Spitfire List Web site and blog of anti-fascist researcher and radio personality Dave Emory.

For The Record

Week­ly Shows, divid­ed into two 30-minute seg­ments, con­sist­ing of print excerpts and inter­views.

This category contains 1183 posts
Listen to For The Record:
Ask your local station to carry the show.

FTR #992 Hindutva Fascism, Part 5: Political and Historical Context (Connecting the Dots)

This pro­gram con­cludes our FTR series on Hin­dut­va fas­cism (Hin­du nation­al­ist fas­cism). In pre­vi­ous pro­grams, we high­light­ed key fea­tures of the gov­er­nance of Indi­an Prime Min­is­ter Naren­dra Modi, whose BJP is a polit­i­cal front for the RSS. Formed along the lines of Mus­solin­i’s Black­shirts in 1925, the RSS was the orga­ni­za­tion that assas­si­nat­ed Mahat­ma Gand­hi. (We have dis­cussed Modi, the RSS and the BJP in numer­ous broad­casts, includ­ing FTR #‘s 795, 889, 441, 442, 445, 988 and 989, 990, 991.)

In past dis­cus­sions of the RSS and BJP, we have not­ed the fol­low­ing:

1.–Modi’s polit­i­cal for­tunes were boost­ed with sup­port and appar­ent financ­ing from Pierre Omid­yar, who also helped finance the rise of the OUN/B fas­cist suc­ces­sor orga­ni­za­tios in Ukraine.
2.–Modi and his BJP are viewed with great favor by Bre­it­bart king­pin, for­mer Trump cam­paign man­ag­er and advis­er Steve Ban­non. A num­ber of Trump’s busi­ness asso­ciates in India are asso­ci­at­ed with the BJP.
3.–Bernie Sanders’ prospec­tive Vice-Pres­i­den­tial can­di­date Tul­si Gab­bard helped arrange the details for Mod­i’s Amer­i­can vis­it and is net­worked with the RSS.
4.–The above-men­tioned Tul­si Gab­bard is a mem­ber of the Hare Krish­na cult, as is her hus­band, her in-laws, her par­ents and her Con­gres­sion­al staff.
5.–Gabbard is high­ly regard­ed by Modi admir­er Steve Ban­non as well.
6.–Gabbard was seri­ous­ly con­sid­ered for a cab­i­net posi­tion by Team Trump.
7.–Under Modi, anti-Mus­lim vio­lence has dra­mat­i­cal­ly accel­er­at­ed, jour­nal­is­tic and civ­il free speech has been atten­u­at­ed, oppo­nents of the gov­ern­ment have faced var­i­ous forms of retal­i­a­tion and oppres­sion, jour­nal­ists and activists crit­i­cal of Modi/BJP/RSS have been mur­dered, a vir­u­lent­ly anti-Mus­lim cler­ic has been appoint­ed head of Uttar Pradesh (Indi­a’s largest province), vot­ing machines have appar­ent­ly been tam­pered with, and Indi­ans have expressed pos­i­tive feel­ings about mar­tial law. BJP mem­bers have cel­e­brat­ed Gand­hi’s mur­der.

In this pro­gram, we posi­tion the ideological/political tile of Hin­dut­va fas­cism in the mosa­ic of what free­lance Dan­ish jour­nal­ist Hen­rik Kruger (author of The Great Hero­in Coup: Drugs, Intel­li­gence and Inter­na­tion­al Fas­cism) and Kevin Coogan (author of Dream­er of the Day: Fran­cis Park­er Yock­ey and the Post­war Fas­cist Inter­na­tion­al) call “The Fas­cist Inter­na­tion­al.”

Begin­ning with review of ide­o­log­i­cal and oper­a­tional links between RSS Hin­dut­va fas­cists and the fol­low­ers of Hitler and Mus­soli­ni, we high­light key fea­tures of what may seem to many to be a clas­sic case of polit­i­cal “strange bed­fel­lows.” Key con­sid­er­a­tions in the Hitler/Mussolini/Hindutva fas­cist affin­i­ty include:

1.–Opposition to the British Empire (as con­sti­tut­ed), admi­ra­tion for the domes­tic agen­das of the Fuehrer and Il Duce, as well as the mil­i­tary prowess shown by the Euro­pean Axis nations: “. . . . In the decades pri­or to that momen­tous event, senior RSS mem­bers had direct links to both Ben­i­to Mus­soli­ni in Italy and Adolf Hitler in Ger­many. Part of the RSS’ fas­ci­na­tion with these total­i­tar­i­an regimes was their shared oppo­si­tion to the British Empire — how­ev­er, it went far beyond that. The RSS (as well as mul­ti­tudes of oth­er Hin­du nation­al­ists) admired the way Mus­soli­ni and Hitler reor­ga­nized their respec­tive nations so quick­ly from the wreck­age of war to build a pow­er­ful econ­o­my and mil­i­tary under the ban­ner of patri­o­tism and nation­al­ism. . . .”
2.–The stud­ied nature of the Hindutva/Hitler/Mussolini affin­i­ty: ” . . . . Marzia Caso­lari, an Ital­ian schol­ar who stud­ied Indi­an pol­i­tics, once wrote of RSS’ con­nec­tions with Euro­pean fas­cism: The exis­tence of direct con­tacts between the rep­re­sen­ta­tives of the [Ital­ian] Fas­cist regime, includ­ing Mus­soli­ni, and Hin­du nation­al­ists demon­strates that Hin­du nation­al­ism had much more than an abstract inter­est in the ide­ol­o­gy and prac­tice of fas­cism. The inter­est of Indi­an Hin­du nation­al­ists in fas­cism and Mus­soli­ni must not be con­sid­ered as dic­tat­ed by an occa­sion­al curios­i­ty, con­fined to a few indi­vid­u­als; rather, it should be con­sid­ered as the cul­mi­nat­ing result of the atten­tion that Hin­du nation­al­ists… focused on Ital­ian dic­ta­tor­ship and its leader. To them, fas­cism appeared to be an exam­ple of con­ser­v­a­tive rev­o­lu­tion. . . .”
3.–Belief in the com­mon, mytho­log­i­cal “Aryan” ori­gins of India and Ger­many: ” . . . . Much of Nazi ide­ol­o­gy and imagery came from the sym­bols and his­to­ry of ancient India – indeed, the infa­mous Nazi swasti­ka was based on a Hin­du sym­bol of strength and good for­tune. More­over, the leg­endary his­to­ry (some would say, myth) of the inva­sion of pre­his­toric India by the mys­te­ri­ous ‘Aryan’ tribes would (cen­turies lat­er) pro­vide Hitler with his notion of a ‘super mas­ter race’ that was des­tined to dom­i­nate the world. . . .”
4.–The enthu­si­as­tic embrace of Hitler and Mus­soli­ni by V.D. Savarkar, the ide­o­log­i­cal founder of Hin­dut­va fas­cism and the pri­ma­ry archi­tect of Gand­hi’s assas­si­na­tion: ” . . . . Per­haps there was no greater admir­er of Hitler and Mus­soli­ni in India than Vinayak Damodar Savarkar, anoth­er lead­ing mem­ber of RSS.In a speech deliv­ered in 1940 (after the Sec­ond World War had com­menced), Savarkar said: There is no rea­son to sup­pose that Hitler must be a human mon­ster because he pass­es off as a Nazi or Churchill is a demigod because he calls him­self a Demo­c­rat. Nazism proved unde­ni­ably the sav­ior of Ger­many under the set of cir­cum­stances Ger­many was placed in. . . .”
5.–The Hin­du Mahasab­ha’s sup­port for a Hitler/RSS con­junc­tion: ” . . . . Indeed, many Hin­du nation­al­ists also derid­ed Gand­hi for oppos­ing Nazism and fas­cism. In 1939, a spokesman for the Hin­du Mahasab­ha (Hin­du Par­ty) inti­mate­ly con­nect­ed Ger­many with Indi­an cul­ture and peo­ple. ‘Germany’s solemn idea of the revival of the Aryan cul­ture, the glo­ri­fi­ca­tion of the Swasti­ka, her patron­age of Vedic learn­ing and the ardent cham­pi­onship of the tra­di­tion of Indo-Ger­man­ic civ­i­liza­tion are wel­comed by the reli­gious and sen­si­ble Hin­dus of India with a jubi­lant hope,’ the spokesman blus­tered. ‘Only a few Social­ists head­ed by… Nehru have cre­at­ed a bub­ble of resent­ment against the present gov­ern­ment of Ger­many, but their activ­i­ties are far from hav­ing any sig­nif­i­cance in India.’ He added: ‘Germany’s cru­sade against the ene­mies of Aryan cul­ture will bring all the Aryan nations of the world to their sens­es and awak­en the Indi­an Hin­dus for the restora­tion of their lost glo­ry. . . .’ ”
6.–Other RSS lead­ers saw use­ful sim­i­lar­i­ties in the eth­nic chau­vin­ist phi­los­o­phy of both Hitler and Hin­dut­va fas­cism. ” . . . . Anoth­er senior RSS mem­ber, Mad­hav Sadashiv Gol­walkar, also praised Nazism and believed the ide­ol­o­gy should be applied to India. ‘Ger­man race pride has now become the top­ic of the day,’ he wrote. ‘To keep up the puri­ty of the race and its cul­ture, Ger­many shocked the world by her purg­ing the coun­try of the Semit­ic Races — the Jews. Race pride at its high­est has been man­i­fest­ed here. Ger­many has also shown how well-nigh impos­si­ble it is for races and cul­tures, hav­ing dif­fer­ences going to the root, to be assim­i­lat­ed into one unit­ed whole, a good les­son for us in Hin­dus­tan [India] to learn and prof­it by.’ Gol­walkar enthu­si­as­ti­cal­ly advo­cat­ed for an India dom­i­nat­ed by Hin­dus. ‘There are only two cours­es open to the for­eign ele­ments, either to merge them­selves in the nation­al race and adopt its cul­ture, or to live at its mer­cy so long as the nation­al race may allow them to do so and to quit the coun­try at the sweet will of the nation­al race,’ he wrote. . . . ”
7.–The eth­nic ide­o­log­i­cal par­a­digm of Hin­dut­va fas­cism and Nazism meld well: ” . . . . If one were to replace ‘Hin­du’ with ‘Ger­man,’ Golwalkar’s words would match Hitler’s rhetoric almost exact­ly. . . .”
8.–Savarkar also saw Nazi and RSS eth­nic the­o­ry and pol­i­cy as con­verg­ing:  ” . . . . Savarkar also spelled out why Hin­dus should rule India and oth­ers should either be expelled or merged into the Hin­du major­i­ty. ‘The Aryans who set­tled in India at the dawn of his­to­ry already formed a nation, now embod­ied in the Hin­dus,’ he wrote. ‘Hin­dus are bound togeth­er not only by the love they bear to a com­mon father­land and by the com­mon blood that cours­es through their veins and keeps our hearts throb­bing and our affec­tion warm but also by the of the com­mon homage we pay to our great civ­i­liza­tion, our Hin­du cul­ture. . . .”

The late Sav­it­ri Devi was an embod­i­ment of the Hindu/Nazi/Aryan ide­o­log­i­cal con­ver­gence. Devi has been among the ele­ments syn­the­siz­ing Hin­dut­va fas­cism with the con­tem­po­rary “Alt-Right.” Devi has been the focal point of renewed inter­est:

1.–” . . . . I filed her as a curios­i­ty at the back of my mind, until the ris­ing tide of extreme-right pol­i­tics in Europe and Amer­i­ca threw up the name ‘Sav­it­ri Devi’ once again. It isn’t hard these days to find dis­cus­sions of Sav­it­ri Devi’s books on neo-Nazi web forums, espe­cial­ly The Light­ning and the Sun, which expounds the the­o­ry that Hitler was an avatar — an incar­na­tion — of the Hin­du god Vish­nu, and Gold in the Fur­nace, which urges true believ­ers to trust that Nation­al Social­ism will rise again. The Amer­i­can extreme-right web­site Counter-Cur­rents hosts an exten­sive online archive of her life and work. . . .”
2.–More about the resus­ci­ta­tion of Devi: ” . . . . Her views are reach­ing a wider pub­lic, too, thanks to Amer­i­can alt-right lead­ers such as Richard Spencer and Steve Ban­non, for­mer Trump chief strate­gist and chair of Bre­it­bart News, who have tak­en up the account of his­to­ry as a cycli­cal bat­tle between good and evil — a the­o­ry she shared with oth­er 20th Cen­tu­ry mys­ti­cal fas­cists. Dark met­al bands and Amer­i­can right-wing radio sta­tions also roar about the Kali Yuga, the Dark Age of Hin­du mythol­o­gy, which Sav­it­ri Devi believed that Hitler was once des­tined to bring to an end. . . . ”
3.–The psy­cho­log­i­cal and polit­i­cal foun­da­tion of the Aryan/Hindutva con­ver­gence is neat­ly summed up in the BBC Mag­a­zine arti­cle we excerpt: ” . . . . Sav­it­ri Devi her­self is almost for­got­ten in India now, but the Hin­du nation­al­ism she espoused and helped to pro­mote is in the ascen­dant, much to the con­cern of her nephew, the vet­er­an left-wing jour­nal­ist Suman­ta Baner­jee.  ‘In her book A Warn­ing to the Hin­dus, which came out in 1939, she advised the Hin­dus to cul­ti­vate a ‘spir­it of organ­ised resis­tance through­out Hin­du­dom,’ he says. ‘The tar­gets of this resis­tance were the Mus­lims, who were a threat, accord­ing to her, to the Hin­dus. And this is the same fear that is being echoed today.’ . . .” 
4.–More about the dynam­ics behind the “Alt-Right”/Hindutva con­ver­gence: ” . . . . Hin­dut­va is the offi­cial ide­ol­o­gy of Prime Min­ster Naren­dra Mod­i’s rul­ing Bharatiya Jana­ta Par­ty, which claims that Mus­lims and sec­u­lar­ists have under­mined the strength of the Hin­du nation. Though the par­ty’s offi­cial spokes­men con­demn vio­lence, the riots that led to the tear­ing down of the Babri Mosque at Ayo­d­hya in 1992 and the cur­rent waves of attacks — some­times fatal — by vig­i­lante groups on Mus­lims and dis­senters tell a dif­fer­ent sto­ry. . . . ”
5.–Highlighting the nature of the ide­o­log­i­cal sim­i­lar­i­ty between Nazi eth­nic pol­i­cy and Hin­dut­va fas­cist ide­ol­o­gy: “In the US, racism, anti-com­mu­nism and Chris­t­ian fun­da­men­tal­ist notions about the impend­ing apoc­a­lypse have togeth­er pre­pared the ground for the far right’s flir­ta­tion with occult Nazism and Hin­du prophe­cies. And as in India, the tra­di­tion­al rul­ing major­i­ty’s fear of los­ing pow­er has been an effec­tive recruit­ing tool. . . .”

