Tag Archives: Chavez

America Retreats Into Irrelevance As Our Enemies Rejoice

From Scrapping Europe’s Ballistic Missile Shield, To Slashing the U.S. Nuclear Arsenal  - Obama’s foreign policy has destroyed our standing among friends, and is relegating our security to be dependent on the civility of hostile strangers.

In the Name of ‘rebuilding America’s image in the world’ – The Obama regime is on a crusade of systematically destroying American influence and power in the world.  Obama has hung our allies out to dry by leaving them defenseless while at the same time, making America defenseless by ordering the Pentagon to slash our own defenses. This happening before his call next week for the UN Security council to pass a unanimous resolution of a ‘Nuclear-Free world’ of which America will be expected to destroy our nuclear weapons first, as a demonstration of our commitment.   Obama of course doing all of this after  he has prostrated America before our enemies and denounced the country on foreign soil.   He will again feed his narcissism as king of the world by chairing the UN Security Council this week.

America’s enemies are laughing at our stupidity and rejoicing at the prospects the vacuum we create will provide for them.

And as happened when Rome collapsed, the world went into the Dark Ages.  Of course when the President reads “The Post American World”,

it’s not hard to surmise that these policies are deliberate and calculated – and not because he is a bumbling fool.

During Obama’s “America Sucks” world tour back in the Spring, Obama apologized  to the Communist and Muslim world.  His Cairo speech if anything was intended as a signal to Jihadists and supporting regimes that they had a ‘friend’ in the White House just as Obama signaled to the Communists of the world that they had a ‘friend’ in the White House.

Think that statement absurd?

Consider these statements by our avowed enemies AFTER Obama’s incessant pandering to our enemies:

“With Obama we can talk, we are almost from the same generation, one can’t deny that Obama is different. He’s intelligent, he has good intentions and we have to help him.” Venezuela’s Communist Dictator Hugo Chavez

Venezuela’s President Hugo Chavez said on Tuesday that he and Cuban ally Fidel Castro risk being more conservative than U.S. President Barack Obama

The exiled leader of the Palestinian Islamist movement Hamas … hailed the “new lexicon” being used by US President Barack Obama towards foreign policy issues the Middle East.

America’s allies will no longer trust us, and anyone seeking the air of freedom inside tyrannical regimes will have to look elsewhere for someone to support freedom.  It is self-evident that the  Obama regime rejects liberty for the preference of Communist dictators and tyrants.

Consider:

Obama left Iranian protesters to die in the streets by the hand of Apocalyptic Jihadist Leader Mamoud Ahmedinejad, and was silent in the face of the iron fisted brutality of the Islamic regime that again Friday vowed to “confront the Zionist regime” while insisting that Israel “Has no future”.  No surprise from Jihadists like Ahmadinejad on a crusade to Islamize the world – while Marxist allies in this country call for Obama to shoot down Israeli Jets if they try to stop Iran from doing as they promise.

Obama said nothing while Iranian people are being beaten in their streets, forcibly removed from their homes, and murdered.

voices.washingtonpost.com/livecoverage/2009/06/report_nedas_family_forced_o…

www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/meast/06/22/iran.protest.stories/index.html

kristof.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/06/16/the-violence-in-iran/

Then Obama offers credibility to the totalitarian regime that is responsible for these atrocities in the name of keeping America from being blamed. But Iran blamed the U.S. anyway.

www.boston.com/news/world/middleeast/articles/2009/05/30/iran_blames_us_for…

While Obama was silent on freedom-seeking Iranians being massacred, he was very quick to jump in and condemn Honduras from upholding it’s Constitution when fellow Marxist leader Mel Zelaya decided to follow in Hugo Chavez’ footsteps and declare himself president for life.

Obama goes and sanctions Honduras President and Ally because he refused a Marxist coup supported by Fidel Castro and Hugo Chavez:

“Zelaya, who took office in 2006 and is limited by the constitution to a four-year term that ends in early 2010, had angered the army, courts and Congress by pushing for an unofficial public vote on Sunday to gauge support for his plan to hold a November referendum on allowing presidential re-election.”

