It's Very Simple: The True Story of Civil Rights
Chapter 17

He reminds of of the Marxist doctrine of thesis-antithesis-synthesis, also known as action-reaction-solution.[1] "Marxism-Leninism teaches… that no revolution can hope to succeed unless there is an effective counter-revolution," but they know they will lose in outright battle, so their only hope is "to control the opposition."

For example, we learn from Lenin that under "Czarism" there had been a man named Sergei Vasilyevich Zubatov, who organized meetings to ferret out revolutionaries and fight them. So, Lenin says, "we sent members of our Party into these meetings and societies… They… acquired much skill in conducting propaganda, and succeeded in wresting the workers from under the influence of Zubatov's agents."

Says the author

Zubatov's agents were known as the Black Hundred, and they were "openly denounced–for 'committing crimes against the people of Russia'; for conducting pogroms against the Jews; for being… a 'right-wing extremist' organization with 'fascist overtones'."

We are reminded that the 1964 riots were ostensibly protesting "police brutality."

According to the New York News, a CIA official "testified that infiltration of police forces and efforts to turn the public against them were favorite Communist tactics."

"In other words," says the author, "the police brutality actually exists. The Communists infiltrate the police, create their own police brutality–by being brutal–and then cause a riot to condemn it."

The CIA official quoted above also testified that "the instructions for how to do the infiltration, and for how to run the riot, are contained in the same captured Communist handbook."

The New York News reported that at the same riots, "the agitators represented both the 'extreme left' and  'extreme right'," and that "both the Commies and extreme Southern right-wingers have been supporting the Black Muslims."

The New York Times even reported on the Viet Cong doing this same thing in Saigon, instructing their members "to mingle among the people, whenever a crowd gathers, and to shout inflammatory slogans to whip up excitement."

In Guyana, Communist Cheddi Jagan pitted his Indian faction against another of African descent. He had his Progressive Youth Organization burn crops and homes, kill people, and rape women and girls, and then blame it on the Africans. When the Indians walked off the sugar plantations in protest, Africans were brought in to take their place. These were denounced as "scabs" by the Indians, who began full-scale retribution against the Africans. Prior to this, the Indians and Africans had lived side-by-side for years "with a minimum of friction."

The author points out that we were sold the phony idea that "the problem is between black Americans and white Americans… [when] the real problem is between Americans of all colors and Communists of all colors."

We hear more about the "right-wing" extremists (The National States Rights Party) who kept showing up whenever one of these Communist-controlled demonstrations took place, and the author points out that this also lends an air of legitimacy to the event. After all, if the racist Nazis are against it, shouldn't we all be for it? And if they're for  the "radical right," we should definitely not be! And if they're for states' rights, we should be against it!

Two members of the National States Rights Party, J. B. Stoner and Connie Lynch, always seemed to show up as agitators when MLK was present. The present author quotes another, who suggests that "So well do the activities of Martin Luther King and those of Lynch and Stoner complement each other–and with such coordination–one can not help but entertain the idea of a single control."

In fact, there was a well-known incident where MLK was "punched in the face and kicked," and the provocateur turned out to be yet another member of this same group, one Jerry Robinson.

We hear about a letter that was circulated nationwide at this time, claiming that the American Nazi Party was planning to exterminate all Blacks. Interestingly, we learn that the Black Muslims hate Jews as much as any Nazi ever did, and we are provided with quotations from Malcolm X to that effect. "In fact," says the author, "two short years [before this], George Lincoln Rockwell, the number one American Nazi, was a guest speaker, by invitation from Elijah Muhammad, at the convention of the Black Muslims," where he stated that he and the American Nazi Party both believe that Blacks are owed "the millions of 'foreign aid' [dollars] now being poured out by our nation to communist countries."

We are reminded that the Black Muslim publication, Muhammad Speaks, has previously been shown to be very pro-Communist.

"How do you figure it?" asks the author. "Here's a man whom any American of any color would deplore–and who is supposed to be against communism–and Mr. Muhammad–who isn't supposed to be against communism–invites him as an honored guest to his convention."

Along the same lines, we learn about Carl and Anne Braden, who have been mentioned in previous chapters. They purchased a house in a White neighborhood and gave it to a Black friend. Almost immediately there were problems of "racism," like a burning cross, rocks thrown, and shots fired through the door. Some people turned up to help protest the racist treatment, one of whom was a demolitions expert for the Communists in Spain during their civil war. The house gets bombed, and one of these supportive protesters is indicted and convicted. We learn from the footnotes that "the bombings may have been planned to make it appear that Mr. Wade was being persecuted by white persons incensed by his moving into the neighborhood."

References:

[1] This is basically the doctrine of pitting opposites against one another until you can use the resulting chaos to implement Communism, which is the final "synthesis." You cause an action, and use the resulting reaction (either real or fabricated by you) to implement your pre-conceived solution.

The 2021 march of Trump supporters on the Capitol Building was intended to be peaceful, identical to all previous marches by various groups. Many were surprised, then, when windows were broken and a woman was shot. The entire march was immediately characterized as "racist," "right-wing extremism," etc., used to tighten control of public discourse, and demonize much of the population. This event followed, to a tee, the process outlined here, of agent provocateurs.[1]

Similarly, in the months leading up to the 2020 election, Facebook pages of Native American news organizations were suddenly inundated with discussions about racist graffiti, and a resurgence of white supremacist activity. I lived on the reservation concerned, and this was not an issue. In fact, it wasn't an issue either before or after the election, even on these same facebook pages, but lasted just long enough to sway public opinion, particularly as Trump followers were publicly being called racists and White supremacists.

When looking up information about the National States Rights Party, we read the following: "Party officials argued for states' rights against the advance of the civil rights movement," and they are lumped in with other groups considered as racist.[2] No mention is made of federal overreach, or violations of the Constitution necessary to implement the demands of the "civil rights movement," as have been discussed in this book. Obviously this group was controlled opposition, as the author points out, but these vital elements are completely absent from the discussion.

In fact, the next chapter is preceded by a quote from J. Edgar Hoover, stating that his concern is that Blacks will "succumb to the party's propaganda" and "lose perspective on the issues involved." Sadly, the entire country has done both.

Reading about the Black man whose home was deliberately bombed to make it seem like racists were responsible, we remind the reader that these things happen all the time, and sometimes make it into the mainstream media. They are often buried quickly, but they do appear from time to time. They are never, however, shown to be tied to any groups. It is always presented as being a lone individual, despite the long history of such false flags.


References:

[1] Please note that we are not Trump supporters, nor members of any major political party. We believe in promoting true principles, and exposing things for what they are.

[2] National States' Rights Party (wikipedia.org) <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_States'_Rights_Party, accessed 2021-02-18.>