In addi­tion to the posi­tion of Hin­dut­va fas­cism in the Fas­cist Inter­na­tion­al , we exam­ine Pierre Omid­yar, his espousal of neolib­er­al eco­nom­ic doc­trine, his sup­port for Mod­i’s Hin­dut­va fas­cists and his sup­port (along with U.S. intel­li­gence cut-outs like the Nation­al Endow­ment for Democ­ra­cy and the Agency for Inter­na­tion­al Devel­op­ment) for the Ukrain­ian OUN/B suc­ces­sor orga­ni­za­tions like Pravy Sek­tor, Svo­bo­da and the Azov Bat­tal­ion.

In FTR #889, among oth­er pro­grams, we high­light­ed Omi­da­yar’s devo­tion to the Aus­tri­an school of eco­nom­ic the­o­ry.

The political/economic con­text of Omid­yar’s efforts can be seen as a “neo-lib­er­al” flank­ing maneu­ver: putting “free-mar­ket” forces in pow­er and the West­ern and South­east­ern flanks of Rus­sia and Chi­na. Those two nations con­sti­tute much of what geo-politi­cians call “The Earth Island” or “World Island.”

Omid­yar’s neo-lib­er­al, Aus­tri­an eco­nom­ic school can be seen in Mod­i’s enthu­si­as­tic recep­tion by Sil­i­con Val­ley movers and shak­ers, at the same time that the Indi­an leader is mov­ing  to weak­en his coun­try’s child  labor laws.

Pro­gram High­lights Include: 

1.–The Omid­yar-owned Hon­ololu Civ­il Beat­’s curi­ous cov­er-up of Tul­si Gab­bard’s par­tic­i­pa­tion in the Hin­dut­va fas­cist Hare Krish­na cult.
2.–The par­tic­i­pa­tion of Indi­an sol­diers in the Wehrma­cht and Waf­fen SS dur­ing World War II.
3.–Tulsi Gab­bard’s co-spon­sor­ship of a bill that would label oppo­nents of Ukraine’s entrance into the EU as “ter­ror­ists.”
4.–Omidyar jour­nal­is­tic pro­tege Glenn Green­wald had Andrew “Weev” Aueren­heimer at his par­ty cel­e­brat­ing Green­wald and Lau­ra Poitras’s receipt of the pres­ti­gious Polk Award. Wee­v’s name has been bandied about in con­nec­tion with the [alleged] hack­ing of DNC e‑mails. We note that Weev is appar­ent­ly res­i­dent in Ukraine. ” . . . . [GOP oper­a­tive Peter] Smith also reached out to “Guc­cifer 2.0”—an alias the U.S. intel­li­gence com­mu­ni­ty has linked to Russ­ian state hackers—and was advised to seek the help of a white nation­al­ist hack­er who lives in Ukraine. . . . [Alt-Right media fig­ure Charles] John­son said he also sug­gest­ed that Smith get in touch with Andrew Aueren­heimer, a hack­er who goes by the alias ‘Weev’ and has col­lab­o­rat­ed with John­son in the past. . . .”


FTR #991 Hindutva Fascism, Part 4: The Hare Krishna Cult

Key points of interest/analysis include:

1.–Hare Krish­na founder and chief guru Bhak­tivedan­ta Swa­mi Prab­hu­pa­da pro­vid­ed com­men­tary on Hin­du reli­gious text “. . . . and often sug­gest­ed that they had not actu­al­ly been writ­ten by him­self, but that God, Krish­na, had revealed them to him. . . .” This was in order to “ . . . .under­line the absolute posi­tion, super­hu­man qual­i­ties, and over­all impor­tance of the guru. [Basi­cal­ly, “guru” as “fuhrer”–D.E.] . . . .”
2.–Bhaktivedanta Swa­mi was fun­da­men­tal­ly opposed to democ­ra­cy. “So monar­chy or dic­ta­tor­ship is wel­come. . . . Per­son­al­ly, I like this posi­tion, dic­ta­tor­ship. Per­son­al­ly, I like this.”
3.–Bhaktivedanta Swa­mi felt that Hin­duism was in a “fall­en state” and that only his discipline/teachings could restore it to its prop­er place. In our dis­cus­sions with Peter Lev­en­da, we have not­ed that fas­cism man­i­fests a long­ing for a bygone time–one that nev­er real­ly exist­ed.
4.–Fascist philoso­phies fre­quent­ly invoke a by-gone, myth­i­cal “gold­en age,” which the fas­cist cadre in ques­tion will restore, after the cor­rupt­ing forces have been neu­tral­ized. ” . . . . He too believed that in bygone ages a divine and sci­en­tif­ic social sys­tem had exist­ed in India, and like Bhak­tisid­dhan­ta Saraswati, he too found­ed a move­ment whose express mis­sion was to reestab­lish what he often referred to as the “per­fec­tion­al form of human civ­i­liza­tion,” var­nashram dhar­ma. . . .” Note that “for­eign­ers” or what would be termed in our soci­ety today “immi­grants,” “migrants,” “Mex­i­cans,” or “Mus­lims” are blamed for this degen­er­a­tion. ” . . . . . . . . Indi­an civ­i­liza­tion on the basis of the four var­nas and ashrams dete­ri­o­rat­ed because of her depen­den­cy on for­eign­ers, or those who did not fol­low the civ­i­liza­tion of var­nasham. . . .”
5.–Bhaktivedanta Swa­mi val­ued the tra­di­tion­al posi­tion of the Ksha­triya war­rior caste, to which the Nazi SS con­sid­ered them­selves as suc­ces­sors, accord­ing to Kevin Coogan’s bril­liant analy­sis (in Dream­er of the Day: Fran­cis Park­er Yock­ey and the Post­war Fas­cist Inter­na­tion­al.) “. . . . the ksha­triyas should be taught how to fight also. There will be mil­i­tary train­ing. There will be train­ing how to kill. Ksha­triya stu­dents in the ISKCON var­nashram col­lege were to prac­tice killing: ‘Just like Ksha­triyas, they have to learn how to kill.’ . . . . There is no sin­gle instance where Bhak­tivedan­ta Swa­mi speaks about ksha­triya train­ing with­out men­tion­ing killing. . . . ‘Learn to kill. No non­vi­o­lence. Learn to kill. Here also, as soon you’ll find, the Ksha­triya, a thief, a rogue, unwant­ed ele­ment in the soci­ety, kill him. That’s all. Fin­ish. Kill him. Bas. Fin­ished. . . .” It is not that because the Ksha­triyas were killing by bows and arrows for­mer­ly you have to con­tin­ue that. That is anoth­er fool­ish­ness. If you have got . . . If you can kill eas­i­ly by guns, take that gun. All the roy­al princes were trained up how to kill. . . . A Ksha­triya, he is expert in the mil­i­tary sci­ence, how to kill. So the killing art is there. You can­not make it null and void by advo­cat­ing non­vi­o­lence. No, That is required. Vio­lence is also a part of the soci­ety. . . .”
6.–Hare Krish­na cult mem­ber Tul­si Gab­bard’s polit­i­cal vec­tor may be eval­u­at­ed against the back­ground of Bhak­tivedan­ta Swami’s prog­nos­ti­ca­tion that the Hare Krish­na cult could infil­trate and take over a key polit­i­cal par­ty and/or gov­ern­ment in a democ­ra­cy. Recall that he viewed democ­ra­cy with utmost con­tempt. ” . . . . Bhak­tivedan­ta also thought that he and his move­ment could take over some gov­ern­ment and rule some part of the world: ‘How­ev­er in Kali-yuga, demo­c­ra­t­ic gov­ern­ment can be cap­tured by Krish­na con­scious peo­ple. If this can be done, the gen­er­al pop­u­lace can be made very hap­py.’ . . . .”
7.–Bhaktivedanta Swami’s teach­ings dove­tail superbly with Nazi occult phi­los­o­phy. ” . . . . Bhak­tivedan­ta Swa­mi, how­ev­er, speaks exten­sive­ly about ‘the Aryans’–at least twen­ty-five of his pur­ports and over a hun­dred lec­tures and con­ver­sa­tions con­tain lengthy elab­o­ra­tions on the top­ic. He places all those whom he calls ‘non-Aryan’ in a cat­e­go­ry sim­i­lar to his ‘unwant­ed pop­u­la­tion,’ thus divid­ing humans into two groups: a large group of var­na sankara and non-Aryans on one side, and a small group of Aryans, ie those who fol­low var­nashram, on the oth­er: ‘Those who tra­di­tion­al­ly fol­low these prin­ci­ples are called Aryans, or pro­gres­sive human beings.’ ‘The Vedic way of life,’ he writes, ‘is the pro­gres­sive march of civ­i­liza­tion of the Aryans.’ ‘In the his­to­ry of the human race, the Aryan fam­i­ly is con­sid­ered to be the most ele­vat­ed com­mu­ni­ty in the world.’ . . . . In more than one fifth of his state­ments he clear­ly describes or defines them in racial terms: The Aryan fam­i­ly is dis­trib­uted all over the world and is known as Indo-Aryan. The Aryans are white. But here, this side, due to cli­mat­ic influ­ence, they are a lit­tle tan. Indi­ans are tan but they are not black. But Aryans are all white. And the non-Aryans, they are called black. Yes . . .”
8.–Bhaktivedanta Swami’s phi­los­o­phy saw Euro­peans and Amer­i­cans as part of, and exten­sions of, the Aryan race: ” . . . . So we all belong to the Aryan fam­i­ly. His­tor­i­cal ref­er­ence is there, Indo-Euro­pean fam­i­ly. So Aryan stock was on the cen­tral Asia. Some of them migrat­ed to India. Some of them migrat­ed to Europe. And from Europe you have come. So we belong to the Aryan fam­i­ly, but we have lost our knowl­edge. So we have become non-Aryan, prac­ti­cal­ly. You French peo­ple, you are also Aryan fam­i­ly, but the cul­ture is lost now. So this Krish­na con­scious­ness move­ment is actu­al­ly reviv­ing the orig­i­nal Aryan cul­ture. Bhara­ta. We are all inhab­i­tants of Bharatavar­sha, but as we lost our cul­ture, it became divid­ed. So on the whole, the con­clu­sion is that the Aryans spread in Europe also, and the Amer­i­cans, they also spread from Europe. So the intel­li­gent class of human being, they belong to the Aryans. Aryan fam­i­ly. Just like Hitler claimed that he belonged to the Aryan fam­i­ly. Of course, they belonged to the Aryan fam­i­lies. . . .”
9.–It should come as no sur­prise that Bhak­tivedan­ta was pro-Hitler, view­ing the Fuehrer as “a gen­tle­man,” who had to kill the Jews because they were “financ­ing” against him. “. . . . So these Eng­lish peo­ple, they were very expert in mak­ing pro­pa­gan­da. They killed Hitler by pro­pa­gan­da. I don’t think Hitler was so bad [a] man. Hitler knew it [the atom­ic bomb] . . . . He was gen­tle­man. He said that ‘I can smash the whole world, but I do not use that weapon.’ The Ger­mans already dis­cov­ered. But out of human­i­ty they did not use it. . . . The activ­i­ties of such men are cer­tain­ly very great . . . There­fore Hitler killed these Jews. They were financ­ing against Ger­many. Oth­er­wise he had no enmi­ty with the Jews. . . . There­fore Hitler decid­ed, ‘Kill all the Jews.’ . . . .”
10.–An in-depth view of Bhak­tivedan­ta Swami’s view of “shu­dras” reveals the deep racist/fascistic views of social class/caste. Described var­i­ous­ly as “black” or “com­mon,” shu­dras are the focus of deep ide­o­log­i­cal con­tempt. This should be seen against the back­ground of the Aryan racial phi­los­o­phy of Bhak­tivedan­ta Swa­mi. “. . . . ordi­nary peo­ple; the labor­er class; once-born; the low­est class of men; non-Aryan; work­er; the black man; he must find out a mas­ter; one who has no edu­ca­tion; almost ani­mal; just like a dog; he becomes dis­turbed; one who is depen­dent on oth­ers; they are igno­rant ras­cals; unclean; equal to the ani­mal; no train­ing; fools, ras­cals. . . Accord­ing to his under­stand­ing, peo­ple of black or dark skin col­or, as well as native Amer­i­cans, are shu­dras, are third-class, degrad­ed, and less intel­li­gent: ‘Shu­dras have no brain. In Amer­i­ca also, the whole Amer­i­ca once belonged to the Red Indi­ans. Why they could not improve? The land was there. Why these for­eign­ers, the Euro­peans, came and improved? So Shu­dras can­not do this. They can­not make any cor­rec­tion. . . . A first-class Rolls Royce car, and who is sit­ting there? A third class negro. This is going on. You’ll find these things in Europe and Amer­i­ca. This is going on. A first-class car and a third-class negro. . . .”
11.–Bhaktivedanta Swa­mi did not feel that the black Amer­i­can slaves should be freed. ” . . . . Just like in Amer­i­ca. The blacks were slaves. They were under con­trol. And since you have giv­en them equal rights they are dis­turb­ing, most dis­turb­ing, always cre­at­ing a fear­ful sit­u­a­tion, uncul­tured and drunk­ards. What train­ing they have got? . . . That is best, to keep them under con­trol as slaves but give them suf­fi­cient food, suf­fi­cient cloth, not more than that. Then they will be sat­is­fied. . . . ‘So the Kiratas, they were always slaves of the Aryans. The Aryan peo­ple used to keep slaves, but they were treat­ing slaves very nice­ly.’ And that the Kiratas were Africans, he had explained many times: ‘Kira­ta means the black, the Africans.’ . . . .”
12.–Bhaktivedanta Swa­mi had some “choice” things to say about women: ” . . . . Gen­er­al­ly all women desire mate­r­i­al enjoyment.Women in gen­er­al should not be trust­ed. Women are gen­er­al­ly not very intel­li­gent. It appears that women is a stum­bling block [sic] for self-real­iza­tion. . . . Although rape is not legal­ly allowed, it is a fact that a woman likes a man who is very expert at rape. When a hus­band­less woman is attacked by an aggres­sive man, she takes his action to be mer­cy. Gen­er­al­ly when a woman is attacked by a man—whether her hus­band or some oth­er man—she enjoys the attack, being too lusty. . . .”