Chavez, Castro and Ortega have all condemned the arrest and removal of the Honduran President Zelaya.

www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/07/01/2613101.htm?section=justin

Obama says in regards to Iran that we don’t want to appear to be meddling in the affairs of sovereign nations. So he remains quiet as innocent people, protesting a stolen election are beaten and murdered.

Then, when a Latin American Marxist wants to be able to stay in office indefinitely and tries to do something that violates his country’s constitution, he is arrested and removed from office by his own government. And what does our, “we don’t want to appear to meddle in the affairs of other countries” President do? He makes a public announcement condemning the arrest and removal of Zelaya and then BANS the Democratic President from entry to America to attend the UN summit – but grants Ahmadinejad and Chavez seats of honor.

Ahmadinejad, Chavez, Gaddafi, Castro Allowed Into US For UN General Assembly But Honduran Leader Banned

Obama stands with tyrants

The consequences of these deliberate TREASONOUS acts by the Obama regime, herald what humorist Mark Steyn has entitled ‘The Long Retreat”.

His conclusion is not only frightening to consider, but a marker of where we actually have arrived – or shall I say – declined to:

In a sense, the health-care debate and the foreign-policy debacle are two sides of the same coin: For Britain and other great powers, the decision to build a hugely expensive welfare state at home entailed inevitably a long retreat from responsibilities abroad, with a thousand small betrayals of peripheral allies along the way. A few years ago, the great scholar Bernard Lewis warned, during the debate on withdrawal from Iraq, that America risked being seen as “harmless as an enemy and treacherous as a friend.”

If perception is reality – then it is no wonder that every enemy of our nation – from Communists to Jihadists are rejoicing at America’s retreat into irrelevance.

2 Comments

Filed under Obama Marxist Tyranny, Politics, War On Jihadists

None Dare Call It Congressional High Treason

congresstreason.jpg

These bozos would selll us out to Bin Laden himself if it would ensure they won elections.

Sadaam Paid For Anti-War Congressmen’s Trip To Pre-Invasion Iraq

Saddam And The Three Stooges

Three congressmen were caught traveling to praise prewar Iraq on Saddam Hussein’s dime in 2002. Others have made pilgrimages to pay tribute to Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez. This is getting out of control.

As the U.S. prepared for war in October 2002, Washington state’s Jim McDermott flew to Iraq on a Saddam-praising junket with fellow Democrats Mike Thompson of California and David Bonior of Michigan. Rather than support the U.S., they condemned U.N. sanctions, vouched for Saddam’s probity and publicly declared America’s democratically elected president a liar.
None of it had anything to do with the congressmen’s claimed concern for Iraqi children, but it did undermine the U.S. alliance-building effort. And by coincidence, it was exactly what Saddam wanted.

Now we learn the junket was just as it seemed at the time — a Saddam-paid propaganda production, starring three U.S. dupes. The congressmen say they had no idea, but they should have known and must be aware that people will seek to manipulate politicians.

In this case, however, Bush derangement syndrome seemed to trump all judgment in freelance diplomacy, and the result was a sellout of our interests.
So was another trip taken to the Andes last year by another Democratic threesome — Reps. Bill Delahunt and James McGovern of Massachusetts and George Miller of California. With at least two of them in hock to Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez for supplying cheap heating oil to their districts, the trio decided to meddle in Colombia, a democracy Chavez seeks to overthrow.

Claiming they were just interested in the humanitarian release of American hostages, they flew to Bogota and Caracas and initiated contact with Chavez’s best terrorists — Colombia’s Marxist FARC. Secret correspondence from the computer of dead FARC warlord Raul Reyes suggests that the real aim of the trip was to muscle Colombian President Alvaro Uribe into restoring Chavez as a mediator between Colombia and the FARC. That would have enabled Chavez to expand his cash and political influence into Colombia.

The junket followed other favors that McGovern and Delahunt did for Chavez. Both were influential, for example, in slashing Colombian military aid by 30% in 2008, and now both intend to vote down Colombia’s free trade pact.

