[ home / rules / faq ] [ overboard / sfw / alt ] [ leftypol / siberia / hobby / tech / edu / games / anime / music / draw / AKM ] [ meta / roulette ] [ cytube / wiki / git ] [ GET / ref / marx / booru / zine ]

/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

"The anons of the past have only shitposted on the Internet about the world, in various ways. The point, however, is to change it."
Password (For file deletion.)

Join our Matrix Chat <=> IRC: #leftypol on Rizon
leftypol archives

File: 1707578957737.jpg (50.28 KB, 580x580, 09435885.jpg)

 No.1756592[Last 50 Posts]

Right wing terrorism is huge rn it feels like there's a new shooting done by some nazi loser every year (christchurch, buffalo, allen tx, etc). I keep seeing conservatives talking about trans shooters and shit but it's obviously false. Why is there no left wing terrorism these days?


We don't need it. We've already gaptured ameriga :DDDDDDDDDDDDDDD


File: 1707579206374.jpg (39.81 KB, 640x480, biagi1.jpg)



>Has there ever been a left wing shooting?
The old Anarchist who shot up an ice detention center a few years back


right wing terrorism is just "women don't talk to me" and "the reason community and industrial decline and cultural degregation exists is because of the mosque down the street"


Maybe now.


Wasn't there that Bernie supporter that tried to kill some senators or congressmen in the USA at a baseball field or something a few years back?


There has been the Audrey Hale shooting recently i guess. But calling it left-wing is kind of retarded as it was clearly a vendetta against one particular school for harboring child mollesters (the shooter was a victim of them back as a student).
Left-wing terrorism kinda fell off overall, it used to be a big thing during the interwar and the cold war but it basically don't exist anymore.


Yeah but it failed and he didn't kill anyone, thanks for pointing it out though that is the closest to what I'm looking for


>some nazi loser every year
It's like biweekly in USA. One leftist shooting I remember is the bernie boomer that shot Scalia. Shit was based imho. Too bad Scalia lived


>Why is there no left wing terrorism these days?
a.) leftism deals with issues systemically, so most left wing people understand individual acts of violence wont do anything
b.) while rightwinger can just walk to a local shopping mall or school and open fire, targets of left-wing terrorist would be powerful people, who have security and shit. So you have to at the same time be unhinged enough to go on mass shooting, while rational enough to research where and when your target will be, how to get to them, plan the whole thing. I am sure there are probably whole bunch of unsuccessful "attempts" where some unhinged guy tries to walk into G8 meeting with a pistol or something, and gets immediately arrested, which isnt really a front-page newspaper material.


I don't think the left is immune to it but I think a lot of people considered the last wave of it in the 1970s to be a mistake that produced the opposite results of what was intended. There's an essay by Vijay Prashad called "Powerlessness Grows out of the Barrel of a Gun" that I see cited sometimes. He talks about the experience of this kind of thing in India, and also goes into Mao and draws the distinction.

>Mao, in 1929, strongly disputed “the ideology of roving rebel bands” and its concomitant, “the remnants of putschism. Just short of a decade later, Mao explained to his troops that the slogan “Political Power Grows Out of the Barrel of a Gun” did not mean that the gun was the means to power, but that “the Party commands the gun, and the gun must never be allowed to command the Party.” Mao, unlike many Maoists today, did not make a fetish of the gun or of the armed struggle. The context of China after the Shanghai massacre of 1928 and into the Yenan years (1937–46) made the gun a necessity, both in the struggle against the armed warlord nationalists and the Japanese imperialists. In 1934 Mao distinguished between terrorism (war against the people) and a “revolutionary war,” “a war of the masses; it can be waged only by mobilizing the masses and relying on them.” Even here, even as we may say that violence in all situations is harmful, it cannot be denied that Maoism at its best is far from terrorism and close to the armed struggle for national liberation familiar to any student of the American Revolution.


>Nothing can be gained from acts of ruthless terror. Terrorism is an elitist form of politics because it does not demand contact with the masses and it assumes that the people will rise spontaneously after acts of terror. If freedom fighters or the oppressed take to the gun, it is in times of terrible necessity, only to protect the people from a ruthless state and to overthrow state power, not to use violence to mobilize people. Powerlessness can also grow from the barrel of a gun.


Also this part:

>The refusal of random violence marked the communist movement, even as the police and propaganda forces pronounced otherwise. In Capital, Marx wrote, “Force is the midwife of every old society pregnant with a new one. It is itself an economic power.” Where the social relations of capital had attained maturity, however, “the dull compulsion of economic relations completes the subjection of the laborer to the capitalist. Direct force, outside economic conditions, is of course still used, but only exceptionally."


