Category: CLASS STRUGGLE - The Greanville Post

Please make sure these dispatches reach as many readers as possible. Share with kin, friends and workmates and ask them to do likewise.

Jeremy Kuzmarov
Covert Action Magazine

Resize text-+=

Student Protests

LAPD’s Failure to Protect Peaceful Protesters at UCLA from Right-Wing Mob Shows Real Priorities

By Jeremy Kuzmarov / May 6, 2024

In 1991, Frank Donner, former director of the ACLU’s Project on Political Surveillance, published a book entitled Protectors of Privilege, which provided a history of police suppression of left-wing and labor protests in the United States.

A key chapter in the book focused on the Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD), whose reactionary political function was epitomized by two of its most notorious chiefs: William Parker and Daryl Gates, who were overtly racist and supported anti-democratic paramilitary policing practices.

The LAPD’s true colors were on display at the University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA) at the end of April when its officers stood by for hours as hundreds of right-wing vigilantes attacked pro-Palestinian demonstrators in what Al Jazeera described as a “really shocking and ugly scene of violence.” The LAPD then aggressively broke up the pro-Palestinian demonstrators’ encampment using flash bangs and riot gear, arresting around 200 of the anti-genocide protesters who were entirely peaceful. (none of the vigilantes were arrested).^[1]

Pro-Israel attackers try to remove barricades at a pro-Palestinian encampment at the University of California, Los Angeles, on May 1, 2024. [Source: msn.com]

On May 2, a day after the break-up of the encampment, I visited the UCLA campus and witnessed students and university employees clearing the protest area.

Though many of the students were refusing to speak to any media, I managed to interview one, Lisa Cooper, who described herself as a seasoned organizer originally from New York who had joined the protesters in solidarity with them.

Cooper told me that she helped run a wellness center in the encampment that brought in acupuncturists who administered treatment to students who had either been physically attacked or were dealing with emotional trauma and the stress of living in the encampment while studying for mid-terms.

The students believed they had to do something in the face of the horrific atrocities going on in Gaza.

Cooper said that dissent was currently under siege in the U.S. and that the protests provided an opportunity to get people thinking about societal problems and realities, and that the students involved felt empowered by their experience, which they would take with them into other aspects of their lives.

“this is a public university that preaches the importance of education, and yet, topics like Palestine are not taught. A lot of the programming shows that people here are taking their education into their own hands, and learning what it means to teach each other and enact activist values.”^[2]

University employees clearing material from protest encampment area at UCLA on May 2. [Source: Photo courtesy of Jeremy Kuzmarov]

According to Cooper, public protest is a right Americans enjoy under the U.S. Constitution and that this should not be forgotten.

Cooper said that the right-wing vigilantes who stormed the encampment were equipped with bear mace, projectiles and other weapons that they deployed against protesters, causing injuries to some of the students.

One protester had 16 staples inserted into his scalp.

UCLA employees clearing protest signs and other items from encampment after the LAPD violently dispersed the anti-genocide protests. [Source: Photo courtesy of Jeremy Kuzmarov]

Because the students did not want to call 911 and put themselves at risk of suspension or arrest, other students drove them to the hospital by car.

Cooper herself was not injured in the attack, but said that the vigilantes hurled racial slurs at her (she is African-American).

UCLA students clearing material from protest encampment on May 2. [Source: Photo courtesy of Jeremy Kuzmarov]

The main police units that broke up the encampment were officers of the California Highway Patrol (CHP) who, she said, are not required to wear body cam devices. CHP was backed up by the LAPD, whose presence was ubiquitous around the campus during my visit.

Cooper said that UCLA should be called to account for not allowing peaceful protests on public property.

UCLA President Michael Drake released a statement supporting the university’s decision to label the protest encampment as unlawful, noting that, “when it threatens the safety of students or everyone else, we must act.”^[3]

MAY GOD PROTECT US FROM UNCLE TOMS—UCLA President Michael Drake [Source: thelantern.com]

ABOUT THE AUTHOR(s)
Jeremy Kuzmarov is Managing Editor of CovertAction Magazine. He is the author of five books on U.S. foreign policy, including Obama’s Unending Wars (Clarity Press, 2019), The Russians Are Coming, Again, with John Marciano (Monthly Review Press, 2018), and Warmonger. How Clinton’s Malign Foreign Policy Launched the U.S. Trajectory From Bush II to Biden (Clarity Press, 2023). He can be reached at: jkuzmarov2@gmail.com and followed on substack here.

Addendum

!function(r,u,m,b,l,e){r._Rumble=b,r[b]||(r[b]=function(){(r[b]._=r[b]._||[]).push(arguments);if(r[b]._.length==1){l=u.createElement(m),e=u.getElementsByTagName(m)[0],l.async=1,l.src="https://rumble.com/embedJS/uukz21"+(arguments[1].video?'.'+arguments[1].video:'')+"/?url="+encodeURIComponent(location.href)+"&args="+encodeURIComponent(JSON.stringify([].slice.apply(arguments))),e.parentNode.insertBefore(l,e)}})}(window, document, "script", "Rumble");

Rumble("play", {"video":"v4qxsnn","div":"rumble_v4qxsnn"});

Corporate media falsely accuse pro-Palestine protesters of "horrific violence".

During the vigilante attack, a group reportedly piled on one person who lay on the ground, kicking and beating the person until others pulled him out of the scrum. The editor of the UCLA Daily Bruin, Catherine Hamilton, was punched in the chest and upper abdomen by the vigilantes. Robert Reynolds of Al Jazeera reported that the vigilante mob, which called for a second Nakba, “appear[ed] to be all largely people who are not of student age and they’re not from the UCLA campus, but what they’re doing is trying to harass and attack the pro-Palestinian demonstrators.” The leaders of the anti-war encampment at UCLA said that “law enforcement simply stood at the edge of the lawn and refused to budge as we screamed for their help. The only means of protection we had was each other as the attack went on for more than seven hours.” “The university would rather see us dead than divest,” it added in a statement posted on X. The Los Angeles Public Defenders’ Union called the UCLA arrests “shameful and a complete failure of leadership.” President Garrett Miller said they are ready to “represent every person facing charges.” ↑
Dylan Winward, “Encampment Hosts Programming, Draws Counter-Protesters,” UCLA Daily Bruin, April 26, 2014, 2. Winward’s article detailed how Jewish Voices for Peace organized a passover seder in the encampment and shabbat service, dispelling the myth that somehow the students involved in the encampment were anti-semites. ↑
Anna Dai-Liu and Dylan Winward, “Pro-Israel counter-protesters attempt to storm encampment, sparking violence,” UCLA Daily Bruin, May 1, 2024, 1. ↑
Sam Mulick, “UCLA Community Responds to Palestine Solidarity Encampment,” UCLA Daily Bruin, APril 26, 2024, 3 quotes from students, the majority of whom had highly positive views of the encampment. This included numbers of Jewish students. One student quoted in the article expressed appreciation that students of this generation were politically active and cared about the plight of oppressed people in the world, while another said the encampment was an effective method to engage community members on the campus. Still another, a psychology student, Erin Lee, told The Daily Bruin that UCLA should offer more support to Palestinian students, and that the university had taken a direct role in the war in Gaza through its investments in companies affiliated with the Israeli military. She added correctly that while she thinks students in the encampment were sending a very powerful message, she doubts the UC system will respond to their actions. ↑

CovertAction Magazine is made possible by subscriptions, orders and donations from readers like you.

