From the FMP News Room:

August 31 – Russia’s Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR) is expected to release new, groundbreaking documents from its historical archive today providing detailed evidence into Nazi German and Polish collaboration prior to the outbreak of the Great Patriotic War.

According to the SVR, the documents indicate that both the Polish bourgeois pre-war regime and the so-called Polish “government in exile” during the war were ripe with infiltrators from both German and British intelligence services. This includes pre-war Polish Foreign Minister Jozef Beck, which the documents reveal was working for German foreign intelligence, and exiled Prime Minister Stansilaw Mikolajcyzk, who was an agent of the British Foreign service in 1943 and 1944.

The details of the negotiations between Nazi Germany and the reactionary bourgeois nationalist regime of pre-war Poland show that the two had made a secret pact in 1934, which include a planned invasion of the Soviet Union. Among the evidence anticipated for public release is a photograph of German Chancellor Adolf Hitler in the office of Polish Foreign Minister Beck in Warsaw, 1934.

According to the SVR’s Public Relations and Mass Media Bureau, responsible for briefing the media and public on the activities of Russia’s Foreign Intelligence Service, the archived evidence shows unequivocal aggression on behalf of the bourgeois Polish regime towards the Soviet Union leading up to the outbreak of the Great Patriotic War in 1941. The new evidence also provides an important element in further justifying the controversial “Molotov-Ribbentrop” Non-Aggression Pact of 1939, which provided a strategic delay of hostilities between the Soviet Union and Hitlerite Germany.

For decades Western bourgeois historians and Polish nationalists have attempted to cover-up the degree of collaboration between Nazi Germany and the Polish bourgeois-nationalist regime. However, the public release of the aforementioned incontrovertible evidence may bring to light the criminal intentions and hostile aggression of both parties towards the Soviet Union.

Source: Russian Foreign Intelligence Service Public Relations and Mass Media Bureau

Geert Wilders has been a subject of modern political discourse. Curiosity drove me to see what he actually has to say. I have posted a video of his.

I do agree with his point that softening a message is pointless.  All that is written or spoken on a political subject will offend some people.  One cannot express views and simultaneously care if people are offended.  If I cared more about getting along than about expressing views, then free media productions never would have been created.  I agree with his anti-elitism too.  Powerful capitalist leaders do not serve national interests.  I agree that infidels should not “play dumb” to Islam and should be assertive and firm in combating Sharia style extremism.  In my opinion, Bush/Obama and their neo-con/neo-liberal supporters have made it more difficult to intelligently critique Islam without being written off as part of the establishment.

My only criticism is that he did not truly show the other side of the argument, which is that ideological opposition to imperialism drives Muslims into extremism.  In other words, Islamic fundamentalism can be a symptom of an alienated persona which originally fights a just cause.   On the other hand, many fundamentalists are in fact motivated by visionary and cultural tendencies rather than rebellion against the West.  Reducing all fundamentalism to resistance against imperialism is oversimplification.

I support those who resist imperialism, even if they do it under the banner of Islam.  But to the extent they become imperialists themselves (immigration, forcing sharia on non-Muslims), I do not continue to support Muslims.

The most famous song about Comrade Che Guevara, performed in 1965 by Carlos Pueblo. Accompanying photos as a salute to Columbia’s Leftist freedom fighters FARC-EP. *video created August 30, 2009

http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Juche

Juche theory is a type of Marxism ideology, but it is built upon the deification and mystification of Kim Il-sung (1912-1994). Its religious or pseudo-religious characteristics distinguish Juche ideology from all other forms of Marxism, including Marx-Leninism of the former Soviet Union, European Neo-Marxism, Maoism, and even Stalinism. Juche ideology characterizes Kim as the “eternal head of state,” a Messianic liberator of humankind, and describes North Korea as a chosen nation, and North Koreans as a chosen people who have a mission to liberate the world. While fear and terror are used to externally dominate the masses in a totalitarian state, Juche Ideology is a tool for the internal domination of their minds (known as hegemony).

The North Korean government admits that Juche addresses questions previously considered in classical Marxism, but distances itself from and even repudiates aspects of this political philosophy. The official position is that Juche is a completely new ideology created by Kim Il-sung, who does not depend on the Marxist classics.

In 1972, in response to the Sino-Soviet split, Juche replaced Marxism-Leninism in the revised North Korean constitution as the official state ideology.