>The response to this immanent violence [within capitalism], the CPI suggested, is not necessarily violence itself, for several related reasons. Even by 1924, the level of repressive technology and military might was such that a generally disarmed population could not pursue a frontal attack on the colonial state. Any armed action, therefore, comes in two forms: first, as sporadic violence against individuals who stand in as representatives of abstract domination, but whose own level of culpability is hard to fathom; and second, as guerrilla warfare, attempts to whittle away at state power and, by acts of élan, to appeal to others to join the struggle. Both fail to conduct the three tasks so central to the left movement: to organize people into the struggle, to proclaim one’s aims openly, and to overthrow the social relations not just after a coup d’état, but also even as the struggle proceeds. The left today pays little attention to the debates between Lenin and Bernstein (via Kautsky), but it may help us sharpen our sense of what the left movement understands by smash (from Marx, Sprengung, or explosion), as in “to smash the state.” Bernstein favored a gradual move to socialism by the reform of the capitalist structure, by the transformation of advanced capitalism into a socialism managed by a state form generally left untouched by the reform process except that it is benevolent rather than malevolent. Better leaders, in other words, can make the state act on behalf of the people. The problem concerns those who are in power and not the configuration of state power that saturates the habits and policies of the state to act at the behest of certain classes.

>Lenin, in response, felt that that capitalist state form itself acted to oppress people, and that it was that state form that needed to be shattered or smashed. The distinction is over what to do with the state form, and from that springs the strategic and tactical difference between social democracy and communism. The latter does not ask that the movement kill bureaucrats in a saturnalia of violence. The task of radicalism is to “smash the old bureaucratic machine at once and to begin immediately to construct a new one that will make possible the gradual abolition of all bureaucracy—this is not utopia, this is the experience of the [Paris] Commune, this is the direct and immediate task of the revolutionary proletariat.” There is no call to indiscriminate violence, but there is a call to radically transform the way in which power operates in society.


It's funny that that's the one example rightoids point to and it's a politician, not a bunch of innocent people in a school or supermarket. Like even if you're a hardcore lib you have to admit those aren't the same thing.


File: 1707585160813.png (272.5 KB, 370x491, funny.png)



>only time anon wishes for police 'accidental shooting' in 'mistaken identity'
the coconut meme is true


File: 1707586450157-0.png (382.93 KB, 469x497, hardcorelib.png)

File: 1707586450157-1.png (347.73 KB, 545x319, pigsinblanket.png)

File: 1707586450157-2.png (510.75 KB, 661x495, example.png)

>Left-wing terrorism kinda fell off overall


>a biden voter from 11 years ago
uygha you can't be serious


File: 1707587589866.jpg (36.81 KB, 599x461, astronauta.jpg)

It's just not really in our nature


File: 1707588256450.png (445.59 KB, 640x747, ClipboardImage.png)

There was that guy who tried to shoot some US senators at a baseball game. Left wingers don't usually do shootings though.


File: 1707588397434-0.png (277.09 KB, 1836x803, ClipboardImage.png)

File: 1707588397434-1.png (590.44 KB, 2251x1425, ClipboardImage.png)

File: 1707588397434-2.png (512.49 KB, 2450x1750, ClipboardImage.png)

File: 1707588397434-3.png (56.25 KB, 1156x242, ClipboardImage.png)

I'm only going to focus on the US because that's what I know. Domestic terrorism on the left looks a lot less bloody and more like a criminal act, as described in the FBI's definition on their website. https://www.fbi.gov/investigate/terrorism. Remember that Stop Against Cop City protestors are labeled terrorists because they burned down an unoccupied demolion machine, yet the KKK is still not labeled a terrorist organization to this day. Neo-liberal society has often labeled anything that is vaugely left-wing, such as black nationalism, to be included in these lists. The Animal Liberation Front and the brawls that Black Bloc anti-fascists get into are also included. Its funny when they separate Islamic and ethnonationalist terrorism from right-wing terrorism. Like its the same category.



>Its funny when they separate Islamic and ethnonationalist terrorism from right-wing terrorism. Like its the same category.

lmao imagine a pie chart of just 90% right wing terror with a tiny sliver left over for us and the anticiv guys, would be prolly be decried as propaganda.

iirc correctly an anarchist in Russia straight up suicide bombed a police building, good night sweet prince o7


>Remember that Stop Against Cop City protestors are labeled terrorists because they burned down an unoccupied demolion machine, yet the KKK is still not labeled a terrorist organization to this day.
To be kind of brutal about it, I think the term "terrorism" in the United States for domestic groups is more of a political statement that's spread in the media or by politicians or think tanks like the ones you linked to. There's a lot of equivocation to make it appear like left and right are "equal" threats when the vast majority of domestic terrorism comes from the radical right. But it's not a formal legal designation, because that doesn't really exist. It would in other words be unconstitutional to designate the KKK as a terrorist organization and outlaw it, like the KKK as a terrorist organization as a matter of status, as opposed to particular acts of domestic terrorism that members of the KKK commit.

There are what the government calls FTOs (foreign terrorist organizations). However, how you define what are essentially transnational groups that have no state of their own as "foreign" or not is an interesting question. But that allows the U.S. to outlaw any "material" assistance to groups designated as terrorist organizations.


>if i recall correctly correctly


bruh I didnt even realize that lol Ion even know how yall be understanding me imma terrible typist


Anarchists in Italy shot a nuclear power CEO outside his house in 2012, the SPF had a shootout with police in 2011, theres some more in greece similar to that too.

