New Obama slogan has long ties to Marxism, socialism

By Victor Morton

The Obama campaign apparently didn't look backwards into history when selecting its new campaign slogan, "Forward" — a word with a long and rich association with European Marxism.

Many Communist and radical publications and entities throughout the 19th and 20th centuries had the name "Forward!" or its foreign cognates. Wikipedia has an entire section called "Forward (generic name of socialist publications)."

"The name Forward carries a special meaning in socialist political terminology. It has been frequently used as a name for socialist, communist and other left-wing newspapers and publications," the online encyclopedia explains.

The slogan "Forward!" reflected the conviction of European Marxists and radicals that their movements reflected the march of history, which would move forward past capitalism and into socialism and communism.

The Obama campaign released its new campaign slogan Monday in a 7-minute video. The title card has simply the word "Forward" with the "O" having the familiar Obama logo from 2008. It will be played at rallies this weekend that mark the Obama re-election campaign's official beginning.

There have been at least two radical-left publications named "Vorwaerts" (the German word for "Forward"). One was the daily newspaper of the Social Democratic Party of Germany whose writers included Friedrich Engels and Leon Trotsky. It still publishes as the organ of Germany's SDP, though that party has changed considerably since World War II. Another was the 1844 biweekly reader of the Communist League. Karl Marx, Engels and Mikhail Bakunin are among the names associated with that publication.

East Germany named its Army soccer club ASK Vorwaerts Berlin (later FC Vorwaerts Frankfort).

Vladimir Lenin founded the publication "Vpered" (the Russian word for "forward") in 1905. Soviet propaganda film-maker Dziga Vertov made a documentary whose title is sometimes translated as "Forward, Soviet" (though also and more literally as "Stride, Soviet").

Conservative critics of the Obama administration have noted numerous ties to radicalism and socialists throughout Mr. Obama's history, from his first political campaign being launched from the living room of two former Weather Underground members, to appointing as green jobs czar Van Jones, a self-described communist.

Activists allege forced abortions, sterilizations in China

By Ashley Hayes, CNN

(CNN) -- When Ji Yeqing awakened, she was already in the recovery room.
Chinese authorities had dragged her out of her home and down four flights of stairs, she said, restraining and beating her husband as he tried to come to her aid.

They whisked her into a clinic, held her down on a bed and forced her to undergo an abortion.
Her offense? Becoming pregnant with a second child, in violation of China's one-child policy.
"After the abortion, I felt empty, as if something was scooped out of me," Ji told a congressional panel in September. "My husband and I had been so excited for our new baby. Now suddenly all that hope and joy and excitement disappeared. ... I was very depressed and despondent. For a long time, whenever I thought about my lost child, I would cry."

As she lay unconscious, she said, an IUD to prevent future pregnancies was inserted.
The issue of forced abortions -- and in some cases, forced sterilizations -- in China has seized the spotlight in recent days with news of escaped activist Chen Guangcheng.

Chen, a blind, self-taught lawyer, rose to fame in the late 1990s because of his advocacy for what he calls victims of abusive practices, such as forced abortions, by Chinese family planning officials. He investigated forced abortions and sterilizations in eastern China -- a practice China denies -- and helped organize a class-action lawsuit on behalf of victims, for which he served four years in prison.
A fellow activist, Hu Jia, said Chen has taken refuge at the U.S. Embassy in Beijing.

"Chen may be safe for the moment, but the women for whom he risked everything are not," said Reggie Littlejohn, president of Women's Rights Without Frontiers, a California-based organization that describes itself as a "broad-based, international coalition that opposes forced abortion and sexual slavery in China."

"Forced abortion is not a choice," Littlejohn said. "It is official government rape."

On a January 2011 visit to the United States, Chinese President Hu Jintao reportedly denied that China was forcing women to submit to abortions. Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, R-Florida, who gave Hu a list of human rights concerns, said that Hu insisted a forced-abortion policy did not exist, according to media reports.

China's population is the largest on earth, with more than 1.34 billion people. Since its implementation in 1979, the one-child policy has prevented more than 400 million births in China, according to China's National Population and Family Planning Commission.

About 13 million abortions are performed nationwide each year, the commission has said -- about 35,000 a day. It is unknown how many of those are coerced.

But the one-child policy has been blamed for abuses. In some cases, advocates say, fetuses identified as female are aborted, or midwives strangle a female infant with the umbilical cord during delivery, identifying the baby as "stillborn," according to All Girls Allowed, a nonprofit group that aims to end female "gendercide," educate abandoned girls, rescue trafficked children and defend women's reproductive rights.

Other females are abandoned, left to die or raised as orphans.

