Date: Wed, 17 Jul 1996 20:18:46 +0200 (MET DST)
From: Rolf Martens <rolf.martens-AT-mailbox.swipnet.se>
Subject: Re: Dissecting the New Flag


Hello Jay,

That dissection of yours of the New Flag which
you started yesterday, Tue 16.07, is quite helpful
in contributing towards proving our point.

I'll reproduce a few points of it here. There's
no need for much comment.


>On Sat, 13 Jul 1996, Rubyg580-AT-aol.com wrote:
>>
>>If Jay or Adolfo thinks not, let them take an article from NF that 
>>exposes the line of RCP on the "peace talks" hoax, and dissect 
>>it paragraph by paragraph,  

>
>Fine, Gina.  Let's see, I'll start with issue #2, oh, here is 
>a good one!  It's on page 9, entitled "The Silence of the Lambs".
>You're right, it is opposing Avakian and Fujimori.  But wait a
>minite, that one is written by Luis Arce Borja, who the New Flaggers
>are now denouncing as a traitor to the revolution and calling for
>his overthrow.  

>
>Maybe I'll start with the first issue that came out after we met
>the New Flag, that's the `July/Aug.95 edition.  Hmmm...dang!  
>Can't find a single word against the  RCP or Avakian written by
>NF.  There is an article on page 18 entitled:  Last Hope of Opportunism
>Swept Away: RIM's Call For The Defense Of Our Red Flag Waving In Peru 
>Reinforces Our Struggle."
>
>It looks very supportive of CoRIM and Avakian to me, Gina.  It
>states:
>
>>"On the 26th of March, 1995, the Revolutionary Internationalist
>>Movement (RIM) has finally issued a call for a struggle against
>>the handfill of opportunists who advocate capitulation.  The RIM
>>statement reaffirmed the defense of the Peoples's War in Peru and
>>support the Communist Party of Peru.  In this call RIM published
>>the conclusions of its "investigation" they have been carrying
>>out since Fujimori's hoax of "peace accords" on October 1993. 
>>Although there are visible ideological limitations and some 
>>erronous assumptions in its analysis, the RIM statements is a step
>>in the right direction."
>
>Okay, it does mention "limitations" and "assumptions" but it clearly
>states that Avakian/CoRIM's statement is a step in the right direction.
>And we know that this CoRIM statement says that the peace accords originated
>within the Party, and this is not true, it is Fujimori's lies, it is
>the same hoax, it DID NOT originate within the PCP. The CoRIM statement
>clearly says:
>
>>"Yet today the greatest challenge the People's War faces does not 
>>come from such assaults by the enemy.  It comes from a line, or
>>strategy for the revolution, which emerged from within the ranks
>>of the PCP, calling for peace negotiations with the US-backed Peruvian
>>government."
>
>CoRIM's statement is NOT a step in the right direction, it is just 
>a continuation of the HOAX.  New Flag here, after some earlier articles
>critical of Avakian in previous issues, is kissing back up to Avakian
>and CoRIM. 

Yes. The "CoRIM" made this about-turn only after it had been 
under attack for its real support of the "peace letters" hoax 
for a year or so.

As Luis Arce Borja pointed out, it was like someone
"coming forward" to "volounteer" against Hitler - in 1947,
when the war had already been over and won for two years.
(Actually even worse, since "CoRIM" had been on "Hitler"'s
side in *this* "war".)  


> By the time we met up with these guys, Gina, they were back
>in Avakian's camp big-time and they mislead us to the contrary.  Ask 
>Dan about the trip to Sweden.  What orders did they give NF?  To stop
>attacking Avakian and CoRIM.  Here in this article is the carrying out
>of those orders by New Flag.

>
>This issue was a big disapointment to me when it came out, Gina.  The
>New Flaggers had told us it was going to have the Anti-avakian article
>we discussed with them and that funny picture of Avakian with a light
>bulb over his head.  But there was no article, NF was soft on Avakianism.
>The explanation was just that some comrades didn't want it in there.  
>Which "comrades" were those, I wonder.  Dan and You and I were all for
>its inclusion, was it the other phony MPP's that vetoed it?  Those
>phony European MPP's that are Avakianists were directing the content of
>the New Flag.

That's quite possible. Behind it all the CIA or some forces
like that appear quite quite clearly diqscernible.

And you Detcom already also have pointed to the fact of
"Quispe":s supporting the Avakianist agent Mr. TP here in
Malmoe, Sweden, and his friends.
>
>Okay, let me go on to the next issue put out by NF after we started 
>working with them.  Okay, again no articles at all, only a small
>weak comment in a reply to a letter from France on page 45/46.  It
>merely says that NF thinks RCP has had a shift to the right in the
>last 2-3 years. 

>Well, that was educational.  I liked that, Gina, I'll dissect more of 
>the New Flag nonsense in coming days. 

>Jay Miles / Detroit


Keep up the good work. 

Rolf M.



     --- from list marxism-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---