All of these are of course not exactly the same as the archetypal rightist mass shooting, where a perpetrator goes into a place with a lot of perceived political enemies and just starts shooting.


This thread glows.



I just looked it up and apparently this CEO was planning to sell a stake in the nuclear company to a Chinese corporation for a Chinese joint venture and instead of selling shares to American investors. So this glows hard.


I smell Agent Kochinski in here


Nah, it doesn't. Ansaldo Nucleare belongs to Ansaldo Energia which in turn is controlled by Cassa Depositi and Prestiti, an investment bank managed by the Ministry of finance. All those words to say that it's basically a state company and Italy doesn't need any terrorist attack to be convinced to sell things to the USA.


Wikipedia literally says otherwise, Mr Agent


Post proof then


You're a douchebag.


>confidently pretending like the 7 months of firey but mostly peaceful BLM riots didn’t happen

Every time with you


File: 1707605786665.jpg (592.09 KB, 1080x1080, classconscious.jpg)

What is this supposed to mean? That the american bourgeois were so frightened by the prospect of some money flowing to the chinese bourgeois that they contrived an elaborate fake Anarchist shooting on motorbikes? This line of reasoning really only makes if you are a chinacuck who thinks that they are working to subvert capitalism.




Doesn't surprise me. There're like ten times as many right wing true believers than there are communists and what else passes as left wing on this board.


The right wing shooter problem is somewhat overblown. Mass shootings are rarer than you think. The media amplifies it by including regular gun crime, gang shoot outs or suicides on campuses as school shootings. Leftist terrorism has been on the wane since the 90s. It was huge in the 70s because you had massive student movements that failed creating a radical fringe who formed armed groups. These groups coordinated internationally via the PLO or PFLP and had states that were willing to harbor them or places where they could go for funding and training. In the 90s, the USSR collapsed, the PFLP almost died out, and the PLO was officially making peace with Israel. The situation in Lebanon meant all armed groups except Hezbollah were forced to dismantle their camps and training sites. The major financier of anti-imperialist terrorism in the 90s was Osama Bin Laden, a guy Western leftists had no real connection. Although Carlos the Jackel would call upon Marxists to ally with Al-Qaeda after 9/11 this has rarely happened. One exception was Yemen where AQAP allowed a local socialist party to run a city after they briefly conquered it. Leftists in the US are overwhelmingly peaceful and pacifist. Its a mix of American left politics being a lot more elitist and the legacy of Vietnam era pacifism. In Europe, leftists have always had a violent streak and a long history of assassinations, bombings, and suicide attacks so terror groups there were more active and drew on a long tradition of violent asymmetric warfare against the state. Armed groups have mostly disappeared and there's no incentive for violence really so you don't see them anymore.


I think you quoted the wrong person because I actually agree with your line of reasoning.


File: 1707642264162-0.png (Spoiler Image, 660.02 KB, 1024x620, ClipboardImage.png)

File: 1707642264162-1.gif (Spoiler Image, 10.61 MB, 320x240, zapruder film.gif)

>Has there ever been a left wing shooting?


File: 1707642905892.png (1.09 MB, 2518x1024, ClipboardImage.png)


File: 1707656062144.png (402.03 KB, 960x917, ClipboardImage.png)

the cia is right wing.


File: 1707657709139.gif (10.61 MB, 320x240, zapruder film.gif)

>the CIA used Oswald
Porky cope. That's literally the pork media's most widely distributed theory. The JFK assassination was peak American class consciousness.


File: 1707661391711.webm (69.83 MB, 854x480, 1649214471480.webm)

>A totally lone wolf who never once got grabbed by the CIA was the peak of American class consciousness.
Whatever you say spook.


Wtf is so bad in the catalog that is causing OP to make such bad slide threads?


File: 1707661923985.png (29.08 KB, 441x248, ClipboardImage.png)

By the time you figure that out it will already be too late. You better find out fast and bump it. Clocks ticking. Tick tock, tick tock.


oh yeah mb comrade meant to quote


Read up on 19th/early 20th century anarchists and propaganda of the deed. I think there was merit to their tactics.


Dude, the US has just blown up a German-Russian pipeline that was supporting all of Western Europe with gas and the US has a long history of using anarchist splinter groups to attack the Italian left, see the Moro assassination, as well as sabotaging EU-China/Russia cooperation in general.


Christ, think about the stakes. I'm not saying the US doesn't do dirty shit, because they did PLENTY of dirty shit in Italy. But not everything it's their fault. Shooting the CEO to stop the Chinese? Well, it didn't work because a Chinese company (Shangai Electric Corporation) owns 40% of Ansaldo Energia now. If the Americans really wanted to stop China from buying shares in an Italian company, they'd put pressure on the government, like they did for TIM's (former state-owned telephone operator) telecommunications grid, which has been sold to an American fund despite its strategic importance.


BR killed Moro not anarchists.
BR didn't have affiliation with the cia.


There used to be a lot of anarchists bombing back in the day.


