The Little-Understood Struggle Between Stalin-Era Soviet Communism and Zionism
By Michael Collins Piper
The Judas Goats: The Enemy Within
American Free Press (2006)
Excerpts: pages 144-154
The Judas Goats: The Enemy Within
American Free Press (2006)
Excerpts: pages 144-154
The twin forces of Bolshevism and Zionism have often collaborated on
many fronts throughout the 20th century—both alien forces having evolved
in the closing years of the 19th century. However,there have been
conflicts between the two philosophies that remain little understood
even by many who have devoted much study to both forces.
While there are many who view Bolshevism and Zionism as two heads of a single snake (and a two-headed snake does, in fact, exist, as biologists have reported) the realities of 20th century geopolitical struggles suggest that there is much more to the story.
In fact, there were sharp differences between the Russian nationalists (led by Josef Stalin) and the Jewish internationalists led by Stalin’s arch-enemy, Leon Trotsky.
By the time of the Cold War, following the establishment of the Zionist state of Israel in 1948, many traditional Trotskyites began a trans-mogrification process, evolving, particularly in the United States, into the leaders of an anti-Stalinist element that emerged as the hard-line pro- Israel bloc that came to be known as today’s “neo-conservatives.”
This is, of course, a cursory overview of a complicated and often confusing international struggle between revolutionary elements, both of which have been hostile to American interests. A detailed history of this struggle would go far beyond the purview of this volume. However, the fact remains that the modern-day disciples of Trotskyism are key figures among The Enemy Within, twisting old-fashioned conservatism into a divisive and destructive force that is utilizing America’s military might, the blood of its children, and its national treasure to enforce a global Zionist imperium—in short, a New World Order.
At the time of Stalin’s death in 1953—the circumstances of which suggest that he was certainly “helped” to his death—the Soviet leader was becoming openly and actively hostile to political Zionism. According to a July 27, 1967 report published in the American Examiner, the Jewish Telegraph Agency reported that:
While there are many who view Bolshevism and Zionism as two heads of a single snake (and a two-headed snake does, in fact, exist, as biologists have reported) the realities of 20th century geopolitical struggles suggest that there is much more to the story.
In fact, there were sharp differences between the Russian nationalists (led by Josef Stalin) and the Jewish internationalists led by Stalin’s arch-enemy, Leon Trotsky.
By the time of the Cold War, following the establishment of the Zionist state of Israel in 1948, many traditional Trotskyites began a trans-mogrification process, evolving, particularly in the United States, into the leaders of an anti-Stalinist element that emerged as the hard-line pro- Israel bloc that came to be known as today’s “neo-conservatives.”
This is, of course, a cursory overview of a complicated and often confusing international struggle between revolutionary elements, both of which have been hostile to American interests. A detailed history of this struggle would go far beyond the purview of this volume. However, the fact remains that the modern-day disciples of Trotskyism are key figures among The Enemy Within, twisting old-fashioned conservatism into a divisive and destructive force that is utilizing America’s military might, the blood of its children, and its national treasure to enforce a global Zionist imperium—in short, a New World Order.
At the time of Stalin’s death in 1953—the circumstances of which suggest that he was certainly “helped” to his death—the Soviet leader was becoming openly and actively hostile to political Zionism. According to a July 27, 1967 report published in the American Examiner, the Jewish Telegraph Agency reported that:
Josef Stalin died 14 years ago of a rage caused when the Politburo opposed his proposal that all Russian Jews be expelled to Siberia, The Detroit News has reported from Washington . . . The story alleged that Stalin called a secret Politburo meeting to announce a campaign against the Jews. He said measures should be taken to deport Jews en masse to Biro Bidjan in Siberia . . .
Lazar Kaganovich, [the] only Jewish member of the Politburo and Stalin’s brother-in-law, tore up his party card and threw the pieces in Stalin’s face, said The News.
The report said that Stalin then turned purple with rage . . . Stalin rose from his chair, according to the account, began screaming incoherently and fell unconscious.An hour later, physicians pronounced him dead.
Although this teasingly and provocatively written news report—aimed
at Jewish audiences—never said, flat out, that Stalin had been murdered,
the intent of the report was very clear: in short, that Zionist
interests in Russia had murdered the Soviet strongman because he was
planning new offensives against Zionism.
