MossadGate: “NSA Prism” Mossad Spying Cousins Out of the Closet
Jump To: Fukushima: Japanese Communist Party Successors
The Chair Leg of Truth; Afghanistan and the Left: The Russian Question Point Blank
MossadGate: “NSA Prism” Afghanistan, the Taliban and Drugs (from Civil Egypt Movement) Jewish Terrorist Group Would Cooperate With Hitler
Look at a World Globe - Odd, There is More Than Only America & Israel
Subject: Internet Kill switch As Opposed to Learning Journalism? Who killed
gryppa666 and piotrbein @ wordpress?
From: Tracy Turner raretrees a-t email@example.com
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e011827aeecb07c04eb8edd65
This email is not a "spokesperson" for Dr. Bein. Some of you asked me what
was going on. This sums it up, as does http://piotrbein.wordpress.com and
In the USA under US laws, it is possible that what was done to Dr. Bein was
a hate crime felony. A *hate* *crime* is a Class 4 *felony* with a maximum
prison *sentence* of three years, or seven years for a second offense.
Those responsible are probably highly skilled hackers aware of how
difficult it is for Homeland Security to backtrack the WWW. ;P
Dr. Bein was persecuted for being a Catholic Pole Male by Hateful Jewish Females, no ifs, ands or buts
about it. Just the mere suspicion of this, founded on several emails in my
possession from one of the suspects, means certain persons are banned from
* email chatting, publishing on my site, having their views or links
forwarded by me, etc. * For those of you who are innocent and ignorant of this, my deepest regrets. Personally, I view this as Goebbel's (first?) (unlikely) bonfire.
To the best of my knowledge, the COTO CREW should not be cast under
aspersion from this; I'm certain IP logs will prove so. Only mentioned at
all to protect those who know how to express themselves. Those who did this
cannot write, blog, photoshop, garner a crowd, journalistically. COTO has a
huge, long track record of admirable wordsmithing.
The 40+ writers/commentors from the March 2013 OEN "banned" have 1-2 foul
rats in their midst making wild accusation; IP's do not lie.
This was done by former OpEdNews groupies. ~ Tracy Turner
PS - To the best of my knowledge, this is the deed done: A *hate*
*crime*is a Class 4
*felony* with a maximum prison *sentence* of three years, or seven years
for a second offense. Motive seemed to be two-fold: Dr. Bein had an article
like this: http://rense.com/general82/sixmil.htm and the same time I had
PiotrBein.wordpress.com ~ Gryppa666.wordpress.com ~ Internet Kill Switch
CensorShipGroupies Reach Out From the Grave
Two 'Misguided Zionists' (Probably) Kill-Switch the Messenger Admired By 10,899,072 Busy Websites
PiotrBein.wordpress.com ~ Gryppa666.wordpress.com ~ Internet Kill Switch
It is possible Dr. Bein suffered a hate-crime. Here is what Cornell has to say:
(a) In General.—
(1) Offenses involving actual or perceived race, color, religion, or national origin.— Whoever, whether or not acting under color of law, willfully causes bodily injury to any person or, through the use of fire, a firearm, a dangerous weapon, or an explosive or incendiary device, attempts to cause bodily injury to any person, because of the actual or perceived race, color, religion, or national origin of any person—
(2) Offenses involving actual or perceived religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability.—
(A) In general.— Whoever, whether or not acting under color of law, in any circumstance described in subparagraph (B) or paragraph (3), willfully causes bodily injury to any person or, through the use of fire, a firearm, a dangerous weapon, or an explosive or incendiary device, attempts to cause bodily injury to any person, because of the actual or perceived religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability of any person—
(iii) in connection with the conduct described in subparagraph (A), the defendant employs a firearm, dangerous weapon, explosive or incendiary device, or other weapon that has traveled in interstate or foreign commerce; or
(3) Offenses occurring in the special maritime or territorial jurisdiction of the united states.— Whoever, within the special maritime or territorial jurisdiction of the United States, engages in conduct described in paragraph (1) or in paragraph (2)(A) (without regard to whether that conduct occurred in a circumstance described in paragraph (2)(B)) shall be subject to the same penalties as prescribed in those paragraphs.
(4) Guidelines.— All prosecutions conducted by the United States under this section shall be undertaken pursuant to guidelines issued by the Attorney General, or the designee of the Attorney General, to be included in the United States Attorneys’ Manual that shall establish neutral and objective criteria for determining whether a crime was committed because of the actual or perceived status of any person.
(1) In general.— No prosecution of any offense described in this subsection may be undertaken by the United States, except under the certification in writing of the Attorney General, or a designee, that—
(2) the term “explosive or incendiary device” has the meaning given such term in section 232 of this title;
(1) Offenses not resulting in death.— Except as provided in paragraph (2), no person shall be prosecuted, tried, or punished for any offense under this section unless the indictment for such offense is found, or the information for such offense is instituted, not later than 7 years after the date on which the offense was committed.
Q: Are you pulling the plug on Rense, too? Your rage at Dr. Bein was over this Rense article, essentially: The 'Six Million' Figure Began Over 100 Yrs Ago By Dr. Frederick Toben 8-8-8
The English lexicon needs a few new words to become daily used:
Christophobe - Jews who scream "antisemitism and anti-semitic" while stomping on the rights of Christians
Zionophobe - One so enamored in correcting the perceived, imaginary anitsemiticsm in others they do not fix the very real Jewish Supremacy in themselves
Pyroraciphobe - One so enamored with their own egomaniacal need to control the words, actions, free speech, science, math of others, they will use any and all means to get their point across. The three roots, fire, racist and phobe depict one who cannot relax and read a good book in the backyard; rather they are using a garden house to extinguish the barbecue of their ethnically/religiously not themselves neighbors. If they would only look down to see their own pants on fire. While putting out Dr. Bein's barbecue with their worst racist ideology this authors has ever seen since birth, two Jewish Supremacist housewives never noticed their persecution of a Christian Pole is a HATE FELONY under US law; that their IP log will give them up! Persecuting Dr. Bein for his Christianity and Polishness is s HATE CRIME!
Dr. Bein's message included "locusts of VID's, VAX, Biological Warfare, Depleted Uranium & DU Munitions, GMO Pesticide profiteering are advancing on the "Rome". 1-2 ignorant shot the messenger, "hugs and kisses" from them to Dr. Bein's Fans:
Some sites previously linked to piotrbein.wordpress.com:
If you have no writing talent, no html skills, cannot photoshop, are not able to research historical, scientific facts, grasp that the rights of others are not there to be smothered under your imaginary tantamount "rights" - you simply pull the plug on over 9 million busy websites probably frequented by a bare minimum of 900 million persons world wide. Websites affected by the messenger-shooters, "Josephina Goebbels.
Some sites previously linked to grypa666.wordpress.com
Small sample of the 1,786,327 websites with links to gryppa666.wordpress.com; the rights of two (2) Zionist Females outweigh the rights of VISITORS from 10,899,072 websites that linked to gryppa666.wordpress.com. Dr Bein is an outspoken critic of the Israeli and US Wars of Depleted Uranium "Liberation". Conservatively, 100 site visitors per month at each domain with links to Piotr Bein, PhD articles would put his monthly readership at 108,990,720. The rights of the 2 outweigh the rights of the 108,990,720 - is this not the precise definition of a Zionmockracy? Both women had no valid religious, scientific or mathematical argument to challenge Dr. Bein; instead banishment from the Internet by an Anonymous Woman - self-proclaimed champions of free speech. In the tiny, misucule cavities, a few dim sparks decided to accuse Bein of "HATE" and deprive 108 million persons per month of civil, frank discourse of GMO, Antiwar, VIDs, VAX, Pesticides, Nuclear Cartel,etc. The discussions of 108 million per month is now replaced with two bored, neurotic divorcees smug sense of 3rd wave "equality".
tags="piotrbein.wordpress.com gyrppa666.wordpress.com book burning censorship web kill switch zionism zog nwo new world order jews jewish holocaust holohoax 1919 - 6 million saying writing or blogging holocaust 1919 punishable by Internet Death"
PiotrBein.wordpress.com ~ Gryppa666.wordpress.com ~ Internet Kill Switch
Window immediately above from: http://balder.org/
Fukushima: Japanese Communist Party Successors
(Some Images Below Were added For Human Interest, From Other Blogs – Most Located Between Articles)
Articles Reflect Author’s Views Only – Essentially, A World of Koched-OutAstroturf Tea and Mother Jones CIA-Rebellion is Friggin’ Boring
Rosbalt, 08/16/2013 11:42
Alla Yaroshinskaya, Member of the Commission of the USSR Armed Forces
to Investigate officials after the Chernobyl accident (1989-1991 gg.) Подробнее:
In Japan, a rapidly and dramatically evolving nuclear disaster after the accident at the nuclear power plant "Fukushima-1" in 2011. As reported a few days ago the world's media with reference to the operating company TEPKO (Tokyo Electric Power Co), a protective wall erected along the coastline, already unable to cope with increasing levels of "dirty" water, which is formed due to an abnormal cooling of reactors. He has risen to 60 cm above the protective barriers, and 300 tons of radioactive dirt splashed into the ocean every day.
In this case, the drainage system, nuclear power plants, according to experts, it has accumulated no less than 20,000 tons. According to recent measurements, the level of radioactive cesium in the water in one of the drainage tunnels reaches 2.35 billion becquerels per liter. The accepted international norm - 150 becquerels.
Knowing a lot about the gracious lies the Soviet authorities after the accident at the nuclear power plant in Chernobyl, do not get tired to wonder how these same Japanese chihvostivshie then (along with the West) to Moscow for concealing the truth about the explosion and its aftermath, for more than two years doing almost the same thing over its nuclear disaster and the world.
The drama of the situation lies in the quiet silence about the creeping nuclear disaster, which has already gets people thousands of miles away. Note that take part in this, and international institutions such as the UN and the IAEA, lulling himself and us that, well, nothing bad will happen.
Two years of radioactive water from the "Fukushima-1" "heals" Oceans and campaign management TEPKO only now for the first time acknowledged its leakage. Only now is the company itself and the Agency for Natural Resources and Energy, the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry of Japan attended an urgent strengthening of the protective barrier. The Japanese government suddenly "seen the light" and issued appropriate guidance.
Meanwhile, as reported on the website of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, in June of this year TEPKO was forced to admit that in the groundwater beneath the damaged reactor was found highly radioactive strontium-90, a product of fission of uranium and plutonium (as well as the explosion of a nuclear bomb - is to the question of the version that was allegedly caused by the tsunami Japanese secret underground nuclear explosion). In the water samples was found and tritium. However, general manager TEPKO Toshihiko Fukuda assured in a press conference that the radioactive water containing strontium-90 is not leaked into the Pacific Ocean.
According to the newspaper Japan Today National, between December 2012 and May of this level of strontium-90 in groundwater near the turbine reactor number 2 increased more than 100 times. In absolute figures, it looks like this: from 8.6 to 1000 Bq per liter of water. It is more than 30 times higher than the legal limit - 30 becquerels. In the water, also found the beyond the amount of tritium - 500,000 becquerels per liter.
Already in 2011, some time after the accident, the report said a team of scientists at Stanford University and the School of Marine and Atmospheric Research Stoney Brukskogo University (New York), "leakage of radionuclides in the ocean waters has caused concern in the local and global levels for the the spread of radiation. " The report states that the radioactive elements after the accident at the nuclear power plant "Fukushima-1" were found in the Pacific Bluefin Tuna, which carries them, migrating across the North Pacific Ocean.