Such stoogery isn’t helped by the bad example set by congressional leaders like Nancy Pelosi. It was the speaker of the House, remember, who took two senators on a pilgrimage to Syria a year ago, at a time of high tensions with Iran, making tyrants there very happy. These activities have little to do with the duties of congressmen to their respective districts or states. They’re also inherently secretive, leaving the citizens in the dark about the funding and the favors. Worst of all, they manage to sell out American interests for the price of undermining the president, as if there were no national interests beyond politics.

The State Department and White House have no authority to stop such shenanigans, so it’s up to Congress to start making its actions more accountable and the media to make them more transparent on the spot.

Leave a comment

Filed under News, Politics

America Embraces Defeat, As It Hands Victory On Over To Jihadists

handing-victoryonplatter.jpg

Triumph in any contest requires resolve. Without the will to win, without the resolve – it is impossible to overcome an opponent, no matter the overwhelming advantage one might have.

Despite the horror of the surprise attack at Pearl Harbor in 1941, and a string of defeats against the Imperial Navy in the Pacific, America never lost the resolve or determinaton to see justice done, and unconditional surrender achieved. Victory was determined by our willpower.

Defeat however, is a certainty when one doubts their abilities or very presence in a contest.

America’s Leftists and Anti-war pollyannas have shown the world that enough of it’s people doubt our just presence in the contest against Jihadist Islam and has lost it’s resolve to not only win, but has lost it’s willingness to even recognize that we are IN a contest. We have heard the mantras of of everything from “This is Bush’s War” to “If we did not make muslims mad at us, they would not be attacking us”, to The government orchestrated 9-11, Jihadists are no threat to us”.

Since America decided to strike back after the horror of 9-11, the detractors of American foreign policy began their work to undermine the efforts. As the anti-war movement and the Communists in North Vietnam discovered in the 1960′s – enemies of America can lose every military engagement against us – and still win an entire war, causing America to retreat in shame into itself by opening a propaganda front at home among the American populace.

The efforts to defeat a radical ideology waging war on us unanswered since the late 1970′s, has been met with almost continuous opposition from political opportunists at home who adopted the pacifistic ideal of “love begetting love” and have fought with growing determination to sabotage our resolve and even our recognition of the enemy, to instead focus on ourselves as the instigators of jihadists. There is far more hatred and vitriol directed at supporters of the efforts in A’stan and Iraq, than for those who chant for our deaths in the streets of Tehran and other Islamic states every Friday after Prayers at the mosque.

Sympathisers of the radical Islamic movment began to use our political correctness as a weapon against us, and since political warfare is the highest calling of the Leftists in America – they suddenly found themselves unwitting allies with Jihadists, and aid their cause by disguising themselves in the mantle of humanists bent on compassion towards a movement bent on submitting the world to Sharia Law.

Having sown self-loathing, doubt, and sabotaging of our resolve with a misguided sense of morality, they are handing victory on a silver platter on over to Jihadists. From Ahmadinejad to Bin Laden, militant Mulsims worldwide sense America’s imminent defeat in a war that they began on the West decades ago. Perception is reality among Jihadists and those of evil intent in this world, and they see our weakness. Like a predator able to sense weak and sick prey, Jihadists are excited that victory is very near for them to realize their most hoped-for dreams, and their leaders are capitalizing on this moment to redirect the momentum America was gaining against Jihadists.

Like the Tet Offensive, this NIE report may very well become the turning point of victory for Jihadists seeking a global caliphate by the defeat and annihilation they seek for American infidels.

Iran Declares Victory After NIE Report

TEHRAN (Reuters) – Iran’s president declared victory over the United States on Wednesday and the head of a U.N. watchdog said Iran had been “somewhat vindicated” by a U.S. report that it halted its nuclear weapons program in 2003.

But Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said Iran would press ahead with its nuclear program which the Islamic Republic says has only peaceful civilian aims.

“Today, the Iranian nation is victorious but you (the United States) are empty-handed,” Ahmadinejad said in a televised speech to a rally in the western Iranian city of Ilam.

ahmadinejad.jpg

Ahmadinejad Declares Victory

Iran’s president declares victory over the United States and other world powers in the dispute about Tehran’s nuclear ambitions.