In their 2003 book, Stalin’s Last Crime, Jonathan Brent and Vladimir Naumov published evidence that Stalin was almost certainly murdered in 1953 after he began moving toward exorcising Zionist influence in Soviet circles of power.
Describing Stalin’s moves against the Zionist elements in Russia, Brent and Naumov wrote that if Stalin had not been removed from power,“much subsequent world history might have been quite different.” They added:
In their 2003 book, Stalin’s Last Crime, Jonathan Brent and Vladimir Naumov published evidence that Stalin was almost certainly murdered in 1953 after he began moving toward exorcising Zionist influence in Soviet circles of power.
Describing Stalin’s moves against the Zionist elements in Russia, Brent and Naumov wrote that if Stalin had not been removed from power,“much subsequent world history might have been quite different.” They added:
Many leading Kremlin figures would have been purged and probably shot; the security services and the military would have been decimated by purges; Soviet intellectuals and artists, particularly Jews, would have been mercilessly suppressed; and the surviving remnant of Soviet and Eastern European Jewry would have been gravely (perhaps mortally) imperiled, while grievous suffering would have been inflicted on all the citizens of the Soviet Union. Another Great Terror, such as occurred in the late 1930s, was averted when Stalin suddenly died on March 5, 1953. Stalin’s version of a “final solution” remained unfulfilled . . .And although even today there are those—including many legitimate and traditional American anti-communists—who believe Stalin was actually in alliance with Zionist interests, as evidenced by his immediate recognition of the State of Israel, Brent and Naumov comment that in 1948,“The Jews and Israel were not yet the enemies of the Soviet state they soon became.” So the point is this: a very real rift—one long in development—between Stalin and the Zionist (and Trotskyite) elements was very much a reality, popular legend notwithstanding.
In fact, by 1952, when Stalin was intensifying his public (and
behind-the-scenes) campaign against Zionism in Russia, Brent and Naumov
point out that the irony that many American Jewish spies for the Soviet
Union would have found it hard to imagine that they were working for “a
country whose leaders soon thereafter would turn against the entire
Jewish population of the Soviet Union and, at the high- est governmental
levels, was seriously considering the idea of the detention and
deportation of hundreds of thousands, if not millions of innocent
people.”
In fact, in the Jan/Feb 2003 issue of The Barnes Review—the Revisionist history journal published by Willis A. Carto—Russian nationalist historian, Dr.OlegPlatonov, offered readers a fascinating history of Russia’s historic troubles with Jewish-Zionist and Jewish-Bolshevik agitation—the proverbial two-headed snake. Platonov, asserted, flat-out, that Stalin had indeed launched a major offensive against Zionism.The words of Platonov, one of the leading Russian intellectuals today, and who is in the forefront of the fight against Zionist influence in 21st Century Russia, are worth reviewing. Platonov wrote:
In fact, in the Jan/Feb 2003 issue of The Barnes Review—the Revisionist history journal published by Willis A. Carto—Russian nationalist historian, Dr.OlegPlatonov, offered readers a fascinating history of Russia’s historic troubles with Jewish-Zionist and Jewish-Bolshevik agitation—the proverbial two-headed snake. Platonov, asserted, flat-out, that Stalin had indeed launched a major offensive against Zionism.The words of Platonov, one of the leading Russian intellectuals today, and who is in the forefront of the fight against Zionist influence in 21st Century Russia, are worth reviewing. Platonov wrote:
The Jewish-Bolshevik rule over Russia was broken by Stalin who, in the second half of the 1930s, carried out a counter-revolution and stripped the carriers of the Zionist ideology of their power. In the 1930s and 1940s, no less than 800,000 Jewish Bolsheviks were annihilated under the leadership of Stalin—the elite of the anti-Russian organization which had planned to transform Russia into a Jewish state. Nearly all Jewish leaders were purged, and the chances of the remaining ones to regain power were reduced to a minimum.The last years of Stalin’s life were dedicated to the uprooting of Zionism and the liquidation of the organizations associated with it.Dr. Platonov added these highly relevant details:
After Stalin’s death, everything changed abruptly. The state was taken over by people bent on the restoration of Jewish Bolshevism . . .The renaissance of Zionism continued during the entire government of N. S. Khruschev.
The situation somewhat improved under Brezhnev, who secretly limited the number of Jews in government positions. As a matter of fact, these measures were rarely put into practice, and both secret and open Zionists found many ways to elude them.