The researchers measured the levels of radiation in 15 tuna caught off the coast of California in August 2011, and found in them elevated levels of cesium-134 and cesium-137. It is noted that the studies on the subject of portable radiation tuna conducted before the Fukushima accident, the radioactive cesium in fish was not recorded at all.
In the report, scientists also noted that "others are large, highly migratory marine animals are actively using the waters around Japan, and these animals can also be transporting the vectors obtained after the accident at the" Fukushima "radionuclides that they transfer to remote areas of the northern and southern parts of the Pacific Ocean . "
As noted in the report of the international NGO "Bellona", less than two years after the accident in the waters near the destroyed nuclear facility operator of TEPKO caught a fish similar to sea bass, in which Japanese radiation standards were exceeded in 2500 again. It has accumulated a 254,000 becquerels per kilogram of body weight.
Another interesting study by researchers at the U.S. for the increased content in the air beta radiation on the Pacific coast of the United States and the upward trend of hypothyroidism in infants after the accident at the Japanese nuclear power plant "Fukushima-1". As the researchers Joe Mangano and Janet Sherman, after the Japanese accident fallout, including radioactive iodine, have been distributed worldwide. However, particularly by the affected were five U.S. states.
Just a few days after the accident, the concentration of iodine-131, has fallen in the United States were 211 times higher in the accepted international norms. The highest levels of radioactive iodine and radiation have been recorded in the states on the Pacific coast. Here, from March to December 2011, the number of cases of congenital hypothyroidism was 16% higher than for the same period in 2010, given its three-percent decline in the 36 other states. The largest discrepancy between the two groups of states (28%) occurred in poslefukusimsky period from 17 March to 30 June 2011. Scientists call for further study an increased incidence of the disease not only in the U.S. but also in other countries in order to better understand the relationship between exposure to radioactive iodine NPP "Fukushima-1" and the risk of congenital hypothyroidism.
These same scientists have studied and compared the mortality statistics in the U.S. (adults and neonates) four months after the accident at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant, and 14 weeks after the destruction of the reactor "Fukushima-1". It turned out that after the middle of March 2011 until the time specified in the U.S. 13,983 people died, including 822 infants, and May-August 1986, following the accident at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant - 16 573 people, including 306 infants. The death rate in the U.S. for 14 weeks after the accident and the Japanese nuclear fallout radionuclides increased by 4, 46%. Over the same period of time to shock the rate was 2, 34%. During the same period, the infant mortality after the incident on the "Fukushima-1" rose by 1.8% compared to its previous decline of 8.37%.
Considering that the study should be continued and refined, the researchers correlated with mortality dropped out in the United States, Fukushima and Chernobyl radionuclides, indicating that in the same periods in previous years, it was lower.
Shortly after their report was made public, officials from British Columbia (Canada), which is located near the north-western United States, announced that 21 people had died from sudden infant death syndrome (SVDVS) in the first half of 2011, while the whole of last year there were 16 such cases.
Meanwhile, after more than two years after the accident, there are more information about the real exposure and workers who have taken over, so to speak, the first nuclear strike, and the public, brought from the 20-kilometer zone. According to recent reports the newspaper "Asahi Shimbun", citing sources in the control TEPKO electricity company, about two thousand workers, taming the nuclear monster, received radiation doses to the thyroid gland, is 10 times higher than officially announced earlier.
Although in December of last year, officials TEPKO fed own people and the world the false information restful 100 millisieverts, which increase the risk of thyroid cancer, received only 178 people. In fact, however, this figure is now surfaced, was understated by more than five times. A body in one of the working revealed more than 1000 mSv. This is the fatal dose.
Not far escaped the Japanese government and the Soviet, strenuously concealed the consequences of the Chernobyl nuclear accident to the public and the world. Of the secret documents that I was able to "dig" and published in 1992, it follows that in order to be discharged from hospital thousands of irradiated, the task force of the Politburo of the CPSU Central Committee on Chernobyl made a political decision - to increase the maximum allowable dose that a person can get through the life tenfold. The Japanese nine months after the nuclear accident at the "Fukushima-1" made a decision - to cancel the evacuation of those places where human dose is 20 mSv per year. (Resettlement of people and a 20-kilometer exclusion zone the Japanese authorities also initially suppressed.)
The motivation for such a decision of the Japanese government is as simple as the door, the longer people will be in evacuation, the more they will have to pay compensation. So it's better to pay their own health and lives.
All this over 27 years ago, we were in the Soviet Union, Gorbachev-Chernobyl-Perestroika! (Then, to hide the extent of the nuclear disaster task force of the Politburo of the Chernobyl took top secret decision to move is taken out of the danger zones of pregnant women and children back - in hundreds of villages affected by radiation. Facsimile these documents I have published in his book "Chernobyl. Top Secret "in 1992.) resent then lies about the Soviet leaders in the Japanese nuclear situation, the collapse of its nuclear reactors were quite worthy disciples of the CPSU.
Member of the Commission of the USSR Armed Forces to Investigate officials after the Chernobyl accident (1989-1991 gg.)
Americans are not like the Stasi, the Russian Police, the Chinese Security Forces - Thank God We Have Our Kinder, Gentler Machine Gun Hand.
Jump To Top
Afghanistan and the Left: The Russian Question Point Blank
Posted on October 2, 2013by
Reprinted from Spartacist English edition No. 29, Summer 1980: http://www.icl-fi.org/english/esp/archives/oldsite/Pointblk.htm
Afghanistan is a flash of lightning which illuminates the real contours of the world political landscape. It has exploded the last illusions of détente to reveal the implacable hostility of U.S. imperialism to the Soviet degenerated workers state. It has stripped away all diplomatic cover for Washington’s alliance with Maoist/Stalinist China. And it has confronted the left inescapably with “the Russian question”: the nature of the state originating in the Bolshevik Revolution and its conflict with world capitalism.
For revolutionary socialists there is nothing tricky, nothing ambiguous about the war in Afghanistan. The Soviet army and its left-nationalist allies are fighting an anti-communist, anti-democratic mélange of landlords, money lenders, tribal chiefs and mullahs committed to mass illiteracy. And to say that imperialist support to this social scum is out in the open is the understatement of the year. U.S. “national security” czar Zbigniew Brzezinski actually traveled to the Khyber Pass and rifle in hand incited the insurgents: “That land over there is yours and you will go back one day because your cause is right and God is on your side.” The gut-level response of every radical leftist should be fullest solidarity with the Soviet Red Army.
Yet much of the left, with the Maoists leading the pack, has joined the imperialist crusade against “Soviet expansionism.” In fact, the official pro-Peking group in the U.S., the Communist Party (Marxist-Leninist) attacked the Carter Doctrine from the right as too soft on the Russians. Likewise, the “Third Camp” social-democrats, like the British Cliff group, which could maintain a certain left posture in the days of détente, stand once more revealed as State Department socialists. Those leftists, whatever they call themselves, who deny that the Soviet Union is a proletarian state power (albeit bureaucratically degenerated) find themselves, some more, some less willingly, on the same side of the barricades as U.S. imperialism.
It is not surprising that the Maoists and social democrats should rally to imperialist anti-Sovietism, although some may bridle at making common cause with the crazed anti-communist Brzezinski and his Afghan cutthroats. But for Trotskyists, support to the Soviet army in Afghanistan should be an elementary political reflex. Trotsky’s last great factional struggle, against the “Third Camp” Shachtman/Burnham opposition in the American Socialist Workers Party (SWP) in 1940, was provoked by the imperialist campaign against the Soviet invasion of “little, democratic Finland.” Drawing the hardest line against social-democratic anti-communism, Trotsky declared: “The safeguarding of the socialist revolution comes before formal democratic principles.”
And the Soviet intervention in Afghanistan has a far more progressive content than Stalin’s action in Finland in 1940, where the Kremlin simply wanted a slice of territory for defensive military purposes, moreover, in the context of an alliance with Nazi Germany. A victory for the Islamic-feudalist insurgency in Afghanistan will not only mean a hostile, imperialist-allied state on the USSR’s southern border. It will mean the extermination of the Afghan left and the reimposition of feudal barbarism—the veil, the bride price. Moreover, the Soviet military occupation raises the possibility of a social revolution in this wretchedly backward country, a possibility which did not exist before.
Yet much of the ostensibly Trotskyist movement is also dancing to Carter’s tune over Afghanistan. The most outright counterrevolutionary position is that of the unstable bloc between the Stalinophobic reformists of the French Organisation Communiste Internationaliste (OCI) and the followers of political adventurer Nahuel Moreno. They not only demand the withdrawal of Soviet troops, but actually solidarize with the reactionary Islamic insurgents! (See “Morenoites Call for Counterrevolution in USSR,” Spartacist No. 27-28, Winter 1979-80.)
The United Secretariat (USec) has, predictably enough, split three ways over the question. A large minority, whose foremost spokesman is Tariq Ali, demands Soviet withdrawal in the name of self-determination for Afghanistan. The leadership around Ernest Mandel too condemns the Soviet intervention for violating national rights, but grudgingly admits that to now call for withdrawal would amount to support to imperialist-backed counterrevolution. The American SWP supports the Soviet action but deliberately minimizes its significance.
SWP Skirts the Russian Question
Long seeking to become a pressure group on the liberal bourgeoisie, the SWP has presented opposition to U.S. imperialist militarism almost exclusively by reference to the democratic right of national self-determination. It was “heroic, little Cuba” and later “heroic, little Vietnam” against the American colossus. Social revolution in the colonial world was reduced to a series of contests between various “Third World” Davids and the U.S. Goliath. In this way the SWP echoed and so reinforced the liberal notion of imperialism as big-power bullying of and military intervention into small countries.
But now it is Jimmy Carter who is appealing to liberal “anti-imperialism” and even Third World nationalism over the Soviet invasion of “little, independent Afghanistan.” The imperialist media go on about “Russia’s Vietnam,” evoking sympathy for poor villagers with their primitive weapons battling the mechanized army of a “superpower.”
How does the SWP justify its support to the Soviet intervention in Afghanistan without confronting liberal, anti-Communist prejudices? No easy task this. The SWP tries the line that Washington is mainly reacting against “the Afghan revolution” rather than the Soviet expansion. That’s right. “The Afghan revolution”—this world-historic event which threatens imperialist domination in Asia!
“It was not Moscow’s increased influence in Afghanistan that alarmed Washington—though there was some concern over that—but the Afghan revolution itself and its repercussions throughout central Asia. The imperialists were opposed to the social gains that had been won by the Afghan workers and peasants and feared that the revolution would advance toward the overthrow of capitalist property relations.”
—“How Washington Instigated Counterrevolution in Afghanistan,” Intercontinental Press, 14 January 1980
So the SWP can play its old liberal refrain of “self-determination for the Afghan revolution.” The Soviet role is here reduced to merely aiding a revolution in a small country attacked by imperialism, a role comparable to that which it played in Cuba and Vietnam:
“So the issue is not Soviet intervention, but a growing U.S. intervention—aimed at taking back the gains won by the Afghan masses—that finally forced the Soviet Union to respond.”
—Militant, 15 February
Everyone knows that, of course, the issue is Soviet intervention or, more precisely, the incorporation of Afghanistan into the Soviet bloc through social revolution from without as in East Europe.
Although the SWP has written numerous articles on “the Afghan revolution,” one is hard put to find a class analysis of the revolution, the government which issued out of it or the state. Rather, in Stalinist or bourgeois-nationalist fashion, the post-April 1978 government is described as “revolutionary,” “popular,” “progressive,” “anti-imperialist,” etc.
