By: Brent Parrish
The Right Planet
At a pro-illegal immigration event held at USC in Los Angeles, California, that was being conducted in Spanish only, Rep. Luis Gutierrez (D-IL) was met with shouts of “communist” and “traitor.”
These are not altogether baseless smears. Gutierrez was a member of the Socialist Party in Puerto Rico during the 80s.
From 1984-86 Gutierrez, a Democrat, served as an advisor to Mayor Harold Washington of Chicago. In 1986 Gutierrez was elected alderman of that city’s mostly-Hispanic 26th Ward. At the time, he was a member of the Puerto Rican Socialist Party, a Marxist-Leninist entity.
At the same event, illegal immigrants shouted the slogan “¡Sí se puede!”–Spanish for “Yes, it can be done!” or “Yes, you can do it!”
“Yes, We Can!” originates from “¡Sí se puede!,” which is a communist revolutionary slogan.
Other videos from the same event:
- Illegal Immigrants Shout Communist Slogan “Si Se Puede”
- Discussing Treasonous Politicians and Illegal Immigration with the Police
- Rep. Luis Gutierrez tells Illegal Immigrants how to get citizenship and benefits
- Illegal Immigrant Event Ends 20 minutes early because of real questions
- A Strong Warning from Trevor Loudon on Illegal Amnesty
By: Retired Adm. James A. Lyons
Accuracy in Media
President Obama’s adamant refusal to link the barbaric atrocities committed by the Islamic State and affiliated al-Qaeda militias to Islam is an insult to the intelligence of all thinking Americans. His insistence that these atrocities are the result of “violent extremism,” not associated with Islam, lessens his already diminished credibility. The Quran and Islamic Law (Shariah) prove him wrong since there are 109 verses in the Quran that can be considered to sanction violence. Furthermore, chapter 2, verse 106 (on abrogation) makes it clear that the later violent verses take precedence over the earlier, less violent ones.
In February, President Obama hosted a White House Summit on countering “violent extremism.” As it turned out, it was essentially a public relations media event that had nothing substantive to offer in terms of countering the Islamic State’s barbaric acts of terrorism. Instead, it was more of a leftist, progressive agenda sympathetic to “Islamic sensibilities and grievances.” It cited lack of education and job opportunities as part of the root cause that enables IS to attract young Muslims. Mind boggling, particularly when Christians, women, and children are having their heads chopped off and are being buried alive.
If it were to have been a serious summit, you would have expected the Director of the FBI and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to be full participants. However, they were not invited. Instead, the Muslim Brotherhood (MB) and its front organizations were full participants, including the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) and the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), both unindicted co-conspirators for funding terrorism from the 2008 Dallas, Texas Holy Land Foundation Trial. Another MB front organization, the Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC), was also represented.
The question must be asked: how can the Obama administration continue to embrace the Muslim Brotherhood when its declared creed, verified by the FBI, is to destroy the United States from within by our own “miserable hands,” and replace our Constitution with Islamic “Seventh Century” Shariah Law?
The MB today, with its deep penetration of all our national security and intelligence agencies, has now been institutionalized. With its carte blanche entry into the White House, it has, in effect, become a defacto cabinet member. All Americans should understand that there is no difference between the Islamic State, al-Qaeda, and the Muslim Brotherhood. Their objectives are all the same, it’s only the methods they use to achieve it that may be different. It is a totalitarian ideology bent on world domination (same as Communism), with Islam the dominant religion and Shariah the law.
The policies of the Obama administration in countering the Islamic jihadists of IS are clearly confusing to our allies. To understand President Obama’s strategy, everything this administration does must be viewed through the prism of his stated objective: to “fundamentally transform America.” This strategy is clear. It is anti-US and anti-Western—but pro-Islam, pro-Iran and pro-Muslim Brotherhood. With his Marxist background, it can be assumed that Obama does not view American power and influence as a force for good in the world. Otherwise, why would he want to fundamentally transform America? Therefore, anything that undercuts US military power and influence is viewed as being “objectively progressive.” President Obama’s refusal to provide legitimate defensive weapons to Ukraine falls under this category. The net result is the emasculation of NATO.
