Saturday, 18 February 2017


Ecuador's Correa Calls for Latin American Unity Against Trump

TeleSur English

President Rafael Correa said the region needs to stand together to fight discrimination and human rights violations.

Ecuadorean President Rafael Correa said Monday that Latin America needs to respond with a strong front and united speech against the anti-immigration measures of U.S. President Donald Trump.

Correa said there needs to be "a regional stand to defend the main type of mobility, which is human mobility, the defense of human rights, reminding the United States that they have been a country of migrants," said Correa in an interview with Spain's Cadena Ser.

The president said that the region is "still missing a consolidated and head-on speech to respond to policies" created by Trump.

Correa is in the midst of his last international tour before ending his presidential term in May. Ecuadoreans will choose a new president on Feb. 19, as well as members of the National Assembly.

"It is impressive what is happening, there will be hard times ahead," said Correa, referring to Trump's policies since his arrival in the White House, including the ban on travelers from seven Muslim-majority countries and the construction of a border wall with Mexico.

Correa said that “there are also opportunities" in the recent protests against Trump's decrees in the U.S. that "haven’t been seen since the Vietnam War or the civil rights struggle."

Correa signed Saturday a Human Mobility Law that guarantees the rights of migrants and ensures that nobody will be dubbed or treated as "illegal" based solely on their immigration status.

According to the government, there are currently about 200,000 Ecuadoreans who are in an irregular situation in the United States.


How did Corbyn come to be loyal to Brexit? The very short version: 

Corbyn is in an english left group that basically are left british nationalists, this includes most of the trade union leaders he is close to including len mcluskey, it includes his closest political advisers and colleagus people like seamus milne (who I was friends with before), andrew murray and other. for many decades they have campaigned against the EU, played up a 'socialist' version of british nationalism that says that 'migration needs to be controlled', 'british jobs for british workers' etc.

Keep in kind that I was a national student advisor for Arthur Scargill, who, while out of politics in any meaningful way for decades, is nonetheless the greatest left-wing english socialist (nationalist) left, and I campaigned on his party's policies in the early 2000s which was clearly british nationalist, FOR immigration controls, and was basically competing for the far right back then, the northern racists were of course voting for the fascist BNP and increasingly ukip back then, that has come to full fruition with Corbyn competing with the far right for these votes. Of course in such a competition the far right ALWAYS wins.

Now Corbyn was a degree or two outside of this as he was an activist MP who wanted to make everyone, the left nationalists, the liberal nationalists and migrant communities happy. Including supporting head choppers (death squads like Moazzam Begg) and those getting getting head-chopped (Kurds) at the same time!

As Corbyn came into the leadership of the Labour Party, he has decided to go along with this left brit nationalist group.

Only the far left loyalists of Corbyn think he did a good job in the referendum on brexit, everyone else knows that he was 'hedging his bets', its an open secret that him and his group wanted to send a message to their core group - northern racist white working class older men - that they are not really against brexit / anti-EU and they really supported brexit. (By the by: this is why ken loach made a film about older northern white man, and not a film about uniting people with migrants.)

At 6am on the morning of 34 June when brexit won, Corbyn demanded the triggering of article 50, which is an advocacy of the fastest brexit track possible. He finally exposed his political position, but the Corbyn left are still largely in denial while also many of them are indulging themselves in british nationalism and doing so in an attempt of doing it guilt free, they have cuddly corbyn promoting a far right british nationalist project, so nothing to worry about!

Corbyn has gradually since June 24 2016 dropped defending migrants, dropped defending freedom of movement, and now he doesnt even talk about anti-racism anymore.

Brexit is a major political disaster and even sections of the ruling classes know this, hence Blair's comments. We have a similar fall out in the usa amongst the ruling factions over trump fascism.

Blair and Kenneth Clarke understand how disastrous brexit is, from the point of view of a traditional more stability-oriented ruling class faction, hence they are talking up against brexit racism, with Kenneth Clarke comparing in parliament Corbyn's leadership to the politics of Enoch Powell, a infamous far right Tory politician known for his anti-immigrant “Rivers of Blood” speech:

“If he was here he would probably find it amazing to believe that his party had become eurosceptic and rather mildly anti-immigrant in a very strange way in 2016.”


6 years ago today in the midst of a western and Qatari and Saudi media led frenzy of instability against Tunisia and Egypt that has brought nothing but misery, division and near societal collapse to these countries (despite sociopaths calling it something good or a 'spring' even in their twisted morbid minds), Libya saw in Benghazi and Bayda and Derna the start of a NATO led and directed horror story. Supremacist political forces initiated an armed insurrection supported and then led by NATO totally, its first acts were killing Libyan police and armed forces, stealing weapons, and then lynching a load of Black / dark skinned people, literally stringing them up and chopping them up in public squares with hundreds of supremacist supporters cheering it all on, much of it is recorded here.  I have reported on it too in 2011 here

Shortly after British SAS were caught in Eastern Libya, and within weeks Fidel Castro told us that NATO was going to attack Libya, this was Castro's signal to us to mobilise, instead the western left including Andrew Murray, Kate Hudson, Lindsey German, John Rees and Chris Nineham of the so-called 'stop the war coalition' backed NATO's supremacist proxy forces in Libya for that whole year and refused to engage in what the anti NATO Libyan community here in England or in Libya had to say. Here is an exchange with John Rees from 2011 where he openly justifies and supports NATO in Libya.

I was one of the only people based in the west reporting on this from my three trips to Libya during the war and trying to get people to engage with the realities. People were in a drugged yo stupor off the Arab Sting, and most happily championed NATO's lynching head chopping 'revolution'. The Libyan people mobilised in an amazing renewal of revolutionary struggle, however Tripoli was overrun in a bloody offensive by massive NATO special forces and helicopter gunships that mowed down many of our comrades and resistance. 

Aforementioned western lefty sell outs continued to then support the human organ eating death squads in Syria also, but they changed their tune slightly after the 'jihadi john' head chopping was reported in the media and after John Rees sat next to Asim Qureshi from 'Cage' organisation where he called Mohammed Emwazi - 'Jihadi John' so-called - a "beautiful man", you can see Rees squirming somewhat while he says that here.

Until today stop the war leadership still support death squads through supporting 'Cage' organisation leader Moazzam Begg who went to Libya after NATO destroyed it to see his colleague and long time western military intel agent Hakim Belhaj who was a leading lyncher for NATO in Libya throughout 2011, helping NATO in a junior role to overthrow Tripoli, here is Belhaj with an English 'journalist' during Tripoli's overthrow.

Begg went on to go to Syria to assist death squads there in a visit formally green lighted by mi5, something he admits readily, he also sent love letters to Daesh leader Baghdadi in a bid to position himself as some kind of broker in relation to Daesh and their head chopping, no jokes see here from 5p which is a death squad platform.

