THE LONG MARCH, AND THE LAOGAI THAT MIGHT HAVE BEEN

W

ay back in the old counter-culture days, when I was just a little hippie, one of the ubiquitous sayings that could pop up in almost any context was, "Come the revolution..." -- usually followed with some silly utopian fantasy. Or occasionally, a disfavoured person who would be "first up against the wall." I think most of us knew we were spouting nonsense, even then. But there are always exceptions.

Apparently, that old "Come the revolution" is very possibly arriving next Tuesday, though evidently about half the American population is decidedly incurious about the light-bringer who promises to change their country and transform the world. The "long march through the institutions" -- the stated strategy of the old-time radicals, after the failure of the '60's revolution -- is coming to fruition. And many others, just along for the ride, appear to be sleepwalking the last few steps.

In that world where Che! is a hero not a killer, where capitalism needs itself some smashing for a better tomorrow, and giant puppet heads are the pinnacle of political discourse, the mood must be very high these days. The old revolutionaries have marched through the institutions instead of blowing them up, and now have tenure.

Barack's friend Billy Ayers is an excellent example, even though he's quite reticent to express himself at the moment. A proud terrorist in the Brigate Rosse mold, who regrets he didn't do more, is now one of the country's foremost educators if one can believe his good press. Billy still describes himself as "part Anarchist, part Marxist," as well as "a small 'c' communist" (whatever that means).

But how many know that Billy's movement once made plans to re-educate the population after they attained power, complete with a gulag or laogai system that featured the liquidation of 10% of the population (their estimate)? That would be the un-re-educatable portion of the oppressor class, I guess. They were very serious about this.

Larry Grathwohl infiltrated the Weather Underground for the FBI.



Renowned moonbat documentarian Zombietime has acquired a rare copy of the Ayers-Dohrn et al manifesto of the day, Prairie Fire, which was dedicated to, among many others, Robert Kennedy's assassin Sirhan Sirhan. The Kennedy clan is of course now backing Ayers' long-time associate for Messiah-in-Chief.

It's worth looking over that Prairie Fire page, just to get a feel for who these people are. But for now, I'll just borrow the transcript of Grathwohl's account for those who won't click on the video:

I bought up the subject of what's going to happen after we take over the government. We, we become responsible, then, for administrating, you know, 250 million people.

And there was no answers. No one had given any thought to economics; how are you going to clothe and feed these people.

The only thing that I could get, was that they expected that the Cubans and the North Vietnamese and Chinese and the Russians would all want to occupy different portions of the United States.

They also believed that their immediate responsibility would be to protect against what they called the counter-revolution. And they felt that this counter-revolution could best be guarded against by creating and establishing re-education centers in the southwest, where we would take all the people who needed to be re-educated into the new way of thinking and teach them... how things were going to be.

I asked, well, what's going to happen to those people that we can't re-educate; that are die-hard capitalists. And the reply was that they'd have to be eliminated. And when I pursued this further, they estimated that they would have to eliminate 25 million people in these re-education centers. And when I say eliminate, I mean kill. 25 million people.

I want you to imagine sitting in a room with 25 people, most of which have graduate degrees from Columbia and other well known educational centers, and hear them figuring out the logistics for the elimination of 25 million people.

And they were dead serious.

Pajamas Media's Bob Owens recently caught up with Grathwohl and asked him if he could recall which of the Weather-people had espoused these views.

Larry Grathwohl: Conversations regarding this occurred in Cincinnati, Detroit, Flint, and Buffalo. Participants included Bill Ayers, Bernardine Dohrn, Mark Rudd, Linda Evans, Jeff Jones, and many others.

Pajamas Media: Was this merely an academic matter to them, or were they serious about killing 25 million Americans that would not bend to their political will?

Larry Grathwohl: I suppose you could consider this a purely academic discussion in that the Weathermen never had the opportunity to implement their political ends. However, I can assure you that this was not the case. There was an absolute belief that they, along with the international revolutionary movement, would cause the collapse of the United States and that they would be in charge.

Grathwohl had personally received instructions from Bill Ayers for bombs to be used in Detroit, and the necessity that they must contain shrapnel and "fire potential." One of these was to be placed on the Detroit Police Officers’ Association building. The blast would have also been catastrophic for a neighbouring restaurant, which had mainly African-American customers.

Larry Grathwohl: When I objected to Billy Ayers that more innocent people would be killed in the restaurant, he replied, "Innocent people have to die in a revolution."

Could you be friends with Bernardine Dohrn and Billy Ayers? I used to know some people who thought they were cool, but that's as close as I ever want to get. They're both right down there with Chairman Mao and Josef Stalin on my list of people I'd least like to associate with. But they have their supporters, even today. In fact, more than 4,000 "academics" have signed an "Educator Statement" in Ayers' defence (and yes, the 3 p's in 'Suppport' is in the original page title), containing this lovely turn of phrase:

It’s true that Professor Ayers participated passionately in the civil rights and antiwar movements of the 1960s, as did hundreds of thousands of Americans. His participation in political activity 40 years ago is history; what is most relevant now is his continued engagement in progressive causes, and his exemplary contribution---including publishing 16 books--- to the field of education.