>Its a mix of American left politics being a lot more elitist and the legacy of Vietnam era pacifism.
Pacifism is very strong in this tradition, but there's an argument that terrorism is an elitist thing (and this argument has been made by Vijay Prashad, and I think Mark Rudd too who was a member of the Weather Underground) because it assumes the masses will spontaneously rise up after acts of terrorism by tiny, elite groups. But those groups don't have contact with the masses, it's an ideological fantasy and more a form of self-expression on the part of the people doing it.

Rudd gave an interview to Jacobin that is pretty good. He's a social democrat now and you can criticize that, but I found his accounting of the time to be really interesting and what he believed their mistakes were:

He believes they fell in love with themselves. They had been really good at organizing students at Columbia University, and then went off to the Democratic National Convention in Chicago in 1968 and expected thousands of revolutionary youth to show up and join them, but only a few hundred people showed up (and most of them were in their group) and they got their asses kicked by the police. But they drew the wrong conclusions from all of this and went underground. It seemed like a combination of frustration with a much larger number of young people, students, etc. not being as radical as them, and the experience of getting walloped by the police in a brutal way that crystallized in them forming this hippie-acid terrorist group that would blow things up as if that would inspire people to rise up, when the opposite happened.

He also believes they misread the Cuban revolution. There was a lot going on in Cuba with major strikes shutting the country down, Batista's regime killing 20,000 people, all kinds of non-violent civil disobedience that was destabilizing the regime, and then there was Fidel and Che in the mountains waging guerrilla warfare, and that was an important part of it, but they became entranced by the guerrilla warfare and tried to replicate it, but Che tried to replicate it in other countries too and failed.

Anyways, Rudd was living underground when there was an even bigger wave of student strikes in 1970 and they effectively played no part in it.


File: 1707668450738.jpg (239.89 KB, 1182x724, 1121.jpg)


File: 1707668789272.png (40.16 KB, 254x133, ClipboardImage.png)

Do it again.


Fieschi did nothing wrong !


File: 1707671388024.png (496.79 KB, 777x567, anarchists!.png)

Eh, anarchism boogied its way to bogeyman status with that stuff and largely discredited itself at the time. The figure of the anarchist as a bearded immigrant with a bomb became universal. Anarchists make good bogeymen… and good boogie men too if you sit them down at a piano.


File: 1707671884508.jpg (352.28 KB, 1080x986, 1.jpg)

>Anarchists make good bogeymen… and good boogie men too if you sit them down at a piano.
10/10. That's comedy.


They were literally mostly peaceful protests. There was some property damage here and there (over such a long period stuff is bound to happen) but a lot of it was done by provocateurs.
I get that you're a reactionary so you only care about aesthetics, but that doesn't mean the rest of us do.


Oswald killed the greatest spook of his time because he was fed up and he had the abillity to do so. Oswald was more based than anyone else in this thread


>le agent provocateurs
Can smell the retardation


Oswald was the only actual Communist on this list as well. The JFK assassination is the prime example of a left-wing shooting


Rightoid not crying about brick and mortar challenge: impossible


During the 2016 BLM protest, there was a black man who shot a police station. He got 3 meatshilds down if I remember correctly.

There is the FTM transgender.


WWI was mostly peaceful. Sure, there was a Somme offensive and a Verdun and it got all the media attention but 99% of it was people walking left and right or waiting in a trench.


It must be noted that Oswald was more left-wing and had more agency than all blm protesters combined


>The JFK assassination is the prime example of a left-wing shooting
Entirely ahistorical. There is decades of academic research covering this.


that's basically the only example unless you want to go back far enough that we're talking about 1990s/early 2000s eco-terrorists


>Implying he killed someone


All of which is bourgeois cope. The CIA and bourgeois think tanks perpetuate the notion that Oswald had no agency as patsy of the CIA in order to deny the revolutionary potential of american proletarians. They create that myth to spread the idea that it must take CIA backing to do what he did. Uppn actual analysis you will find that Owald had every material reason to do what he did on behalf of the proletariat and that the bourgeoise have every material reason to create and spread the lies you believe.


How did killing the president who was about stop the war in Vietnam serve the proletariat?


Kennedy had a long record of not doing shit. Oswald's actions brought Kennedy's empty promises to fruition


I am disappointed that everyone forgot them.



True, when Kennedy promised to shatter the CIA into a thousand pieces and then was subsequently killed in an assasination the CIA was abolished.


Kennedy never made this proposition. State your empty source to prove that fact.


I am so happy that Kennedy was killed so the following promises the U.S. President made in December 1961 promoting the Alliance for Progress with Venezuelan President Rómulo Betancourt came to fruition who had invited Kennedy to this land redistribution ceremony in a Venezuelan village.

-Economic Development: The plan aimed to achieve an annual increase of 2.5 percent in per capita income in Latin American countries, with the goal of promoting economic growth and reducing poverty.

-Democratic Governments: The charter called for the establishment and support of democratic governments in Latin America, promoting political stability and the protection of human rights.

-Education and Literacy: One of the goals was to eliminate adult illiteracy in Latin America by 1970, recognizing education as a crucial factor for social and economic development.