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad wasted no time in declaring victory.

Speaking to crowds in western Iran, he vowed Iran would stand firm behind its right to obtain nuclear technology and would not retreat one iota.

Arab and Persian TV is abuzz with the latest news of the economic fallout from the credit collapse; the NIE report; Congress’ waffling on funding the troops; and the SCOTUS decision to decide whether or not to grant the Jihadist combatants at Guantanamo Bay, Constitutional Rights and access to America’s legal system at American taxpayer expense.

All of those news stories are chum, that are being dumped into the waters of the militant Islamic movement to stir the teeming muslim masses into a frenzy for Jihad. They might be well afraid of our military forces in Iraq, who have quelled the Insurgency and sent Al Qaeda running back into Afghanistan to regroup – but they know, as Bin Laden had predicted, that America would defeat itself from within – and that all they would need to do is wait…and be patient.

The NIE report and the efforts to close Guantanamo Bay have lifted the spirits of an enemy that would otherwise be crushed. The political rhetoric from pacifistic Isolationists like Ron Paul, Dennis Kuccinich and the entirety of the anti-war Democratic field will galvanize Jihadists and breathe new life into future efforts they have to wage the ultimate Jihad on Satan’s nation. Driving us from Babylon and burning our cities to the ground before their messiah comes to lead all of Islam to victory in establishing a global Caliphate, as the adherants to Quranic prophecy like Ahmadinejad say is their divine mission.

Americans do not sense or have any willful understanding of the absolute danger that we have now put ourselves into.

Already, the fallout from the bogus NIE report has stymied U.S. efforts to isolate and force sanctions on a defiant Iran that has boasted more than 3,000 working centrifuges to weaponize uranium. Ahmadinejad has stated in the past to crowds in Tehran that America and the West will never be able to stop the Islamic republic from obtaining and using nukes. I would imagine it is because he, like Bin Laden, understand the politcal war taking place within, and the lack of any resolve a war-weary American public has for another front against the rising Islamic juggernaut.

But Iran is wasting no time making use of the victory America is handing to Jihadist Islam’s expansion. As of this writing, Iran’s Mohamed Khatami, ex- agent chief executive of the Islamic Republic of Iran is meeting with Mexican President President Felipe Calderón, to discuss a “Pacific Co-existence” between Iran and Mexico(Babelfish or fluency to translate Spanish required) or the same story at this link – Mexico and Iran dialogue in Tenochtitlan.

Mexican president Felipe Calderon met yesterday with Mohamed Khatami at Los Pinos. Dr. Khatami is the former president of the Islamic Republic of Iran who was succeeded by Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

The meeting at Los Pinos is part of a growing alliance between Mexico, South America and Islam. The purpose of the meeting was to establish better communications between the Iranian and Mexican peoples.

There has been great worry around the globe concerning the war-mongering policies of the Bush Administration and its Zionist cohorts. Recently, President George Bush threaten to start World War III and accused Iran of making “nuclear bombs” . The accusation was refuted by a recently released National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) report.

In addition, President Calderon has been worried about the growing racist hostility against Mexicans and Mexican-Americans in the USA. In mid-November approximately 568 US leaders of Mexican descent met in Mexico City to dialogue with the Mexican Congress on ways to combat the anti-Mexican actions of US xenophobes. One proposal was to stop all Pemex oil exports across the border and instead sell the oil to China. Another proposal was to totally repudiate Mexico’s external debt to the Zionist controlled World Bank and the International Monetary Fund. The interest alone on the external debt is sucking the blood of many Mexican families and forcing them to migrate across the border.

The visit of Dr. Mohamed Khatami to Mexico City may signal the beginning of a new international alignment that may bring into reality what Patrick Buchanan wrote in his new book, “Day of Reckoning.” A Bolivarian/Islamic front would be very difficult to defeat.