The North Korean government does make some reference to the pre-Stalin internationalists, Karl Marx, Frederick Engels, and Vladimir Lenin, as creditable leaders of the socialist movement in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, before the advent of Juche. But the writings of classical Marxism are generally forbidden for lay readers in North Korea. One of the premises of classical Marxist international socialism is that the workers of the world have no nation. Juche is tailored to the national peculiarities of North Korea, and to the task of creating socialism in a hostile environment.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Juche
Also Juche focuses on IDEAS whereas strict Marxism focuses on MATERIALISM! The IDEA of progressive nationalism and self-reliance, not the material class conflict of Marxism.

1. The people must have independence (chajusong) in thought and politics, economic self-sufficiency, and self-reliance in defense.
2. Policy must reflect the will and aspirations of the masses and employ them fully in revolution and construction.
3. Methods of revolution and construction must be suitable to the situation of the country.
4. The most important work of revolution and construction is molding people ideologically as communists and mobilizing them to constructive action.

Looks like IDEAS and GOALS to me; not talk of materialism and class conflict. Frankly it resembles Communitarian populism.

After the 1991 collapse of the Soviet Union, North Korea’s greatest economic benefactor, all reference to Marxism-Leninism was dropped in the revised 1998 constitution. But Marxist-Leninist phraseology remains in occasional use, for example, socialism and communism.

This validates my previous post, in which I argued that not all Communists and Socialists are Marxist-Leninists. Many envision some of the destinations that Marx mentioned, but not his pathways to get to the destinations.

[Great Patriotic War : Berlin 1945] – video produced Aug. 29, 2009.

Nazi war crimes in the Soviet Union, some images are for Mature audiences.
I uploaded the original HQ.wmv that’s in a higher resolution, it looks way better than on Youtube. (6.8mb)

http://sharebee.com/a184f220

http://www.zshare.net/video/6474297060538f7e/

http://depositfiles.com/files/n7di1k7kh

http://www.badongo.com/vid/1230839

http://www.megaupload.com/?d=1I7YIQMK

http://rapidshare.com/files/272226231/EasternFront.wmv.html

Link to News Room

After inspecting and visiting with workers at a smeltering plant inside the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK), General Secretary Kim Jong Il of the Korean Workers’ Party (KWP) called for a “renovation” in information technology in order to develop the country’s strength as a technological power.

August 27 – General Secretary Kim Jong Il of the Korean Workers’ Party called for an “information technology renovation” in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK), according to the official Rodong Sinmum daily journal.

General Secretary Kim’s comments came after visiting the May 11 Smeltery plant, according to DPRK state media. While touring the plan, Kim advised workers to improve technology in production process in order to increase overall productivity.

The development of a strong, powerful and technologically advanced nation has been the cornerstone of Kim Jong Il’s revolutionary Songun policies. Earlier this week, Kim Jong Il reaffirmed that the future of the DPRK lied inextricably with its ability to establish itself as a “powerful nation” against the threats of US imperialism and hostile foreign enemies in puppet “south” Korea and militarist Japan.

The link to the news room shows clearly that Kim Jong Il, like Stalin and Mao, set a goal of utilizing the non-existence of capitalist inefficiency to quickly modernize a country, and that North Korea talks about being a “strong nation against imperialism.” This is devastating for the clowns who continue to insist that nationalism and modern Communism are irreconcilable. It looks like a major Communist Party just vindicated me on two points.

Ted Kennedy has passed, and while liberalism took its greatest advances during his generation, it still remains a defining part of American culture.  America itself was doomed form the start, founded on liberal principles, but Ted Kennedy’s generation was particularly noxious.  His agenda of “freedom,” open borders, feminism, abortion and affirmative action became mainstream.  I do not blame Irish Catholics for “making America liberal.”  America was a liberal democracy from the start.  But it cannot be denied that Irish Catholics jumped on the bandwagon.

I recognize that people like Ted Kennedy are the symptom – not the problem.   The problem is spirit and atittude of liberalism that originated long before 1776.  I will not openly celebrate the death of a political opponent, but I can hope that America will produce better thinkers in the future who critique the problems of society instead of joining them.  I do not blame Ted Kennedy for acting like a typical liberal on a personal level, but he did nothing to earn my respect.

I would be pleasantly surprised if neo-liberalism passed with Ted Kennedy.  Unfortunately, it has only became slightly less extreme since then.