-Price Stability: The Alliance aimed to maintain price stability in the region, avoiding high inflation or deflation, which could hinder economic progress.

-Income Distribution and Land Reform: The program sought to promote more equitable income distribution and land reform to address social and economic inequalities.

-Economic and Social Planning: Latin American countries were expected to create comprehensive plans for national development, which would be reviewed and approved by an inter-American board of experts.

-Financial Commitment: The participating Latin American countries pledged a capital investment of $80 billion over 10 years, while the United States would provide or guarantee $20 billion in aid.

-Tax Reform: The tax codes in Latin American countries were to be revised to demand a greater contribution from the wealthier individuals and corporations, aiming for a fairer distribution of the tax burden.

I am very happy that thanks to Kennedy's assassination sweeping land and tax reform could be implemented all across Latin America.


The New Left terrorists basically watched Battle of Algiers and thought they could replicate it in their own countries. Foolish Leninism: a small squad of people who know the truth can lead the masses with a few bombs and assassinations. The left have never been good terrorists anyway. Look at the reaction to 9/11. The US left is extremely gun shy and cloistered. The Red Army Faction in Germany where the only mildly significant group but even they didn't succeed. Look at the jihadis, they have a lot of sophisticated theory on this stuff and are willing to kill. Leftists indulge in only foolish militancy.


File: 1707686445486.jpg (356.77 KB, 1000x551, lbj-l.jpg)

The Alliance From Progress policy was not a promise. It was already in place years before Kennedy was shot, so it was just another reason why Oswald was so goddamned based for killing him.

I was referring to the Civil Rights Act of 1964, to which JFK's assassination was a catalyst.



Oswald was a CIA stooge this has been proven so much. JFK threatened to break apart the CIA and the head of the CIA at the time blamed Kennedy for the failure of the Bay of Pigs. Oswald was killed by the mob (who did have CIA connections) because the CIA was afraid he would squeal about their involvement in the JFK assassination.


>Oswald was a CIA stooge this has been proven so much.
The only people "concluding" that Oswald was CIA or FBI are spooks.
>JFK threatened to break apart the CIA
Never happened. Just state your source. Perhaps the Federal government said this, but that does not mean it happened.
>and the head of the CIA at the time blamed Kennedy
Kennedy was to blame because he was Commander in Chief. The CIA was beholden to his orders. The Bay of Pigs Invasion and Cuban missile crisis are just more reasons as to why Oswald was based for BTFO of JFK.
>Oswald was killed by the mob (who did have CIA connections)
Oswald was killed by the bourgeoisie in retaliation, pure and simple.
>because the CIA was afraid he would squeal about their involvement in the JFK assassination.
The FBI killed Oswald because they could not give him a trial nor opportunity to even speak.


>Kennedy was to blame because he was Commander in Chief. The CIA was beholden to his orders.

Literally wasn't, the CIA undermined Kennedy with the bay of pigs invasion that's why he fired Dulles. You are literally the one spreading the glowie narrative of the assassination not only being a covert intelligence narrative but actually being goood!!


Kennedy launched the bay of Pigs Invasion. Get a fucking grip


>but even they didn't succeed
Well Germany only ever remained meekly involved in the Vietnam war and I don't think what is attempted today to the Palestinian people would be accepted or able to be done back thrn so it's hard to really call them a failure with any real honesty.


The response to RAF terrorism basically created the modern German police and anti-terrorism apparatus.


Same thing that happened to Italy with the Years of Lead.


And yet this kind of police exists in many many countries without the strong armed movement. Funny that.
Extreme goalpost moving in any case.


File: 1707773500668-0.png (808.57 KB, 1110x624, ClipboardImage.png)

File: 1707773500668-1.png (846.83 KB, 1188x982, ClipboardImage.png)

File: 1707773500668-2.png (361.62 KB, 1390x990, ClipboardImage.png)

File: 1707773500668-3.png (592.43 KB, 686x386, ClipboardImage.png)

Allegedly, the Lakewood Church shooter's AR had a "Free Palestine" sticker on it. We still have details coming out on Genesee Moreno's identity and their politics (if they have any).


This is bad


not afaik, but back in the 60s/70s there were left wing violent organizations like the black panthers, weathermen, RAF(germany), etc. In the 90s-2010s you saw antifa and the black block but they didn't really do shootings and prefered to scuffle with hands? So i guess the answer is mostly NO but if so not for quite some time.

The right is more individualistic and thus practices "leaderless resistance"


It's settled then. Harvey Lee Oswald was the most based left-wing shooter. He was the only communist on this thread


If we compare this shooting to Harvey Lee OSWALD's shooting, then the difference between successful and unsuccessful left-wing terrorism becomes apparent




File: 1708214990591.jpeg (23.71 KB, 474x266, 4.jpeg)

Lee Harvey Oswald was of course not a communist shooter. Instead of arguing or listening to the determined retard ITT check out the lifelong scholarship of Peter Dale Scott or Professor Aaron Good. They and otherś have dedicated their lives work to exposing CIA involvement in the assassination of JFK and proven it beyond doubt. Good is involved with the recent series https://www.fourdiedtrying.com/ about the 4 assassinations in the space of 4 years, including JFK's, that chaged the course of world history. The people that killed Kennedy facilitated the genocide of millions of communists in Indonesia and facilitate the genocide happening in front of our eyes in Gaza rn.
The series is on amazon or any pirate site. Search the scholars on any podcast site.


