to Riyadh, but to London. September 11, 2001, set into motion what has been two decades of emergency rule, in which long-term planning has been replaced by responses to supposedly urgent threats, in which intelligence agencies and financial institutions have taken increasing power in the trans-Atlantic world. This two-decade change in the governance of the planet, or at least its trans-Atlantic sector, was forecast by Lyndon LaRouche, before the September 11 attacks. Responding to a question from the Congressional Black Caucus, regarding Bush's nomination of "inveterate Confederate" John Ashcroft as his Attorney General, during an EIR January 3, 2001 webcast, Lyndon LaRouche warned of the danger of U.S. government itself being replaced by crisis management, and of the threat that a Reichstag Fire event would be used to usher in dictatorial powers under the incoming Bush Administration, all driven by a collapse of the financial system. LaRouche: "We're going into a period in which either we do the kinds of things I indicated in summary to you today, or else, what you're going to have, is not a government. You're going to have something like a Nazi regime. Maybe not initially, at the surface. What you're going to have is a government which cannot pass legislation, meaningful legislation. How does a government which can not pass meaningful legislation, under conditions of crisis, govern? They govern, in every case in known history, by what's known as crisis management. "In other words, just like the Reichstags fire in Germany. "How did that happen? "Well, a Dutchman, who was a known lunatic, used to set fires, as a provocateur. And he went around Germany setting fires. And one night, with no security available for the Reichstag [the Third Reich Parliament], he went into the Reichstag building, and set the joint on fire. And Hitler came out and said, 'Well, let's hope the Communists did it.' And Göring moved, and the Schmitt apparatus, that is, of Carl Schmitt, the jurist. And they passed the Notverordnung. And on the basis of a provocation—that is, crisis management—they rammed through the Notverordnung [emergency decree], which established Hitler as dictator of Germany. "What you're going to get, with a frustrated Bush administration, if it's determined to prevent itself from being opposed--its will--you're going to get crisis management. Where members of the special warfare types, of the secret government, the secret police teams, will set off provocations, which will be used to bring about dictatorial powers and emotion, in the name of crisis management. "You will have small wars set off in various parts of the world, which the Bush Administration will respond to, with crisis management methods of provocation. That's what you'll get. And that's what the problem is. And you have to face that. You've got to control this process now, while you still have the power to do so." Several years following the attacks, an enormous scandal around a 22-year deal starting in 1985 known as "Al Yamamah" between British weapons manufacturer BAE and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia erupted. This involved enormous quantities of off-the-books cash, bribes, and weapons. On June 21, 2007, LaRouche, speaking at a webcast entitled "BAE: The World's Biggest Loose End," returned to his earlier warning: "The world has been living under a system, which is the 9/11 system, which already existed, as I warned at the beginning of 2001, before President George W. Bush was inaugurated for the first time in January of 2001. Where I said The world system has reached the point, that an onrushing collapse of the system is now in process. We can not determine exactly when or how this will occur, but we know the following two things "Number 1, we know that this President and this Presidency can not deal with this crisis. Therefore, we must expect that the entire world will be subjected to the kind of thing we experienced in February of 1933, when Hermann Göring, the man behind the throne, the sort of Dick Cheney of the Hitler Administration, orchestrated the burning of the Reichstag as a terrorist event. And this terrorist event was used on that night, or the following day, to install Hitler with dictatorial powers, which Hitler never lost, until the day he died! "And I said then, the danger is that something like this will occur, under present trends in the United States, and it did occur. And it was called 9/11." "Now, without going into the details of what we know and what we don't know about how 9/11 was orchestrated, we know that the only means by which this kind of thing is orchestrated, is found in one location in a financial complex which is centered in the identity of the BAE. Now, that's the mystery of 9/11. How it was done, the mechanics—that's irrelevant. We'll find out. And everybody in and around government, who understands these matters, knows that! And that's where the heat is here. "We've come to the point that an entire system is collapsing. That system, at this point, because of the complicity of the present U.S. government, and the complicity of the leadership of the Democratic Party, as well as the Republican Party, because of this, we are living under a one-world system, called generically 'globalization.' It's a preparation for the new Tower of Babel, under which there are no nations, and in which languages begin to become babble. Under this system, what controls it? It's called 'globalization'; it's called the 'global warming crisis'; it's called these various kinds of things, referring to these things. It's a one-world system! It is not consolidated, but every obstacle to this one-world system is crumbling." Now, 20 years later, the misguided NATO/American adventure in Afghanistan has ended in disgrace, and additional truth about the event that ushered in a global shift in governance is coming to light. Will the past two decades of geopolitics and hegemony be repudiated and reversed? Will the American people, and the world, come to know what happened on 9/11? A "big lie" created 20 years of such offenses against human rights as the Patriot Act, the Afghanistan War, the Iraq War, the Libyan disaster, the Yemen War, military intervention in Syria, and, if not stopped, war with Russia and China. If that lie is not countered, and the theft, by ongoing crisis management, of the very concept of "future" is not reversed, the human race could be decimated by the dark age conditions envisioned by proponents of geopolitical war, "green" supranational governance, and financial "regime change." Lyndon LaRouche was right when he forecast this train of development over 20 years ago. Will the world take his advice today?

