USSR: Photographs of Lee Harvey Oswald in Minsk (BSSR) – 1959-1962

0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

Lee Harvey Oswald and Fellow Minsk Workers

(Research and Translation by Adrian Chan-Wyles PhD)

Translator’s Note: The Warren Commission made much of Oswald’s sojourn to the USSR just prior to the murder of JFK. The US Authorities tried to amass as much information about this stage in Oswald’s short life, as a means to fabricate ‘probable cause’. Bear in mind that Oswald never stood trial, and his guilt was never ascertained in a court of law. The reason the US Authorities were pursuing this line was because of the ‘witch-hunt’ pogrom initiated against all ‘Socialists’ and ‘Communists’ living in the US since the end of WWII. This pogrom had existed in a less intense form prior to WWII, but following the Soviet victory over fascism during the Second World War, the US Authorities embarked upon a fully comprehensive ‘disinformation’ campaign that re-wrote Soviet history to give the false impression that Soviet Communism was no different to German National Socialism, and that everyone who adhered to Marxist-Leninist ideology were morally repugnant and pursuing a political path of utmost ‘evil’. Rather illogically, and in no way acting inaccordance with established legal practice, the US Authorities declared that Oswald’s association with ‘Communism’ proved that he had the ‘motive’ to pull the trigger and incentive to murder President John F Kennedy. In fact, this approach means nothing from a legal perspective, and is defined as ‘hearsay’. In short, the assumption that Oswald killed Kennedy because he was a ‘Communist’ is inadmissible as evidence in Court, and yet it is this assumption that is used to ‘judge’ Oswald and a priori suggest that he is guilty. As a consequence, anyone who ‘questions’ this assumption is falsely presented as ‘supporting’ the murder of JFK, rather than questioning a faulty legal procedure. Although the recent release of a number of previously ‘secret’ JFK Files strongly deny Oswald’s involvement, there are still elements of the US Establishment who are keeping to script and trying to ‘sell’ the old and tired idea that ‘absence of evidence’ is indeed ‘proof of culpability’. The article below gives a different side to Oswald, and highlights his time in the Soviet Union. Interestingly, he did not partake in any shooting clubs, did not visit any firing ranges, and appears never to have owned a fire-arm of any sort whilst living in Minsk. There is no evidence within Russian language sources that Oswald was being ‘trained’ to assassinate JFK whilst visiting the USSR. This is important as the Warren Commission suggests that whilst acting alone and aiming from the Book Depository Building, Oswald managed to fire three of the best rifle-shots ever recorded at a moving vehicle that was not entirely clear in his sights. In summary, being a Communist does not imply ‘Criminal intent’. ACW (11.1.2018)

The recent release of the JFK Assassination Files in the US not only shed doubt on whether President John F Kennedy was shot by a lone gunman – but question whether Lee Harvey Oswald was involved at all. He was ‘set-up’ as a ‘patsy’ or fall-guy’ because he was known to be a Communist (this was true even when serving in the US Marine Corp). There is no logical reason why a Socialist like Oswald would murder one of the most progressive and potentially leftwing Presidents the US has ever known. It appears that the US Intelligence Services co-opted Oswald’s name in the fabrication of a cover-story to divert public attention away from the fact that the US Political System had conspired to kill its own democratically elected leader. Nptice also how Lee Harvey Oswald was treated for his visit to the USSR between 1959-1962 – compared to Bill Clinton who spent a week in the Soviet Union in 1969. The former was oppressed and murdered for his political views, whilst the latter became the ‘elected’ 42nd President of the United States!

Lee Harvey Oswald described his political views as being ‘Marxist-Leninist’, and stated on live US TV that he was being framed for the murder of President John F Kennedy, because he had lived in the Soviet Union. When only 19 years old, Oswald was discharged from the US Marine Corp, and travelled to the UK, and then on to Helsinki, where he obtained a five-day tourist visa from the Embassy of the USSR. The motivation for this journey was to develop his understanding further about Socialism, an interest he possessed even before joining the US Marines. He arrived in Moscow on October the 16th, 1959, and informed the tourist agent assigned to assist him, that he wanted to defect. Following an initial refusal, Oswald is said to have suffered a ‘breakdown’ and was briefly hospitalised in the USSR. Following this episode, the Soviet Authorities relented and he was granted Soviet Citizenship. It was made clear to him that as an ex-member of the US Military, he could not stay in Moscow or Leningrad for security reasons, but must relocate to ‘Minsk’. Russian language records state that Oswald did not know where Minsk was, and thought that it might be in Siberia (the Soviet Officials laughed).

On January 5th, 1960, Oswald received the relatively large amount of 5000 rubles from the Red Cross as a means to relieve hardship during his re-settlement. As a Soviet Citizen, Oswald arrived on January 7th, 1960, in Minsk (Belarus Soviet Socialist Republic – BSSR), and stayed for two months at the fashionable ‘Minsk’ Hotel (Room 453 – 4th Floor). Following this, Oswald would spend most of the next two and half years living in a flat in the vicinity Minsk Victory Square. On January 11th, 1960, Oswald visited the ‘Minks Lenin Radio Plant’ where he would be employed for the rest of his time in Minsk. He was paid 700 rubles a month, and on the 5th of every month, he received a further 700 rubles from the Red Cross. Oswald mentions that the factory floor was dominated by a large picture of Lenin which all employees had to stand and appraise from 11am – 11:10 am – a procedure Oswald did not favour. Two points of oddity exist here, which originate from within Oswald’s diary.

Firstly, there was no need for the Red Cross to grant sums of money to Oswald when the USSR possessed one of the most comprehensive Welfare Systems in the world. The Constitution of the USSR guaranteed all people living within the USSSR – whether ‘foreigner’ or ‘Citizen’, the right of full access to the Welfare System. Oswald received ‘free’ medical care and was given benefit payments whilst being re-settled. He was allocated a ‘flat’ in a modern (post-WWII reconstructed) part of Minsk, for which he was charged a nominal rent only after he started working full-time. Furthermore, the USSR had full employment and everyone was given a job suited to their abilities and needs. There was no competition for jobs as is the case in the capitalist West. Secondly, as a Marxist-Leninist, who had presumably read at least some work related to Marx and Lenin, Oswald would have appreciated the need for political education amongst the people. Standing to attention for ten minutes during a mid-morning break is the minimum a Soviet Citizen could do as a means to ‘appreciate’ and ‘remember’ where all the material benefits they enjoyed, had historically originated. Prior to the rise of revisionist Khrushchev, Lenin’s portrait may well have rested alongside that of Joseph Stalin. Whatever the case, Imbuing a sense of innate respect for the Soviet State was an important part of Soviet identity. Oswald was young, of course, and there is no guarantee that his diary was not ‘altered’ or ‘adjusted’ to give a negative impression of the USSR – the very country Oswald had given-up his US Citizenship to enter.

On January 8th, Oswald recorded in his diary about a meeting he had with the ‘Mayor of the City’ Sharapov (Шараповым), who promised him a free apartment and separately warned of ‘uncultured people who sometimes offend foreigners.’ Lee did not have any special conflicts, however, with local residents, but he was given the promised apartment quite quickly. Already by March 16th, 1960, Oswald recorded in the ‘Diary’:

‘I’m getting a small one-room apartment with a kitchen and a bathroom. Near the Plant (8 minutes walk). Beautiful view from two balconies to the river. Almost free of charge (60 rubles per month). This is a dream for Russians.’

A separate, albeit ‘small’ apartment was considered very highly by most of the Minsk citizens, who appreciated everything the Soviet State provided. In addition, the American guest was placed in an excellent post-war home, almost on the main avenue of the city, with a view not only of the river, but also of the headquarters of the Red Banner Belarusian Military District. Oswald’s new address was – Ul. Kalinin, 4, ap. 24. A year later, ‘ul. Kalinin’ is renamed the ‘Communist’ (Коммунистическую), under this name it continues to exist today. The photo of this apartment house, apparently made by Oswald, is contained in the materials of the Warren Commission. During his ime i Minsk, Oswald would marry ‘Marina’ and have a child before decding to return to the USA during May, 1962.