From the 1950s to the 1970s, a powerful fifth column spearheaded by the carriers of the Zionist ideology arose in Russia. Many of its leading figures were sons or grandsons of Bolshevik revolutionaries.
These very people later became the most active elements of the so-called perestroika, which led to the dissolution of the Soviet Union, the assumption of political power by the Jews and the transfer of a considerable part of Russia’s national wealth to foreign countries.
Today, of course, the fight against Zionist influence in Russia has
expanded considerably, and Russia’s current president,Vladimir Putin, is
increasingly under the gun from American-based (and worldwide) Zionist
elements who view the so-called“Russian strongman”as a potential threat.
(In a later chapter, we’ll discuss Putin further.)
The point that we need to focus on—and which must be emphasized—is that the break between Stalin and the Zionists, which began in the 1930s and which reached a fever pitch at the time of Stalin’s assassination in 1953, led specifically to events in the United States which played a major part in behind-the-scenes intrigue in the so-called “Cold War.“ This led to the establishment of the power bloc that today—in the 21st century—is known as the “neo-conservative” movement: that is, the Zionist-Trotskyite globalist warmongers who are using the wealth and power of the United States to enforce their world imperium.
In 1914, no less than V. I. Lenin wrote of Trotsky:“Comrade Trotsky has never yet possessed a definite opinion on any single, earnest Marxian question: he has always crept into the breach made by this or that difference, and has oscillated from one side to another.” And this reflects precisely the way so many American Trotskyites—who became the neo-conservatives—actually shifted their own agenda in order to fit with the times, particularly as elements within the Soviet government continued, behind the scenes, to agitate against Zionist influence.
So although many American anti-communists (and outright anti- Zionists and anti-Semites) were caught up in the theory that Soviet Communism (even under Stalin) had been largely a “Jewish” project, so to speak, there were a few discerning voices who recognized that the fight between Stalin and Trotsky had a definitive“Jewish slant”that need- ed to be examined in careful context.
The point that we need to focus on—and which must be emphasized—is that the break between Stalin and the Zionists, which began in the 1930s and which reached a fever pitch at the time of Stalin’s assassination in 1953, led specifically to events in the United States which played a major part in behind-the-scenes intrigue in the so-called “Cold War.“ This led to the establishment of the power bloc that today—in the 21st century—is known as the “neo-conservative” movement: that is, the Zionist-Trotskyite globalist warmongers who are using the wealth and power of the United States to enforce their world imperium.
In 1914, no less than V. I. Lenin wrote of Trotsky:“Comrade Trotsky has never yet possessed a definite opinion on any single, earnest Marxian question: he has always crept into the breach made by this or that difference, and has oscillated from one side to another.” And this reflects precisely the way so many American Trotskyites—who became the neo-conservatives—actually shifted their own agenda in order to fit with the times, particularly as elements within the Soviet government continued, behind the scenes, to agitate against Zionist influence.
So although many American anti-communists (and outright anti- Zionists and anti-Semites) were caught up in the theory that Soviet Communism (even under Stalin) had been largely a “Jewish” project, so to speak, there were a few discerning voices who recognized that the fight between Stalin and Trotsky had a definitive“Jewish slant”that need- ed to be examined in careful context.
In the late 1950s, John H. Monk, the American nationalist and frankly
anti-Semitic editor of the Texas-based journal, Grass Roots, published a
remarkable essay entitled “Let Us Look Into This Thing Called ‘Trotsky
Communism.’” He concluded after an extensive review of the history of
the conflict between Stalin and Trotsky that, put simply: “Trotsky
Communism and Soviet Communism are enemies.” In Soviet Russia, as Monk
noted, beginning in the late 1930s, “top ranking Jews began at that time
toppling from their high seats,” and that “Russia at last had gotten
her eyes open [and that] the good work started in 1928 with the exiling
of Trotsky” by Josef Stalin. He added, quite pointedly:
Just recently, the Anti-Defamation League issued a special bulletin in which it wept sorely because the Russian Jews used to fill, back in 1935, ten percent of the high seats in the empire, and now they have only “one half of one per- cent” and it is shaky. No wonder the American Jew-Trotsky gang invented the slogan:“Down with Communism!”They mean Russia.
Monk pointed out that the Zionist movement and affiliated groups such
as the ADL had quickly aligned themselves with the Trotskyite movement
that set up shop in the United States—in New York City in
particular—upon Trotsky’s exile from Russia.“If we run with the Trotsky
Communist slogan, ‘Down with the Communists,” we automatically become
partisans of the filthiest underground that has ever existed any- where
on this earth:Trotsky Communism.”