We con­clude with review Tul­si Gab­bard’s net­work­ing with Modi, the BJP and the RSS:

1.–Gabbard is also a big fan of Naren­dra Modi, hav­ing been involved with the plan­ning of Mod­i’s U.S. vis­it and net­work­ing with BJP mem­bers: ” . . . . Gab­bard, a strong sup­port­er of Modi, is a Demo­c­rat Con­gress­woman from Hawaii. . . . She had spo­ken to Modi after his vic­to­ry in the Indi­an gen­er­al elec­tions and con­grat­u­lat­ed him and the Bharatiya Jana­ta Par­ty (BJP). She has also been involved in the plan­ning of Modi’s US vis­it and had last month met two BJP lead­ers Vijay Jol­ly and MP Rajyavard­han Rathore in that con­nec­tion. . . .”
2.–On a trip to India, Gab­bard net­worked with both the BJP and the RSS, the Hin­du nationalist/fascist par­ty for which Mod­i’s BJP is a cat’s paw. (All of Mod­i’s cab­i­net appoint­ments were drawn from the RSS. Mod­eled on the Ger­man Nazi Par­ty and Mus­solin­i’s black­shirts, the RSS killed Gand­hi.): “. . . . Speak­ing at a fundrais­ing event for the BJP in August 2014 . . . Gab­bard said that Modi’s elec­tion vic­to­ry was only pos­si­ble because ‘peo­ple stood up, one by one by one by one, and said we will demand that this change occurs.’ . . . Gab­bard was treat­ed as roy­al­ty on her vis­it to India last year. As she hob­nobbed with the Indi­an prime min­is­ter and for­eign min­is­ter among oth­ers, “The Tele­graph,” a Kolkata-based news­pa­per, called her ‘the Sangh’s mas­cot’ in the US. The Sangh, a moniker for the Rashtriya Swayam­se­vak Sangh (RSS), is a right-wing hin­dut­va organ­i­sa­tion and the ide­o­log­i­cal guardian of the BJP par­ty that rules India now. . . .”

Pro­gram High­lights Include:

1.–Review of the links between “eso­teric Nazism,” the Hindu/Aryan myth.
2.–Review of Sav­it­ri Devi, a key expo­nent of the Hin­du Aryan myth.
3.–Review of RSS founder V.D. Savarkar’s embrace of the “Aryan/Hindu” myth as it applied to the British colo­nial mas­ters of India.


FTR #990 Hindutva Fascism, Part 3: Modi Operandi

Con­tin­u­ing our FTR series on Hin­dut­va fas­cism (Hin­du nation­al­ist fas­cism) we high­light key fea­tures of the gov­er­nance of Indi­an Prime Min­is­ter Naren­dra Modi, whose BJP is a polit­i­cal front for the RSS. Formed along the lines of Mus­solin­i’s Black­shirts in 1925, the RSS was the orga­ni­za­tion that assas­si­nat­ed Mahat­ma Gand­hi. (We have dis­cussed Modi, the RSS and the BJP in numer­ous broad­casts, includ­ing FTR #‘s 795, 889, 441, 442, 445, 988 and 989.)

Begin­ning with dis­cus­sion of Mod­i’s appoint­ment of Yogi Adityanath to be the gov­er­nor of Uttar Pradesh province, Indi­a’s largest, we note:

1.-Yogi Adityanath is a mem­ber of the Rashtriya Swayam­se­vak Sangh (RSS).  ” . . . . Adityanath, born Ajay Singh Bisht, found his voca­tion in col­lege as an activist in the stu­dent wing of the Rashtriya Swayam­se­vak Sangh, a right-wing Hin­du orga­ni­za­tion. . . .”
2.-Adityanath’s polit­i­cal foun­da­tion is the vir­u­lent­ly anti-Mus­lim ide­ol­o­gy of the RSS: ” . . . . As leader of a tem­ple known for its mil­i­tant Hin­du suprema­cist tra­di­tion, he built an army of youths intent on aveng­ing his­toric wrongs by Mus­lims, whom he has called ‘a crop of two-legged ani­mals that has to be stopped.’ At one ral­ly he cried out, ‘We are all prepar­ing for reli­gious war!’ . . .” 
3.-Modi’s “pro-busi­ness,” “pro-devel­op­ment” polit­i­cal agen­da has giv­en way to what The New York Times pre­dictably labels “populist”–the Hin­dut­va, anti-Mus­lim fas­cism which has long been the  main­stay of the RSS.   “Adityanath (pro­nounced Ah-DIT-ya-nath) was an aston­ish­ing choice by Naren­dra Modi, India’s prime min­is­ter, who came into office three years ago promis­ing to ush­er India into a new age of devel­op­ment and eco­nom­ic growth, and play­ing down any far-right Hin­du agen­da. But a pop­ulist dri­ve to trans­form India into a ‘Hin­du nation’ has drowned out Mr. Modi’s devel­op­ment agen­da, shrink­ing the eco­nom­ic and social space for the country’s 170 mil­lion Mus­lims. . . .”
4.-The gov­er­nor of Uttar Pradesh is also seen as the fron­trun­ner to become Prime Min­is­ter. ” . . . . Few deci­sions in Indi­an pol­i­tics mat­ter more than the selec­tion of the chief min­is­ter of Uttar Pradesh, because the post is seen as a spring­board for future prime min­is­ters. At the age of 45, the diminu­tive, baby-faced Adityanath is receiv­ing the kind of career-mak­ing atten­tion that projects an Indi­an politi­cian toward high­er office. . . .”
5.-Adityanath is best known for encour­ag­ing vig­i­lante death squads against Mus­lims. He also wor­shipped at the Gorakhnath Tem­ple, whose head priest was arrest­ed for encour­ag­ing Hin­du mil­i­tants to kill Gand­hi only days before he was shot. ” . . . . He was so engrossed in the [RSS] group’s work that the first two or three times he was sum­moned by a dis­tant rel­a­tive, the head priest of the Gorakhnath Tem­ple, he ‘could not find the time,’ he has said. . . . But reli­gion and pol­i­tics were fast con­verg­ing. Gorakhnath Tem­ple had a tra­di­tion of mil­i­tan­cy: Digvi­jay Nath, the head priest until 1969, was arrest­ed for exhort­ing Hin­du mil­i­tants to kill Mahat­ma Gand­hi days before he was shot. His suc­ces­sor, Mahant Avaidyanath, urged Hin­du mobs in 1992 to tear down a 16th-cen­tu­ry mosque and build a tem­ple there, set­ting off some of the blood­i­est reli­gious riots in India’s recent his­to­ry. . . .”

Modi is real­iz­ing the repres­sive fas­cist agen­da of the BJP/RSS. Cen­sor­ing the press and con­duct­ing wide­spread sur­veil­lance of crit­ics are now rou­tine. In addi­tion, there have been a num­ber of hith­er­to unsolved assas­si­na­tions of jour­nal­ists and politi­cians crit­i­cal of Modi and his agen­da.

Promi­nent Indi­an jour­nal­ist Gau­ri Lankesh was the lat­est vic­tim:

” . . . . . Gau­ri Lankesh, one of India’s most out­spo­ken jour­nal­ists, was walk­ing into her house on Tues­day night. It was around 8. The night was warm. She was alone. As she stepped through her gate, just feet from her front door, sev­er­al gun­shots rang out. She was killed instant­ly in what polit­i­cal oppo­si­tion offi­cials say appears to be yet anoth­er assas­si­na­tion of an intel­lec­tu­al who pub­licly crit­i­cized India’s gov­ern­ing par­ty and the Hin­du agen­da it has pur­sued. In recent years, at least three oth­er anti­estab­lish­ment activists have been silenced by bul­lets. . . . On Mon­day, the day before she was killed, she shared a post on her Face­book page that was writ­ten by some­one else. ‘The RSS is the ter­ror­ist orga­ni­za­tion,’ it read. . . . ”

The same gun was used to kill both Gau­ri Lankesh and anoth­er promi­nent vic­tim, M M Kalbur­gi: ” . . . . . A pre­lim­i­nary foren­sic analy­sis of bul­lets and car­tridges found at the site of the Sep­tem­ber 5 shoot­ing of jour­nal­ist and activist Gau­ri Lankesh and those recov­ered from the killing of Kan­na­da research schol­ar M M Kalbur­gi two years ago has revealed that the same 7.65-mm coun­try­made pis­tol was used for the two killings. This find­ing has been com­mu­ni­cat­ed to the Spe­cial Inves­ti­ga­tion Team that is prob­ing the mur­der of the 55-year-old jour­nal­ist and activist, sources involved with the two sep­a­rate inves­ti­ga­tions have told The Indi­an Express. . . . .”

There are numer­ous oth­er sim­i­lar­i­ties between the killings of Lankesh and Kalbur­gi. Note that the assas­sins rode motor­bikes with hel­mets in both crimes, mak­ing it dif­fi­cult to iden­ti­fy the shoot­er. Note the motor­bikes present in the pho­to of Adiny­ath’s Hin­du Youth Brigade, vis­i­ble above.

The same weapon used to kill Gau­ri Lankesh and M M Kalbur­gi was also used to kill Govind Pansare and Naren­dra Dab­holkar! ” . . . . Schol­ar and ratio­nal­ist Kalbur­gi was shot dead at his home at 8.40 am by two uniden­ti­fied per­sons who drove up on a motor­cy­cle. The assailants knocked on the door of the home of the 77-year-old Sahitya Akade­mi Award win­ner and shot him on the doorstep with two bul­lets from a 7.65 mm coun­try­made pis­tol. Lankesh was shot dead in the front yard of her home at 8 pm on Sep­tem­ber 5 by one of two per­sons who came on a motor­cy­cle and fired four bul­lets from a 7.65 mm coun­try­made pis­tol while she was open­ing the gates to her home. Inves­ti­ga­tions in the Kalbur­gi mur­der case by the Kar­nata­ka Crim­i­nal Inves­ti­ga­tion Depart­ment had revealed that the 7.65 mm pis­tol used to kill the ratio­nal­ist was the same one that was used to mur­der 81-year-old Maha­rash­tra ratio­nal­ist and Left­ist thinker Govind Pansare in Kol­ha­pur on Feb­ru­ary 16, 2015 by two uniden­ti­fied men. The foren­sic analy­sis had also revealed that one of the two guns used to shoot down Pansare in 2015 had also been used to kill Maha­rash­tra ratio­nal­ist Naren­dra Dab­holkar, 69, in Pune on August 20, 2013 by a pair of uniden­ti­fied men. . . .”