The destruction of Libya directly through the 'Feb 17' NATO rebellion has led to so much death and collapse right across northern and Sahel and sun Sahara Africa, if has led to many things Gaddafi said it would not lease the proliferation of Daesh and Al Qaeda death squads, and massive plunging poverty for Libyans and others, it was the start of what has led to the growth of fascism in the west with Brexit, Le Pen and Trump, as the NATO wars on Libya and Syria meant that that fascism NATO exported to these countries has returned in so many ways to Europe itself.

And to date NO ONE in the west has made amends for their shameful support of this massive NATO destruction of Africa and their role in either championing it at the time or their complicity with their silence and inaction. For my part and that of my comrades, as ever to every actually existing global struggle against imperialism and NATO: we stay loyal and committed to Libya in its quest for unity, independence, socialism, Pan Africanism and Pan Arabism. 

Wednesday, 15 February 2017


Brief History of Global [but mostly western] Anti-Fascism

Anti-Fascist News 
By Alexander Reid Ross

Fascism, as we know it today, came amid the sweeping nationalism accompanying World War I. Numerous leftists shifting from left to right ported their watchwords of solidarity and insurrection over to militant formations designed to destroy the left and seize power. They were not unopposed in this mobilization of a left and right so-called “revolution.” This is the story of the revolutionaries, renegades, and warriors who broke with the powerful movement toward totalitarianism and continue to struggle as partisans for freedom and equality.

Fascism did not emerge on its own as a full cloth ideology. It developed from a complex history of anti-Semitism, ultranationalism, reactionary Catholicism, and the conditions of economic exploitation of industrial workers and peasants. At the turn of the 20th Century, the Dreyfus Affair marked the flash point for violent confrontations between left and right as ultranationalist anti-Semites framed a Jewish army captain for conspiring with the hated Prussians. The right relied on leagues and sporting clubs through which they could practice for physical confrontation while developing the mannerisms and affectations that would attempt to refine an otherwise blunt and stupid politics. Long at odds over the question of anti-Semitism, the left organized through associations, syndicates, and humanitarian organizations to support Dreyfus, organizing an important consensus that would affect future political positions.

In Germany, a financial crisis led to pogroms against Jews. Pogroms throughout Eastern Europe also led to the strengthening of Jewish workers’ defense organizations like the Jewish Bund. Tough men of the Jewish working class, the Bund stewarded marches for dignity and better wages, organized self-defense trainings, and developed autonomous aid networks within Jewish sectors. While Vladimir Lenin criticized the Bund for representing stop-gap politics, the Bolshevik wing of the Russian Social Democratic Labor Party went about building combat groups that would resist the counter-revolutionary forces of the Black Hundreds.[1] The anarchists of Russia went a similar direction, including Voline of the St. Petersburg Soviet, Uncle Vanya who helped organize workers’ insurrections from Samara to Ukraine.

But Fascism emerged through the breakdown in the Dreyfusard consensus, the alliance of ultranationalists and leftists around the notion of destroying liberal parliamentarianism, and in doing so managed to bypass the strongest left-wing resistance in the early stages. Instead, through the aesthetics of futurism, the charismatic leadership of Mussolini, and the syncretic positions of national syndicalism, Fascists presented themselves as marking the radical edge that could finally penetrate the armor of moderate politics. Recognizing the danger, anarchists like Errico Malatesta called for a broad antifascist front that discarded political differences in favor of resisting the vicious hierarchies and empty rhetoric of Fascists. Marxists, under the leadership of Antonio Gramsci, would brook no compromise with the anarchist-supported Arditi del Popolo (Army of the People), hoping instead for a mass insurrection of armed workers. With the resistance internally fragmented and the left under assault by an increasing alliance between the Fascists and the state, Mussolini entered government supported by a mass movement and the Fascist blackshirts continued to assassinate and apprehend leaders like Malatesta and Gramsci.

In Germany, the left stood similarly fractured. World War I ended through a massive revolution that started in a Naval mutiny and resulted in the abdication of the Kaiser, as well as a Bavarian insurrection that deposed the local government and established a “Soviet” led by anarchists and communists. Having voted to enter the war, the Social Democrats rose to power through popular left-wing sentiment and compromises with the far right—in particular, the Freikorps, a paramilitary force of army veterans who the Social Democrats would deploy to brutally crush a Communist uprising in Berlin led by Rosa Luxemberg and Karl Liebknecht and the Bavarian Soviet, as well as a renewed uprising in the industrial Ruhr Valley led by a militant force calling itself the Red Army of the Ruhr. It was only after the defeat of these three significant left-wing revolutionary uprisings that Hitler would rise in a beerhall in Munich and pretend to lead a “national revolution” of Freikorps and other paramilitary rightist factions under Nazi guidance.

The left scrambled to the defensive to set Hitler back on his heels, setting up its own combat groups (Kampfbunds) and attacking Nazi meetings and events. Even the Social Democrats, observing the fearsome rise of the brutal Stormtroopers, set up the militant Reichsbanner, but the leadership had already granted significant powers to the Freikorps and the SA simply heightened the tensions. By the early 1930s, the German Communist Party had adopted a defeatist attitude, marking the Social Democrats as “social fascists” and supporting Nazi strikes and parliamentary efforts like a significant “no confidence” vote in the Reichstagg. Those who risked life and limb in the streets fighting Nazis were placed in vulnerable positions by their own leadership. When Hitler took power, the aspirations of the Communist Party’s “First Hitler, then us!” strategy proved totally foolish, as the Nazis immediately demobilized the Kampfbunds, including Antifaschistische Aktion, and sent the left to concentration camps.

In France and the UK, resistance to fascism also manifested in street battles and strategic competitions over urban space. Famously, the UK antifascists repeatedly broke up the meetings of the pugilistic cad, Oswald Mosley, refusing to yield London’s working class East End to fascist influence by halting a march in an event that came to be known as the Battle of Cable Street. Meanwhile, French fascists asserted that they had created fascism by destroying the Dreyfusard consensus, and paramilitary formations emerged across the far right enlisting, paradoxically, the support of anti-Jewish North African Arabs in exchange for money and services. While members of the French radical left “drifted” toward fascism vis-a-vis the “neo-socialism” of Marcel Dèat and the populism of former Communist Party central committee member, “le Grande Jacques” Doriot, others confronted fascists, blockaded meeting venues, and launched antifascist boycotts. Unlike in Germany and Italy, the French and English left was able to prevent voluntary capitulation to fascism—perhaps in part as a result of the rejection of the defeatist line that “bourgeois socialists” and “radical liberals” and even moderate conservatives should be considered as bad as, if not worse than, fascism.