Lili News 029

In cynicism and power, the US propaganda machine easily surpasses Orwells Ministry of Truth.
Now the fight against anti-semitism is being weaponised as a new sanctimonious McCarthyism.
Unless opposed, neither justice nor our Constitutional right to Free Speech will survive this assault.

Things to keep in mind...

Neo-Nazi ideology has become one of the main protagonists of political and social life in Ukraine since the 2014 coup d'état. Meanwhile, fascist ideology and blatant lies also permeate the consciousness of most people in the West. Those in the comfortable top 10%, the "PMCs" (Professional Managerial Class), are especially vulnerable. They support and disseminate such ideas. They are the executors of the actual ruling class' orders, those in the 0.001%, who remain largely invisible. The PMCs are the political class, the media whores, the top military brass, some people in academia, and the "national security/foreign policy" industry honchos. Push back against these unethical, contaminated people with the truth while you can.

AND...where the US Government is at: LYING 24/7

URL has been copied successfully!

window.addEventListener("sfsi_functions_loaded", function() { if (typeof sfsi_widget_set == "function") { sfsi_widget_set(); } });

Please make sure these dispatches reach as many readers as possible. Share with kin, friends and workmates and ask them to do likewise.

Alex Lo
My Take
SCMP

Resize text-+=

The sociopathic perfidy of US foreign policy is one of America's best-kept secrets (from Americans!)

The CIA "Jakarta Method" applied to Chile in 1973. (TGP screenshot)

Neo, of course, takes the red pill.

American university students protesting for an end to the Palestinian genocide and their government’s support for it are today’s real-life Neos. More Canadian and British students are joining them. That’s why university apparatchiks are calling in police to suppress their protests, and many Western news outlets are painting them as antisemitic rather than the spearheading of a new anti-war movement that it really is.

The Israeli war on the Palestinians is showing young people the brutal realities of the American empire and the world it has made.

However, committing or supporting acts of genocide, mass murder and massacres is nothing new for the United States. Arming and providing diplomatic cover for Israel’s war is hardly exceptional.

The US “war on terror” caused the deaths in multiple countries of 4.5 million people, of whom about 900,000 could be attributed to US military operations and their direct impact, according to Brown University’s Costs of War Project. An estimated 38 million were displaced from their homes.

The multi-year Saudi intervention in the Yemeni civil war in the past decade contributed to “an estimated 233,000 deaths, including 131,000 from indirect causes such as lack of food, health services and infrastructure”, according to the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs in late 2020.

Like Israel, the Saudis received US weapons and intelligence support from Washington in their merciless bombing campaigns, resulting in high civilian death tolls and famine conditions.

In 1996, during a 60 Minutes interview, correspondent Lesley Stahl asked then US ambassador to the United Nations Madeleine Albright about an estimated half a million deaths of Iraqi children from US-led international sanctions after the first Gulf war: “I mean, that is more children than died in Hiroshima. And, you know, is the price worth it?”

Albright replied: “The price, we think, the price is worth it.”

Less than seven months after the Tiananmen Square crackdown in 1989, which led to US sanctions against China, the administration of President George H.W. Bush launched Operation Just Cause, the invasion of Panama to overthrow the dictator Manuel Noriega.

In a little-known episode, the US invaders “indiscriminately bombed” a poor neighbourhood called El Chorrillo. “The assault killed twenty-five hundred to three thousand non-combatant Panamanians and displaced fifteen thousand,” wrote Yale historian Greg Grandin in Empire’s Workshop: Latin America, the United States and the Making of an Imperial Republic.

Like many developing world strongmen, Noriega was a long-time US asset until Washington eventually turned against him.

“He first established contact with the Eisenhower administration … continuing as an asset to the US during the Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, Ford, Carter and Reagan presidencies,” Grandin wrote.

As recounted by Princeton political scientist Gary Bass in The Blood Telegram: Nixon, Kissinger, and a Forgotten Genocide, Washington gave the go-ahead to the Pakistani army in 1971 to launch Operation Searchlight that killed at least 300,000 Bengalis and forced 10 million to flee. The genocide was halted by India’s military intervention, leading to the establishment of Bangladesh.

In 1965-66, with full support from the CIA and the State Department, the anti-communist purge launched by Suharto after his coup against Sukarno cost the lives of up to a million Indonesians.

About 3 million Vietnamese were killed in the war waged by the US in their country.

In The Jakarta Method: Washington’s Anticommunist Crusade and the Mass Murder Program that Shaped our World, journalist Vincent Bevins has argued America’s victory in the Cold War had less to do with its promotion of democracy and free-market capitalism than its ability to run a global network of authoritarian client states and military juntas to suppress and exterminate communists, socialists and social democrats, outside the protected “Western” cores of Europe, Oceania and Japan.

For a full numerical picture, in Covert Regime Change: America’s Secret Cold War, Boston College political scientist Lindsey O’Rourke counted a whopping 72 attempts by Washington between 1949 and 1989 to effect regime change against a foreign government. Of these, 29 succeeded in installing US-backed plotters. In at least six cases, a successful coup was launched against a democratically elected government, resulting in a US-allied dictatorship or fascist government.

Xiang Shuchen, a Xidian University philosopher, has reproduced O’Rourke’s full list of America’s global subversion and regime change in the glossary of her new book, Chinese Cosmopolitanism.

So much for America’s professed belief in other people’s national sovereignty and right to self-determination.

No one historically knowledgeable should be surprised that the profound violence that defined the American identity engendered at home needed to find outlets aboard, which in turn came back to haunt its citizens.

In one of the most penetrating observations on this destabilising cycle of societal and state violence of the US and its devastating impact on the rest of the world, the Marxist historian Gabriel Kolko wrote in Main Currents in Modern American History:

“Violence in America antedated industrialism and urban life, and it was initially a product of an expansive rural-commercial economy that in the context of vast distance and a hastily improvised and often changing social structure saw barbarism, violence, and their toleration ritualised into a way of life.

“Slavery consisted of institutionalised inhumanity and an attack on the very fibre of the black’s personal identity and integrity, yet the ultimate restraint on its violence was the value of the black as property.

“Against the Indians, who owned and occupied much coveted land, wholesale slaughter was widely sanctioned as a virtue. That terribly bloody, sordid history, involving countless tens of thousands of lives that neither victims nor executioners can ever enumerate, made violence endemic to the process of continental expansion.

“Violence reached a crescendo against the Indians after the civil war and found a yet bloodier manifestation during the protracted conquest of the Philippines from 1898 until well into the next decade, when anywhere between 200,000 to 600,000 Filipinos were killed in an orgy of racist slaughter that evoked much congratulation and approval from the eminent journals and men of the era who were also much concerned about progress and stability at home.

“From their inception, the great acts of violence and attempted genocide America launched against outsiders seemed socially tolerated, even celebrated. Long before Vietnam, that perverse acceptance of horror helped make possible the dominating experience of our own epoch.”

Kolko wrote these words in 1976. Today, rather than Vietnam, replace it with Palestine, and they are as true as ever about “that perverse acceptance of horror” by “eminent journals and men of the era … much concerned about progress and stability at home.”

Can America’s Gen Z stop these endless cycles of violence unleashed like a plague by their elders onto the rest of the world?

