Saturday, 31 January 2015


Aaron Dixon, Seattle chapter leader of the Black Panther Party

"On a day to basis in the community, we [the Black Panther Party] often received pleas for help from upset mothers concerning their teenage daughters and the pimps in the area. The Seattle-Tacoma region boasted Fort Lewis, one of the largest military installations on the West Coast, two air force bases and several naval bases, all of which contributed to the big business of prostitution. Elmer and I knew a number of the young girls who stood on them corners, soliciting. We had grown up with them, attended school with them. Whenever we saw any underage sisters down on 'Ho Stro', where the prostitutes strolled on Yesler Street, we sent them home. And, because our community center [Black Panther office] was near the Ho Stro, many of the prostitutes took refuge in our office when the police came down on them. Sometimes, at the request of the mothers, we went out in search of their daughters on the streets of Seattle or at pimp's houses; on occasion pimps kidnapped young women and sent them to Utah to 'break them in'.

One day a couple of comrade sisters came in from selling [Black Panther] papers and told us they had been harassed by some pimps, so we sent a squad to where the pimps lived. The comrades broke down the door and administered some revolutionary justice. About a week later, we held a fundraising dance to benefit the [Black Panther organised free] medical clinic. Toward the end of the event, [Black Panthers] Elmer, Anthony, Jake Fidler, and Valentine were doing a security check of the perimeter when Valentine spotted a young girl sitting in a gold Cadillac, crying, while a pimp with a big floppy hat sat at the wheel. Valentine leaned in and asked the girl what was wrong. He got into the cas as she scooted over.

"He won't let me leave," she said quietly.

"You want to leave, you can leave," responded Valentine. "He won;t do nothing - watch.," Valentine said, taking out his knife and beginning to slice up the leather of the interior of the car.

The pimp showed no reaction because Elmer, on the other side, had a 9mm pointed at his head. Valentine took the young girl back to her mother.

The next day, five Cadillacs of various colours pulled up to the community center. James Redman, Valentine and I met them as they pulled up. We exchanged words as they voiced their anger at our interventions. I advised them them to look up at the office windows, where they saw some heavy artillery looking down on upon them. They took off. Shortly afterward, the troublesome pimps moved to Tacoma." 

- My People Are Rising: memoir of a Black Panther Captain, Aaron Dixon [pictured] p193-194

A few comments: this shows a number of things, straight away I notice how 'pimping' ie., the organised systematic abuse of women and girls has been promoted non-stop by the mainstream and has now been internalised on a mass level by the masses and whereby it is a generally accepted term of positive reference!

Secondly, this shows that an oppressed people can only move forward if they have the organised and militant capacity in their community to confront the ruling elite's promotion of anti-people oppression on a non-state level, ie., through their support for organised crime such as drug dealers, pimps and so on. Finally, this shows how tall an order it is for people to actually start building the beginnings of a real peoples struggle, ie., I am not advocating being armed at all, but there has to be a serious level of organised discipline and militancy and conciousness if we are to even take the first real baby steps to a real revolutionary peoples movement.

Aaron Dixon was in his LATE TEENS when he was leading the Seattle branch of the Panthers. What shame this puts us all to and the pathetic and sorry state of peoples determination for revolutionary dedication! What an inspiring example the Panthers and all our anti-imperialist socialist revolutionaries, movements and countries were and are in the GlobalSouth and the few organisations remaining in the 'west', like Sinn Fein and Basque Country revolutionaries mostly. - Sukant Chandan, Sons of Malcolm


"Eldridge [Cleaver] had been living in ‪‎Algeria‬ with Kathleen Cleaver and their two children. He and the party had been granted diplomatic status by the Algerian authorities, who provided him with a villa and gave him travel privileges to North Korea and other socialist nations to garner support for the party. Even Yasser Arafat of the Palestinian Liberation Organisation visited Eldridge in Algeria, bringing a case load of AK-47s […] Many African liberation organisations were offered headquarters and support from the Algerian government, including organisations from ‪‎Angola‬, ‪‎Mozambique‬ and ‪Zimbabwe‬. But none of their offices compared to the compound provided for the Black Panther Party. At the party's compound, the International Section [of the Black Panther Party] entertained revolutionary fighters from all over Africa and the Middle East. [Panther member] Don Cox event attended ‪PLO‬ training camps."

- My People Are Rising: Memoir of a Black Panther Captain, Aaron Dixon, pages 211-212.


“We have a once in a lifetime opportunity to build a socialist state in Europe”


"First of all, why did you come to the Donbass to fight against Poroshenko’s government?

We all agree that the Odessa massacre was the turning point for us. But there are many reasons why we have joined the struggle: to help build a socialist state in Europe, to help defend the people of Donbass from the Kiev army. This is a fight against fascism and we are in debt to those who joined the International Brigades in Spain in 1936 to fight against the coup.

Leaving your life, your friends and your family to go fight in a war in which you could die can’t be easy. Is Novorossiya worth such risks?

We are perfectly aware of the risks that come with the decision to go to war and we know what we left behind in Spain, but the cause is worth the risk. We are here to fight against fascism. For the first time in a very long time, there is a real chance to help build a socialist state in Europe. As communists, we could not let go of this opportunity.

You define yourselves as communists. What does it mean for you to fight for Novorossiya? What are your political and military goals?

Our main military task is to stop when we have liberated the future state of Novorossiya from the fascist scum. They are the ones who caused this war. And our main political task is to help build the socialist state of Novorossiya by being part of the revolutionary units of the armed forces along with other communists fighting here. The red flag will once again fly high in Europe.

As with Kurdistan or Palestine, the Donbass resistance is based on popular support and is politically diverse, so it stands out that one of the leaders of the Lugansk militia is Vitaly Victorovich, a known communist.

What is the real presence and influence of communists in the popular resistance?

Communists have a prominent presence in the resistance. There are two units formed exclusively of communists: one in the Vostok Battalion and another one here, in the Prizrak Brigade. There are communists in other units too. There is great Soviet nostalgia within the volunteers fighting in the Militia. Everything has deteriorated here since the collapse of the Soviet Union, everybody here can see it. We could not say exactly how many communists are in the resistance, but it is the predominant ideology in the Militia.

Communist ideology is present in the political arena too. Igor Plotnitsky, the leader of the LPR has a communist ideology. Communists are influential in both the Lugansk and the Donetsk militias. Many of the commanders are fighting for a Novorossiya free from fascists and oligarchs.

After a brief stay in other units and battalions, you have just joined the Red Squad 404 of the Prizrak Brigade. Why did you transfer here? Tell us about your new life in this unit.

Our life in this unit is similar to what it was in other units: the same discipline, same schedules and same rotations at the front. What really changes is the hierarchy. Everything here is more egalitarian, there are no commanders. There is a political commissar who is in charge of the discipline and morale of the soldiers. And we have two leaders: one in charge of military training back in the headquarters and one in charge of leading the comrades in battle.

We made the decision to change units for political reasons, even though there have always been communist commanders in our units. Political differences prevented us from feeling as comfortable as we would have liked. We feel fully comfortable with our new comrades here in unit 404.

