Manhattan Town event with Diane Sare (including transcript)

LPAC Policy Committee member Diane Sare is the featured speaker at this week’s Manhattan Town hall meeting.



DENNIS SPEED:  My name is Dennis Speed and on behalf of the LaRouche Political Action Committee I want to welcome everybody here for our Saturday dialogue with Lyndon LaRouche for Feb. 18th.  Now, there are many matters than could be considered, but what’s important I think is to keep a focus on our actions, and what we’ve been doing.  There was a conference call that Helga Zepp-LaRouche addressed, actually the Thursday Fireside Chat.  And in that call, she called upon our national organization to conduct a form of mobilization to defend the Presidency.  In that call, she said this:

“Because he is not sitting down and taking the fact that it’s actually a coup in process against him.  I think this is very serious.  The old establishment, the neo-liberal, neo-con, unipolar world establishment both in the United States and Europe they’re completely freaked out.  They don’t accept the fact that Trump was elected and they’re obviously involved in an attempt to get Trump out of the White House.  Anyway, either a coup, a military coup which was talked about, an impeachment, or even worse, as the chief editor of the German liberal newspaper, Die Zeit, said in a talk show; he said, `Murder in the White House.’  I mean this is quite scandalous that the chief editor of the so-called mainstream newspaper would say such a thing.

“But what is going on is very serious.  Because they have deployed George Soros, who is really nothing but an instrument of the British Empire, and George Soros who is the inventor, or the financier of the concept of color revolution, in other words, to finance all kinds of civil groups, NGOs, other groups how to cause regime change.”

So, today, our central presentation which Diane will be giving you will be focussed around our role in destabilizing that coup and the things we’re going to be doing this week to do that. I just want to reference for people, that, for people that various reasons, didn’t see it or whatever, part of what President Trump said in answer to a question at the Thursday press conference, he said, concerning this question of Russia:

” President Putin called me up very nicely to congratulate me on the win of the election.  He then called me up extremely nicely to congratulate me on the inauguration, which was terrific.  But so did many other leaders — almost all other leaders from almost all other countries.  So that’s the extent.

“Russia is fake news.  Russia — this is fake news put out by the media.  The real news is the fact that people, probably from the Obama administration because they’re there — because we have our new people going in place right now. …”  And he goes on and he talks about a few other things.  And he just makes the point that the entire process is totally misrepresented and that it’s fake.

His friend, Roger Stone, was interviewed by RT, and he said this.  He said “The real issue is that Trump does not want to go to war with the Russian state.”  This is not an exact quote, it’s a compilation quote, that Trump is actually the peace candidate and the military-industrial complex is very upset about this election.  Concerning the question of investigating the charges, Roger Stone said:  It would be fine to have a special prosecutor to investigate and that I would love to testify.  He said, “I never thought I would see the day that Russian media were less censored than that in the United States, but that is the case today.” And among other things he said in this interview, he referenced Brezhnev and Nixon being able to reach a modus vivendi, and said, if Brezhnev and Nixon can do that, then clearly Trump and Putin can do the same thing.  He said many other things, and the interview can be looked at [https://www.rt. com/op-edge/377781-trump-leaks-independent-probe/]

I also want to note that former Congressman Dennis Kucinich and journalist Glenn Greenwald have both been warning about the manipulation of the so-called “left” and “progressive left”  — sometimes called the “regressive left”  — into opposing Trump and trying to overthrow him.  And so there are other voices that have joined these. [ kucinich-greenwald-even-americans-hate-trump-defend-attempted- coup-deep-state.html]

So the important thing is we have a situation where we have a particular and unique role. And what we’re going to now do, is go directly to Diane, who is going to tell us how our organization, both the Manhattan Project and the national organization is going to deploying for the purpose of thwarting this operation against the Presidency of the United States being conducting by George Soros and the British Empire.

DIANE SARE:  So, as people who’ve been associated with LaRouche for either many years or recently, if there is any such thing, because I think most people have some idea of the history of this organization; we’re really at an extraordinary turning point, which Helga Zepp-LaRouche made very clear on the call on Thursday night, where the work of the LaRouche’s over 40 years to put together a new alliance of nations committed to a Westphalian principle, that you act in the interest of the other, has now come into existence.  Xi Jinping expresses it as “win-win collaboration.”  And while this has grown by leaps and bounds, with 70 or more nations involved, what has happened to the trans-Atlantic system is the thing is completely bankrupt.  We have done — I don’t know, the last official figure I hear was a few years ago, when you had Neil Barofsky calculating what we’d spent on bail-outs with the TARP, which was something like $23 trillion.  I once tried to add up the things that we heard about after that, so maybe it’s $31 trillion or  — you know, a trillion here, a trillion there, who’s counting after a while? — and it’s ceased to work.

The banking system of Italy, Greece, Deutsche Bank, these things are hanging by a thread! The euro, the European Union could disintegrate. And what you see is a growing revolt, as Mr. LaRouche identified: The election of Donald Trump was not an American phenomenon.  It was part of the same thing you saw in Great Britain with the Brexit: That it’s part of a global rejection of the policies which have immiserated billions of people on this planet.  So I just wanted to look at something so we can arm ourselves for what we have to do his week, in preparing the American people for a fight, because I think at this point, frankly, the American people are so disgusted with the news media and what they’re being bombarded with, that the impulse of many people is to simply withdraw, and that’s not what we need to be doing now; we need to actually go for victory.