Monk’s essays on this controversial topic were even reprinted by famed Lyrl Clark Van Hyning in her popular Women’s Voice newsletter, which no one ever accused of being a “communist” journal.
On September 15, 1969, writing in the popular American nationalist newspaper, Common Sense, which had, over the years, frequently featured the works of outspoken Jewish-born American anti-Zionist spokesman Benjamin Freedman, one Morris Horton (under his pen name “Fred Farrell”) wrote a fascinating assessment of the reality of Trotskyite Communism. Horton wrote in part:
Monk’s essays on this controversial topic were even reprinted by famed Lyrl Clark Van Hyning in her popular Women’s Voice newsletter, which no one ever accused of being a “communist” journal.
On September 15, 1969, writing in the popular American nationalist newspaper, Common Sense, which had, over the years, frequently featured the works of outspoken Jewish-born American anti-Zionist spokesman Benjamin Freedman, one Morris Horton (under his pen name “Fred Farrell”) wrote a fascinating assessment of the reality of Trotskyite Communism. Horton wrote in part:
Originally “Communism” was nothing but a tool of the wealthy American Jews of New York. In the United States, and in much of the rest of the world, it is still just that. Let us now address ourselves to a question important to anyone who really wants to understand Communism:“What is the difference between a Stalinist and a Trotskyite? Some people will tell you:“All Communists are alike.”
This is a dangerous piece of shallow misinformation. It is acceptable only if you are willing to substitute shallow sloganeering for real knowledge.A Stalinist represents primordial Russian nationalism. A Trotskyite represents the Jewish interests of New York City. The Jewish interests of New York suffered a terrific setback one day many years ago, when a taciturn hood planted an ax in Leon Trotsky’s skull in a villa in Mexico.Horton was particularly adamant in pointing out that the American “anti-Communist” movement was increasingly falling into the hands of very real Communists—the Trotskyites—who in the guise of “fighting Communism” were actually working to introduce it into the American system.This is a point that few anti-communists understood then and even today they find it difficult to digest. Horton wrote:
The world Communist conspiracy is not a Russian conspiracy; it is an American Jewish conspiracy.Today it is falling into great disrepute around the world. America is being blamed for supporting communism around the world. Unhappily, the charge is true. New York is the real hub of the conspiracy. If some of our Anti-Communists would stand up four square and tell this plain truth, we might possibly yet be liberated from Jewish misrule. Few of them ever do.
Most of the Communists and many of the Anti- Communists are on the same payroll, the Jewish payroll. They carry on a sham battle with each other.The first basic rule of this sham battle is:“Never drag any real truth into the matter on either side; tell anything else you want to tell, but never tell the truth.” This is the basic background of most of the phony “experts” on Communism who have been “experting” about it for forty years and haven’t made a dent in it.
These people generate the literature on Communism that is generally available to the American public.They have no interest in providing any genuinely valid information. Their aim is to manipulate public opinion.In his essay, Horton emphasized that the age-old labels of “Right” and “Left” no longer had any real meaning—a point that even many legitimate and self-styled modern-day American “conservatives” of the 21st century have yet to realize:
Therefore, they seek to divide the Gentile.They seek to make the middle class believe that the working class is allied to Red Russia; All of this is, and always was, pure hallucination, generated by Jewish intellectual quacks in order to pro- mote a minority tyranny over the American Majority.
There is no genuine validity in either the “Right” or “Left” positions in politics. These are artificial, Jew-invented positions. Jewish control of communications is absolutely essential to the success of this power system. Jewish political quackery would not long survive exposure.
The Right-Left Age is the Jewish Age, and it is an age which, on the world stage, is now receding into the past. If America continues to live in this Jewish past, then America has no future.
Horton’s words—written nearly 50 years ago—continue to reverberate.
But to drive home the point further, it is worth reviewing a trans-
lation of an analysis of Zionism published in Spanish in the November 4,
1979 edition of Granma, the official newspaper voice of the communist
regime of Cuba’s Fidel Castro.
(Similar versions of this had previously appeared in the Soviet Union, at a time when there were increasing public noises against Zionism, much to the dismay of the American Trotskyites who were then reinventing themselves as “the neo-conservatives.”