Even though nationalists are a minority in the Militia, a part of the (Spanish) Left have used their presence as an excuse to whitewash Kiev’s and NATO’s crimes against the civilian population. Some have gone as far as calling you Nazis, not just you but the whole resistance. What do you have to say to that?

Any Left that justifies fascists killing civilians should rethink what their ideology really is. Some have called us Nazis, which is hilarious to us, dark-skinned half breeds (laughs). Those of you who have been here are the only ones who can judge, everybody else is just speculating three thousand kilometres away. And I want to make it clear [Sergio] that I am redder that the blood flowing through my veins. And that is not going to change, no matter what others may say.

What do you think is the main character of the Novorossiyan resistance: class struggle, the fight against fascism or national liberation?

Novorossiya is a fight against fascism, against the rule of the oligarchs and a national liberation movement. We are fighting against the Kiev fascists and the oligarchs who looted post-Soviet Ukraine. And it is a national liberation movement too, since they are defending their culture, their language and their people."



Some serious escalation by the white colonial settler state of 'israel' in the last week, and the, as and to be expected, strong #Resistance response by the Lebanese #Hizbullah against the enemy following the martyrdom of our brothers from Hizbullah and IRI. Some comments and analysis on this on Al Etejah English TV last night. Great dangers and great possibilities lie ahead, major issues pertaining directly to the #Revolution in #Palestine, #Syria etc. I also bring in the dynamic of #Libya which was basically a practice run as to what nato and allied death squads (fsa, isis, nusra, islamic front, etc etc)has been and is doing to #Syria and wider afield.

The whole program is interesting, my comments at 08:36 / 22:13 / 32:00 / 39:37

Great quote here from #Nasrallah today (thanks Digital Resistance and br Eisa): "Sayyid Hassan Nasrallah: "Israel is not afraid of thousands of armed Al-Qaeda militants on its border, but was scared of 6 unarmed #Hezbollah fighters last week.""

Sunday, 25 January 2015

first annual MALCOLM X FILM FESTIVAL - organised by the Malcolm X Movement

the first annual 
Organised by the Malcolm X Movement



speakers include*:
ILYASAH SHABAZZ (writer and daughter of Malcolm X)
Dr MOUSSA IBRAHIM (Libyan Resistance)
GERRY McLOCHLAINN (former Irish POW / Sinn Fein)
GEORGE SHIRE (ZANU-PF Liberation War veteran)
GAMAL NKRUMAH (Kwame Nkrumah's Son)

TAIMUR RAHMAN (Communist Workers Peasants Party of Pakistan)
SWISS (So Solid Crew)
SUKANT CHANDAN (Malcolm X Movement)
SARA MYERS (Exhibit B protest)
SAQIB DESHMUKH (Justice for Habib 'Paps' Ullah Family Campaign)

Suggested donation £5

All seven events are being filmed for publication

1. Sat 14 March - 1-630pm Culturlann, Falls Road, Belfast, BT12 6AH 

2. Sat 21 March - 2-8pm, Ruskin College, Steve Biko room, OX3 9BZ

3. Sun 22 March - 2-8pm, The Drum, Aston, Birmingham, B6 4UU

4. Sat 28th March - 2-9pm, Sally Bennis Theatre, Grand Parade, Brighton, BN2 0JY

5. Mon  06 April (Bank Holiday) - 230-8pm, Rich Mix, Bethnal Green, London, E1 6LA

6. Sat 11 April - 5-8pm, Black Cultural Archives, Brixton, London, SW2 1 EF

7. Sun 12 April - 230-830pm - Malcolm X Centre, St Pauls, Bristol, BS2 8YH

The Malcolm X Movement is a Black & Asian led decolonial anti-imperialist organisation that seeks to unite Global South peoples and diaspora. The Malcolm X Movement (MXM) and supporting organisations is immensely proud to bring to our peoples the first annual Malcolm X Film Festival taking place in SEVEN cities across England including one in Belfast, (occupied) Ireland.

This is the biggest Black & Asian radical event of its kind to take place in England and perhaps western Europe for for the last generation since the mid 1990s. Never before in this time has such an event with such a inspiring amount of speakers and Global support (including from Ilyasah Shabazz, the Black Panther Alumni, the revolutionary Palestinian group the PFLP, the Black Panther Alumni, the Communist Workers & PEasants Party of Pakistan amongst others) taken place in the last 20 years or so.

With the steady but sure increasing power of the Global South against neo-colonialism and the 'colonial matrix of power', with the 'west' increasing its covert and overt global war in an attempt to maintain its hegemonic position and with the directly related microcosm of this global war reflected in the increasing oppression and exploitation of Black and Asian and working class peoples in the west, never has there been a more necessary time for the MXM to contribute to the building of communities of resistance in unity with the Global South.

The MXM has already delivered a free one year liberation school under the initiative of its 'Assata Tupac Liberation School', and has held one public conference entitled 'Strike the Empire Back' in June 2014, see here:

The MXM is not launching until August this year (2015) when it will organise with supporting organisations the first annual Malcolm X Summer Festival.

We in the MXM take inspiration and leadership from Malcolm X who made it plain himself, advocate uniting all peoples against the 'greatest purveyors of violence in the world' (Dr King Jr) today which is the neo-colonialism: "We have a common enemy. We have this in common: We have a common oppressor, a common exploiter, and a common discriminator. But once we all realize that we have this common enemy, then we unite on the basis of what we have in common"***

Supporting organisations**:

Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine
Libyan Peoples National Movement
Black Panther Almuni
Communist Workers Peasants Party of Pakistan
Respect Party
Kurdish Students Union
Global Afrikan Congress
Hansib Publications
African Peoples Liberation Organisation
Islamic Human Rights Commission
'Rice N Peas' Films
Nu Beyond
Black History Studies
NUS Black Students
Black British Islamic Bureau
Intifada Street
Pan-African Society Community Forum
Justice for Habib Ullah Campaign
Media Diversified 
International Institute for Scientific Research
Muslim Vibe
Global Studies School, University of Sussex
Tricontinental Anti-Imperialist Platform
Migrant Media
Ujima FM
I am Hip-Hop
Voice Over Productions
South Bristol Workers Forum
Bristol Ukraine Antifascist Solidarity
Oomk Magazine

*Please note: Not all speakers are speaking at every event of the Malcolm X Film Festival, and at some events some speakers may speak either in person or via live video link. Please check the individual events to see which speakers are speaking

** More organisations can apply to be a supporting organisation to the MX Film Festival, please get in touch if you would like to do so.

***All enquiries, including getting involved in the Malcolm X Movement, should be emailed to

Wednesday, 21 January 2015


#‎americansniper‬ film, neo-colonial war and representations of the resistant-colonised and the colonisers: this fim is continuing to do what the propaganda arms of the neo-colonialists have always done. Countless yankee films glorifying their genocidal wars against Koreans and Vietnamese have all raised up the 'Humanity' of the genocidal troops while our people are worth nothing but to be raped ('love you long time' and many other such like are disgusting and reprehensible neo-colonial white supremacist anti-female slurs), sexually assaulted, massacred, blown to bits, and our glorious Korean and Vietnamese Communist-led Resistance as thugs, brutes and idiots, when really these comrades of ours are the loftiest in ethics, moral and sacrifice for our peoples. This new 6 oscar nominated film only but continues in this trend.

