Welcome to the Los Angeles Free Press!
The Original, 1960s, Counter-Culture Icon, and
still the Best Alternative to the Corporate-Controlled Media.

The LA FreeP~ A Real Head Trip for Smart Minds.


For original 1960's and 70's Music Adverts,
News, Interviews, Reviews, and Articles:


USE Subject Line: ARCHIVE Request for [this]



To contribute articles and suggestions, apply for an internship, or create an alliance contact: stevenmfinger@gmail.com

From the LA Free Press Archive – It’s a 50-year (!) Throwback Thursday!

Confessions Of A Spy…

is not the Front Page story but let’s hope it’s the fate that befalls (or, more properly, uplifts) the perpetrators of the 4 articles that do begin on this page. Here is our spy’s confession, followed by a page that has the balance of 2 of 4 the ‘lead’ articles.

As the swastika on the Front Page indicates, each of the articles are but one illustration in a larger picture. A picture that sometimes fades but, I guarantee you, 50 years hence, in 2020, it will be, once again, bright and shiny. And, of all places, right here in America! It – Fascism – will be endemic and systemic.
Not so sure these 4 instances are seeds to anything in particular? or what that might look like in
full bloom? Here are 14 characteristics of Fascism as written down by political scientist Dr. Lawrence Britt in 2003 – that’s 34 years from ‘today’ in 1969 and 16 years back if you are just now catching up with the LA Free Press. If they all seem familiar… it’s time to talk about what we should do next.

(Just so ya know…
Today you can catch a break at https://www.facebook.com/LAFPmusic
and the rest of this story right back here tomorrow.)

Oil Men Kill Smog Bill Even as Repressed Women Rise Up. What Happens Next?

The answer is here. But first… a word from our Editor:
“Hello, dear friends.
Today marks the first day of a radical change to our 50-Year Throwback Thursday feature. As you know, for years now, each week, from the LA Free Press Archive we’ve pulled our Issue from 50 years back and compared its articles to the contemporary news – and the parallels have been amazing!
And, of course, you also know it wasn’t that we were just trying to amaze you. We were also trying to forewarn you: What was, is also what is, though the names may have changed.
Here are but two examples… The Ecology Movement, which morphed into Climate Change, and Women’s Lib as a forerunning title of the Feminist Movement.
Our point, all along, has been that the Movements remained because the injustices persisted. And our hope was, in recognizing that, those that read the Free Press would ensure that the Tipping Point would not be reached, the bounds of good governance and a equitable society and, surely, of survival, would not be breached.
But, dang, we’re awfully close, aren’t we? Just in these two… Climate Change is at the mark of Climate Crises, and the Feminist Movement’s component, Metoo#, is more obvious every day. The simple truth is that on its grand go-around in the 60’s, the counterculture didn’t win. And this time around, it can’t afford to lose.

Hence, we’ve arrived to the reason for the format change: At this point in the 60’s – far past 1967’s springboard into The Summer of Love where Hippie Ideals flourished, and heading quickly into the Chicago 8 Conspiracy Trial – it begins about two weeks from now (in 1969 time) – wherein some of those Ideals seemed to be convicted, we’ll then move into and through the Nixonian Government, a challenge to higher ideals if ever there was one. Kinda like now, if you see where this is going… but, if not, let me put it this way – it’s not just that there will be a lot of news, it’s that a lot of that news will be about causes like ours being set against by forces like theirs. (Again – kinda like now.).

Simply put, there are, from this point forward, too many articles and, particularly, too many that deserve to be put under a magnifying glass, to squeeze them all into a single Thursday.  To be extra clear, if we’re to win this time around – when the stakes seem infinitely greater (we’re carbon’d upto our limit), as so, too, seem our opportunities (to avoid war(s) vs trying to stop those in motion) – we need to look at these articles closely to see what was, and what was needed to come out ahead.

Therefore, the new format will accommodate that.  As in this first ‘edition, rather than including 4 or 5 articles as we usually do, we are only discussing 2. Taking a closer look, because the format can now support that. And, as it’s true that this and each successive Issue has so many articles in it, this new format does not just consist of a Thursday, it draws out and discusses articles on the following Wednesday, as well. Together, will see how this works.

For the moment, though, let’s just consider these two articles… which as you might have suspected are in accordance with the examples given above.  And for good reason. Please, if you wish, take them both for a read, and return tomorrow if your curious if our thoughts about them – published then – agree with yours.

Yes, Oil Men Kill Smog Bill is the ‘Screamer’ Headline but the one that is right on the money is the article headline itself – Lobbyists Suffocate Bill to End Pollution.  Here the article continues…

And (tomorrow) our thinking is this….