US President William McKinley was killed by an anarchist


>In the 90s-2010s you saw antifa and the black block but they didn't really do shootings and prefered to scuffle with hands?
There was low-mid scale shootings, bombings and arson in the 2000s that came out of these spaces really spurned on by the 'economic collapse ' of 2007 and so on.


>strawman and ad-hominem
>Trust the FBI backed American intelligentsia
Anyone who isn't a retard knows you are either spooked or a spook. Harvey Lee Oswald was a Communist. None of your spooky bullshit will change this fact.


when do we get the biopic


OP here, just an update on this. The shooter allegedly has a history of being an antisemite so no probably not a leftist


I notice severe lack of people like Fred Hampton and Medgar Evers. Gues they didn't want to show actual commies in there.


I FUCKING TOLD YOU. It's glowie propaganda. Oswald was a communist.


Fuck off, retard


You're the retard. I just aced my test.
>>1767683 (You) cont.
What were the communists' statements regarding the Kennedy assassination when it happened? I doubt they considered it too bad of a thing, the real Communists that is. That's why they don't include communists in the glowie propaganda you've shared, but only spooks who perpetuate the bourgeois narrative. The communists then understood the historical necessity of the event; today, they do not rely upon glowie propaganda to negate the fact that Oswald wasn't a pawn of the fbi, but a based as shit communist


Actual communists are not liberals who believe Kennedy was killed by the fbi for "being progressive". Actual communists do not feed bourgeois narratives.


File: 1708449081594.png (186.48 KB, 474x266, ClipboardImage.png)

Look at the image of this propaganda closely


What a crock of shit.


File: 1708449398032.png (43.64 KB, 204x192, ClipboardImage.png)

Was the Palestinian who shot RFK for his continuous support of genocide also an FBI agent like Oswald??? Or was he a leftist?


Kennedy was killed because he was apprehensive about getting involved in Vietnam, after his failed invasion of Cuba.
The fact that LBJ and his arms dealing wife got into Vietnam less than a year after Kennedy's assassination is not a coincidence.

Was Oswald a communist, maybe. Was he alone?
Nearly impossible. Was Kennedy's assassination based?
Yea, but what came after was very unbased, so unbased it was probably the least based thing in us history.


Explain why it is nearly impossible to get a gun and shoot someone in america


Kennedy was not apprehensive about Vietnam. In his short three-year term, Kennedy had increased the number of American military advisors in South Vietnam from seven hundred to over sixteen thousand, way higher than allotted in the 1954 Geneva Accords. Kennedy also more than doubled the U.S.’s foreign aid package from $223 million to $471 million (Cohen 349). Critically, Kennedy also oversaw the assassination of South Vietnamese president Ngo Dinh Diem, representing a targeted and irreversible infringement in Vietnam from the U.S. Marc Selverstone writes that Kennedy and his team’s decision to overthrow Diem in November of 1963 represented, “an act that perpetuated, and arguably exacerbated, [Vietnam’s] political instability”, no doubt bringing the U.S. closer to the brink of war in Vietnam (Selverstone, Miller Center).


>I don’t think that unless a greater effort is made by the Government to win popular support that the war can be won out there. In the final analysis, it is their war. They are the ones who have to win it or lose it. We can help them, we can give them equipment, we can send our men out there as advisers, but they have to win it, the people of Viet-Nam, against the Communists.

What I meant was, he was apprehensive to send American troops to Vietnam.


Kennedy laid the groundwork for the invasion. Kennedy was not progressive. Kennedy was as imperialist as they come.

Kennedy was correct to be patient and build up the imperialist forces despite the dovish veil, but it didn't matter anyways because they got BTFO


>Harvey Lee Oswald was a Communist

anon, where was the New Orleans office of the hands off cuba chapter that Lee Harvey Oswald was the only member of? where was it in relation to the CIA office? it was the same building. and why did communist oswald spend so much time hanging around white russian exiles?


fbi created hearsay. spookery Where is the evidence of this


Oswald didn't exist, you glowie. It was all a massive psyop to move your attention from UFO, which obviously are only real communists.