Perhaps nowhere was fascism more heavily contested, however, than in Spain where fascism had a significant following. In 1930, a military coup by Miguel Primo de Rivera adopted fascism “spiritually,” but generally reproduced the old 19th Century authoritarian conservatism and bare-knuckles corporatism. While General Miguel fell from grace, however, his son José Antonio Primo de Rivera, also known simply as José Antonio, rose to prominence and supported a purer form of fascist dictatorship led by the militant forces of a fascist Falange that would defeat leftism in the streets. Leftists, of course, rose to the challenge and fought tooth and nail against the fascism of Spanish aristocrats that situated itself within the working class through an alliance with the Committees of the National Syndicalist Offensive under the leadership of Ramiro Ledesma Ramos. Street fighting between the left and the Falange-National Syndicalist alliance grew extremely intense, with assassinations and beatings spilling over onto left-wing sympathizers and liberals. Following the election of the left-wing Popular Front, leftist police assassinated a leader of the reactionary Catholic conservatives named Calvo Sotelo, sparking an outcry that led, in no small part, to the invasion of Spain by the colonial military forces of Francisco Franco. Although the Popular Front incarcerated José Antonio, the Falange formed a significant, loyal, and ferocious section of Franco’s army, which met with the valiant opposition of anarchist militias hoping not only to defend the Republic but to further the revolutionary interests of self-determination, land, and liberty. Under the anarchist leader, Buenaventura Durruti, the Iron Column marched against Franco’s invading force along with a quasi-Trotskyist forces of POUM, the liberal fighters under Largo Caballero and the Stalinist-backed Communist Party. However, supplied by corporate powers across the Atlantic and tacitly enabled through Allied neutrality and appeasement, the armies of Franco beat down the antifascist resistance with Hitler and Mussolini’s overt assistance.

When Hitler’s tanks rolled into France the next year, it found relatively little resistance. Partisan forces emerged from Italy to Greece and across the Eastern Front. These partisans worked to sabotage fascist communications and supply lines, assassinate officials, and develop antifascist networks, workers’ associations, and societies to propagandize against their respective repressive regimes. After Mussolini and Hitler invaded Greece in 1941, leftists brokered a tenuous truce with ultranationalist “Hellenic Patriots” who supported parafascist dictator Ioannis Metaxas. Fighting persisted in Ukraine and the Balkans, as well, where Nazi-allied forces committed some of the worst atrocities of the war. When the US invaded Italy and occupied Rome in 1943, the partisans of the North engaged in fierce behind-the-lines struggle against the likes of the Black Prince Borghese who remained faithful to Mussolini’s government-in-exile, the Republic of Salò. Russia marshaled and lost tens of millions of people in the explicitly antifascist war to defeat the Reich and the ideology it represented, while the fascist-friendly Allen Dulles set up the architecture for a post-war insurgency inclusive of fascist “stay-behinds” fighting against Soviet influence in Europe.

The tenuous peace between partisans unravelled after the War and the collapse of the Reich, at which point the British supported the Hellenic forces’ military struggle against the Communist partisans with whom they had fought only months prior. Similarly, in Italy, the US’s Office of Strategic Services, later eclipsed by the CIA, recruited Fascist agents to oppose the left-wing Popular Front in the 1946 elections, continuing over the next decades to support links between Fascist networks within the government and clandestine terrorist groups targeting public infrastructure in a “Strategy of Tension” designed to pull the population toward the security state. These fascist groups like Black Prince Borghese’s Fronte Nazionale, which included the Nuovo Ordine and Avanguardia Nazionale, were schooled by the CIA-supported Greek military dictatorship that took power in 1967, and attempted on at least one occasion the similar overthrow of Italy’s Christian Democratic Party, were opposed in the streets by a mass movement of left-wing workers, students, and women in the tradition of antifascist partisans.

In France, Franco-sympathizer Pierre Poujade extended the street fights of the 1930s into the 1950s with his radical right populist party of the Union de Défense des Commerçants et Artisans, which was heavily contested by the left. The far-right paramilitary group Organisation Armée Secrète emerged out of the far-right hatred of the post-War Fourth Republic and resistance to decolonization in Algeria to plague the left and set the violent standard for fascist militants organized through groupusculeslike Occident and the Groupe Union Défense. These organizations met opposition in Algeria by the militants of the Front de Libération National and in France by militant ultras. A former Poujadist named Jean-Marie Le Pen, who had purportedly lost the use of one eye in a particularly brutal street fight before rising to lead the new National Front in 1972. Some three years later, a bomb blast ripped through Le Pen’s Paris apartment, followed just two years later by a car bomb that killed Le Pen’s close ally, “national revolutionary” François Duprat.

In Italy, the assassinations, fights, and bombings between left and right grew so intense that the period between 1969 and the late 1970s became known as the Years of Lead. The “Hot Summer” of 1969, in which a wave of factory strikes and occupations spread to the general population, sparking the Autonomia movement, was followed by an explosion in Milan’s Piazza Fontana set by fascists to frame the left. Police rounded up anarchists and leftists by the hundreds, including a railroad worker named Giuseppe Pinelli who died in police custody, producing a massive outcry throughout Italy. As fascists persisted in attempting to infiltrate left-wing groups and co-opt the leadership of Autonomia, ongoing clashes and bomb blasts rocked Italy, which spilled into other countries as Italian fascists laying low abroad helped to spread their strategies and tactics elsewhere.

In Germany, opposition to fascism was similarly complicated by post-war “stay-behind” networks. Like Italy, the post-war order in Germany maintained tacit bonds between state entities like the Bundesnachrechtendienst and non-state fascist groupuscules. However, fascist groups like the Sozialistische Reichsparty faced a ban, making overt organizing difficult. At the same time, veterans organizations became breeding grounds for Holocaust denial and Nazi propaganda, and anti-immigrant sentiment was not unusual. During the 1980s, a strong horizontalist resistance movement grew in opposition to nuclear weapons, environmental destruction, and economic exploitation called the Autonomen movement, which targeted and was targeted by fascists seeking to generate mass resistance to immigration, refugees, and multicultural society. Partly in response to the Autonomen movement and the government’s ban on certain fascist parties, “national revolutionaries” developed the strategy of “Freie Kameradschaften”—small groups of 3 to 5 people committed to engaging in political violence against the homeless, disabled people, migrants, non-whites and non-straight people. Through the Freie Kameradschaften, fascists began to appropriate the strategies of the Autonomen movement, including donning black clothing and black masks to maintain anonymity. Yet they met with violent resistance from the leftist Autonomen movement, which produced a new wave of horizontalist Antifaschistische Aktion groups.