Iran is playing chess, and hardball poker with nuclear ambitions at the same time. America is busy playing PC footsie and pretending we have nothing to fear from an Iran determined to head a Caliphate with nuclear capabilities. Overtures of Iran to Communist Dictator Hugo Chavez, and now to Mexico – pinpoint at least to this mind, that Iran is setting up a strategic showdown with allies that will allow it to strike America by proxy, and fulfill the Quranic prophecies Ahmadinejad so often has proclaimed is their divine mission.

There was a reason that Iran and Noth Korea were referred to as an Axis of Evil. Add South America and Mexico to that list of Iranian allies, combined with their allies here at home and it is possible our near future will become more interesting than China would ever wish for us.

And America will have served that possibility up on a silver platter with the course offered to Jihadists this week.

4 Comments

Filed under Culture War, Politics, War On Jihadists

Danger From The South: Inciting A Socialist Revolution In America

amerorevolution.jpg

To compound the problems America is already beset with our faltering economy and the war on Jihadists – comes word that Venezuela, having allied itself with Iran, is sponsoring forums to promote a militant Socialist Revolution in America.

Given the Socialist slide America is already on, and the precarious situation in Mexico, Communists like Chavez think America is ripe for chaos, revolution and takeover, from both invasion from the South, and from revolution within.

Venezuela forum debates prospects for revolution in U.S.

CARACAS, Venezuela—A five-day rolling panel discussion on “United States: A possible revolution” was the central event at the third Venezuela International Book Fair, which took place here November 9-18.

The 22 panelists, four or five of whom spoke each day, included political activists and writers from the United States expressing diverse political views, as well as a number of U.S. citizens living in Venezuela. Hundreds of Venezuelans and others took part in one or more sessions, with dozens raising questions and making comments from the floor. The forum was covered by Venezuelan television, radio, and newspapers. The issues debated on the character of the working class and prospects for revolution in the United States sparked a political discussion that permeated the book fair. An article on the fair itself will appear in next week’s Militant.

The forum kicked off November 10 with presentations by Mary-Alice Waters, a member of the Socialist Workers Party National Committee and president of Pathfinder Press; Eva Golinger, a Venezuelan-American lawyer and author of The Chávez Code; Chris Carlson, a contributor to the venezuelanalysis.com website; and Tufara Waller, cultural program coordinator of the Highlander Center in Tennessee. The issues joined at that first session remained at the center of the debate the following four days. (See “Venezuela book fair theme: ‘U.S., a possible revolution’” in last week’s Militant.)

In addition to the forum panelists mentioned below, others included Bernardo álvarez, Venezuela’s ambassador to the United States; former University of Colorado professor Ward Churchill; August Nimtz, a University of Minnesota political science professor; William Blum, an author who has written a number of books opposing U.S. foreign policy; ex-Maryknoll priest Charles Hardy; and Dada Maheshvarananda, yoga instructor and founder of the Prout Institute.

Debate over immigrant workers The political perspectives most sharply debated over the five days were, first, the impact and importance of millions of Latin American immigrant workers in the United States, and, second, the history of revolutionary struggles of working people in the United States and the lessons of those struggles for revolutionary prospects. In a striking way, the discussion registered that those living and engaged in the class struggle in the United States generally expressed greater confidence in the revolutionary capacities of working people there than did those—both U.S. citizens and many Latin American participants—living outside the United States.

Several panelists are active in work to expand rights for immigrants in the United States. These included Diógenes Abreu, a Dominican-born community organizer who currently lives in New York; Luis Rodríguez, a Chicano activist in California’s San Fernando Valley; and Gustavo Torres, an organizer for the immigrant rights group Casa de Maryland. Several of them gave a vivid and accurate picture of conditions of life for immigrant workers in the United States and the growing resistance and confidence manifested in strikes and ongoing street mobilizations against raids and deportations.

Both Torres and Antonio González, president of the Southwest Voter Education and Registration Project, said the road to “empowerment” is organizing Latinos to vote. “What does a revolutionary do in the U.S. today?” asked González. “Take power wherever you can” by electing Latinos to city, state, and federal offices. His PowerPoint presentation highlighted the growing number of Latino voters.