00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

Oswald and his New Apartment

00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

Oswald (far-left) and Alexander Sieger [Александр Зигер] (far-right)

000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

Oswald and his Wife (Russian) Marina

00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

Marina Oswald (nee: Prusakova) [ Марина Николаевна Прусакова]

Russian Language Source:

https://realt.onliner.by/2013/05/15/oswald

The Anti-Socialist Crimes of ‘Sir’ Winston Churchill – the Short Course

00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

In response to the general lack of public education regarding this matter, and seven years in to a devastating rightwing Tory rule of the UK, I felt that a quick access guide to many of the ‘crimes’ of Winston Churchill be gathered in one place for research purposes. As the Tories continue to privatize the NHS and dismantle the Welfare State, and after being found ‘Guilty of Crimes Against Humanity’ by the UN in 2016, their resorting to invoking the spectre of Winston Churchill has seen at least three big budget movies made since 2010, all purporting to represent various aspects of his life, but all perpetuating myth after myth, and none covering any of the historical ‘crimes’ or ‘morally reprehensible’ acts that this man has been directly or indirectly involved in. The central myth to be demolished is that Winston Churchill was not a great leader either during wartime or peace, and that his racist and anti-Socialist opinions were responsible for inflicting suffering and death upon millions of people in the UK and abroad. Furthermore, as a natural holder of fascistic opinions, Winston Churchill is on record as an admirer and supporter of Adolf Hitler – a fact that does not sit well with those who perpetuate his myth as ‘anti-fascist warrior’. Winston Churchill was hated by the British working class, and was often driven from bombed-out parts of London which he had visited to film short propaganda films about ‘how we can take it!’ Of course, although the British working class died in their tens of thousands during the ‘Blitz’ (1940-1941), Churchill lived unconcerned in a luxury bomb shelter under Whitehall, smoking Cuban cigars and eating caviar whilst the ordinary British people starved.

On the other hand, there is no doubt that amongst a certain type of ‘White’ person enthused with bourgeois attitudes and opinions, Winston Churchill is nothing but an unquestioned ‘hero’ and champion of ‘Human Rights’, and virtually no evidence to the contrary will sway this interpretation. This is because the middle-class image of Churchill is ‘religious’ in nature, and constitutes a type of hagiography premised entirely upon ‘faith’, and not at all upon ‘fact’. If an interpretation of Churchill’s life was fact-based, he would be generally perceived in a very different light. Although the ‘unelected’ leader of Britain during WWII, he did none of the fighting and did not experience any of the suffering. As a consequence, Churchillian apologists (which has included many members of the British Labour Party), have attempted over the years to ascribe all kinds of fanciful notions to Winston Churchill, whilst ignoring his bigotry and racism. Boris Johnson, for instance, laughably tries to convince his readership that Churchill founded the Welfare State in the UK – however, the actual facts reveal that whenever British workers went on strike, or came together to protest – Churchill immediately deployed the British Army as a means to prevent a ‘Socialist’ Revolution! The British working class should work to expose Churchill’s anti-Socialist attitudes and support all non-White people in their condemnation of his racist attitudes.

A Chronology of Churchill’s Racist, Xenophobic and Anti-Socialist Attitudes

Churchill Speaks About the ‘Evils’ of Socialism in the UK and North Korea (1950)

1899: In his book entitled ‘The River War’, Winston Churchill discusses Islam in the following terms – ‘How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia [rabies] in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. Improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live.’

1900: Winston Churchill enters Parliament as a Conservative, but jumps ship and temporarily joins the Liberal Party in 1904. However, as the Liberal Party lost influence and votes, Churchill soon returned to the Tories. This duplicity has led a number of commentators to suggest Churchill possessed no scruples or principles.

1914: As First Lord of the Admiralty, Winston Churchill vocally calls for the full mobilisation of the British Military to launch an immediate attack upon Imperial Germany.

1915-1916: Winston Churchill championed the cause of an invasion of Gallipoli, Northern Turkey by British and Allied troops. After around 10 months of fighting, this disastrous campaign left at least 160,000 British troops and 30,000 French dead for no discernible gain.

1918-1921: Winston Churchill was responsible for Britain (and 13 other countries) invading Revolutionary Russia and attempting to kill Lenin and crush Bolshevism. Under Churchill’s orders, the British Army massacred unarmed Bolshevik prisoners at Baku in late 1918.

1919: As Colonial Secretary – Winston Churchill advocated the use poisonous gas in Iraq. ‘I do not understand the squeamishness about the use of gas, I am strongly in favour of using poison gas against uncivilized tribes.’

1922: Admirer of Italian fascist dictator Benito Mussolini. Churchill was of the opinion that as Revolutionary Russia developed into the USSR in late 1922, the fascist dictator Mussolini offered Western Europe a rightwing alternative to Socialism in general, and Bolshevism in particular.

1924: As Chancellor of the Exchequer, Winston Churchill, irrespective of the UK’s inflation rate, returned the UK to the ‘gold standard’. This has ongoing and devastating economics repercussions which led directly to the Wall Street Crash of 1929, and the subsequent ‘Great Depression’ across the Western world. Winston Churchill has also been implicated in the ‘Zinoviev Letter’ affair – which brought down the ‘first’ Labour Party Government. This was a fake letter published by the rightwing Daily Mail newspaper in the UK, falsely suggesting that the Labour Party was an extension of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union.

1931: Winston Churchill attacks Mahatma Gandhi’s anti-colonial activities – ‘It is alarming and nauseating to see Mr Gandhi, a seditious Middle Temple lawyer, now posing as a fakir… striding half-naked up the steps of the Vice-regal Palace.’

1935: Winston Churchill publishes his book entitled ‘Great Contemporaries’, within which he states: ‘(Adolf Hitler is) a genius born of the miseries of Germany. We may yet live to see Hitler a gentlier figure in a happier age.’

1936: Winston Churchill condemns the Battle of Cable Street in East London, where hundreds of thousands of British working class Socialist people clashed with around 10,000 British fascists led by Oswald Mosley.

1936-1939: Winston Churchill criticises the British people who volunteer to travel of Spain and fight for the democratically elected, ‘Socialist’ Republican Government – against the Nazi German-backed fascist insurgency of General Franco.

1937: Winston Churchill re-publishes his ‘Great Contemporaries’, reiterating his admiration for Adolf Hitler – condemning the British working class for its opposition to fascism. In the same year, Churchill publishes his book entitled ‘Step by Step’, within which he states ‘One may dislike Hitler’s system and yet admire his patriotic achievement. If our country were defeated, I hope we should find a champion as indomitable to restore our courage and lead us back to our place among the nations.’

1937: Winston Churchill’s statement to the Palestine Royal Commission reads: ‘I do not admit for instance, that a great wrong has been done to the Red Indians of America or the black people of Australia. I do not admit that a wrong has been done to these people by the fact that a stronger race, a higher-grade race, a more worldly-wise race to put it that way, has come in and taken their place.’

1938: Winston Churchill takes measures to exclude returning British Veterans of the Spanish Civil War from mainstream society. Many lose their jobs, are excluded from Union Membership, and are permanently ‘banned’ from serving in the British Armed Forces even during times of war (and when ‘Conscription’ was in force). Churchill view this draconian action as an ‘anti-Communist’ move.

1939: Winston Churchill has Oxford graduate and British Communist Party Member – Tom Wintringham (1898-1949) – removed from his post as head of the ‘People’s Army’ – a voluntary military force in the UK comprised of Spanish Civil War Veterans prepared to defend the British Mainland from Nazi German invasion. Churchill has the organisation re-named the ‘Home Guard’, and falsely claims it to be his own invention.

1939: As Britain is under threat (and following the tradition of ancient Greece and Rome), the democratic system is ‘suspended’ for the duration of hostilities with Nazi Germany. Governance of the UK is ‘shared’ by the three leading parties, Labour, Liberals and Tories. Winston Churchill is chosen to lead the three parties as an elder statesman. Until 1945, he delivers rousing speeches written by a team of speech-writers dishonestly presented as ‘his own work’.

1940: During the Dunkirk Evacuation of the defeated British Expeditionary Force (BEF) from France, Adolf Hitler (for no discernible reason) calls a ‘halt’ to the Nazi German advance. This break in the fighting allowed the greater part of the BEF to be rescued and returned to the UK (although other British formations remained and were captured). As successive British Governments have refused to release the files dealing with this time, it has been speculated that Winston Churchill brokered a deal with Hitler along the lines that the UK would align itself with Nazi Germany in any future attack upon the USSR.

1941: Whilst refusing to ‘arm’ the local Chinese population and to provide adequate troops and weaponry for its defence, Winston Churchill orders the British colony of Hong Kong ‘not to surrender’ against a ferocious Japanese invasion. Sikh police officers in the British Administration immediately defect to the invading Japanese, and the colony falls on Xmas Day, 1941. Japanese massacres begin almost immediately.

1942: Winston Churchill ordered the Dieppe Raid as a means to ‘test’ Nazi German defences in Northern France. This led to the death or capture of around 3000 British and Canadian troops for no discernible gain. Churchill later tried to blame his bad judgement as the result of pressure from the Soviet Union. Also in this year, Churchill’s War Cabinet produces the ‘Beverage Report’ calling for a raising of tax for a radical re-distribution of wealth throughout British society. Churchill agrees with this report at the time.

1943-1944: Winston Churchill ordered the British Army in Bengal (India) to commandeer all the food supplies in the area, and deny the local population any sustenance. This led to a famine throughout the region that killed around 4 million people (some estimates suggest a figure of between 12-29 million deaths). The numbers are in dispute due to the fog of war and allegations of British maladministration of the entire affair, in an attempt to cover-up Churchill’s Crime Against Humanity.