As with the Italian terrorists who fled through Franco’s Spain to promote fascism elsewhere in the world, Nazi war criminals like Klaus Barbie had escaped to areas of Latin America and worked to foster a new international movement. Throughout Latin America, and most notoriously in Argentina where the fascist-organized Alianza Anticommunista Argentina fought a “Dirty War” against left-wing Peronists known as Montoneros, fascists helped train and create anti-left paramilitary groups that instigated the conditions for Civil War and military coup. These forces found militant opposition in the form of national liberation armies like the Frente Farabundo Martí para la Liberación Nacional in El Salvador who engaged in a long-term revolutionary war against paramilitaries who committed such heinous acts as assassinating the Archbishop Romero during mass and raping then murdering a group of Catholic nuns. At the same time, fascist networks oriented through Salazar’s Portugal strove to maintain colonialism in African countries like Guinea-Bissau, where anti-colonial forces under Amílcar Cabral fought them.

Such far-right and colonial networks developed and/or supported by fascists found happy allies within the US government, including the fairly extensive intelligence networks created by fascist propagandist Willis Carto, Roy Cohn and Lyndon Larouche. Intimately tied to the former’s large base of supporters was a rising fascist militant named David Duke, who mass marketed a new generation of Ku Klux Klan violence as “white civil rights.” Having fallen off after its height in the 1920s, the Klan received a boost of support from the White Citizens Councils and the populist politician George Wallace in the 1960s; however, Wallace’s events faced violent resistance from community groups, and FBI support for integration hindered the Invisible Empire’s growth. The resurgent Klan found powerful opposition in the form of civil society groups and new anti-racist formations.

As the Southern Poverty Law Center came into effect, working within the courts and peaceful social organizations to promote diversity against hate, left-wing radicals developed more militant strategies for opposing the rise of fascism. Targeting racism through militant class struggle, the Workers’ Viewpoint Organization attempted to organize an inter-racial textile workers’ union to oppose the Klan in Greensboro, North Carolina. However, the Klan fought back, uniting with area fascists for a 1979 ambush against an anti-Klan rally that left five dead and five wounded. Other left-wing groups like the John Brown Anti-Klan Committee and the Prairie Fire Organizing Committee emerged with the desire to expose fascism within the US and to defeat racism through militant class struggle, and met with varying levels of success in the Midwest amid the rise of fascist skinheads.

As well as Latin American military dictatorships, Italian fascists also influenced the English far-right, bringing the “political soldier” concept to a group of fascists that decided to splinter front the National Front and organize skinheads as the frontline shock troops of a new fascist movement. These fascist skinheads mobilized through a network of Oi! punk bands and publications, spreading throughout North America and meeting an increasingly organized resistance by the mid-1980s. Anti-racist skinheads organized into Anti-Racist Action, Red and Anarchist Skinheads, and local manifestations of Skinheads Against Racial Prejudice, among other groups, to confront fascists attempting to create a violent mass movement against non-straight, non-white people in society. As fascist skinheads were beaten out of urban areas by anti-racists, fascist strategy moved toward the militia and Patriot movement during the 1990s, which provided a new kind of “leaderless resistance” based in rural areas where the left had a less formidable presence.

These small bands of violent fascists often identified with the fascist skinhead movement also appeared in France under the Parti Nationaliste Française et Européen and Troisième Voie through the related paramilitary formation, the Jeunneses Nationalistes Révolutionnaires, who at times stewarded marches of Le Pen’s Front National. With Le Pen increasingly pressuring the centrist parties at the polls, the French Socialist Party created the popular S.O.S. Racisme group, which promoted multiculturalism through large events and public gatherings. In the streets, the foot soldiers of the “national revolution” found more violent opposition from gangs like the Black Dragons and Duckie Boys. Similarly, in the UK, the large Rock Against Racism movement gave way to the Anti-Nazi League, which cultivated a mass movement against the National Front and British National Party. More confrontational and revolutionary left-wing groups also emerged like Red Action and Anti-Fascist Action, which like Anti-Racist Action joined the militant horizontal strategies and tactics of Antifaschistische Aktion. By the late 2000s, these groups and groups like them were increasingly referred to as “Antifa.”

The appropriation of Autonomen movement strategy and tactics came to a head amid the 2008 recession, when “Autonomist Nationalists” began to form black blocs from the Czech Republic to Germany and the Netherlands. The black blocs were repeated by supporters of the “CounterJihad” movement appearing in Germany as PEGIDA and in England as the English Defense League, among other places. Meanwhile, those groups have seen a rising wave of opposition, including a humiliating running battle between fascists and antifascists in Brighton that left the “March for England” in tatters. This and other events showed that groups with names like National Action and National Resistance that have emerged from Sweden to Ukraine, linking up for spontaneous street demonstrations and acts of mob violence, are virtually impossible to oppose without organized community defense.

In the US, the CounterJihad groups associated with the militia movement galvanized the anti-mosque movement of 2014, appearing outside of places of worship or community centers often with black masksarmed with assault rifles and other weapons. These formations are increasingly opposed by likewise-armed community defense groups and antifas who seek to protect non-white communities from attacks and intimidation. More recently, the alt-right has emerged in league with Donald Trump, taking much of its inspiration from the “intellectual” fascist milieu that emerged during the Years of Lead to link left and right and reproduce the conditions that led to the destruction of the Dreyfusard consensus. Where the alt-right has moved into the physical space of real life, it has been dogged by antifa opposition—as in the recent protests against Milo Yiannopolos at the University of California–Berkeley.

Fascism has never arisen without opposition through community consensus. Instead, antifascists have worked to root out fascist infiltration and “entryism” that seeks to pass as the merger of left and right, while also militantly opposing fascist marches and meetings. Where fascism obtained power, it did so through the largely through the betrayal of the organized left by its leadership, along with state collaboration with the fascists amid significant, often violent, fighting amongst left-wing groups. If, in Italy and Germany, antifascists had decided to join with powerful liberals and even conservatives to defend their communities against Blackshirts, if the Communists of Germany had not succumbed to the temptation of labelling social democrats the equivalent of fascists while completely alienating everyone outside of a particularly small section of the industrial working class, perhaps fascism might never have emerged—perhaps it would have only been a detail in the history of Italy in the 1910s. It is wise, then, to heed the warnings of history and to maintain a form of militant antifascist action based in tactical alliances and the spirit of friendship rather than vulgar self-interest and political bravado. Where fascism is proud, we must be humble. Where fascism is divisive, we must unite. Where fascism is weak, we must strike.

[1] The shock troops of the merciless anti-Jewish pogroms in Ukraine, the Black Hundreds are widely seen today as some of the earliest formations of what would become the fascist movement, and it was none other than the famous writer Fyodor Dostoevsky who, with a co-author, would set out the platform of the “conservative revolution” followed by the later melding of the German “Patriotic movement” and Marxian theorists known as the National Bolshevik wing of the Nazi Party.


Alexander Reid Ross teaches geography at Portland State University. He is the author of Against the Fascist Creep and the editor of Grabbing Back: Essays Against the Global Land Grab. His articles have appeared at sites like ThinkProgress, The Ecologist and the Cambridge University Strategic Initiative in Global Food Security. Project Censored recognized his work for Media Democracy in Action in Censored2016.