The recent assas­si­na­tion of Indi­an jour­nal­ist-turned-activist Gau­ri Lankesh high­lights the role of the Dalit (for­mer­ly “untouch­able”) caste in the elec­toral strat­e­gy of Mod­i’s BJP (again, a polit­i­cal front for the Hin­dut­va fas­cist RSS.) ” . . . . Ms. Lankesh was also an effec­tive polit­i­cal orga­niz­er with the abil­i­ty to bring togeth­er social and polit­i­cal groups — Dal­its, indige­nous trib­als, left­ists, Mus­lims and oth­ers — opposed to the Hin­du nation­al­ist attempts to trans­form India into a coun­try pri­mar­i­ly for the Hin­dus. . . .”

An effec­tive polit­i­cal orga­niz­er who appeared to have the abil­i­ty to bridge a key divide between the Dal­its and the rest of the non-Hin­du nation­al­ist seg­ments of Indi­an society–Ms. Lankesh–gets gunned down. She was the lat­est activist who pos­sessed that abil­i­ty to bridge divides to be assas­si­nat­ed in exact­ly the same man­ner in recent years: The oth­er three were Daab­holkar, Kalbur­gi and Pansare, who were slain with the same weapon–a gun that was used to kill Lankesh as well. ” . . . . In August 2013, the activist Naren­dra Dab­holkar, who cam­paigned against reli­gious super­sti­tions, was mur­dered. In August 2015, M. M. Kalbur­gi, a schol­ar and out­spo­ken crit­ic of idol wor­ship among Hin­dus, was gunned down at his own doorstep. In Feb­ru­ary 2015, Govind Pansare, a Com­mu­nist leader, com­mu­ni­ty orga­niz­er and colum­nist, was killed in a small town near Mum­bai. Mr. Dhabolkar, Mr. Kalbur­gi and Mr. Pansare were mur­dered by assas­sins on motor­bikes, who hid their faces with hel­mets and fled after the mur­der. Exact­ly as Ms. Lankesh was killed. The mur­dered intel­lec­tu­als also wrote in region­al lan­guages and worked as activists. Each of them shared the qual­i­ty of being accept­able to the left­ist groups and Dalit groups. They could bring togeth­er com­mu­ni­ties opposed to the Hin­du right. . . . ”

We note that the method­ol­o­gy of the RSS, the orga­ni­za­tion that killed Mahat­ma Gand­hi, remains in place.

We also note that, if Modi wants to not only get reelect­ed and also lead the BJP to a take over of par­lia­ment so he to ful­ly imple­ment his far-right agen­da, he’s going to have to fig­ure out how to get that Dalit vote: Ms. Lankesh and the oth­er vic­tims enu­mer­at­ed above stood in the way of that strat­e­gy: “ . . . . Caste, in short, remains per­haps the sin­gle most influ­en­tial fac­tor in Indi­an pol­i­tics despite rapid mod­ern­iza­tion of the world’s largest democ­ra­cy, as proven in the lat­est pres­i­den­tial con­test. And Naren­dra Modi, who won a land­slide vic­to­ry by widen­ing the party’s appeal beyond the ortho­dox Hin­du class, is sure to milk it for all it’s worth. . . . Even though it has cam­paigned on pre­serv­ing con­ser­v­a­tive Hin­du tra­di­tions, includ­ing sanc­ti­ty of upper-caste Brah­mins, the BJP is depen­dent on the votes of Dal­its and oth­er low­er castes to win cru­cial states. In the state of Bihar, the third most pop­u­lous state, Modi and the BJP suf­fered a demor­al­iz­ing defeat to the rival Rashtriya Jana­ta Dal par­ty in 2015 State Assem­bly elec­tions. Bihar’s low-caste com­mu­ni­ties vot­ed heav­i­ly in sup­port of RJD and its leader, Lalu Prasad Yadav, who was able to strike a fruit­ful elec­toral alliance between Bihar’s Mus­lims and the state’s mar­gin­al­ized, cow-herd­ing Yadav caste . . . . In March, the right-wing Hin­du par­ty secured a major vic­to­ry in India’s most pop­u­lous state of Uttar Pradesh, win­ning over the state’s low­er-caste votes. Modi steered clear of poten­tial­ly divi­sive lan­guage in his speech­es, and the par­ty was report­ed to have induct­ed mem­bers of the low­er caste in lead­er­ship posi­tions. Not sur­pris­ing­ly, Modi and the BJP are con­tin­u­ing this trend with the lat­est nom­i­na­tion of Ram Nath Kovind for pres­i­dent. . . .”

In addi­tion to polit­i­cal assas­si­na­tion and state repres­sion, it appears that Mod­i’s suc­cess may well rest, in part, on the manip­u­la­tion of elec­tron­ic vot­ing machines, some­thing that will ring famil­iar to stu­dents of Amer­i­can elec­toral pol­i­tics. ” . . . . Express­ing shock and dis­be­lief over the Uttar Pradesh Assem­bly elec­tion results, Bahu­jan Samaj Par­ty (BSP) supre­mo Mayawati today accused the Bharatiya Jana­ta Par­ty (BJP) of tam­per­ing with elec­tron­ic vot­ing machines (EVMs). ‘How come the BJP man­aged to win in Mus­lim bas­tions in the state. [The BJP and its polit­i­cal muse the RSS are vio­lent­ly anti-Mus­lim as a mat­ter of doctrine.–D.E.] The poll results are very sur­pris­ing’, Mayawati said. Alleg­ing that there was mas­sive rig­ging of vot­ing machines in the state to favour the BJP, the BSP chief said, ‘Most votes in Mus­lim major­i­ty con­stituen­cies have gone to the BJP. This makes it clear that the vot­ing machines were manip­u­lat­ed.’ . . . . ”

Trag­i­cal­ly, the chaos envelop­ing India–the assas­si­na­tions, cen­sor­ship, cor­rup­tion and con­tin­ued grind­ing social and eco­nom­ic inequality–has fueled sen­ti­ment for a mil­i­tary gov­ern­ment, presided over by a “strong leader.” “. . . . A major­i­ty of Indi­ans, 53 per­cent, sup­port mil­i­tary rule, accord­ing to a Pew Research Cen­ter sur­vey released last week. . . .  At least 55 per­cent of Indi­ans also back a gov­ern­ing sys­tem ‘in which a strong leader can make deci­sions with­out inter­fer­ence from par­lia­ment or the courts,’ the sur­vey added, not­ing that sup­port for auto­crat­ic rule is high­er in India than in any oth­er nation sur­veyed. . . .”

As Modi makes fur­ther moves to con­sol­i­date pow­er, those moves may well have strong pub­lic back­ing. Espe­cial­ly with BJP vot­ers: ” . . . . Sup­port­ers of Modi’s rul­ing Bharatiya Jana­ta Par­ty (BJP) and urban dwellers ‘are sig­nif­i­cant­ly more like­ly’ to sup­port mil­i­tary rule than back­ers of the oppo­si­tion Con­gress par­ty and rur­al res­i­dents, the Pew Research Cen­ter sur­vey showed. . . .”

The pro­gram clos­es with jux­ta­po­si­tion of two grotesque actions by Naren­dra Modi–again the Prime Min­is­ter from the BJP, a polit­i­cal front for the Hin­dut­va fas­cist RSS, the orga­ni­za­tion that mur­dered Gand­hi. (See FTR #‘s 988 and 989 for detailed analy­sis of the RSS and the killing of Gand­hi.)

In a delib­er­ate attempt to con­flate his pub­lic rela­tions image with that of Gand­hi, Modi has posed with a spin­ning wheel, which Gand­hi saw as both a vehi­cle for com­bat­ing British colo­nial tex­tile pol­i­cy and as a tool for real­iz­ing Satya­gra­ha and the per­son­al insight and dis­ci­pline required by it.

Gand­hi prac­ticed what he preached, going about attired in a loin­cloth of “home­spun” fab­ric. Modi, in con­trast, was pho­tographed in an expen­sive, pin-striped suit when enter­tain­ing the Oba­mas on a state vis­it. (The pin-stripes were actu­al­ly Naren­dra Mod­i’s name, in fine gold­en print.) Val­ued at around $16,000.00, the suit was even­tu­al­ly auc­tioned off for the sum of $695,000.00. Gand­hi’s soul must be weep­ing to see what has been done to his lega­cy. ” . . . . Indi­a’s Prime Min­is­ter Naren­dra Modi is not­ed for mak­ing bold state­ments — both in pol­i­cy and fash­ion. When Modi sport­ed a suit with pin­stripes that spelled out his name in tiny gold let­ter­ing, his crit­ics called it the height of van­i­ty. But the con­tro­ver­sial suit raised more than eye­brows: It sold at auc­tion today for near­ly $695,000. The ‘self­ie’ suit was debuted when Modi wore it to a bilat­er­al meet­ing with Pres­i­dent Oba­ma dur­ing his vis­it to India last month. . . . .”


FTR #988 Hindutva Fascism, Part 1: The Assassination of Mahatma Gandhi, Part 1 and and FTR #989 Hindutva Fascism, Part 2: The Assassination of Mahatma Gandhi, Part 2

In pre­vi­ous pro­grams, we have ana­lyzed the Hin­dut­va (Hin­du nation­al­ist) fas­cist char­ac­ter of the RSS and its polit­i­cal front the BJP, the par­ty of cur­rent Indi­an Prime Min­is­ter Naren­dra Modi.

In past dis­cus­sions of the RSS and BJP, we have not­ed the fol­low­ing:

1.-Modi’s polit­i­cal for­tunes were boost­ed with sup­port and appar­ent financ­ing from Pierre Omid­yar, who also helped finance the rise of the OUN/B fas­cists in Ukraine.
2.-Modi and his BJP are viewed with great favor by Bre­it­bart king­pin, for­mer Trump cam­paign man­ag­er and advis­er Steve Ban­non. A num­ber of Trump’s busi­ness asso­ciates in India are asso­ci­at­ed with the BJP.
3.-Bernie Sanders’ prospec­tive Vice-Pres­i­den­tial can­di­date Tul­si Gab­bard helped arrange the details for Mod­i’s Amer­i­can vis­it and is net­worked with the RSS.
4.-Under Modi, anti-Mus­lim vio­lence has dra­mat­i­cal­ly accel­er­at­ed, while free speech has been atten­u­at­ed. BJP mem­bers have cel­e­brat­ed Gand­hi’s mur­der.

An enti­ty pat­terned after Mus­solin­i’s Black­shirts, the RSS was the orga­ni­za­tion that spawned the assas­si­na­tion of Mahat­ma Gand­hi.

Fas­cist orga­ni­za­tions gen­er­al­ly demo­nize a “malev­o­lent oth­er,” in the case of the RSS, it was Indi­a’s large Mus­lim pop­u­la­tion. (Before gain­ing inde­pen­dence, India and the mod­ern nations of Pak­istan and Bangladesh were part of one large British colony.

The dis­turb­ing facts con­cern­ing Mahat­ma Gand­hi’s assas­si­na­tion at the hands of the RSS and its ide­o­log­i­cal leader V.D. Savarkar was relat­ed by James Dou­glass in “Gand­hi and the Unspeak­able”. (Dou­glass is also the author of JFK and the Unspeak­able: Why He Died and Why It Matters–a book we have used on numer­ous occa­sions.)