The “leading from behind” strategy announced at the start of the Libyan war, and the unilateral disarmament of our military forces, also fall under this category. A defining moment in the Libyan war was when the Obama administration switched sides in the global war on terror and provided weapons and material support to al-Qaeda and MB-controlled militias. Furthermore, as we now know, the Libyan war was unnecessary since Muammar Gadhafi was prepared to abdicate.
The Middle East today is a disaster area with failed states in Libya, Iraq, Syria, and now Yemen. What’s astonishing is that we are now a de facto partner with the world’s leading state sponsor of terrorism, Iran. By so doing, we are enhancing the expansion of Iran’s hegemony throughout the Middle East at the expense of our long term allies—Egypt, Jordan, Israel and Saudi Arabia.
The Obama administration’s precipitous withdrawal from Iraq gave Iran a clear signal that we would not contest their influence over Iraq. It was a foolish, or worse, attempt to obtain a nuclear weapons agreement with the evil Ayatollah Khamenei regime. Today, Iran is already a nuclear threshold state that has sufficient enriched uranium to make 8 to 12 nuclear weapons within a few months. Furthermore, a reliable source has informed me that Iran secretly bought four nuclear weapons from the former Soviet Muslim Republic of Kazakhstan in 1992. They were said to have been transferred to Iran and stored in the Lavizan military site near Tehran.
More recently, it was reported by Jerome Corsi of WorldNetDaily, on 26 February, 2015, that Iran is operating another secret advanced, uranium underground enrichment site northeast of Tehran that was previously unknown to the International Atomic Energy Agency.
With thousands of American lives lost due to Iran’s more than 35 years of aggression against the United States, it is inconceivable that any American administration would agree to enter into such a critical agreement, like the one currently being negotiated with such an evil regime.
When you consider all of the above, as well as the Obama administration’s abuse of power and the many scandals including Benghazi, the IRS, Operation Fast and Furious, Obamacare, and the immigration fiasco, any other administration would be brought up on charges of threatening the security of the United States. America, it’s up to you to influence your representatives to hold President Obama accountable.
By: Arlen Williams
Obama the neo-Marxist “community organizer” gets with the racists of the Hispanic world. Via CNN, “President Barack Obama addresses the National Council of La Raza annual conference Monday in Washington,” AFP photo
“The lawless one,” in the White House. President Antithesis (it’s like what Antichrist is to Jesus, but different… well, sort of different).
Obama defies judge, forges ahead with amnesty
As to the #NAU for North American Union, a.k.a., North American Integration, I may update this entry with more of that context, or may simply address how it all fits together elsewhere, later.
By: Cliff Kincaid
Accuracy in Media
Yesterday’s news became big news on the Fox News Channel on Thursday when former New York City Mayor Rudolph Giuliani brought up the name of President Barack Obama’s childhood mentor, Frank Marshall Davis. It was almost seven years to the day when we published our seminal piece about Davis, “Obama’s Communist Mentor.”
Davis was a member of the Communist Party and a suspected Soviet espionage agent. He was included in the FBI’s security index, meaning that Davis could be arrested or detained in the event of a national emergency. The FBI file on Davis documents his anti-white and pro-Soviet views, infiltration of the Hawaii Democratic Party, and other activities.
Davis also wrote an autobiographical and pornographic sex novel, Sex Rebel, disclosing that he had sex with a young girl and engaged in shocking and bizarre sexual activities.
Giuliani’s public identification of Davis and discussion of his role in grooming a young Barack Obama marks the first time, in my memory, that a top Republican has ever mentioned the Davis-Obama relationship. It was done in the context of Fox News’ Megyn Kelly of questioning how Giuliani could dare ask whether Obama loves America.