This is elder Ras Judah and I in St Paul's Bristol last night [4 Feb 2017] where an excellent Malcolm X Movement / Ujima FM / PASCF event took place with over 100 of the community present with Bob Brown the main speaker. A few weeks ago Judah was harassed outside his home in Easton by police, he is a veteran community organiser and has been a community advisor to the local police before; they said they were looking for a suspect that looked like him and demanded to know his personal details, Judah refused and then was physically assaulted by the police and then electrocuted by taser gun in his face. Thank God he is still with us. The Malcolm X Movement raised the demands that all the 60 police officers that have tasers in Bristol need to have their right to bear tasers removed immediately and permanently and our only central way to put pressure on the police for them to desist their harassment is to mobilise in mass militant civil resistance our communities.

Ras Judah and AAPRP veteran Bob Brown greet each other at the event


Le Pen: Was chatting on the phone to James Stuart (he left Facebook, was sick and tired of the amount of fascist infiltration and collaboration), and he raised an interesting thing - the disgusting sexual assault of one of our brothers by the French pigs seems to have been timed perfectly; quite understandably our youth have been showing their militant anger through some rioting etc, this in turn indirectly assists the support for the neo-nazi Le Pen for the presidency. The media is going overdrive in giving her a platform, the media including the British one is even assuming she will basically win the presidency, the opposing candidate fillon or whatever his name is, is caught up in some corruption scandal that is hardly of the height of corruption that usually goes on: just seems EVERYTHING is pointing to Le Pen winning. Even many of our own African and Asian people in the 'suburbs' / ghettoes are voting for fascism such is the collapse of our political struggles. Le Pen winning will complete the start of the beginning of new fascism on state levels, it will be the end of the EU and the start proper of a fascist vengeance and the domestic and external conflicts and imperialist wars that comes with that. And of course the left is just twiddling it's thumbs with anxiety and has immobilised itself. Through blood and struggle a new decolonial anti-imperialist left will eventually emerge, no signs of it yet though.


Isn't the worse case of 'cultural appropriation' when us Asian and African heritage people in the 'west' use our backgrounds to big us up but we either fail to defend our homelands when they are destroyed by the same west, or even when we play into a western war to destroy our homeland? Using that of your homeland to make yourself more 'cool', 'attractive' and 'authentic' but using that to get yourself a position, fame, career within the western system and support its foreign policy. Now that's perhaps not just cultural appropriation, but a real shitty thing of the highest order to do. Defend our homelands!


So proud of Iran, North Korea and China! While people in the usa and Britain march against trump but have no real impact and are unlikely to going forward as the only leadership are left of the colonial system (democrats, soros, labour and lib dems and greens), these Asian nations showed what real strategic resistance against growing fascist imperialism of trump looks like. Iran blasted a missile as a fuck you, and then the Supreme Leader initiated massive protests against Trump, then China rolled hard against trump saying China is ready for war if trump wants to aggress her, and North Korea fires a missile into the sea towards Japan just as trump sits down for a meal with Japanese president! Trump's reply on Iran is still very militaristic but relatively muted, on China he has just backed off for the time being and said he respects everything about China 😂 and on North Korea he literally says he "stands behind" his regional allies (Japan, South Korea), talk about cowardly language! Into the first month of this fascist idiots presidency, these Homelands of ours have done well to embarrass this piece of shit and get him to back off. However, this is just the very start and Trump will be looking to ratchet up war again very soon, possibly targeted at Iran or/and further destruction of Syria.


My Valentine's Diary: today was wonderful with those who I love, but that's my business not yours. What I wanted to share is two social experiences today, both took place on the top deck of public buses in West London.

1, I was about to get off my stop, and then some Black brother touched my arm behind me, I turned around, and he was speaking to a Black sister at the back of the bus. The brother turns around and says "Sukant! It's Ken" [not his real name], I didnt recognise him straight away but it was a charming Black brother in my class from high school, he has bright bright eyes, and an amazing smile, he was quite intense back in our teens, and was one who would flip if he felt the slightest affront, luckily I was never subjected to his flips! lol. The sister on the back of the bus was another classmate from high school, I greeted her and wished her the best and gave her congrats for her lovely little girl sitting next to her. K and I talked as we got off the bus for a few mins, the pain of life was evident, the joys of life is his child. He was an amazing kick boxer, but complained about his health and that he tried to train the other day and straight away his shoulder and leg hurt. I said, we are not running off sheer youth anymore, we need to eat, meditate and exercise right. I really would like to impress on our peoples that your teens and 20s are the age to get your lifestyle right for the rest of your life. Brother K and I discussed about old friends and and where they are today and he said he watched loads of my videos on youtube (interestingly, its only the working class Black friends of mine from high school who big me up on that), and we promised to connect on FB. Was a wonderful and touching greeting.

2, In the evening I got onto the top deck of the bus, and the front seats were full of Syrian children, three Syrian mothers behind them. I got to the second last seats at the back of the bus. In front of me, more Syrian boys, and two white boys behind me at the back of the bus. I noticed one of the approx 7yr old Syrian boys complained to al older Syrian boy of around 14yrs old, I only gleaned that he complains about the boys behind me. None of these Syrians seem to speak any english. So I kept a look out. The Syrian boy went back to these boys behind me a few mins later, he wanted to look at their smart phone. The smaller white boy behind me stamped his foot at the boy along with his whole body, a flinching motion which obviously scared the Syrian 7yr old and made him flinch. I gently snapped at the white boy: 'You can't do that, man! You scared him. You need to cut that out!'. The white boy is a local boy, we know each other's face from the local park etc. He looks embarrassed, and says: OK. But his friend next to him says: 'but that boy keeps annoying us all day'. All day?! They are on a bus for a short journey. I say: 'I don't care, he has done nothing wrong, he just wants to look at your phone'. The Syrian boy gives me a sad face and points to his ribs, indicating that they had poked him before. This upset me even more, so I said to the white boys: 'Listen, he is much smaller than you, so it ends'.  The white boys are put 'under manners', and the Syrian boys goes back to the older Syrian boys and gives me a few little smiles. I smile back broadly.

Bitter sweet Valentines. I love our peoples. I am totally loyal to them until the day I die, and God let my spirit continue with our peoples until total liberation.


Archbishop of Canterbury suggests Brexit 'in fascist tradition'


The archbishop of Canterbury has grouped Brexit and the election of Donald Trump with the revival of nationalism, populism and even fascism across the globe.

In his opening address at the Church of England’s synod, meeting this week in London, Justin Welby said: “There are a thousand ways to explain the Brexit vote, or the election of President Trump, or the strength in the polls in Holland of Geert Wilders or in France of Madame Le Pen and many other leaders in a nationalist, populist or even fascist tradition of politics.”