During the discussion periods day after day, a number of participants from Venezuela and elsewhere in Latin America took exception to the evidence that immigrant workers resisting the superexploitation they face in the United States are an important force in the working-class vanguard that is emerging there. In various ways, several said that Latin Americans living and working in the United States are simply there to get “a piece of the pie.”

“They are only there to get passports,” said one participant. “Once they get them they’ll stop marching.” Many characterized immigrant workers as sellouts who have bought into the “American dream” at the expense of fighting for political, economic, and social change in Latin America.

In the discussion, Carlos Samaniego, a packinghouse worker from Minnesota, countered this view. He described the vanguard role that immigrant workers are playing in struggles in the United States—from coal mines in the West to union struggles in Midwest slaughterhouses.

America’s revolutionary heritage The other hotly debated question was the revolutionary history of toilers in the United States and, by extension, prospects for a Third American Revolution, a socialist revolution.

“America was created by revolution,” said panelist Lee Sustar, labor editor of the Socialist Worker newspaper, which reflects the views of the International Socialist Organization. Speaking at the November 13 session, he referred to the U.S. Civil War as “the completion of the bourgeois democratic revolution” that had won independence for the 13 British colonies some 80 years earlier.

“There has never been a revolution in the United States, and anyone who thinks there has been is ignorant of their own history,” responded panelist Richard Gott, a British author and journalist. Gott said the American Revolution, which defeated British colonial rule, could not be considered a revolution. Rather, it was a war to take land from Native American tribes, whose territory, he said, was being protected by the British royal army.

“No, a revolution is not possible in the United States,” said Gott. “It is conservative and reactionary. The only hope is Latin America.”

“I want to express my total agreement,” interjected Haiman El Troudi, the moderator of the panel that day. “There never has been a revolution in the United States and never will be!” El Troudi has held several offices in the Chávez government and written books including Being Capitalist is Bad Business and History of the Bolivarian Revolution.

“It is impossible for a revolution to begin in the United States,” said a Venezuelan participant from the floor. He pointed to what he considered U.S. workers’ complicity with Washington’s wars against Iraq and Afghanistan as proof that working people there are desensitized to injustice.

But in remarks during the November 11 panel, ex-Marine and founder of Iraq Veterans Against the War Jimmy Massey described his evolution from a prowar patriot to a staunch opponent of the war in Iraq. He walked through day-to-day experiences in Iraq that led him to oppose U.S. policies in the Middle East and to organize fellow soldiers to do the same.

Another idea frequently expressed by speakers from the floor and by a few panelists was that “change has to come from the South,” referring to Latin America. Many said the only hope was to wait until enough countries in Latin America close their doors to imperialist penetration so as to cause a collapse in the U.S. economy. The fact that nowhere in Latin America but Cuba have working people yet successfully carried through to victory the kind of revolutionary struggle necessary to end imperialist domination received scant attention.

Some participants argued that U.S. capitalism would be thrown into crisis if enough leftist governments were elected in Latin America and refused to sign bilateral “free-trade” agreements with Washington or join the U.S.-initiated Free Trade Area of the Americas. Others pointed to popular struggles in Venezuela, Ecuador, Bolivia, and Nicaragua as being the key to educating working people in the United States. Despite different arguments and emphases, the point of agreement was that no initiative could be expected from working people inside the imperialist bastion.

A contrasting point of view was presented by Héctor Pesquera, a leader of the Hostosiano Independence Movement of Puerto Rico. “The Puerto Rican struggle is connected to the North American revolution,” he said. Pesquera summarized the worsening conditions facing both working people in Puerto Rico and Puerto Ricans living in New York. Pointing to the movement that forced Washington to withdraw its naval bases from the Puerto Rican island of Vieques, Pesquera noted that this blow to the U.S. rulers had strengthened social movements in the United States.

“I’m going to take issue with what every one of you has said,” stated Amiri Baraka, a poet from Newark, New Jersey, speaking from the audience. Baraka, a panelist on the closing day of the event, has been active in Black nationalist, Maoist, and Democratic Party politics since the 1960s. Attacking Sustar for not identifying himself as a “Trotskyite,” and falsely accusing fellow panelist George Katsiaficas of introducing himself as a former member of the Black Panthers, Baraka’s intervention was the first time in four days of sharp debate that the tone of civil discourse was breached.