If the Republicans had brought this up during the 2008 campaign, Obama might have been defeated and the country could have been spared the last six years of “progressive” hope and change. The Davis-Obama relationship is something so damaging and corrupt that its public airing would have raised questions about the Democratic Party’s vetting of Obama and the direction of the Democratic Party itself.
However, Republican operative Karl Rove was warning Republicans not to accuse Obama of being a socialist. He said such a charge would generate a negative backlash. The result in 2012 was another Obama victory.
Now that it has become apparent to more and more people that Obama is not a traditional liberal Democrat and is, in fact, a Marxist with Muslim sympathies, a figure such as Giuliani feels compelled to speak out. So let’s take a look at what Giuliani said.
“I don’t feel it. I don’t feel this love of America,” Giuliani said, talking about Obama. “I’m talking about a man who grew up under the influence of Frank Marshall Davis who was a member of the Communist Party, who he refers to over and over in his book, who was a tremendous critic of the United States.”
Kelly countered that Obama “was raised in part by his grandparents. His grandfather served in World War II, his grandmother worked in a munitions plant to help the nation during World War II. I mean, to suggest he was raised by people who don’t love America or didn’t help him learn to love America.”
Giuliani argued that “his grandfather introduced him to Frank Marshall Davis, who was a communist.” He added, “You can fight in World War II, and then you introduce someone to a Communist and the young boy gets…”
After Kelly interjected that “it’s a political world view. It’s not a hatred for the country,” Giuliani responded, “Communism wasn’t hatred for America?”
Giuliani is correct about the Davis influence over Obama and the role that the grandfather played in picking Davis as a mentor.
But when Giuliani notes that Obama refers to Davis “over and over in his book,” Dreams from My Father, it’s important to point out that Davis was not identified as Frank Marshall Davis in that book. Instead, Obama identified him merely as “Frank.” The rest of the story was put together by anti-communist researcher Trevor Loudon, and we confirmed the identification with another source in Hawaii who was a close friend of Davis.
Even more of the story was put together by Paul Kengor in his authoritative book on Davis, The Communist. It appears that Davis was an influence over Obama for about nine full years, until Obama was 18 and went off to college. Obama went off to college and, by his own admission, would attend socialist conferences and pick Marxist professors as his friends.
This relationship alone would have disqualified Obama from getting low-level federal employment. The loophole in our system is that background checks are not required for federal elected officials. Our founders counted on a free press to review the fitness of those running for office.
When former Obama adviser David Axelrod talks about Obama being free from major scandals, he is ignoring the biggest scandal of all—how Obama concealed his Marxist upbringing and relationship with Davis. Axelrod of course was part of the cover-up. When “Frank” was identified as Davis, the Obama campaign insisted he was just a civil rights activist.
As we reported at the time, news organizations such as the Associated Press, The Washington Post, Newsweek and even Fox News ignored or downplayed Davis’s communist sympathies.
As Giuliani indicated, there are other influences on Obama that help explain his anti-Americanism. These include the “community organizing” philosophy of Saul Alinsky, his pastor Jeremiah Wright and the communist terrorists Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn.
Giuliani clearly feels, at this stage in Obama’s presidency, that some things have to be said openly for the sake of the country. A former crime-busting U.S. Attorney who was mayor of New York City at the time of 9/11, Giuliani fears for the future of our country. But it’s not just the fate of America that is at stake. It is clear that Obama has no love for America’s traditional allies, such as Israel. Hence, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is coming to America to plead his case personally. He is afraid that Obama wants to make a deal that will allow Iran to acquire nuclear weapons.
Now that Giuliani has publicly raised some inconvenient truths about Obama, the “progressives” and their media allies will naturally scream and cry “McCarthyism.” Strangely taking this tack, Fox News’ Kelly wondered if Giuliani’s comments about Obama had damaged “the Republican brand.” The Republican brand will only be damaged by an inability to face facts and confront and expose anti-Americanism at the highest levels of the United States government. It is shocking that it has taken this long for the evidence to emerge publicly on a national basis on Fox News and other channels.
