Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff
by American Dream » Sat Feb 21, 2015 5:37 pm
by Project Willow » Sat Feb 21, 2015 6:55 pm
coffin_dodger » 21 Feb 2015 13:27 wrote:We are in opposition to white supremacy and white separatism; anti-Muslim and anti-Jewish views and conspiracy theories; patriarchy and homophobia – and to capitalism and all authoritarian forms of statist and religious rule.
Well, it's informative to know that we have our very own anti-conspiracy theorist here amongst us at RI. Just what every good System needs acting on it's behalf - in the far corners of the internet.
American Dream wrote:OK: What do you think of anti-Semitic and/or Islamophobic conspiracy claims? Do you actually endorse these sorts of ideas?
by coffin_dodger » Sat Feb 21, 2015 7:02 pm
American Dream wrote:OK: What do you think of anti-Semitic and/or Islamophobic conspiracy claims? Do you actually endorse these sorts of ideas?
by Searcher08 » Sat Feb 21, 2015 8:16 pm
American Dream » Sat Feb 21, 2015 9:31 pm wrote:So you like "white supremacy and white separatism; anti-Muslim and anti-Jewish views and conspiracy theories; patriarchy and homophobia"?
So American Dream, you like pedophilia and beating up people in the street ?
by Searcher08 » Sat Feb 21, 2015 8:23 pm
coffin_dodger » Sat Feb 21, 2015 11:02 pm wrote:American Dream wrote:OK: What do you think of anti-Semitic and/or Islamophobic conspiracy claims? Do you actually endorse these sorts of ideas?
Round and round and round we go, on AD's carousel of conflation, insinuation and 'ism-innuendo'.
Always arriving back at the same place.
I am interested in discussing why anti-Semetism and Islamophobia exist. I endorse neither.
I have a pretty good idea why Islamophobia exists - our main stream media is full of anti-Islamic diatribe - instigated and propogated by The System. So that we can bomb the hell out of them with a clear conscience. This is reality and is happening now.
Anti-Semetism is on the rise, too. But why? The System and main stream media are pro-Semetic. It doesn't make sense.
Unless one considers the possibility of guilt by association - something you, in fact, are very fond of inferring.
There are a growing number of malcontents that dislike The System and what it represents - murder abroad, tightening surveillance of it's own populace, political puppets, declining freedoms, equality imbalance, paedophile rings, torture, Corporate Culture, persecution of whistleblowers, msm compliance, interference in Foreign State affairs - to name but a few. The closer one scrutinizes The System, the more rotten it reveals itself to be.
Being associated, (and vociferously supported by) a rotten system may prove to be a foolhardy position in the long term.
by Belligerent Savant » Sun Feb 22, 2015 5:23 pm
by seemslikeadream » Sun Feb 22, 2015 5:41 pm
by coffin_dodger » Sun Feb 22, 2015 6:52 pm
Antisemitism (also spelled Anti-Semitism or anti-semitism) is prejudice against, hatred of, or discrimination against Jews as a national, ethnic, religious or racial group
by Project Willow » Sun Feb 22, 2015 7:02 pm
by Belligerent Savant » Sun Feb 22, 2015 8:07 pm
by seemslikeadream » Mon Feb 23, 2015 12:33 pm
by solace » Fri Mar 06, 2015 3:39 pm
British journalist Jonathan Kalmus decided to test the levels of prejudice in two British cities with shocking results.
'You Jew' was the anti-Semitic scream which came from a passing car. My shaken wife tried to explain it away to my seven-year-old daughter as a very large sneeze. They were simply playing in a local park in Manchester a few weeks ago when the incident ripped through what should have been a peaceful and wholesome time for any mother and child.
'Fight the Jewish scum' and 'Jew, Jew, Jew... Run', were the more vicious threats hurled at me in the past few days, however, when I decided to secretly film and find out whether 'Jew-hatred' really is alive and kicking on British streets.
The answer to that question is a resounding and heart-sinking yes.
I took the inspiration from the viral videos of Israeli journalist Zvika Klein, who filmed himself being threatened on the streets of Paris, and Muslim Hamdy Mahisen, who filmed himself getting abuse in Milan.
Zvika walked in Paris for 10 hours, Hamdy in Milan for five. It took me just one minute. One minute of walking one single, busy major street in Manchester before abuse was flung at me.
In 25 minutes on that one single street in Longsight, I was spat at by one man and called 'a Jew' multiple times by passers by, even by a young boy walking with his father.
I was just walking in the street testing the effect of being clearly identifiable as a Jew by wearing a small traditional Jewish head covering called a kippah.