While this analysis from the communist point of view has been superceded by the collapse of the Soviet empire as it existed when this document was first published, it contains fascinating insights into the sources of tension between Zionism and Communism.
(Similar versions of this had previously appeared in the Soviet Union, at a time when there were increasing public noises against Zionism, much to the dismay of the American Trotskyites who were then reinventing themselves as “the neo-conservatives.”
While this analysis from the communist point of view has been superceded by the collapse of the Soviet empire as it existed when this document was first published, it contains fascinating insights into the sources of tension between Zionism and Communism.
The Zionist movement, created by the Jewish big bourgeoisie at the
end of the 19th century, was born with a decidedly counterrevolutionary
purpose. From the founding of the World Zionist Organization in 1897 to
the present, Zionism, as ideology and political practice, has opposed
the world revolutionary process.
Zionism is counterrevolutionary in a global sense in that it acts the world over against the three major forces of revolution: the socialist community, the working class movement in capitalist countries and the movement for national liberation.
Zionist counterrevolution began by making inroads in the European working class movement. In the early years, when the growth of monopoly capitalism and the expansion of reactionary tendencies that accompanied the establishment of the imperialist phase of capitalism demanded the unity and solidarity of the proletariat, the Zionists focused on dividing the working class.
Zionism is counterrevolutionary in a global sense in that it acts the world over against the three major forces of revolution: the socialist community, the working class movement in capitalist countries and the movement for national liberation.
Zionist counterrevolution began by making inroads in the European working class movement. In the early years, when the growth of monopoly capitalism and the expansion of reactionary tendencies that accompanied the establishment of the imperialist phase of capitalism demanded the unity and solidarity of the proletariat, the Zionists focused on dividing the working class.
They propagated the thesis that all non-Jews were, and would always
be, anti-Semites; asserted that the only possi- bility for the Jewish
masses’ well-being and justice was to emigrate to the “promised land”;
and defended class collaboration, thus diverting the Jewish proletariat
away from the struggle for their real emancipation and dividing and
weak- ening the working class movement. It’s not fortuitous that in
czarist police archives one finds documents calling for sup- port for
the Zionist movement as a way of stemming the tide of proletarian
revolution.
Theodore Herzl, the founder of Zionism, wrote at the time in his diary:“All our youth; all those who are from 20 to 30 years old, will abandon their obscure socialist tendencies and come over to me.”
However, the efforts of Zionist counterrevolution could not hold back the wheels of history.The victory of the Great October Socialist Revolution in Russia ushered in a period of transition from capitalism to socialism on a world scale. The first victory of the proletariat, the premise of future victories, was a heavy blow to Zionism.
Most of the money that filled Zionist coffers came from Russia, where czarism had humiliated and oppressed the Jews for centuries. Russia provided a million immigrants for the Zionist colonization of Palestine. When the Russian Revolution liquidated the exploitation of man by man, it also destroyed the basis for Zionism in the Soviet Union.
Leninist policy on the national question toppled all Zionist myths that the Jews could not be fully incorporated, with equal rights, into society and destroyed all the racist claims on the inevitability of anti-Semitism. The Zionists never did, and never will, forgive the Soviet state and its Leninist Party, not so much for cutting off the money flow from Russia and for the loss of workers for the colonization effort, but because the Bolsheviks implemented a correct policy that incorporated the talents and efforts of the Soviet Jews into the tasks of building a new society and thus demonstrated the class origins of discrimination and anti-Semitism, breaking with the past and providing a genuine solution to the Jewish problem, a solution which was not and could never be a massive exodus to Palestine.
Theodore Herzl, the founder of Zionism, wrote at the time in his diary:“All our youth; all those who are from 20 to 30 years old, will abandon their obscure socialist tendencies and come over to me.”
However, the efforts of Zionist counterrevolution could not hold back the wheels of history.The victory of the Great October Socialist Revolution in Russia ushered in a period of transition from capitalism to socialism on a world scale. The first victory of the proletariat, the premise of future victories, was a heavy blow to Zionism.
Most of the money that filled Zionist coffers came from Russia, where czarism had humiliated and oppressed the Jews for centuries. Russia provided a million immigrants for the Zionist colonization of Palestine. When the Russian Revolution liquidated the exploitation of man by man, it also destroyed the basis for Zionism in the Soviet Union.