And so, plotting the extermination of 25 million fellow citizens and the successful bombing campaigns which did kill innocent people (as well as some of the perpetrators) has become, in the hands of America's educators, passion for the civil rights and anti-war movement. As a supporter (too young to be a participant) of the civil rights movement at the time, I object very strongly to these "educators" likening non-violent civil rights marchers to cold blooded killers.

The last time Billy Ayers talked publicly of these things was coincidentally on September 11, 2001. Maybe he'll be willing to talk more after the election. This is what happens when you try to ask him about it today.



Not so tough now, are you Billy? "Get off my private property"? Is that really any way for an anarcho-Marxist to talk? And what's with calling in the "pigs" to escort you across the street and protect you from a People's Reporter? Thirty-five years ago you were trying to kill them, today you have no regrets but you still want their protection? Lame.

I don't think I'd want an associate of these people to be my President.

But that's one of the many lies The One has been telling lately. Ayers wasn't just "a guy in the neighbourhood," but someone Obama had a long association with, even while knowing his past history (as confirmed by his campaign spokesman). Ayers had set up the Chicago Annenberg Challenge in order to accept a $50 million Annenberg education grant and distribute it in the interests of the education of Chicago's kids (matching grants brought it up to $147 million). It went instead to 'alternative schools' for radical indoctrination.

Ayers appointed Obama to chair the CAC, where they served together as well as on the Woods Fund. Together they doled out millions to questionable recipients and achieved no improvements to education, Chicago later discovered. Money was also funnelled to ACORN, Jeremiah Wright's racist ministry, PLO professor Rashid Khalidi, and many others.

There exists a documentation which would shed light on a few of these associations in Obama's life, but nobody is allowed to see it. Professor Khalidi, another neighbour and friend of the Obamas who has held fundraisers for him, was given a farewell banquet send-off from Chicago to his new position at Columbia University in 2003. Joining in celebrating the Palestinian terror supporter were Billy and Bernardine, as well as Barack and Michelle. At last count, the Los Angeles Times is up to its fourth different reason why they can't release the video or a transcript.

Clearly, some people have seen this recorded event. The Times reported on the proceedings in April, and that's as far as they're willing to go. Doug Ross has a previously reliable source in LA who claims to have seen it, and offers a couple of short quotations.

Saw a clip from the tape. Reason we can't release it is because statements Obama said to rile audience up during toast. He congratulates Khalidi for his work saying "Israel has no God-given right to occupy Palestine" plus there's been "genocide against the Palestinian people by Israelis."

It would be really controversial if it got out. That's why they will not even let a transcript get out.

If this were John McCain or Sarah Palin who were hanging out with violence-espousing radicals and self-admitted but unconvicted terrorists, this tape would have been out six months ago and we'd still be seeing clips from it today. The One has a very committed information wing at his disposal.

He also has a phenomenal money collection machine, and will likely finish up with close to ten times the cash John McCain was allowed to have under public financing of his campaign. For one who presents himself as the candidate of hopeful changey things like contributor transparency, it's remarkable that Obama can get away with promising to abide by public financing limits if his opponent did so, then breaking his promise and raking in close to three-quarters of a billion bucks so far.

And in keeping with the ACORN ethic, millions of those bucks have been contributed in small amounts from the likes of "Adolphe Hitler" and "Doodad Pro." Or any other name you care to make up. Foreign-issued credit cards are also accepted.

This is only possible, as the blogosphere has discovered, by actively disabling the Address Verification Service normally used by online vendors. The same tests were conducted on McCain's online donation facility -- they're always rejected for mismatched names, addresses or other information. This isn't a feature the O machine forgot to turn on, it's one they had to have intentionally turned off.

Three-quarters of a billion is quite a lot of dollars to be unspreading themselves straight into The One's bank account on the back of a broken promise. One pundit quipped that it's little different than had the campaign placed dumpsters all over the country and invited everyone to throw in as much cash as they wanted, individual contributions limits be damned. Obama has actually campaigned with "running a presidential campaign" as a qualifying experience on his resumé.

After Joe accidentally elicited O's economic philosophy a few weeks ago ("spreading the wealth around is good for everyone"), he denied being a proponent of redistributionism. But that could only be maintained for a few days, until a 2001 radio interview came to light wherein he laments that the Supreme Court hasn't been radical enough, and that the civil rights movement had failed to bring about "redistributive change" (MP3 file). The full interview is available here. Jeff Goldstein offers a partial transcript, and here's a little bit:

"[O]ne of the, I think, tragedies of the civil rights movement was, um, because the civil rights movement became so court focused I think there was a tendancy to lose track of the political and community organizing and activities on the ground that are able to put together the actual coalition of powers through which you bring about redistributive change."

Whatever happened to that guy? He just doesn't talk that way anymore. For some reason. Yes We Can? Maybe We Can't.

Barack is a pleasant young face put forward by an old movement hoping to finally finish its long march to power. He's a protégé of many of the influential figures in his life, and by his own assertions in both of his autobiographies he was always drawn to "hanging out" with the most radical folks he could find. If he has any "normal" friends, they haven't been coming out of the woodwork to tell his story. Who are the people who've been greasing the skids for him during his astonishingly rapid rise? Nobody wants to talk about it.