My concern is NOT that this is another tear and sympathy inducer for neo-colonial genocidal troops, but that we are in danger in playing into the racist sterotypes by failing to support our Resistance today in Syria, Libya, Iraq and elsewhere by being silent on this, or supporting the smaller scale supremacist death squads who are serving 'western' interests on every level, and to think people are supporting this by their support for these very same death squads under the guise of the 'Arab Sting' and the rest.

This film and the general western project is preparing culturally and psychologically people to actively support their neo-colonial project, my main concern and agenda is that are WE preparing our people and the people in the west for OUR current global Resistance and Liberation struggle of our peoples, countries, multi-lateral bodies in this final stage of battling to defeat neo-colonialism once and for all.

A lot of opposition to this film has become another moaning groaning opportunity for empire-liberals (those who talk some lefty 'radical' rhetoric, but give a pass or support the enemy when it comes to the crunch) to embellish their neo-colonial prejudices and pining to be accepted by the left wing of the neo-colonial society. On a connected note, Brian Di Palma's film on Iraq - Redacted- is by far the best film I have seen on Iraq along with the excellent doc-film 'Meeting Resistance'. While Redacted does not explain or point to how Iraqi Al-Qaeda was given direct and indirect support by the brits and yanks, it is still excellent. Meeting Resistance is a VERY important filmic documentary on the Iraqi Resistance.

Please God, unite and inspire the uniting of ALL those forces which strategically sought to unite ALL Iraqi peoples against the enemy, some of whom are split and divided today.

I am / we are the ‪#‎VietnameseSniper‬,

the ‪#‎SovietSniper‬,

the ‪#‎KoreanSniper‬,

the ‪#‎FLNSniper‬,

the ‪#‎PalestinianSniper‬,

the ‪#‎ANCSniper‬,

the ‪#‎BlackPantherSniper‬,

the ‪#‎RobertFWilliamsSniper‬,

the ‪#‎Cuban26JulySniper‬.

I am ‪#‎HumanitysLiberationSniper‬,

the ‪#‎DecolonialSniper‬,

the ‪#‎AntiImperialistSniper‬.

- Sukant Chandan, Sons of Malcolm

Tuesday, 20 January 2015


Neo-colonialism, white supremacy and english and international football: I loved playing football in my pre-teens, couldn't play enough of it, morning, lunch and afternoon breaks at school was always a dash to the playground, quickly choosing teams, ripping up the knee area of my school trousers at least once a week (sorry Mum!). Drinking from the water fountains tired and thirsty. I played in the school team as goal keeper and sometimes defence. Sunday afternoons however were very depressing when watching league Football, less so FA cup.

While I loved Ian Rush and esp John Barnes, but the whole culture left me feeling alienated, feeling culturally outside of it all and was another contribution to the terribly lonely, alienated and 'othered' feeling I sub-conciously had ever since stepping onto the plane at nearly the age of 4 yrs old leaving the orange warm glow of the Homeland (Chandigarh, India).

However, when the world cup was on telly, it was a totally different experience, I got SO excited about the African and 'latin' American teams playing, I was mesmerised by the Brazilian football team's skills, Pele was a great hero of mine, his football skills were pure ballet-like poetry in confounding his opponents, and the whole team seemed to gracefully dance to victory after victory.
However, it was Maradona who brought the fire. I still remember my Mother and I watching the glorious 'hand of God' beat the dirty english team that was representing thatcher's neo-colonial offensive across the world and against Argentina and Las Malvinas (so-called 'falkland islands'). Maradona was our (GlobalSouth ppls) attack fighter, so many opposing team players would surround him terrified of his offensive skills, no matter, small, stocky, lightning Maradonna would find a way through and continue to attack. After all his problems Maradona today is a comrade of ours and of Chavez, Castro and all our fighters across the world against imperialism and for socialism.

Thank you Pele and Maradona for helping me understand I don't have to fit in under the neo-colonial assimilationist terror and oppression in the west, that we have a incomparably more beautiful global community who will with grace and sometimes with the 'hand of God' defeat the enemies of our peoples.

- Sukant Chandan, Sons of Malcolm

Monday, 19 January 2015


Our heroes in Syria and Lebanon, Bilad al-Sham. RIP Martyrs Imad and Jihad Mughniyeh! Martyred by white colonial settler helicopter gun ships. Leaders and Fighters against the nato-gcc-israel and lefty-liberal allied Arab Sting death squad movement. UNITY against the common enemy! - Sukant Chandan, Sons of Malcolm



Br Mbandaka, Br Student Minister Hilary Muhammad, Sr Sara Myers, Sukant Chandan, Br Mustafa Ali

On Friday 16th January 2015, the Nation of Islam and Brother Student Minister Hilary Muhammad, Minister Lous Farrakhan official representative in Britain held a packed community event at their building in Brixton. Over 200 people were engaged in a dynamic and insightful discussion around the discussion topic of 'is there freedom of speech', as well as addressing other issues such as 'are Islam and terrorism synonymous' and 'is there a war on Islam'.

It was an honour for myself to share a panel at such an event organised by the NoI because, as I mentioned in my address I have a deep respect for the work of the NoI and especially Minister Louis Farrakhan who has played a mentoring role in my life. One of the most inspirational things Minister Farrakhan has done for me is when in early 2011 when the neo-colonialists and their allies in North Africa and the 'Middle East' were conducting a orgy of lynching, raping and destruction under the guise of the 'Arab Spring' Minister Farrakhan joined in with other of our revolutionary global leadership such as Fidel Castro, Daniel Ortega, Hugo Chavez in identifying that traumatic episode for what it was: a clear project to destroy one of Africa's greatest countries, leaderships, to wreak a revenge on Muammar Gaddafi's leadership to the global struggle against imperialism, including a massive amount of radical Black and Asian organisations within the leading european countries themselves and his more recent leadership in Pan-African capacity building in the form of the African Union and also developing 'South-South' strategic relations with the rest of the world especially our allies in the souther half of the African continent. 

As I imparted at the event, when it comes to freedom of speech, I witnessed myself what the West really mean by that when the Libyan Jamahirya TV building was destroyed by Nato bombs martyring some 12 brothers and sisters whose only 'crime' was to resist and counter the Nato and allied war of aggression against the Libyan people. 