Although the C of E leader has previously suggested Trump’s politics and policies were based on fear and exclusion, his criticism went a step further by linking the US president in with far-right party leaders in Europe.

With regard to Brexit, Welby’s connection between the referendum result and far-right and neo-fascist politics is likely to infuriate those who say the vote was the outcome of social, political and economic marginalisation and exclusion rather than stemming from deep-seated nationalism.

In fact, Welby cited “the impact of globalisation economically, or marginalisation politically and of post-modernity culturally” as playing a role in the new political landscape, while saying there was no simple explanation.

The archbishop added: “That will be the material of a thousand PhDs and no consensus in the next 50 years. We are in the middle of it all and we see neither the destination nor the road we must travel.”

He added that now was “a moment to reimagine Britain, a moment of potential opportunity, certainly combined with immensely hard work and heavy lifting”. Welby said: “It is a moment of challenge, but challenge that as a nation can be overcome with the right practices, values, culture and spirit. This could be a time of liberation, of seizing and defining the future, or it could be one in which the present problems seize our national future and define us.”

The church had a significant role to play – despite its declining numbers, obliquely acknowledged by Welby – in bringing a fractured country together through its education of 1 million children in C of E schools, its presence in every community and its role in national history.

“The Church of England retains influence,” he said. “We have at present the extraordinary privilege of sitting in parliament, the remarkable gift and responsibility of educating, chaplains in every sphere of life and a role in the public life of the nation. We have a heritage of presence across England, burdensome although it may sometimes be, and the vocation of being the default point of help and support in times of trouble, or celebration in times of joy.

“In the necessary reimagination of our country we cannot dictate but we must participate. Participation means being a listening, suffering and reconciling presence, not a hectoring, self-interested one. The language of public life at present is deeply, savagely divided and may become worse. Our power is found only in selfless service and the cross.”

The opening day of the four-day synod was dominated by the issue of sexuality, with tensions between traditionalist and inclusive wings of the church evident. One synod member, the Rev Canon Simon Butler of St Mary’s Battersea, disclosed that he had received a text from another synod member a few minutes before the synod opened, which he described as “borderline harassment”.

In his speech, Welby said: “The text received by Simon Butler was an inexcusable self-indulgence by the sender; a perfect illustration of how not to act.”

Gay rights campaigners argued to extend the time allocated to debate on Wednesday a report by bishops that upholds traditional teaching on marriage as a lifelong union between a man and woman. The decision rests with Welby and John Sentamu, the archbishop of York, as the joint presidents of the synod.

There were also calls for extra debates on the government’s announcement that no more refugee children will be brought to the UK under the so-called Dubs amendment and on Trump’s executive order – now suspended – barring the entry of Syrian refugees and people from seven Muslim-majority nations to the US.

“These are matters that properly concern our synod,” said the Rev Canon Jane Charman from Salisbury. “The recent actions of the US and UK governments have a direct impact on some of the most vulnerable people in our world.” The synod was in danger of being too absorbed in internal affairs, she added.

Wednesday, 1 February 2017


Basically and very briefly:

The right wing / far right wing European nationalists have always been in the 'anti globalisation' movement since the 1990s, and western far right orgs have infiltrated third world national struggles (Iraq, Libya, Iran, Palestine, Hizbullah and others) for their own anti Jewish bullshit.

Add to this the Duginist (he was close to the national bolsheviks) Russian fascists who have RT and many other platforms.

These three forces and others (David icke, David duke, Alex jones and others) have all been gaining ground in anti imperialists circles.

The 'refugee crisis' of late summer 2015 flipped these forces together and united them into a new fascist project that has brexit and trump as their leading political projects. Most / many western far right organisations are in this spiders web of fascist alliance.


7 Reasons I am not sure I support the petition to stop Trump coming to Britain:

1. The Queen and Tory state are using this to state and posture that they are 'not as bad as Trump', this is a very old move by the brits in relation to the yanks, constantly making out they are a lesser evil: they are not, they often are worse but more covert and underhand than the yanks. It's important we reject this posture from our own globally leading genocidal british state, and take away the basis for them to posture.

2. The posture of the Queen and Tories in faking 'concern' about Trump's visit is a clever means by the Brit state to appear 'more reasonable', and make out they have some kind of rational influence on Trump, and also they are using this to confuse people, so even people on the left in england are saying: 'Trump leave our Queen alone' / 'We assert our British values over yours' - Corbyn said that! etc

3.Trump's visit is galvanising, mobilising people, creating and opening a political space for protest against all fascism: I did not want brexit and will fight it, I did not want trump and will fight it, all rising fascism has to be fought. However, now we have this, and in the context that the moves here to oppose brexit have been totally sabotaged by Corbyn's pro-brexit loyalism, but the mobilisation against Trump and against his visit here is seeing that after many years we are seeing a little bit of a pick-up in potential anti-fascist developments. Don't get me wrong, its totally leaderless, confused, liberal/left white dominated, the grassroots aren't really there, migrant communities arent really there, but its better than next to nothing of what we have had.

4. The more people mobilise against Trump, the more the pressure builds indirectly and directly against Trump's parallel project in Britain - Brexit. Let him come, let him be the spark that lights peoples growing anger against growing fascism everywhere and on every level.

5. I of course am concerned that Trump's visit here will give more succour to the fascists and their attacks. Perhaps fascist and racist attacks are increasing anyway due to two historic fascist victories so far: brexit and trump presidency? This being the case, its clear that the public argument has been won, the camp opposing trump and his visit to britain has won over those who are pro fascist and pro trump. Trump's visit here will push this mobilisation to massive levels, let it!

6. The reason why the Tories and the Queen are making posturing noises against Trump's visit is that they know the public growing anger against it is also indirectly aimed at the Queen, the Tories and Brexit. This is a really awkward situation for the British state, they can't alienate trump, as its their number one global ally in the development of the Anglo-American hostilities against China and against the rest of europe. But also, Trump visiting Britain is causing a growing public anger and mobilisation that is pushing the political momentum of the anti-Brexit forces here. I think the British state will push through Trump's visit, as Trump is not going to like being treated as a lesser usa president than Obama was by the Brits.

7. The impending visit of Trump is embarrassing the colonial left in england, which is pretty much the entire left save for a tiny tiny section of the Black Power anti-imperialist politics of a handful of Black n Brown and few white friends. The left that are getting excited about opposing trump's visit have done and will do nothing against trump's project here: brexit. People opposing trump are also increasingly angry and moving against brexit, especially cos Corbyn and the left have sold them/us out, and they will go well beyond the corrupt colonial left forces trying to leech off the rising anger against trump/brexit.