So what I want to just do is show you another section of the press conference of President Trump that Dennis was just referencing:


PRESIDENT TRUMP: …the whole Russian thing — that’s a ruse.  That’s a ruse. And, by the way, it would be great if we could get along with Russia, just so you understand that.  Now, tomorrow you’ll say, Donald Trump wants to get along with Russia, this is terrible.  It’s not terrible — it’s good.

We had Hillary Clinton try and do a reset.  We had Hillary Clinton give Russia 20 percent of the uranium in our country. You know what uranium is, right?  It’s this thing called nuclear weapons and other things.  Like, lots of things are done with uranium, including some bad things.  Nobody talks about that.  I didn’t do anything for Russia.  I’ve done nothing for Russia. Hillary Clinton gave them 20 percent of our uranium.  Hillary Clinton did a reset, remember, with the stupid plastic button that made us all look like a bunch of jerks?  Here, take a look. He looked at her like, what the hell is she doing with that cheap plastic button?  Hillary Clinton — that was a reset.  Remember? It said “reset.”

Now, if I do that, oh, I’m a bad guy.  If we could get along with Russia, that’s a positive thing.  We have a very talented man, Rex Tillerson, who is going to be meeting with them shortly. And I told him, I said, I know politically it’s probably not good for me.  Hey, the greatest thing I could do is shoot that ship that’s 30 miles offshore right out of the water.  Everyone in this country is going to say, oh, it’s so great.  That’s not great.  That’s not great.  I would love to be able to get along with Russia.

Now, you’ve had a lot of Presidents that haven’t taken that tack.  Look where we are now.  Look where we are now.  So, if I can — now, I love to negotiate things.  I do it really well and all that stuff, but it’s possible I won’t be able to get along with Putin.  Maybe it is.  But I want to just tell you, the false reporting by the media, by you people — the false, horrible, fake reporting makes it much harder to make a deal with Russia. And probably Putin said, you know — he’s sitting behind his desk and he’s saying, you know, I see what’s going on in the United States, I follow it closely; it’s got to be impossible for President Trump to ever get along with Russia because of all the pressure he’s got with this fake story.  Okay?  And that’s a shame.  Because if we could get along with Russia — and, by the way, China and Japan and everyone — if we could get along, it would be a positive thing, not a negative thing….

… look, it would be much easier for me to be tough on Russia, but then we’re not going to make a deal.

Now, I don’t know that we’re going to make a deal.  I don’t know.  We might, we might not.  But it would be much easier for me to be so tough — the tougher I am on Russia, the better.  But you know what, I want to do the right thing for the American people.  And to be honest, secondarily, I want to do the right thing for the world.

If Russia and the United States actually got together and got along — and don’t forget, we’re a very powerful nuclear country and so are they.  There’s no upside.  We’re a very powerful nuclear country and so are they.  I’ve been briefed. And I can tell you, one thing about a briefing that we’re allowed to say because anybody that ever read the most basic book can say it:  Nuclear holocaust would be like no other.  They’re a very powerful nuclear country and so are we.

If we have a good relationship with Russia, believe me, that’s a good thing, not a bad thing…. [END VIDEO]

SARE: Now, Trump has been quoted in the press as saying that the American news media are not only his enemy, but the American news media are the enemy of the American people.  So, just as an example — I get updates from the Washington Post; this is the one I got this afternoon.  The first article:  “DeVos Criticized Teachers at D.C. school she visited, and they are not having it.” So, the first article is about how the D.C. teachers are allegedly fighting his Education Secretary.

Then, John McCain — the guy who has been photographed standing next to ISIS terrorists, who thinks we could overthrow Putin with a Russian Spring — the genius, John McCain, who is a very good reason for why people should not be subjected to torture, just systematically dismantled Donald Trump’s entire worldview.  “Stunning Stuff from a Member of the President’s Own Party.”

Then another article — these are all articles in the Washington Post — “Lawmakers Say Trump’s Words Matter, and Hurt the country’s Standing Abroad.” Why?  “A growing roster of lawmakers from both major parties say they think the President’s rhetoric” — what rhetoric?  He doesn’t think we should have a nuclear war with Russia? — “and erratic behavior damaged diplomatic relationships and weakened global stability.”  Now, it’s much better to be like John McCain and call for organizing an Arab Spring against Putin, who has an over 85% approval rating and a lot of nuclear weapons.  That would be really good.

And then: “A University Takes on One of Its Own Alumna, Kelly Anne Conway,” so there’s an attack on her.  Then the article, “Trump Calls the Media the Enemy of the American People.”  Then they say, “Pence: U.S. Will Hold Russia Accountable, and Stands with NATO.”  Who knows what Pence actually really said, until we find out later?  Then, the next article: “Trump’s Family’s Elaborate Lifestyle Is a Logistical Nightmare at Taxpayer Expense.”  Then, “Greg Popovich Has Found the Opponent of His Life — President Trump.”  Then, “If Russia Tried To Influenced the U.S. Election, Things Aren’t Going As Planned.”  And then, “Pence and Merkel Embrace NATO, but Have Different Milieu” — in other words, is there any articl? I didn’t skip anything, I just read them right down!

The media are obsessedobsessed  with trying to destroy the potential of a New Paradigm that the U.S. would be engaged in!

Now happily — and I couldn’t find the figures this morning, but people remember there was a big freak-out because RT has hundreds of thousands of more followers than CNN and so on.  The American people actually don’t believe this crap; and they’re not buying into it.  The media are massively discrediting themselves by continuing with this; but it’s a kind of noise and bombardment that prohibits people from thinking clearly.