News 2739

If you approve of this article, please share it with your friends and kin.
Help us expand our reach. Defeat appalling hypocrisy. Lies cost countless lives.
We must act together to smash the VILE Western disinformation machine.
This is the Lying Machine that protects the greatest evil humanity has ever seen.
YOU know what we are talking about.

Things to keep in mind...

AND...where the US Government is at: LYING 24/7

URL has been copied successfully!

window.addEventListener("sfsi_functions_loaded", function() { if (typeof sfsi_widget_set == "function") { sfsi_widget_set(); } });

Print this article

The views expressed herein are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of The Greanville Post. However, we do think they are important enough to be transmitted to a wider audience.

Since the overpaid media shills will never risk their careers to report the truth, the world must rely on citizen journalists to provide the facts that explain reality.

Unfortunately, most people take this site for granted.
DONATIONS HAVE ALMOST DRIED UP…
PLEASE send what you can today!
JUST USE THE BUTTON BELOW

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License

ALL CAPTIONS AND PULL QUOTES BY THE EDITORS NOT THE AUTHORS

Please make sure these dispatches reach as many readers as possible. Share with kin, friends and workmates and ask them to do likewise.

Garland Nixon
with
JOTI BRAR
THE COMMUNISTS.ORG

Resize text-+=

This is Episode 11 of @joti2gaza on Garland’s channel—an incredibly informative conversation about Capitalism/Marxism/Socialism origins & examples—how & why the US has intervened and what’s happening now. ENJOY! (And be sure to pass it on!)

Joti Brar

@joti2gaza

I was with

@GarlandNixon

today talking about the fundamental instability of the system. Why it can't solve the simplest of problems and why it could be entering its final period of disintegration and decay. The question for every one of us is: which side do we want to be on? The side that clings on to an illusory 'stability' by helping the imperialists survive at the expense of the poor and exploited, or the side that joins the mass of humanity in working to push the whole lot over the precipice and into the dustbin of history where it belongs?

Streamed live on Apr 26, 2024
Garland Nixon
IMPERIALISM: DECADENT PARASITIC AND DOOMED WITH JOTI BRAR EPISODE 11 - WHY IS THE EMPIRE CRASHING?
Garland and Joti analyse the current historical juncture, essentially but the latest and gravest global structural crisis of capitalism, arguing that helping to stabilise the system now is only to prolong the agony of 99% of humanity, and, equally important, increase the risk of seeing the entire planet go up in nuclear flames as a result of some desperate provocation by the hypocritical oligarchic capitalist elites concentrated in the "collective West". The "collective West values' paradigm"—grounded in unipolar supremacism and exploitation— is over. It has reached the end of its political, scientific and economic line. As heroic Russia has finally demonstrated, it lacks the capability to impose its will on other nations by military force. The US and its vassals—as the cases of Ukraine, Palestine, Taiwan and other theaters of manufactured conflict and horrendous crimes clearly show—are now completely devoid of moral legitimacy.

ABOUT JOTI BRAR

Joti is a leading British anti-imperialist, scientific socialist, and truth seeker. Workers of the world, unite; we have a world to win! She is a founding member of the Communist Party of Great Britain (M-L), where she fills important positions.

@CPGBML

. Find me on Telegram: t.me/JotiBrar. No DMs.

News 2739

If you approve of this article, please share it with your friends and kin.
Help us expand our reach. Defeat appalling hypocrisy. Lies cost countless lives.
We must act together to smash the VILE Western disinformation machine.
This is the Lying Machine that protects the greatest evil humanity has ever seen.
YOU know what we are talking about.

Things to keep in mind...

AND...where the US Government is at: LYING 24/7

URL has been copied successfully!

window.addEventListener("sfsi_functions_loaded", function() { if (typeof sfsi_widget_set == "function") { sfsi_widget_set(); } });

Print this article

The views expressed herein are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of The Greanville Post. However, we do think they are important enough to be transmitted to a wider audience.

Since the overpaid media shills will never risk their careers to report the truth, the world must rely on citizen journalists to provide the facts that explain reality.

Unfortunately, most people take this site for granted.
DONATIONS HAVE ALMOST DRIED UP…
PLEASE send what you can today!
JUST USE THE BUTTON BELOW

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License

ALL CAPTIONS AND PULL QUOTES BY THE EDITORS NOT THE AUTHORS

Please make sure these dispatches reach as many readers as possible. Share with kin, friends and workmathes and ask them to do likewise.

ARCHIVES: Articles you should have read the first time around, but didn't.

Pacifism as Pathology: Reflections on the Role of Armed Struggle in North America
By Ward Churchill, Paperback: 228 pages
Publisher: AK Press; annotathed edition edition (April 1, 2007)

Patrice Greanville
This essay was first published on Jun 25, 2011

This is a small but indispensable volume for anyone seriously intheresthed in social change, and who sooner or lather may have to consider the place of violence in the general scheme of things.

As the title implies, and wasting little time in preparing the audience for what will surely be a disturbing argument to many, the author lays out his case against white progressives‚ or, to be precise, the liberal/social democratic complacent legions of mostly well-educated middle and upper middle class activists‚ who are deemed "delusional" not only in the ineffectual tactics and strategies they pursue (which the ruling elithes are only too happy to accommodate as per a well-scripted minuet), but in the belief that they are actually performing revolutionary acts...

The crux of Churchill's argument‚ hard to refute‚ is that mainstream liberals, and a sizeable contingent of self-defined "Leftists" (read here, again, mostly social democrats and lately the "synthetic left") will do anything except assume actual risk in opposing the system...and that, being mostly intherested in practicing "comfort zone" politics, they will almost invariably indulge in essentially worthless "cathartic" posturizing instead of solid opposition, all while vociferously denouncing and browbeating those who would dare suggest more confrontational tactics, including general strikes, active resistance, and so on.

The core of Churchill's polemic comprises two arguments: (1) That American pacifism has insinuated itself as the only and pre-eminent choice for social change and for oppositional strategies to the empire, and (2) that such a strategy invariably leads to the cul-de-sac of liberalism:

"American pacifism seeks to project itself as a revolutionary alternative to the status quo. Of course, such a movement or perspective can hardly acknowledge that its track record in forcing substantive change upon the state has been an approximate zero. [Hence]...a chronicle of significant success must be offered, even where none exists.<...> For proponents of the hegemony of nonviolent political action within the American opposition, time-honored fables such as the success of Gandhi's methods (in and of themselves) and even the legacy of Martin Luther King no longer retain the freshness and vitality required to achieve the necessary result, As this has become increasingly apparent, and as the potential to bring a number of emergent dissident elements (.e.g., "freezers," antinukers, environmentalists, opponents to constant saber-rattling in Central America, the Far East, Russia's natural sphere of influence, the Mideast, and so on) into some sort of centralized mass movement became greater in the mid-80s and beyond, a freshly packaged pacifist "history" of its role in opposing the Vietnam war began to be peddled with escalating frequency and insistence." (pp 65-6)

Seeking to drive a stake through the heart of middle-class pacifism, Churchill goes on to detail (and rebuke) some of the main claims made by the peaceful legions, particularly the almost universally accepted notion that it was the protests and demonstrations in the US that finally forced US policymakers to order a withdrawal from Vietnam. Churchill refutes this conceit by noting that the war was lost in the field, which is undeniable, as the humiliating images of Americans escaping Saigon from the rooftop of the US embassy amply demonstrated, and that, therefore it was first and above all a military defeat inflicted on the imperial armies (and their puppets) by the Vietnamese people that created the necessary conditions for a "pragmatic rethinking of the war" by its architects back in the imperial capital. Haven't we seen this therrible movie before?