00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

1944: Majdanek Concentration Camp (Poland). When British BBC correspondent Alexander Werth reported that he had been in the Red Army frontline when it had liberated the Majdanek Concentration Camp, Winston Churchill forbade the BBC from transmitting the details of the brutality and mass murder discovered – instead referring to this information as ‘Communist propaganda’, designed to make people feel ‘sorry’ for Soviet suffering!

1945: Winston Churchill, in collusion with Pope Pious XII, ordered the resettlement of an SS Regiment in Scotland – with the cover story that these men (who had committed mass murder and other atrocities on the Eastern Front during the Nazi German invasion of the Soviet Union) – were relocated Polish refugees. Churchill carried-out this pro-fascist policy whilst criticising the Labour Party’s plans for a ‘Socialist-style’ National Health Service (NHS) and comprehensive Welfare State. As WWII drew to a close, Churchill supported the militarily pointless atomic bombing of Japan.

1945-1946 War in Vietnam: Ho Chi Minh’s ‘Viet Minh’ freedom fighters in Vietnam had been promised ‘Independence’ from French (and Japanese) colonial rule by Churchill, if they fought against the Japanese on behalf of the Allied cause during WWII. However, under the terms of the 1941 Atlantic Charter, both Churchill and Roosevelt agreed that all occupied territories had to be return to their pre-war governments upon the secession of hostilities. A particularly bitter pill for Ho Chi Minh to swallow was that the British Army ‘re-armed’ the surrendered Imperial Japanese Forces, which then re-deployed to yet again terrorise the Vietnamese population. This pro-colonial policy of Churchill would lead to the wars in Vietnam between the French, the Americans and the Vietnamese people. These wars would lead to millions of Vietnamese deaths.

1946-1949 Greek Civil War. During the brutal Nazi German (and Fascist Italian)  occupation of Greece during WWII, the ‘Communist’ Democratic Army of Greece (DSE), also known as the ‘People’s Army’, offered the only real resistance to this fascist tyranny. Most Greek people at the time supported a ‘Socialist’ Revolution, but Churchill retained a Greek rightwing ‘government in exile’, that had no intention of allowing any kind of leftwing administration after the war. Furthermore, Churchill had entered into an understanding with Stalin as part of the Percentages Agreement of October, 1944, that the USSR would not support a Socialist Revolution in Greece. Churchill’s interference in the internal affairs of Greece, and his support for a rightwing government, led to the deaths of over 150,000 Greek people AFTER WWII had come to an end.

1946: Smarting from his comprehensive electoral defeat in 1945, and having witnessed the coming to power of a ‘Socialist’ Labour Party, Winston Churchill makes his infamous ‘Iron Curtain’ speech  in 1946, and actively assisted President Truman to initiate the US ‘Cold War’ anti-Soviet disinformation programme. Churchill was concerned that the Labour Party was planning an ‘alliance’ with the Soviet Union, and a ‘Communist Revolution’ in Britain. Churchill backed the anti-Socialist Truman Doctrine and Marshall Plan not only in the UK, but across the entirety of Western Europe. This US interference within European politics eventually morphed into the anti-Socialist ‘European Union’ (EU).

1948-1960: Malaya Emergency. Winston Churchill had become Prime Minister in 1951, and continued the existing British imperialist policy in the colony of Malaya. During WWII, Malayan and Chinese Communist Partisans were promised independence by Churchill if they fought for the Allies against the Imperial Japanese. However, following Japan’s surrender in 1945, Churchill sent in the British Army to put-down the Malay Independence Movement. In 1948, the British Army would commit the atrocity of ‘Batang Kali’. Churchill saw the Malaya Emergency as an important resistance to the perceived threat of the spread of International Communism, and refused to hold the British Army accountable for its actions.

1950-1953: Korean War. Winston Churchill had become Prime Minister in 1951 – and continued the Labour Party’s support for the US and UN intervention in Korea. This included an unquestioned parroting of an essentially ‘racist’ US Cold War rhetoric against North Korea and Communist China, which had no basis in fact. As Communist Forces began to inflict humiliating defeats upon Western Military Forces, Churchill, fearing the possibility of a defeat to Communist Forces, changed his tune and began to advocate negotiation and ceasefire. However, in a 1950 pre-election speech, Winston Churchill suggests that British Socialism is an ‘evil’, and that Soviet Communism is exactly the same as Adolf Hitler’s National Socialism, stating that the ‘Free World’ must fight once again to defeat the ‘materialist religion’ of Communism. Churchill, of course, says nothing about the US use of biological and chemical weapons in Korea, or the millions of civilians killed by UN Forces.

1951: Whilst elected Prime Minister, Winston Churchill began an immediate attack upon the NHS (introducing pointless ‘Prescription Charges’), and the Welfare State. Many of the draconian and fascistic elements of the ‘Department of Work and Pensions’ (as it is now known) derived from Churchill’s time in office. Although the British working class paid for the NHS and Welfare State through taxation, and despite ample finance being raised, Churchill instigated the idea that this Socialist provision was ‘failing’ and could not be ‘afforded’ – both false assumptions. From this time onward, anyone seeking free healthcare or benefits would be treated with disrespect and derision by governmental staff. For Churchill, only the ‘rich’ deserved a secure or happy life.

1954: Chemical Castration of Alan Turing (the Enigma Code Breaker during WWII). Turing committed suicide shortly after. Churchill was instrumental in Turing’s prosecution for being ‘gay’.

 

Flat Earth ‘Denialism’ and the Cold War

0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

Like virtually all pseudo-scientific theories, the confirmed findings of conventional science must be attacked, misrepresented, denigrated and misinterpreted as an attempted means to demolish any and all logical and rational opposition. What strange situation these ideas create, whereby their proponents claim to be exercising ‘free-thinking’, but in so doing concoct theories that deliberately stifle not only free-thinking, but all human scientific development and progression. If a ‘flat earth’ is real, then the entire edifice of conventional science must be ‘wrong’. This sounds extraordinarily similar to the religious rhetoric of theology, which in its purest form also denies any and all material narratives and paradigms developed over hundreds (or even thousands) of years of human intellectual endeavour. This is an illogical position to hold, regardless of how entertaining (or even ‘intriguing’) the rhetoric of the ‘Flat Earth’ Movement happens to be. I am not saying that Flat Earth enthusiasts should not hold the views that do – far from it, I fully encourage diverse thinking in every way – but rather that I see a logical issue with the propaganda Flat Earthers espouse. Why, for instance, cannot Flat Earthers align themselves with the standards of conventional science and work toward proving their theory? The answer is that as a theory, Flat Earth does not stand-up to the rigours of scientific scrutiny, and therefore constitutes a profession of ‘faith’ against that of empirical fact.

At the following link, there is a particularly ludicrous statement from the Falt Earth Society Q&A which states:

People have been into space. How have they not discovered that the earth is flat?

The most commonly accepted explanation of this is that the space agencies of the world are involved in a conspiracy faking space travel and exploration. This likely began during the Cold War’s ‘Space Race’, in which the USSR and USA were obsessed with beating each other into space to the point that each faked their accomplishments in an attempt to keep pace with the other’s supposed achievements. Since the end of the Cold War, however, the conspiracy is most likely motivated by greed rather than political gains, and using only some of their funding to continue to fake space travel saves a lot of money to embezzle for themselves.

In light of the above, please note that we are not suggesting that space agencies are aware that the earth is flat and actively covering the fact up. They depict the earth as being round simply because that is what they expect it to be.’

The lunacy of this position is this: Although the capitalist USA and Socialist USSR competed at every possible level of existence to prove their respective socio-economic systems superior to the other, (i.e. through political, economic, military, scientific, technological, sporting, medical, cultural, art and social endeavour), and given the further fact that the USA built-up a vast nuclear arsenal to ‘destroy’ the Soviet Union – an objective justified as an act of ‘self-defence’ – whilst the USSR waited for the American working class to ‘rise-up’ and over-throw the US capitalist system from within (and thereby generate an ‘international’ friendship with the USSR), the Flat Earth Society would have us believe that both superpowers suddenly decided to ‘collude’ in a massive cover-up to ‘hide’ the fact that the Earth is ‘flat’! What would be the point in this? None at all. The USSR viewed the US as representing a primitive phase in human evolutionary development, whilst the US capitalists had no intention in empowering their own working class, let alone sharing their immense wealth. Far more logical would have been one side deliberately ‘revealing’ to the world the deceptive plan of the other. This action would have ensured a long-lasting Cold War victory for whomever got the allegation in first. As this never happened, it suggests that their was no conspiracy to hide a ‘Flat Earth’, and no point (or benefit) in propagating what would have been a false spherical world theory (and any apparent technological achievements premised upon that assumption). The idea that empirical science cannot perceive the Earth is flat (presumably due to a lack of insight), but that Flat Earthers can because they possess a superior wisdom, is delusional and nothing less than an allusion to the state of ‘grace’ supposedly experienced within the theistic religions.