And nobody will really know who he is until (if...) he becomes President. A man who, due to his own past associations, could not even qualify to be on his own Secret Service detail. Is America really going to do this?

Were I to be residing in Israel rather than in Thailand, I'd be considerably nervous right about now, I think. Only because the Iranian mullahs, Hizb Allah and Hamas are a more immediate concern than China, at this point in history. I'd be most nervous of all if I lived in Iraq, which Barack would have abandoned long ago to a grisly fate.

The quirky sidekick of The One We've All Been Waiting For recently guaranteed that if this young and untested fellow became President, the crazies of the world would deliver a serious crisis within six months. He added that whatever the new leader's response would be, it would look wrong. The citizens would doubt him and he would need their faith.

Joe the Biden painted a crisis picture in five scenarios, but he specified only the Iran and Russia possibilities. If Iran actually gets the bomb, the day could come when Mahmoud Ah'm-inna-jihad (or his council of Ayatollahs) would say, "We demand a meeting with Barack Obama, without conditions." And Barack replies, "Yes I would!" -- being on record with that policy for quite some time already.

As far as I can tell, "without preconditions" actually means "I'm at your mercy." It means your opponent holds all the cards. This is essentially what His Holiness Dalai Lama has had to say to China. "We'll meet you without preconditions." They are doing so at the moment.

I don't know any other circumstance that a US President would ever directly negotiate with any state unconditionally. It  would require a threat behind it. If there were to be an imminent atrocity threatened by the Twelfth Imam-ists, Barack would be obliged to go and meet them unconditionally should they demand it. Anybody would, if there were millions of lives at stake.

And Jihad International would love it. That event would be fantastic recruiting material for them, should they ever be in a position to coerce it. Giving it to them without the coercion would just be for a stupid give-away rather than an effort to save lives.



Plenty of people feel that if Barack is truly presidential material, he needs to prove himself first. Until very recently, that was his own view, as he told the Chicago Sun-Times the day after he was first elected as a US Senator.

"I was elected yesterday. . . . I have never set foot in the U.S. Senate. I’ve never worked in Washington. And the notion that somehow I’m immediately going to start running for higher office just doesn’t make sense. So look, I can unequivocally say I will not be running for national office in four years, and my entire focus is making sure that I’m the best possible senator on behalf of the people of Illinois. . . . I am not running for president in 2008."

A month later, his wife agreed with him. "It's way too soon, he hasn't done anything yet!" (Dec. 6, 2004)



But somewhere along to the way to doing something, it has become an offence to look into his character or his associations. Any hint of such questions are immediately met with cryptic allusions to "code words" which invariably point to racism. And while his supporters are not above hanging one of his opponents in effigy, let's just consider the fallout if that shoe was on the other foot. It wouldn't be tolerated in West Hollywood, that's for sure. Hell, it wouldn't be tolerated anywhere.

Yes, Palin Madness Syndrome (PMS) has reached the heights of irrationality heretofore only seen in the most disabled of BDS sufferers. Yet she is almost daily introduced to her crowds by officials of the National Organisation for Women, and is praised even by card-carrying Democratic Party women who recognise what the comedians have missed -- that she has a first-rate mind. (There is a phenomenal speech video on that page that you will never see covered by the Tanning Bed Media).

I thought I'd seen the limits of madness in this election cycle, until I saw this. Erica Jong is one of those famous "structural feminists" (I believe that's the term) who has actually completely lost her mind. She told an Italian daily newspaper:

"The record shows that voting machines in America are rigged."

"My friends Ken Follett and Susan Cheever are extremely worried. Naomi Wolf calls me every day. Yesterday, Jane Fonda sent me an email to tell me that she cried all night and can't cure her ailing back for all the stress that has reduces her to a bundle of nerves."

"My back is also suffering from spasms, so much so that I had to see an acupuncturist and get prescriptions for Valium."

"After having stolen the last two elections, the Republican Mafia…"

"If Obama loses it will spark the second American Civil War. Blood will run in the streets, believe me. And it's not a coincidence that President Bush recalled soldiers from Iraq for Dick Cheney to lead against American citizens in the streets."

"Bush has transformed America into a police state, from torture to the imprisonment of reporters, to the Patriot Act."

Well, providing that the city on the hill isn't devoured by race riots next Wednesday, it will perhaps be appropriate to enjoy an Obama Victory Sandwich.

"Saul Alinsky’s Famous Hot Corned Beef sandwich" — Not really corned beef, but shhh! We won’t tell if you won't! Comes with fries and gravy. Or so you think… From Sarge’s Deli, 548 3rd Ave, between 36th and 37th St, New York, NY

Eight other creations await your discerning palate.

Amid all these serious contentions over the most consequential job-placement on the planet, there is still some happy news. It still remains the case that You Can Vote However You Like.



Beautiful. There are a lot of words and it's hard to catch them all, but Hot Air has the lyrics and an interview with some of the kids.
.

Labels: USA

- posted by Agam @ 2:46 AM 0 comments

0 Comments:

Post a Comment