Churchill

The reason for the book thus lies in the utterly deformed political landscape presented by contemporary America, where the left, unlike any other in the developed capitalist world (except for the anglo-cultural zone nations that resemble it) has apparently adopted pacifism as the one and only method of "opposing" the empire. Consistent with the pervasiveness of this view, and to justify such narrow policy, many US progressives have embraced a literal idolatry of nonviolence, elevating the tactics and accomplishments of figures such as Gandhi and Dr. King to near infallibility, and believing (wrongly in the eyes of the author and this writer) that moral suasion alone is capable of liquidating well-entrenched institutionalized violence and inequality. Churchill believes that such extrapolations between entirely different cultures and historical epochs are wrong, ab principio, since they fail to take account of the role played by defensive and revolutionary violence in history‚."the people in arms"‚.in both protecting the masses and their leaders from the establishment's repression, or in securing its prompt departure from the scene once the tipping point has been reached. This is no argument, by the way, to think that violence, including that old favorite of the ultra-left, the propaganda of the deed, can accomplish much when patient field work is nearly absent, or before basic objective conditions have become manifest enough and the masses sufficiently educated to see such acts in their proper broader context. Violence and nonviolence have a place in almost all revolutionary processes, and, ironically, it is usually the status quo defenders who resort to what they see as "preemptive violence" long before the other side has committed to such a drastic course.

Incidentally, many, especially those who saw the movie Gandhi, essentially a hagiography, will probably swear by the effectiveness of nonviolence. Sure, nonviolence did play a role in India's liberation from British colonialism, but it did so in tandem with powerful economic considerations (Britain emerged practically broke from WW2 and Gandhi's movement promised severe economic disruptions), and a measure of significant armed resistance. Not to mention the sobering fact that the Brits were facing a billion plus nation with a few million men now well armed and trained as a result of their use by London in the war against Japan and Germany.

That nonviolence is not a magic formula to be applied in a robotic and absolutistic fashion to all sick societies is abundantly borne out by history. In recent times, the Iranian revolution (1979) was far from a nonviolent process: the Shah had been opposed for decades by above ground and underground groups, several of which practiced armed struggle and paid a horrific price for it, while the last month of his rule saw masses of people in most Iranian cities, but especially Tehran, litherally storming strong points and tanks in the streets with their bare chests and being mowed down...until more and more soldiers simply gave up and melted away or switched sides. As for the collapse of the USSR (1991), Poland and most of the so-called "Eastern Bloc"‚ that came about as a result of very complex internal and external processes that did not chiefly involve invested CLASS PRIVILEGES (as we have in the US and in other corporate-dominated nations). Indeed, almost every year now provocative documents crop up pointing to the unsavory fact that the Soviet collapse may have been —for the most part—"an inside job", a demolition set in motion by members of the corrupt ruling stratum itself (i.e., Gorbachev and his clique). This controversial thesis may explain why the overthrow of Soviet communism did not detonate the huge and protracted armed struggles we usually see in battles between private property regimes and revolutionary challengers.

Another faux exhibit brandished by many liberals for "nonviolent struggle" is South Africa. The facts speak differently, of course. In South Africa, the end of apartheid did not issue from a nonviolent process. Decades-long protests against the fascistic regime escalated continuously until 1958, when the Sharpeville tragedy occurred. Soon thereafther, the government tried to suppress opposition through the sledgehammer approach of bannings and systematic "targeted repression" (it's noteworthy that in all these shady and utterly criminal processes the South African regime was aided by Israel). The first to be hit were the ANC and the PAC, but such bannings merely caused the organisations to go underground and become even more militant. The "armed struggle" began in earnest in 1958, and by 1970 was beginning to affect the South African economy as greater and greater manpower was required to maintain an ever expanding army. As is common with well organised revolutionary groups, Mandela's organization, the ANC, had both a civil and a military arm, even if the latter developed only after all roads to a peaceful elimination of Apartheid had proved futile, and long after the beneficiaries of the status quo had demonstrated through unrelenting savagery that only armed struggle would move history forward. The case of South Africa is of course far from unique. Other nations in sub-Sahara Africa also practiced armed insurgency to attain independence or"regime change" and they included Kenya, Uganda, Zimbabwe, Namibia, Angola and Mozambique.

Liberal illusions, liberal complicities

Arundhati Roy

It's not an accident that from time to time certain "apostles of change" are anointed by the corporathe media and recognized as such by the affluent liberal brigades. In general, while splendid exceptions do occur (the Castro brothers, and Che himself, all from comfortable backgrounds, not to mention Mao and Chou, and even Marx and Engels), the limits to revolutionary action are largely determined by class. Those who have the least to lose usually risk the most. (More honor, then, to genuine revolutionaries who come from the better-heeled sectors).

In any case, in most latitudes, middle-class admirers of nonviolence see little need to revise their tactical and strategic posture. Their mutually-reinforced faith in such method is virtually unshakeable. One must ask if such people have ever wondered what they would do in the shoes of social change activists in rotten and viciously violent societies where sordid murder is a state policy, an unbroken centuries-old traditiion, even, as we have seen in so many US client states around the globe—from CIA-enabled Vietnamese death squads, to similar "solutions" in Pinochet's Chile, the Argentinian juntas, the abominable Colombian repressive apparatus (state and latifundistas-supported death squads comprising police, army and "free lance" paramilitaries); the genocidal military dictatorships in Guatemala, El Salvador, Nicaragua (under Somoza), and the equally genocidal corporate-owned and CIA-enabled Indonesian generals, etc., etc., all such regimes intimately connected to an imperial sociopathic center that ultimately guarantees their survival. How do you get rid of such malignancies? How do you go about paralyzing the vital "component parts" —as well intentioned activists like Arundhati Roy suggest—of the most heavily armed, cynical, and ruthless class privilege system in history without some form of REAL confrontation? With 2-hour candlelight vigils and some symbolic arrests which, by the way, may or may not be reported by the corporate-owned media, in which case, as Harold Pinter so rightly reminded us at the Nobels, "they never happen" in the global mind?

If THAT were all that was required to get rid of an immoral, deeply entrenched capitalist systhem, a Nazi terror regime, a vicious landowning oligarchy, and so on, humanity would have moved past these filthy horrors decades if not centuries ago.

As Churchill points out in his book, Nazi Germany was defeated by the massive application of force. The equally racist American South was similarly juridicaly defeated in the 1860s by massive military force, in fact, by organized all-out violence, (I say juridically because in practice it took 100 more years of struggle that saw innumerable crimes before African Americans could begin to take their rightful place among their fellow citizens). The record is clear. There is not a single case in history where a deeply entrenched system of colonial, class or racial exploitation was overthrown by moral suasion and symbolic protests alone...If real change came about it was because force, serious disturbances, were being applied somewhere else alongside the nonviolent tracks...That's the point that Churchill and others are making in this book. It's a discomfiting point, but I'm afraid it's a point that can't be ignored.