The event saw other panellists stating clearly that when it comes to freedom of speech this must be contextualised with power relations whereby those higher up in the neo-colonially defined and constructed hierarchy are enabled more freedom of speech whereas the greater victims of the neo-colonial order are denied freedom of speech when that speech is married to relative and resistant power to the same system, and when our speech becomes manifest in effective action we are faced with often deadly responses from the same system of oppression. However, it is only through building our own capacity of organisations, media married to our struggle of Black peoples in the three souther continents of 'latin' America, Asia and Africa can we liberate Humanity from the "greatest purveyors of violence" on the planet today who remains the regimes of Paris, London and Washington. In that endeavor, the NoI have contributed greatly and continue to, and with them I hope we can increasingly work shoulder to shoulder with our peoples and with God on our side. - Sukant Chandan, Sons of Malcolm

Wednesday, 14 January 2015


Libya: Dr. Moussa Ibrahim speaks

14.01.2015 01:58
Libya: Dr. Moussa Ibrahim speaks. 54347.jpeg
During a historic event last Monday at the Committee Rooms Houses of Parliament, Westminster, London, dr. Moussa Ibrahim, the main media spokesperson of the Libyan Jamahiriya government at the time of the NATO aggression in 2011, spoke publicly in English for the first time after the so-called fall of Tripoli. Dr. Ibrahim, who is still wanted by the NATO powers for committing the "crime" of eloquently defending the truth about the imperialist war on Libya to the international press, joined the event called "Libya: NATO's untold story"  via video link.
 By Linda Housman
"This is a political and moral appeal to each and every one of you", Dr. Ibrahim started his speech. "I address your hearts and minds."
Dr. Ibrahim declared he also spoke on behalf of the Libyan Popular National Movement, which was founded in early 2012 as the political body of the majority of Libyans who support the Jamahiriya, and whose founding declaration can be found here. "We are Green Libyans, we support Brother Leader Muammar Gaddafi, and we make a peaceful initiative to reclaim our country from Al Qaeda and NATO's gangs", he said.
The illegal war on Libya was a full blown media war, Dr. Ibrahim stressed. Throughout the conflict, the racist lie of Black African mercenaries was used to demonize the Jamahiriya. "But not a single African soldier was captured during eight months of war." Meanwhile NATO's rebel terrorists were eager to pose with darker skinned Libyans whom they forced to eat the green flag of the Libyan Jamahiriya.
Other media lies included the "10,000 peaceful protesters who were killed by Gaddafi's forces", which was the basis of UNSC Resolution 1970 and 1973 and of U.S. President Obama's hypocritical statement that "if we had waited one more day, Benghazi, a city nearly the size of Charlotte, could suffer a massacre that would have reverberated across the region and stained the conscience of the world." However, dr. Ibrahim emphasized, "even [former chairman of the NATO-rebels' National Transitional Council] Mustafa Abdul Jalil admitted that only eight protesters were killed before the NATO intervention, not 10,000."
"We asked the West for a fact finding mission to prove the media lies. They had money for this war, but apparently not for a fact finding mission."
"Libya was the main member of the African Union and the main power behind Arab unity", dr. Ibrahim said. "The West knew Gaddafi would not slow down his efforts to unite Africa and the Arab world. France even asked Libya to stop a project for a united African currency, calling it "destabilizing". Now their ultimate goal is to split up Libya in three parts, so that they can totally control these geographically and politically weak regions."
In a quick reference to last week's terrorist attacks in France, dr. Ibrahim said he read several Arabic-language reports saying that the Paris terrorists, who last summer returned from Syria, may have visited Libya and may have received training in Libya, which certainly could be the case as many foreign fighters left Libya for Syria during mid-2012.
Dr. Ibrahim ended his address by pointing out that there are currently two million Libyans, meaning one third of the population, living in exile, often under appalling conditions. "But we are not just crying over Libya. We have the tools to solve this crisis, based on national dialogue in which all Libyans are included. I cannot claim this is going smoothly, but I believe that Green Libya will prevail."
In October 2012, dr. Ibrahim refuted reports of the Libyan prime minister's media office on his capture in Libya by saying in an audio message that he is not even in the country. He said those reports were an attempt to distract people from the Libyan regime's crimes in the city of Bani Walid.  Libya's Deputy Prime Minister, Mustafa Abushagur, subsequently apologized on Twitter for reporting the news of dr. Ibrahim's capture. Ibrahims younger brother, 25-year-old Hassan, however was assassinated by a British Apache gunship in Zawiya during the third week of August 2011.
The "Libya: NATO's untold story" event was hosted by journalist, broadcaster and political analyst Hafsa Kara-Mustapha. Other speakers at the event were dr. Mabruk Derbash, professor at Tripoli university and political commentator, who stated that he opposed Gaddafi on many issues, but now wished that "the problems of the Jamahiriya returned, as compared to what Libya has become, they were hardly problems at all", and Sukant Chandan, coordinator at theTricontinental Anti-Imperialist Platform and political analyst who reported from Libya three times during the NATO aggression in 2011.
"We are so colonized that we don't want to listen to the Libyan people, or to revolutionary leaders like Chavez and [Fidel] Castro", the latter pointed out. This also turned out to apply to a few pro-NATO attenders of the event who could not wait to put dr. Ibrahims words out of context on social media. "Mussa ibrahim: asks if the room has only libyans or even foreign journalists ? He probably would put the lying mode" Twitter user @Tajourian wrote, conveniently leaving out dr. Ibrahims addition that he would like to know this because of geographical indications in his speech that might need explanation for non-Libyans.
Many others did value the historic speech of dr. Ibrahim. "Moussa Ibrahim true Libyan hero and patriot !!!!", an exiled Libyan posted on Twitter.
A video of the event will be available on YouTube on the Tricontinental channel soon.

Tuesday, 13 January 2015


Highly successful event tonight, thanks to all who made it happen, esp my Trincontinental comrades Hafsa Kara who chaired brilliantly, Dhruv Shah for the audio-visual work, Carlos Martinez on the e-comms. Many thanks for the support from George Galloway MP and for his contribution at the start of the event. our Libyan brother Dr Mabruk Derbésh made a very insightful contribution and in the QnA on how he was in opposition to Muammar Gaddafi on many issues pre 2011, but considered things today incomparitvely worse and he said "I wish the problems of the Jamahirya returned, as compared to now what Libya has become, they were hardly problems at all".

And many thanks again to Dr. Moussa Ibrahim (د. موسى إبراهيم), former Libyan Jamahirya government media spokesperson during the nato war of aggression and divide and ruin in 2011. It was a historic event in that Dr Moussa Ibrahim spoke for the first time in english since 2011, that this pro-resistance pro-GlobalSouth event took place in the british parliament (with britain being a leading force in the destruction of Libya), and that we had the direct support of a parliamentarian. Still lots more work to do to bring to light and justice the greatest crime against Humanity in our times.

Many thanks to all who came, many thanks to the LIbyan community who represented today, they comprised nearly half of all the 70 people in the room. Thanks to friends who came from far and wide, thanks to our sister from Prague who traveled all the way especially for this meeting, and other comrades from Sheffield, Brighton and elsewhere who attended. Thanks to RT for coming. As we say in SouthAsia BBC murdabad, to the scummy little bbc slave who read of his mi5 style sheet in asking Dr Moussa some utterly stupid questions, and thanks to the Libyan monarchist who came who gave me the chance to tell him off and put him in his place in my speech when he was smirking at me mentioning the systematic persecution and lynching of darker skinned Libyans that still continues today. Libyan people deserve our support who are resisting nato and its allied death squads, not those death squad leaders and their closest supporters such as Hakim Belhaj and Moazzam Begg and Cage Prisoners. Lynchers of anti-nato revolutionaries and Black Libyans and Africans (and Syrians etc) like the aforementioned are not worthy of more support than their victims!

professional HD videos of the event up soon on youtube! A fuller written report and pictures coming out tomorrow.