This controversy will help determine what direction the Republicans will take. The Washington Post’s Dana Milbank, who has made it his job to protect Obama from the fallout from major scandals, was quick to label Giuliani’s remarks about Obama as “stupid.” He also attacked Wisconsin Republican Governor Scott Walker as “spineless” for saying Giuliani “can speak for himself,” and not directly challenging what the former mayor had said
“What Scott Walker did ought to disqualify him as a serious presidential contender,” wrote Milbank.
This is a signal from one of Obama’s best friends in the media that the information unearthed by Giuliani is of the blockbuster variety. Giuliani went for the jugular and hit a gusher.
The first thing Republicans can do is simply challenge the media to report on the Davis FBI file. They have been avoiding it for over six years.
Congress could also investigate Obama’s communist connections, which stretch from Hawaii to Chicago, and question the FBI about what they knew, if anything, about the Obama-Davis relationship. The reestablishment of House and Senate internal security committees, including a loyalty program for U.S. officials to eliminate security risks, should be considered.
Republicans could remind people that it was anti-communist Democratic President Harry Truman who started the first loyalty program. He issued executive order 9835 establishing the program in 1947.
The executive order said that “each employee of the Government of the United States is endowed with a measure of trusteeship over the democratic processes which are at the heart and sinew of the United States,” and declared that “the presence within the Government service of any disloyal or subversive person constitutes a threat to our democratic processes…”
It is time for a background check on the President of the United States. Does he pass the loyalty test?
By: Brent Parrish
The Right Planet
For many years now I have said the State Department needs to be cleaned out from top to bottom. And I’m not alone in that opinion, either. The U.S. Department of State has a long history of working against the best interests of the United States, consistently shilling for all things socialist. Those who have looked into tax-exempt foundations like the Carnegie Endowment, Ford Foundation, Rockefeller Consortium, Guggenheim Fellowship, etc., and the subsequent investigation by the Reece Committee, might know what I’m talking about.
The first U.S. Secretary of Defense, James Forrestal, once said, “Consistency has never been a mark of stupidity. If the diplomats who have mishandled our relations with Russia were merely stupid, they would have occasionally made a mistake in our favor.”
State Department Spokesperson Marie Harf recently told MSNBC’s Chris Matthews ISIS could be stopped if we could just create jobs for them.
At first blush, for those ignorant of Marxist ideology, this sort of thinking seems preposterous. Well, I am strongly inclined to agree. But I digress.
For dyed-in-the-wool Marxists and their fellow travelers (sympathizers), it makes perfect sense. This is why I believe it so important more Americans gain a better understanding of Marxism—since it is lauded and approved of by so many American universities and the liberal media, not to mention those in positions of power within our own government.
Karl Marx believed our view of history needed to be changed (cf. “hope and change”). Cleon Skousen wrote in his book The Naked Communist about the central importance economics plays in the Marxian religion. Marx believed history should be changed to “a fixed, undeviating, pre-determined course of progress which could be charted in the past and predicted for the future on the basis of a single, simple criterion—economics.”
According to Marx and his votaries, if we could only “level the playing field” by making everyone and everything the same (see “equality and fairness”), it would usher in a veritable utopia, i.e., the long hoped for “workers’ paradise.” Interestingly, about 90 percent of what Karl Marx wrote concerned economics (see Das Kapital).
Well, let’s just get something straight: ISIS doesn’t give a damn about economics—quite the contrary. Their motivations and actions are not influenced by Marxism, per se, but rather the teachings of Muhammad, and a literal interpretation of the Koran and the Hadith.
Although it should be noted that Marxism and Islam have quite a bit in a common.