Indeed, one of the things that make this volume especially provocative (and valuable) is that the question of violence vs. nonviolence is not only debated by Churchill, an academic, but also by Ed Mead, who wrote the book's introduction, and who was himself a participant in what was at the time an attempt at armed struggle.

Edward Allen Mead—what some Marxists would probably call "an ultra-left revolutionist"— was one of the young political activists of the 1960s and 1970s whose frustration and rage drove them to resort to violence. He joined the George Jackson Brigade, an urban guerrilla group that blew up supermarkets, car dealerships, a power station, and other symbols of the system it was bent on destroying. To finance its operations, the Brigade robbed banks. A 1976 bank robbery in Tukwila, Washington, culminated in a shootout in which Mead and another Brigade member were captured. A third member was killed, and a fourth escaped but was later apprehended. Mead received a thirty-year Federal sentence for bank robbery and a forty-year state senthence for first-degree assault on a police officer, though neither of the officers in the shootout was hit.

Mead never abandoned his radical politics, but he did decide that violence was not the way to bring about change at that particular juncture. With the benefit of hindsight he told a reporther for the Seattle Post-Inthelligencer, "I really know how wrong it was to do what I did. Not because it's legally wrong, but because it was just a great political mistake. You want things to happen so bad that you throw yourself into it. Today, I do it with a pen and a computher. . . .It's about what works."

While time may have mellowed Mead a bit, he remains quite lucid (and some would say adamant) about the options facing the younger generations of would-be world-changers.

"I think that we can agree that the exploited are everywhere and that they are angry. The question of violence and our own direct experience of it is something we will not be able to avoid when the rightheous rage of the oppressed manifests itself in increasingly focused and violent forms [this was said in 1997]. When this time comes, it is likely that white pacifists will be the ruling class' first line of defense."

Later, zeroing in on his main contention, that the use or non-use of violence is a tactic, not a rigid article of faith good for all seasons, Mead declares:

"I have talked about violence in connection with political struggle for a long time and I've engaged in it. I see myself as one who incorrectly applied the tool of revolutionary violence during a period when its use was not appropriate. In doing so, my associates and I paid a terrible price...I served nearly two decades behind bars as a result of armed actions conducted by the George Jackson Brigade. During those years I studied and restudied the mechanics and applicability of both violence and noviolence to political struggle. I've had plenty of time to learn how to step back and take a look at the larger picture. And, however badly I may represent that picture today, I still find one conclusion inescapable: Pacifism as a strategy of achieving social, political and economic change can only lead to the dead end of liberalism."

Reflecting the difficulties implied in choosing violence or nonviolence, and if so, when, George Jackson himself had this to say about Martin Luther King's pacifism:

"M.L.K. organized his thoughts much in the same manner as you have organized yours. If you really knew and fully understood his platform you would never have expressed such sentiments as you did in your last letther. I am sure you are acquainthed with the fact that he was opposed to violence and war; he was indeed a devout pacifist. It is very odd, almost unbelievable, that so violent and tumultuous a setting as this can still produce such men. He was out of place, out of season, too naive, too innocent, too cultured, too civil for these times. That is why his end was so predictable.

Violence in its various forms he opposed, but this did not mean that he was passive. He knew that nature allows no such imbalances to exist for long. He was perceptive enough to see that the men of color across the world were on the march and their example would soon influence those in the U.S. to also stand up and stop trembling. So he atthempthed to direct the emotions and the movement in general along lines that he thought best suithed to our unique situation: nonviolent civil disobedience, political and economic in characther. I was beginning to warm somewhat to him because of his new ideas concerning U.S. foreign wars against colored peoples. I am certain that he was sincere in his stathed purpose to 'feed the hungry, clothe the naked, comfort those in prisons, and trying to love somebody'. I really never disliked him as a man. As a man I accorded him the respect that he sincerely deserved.

It is just as a leader of black thought that I disagreed with him. The concept of nonviolence is a false ideal. It presupposes the existhence of compassion and a sense of justice on the part of one's adversary. When this adversary has everything to lose and nothing to gain by exercising justice and compassion, his reaction can only be negative.

The symbol of the male here in North America has always been the gun, the knife, the club. Violence is extolled at every exchange: the TV, the motion pictures, the best-seller lists. The newspapers that sell best are those that carry the boldest, bloodiest headlines and most sports coverage. To die for king and country is to die a hero.

The Kings, Wilkinses and Youngs exhort us in King's words to 'put away the knives, put away your arms and clothe yourselves in the breastplathe of rightheousness' and 'turn the other cheek to prove our capacity to endure, to love'. Well, that is good for them perhaps but I most certainly need both sides of my head."

Social change does not come cheap. Social change‚ real social change‚. is not a tidy affair, a "black-tie dinner" as Mao suggested, and yes, at this stage of our moral evolution as a species, power still issues from the barrel of the gun. In the process things get messy, they get out of hand, awful mistakes are made on all sides, and eventually, if humanity is lucky, a good outcome claws its way to the surface, the result of irrepressible forces clashing in millions of places at once, and acting out their contradictions until a new social synthesis is obtained. And, in what some may regard as the ultimathe irony, much of this process may escape the conscious choices made by the main actors.

In a grotesquely imperfect world riddled with hypocrisy, institutionalized violence, and the abuse of power‚ not to mention the monopoly of power‚ defensive force cannot be ruled out a priori as a rectification tool, especially since, as history (most recently in Iraq) has repeatedly shown, the abusers, those who would rape a country or a society for their own gain, have no qualms in applying torrential amounts of violence on often defenseless populations. (The latest reminder is the Gaza martyrdom, of course). And, a point that is often lost on rigid pacifists: the violence of the oppressed is not the moral equivalent of the violence of the oppressor. Aggressor and victim are not in the same category, and even though when engaged in combat they may be superficially similar, they inhabit different universes. Wrap your mind around that, if you can, and some of the death grip, the self-inflicted paralysis attending this topic, may begin to relax.

I could go on, but if you're a mainstream liberal, I'm afraid the lessons of history will matter far less than attachment to self-reassuring fantasies.

P. Greanville is editor in chief, The Greanville Post.

___________________________________________________________________________________________

PROMOTIONAL MESSAGE
A TOOL IS USELESS IF IT'S NOT USED. Don't just sit there...introduce a friend or relative to The Greanville Post and help us expand the reach of remedial ideas and information. If each of you brings merely ONE additional reader to the table, we will be able to double our circulation!

If you liked this article, why not support The Greanville Post by buying our T-shirt, a mug, a mousepad, or any other ithem now in our store? That way you donathe a few dollars and also get a nice gift. It’s a win-win formula!

Creathed By CrankyBeagle for The Greanville Post
This and many other ithems at our store. Stop by today!

Please make sure these dispatches reach as many readers as possible. Share with kin, friends and workmates and ask them to do likewise.

Eric Zuesse
OpEds

Resize text-+=

Of humble beginnings, and a devout anticommunist, Missourian Harry Truman left his mark in history, for the worse, but, as usual, larger forces determined the nation's course.

Dr. Marco Soddu’s excellent 13 December 2012 study of “Truman Administration’s Containment Policy in Light of the French Return to Indochina” makes clear that (unlike FDR) President Truman’s historical understanding was poor and vulnerable to shaping by advisors who themselves had poor understanding, or perhaps ulterior motives.