This is Corbyn's letter to Labour Party members about brexit. No mention of racism, freedom of movement, defending migrants etc. Don't be fools, understand what's going on:

Begin forwarded message:

From: Jeremy Corbyn
Date: 28 January 2017 at 19:37:13

Subject: Our approach to Brexit


Labour campaigned in last year's referendum to remain in the European Union — and nearly two-thirds of Labour voters voted to remain.

As we all know, the result was a vote to leave.

We are not a party for the 48% or the 52%, but for everyone. We have an important role to play in bringing the country together and getting the best possible deal from Brexit.

Labour respects the will of the British people. But we do not respect the will of a Tory government that is threatening to relegate Britain to a bargain basement tax haven.

That's why we will vote to trigger Article 50 in the European Union Withdrawal Bill — but also will use every means at our disposal to make sure jobs, living standards, workers' rights and environmental protections are protected in the negotiations that follow.

So Labour has tabled a series of amendments to the Bill to ensure there is meaningful parliamentary scrutiny at every stage and a vote on the final deal.

We have also tabled an amendment to build in the broad principles we need to get the best outcome for our country — including tariff-free access to the single market and an anti-tax haven amendment to make sure the Prime Minister does not use Brexit as an excuse to duck out of tackling tax avoidance and evasion.

And we will support amendments to ensure the Tories don't yet again attack people's rights at work.

This is a difficult moment for our party. We campaigned to remain, but we have to accept the democratic result.

We will be reaching out to our friends and allies in the European socialist and progressive parties to help secure an agreement that strengthens cooperation and solidarity across Europe.

We must remember that what unites us is far stronger than what divides us: our commitment to defend our NHS, to campaign against the Tories' cuts to schools and social care — and our determination to build a country in which no one and no community is left behind.

We will vote for Article 50, but we will not be giving the Tories a blank cheque on their damaging agenda for Brexit — or any of their other failures.

Best wishes,

Jeremy Corbyn MP
Leader of the Labour Party


Obviously as I have since I was 15 years old, I stand squarely with Muslims under attack of growing fascism and fascist imperialism in our homelands and in the 'west'. But how are we going to defeat this growing mess?

On the one hand we have liberal imperialist ruling factions who have directly helped to develop global fascism by exporting fascist via war to our Homelands, these same forces of Clinton/Soros/Obama etc are generating protests to destabilise trump and get back into power, there is a similar situation here with the Labour Party. We can and should engage with protests even if controlled and even financed by these enemy imperialist forces as the masses are going to these protests some knowing and many not knowing the colonial corruption of the leaders etc. Real anti imperialist socialist forces that are pro migrant / pro global south have to maintain strict independence from these 'liberal' imperialist forces.

I think the blunt reality is that while we should do all that we can to mobilise and organise, we don't and won't have any independent strategic strength now or in the future in the west do push back growing fascism, we are gonna get it more and more until escalating and then total world war. The 'west' never saw strategic capacity of anti imperialist socialist forces led by Black n Brown people apart from a very short period in the 1960s and 1970s thanks to the radicalisation off the back of 'third world' liberation struggles.

The main thing imho is maintain total independence from imperialist manipulation from Democratic Party / Labour Party, deepen Black Power revolutionary socialist history and ideological understanding. The one thing that is not happening is independent organising and mobilising of migrant communities in Britain as a result of Corbyn's pro brexit position. I don't see that changing.


Shame on my own ignorance, but it was only today when watching some children's program that I was taught that Poi is a beautiful Maori musical/cultural thing. Until now I always thought it's the embarrassing and silly thing that western white women do, usually on Thai beaches where they go as settler colonial tourists while their men rape Thai women, boys and girls. Respect to Maori people and their beautiful Poi.


Why have I changed my profile picture? 

This picture is of Shaheed Udham Singh / 'Mohammed Singh Azad', an Indian left-nationalist close to the socialist and left revolutionary nationalism in India especially in Punjab. He is a leading revolutionary martyr of the global anti british colonialist cause, and specifically a child of Punjab who sought revenge for the british colonial Amritsar Massacre of 1919 by travelling to London and shooting dead the colonial governor responsible for that massacre. He was tried in secret and then executed by the brits in london on 31 July 1940. This is a screen grab from a music video by Taru Dalmia​ and Samara Chopra​ entitled 'Frank Brazil' which was another name Udham Singh gave himself. The music video is here.

The profile picture represents our people in our Homelands having the dedication and determination to uplift and liberate our people, that we come to the 'west'. with loyalty to our peoples cause in our hearts and actions. I am not advocating anyone shooting anyone in the west, but I am advocating the spirit of resistance and loyalty, and giving honour to our martyrs; of facing the trials and tribulations and sacrifices in our struggle.

At a time of growing imperialist war and fascism, we must return and walk in the path of our martyrs, ancestors which is a path to resistance and liberation.

I dont often change my 'profile picture' on facebook. I have had the 1+4 alliance on my profile picture for some years now, that was the Syrian people, anti-imperialist organisations and the government plus Iran, Hizbullah, Iraq and Russia.

While I am still loyal to the Syrian people and Hizbullah especially in their struggle to free Syria from this Nato directed death squad demolition project, I feel it is time to re-focus due to growing political problems. In short, there are fascists on both side of the Syrian conflict, there are imperialist fascists (often thinking they are liberals) on the side of Nato and the death squads, and then there is increasing amounts of fascists *supporting* the Syrian cause, the Syrians cannot be blamed for this nor can the Syrian government wholly as they are surviving by a thread but at the same time they should know better than to surrender to fascists. Then you have the big problem of Moscow/Putin/Russia who have historically since clearly summer 2015 with the white supremacist mis-named 'refugee crisis', they have flipped into a total pro-fascist advocacy giving platform to endless racists, fascists and neo nazis on RT for example. They have united with and helped to raise fasicsts in the west, and even leaders like trump. Russia is foolish, Nato and trump is dangling carrots in front of its nose to only weaken its allies (escalating war plans and propaganda on China and Iran etc) by means of this bribe that is being extended from Washington. The cause of the Syrian, Yemeni, Libyan, Lebanese, Tunisian and ALL peoples of the region for independence, unity and liberation is a cause I am totally committed to.

However, Syria is on a slow long term imperialist burn, it has the future of what Somalia, Iraq and Afghanistan have become in recent decades. We must continue to stay loyal to Syria, but the dangers to Syria and all our Homelands and peoples is growing and that threat is emanating directly from the start of the rise of fascism from western states such as trump, brexit with others soon to follow.