So now, on top of this, what they don’t have here, is that as people may know, President Obama in fact, is doing exactly what Putin warned about.  He said there are some people who leave without saying goodbye because they don’t want to disrupt a process, and so on; then he said there are some people who say goodbye and never leave.  Well, what is Obama doing?  He and his wife and two daughters are moving into a walled mansion, a giant walled mansion — I would call that a compound — not far from the White House which has eight bathrooms and nine bedrooms or something like that.  And, you’ll be happy to hear, Valerie Jarrett is moving in with him and his mother-in-law; and from this giant walled compound, Barack Obama is supposedly going to be leading this group of 30,000 resisters.

Now, I’m sorry, as far as I know, there is no evidence whatsoever that Barack Obama can organize his way out of a paper bag.  The guy is not an organizer; he didn’t put this together. His own education at Harvard was paid for by some Saudi businessman.  The guy is a fraud; he is a creation from beginning to end.  There is nothing real about him.  When he first got in, Mr. LaRouche said this funny thing; he said that the reason that Obama wears shoes is because he’s an empty suit, and if he didn’t have something to weight down the suit it would just float away. There is nothing excepting a mean-spirited killer quality; there is that, which he got from his stepfather who participated in mass murdering people in Indonesia.

So what’s going on is, you have a fake operation which does not have the enthusiastic support of even a significant fraction of the American people, let alone some majority something or other that they’re claiming that they have.  And Obama is going to be coordinating — whatever that means — under orders from George Soros on behalf of the Queen of England from his compound, which is going to look like — we wanted to have an Addams Family cartoon for that, but anyway.

I just wanted to share something else that came out, because you also have to think, what do you think is going on in the Democratic Party right now?  Of like anybody who wanted to win an election?  I actually think there’s probably hysteria and massive fighting behind the scenes; because people are saying, “What the heck are you doing?  We know why Hillary Clinton lost; you don’t have to be a rocket scientist to know you don’t want a war with Russia!”  Is there anyone here who thinks we should have a war with Russia?  Do you know anyone who thinks that we could…?  I did meet one guy, I have to say, when I was running for office I met a military guy who thought we could survive a nuclear war.  I did.  And he said that we had such fantastic anti-ballistic missile defense systems that we could just nuke Russia, and everything they would throw back at us, we could knock out of the sky and we’d win the war.  But I have only met one person who had such a view.  He was probably an advisor to Obama, I don’t know.

No!  The American people don’t want that.  There was a reason why Hillary Clinton lost the election, which this stupid news media never caught on to.  They had a narrative; and you know what?  The American people didn’t buy it; they weren’t in it; it didn’t reflect them.  So anyone who an actual real person in the Democratic Party is saying, “When are we going to talk about what our party used to represent?  Do we have a relationship with organized labor?  Do we think we should build things?  Do we actually really care about the refugee crisis?  We didn’t do anything to stop Obama from blowing up these countries which led to the refugee crisis.”

In other words, there’s a fight; and in fact, part of this is leaked.  This is kind of funny, this group that Obama nominally has organized that he’s the head of, called “Organizing for Action,” is not really interfacing with the grass-roots Democrats around the country; at least as reflected by executive director of the Democratic Party in Louisiana, who was caught on a tape and then gave an interview later about Obama’s Organizing for Action.  He said, “This is some grade A bullshit right here.” He said, “It seems to me that this group is tone deaf.  We have lost over 1,000 seats in the past eight years, all because of this crap.”  So, how many people in the Democratic Party are actually thinking this; but you would never know.  Do you think the Washington Post or the New York Times is going to tell you about this?  Forget it!  We just saw what the Washington Post has to say; it’s one lie after the next, each more egregious than the other.

So, something that’s very important is that Mrs. LaRouche has called for a Day of Truth on the 23rd of February. Basically, there were a series of events — I have some video footage going up to Feb. 18th — of the coup in Ukraine.  People may recall the original issue was that Yanukovych, the elected President of the country, was in a position because he was supposed to sign an economic agreement with the European Union; but he was put in a situation where he could not work with both Russia and the European Union.  The government of Ukraine posted on their website — but much too late after the hysteria had already been whipped up — that various economists did studies that if Ukraine oriented toward Russia, they would have gained EU5 billion in their productive growth.  If they oriented to the EU in the way that the EU wanted them to do, they would have had a net loss of EU39 billion.  And looking at what had been done to Greece, which people may remember, it really shouldn’t have been a hard choice.  But, it didn’t fit the narrative from George Soros and company.  So, a coup was organized; orchestrated with what Victoria Nuland — our assistant secretary of state for European and Eurasian Affairs — described as $5 billion funneled through the State Department.  We created a new government in Ukraine; the United States did that.  This money, a lot of it came from George Soros through his Open Society Institute. George Soros, by the way, was knighted by the Queen of England in 1965; he absolutely does not represent the interests of the United States.  He is acting as an interest for a foreign power; namely, the British monarchy and that legacy of evil.

What happened — and a lot of this draws on a collaborator of ours, Natalia Vitrenko; you may have seen some of her videos we’ve posted on the LaRouche PAC site.  She’s an extraordinary woman; she was a member of Parliament in the Ukraine.  She is the head of the Progressive Socialist Party in Ukraine (PSPU); she ran for President at one time, and got I think 11% of the vote. She’s been a very outspoken figure; and she’s been in collaboration with Mr. and Mrs. LaRouche over many years.  She has her doctorate in economics; she concurred with Mr. and Mrs. LaRouche’s economic forecast.