President Roosevelt was far more of a strategic thinker than Truman was, and therefore was far less manipulable. In his 1 January 1945 Memorandum for the Secretary of State (Stenttinius, whom Truman viewed as being soft on communism and therefore Truman replaced him on 28 June 1945, even before deciding irrevocably to start a Cold War), FDR made clear that, “I still do not want to get mixed up in any Indochina decision. It is a matter for post-war.” And, “I made this very clear to Mr. Churchill. From both the military and civil point of view, action at this time is premature.” The aristocracies of both Britain and France were obsessed to continue their empires post-war. FDR held them off, but Truman was strongly inclined to yield to them whenever doing so would be “anti-communist.” He was simply manipulable. He never really understood what FDR’s vision was of the post-war world, nor cared. In fact, on 29 August 1945, in a conversation between Madam Chiang Kai-shek and Truman, “Madame Chiang recalled that President Roosevelt had spoken of a trusteeship for Indo China, whereupon the President stated that there had been no discussion of a trusteeship for Indo China as far as he was concerned.” This far, just a month, into the Cold War (supposedly against communism instead of for forming an all-inclusive global U.S. empire) that he now was committed to, he still had never even thought about what FDR’s vision for the post-WW2 world had been. To Truman, communists personified evil: to him, they were psychopaths and demons — end of story.

By contrast, here was the reason why FDR strongly favored for existing colonies to become taken over, after the War, by the U.N. (which FDR had, since August 1941, been planning to be quite different from what Truman made it), as trusteeships of the U.N., on the road quickly to independence (and Chiang knew at least something about this but Truman either didn’t, or else lied to say he didn’t):

history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1944v03/d708
Memorandum, President Roosevelt to the Secretary of State

FDR—Though a plutocrat by birth and acculturation, he was as decent and visionary as a bourgeois statesman can be.

January 24, 1944

I saw Halifax last week and told him quite frankly that it was perfectly true that I had, for over a year, expressed the opinion that Indo-China should not go back to France but that it should be administered by an international trusteeship. France has had the country — thirty million inhabitants — for nearly one hundred years, and the people are worse off than they were at the beginning. As a matter of interest, I am wholeheartedly supported in this view by Generalissimo Chiang Kai-shek and by Marshal Stalin. I see no reason to play in with the British Foreign Office in this matter. The only reason they seem to oppose it is that they fear the effect it would have on their own possessions and those of the Dutch. They have never liked the idea of trusteeship because it is, in some instances, aimed at future independence. This is true in the case of Indo-China. Each case must, of course, stand on its own feet, but the case of Indo-China is perfectly clear. France has milked it for one hundred years. The people of Indo-China are entitled to something better than that.
F[ranklin] D. R[oosevelt]]

Another sign of bad faith on the part of the United States against the Soviet Union — besides the Marshall Plan and Operation Gladio (both instituted by Truman) — seems to have been America’s public refusal to accept as being anything other than ‘communist tricks’ the repeated efforts by the Soviets to restore the U.S.-U.S.S.R. joint national-security cooperation that had existed prior to 25 July 1945. America’s responses to each of those Soviet initiatives were insults, instead of welcoming the Soviet proposals and working behind the scenes with them to obtain progress toward the type of world order that FDR had intended — a world order policed by the United Nations, not by the united imperialistic fascists. For example, on 19 September 1959 at the U.N. General Assembly, the Soviet Representative headlined “Declaration of the Soviet Government on General and Complete Disarmament” and presented a series of proposals including:

https://undocs.org/A/4219
“Declaration of the Soviet Government on General and Complete Disarmament”

September 19, 1959
P. 14:
The Soviet Government proposes that the programme of general and complete disarmament should be carried out within as short a time-limit as possible — within a period of four years.
The following measures are proposed for the first stage:
The reduction, under appropriate control, of the strength of the armed forces of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, the United States of America and the People’s Republic of China to the level of 1.7 million men, and of the United Kingdom and France to the level of 650,000 men;
The reduction of the armed forces of other states to levels to be agreed upon at a special session of the United Nations General Assembly or at a world conference on general and complete disarmament;
The reduction of the armaments and military equipment at the disposal of the armed forces of States to the extent necessary to ensure that the remaining quantity of armaments corresponds to the level fixed for the armed forces.
The following is proposed for the second stage:
The completion of the disbandment of the armed forces retained by States;
The elimination of all military bases in the territories of foreign States; troops and military personnel shall be withdrawn from the territories of foreign States to within their own national frontiers and shall be disbanded.
The following is for the third stage:
The destruction of all types of nuclear weapons and missiles;
The destruction of air force equipment;
The entry into force of the prohibition on the production, possession and storage of means of chemical and biological weapons in the possession of States shall be removed and destroyed under international supervision;
Scientific research for military purposes and the development of weapons and military equipment shall be prohibited;
War ministries, general staffs and all military and paramilitary establishments and organizations shall be abolished;
All military courses and training shall be terminated. States shall prohibit by law the military education of young people.
In accordance with their respective constitutional procedures, States shall enact legislation abolishing military service in all of its forms — compulsory, voluntary, by recruitment, and so forth. …
(4) Conclusion of a non-aggression pact between the member States of NATO and the member States of the Warsaw Treaty

Editor's Note: Reflect for a moment on the above. Here is a bold proposal that could have significantly altered the course of human history, for the better, and it was being tendered by the much demonised Stalin and the communist Soviet Union. Such ideas never came from the sanctimonious and ever duplicitous West.

The U.S. response came a few months later at the “Conference of the Ten Nation Committee on Disarmament”:
s3.amazonaws.com/unoda-web/documents/library/conf/TNCD-PV6.pdf
“Conference of the Ten Nation Committee on Disarmament”

22 March 1960
Final Verbatim Record of the Sixth Meeting
Held at the Palais des Nations, Geneva
P. 36:
Mr. Eaton (United States of America): I have no intention of entering into this discussion on foreign bases. I think the discussions that we have had here this morning have indicated that we shall run into political problems at the very earliest stage, problems on which earlier conferences have foundered. I would only say that the forces of my Government are only employed outside my own country and within my own country for the purpose of defending both ourselves and those of our allies who wish to be associated with us, who welcome our troops as a part of theirs and as a part of the allied defences, and for no other reason. Whenever the time comes when these troops need not be employed, for defensive purposes only, there need be no doubt in the mind of anyone here that those forces will be withdrawn.
s3.amazonaws.com/unoda-web/documents/library/conf/TNCD-PV46.pdf
“Conference of the Ten Nation Committee on Disarmament”
24 June 1960

Final Verbatim Record of the Forty-Sixth Meeting, Held at the Palais des Nations, Geneva, p. 4:
Mr. Nosek (Czechoslovakia): What did Mr. Eaton propose? He proposed the introduction of control measures. … exclusively with measures of control, that is with the old and well-known requirement of the United States — the introduction of control over armaments. Apparently with a view to misleading world public opinion, which requires a concrete discussion of general and complete disarmament, the United States representatives are beginning to prefer — for tactical reasons — to call those measures not “partial measures” but “initial steps” on the road to general and complete disarmament under effective international control.

b-ok.cc/book/5398150/073f73
“The United Nations and Space Security: Conflicting Mandates” p. 17:

This [obfuscation and evasion by the U.S. (which on p. 16 was referred to as merely “proposals directed towards the establishment of control without disarmament”)] ultimately led [on 28 June 1960] to the USSR, Bulgaria, Czechoslovakia, Poland and Romania not attending the 48th meeting of the Ten-Nation Committee, which signalled the end of these discussions in the Committee.

