You are here

Left treated Hillary's war plan against Russia as a non-issue

See also: George Soros linked to the anti-Trump street riots perpetrated by Hillary’s Democrats thugs (12/11/16) | Syrian Free Press

As the title suggests, this article argues, using six examples, that the left treated Hillary Clinton's war plans against Russia as a non-issue. The article begins with six numbered headings and follows with the correspondingly numbered reasons, using arguments from emails, interviews and other documents. The article also discusses the influence of the Trotskyists in riots against Trump.

(1) Left treated Hillary's war plan against Russia as a non-issue
(2) Trots no mention of Assange Pilger interview
(3) Trots run the Demonstrations against Trump
(4) ISO Trots call for Overthrow of Assad
(5) Socialist Alternative Trots reject White Working Class
(6) Oligarchy still exists and is still powerful - Paul Craig Roberts

(1) Left treated Hillary's war plan against Russia as a non-issue

This is argued in an email I received from 'S -' on Wed, 9 Nov 2016 20:21:19 -0500. The subject was: Re: On election eve, NATO announces military buildup against Russia. But Trump will tear up Brzezinski's Chessboard.

Responding to a post I wrote, entitled, 'Trump wins, war with Russia averted, ends reign of Clinton crime family', S- writes,

I was estranged from most of the left this time. Although I voted for Jill Stein, I felt palpable relief in hearing of Clinton's defeat by Trump. This whole election ought to have been a referendum on: "Should we go to war with Putin?" The idea that Clinton, determined to force a showdown with Russia, was "the lesser evil" was insane. Trump, however odious, was the peace candidate. Those who continued to support Clinton after she announced her support for a no-fly zone in Syria--an act of war against Russia---should be ashamed of themselves.

That is an act of collective suicide. The radical Left --Noam Chomsky,Naomi Klein, Michael Moore, the later Tom Hayden etc etc,--was supporting Dr Strangelove, all the while talking about how dangerous Trump is. The left treated Clinton's war plan as a non-issue, or at worst as unimportant. This is a left that is crippled by its emotional attachments to the Democratic Party, by its collective fantasies as shaped by corporate press. True Trump is a wild card, but Hillary Clinton Strangelove was eager to attack Russia and she had the support of both parties' establishments. To call her "the lesser evil" shows a profound confusion of the left in America, if not a collective death wish. S-- , Ph.D.

2) Trots no mention of Assange Pilger interview by Peter Myers, November 11, 2016

As soon as they learned of Trump's win, the Trots organized street demonstrations in cities across the US. These are the same people behind Black Lives Matter - that's just a spinoff, a franchise. After the murder of several policemen, they pulled the demonstrations, lest disorder on the streets boost Trump. Now they're back. These demonstrations are mainly run by two militant Trotskyist organizations:

- the International Socialist Organization (ISO):

- Socialist Alternative:

They have some factional differences, but work together. The ISO oppose all the "dictators" - Castro, Chavez, Assad, Gaddafi & Mugabe - whereas Socialist Alternative support Castro & Chavez but oppose Assad, Gaddafi, & Mugabe (calling for their downfall).

The ISO is strong among Left academics at leading universities. News reports show demonstrators carrying signs such as 'Socialist
Alternative'. Yet the reports never call them 'Communist' or 'Trotskyist'; they are just presented as normal Americans.

At yesterday's demonstrations, a reporter noted the Trump had "some work to do" to re-unify the country. But these Trots will never change their spots - they are revolutionaries.

There are major differences between 'Stalinist' and the militant 'Trotskyist' camps. I classify as 'Stalinist' all the Left but anti-Trotskyist websites. The 'Stalinists', such as Global Research, oppose the overthrow of Gaddafi and Assad, whereas the militant Trotskyists support the overthrow.

There is one Trotskyist organization which stands out from the others - ICFI: It does not command demonstrators on the streets - it is not 'militant' (but it was a major backer of the Tamil Tigers). WSWS opposes the overthrow of Gaddafi and Assad.