In this pro­gram we set forth key fea­tures of the assas­si­na­tion of Gand­hi includ­ing:

1.-The Hin­dut­va (Hin­du nation­al­ist) fas­cist ide­ol­o­gy of the RSS, the orga­ni­za­tion inspired by, and presided over, by V.D.Savarkar,which–along with its ide­o­log­i­cal leader–were deeply involved with Gand­hi’s mur­der.
2.-The RSS’s orga­ni­za­tion­al and ide­o­log­i­cal affin­i­ty with Mus­solin­i’s Black­shirts.
3.-The orga­ni­za­tion’s (and Savarkar’s) coop­er­a­tion with the British, whom Savarkar saw as poten­tial part­ners in an “Aryan Empire.”
4.-The close rela­tion­ship between the RSS and the Hin­du Mahasab­ha, a para­mil­i­tary orga­ni­za­tion that par­tic­i­pat­ed in the British colo­nial mil­i­tary dur­ing World War II and sub­se­quent­ly assumed promi­nence in the fledg­ling Indi­an nation­al secu­ri­ty estab­lish­ment.
5.-The lax­i­ty of Indi­an police offi­cials in pur­su­ing an inves­ti­ga­tion into Gand­hi’s killers fol­low­ing an ear­li­er attempt at slay­ing the Mahat­ma.
6.-The appar­ent sym­pa­thy of com­plic­it Indi­an secu­ri­ty offi­cials, many of whom had affin­i­ty with the RSS and Hin­du Mahasab­ha.
7.-The appar­ent com­plic­i­ty of Indi­an Prime Min­is­ter Nehru and Home Min­is­ter Patel in the killings–failing to enact basic, for­mal­ized secu­ri­ty pro­ce­dures that would have pro­tect­ed Gand­hi.
8.-The com­plic­i­ty of the Indi­an court try­ing Gand­hi’s killers in obscur­ing the fun­da­men­tal par­tic­i­pa­tion of Savarkar in the assas­si­na­tion con­spir­a­cy.
9.-The court’s acqui­es­cence in allow­ing Gand­hi’s self-con­fessed assas­sin Nathu­ram Godse (Savarkar’s per­son­al sec­re­tary) to read a nine-hour con­dem­na­tion of Gand­hi and implic­it defense of the Mahat­ma’s mur­der.
10.-The sub­se­quent reha­bil­i­ta­tion of Savarkar’s polit­i­cal rep­u­ta­tion after the BJP (a polit­i­cal cat’s paw for the RSS) assumed pow­er in India.
11.-The Orwellian re-write of Indi­an text books to omit any ref­er­ence to the Hin­dut­va fas­cist role in Gand­hi’s killing.


FTR #987 Walkin’ the Snake at Breitbart and YouTube

Con­tin­u­ing our long-run­ning analy­sis of the real­iza­tion of the Nazi method­ol­o­gy expressed in “Ser­pen­t’s Walk,” we fur­ther devel­op Bre­it­bart’s achieve­ments in that regard, as well as under­scor­ing how YouTube has evolved in that same man­ner.

The back cov­er of “Ser­pen­t’s Walk” sums up the essence of the tome: ” . . . It assumes that Hitler’s war­rior elite — the SS — did­n’t give up their strug­gle for a White World when they lost the Sec­ond World War. Instead their sur­vivors went under­ground and adopt­ed some of the tac­tics of their ene­mies: they began build­ing their eco­nom­ic mus­cle and buy­ing into the opin­ion-form­ing media. A cen­tu­ry after the war they are ready to chal­lenge the democ­rats and Jews for the hearts and minds of White Amer­i­cans, who have begun to have their fill of gov­ern­ment-enforced mul­ti-cul­tur­al­ism and ‘equal­i­ty.’ . . .”

Key to the suc­cess achieved by both Bre­it­bart and YouTube “alt-right” per­son­al­i­ties is net­work­ing. At Bre­it­bart, the skill­ful, adroit Milo Yiannopou­los served as a point per­son for a coterie of white suprema­cists and anti-Semi­tes while couch­ing the views they espouse in a care­ful, rhetor­i­cal­ly ambigu­ous man­ner deflec­tive of overt crit­i­cism. At YouTube, reg­u­lar per­son­al­i­ties with their own shows and con­tent host oth­er, more overt­ly extrem­ist guests and chan­nel view­ers to the more extreme sites through that expo­sure.

Buz­zFeed has a long piece based on a cache of leaked emails that describe behind-the-scenes efforts at Bre­it­bart to main­stream the “Alt Right” neo-Nazis. This sto­ry firms up analy­sis of Bre­it­bart as a white nation­al­ist pub­li­ca­tion run by neo-Nazis for the pur­pose of main­stream­ing neo-Nazi ideals.

Those efforts pri­mar­i­ly revolved around Milo Yiannopou­los, who is:

Tasked with reach­ing out to “Alt Right” fig­ures.
Get­ting com­ments from them about what the “Alt Right” was all about.
Then, lat­er get­ting feed­back from them about the planned arti­cles before they were pub­lished.
It was clear­ly a group effort. Those efforts includ­ed Andrew ‘the weev’ Auern­heimer, Cur­tis Yarvin (the founder of the “Dark Enlight­en­ment” move­ment), and Devin Sauci­er, a neo-Nazi Yiannopou­los describes as his best friend.

Of pri­ma­ry inter­est here is the cun­ning exer­cised by Yiannopou­los, Ban­non et al in pars­ing just what they can get away with doing and what they must avoid. Aueren­heimer, for exam­ple, was exclud­ed a Yiannopou­los pod­cast after being vet­ted by Bre­it­bart man­ag­ment.

The emails includ­ed back and forths between Yiannopou­los and Bre­it­bart edi­tors about whether or not the pub­li­ca­tion was get­ting too open­ly friend­ly with the Nazis, with Yiannopou­los being told at one point that it was fine to use a “shekels” joke but “you can’t even flirt with OKing gas cham­ber tweets.”

Oth­er points of infor­ma­tion include: Cur­tis Yarv­in’s state­ment that he was “coach­ing” Peter Thiel on pol­i­tics; How the two Yiannopou­los pass­words found in the emails were “a pass­word that began with the word Kristall”, and “LongKnives1290,” ref­er­ences to Kristall­nacht and the Night of the Long Knives;”

Note­wor­thy, also, is the finan­cial pow­er of the Mer­cer inter­ests, who have suc­cess­ful­ly rat­tled legal sabers against media out­lets who have tarred Yiannopou­los with the racist brush.

Alt-right YouTube hosts also employ net­work­ing, invit­ing ide­o­log­i­cal­ly extreme guests to par­tic­i­pate on their pro­grams, pre­sent­ing views more inflam­ma­to­ry than those nor­mal­ly aired on the net­casts. The extrem­ist guests then receive a sig­nif­i­cant bump-up in traf­fic from their appear­ances.


FTR #986 Walkin’ the Snake with Breitbart, Part 3

This pro­gram details the process of main­stream­ing “Alt Right” neo-Nazis. As has been dis­cussed before, this has been under­way at Bre­it­bart for some time. This analy­sis is pre­sent­ed against the back­ground of our decades-long dis­cus­sion of the Nazi tract Ser­pen­t’s Walk. The back cov­er of that book sums up the essence of the tome: ” . . . It assumes that Hitler’s war­rior elite — the SS — did­n’t give up their strug­gle for a White world when they lost the Sec­ond World War. Instead their sur­vivors went under­ground and adopt­ed some of their tac­tics of their ene­mies: they began build­ing their eco­nom­ic mus­cle and buy­ing into the opin­ion-form­ing media. A cen­tu­ry after the war they are ready to chal­lenge the democ­rats and Jews for the hearts and minds of White Amer­i­cans, who have begun to have their fill of gov­ern­ment-enforced mul­ti-cul­tur­al­ism and ‘equal­i­ty.’ . . .”

Buz­zFeed has a long piece based on a cache of leaked emails that describe behind-the-scenes efforts at Bre­it­bart to main­stream the “Alt Right” neo-Nazis. This sto­ry firms up analy­sis of Bre­it­bart as a white nation­al­ist pub­li­ca­tion run by neo-Nazis for the pur­pose of main­stream­ing neo-Nazi ideals.

Those efforts pri­mar­i­ly revolved around Milo Yiannopou­los, who is:

1.-Tasked with reach­ing out to “Alt Right” fig­ures.
2.-Getting com­ments from them about what the “Alt Right” was all about.
3.-Then, lat­er get­ting feed­back from them about the planned arti­cles before they were pub­lished.

It was clear­ly a group effort. Those efforts includ­ed Andrew ‘the weev’ Auern­heimer, Cur­tis Yarvin (the founder of the “Dark Enlight­en­ment” move­ment), and Devin Sauci­er, a neo-Nazi Yiannopou­los describes as his best friend.

Of pri­ma­ry inter­est here is the cun­ning exer­cised by Yiannopou­los, Ban­non et al in pars­ing just what they can get away with doing and what they must avoid. ” . . . . By Yiannopoulos’s own admis­sion, main­tain­ing a suf­fi­cient­ly believ­able dis­tance from overt racists and white nation­al­ists was cru­cial to the machine he had helped Ban­non build. . . .‘Thanks re 1488,’ Yiannopou­los respond­ed. . . .‘I have been strug­gling with this. I need to stay, if not clean, then clean enough.’ ”

The emails includ­ed back and forths between Yiannopou­los and Bre­it­bart edi­tors about whether or not the pub­li­ca­tion was get­ting too open­ly friend­ly with the Nazis, with Yiannopou­los being told at one point that it was fine to use a “shekels” joke but “you can’t even flirt with OKing gas cham­ber tweets.”

Pro­gram High­lights Include:

1.-Curtis Yarv­in’s  state­ment that he was “coach­ing” Peter Thiel on pol­i­tics.
2.-How the two Yiannopou­los pass­words found in the emails were “a pass­word that began with the word Kristall”, and “LongKnives1290”.
3.-How the for­mi­da­ble eco­nom­ic pow­er of the Mer­cer fam­i­ly serves as a legal intim­i­da­tion fac­tor for any­one label­ing Yiannopou­los as a racist or Nazi.


FTR #985 Fascism: 2017 European Tour, Part 2

Begin­ning our tour in Poland, we note alarm­ing signs of that coun­try descend­ing into fas­cism, with anti-immi­grant, anti-Mus­lim xeno­pho­bia on the ide­o­log­i­cal front burn­er of the iron­i­cal­ly named Law and Jus­tice Par­ty: ” . . . . Tens of thou­sands of peo­ple — many of them young men with crew cuts, but some par­ents with chil­dren, too — flocked to the Pol­ish cap­i­tal to cel­e­brate Inde­pen­dence Day in a march orga­nized in part by two neo-fas­cist orga­ni­za­tions. They waved white and red Pol­ish flags, they bran­dished burn­ing torch­es, and they wore “white pow­er” sym­bols. They car­ried ban­ners declar­ing, ‘Death to ene­mies of the home­land,’ and screamed, ‘Sieg Heil!’ and ‘Ku Klux Klan!’ . . . .”

The treat­ment accord­ed female counter-demon­stra­tors exem­pli­fies the nature of the ral­ly: ” . . . . A dozen incred­i­bly coura­geous women showed up to protest the march. After mix­ing with the marchers, they unrav­eled a long strip of cloth embla­zoned with ‘Stop Fas­cism.’ They were imme­di­ate­ly attacked. Their ban­ner was ripped apart. Marchers pushed some of the women to the ground and kicked oth­ers. . . .”

At an insti­tu­tion­al lev­el, the Law and Jus­tice Par­ty is imple­ment­ing an Orwellian mock­ery of its name: ” . . . Ever since the Law and Jus­tice Par­ty won both the pres­i­den­tial and par­lia­men­tary elec­tions in 2015, Poland has been under­go­ing a dis­turb­ing polit­i­cal trans­for­ma­tion. Law and Jus­tice is an Orwellian name for a par­ty that con­stant­ly vio­lates the law, breaks con­sti­tu­tion­al pro­vi­sions and is hell­bent on sub­ject­ing the courts to its con­trol. The par­ty is dis­man­tling the insti­tu­tion­al frame­work of par­lia­men­tary democ­ra­cy piece by piece in order to remove any restraints on the per­son­al pow­er of its leader, Jaroslaw Kaczyn­s­ki. ‘Prezes,’ the Boss, peo­ple call him. . . .”

The xeno­pho­bia uti­lized by the Law and Jus­tice Par­ty is a com­mon ele­ment in Euro­pean and Amer­i­can fas­cist move­ments: ” . . . . Two years ago, the par­ty bet that latch­ing onto the refugee cri­sis in Europe would give it pur­chase on the votes nec­es­sary to win. Its cal­cu­la­tion proved entire­ly cor­rect. One of the first insti­tu­tions the par­ty hijacked was pub­lic tele­vi­sion. Law and Jus­tice has turned it into Fox News on steroids, paid for by the tax­pay­ers. It feeds view­ers non­stop pro­pa­gan­da about the mount­ing threat to Poland’s sov­er­eign­ty from the Euro­pean Union, specif­i­cal­ly in the form of Mus­lim refugees. Those refugees present a threat to our way of life, the gov­ern­ment and the press insist. They will assault our women, they say, and they are car­ry­ing infec­tious dis­eases to boot. A year ago, a quar­ter of Poles opposed accept­ing any­one flee­ing the rav­ages of war in the Mid­dle East; after months of relent­less pro­pa­gan­da, 75 per­cent are now opposed. This year the coun­try has let in only 1,474 asy­lum seek­ers, near­ly all of them from Rus­sia or Ukraine. . . .”