In Bradford the situation was more shameful. It took 13 minutes, during which I was stalked by a man who repeatedly took pictures of me. He followed me on foot for five minutes and thirty seconds according to my footage.
There was a shout of 'you Jew' at me as I crossed the road to Bradford City Park. Minutes later a man turned his head and yelled 'fight the Jewish scum' just behind my back.
Some time later three youths shouted at me across a street repeatedly, 'You're a Jew, not a Muslim...Jew, Jew, Jew run!'
I was prepared to walk for hours and expected to get nothing on camera. On Manchester's curry mile, a haven of mixed cultures and skin colour, it took two-and-half-minutes for a young lad on a bike to ride up to me and shout, 'You're a Jew' in my face. I was left speechless that anti-Semitism is so obvious.
In total, between the two cities I suffered a series of anti-Semitic hate incidents, two more than those in Zvika Klein's video and achieved in one-tenth of the time here in Britain. What a horrible reality.
Why did I pick Bradford? For a simple reason. Last summer during the height of another Gaza conflict between Israel and Palestinians, 5,000 people, predominantly young Muslim men, gathered for a mass rally in Bradford City Park. The city's MP, George Galloway, spoke while flanked by two butch men wearing T-shirts emblazoned 'Palestine's army you are not alone'.
Mr Galloway has repeated on many, many occasions that his message and political struggle is with Israel and Israelis, not Jews. Despite that, statistics show that bringing the Middle East's struggles onto the streets of Britain has a direct effect on how people treat Jews.
No one could accuse me of targeting Muslim neighbourhoods to provoke a reaction. This was the centre of an ordinary English city and I was minding my own business.
No one could accuse me of wearing something provocative or political. A Jewish person or any peaceful person walking in a British street anywhere, let alone a city centre, should be welcome.
But it is no surprise. The latest statistics from the Jewish Community Security Trust show 2014 was the most anti-Semitic year in Britain on record. 1,168 anti-Semitic incidents in 2014 - that is 37 per cent higher than all the attacks in France in the same year. Anti-Semitism in Britain is growing fast. Incident rates have doubled from 2013 to 2014.
It is completely understandable that anyone who does not feel the threat would not realise the extent of anti-Semitism, how common it is and how it effects Jews in our country every day.
But anti-Semitic attacks and verbal abuse are everyday concerns for British Jews.
As I encountered anti-Semitism for nothing but walking in a street, many other people walked past me and did nothing. They heard the comments, and were caught on camera turning back and looking as others hurled abuse. When someone spat on my back no one stopped to intervene.
by Searcher08 » Fri Mar 06, 2015 5:01 pm
by American Dream » Fri Mar 06, 2015 7:02 pm
’70s British Punks Against the National Front
Anti-fascist history time: a story about punk rock, Rock Against Racism, the National Front, and the Anti-Nazi League in 1970s Britain.
‘See Them Ah Come, But We Nah Run’ – A view from the ground of campaigning against the National Front
Colin Revolting
April 1978 In the middle of 70,000 young people who’ve come to rock against racism, me and two school friends join everyone around us singing, “Sing if you’re glad to be gay…” If we dared utter these words at school we’d be beaten up – which is what happened to two lads caught kissing in the bushes. There’s no sense of threat in this crowd today, singing along with Britain’s first openly gay pop star Tom Robinson. We’ve marched five miles from Trafalgar Square waving Anti-Nazi League lollipop placards to be part of this Carnival Against the Nazis and we will be leaving having expressed our solidarity with gay people. What an amazing day.
Leaving the area is not so much fun. As hundreds of coaches pull away from Victoria Park handfuls of racists crawl out of pubs to heckle the thousands leaving. They are hardly brave to shout at departing vehicles, but the three of us have lost our gang of school friends so we slip past the racists searching for a bus home to South East London. Meanwhile skinheads in a pub in Deptford make one of the local punk bands play “Happy Birthday” for Adolf Hitler. The majority of Deptford voters put their cross against anti-immigrant Nazi parties in the 1976 local elections. People are divided. May 1978 Our 6th Form is 98% white. Racism is not as bad as it was in lower years, but there’s fear and ignorance about immigration.
Inspired by the carnival, me and some school friends agree to leaflet Eltham High Street against the NF. We meet outside the library (we are sixth formers) and an ANL man arrives on a motorbike with a pile of leaflets. As we hand them out some people are hostile, some welcome the leaflets and most don’t react at all. One bloke sees the swastika on the leaflet say National Front is a Nazi Front and sees red. “I fought against the Nazis in the war,” he spits. “We’re Anti-Nazis,” we say. “I don’t care what kind of Nazis you are, bugger off!” When we manage to clear up the confusion and he tells us about chalking slogans on the streets in the 1930s against Mosley’s Blackshirts and sticking posters on the backs of buses.