>anon, where was the New Orleans office of the hands off cuba chapter that Lee Harvey Oswald was the only member of?
Oswald did try to organize, as he was a Communist. Oswald was the only member because he was a single man overcoming adversity and making the world a better place
>where was it in relation to the CIA office? it was the same building.
Where is the evidence? hearsay
>and why did communist oswald spend so much time hanging around white russian exiles?
Where is the evidence? hearsay

>oswald was cia and fbi and an alien because he organized and (insert unsubstantiated glowie hearsay to undermine that fact)


Why would a single man operation like Oswald's even need an office? There is no evidence of his failed chapter having an office. This provides even more motive, as he realized organizing was impossible in America. It was easier to just kill the president


<What were the communists' statements regarding the Kennedy assassination when it happened?
>It was around 1:30 in the afternoon, Cuban time. We were having lunch in the living room of the modest summer residence which Fidel Castro owns on magnificent Varadero Beach, 120 kilometers from Havana. For at least the tenth time, I was questioning the Cuban leader on details of the negotiations with Russia before the missile installations last year. The telephone rang, a secretary in guerrilla garb announced that Mr. Dorticós, President of the Cuban Republic, had an urgent communication for the Prime Minister. Fidel picked up the phone and I heard him say: “Como? Un atentado?” (“What’s that? An attempted assassination?”) He then turned to us to say that Kennedy had just been struck down in Dallas. Then he went back to the telephone and exclaimed in a loud voice “Herido? Muy gravemente?” (“Wounded? Very seriously?”)

>He came back, sat down, and repeated three times the words: “Es una mala noticia.” (“This is bad news.”) He remained silent for a moment, awaiting another call with further news. He remarked while we waited that there was an alarmingly sizable lunatic fringe in American society and that this deed could equally well have been the work of a madman or of a terrorist. Perhaps a Vietnamese? Or a member of the Ku Klux Klan? The second call came through: it was hoped they would be able to announce that the United States President was still alive, that there was hope of saving him. Fidel Castro’s immediate reaction was: “If they can, he is already re-elected.” He pronounced these words with satisfaction.


>After the quarter-hour of silence observed by all the American radio stations, we once more tuned in on Miami; the silence had only been broken by a re-broadcasting of the American national anthem. Strange indeed was the impression made, on hearing this hymn ring out in the house of Fidel Castro, in the midst of a circle of worried faces. “Now,” Fidel said, “they will have to find the assassin quickly, but very quickly, otherwise, you watch and see, I know them, they will try to put the blame on us for this thing. But tell me, how many Presidents have been assassinated? Four? This is most disturbing! In Cuba, only one has been assassinated. You know, when we were hiding out in the Sierra there were some (not in my group, in another) who wanted to kill Batista. They thought they could do away with a regime by decapitating it. I have always been violently opposed to such methods. First of all from the viewpoint of political self-interest, because so far as Cuba is concerned, if Batista had been killed he would have been replaced by some military figure who would have tried to make the revolutionists pay for the martyrdom of the dictator. But I was also opposed to it on personal grounds; assassination is repellent to me.”

>The broadcasts were now resumed. One reporter felt he should mention the difficulty Mrs. Kennedy was having in getting rid of her bloodstained stockings. Fidel exploded: “What sort of a mind is this!” He repeated the remark several times: “What sort of a mind is this? There is a difference in our civilizations after all. Are you like this in Europe? For us Latin Americans, death is a sacred matter; not only does it mark the close of hostilities, but it also imposes decency, dignity, respect. There are even street urchins who behave like kings in the face of death. Incidentally, this reminds me of something else: if you write all those things I told you yesterday against Kennedy’s policy, don’t use his name now; speak instead of the policy of the United States government.”


>We went by car, with the radio on. The Dallas police were now hot on the trail of the assassin. He is a Russian spy, says the news commentator. Five minutes later, correction: he is a spy married to a Russian. Fidel said, “There, didn’t I tell you; it’ll be my turn next.” But not yet. The next word was: the assassin is a Marxist deserter. Then the word came through, in effect, that the assassin was a young man who was a member of the “Fair Play for Cuba Committee,” that he was an admirer of Fidel Castro. Fidel declared: “If they had had proof, they would have said he was an agent, an accomplice, a hired killer. In saying simply that he is an admirer, this is just to try and make an association in people’s minds between the name of Castro and the emotion awakened by the assassination. This is a publicity method, a propaganda device. It’s terrible. But you know, I’m sure this will all soon blow over. There are too many competing policies in the United States for any single one to be able to impose itself universally for very long.”

>We arrived at the granja de pueblo, where the farmers welcomed Fidel. At that very moment, a speaker announced over the radio that it was now known that the assassin is a “pro-Castro Marxist.” One commentator followed another; the remarks became increasingly emotional, increasingly aggressive. Fidel then excused himself: “We shall have to give up the visit to the farm.” We went on towards Matanzas from where he could telephone President Dorticós. On the way he had questions: “Who is Lyndon Johnson? What is his reputation? What were his relations with Kennedy? With Khrushchev? What was his position at the time of the attempted invasion of Cuba?” Finally and most important of all” What authority does he exercise over the CIA?” Then abruptly he looked at his watch, saw that it would be half an hour before we reached Matanzas and, practically on the spot, he dropped off to sleep.

>After Matanzas, where he must have decreed a state of alert, we returned to Varadero for dinner. Quoting the words spoken to him by a woman shortly before, he said to me that it was an irony of history for the Cubans, in the situation to which they had been reduced by the blockade, to have to mourn the death of a President of the United States. “After all,” he added, “there are perhaps some people in the world to whom this news is cause for rejoicing. The South Vietnamese guerrillas, for example, and also, I would imagine, Madame Nhu!”