NATO Terrorism in Europe: Operation Gladio (1945-1990)

00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

Operation Gladio was a US-sponsored and NATO-controlled para-military (terrorist) project designed to keep standing armies of far-right guerilla fighters in place throughout the many countries of Western Europe. This NATO terrorist policy was used against local people (to keep them from embracing Socialism), and to fight any theoretical  invasion of Western Europe by the Soviet Union. These right-wing terrorist groups murdered hundreds of people between 1945 and 1990 – in an attempt to blame far-left groups. The problem was that nobody believed that far-left groups were carry-out these terrorist attacks (as Karl Marx and Lenin had rejected the use of terrorism). I suspect the ‘Madan’ neo-Nazi regime in the Western Ukraine is comprised of a remnant of one of these far-right cells nurtured to the position of full national governance by the US Government (under Barack Obama). Operation Gladio was exposed in 1990 as the Soviet Union was beginning to fall apart under the management of the traitor Gorbachev. The USSR never used terrorism in the West – but the mainstream media – colluding as it does with the Bourgeois State – presented every terrorist outrage committed by these rightwing thugs as originating in the USSR. Furthermore, the nature and design of these ‘false flag’ attacks appear identical to terrorist attacks that occur across the world today, an uncomfortable fact that has led many to speculate that national governments orchestrate terrorist attacks (blaming these terrorist outrages upon the enemy of the moment), as a means to inspire anger and hatred in the general population toward a particular (and usually ‘innocent’ third party).

The US Behind the Panama Papers

000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

President Obama – the first African-American President in US history – openly supported the ‘Madan’ neo-Nazi insurgency in Western Ukraine (in 2014) without any shadow of irony. President Obama also voted against a United Nations Resolution ‘banning’ the glorification of neo-Nazism (2014), He also presided over an Administration that saw the ‘White’ police force murder unarmed ‘Black’ people at an incredible rate – and he did nothing. In 2015, the so-called ‘Panama Papers’ were released by a consortium of US billionaires in 2015 – again under the Obama Administration – and funded by George Soros, the Rockefeller Foundation, the Ford Foundation, and the Carnegie Foundation. The Panama Papers appear to be a bizarre attempt by Obama to mimic Cold War intrigue, and attack the perceived ‘enemies’ of the United States. Capitalism is corrupt a priori, and the rich hire ‘accountants’ as a means to retain as much of their money as possible, by paying as least tax as possible. This is how people like President Obama and George Soros became rich in the first-place. Tax avoidance is lawful, whilst tax evasion is a crime. The Panama Papers supposedly reveal that many incredibly rich people in the world appear to be perpetuating the illegal act of ‘tax evasion’ through off-shore banking and the use of false front dummy corporations, etc. Of course, all this is being carried-out not so much by the rich people involved, but rather by their accountants and lawyers. Wikileaks has confirmed that the US Government is behind the Panama Papers – and has targeted President Putin (who in fact is not mentioned once in the Panama Papers), and supposedly various members of the Communist Party of China. Both the Kremlin and Beijing have rejected the allegations and termed the Panama Papers ‘fake news’. This entire exercise exposes the shocking lack of education that abounds in the US, where a group of corrupt capitalists can conspire to ‘fabricate’ a tissue of lies that falsely accuses other world leaders of being as ‘corrupt’ as they are themselves! It is almost beyond belief that 50 years ago the US Administration accused its enemies of being ‘Communist’, whereas today they are accused of being ‘capitalist’! Finally, the ‘Panama Papers’ may have been a half-baked attempt at combating Wikileaks – a misconstrued exercise in Obama propaganda that lacks the moral integrity that underlies Wikileaks. At the end of the day, ‘greed’ and ‘self-interest’ are the basis of the capitalist system and it makes no difference when this system is exposed for what it is.

Chen Duxiu: How Trotskyism Infiltrated China

00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

Left: Chen Duxiu  (陈独秀) Right: Leon Trotsky

Author’s Note: Trotsky was causing trouble in Russia a long-time before the successful Bolshevik Revolution of 1917. He was a bourgeois political careerist, who associated himself with the Revolutionary left, whilst propagating distinctly ‘rightwing’ dogmas. Not only did he establish a ‘Communist Party’ in opposition to Lenin’s Bolshevik Movement years prior to the October Revolution, but it is also known that Trotsky received ample funding for his political intrigues from the International Zionist Movement (particularly from within the USA). The purpose for this bizarre blend of Revolutionary leftism and rightwing Zionist racism, appears to have been for the purpose of disrupting and over-throwing the old Czarist regime in Russia, whilst simultaneously sabotaging any Marxist-Leninist Movement that might emerge to fill the vacuum. This was probably in the service of the Zionists, who had their eyes on Russia as a ‘New Israel’. Trotsky’s deception and racism was identified by Lenin, and finally defeated in the USSR by Stalin, but it has survived in the world through its migration out of Russia, where it today masquerades as a ‘Socialist Movement’, which still refuses to condemn the racist Zionism perpetuated by the modern State of Israel. Chen Duxiu is an enigma who is suspected by a number of Chinese intellectuals to have been a ‘spy’ for Imperial Japan. This allegation stems from his time in Japan as a student, and has led many to assume that he positioned himself at key places within Chinese history, so as to cause the maximum damage and disruption to the Chinese Government and to Chinese culture. By associating himself with the early Marxist-Leninist Movement in China, he is considered one of the founders of the Communist Party of China (CPC). However, rather illogically, Chen Duxiu ideologically opposed and confronted the Soviet Union under both Lenin and Stalin, and refused to accept Mao Zedong’s Revolutionary ideas. He also refused to maintain the ‘alliance’ between the originally leftwing Kuo Ming Tang (KMT) and the CPC – and is considered historically responsible for the breaking of that alliance, and the rise of the rightwing Chiang Kai-Shek. Following Trotsky’s exile from the Soviet Union in 1929, Chen Duxiu found an outlet for his peculiar form of reactionary politics, and it is through his efforts that the ideas of Trotsky gained a foot-hold in China. The point is that Chen Duxui acted in a very ‘non-Chinese’ manner in his handling of political affairs, and this observation certainly gives credence to the allegation of him ‘spying’ for Japan. Whatever the case, when Trotsky called upon the Imperial Japanese to strive onward to victory in China – even Chen Duxiu was taken aback.  ACW 9.11.2017

Just as Leon Trotsky lead the international community of ‘Trotskyites’, Chen Duxiu (1879-1942) led the Chinese faction of this organisation. Although very much a minority movement within China, this faction was commonly known as the ‘Trotskyite Opposition’ (托洛茨基反对派 – Tuo Luo Ci Ji Fan Dui Pai). It had arisen in China during the early 1930’s in opposition to Joseph Stalin’s leadership of the Soviet Union, and acted in support of the exiled Leon Trotsky. Trotsky had been exiled from the Soviet Union in 1929 for the crime of ‘Treason’, and attempting to bring-down the USSR. His expulsion from the USSR marked the end of Trotsky’s direct power-struggle with Joseph Stalin for leadership of the Soviet Union, and the entering of a new international phase of anti-Soviet agitation, which saw Trotsky reveal his true bourgeois motivations. Whilst busy creating a ‘mirror’ organisation to oppose the legitimate International Communist Party (now administered by Stalin), in 1938 Trotsky bizarrely called for all his followers around the world to ‘co-operate’ with the forces of International Fascism – and in so doing – help destroy the Soviet Union. Although Mao Zedong was an ardent Marxist-Leninist, people like Chen Duxiu, however, defined their political position as being in opposition to the leadership of Joseph Stalin. This is why Chen Duxiu was the leader of the Chinese faction of Trotskyites, but how and why did he manage to acquire such a politically damaging and disruptive position?

Born in poverty, and later educated in Japan, Chen Duxiu was one of the key founders of the Communist Party of China (CPC) in 1921 – soon being elected as its first General Secretary. However, despite referring to himself as a ‘Marxist’, and an admirer of Lenin (and the Russian Revolution), Chen Duxiu opposed the concept of ‘Internationalism’ as advocated by the ‘Communist International’ (the ‘Comintern’, or international collective of Communist Parties from around the world, administered from Moscow), and did not agree with the principle of co-operating with the Soviet Union (either under Lenin or Stalin). In 1921, as General Secretary of the CPC, Chen Duxiu refused accept large sums of money (and other support) from the Soviet Union. Chen Duxiu also disagreed with the Comintern’s policy that insisted that the CPC co-operate with the Nationalists (KMT), and due to this disruptive and regressive attitude that split this alliance, Chen Duxiu was eventually stripped of the Leadership of the CPC in 1927. In 1929, the Chinese Warlord Zhang Xueliang annexed the Chinese Eastern Railway (under orders from the Nationalist Government of China). Prior to this, the Chinese Eastern Railway had been jointly administered by the USSR and the Chinese Government. The Soviet Red Army entered north-east China and swept away all Chinese military forces before it. At this time, the CPC called upon all Chinese Communists to ‘support’ the Soviet military action against the bourgeois Nationalist Government – but Chen Duxiu refused to heed this call. Instead, he voiced his opposition, and immediately assumed the ‘Trotskyite’ position of confronting and opposing the USSR at every-turn. The Soviets, however, were successful and its military victory secured a return to the joint administration of the Chinese Eastern Railway, and Chen Duxiu was expelled from the CPC (in 1929).