Until our government pulls its proverbial head out of its posterior region, and begins to address the Islamic ideology that fuels terrorist groups like ISIS, we will forever be beating our collective heads against the wall wondering why we are not getting anywhere, while the enemy runs roughshod over us and others. If you cannot define the enemy, you cannot defeat the enemy. How many times does it have to be said?
Harf went on to make the patently absurd claim that “we cannot win this war by killing them [ISIS] … we cannot kill our way out of this war.”
So why are we killing them? The whole purpose of war is to kill the enemy until they’re either all dead or they surrender unconditionally. Period.
You just can’t make this stuff up.
Of course this brings us to the all-important question: just whose team is the Obama Administration and the State Department playing for?
By: Lloyd Marcus
I had the honor of hanging out with a great group of patriots, the Ft Lauderdale Tea Party. I was the keynote speaker at their 309th consecutive meeting. My message articulates why Conservatism is best for all Americans and why Liberalism is destructive. My presentation also includes me singing which enhances my message because music strikes a universal emotional chord.
The audience at the meeting included the president of a high school Republican club. I asked why he chose Conservatism. He chucked and attributed it to his high IQ. There is hope for the future folks.
The extremely faithful and fired-up patriot leaders of the group are Danita and Jack; new friends of my wife Mary and me.
Jack informed me that a poll revealed that Jeb Bush topped his group’s list of least favored presidential candidates for 2016. A gentleman bent my ear for quite a while, ranting about how he will stay home on election day if Jeb Bush is our candidate. He vowed never again to hold his nose and vote for a RINO, citing having voted for McCain and Romney.
Remember, Obama was reelected in 2012 because four million Republicans chose not to vote. Some thought what’s the point – Romney vs Obama, six of one, half a dozen of the other. Some Christians said they could not vote for a Mormon. I thought, “Great, so you sat at home and allowed a true devil to win!” Having said that, I do respect and appreciate that Conservatives are thinkers and are driven by character and principles.
I held my nose and voted for Romney because I knew the alternative was much, much worse; giving the most America hating arrogant out-of-control president in U.S. History four more years to urinate on our Constitution; purposely lower our status on the world stage and correct what he erroneously perceives as America’s injustices.
Our president is obviously an anti-America-as-founded far left radical operative; an enemy from within. During the Cold War some feared the Communists would overtake us without firing a shot. http://bit.ly/1D5VC6Q Ladies and gentlemen, I give you Barack Hussein Obama.
My faith in God keeps me upbeat and confident that we will overcome the evil seeking to destroy our great nation. God’s Word instructs us not to grow weary in well-doing.
As for Jeb Bush becoming our nominee, I am thumbs down on him because of his support for Common Core (big government overreaching control of education) http://bit.ly/1uyWoC8 and amnesty for illegals. http://bit.ly/1tWf57U
However, if it comes down to Jeb Bush or another flaming RINO as our candidate, the Tea Party will be faced with a difficult dilemma.
Think of the consequences of Hillary becoming the first woman to sit in the big chair in the Oval Office. The Dems and MSM will make every issue about her gender. To silence all opposition to President Clinton continuing Obama’s fundamental transformation of America (socialist/progressive agenda), the Democrats and MSM will update their propaganda, branding all opposition “sexist” rather than “racist.”
We’ve seen this movie before. The MSM will beat the public over the head 24/7 with their lie until the public is repeating it; opposing Hillary is sexist, white cops murder blacks, white privilege is a problem, Republicans are at war with women and so on.
Hillary Clinton occupying the White House will in essence mean at least four more years of a Democrat regime believing themselves invincible, free to continue using the Constitution as toilet paper.
We can not allow the deep-pocketed GOP establishment or mainstream media to select our presidential candidate.
So, how do we avoid the great 2016 Tea Party dilemma, having to vote for a RINO? We must rally around a conservative candidate who probably will not walk on water (be perfect on every issue). I can support a non perfect conservative candidate as long as they are fearless and laser focused on stopping Obama’s insane evil agenda.