In Italy, Cas­a­Pound reca­pit­u­lates Italy’s fas­cist past, in res­o­nance with anti-immi­grant xeno­pho­bia exhib­it­ed by oth­er neo-fas­cist par­ties: ” . . . . But Cas­a­Pound is win­ning seats in a hand­ful of towns, and some of its core beliefs — a fond­ness for Rus­sia and sharp oppo­si­tion to the Euro­pean Union, glob­al­iza­tion and immi­gra­tion, which it believes sul­ly the nation­al iden­ti­ty and econ­o­my — are increas­ing­ly spread­ing through­out Italy. In Sici­ly, the new head­quar­ters of Broth­ers of Italy, a descen­dant of the post-fas­cist Ital­ian Social Move­ment, had the phrase ‘Ital­ians first’ writ­ten on the wall dur­ing its recent inau­gu­ra­tion. Anti-immi­gra­tion sen­ti­ment has grown so pop­u­lar that the once-seces­sion­ist North­ern League has dropped the word ‘North­ern’ from its name as it looks for inroads to the south. . . .”

Much of our tour is in Ukraine, where the OUN/B fas­cists are rewrit­ing his­to­ry.

Key ele­ments of this Orwellian re-write include:

1.-The Insti­tute of Nation­al Mem­o­ry, head­ed by Volodomyr Via­tro­vych, is stand­ing World War II his­to­ry on its head. inter­na­tion­al­ists. . . .”
2.-Viatrovych and his Insti­tute are mar­ket­ing a “pet Jew” UPA sol­dier to prove the open-mind­ed, polit­i­cal­ly cor­rect­ness of the UPA and the OUN/B.
3.-Wholesale sup­port for Via­tro­vy­ch’s Orwellian re-write of Ukrain­ian his­to­ry has come from Poroshenko gov­ern­ment: “. . . . The con­tro­ver­sy cen­ters on a telling of World War II his­to­ry that ampli­fies Sovi­et crimes and glo­ri­fies Ukrain­ian nation­al­ist fight­ers while dis­miss­ing the vital part they played in eth­nic cleans­ing of Poles and Jews from 1941 to 1945 after the Nazi inva­sion of the for­mer Sovi­et Union. . . . And more point­ed­ly, schol­ars now fear that they risk reprisal for not toe­ing the offi­cial line — or call­ing Via­tro­vych on his his­tor­i­cal dis­tor­tions. Under Viatrovych’s reign, the coun­try could be head­ed for a new, and fright­en­ing, era of cen­sor­ship. . . .”
4.-More about Via­tro­vy­ch’s his­tor­i­cal pro­pa­gan­da: “. . . . To that effect, Via­tro­vych has dis­missed his­tor­i­cal events not com­port­ing with this nar­ra­tive as ‘Sovi­et pro­pa­gan­da.’ [This is true of infor­ma­tion pre­sent­ed by any­one that tells the truth about the OUN/B heirs now in pow­er in Ukraine–they are dis­missed as ‘Russ­ian dupes’ or “tools of the Krem­lin’ etc.–D.E.] In his 2006 book, The OUN’s Posi­tion Towards the Jews: For­mu­la­tion of a posi­tion against the back­drop of a cat­a­stro­phe, he attempt­ed to exon­er­ate the OUN from its col­lab­o­ra­tion in the Holo­caust by ignor­ing the over­whelm­ing mass of his­tor­i­cal lit­er­a­ture. . . .”
5. The Pol­ish fas­cists described above have remained silent about Via­tro­vy­ch’s aca­d­e­m­ic coverup of the Ukrain­ian fas­cists’ exter­mi­na­tion of eth­nic Poles dur­ing World War “. . . . UPA supreme com­man­der Dmytro Kliachkivs’kyi explic­it­ly stat­ed: ‘We should car­ry out a large-scale liq­ui­da­tion action against Pol­ish ele­ments. Dur­ing the evac­u­a­tion of the Ger­man Army, we should find an appro­pri­ate moment to liq­ui­date the entire male pop­u­la­tion between 16 and 60 years old.’ Giv­en that over 70 per­cent of the lead­ing UPA cadres pos­sessed a back­ground as Nazi col­lab­o­ra­tors, none of this is sur­pris­ing. . . .”
6. Ukraine’s Min­istry of Edu­ca­tion is echo­ing and ampli­fy­ing Via­tro­vy­ch’s nar­ra­tive: “. . . . Sev­en­ty his­to­ri­ans signed an open let­ter to Poroshenko ask­ing him to veto the draft law that bans crit­i­cism of the OUN-UPA. . . . After the open let­ter was pub­lished, the legislation’s spon­sor, Yuri Shukhevych, react­ed furi­ous­ly. Shukhevych, the son of UPA leader Roman Shukhevych and a long­time far-right polit­i­cal activist him­self, fired off a let­ter to Min­is­ter of Edu­ca­tion Ser­hiy Kvit claim­ing, ‘Russ­ian spe­cial ser­vices’ pro­duced the let­ter and demand­ed that ‘patri­ot­ic’ his­to­ri­ans rebuff it. Kvit, also a long­time far-right activist and author of an admir­ing biog­ra­phy one of the key the­o­reti­cians of Ukrain­ian eth­nic nation­al­ism, in turn omi­nous­ly high­light­ed the sig­na­to­ries of Ukrain­ian his­to­ri­ans on his copy of the let­ter. . . .”
7.-More about Min­is­ter of Edu­ca­tion Kvit, and Via­tro­vych: “. . . . Last June, Kvit’s Min­istry of Edu­ca­tion issued a direc­tive to teach­ers regard­ing the ‘neces­si­ty to accen­tu­ate the patri­o­tism and moral­i­ty of the activists of the lib­er­a­tion move­ment,’ includ­ing depict­ing the UPA as a ‘sym­bol of patri­o­tism and sac­ri­fi­cial spir­it in the strug­gle for an inde­pen­dent Ukraine’ and Ban­dera as an ‘out­stand­ing rep­re­sen­ta­tive’ of the Ukrain­ian peo­ple.’ More recent­ly, Viatrovych’s Ukrain­ian Insti­tute of Nation­al Mem­o­ry pro­posed that the city of Kiev rename two streets after Ban­dera and the for­mer supreme com­man­der of both the UPA and the Nazi-super­vised Schutz­mannschaft Roman Shukhevych. . . .”
8.-In keep­ing with the re-writ­ing of Ukraine’s wartime his­to­ry, the city of Lvov [Lviv or Lem­berg, when it was part of Poland] has estab­lished a fes­ti­val in hon­or of Roman Shukhevych, the head of the Ein­satz­gruppe Nachti­gall or Nightin­gale Bat­tal­ion, on the anniver­sary of the begin­ning of a pogrom that he led.

More about this pogrom:

1, “The Ukrain­ian city of Lviv will hold a fes­ti­val cel­e­brat­ing a Nazi col­lab­o­ra­tor on the anniver­sary of a major pogrom against the city’s Jews. . . . On June 30, 1941, Ukrain­ian troops, includ­ing mili­ti­a­men loy­al to Shukhevych’s, began a series of pogroms against Jews, which they per­pe­trat­ed under the aus­pices of the Ger­man army, accord­ing to Yale Uni­ver­si­ty his­to­ry pro­fes­sor Tim­o­thy Sny­der and oth­er schol­ars. They mur­dered approx­i­mate­ly 6,000 Jews in those pogroms. . . .”
2.-The Ein­satz­gruppe Nachti­gall was an SS exter­mi­na­tion unit. “. . . . In 1959 [SS offi­cer Theodor] Ober­laen­der was the cen­ter of a storm that final­ly forced his res­ig­na­tion in May 1960. He was blamed for the mass mur­der of thou­sands of Jews and Pol­ish intel­lec­tu­als who had been liq­ui­dat­ed in July 1941 when a spe­cial SS task force under his com­mand occu­pied the Pol­ish city of Lem­berg (Lvov). . . . As briefly men­tioned in a pre­vi­ous chap­ter, Min­is­ter Ober­laen­der is accused of hav­ing been involved in the so-called “Lem­berg mas­sacre,” in which sev­er­al thou­sand Poles and more than 5,000 Jews were slaugh­tered. Dr. Ober­laen­der does not deny a] that he was the com­mand­ing offi­cer of a spe­cial SS task force, the Nightin­gale Bat­tal­ion, made up of nation­al­ist Ukraini­ans; and b] that this bat­tal­ion was the first Ger­man unit to move into the Pol­ish city of Lem­berg on June 29, 1941, where it remained for six or sev­en days. . . .”

The offi­cial found­ing of the UPA (Octo­ber 14)–the group whose troops com­prised the Ein­satz­gruppe Nachtigall–is now a nation­al holdiay Ukraine: ” . . . . Thou­sands of Ukrain­ian nation­al­ists have marched through the cap­i­tal, Kyiv, to mark the 75th anniver­sary of the cre­ation of the con­tro­ver­sial Ukrain­ian Insur­gent Army (UPA). March orga­niz­ers said as many as 20,000 peo­ple par­tic­i­pat­ed in the Octo­ber 14 march, which was sup­port­ed by the right-wing Free­dom, Right Sec­tor, and Nation­al Corp polit­i­cal par­ties. . . . Jour­nal­ists report­ed see­ing some marchers giv­ing Nazi salutes. Since 2015, the Octo­ber 14 anniver­sary has been marked as the Defend­er of Ukraine Day pub­lic hol­i­day. . . . .”

Pro­gram High­lights Include:

1.-We return to the sub­ject of the Lithuan­ian Rifle­man’s Union, who are engag­ing with maneu­vers with sim­i­lar orga­ni­za­tions from Latvia and Lithua­nia.
2.-Reviewing infor­ma­tion about the Lithuan­ian Rifle­men’s Union, we high­light its activ­i­ties as part of the Nazi mil­i­tary effort in the Baltic states, includ­ing par­tic­i­pa­tion in admin­is­ter­ing Hitler’s “Final Solu­tion.”
3.-Reminiscent of the Nazi “pun­ish­er bat­tal­ions,” the Lithuan­ian Rifle­man’s Union–a fas­cist militia–has been expand­ed to meet the so-called “Russ­ian threat.” Like the OUN/B’s mil­i­tary wing–the UPA–the Lithuan­ian Rifle­man’s Union con­tin­ued the com­bat of World War II until the ear­ly 1950’s. Formed dur­ing the wan­ing days of the Sec­ond World War, they jumped from the Third Reich to the Office of Pol­i­cy Coor­di­na­tion, a CIA/State Depart­ment oper­a­tional direc­torate. (This is cov­ered in FTR #777, as well as AFA #1.)
4.-Review of info­ra­tion from FTR #779, not­ing that Svo­bo­da was net­work­ing with Rober­to Fiore’s Forza Nuo­va. Svo­bo­da has threat­ened Ukrain­ian Jews who protest­ed the estab­lish­ment of an offi­cial hol­i­day in Ukraine hon­or­ing Ukrain­ian pogromist Sime­on Pet­lyu­ra, whose troops killed 50,000 Jews in Ukraine.


FTR #984 Fascism: 2017 European Tour

We begin our tour by exam­in­ing overt­ly fas­cist ele­ments in the gov­ern­ing Bul­gar­i­an coali­tion of Boyko Borisov, evoca­tive of Bul­gar­i­a’s past as an ally of Nazi Ger­many in World War II. ” . . . May 17, Pavel Tenev, Min­is­ter of Region­al Devel­op­ment, at the time, was forced to resign, after pub­li­ca­tion of a pho­to, show­ing him with his right arm extend­ed in a Nazi salute, stand­ing in front of a wax fig­ure of a Nazi offi­cer in Paris’ Musée Grévin. May 19, anoth­er pho­to was pub­lished on the inter­net, show­ing the fresh­ly appoint­ed depart­ment direc­tor in the Min­istry of Defense, Ivo Antonov, also giv­ing the Nazi salute in front of a Sec­ond World War tank of the Wehrma­cht. . . .”

Oth­er coali­tion part­ners have made dis­parag­ing remarks about Roma (“gyp­sies”) and Jews. Worth not­ing that Borisov’s selec­tion of coali­tion part­ners: ” . . . .Fol­low­ing the recent March 26, par­lia­men­tary elec­tions, Borisov, the win­ner of the elec­tions (his GERB with 32.7 per­cent), did not begin nego­ti­a­tions for a gov­ern­ment coali­tion with the Bul­gar­i­an Social­ist Par­ty (27.2 per­cent) or with the Move­ment for Rights and Free­doms (9 per­cent) rep­re­sent­ing the Turk­ish-speak­ing minor­i­ty, but rather with the Unit­ed Patri­ots (9.1 per­cent). The Unit­ed Patri­ots is an alliance of three extreme right-wing par­ties. . . .”

In recent weeks, the strug­gle over the poten­tial seces­sion of Cat­alo­nia from Spain has gar­nered con­sid­er­able atten­tion

That strug­gle is framed against a larg­er polit­i­cal dynam­ic embrac­ing advo­ca­cy of the elim­i­na­tion of for­mal nation­al bor­ders in Europe in favor of “region­al­ist plans.” Just such region­al­ist advo­ca­cy was the focal point of a promi­nent arti­cle (with accom­pa­ny­ing maps of the pro­ject­ed realign­ment) in Die Zeit, a major Ger­man week­ly.