And she is right now being targetted.  On Oct. 28 of last year, her offices were raided by paramilitary forces in Ukraine; claiming that there was a dispute with the landlord.  Now, they’re attempting to charge her with something called “infringement of the territorial integrity of Ukraine,” which is a crime which would carry a 10-year prison sentence.  They have no evidence for such.  She said this is a political witch hunt; it does endanger her. She put out a video saying that if her economic program had been adopted by Ukraine in the mid-1990s, when she proposed it as a member of Parliament, in opposition to the International Monetary Fund’s deregulation and privatization, Ukraine would have been a thriving nation today; there would have been no economic hardship; there would have been no coup; and 10,000 people in the Donbass who’ve been killed in the wake of this would still be alive.  So, she is a very important person; and you will hear her voice in one of the videos that I’m going to show you.  There is this document on her which we should circulate, because we have to make public the situation that she is in, for having the courage that she has to speak out and to associate herself with Mr. and Mrs. LaRouche over many, many years.

So, she described — what happened was, the media were whipping up this furor in Ukraine about working with Russia instead of working with the European Union; and she describes a staged incident which occurred in November of 2013, where there were thousands of protesters out in the square, but the demonstrations had largely ended in the Maidan.  What happened was, there were about 1,000 people left in the Maidan in the middle of the night.  At 4 a.m. someone got a group of police to come in and start beating everybody, when most of the demonstration had been cleared. Somehow, coincidentally, at 4 a.m., all of the international news media were there to film this.  Then this was circulated all around the world.  I found the video, and sure enough, posted on the London Guardian website, where they show the police beating people; and they say, this is the oppressive Ukrainian regime, this is how they treat peaceful protesters.  Then, shortly thereafter, what happened is, the so-called “peaceful” protest got taken over; got infiltrated by a group of literal neo-Nazis; followers of Stepan Bandera, who was a collaborator of Hitler.  If people know the history in Ukraine, the Ukrainian collaborators with the Nazis were known to be among the very most brutal of anyone.  This guy killed over 70,000 Jews and Poles; and the demonstrations took an ugly turn, where people began marching with torches, carrying giant photographs of Stepan Bandera.  So literal Nazi marches through the streets of Ukraine, complete with swastikas.  This would be as if in Germany you had a parade of people marching around with pictures of Adolf Hitler. This is what was happening in Ukraine in December of 2013.

The thing had turned violent, and in that context, Victoria Nuland comes in and brings cupcakes and Twinkies to the people who are throwing the Molotov cocktails; Obama calls them peaceful demonstrators.  Then, I just want you to hear this audio recording of our plans for how we organized their government.

[Begin audio]

VICTORIA NULAND:  I can’t remember if I told you this, or I only told Washington this; that when I talked to [UN Undersecretary] Jeff Feltman this morning, he had a new name for the UN guy — Robert Serry  — did I write you that this morning?


NULAND: He’s now gotten both Serry and Ban Ki Moon to agree that Serry could come in Monday or Tuesday.


NULAND:  So that would be great, I think, to help glue this thing and have the UN help glue it, and you know …

PYATT:  I think we’ve got to do something to make it stick together.  Because you can be pretty sure that if it does start to gain altitude, the Russians will be working behind the scenes to torpedo it.

NULAND:  … fuck the EU!

PYATT:  No, exactly.  And again, the fact that this is out there right now…

SARE:  She said, “Fuck the EU.”  This is clipped out of context a little bit.  They talk about the UN, and she says, “Fuck the EU!”  Then what she goes on to say — she’s talking to Pyatt, the U.S. ambassador to Ukraine — and then she goes on to say, “I think Yatz, no this one is” — and she describes the whole process of how we’re going to assimilate — you heard her say it’s going to “glue”; you heard her say that in the beginning.  So, she and Pyatt are deciding, with $5 billion from George Soros, they’re going to glue together a synthesized government of Ukraine.  That’s the “democratic” thing we are supposed to be supporting.

Now can we show that other video?  What I want to show you is events in Ukraine which Natalia Vitrenko showed at a conference in France, of what actually happened.  Yanukovych was under orders from the EU; he was trying to obey what he was being told by the people allegedly trying to help him, who were actually trying to overthrow him.  So, the police were unarmed; the demonstrators were armed.  You will see it; and what you see in the video is the police.  There was a storming of the government buildings; the police are all behind the fence, and these protesters are throwing in Molotov cocktails and setting people on fire and so on.  Go ahead, you can just show this; and you’ll hear the narration.


VOICEOVER TRANSLATION OF NATALIA VITRENKO NARRATING: Officials came to Kiev, but they did not notice any guerrillas or neo-Nazis.  They demanded that the government pursue only a peaceful solution. But on January 15, Zbigniew Brzezinski gave his interview, saying that the Maidan should not stop, but must go forward. Then, on January 19, there was a new wave of aggression. The police, the Berkut, were just standing there, standing guard around the government quarter, making no moves, and not touching the Maidan. But the neo-Nazi guerrillas came out of the Maidan to attack the government quarter. [Video.] This is January 19. The EU said that these are not terrorists or guerrillas, but “Euromaidan activists.” Each time, the actions are more aggressive. On January 19, you have them throwing Molotov cocktails at the police, setting them on fire.

What you’re seeing here, is how the Euromaidan defends European values.   Here you have February 18. They said they were going on a peaceful march to the Supreme Rada. [Video of armed guerrillas attacking police outside the Rada.] During all this time, the EU was telling Yanukovych not to introduce a state of emergency. Out of 20,000 people in the Euromaidan, there were 2,000 hardcore neo-Nazis.