I am starting to hear patriots say they are “all in” for their favorite 2016 presidential candidate; Ted Cruz, Scott Walker, Dr Ben Carson and so on. Fine, I am cool with that. I am not ready to go “all in” for anyone at this stage.
All I ask is that we unite and rally around the last conservative standing. Folks, I pray that our nation can recover and turn back the mess of 8 years under Obama, America’s first king. The last thing America needs is Hillary, America’s first queen.
By: Renee Nal
“Now that more people live in cities across the planet than do not, it is imperative that this revolutionary change in attitude occurs rapidly.” – Author David Thorpe, from his article “There’s a $90 Trillion Plan to Rid the World’s Cities of Cars”
Former Vice President Al Gore and former Mexican President Felipe Calderon have been roundly mocked for their vision to separate citizens from their vehicles.
As reported at the Washington Times,
Starting over is a $90 trillion expense. Minimum. But to meet that cost they would have to cram us all together in those cities like livestock, at the cost of our freedoms.
The Daily Caller observes:
Calderon and Gore made their presentation at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland where, ironically (or maybe not, at this point), some 1,700 private jets — which use petroleum — were used to shuttle in conference participants and others to discuss global warming and other pressing global issues.
We may want to laugh at the plan, but Americans are financing it.
While in India this week, President Obama pledged $4 billion dollars in “investments and loans” as reported at Reuters. What Reuters neglected to mention, along with the rest of the American mainstream media, was that $2 billion will be spent for the “development of smart cities,” as reported at the Times of India.
The left’s age-old tradition of population manipulation and social engineering experimentation continues openly today in the guise of “sustainability” (code for Agenda 21), which seeks to convince local city leaders around the world to remake cities in an effort to combat “anthropogenic [human-caused] climate change.” The “smart cities” movement is a part of this effort, as discussed at Broadside News.
Smart cities will have an infrastructure that will verify that the habits of citizens are monitored to ensure they are not indulging in harmful activities like using too much water, for example. Make no mistake, you will not be using more resources than deemed to be your fair share.
Like “Smart Meters,” in time, “the Smart Grid will enable consumers to react in near real-time to lessen their impacts.” Or, it can be remotely done for you.
No more cars
At a panel discussion during a conference (hashtag #TTDC15) sponsored in part by firm called “Embarq,” the discussion to remold cities was in full swing. Embarq seeks to capitalize on the “smart cities” movement and claims to engage in “[H]elping cities make sustainable transport a reality.”
During one of the discussions, India’s “Union Urban Development Secretary” Shankar Aggarwal stated that “smart cities” currently being developed in India will be “coordinated, compact and connected” and “meant for citizens and not for cars.”
Aggarwal laments “urban sprawl,” noting that people have to travel long distances to get to work. Stating that traveling long distances to get to work somehow lessons global competitiveness, he continues:
It is very necessary that we create cities which are compact, and the transportation needs to undergo a huge change. Instead of promoting individual cars, we have to go in for public transport and that means people should be able to walk to work, bicycling, walk to work [yes, he said it twice], and then they should make use of public transport…
Here are some of the creepy tweets:
— Sustainable Cities (@sustaincities) January 26, 2015
— Smart City Expo (@SmartCityexpo) January 26, 2015
— FIA Foundation (@FIAFdn) January 23, 2015
— Oxford Smart City (@OxfordSmartCity) January 23, 2015
— abc* Foundation (@abc_foundation) January 22, 2015
— Lakshmi Rajagopalan (@laksrajagopalan) January 22, 2015
The panel discussion can be viewed here (Shankar Aggarwal’s comments can be seen at around the 8:50 minute mark):
In evolving manifestations, the radical left shares a common theme: an overarching obsession with social engineering based on a lust for power and an irrational fear of over-population, which justifies their need to manipulate populations.
