This is the 1st publication of a page of the Plan by a newspaper (to wit, the LA Free Press) in these United States. It’s a scoop, as they say in this business, over those other papers you may have heard of – the NYT, the LAT, the WashPo and the others that somehow seem tied into corporate interests and whose readers seldom look down into the underground (us, again) for their daily briefing.
However, with due transparency, please take note that we’re not claiming any deep dive into the worldwide secret spydom to say that we are the paper that brought this into the light. No… that was done by (not, just one, but) several European newspapers, even “Der Stern”, a West German magazine.
I’ll also tell that this wasn’t a new report, the article says it was at least 6 years old, so you may wonder why we made it a Front Page story back then in 1969. More to the point, why am I making it a Front Page story again… 50 years later?
Well, actually, the reasoning back then is very much the same as the reasoning now: Aren’t we (once again) talking about an opposing government that’s developing nuclear bombs and intercontinental missiles? (In fact, at this point, we’re facing nuclear missiles!)
So, in our usual manner of bringing together the LAFP of the day (in 1969) with the news of today… The hesitancy then, even in showing the public an antiquated plan, was as foolish as hardly saying a word now that there’s any plan at all.
There had best be one, right? Especially as the Treaty that was going to keep things from flying our way… just like that original article… is history!
I’ll leave you with that thought and move on as there are 4 other items in this Issue that also deserve reviews in light of the contemporary news- 3 articles, and 1 very interesting advert. In one way or another, they all are remarkably prescient.
Here’s the first one –
It’s about doctors that are either self-abusing narcotics or enabling others to abuse them. I know you’ll recognize the similarity to our present situation. Had this old story been in mind as the opioid Wave of Death began, perhaps there would have been a review of doctors’ prescription practices and we would not have reached the point where there are now more than 100 deaths each and every day from drug habits that in many, many cases were begun by an over prescribing practitioner.
Fortunately, tho just yesterday, a decision was handed down by a Court… not against the doctors who dug the graves in this graveyard, but against those who brought the graveyard, itself, to life – the drug companies.
Once again, because the LA Free Press was publishing what corporations didn’t want to see in print, there was a head’s up about what might be coming down the road. Would the mainstream press rather forfeit its ad space than turn away a fellow corporation? Apparently not as it’s a successful formula: today it’s addictive drugs, tomorrow it’s re-hab services… and so on.
Here’s the second one on this list of articles: In January of ‘this’ year (1969) – yes, I know, the article says ’68 but, hey, I wasn’t the Editor back then – all hell broke loose at Valley State College. Why? Seemingly, it’s was precipitated by a program which integrated the all-white student body with a couple of hundred black and brown bodies. When they held a peaceful assembly, the administration declared it an unlawful assembly, and almost the entire group was arrested!
[Ed.’s Note: As I’ve mentioned before, I’ve some personal experience in matters of this kind having once been arrested for unlawful assembly in California myself. That said, here are some things generally unknown:
1. What the 1st Amendment of the Constitution of the United States actually says is “that congress shall make no law abridging the right of the people peaceably to assemble”.
2. That most people, even our Reporter, believe the adjective describing such an ‘assembly’ is ‘peaceful’ rather than ‘peaceably’ and, hence used the former rather than the latter. (“peaceful” can be applied to a person or an object “at peace”, whereas “peaceable” can only be applied to a person, and means “Inclined to keep the peace”.)
3. – and this is an important distinction – The California Constitution does not provide such a Right but, conversely, in its Criminal Code, Statute 407 deﬁnes an “unlawful assembly” as two (yes, just 2) or more people assembled together “to do an unlawful act, or do a lawful act in a violent, boisterous, or tumultuous manner.”
So… back to those ‘unlawfully assembled’ students… Though made clear to the Court that they, themselves, were not violent – only the arresting Officers were violent – it was not until several years later, when other cases were defended, did a court rule that the assembly must, in fact, “be violent or pose an immediate threat of violence”. In other words, an assembly that was only “boisterous or tumultuous” would, more rightfully, not be regarded as a violation of the statute.
So, at this early date, in this instance, upon the arrest of just the second person – per the Statute – eventually 286 students were arrested, convicted, and penalties meted out.
Let me clear about this, other than the students, damn few folks were shouting about this being a 1st Amendment violation. In fact, in spite of the 1st Amendment’s declaration that ‘Congress shall make no law abridging the Right to assemble”, IT ALREADY HAD… by restricting the promotion of the assembly and the travel to it!
This was done almost immediately after Martin Luther King Jr.’s assassination on April 4, 1968 via the passage of the Civil Rights Act on the 11th of April – in the wake of the riots that had broken out country-wide. Among the many who celebrated this step forward, few voiced concern of the prohibitions within it against inciting additional riots. After all, it seemed as if the battle had been won for this issue… and what other liberal issues were there to be fought for? But, aha, here were these students, short on resources (i.e. money, lawyers… and, maybe, needing to get back into school to go any further, they were short on time, too). And so no real challenge was made, in their trials, to that Section of the Act – which reads as: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2101
Coincidentally, though, these trials were coming to this conclusion almost exactly on the anniversary date of another assembly. But that one was a truly large, truly violent (violence again supplied courtesy of the police) riot – it was at the Democratic Convention in Chicago.
At the upcoming trial for leaders of that protest, this very law will be key. So much so that a ‘campaign’ was begun against it! Here, from the LA FP is one of the campaign’s ads. Then it was just 1 year and 1 day from the actual riot. Now, even though it’s 50 years old (today!!) remarkably, you will instantly recognize it… as the very same law being used at this very point in time. (i.e. by the liberal left against the alt-right in Charlottesville, and by the Trump administration against the liberal-left everywhere.)
Finally, we bring you this last article from this Issue – for 2 good reasons:
1. It is an excellent re-telling of the rise of the Feminist Movement, AND
2. because of the somewhat surprising support its reasoning gets from this current article in Salon
(The balance of ‘Don’t Count Chicks Before They Hatch’ is on the ‘A Unique Perspective’ Tab. Go to ‘Topics’, CLICK right arrow til you reach Women’s Rights & Wrongs.)
If you would like any additional Items from our Archive, please let me know through the ‘ARCHIVE Request’ Box at the top right of this page.