(Sukant Chandan, Tricontinental)

Monday, 12 January 2015


#‎FreedomOfSpeech‬ or ‪#‎FreedomOfDeceit‬? To remind people, I witnessed with my own eyes nato bombs destroying the Libyan TV broadcasting building in the summer of 2011 in Tripoli, and it killed our brothers and sisters working there. I myself was on a TV interview in the same building only recently to that attack.

And let's not forget Nato's massacre of Serbian media and journos in 1999. ie., the deliberate massacre of those people resisting the nato war of aggression.

This is but a reflection of general neo-colonial media which is actually the foremost arm of neo-colonialisms global war. And those attacks and this media come neo-colonial propaganda war in both instances of Serbia 1999 and Libya 2011 was, pardon the pun, dove-tailed by nearly every western radical person and organisation.

So before you accept anything coming out of the deeply neo-colonial puerile nonsense from these snakes, fakes, fools and tools of empire talking profoundly hypocritical nonsense on ‪#‎CharlieHebdo‬ etc (they champion massacres by the same 'rebels' in Syria and Libya as 'revolutions' but endless hand wringing when whites are killed: remember those supporting Isis, Nusra etc bemoaning Henning's head chop, when they support head chopping, rape, loot, abduction as long as they Syrians etc!) check their CVs on this, and you'll more often than not find they are neo-colonialism's little helpers.

- Sukant Chandan, Sons of Malcolm

Friday, 9 January 2015



Neo-colonial/Eurocentric Anti-racism

'Race, sex, class' (racism, sexism and classism) have long been the three things that western radicals have critiqued etc. Of course, (neo)colonialism manifests in many other oppressions. But in this radical lexicon, 'racism' *should* directly connect to or even equate to 'western superiority', or the global nature of oppression, but it factors in western radicalisms analysis ONLY in the sense that westerns treat it as an exotic 'other' struggle, they have a paternalistic attitude towards it: those pitiful Black n Brown people who die, starve, tortured, struggle and martyred in their millions. They are exotified: those sexy dying, fighting oh-so-cool human capital on whose sacrifices we can steal their symbols and iconography to posture a neo-colonial 'radical'posture' but more often than not, actually western radicals have a profound neo-colonially informed and neo-colonially infected fear, hostility and hatred for those historically and especially today fighting and slowly defeating neo-colonialism.

THIS is what racism is, not some eurocentric geo-political bubble by which 'radicals' have a spoilt child of empire tantrum with their ruling class parents. Western radicals are not just racists (joining in white supremacy with a oh-so-contemporary benetton rainbow twist) but deeply and actively vested in the neo-colonial oppression defined arrogance, ego, and hyper-racism.

In a sense, the number one problem is still, as Du Bois said, the 'colour line', just that the enemy has brought into its side of the 'colour line' overwhelming amount of radicalism, including Black n Brown radicals. As Malcolm X said at the oxford union debate paraphrasing Shakespeare: 'to be or not to be' is the central question, or to be a part of the neo-colonial system or to be outside of it and to be in unity with the global Resistance against it.

- Sukant Chandan, Sons of Malcolm

Thursday, 8 January 2015

public event: BLACK PANTHER, AARON DIXON IN CONVERSATION - 630pm Tues Jan 27th 2015, Housmans Bookshop, N19DX

MY PEOPLE ARE RISING: In Conversation with Black Panther, Aaron Dixon

Tricontinental Anti-Imperialist Platform invite you to this exclusive conversation with brother/comrade Aaron Dixon. Aaron Dixon founded the Seattle branch of the Black Panther Party in his youth, developed the Free Breakfast Program for children which fed thousands of children, countered police brutality and developed global solidarity with movements against colonialism and neo-colonialism at the time.

At a time when the initiatives against police brutality are rising in the 'west', when movements are looking for viable examples of struggle and organising, the Black Panthers remain a signature experience to inform our present day struggles.

Aaron Dixon will be signing copies of his book - My People Are Rising - which recounts his experiences at this event.

The Tricontinental's Sukant Chandan will be hosting this event.

Entry is suggested £3.


Tuesday, 6 January 2015


January 3, 2015
Press Statement

Six Left parties, the CPI, CPI(M), CPI(ML)-Liberation, AIFB, SUCI(C) and RSP have issued the following statement:

Obama Visit: Observe Protest Day on January 24

The Modi government and the BJP have unleashed the forces of Hindutva which threatens the secular and democratic values of the Indian Republic. It is at such a juncture that the Government has invited President Obama of the United States of America to be the Chief Guest of the Republic Day on January 26.

It is a supreme irony that the day which symbolizes India’s independence and sovereignty is being graced by the head of a country which has done the most to assault and destroy the sovereignty of many countries around the world. President Obama himself is responsible for the aggression in Libya and for the rerun of bombing and sending troops back to Iraq. The US is doing everything to destroy Syria as a national entity.

The Left parties protest the visit of President Obama because:

1. The United States is targeting and destabilizing governments and countries in West Asia by military interventions like in Iraq, Libya and Syria.

2. The United States is the patron and staunch supporter of Israel which occupies Palestinian land and Arab territories and subjects the Palestinian people to colonial oppression.

3. The United States has shifted a substantial part of its naval and military resources to Asia as part of the pivot of Asia and is creating new military bases and tensions in the Asia-Pacific region.

4. US intervention in Afghanistan and role in Pakistan have nurtured fundamentalist forces, the disastrous consequences of which serve as a warning to India.

5. US which wages wars in the name of defending democracy, is facing massive protests at home against racial murders by its police force. Further the terrible record of torture and Islamophobic profiling by the CIA with the approval of the US government has recently exposed the US as amongst the worst violator of human rights and democracy in the world.

The BJP government is pursuing a pro-US foreign policy which is contrary to an independent non-aligned foreign policy. This is being done in the interests of Indian and foreign monopoly capital.

The Left parties strongly protest:

1. The decision to renew the India-US Defence Framework Agreement for another ten years. This is a pact which will yoke India to American military strategy in Asia.

2. Seeking to pressurise India to change its foreign policy orientation vis a vis Palestine, Israel and Iran to suit US interests

3. The relentless pressures exercised by the Obama administration on India to open up the financial sector to US capital, as a result of which the Modi government has promulgated an ordinance to allow 49 per cent FDI in the insurance sector.

4. The strong pressure of the US to weaken the patents regime in India to benefit the US drug companies, so that they can sell drugs in India at high prices.

5. America’s pressures that India to give up its food security programme by undermining public procurement and the public distribution system.

6. US pressuring India to weaken laws that protect labour rights and environment, to benefit US corporations.

7. The Obama-Modi efforts to dilute the civil nuclear liability law to favour US nuclear companies.

The Left parties call for a Protest Day against the visit of President Obama on January 24.