Chinese traditionally prefer boys over girls because they are seen as better able to provide for the family and carry on the family bloodline. As a result, the practice of aborting female fetuses or abandoning infant girls continues, particularly in rural areas.

In November, according to state-run news agency Xinhua, Premier Wen Jiabao, in a speech to the National Working Conference on Women and Children, "urged banning illegal fetus gender identification and illegal abortion."

"The social status of the female population indicates the level of social progress (of a nation), while children are the future and hope of a nationality and a nation," Wen said.

Last summer, Xinhua reported that "millions of Chinese men of marrying age may be living as frustrated bachelors by 2020" because of the gender imbalance. In 2010, China's sex ratio at birth was 118 boys for every 100 girls, the news agency said.

China kicked off a national campaign "to significantly curb non-medical sex determinations and sex-selective abortions to balance the gender ratio," Xinhua said. Also during the campaign, "efforts will be made to raise awareness of gender equality, to severely punish those involved in cases of non-medical sex determinations and sex-selective abortions, and to strengthen monitoring."

Liu Qian, vice minister of the Ministry of Health, said that doctors violating the ban would be stripped of their licenses or penalized, and involved medical institutions would also be punished, according to Xinhua.

The one-child policy could contribute to China's high rate of female suicide, according to All Girls Allowed.

China is the only country in the world where the female suicide rate is higher than that of men -- some 500 women a day, the group said, citing statistics from the World Health Organization and the U.S. State Department.

In its 2009 Human Rights Report, the State Department noted that "many observers believed that violence against women and girls, discrimination in education and employment, the traditional preference for male children, birth-limitation policies, and other societal factors contributed to the high female suicide rate. Women in rural areas, where the suicide rate for women was three to four times higher than for men, were especially vulnerable."

Sometimes the consequences are even more severe. In October 2011, a woman who was six months pregnant died during a forced abortion in eastern China, according to Women's Rights Without Frontiers.

Last month, a woman in the same region was forced to undergo an abortion while nine months pregnant, the organization reported. The baby was born alive, but then was drowned in a bucket, according to the organization. A photo of the infant's body floating in the bucket was circulated on Weibo, the Chinese version of Twitter, sparking widespread outrage.

Chinese officials are prohibited under law from "infringing on the rights and interests of citizens when promoting compliance with population planning policies," according to the Congressional-Executive Commission on China, created by Congress to monitor human rights and the rule of law in China. However, the commission in its most recent annual report noted "reports of official campaigns, as well as numerous individual cases in which officials used violent methods to coerce citizens to undergo sterilizations or abortions or pay heavy fines for having 'out-of-plan' children," meaning a family's second child.

In one example from October 2010, the commission said, a woman in southeastern China who was eight months pregnant with her second child was kidnapped and detained for 40 hours. She was forcibly injected with a substance that caused the fetus to abort. Her husband reportedly was not permitted to see her during this time, the commission said.

"Nothing in human history compares to the magnitude of China's 33-year assault on women and children," said Rep. Chris Smith, R-New Jersey and chairman of the commission, during the September hearing at which Ji Yeqing testified.

"Today in China, rather than being given maternal care, pregnant women without birth-allowed permits are hunted down and forcibly aborted. ... For over three decades, brothers and sisters have been illegal; a mother has absolutely no right to protect her unborn baby from state-sponsored violence."

"Out of plan" children whose parents do not pay fines may go without household registration, or hukou, which presents obstacles to social benefits including subsidized health care and public education, All Girls Allowed said, citing the commission's 2010 report.

A woman's family members, including her husband, parents, in-laws or siblings, may also be targeted for violations of the policy, according to Women's Rights Without Borders, which published a 2005 report compiled from Chen's notes into cases he was investigating before his arrest. The report alleges arrest, torture, beatings and fines of family members for the violations of relatives. It also documents a case where a woman suffered health problems after being forced to undergo a tubal ligation despite her high blood pressure.

Ji told lawmakers her first forced abortion was in 2003, after officials said she and her husband would be fined $31,000 for their second child and fired from their jobs. Her second came in 2006, despite the fact she and her husband at that time were willing to pay the fine and lose their jobs.

She continues to suffer consequences from the abortions. Her husband divorced her, she said, because she could not give him a son (the couple already had a daughter). After she remarried and moved to the United States in 2010, she said, she visited a clinic to have her IUD removed and undergo an exam. "The doctor told me that I had cervical erosion, likely due to the poor medical conditions of my forced abortions," she said.

Liu Ping told a similar story to Congress last year. She said after giving birth to her son, she was required to undergo five abortions between 1983 and 1990. During the last procedure, an IUD was inserted.