Our second article is this one. As it mentions, it concludes an earlier published interview (which can be found in our 50 Year Throwback of this year’s August 29th Throwback). Even taken together they are a concise statement of (yes, our thoughts on this one will also be here for you upon your return 🙂 )

Top Secret Warfare Plan – USA Defense vs Soviet Bloc Aggression

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.

There Should Be No Secret Police (But there were, there are, and there may still be.)

Written by Art Kunkin, it was a Statement of a High Ideal, but one that any American should have felt sure of. His was a concern that, in practice, it just wasn’t so and, particularly, that it was impacting many of those in our community. So he took, as he said he would, that step beyond The Statement and did publish that List of Narcotic Agents (Narcs, as we knew them in ‘our’ community)- the Secret Police.
And – in less than a week – it was as if an earthquake of a terribly large magnitude struck the LA Free Press, opening fissures that went deep, their damage devastating.

‘Today’, though, is August 8th, 1969 and, as this paper sits before you, neither you nor Art know what’s coming. At best, you might suspect a mere repercussion, and so you would just read on.
But next week? It’s the beginning of the end.

Till then, here are some of the more important, more unusual items in ‘today’s’ Issue – items that offer insights to a future in which we now sit:
*A “Cheery Leary” talks about pardons and – here your ears should perk up – how he might be running for Governor as a Republican. Think about that for a moment (in present time)… Would a progressive Republican split the Independent vote, and also pull the vote of Republicans embarrassed by political stagnation and anti-American actions?  And this…

*Beyond our usual reports on anti-war demonstrations, here’s why they don’t – and can’t – stop. This article is a reminder that when you hear the word ‘war’ (today) it’s as bad as it ever was. (Sadly, we’ve not out grown it, likely we are gearing up, once again, for it.)

*But, you say, we war to ensure that American principles prevail. Here, though, in a war on our very own shores (at Chicago’s Democratic Convention) is a reminder that there, and in this trial, those principles are not always paramount. Will they be even more suppressed 50 years hence, in 2019?  (Are they?)
And do those 3 Amendments (RIGHT THERE in the very middle of this article) still hold sway – CAN ALL fights for our Rights put us – as in ‘us’ Americans – in the pokey?

[Ed.’s Note: Long story made short – from personal experience – YES, They Can put us in the pokey!  And that’s no matter what you believe the Federal Constitution guarantees.  So… best to take a moment to read this one if you are, or were thinking of becoming, an Activist.]

*Now, finally, to that LA FP 50 year-old story that always shows up… the one that seems to have been written just yesterday as it’s addressing an issue we are dealing with today. And what would that be… what’s in the news right now? Here in California , it’s the new bill that the Governor just signed into law –
Assembly Bill 392:  use of deadly force must be a policeperson’s last resort. Specifically, Officers may pull their trigger only when “necessary,” meaning when NO alternatives are available to prevent serious injury or death to themselves or others.

While a step up from the current standard of being able to pull that trigger  when such use of deadly force is “reasonable”, the distinction in making the decision to shoot is still the officer’s call.

Ideally, Officers will stay safe and, now, the number of ‘suspects’ shot will be less.  Very simply, this is a needed change in the law as (we all know) too many people are killed by them, seemingly without adequate reason.

HOWEVER – the devil remains in the details… when that shot was fired was it absolutely necessary?  This is, usually, sorted out in court, the decision based on testimony by officers (who surely have a biased view) and other experts.

This brings us all the way around and back to our very first article, the one regarding secret police.  Why, exactly, is it that we are calling them ‘secret police’?   Afterall, we all knew of them. So was it, instead, that they didn’t self identify (especially by not showing either a badge nor uniform) before they began their ‘investigation’ (or, sometimes, their encouraged incorporation) of our behavior into our pending arrest?   Yes, of course… but that’s only the most obvious aspect of the secret police – their ‘masked’ identity as just another among us.

And it’s the easiest to rectify.  All that’s needed is to ‘un-mask’ them – Put a name to their face.  But the consequences are dire.  In fact, by doing the first, Art Kunkin found out all too much about the second… as the Front Page headline of next week’s Issue screams out.

So… what to do? Clearly and fully understand what actually makes the Secret Police secret. And nip it in the bud. As usual, and as remarkable as always, it’s a look back – to these early Issues of the LA FP – that tells us how to move forward.

To wit, this last presented article from this ‘current’ Issue tells why neither the motivation nor the operation of a police force should ever be hidden (kept secret) from the public.  As importantly, it shows you how such a thing came to be.  And, perhaps most importantly, it gives you not only a reason as to why we have arrived to where we are today – yes, 50 years later in 2019 –  but a good reason as to – even with the new law – why we might wind up back in the same old place.


Older posts
Our 50-Year Throwbacks