Halt US aggression

Stop interference in India’s domestic matters

Stop US-India strategic collaboration


Prakash Karat
General Secretary, CPI(M)

Sudhakar Reddy
General Secretary, CPI

Dipankar Bhattacharya
General Secretary, CPI(ML)-Liberation

Provash Ghosh
General Secretary, SUCI(C)

Debabrata Biswas Abani Roy
General Secretary, AIFB RSP


My Email Correspondence With Noam Chomsky on Syria: 1/1/15 – 3/1/15

From Jay Tharappel

Note: As I understand legal principles. This transcript has not been altered to the extent that it constitutes a misrepresentation of the original source. All alterations are purely cosmetic, i.e. the removal of repetitive back correspondence. Disclosing this correspondence is ONLY an invasion of privacy if the publication contains material that a reasonable person would expect the author (of the said material) to remain private. This is highly unlikely given that Mr. Chomsky's career involves publicly discussing the very topics featured in this transcript.

Jay Tharappel:


In this interview you state at 4:33.

"The major ground forces that are fighting ISIS are apparently the PKK and its allies in Syria..."

By allies in Syria it's clear you're referring to the YPG.

Just curious why you didn't mention the Syrian ArabArmy, which has been fighting ISIS since its inception?

Noam Chomsky:

The Syrian army appears to be pursuing Assad’s own objectives, fighting ISIS being a secondary concern on the ground.

Jay Tharappel:

What's "Assad's own objectives" and why are they more important than fighting ISIS, in your opinion?

Noam Chomsky:

Assad’s own objectives are to stay in power no matter how many Syrians he kills and how much damage he does to the country

Jay Tharappel:

What do you make of the efforts made by the Syrian government, over the past four years, to address the legitimate grievances of the Syrian people with a constitutional referendum removing the Baath party's political monopoly, the parliamentary elections, and the presidential elections of 2014 in which 15.6 million Syrians were eligible to vote, 11.6 million Syrians voted, 10.3 million for President Assad?

Doesn't this suggest, at the very least, that the status quo is preferable to Syrians over the alternative, which is for the government to fall to sectarian death-squads?

Noam Chomsky:

The efforts were a poor joke, particularly while Syria was slaughtering the Syrian people.

Whether the monstrous Assad regime is better than the various possible alternatives – Rojava, ISIS, the now defunct Free Syrian Army, the Syrian democrats who protested repression and then were crushed by violence,… -- I leave to you to decide.

Jay Tharappel:

There's much to suggest the Syrian Arab Army (SAA) is NOT slaughtering its own people.

Around 30K SAA soldiers have died in this conflict, which would imply that a significantly larger number of rebels have been killed.

Given the uneven casualty-exchange ratios to be expected between a mechanised army and guerrillas, it's quite possible that up to 3 or 4 times as many rebels have been killed, which would imply that the majority being killed are armed combatants on all sides.

These claims about the SAA mowing down civilians are provided by unreliable opposition sources as Nir Rosen, who you've cited as credible in the past, has already pointed out:

“Every day the opposition gives a death toll, usually without any explanation of the cause of the deaths. Many of those reported killed are in fact dead opposition fighters, but the cause of their death is hidden and they are described in reports as innocent civilians killed by security forces, as if they were all merely protesting or sitting in their homes.” [13/02/2012 Al-Jazeera]

The atrocities committed by ISIS, Al-Nusra, theIslamic Front, the FSA etc. are frequent and uncontested, whereas the crimes that Syrian government have been accused of committing by the US backed SNC opposition i.e. Houla, Banias, Bayda, Tremseh, have been bitterly contested by crushed by different sources.

The Syrian democrats, far from being "crushed by violence", have won most of their demands.

They wanted, an end to the Baath party's political monopoly, an objective constitutional criteria for the licensing of new political parties, an end to sweeping security laws, a constitutional referendum parliamentary elections, and presidential elections - ALL of which have been delivered by Assad's government in the middle of a violent insurgency.

Now the only people fighting the Syrian state are extremist reactionaries.

If you sympathise with those Syrian democrats,why would you denounce their achievements as a "poor joke"?

Again, out of the 15.8 million eligible voters,11.6 million voted, 10.3 million voted for President Assad. That's 88 percent of the vote with a participation rate of 73 percent, which is around 20 percent better than US elections which you encourage people to participate in.

I'm just curious as to why you haven't vocally opposed US support for death-squads in Syria?

Final question.

Are you, at the very least, willing to voice your opposition to the sanctions on Syria?

These sanctions, on top of the effects of war,have contributed to a sharp devaluation of the Syrian pound and potentially may end up being as damaging as the sanctions on Iraq?

P.S. I wanted to thank you personally for your books which really helped me understand the world as a teenager.


Jay Tharappel

Noam Chomsky:

Some of this is accurate, the exculpation of the vicious Assad regime is not.

I haven’t written about the rather ambiguous US role in Syria

Jay Tharappel:

I asked you a few other questions, Noam.

If you sympathise with those Syrian democrats, why would you denounce their achievements as a "poor joke"?

Are you, at the very least, willing to voice your opposition to the sanctions on Syria?


[*THIS IS NOT PART OF THE CORRESPONDENCE: Admittedly I would have been better asking him“If you sympathise with those Syrian democrats, and given that they largely achieved their demands, is it fair to dismiss the government’s efforts at reform as a "poor joke"?”]

Noam Chomsky:

I notice that you depart from the normal practice, and do not include back correspondence so that the recipient can know what you are talking about. I took the trouble to look it up. You wrote: “What do you make of the efforts made by the Syrian government, over the past four years, to address the legitimate grievances of the Syrian people…”

I responded that “the efforts are a poor joke.”

Jay Tharappel:

Hi Noam,

I accidentally deleted everything on that email,hence the absent back correspondence. Sorry about that.

Yes, I know you answered that question. Thank you.

I also asked two other questions which I was curious to get your answer on.

They are:

1. If you sympathise with those Syrian democrats, why would you denounce their achievements as a "poor joke"?

2. Are you, at the very least, willing to voice your opposition to the sanctions on Syria?

For context, these were the questions I asked in that long email I sent earlier.


Noam Chomsky:

It seems that you don’t read the letters you receive, which makes correspondence impossible. Take a look at my last letter, and your question 1.

Jay Tharappel:

Hi Noam,

Believe you me I've read everything you wrote.

I asked you: "What do you make of the efforts made by theSyrian government, over the past four years, to address the legitimate grievances of the Syrian people…"

And you responded with “the efforts are a poor joke.”

The reason I asked you the question, 'if you sympathise with thoseSyrian democrats, why would you denounce their achievements as a "poor joke"?', is because earlier you mentioned "the Syrian democrats who protested repression and then were crushed by violence".

In response to this I pointed out that the demands of the Syrian democrats were all agreed to and implemented by the Syrian government and I cited all the major examples of this.

As such, to suggest (as you did) that they were crushed in any significant political sense is false.

I was also hoping to direct your attention to the irony of you initially expressing sympathy with those "Syrian democrats", only to then discredit the democratic reforms they demanded and won as a "poor joke".

If you sympathise with the "Syrian democrats" you have to concede that they got what they wanted, which is good.