The imperial establishment of the U.S./NATO/trans-Atlantic created a murderous bloodbath in Afghanistan, killing tens or hundreds of thousands, wasting trillions of dollars, destabilizing the region, and having less than nothing to show for it 20 years later.And, now, that establishment is taking out its rage on the people of Afghanistan, choking their fragile economy by withholding—either directly or through financial means—the food, fuel, electricity, and development the nation so desperately needs. The people of these trans-Atlantic powers are tolerating the denial of development assistance or even cooperation with Afghanistan, with the demand that a government more to the liking of that elite comes to power. But what 20 years of military might could not achieve, will also not be brought about by financial force. Afghanistan will have a government through the decisions and actions of its own people, and the capable nations of the world—particularly those who created its current calamity—bear a responsibility to assist that government in bringing Afghanistan into a peaceful, productive, and proud role in the region and the world. The UN Development Program released a 17-page report that details the current suffering in Afghanistan and how trans-Atlantic institutions are poised to make it much worse. External aid accounts for three-quarters of the Afghanistan budget. How will schools, hospitals, or infrastructure be funded, if it is cut off? The entire country has only 600 MW of installed generating capacity—less than 1% the per-capita level of the United States. Ten million children require humanitarian assistance to survive, with 1 million projected to suffer from acute severe malnutrition. Over 4 million school-age children are out of school. At present, 72% of Afghans live below the poverty level of $2/day. UN modeling suggests that that figure could increase by 25%, to create the specter of “near universal poverty.” Against this backdrop, the Biden administration continues to freeze the assets of Afghanistan’s central bank—over $9 billion. An IMF allocation of $450 million worth of SDRs is out of reach thanks to the Fed shutting off dollar access. The World Bank has also suspended financial support. This is murder, and it must be stopped! On May 12, 1996, Madeleine Albright, was asked by a CBS interviewer about the tremendous cost of the Gulf War against Iraq, including more than 500,000 Iraqi children under the age of 5 who died as a result of the sanctions. Albright, unfazed, responded that the price of those deaths were “worth it.” Worth what? Biden must immediately take his knee off of Afghanistan’s throat, unfreeze the nation’s assets, and play a positive role in its development. Despite the past 20 years, the Taliban has said it is open to U.S. cooperation. The solution is clear. It was laid out at the July 31 Schiller Institute conference “Afghanistan: A Turning Point in History After the Failed Regime-Change Era.” Start the development process now. To achieve this, Schiller Institute Founder Helga Zepp-LaRouche has called for putting to immediate use the experience and talents of Pino Arlacchi, former Executive Director of the UN Office for Drug Control and Crime Prevention, who made a powerful intervention at that conference. We do no honor to the American victims of 9/11 by adding piles of additional deaths across the world. May this 20th anniversary of that disaster mark the end of two decades of disastrous policy. Let Afghanistan breathe!

This week's call featured excerpts of LaRouche's September 11, 2001 Salt Lake City radio interview, which occurred just after the first tower had been struck. In this he demonstrates the quality of leadership one would expect from a head of state, and outlines the needed strategy for both immediate and long term survival.

Join us LIVE on September 11 at 2pm EDT.Register at schillerinstitute.com for updates and reminders. Presentations by: Helga Zepp-LaRouche, William Binney, Ray McGovern...and others.