The April 1978 “Revolution”: What Happened?
Key to understanding what has happened in Afghanistan since April 1978 is that for decades the country has been a Soviet client state. A large fraction of the country’s thin educated stratum was trained in the USSR, and much of the intelligentsia regarded the Soviet Union as a source of social progress. And for good reason. An Afghan schoolteacher looking across the northern border at Soviet Central Asia, two generations ago as wretchedly backward as Afghanistan, today sees a literate, relatively modern society where women are no longer degraded slaves.
The generally pro-Soviet sympathies of the Afghan intelligentsia manifested themselves organizationally with the establishment of the People’s Democratic Party of Afghanistan (PDPA) in 1965. A pro-Moscow, petty-bourgeois radical party, the PDPA was composed of schoolteachers, university students, government officials and, not least important, army officers. The party had no base among the peasant masses nor among the tiny urban working class.
In 1967 the PDPA split between the Khalq (Masses) faction led by Noor Mohammad Taraki, one of the country’s best-known poets, and the Parcham (Banner) faction led by Babrak Karmal. The difference between the factions is hard to fathom, and may have been cliquist in nature. Both groups adhered to a strategy, consistent with their social composition, of capturing and radicalizing the weak governing apparatus. Officers loyal to the PDPA-Parcham played a major role in overthrowing the monarchy in 1973, and the party participated in the first bourgeois-nationalist Daud government.
Subsequently Daud moved right and in early 1978 decided to crush the PDPA, now shakily reunited. When police assassinated a PDPA leader and others were arrested, mass demonstrations, mainly composed of students and government office workers, broke out in Kabul. In the ensuing showdown the PDPA military fraction outgunned Daud’s men; Daud himself was killed. Thus was born the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan.
The April 1978 “Revolution” was essentially a left-wing military coup with a certain popular support among the intellectuals. Unusually, the PDPA officers turned the main governmental posts over to the civilian wing of the party. But the real power remained in the military. Hafizullah Amin emerged as the strongman of the new regime because he had previously been in charge of the PDPA’s work within the officer corps.
Glorifying “the Afghan revolution” so as to minimize the significance of the Soviet intervention, the SWP conjures up a non-existent mass workers’ and peasants’ insurrection:
“Then, in April 1978, the Afghan masses rose up and fought to change these oppressive conditions….
“Tens of thousands of Afghan workers and peasants took to the streets, a section of the army rebelled, a new government came to power.”
—Militant, 18 January 1980
The narrow, petty-bourgeois elite social base of the new PDPA regime is described in late 1978 by the knowledgeable radical journalist Fred Halliday. Although a supporter of “the Afghan revolution,” Halliday, unlike the SWP charlatans, respects empirical truth:
“What has occurred is the seizure of power by a radical sector within the state apparatus, led by civilians (most of them teachers or other kinds of civil servant) aided by army officers….
“The new regime’s implantation outside the main urban centers is very weak, and the inevitable temptation will be to rely on the armed forces rather than the party to implement policies….
“At the same time, the lower ranks of the State apparatus—both civilian and military—remained untouched, and in particular it was evident that the possibility of counterrevolutionary resistance from the lower ranks of the armed forces had not been eliminated merely by the removal of the top officers.”
—“Revolution in Afghanistan,” New Left Review, November-December 1978
The left-nationalist PDPA came to power in one of the most primitive, tradition-bound countries on earth. According to the United Nations Statistical Yearbook for 1978, only 35,000 people were employed in manufacturing out of a population of 17 to 20 million. At the same time, there were a quarter of a million mullahs, paid by the government, an enormous parasitic caste sucking the blood from a desperately poor people.
These few statistics indicate the limits to social change from within Afghan society. Unlike in neighboring Iran or Pakistan, a proletarian revolution is not possible in Afghanistan. The country is too absolutely economically backward. On the other hand, the social base for reactionary resistance to even the most moderate bourgeois-democratic reforms is strong.
Despite this the PDPA regime launched an ambitious (for Afghanistan) series of democratic reforms—land redistribution, cancellation of peasant debts, reduction of the bride price to a nominal sum, compulsory education for both sexes, moves toward the separation of church and state. In particular it was the regime’s steps toward the equality of women which most fueled the reactionary uprising. And this is recognized even by bourgeois journalists who have covered the Afghan “freedom fighters.” The New York Times (9 February) reporter observed:
“Land reform attempts undermined their village chiefs. Portraits of Lenin threatened the religious leaders. But it was the Kabul revolutionary Government’s granting of new rights to women that pushed Orthodox Moslem men in the Pashtoon villages of eastern Afghanistan into picking up their guns.”
The Left-Nationalist Regime Besieged
By all accounts the PDPA regime acted with a bureaucratic commandism and arbitrariness which alienated many of its potential supporters, especially among the rural poor. The example commonly given is the cancellation of peasant debts to the landlords. The landlords retaliated by withholding seed grain and, since the government couldn’t supply it, the peasants were economically worse off than before.
In general the regime made no effort to neutralize its numerous social enemies by moderating the pace of reforms while simultaneously broadening its own base (e.g., sending large numbers of youth to study in the USSR, rapidly expanding the urban proletariat). At the same time, murderous cliquism, especially by Amin, eliminated much of the PDPA’s original following. An ever smaller group of modernizing intellectuals was tending to be pitted against the mass of the people. The Taraki/Amin regime can thus be convicted of a large dose of utopian adventurism, seeking to drag Afghanistan into the twentieth century by purely military means, moreover, a military means it did not possess.
As the insurgency grew the army was riddled with desertions and mutinies, and the PDPA regime became ever more dependent on Soviet military support. By the summer of 1979 Amin commanded some 5,000 Soviet military cadre; they manned the sophisticated weaponry, especially flying combat aircraft. Without these Soviet forces it is more than possible the Kabul radical government would have fallen before the counterrevolution.
Those self-styled “Marxists” like Tariq Ali, who now maintain that the Afghan left-nationalists and feudalist reactionaries should be allowed to fight it out free of foreign interference, should logically have demanded the withdrawal of Soviet troops well before the December coup. Here Khomeini and Brzezinski were, as usual, more consistent than their present left tailists. Last June the ayatollah read the riot act to the Soviet ambassador over his country’s intervention in “Islamic” Afghanistan. A month later Carter’s spiritual adviser Brzezinski denounced the Soviets for trying “to impose alien doctrines on deeply religious and nationally conscious peoples” ([London] Guardian, 6 August 1979).
There has been speculation in both the bourgeois and left press that the Soviets overthrew Amin because he was a “national communist,” a budding Afghan Tito. Even leaving aside that he ruled through a section of the old bourgeois officer corps, this notion is utter nonsense. The Soviet presence in Afghanistan expanded precisely with the accession of Amin as premier in the spring of 1979, as he opted for a purely military solution to the rightist insurgency. Conversely, the Kremlin advocated slowing down the pace of reforms in order to minimize the need for direct Soviet military support to the petty-bourgeois radicals in Kabul. Amin evidently believed that however much trouble he got into with the counterrevolution, the Russians would be forced to bail him out.
And in a sense they did, though not exactly in the way he had expected. Here we have one of those ironies of history so appreciated by the late Isaac Deutscher. One wonders if the shade of Hafizullah Amin appreciates that in the end he won, though it cost him his own life. He provoked a situation in which the Soviets intervened with sufficient force to crush the reactionary insurgency and therefore with sufficient force to impose a social revolution on backward, mullah-ridden Afghanistan.
Extend the Social Gains of the October Revolution!
Khomeini and Brzezinski to the contrary, Taraki/Amin’s Afghanistan was not a Soviet Communist satellite, i.e., a deformed workers state. It was an unstable petty-bourgeois nationalist regime ruling through a shaky remnant of the old army. Facing a seemingly unwinnable civil war, a section of the PDPA might have tried to extricate itself by turning sharply to the right, expelling the Russians and making a deal with the Western imperialists for their backing against the rebels. From what we know of the ruthless, power-mad Amin, he was capable of emulating Chiang Kai-shek in 1927 or Anwar Sadat in 1972.
With its massive intervention in late December, the Soviet armed forces became the dominant power in Afghanistan, whose present fate will be decided in Moscow, not Kabul. Of course, the conservative bureaucrats in the Kremlin did not send 100,000 troops into Afghanistan to effect a social revolution, but simply to make secure an unstable, strategically-placed client state. No doubt Brezhnev & Co. would prefer a friendly bourgeois state like Finland. But Afghanistan is not Finland. There is no way that country can sustain anything remotely like a stable bourgeois democracy. In any case, the rightist insurgents and their imperialist backers are intransigent against any coalition government the Russians would accept. It is possible the Kremlin could do a deal with the imperialists to withdraw, for example, in return for NATO’s reversing its decision to deploy hundreds of new nuclear missiles in West Europe. That would be a real counterrevolutionary crime against the Afghan peoples.
More likely is the Soviet army’s prolonged occupation of Afghanistan and with it the possibility of its transformation along the lines of Soviet Central Asia or Mongolia. Social revolutionary measures (e.g., land to the tiller) would be necessary to erode and win over the poor peasant supporters of the reactionary insurgency. Only those leftists poisoned by bourgeois-nationalist ideology could deny that such a social revolution, although imposed from without and bureaucratically deformed, would have an enormously liberating effect for the Afghan masses. Even the New York Times admits that Soviet Central Asians regard their country’s military intervention in Afghanistan as support for the liberation of their backward, oppressed neighbors. (See “Soviet Central Asians Back Afghan Intervention,” Workers Vanguard No. 254, 18 April.)
The difference between Soviet Central Asia and Afghanistan is to be measured not in decades but in centuries. While Afghanistan is over 90 percent illiterate, neighboring Soviet Uzbekistan probably has a higher literacy rate than Jimmy Carter’s Georgia. The average life expectancy in Uzbekistan is 70 compared to 40 in Afghanistan. A major reason for this is that in Uzbekistan there is one doctor for every 380 people and in Afghanistan one doctor for every 20,000! All social and economic comparisons show the same thing.
Marx and Engels, following the French utopian socialist Charles Fourier, maintained that “in any given society the degree of women’s emancipation is the natural measure of the general emancipation.” The status of women in Soviet Central Asia is not only higher than in any Islamic bourgeois country (let alone Afghanistan), but in some areas (e.g., representation in the government) compares favorably even with the advanced bourgeois democracies. For example, 18 percent of all judges and 45 percent of all legislative members from the village level up in Uzbekistan are women.
To be sure, the workers and peasants of Soviet Central Asia suffer the same inequalities and bureaucratic oppression as their class brothers and sisters in Great Russia. There is some pressure for Russification in Uzbekistan, Tadzhikistan, Khirgizia, etc. and, of course, the Moscow Stalinist regime denies all nationalities the democratic right of self-determination, i.e., the right to secede and form a separate state. Should Afghanistan be transformed into a Soviet-satellite deformed workers state, it is possible a future revolutionary crisis could find the Afghan workers and peasants battling against a Soviet army under command of the Kremlin Stalinist bureaucracy. And in general proletarian political revolution within the Soviet bloc will be interwoven with the struggle for the right of national self-determination and other democratic rights and freedoms. But to raise the banner of “national self-determination” for Afghanistan today is to provide a democratic cover for imperialist-backed social counterrevolution of the most brutal, barbaric kind.