That's just hearsay. I want official statements


File: 1708457369827.jpg (113.69 KB, 450x300, fidel and goldberg.jpg)

>Fidel Castro shares at least one belief with the majority of Americans: He is convinced that the assassination of President John F. Kennedy was not the work of a lone gunman, but was the culmination of a broad conspiracy. According to a recent Gallup poll, 61 percent of Americans believe Lee Harvey Oswald did not act alone in Dallas 50 years ago. But Castro suspects that Oswald might not have been involved in the assassination at all. Here is what he told me–to my great surprise–over lunch one day in Havana: “I have reached the conclusion that Oswald could not have been the one who killed Kennedy.” Castro is of course a confident man, but he said this with a degree of surety that was noteworthy.


>One afternoon, after a marathon interview session, we gathered for lunch – Castro, his wife, Dalia, his son Antonio, a couple of aides, Julia, a translator and myself – and an expansive Castro told stories of the early days of the revolution, and entertained a series of random questions from us. I knew, from Julia, who has studied Castro for years, that JFK was seldom too far from his thoughts, but our discussion of U.S. policy actually began with other presidents. Castro spoke of a biography of Abraham Lincoln he had just read.

>“Is Lincoln the most interesting American to you?” I asked.

>“No,” he said, “but much more than Washington.”

>“Much more than Kennedy?” I asked.

>“Yes,” he said, but unconvincingly. “Kennedy made many mistakes. He was young and dramatic.” Castro reserved his animus mainly for Robert Kennedy, who was attorney general in his brother’s administration and loathed Castro and his revolution. It was Robert, Castro believes, who was behind U.S. plots to have him assassinated. But he blames JFK for the invasion of the Bay of Pigs by a ragtag Cuban exile army: “Kennedy was humiliated by his defeat at the Bay of Pigs, but all that we did was to protect ourselves.”

>Then Castro began talking about JFK’s assassination. “It is a very sad story,” he said. “It was a very sad day when it happened.” He remembered the moment he heard of the shooting. “I won’t forget it. As soon as we heard, we all rushed to the radio to listen.”

>Self-preservation was on the Cuban leader’s mind in the days after the assassination. He understood that he would be blamed for JFK’s death, especially after it was learned that Oswald had vociferously opposed American policy toward Castro’s Cuba. Castro tried hard to communicate to the Americans that he had nothing to do with JFK’s death.


>Castro told us at lunch – as he would – that none of his associates or officials had anything to do with the assassination and that the Cuban embassy in Mexico City, which Oswald had visited, denied him permission to visit Cuba, fearing he was a provocateur.

>I asked Castro why he thought Oswald could not have acted alone. He proceeded to tell the table a long and discursive story about an experiment he staged, after the assassination, to see if it were possible for a sniper to shoot Kennedy in the manner the assassination was alleged to have happened. “We had trained our people in the mountains during the war” – the Cuban revolution – “on these kind of telescopic sites. So we knew about this kind of shooting. We tried to recreate the circumstances of this shooting, but it wasn’t possible for one man to do. The news I had received is that one man killed Kennedy in his car with a rifle, but I deducted that this story was manufactured to fool people.”

>Castro said his suspicions grew especially pronounced after Oswald was killed. “There was the story of Jack Ruby, who was said to be so moved by the death of Kennedy that he decided to shoot Oswald on his own. That was just unbelievable to us.”

>I then asked Castro what he believed actually happened. I brought up his friend Oliver Stone, who suggested that it was the Central Intelligence Agency and a group of anti-Castro Cubans (I used the term “anti-you Cubans”) that plotted the assassination.

>“Quite possibly,” he said. “This is quite possibly so. There were people in the American government who thought Kennedy was a traitor because he didn’t invade Cuba when he had the chance, when they were asking him. He was never forgiven for that.”

>“So that’s what you think might have happened?”

>“No doubt about it,” Castro answered.

>We talked a bit more about Kennedy and his legacy. Castro told us about his subsequent contact with members of Kennedy’s family, including Maria Shriver. “She’s the one who married Schwarzenegger,” he said. “The world is a very small place.”



File: 1708457414720-0.pdf (343.9 KB, 197x255, fulltext.pdf)


i apologize, the organization was Fair Play for Cuba. the building both offices were located in was the Newman Building, which is known because it is the address given on the pamphlets oswald was handing out at his one man demonstrations. there is also multiple eyewitness testimony of oswald spending time in the company of the anti-cuban right wingers in the office, men who had previously been involved with hosting and training the white cuban volunteers for bay of bigs


>I want official statements
Like, by CIA or something? Seriously?

Unique IPs: 42

[Return][Go to top] [Catalog] | [Home][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[ home / rules / faq ] [ overboard / sfw / alt ] [ leftypol / siberia / hobby / tech / edu / games / anime / music / draw / AKM ] [ meta / roulette ] [ cytube / wiki / git ] [ GET / ref / marx / booru / zine ]