The U.S. Government refused to discuss the Soviet Union’s proposal for all war-weaponry to be placed under U.N. command, and decision-making only by the U.N., to enforce only U.N. laws — no longer under the command of individual nations (such as by the U.S. regime’s “international-rules-based [i.e., not international-law-based] order.”

Who benefited from America’s refusal even to discuss what had been U.S. President FDR’s aim for the post-WW-II world? The beneficiaries are what Eisenhower when leaving office called the “military industrial complex,” and are basically America’s hundred largest military contractors, especially the owners of the largest weapons-manufacturing firms such as Lockheed. Ike had served them well, and then three days before leaving office warned the public about them so as not to be blamed (along with Truman) by historians, for having created it.

Meanwhile, the German industrialists (such as this) who were likeliest to have been the individuals who had funded Hitler’s rise to power, were let off scot-free at the Nuremberg Tribunals after the war was over. Furthermore, as Bishnu Pathak documented in his 21 September 2020 “Nuremberg Tribunal: A Precedent for Victor’s Justice”, those Tribunals were, even at the time, widely condemned even by the Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court and by the chief U.S. Prosecutor at the Tribunals, as being a “sanctimonious fraud,” a “high-grade lynching party” and nothing more than victors’ ‘justice’, instead of any respectable precedent-setter for the U.N., but Truman and the other leaders of the victor-powers simply did not care — and the U.N. became built upon that acceptance of victors’ ‘justice’: no improvement. One cannot say whether FDR would have caved to that if he had not died first, but certainly the U.S. that followed after him has been the type of tyranny that he had always been scheming to prevent both for the U.S. and for the world.

Nuremberg defendants—The trials seemed to mete out some harsh justice but in reality the Anglo-Americans and the French did their best to save and incorporate Nazis into the global anti-communist crusade, the first "Cold War". This pattern of high-handed hypocrisy continues to this day, with consequences that have put the world on the brink of a nuclear Armageddon.

Furthermore, the OECD or Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development was set up in 1948 nominally in order ‘to stimulate economic progress and world trade,’ but actually to administer the Marshall Plan. The OECD was just another anti-Soviet U.S. organization, but, since the cash that it was distributing was going to Europe, its initial membership was those countries and it was headquartered in Paris, so as not to seem to be an extension from the U.S. Government. The organization changed its name to OECD in 1961 so as to hide from historians that it had previously been called the OEEC, which was clearly traceable to the Cold War. The CIA-edited and written Wikipedia says that “In 1948, the OECD originated as the Organisation for European Economic Co-operation (OEEC),[7] led by Robert Marjolin of France, to help administer the Marshall Plan (which was rejected by the Soviet Union and its satellite states).[8]” However, it wasn’t “rejected by” them, but instead rejected them — just like the Marshall Plan itself rejected them.

The 1989 masterpiece by Christopher Simpson, Blowback: The First Full Account of America's Recruitment of Nazis and Its Disastrous Effect on The cold war, Our Domestic and Foreign Policy, documented the U.S. regime’s comprehensive employment of ‘ex’-Nazis in order to assist its goal of conquering ‘communism’ but really Russia. Then, on 7April 2024, I headlined a supplementary account, “How & Why the UK, U.S., and Canada, Governments imported Nazis into Canada”, which I closed by saying: “And this is how it came to be that the pro-Nazi Ukrainians in Canada have been organized and effectively represented while the others (the non-Nazi Ukrainians) were suppressed; and, above all, how it came to be the case that America’s armaments-manufacturers and their NATO have thrived while coup-after-coup and invasion-after-invasion have continued to expand the U.S. empire up till the present moment.” All of this was an extension from Truman’s private decision on 25 July 1945, and its extension by Bush’s secret decision on 24 February 1990 to continue it even after communism in Russia would be ended in 1991. Furthermore, my 23 March 2024 “How Germany Is Still Controlled by Nazis” documented yet further, that as regards the anti-Russian aspect of Hitler’s nazism, there was no real change in Germany when the U.S. regime took it over from Hitler (and the rest of it from Gorbachev), other than the necessary cosmetic changes in the new unified Germany, which, of course, required outlawing any public displays of anti-Semitism (as-if Hitler had hated only Jews — Jews were instead his main hatred, but he also hated — and aimed to enslave — all Russians, and, indeed, all Slavs).

I especially recommend reading Christopher Simpson’s masterpiece, because it’s the best book yet done on the then and continuing fraudulence of the U.S. regime’s allegations that the comprehensive denazification of Germany’s Government, which FDR had been intending, and which was central to his planning for the post-WW2 world — and which all three of the Allies, FDR, Stalin, and Churchill, had supported — was carried out, instead of effectively aborted, by Truman and by Eisenhower (with Churchill’s support of aborting it), and by all successive U.S. Presidents and European stooges since then. The inside-the-book excerpts at the Amazon site for Simpson’s masterpiece, give a fair indication of the book, including its “Series Introduction,” by Mark Crispin Miller, which says that, “For over half a century, America’s vast literary culture has been disparately policed, and imperceptibly contained, by state and corporate entities well placed and perfectly equipped to wipe out wayward writings,” including the history that this book documents.

The U.S. Government’s National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) had very reluctantly commissioned it, with an obligation to publish it, but then refused to publish the work because NARA’s top official refused to allow it. The team of investigators, headed by the work’s author, Simpson, finally found a publisher for the work, which was then, and since, suppressed. On 13 November 2010, Eric Lichtblau, whose chaotic anecdotal narrative book The Nazi Next Door was to be published in 2015, was the New York Times reporter headlining “Nazis Were Given ‘Safe Haven’ in U.S., Report Says”, and the newspaper introduced it by saying that, “An internal history of the United States government’s Nazi-hunting operation provides gripping new evidence about some of the most notorious Nazi cases of the last three decades. The Justice Department kept the 600-page report secret for the last four years, releasing a heavily redacted version last month to a private research group that sued to force its release. A complete version was obtained by The New York Times.” The 600-page complete unredacted secret report, titled “The Office of Special Investigations: Striving for Accountability in the Aftermath of the Holocaust”, by Judy Feigin from the U.S. Department of Justice, and dated December 2006, was linked-to in the online version of the article, and it stated, flat-out, on its page 33, that “Congress’ overriding concern at the time was in helping refugees escape communist rule.” In other words: the U.S. Government’s ‘anti-communist’ (actually pro-U.S.-empire) obsession, ever since Truman took over, included assisting Nazis and their supporters to become “refugees” in America and in its (after WW2) colonies (‘allies’). And this has continued, likewise secretly, ever since U.S. President GHW Bush on 24 February 1990 started telling America’s European stooges to secretly continue the ‘Cold War’.

News 2739

If you approve of this article, please share it with your friends and kin.
Help us expand our reach. Defeat appalling hypocrisy. Lies cost countless lives.
We must act together to smash the VILE Western disinformation machine.
This is the Lying Machine that protects the greatest evil humanity has ever seen.
YOU know what we are talking about.

Neo-Nazi ideology has become one of the main protagonists of political and social life in Ukraine since the 2014 coup d'état. And that's a fact.