The elitist mindset is anything but “progressive” if one goes by the true meaning of the word, and can be traced back to left-wing heroes Thomas Malthus, Margaret Sanger, George Bernard Shaw and H.G. Wells, for example.
A bit of history
Al Gore’s car-less society is just another iteration of radical social engineering endorsed by the left. Their grand visions do not take the nature of man into account, which is why the founding fathers are the true progressives.
Consider some of the following quotes:
In 1798, Thomas Robert Malthus wrote An Essay on the Principle of Population which laments,
The power of population is indefinitely greater than the power in the earth to produce subsistence for man.
Progressive icon George Bernard Shaw wrote,
Just consider the situation we are up against – an overpopulation problem created by capitalism, and are trying to get rid of it by substituting emigration. Socialists say quite truly that Socialism can get rid of it, and clergymen tell us that self-control can relieve it. But it cannot wait for Socialism, and people will not practice self-control.
A eugenicist like many of his socialist peers, George Bernard Shaw was not a fan of morality. In “Eugenics: Its Definition, Scope, and Aims, The American Journal of Sociology, Vol. X, No. 1, July 1904,” he wrote:
What we must fight for is freedom to breed the race without being hampered by the mass of irrelevant conditions implied in the institution of marriage.
H.G. Wells submits,
As the standard of living and the multiplicity of interests increase, there is no sort of people anywhere who will not welcome the freedom and the relief from burdensome families that Birth Control affords.
More quotes on how the masses must be manipulated to fight “overpopulation” can be found at Liberty Unyielding.
The individual versus the collective
While the radical left brands their ideas as revolutionary and “progressive;” their visions of Utopian societies in various forms can be traced back to ancient philosophers. In fact, America’s founding fathers are the true progressives, as they put in place a Constitutional Republic that was sincerely revolutionary when compared to the vast majority of political systems throughout the entire world, throughout the entirety of recorded mankind: a focus on the individual rather than the collective, and the idea that morality was essential to freedom.
If ‘Thou shalt not covet,’ and ‘Thou shalt not steal,’ were not commandments of Heaven, they must be made inviolable precepts in every society, before it can be civilized or made free. – The Works of John Adams, Second President of the United States, Volume 6, 1856
It is likely that most people would rather live in a cave and be free than be in a “smart city” and be monitored and car-less.
This article has been cross-posted at Broadside News.
By: Trevor Loudon
The second half of 2014 was marked by a very intense anti-police campaign from the US left.
In an obvious attempt to destroy public confidence in local police forces, every black death at the hands of uniformed officers was trumpeted across the nation as proof of endemic police racism.
This is an old communist game, but unfortunately not enough people know history.
Below are extracts from the testimony of Mr. Bellarmino Joe Duran, a plasticizing press operator and an FBI informant, working in the West Side Mexican Branch of the Communist Party of Denver, Colorado.
Mr. Duran was active in the Denver Communist Party from 1948 to 1956.
This testimony was given to the “Investigation of Communist activities in the Rocky Mountain area.” Hearings conducted May 15 and 16, 1956, by the COMMITTEE ON UN-AMERICAN ACTIVITIES, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.
Note what Mr. Duran has to say about the Communist Party’s campaign against the Denver police in response to government investigator Arens:
Mr. ARENS. Now may I invite your attention to an organization known as the West Side Fair Play Committee and ask you what you know about that organization.
Mr. DURAN. The West Side Fair Play Committee was an organization which to my knowledge was started in sincerity of a mother trying to defend her son against police brutality. The Communist Party of Denver heard about it and entered the case. When I heard about it Virgil Akeson, of the Mine, Mill and Smelter Workers Union was active in it. Morris Wright was active in it, Alfredo Montoya, of the Mine-Mill was active in it, Alfonso and Rose Sena were active, and Jesus and Judith Sauceda were active in it. These people I have identified before as members and leaders of the Communist Party.