Final session “When I first heard the theme of this forum, I thought it was a joke,” said Steve Brouwer, an American living in Venezuela and writing a book on peasant cooperatives. Brouwer was a panelist at the final session. “But the more I thought about what is happening in the world, the more I listened to my Latino brothers here, the more I became convinced that revolutionary change in the U.S. is possible.”

Brouwer said that working-class complacency in the United States in the 1920s had given way to labor battles in the 1930s that shaped U.S. politics for 45 years. He cited a “mildly progressive” Democratic Party, influenced by these developments in the labor movement, as key to what he called a progressive course that ended with the election of Ronald Reagan in 1980.

Amiri Baraka and Amina Baraka were also panelists at the final session.

Amina Baraka, introducing herself as “a Black woman who is a communist who uses the cultural arena,” spoke about her work and read a poem.

Amiri Baraka came back to the previous day’s discussion, disagreeing with Gott and others who denied the two great revolutions in U.S. history. He also disagreed with Sustar’s characterization of the Civil War as the completion of the bourgeois democratic revolution.

“That revolution has never been completed,” Baraka said. “There is still no democracy for Blacks.” He proposed that Blacks and Latinos, including the “progressive” Black bourgeoisie, unite around a program to abolish the electoral college; establish a unicameral parliamentary system; ban “private money” from election campaigns; make voting compulsory; and restore voting rights to felons. Such constitutional reforms, he said, would shift power towards “people’s democracy” in the United States. Revolutionary goals could then be put on the agenda.

What has derailed all previous revolutionary struggles in the United States, Baraka argued, is “white privilege.” He citied the defeat of Radical Reconstruction following the Civil War, the failure of the 1930s labor upsurge to go further, and the decline of the mass movement that brought down Jim Crow segregation as three examples. Moreover, “white privilege” and the failure of the “white left” to fight it remain the primary obstacle to struggles today.

Baraka also renewed his attack on Katsiaficas, who had spoken about Asian student struggles on the panel the previous day. Baraka accused him of being an agent trying to stir up support in Venezuela for student marches against the government of Hugo Chávez.

Baraka concluded by reading his poem, “Somebody Blew Up America,” a Spanish translation of which was distributed to participants. Written after September 11, 2001, the poem presents a long list of historical atrocities, interlacing anti-imperialist and anticapitalist rhetoric with conspiracy theories of history and anti-Semitism. “Who decide Jesus get crucified,” the poem asks. “Who knew the World Trade Center was gonna get bombed / Who told 4000 Israeli workers at the Twin Tower / To stay home that day / Why did Sharon stay away?”

During the opening day of the panel, a participant from Panama had said during the discussion that Jews are the main problem facing working people in the world today because “they have all the money” and control everything. Norton Sandler, a member of the Socialist Workers Party in the United States, spoke from the floor the next day and pointed to the danger of scapegoating and Jew-hatred for the working-class movement.

After Baraka’s remarks the final day, Mary-Alice Waters took the floor to thank the organizers of the book fair “for bringing together diverse forces for such a broad variety of views for the discussion that took place here.” She stressed the importance of civil debate, noting that “the poison of agent- and race-baiting should be rejected by all.”

Some prominent speakers invited to take part in the central forum were unable to make it during that event, but joined the discussion in the following days.

A November 17 program on “Liberation, Imagination, Black Panthers” featuring Kathleen Cleaver, former national spokesperson for the Black Panther Party, was one of the larger events of the fair outside the central forum. A video interview with Noam Chomsky, the well-known author, anarchist, and a linguistics professor, was played after the conclusion of the forum, and a booklet containing a translation of his comments was distributed for free.

Ramón Medero, president of Venezuela’s National Book Center, the sponsor of the fair, expressed his appreciation to all the panelists whose efforts had contributed to the success of the event, and satisfaction that the fair served to open a much-needed political discussion.

27 Comments

Filed under Illegal Insurgency, News