Between 1929 and 1931, Chen Duxiu pursued a purely Trotskyite political path, and actively campaigned to sabotage the CPC in all its work. This effort eventually led to Chen Daxiu assisting in the founding the ‘Leftist Opposition to the Communist Party of China’ (中国共产党左派反对派 – Zhong Guo Gong Chan Dang Zuo Pai Fan Dui Pai), an act which immediately attracted the attention of the exiled Trotsky. Indeed, Chen’s organisation facilitated Trotsky’s direct and disruptive interference within China’s domestic political situation, and between 1931 and 1945 undoubtedly contributed to the 60 million casualties China suffered in her battle against fascist Imperial Japan, and the Nationalist forces of Chiang Kai-Shek. The Japanese began to militarily agitate in the Manchurian area of north-east China from 1931 onwards, and this became all-out war in 1937. As the Imperial Japanese military forces raped and pillaged their way across China, Trotsky called for all Chinese people to ‘stop resisting’ the Japanese advance, and instead facilitate its progress. Although Chen Duxiu loyally followed Trotsky, and had implemented Trotsky’s call to resist the Nationalists and the CPC in equal measure, he stopped short of fully endorsing Trotsky’s policy of leaving the Chinese people defenceless in the face of brutal Japanese violence. Whereas Mao Zedong had formulated a method of mobilising and empowering the masses of peasants in his interpretation of Marxist-Leninist Thought, Chen Duxui steadfastly refused to accept this thinking. In an unusual twist of fate, Chen Duxui was eventually arrested by the government of the Shanghai International Settlement – an Anglo-American imperialist and colonial presence in China. It is ironic to think that Chen Duxiu’s deceptive Trotskyite activities would attract the negative attraction of the imperialist West – when after WWII – Trotskyism would be fully embraced by the capitalist West as the foundation of its (false) anti-Soviet Cold War rhetoric! Chen Duxui was arrested during October 1932, and handed over to the Nationalist Authorities. He was tried for generating ‘propaganda of a treasonous nature’, for which he was found ‘guilty’ in 1933, and sentenced to 13 years imprisonment. In 1937, he was released early and made statements appearing to now support the CPC and oppose the Japanese invasion of China. However, as he failed to condemn Trotsky, many within the CPC view him as a ‘traitor’ who could not be trusted. This attitude was compounded by the rumour that Chen Duxui may have been in the paid employment of the Japanese Military. Chen Duxiu died in 1942.

Chinese Language References:

http://view.news.qq.com/a/20140521/010848.htm

https://zh.wikipedia.org/zh-hans/陈独秀

 

 

How the Soviets Developed Supersonic Passenger Flight (Ту-144)

00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

Soviet Ty-144 

I (and my family) recently visited the permanent Brooklands Concorde Exhibition (in Surrey), and was enthused with the ‘futuristic’ design and technology that we saw close-up, and the simulated Concorde flight that we took. Although now decommissioned and very much a museum piece (despite that fact that there is nothing in the world of commercial aeroplanes that comes close to a functioning Concorde today), I was surprised to learn that the British and French governments ‘co-operated’ to build a supersonic aircraft that cost far too much to design, build and fly, and which no commercial airline in the world would buy. Why would two former imperialist powers emerging out of the destruction and bankruptcy of WWII, waste valuable financial and material resources upon a project that due to its lack of commercial viability, was guaranteed to be an economic failure?

0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

Brooklands British Concorde (GBBDG) Prototype

As matters transpired, we were told that the British manufacturers of Concorde could not ‘sell’ their completed prototypes, and so had to ‘give’ British Airways a number of these supersonic aircraft for ‘free’. Even so, the tickets to fly from London to New York in just 3 hours (at Mach 2.04 – or 1,354 mph – 2,180 km/h at cruise altitude), were so expensive that only the very rich could afford to travel. This proved to be a business failure, as Concorde to never attract the general public, and become a popular mode of mass transportation. As a consequence, the Western Concorde worked the skies from around 1969 to their eventual grounded in 2003, operating at huge loses. Despite its progressive design and extraordinary technology, capitalist economic forces brought the life of Concorde to an end. We are now faced with the absurdity of a futuristic piece of technology literally ‘rotting’ in a museum!

0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

Soviet Ty-144 in Flight

When I checked historical sources, I saw that the government of the United States was behind the initial financing of the Anglo-Fremch project to build a ‘faster tha sound’ passenger carrying aeroplane – as a means to equal the Soviet Ty-144 supersonic jet. Although the Soviet Union had suffered between 27 – 40 million dead and wounded during the Great Patriotic War (1941-1945), Joseph Stalin led the Socialist State in its recovery and development of nuclear power and space technology. Out of this monumental collective effort, the Soviet scientists and engineers eventually developed the ‘Ty-144’ passenger carrying, supersonic aeroplane. This aircraft was designed and built by the Tupolev Design Bureau throughout the 1960’s, was designed to demonstrate the superiority of the Soviet Socialist organisation of society. This project (like every Soviet innovation) was not designed to produce monetary profit, but rather to progress the social evolution of humanity. Whereas a single ticket to fly on the Western Concorde cost thousands of pounds, in the USSR, a traveller could fly from one side of the country to the other on the Ty-144, for the equivalent of just five British pounds. Although a piece of Socialist technology designed to carry unarmed civilians, nevertheless, declassified NATO Records state that the Ty-144 was considered a ‘military threat’ to Western capitalism, and was designated by the NATO code-word ‘Charger’. This code-word was to be used as and when the leaders of the Western (liberal) democratic countries decided it was time for NATO to ‘shoot’ the Ty-144 out of the sky.

00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

Soviet Ty-144 Replete with ‘CCCP’ and ‘Red Flag’ Markings

The Ty-144 did not have such elements of the wing design as flaps and slats. Decrease in landing speed to acceptable values (​​of 350-400 kph) was carried out by a unique method for civilian aircraft, using the deflected toe on the fuselage and the unique front wing design. During the transition to supersonic mode, a complicated procedure was performed for transferring fuel to the centring tank in the cargo compartment, which compensated for the displacement of air pressure at the centre. Whilst flying at supersonic speed, it was recommended not to use the elevons – the control was carried out by changing the thrust of the engines. The aircraft did not have the thrust reversal of the engines, but it had powerful brake fans in the chassis, the initial speeding-off at landing, at the commander’s discretion, was effected by the release of a braking parachute. The Flight Manual forbade flights at night, although all the equipment needed for this was available. The aircraft used the most advanced scientific and technical solutions. At the disposal of the pilots was even an analog GPS-navigator – PIN (Projection Indicator Navigation Conditions). On a small screen, a map of the airfield was generated from a video tape, which superimposed the position mark of the aircraft; the geographic coordinates of the mark were calculated by an automated process, which processed data from the radio-navigation systems. Unlike the Western Concorde, the Ty-144 had an auxiliary power unit with the ability to start engines in mid-air, as well as the ability to power the aircraft and air conditioning whilst on the ground.