Even so, none of the Trotskyist sites carried the pre-election interview of Julian Assange by John Pilger. The 'Stalinist' sites, such as Global Research, did carry it.

This is amazing, because John Pilger is quintessentially Left. I heard him speak at a Trotskyist conference in Canberra 20 years ago. Yet this most pertinant interview, exposing Hillary's accepting donations from the Qatar and Saudi governments even though she knew they were funding ISIS, was censored by the Trots. They were so anti-Trump that they turned a blind eye to Hillary's war agenda.

Check yourself. These are the searches:

WSWS did cover the NATO military buildup against Russia, announced just before the election, but the ISO and Socialist Alternative did not mention it. They think that Gay Marriage matters more than World War III.That is why it is fitting to classify them in the War camp.They may well be accepting funds from George Soros, as certain Trotskyist organizations (such as Partisan review) were accepting payments from the CIA during the Cold War. Russians threw a party for Trump, in Moscow, after the election.

(3) Trots run the Demonstrations against Trump

Protesting Trump from day one. Sumaya Awad and Dorian Bon report from New York City as thousands show their anger with the president-elect on the first day after the presidential election. November 10, 2016.

EVEN AS rain began to pour down in the evening after Election Night, thousands of people in New York City turned up to protest Donald Trump and his rise to the presidency. Various marches snaked through lower and midtown Manhattan. Every half hour or so, two marches would collide and erupt in joyous shouts of solidarity before continuing on together. While some marches began on the sidewalks, by the end of the night, they had taken over the streets. When protesters waded into Broadway, they met support from car drivers honking their horns, bus drivers raising their fists and people shouting from upper floors of office buildings and apartments. Hundreds of vehicles were deserted in the streets as drivers joined the march.

As the march went down Sixth Avenue, people came out from retail stores to watch and film protesters chanting, "We demand impeachment!" and "Racist, sexist anti-gay! Donald Trump, go away!" Other onlookers chanted along, at first hesitantly, then confidently, as the demonstration marched in defiance of the racist, Islamophobic bigot who will soon become president.

New Yorkers were not alone in rejecting Trump. While Democrats from Hillary Clinton to Elizabeth Warren were calling on supporters to unite behind Donald Trump, protests were erupting across the country.

Thousands took over the downtown streets in Chicago, Boston and Los Angeles, and there were big protests at universities from California to Massachusetts. There were high school walkouts in Arizona and Iowa--two states where Trump won a majority--as well as Berkeley High School in California, where 1,500 students -- half the student body -- participated.

In Washington, D.C., chants of "No Trump! No KKK! No fascist USA!" rang out as an impromptu march of several hundred people met another large group of people at Trump's new luxury Pennsylvania Avenue hotel. After such a devastating Election Night, people were inspired to chant, talk and speak out about what they think happened and what we need to do next.

The anger was directed not just at Trump and everything he stands for, but the Democratic Party machine whose response to Trump's campaign slogan of "Make America great again" was "America has always been great." As one speaker put it, "Donald Trump's white nationalist economy should have been on the ballot against a social economy. We weren't able to have that vote because the Democratic Party didn't allow us to have that choice."

"The GOP was able to split white workers from having any solidarity with workers of color so here we are," said Melanie from Capitol Heights. "It's not about Hillary Clinton. It's about the Democratic machine and the way they ran their candidate of choice through the system. So we see that the liberal elites were out of touch as we have known." [...]

AT THE New York protests, one of which was called by a coalition of activists and the other by Socialist Alternative, the atmosphere was joyful and defiant. People seemed excited to be on the streets again, unified.

The many dozens of movements that marchers came from were reflected in the chants: "Black lives matter" led to "Muslim lives matter," then "Disabled, trans and immigrant lives matter," each one louder than the last.

Often times several chants could be heard at once from different places in the crowd: "Not my president," "Her body, her choice," "We won't let Trump spread his hate, We won't let him legislate," "Whose streets? Our streets!" "From Palestine to Mexico, border walls have got to go!" "We reject the President-elect!' [...]