This again is outside the Rada on the 18th of February. Again, out of 20,000 demonstrators, 2,000 are these hardcore neo-Nazi groups.  On this Feb. 18 demonstration, they announced beforehand that they were doing a peaceful march by the Rada, the Parliament. [END VIDEO]

SARE:  OK.  So, that was February 18, 2014.  Then what happened was, while all this was going on Yanukovych was in negotiations with the opposition; and they presented an agreement, witnessed by the Foreign Ministers of Germany, France, and Poland, saying we’ll have a constitutional reform by September, Presidential elections late in the year, and everyone should turn in their weapons.  This document was taken out to the peaceful protesters at the Maidan, and you will not be surprised that when it was read out, people booed. And then a young commander of the Maidan grabbed the microphone and said the deal was unacceptable; they hadn’t been out there for three months just to have Yanukovych stay in office, and if Yanukovych was not out by 10 a.m. the next morning, they were going to go in for a full attack on the regime.

So, Yanukovych fled the country, went to Russia; and the Rada, all the members of parties who would have been sympathetic to working with Russia, for fear — and many of them were beaten up, and set on fire, and all kinds of things — so they fled. So, you certainly did not have a constitutional vote of the Rada with full representation.  So the people that were left, voted to get rid of Yanukovych and to install Turchynov as the acting President on February 22nd.  So, February 22nd was the date of the coup; on February 23rd, we’re holding a Day of Truth.

Now what was said, and how did the media function on this? We saw what was occurring there — this absolutely violent — and there’s other video footage you can see of the people marching with the pictures of Bandera and their swastikas and so on.  So, the media says this is all coming, there’s really just terrible Russian propaganda; it’s really peaceful demonstrators.

Then the way they feed themselves is, they interview some guy — a 38-year-old doctor from Kiev — saying I came here to support the students who were brutally beaten yesterday.  This was after they staged that incident back in November; and he said, “I’m sure Yanukovych was ordered to beat them by Putin.” Now, this is some guy who’s just reading the press coming in there; but he’s cited by the London Guardian as the evidence for the story of how it’s Putin behind this.  And that’s how the media operate.

Now later in the year, people may recall, there were certain of these horrific videos circulating on Facebook; one of Odessa, where there was a group of pro-Russians meeting in the labor union building and these neo-Nazis came, herded everyone into the building, and set it on fire, burning people to death.  There was a real targetting: The slogans of Bandera were “Death to the Muscovites!”; “Death to the Jews!”  This is the kind of things they were saying.

So in this context, later in March of 2014 — and this is very important, because do you know why we have sanctions on Russia?  The alleged reason?  Why do we have sanctions on Russia right now?  Because they supposedly invaded Crimea, right? Russia annexed and invaded Crimea.  Now, given this is what they were doing to people who spoke Russian or were pro-Russian, in Crimea you have a population which is 80% to 90% ethnic Russian. Do you think they would really like to part of a country that is going to brutalize them and burn them alive in buildings and things?  No!

What happened is, Putin brilliantly held, they organized the referendum; the people of Crimea had a vote.  When they had the vote on March 16, 2014, 97% of the population declared that they wanted to leave Ukraine and rejoin the Russian Federation—97%. This is what is called a “Russian invasion of Crimea.”  The people of Crimea hold a vote and they decide to leave.  I found an article in Forbes magazine which is a poll that they took in June 2014, so this four months after this election.  They did a Gallup poll—Gallup is a Western polling agency —  and they wanted to know whether people thought that the referendum on Crimea reflected the view of the people; in other words, was this accurate, or was it a fraud; 82.8% of the people of Crimea said, “yes, it was accurate.”  Then they broke this down; it was 82.8 overall.  Of the ethnic Russians, 93.6% thought it was accurate; and of the Ukrainians, the ethnic non-Russians, 68.4%—well over two-thirds of the Ukrainians living there thought the vote was legitimate.  Then they asked as a whole, did they feel that joining Russia would make life better in Crimea? And 73.9% of the population said “yes.”

So, for all of this talk about how we’re not going to lift the sanctions on Russia until they give Crimea back to Ukraine, no one in Crimea wants to go back to Ukraine!  If they did, I’m sure we would see all over the news, the pictures of the big demonstrations in Crimea.  Has anyone here seen pictures of people protesting in Crimea?  Are there people waving Ukrainian flags saying, please, we all want to go back to join Ukraine? There is no such thing.  The vote was 97%! And they did another poll a year later, and 80% of the people in Crimea said yes, that’s how we voted and it’s legitimate.  So, think about what we’re being fed in the media here and the pretext for keeping sanctions on Russia which did nothing.  It’s extraordinary.

Before I close, just a couple things.  I wanted to read you a section of a letter that Natalia Vitrenko wrote to President Trump shortly after the election.  She writes:

“I greatly hope that you will abandon as undemocratic and intolerable the planning and implementation of coups d’état through color revolutions such as has been done by U.S. agencies twice in Ukraine.  I would like to see you build relations with Russia and China, not as enemies or rivals but as partners and allies in the name of peace, justice, and prosperity for the entirety of our planet Earth.  I hope very much that you will also make a positive influence on what is happening in Ukraine. Our people are suffering badly from war, extreme poverty, corruption, political repressions, and the rampaging of the neo-Nazis.  The outgoing U.S. administration kept stirring up the people of Ukraine against Russia, thereby, inciting a war between our fraternal peoples, one that unquestionably threatens to trigger a Third World War.  The whole world awaits with hope for you to carry out your promises with specific actions to ensure the welfare of every American and promote peace and prosperity for all mankind.”