самолёты т

Already in 1947, the American prototype Bell X-1 – for the first time in world history – overcame the sound barrier. Since 1954, there was the production of supersonic fighters such as the American F-100 and the Soviet MiG-19. The USSR was already developing plans for a supersonic passenger aeroplane when the British and French started showing their designs at airshows around the world. The Soviet motivation was to make fast plane that could traverse vast distances very quickly and efficiently, and which did not have to continuously land for refuelling. Work on creating a supersonic passenger airliner in the USSR began in the Tupolev Design Bureau in the early 60’s. The Tupolev Design Bureau was chosen as one of the most experienced in the field of passenger aircraft, especially jet aircraft. On July 16th, 1963, the Resolution of the Council of Ministers of the USSR No. 798-271 was issued. The Soviet State envisaged the creation of a supersonic liner with a cruising speed of 2300-2700 kph, with a practical range of 4000-4500 kilometres, which could carry around 80-100 passengers on board, or travel 6000-6500 kilometres with additional fuel tanks and just 50 passengers on board. The construction of the first prototype began in 1965, and a second copy for static testing was also built with it. The first flight of the Ty-144 took place on December 31, 1968 (it was carried out by the Tupolev EDO testor Eduard Yelyan), that is, two months earlier than the Western Concorde. The Ty-144 was the first passenger airliner in history to overcome the sound barrier, it happened (June 5th, 1969) at an altitude of 11,000 meters. The next symbolic milestone was breaking the 2 Mach sound barrier, which was achieved by the Ty-144 on May 25th, 1970, flying at an altitude of 16,300 m at a speed of 2,150 kph. The aircraft combined a huge number of advanced development and design solutions. For example, the retractable whilst in flight were the front horizontal plumage (PGO), which significantly increased manoeuvrability in the air whilst reducing the speed at landing. The Ty-144 could land and take off in 18 airports of the USSR, whilst the Western Concorde, whose take-off and landing speed was 15% higher, required a separate landing certificate for each airport. During the design period, tremendous work was carried out. Inparticular, the modelling of the wing was carried out in full-scale tests on a specially prepared MiG-21I fighter (a special flying laboratory designed for studying the wing of the Ty-144 aircraft). Mass production of the aircraft was carried-out at the Voronezh plant number 64. By the abandonment of operation, 16 Ty-144 aircraft were built (four more planes were still being built), which made a total of 2556 sorties and flew 4110 hours. However, despite this Soviet success, the Ty-144 never saw commerical deployment due to a number of tecnical issues that were difficult to over-come. After a near tragedy during a test flight in 1981, the Ty-144 project was finally cancelled in 1983. It is believed that the Western Concorde was premised upon Soviet designs, but that the Western engineers were able to iron-out (or completely alter) a number of design issues. After Brezhnev’s death, the attitude of the new leadership of the country to the plane changed. Preference was given instead to the simpler and more reliable subsonic IL-86 airbuses.

Russian Language Source:

https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ту-144

The Fabrication of Burma in the Western Mind

0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

Author’s Note: As a Scientific Socialist, I do not unquestionably support the bourgeoisie system – but until we achieve a Socialist Revolution in the West, we are stuck with it, and must find some use for it. Although I am scholar specialising in Chinese philosophy and religion – and a practising Chinese Buddhist – I must state that I am irreligious and profess a support for science premised upon the study of a material universe (which includes Quantum Mechanics). Although I do not possess any notion of ‘faith’ in religion, and believe that religions should not hold political power, I am not opposed to religions per se. As long as it follows the law and does not cause harm to others, people are free to do as they will with their minds and bodies. However, as both a Socialist and a Buddhist, I consider myself a friend of Islam, and am perfectly aware of the Islamophobic lies and disinformation that currently emanates from the West. On a Muslim organised ‘peace march’ through London recently, my family and I were the only non-Muslims present. However, the polarised fashion the Western press is treating the situation in Myanmar (i.e. ‘Burma’ – I use the names interchangeably), both the wisdom systems of Buddhist and Islamic scholarship are being compromised and side-lined for the establishment of a purely Eurocentric (and racist) paradigm which has its foundations within the Western, imperialist presence in Asia. Obviously, I reject ALL Buddhist and Islamic derived violence, and would call upon the Burmese Government Authorities, the Buddhist Burmese Authorities, and the Islamic Authorities (both within and outside the Rohingya community) to defuse the situation and take a step-back from psychological and physical violence, and let traditional Asian wisdom and knowledge take the place of Western-inspired race-hate. ACW (9.9.2017)

00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

The West – that is Europe and the US – has been dominated for hundreds of years by the the capitalist economic system, and its supportive (middle class dominated) liberal, democratic system. Freedom is defined as any and all socio-economic, political or cultural expressions that directly benefit the middle class, and which legally facilitate the unbridled ability to exploit the working class. Invariably, the middle class is numerically small, but retains most of the political power, and controls the majority of the finance. It guarantees this power from generation to generation by its iron grip on the military and the police, and a bourgeois legal system that only theoretically extends rights to all citizens. In reality, the bourgeois legal system only extends those rights that an individual can financially prove should be applied to themselves and their situation. This amounts to the situation (for the numerically superior working class) of no money equals no rights. As capitalism requires an ever expanding market of exploitation to furnish its insatiable thirst for profit, the Western bourgeoisie eventually exported their capitalist system all over the world. Although challenged here and there in the 17th and 18th centuries, it was not until the 19th century (and the rise of Marxism) that its progress was seriously (although temporarily) checked (as seen in the 1848 Europe-wide uprisings, and the 1871 Paris Commune). It was not until the Russian Revolution of 1917 (led by VI Lenin), that saw a large swathe of humanity reject predatory capitalism for Scientific Socialism – soon to be join by Mao Zedong’s China in 1949. Obviously, the Western bourgeois world, in an attempt to retain its economic, political and military hegemony over the world (particularly after WWII), began a disinformation campaign that involved the media (in all its aspects) as well as the professional and amateur academic establishment, to fabricate an ‘alternative’ history and interpretation of world history and current affairs, that was designed to denigrate Socialism amongst the exploited workers of the West (with racism toward non-Whites being a major component), so that these Western workers voluntarily ‘distanced’ themselves from those elements of the International Working Class that already lived ‘freely’ in Socialist countries (falsely and inaccurately termed ‘Communist’ by a Western media that remained entirely ignorant of the philosophy of Scientific Socialism). This disinformation campaign inverted reality, and presented working class freedom as working class enslavement – with the implicit threat that should the Western workers over-throw the oppressive capitalist regime they currently suffer under, life would be worse for them, rather than better. An extra layer of bourgeois security was generated through the tolerance and selective support of fringe far-right political groups in the West that blamed all the inequalities within the capitalist system upon immigrants, and which encouraged race-hate and racially inspired violence and murder. These fascists groups were designed to operate within working class communities and use race-hate to stop those communities being infiltrated by Socialist propaganda and organised working class movements that aimed to over-throw the British capitalist system either by force of arms, or through the ballet box. These rightwing groups have been very successful in convincing working class people to vote for parties that advocate policies which are against their own class interests, or to boycott the voting system altogether, and refuse to vote for parties that represent working class interests. Whilst inappropriately voting or not voting, the working class is stripped of all its militancy and conscious awareness, and sits passively on the political sidelines suffering terribly from oppressive government policies – whilst doing nothing constructive about it.

Who will save the Rohingya?

What does this have to do with Burma (Myanmar)? The question that has to be asked is this; If the domestic working class in Britain can be manipulated to perceive the world in a manner that is against its own class interests, how easy is it for the Western media (and mainstream academia) to use racism, prejudice and discrimination to misrepresent what is happening in Burma? The answer, of course, is highly likely. The British East India Company – operating out of India – used the British Army in a number of invading wars against the indigenous Burmese people between 1824 and 1885 (during the three so-called Anglo-Burmese Wars), effectively (and actually) annexing the country in 1886, making Burma an extension of the British imperialist rule of India. This administration continued until 1948 – when the British Labour Party granted Burma full independence from British colonial rule. However, under British rule, the Burmese people were used as a virtual slave-labour force, with Christian missionaries being imported by the British to convert the predominantly Buddhist population (a standard model of destroying indigenous cultures to make the ethnic people easier to control). Any ethnic Burmese who resisted was harshly punished with imprisonment, torture or even execution. Just as the British had imported en mass Tamil (Hindu) workers into the predominantly Buddhist Sri Lanka, they also imported (en mass) Bengali Muslim workers into Burma. The point of this enforced migration and settlement was the deliberate propagation of ethnic tensions between the subjugated peoples of the British empire, so that they could not ‘unite’ against British rule – being too busy fighting one another’s presence. Of course, the Bengali Muslims are not ethically Burmese (or ‘Buddhist’), and today refer to themselves as ‘Rohingya’ – a term not recognised by the Myanmar government since 1982. During WWII, the imperial Japanese invaded Burma, and the British Authorities armed and trained the Bengali Muslims – making them a distinct fighting unit of the British Army in the resistance to the Japanese presence. However, the ethnic Burmese people, by and large, welcomed the invading Japanese as ‘liberators’ from British colonial rule. This led to a conflict between the ethnic (Buddhist) Burmese fighting for the Japanese, who opposed the British-supported Bengali Muslims who were attempting to annex the Arakan area of Burma, and integrate it with the Bengal part of India (or today’s Bangladesh). It is this British arming and encouraging of Bengali nationalism that is seen as the historical origin of the ‘violent’ and ‘murderous’ ethnic tensions that exist today between ethnic (Buddhist) Burmese and ethnic (Muslim) Rohingya in the Rakhine State of Western Myanmar. The Burmese Authorities take the position today that it is Rohingya nationalism that is driving the inter communal violence, and that the Rohingya resistance to ethnic Burmese rule is now funded (in-part) by Saudi Arabia, and other Islamic States that finance and train the various elements of Islamic extremism and Islamic terrorist groups that exist in the world. Perhaps one of the biggest (and saddest) ironies regarding this matter is the video clip of Hilary Clinton admitting during an interview that the US ‘manufactured’ Islamo-fascism (i.e. ‘Al Qaeda’) as a means to fight the Soviet Union in Afghanistan (the same ‘Al Qaeda’ that would carry-out the 911 attacks in New York).