Revolution, Counterrevolution and National Self-Determination
“Russia has violated the national sovereignty of Afghanistan,” scream the U.S. imperialists, the Peking Stalinists, the Eurocommunists. And this cry is duly echoed by the Mike Klonskys, Tony Cliffs and Tariq Alis. This charge doesn’t even hold up on its own terms. Afghanistan is not a nation but a feudal-derived state comprising a mosaic of nationalities, ethnic and tribal groupings. The Afghan monarchy was consolidated in the late nineteenth century over myriad unrelated peoples as a buffer state between tsarist Russia and British India. Much of the rural population has never lived under the effective control of any central state power, but identifies exclusively with particular ethnic, tribal or linguistic groups.
Imperialist trouble-shooters to the rightist insurgents lament that the Pashtoon, Hazara, Tadzhik, etc. guerrillas hate one another as much as they do the Soviet-backed Kabul radicals. Should the counterrevolutionary forces win, there would likely follow another civil war, this time fought along ethnic lines. In fact, if Soviet Central Asia is taken as a guide, the ethnic minorities of Afghanistan would enjoy more genuine national rights in a Soviet-bloc satellite than under a Pashtoon reactionary regime.
At a more fundamental political level, however, all this is beside the point. Even if Afghanistan were a homogeneous nation, revolutionary Marxists would support the Soviet Union’s armed intervention. Both before and after the December coup, all talk of Afghan “national sovereignty” was but a cover for defending the class and caste privileges of the landlords, moneylenders and mullahs, privileges threatened by the Kabul petty-bourgeois radical government. For the imperialists, such slogans were mainly designed to bolster popular support for a renewed onslaught against Communist Russia. For revolutionary Marxists, the furthering of social revolution, including defense of the USSR against capitalist-imperialism, stands higher than the bourgeois-democratic right of national self-determination.
Seeking to justify their enthusiastic support to the Carter Doctrine, some Maoists, like Carl Davidson, have turned Lenin into a national-liberal, who supposedly opposed in principle military interventions to support revolutions in other countries. As against this Stalinist claptrap, even before the Bolshevik Revolution Lenin maintained that a victorious workers government was duty-bound not only to agitate for proletarian revolution in capitalist countries, but, when necessary, to support it with force of arms:
“After expropriating the capitalists and organising their own socialist production, the victorious proletariat of that country will arise against the rest of the world—the capitalist world—attracting to its cause the oppressed classes of other countries, stirring uprisings in those countries against the capitalists, and in case of need using even armed force against the exploiting classes and their states.” [emphasis in original]
—“On the Slogan for a United States of Europe” (1915), Collected Works Vol. 21 (1964)
When a civil war is raging, a liberal attitude raising national self-determination to the ultimate principle can become downright criminal. Consider Hungary in 1919. In good part due to its own errors, the Soviet regime of Bela Kun alienated probably a majority of Hungary’s peasantry and national minorities. The passive opposition of the petty-bourgeois masses to the Budapest-based workers government contributed to the victory of Admiral Horthy’s white army, backed by the imperialists, and with it the extermination of the revolutionary proletarian vanguard.
During the four and a half months of Soviet Hungary’s existence, the Russian Bolsheviks did everything in their power to link up with it militarily. In late April Lenin personally ordered the commanders of the Ukrainian Red Army: “The advance into part of Galicia and Bukovina is essential for contact with Soviet Hungary. This task must be achieved more quickly and surely” (Collected Works, Vol. 44). But the military campaign did not succeed, to the great misfortune of the socialist cause. In late July, just before the end, Lenin had to inform Bela Kun:
“We are aware of Hungary’s grave and dangerous situation and are doing all we can. But speedy assistance is sometimes physically impossible. Try to hold out as long as you can.”
Had the Ukrainian Red Army managed to save the Hungarian Soviet Republic, imperialist spokesmen and social-democrats throughout the world would have denounced “Soviet Russian imperialism” for trampling on the national independence of the Hungarian people. No doubt there would even have been analogies with tsarist Russia’s occupation of Hungary during the revolutions of 1848.
The Democratic Republic of Afghanistan was not, like the Hungarian Soviet Republic of 1919, a proletarian dictatorship (the Afghan proletariat being minute). Nonetheless, the civil war in Afghanistan was a social struggle which pitted a modernizing intelligentsia against feudalist reaction. Here it is significant that a number of left groups (e.g., the soft Maoid Guardian and various Shachtmanite sectlets in the U.S.) supported the PDPA regime against the rightist rebels, but then condemned the Soviet intervention and demanded the Red Army withdraw. When a left-nationalist bourgeois government is fighting reaction, these self-styled “Marxists” can support it. But when there is actually a possibility that feudal-capitalist property relations will be overthrown, when the power of the mullahs can in fact be broken, when women can be liberated from the veil—then these petty-bourgeois radicals are against it. For these dregs of the pro-nationalist New Left and the wretched “Third Camp” social democrats, counterrevolution from within is preferable to revolution from without!
The Bitter Fruits of New Leftism
A decade ago it was the first principle, almost a truism, for every young radical that U.S. imperialism was the truly monstrous main enemy of the world’s peoples. Yet today the remnants of the New Left “anti-imperialists” of the 1960s, now largely one or another variety of Maoist, have reunited with American imperialism against “Soviet aggression.” How has this come about?
During the early/mid-’60s, when Washington was more hostile to Peking than to the Kremlin, a new generation of radicals arose critical and contemptuous of Khrushchev/Brezhnev in the name of Third World nationalism. But today over Afghanistan it is the American ruling class which invokes the rhetoric of national independence in attacking Soviet “hegemonism” and “superpowerism.”
The New Left considered “the Russian question,” i.e., the social character of the USSR, a scholastic topic of dispute among the irrelevant “old left.” To them the Cold War was dead, Russia had become part of the rich white man’s world, a co-partner with the U.S. for conservatism on a world scale. The real struggle was now between the “Third World”—China, Vietnam, Cuba—and U.S. imperialism.
This outlook was captured by the U.S.’ most prominent New Left “theoretician,” Carl Oglesby, in his 1967 Containment and Change. Here the Chinese and Vietnamese revolutions are presented simply as responses to foreign domination, having little if anything to do with capitalism versus communism. The Chinese Revolution “has nothing at all to do with communism, but rather with the independent organization of China and her acquisition of modern fire.” On Vietnam: “…one should be able to show somehow that the issue of the Vietnam war is not Western freedom versus Eastern slavery, but foreign versus local control of Vietnam.”
On U.S.-Soviet relations, Oglesby opined:
“With the Soviet Union, we have gone from confrontation to detente. The relationship is no longer defined by its anger and uncertainties…. Direct military confrontation is feared and avoided equally by both sides, crises are referred to hot lines instead of war rooms, and one sometimes wonders if there is not something still springier in the air: a slow convergence of political aims. The European Cold War no longer finds Russians and Americans peering at each other through gunsights. Instead we have the experience of virtually integrated aid programs in Afghanistan [!] and India.”
This political worldview, which equated the global roles of the U.S. and USSR, contained the rudiments of the “superpower” doctrine even before much of the New Left embraced Maoism and its doctrine of “Soviet social-imperialism.”
Western Maoism arose from the grafting of New Leftism and Stalinism. A decisive shaping factor was the Vietnamese Revolution, in which a successful struggle against American imperialism was carried out under a traditional Stalinist leadership. To the impressionistic New Leftists, the “Third World” Stalinists seemed revolutionary as against the Soviets. From here it was only a short step to Mao’s doctrine of rival superpowers.
The myriad Maoist sects have tended to come to terms with the Peking-Washington alliance which has developed ever since Nixon’s trip to China in 1972, while the U.S. was raining bombs on Vietnam. In the face of such events as Chinese support to the CIA-engineered South African invasion of Angola in 1975-76, many Maoists pulled back, seeking to return to the good old days of “anti-imperialist unity.” But in Angola it was war-by-proxy between the U.S. and the Soviet Union. Now it is face-to-face over Afghanistan and there is no escaping. They must choose their camps.
With the rapid heating up of the Cold War and the open declaration of a Washington/Peking axis, the Maoists have come full circle. The events in Afghanistan only underscore that those who refuse to defend the Soviet Union against U.S. imperialism will inexorably be driven into the arms of the State Department and Pentagon. While Stalin suppressed proletarian revolution for an alliance with the “progressive” bourgeoisie, for Maoists the popular front against “Soviet social-imperialism” can only be constructed as a bloc with the most vicious, anti-Communist sections of the imperialist ruling classes.
At the core of Stalinist doctrine is the program of “building socialism in one country.” This is the ideology of a narrow, nationalist bureaucratic caste which rests on the foundations of a collectivized economy but stands opposed to the program of proletarian revolution. The attempt to counterpose China (or Albania) to Russia as the socialist fatherland has proved a dead end. The rapprochement of China with American imperialism has demonstrated that the Maos and Dengs, under the guise of building “socialism” in their country, are as willing to sell out the revolution as the Stalins and Brezhnevs. Moreover, the Peking Stalinists are today joined in a global counterrevolutionary alliance with the main imperialist power against the main anti-capitalist state power—the Soviet Union. Should U.S. imperialism overthrow the USSR (as the pro-Peking Maoists urge), this would also lead in short order to the destruction of People’s China by the same imperialist power.
“Third Camp” Fever in the USec
The Afghanistan crisis has predictably thrown the fake-Trotskyist United Secretariat of Ernest Mandel into utter political disarray. At a late January USec meeting three lines were presented. The right-minority resolution advocated the pro-imperialist “Soviet troops out” line, asserting that a victory by Muslim reactionaries would be “much less harmful” than a prolonged Soviet presence. The left-minority position, ludicrously coming from the reformist American SWP, defended the Russian-backed Kabul regime while minimizing the Soviet intervention.
The Mandelite plurality tries to split the difference, playing both ends against the middle and saluting the golden mean. Its resolution (Intercontinental Press, 3 March) upbraids the Kremlin for not “considering any of the democratic and national sentiments of the oppressed classes and peoples” and for “introduc[ing] extreme confusion in the world proletariat”; it refuses to give the intervention “the least political support” and declares it is “opposed to the annexation of new territories by the Kremlin”—even if a social revolution is carried out. But well practiced in the art of obfuscation, the Mandelites do not call for withdrawal of Soviet forces; and after more than 100 paragraphs of fulminating against the intervention, they drop in, out of the blue, four sentences of the most mealy-mouthed defensism.
There is now real trouble in Mandel’s main European sections. Almost half, 20 to 22 of the central committee of the USec’s badly tarnished “star” French section, the Ligue Communiste Révolutionnaire (LCR), has taken an outright pro-imperialist line. Arguing that Soviet intervention “mocks the right of peoples to self-determination,” they call for “actions by the anti-imperialist and workers movement to press the Soviet Union to immediately withdraw its troops from Afghanistan” (Rouge, 22 February). What “actions” do they have in mind? Perhaps refusal by French dockers to load grain for the USSR?
If this large LCR minority has become “Carter Doctrine socialists,” the majority are hardly red revolutionaries. They too condemn the Soviet action, but reject the call for immediate withdrawal as playing into the imperialists’ hands.
The factional dissension in the once-leftist British section, the International Marxist Group (IMG), is even more deep-going. The original “Soviet Troops Out” article by Tariq Ali (Socialist Challenge, 3 January) produced a major furor. The IMG printed a number of letters raking Ali over the coals for “joining the imperialist chorus” and “dancing to the tune of the U.S. State Department.” So a couple of weeks later the IMG changed its line without openly repudiating its earlier counterrevolutionary position. It still condemned the Soviet intervention but admitted that “in the present situation a call for the immediate withdrawal of troops would be tantamount to being in favour of the victory of the rightist forces” (Socialist Challenge, 17 January). No kidding!