Click here for the rest of Part One, and here for Part Two.
by American Dream » Mon Mar 09, 2015 12:06 pm
Armed Autonomy
The “1,000” organization, or MIL (Movimiento Ibérico de Liberación), a pioneer in so many things, gave itself the name of “Autonomous Combat Groups” (GAC) in 1972. The armed struggle made its debut with the purpose of helping the working class, not replacing it. They took the name “autonomous” from the groups that were engaged in 1974 to support and win the release of the MIL prisoners—which the police called the OLLA—and the groups that followed in their footsteps in 1976, which, after a debate in the Segovia prison, adopted the name “Grupos Autónomos” or GGAA (in 1979). Although hindsight is, as they say, 20-20, we must nonetheless point out that the pretense of being the “armed faction of the revolutionary proletariat” was not just debatable but also false as a matter of principle. All the groups, whether or not they engaged in armed struggle, were separate groups that only represented themselves, which is what “autonomous” really meant in that context. This kind of autonomy, by the way, would have had to question the existence within the MIL of a specialization of tasks that divided the membership into theoreticians and activists. The proletariat represents itself as a class through its own institutions. And it never takes up arms except when it is necessary, when it is ready to destroy the state. But in that case, not a fraction but the whole class is armed, forming its militias, “the proletariat in arms”. The existence of armed groups, even if they place themselves at the service of wildcat strikes, contributes nothing to the autonomy of the struggle, insofar as they are composed of people who are at the margins of the assemblies’ collective decision making and outside their control. They comprised a separate power and rather than helping the assemblies they could have posed a threat to them if they were infiltrated by spies or provocateurs. During that phase of the struggle, the pickets were sufficient. The most radical practices of the class struggle were not the expropriations or the fireworks in businesses and government offices. The really radical contributions were those efforts that helped the proletariat to go on the offensive: the generalization of insubordination against all hierarchy, the sabotage of capitalist production and consumption, the wildcat strikes, the revocable delegates, the coordination of struggles, its self-defense, the creation of specifically working class information networks, the rejection of nationalism and of trade unionism, the occupations of factories and public buildings, the barricades…. The contribution to proletarian autonomy made by the groups mentioned above was limited by their voluntarist stance with regard to the question of armed struggle.
In the case of the Autonomous Groups, it is clear that they wanted to move among the masses and pursued their maximum radicalization, but the clandestine conditions imposed by the armed struggle isolated them from the masses. They were completely lucid concerning what was needed for the extension of the class struggle, that is, concerning the question of proletarian autonomy. They were acquainted with the legacy of May ’68 and condemned all ideology as an element of separation, even the ideology of autonomy, since in the times of ferment the enemies of autonomy are the first to proclaim their support for autonomy. According to one of their communiqués, the group’s autonomy was “not simply a common practice founded upon a minimum shared framework for action, but was also based on an autonomous theory corresponding to our way of life, of struggle, and our concrete needs”.
They took the libertarian “L” to avoid being pigeonholed within the spectacular anarchism vs. Marxism opposition, as well as to prevent their recuperation as anarchists by the CNT, which, as a trade union organization, they considered to be bureaucratic, accommodationist and tolerant of the existence of wage labor and therefore of capital. They had no intention of being permanent organizations like the parties because they rejected power; all truly autonomous groups organized for certain concrete tasks and dissolved themselves when these tasks were concluded. The repression abruptly brought them to an end, but the nature of their practice was revealed as much by their exemplary, and therefore edifying, errors as by their successes.
American Dream » Mon Mar 03, 2014 5:59 pm wrote:http://www.deepblacklies.co.uk/operation_gladio.htm
OPERATION GLADIO
By David Guyatt
By 1972, with the prospect of a Soviet invasion receding, a decision was taken to “make a pre-emptive attack” on the Italian communist party - who had polled 27% in that year’s election - and who would go on to increase their vote to 35% just four years later. There immediately followed a series of bomb outrages signalling the beginning of a “strategy of tension,” designed to shift Italian politics sharply to the right. In April 1972 a Fascist bomb attack killed three carabinieri. In November 1973, an Argo 16 aircraft was destroyed in a mid-air explosion.
But if the Gladio network was the armed force, the secret Masonic lodge “Propaganda Due” (P2) was the Elitist “shadow government” tasked with directing them. Adhering to a right wing ideology bordering on fascism, P2 was headed by Licio Gelli - known as the “Puppet-master.” During the war Gelli had been a member of Mussolini’s notorious “Black shirts,” and later acted as liaison officer to the Hermann Goering SS division. By 1974 P2 had in excess of 1000 members comprising a “who’s who” of Italian political, military and economic power. Members included four Cabinet ministers, three intelligence chiefs, 160 senior military officers, 48 MPs, the Army Chief of Staff, as well as top diplomats, bankers, industrialists and media publishers.