Leninist policy on the national question toppled all Zionist myths that the Jews could not be fully incorporated, with equal rights, into society and destroyed all the racist claims on the inevitability of anti-Semitism. The Zionists never did, and never will, forgive the Soviet state and its Leninist Party, not so much for cutting off the money flow from Russia and for the loss of workers for the colonization effort, but because the Bolsheviks implemented a correct policy that incorporated the talents and efforts of the Soviet Jews into the tasks of building a new society and thus demonstrated the class origins of discrimination and anti-Semitism, breaking with the past and providing a genuine solution to the Jewish problem, a solution which was not and could never be a massive exodus to Palestine.
Zionist counterrevolution took on an anti-Soviet thrust. Before
October 1917 the Zionists collaborated with Kerensky. Later they
supported all the attempts at counter- revolution and enthusiastically
participated in the different white “governments” set up in different
parts of the country during the Civil War [in Russia]. They were active
in all the moves against the Soviet Union from abroad, and their
powerful propaganda machine spread a spate of lies about the first
workers’ and peasants’ state in the world.
Not even the Soviet victory over German fascism, which saved so many Jewish lives, made the Zionists change their anti-Soviet stand.
With the outbreak of the cold war the Zionists collaborated in all the subversive and diversionary activities against the USSR and other socialist countries. The secret services of the Zionist state of Israel coordinated their spy activities with the CIA. Zionist agents played an active role in the counter-revolutionary attempts in Hungary and Czechoslovakia.
Today Zionism seconds the hypocritical anti-Soviet campaign on presumed violations of the human rights of Jews in the Soviet Union and does all it can to put pressure on Soviet citizens of Jewish origin so they will leave their true homeland and go to Israel.This effort by Zionist counterrevolution can only lead to new failures. And to complete the picture there is the Zionist counterrevolutionary action against the national liberation movements.
Soon after World War I, Zionist settlers penetrated into Palestinian territory, acting as the spearhead of British imperialist interests in opposition to the Arab peoples’ hopes for independence. Their role was clearly spelled out by the prominent Zionist leader Max Nordau in a statement to the British authorities:
“We know what you want from us: that we defend the Suez Canal.We must defend your route to India which pass- es through the Middle East.We are ready to take on that difficult task. But you must allow us to become powerful enough to carry out that task.”
Not even the Soviet victory over German fascism, which saved so many Jewish lives, made the Zionists change their anti-Soviet stand.
With the outbreak of the cold war the Zionists collaborated in all the subversive and diversionary activities against the USSR and other socialist countries. The secret services of the Zionist state of Israel coordinated their spy activities with the CIA. Zionist agents played an active role in the counter-revolutionary attempts in Hungary and Czechoslovakia.
Today Zionism seconds the hypocritical anti-Soviet campaign on presumed violations of the human rights of Jews in the Soviet Union and does all it can to put pressure on Soviet citizens of Jewish origin so they will leave their true homeland and go to Israel.This effort by Zionist counterrevolution can only lead to new failures. And to complete the picture there is the Zionist counterrevolutionary action against the national liberation movements.
Soon after World War I, Zionist settlers penetrated into Palestinian territory, acting as the spearhead of British imperialist interests in opposition to the Arab peoples’ hopes for independence. Their role was clearly spelled out by the prominent Zionist leader Max Nordau in a statement to the British authorities:
“We know what you want from us: that we defend the Suez Canal.We must defend your route to India which pass- es through the Middle East.We are ready to take on that difficult task. But you must allow us to become powerful enough to carry out that task.”
And, as a matter of fact, the Zionists became a power and succeeded
in establishing their own state in 1948: the Zionist state of Israel.
Now their task is to defend oil routes, protect all the interests of
U.S. imperialism and block the advance of the Arab revolution.
Backed by tremendous amounts of imperialist economic and military
aid, the Zionists are constantly acting against national liberation
movements.
At one time it was their mission to penetrate African and Asian independence movements, guarantee that the newly independent states followed paths acceptable to imperialism, that they not stray from the confines of neocolonialism. Israel offered courses, advisers, all sorts of aid.
But the ploy wasn’t very successful. Israel’s increasing role as imperialism’s policeman in the Middle East, its racism and avowed expansionism made the young African and Asian nations see the dangers of Israeli“aid,”the treachery of Israeli foreign policy.
Nevertheless, the Zionist state took up a new role in the struggle of world reaction against progress. It went beyond the geographical confines of the Middle East, estab- lished friendly ties with all reactionary regimes and began to supply arms,equipment and advisers to those who were trying to suppress national liberation struggles.