Yet even this halfhearted “defense” of the Soviet forces provoked an outpouring of criticism from the right. Letters appeared in Socialist Challenge baiting the majority for wanting to form “welcoming committees for the Red Army” and urging the IMG to “junk the old Trotskyism.” Amid all this, Socialist Challenge (6 March) introduced a new column entitled “Thinking Aloud” for Tariq Ali to ventilate his “personal” (read, factional) views. He began his first column: “I remain unrepentant on Afghanistan.”
Thus just a few months after this Potemkin Village “Fourth International” lost perhaps a third of its members in the split of the Latin American-centered Bolshevik Faction of political adventurer Nahuel Moreno, the USec is once again wracked by internal strife, this time concentrated in the Mandelite heartland. Mandel & Co. are trying to downplay the extent of the dissension over Afghanistan, but it is more potentially destructive than the Moreno split, a somewhat accidental development arising from the Argentine caudillo‘s overweening personal ambition. In the present case, it is the fruit of Mandel’s own revisionism.
What we are now witnessing is the open rebellion by a significant section of the USec, long schooled in New Left anti-Sovietism and petty-bourgeois nationalism, against the Trotskyist program of unconditional military defense of the Soviet degenerated workers state against imperialism. These USecers, cadres and ranks, are being drawn into the U.S.-led global counterrevolutionary alliance against the USSR through the medium of those tendencies with which they have long sought to regroup—East European “dissidents,” the soft Maoists (e.g., the French Organisation Communiste des Travailleurs), the Eurocommunists (the circle around Jean Elleinstein) and various social-democratic groupings (the British Socialist Workers Party of Tony Cliff).
Tariq Ali: Anti-Soviet New Leftist
There is nothing accidental or episodic in Tariq Ali’s role in this factional situation. He is the representative par excellence of New Left movementism and Third World nationalism within the USec. A former New Left celebrity, back in 1969 he edited an anthology, The New Revolutionaries, featuring such notables as Fidel Castro, Régis Debray, Ernest Mandel and, perhaps prophetically, Tony Cliff. His own contribution included among the “new revolutionaries” Mao and Ho but definitely excluded the stodgy Kremlin bureaucrats: “…Asian communism was to prove itself more human, more humane and more willing to admit its mistakes than its counterpart in the Soviet Union.” Ah, music to Pol Pot’s ears.
Ali also echoed the Maoist line that the Soviet Union exploits backward countries in its economic relations with them:
“…The Soviet Union and East European countries, in their trade relations with the exploited world, contribute toward maintaining the unequal exchange. The Soviet Union could easily pay more without harming its own economy.”
In other words, wealth should be transferred from the workers and peasants of the USSR to the bourgeoisies of the “Third World”—to the Pahlavis, Nassers and Indira Gandhis.
If Ali responds to the Afghan crisis with the outlook of 1960s New Left Maoism, he uses some arguments borrowed from the ideological arsenal of Khrushchevite “peaceful coexistence” (a tour de force of Stalinist ecumenism). The USec minority resolution presumably submitted by Ali and his co-thinkers actually accuses Brezhnev & Co. of something like “left adventurism” in provoking imperialist militarism. It deplores that Soviet intervention allegedly fuels:
“The imperialists’ justification for their resumption of the arms race, under the pretext that the Soviet Union is demonstrating in Afghanistan that it intends to use force to impose regimes loyal to it. The Afghanistan affair has already made a shambles of the efforts of the workers movement in the imperialist countries against the step-up of the nuclear arsenal in Europe and the West.”
—“Draft Resolution on the Soviet Intervention in Afghanistan,” Intercontinental Press, 3 March
This is, of course, the very rationale by which Soviet Stalinism has for decades justified not supporting revolutions in other countries. “Peaceful coexistence” means precisely: don’t “export” revolution; don’t export arms to revolutions. Do nothing to upset the imperialists and weaken the “forces of peace” in the imperialist countries.
Mandel’s Chickens Come Home to Roost
In the late 1960s the Mandelites invented the term “new mass vanguard” in order to identify themselves with the burgeoning New Left Maoist current against the pro-Moscow CPs. A 1969 USec majority resolution in praise of Maoism states:
“…the sharp campaign which Peking unleashed against the right-wing opportunist line of the CPs following Moscow’s lead…has objectively contributed to deepen the world crisis of Stalinism and to facilitate the upsurge of a new youth vanguard the world over. Inside that youth vanguard the general sympathy for China and Maoist criticism of the Kremlin’s revisionism remains deep….”
—“Original Draft Resolution on the `Cultural Revolution’ and Proposed Amendments—Arranged in Two Columns,” [SWP] International Internal Discussion Bulletin, June 1970
When this drivel was written, Peking’s criticism of Soviet “revisionism” had become its main ideological basis for declaring the USSR was a “social-imperialist, capitalist” country. In the immortal words of the Chairman himself: “The rise to power of revisionism means the rise to power of the bourgeoisie.” By 1969 the Mao regime was already likening the USSR to Nazi Germany, an overture for a deal with the “democratic” imperialist countries. In his memoirs Henry Kissinger indicates that Peking’s denunciation of the Brezhnev Doctrine as “a fascist theory” was one of the first signs which convinced him a rapprochement with Mao’s China was possible.
For over a decade the European USec has chased after precisely those elements within the Stalinist milieu which have broken with Moscow in favor of competing nationalisms—for the Maoists, it was the Chinese and lately the Albanian bureaucracies; for the Eurocommunists, their own imperialist bourgeoisies. Mandel has taught his followers that among Stalinists antipathy to the Soviet leadership is the main criterion for healthy political motion. Afghanistan shows many have taken this lesson to heart.
Never given to “sectarian” narrowness, the USec generously included in the “new mass vanguard” various left social-democratic groupings, such as the French Parti Socialiste Unifié (PSU), a habitat for renegades from Trotskyism like Michel Pablo and Yves Craipeau. Proposing unity to the PSU a few years ago, Mandel assured its leaders that Trotskyism and the Fourth International were mere “labels” to be negotiated away if the organizational price was right.
In Britain for years the main political bedfellow of the IMG has been the “state-cap” Socialist Workers Party of Tony Cliff, who broke from Trotskyism in 1950, refusing to support the Soviet bloc in the Korean War. Right now when the Cliffite SWP is denouncing the Soviet action in Afghanistan as “imperialist,” the IMG is holding joint meetings with these anti-Communist renegades. And at a mid-February IMG national conference, the “majority” (a bare 50 percent) voted to “launch a public campaign to unite the forces of the IMG with those of the SWP.” Even the main opposition wanted to follow this liquidationist course, only desiring to hold out for better terms (see “IMG Lurches Toward Cliff,” Spartacist/Britain, March 1980).
Pandering to the left social-democratic/Eurocommunist milieu, the USec has for years uncritically enthused over pro-Western Soviet-bloc dissidents. In light of Carter’s present moves, we recall that in early 1979 the USec-sponsored Labour Focus on Eastern Europe reprinted without comment a call by a group of Soviet émigrés for a total economic, technical and cultural boycott of the USSR. Circulating this reactionary, anti-Communist propaganda caused Tamara Deutscher to withdraw as sponsor of the journal. So when the USec majority now claims to oppose Carter’s boycott of the Moscow Olympics and “the imperialist sanctions,” this declaration is less than convincing.
Afghanistan Explodes Mandel’s Détente
How does Mandel square his professed Trotskyism with a regroupment orientation toward those who refuse to defend the Soviet Union? Simply by proclaiming that defense of the USSR against imperialism is irrelevant in this happy age of détente. Mandel’s conception of détente is actually a version of the old 1960s Maoist “superpower” condominium doctrine. He denies that U.S. imperialism remains fundamentally hostile to the Soviet degenerated workers state. Rather he defines the relationship as one of jointly suppressing the revolutionary forces throughout the world. Mandel claims that Brezhnev’s Russia functions essentially as world capitalism’s gendarme, a position in substance (if not in form) identical to that of the New Leftish Maoists and “Third Campists” like Cliff.
Mandel has derided the Spartacist tendency as fixated on Soviet defensism for our contention that Washington has abandoned its post-Vietnam policy of détente and returned to the Cold War path (ideologically expressed in Carter’s “Human Rights” campaign). After the Sino-Vietnam war in February 1979, he reasserted: “…nothing has changed in the basic aspect of the world situation, which is the consistent pursuing of mutual peaceful coexistence and collaboration by Moscow and Washington on a world scale” (“Behind Differences on Military Conflicts in Southeast Asia,” Intercontinental Press, 9 April 1979). Never mind that Washington rather openly colluded with the Chinese invasion of a Soviet ally. Never mind that the day that the Chinese army crossed the Vietnamese border, the State Department warned the Soviets against retaliating in kind. For Mandel, it’s détente über alles.
His latest book, Revolutionary Marxism Today, published a few months before the Afghanistan crisis, actually prophesies:
“…I would deny that we are entering a new cold war situation in which imperialism, more or less allied to Peking, is preparing an aggressive drive against the Soviet Union….
“The basic trend in the current world situation, I would argue, is not toward a new, full-fledged cold war between Moscow and Washington, but a continuation of `peaceful coexistence’ that has been pursued for several decades [?!] now.”
One can imagine that as the Trident missiles rise out of the North Sea headed toward their Moscow target they pass over the University of Louvain where a certain professor of Marxism is lecturing that détente is alive and well and is the main axis of world politics.
Remember how, when Michel Pablo wanted to tail after the Kremlin in the 1950s, he invented a theory of “centuries of deformed workers states.” Mandel’s present equivalent—aimed at cozying up to anti-Soviet dissidents, Eurocommunists and Jimmy Carter—is “decades of peaceful coexistence.”
Marx was fond of the British empiricist saying: facts are stubborn things. In Afghanistan today the defense of the USSR is posed with a directness and immediacy that not even a centrist charlatan like Mandel can dodge. Everyone knows that to call for Soviet withdrawal is to call for the establishment of a fanatically anti-Communist government on the southern border of the USSR. But for the USec to militarily support the Soviet army in Afghanistan would draw the line against almost every organization, tendency and individual it has sought to regroup with for the past five or even ten years.
After years of sweeping the Russian question under the rug, the USec is now reaping the reward in the form of a massive anti-Soviet bulge in the face of American imperialism’s warmongering over Afghanistan. Whether the USec’s deeply ingrained cynicism toward program can stave off sharp and even factional polarization over the central questions of revolutionary orientation in a period of heightened bourgeois anti-Sovietism remains to be seen. Is there anything left of the primitive leftist energies which once characterized the young USec cadres who built barricades in the Paris streets in May ’68 and carried Vietcong flags in the radical “mobilizations” over Vietnam? Or have “the children of ’68″ grown up through the years of tailing popular frontism into ordinary anti-Soviet social democrats?
This much is clear: the consistent Trotskyist program of the international Spartacist tendency, centering for the backward countries on the struggle for the permanent revolution—the fight for liberation under the leadership not of the “anti-imperialist bourgeoisie” but of the revolutionary proletariat—is the only road forward.
For unconditional military defense of the deformed and degenerated workers states through socialist revolution in the capitalist countries and political revolution against the Stalinist bureaucracies! Extend the gains of the October Revolution to Afghan peoples!
The struggle against reformism is now almost fully replaced by the struggle against centrism [...] The struggle with hidden or masked opportunists must therefore be transferred chiefly to the sphere of practical conclusions from revolutionary requisites.