It was also during 1974 that Gelli met secretly with Alexander Haig. Formerly, the NATO Supreme Commander, Haig had meanwhile become President Nixon’s White House Chief of Staff. The secret meeting was held in the US Embassy in Rome. Receiving the blessing of Henry Kissinger, the US National Security Adviser, Gelli left the meeting with a promise of continued financial support for the Gladio network and it’s plan for the “internal subversion.” of Italian political life. As welcome as this was, Gelli required additional funds to support P2 and operation Gladio.
He turned to P2 member Roberto Calvi, Chairman of Banco Ambrosiano - the largest non-state owned bank in Italy. Calvi began to illegally siphon money from his bank, using the Vatican bank - the Istituto per de Religione (IOR) to launder it. Almost certainly, Gelli had a hold over Calvi. Earlier, in 1967, the former head of the Italian Secret Service had joined P2 and brought with him 150,000 sensitive dossiers that had been compiled on highly placed individuals of Italian society.
Whether as a result of blackmail or political ideology, Calvi continued to funnel a vast amount of funds to Gelli and P2, bankrupting his bank in the process. Meanwhile, other events were to occur that shocked not only Italy but the entire world. In early 1978, Prime Minister Aldo Moro was kidnapped and later assassinated by the so called “Red brigades” - a revolutionary pro Soviet group. Evidence now exists that shows Moro’s murder was orchestrated by P2, and that both the “Red” and “Black” brigades were heavily penetrated by US intelligence - who are credited with “running” them.
Four years earlier, in 1974, Moro - then Foreign Minister - visited the US. Aware of the popular, democratic support the Italian Communist Party (PCI) was receiving from Italian voters, Moro wished to reach an accommodation with the PCI, and offer their leaders Cabinet rank in a new centrist ruling party. His Washington visit did not go well. During a meeting with then Secretary of State, Henry Kissinger, Moro was told that such a move was viewed in the US as “profoundly dangerous and mistaken.” A later meeting with an unnamed intelligence official left Moro fearful for his life. The official told Moro he must abandon any idea to incorporate the communists “…or you will pay dearly for it.” The official continued by warning Moro that “groups on the fringes of the official secret services might be brought into operation” if he didn’t modify his position. It was a clear reference to P2 and the Gladio network. Moro cut short his visit and returned home in fear of his life, his wife later revealed...
Europe’s “Stay Behind” units
Italy was not alone in having covert “stay behind” units in operation. The operation encompassed all of western Europe. In France the unit was called “Glaive” - again named after a Gladiatorial sword. Austria’s unit was named “Schwert,” also meaning sword. In Turkey the unit was named “Red Sheepskin” and in Greece “Sheepskin.” Sweden’s unit was called “Sveaborg.” In Switzerland it went by the title P26. Other units in Holland, Belgium, Spain, Portugal, Germany, Norway, Luxembourg, Denmark and Holland remain unnamed. Not least, the United Kingdom’s unit was simply known as “Stay Behind.”
Origins of the Stay Behind network
Information that surfaced in recent years suggests that the “Stay Behind” concept first arose in Britain. Senior military sources told the Guardian newspaper in December 1990, that a British guerrilla network was already in place following the fall of France in 1940. Numerous arm “caches” were buried for later use by a special forces ski battalion of the Scots Guards under the leadership of Brigadier “Mad Mike” Calvert. After the war, the decision was taken to create new units throughout Europe. The plan was conceived by the US Joint Chiefs of Staff and spearheaded by the newly formed CIA.
Covert political destablisation in Britain
Britain’s “Stay Behind” unit was modified after the war, for a “secondary use.” This was to combat “the takeover of civil government by militant leftwing groups.” The network was operated by Britain’s intelligence services and selected members of the armed forces. Rumours persist that Harold Wilson’s Labour government was the target of a Gladio type campaign not dissimilar to that of Italy. Wilson’s surprise resignation has been credited to a dirty tricks campaign operated by British intelligence at the behest of the US. Known as operation “Clockwork Orange” Army psyops personnel began “fabricating” evidence that showed that senior members of the Wilson Cabinet, including the Prime Minister himself, were Soviet dupes. Waiting in the wings were senior military and other rightwing figures alleged to be planning a military style “Coup D’Etat” in the event that the Labour government won the forthcoming election.
Return to Data & Research Compilations
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
Site design by Likely Arts based on "Deluxe" by Artodia.