No Comment

URL has been copied successfully!

window.addEventListener("sfsi_functions_loaded", function() { if (typeof sfsi_widget_set == "function") { sfsi_widget_set(); } });

Print this article

The views expressed herein are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of The Greanville Post. However, we do think they are important enough to be transmitted to a wider audience.

Since the overpaid media shills will never risk their careers to report the truth, the world must rely on citizen journalists to provide the facts that explain reality.

Unfortunately, most people take this site for granted.
DONATIONS HAVE ALMOST DRIED UP…
PLEASE send what you can today!
JUST USE THE BUTTON BELOW

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License

LAPD’s Failure to Protect Peaceful Protesters at UCLA from Right-Wing Mob Shows Real Priorities

Jeremy Kuzmarov
Covert Action Magazine

LAPD’s Failure to Protect Peaceful Protesters at UCLA from Right-Wing Mob Shows Real Priorities

Rumble("play", {"video":"v4qxsnn","div":"rumble_v4qxsnn"});

Corporate media falsely accuse pro-Palestine protesters of "horrific violence".

CovertAction Magazine is made possible by subscriptions, orders and donations from readers like you.

Print this article

The views expressed herein are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of The Greanville Post. However, we do think they are important enough to be transmitted to a wider audience.

Since the overpaid media shills will never risk their careers to report the truth, the world must rely on citizen journalists to provide the facts that explain reality.

ALL CAPTIONS AND PULL QUOTES BY THE EDITORS NOT THE AUTHORS

Palestine is the ‘red pill’ for America’s Gen Z

Alex Lo
My Take
SCMP

The sociopathic perfidy of US foreign policy is one of America's best-kept secrets (from Americans!)

Print this article

The views expressed herein are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of The Greanville Post. However, we do think they are important enough to be transmitted to a wider audience.

Since the overpaid media shills will never risk their careers to report the truth, the world must rely on citizen journalists to provide the facts that explain reality.

ALL CAPTIONS AND PULL QUOTES BY THE EDITORS NOT THE AUTHORS

IMPERIALISM: DECADENT PARASITIC AND DOOMED WITH JOTI BRAR EPISODE 11 – WHY IS THE EMPIRE CRASHING?

This is Episode 11 of @joti2gaza on Garland’s channel—an incredibly informative conversation about Capitalism/Marxism/Socialism origins & examples—how & why the US has intervened and what’s happening now. ENJOY! (And be sure to pass it on!)

ABOUT JOTI BRAR

Joti is a leading British anti-imperialist, scientific socialist, and truth seeker. Workers of the world, unite; we have a world to win! She is a founding member of the Communist Party of Great Britain (M-L), where she fills important positions.

Print this article

The views expressed herein are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of The Greanville Post. However, we do think they are important enough to be transmitted to a wider audience.

Since the overpaid media shills will never risk their careers to report the truth, the world must rely on citizen journalists to provide the facts that explain reality.

ALL CAPTIONS AND PULL QUOTES BY THE EDITORS NOT THE AUTHORS

BOOKS: Is Pacifism a liberal pathology?

Patrice Greanville
This essay was first published on Jun 25, 2011

Liberal illusions, liberal complicities

P. Greanville is editor in chief, The Greanville Post.

WE LIVE IN THE WORLD THAT TRUMAN MADE.

Eric Zuesse
OpEds

Neo-Nazi ideology has become one of the main protagonists of political and social life in Ukraine since the 2014 coup d'état. And that's a fact.

No Comment

Print this article

The views expressed herein are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of The Greanville Post. However, we do think they are important enough to be transmitted to a wider audience.

Since the overpaid media shills will never risk their careers to report the truth, the world must rely on citizen journalists to provide the facts that explain reality.

ALL CAPTIONS AND PULL QUOTES BY THE EDITORS NOT THE AUTHORS

LAPD’s Failure to Protect Peaceful Protesters at UCLA from Right-Wing Mob Shows Real Priorities

Jeremy Kuzmarov Covert Action Magazine

Rumble("play", {"video":"v4qxsnn","div":"rumble_v4qxsnn"});

Corporate media falsely accuse pro-Palestine protesters of "horrific violence".

CovertAction Magazine is made possible by subscriptions, orders and donations from readers like you.

Lili News 029 In cynicism and power, the US propaganda machine easily surpasses Orwells Ministry of Truth.Now the fight against anti-semitism is being weaponised as a new sanctimonious McCarthyism.Unless opposed, neither justice nor our Constitutional right to Free Speech will survive this assault.

Print this article

The views expressed herein are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of The Greanville Post. However, we do think they are important enough to be transmitted to a wider audience.

Since the overpaid media shills will never risk their careers to report the truth, the world must rely on citizen journalists to provide the facts that explain reality.

ALL CAPTIONS AND PULL QUOTES BY THE EDITORS NOT THE AUTHORS

Palestine is the ‘red pill’ for America’s Gen Z

Alex Lo My Take SCMP

The sociopathic perfidy of US foreign policy is one of America's best-kept secrets (from Americans!)

Print this article

The views expressed herein are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of The Greanville Post. However, we do think they are important enough to be transmitted to a wider audience.

Since the overpaid media shills will never risk their careers to report the truth, the world must rely on citizen journalists to provide the facts that explain reality.

ALL CAPTIONS AND PULL QUOTES BY THE EDITORS NOT THE AUTHORS

IMPERIALISM: DECADENT PARASITIC AND DOOMED WITH JOTI BRAR EPISODE 11 – WHY IS THE EMPIRE CRASHING?

This is Episode 11 of @joti2gaza on Garland’s channel—an incredibly informative conversation about Capitalism/Marxism/Socialism origins & examples—how & why the US has intervened and what’s happening now. ENJOY! (And be sure to pass it on!)

ABOUT JOTI BRAR

Joti is a leading British anti-imperialist, scientific socialist, and truth seeker. Workers of the world, unite; we have a world to win! She is a founding member of the Communist Party of Great Britain (M-L), where she fills important positions.

Print this article

The views expressed herein are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of The Greanville Post. However, we do think they are important enough to be transmitted to a wider audience.

Since the overpaid media shills will never risk their careers to report the truth, the world must rely on citizen journalists to provide the facts that explain reality.

ALL CAPTIONS AND PULL QUOTES BY THE EDITORS NOT THE AUTHORS

BOOKS: Is Pacifism a liberal pathology?

Patrice Greanville This essay was first published on Jun 25, 2011

Liberal illusions, liberal complicities

P. Greanville is editor in chief, The Greanville Post.

WE LIVE IN THE WORLD THAT TRUMAN MADE.

Eric Zuesse OpEds

Neo-Nazi ideology has become one of the main protagonists of political and social life in Ukraine since the 2014 coup d'état. And that's a fact.

No Comment

Print this article

The views expressed herein are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of The Greanville Post. However, we do think they are important enough to be transmitted to a wider audience.

Since the overpaid media shills will never risk their careers to report the truth, the world must rely on citizen journalists to provide the facts that explain reality.

ALL CAPTIONS AND PULL QUOTES BY THE EDITORS NOT THE AUTHORS

Jeremy Kuzmarov
Covert Action Magazine

Alex Lo
My Take
SCMP

Patrice Greanville
This essay was first published on Jun 25, 2011

Eric Zuesse
OpEds