The wedding was a confluence of influential figures. Actor Danny Glover, playwright Eve Ensler, and broadcast journalist Amy Goodman were among the guests celebrating the union. But another attendee, Ben Cohen of Ben & Jerry’s fame, would soon find himself at the center of controversy, arrested during a protest and publicly calling for the defunding of a federal agency.
The guest list held another unsettling detail. Ibrahim AlHusseni, present at the celebration, was later arrested for alleged securities fraud, and a substantial bail – reportedly funded by one of the hosts – secured his release pending sentencing. These weren’t isolated incidents; they were threads in a complex web beginning to unravel.
The People’s Forum and BreakThrough News, organizations gaining prominence in nationwide demonstrations, were deeply connected to the wedding’s attendees. These movements, coordinated through larger coalitions, were rapidly becoming focal points for activism and protest across the country.
At the heart of this network was a newly established nonprofit, Tricontinental Ltd., founded by a friend and fellow wedding guest, Vijay Prashad. Named after a historic 1966 conference, the organization quickly became a key recipient of funding, raising concerns about its true purpose.
A warning emerged, detailing “interlocking ownership and management roles” across these entities. The concern? A deliberate strategy to disseminate propaganda, masked as independent scholarship and commerce, potentially influenced by external forces.
Financial records revealed modest, yet significant, investments by a Singham-linked nonprofit in a partnership between Goldman Sachs and a Chinese state-backed investment firm. While legally permissible, the investment placed the organization within a sensitive financial structure, raising questions about overlapping interests.
Just weeks after the wedding, the People’s Forum was officially registered. Initial funding of $2.5 million flowed in, and familiar faces from the wedding – including key organizers – took positions on the board, solidifying its foundation.
One board member, Manolo De Los Santos, openly identified as a Marxist, displayed a history of connections to controversial international leaders, including those from Venezuela and Cuba, and individuals linked to Cuban intelligence operations.
Another key figure, Brian Becker, a veteran Marxist organizer, transformed the People’s Forum into a central hub for protest infrastructure, building upon existing networks and orchestrating demonstrations. His past, rooted in American Marxist ideology, added another layer of complexity.
Even a former extremist, once imprisoned for supporting a militant group, recalled Becker’s crew taking control of protests, directing other groups to simply “show up” and let them manage the proceedings.
Over the years, a total of $22.4 million was channeled into the People’s Forum, enabling it to operate not only as a physical space but as a coordination center, linking funding, messaging, and protest activity.
The organization’s stated mission was to “foster collaboration” and “build unity” across diverse movements, aiming for a “new world” through collective action. But beneath the surface, a different agenda was taking shape.
In 2021, the People’s Forum hosted a conference focused on “China and the Left,” featuring speakers who lauded China’s development model and criticized U.S. foreign policy, framing it as a challenge to capitalism.
Financial transactions revealed a direct link between the People’s Forum and organizations involved in large-scale protests, including a payment to a fiscal sponsor of the ANSWER Coalition shortly after a controversial international event.
Further investigation uncovered a multi-million dollar building purchased by the People’s Forum in Manhattan, a tangible symbol of its growing influence and financial power.
The flow of funds was often obscured through a series of newly created nonprofits with generic names and overlapping leadership, utilizing recurring addresses and complex financial structures. These layers served to distance the original source of funding from the ultimate recipients.
One such entity, the United Community Fund, listed its focus as “International, Foreign Affairs, and National Security Alliances and Advocacy,” and featured individuals with strong anti-American views on its board.
The network’s reliance on multiple layers, anonymous companies, and recycled leadership raised a critical question: what was the ultimate goal of this intricate system of funding and organization?
As the network expanded, it actively promoted the ideologies of Mao and the “United Front” strategy – a tactic of building alliances with diverse groups to achieve a common revolutionary objective. A recent book launch celebrating the 1966 Tricontinental Conference exemplified this approach.
The State Department recently identified the People’s Forum and CodePink as potential threats due to their alignment with the People’s Republic of China, accusing them of spreading disinformation and supporting controversial regimes.
Congressional committees are now investigating the network for potential violations of nonprofit law, and federal agencies are conducting their own inquiries. The investigations are ongoing, but the questions surrounding the network’s activities remain.
The White House has even created a new National Security Council position focused on “cognitive advantage,” recognizing the importance of information warfare in the modern geopolitical landscape.
The Singham network operates at the intersection of these forces, and as activists departed Cuba, their actions reflected a carefully constructed structure built over years, following a long-established strategy of international collaboration and coordinated activism.