Region­al­ist advo­ca­cy has a sig­nif­i­cant past, with the ear­ly post­war CIA and Allen Dulles hav­ing embraced such a dynam­ic. ” . . . . the fed­er­al­ists had ini­tial­ly been sup­port­ed and con­trolled by the CIA pre­de­ces­sor, the Office of Strate­gic Ser­vices (OSS) and [one of its top spies] Alan Dulles, resid­ing in Bern, and lat­er by the CIA itself. . . .”

In addi­tion, the region­al­ist dyanam­ic enjoyed the sup­port of long-time Ger­man finance min­is­ter Wolf­gang Schauble, whose advo­ca­cy and imple­men­ta­tion of bru­tal fis­cal aus­ter­i­ty helped beg­gar much of the EU, includ­ing Spain, fol­low­ing the finan­cial cri­sis of 2008. ” . . . . Wolf­gang Schäu­ble, as Pres­i­dent of the Asso­ci­a­tion of Euro­pean Bor­der Regions (AEBR) in the ear­ly 1980’s, was also pro­mot­ing region­al­ist plans. Inspired by for­mer Nazi func­tionar­ies, the AEBR crit­i­cized the ‘nation-state’s bar­ri­er effect’ of bor­ders in the inter­ests of large cor­po­ra­tions. . . . For­mer Nazi func­tionar­ies were active­ly par­tic­i­pat­ing both on the AEBR’s com­mit­tees and in the imme­di­ate entourage of its plan­ning of the ‘region­al­iza­tion’ of the bor­der regions, includ­ing Gerd Jans, the for­mer mem­ber of the Waf­fen SS in the Nether­lands, Kon­rad Mey­er, respon­si­ble for the Naz­i’s ‘Gen­er­alplan Ost,’ Her­mann Josef Abs, of the Deutsche Bank, as well as Alfred Toepfer, described by the pub­li­cist Hans-Rüdi­ger Minow as ‘infa­mous for his bor­der sub­ver­sion of France’s Alsace.’ In an exten­sive study, Minow describes the con­ti­nu­ities of the Naz­i’s con­cepts. . . .”

Despite an ini­tial impres­sion of “region­al­ism” that many might see as alien, The Schauble/AEBR/regionalism dyan­mic ide­ol­o­gy may be seen as some­thing of a sub­sidiary ele­ment of glob­al­iza­tion. ” . . . .  .In 1979, Schäu­ble became pres­i­dent of the Asso­ci­a­tion of Euro­pean Bor­der Regions (AEBR), an orga­ni­za­tion with the objec­tive of down­grad­ing the sig­nif­i­cance of bor­ders in Europe. Busi­ness inter­ests played an impor­tant role, which is why the AEBR could find reli­able sup­port­ers in indus­try. A ‘Euro­pean Char­ter on Bor­der and Cross-Bor­der Regions,’ passed by the AEBR in 1981, stip­u­lat­ed that the ‘elim­i­na­tion of eco­nom­ic and infra­struc­tur­al bar­ri­ers’ must urgent­ly be pur­sued. . . .”

The imple­men­ta­tion of region­al­iza­tion would facil­i­tate Ger­man dom­i­na­tion of Europe, which has met resis­tance from poor­er EU and EMU coun­tries over the aus­ter­i­ty doc­trine favored by Wolf­gang Schauble. ” . . . . Eco­nom­ic maps by the EU’s Euro­stat sta­tis­tics admin­is­tra­tion show the regions where Europe’s wealth and, there­fore, Europe’s eco­nom­ic pow­er is con­cen­trat­ed, a block with its cen­ters in south­ern and cen­tral Ger­many, to the west, in Flan­ders and spread­ing to seg­ments of the Nether­lands, and to the South to parts of Aus­tria and North­ern Italy and in var­i­ous sep­a­rate regions of West­ern and North­ern Europe. A num­ber of these regions main­tain close rela­tions to Ger­many, or to the Ger­man regions. (german-foreign-policy.com reported.[11]) This clear­ly Ger­man-dom­i­nat­ed block would hard­ly have any dif­fi­cul­ty con­trol­ling a ‘Europe of the Regions.’ . . . .”

Also worth not­ing is the fact that the Cat­alon­ian inde­pen­dence move­ment embraces a Cat­alon­ian iden­ti­ty that involves peo­ple from France, as well as Spain: ” . . . . The Cata­lan move­ment cur­rent­ly push­ing for seces­sion is in fact large­ly defin­ing itself eth­ni­cal­ly. The autonomous move­ment has been close­ly coop­er­at­ing with French cit­i­zens, who live out­side the Span­ish region of Cat­alo­nia, but also con­sid­er them­selves ‘eth­nic Cata­lans.’ At their ral­lies one can hear ‘Nei­ther France nor Spain! Only one coun­try, Cat­alo­nia!’ . . . .”

The two Twit­ter accounts that appear to account for near­ly a third of all Twit­ter traf­fic with the #Cat­alo­nia hash­tag, in ref­er­ence to the Cat­alon­ian seces­sion move­ment belong to Julian Assange and Edward Snow­den.

 Of more  than pass­ing inter­est, under the cir­cum­stances, is the Twit­ter effort by both Julian Assange and Edward Snow­den on behalf of Cat­alon­ian inde­pen­dence.

 As seen in many past pro­grams and posts, Snow­den and Assange are as far to the right as it is pos­si­ble to be.

 Their cyber­lib­er­tar­i­an activism and their sup­port for Cat­alon­ian inde­pen­dence is root­ed in anar­cho-lib­er­tar­i­an eco­nom­ic the­o­ry. See­ing the dis­so­lu­tion of nation­al gov­ern­ments as desir­able, their sup­port for the prin­ci­ple of seces­sion is root­ed in what Mus­soli­ni termed “cor­po­ratism.”

 Snow­den and Assange’s osten­si­bly “lib­er­at­ing” doc­trines, if put into effect, would leave cit­i­zen­ry  at the mer­cy of unfet­tered eco­nom­ic will, exer­cised by cor­po­ra­tions and their asso­ci­at­ed elites.

Snow­den specif­i­cal­ly appears to be advo­cat­ing that no seces­sion move­ment any­where ever can be reject­ed by the gov­ern­ment under the premise that self-deter­mi­na­tion is a human right, view­ing this as a “nat­ur­al law” issue.

In that con­text, the right to secede is cham­pi­oned by the Lib­er­tar­i­an far-right, all the way down to the right to indi­vid­u­als to secede from all gov­ern­ment. As this piece from Lib­er­tar­i­an David S. D’Amato demon­strates, extend­ing the right to secede down to the indi­vid­ual facil­i­tates the imple­men­ta­tion of an anar­cho-cap­i­tal­ist soci­ety with no gov­ern­ment at all, as seen by fig­ures like Mur­ray Roth­bard. This is envi­sioned as an excel­lent way­of achiev­ing an anar­cho-cap­i­tal­ist utopia.

The Snowden/Assange pro-seces­sion­ist move­ment should also be seen against the back­ground of the Neo-Con­fed­er­ate move­ment, cham­pi­oned by Ron Paul and the Lud­wig Von Mis­es Insti­tute.

 Fol­low­ing cap­ture of 13 per­cent of the vote in Germany’s fed­er­al elec­tions on Sun­day by the Alter­na­tive For Ger­many (AfD), Alexan­der Gauland, the AfD leader, pro­voked out­rage after sug­gest­ing that Ger­mans should no longer be reproached with the Nazi past.

This type of behav­ior appar­ent­ly moti­vat­ed AfD leader Frauke Petry to leave the par­ty, just hours after the elec­tion over its extrem­ism.

Pro­gram High­lights Include:

1.-Review of Dorothy Thomp­son’s 1941 arti­cle about what a Nazi vic­to­ry in Europe would look like–a sce­nario that bears con­sid­er­able resem­blance to the region­al­iza­tion plan dis­cussed above.
2.-Discussion of the poten­tial for­tunes of Aus­tri­a’s Free­dom Par­ty, formed in 1956 as a vehi­cle for the re-intro­duc­tion of Aus­tri­an Third Reich alum­ni into that nation’s polit­i­cal process.


FTR #983 Fascism, 2017 World Tour, Part 2

As the title indi­cates, this pro­gram exam­ines man­i­fes­ta­tions of fas­cism around the world.

In Europe, we ana­lyze:

1.-The reca­pit­u­la­tion of Nazi and fas­cist ele­ments in the cur­rent Bul­gar­i­an coali­tion gov­ern­ment of Boyko Borisov. (Bul­gar­ia was a Nazi ally in World War II.)
2.-The vital­i­ty of “regionalism”–a political/economic doc­trine that advo­cates the seces­sion of key pros­per­ous regions from nation states.
3.-Analysis of region­al­ism as an appli­ca­tion of glob­al­ist eco­nom­ic the­o­ry to Euorope.
4.-The his­to­ry of regionalism’s advoa­cy by Third Reich vet­er­an the­o­reti­cians.
5.-Edward Snow­den and Julian Assange’s sup­port for Cata­lan seces­sion from Spain.
6.-The suc­cess of the AfD in Ger­man elec­tions.
7.-AfD politi­cian Alexan­der Gauland’s state­ment that Ger­mans should be proud of what that country’s sol­diers accom­plished in World War II.
8.-The Aus­tri­an Free­dom Party’s pro­ject­ed suc­cess in upcom­ing elec­tions. The par­ty was formed in 1956 by Third Reich vet­er­ans as a vehi­cle for re-intro­duc­ing Aus­tri­an Nazis into the country’s polit­i­cal life.

In Latin Amer­i­ca, we exam­ine:

1.-The ver­dict that Argen­tine AMIA bomb­ing inves­ti­ga­tor Alber­to Nisman’s death was a mur­der, not a sui­cide.
2.-Review of the AMIA bomb­ing inves­ti­ga­tion.
3.-The dis­cov­ery of a cache of Nazi arti­facts, includ­ing devices used for deter­min­ing racial puri­ty. Hitler appar­ent­ly posed with some of the arti­fi­cats.
4.-The role of Nisman’s wid­ow as the judge inves­ti­gat­ing the Nazi arti­fact case.
5.-Operational links between Amer­i­can Nazi Christo­pher Cantwell and the Koch Broth­ers-fund­ed Lud­wig Von Mis­es Insti­tute in Brazil.

In the Unit­ed States, we detail:

1.-How Bre­it­bart active­ly pro­mot­ed Neo-Nazism, while down­play­ing what it was actu­al­ly doing.
2.-How white suprema­cist and Nazi ele­ments are suc­cess­ful­ly using YouTube to main­stream fas­cist and racist views.

In the Mid­dle East, we high­light:

1.-Benjamin Netanyahu’s polit­i­cal con­nec­tions with the Thyssen/Krupp firm, one of the lynch­pins of the Bor­mann cap­i­tal net­work.
2.-Yair Netanyahu’s attri­bu­tion of his father’s polit­i­cal dif­fi­cul­ties to sab­o­tage by an inter­na­tion­al Jew­ish con­spir­a­cy.
3.-Ronald Regan’s 1981 cita­tion of Ibn Khal­dun as a key advo­cate for sup­ply-side eco­nom­ics.
4.-Review of the Mus­lim Brotherhood’s embrace of the views of Ibn Khal­dun.


FTR #982 Manafort and the Snipers: The Azov Battalion and the “Russia-Gate” Psy-Op

Con­tin­u­ing and deep­en­ing analy­sis of the pro­found Ukrain­ian fas­cist con­nec­tion to the “Rus­sia-Gate” dis­in­for­ma­tion inun­dat­ing the Amer­i­can polit­i­cal and jour­nal­is­tic land­scapes, this pro­gram high­lights cir­cum­stances sur­round­ing the sniper shoot­ings  at the Maid­an demon­stra­tions.

Those sniper shoot­ings were the key cir­cum­stance gen­er­at­ing inter­na­tion­al out­rage against the Yanukovich regime and pre­cip­i­tat­ing the rise of the OUN/B Ukrainain fas­cist suc­ces­sor orga­ni­za­tions. Record­ed the day after for­mer Yanukovuch advis­er and Trump cam­paign man­ag­er Paul Man­afort was indict­ed by [VERY] spe­cial pros­e­cu­tor Robert Mueller, this pro­gram sup­ple­ments dis­cus­sion from FTR #981.

Dis­till­ing infor­ma­tion con­cern­ing the sniper attacks, we review the pos­si­bil­i­ty that Man­afort might have played an advi­so­ry role in the sniper shoot­ings, that the shoot­ings might have been a provo­ca­tion and exam­ine the role of the Nazi Azov bat­tal­ion and its pro­po­nents and com­po­nent fig­ures in con­nec­tion with the Maid­an shoot­ings and the “Rus­sia-Gate” pro­pa­gan­da. 

We won­der if recent attacks in Ukraine might be ele­ments of a “san­i­ti­za­tion” oper­a­tion, aimed at elim­i­nat­ing par­tic­i­pants in the Maid­an shoot­ings (provo­ca­tion?), while blam­ing the vio­lence (of course) on Rus­sia.