In 1954-55 there was a meeting to disband ANMA (another Communist front, the National Association of Mexican-Americans). A Communist Party meeting was called. Present at this meeting were Alfredo Montoya, Martha Correa, Alfonso Sena, Morris Wright, and myself.
Immediately after that Harold Zepelin, early in 1954, instructed me as member of the Communist Party to penetrate the West Side Fair Play Committee and that I was released from my ANMA duties and therefore it would be my main responsibility directly to the party to develop the juvenile delinquency issue and fight the police in the West Side Fair Play Committee.
The directive from Harold Zepelin, and I quote him, was that it is time that the members of the Communist Party start fighting other individuals and organizations, and direct their fight against the government locally, either State or Federal. Our responsibility was to fight the Denver Police Department as part of that tactic of fighting the Government, to set the Denver Police Department against the people and the people against the police department.
The activities of the West Side Fair Play Committee were outright controlled and dictated by the Communist Party, and by that I mean this : There were people there who wanted other activities other than just juvenile delinquency and fighting against the police. They didn’t want to fight against the police. The Communists in there were less in number than the active people, but they would combine and bombard these people with their propaganda until they convinced them that they should fight the police.
In Denver, Colo., a Communist by the name of Martha Correa witnessed a policeman beating a Spanish American man. I cannot testify whether he was in the wrong or not. 1 do not know the situation.
She raised it. This man said he was wrong, and he wanted to forget about it. Later on the members of the Communist Party of Colorado convinced this man to sue Officer Burke, of the Denver Police Department for $45,000. This was continuously agitated to divide the people from their local government and specifically within the police department. That is the general activity of the West Side Fair Play Committee.
Does any of this sound familiar people?
In those days, America had two significant Marxist-Leninist parties. Now the country has at least ten.
Almost all of them have been active in the recent anti-police rioting and demonstrations. They are working overtime, right now in Black and Latino communities, to make the next wave of violence even bloodier and more destructive.
Federal, state and even city governments were once able to keep a lid on communist agitation, because they held regular public hearings which kept the public on guard against subversive activities. They also actively ran informants inside radical groups.
Now the government and the media are largely complicit with the radicals, so the public are almost completely unaware of the threat.
The next Republican administration must re-open Congressional and Senate hearings into internal subversive activities.
If they don’t, there will be significant blood on the streets. That’s a guarantee.
Mona Field was first elected by the voters to the Los Angeles Community College District Board in 1999 and reelected in 2003, 2007 and 2011. She has been elected by her colleagues twice to serve as the President of the Board of Trustees (2004 and 2009).
A lifelong resident of Los Angeles, Ms. Field received a B.A. degree in Social Relations at Immaculate Heart College in Los Angeles and an M.A. degree in Social Sciences at California State University. Throughout her professional career, Ms. Field has been a leader in furthering causes of “social responsibility, positive labor-management relations and excellence in education.”
Ms. Field has been a professor of Political Science at Glendale Community College. She has taught courses in American Political Ideals, California Government, Introduction to Sociology, Introduction to Community Volunteerism and Introduction to Social Science.
She has also taught and lectured at other venues, including UCLA Extension, California State University, Sacramento in the Community College Leadership Program and the California School Employees Association Leadership Training Program.
The West Coast Socialist Scholars Conference 1993, “New Realities, New Identities; Socialism and Empowerment” was held April 17, 1993 at the University of California, Los Angeles.
Co-sponsors included Socialist Community School – Democratic Socialists of America – Committees of Correspondence – CrossRoads Magazine – International Socialist Organization – Socialist Organizing Network – Solidarity – Union of Radical Political Economists
In 1995, Mona Field claimed long time membership of Democratic Socialists of America.
In 2013, Mona Field was a financial contributor to the Liberty Hill Foundation, one of California’s most influential leftist non-profits and a hangout for rich, elderly LA socialists.