(4) ISO Trots call for Overthrow of Assad

The Western left and the Syrian war

Australian socialist Corey Oakley takes up the debates among anti-imperialist forces over what the left should say about Syria, in an article for the newspaper Red Flag.

November 1, 2016

THE SYRIAN war is not just a tragedy. It is a crime of immense proportions. And it is clear as day who is culpable.

First, the Assad regime, which in 2011 met the demands of a protest movement for social justice and democratization with bullets and torture cells, and when that failed, and protesters began to call for Bashar al-Assad's overthrow, decided there was no price in blood it would not pay to stay in power.

Second, the Iranian regime, which, as the rebellion grew and the resources of the regime were exhausted in the face of a nationwide uprising, deployed its own military forces and proxy militias to keep the government in power and prolong the war.

Third, Russia. While Putin backed Assad from the outset, it was only in September last year that Russia, fearful the regime was on the brink of collapse, intervened decisively, unleashing the terrible power of its air force on rebel-held cities such as Aleppo. John Kerry's assertion that the Russian plan for Aleppo is modeled on its campaign in Grozny in 1999, when Russian forces laid waste to the entire city in order to wrest it from rebel hands, is likely to be a correct, if hypocritical.

THEN THERE is the West. It deserves its share of the blame too, but not for the reasons many claim. The predominant narrative on the left is that the U.S. and its allies have pursued a strategy of "regime change" in Syria, and are responsible for fuelling the resistance to Assad.

In fact, the opposite is true. Despite expressing, at various times, sympathy for rebels and hostility to Assad, the U.S. has at almost every stage hindered efforts to overthrow the regime. [...]

(5) Socialist Alternative Trots reject White Working Class

We Need Mass Resistance to Trump and a New Party of the 99% November 9, 2016.

People in the US and around the world awoke today to one of the most shocking political upsets in living memory with the election of Donald Trump as president. It was the culmination of an election cycle when ordinary Americans rose up against the political establishment and against the destructive effects of globalization and neo-liberalism. This was expressed both on the left, with the campaign of Bernie Sanders which galvanized millions for a "political revolution against the billionaire class," and, in a distorted way, on the right with Trump’s campaign.

But Trump did not just run as the alleged defender of the "forgotten men and women" in working class communities. He also ran the most overtly bigoted and chauvinist campaign of a major party candidate in modern times. He created a space for white nationalists and open white supremacists to come out of their holes and try to reach disaffected white workers and youth. This is a very dangerous development.

However, we completely reject the notion – relentlessly pushed by liberal commentators, trying to deflect from the staggering failure of the Democratic Party – that the outcome demonstrates that the bulk of the white working class shares Trump’s racism and xenophobia. [...]

It needs to be underlined that the outcome of this election was not just a shock to tens of millions of progressive workers, women, immigrants, people of color, and LGBTQ people but also – for quite different reasons – to the ruling elite of the United States. [...]

(6) Oligarchy still exists and is still powerful - Paul Craig Roberts

10 November 2016.

The Working Class Won The Election

Paul Craig Roberts

November 9, 2016 @ 12:29 pm.

The US presidential election is historic, because the American people were able to defeat the oligarchs. Hillary Clinton, an agent for the Oligarchy, was defeated despite the vicious media campaign against Donald Trump.  This shows that the media and the political establishments of the political parties no longer have credibility with the American people.

It remains to be seen whether Trump can select and appoint a government that will serve him and his goals to restore American jobs and to establish friendly and respectful relations with Russia, China, Syria, and Iran.

It also remains to be seen how the Oligarchy will respond to Trump’s victory.  Wall Street and the Federal Reserve can cause an economic crisis in order to put Trump on the defensive, and they can use the crisis to force Trump to appoint one of their own as Secretary of the Treasury. Rogue agents in the CIA and Pentagon can cause a false flag attack that would disrupt friendly relations with Russia.  Trump could make a mistake and retain neoconservatives in his government.