So, this is the letter from Vitrenko to President Trump, and I would just say in conclusion that part of the reason why we place such an emphasis here on the work in Classical music, among other things, is because in a moment like this, it is very important for one to be able to trust one’s own mind.  That is, you have to develop — and this is crucial to LaRouche’s method of thinking and economics — is to develop a method for being able to determine whether something is true or not.  As Einstein said, a very, very small percentage of determining of that is based on empirical evidence; and in fact, he says, the more important the universal principle you’re trying to discover, the smaller portion of empirical evidence will be involved in that. Because the principles of the universe, which our mind can reflect and we fight to develop to reflect, are unseen. Everything that we have here in the physical world carries certain imperfection, but a principle is in a different domain.

So, I think in this period, it’s very important to not be thrown by the crazy hysteria and fear-mongering and noise, and to also know that what did happen in the election did happen.  The American people are not going to go back on that.  As LaRouche said, the American people don’t want to die.  They voted against death.  If they wanted to die, — he didn’t say this, I’m saying this —  if they wanted to die they would have elected Hillary Clinton.  But they didn’t wish to, and I think they still don’t want to.  And it is up to us to provide a certain kind of crucial leadership of principle including the policies which have been reiterated here repeatedly: The necessity of getting Glass-Steagall reinstated immediately as a first step toward a full recovery program; and then what Mrs. LaRouche outlined is that Donald Trump be at the Belt and Road summit in China on May 14 and 15, because imagine what potential will exist in the world after President Trump meets with all of these leaders who are involved in this.  It will be a turning point; it will be a whole new geometry before us.  At any rate, that is what I wanted to present. [applause]

SPEED:  In discussion with our organization last Sunday, Lyn LaRouche referencing last week’s meeting said that he would be very happy if John Sigerson’s voice were heard again. Many of us last night were at an event here in Manhattan, which in one sense we want to make sure people have some evaluation of. So I’ve asked John to come to the microphone, not merely to speak about that event, but to take up part of what Diane was talking about there at the very end.  John.

JOHN SIGERSON:  I must say that the press conference that Trump gave on Thursday was the first Presidential press conference that I’ve been able to tolerate in listening to in the last couple of decades.

I encourage everybody who hasn’t done so to actually listen through the entire press conference, because it really is showing that this is a new era.  I wanted to point out one aspect of that which is a musical aspect, which is a theme that President Trump was developing.  And I don’t know whether Trump knows what a fugue is, what a Bach fugue is.  I don’t know whether he’s read William Empson’s Seven Types of Ambiguity, in terms of way the poetry works, i.e., the basis of poetry being ambiguity, or irony, as Lyndon LaRouche has laid out in so great detail over the years.  But a number of times he said, when he was talking about the New York Times:  He didn’t describe them as the New York Times, he described them as the failing New York Times. This was for me a breath of fresh air.  It was like coming out of a period equivalent to the Cultural Revolution in China, where all of a sudden you get a new wind blowing because this is something that you weren’t allowed to say.  You were not allowed to say anything against the New York Times.  After all, you weren’t allow to say anything against Obama, especially our African-American friends, some of whom who distanced themselves from us for many years because you weren’t allowed to say anything—anybody who was supporting Obama—it doesn’t matter that the New York Times had as one of its employees in the 1920s, Adolf Hitler—it doesn’t matter at all; you can’t attack the New York Times.  And here, you have the President of the United States saying the “failing New York Times.

This is a kind of a beginning of a fugal poetic principle because that’s the only way you’re going to get at the truth. That in itself is not the truth, but it’s beginning the kinds of poetic appositions that will get us to the truth.

I just wanted to point out—what is a fugue after all?  A fugue—you begin with a voice and if anybody hasn’t heard a fugue or really listened to one carefully, go home and do so.  A fugue, it begins with one voice.  And then a second voice comes in at a certain distance, but the first voice keeps on going. but it creates already a dialogue. And then you may even have a third voice and then even a fourth voice comes in.  And in a really well-developed fugue, they begin to have a discussion. But then everything stops at a certain point.  It just stops.  And then, one of the other voices comes in, and with something seemingly completely different.  And then that develops, and then at a certain point toward the end, the original idea comes in.  And then, you actually get an idea of what the fugue is, which is none of the above.  It is the interaction between it, so your mind is beginning to get the idea of what Lyndon LaRouche is talking about in terms of grasping a concept as a whole, which is exactly what we are doing with the Trump Administration.  We are telling the Trump Administration that they are poets, in their own way. They say, “Huh? I’m a poet? Huh?”  But that’s exactly what we’re working on.

I want to return to this idea of coming out of literally almost a Dark Age, which we’re still struggling to get out of. As Dennis mentioned, we were at this concert which was sponsored by the Harlem Opera Theater, which is a group that just celebrated its 15th anniversary, which is an interesting time, that is, that they started right at the point at the beginning of the Bush Administration, and since then they’ve been fighting what’s turning out to be, indeed, a rearguard battle against exactly this cultural degeneration; although some of them did not see it that way at the beginning of the Obama Administration, but I think they’re now beginning to see it.