If the reforms were a "poor joke" because according to you they were accompanied by the Syrian government "slaughtering the Syrian people", then I provided separate reasoning for why such a characterisation is false, and am more than happy to provide you with more reasons.

P.S. don't forget the other question, 'are you, at the very least,willing to voice your opposition to the sanctions on Syria?'.

Noam Chomsky:

In short, when you asked why I denounce the achievements of the Syrian democrats as a “poor joke,” you knew that I was not referring to them at all, but rather to the Syrian government and your claims about its achievements.

Nothing could show more clearly that your attempt at correspondence is a poor joke.

Jay Tharappel:

Hi Noam,

Well yes, obviously I *know* you weren't referring to the Syrian democrats as a "poor joke" but rather to my claims about the Syrian government's reforms.

My point is that the Syrian democrats (who we both sympathise with) ended up getting what they wanted, i.e. the series of constitutional reforms I mentioned to you earlier.

Therefore your original contention that the "Syrian democrats"were "crushed by violence" is clearly false given that their demands for constitutional reform were implemented by the government.

To avoid any semantic confusion, I have assumed that the only political significance the term "crushed by violence" can have, is in referring to the successful suppression of a popular movement.

In Syria this didn't happen because as I said, the Syrian democrats got what they wanted.

That's my point.

How about the sanctions question?

'Are you, at the very least, willing to voice your opposition to the sanctions on Syria?'.


Noam Chomsky:

Since you *know* I wasn’t referring to the Syrian democrats as a “poor joke,” then why did you write: “If you sympathise with those Syrian democrats, why would you denounce their achievements as a "poor joke"?

Jay Tharappel:

Hi Noam,

Because they're two completely different claims.

We both know you didn't refer to the Syrian democrats as a "poor joke".

However the question I asked was why you appear to denounce their *achievements* as a "poor joke".

Those *achievements* referring to the series of constitutional reforms I mentioned earlier.

Again, my actual contention was stated in my first long post.

"The Syrian democrats, far from being "crushed by violence",have won most of their demands."

Given that the Syrian democrats got the reforms they wanted, clearly your claim that their movement was supposedly "crushed by violence" is plainly false.

Sorry for any ambiguity on my part.



Noam Chomsky:

“'if you sympathise with those Syrian democrats, why would you denounce their achievements as a "poor joke"?

If you’re not capable of recognizing simple and unambiguous facts, don’t waste your time and mine.

Jay Tharappel:

What "simple and unambiguous facts" are you referring to now?

Are they "facts" about Syria's reforms that validate your "poor joke" claim?

If so, why haven't you detailed any?

Again, my ORIGINAL contention is that the following claim of yours is false:

"the Syrian democrats who protested repression and then were crushed by violence"

In response to this, I am saying that the Syrian democrats were NOT crushed by violence because they ended up getting ALL the reforms they wanted.

You then began accusing me, of accusing you, of referring to the Syrian democrats themselves as a "poor joke", whichI NEVER did.

Please focus on my ORIGINAL contention.



Noam Chomsky:

The simple and unambiguous facts are that you claimed that I denounced the achievements of the Syrian democrats as“poor joke,” when you knew perfectly well that I was referring to the Assad regime.

For reasons that are you’re business, you continue to pretend otherwise.

Until you can bring yourself to face simple and unambiguous facts, there’s no point pretend to have a correspondence.

Jay Tharappel:

Hi Noam,

Some clarification.

I asked you: "What do you make of the efforts made by theSyrian address the legitimate grievances of the Syrian people...?"

To which you replied: "The efforts were a poor joke" and followed that up with "the Syrian democrats who protested repression...were crushed by violence".

In response, I stated that I disagreed with your claim that the Syrian democrats were "crushed by violence" on the basis that their demands were acceded to by the government.

After making this point, I asked you "if you sympathise with those Syrian democrats, why would you denounce their achievements as a"poor joke"?"

The *purpose* of this question was to highlight the contradiction in your argument.

My premise (backed up by facts) is that the Syrian democrats got what they wanted, which, if true, undermines your claim that the government's efforts were "a poor joke".

If you're saying the efforts were a "a poor joke" because of the Syrian government's military measures, then it's my contention that one shouldn't conflate the Syrian democrats with the armed insurgency.

Why? Because the former wanted merely to reform the state (and they succeeded) whereas the latter still want to overthrow the state (and replace it, I'd argue, with something worse than the existing government).

As such, your claim that the "Syrian democrats" were "crushed by violence" is wrong for TWO reasons.

Firstly because the Syrian democrats got the reforms they wanted.

Secondly because the Syrian democrats were NOT the targets of the government's military operations. This source details my reasoning:

I appreciate your willingness to discuss these issues.



Noam Chomsky:

Sorry, but there isn’t the slightest contradiction, just your falsification, which is, again, simple and unambiguous. As you now recognise, my statement that “The efforts were a poor joke” referred to your claims about the Syrian government. You then asked why I denounce the achievements of Syrian democrats as a poor joke.

That’s straight, simple, unambiguous falsification. If you can’t accept that much, there’s no point pretend to have a correspondence.

Jay Tharappel:

Yes, we've clarified this a few times now.

I accept that there's a difference, at least semantically between your denouncing the government's reform efforts as a"poor joke", and my inference that this in turn amounted to you denouncing the achievements of Syrian democrats.

However, the underlying*substance* of my inference was that the Syrian democrats got the reforms they wanted, and as such, the government's efforts cannot be considered a "poor joke".

My main point however was that your claim that the "Syrian democrats" were "crushed by violence" is wrong.

You seem unwilling to address this point.


Noam Chomsky:

I’m sorry, it it’s not a difference“at least semantically.” It’s simply a straight falsehood. And there’s no possible inference of the kind you mention.

Since you don’t want to enter into a discussion, I shouldn’t bother answering your “main point,” which is incorrect,severely, as you can easily learn from the correspondents who do the best workin the area: Patrick Cockburn, Charles Glass, Jonathan Steele, others. If you want to debate them, contact them. But I think I can predict that if you refuse to acknowledge simple and unambiguous facts, they won’t even bother responding.

Jay Tharappel:

Hi Noam,

It's not a falsehood if you accept the argument that the Syrian democrats got what they wanted, and as such, that their"achievements" match the efforts of the Syrian government.

This would also mean you can't simply write off the Syrian government's efforts as a "poor joke" if those efforts matched the demands of the Syrian democrats.

Whether I believe I adequately qualified my statement or whether it's a falsehood as you allege is entirely peripheral to my main point, and as such doesn't preclude entering into a discussion about my main point.

In response to my main point, you've merely asserted that I'm wrong, and then appealed to the authority of three correspondents who apparently disagree with me, although I doubt you know their arguments.

That you couldn't, and still can't provide any reasons of your own suggests that you're really not familiar with this topic.

Do you even know what the new constitutional laws are for the licensing of new political parties?


Noam Chomsky:

If you were capable of rising to a minimal level of honesty, a discussion would be possible. And I would then suggest that you learn something about the topic, referring you to sources. But until you can accept the first condition, don’t waste your time and mine any further.