- Leon Trotsky, 'Centrism and the Fourth International', 1938
Image unrelated to these articles - is she one of those we need to punish for Assad's sins? The more the beltway crowd becomes God, the more Roman kindling is added to the Empire. Eisenhower to Obama policy is psyops not security, it is simply personal fortune building and blindness to suffering...
Jump To Top
Afghanistan, the Taliban and Drugs (from Civil Egypt Movement)
Deepak Lal http://civicegypt.org/?p=37036
After some hesitation, he heard U.S. President Barack Obama to the advice of his generals to increase the number of U.S. soldiers in Afghanistan in order to be able to drive the Taliban from the area of Helmand. The strategy is for the U.S. troops to keep the type of field presence as soon as this area is secured, while moving the police forces and development agencies to restore the authority of the Afghan government, and to provide all means of economic reconstruction of the region. The third step will be selected elements "moderate" Taliban for appointment to the Afghan government.
This strategy is reminiscent of the policy pursued by General Petraeus to calm the situation in Iraq as a prelude to the withdrawal of it, but there is considerable uncertainty about the extent of the potential success of this strategy. This is due to several reasons:
First, the desire to set the Taliban in government is a cause for concern. Unlike the situation in Iraq, the rebels were a minority, and the activation and support for the majority to form a government is relatively reasonable, but in Afghanistan, are the most numerous rebels so that belong to the largest tribe in the region, namely: the Pashtun tribe.
The appointment of the Taliban, a movement Wahhabi curriculum, would turn Afghanistan into an Islamic state par excellence, which will provide a new base for the "jihadists" who will constitute a threat to neighboring countries, especially India. The Chinese, who are afraid of insecurity in County Xengjianj, have voiced their opposition to the United States this step.
In 2007, provided the southern provinces of Afghanistan, 92% of the world's opium, valued at a minimum import (farm gate value) of $ billion. The drug economy that provides for the Taliban enough money to buy weapons and control of the opium-growing provinces, through the protection of farmers from drug eradication strategies led by the United States, as part of the war on drugs in the world as a whole.
Third, attempts to convince farmers to abandon drug cultivation and the trend towards illicit crop cultivation Stariqlha relatively larger gains derived from drug cultivation. Where the evaluation showed the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) development project alternatives [UN] between 1997 and 2000, in three regions of Kandahar province, showed that despite the success of the project in raising crop plantings legal (such as wheat, cumin, and beans , onions and fruit) by almost 90%, but these improvements were not sufficient and able to make the crop more profitable and legitimate financial payoff from poppy cultivation. The age of the poppy crop is shorter, and harvested before the wheat harvest, allowing the farmers to redouble their crops through the cultivation of corn after harvest poppies. In addition, the poppy resists weather, making it more dependent crop of wheat. The poppy is also easy to store, transport, and sale, which provides the poor farmers and easy way to get a smooth income, thus blocking their temporary consumer needs in the absence of all formal credit markets. It was average income per hectare of opium poppy in 2000 sixteen thousand U.S. dollars. The report also concluded that the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime in the 'economy Drug 'it "when these levels huge income, can not be any other crop, grown on a large scale, to compete with poppy in Afghanistan" (see my article about the "risk of war on terror to the war on drugs," in the Journal of World Economics, 2008).
Fourth, the economy grew prohibited broad and development after the withdrawal of Russia and the civil war between the teams Mujahideen multiple in Afghanistan, which provided the infrastructure for mobility, communications, and weapons and the necessary protection you need those teams and groups multiple to extend their control all the regions.
The poppy prosperous economy has continued under the auspices of the Taliban. Although prevented cultivation and production of 'hashish' consumed by Afghans and Muslims, but they allowed the cultivation of opium consumed by 'infidels' in the West! It also banned opium in 2000 to resist international pressure for human rights, had financial motives. Through this ban, the price of opium in Afghanistan, from $ 44 per kilogram to $ 350 per kilogram. Before the ban, 60% of opium stored for future sales, Vjna owners of stock fortunes. And a large section of this wealth went to Osama bin Laden and his followers, who are acting as intermediaries or brokers for Afghan opium producers, users of this income to finance terrorist training camps in Afghanistan. (See Lal, ibid).
With the fall of the Taliban and the end of the ban, opium production reached the 2000 level again, and very quickly. As for the military commanders, who are still ruled large parts of Afghanistan, the drug economy continues to provide a source of revenue. In such circumstances, you can not win the war in Afghanistan only by smashing the drug economy during confront the Taliban. It will be the response of rationality in relation to development agencies of NATO is to use the money spend it now in the economic development efforts they are making in Afghanistan, which ended in failure, as well as the money spend on counter-narcotics to buy crops of opium poppy and other types of drugs from farmers and enter directly in competition with Taliban and drug kingpins market. It can compel farmers to put the proportion ten percent of their income derived from poppy cultivation, and that they now provide to the Taliban, to put them in deposits for development development funds, managed hands local, and be based locally as well, and used in the renewal of agricultural infrastructure destroyed, which can be over time to increase the level of production of other crops alternate position to shift towards crops is prohibited.
The opium, which bought directly from farmers, could be used by Western development agencies to provide analgesic morphine to relieve pain caused by various deadly diseases, including AIDS, and this is what happens in many parts of the world, particularly in the areas of sub-Saharan Africa.
And see the World Health Organization (WHO) report that 4.8 million people a year, of people with cancer of different grades of moderate to severe, are not receiving appropriate treatment. As well as the case of the 1.4 million people infected with AIDS in the last stages of the disease. As for the other cases causing pain, there are no estimates of the number of people out, but the World Health Organization (WHO) believes that millions of people are not receiving treatment opportunities. The vast majority of these are of the population of developing countries (Lal, ibid).
Any surplus of opium can be stored for the future to be used for medical purposes, as well as to control on tranquilizers markets. But such solutions rationality to the problem of Taliban and defeat, through the acceptance of the drug economy in Afghanistan and use it for victory rather than risk war on terrorism, such solutions can only be achieved if abandoned the United States and Britain for the war on drugs, which lasted for decades . This is the subject of my next article.
US CIA "Freedom and Liberty" via "Freedom Loving" Al Quada "Rebels"
Jump To Top
Jewish Terrorist Group Would Cooperate With Hitler
Holocaust in Gaza - 'Holocaust' means 'fire victim'
Now it soon Auschwitz today again, and we must again learn about the Holocaust. Holocaust cult, and Auschwitz / gas chamber stories of six million Jews killed during the Holocaust is just a tad more, especially now that Israel's reputation has suffered great damage in world opinion because of their inhumane treatment of the Palestinians. 81% of the Israeli population supports the carnage in Gaza, and throughout Europe Jews and Zionists started in aggressive campaigns to turn international opinion in their favor. Therefore it is important that people again will be notified of how this all began when the Jewish propagandists are dazzling proficient in their attempt to rewrite history. The prohibition of 'Holocaust denial' in various European countries, as well as other censorship legislation stems mainly from pressure from Jewish organizations , but there is much more history as Jødene want to be reserved. [Buttocks]
Wanted: Members of the Stern gang wanted by the British official bodies that had Palestine as a protectorate from 1922 to 1948. The text is in Hebrew, and from the left, we see Yaacov Levstein, Yitshak Shamir, Natan Friedman-Yelin, Yaacov Levi, Moshe Bar Giora and Yehoshua Cohen. Photo: Palestine Remembered | Larger
Wanted: Members of the Irgun wanted by the British police. From left: Menhaem (Menachem) Begin, Arieh Ben Eliezer, Leib Boyko, Reuben Franco and Marek Kahane. Begin marked by Palestine Remembered that have put the old posters on the web. Beginnings is considered by many pro-Palestinian Africans seen as one of the greatest of villains . | Larger
PROPOSAL FOR COOPERATION WITH NAZI STONES
The letter where the cooperation between the Stern Gang and the Nazi stones were proposed. The letter was sent to Berlin, but was never Answered by the Germans. Larger
Yair Stern created the terrorist group the Stern Gang in 1940. In childhood had the Polish Jew Yair and his family escape from the Germans during the First World War. They were living in Russia, where Yair parted from his mother when he was 13 He went home to Poland after living with an uncle in St. Petersburg.
Terror group symbol indicates rural areas claimed the organization to get to create the Jewish state, the former Mandate for britene, today Israel, the West Bank, Gaza and Jordan. Photo: WIKI MEDIA
KILLED BY STERN GANG
The Swedish diplomat Count Folke Bernadotte was killed by the Stern Gang in Jerusalem in 1948. The killing was ordered by Yitzhak Shamir, Natan Yellin-Mor and Yisrael Eldad. The French UN staff André Serot was also killed in the attack. Folke Bernadotte had otherwise saved many Jews with the so-called 'White Buses' in the war's final days.
Stern member think Nathan Yellin-Mor (center) and Matityahu Shmueliwitz was after Bernadotte assassination found guilty of being members of a terrorist organzation. They were immediately given amnesty. Here they stand in front of Acre fengselet after release in 1949. | Larger
IN CONFLICT WITH JØDENE
Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Hajj Amin al-Husseini , contributed to spreading anti-Semitism in the Middle-East when he was a religious leader, and especially during the war. He was a nationalist and also stood in opposition to britene because he wanted a Palestinian state. He met Hitler in 1941, and asked for help to fight against a Jewish state in Palestine.
BOMBED KING DAVID HOTEL
22 July 1946 blew Irgun members of a bomb in the basement of the hotel in Jerusalem. 91 people were killed, 46 were wounded. Britenes military headquarters located here. Irgun has always claimed that they phoned beforehand and announced well in advance eksplozionen, while the British have seen differently. Larger
Menachem Begin was head of the Irgun when the bomb (King David Hotel) blew up in 1946. Begin played an important role in resistance to britene before Israel was created. He later became Israel's sixth prime minister and Nobel Peace Prize winner of the Camp David Accords.
From another source: November 25, 1940, the refugee ship SS Patria filled with Jewish refugees blown up by Jewish terrorists in Haifa Port. It cost 268 Jewish immigrants life. The explosion was terrorist group Haganas work more precisely a division of the Irgun who were in Haganna, led by Menachem Begin. Irgun broke out later from the Haganah.
CONTROLLED STERN GANG
Yitzhak Shamir was one of those who took charge of the Stern Gang after the founder's death. He was one of those who ordered the murder of Folke Bernadotte. Since he became prime minister of Israel. They looked at Bernadotte as an anti-Zionist and as being too friendly towards the British.
Inserted in the picture: Shamir's son Yair
COOPERATION WITH BRITENE
Haganah became the core of the Israeli defense since it was established in 1948. They did not support the Stern and Irgun methods, but cooperated in a period still with them.
WAS IMPORTANT FOR THE CREATION OF ISRAEL
Hanagah members during training in 1947. The moderates in the military group believed Israel had to have the support of a great power, namely britene. The more radical elements outside began to look to the United States. | Larger
Detested TERRORIST GROUPS:
Britain's Prime Minister Winston Churchill believed should have been opened for more immigration to the Palestinian territories, but condemned the Jewish terrorgruppene strongly.
Winston Churchill on the Jews: The battle for the Jewish people's soul
The parents of Israeli Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni became the first to marry in the nyopprettede Israeli state in 1948. The danger Eitan Livni was the leader of the Irgun, and mother Sara Rosenberg, was also Irgun activist.