The Israeli armaments industry specialized in designing and producing all sorts of weapons for urban and rural anti-guerrilla warfare.
The South African racist regime, the dictatorships of Guatemala and El Salvador, and the fascist Pinochet are among the best clients of the Israeli armaments industry. Israeli arms sales in 1978 were estimated at $400 million. One of their best clients was the Nicaraguan dictator Anastasio Somoza.
Zionist counterrevolution was present in Somoza’s Nicaragua in the form of Galil guns and Pull-push planes, but they couldn’t stop the victory of the Sandinista revolutionaries.
This is a symbol of our times: neither the machinations of Zionist counterrevolution, nor Israeli arms, can hold back the victorious march of the peoples of the world.
At one time it was their mission to penetrate African and Asian independence movements, guarantee that the newly independent states followed paths acceptable to imperialism, that they not stray from the confines of neocolonialism. Israel offered courses, advisers, all sorts of aid.
But the ploy wasn’t very successful. Israel’s increasing role as imperialism’s policeman in the Middle East, its racism and avowed expansionism made the young African and Asian nations see the dangers of Israeli“aid,”the treachery of Israeli foreign policy.
Nevertheless, the Zionist state took up a new role in the struggle of world reaction against progress. It went beyond the geographical confines of the Middle East, estab- lished friendly ties with all reactionary regimes and began to supply arms,equipment and advisers to those who were trying to suppress national liberation struggles.
The Israeli armaments industry specialized in designing and producing all sorts of weapons for urban and rural anti-guerrilla warfare.
The South African racist regime, the dictatorships of Guatemala and El Salvador, and the fascist Pinochet are among the best clients of the Israeli armaments industry. Israeli arms sales in 1978 were estimated at $400 million. One of their best clients was the Nicaraguan dictator Anastasio Somoza.
Zionist counterrevolution was present in Somoza’s Nicaragua in the form of Galil guns and Pull-push planes, but they couldn’t stop the victory of the Sandinista revolutionaries.
This is a symbol of our times: neither the machinations of Zionist counterrevolution, nor Israeli arms, can hold back the victorious march of the peoples of the world.
(END OF THE GRANMA ARTICLE)
Whatever one thinks of Fidel Castro or of former Soviet leader Josef
Stalin, the fact is that there has long been a very real split between
the Trotskyites—who have (in the leadership level of the
“neo-conservative” network in the United States) evolved into the
tribunes of the global Zionist movement—and the
nationalistically-oriented elements led in Russia by Stalin following
his consolidation of power.
To understand these nuances and to recognize the part they have played in shaping the events of the last half of the 20th century it is vital to understand how and why The Enemy Within has been able to manipulate the traditional cause of“anti-communism”and bend it into a mechanism for the Zionist cause.
Where there are a few insignificant Trotskyite movements—rag-tag bands of street agitators and others—who continue to operate quite independently of (and often in opposition to) the neo-conservative Zionists, it is those “neo-conservatives” who have wrapped themselves in the American flag who are the real Enemy Within.
And in light of all this, it’s no coincidence that in Russia today, both traditional Communists (many of whom revere the memory of Josef Stalin) and anti-Communists are united in their opposition to Zionism and Jewish plutocratic power.
In the chapter which follows, we will examine some remarkable historical facts which underscore the reality of the split between the Stalinists and the Zionist Trotskyites, and will further clarify the nature of the modern-day Enemy Within.
To understand these nuances and to recognize the part they have played in shaping the events of the last half of the 20th century it is vital to understand how and why The Enemy Within has been able to manipulate the traditional cause of“anti-communism”and bend it into a mechanism for the Zionist cause.
Where there are a few insignificant Trotskyite movements—rag-tag bands of street agitators and others—who continue to operate quite independently of (and often in opposition to) the neo-conservative Zionists, it is those “neo-conservatives” who have wrapped themselves in the American flag who are the real Enemy Within.
And in light of all this, it’s no coincidence that in Russia today, both traditional Communists (many of whom revere the memory of Josef Stalin) and anti-Communists are united in their opposition to Zionism and Jewish plutocratic power.
In the chapter which follows, we will examine some remarkable historical facts which underscore the reality of the split between the Stalinists and the Zionist Trotskyites, and will further clarify the nature of the modern-day Enemy Within.