Jay Tharappel:

Hi Noam,

Fine, we both accept that you referred to the Syrian government's efforts as a"poor joke", not the achievements of the Syrian democrats.

That still takes nothing away from my MAIN point.

When you finally got around you addressing my main point all you could do was name three journalists, whose reports I read avidly by the way, as if that constituted an argument.

The point, which I will repeat again, is that your claim that Syrian democrats,referring more broadly to the reform movement, was "crushed by violence is false for two reasons.

Firstly, it was not crushed in any serious political sense because all the major demands of this movement were addressed through major constitutional reform.

Secondly, those Syrian democrats cannot be conflated with the armed insurgency.The Syrian state has targeted the latter, not the former.

To be sure, there was a well-documented incident in Maarat Al-Nu'man in Idlib where state security was allegedly responsible for killing protestors.

The local government then struck a deal with the protestors and removed four hundred security personnel from the town and confined the remaining 90 police/army personnel to their barracks.

Five thousand people marched in peacefully, but this time they were joined by armed men, initially with pistols, then with"rifles and rocket-propelled grenade launchers held by men with heavy beards in cars and pick-ups with no registration plates"

[See 'Syria caught in crossfire of extremists: Pro-democracy demonstrators inSyria fear that armed jihadis are provoking much of the latest bloodshed' by Hala Jaber, Sunday Times, 26/06/14]

This incident, and many others like it, of peaceful protests calling for reforms being infiltrated by armed insurgents who used them to stage attacks against state forces, which then elicits a predictable violent military response, have definitely happened, but the Syrian democrats were not the targets.

Again what was your response to me?

To tell me to go read the works of Patrick Cockburn, Charles Glass, andJonathan Steele, as if that constituted an argument.

So yes, to borrow your own words, if you were capable of rising to a minimal level of honesty, a discussion would be possible.


Noam Chomsky:

Glad to know that you accept the unambiguous fact.

If you don’t agree with the few people who are following the situation closely,and have excellent reputations for accuracy, then by all means communicate with them to explain to them why they are wrong.

Jay Tharappel:

When did I say I don't agree with them?

Again, all you've done is allege that they disagree with me without so much as pointing to an article of theirs to back up your argument that"the Syrian democrats who protested repression and then were crushed by violence".

As I said before, I've read their reports, especially those of Cockburn and Glass, and none of them come close to implying, as you have, that theSyrian government's reform efforts are a "poor joke".

Take for example the reforms that led to last year's Presidential elections, Cockburn writes:

"The presidential election – which Mr Assad will inevitably win –is a public rejection of demands by the opposition and its foreign backers that the should leave power."

The implication from Cockburn being that the elections demonstrate the will of the Syrian people. If he thought they were a "poor joke" as you've done, he would have questioned the election's relevance if not its validity.

So no, I don't need to communicate them to disagree with you.

What *are* your opinions regarding the reforms implemented by the Syrian government?

Surely you've got a better answer than "poor joke".


Noam Chomsky:

When Cockburn says that he will “inevitably win” he means that they’re a poor joke.

If you think you agree with them about the “reforms,” then write to them to express your thanks for their praise for Assad and his reforms.

Jay Tharappel:

Hi Noam,

How can you infer such an interpretation from Cockburn?

Especially given that he follows "which Mr Assad will inevitably win" with "is a public rejection of demands by the opposition and its foreign backers that he should leave power".

For an election result to represent a "public rejection" of anything implies that it represents the will of the electorate.

Syria's presidential election was the culmination of the reforms in that it necessarily had to come after a constitutional plebiscite and parliamentary elections.

So as I said before, if Cockburn thought the reforms (which culminated in presidential elections) were a "poor joke" as you've done, he would have questioned the election's relevance if not its validity.

You said: "If you think you agree with them about the “reforms,” then write to them to express your thanks for their praise for Assad and his reforms."

Why should I?

Also, I never stated that these journalists praised Assad, only that, unlike you, they don't view the Syrian government's reform efforts as a "poor joke".

So tell me, will you be voicing your opposition to the sanctions on Syria?

Jay Tharappel:

Actually Noam, now that I've read it again, I *could* be wrong in my interpretation.

By "public rejection" Cockburn *could* be saying that the presidential elections are a means by which the Syrian government publicly repudiates the "demands by the opposition and its foreign backers that he should leave power."

This secondary interpretation doesn't however add credence to your interpretation that Cockburn considers the election a "poor joke" so you still have some explaining to do.


Noam Chomsky: 

Sorry, but I have no explaining to do. If you’re interested in coming to understand Cockburn’s views, you know how to proceed.

Noam Chomsky:

Glad that you began to understand, as your later letter indicates. If you want to proceed, you know how.

Jay Tharappel:

Hi Noam,

Still, my secondary interpretation doesn't validate your interpretation now does it?

You claimed the Syrian government's reform efforts were a "poor joke" and STILL are unable to back this up with your own reasoning.

I'm happy to leave it there.

Thank you for taking the time to discuss these issues with me, and have a nice day.


Noam Chomsky:

To translate to English, you are unwilling to check the validity either of your belief or of your interpretations of the writings of serious correspondents on the scene. Your problem, not mine.

More than happy to leave it there. And, incidentally, I didn’t discuss these issues with you, for reasons you know.


Monday, 5 January 2015


By James Stuart

Lefties, especially trots, like to mock Hoxhaists. And I certainly have my own differences with them. But how many SWP or Class War members are putting their lives on the line and fighting ISIS/Daesh? Oh thats right, none, because they were all cheering for the other side. Push comes to shove, most of them couldn't fight sleep. But doesn't stop them spitting on the sacrifice of others. "Well, Stalinists, innit? Grave diggers of the revolution. Wanna buy a paper?"

Turkish MLKP fighters in Kobane, Kurdistan. Much respect comrades.

"Comrade Sibel Bulut (Sarya Özgür/ Eylem Deniz), a party combatant, has become immortal fighting the ISIS gangs at the southern front of Kobane. Comrade Sarya's path of life began in 1986 in Dersim and has risen to immortality after revolutionary works in different areas of struggle.

Our comrade Sarya, who was in Cizire at that time, was one of the first, that followed the call of our party 'Participate in this revolution. Defend this revlution. Answer the call of Kobanê. Mobilize yourselves.'

Our comrade Sarya said 'It's each honourable person's task to stand at Kobanê's side. Standing by Kobanê and its people is the duty of every person with self respect and conscience. As a communist, I need to be right in the midst of this fair struggle' and saying so had been fighting as a volunteer since the 16th October 2014 in Kobanê.

Our comrade Sarya defended the revolution and hoisted our party's banner. She was a communist combatant of our struggle for dignity and freedom, which we love so much that we die for it. Just as the fallen comrades Serkan and Paramaz she was a soldier of the great and fair cause. She was one of the female representatives of self-sacrifice, as the martyrs Arin Mirxan, Yasemin and Güneş before her.

Sacrificing her life she left us an honourable heritage as well as her weapons, which we will carry on to victory. She showed the whole world that there is nothing more valuable than dignity and freedom."