What struck me about the concert, and I won’t be too harsh here because I think it was a wonderful tribute to Sylvia Olden Lee, the wonderful coach and just incredible human being, who I had the privilege of working with along with some others in the 1990s.  I had the privilege of being coached by her. And there were many, many stories which just rang so true because of the fact that she would, — especially when you were singing something, and then she would sort of say, “Honey, nobody would pay money to hear that!”  Indeed, the concert was various testimonials from people who knew her, and also from her daughter, and from her son, and from many other wonderful musicians from that era.

This was interleaved with performances by young singers, people who have won competitions in the Harlem group. With only a few exceptions, what I heard with the young singers, who were singing very good music—Beethoven, Schubert, very good things. But you heard, what was missing—in most of the cases, what was missing because of this cultural degeneration that has gone on over the last at least 16 years, really much longer than that. And what struck me is that, with Sylvia, one of the things that she founded was an organization called, or an idea, called SYLVIA, which stands for Saving Young Lyric Voices In Advance. And it struck me that if we really want to make a tribute to what Sylvia was doing, we have to somewhat change that to SYLMIA, Saving Young Lyric Minds In Advance.

Because what I heard is that the voices are being saved, but the minds still need a lot of work, especially for our young people.  This is a big challenge, but what I am happy about, is, for instance, if you have young people, get them to watch this Trump press conference.  Sit ’em down, if they’re 16 years old,  — I don’t care how old, sit them down so that they can listen to this.  And have a discussion with them, to work this through.  Because the paradoxes, not that you’re going to say, “what the President says is the Truth and the whole Truth, and…” — there were a lot of problem with it.  But nonetheless, it’s exactly the beginning of the kind of fugal discussion process which can save this nation.

Thank you.

Q: I’m Rick from Bergen County, New Jersey.  In the recent Hamiltonian that I just received, and in trying to put the Maidan and the Ukrainian situation and Crimean situation in context, can you briefly mention several historic examples of so-called color revolutions that have been implemented previously; so  for example, in 1979, Iran, with the creation of Islamic extremism, and such movements? And I say this because the name of Gene Sharp is mention in this particular article, and a lot of people may not know who he is.

SPEED:  Well, mainly for purposes of time, and also because the point has really been made about the nature of them, we’re not going to go through all the various different incidents.  But let me just put it this way:  George Soros operates a set of non-governmental organizations, and otherwise finances various things, such as for example MoveOn; for example, if one is done in the United States, maybe they’ll call it the Purple Revolution after “Purple Rain,” you know, Prince.  They always name it after some color.  But it’s not relevant about the fact of —

The nature of the apparatus was something that was created, it’s called Project Democracy.  People associate it with the Republican Party and George Bush of the 1980s.  We wrote a very long report, called “Project Democracy, The Parallel Government Behind the Iran-Contra Affair,” which came out in April 1987, exactly when, and that day or the next day, all of our offices in the United States were shut, in the process of trying to roll up our organization.

So to understand the color revolution, the best way to understand it, is to look at what was attempted against our organization’s exposing this whole apparatus, which is well known in the government.  For example, John Kerry knows all about this apparatus.  And over years, we’ve sometimes worked with him to expose it. But it’s a Democratic Party and Republican Party apparatus, and the most important thing is it’s run out of the British Empire.  It’s not run from the United States.  The way to best understand it, actually, is to look at some of the work of people like Lord Palmerston or others, and the way it was the British intelligence is actually the author of what we’re looking at right now.

So, rather than take different incidents, the thing I would just say is, we have a dossier which is going to get released, and we’ll begin this week — we hope to have it very soon, and all of you are going to be involved in helping us.  Because our point is that, the reason for having the Day of Truth is because the truth is such a process is presently under way in the United States, but it will not work.  It’s going to be destroyed by us. And in fact, we’re going to reverse the process, that the people who are doing this are going to be themselves, destroyed. There’s a saying that Helga referenced, “The revolution eats its own children.” And we’re just going to essentially enhance the revolution’s appetite to do that. [laughter]

Q: Hi it’s Bruce from New Jersey.  I just wanted to say a few things about a couple of events that have gone on in the last week or so, particularly the work that was done in Washington, D.C., where we both took down from this Manhattan area, the copies of petitions that people had been signing on the street and in meetings and elsewhere, along with petitions that were sent up from different areas of the country by what would seem like a very wide-ranging, but actually with one intent in mind, grouping.  For example, I went to a Texas congressman’s office with petitions that had been sent up from signatures that had been gathered by the Tea Party group, down in that area.  I went to a different congressman’s office, where petitions had been gathered by the former Bernie Sanders organization, now called “Our Revolution.”

So it would seem like this couldn’t happen.  This couldn’t happen a few years ago.  But what we’re seeing is this change in dynamic which is really global in its nature.  And I think we really have to take advantage of that.  I mean, we could literally at this point go to any meeting in the country and find similar circumstances from what I found, the day after when I — the day after I went to Washington, there was a meeting of the Progressive Democrats, from people all over the state of New Jersey happened to be in my town.  But we had people from as far away as Bergen County all the way to the southern end of the state.  And although after talking initially with the people there, and they had agreed that I could actually make a short statement, somebody “higher up” apparently decided they didn’t want to see that.  So they said, “well, we’ll just let you hand out some things after the meeting.”

So when it came to the question & answer period, I raised my hand, and they said, “what did you want to talk about?” And I said, “The economy.  Why don’t we talk about it?”  and I held up this here, and made it as visible as I could from where I was — “why don’t we talk about Glass-Steagall? This is one of the things that we’ve all got to be working on right now.”