"When I learned of the procedure, I protested that I had a kidney disease and could not keep the IUD, but they completely ignored me," she said. "The doctor just gave the bill to my husband and told him to pay." Her husband was later arrested, she said, and she was given a "serious administrative warning" at her job and fined six months' pay.

Liu had to report to the factory clinic each month for an exam to make sure she had not removed the IUD on her own or become pregnant again, she said.

In 1997, she missed a monthly pregnancy check because she was caring for her terminally ill mother, she testified.

"Agents from the Family Planning Commission waited at my home to drag me to the exam," she said. "When they pushed me to the ground, I fell and hurt my neck vertebrae. My spirit completely collapsed after this one. I attempted suicide, but was stopped by my family from jumping."

Liu was able to move to the United States and she and her husband reconciled after a divorce.

"I feel happiness and joyful," she told lawmakers. "But I know in my homeland, China, there are millions of women who are suffering as I did. Each day thousands of young lives are being destroyed. I beg everyone to save them."

Pioneer of global peace studies hints at link between Norway massacre and Mossad

In several anti-Semitic remarks, Norwegian sociologist Johan Galtung also defends 'The Protocols of the Elders of Zion' and says Jewish influence was one of the factors leading to Auschwitz.

By Ofer Aderet

Johan Galtung, Norwegian sociologist nicknamed the “father of peace studies,” made anti-Semitic and anti-Israeli remarks while lecturing at the University of Oslo, in an article published afterward in the Norwegian press and in an interview with Haaretz that followed.

Among other statements, Galtung claimed that a possible connection exists between the terrorist responsible for the massacre of children in Norway last summer, and the Mossad. “The Jews control U.S. media, and divert for the sake of Israel,” wrote Galtung in an article published in Norway.

He pointed out that one of the factors behind the anti-Semitic sentiment that led to Auschwitz was the fact that Jews held influential positions in German society.

 Galtung also recommended reading “The Protocols of the Elders of Zion,” – one of the most popular anti-Semitic texts in the world.

Professor Galtung, 82-years-old, is one of the founders of the discipline called “Peace Studies and Conflict Resolution,” as well as a founder of the international Peace Research Institute in Oslo. He is considered well-respected sociological researcher, has been awarded many prizes, and is the author of over a thousand articles and over a hundred books. Some of his work has also been translated into Hebrew.

Galtung’s repeated anti-Semitic remarks were exposed by the website of the Norwegian periodical, “Humanist.” (http://humanist.no) Some of the comments were made during a lecture at the University of Oslo last summer, and others were written by Galtung in response to an article critical of him that was published in the periodical.

Among other claims, Galtung stated that there is a possible link between Anders Behring Breivik, responsible for massacring dozens of children in Norway last summer, and Jewish and Israeli factions. The connection is supposedly based on the fact that the murderer has ties to the “Freemasons” organization, “which has Jewish origins,” according to Galtung. The supposed connection to Israel is through the Mossad – which Galtung believes might have given Breivik his orders.

In the same breath, Galtung mentioned a conspiracy theory, linking last summer’s massacre in Norway with the attack on the King David Hotel, carried out by the Etzel in 1946 – both attacks took place on July 22. He finished with this astonishing claim: “It will be interesting to read the [Norwegian] police report on Israel, during the trial."

In an email exchange with Haaretz on Sunday, Galtung requested to clear up his claims. “When we know nothing about who is behind Breivik, including whether there is anybody at all, any hypothesis is legitimate; that is in the nature of research,” wrote Galtung.

“I consider the Mossad highly unlikely, but it is illegitimate to eliminate it as a hypothesis with no evidence,” continued Galtung.

When asked what he meant concerning the police report on Israel, Galtung replied: “Exactly what I said. I’m assuming that they are open to any possibility, and not only investigating acts carried out by Breivik, but rather other conjectures as well.”

 In the correspondence with Haaretz, Galtung mentioned what he calls the “ambiguity of everything human.” To explain, he raised examples from the Middle Ages and the modern period. According to Galtung, “The terrible programs,” carried out upon the Jews, had another “problematic” side as well. “The Jews played a role in demanding payment from indebted peasants,” wrote Galtung.

According to Galtung, “terrible Auschwitz,” had two sides as well. “[It was] not unproblematic that Jews had key niches in a society humiliated by defeat at Versailles,” wrote Galtung, referencing Germany following World War I. Galtung continued, “In no way, absolutely no way, does this justify the atrocities. But it created anti-Semitism that could have been predicted.”