Jewish propaganda and black operations
The expulsion of Jews from Arab countries was staged by Jews
'Another example of a propaganda course, the Iraqi Jews' exodus. Jewish presence in Iraq can be continuous back to Old Testament times. The Iraqi Jews constituted the world's oldest Jewish communities, and they were an important and integral part of Iraqi society.
In the spring of 1950 were directed terror against the Iraqi Jews. There was thrown bombs against them. The last bomb was thrown in front of a synagogue. A Jewish boy was killed. The killing sparked a panic exodus. In a short time disappeared world's oldest Jewish communities. 125,000 Iraqi Jews fled, and most chose to go to Israel.
But an Israeli Yehudah Tajjar had previously led the Iraqi authorities on the trail of terrorists. He was having a stroll in Baghdad has been recognized by a Palestinian refugee who had been street vendor in Israel. Tajjar told first that he was the girlfriend visit but the authorities' investigation revealed that he was part of a group that called itself the "Movement".
Group fifteen members, who were all Zionist Jews were behind the bomb terrorist who had driven 125,000 Iraqi Jews to flee. The group was linked to the Jewish elite.
Much more at:
Cnn Herald-Tribune February 5, 2009 - The double lie
The Age of Terror: A Survey of Modern Terrorism | marinata01
The Transfer Agreement (Book)
In 1925 immigrated THE POLISH JEW Yair STERN to Palestine. He was 18 years old.
The years in Siberia as he age 10 survived by selling spring water, led probably not a warm relationship with Russia. Israel, on the other hand, he loved more than anything else.
You're engaged to me, my homeland
According to all of Moses' laws and Israel
And with my death I will bury my head in your bosom
And you will live forever in my blood
The student wrote about a sensual love for Israel, he wrote poems about being a martyr for the Jewish Holy Land.
In Palestine, he began working to create a Jewish state. In the 1930s he traveled back and forth to Europe, prepared Jewish immigration to Palestine and organized revolutionary cells in Poland.
For this he ended up in jail. There hatched his plan to create terrorist group Lehi , the British called Stern Gang. Israel was to be won by force of arms, the British were forced out.
MORE SECRET, JEWISH terrorist groups existed even before Israel became a state in 1948
In the interwar period and during World War II they were operating against the British, who had the area as their protectorate, and against "fraudulent" Jews. During the entire period they fought also against Palestinian groups engaged in attacks on Jews.
Stern Gang (established 1940) was with Irgun the most extreme. And they were central to the creation of Israel.
Irgun and Stern - Violence terrorism and fascism
- The Jewish terrorist groups Irgun and Stern stood far out on the far right, they were strongly influenced by fascism and had its roots in the radical Zionist movement in Poland. They glorified violence and terror as the main means of political struggle, says historian Hilde Henriksen Waage for Dagbladet.no.
MANY THOUGHT OF ISRAEL was a miracle when the country was in 1948. But instead, it was the result of long-term planning. In the interwar period, built the Jews, with British consent, a state within a state. They were political parties and institutions for Western pattern. One of the pillars was the formation of a defense.
- It was a ready state before Israel was created, says Henriksen Waage.
When the British began to limit immigration to Israel, and it became clear that they would not agree to establish an Israeli state against the mass of the people, began several to the British as the enemy. Militant Jews broke out from the more moderate defense groups.
- For Stern and Irgun, the British were the main enemy. Violence may be the means to push them out, they thought, something the more moderate disagreed with, sir Henriksen Waage.
Yair STERN created his terrorist organization after he had fought in the Irgun, and the more moderate military organization Haganah. He believed none of them went far enough.
Stern gang were brutally approach. The disrupted British police stations, railway tracks and cafes. They killed Palestinians, Britons and Jews that they felt betrayed matter. They kidnapped British soldiers abused them and blew hotels. In 1944, the gang killed Lord Moyne in Cairo. He was Britain's top representative in the region.
The group emerged as also as something that might look like a mafia organization. They financed their business by extortion, bank robberies and donations. They made a dozens of killings, many of Jews. The group had just a few hundred members.
Britons watched them closely, they saw the Stern gang as a terrorist group. Wanted Posters with Yair Stern's face was hung up in all of Palestine.
- British prisoners all they could afford. But they had great difficulty in tracing members. As today's Hamas soldiers received the support and could hide among civilians, says Henriksen Waage.
Today documents on the Stern gang by the British secret services created released .
Comments to Hitler
EN Yair STERN CERTAIN up to go into the Hitler-Germany's side in World War II, it was a considered decision that lay behind.
Yair was fully aware that the Germans were jødehadere, but he thought they could be manipulated. And hatred against the British, he was to think that they could have common interests. A representative of Lehi was in 1940 sent to Beirut for talks with a German authority representative. He offered Hitler espionage, sabotage and military actions against the British in the Middle East and in Eastern Europe, where Stern had terrorist cells.
A letter with the same content was sent to the German ambassador in Akaara in 1941. Here was the Stern gang's offer of participation in the war against the British repeated against the Germans would help remove the British from Palestine and establish their own Jewish state.
The ambassador sent the letter to Hitler in Berlin. But Yair Stern never got answers from the Germans.
Yair DEAD OF the affair. In 1942 he was shot by British agents who revealed his hiding place.
After Stern's death was Yitzhak Shamir, one of those who took over the management. He was Israel's prime minister on two occasions, in the 80s and 90s.
He was and ordered the assassination of Folke Bernadotte , who was the UN's main mediator in Palestine. Stern gang killed the Swede, who they thought was a threat to Israel in 1948. No one was convicted of the killing.
But Israel had to do something. 31 May 1948 was Stern Gang dissolved and integrated into the Israeli defense , the leaders were given amnesty. The group continued to operate in Jerusalem. After the assassination of Bernadotte group was banned by the Israeli authorities, members imprisoned and forced the group dissolved. They were, however, amnesty after a short time.
Yair Stern's Memorial Day is marked every year with participation from the Israeli authorities and politicians.
Irgun and Stern hailed in Israel
- Irgun and Stern is now legitimate, official actors in Israeli politics and society. Their actions will be far on the way portrayed as heroic. They were the pioneers that helped to create the state of Israel, says Henriksen Waage.
9 TO 11 April 1948, more than 100 Palestinians killed in Deir Yassin massacre near Jerusalem. Along with the Stern Gang attended the Irgun , a larger, extremist Jewish terrorist organization that Stern left. They had about a thousand members at its peak.
Kill The figures were initially reported to be more than twice as high. The event helped to arouse terror among Palestinians and contributed to that they began to flee in large groups .
Irgun was established in the early 1930's, with the desire to become a regular army, and not just a militia. through the 30th century bombed the Palestinian villages, attacked both Arabs and Britons at the cafe, on beaches, in hospitals and on the bus.
22 July 1946 placerde Irgun a bomb in the basement of the King David Hotel in Jerusalem. Here, the UK authorities to headquarters. The attack was the bloodiest British saw the mandate period. 91 people were killed, 46 wounded.
The contradictions LEVER CONTINUED
In 2006, protested the British Ambassador to Israel at it was to be a day of remembrance for the Irgun attack on the hotel.
- We do not think it is right to honor a terrorist act that took many lives, he wrote, and also protested against the text on the poster at the hotel where it was alleged that the victims died because the British did not evacuate the hotel when they were told about the bomb. The ambassador denied that this is true.
The former Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu (Likud) was in the debate.
- It is very important to distinguish between terror groups and freedom fighters, and between terror action and legitimate military action. Imagine that Hamas or Hezbollah would call in a bomb warning to the military headquarters in Tel Aviv, Netanyahu said .
BUT NOT ALL WERE just thrilled with the effort. In 1948 published prominent Jews like Albert Einstein and Hannah Arendt a letter in the New York Times in which they described the Irgun as a right extreme, chauvinistic terrororganiation. They claimed that teachers were beaten for criticizing the Irgun that adults who prevented their children from participating in the group was shot, they used gangsterism, violence, rudeknusing and robbery.
After World War II characterized Churchill Irgun as the wildest gangsters. He would never forgive their terrorist attacks. The group was formally condemned by the World Zionist Congress in 1946.
Israel's future Prime Minister Menachem Begin was the leader of the Irgun. He received the Peace Prize in 1978. The current Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni's father, Eitan Livni was also involved in the Irgun. He was in prison for leading comprehensive sabotage operations against the British .
After the Irgun officially disbanded, the group continued to make its presence felt in the highly nationalist Herut party and later in coalition Likud.
- Irgun and Stern formed from the 1960 figure starting point for Likud, today belongs to the words of Israel official right, says Henriksen Waage.
Irgun and the STERN CAME FROM the more moderate Haganah , a secret Jewish organization for armed self-defense that was created in the early 1900s to defend Jewish settlements.
They grew large during the Palestinian uprising in the early 1920s, and since the Israeli preheat (IDF) was created formed Haganah core.
Haganah worked with the British before the war, although the British did not formally recognized group. following the assassination of Lord Moyne helped Haganah, and arrested and interrogated Irgun members. The effort is called hunting season in Israel.
But the relationship with terrorist organizations Irgun and Stern was difficult.
- David Ben Gurion and the Zionist movement had on one side a collaboration and on the other a problematic relationship with these organizations. Irgun and Stern were more extreme. They were introduced illegally own weapons, it was a problem to control them, says Henriksen Waage.
Stern Gang and Irgun takes great sympathy among the Jews in Palestine and methods had great support. Therefore entered Haganah post-war cooperation with the Irgun and the Stern, and they conducted a series of terrorist acts against the British together.
Yitzhak Rabin and Ariel Sharon were among Haganahs most famous members.
TERRORISM OR RESISTANCE STRUGGLE?
Henriksen Waage do not think it is entirely appropriate to compare today's Hamas with the Jewish terrorist organizations.
- It's a big difference here. These Jewish terrorist organizations had as an ideology one glorification of violence and terror as a legitimate political weapon.
- Not quite odd Hamas?
- It is more complicated. Hamas has also hosted part of a religious, political and social movement. But more important than that is the Irgun and Stern both struggled to conquer the country, to get rid of a colonial power and to expel the Arabs. Hamas' charter, if we are to take it on the floor, is full of expressions that suggest that Israel should be obliterated.
But at the same time, the entire Hamas' commitment stems from the Israeli occupation. Hamas is a long way down the road a resistance group. Irgun and Stern came from another country and tried to oust a people, says Henriksen Waage concludes.
Appendix: original right column in the newspaper Norway
JEWS IN ISRAEL AND PALESTINE
As far back we can see has had Jews in the area
For a long time, partly under the Turkish rule, was tension between jødene and their Arab neighbors at a low level. Jødene came to die in the Holy Land and drives religious activities in cramped ghettos in Hebron, Safed, Tiberias and Jerusalem.
In the early 1800s this changed. Napoleon called in 1799 to Jews had to restore the old Jerusalem.
It gikk 50 years before it happened particularly myeloma more. Nationalism became larger as jødene in both Western and Eastern Europe was more difficult, with the killing of Jews and pogroms in the east.
This was also associated with national trends in Europe.
Hebrew was relaunched as a living language, not just a ritual symbolic language. The idea of a Hebrew state was created, which one would speak its own language.
Dreyfus in 1894 revealed in depth anti-Semitism in France 1). The anti-Jewish propaganda was also about people and race.
The Jewish journalist Theodor Herzl covered the Dreyfus case and published the book The Judenstaat, in which he argued for a Jewish State. In 1897 he took the initiative to set up World Zionist Organization. He was the founder of political Zionism.
The idea of returning to Palestine spread. Here could jødene get a nation, once more.
In 1891 came the first protests against jødenes presence.