So with that, after the meeting, people started coming over, signing the petition; I had somebody from the teacher’s union taking copies to go to a local regional high school; I had a structural engineer from North Jersey who wanted us to contact him, and the Our Revolution group.

So again, I say, you can go to any organization you want and get a similar kind of result, because as I pointed out to the congressional offices, 70% of the public wants Glass-Steagall back! You could literally go to the National Dog Catcher’s Association meeting, and get that same result, and probably they’d say, “well, where do you want us to start grabbing Wall Street dogs up and neutering ’em?”  [laughter] So I just wanted to point that out, because we, in the next short period of time, we need to be getting this pressure put back on the Congress, on the House, on the Senate, everybody we can, to get create a “Glass-Steagall Spring.”

SARE:  That’s great!  [laughter] I think that’s excellent. I think that also would create the possibility where we could do what Mr. LaRouche has been talking about for some time, which is to take over a bunch of these Wall Street buildings and put things in them that are useful:  Like hospitals, universities, practice rooms and so on.  Because of course, what Glass-Steagall will do is demonstrate the utter bankruptcy of the whole system.

So that’s very good.  And everyone here should just pour it on, through the address that Trump is giving on Feb. 28 to the Joint Session of Congress, where the intent is that he will call for Glass-Steagall’s reinstatement at that time.  If we haven’t already gotten it done by then.

Oh, one other thing: As people may know, there’s congressional town meetings, and Lynne will go through some of this, all over the place and these crazy Soros-funded Organizing for Action groups are trying to get people to go there and do all kinds of impotent things, like hold up signs that say “I Disagree” or whatever.  There’s no content or substance to anything that they’re doing whatsoever.  But these meetings are a great opportunity for us to go with our literature, and give people some guidance in terms of what is actually going on that they don’t know about.  So, I’m sure Lynne will go through that. But I just want to encourage everybody to be completely confident about what we have to say; and if someone is really being a jerk, then there’s probably something wrong with them: Either they are an FBI agent or they’re paid by someone or whatever, because we are in a situation where everybody who is sane, as we were discussing earlier, thinks we should work with Russia and China! They think we should get millions of people back to work in this country, they do think we should be considering a future, and that’s what we’re organizing them to do.  So there’s no need to be shy or hold back or afraid of what kind of response you’re going to get: we should plunge ahead confidently and do the organizing.

SPEED:  What we’ll do, since we’re pretty much at time, is we’ll conclude by reporting to you from a development in Copenhagen, our organization there, which held an event last night.  So I just wanted to reference this: “The dialogue of cultures between the sponsors of the concert, itself, led to the great success — the Schiller  Institute, the Russian-Danish Dialogue organization, the Russian House in Copenhagen, and the China Culture Center of the Chinese Embassy (about to open, which also provided intermission food). And the concert was held in the Russian Center for Science and Culture of the Russian Embassy.”

Now, the concert was originally set up for 120 people, that’s the most room they had.  What happened there were no seats left in the room, and people just kept coming, until there were about 200 people, standing in the aisles and outside.  The people were told by Schiller Institute chairman Tom Gillesberg that we have a unique moment in world history, where the potential is there for the United States to join the new paradigm of economic development sweeping the world.

Now, understand, this is Copenhagen, this is an event of 200 people, and the opening remarks given by our person are about the United States, and what can happen with respect to that possible dialogue.

“Then the procession of gift-givers began.

“From Russia came children playing Russian folk songs on balalaikas, and a baritone who has sung on 200 stages, performed Mozart and Gounod. From China came a very musical young science student who played many flutes, and sang a Chinese love song, a duet, with one of our Danish members, Feride. From Indonesia came a traditional dancer, who filled the room with her grace. From Ghana came two young men who sang and played a religious song, and a song about when we work together, we are stronger than when we stand alone. ”

And from Denmark and Sweden came three outstanding female opera singers … they sang songs and arias from Schubert, Verdi, Dvorák and Sibelius. A soprano who recently retired from the Royal Danish Opera; a Danish woman pianist was the accompanist, and another of our members.  And so forth.  And for the finale, all the musicians sang Verdi’s “Va Pensiero,” with the addition of several members of the Schiller Institute’s future chorus. And they say here that they were signing people up for the chorus and that whole process.  I think you recognize that process as familiar.

And Michelle Rasmussen who is essentially more than an honorary New Yorker, wrote this report and they’ve been pushing in this direction for quite some time.

And finally, I just wanted to make sure we referenced that, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, at the Munich Security Conference, referenced a communication between the Russian Ministry and Cassius Marcellus Clay, the American ambassador to Russia in 1861, which communiqué also references their mutual disdain for the British Empire.  In the speech he gave yesterday at the Munich Security Conference.  So, to understand when we say that we’re on (quote) “the winning side of history,” it’s more than that:  It’s that Lyndon LaRouche who fought for these ideas for decades, represents the inevitable, because of his being right, principle that as John talked about before, takes on a fugal role in certain circumstances.  And that’s this circumstance.  That’s what’s happening.

What we have to do as the Manhattan Project is simply prosecute the fight that he outlined two years ago:  The idea was Hamilton, the idea was a federal, national process, the idea was to defend and to create the concept of an American Presidency — that’s what we did for two years, was a Presidential campaign — if you remember, as he said; it just didn’t have a candidate, it had a principle.  You have the result in the White House, and now our jobs is to fulfill the campaign that he requested of us in the first place, because we’ve come this far.



This entry was posted in LPAC, Manhattan Project and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.