Another claim, made by Galtung in a Norwegian periodical, is that Jews control the American media. “Six Jewish companies control 96% of the media,” wrote Galtung. He included the names of journalists, publishers, TV networks, and movie studios, that he claims are controlled by Jews. Media mogul Rupert Murdoch was also included on the list. “He’s not Jewish, but many of the people under him are,” wrote Galtung, in reference to Murdoch. “Many of them are fanatically pro-Israel,” he pointed out. Immediately following these claims, Galtung wrote that “seventy percent of the professors at the 20 most important American universities are Jewish.”

Galtung bases his doctrine on an article written by William Luther Pierce, founder of the “National Alliance,” a white supremacist organization. The same article inspired Timothy McVeigh to carry out the Oklahoma City bombings that killed 168 people in 1995.

When asked by Haaretz to describe the effects of the “Jewish control” of the media, he answered that it could be a good thing, in terms of intellectual quality, but that it could also “limit the discourse about anything where Israel is involved."

As an example, he raised American media coverage of Iran. According to Galtung, “U.S. mainstream media only discusses Iran in terms of nuclear arms,” and does not discuss American involvement in internal Iranian affairs. Galtung wrote of “The trauma of 1953 – the CIA-MI6 strike against a legally elected prime minister.” Another example, according to Galtung, is “The Arab Spring, discussed only in terms of dictatorship-democracy, not also in terms of the role of U.S.-Israel behind those dictatorships."

Galtung also held an open forum discussion concerning the contents of the book “The Protocols of the Elders of Zion,” one of the most quoted anti-Semitic works around the world. “I wonder how many people with such strong opinions on the book have even read it,” he wrote. “It is impossible to do so today without thinking of Goldman Sachs,” he added. Goldman Sachs is an international investment Bank founded and run by Jews, attacked in the media from time to time as a “capitalist pig."

“The Protocols,” are a forgery, created by the Russian secret police during the days of the Czar, which supposedly illustrates the Jewish plot created at a secret conference called the “Elders of Zion” to take over the world. Galtung, however, has another opinion. “It is hard to believe that the Russian secret police was able to be so specific,” wrote Galtung. While corresponding with Haaretz, he was less decisive, writing “I don’t know exactly who wrote the protocols."

Gad Yair, a sociology professor at Hebrew University, was the first to expose Galtung’s anti-Semitic remarks in Israel. Yair wrote about Galtung in his blog. (http://coolcite.com).

“Professor Galtung was a valued and deserving member of any public or academic discussion, until now. If a trustworthy peace-broker was ever needed anywhere in the world, that was Norwegian professor Johan Galtung. This background gives meaning to the astonishment of Norwegian academia in the face of his comments. It is the same as the astonishment created by the murderer Breivikin." Norwegian academia is wondering, added Yair, how "this merchant of peace was basing his ideas on neo-Nazi publications, and including them in interviews, lectures and articles? Does he also, like Breivik, cry peace with a Nazi salute?"

Australian Senator Nick Xenophon teargassed in Malaysia

by: By Belinda Cranston

* Nick Xenophon goes to Malaysia to learn about elections
* Senator involved in protest over electoral reforms
* He's in the line of fire as police throw tear gas

INDEPENDENT Senator Nick Xenophon has had teargas fired in his direction during a demonstration for electoral reforms in central Kuala Lumpur.

Tens of thousands of demonstrators swamped the Malaysian capital today to demand the reforms, ahead of national polls expected soon.

Senator Xenophon, who is in Kuala Lumpur on an international fact-finding mission on election processes in Malaysia, was among the crowds when police fired teargas and chemical-laced water at demonstrators.

Until then it had been a peaceful rally that had included chanting and a speech by Malaysia's opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim, Senator Xenophon said.

"The police have just let off canister after canister of teargas," he said soon after the demonstration was broken up. "People have been injured. People are fainting."

Those targeted included the opposition leader's daughter, Iman Anwar, 22.

She believes police who recognised her deliberately fired a canister in her direction. Accompanied by one of her father's bodyguards, she ran to a nearby mosque to seek shelter. "But they were still shooting at us, so we decided to walk in another direction," she said.

The demonstrators had defied a lockdown of central Kuala Lumpur that left it a maze of razor wire and barricades.

"This is a country that the Australian government is happy to do refugee swaps with," Senator Xenophon said.

"It raises serious questions over how authoritarian it is."

Saturday's rally was one of Malaysia's biggest street rallies in recent years, reflecting concerns that Prime Minister Najib Razak's ruling coalition - which has held power for more than 50 years - will have an unfair upper hand in elections that could be called as early as June.

Activists have alleged that the election commission is biased and claimed that voter registration lists are tainted with fraudulent voters.