Major con­sid­er­a­tions in the Azov Battalion/Maidan sniper/Manafort imbroglio include:

1.-Alleged “Russ­ian agent” Paul Manafort–identified in FTR #919 as a prob­a­ble “advance man” for regimes tar­get­ed for destabilization–may well have been the per­son who rec­om­mend­ed to his “client” Yanukovich to fire on the Maid­an demon­stra­tors. It was that gun­fire that sig­nalled the end of Yanukovich’s gov­ern­ment. This rein­forces Mr. Emory’s take on Man­afort. ” . . . . The lawyer’s demands for expla­na­tion spring from the hack­ing ear­li­er this year of the iPhone of Mr Manafort’s daugh­ter, [since con­firmed as gen­uine, at least in part–D.E.] Andrea, with around 300,000 mes­sages pub­lished in the dark web. One of the texts sent to her sis­ter Jes­si­ca said: ‘Don’t fool your­self. That mon­ey we have is blood mon­ey.’ It con­tin­ued ‘You know he has killed peo­ple in Ukraine? Know­ing­ly, as a tac­tic to out­rage the world and get focus on Ukraine. Remem­ber when there were all those deaths tak­ing place. A while back. About a year ago. Revolts and what not. Do you know whose strat­e­gy that was to cause that, to send those peo­ple get them slaugh­tered.’ . . . .”
2.-Reinforcing the hypoth­e­sis that the Maid­an shoot­ings were a provo­ca­tion is the dis­clo­sure by Ukraine’s chief pros­e­cu­tor that the rifles alleged­ly used to fire on the Maid­an demon­stra­tors were recov­ered by an alleged Yanukovich oper­a­tive and leader of the snipers who was one of the demon­stra­tors on the Maid­an! “ . . . Ukraine’s Pros­e­cu­tor Gen­er­al Yuriy Lut­senko says that the man who helped the so-called “black hun­dred” of police task force Berkut, who had been shoot­ing at pro­test­ers dur­ing the Rev­o­lu­tion of Dig­ni­ty, flee Kyiv and delib­er­ate­ly drowned their weapons to con­ceal evi­dence, was him­self one of the par­tic­i­pants of the Maid­an protests. ‘With the help of mil­i­tary coun­ter­in­tel­li­gence, we have found weapons of the ‘black hun­dred,’ includ­ing a sniper rifle, which the entire coun­try saw on footage show­ing the shoot­ing at the pro­test­ers from out­side the Octo­ber Palace,” he told the 112 Ukraine TV chan­nel. . . . ‘We found it with a large num­ber of auto­mat­ic rifles on the bot­tom of one of Kiev’s lakes. They were cut and drowned in one batch by a sin­gle group, whose leader is one of the tar­gets of our inves­ti­ga­tion. Unfor­tu­nate­ly, this man who, accord­ing to our ver­sion, upon the orders of [for­mer Inte­ri­or Min­is­ter Vitaliy] Zakharchenko helped the ‘black hun­dred’ flee Kyiv, destroyed and drowned their weapons, he, him­self, was with us on the Maid­an,’ Lut­senko said. . . . ”
3.-The jour­nal­is­tic view­point on a Ukrain­ian hack­er alleged­ly used by “Russ­ian hack­ers” against the U.S. comes from  Anton Gerashchenko, part of the same milieu as Pravy Sek­tor, Azov, etc. Gerashchenko is, in fact, an apol­o­gist for Azov, as dis­cussed in FTR #‘s 803, 804, 808, 818:  ” . . . . Secu­ri­ty experts were ini­tial­ly left scratch­ing their heads when the Depart­ment of Home­land Secu­ri­ty on Dec. 29 released tech­ni­cal evi­dence of Russ­ian hack­ing that seemed to point not to Rus­sia, but rather to Ukraine. . . A mem­ber of Ukraine’s Par­lia­ment with close ties to the secu­ri­ty ser­vices, Anton Gerashchenko, said that the inter­ac­tion was online or by phone and that the Ukrain­ian pro­gram­mer had been paid to write cus­tomized mal­ware with­out know­ing its pur­pose, only lat­er learn­ing it was used in Russ­ian hack­ing. . . . It is not clear whether the spe­cif­ic mal­ware the pro­gram­mer cre­at­ed was used to hack the D.N.C. servers. . . .”
4.-Exemplifying the Ukrain­ian fas­cists at the epi­cen­ter of “Rus­sia-Gate” are a group of Ukrain­ian hack­ers, work­ing in tan­dem with fas­cist politi­cians like the afore­men­tioned Anton Gerashchenko. (This is dis­cussed in FTR #981.) The hacker/Ukrainian fas­cist link spawned the “Pro­pOrNot” list of “Russian/Kremlin/Putin” dupes in the U.S. media: This list was com­piled by the Ukrain­ian intel­li­gence ser­vice, inte­ri­or min­istry and–ahem–hackers: “. . . . One of the more fright­en­ing poli­cies enact­ed by the cur­rent oli­garch-nation­al­ist regime in Kiev is an online black­list [42] of jour­nal­ists accused of col­lab­o­rat­ing with pro-Russ­ian ‘ter­ror­ists.’ [43]  The web­site, ‘Myrotvorets’ [43] or ‘Peacemaker’—was set up by Ukrain­ian hack­ers work­ing with state intel­li­gence and police, all of which tend to share the same ultra­na­tion­al­ist ide­olo­gies as Paru­biy and the new­ly-appoint­ed neo-Nazi chief of the Nation­al Police. . . . The web­site is designed to fright­en and muz­zle jour­nal­ists from report­ing any­thing but the pro-nation­al­ist par­ty line, and it has the back­ing of gov­ern­ment offi­cials, spies and police—including the SBU (Ukraine’s suc­ces­sor to the KGB), the pow­er­ful Inte­ri­or Min­is­ter Avakov and his noto­ri­ous far-right deputy, Anton Geraschenko. Ukraine’s jour­nal­ist black­list website—operated by Ukrain­ian hack­ers work­ing with state intelligence—led to a rash of death threats against the doxxed jour­nal­ists, whose email address­es, phone num­bers and oth­er pri­vate infor­ma­tion was post­ed anony­mous­ly to the web­site. . . .”
5.-Anton Geraschenko is also a pri­ma­ry asso­ciate and defend­er of the Azov Bat­tal­ion and the Nazi Social Nation­al Assem­bly that helped spawn it and over­laps its oper­a­tions: ” . . . . The Azov Bat­tal­ion was formed and armed by Ukraine’s inte­rior min­istry. A min­is­te­r­ial advis­er, Anton Gerashchenko [who is net­work­ing with Ukrain­ian hack­ers loom­ing large in the “Rus­sia-Gate” investigation–D.E.], got angry when I asked him if the bat­tal­ion had any neo-Nazi links through the Social Nation­al Assem­bly. ‘The Social Nation­al Assem­bly is not a neo-Nazi organ­i­sa­tion,’ he said. ‘It is a par­ty of Ukrain­ian patri­ots who are giv­ing their lives while the rich Euro­peans are only talk­ing about sup­port­ing Ukraine. When, may I ask, will Eng­lish peo­ple come here and help us fight ter­ror­ists sent by Russia’s Pres­i­dent [Vladimir] Putin, instead of lec­tur­ing us on our moral val­ues or people’s polit­i­cal affil­i­a­tions?’ Mr Gerashchenko was adamant, how­ever, that there were no for­eign cit­i­zens fight­ing in the Azov Bat­tal­ion. ‘There are for­eign jour­nal­ists, from Swe­den, Spain and Italy, who have come to report on the hero­ic achieve­ments of the fight­ers in their strug­gle against ter­ror­ism,’ he said. . . .”
6.-Mikael Skillt (whom we dis­cussed in FTR #803), alleges that he spoke to two aparent mem­bers of the unit con­tained at two snipers, some of whom were present dur­ing the Maid­an protests and appeared to have fired at Ukrain­ian police units. This rein­forces the view that the vio­lence that led to the ouster of Yanukovych was the out­growth of a provo­ca­tion. Note that the Azov’s num­ber two man–Ihor Mosiychuk–was sen­tenced to prison for a planned bomb­ing in Jan­u­ary 2014. His sup­port­ers demon­strat­ed on his behalf on the Maid­an, help­ing to cre­ate the tur­moil that led to Yanukovich’s over­throw. Might this have been part of the same gam­bit as the Maid­an sniper attacks? ” . . . . He [Swedish army sniper Mikael Skillt] admits, how­ev­er, to hav­ing spo­ken to at least two snipers, who, dur­ing the Maid­an protests had shot at police from the Trade Union House in Kiev — at the time, the head­quar­ters of the pro­tes­tors. ‘Their mis­sion was to take out Berkut’s snipers,’ explained Skillt.[7] The dead­ly shots from the Maid­an, which in West­ern pro­pa­gan­da had been used to legit­imize the over­throw of Pres­i­dent Vik­tor Yanukovych, have nev­er been inves­ti­gat­ed by the putsch regime, and Berlin has nev­er applied pres­sure for an inves­ti­ga­tion. . . . [On] Jan­u­ary 10, 2014, Mosiy­chuk and two oth­er fas­cists had been found guilty and sen­tenced to sev­er­al years in prison for a planned August 2011 bomb­ing attack. On the evening of Jan­u­ary 10, ultra-right-wingers staged demon­stra­tions protest­ing the sen­tence. The demon­stra­tions degen­er­at­ed into vio­lent con­fronta­tions with the police. These con­fronta­tions, in turn, were then used by Berlin, Brus­sels and Wash­ing­ton to accuse Yanukovych of exces­sive use of force on the ‘move­ment fight­ing for democ­ra­cy.’ . . .”
7.-The assas­si­na­tion of a Chechyan sniper fight­ing in Ukraine sug­gests the pos­si­bil­i­ty that the Maid­an sniper dynam­ic may be in the process of being san­i­tized, after Mr. Man­afort’s indict­ment, yes­ter­day. Are the assas­si­na­tion of Ukrain­ian sniper Ami­na Okuye­va and the bomb­ing attack on Ihor Mosiy­chuk linked? (Mosiy­chuk was Azov’s sec­ond in com­mand, for whom Okuyeve worked as an advi­sor.) Was a pre­vi­ous alleged attempt on the live of Okuye­va and her hus­band by an assas­sin pre­tend­ing to be a “for­eign jour­nal­ist” linked? Might the “for­eign jour­nal­ist” have been con­nect­ed to the Azov Bat­tal­ion? ” . . . . A Ukrain­ian vet­er­an sniper was killed, and her hus­band, who alleged­ly tried to assas­si­nate Russ­ian Pres­i­dent Vladimir Putin, was wound­ed in a shoot­ing on Mon­day near Kyiv. . . . Ami­na Okuye­va and Adam Osmayev were rid­ing in a car past a rail­road cross­ing in the vil­lage of Hle­vakha when their vehi­cle came under heavy fire from some­one in the bush­es on the side of the road. . . . Osmayev, who was also shot in the leg, has since blamed Rus­sia for the attack and said that it was con­nect­ed to a car-bomb­ing last week that wound­ed Ukrain­ian law­mak­er Ihor Mosiy­chuk . . . Okuye­va had once worked for Mosiy­chuk as an advis­er, accord­ing to Reuters. . . . This was­n’t the first assas­si­na­tion attempt the cou­ple had faced. On June 1, Osmayev and Okuye­va were in a car with a man, Artur Denisul­tanov-Kur­makayev, mas­querad­ing as a French jour­nal­ist named Alex Wern­er. [Was this one of the “for­eign jour­nal­ists” Anton Gerashchenko claimed were com­ing to Ukraine?–D.E.] At one point, Denisul­tanov-Kur­makayev asked them to pull the car over so that he could give them a gift from his edi­tors. ‘When he opened it I spot­ted a Glock pistol,‘Okuyeva told RFERL after the June attack. ‘He imme­di­ate­ly grabbed it and start­ed shoot­ing at Adam.’ . . . ”

Pro­gram and Writ­ten Descrip­tion High­lights Include:

1.-Review of Ukraine’s lus­tra­tion laws–the three-sided statute tar­get­ed cor­rup­tion, enhanced “anti-Com­mu­nism” and–most importantly–criminalized any crit­i­cal com­men­tary on the OUN/B and UPA’s col­lab­o­ra­tion with the Third Reich.
2.-The efforts by Ukrain­ian fas­cists of the Pravy Sek­tor milieu to oust Petro Poroshenko by report­ing cor­rup­tion to U.S. author­i­ties.
3.-Review of the Ukrain­ian intel­li­gence ser­vice’s col­lab­o­ra­tion with CIA on the Man­afort inves­ti­ga­tion.
4.-The role of OUN/B devo­tee Valen­tyn Naly­vaichenko in gov­ern­ing the SBU (the Ukrain­ian intel­li­gence ser­vice.)
5.-Review of the oper­a­tional links between the Ukrain­ian UNO-UNSA (the lat­est iter­a­tion of the UPA) and anti-Russ­ian Chechen Islamists.
6.-Review of Jaroslav Stet­sko’s per­son­al secretary–Roman Svarych–as spokesman for the Azov Bat­tal­ion.