With Trump there is at least hope.  Unless Trump is obstructed by bad judgment in his appointments and by obstacles put in his way, we should expect an end to Washington’s orchestrated conflict with Russia, the removal of the US missiles on Russia’s border with Poland and Romania, the end of the conflict in Ukraine, and the end of Washington’s effort to overthrow the Syrian government.  However, achievements such as these imply the defeat of the US Oligarchy.  Although Trump defeated Hillary, the Oligarchy still exists and is still powerful.

Trump said that he no longer sees the point of NATO 25 years after the Soviet collapse.  If he sticks to his view, it means a big political change in Washington’s EU vassals.  The hostility toward Russia of the current EU and NATO officials would have to cease. German Chancellor Merkel would have to change her spots or be replaced. NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg would have to be dismissed. Read the rest of this article here.

Image icon clinton-ww3.jpg6.9 KB


Soros-fronted orgs among groups calling for anti-Trump protests

Good discussion from readers below this article.

This to be posted to a forum on, There's a lot of ruin in a country :

J-D, dale

According to United_States_presidential_election,_2016 at Wikipedia, the popular vote for Donald Trump was 60,350,241 or 47.30% of the vote. The popular vote for Hillary Clinton was 60,981,118 or 47.79% of the vote.

That means that Hillary Clinton got less than 1% more of the popular vote than did Donald Trump. However, if the votes from California (5,488,261 to Clinton, 2,969,532 to Trump), with a population of 37,253,956 or more than 11% of the 324,954,000 population of the United States, are excluded, Donald Trump would have got 57,296,326 votes or 3.4% more than Hillary Clinton's 55,351,661 votes.


Had the American Presidental electoral system been based - more democratically, I agree - on the popular vote and not the electoral college vote, then Donald Trump, no doubt, would probably have focussed more of his energy on the more populous states like California and Washington and, I think, won the popular vote.

Another serious shortcoming of the American Presdential electoral system is that it does not allow for preferential or "instant run-off" voting. It is, instead, based on the primitive "first-past-the-post" system. It was clearly impossible in the circumstances of the 2016 election, or of any other Presidential election I am aware of, for candidates like the Greens' Jill Stein or Libertarian Gary Johnstone to have won. A higher vote for either of them would have turned the election into a lottery. (It is striking that Jill Stein, who complained so bitterly that the system was rigged against her, failed to raise this issue.)

Notwithstanding the marginal benefit gained by Donald Trump from the Electoral College system on this occasion, the system was clearly rigged against Donald Trump. This included the astonishingly hysterical campaign by the American mainstream media, and even most of the 'alternate' newsmedia against him.

That Donald Trump won, in the face of overwhelming hostility from the mainstream media and in the face of opposition from most of the leaders of his own Republican Party, including the Speaker of the House of Representatives, Paul Ryan, is testimony to Donald Trump's wisdom and his managerial skills and to the strength of the grassroots movement that supported him.

Most of the 'alternative' newsmedia, including Russia's, contrary to Hillary Clinton's claim that Donald Trump was a puppet of Vladimir Putin, were also hostile to Donald Trump. The only reporter who I can recall showing any balance and sympathy towards Donald Trump was the aforementioned Sophie Shevardnadze.

At best, nearly all of the other 'reporting' on was indifferent to the outcome of this critical election. At worst, it mimicked the Western mainstream media's (msm) smears against, and ridicule of, Donald Trump. The worst were the journalsts from the United States' branch of, RT America. An example of RT America's appalling misreporting is Here's who to blame for Trump, The good news of the election, and More, the 12 November edition of 'comedian' Lee Camp's Redacted Tonight.

So, paradoxically, Russia (or at least some who pretend to be countering the msm and presenting Russia's world view) did interfere in the United States' election against Donald Trump and in favour of war-hawk Hillary Clinton.

I am still waiting for someone to respond to my earlier point about Hillary Clinton's complicity in the murder of hundreds of thousands from Serbia, Kosovo, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Yema and Syria.

Whilst only time will tell how many of his promises President-elect Donald will keep, the likelihood that the United States would impose a Libya-style 'no-fly zone' over Syria in the immediate future has been considerably reduced and we should not have to see the black flag of the Islamic State flying over Damascus.