Senator Xenophon is one of two Australian delegates taking part in the fact-finding mission.
The other delegates are from Germany, India, Pakistan, the Philippines, Thailand, South Africa, Turkey and Tunisia.

The group were invited to Kuala Lumpur by Mr Anwar.

Netanyahu’s choices: Strike Iran before or after Israeli elections

DEBKAfile Exclusive Analysis

Binyamin Netanyahu and Ehud Barak are facing another of the periodic opposition campaigns to unseat them – this time by pressure for an early election a year before its October, 2013 date. New faces have joined the opposition lineup. They are focused on challenging the current government’s credentials for leading an Israeli attack to preempt a nuclear Iran. These two goals are interchangeable. However, before the campaign peaks, debkafile’s analysts report it has begun to backfire.

The newcomer to the anti-government ranks is the party registered Sunday, April 29, by ex-broadcaster Yair Lapid as “Yesh Atid” (There is a Future). His potential partners are former Shin Bet director Yuval Diskin, former Mossad chief Meir Dagan, former Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and former chief of staff Gaby Ashkenazi. They are all casting about for a political base, together or apart, from which to tip over the current government. Incumbent President Shimon Peres cheers them on from the wings.

Diskin’s assault on Netanyahu and Barak as not to be trusted to lead a war and guided by “messianic” feelings was launched Friday, April 27, directly after Independence Day celebrations, at the same time as two leading opposition parties, Labor and Kadima, set the stage for an early election to stem the right-of-center government’s constant gains in opinion polls.

The ex-Shin Bet chief sounded the drum for them all by his assault on Netanyahu’s competence for leading any wars, least of all, a major conflict against Iran. Captions suddenly blossomed in foreign publications on the lines of “Israel’s Generals in Revolt,” implying that Israel’s security establishment was solidly against an attack on Iran.

This is far from the truth. The vocal opponents are a group of disaffected ex-security officials. There are questions about why they did not resign on the grounds of the views they are now voicing instead of fighting to have their tours of duty extended.

Now they are casting out lines for careers in politics.

Ehud Olmert, one of the Yesh Atid founding fathers and a member of its inner leadership, set the new party’s security agenda in New York Sunday with this comment: “I think that fundamentally, Israelis believe that a nuclear Iran imperils their existence. That is not in dispute. Nor that we must do everything it takes to defend ourselves against this peril. The question is what should be done, who should do it and when. My answer is this: It is being done and continues to be done by the international community led by the United States.”

With this agenda, Olmert sought to place the question of an Israeli solo attack on Iran versus reliance on US President Barack Obama front and center of the election campaign to come.
He appeared to be drawing on Diskin’s words, that the Israeli public is “stupid” or “ignorant,” leading to his belief that the Israeli voter would swallow a straight black-and-white choice between the “good guys” and the “bad guys.’

The good guys would be Barak Obama and his advisers, who have worked so hard to hold Israel back from a military offensive against Iran, and the baddies are Prime Minister Netanyahu and Defense Minister Barak who are making trouble for the US president.

On April 26, Chief of Staff, Lt. Gen. Benny Gantz tried to fracture this distorted picture: He reported that other armies stand alongside Israel ready to attack Iran and prevent its acquisition of a nuclear weapon.

He did not name those armies, but debkafile’s military sources disclosed he was referring to the United States.

In their drive to discredit Netanyahu and Barak, President Peres, Olmert, Dagan, Diskin and Ashkenazi failed to take note of Gen. Gantz’s words or what they portended – namely: In the past week, the United States has brought forward its operational preparations for an attack on Iran.
Instead, in Jerusalem, Israel’s opposition parties gathered for the push to corner Netanyahu into announcing an early election.

They got their wish sooner than they expected.

The prime minister, after turning the situation over for 48 hours, assented. He figured that the key weapon adopted by his rivals to knock him over was not in fact in their hands but in his: It is up to him and him alone to decide whether to attack Iran. In fact, if an election was forced on his government, he could defeat their scheme by bringing the attack forward.

So the impression of Netanyahu and Barak fighting with their backs to the wall against a body of generals is totally misleading.

Their opponents are beginning to realize that their anti-government offensive has missed its mark and may well blow up in their faces. The pressure for an election may therefore dissipate in the coming days - or not. That too is up to Netanyahu. He may decide that a successful operation against Iran would assure him of an election victory and wipe out his rivals. For now, he's got his foes guessing.
President Obama was far from happy with the exes’ anti-government maneuvers because he realized that they offered Prime Minister Netanyahu his strongest incentive yet for bringing forward an attack on Iran, an eventuality which the US president had made every effort to prevent before he himself faces the American voter in November.