Who will save the Rohingya?

Burmese Buddhists living in the Rakhine State view themselves as ‘ethnic’ inhabitants of Myanmar, and state that Islamic militants regularly attack their villages and Buddhist temples, carrying-out acts of rape, torture and murder. The point of this activity is to ‘cleanse’ the area of the ethnic Burmese and their Buddhist culture. In response, the Burmese Authorities have deployed the military to carry-out punitive expeditions into the Rohingya areas. Before examining whether any of this is true or not, Burma’s modern history has to be understood. After gaining its independence from the British in 1948, Burma refused to join the British Commonwealth (viewing it as a means for Britain to retain political influence and power throughout its former empire), and declared itself a ‘Socialist State’, with close political and economic ties to the Soviet Union – and later Communist China. As the Cold War developed, and the US anti-Communist disinformation spread throughout the world, Burma was presented not as a former British colony that had suffered terribly under British imperialist rule and was now attempting to independently re-build its economy (and culture) from the base-up, but rather as a despotic and ‘failed’ State that ‘oppressed’ its people, and applied ‘racist’ policies toward the Rohingya. In fact, the propagation of Rohingya nationalism by the British, ensured that the Bengali Muslims in Arakan remained firmly opposed to Socialism, acting as a pro-Western, pro-capitalist destabilising force in Burma. Unlike the pro-capitalist 14th Dalai Lama and his unrepresentative pro-Tibetan Movement, the Burmese Socialist Authorities (many of whom were Buddhist), as well as the Buddhist monastic community, remained (quite naturally) opposed to capitalist greed and oppression. As a philosophy, Buddhism at its base remain anti-capitalist a priori – but has become associated with immense wealth in the West due to movie stars, rock stars and the middle class embracing various aspects of distorted Japanese Zen and corrupted sects of Tibetan Buddhism, etc. Asian Buddhist temples that teach non-greed, non-hated, and non-delusion, are generally ‘ignored’ by many Westerners who have no interest in the associated Asian culture through which this genuine Buddhism has been transmitted. As a consequence, Burma has been misrepresented to the Western mind very much in a racist and mythological manner, following the bourgeois blue-print used to misrepresent Tibet as a means to destabilise Communist China. As a result, up until 2011, Burma was a ‘brutal’ military regime that oppressed its people – an interpretation encouraged by the US and its mouth-piece the United Nations (UN). The problem the West now has is one of transition for its previously anti-Burma rhetoric, with regards to its former media darling in the form of Burma’s now de facto leader –  Aung San Suu Kyi (the 1991 recipient of the Noble Peace Prize) – who (rather embarrassingly for her Western bourgeois supporters) remains resolutely ‘anti-Rohingya’ in the face of the capitalist world’s criticism of her leadership and her government’s punitive actions against the Rohingya people. The Chinese language press has reported that Aung San Suu Kyi personally requested that the US not use the term ‘Rohingya’ in its diplomatic communications, and that as reported in today’s Morning Star (9.9.2017) and the Chinese language press (see links below), Aung San Suu Kyi has also stated that videos and reports purportedly recording and showing the torture and abuse of Rohingya’s, are in fact the product of ‘fake’ news. Although Aung San Suu Kyi is a supporter of Western-style capitalism (which has only impoverished the Burmese people), and the liberal, democratic process, (as opposed to the centralised democracy of the Socialist System), her attitudes and behaviour appear to mimic those of the previous ‘Socialist’ Burmese leaders who continuously referred to the Rohingya as ‘invaders’ from India. In fact, Aung San Suu Kyi (agreeing with other Burmese officials), has routinely stated that Myanmar is currently under a sustained Islamo-fascist attack from a Rohingya-led Al Qaeda insurgency (funded by Saudi Arabia – an ally of the US and Israel), which aims to annex the Rakhine State – purging it of its Buddhist culture and ethnic Burmese people – and replacing it with an Islamic culture. In this regard, Aung San Suu Kyi cannot understand why the West refuses to support Myanmar in its fight against Islamic extremism, when it supports Israel without question, and any other movement in the world that opposes Islamo-fascism. Just because Aung San Suu Kyi might be an expressed ‘anti-Socialist’, does not mean that she automatically supports the Western Cold War rhetoric that privileged the Rohingya people when Burma was a Socialist State. The fact that she will not ‘bow’ to international pressure to alter her stance on this issue, demonstrates the strength of the anti-Rohingya feeling throughout the country she now leads.

Malaysia Myanmar Protest

The West has used Buddhism in the past as a means to try and destabilise the Tibetan part of China – probably since 1949 – and it would seem that a Western presence in Burma might well be up to its old tricks again. Just as it is well documented in Western sources that the CIA armed and trained Buddhist monks in Tibet that had taken vows of non-violence, it would seem that Buddhist monks that have taken vows of non-violence and non-hatred have been influenced in Myanmar to propagate race-hate amongst Muslims in that country. Why would protesting Buddhist monks hold-up placards in English – a language very few Burmese or Rohingya’s could read? Who are these placards meant to inform? Are Burmese Buddhist monks really leading protests against the Rohingya people? The answer appears to be ‘yes’ with the caveat that not all Buddhist monastic orders in Myanmar support protests or agree that Muslims should be demonised. The Buddhist lay and monastic vows form a psychological and physical barrier to any violent production of thought or action. Of course, the Western press ignores the Myanmar Buddhist establishment that continuously calls upon the Burmese Buddhist population to meditate upon loving kindness, and to act with charity, wisdom and compassion toward all beings – including the Rohingya Muslim community.  Just as important (and as equally ignored by the Western press), is the Rohingya representatives that continuously call for ‘peace’ from Burmese Muslims, and not to respond with violence to any provocation (this latter point is even ignored by the Islamic press in the West, which remains wedded to representing the Rohingya people as a disempowered and oppressed ‘ethnic minority’ in Myanmar – that is currently suffering a ‘genocide’). This one-sided and poorly informed viewpoint has even been endorsed by the leftwing British politician George Galloway recently, through his social media. This situation is unfortunate and appears to be representative of a ‘hidden’ agenda preferred by forces operating outside of Myanmar. Consider this; the 14th Dalai Lama lives a life of luxury in the West, selling books and charging large amounts of money for study courses conveying the distorted form of Buddhism he teaches, (whilst calling for the destruction of the Communist government of China, and for young people in China to ‘self-immolate’) all of which breaks the monastic rules he took in his youth, but the Western press maintains a continuous support for his antics and remains ‘silent’ about his excesses and hypocrisy. This is the same Western press that misrepresents an overwhelmingly ‘peaceful’ Buddhist establishment in Myanmar as being a hot-bed of extremist terrorism. This reads very much like the usual Eurocentric ‘divide and conquer’ strategy in effect.

00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

Are the Rohingya Muslims terrorists? Certainly not. Did they exist in Burma before their mass importation into the area? Undoubtedly ‘yes’. What, then, is the problem? The problem is the historical Western, imperialist interference in the internal affairs of Burma (Myanmar) – an interference that is continuing today and causing all kinds of suffering in Rakhine State. It is reasonable to assume that the West wants Burma to rip itself apart using ethnic and religious disputes to fuel the fire of hatred and violence. Have certain Buddhist monks incited violence between ethnic Burmese and ethnic Rohingya? The answer is ‘Yes’. However, as these monks broke their monastic vows of ‘peace’ to do this, they should have been expelled from the Buddhist monastic Order (the ‘Sangha’), and then tried in a civilian court and imprisoned. This is what usually would happen in a Buddhist country, and it is telling that this action was not taken in Burma. Of course, it may be that Aung San Suu Kyi – who received moral support from the Buddhist Sangha whilst under house arrest – is reluctant to move against the Buddhist monastic establishment which has a very powerful influence over the opinions and actions of ordinary Burmese people. If the Buddhist Sangha called for the over-throw of Aung San Suu Kyi, the Burmese people would make short-work of ousting her from office. This explains her reluctance to ‘officially’ moderate the Burmese government’s stance on the Rohingya. Have innocent Rohingya been murdered? Yes – just as innocent Burmese Buddhists ave been murdered. Does the UN correctly reflect the problem in Burma? No. The UN is a mouth-piece for the neo-colonial policies of the US government, and its official announcements are always in line with current US foreign policy directives. Whilst advocating Islamophobia across the world, the US wants the Rohingya in Burma to appear to be a one-sided ‘victim’ in the ethnic violence perpetuated there. This is probably a hang-over from the days that the US wanted to bring-down the Socialist State in Burma – but just like the Al Qaeda the US developed in Afghanistan – the Islamic militants it created in Burma have now assumed a life of their own, and are effectively out of control. Although the Rohingya as an ethnicity are not terrorists, there is a minority that definitely uses violence to pursue political objectives. The problem has been that the Burmese military has attacked and punished large swathes of the Rohingya population – many of whom have had no connection with Islamic extremism or terrorism in Burma. This is an unjust situation involving both sides – but the Burmese people and the Rohingya must realise that they need to throw-off the destructive influence of the West, and in so doing reject the divisive politics of race and religion. Buddhists and Muslims can live together in peace in Burma, but this will take time, self-discipline, and an altruistic approach to social well-being.