Udham Singh's Last Words

On the 31st July, 1940, Udham Singh was hanged at Pentonville jail, London. On the 4th of June in the same year he had been arraigned before Mr. Justice Atkinson at the Central Criminal Court, the Old Bailey. Udham Singh was charged with the murder of Sir Michael O'Dwyer, the former Lieutenant-Governor of the Punjab who had approved of the action of Brigadier-General R.E.H. Dyer at Jallianwala Bagh, Amritsar on April 13, 1919, which had resulted in the massacre of hundreds of men, women and children and left over 1,000 wounded during the course of a peaceful political meeting. The assassination of O'Dwyer took place at the Caxton Hall, Westminster. The trial of Udham Singh lasted for two days, he was found guilty and was given the death sentence. On the 15th July, 1940, the Court of Criminal Appeal heard and dismissed the appeal of Udham Singh against the death sentence.

Prior to passing the sentence Mr. Justice Atkinson asked Udham Singh whether he had anything to say. Replying in the affirmative he began to read from prepared notes. The judge repeatedly interrupted Udham Singh and ordered the press not to report the statement. Both in Britain and India the government made strenuous efforts to ensure that the minimum publicity was given to the trial. Reuters were approached for this purpose.

The father of Udham Singh, Tehl Singh, was born into a poor peasant family and worked as a Railway Gate Keeper at the railway level crossing at Village Uppali. Udham Singh was born on 28th December, 1899 at Sanam, Sangrur District, Punjab. After the death of his father Udham Singh was brought up in a Sikh orphanage in Amritsar. The massacre at Jallianwala Bagh in 1919 was deeply engraved in the mind of the future martyr. At the age of 16 years Udham Singh defied the curfew and was wounded in the course of retrieving the body of the husband of one Rattan Devi in the aftermath of the slaughter. Subsequently Udham Singh travelled abroad in Africa, the United States and Europe. Over the years he met Lala Lajpat Rai, Kishen Singh and Bhagat Singh, whom he considered his guru and 'his best friend'. In 1927 Udham Singh was arrested in Amritsar under the Arms Act. The impact of the Russian revolution on him is indicated by the fact that amongst the revolutionary tracts found by the raiding party was Rusi Ghaddar Gian Samachar. After serving his sentence and visiting his home town, Udham Singh resumed, his travels abroad. If it was the Jallianwala Bagh massacre which provided the turning point of his life which led him to avenge the dead, it was Bhagat Singh who provided him with the inspiration to pursue the path of revolutionary struggle.

Echoes of Kartar Singh Sarabha and Bhagat Singh may be found in the words of Udham Singh in the wake of the assassination of O'Dwyer.

'I don't care, I don't mind dying. What Is the use of waiting till you get old? This Is no good. You want to die when you are young. That is good, that Is what I am doing'.

After a pause he added:

'I am dying for my country'.

In a statement given on March 13th, 1940 be said:

'I just shot to make protest. I have seen people starving In India under British Imperialism. I done it, the pistol went off three or four times. I am not sorry for protesting. It was my duty to do so. Put some more. Just for the sake of my country to protest. I do not mind my sentence. Ten, twenty, or fifty years or to be hanged. I done my duty.'

In a letter from Brixton Prison of 30th March, 1940, Udham Singh refers to Bhagat Singh in the following terms:

'I never afraid of dying so soon I will be getting married with execution. I am not sorry as I am a soldier of my country it is since 10 years when my friend has left me behind and I am sure after my death I will see him as he is waiting for me it was 23rd and I hope they will hang me on the same date as he was.'

The British courts were able to silence for long the last words of Udham Singh. At last the speech has been released from the British Public Records Office.

Shorthand notes of the Statement made by Udham Singh after the Judge had asked him if he had anything to say as to why sentence should not be passed upon him according to Law.

Facing the Judge, he exclaimed, 'I say down with British Imperialism. You say India do not have peace. We have only slavery. Generations of so called civilization has brought for us everything filthy and degenerating known to the human race. All you have to do is read your own history. If you have any human decency about you, you should die with shame. The brutality and bloodthirsty way in which the so called intellectuals who call themselves rulers of civilization in the world are of bastard blood...'

MR. JUSTICE ATKINSON: I am not going to listen to a political speech. If you have anything relevant to say about this case say it.

UDHAM SINGH: I have to say this. I wanted to protest.

The accused brandished the sheaf of papers from which he had been reading.

THE JUDGE: Is it in English?

UDHAM SINGH: You can understand what I am reading now.

THE JUDGE: I will understand much more if you give it to me to read.

UDHAM SINGH: I want the jury, I want the whole lot to hear it.

Mr. G.B. McClure (Prosecuting) reminded the Judge that under Section 6 of the Emergency Powers Act he could direct that Udham Singh's speech be not reported or that it could be heard in camera.

THE JUDGE (to the accused): You may take it that nothing will be published of what you say. You must speak to the point. Now go on.

UDHAM SINGH: I am protesting. This is what I mean. I am quite innocent about that address. The jury were misled about that address. I am going to read this now.

THE JUDGE: Well, go on.

While the accused was perusing the papers, the Judge reminded him 'You are only to say why sentence should not be passed according to law.'

UDHAM SINGH (shouting): 'I do not care about sentence of death. It means nothing at all. I do not care about dying or anything. I do not worry about it at all. I am dying for a purpose.' Thumping the rail of the dock, he exclaimed, 'We are suffering from the British Empire.' Udham Singh continued more quietly. 'I am not afraid to die. I am proud to die, to have to free my native land and I hope that when I am gone, I hope that in my place will come thousands of my countrymen to drive you dirty dogs out; to free my country.'

'I am standing before an English jury. I am in an English court. You people go to India and when you come back you are given a prize and put in the House of Commons. We come to England and we are sentenced to death.'

'I never meant anything; but I will take it. I do not care anything about it, but when you dirty dogs come to India there comes a time when you will be cleaned out of India. All your British Imperialism will be smashed.'

'Machine guns on the streets of India mow down thousands of poor women and children wherever your so-called flag of democracy and Christianity flies.'

'Your conduct, your conduct - I am talking about the British government. I have nothing against the English people at all. I have more English friends living in England than I have in India. I have great sympathy with the workers of England. I am against the Imperialist Government.'

'You people are suffering - workers. Everyone are suffering through these dirty dogs; these mad beasts. India is only slavery. Killing, mutilating and destroying - British Imperialism. People do not read about it in the papers. We know what is going on in India.'

MR. JUSTICE ATKINSON: I am not going to hear any more.

UDHAM SINGH: You do not want to listen to any more because you are tired of my speech, eh? I have a lot to say yet.

THE JUDGE: I am not going to hear any more of that statement.

UDHAM SINGH: You ask me what I have to say. I am saying it. Because you people are dirty. You do not want to hear from us what you are doing in India.

Thrusting his glasses back into his pocket, Udham Singh exclaimed three words in Hindustani and then shouted, Down with British Imperialism! Down with British dirty dogs!'

As he turned to leave the dock, the accused spat across the solicitor's table.

After Singh had left the dock, the Judge turned to the Press and said:

'I give a direction to the Press not to report any of the statement made by the accused in the dock. You understand, members of the press?'