The first rural area countries was purchased in 1905. The first immigrants rose to a niggardly area as did with malaria, drought and poverty. They began with agriculture.
In 1914 had 85 000 Jews immigrated to Palestine. The first kibbutz was established in 1909. In Tel Aviv grew the new Jewish city.
Popular support for Zionism was not clear, on the contrary, protested many Jews towards the creation of a Jewish state. Not once among the Jews in Palestine was strong engagement in the beginning.
Zionism was initially a secular-moving, but in 1902 they formed the religious members of their own branch.
Palestinian Arabs protested in the early 1900s more at the new Jews arrived in the country. They bought land and superseded Arabic capacity for work. An anti-Zionist newspaper was established in Haifa. Some Jewish settlements were attacked, but the Jews ignored largely Arabs trial and defended himself
when it was necessary.
The First World War changed the political situation of chaos in the Zionist Movement and disagreement about which of the parties in the war you had to support.
Immigration stopped. The Zionists tried to rally support for their cause among others in the UK and France. They wanted to hook up with the victor, to be heard in fredsforhandlingene. They also liked to create a Jewish army.
Britain gave no support. In 1918, the Jewish Brigade created within the British Army - paraded in London and sent units to the Middle East to conquer Palestine. The British left, however, soon this idea.
A Jewish national home a gift from the British
The greatest triumph, however, was diplomatic. The British promised in 1917 to support a "Jewish national home" in Palestine.
The British used the war. A Jewish intelligence was created [Mossad = Foreign Shin Bet = in Israel]. The British had in 1922 mandated to manage Palestine.
But the creation of Israel was not as simple as some Zionists had hoped. The statements of support from the British were vague and also expressed the Palestinians concern over developments. More attack Jewish settlements.
In 1920, four Jewish villages in Galillea (Sea of Galilee) attacked by Palestinian People, and one of the most militant Zionists were killed.
The Jewish Defense had organized. While defending the settlers their with resources on your own.
The organization Haganah created irregular defense forces to protect the Jewish agricultural colonies on Palestinian attacks.
The clashes became more and more bloody. Also British police attended.
In 1921, after the new pogroms, the Zionists began again to build houses.
The main thing was to build a strong Jewish army. It was set up training camps in Europe. Many of the volunteers were asked to provide their own weapons, they also bought weapons in Europe, some were stolen, smuggled into another. The 300 members of the Haganah was grown around 1930 to 3000. Both diaspora and Arabs became more militant.
The British put restrictions on Jewish immigration and purchase of land, the anti-British sentiment grew. Thus began the most militant Jewish factions to attack on britene.
Sources: Big Norwegian lexicon and J. Bowyer Bell: Terror out of Zion. Irgun Zvai Leumi, Lehi and the Palestine Underground
Dagbladet Norway January 2009 - Jewish terrorist group would co-operate with Hitler
Footnote: Dreyfuss was just his trial and was acquitted. There are those who believe that the Dreyfus affair was just another proof that there was not much anti-Semitism. Dreyfuss was something of a folk hero. [Buttocks]
Video on the right: The Transfer Agreement
1933: Zionists sign a deal with Hitler - The Transfer Agreement
The Untold Story of the Secret Pact Between the Third Reich and Jewish Palestine
News Cast about the launch of the Controversial book about Nazi-Zionist collaboration. Admission att boycott of jewish stores was for only one day, April 1, 1933!
The Age of Terror (2002)
A 3BM Television (London) production, in association with Discovery Europe
Directors Jon Blair, Dan Korn, Polly Williams
Narrator ........................ Tim Piggot-Smith
In effect Israel had set in train the model of the sort of terrorism att most of the world deplores.
Episode 1: In the Name of Liberation begins with an act at mange anser the first real act "modern" terror - the bombing of the King David Hotel, and moves on til Struggles for independence by "terrorist" groups in Algeria, Malaysia and South Africa.
Stressing att "one society's freedom fighter is another's terrorist" the writer-directors uncover the uncomfortable post-modern truth at vi live in a relative world, The series' message in the end is very much att of Ghandi: an elegy til ofrene violence perpetrated in many guises, and a finger pointed unwaveringly to dem som vil delude sig into thinking de kan Justify what theyhave done.
Calling the King David Hotel explosion 'the first terrorist attack of the 20th century' and generally treating the whole idea att Jews invented terrorism as indisputable fact.
The narrator konstaterar categorically att Jews were the first terrorists of the 20th century and said future terrorists learned from sina example.
The Irgun copied Arab tactics after the 1939 White Paper når it saw violence could influened British policy.
The Age of Terror: A Survey of Modern Terrorism
The map illustrates Israel's expansion from 1946 to 2008 - White Jewish land - Red Palestinian land. Some experts and accounting firms put the Israeli genocide of Arabs via land grab wars at 4 million deceased. Similar experts put the American/NATO genocide tally (from Desert Storm to 2013) in Iraq and Afghanistan at 3 million deceased. Several sources peg the CIA/Pentagon "wars of liberation from 1946 to 2013 at 16-20 million deceased. When the media get on a kick about Holocaust Denial, said media are never looking in the mirror; rather they are "social" engineering. ** Holocaust Denial and PTSD - by Rachel Alebev.
Interesting exchange of words between George E Petersen and Mr Jensen
"Terrorists" often end up on top of a cake.
It is also the case in Israel.
'Chased out of their homes (in an Arab village) was the newlyweds who were holding hands, along with 33 of their neighbors lined up against a wall and mowed down. "
"There is no doubt that the attacking Jews made many sexual assault. Many young school girls were raped and later slaughtered. '
Both quotes from Larry Collinses and Dominique Lapierres book "O Jerusalem"
The quote above comes from an article written by George E. Petersen Jyllands Posten January 9, 2009: Feature: 2009: 10 possible bids
This was the historian Bent Jensen to respond in his article ' Our Time Nazism 'where he compares the statements of' The Protocols of Zion '.
Jørgen E. Petersen (journalist, Paris) responds with a letter to the editor: Research is not good enough
'I took advantage of quotes from Larry Collinses and Dominique Lapierres world famous book "O Jerusalem", including about Jewish terrorist murders of Arab, raped schoolgirls. This overrides professor Bent Jensen by calling their book "colored". It was originally released by the publisher "Simon and Schuster" and distinguished notified of such The New York Times Book Review and The Los Angeles Times. Reader's Digest brought excerpts.
He also uses the procurator-trick involving one of its argument suitable old Russian pamphlet. The fanatical propagandists form will take over from the beginning the management of his chronicle.
What BJ should have discovered as a researcher, is that the "colorful" quote from the British police officer, among other things, investigated the murder of the wedding party in Deir Yassin. [...]
As it actually became quite quietly by my essay, I was / am not looking for any kind of unrealistic foreign policy witch hunt, but just wanted to show that Israel is a state built up by terrorists as bloodstained as you find them elsewhere. more
Zionist - Nazi samarnejde Ha'avara
What the the radical Zionist expected by the Nazis was to grief that the German Jews emigrated to Palestine. Also the Nazis wanted the Jews know as soon as possible out of the country. span> To this end, shortly before the Nazis to Government came, signed an agreement that the emigration should ensure German Jews to Palestine.
Das Emigration agreement
More Zionist history:
Gilad Atzmon November 20, 2009 - Zionist Control of Britain's Government: 1940-2009 by William A. Cook
Balder Blog 16 January 2009 - Claus Bentow - Danish Zionist Federation: Jews fear Muslim immigrants and ventre extremists
Balder Blog January 14, 2009 - The Palestinian Israeli conflict (Gaza) in the Danish media as seen by a nationalist
Balder Blog 12 January 2009 - Hamas was for years supported by Israel to sow discord between Palestinians
Balder Blog January 6, 2009 - Palestinian som shot Israelis in Danish shopping centers was role model for the multi cult
Global Research 19 January 2009 - War and Natural Gas: The Israeli Invasion and Gaza's Offshore Gas Fields (Michel Chossudovsky)
Dagbladet laborer 16 January 2009 - Israel will have your fingers in Gaza gas (Michel Chossudovsky)
Comment on: Balder Blog
Some day they will build a fence around Buckingham Palace, Washington and Tel Aviv to protect all of us from terrorism.
Two men walk into a very long, narrow bar. The taller, redheaded man heads towards restrooms all the way at
the other end; the shorter, swarthier man sits on a stool next to an attractive brunette woman.
“Buy you a drink?” he asks.
“Oh, no, I’m waiting on my fiance, he’ll be here any minute”…
“Pointing at the disappearing red-headed man, he murmurs, “he just got his blackbelt in Karate and came in here
to show off. Don’t be surprised if he kicks your boyfriends ass,” the swarthy man mumbled.
10 minutes later, the redheaded man asks the woman if he can buy her a drink and her boyfreind jumps up and
startes threatening the red-headed man. The two get in a shouting, then tousling and finally a fist fight in the bar.
The redheaded man has to resort to using home-made Uranium knuckles to prevent losing in the fiances home-bar.
The swarthy man grabs $400 out of the red-headed man’s wallet on the bar.
“What are you doing?” asks the brunette.
“Oh, he does whatever I want when it comes to violence; and I take money from him in return for him being my
The brunette woman introduces herself, “I’m the league of Arab Nations, who are you?”
“Why, my name’s Israel says the swarthy man”… "Wanna go to my place and see what's on TV?"
The brunette (Arab Nations) demurs, "I need to go eat, we Palestinians are always hungry"
Slave'sCook's from Ramallah. She makes bomb Lebneh, Couscous, Hummus and Chicken. Do you watch much TV?
Arab Nations demurs, "I need to go feed my children, someone bulldozed our Olive Trees and there is nothing to eat. We don't own a TV...
Chattily, Israel did not see the reality: "If you bought a VTX TV and if your children sat closer to the screen and watched M-o-d-e-r-n F-a-m-i-l-y and F-r-i-e-n-d-s on *MATRIX TV* you would see how NICE I am, there is NARUS a VERINT bone in my AMDOCS body... If you owned a
TBTV you would see how NICE we are and not be bogged down in dead Olive Groves...
Jump To Top
tags: Egypt's Copts Israel American political Islam fundamentalist Muslim Brotherhood religious political reform terrorism, human history Islamic history education enlightenment revolution of the Cultural Revolution army veil religious freedom ruling Egyptian constitution democracy Arabia the Salafist Middle East peace Iraq hair secular liberal philosophy of the short story of Arab women Wahhabi Muslim woman citizenship JoinEgypt, Turkey, human rights, women's rights Syria political Science Palestine Egypt ancient Egypt, soviet, afghanistan, jewish, world, british, stern, state, irgun, israel, revolution, jews, afghan, support, people, group, social, military, left, nuclear, workers, power, government, terrorist, imperialist, palestine, national, countries, intervention, political, army, other, first, ussr, accident, gang, states, years, third, main, revolutionary, members, union, imperialism, forces, regime, time, country, central, united, israeli, usec, party, communist, communism, totalitarianism, hegemony, NWO New World Order
Ogooglebars: Unit-8200, Pioneer, Payoneer, Kidon, Palentir, Comserve, Natsam, AT&T Back Door, Bamford, DGSE, Dragnet, France, Intelligence, ISNU, Israel, Mark Klein, Mossad, Narus, Nicolas Sarkozy, NIE, NSA PRISM, Sigint, Snowden, Surveillance, Verint, Verizon, Deep Packet Inspection DPI, FLAME, STUXNET
Snowden World View Outside of "NSA" Reuters PRISM, PsyOps