Chinese Language Reference Articles:

http://news.hangzhou.com.cn/gjxw/content/2017-09/07/content_6650607.htm

http://www.g-photography.net/contest/info/news_18331.html

http://we-share-everything.com/遭緬甸軍隊屠殺 「羅興亞人」向翁山蘇姬政府宣/

http://news.china.com/zhsd/gd/11157580/20150610/19822819_all.html

http://www.zgfznews.com/fznews/tupianzhongxin/guoji/2012/9/4/915382.shtml

 

Joe Bugner and Hungarian Neo-Nazism

0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

The former British and Australian heavyweight boxer – Joe Bugner is in fact Hungarian born ‘József Kreul Bugner’, whose parents left Hungary after the 1956 neo-Nazi uprising was put-down by the Soviet Red Army. In the West, the 1956 neo-Nazi uprising in Hungary was presented as a ‘freedom’ movement, and its crushing interpreted as yet another act of senseless oppression, perpetuated by the Soviet Union. Why did Joe Bugner’s family leave Hungary after a ruthless and murderous neo-Nazi uprising was quelled – and the normalcy of a Socialist government restored? The only answer that makes sense is that the Bugner family was involved in supporting the neo-Nazi movement in Hungary, which over a decade before had seen the Hungarian government (and Hungarian armed forces) actively assist Adolf Hitler’s invasion of the Soviet Union (1941-1945), and fully participate in the holocaust committed there. Although Joe Bugner was born in 1950 (being only 6 years old when his family emigrated to the UK in 1956), obviously he would have absorbed the far rightwing attitudes of his parents – with no questions asked about his family background when he settled in the capitalist West. The Soviet Union had been fighting neo-Nazi insurgencies in the Ukraine from 1945-1947, with sporadic uprisings occurring up until around 1955. The Soviet Archives reveal that the Ukrainian neo-Nazis were found to be armed with British, American and Nazi German weaponry, as were the neo-Nazi insurgents of Hungary in 1956. There is also evidence that the situation was compounded when Khrushchev ordered the release of thousands of Hungarian men who had voluntarily fought in the Nazi German armed forced during WWII (who had committed all kinds of atrocities in the USSR), back into Hungary unregulated, just prior to the neo-Nazi uprising in 1956.

0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

Hungarian Communist Official Beaten to Death by Hungarian Neo-Nazis (1956)

It is interesting to note that Nazi Germany had nearly destroyed the UK during WWII, and yet just 11 after the end of that war, the UK was giving ‘British Citizenship’ to Hungarian neo-Nazis – no questions asked. Of course, this all happened due to the distortions of the US-led Cold War, which in a relatively short time period, managed to re-write history and persuade the Western world that night was day, and black was white, etc. From the late 1940’s, the US presented the Soviet Union as being exactly the same as the Nazi German regime the Red Army had taken a key part in destroying. Also down-played and hidden from view was the fact that around 40 million Soviet men, women and children died in the fight against Nazi Germany – and in the holocaust Hitler initiated in that country. As matters transpired, (and taking into account that there were rumours of General Tito of Yugoslavia agitating in assisting the neo-Nazi insurgency in Socialist Hungary), the Soviet Red Army – exercising extreme self-discipline – separated the two sides and arrested the perpetrators. This is why over-all casualties are reported in Soviet Records as being around 3000 killed. In the meantime, Joe Bugner made a career in the capitalist West presenting his racism, bigotry and misogyny as a playful eccentricity.

Russian Language Source:

http://проза.рф/2016/10/26/1916

Pol Pot’s Explanation of Events

0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

Pol Pot & Khmer Rouge Delegation – Beijing (c. 1975)

For the intimate expressions of Pol Pot, I have accessed a number of Chinese language source articles (referencing two below). I have taken this path because Pol Pot was a close ally of Mao Zedong, and according to the memories of Chinese people, Pol Pot was a very charming and likeable person. This is an interesting assessment from a Chinese culture that even within its Communist manifestation, puts much emphasis upon good behaviour and conformity to social and cultural norms that secure a peaceful and stable society. In the West, which has perpetuated the myth that Karl Marx’s ‘Scientific Socialism’ is exactly the same as Adolf Hitler’s ‘National Socialism’, the matter of Pol Pot is cut and dried – Pol Pot is simply (and unquestioningly) presented as a genocidal murderer. The problem is a lack of objective evidence for his apparent crimes, and a reliance upon an unsubstantiated Western Cold War rhetoric, that is as much motivated by anti-Asian racism, as it is by anti-Socialist ideology. Even though the Soviet Union supported Vietnam in its invasion and annexing of Cambodia in 1978 (establishing the Soviet controlled ‘People’s Republic of Kampuchea’ to replace the ousted Khmer Rouge), Russian encyclopaedia sources dealing with this matter, state that the figure of between 1 to 3 million people killed by the Pol Pot regime is ‘theoretical’, as it has never been proven in a court of law.

Chinese sources also question this figure, pointing-out that it arises only within anti-Socialist Western sources, that have in the past routinely accused Socialist and Communist sources of committing all kinds of false, imagined and fabricated acts (similar to those actually committed by Adolf Hitler and his Nazi regime). In this regard, the ‘killing fields’ of Pol Pot resemble the Concentration Camps of Nazi Germany, but the numbers simply do not add-up. Today, the official figure for the Cambodian population stands at about 16 million, but in the 1960’s and 1970’s, it is believed to have been around 9 million. Many Chinese scholars point-out that Pol Pot and his Khmer Rouge were extremely popular amongst the Cambodian people, who flocked to support his call for Revolution. The logical question is how could a population that by and large supported Pol Pot also ‘massacre’ itself in such large numbers, in a short space of time, lacking the technological know-how and advanced industrial capability possessed by the Nazi Germans? The Western rhetoric suggests that between 1/9th and 1/3rd of the population was ‘killed by itself’. When confronted with the illogicality of this situation, those that support this theory state that its accomplishment just goes to ‘prove’ what a maniac Pol Pot was, not realising that in reality just one man is being accused of being so well organised and efficient at political and practical leadership (whilst apparently being ‘mad’), that he achieved all this through an act of mass hypnosis. Whatever the case, the current Western narrative suggests that the Cambodian population of 9 million was either reduced to 6 million or 8 million between 1975 and 1979 – and yet by 2017 – that very same Cambodian population had risen by either 10 million or or 8 million (to 16 million) in just 38 years!

The Khmer Rouge wore ‘black’ uniforms together with a chequered neck-scarf to wipe-away sweat, and because of this they were often referred to as the ‘Black Guards’. Following Pol Pot’s ascending to power on April 17th, 1975, every citizen of Cambodia was required to dispose of the ‘bourgeois’ clothing that had penetrated the cities and towns, and revert to what was thought to be a more traditional form of ethnic Khmer peasant clothing. When asked why he emptied the cities, Pol Pot stated that the US had already been bombing areas of Eastern Cambodia, and that he (and the Khmer Leadership) were apprehensive that the US would launch a vast and sustained bombing campaign upon Cambodian cities and towns – much like the years’s of US destruction wrought upon North Vietnam. The Khmer Rouge also feared a US ground invasion, and their answer to these problems was to mobilise the entire Cambodian population within the relative safety of the countryside, living in communes of single-sex barracks, training in the day to farm the land, and prepare for a ‘People’s War’. When asked in the late 1970’s, and again by an American journalist just prior to his death (in 1998) why there was evidence of mass graves found in certain areas of Cambodia, Pol Pot gave exactly the same answer. Pol Pot’s answer is written in the Chinese language as ‘敌特破坏’ – which translates as the ‘enemy spies were destroyed’. In other words, Pol Pot ordered these killings to be carried-out by the Khmer Rouge, as a means to destroy what he perceived to be ‘enemies of the people’ operating within Cambodia. Of course, it is not beyond the realms of possibility that the invading Vietnamese forces, and US-backed insurgency forces could have been responsible for at least some of these deaths. There is also a suggestion that Pol Pot’s policies have been skewed and misrepresented over the years. When asked about his policy of ‘eradicating’ the city-dwellers, Pol Pot replied that he had meant it was the principle of bourgeois (Westernised) living that was to be eradicated – and not necessarily the people who had been subject to this kind of pollution (although this position does seem to contradict the known dictates of the Khmer Rouge once in power). This information does not excuse the terrible crimes that apparently occurred in Cambodia under Pol Pot, but it does provide a more complete picture when viewed alongside the more commonly known facts in this case. My research is ongoing.

Chinese language References:

https://www.laonanren.com/news/2016-08/122729.htm

http://baike.baidu.com/item/波尔布特

 

 

 

%d bloggers like this: