¡Que Se Vayan Todos!

Confronting Empire

2007-06-21T02:48:00.000-04:00

Please note that our blog has moved. Our new blog, Confronting Empire, is available at http://www.confrontingempire.blogspot.com/.

U.S. Military Spending

2007-01-16T22:58:00.000-05:00

Two striking visual representations of spending on military might. In chart 2, note how low spending was just after the end of WW2 and how little it dropped after the collapse of the Communist Menace. Chart 3 depicts U.S. defense spending in preparation for the impending invasion from outer space - or maybe just to keep the rest of the world in line.

Source for images:
Miriam Pemberton and Lawrence Korb, "A Unified Security Budget for the United States, 2007," Foreign Policy In Focus, May 3, 2006,

Influencing Nicaraguan Elections

2006-11-03T16:10:00.000-05:00

A revealing window into the methods the U.S. is willing to use to influence foreign media as a means to influencing foreign elections is provided by this excerpt:

Even some of America's friends here think Mr. Trivelli has been heavy-handed. Carlos Bricen[~]o, a U.S. citizen who heads a television station in Managua, says he was telephoned by a deputy of Mr. Trivelli who said the election was a matter of U.S. national interest and suggested his news coverage should reflect that concern. "The U.S. has lost the parameters of what is permissible and what is totally unacceptable," Mr. Bricen[~]o says.

Another excerpt is notably honest in itassessmentnt of the relevant history:

The U.S. has a turbulent history with Nicaragua, which it has treated as a kind of protectorate.

JOSE['] DE CO[']RDOBA, "A Cold War Ghost Haunts Elections In Nicaragua," Wall Street Journal, November 3, 2006; Page A1 [from an email listserv posting]

Tidbits on Slavery

2006-10-29T12:32:00.000-05:00

Economic historians now believe the rise of plantation colonies added millions of acres of cultivated land to the European economies, diversified output, stimulated a new type of consumption and enabled these societies, by the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries, to pull ahead of South and East Asia, which had been the world's most prosperous and civilized regions.
[...]
It is sobering to reflect that Africa was carved up by the colonial powers in the name of suppressing the slave trade. While the Berlin Conference of 1884-85 was a cynical travesty of antislavery, some genuinely abolitionist impulses did lend support to colonialism.

ROBIN BLACKBURN, "The New World Order," The Nation, November 13, 2006, .

Between the plague and the cholera

2006-08-22T18:59:00.000-04:00

Kieran Prendergast argues:

there is a big dynamic among the membership [of the UN] to try and keep the United States within the system [of international law] and that gives rise to a certain flexibility in accomodating (sic) U.S. concerns. The image I’ve used before when these things get very difficult may be that the choice is between the plague and the cholera. Neither is desirable, but better the cholera than the plague. So you’ve seen many instances when the United States really wanted to do something and exercised its persuasive powers, the membership was willing to go a long way to compromise—even sometimes against its better judgment.

Source:
Kieran Prendergast, “Interview with Sir Kieran Prendergast, Former UN Under-Secretary-General for Political Affairs,” The Fletcher Forum of World Affairs, VOL. 30:1 WINTER 2006, accessed 22 Aug. 2006 http://fletcher.tufts.edu/forum/30-1pdfs/prendergast.pdf.

Photo From Lebanon

2006-08-12T08:53:00.000-04:00

The caption reads: "A large banner looms over the now nearly empty streets of downtown: Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice stares intently, with piercing fangs and blood dripping from her lips. 'The massacre of children in Qana is a gift from Rice,' the banner says." (Photo: PAUL ASSAKER, MCT)

[Leila Fadel, "Lebanon Gripped by Anti-American Sentiment," McClatchy Newspapers, August 11, 2006. Accessed online at <http://www.commondreams.org/headlines06/0811-03.htm>]

Tags: [Condoleezza Rice, Lebanon, Photo]

Essay Publication Success

2006-07-08T15:30:00.000-04:00

An essay of mine that recounts my (brief) experiences working with the Service Employees International Union has been published in Monthly Review Zine. Let the ad hominem attacks begin.

[SEIU, labor movement]

False Confessions Rampant

2006-06-22T09:18:00.000-04:00

False confessions to serious crimes as a result of police misconduct during interrogations (something that used to be glorified on NYPD Blue if the times I occasionally watched the show were at all representative; another example of entertainment as propaganda) are a serious problem in the U.S. An illustration of the extent of the problem comes from one of the co-founders of the Innocence Project who notes that "of the 180 inmates in the United States exonerated by DNA testing in the last two decades, 44 had falsely confessed." The quote comes from a Los Angeles Times article which focuses on a case in Texas in which an innocent man confessed to murder after police threatened him with the death penalty and prison rape.

[Henry Weinstein, "Freed Man Gives Lesson on False Confessions," Los Angeles Times, June 21, 2006]

Tag: [false confessions]

Iraq War Fought "To Make An Example" Of Hussein

2006-06-20T09:43:00.000-04:00

Michiko Kakutani, reviewing Ron Suskind's book, "The One Percent Doctrine," writes that the Iraq war, "according to the author's sources who attended National Security Council briefings in 2002, was primarily waged 'to make an example' of Saddam Hussein, to 'create a demonstration model to guide the behavior of anyone with the temerity to acquire destructive weapons or, in any way, flout the authority of the United States.'" This is a quote sure to turn up in Chomsky's next book.

Of less political significance, but nonetheless interesting, it seems the portrait of Cheney as Bush's puppet master does indeed have some validity. Kakutani writes:

This book augments the portrait of Mr. Bush as an incurious and curiously uninformed executive that Mr. Suskind earlier set out in "The Price of Loyalty" and in a series of magazine articles on the president and key aides. In "The One Percent Doctrine," he writes that Mr. Cheney's nickname inside the C.I.A. was Edgar (as in Edgar Bergen), casting Mr. Bush in the puppet role of Charlie McCarthy, and cites one instance after another in which the president was not fully briefed (or had failed to read the basic paperwork) about a crucial situation.

["Personality, Ideology and Bush's Terror Wars," New York Times, June 20, 2006]

Tag: [Suskind]

The Democratic Party's Anti-war Pose

2006-06-15T14:50:00.000-04:00

The House engaged in "impassioned" debate on the Iraq war today, reports the Associated Press. Republicans, taking their lead from House Speaker Hastert and armed with a "debate prep book" provided by the Pentagon, took a bold stand against "evildoers" (perhaps the prep book was a comic book?) while the Democratic leader, Pelosi, called the war a "grotesque mistake" - rather than a deliberate act.

Although the war has become unpopular with the public, it is the Republicans who are on the offensive, seeking "to put lawmakers of both parties on record on an issue certain to be central in this fall's congressional elections." Congressional Democrats are "divided into three camps. Some want troops to leave Iraq this year. Others object to setting any kind of timetable. A number of them want the United States to start redeploying forces by year's end but don't want to set a date when all troops should be out."

It is interesting to consider why this apparent paradox exists. There is considerable confusion on the left about the nature of the Democratic Party machine, as evidenced by the frequent charge that Democratic representatives are 'cowardly' or 'spineless;' one cannot speak of 'bravery' or 'cowardice' in relation to those who have no principles save to abide the power of the purse. In this context, it is nearly inconceivable that Democratic VIPs would take note of the rights of the victims of imperial aggression - but if one is to ignore this aspect of the war in Iraq, one must adduce other objections to the venture. Indeed, there are many purely self-interested factors that could be noted, a predictable increase in terrorism against the U.S., the enormous costs, etc. However, here too we run into problems - those who wish to uphold the dominant ideological line must be careful not to undermine the system with subversive ideas. As a result, even the most dovish representatives are unwilling to appeal to their (much more anti-war) popular constituencies with anything beyond lamentations of the "grotesque mistake." The "mistake" was made by most of the Congressional Democrats, as well as Republicans, tricked into it by the devious Bush administration no doubt. It's not exactly the strongest argument, even if it were true, pleading one's own susceptibility to transparently false arguments for the war. The Republican accusation is, after all, quite true - the Democrats are simply hypocritical and inconsistent in attempting to opportunistically capture the anti-war vote, putting aside for a moment that the Democrat's appeals consist mostly of rhetorical flourishes, largely devoid of any policy significance.

["House Debates Resolution on Iraq War," the Associated Press, June 15, 2006]
Tag: [Iraq debate]

Republicans Blocked Black Voters In 2004?

2006-06-15T10:57:00.000-04:00

If Greg Palast is to be believed, there is solid evidence that the Republican Party used a calculated plan to deliberately exclude large numbers (from tens of thousands to a million) of voters in the 2004 elections because they were black. If this is indeed credible (the case is presented in his new book), it would obviously be quite significant. It's worth looking into this story further and following the reactions it receives.

["The Front Lines of the Class War from 1927 to Today," Democracy Now!, June 14th, 2006]

Iran: No Need For US To Invade

2006-06-15T10:38:00.000-04:00

Juan Cole reports that an advisor to Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad recently "joked that there was not need for the US to invade Iran. He said that the US had invaded Afghanistan and established an Islamic republic there. Then it had done the same thing in Iraq. Since Iran has had an Islamic republic for 27 years, he said, there really isn't a point in a US invasion." Cole notes that the jest has more than a little truth to it: "The Northern Alliance that the US installed in Afghanistan is a coalition of the Sunni Jami'at-i Islami and the Hazara Shiite Hizb-i Vahdat. And in Iraq, you now have the Supreme Council for Islamic Revolution in Iraq and the Da'wa Party, not to mention the Sunni Iraqi Accord Front, as the leading parties, and the new constitution forbids legislation contradicting Islamic law." Indeed, it's well understood by those that care to see that the U.S. has long been fomenting Islamic fundamentalism, either directly or indirectly.

Complaints Against New Orleans Police Are Up

2006-06-15T09:05:00.000-04:00

Complaints against the New Orleans police force are up, though it's not clear if this is because the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina has caused people to be less accepting of the established order or because the police are indeed even more abusive than before. "For some residents, the sense that the city is on edge and the department's future uncertain has brought echoes of the days when the local police were considered among the least competent and most racist and brutal in the nation."

"Given where they are mentally and emotionally, we've gotten more citizen complaints about the way the police are treating people than we have in a long time," said Oliver M. Thomas Jr., the City Council president. "Over the last two years, they'd been getting better and more professional. But I've been hearing lots of complaints about verbal abuse."

It's surely not a hopeful sign that the new "blunt-talking" police superintendent uses phrases like "gutter punks."

The article also notes that one of the reasons the force is having difficulty recruiting new officers is the lack of affordable housing. Some officers "have had to double up with other officers or move to distant suburbs to find housing they can afford on their salaries of $35,000 to $50,000." One can only imagine the difficulties in returning to the city for the significant percentage of the city's former population who don't earn a decent wage.

[Christopher Drew, "Police Struggles in New Orleans Raise Old Fears," New York Times, June 13, 2006]

Tag: [New Orleans police]

U.S. Opposes Democracy In Somalia

2006-06-15T08:53:00.000-04:00

It seems that, whatever their faults, the Islamic groups now in power in Mogadishu, Somalia are preferred by the general population to the U.S.-backed warlords that have been in power since 1991.

...the residents of Mogadishu, who have been able to move freely around the city for the first time in years. For many here that is enough to suggest the Islamists are the good guys.
"We don't believe they are like the Taliban," says Ahmed Mohamed Wasuge, who owns a hardware shop. "At the moment the sharia courts are working for us and have brought peace and security, which all the communities of Mogadishu welcome."

[Rob Crilly, "Mogadishu's unfamiliar calm," Christian Science Monitor, June 15, 2006]

Tag: [Mogadishu]

Bush Surprises al-Maliki

2006-06-13T12:35:00.000-04:00

NBC, reporting President Bush's surprise visit to Iraq today, notes that Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki "didn't know Bush was in Baghdad until five minutes before they met." For security reasons, "The trip was known only to a handful of aides and a small number of reporters sworn to secrecy..." The "dramatic move" by Bush is but a minor illustration of the utter absence of sovereignty in Iraq. Can one imagine an important head of state of a foreign country putting in a surprise appearance on US soil to meet Bush without the prior knowledge of Washington? "Thanks for having me," Bush is reported to have said upon meeting al-Maliki, presumably without irony.

Symbolically, the meeting took place in the current U.S. Embassy, formerly a palace of Saddam Hussein.

["Bush tells PM: Iraq's future 'is in your hands'," NBC News and news services, June 13, 2006]

Asymmetrical Warfare Postscript

2006-06-12T21:29:00.000-04:00

An addendum to my earlier post - Reuters reports that "State Department image crafters" are upset by the "asymmetrical warfare" comments of Guantanamo commander Harry Harris, as well as the remark by a senior State Department official who referred to the suicides as a "great PR move" by the enemy. It seems the indiscreet comments could "further erode America's image among allies." The article adopts the proper framing of the issue: 'never mind the abhorrent underlying government policies, what's important is the impolite honesty of the officials in revealing their crassness.'

[Sue Pleming, "US seeks to deal with Guantanamo suicides fallout," Reuters, June 12, 2006]

Tag: [Guantanamo suicides]

The U.S. as Rogue State

2006-06-12T17:13:00.000-04:00

The U.S. usage of the death penalty in defiance of international human rights norms has caused most of the world's governments to refuse to extradite criminal suspects to the US unless provided with guarantees that the suspects' elementary rights (not being subject to the death penalty) will be protected. In response, the US government has turned to illegal international kidnapping (euphamistically referred to as "rendition") to seize whom it pleases.

A Human Rights Watch researcher notes that the use of illegal detention and torture "has severely compromised the chances of prosecuting terrorist suspects." Yet another illustration that the Bush administration does not prioritize combating terrorism - even the "retail terrorism" (non-state terrorism) of the enemy.

[Mithre J. Sandrasagra, "A Hindrance to U.S. War on Terror, Say Rights Groups," Inter Press Service, June 10, 2006]

Tag: [rendition]

U.S. Bravely Combats Asymmetrical Warfare

2006-06-12T10:26:00.000-04:00

The first successful suicides occurred at Guantanamo Bay on Saturday, the culmination of dozens of attempts in the past several years by prisoners at the camp who are held "lawlessly" in the words of Human Rights Watch. Although rights groups (HRW and others) said the deaths were "driven by despair," the camp commander saw through such phony baloney - the suicides were "not an act of desperation, but an act of asymmetrical warfare waged against us." The "warfare" is "asymmetrical" because "They have no regard for life, either ours or their own." Such justifications almost defy comment. The notion that the enemy does not share the West's sacred reverence for life is recurrent throughout our history, though this instance is perhaps exceptionally absurd.

Kevin brought my attention to this article. ["Triple suicide at Guantanamo camp," BBC News, 11 June 2006]

Tag: [Guantanamo]

Colombia Still Most Dangerous For Trade Unions

2006-06-11T19:12:00.000-04:00

The most recent "Annual Survey of Trade Union Rights" published by the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions found that: "Latin America remained the most perilous region for trade union activity, with Colombia once again topping the list for killings, intimidation and death threats. 70 Colombian unionists paid the ultimate price for standing up for fundamental rights at work." Other U.S. dominions singled out for special mention in the press release accompanying the report included Iraq and El Salvador.

["Brutal Suppression of Workers' Rights Detailed in Worldwide Report," ICFTU press release, June 6, 2006]

Tags: [Colombia, trade unions]

Government-corporate Dirty Dealings

2006-06-11T18:24:00.000-04:00

In an episode reminiscent of an X-Files show, the chief investigator for Iowa Republican Senator Charles E. Grassley was attacked last November by an "assailant, dressed in black" who "clubbed her with what appeared to be a baseball bat." Senator Grassley, who has apparently earned a reputation as a champion of anti-corruption reform in the FDA, suspects she was attacked because of the unwelcome investigations she led on drug safety and other issues. "If they had knocked her out with the first hit, she'd be dead. She was able to just survive and fight back, and the guy got scared and ran off," the Senator commented.

Among other inappropriate FDA behavior, Grassley's office investigated an antibiotic developed by Sanofi Aventis that "the agency approved despite knowing a clinical trial investigator failed to report patients' side effects , back-dated documents, and falsified data."

[Diedtra Henderson, "Watching the watchdog," Boston Globe, June 8, 2006]

Tag: [FDA]

Colombia is "one of the world’s biggest and most forgotten humanitarian tragedies"

2006-06-09T12:47:00.000-04:00

Referring to the millions of Colombians displaced as a result of decades of internal conflict (which the U.S. has played no small part in perpetuating), the spokesman for the UN High Commissioner for Refugees called the Colombian "situation," "not only the largest UNHCR operation in the Americas but also one of the world's biggest and most forgotten humanitarian tragedies." ["COLOMBIA: UN CALLS ON WORLD TO PAY MORE ATTENTION TO MILLIONS DISPLACED BY CIVIL WAR," UN News, June 9 2006]

Tag: [Colombia]

The Colombian Paramilitaries and Uribe are One

2006-06-06T20:15:00.000-04:00

If anyone can doubt that the Uribe administration (a valuable U.S. government ally in the region) is closely connected to terrorism in Colombia, this passage from an Amnesty International USA document should dispel any questions:

a paramilitary group calling itself Colombia Free of Communists sent a threatening email to 20 organizations, including the Consultancy for Human Rights and Displacement (COHDES) and the National Indigenous Organization of Colombia (ONIC), labeling them communists and supporters of the left-wing guerrilla organizations FARC and ELN. The email warns the 20 organizations that "you are going to know something more about us now that we are to continue in power... along with the legitimate Colombian armed forces clearing our countryside and cities of grovellers like you." The statement warns members of these organizations to "stop coming here and fucking around with your issue of human rights, education, inequality, and all those things that you have invented because here what we have is work to do... Clear our land of these unproductive elements... You are all warned, we know where you are".

The phrase "now that we are to continue in power" is a crystal clear reference to Uribe's re-election.

The Amnesty document also notes that:

The paramilitary demobilization that is supposed to come to a closure this year has not proven effective. The process grants amnesty to many individuals responsible for human rights violations and does not allow for justice or reparations for the victims or victims' families. There is increasing evidence that the paramilitaries are not demobilizing after all, but are simply renaming themselves. The paramilitaries even boast about their ongoing collaboration with the army in recent threats they have sent to human rights defenders.

["U.S. Policy and Legislation: Help Reduce Security Assistance to Colombia," Amnesty International USA, June 6, 2006]

Tag: [Colombia]

A Warning of Things to Come

2006-06-06T17:39:00.000-04:00

Maria Jimena Duzan, a columnist for El Tiempo (Colombia's leading daily paper) wrote shortly before Colombian president Alvaro Uribe was recently re-elected, "If Uribe is re-elected, he will have omnipotent power without precedent in our history."
[Juan Forero, "Colombian Leader, Seeking Re-election, Warns of Catastrophe," New York Times, May 28, 2006]

Tags: [Colombia, Uribe]

On the term Collateral Damage

2006-06-06T17:21:00.000-04:00

Tom Engelhardt explores the Orwellian nature of the term "collateral damage":

"Collateral damage" is, of course, a Pentagon euphemism for unintentional or incidental destruction of property, facilities, or noncombatants that crept into our language in the Vietnam years and never left. Collateral means "of a secondary nature" or "subordinate," and "damage" is a description you would apply to wrecked or destroyed property, but not normally to the human body. Who, after all, would say, as a woman lay on the ground, shot through the head, that she had been "damaged."... In modern wars, especially those conducted in part from the air (as both Iraq and Afghanistan have been), there's nothing "collateral" about civilian deaths. If anything, the "collateral deaths" are those of the combatants on any side. Civilian deaths are now the central fact, the very essence of war. Not seeing that means not seeing war.

[Tom Engelhardt, "Collateral Damage: The 'Incident' at Haditha," TomDispatch.com, June 6, 2006]

I spent some time searching the web to pin down the exact origin of the term (here's one of the best webpages I found) and it seems to have originated in the 1970s but became popularized by the U.S. government during the first Gulf War. Significantly, the most recent edition of the Oxford English Dictionary came out in 1989 and did not contain the term but it is being added for the third edition. There are several conflicting origins given that predominate online. If anyone can locate a precise origin from a credible source, I'd be grateful.

Tag: [collateral damage]

"They're pretty good at press releases"

2006-05-27T23:09:00.000-04:00

Amnesty International has compared the US to Syria and Chile under Pinochet in its use of torture, an Australian newspaper has reported.

Returning to centrism, Amnesty also referred to the US as a country that "was once considered an exemplar of human rights." The use of the passive voice allows them to avoid using a subject who was doing the considering, which makes sense, because few such subjects exist.

[Tags: War on Terror, Amnesty International]

Weekly Roundup

2006-05-20T20:36:00.000-04:00

I know the Pentagon's got to be shitting itself over this flash video.

Yet another overview of the controversy around the Walt/Mearsheimer paper (thorough but nothing new for those who've been following it) and a more interesting account of the workings of AIPAC and its effectiveness as a lobby:
[Michael Massing, "The Storm over the Israel Lobby," New York Review of Books, Volume 53, Number 10, June 8, 2006. Backup link here.]

An open letter from Minnesota Democrat and House Representative Betty McCollum to the executive director of AIPAC:
[Betty McCollum, "A LETTER TO AIPAC," New York Review of Books, Volume 53, Number 10, June 8, 2006]

A good overview of the immigrants' rights movement in LA:
[Sonali Kolhatkar, "LA's New Immigrant Movement," May 05, 2006]

This scandal has not received nearly as much attention as it should, perhaps under the venerable journalistic defense that an inconvenient story such as this is "old news" even though it's never reported on adequately in the first place so that it's hardly old news to the general public:
["Chicago's Abu Ghraib: UN Committee Against Torture Hears Report on How Police Tortured Over 135 African-American Men Inside Chicago Jails," Democracy Now!, May 9th, 2006]

Porter's brief analysis here mentions several valuable facts and documents:
[Gareth Porter, "Iran Nuclear Conflict Is About U.S. Dominance," Inter Press Service, May 11, 2006. Backup link here.]

This report chronicles the experiences of youth detained in the New Orleans juvenile justice system during the flooding resulting from Hurricane Katrina and the horrendous treatment they received:
["Treated Like Trash," Juvenile Justice Project of Louisiana]
Just a few excerpts of a report full of horrific anecdotes:

For those who decided not to drink the floodwater and waited until they were removed from the facility, there was often no relief for hours, or even days. P.O., a 15 year-old boy, reported he saw a boy get "maced" by guards when he asked for drinking water while waiting to be evacuated from the Broad Street Bridge.
***
C.S., a 15 year-old boy, "We had human feces floating around us in the water ... we was forced to survive in for 3 days. I still have little sores on my skin. I can't seem to get that smell out of my skin. ... [M]aybe it's all in my head but that smell will be with me, and be in my head for a very long time."
***
O.S., a 14 year-old boy, stated once they arrived at the Broad Street Bridge, the children were threatened armed, uniformed officers whom O.S. believed were from the New Orleans Police Department. "They had guns. ... They told us that the mayor said 'We can shoot to kill.' There was military there, too, but it was NOPD. NOPD beat up an adult prisoner. They busted open his head. ... You could see the meat."
***
T.J., a 17 year-old boy, stated, "Guards told [us] while [we] were being evacuated, 'You're not juveniles no more. You are in an adult jail. If you move the wrong way, we're gonna shoot you.'" T.J. also recalls, "One man was maced and beat up really badly. His head was busted. ... They let the dogs loose on that man. ... The dogs were biting him all over. They told people they would kill them if they moved. ... The worst thing I saw was the guards beating that man while everyone was just sitting there. ... Those people need to go to jail or something."

And in case you were wondering, yes Thomas Friedman is still vapid:
["Tom Friedman's Flexible Deadlines," FAIR, 5/16/06]

Tags: [Katrina, juveniles, Thomas Friedman, Gareth Porter, Iran, Chicago, torture, McCollum, AIPAC]

Fox News analyst John Gibson says we need more white people

2006-05-20T00:11:00.000-04:00

I mean, we know they all they think it, he's just saying it out loud. Does this remind anyone else of Israel's "demographic problem"?

[John Gibson, Fox News, immigration]

identity change for spammer

2006-05-19T23:33:00.000-04:00

It seems that the Nigerian guy who fell into wealth under some nebulous circumstances and seeks your help in getting a wire transfer has found an accomplice in a Venezuelan suffering under the Chavez "regime." Read on, open your pocketbooks and your hearts.

DEAR FRIEND,

KINDLY ALLOW ME TO INTRODUCE MYSELF. I AM ANDRE ORTEGA, SON OF MY
FATHER CARLOS ORTEGA, ONE OF THE TOP OPPOSITION LEADERS IN VENEZUELA, WHO
HAS BEEN SENTENCED FOR 15 YEARS IN JAIL.

I AM WRITING YOU IN THE STRICTEST CONFIDENCE TO ASK YOUR HELP WITH A
FAMILY SECRET TREASURE LEFT TO MY FAMILY BY MY KIND FATHER, MR. CARLOS
ORTEGA. OUR FAMILY LIVES NOW IN A SMALL APPARTMENT IN CARACAS UNDER
PRESSURE OF REGIME OF PRESIDENT HUGO CHAVES.

HOWEVER BEFORE MY FATHER WAS JAILED HE LEFT ME A CERTIFICATE OF DEPOSIT
FOR $28 MILLION US DOLLARS ISSUED BY THE OIL TRADING COMPANY FOR HIS
PART IN ENTERPRISE. THE DEPOSIT IS HELD BY THE NOTARY PUBLIC AGENT,
WHO EXPECTED TO HOLD IT JUST A SHORT TIME,
BUT FATHER WAS JAILED. I CANNOT GET THE MONEY NOW AND ONLY HAVE A CERTIFICATE
OF DEPOSIT. IF I ATTEMPT TO RECEIVE THE DEPOSIT, I WILL BE CEASED
BY THE PRESIDENT'S AGENTS AND PROBABLY WILL SPEND THE REST OF MY LIFE IN
THE SEVERE POLITICAL JAIL.

I NEED YOUR HELP AND IF YOU KINDLY AGREE I AM WILLING TO GIVE YOU $2.8
MILLION SHARE OF THE DEPOSIT FOR HELPING TO WITHDRAW THE DEPOSIT FROM
THE NOTARY PUBLIC AGENT AND AS A BUSINESS EXPERT FOR INVESTMENT. MY
FATHER BEFORE HE WAS SENTENCED TOLD ME NOT TO INVEST THE MONEY IN VENEZUELA
BECAUSE IT IS UNSAFE DUE TO THE UNSTABLE POLITICAL SITUATION. I WOULD
LIKE TO BUY A HOUSE IN YOUR COUNTRY AND INVEST IN BUSINESS AND I HOPE
YOU CAN HELP ME.

SORRY FOR DISTURB YOU WITH MY TROUBLES AND TROUBLES OF MY COUNTRY, BUT
THE SITUATION IS DESPERATE FOLLOWING THE RECENT SOCIAL CRISIS AND THE
REGIME OF THE PRESIDENT HUGO CHAVEZ.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION OF MY PROBLEM. PLEASE GIVE ME YOUR
RESPOND AND I WILL EXPLAIN THE DETAILS.

THANK YOU IN ADVANCE FOR YOUR HELP.

ANDRE ORTEGA,
SMARTANDRE@MIPUNTO.COM

[spam]

maintaining state supremacy

2006-05-19T08:24:00.000-04:00

A lawsuit brought against the CIA by a Lebanese-born German, who accuses the agency of injecting him with drugs and beating him, has been thrown out by a US District Court judge who has refused to rule on the merits of the case because "private interests must give way to the national interest in preserving state secrets". What a touching argument.

[CIA, torture]

Ecuador going Bolivian, and the US turning Venezuela into Iraq

2006-05-17T23:12:00.000-04:00

Ecuador seizes an oilfield from the Occidental Petroleum Corporation, the US' fourth largest.

And the Washington Times has reported (I'm not sure if it can be accurately said that the Washington Times actually does any reporting, but I digress) that Thomas A. Shannon, assistant secretary of state for Western Hemisphere affairs, is accusing Venezuela of ties to terrorism - sans evidence, if that's even worth mentioning.

From the article:

Venezuela has allowed its intelligence service to become a clone of Cuba's while it shelters groups with ties to Middle East terrorists and allows weapons from its official stockpiles to reach Colombian guerrillas...
"Cuban intelligence has effectively cloned itself inside Venezuelan intelligence to the point that [our] ability to cooperate and have a relationship with Venezuela on the intelligence side is very difficult," Mr. Shannon said.

[Venezuela, Hugo Chavez, Ecuador]

weekend update, segunda parte

2006-05-14T14:30:00.000-04:00

According to a Scottish study that attempts to document the inner workings of the highly complex Western mind, to whose core values all are to aspire,

Adolescents have become so inured to violent images that they find photographs depicting animal cruelty more distressing than pictures of dead humans and severed limbs, new research has discovered.
...
A study involving more than 500 from the north-east of Scotland found that teenagers become more visibly distressed when confronted with pictures of a starved dog than a heap of human bodies.

Turning to one of the West's offshoots - hereafter referred to the Middle East's only democracy - "Israel's Supreme Court has upheld a controversial law barring West Bank Palestinians from living with their spouses and children in Israel itself." Is the South Africa comparison strong enough to really convey the criminality of this?

Finally, in what can only be interpreted as extreme hubris and desperation...

Career appointees at the Department of Agriculture were stunned last week to receive e-mailed instructions that include Bush administration "talking points" -- saying things such as "President Bush has a clear strategy for victory in Iraq" -- in every speech they give for the department.
...
There's a sample introduction: "Several topics I'd like to talk about today -- Farm Bill, trade with Japan, WTO, avian flu . . . but before I do, let me touch on a subject people always ask about . . . progress in Iraq."
...
"The Iraqis have also discussed specific products, like tomatoes, which they are anxious to export into the world community," the e-mail notes.

[Tags: Israel, Iraq]

left-wing, Laitn American unity

2006-05-12T23:36:00.000-04:00

Upside Down World has a solid summary of Bolivia's recent "nationalization" of gas, emphasizing Chávez's mediation role between Morales and Kirchner/Lula in preventing a more extreme reaction to the policy announcement on May 1.

Tags: Bolivia, nationalization]

Weekly Roundup

2006-05-11T09:02:00.000-04:00

Some of the most interesting news and analysis I've come across in the past week:
[Hilary MacGregor, "When diversity adds fairness," Los Angeles Times, April 17, 2006]
"Juries with white and black members are more likely to share information and challenge assumptions, a study finds."

Janet Schofield, a professor of psychology at the University of Pittsburgh, said the study contradicts the idea of a "colorblind" society. Juries made up of one ethnic group can let stereotypes shape their assumptions, she says, but juries with at least two ethnic groups are more likely to broaden their perspective.
"There is an awareness that other jurors may be watching you and judging you," said Schofield, who specializes in integration and interracial behavior. "It might make people be, or appear to be, particularly careful. It could be that they really are, or they want to look that way, so they are not open to charges of having been unfair or racist."

[Ruth Conniff, "Halliburton's Immigrant Detention Centers," April 17, 2006]

KBR, the Halliburton subsidiary recently reprimanded for gross overcharging in its military contracts in Iraq, won a $385 million contract to build the centers. According to the Halliburton website--www.Halliburton.com--"the contract, which is effective immediately, provides for establishing temporary detention and processing capabilities to augment existing ICE Detention and Removal Operations Program facilities in the event of an emergency influx of immigrants into the U.S., or to support the rapid development of new programs."

Emad Mekay, "Rich Nations Use IMF-World Bank Meet to Advance Own Agenda," IPS News, April 24, 2006]

"They (IMF) were the big enforcer of a very powerful creditors' cartel, and that's almost broken down completely for the middle-income countries, and it is not nearly as relevant in the low-income countries," said Mark Weisbrot, co-director of the Centre for Economic and Policy Research in Washington.
"So that's what they are trying to figure out: how to make it relevant again and do the things that really matter to the G7 (Group of Seven most industralised nations) and the U.S., most importantly," Weisbrot said.
But long-time observers of the IMF and World Bank say that even with some voice, the harm done by the IMF to the economies of poor nations will hardly ebb as long as it continues its policies of excessively low inflation and deficit ceilings required of borrowing nations to remain eligible for loans.

[Alister Bull, "America's rags-to-riches dream an illusion - study," Reuters, April 26, 2006; backup link]

The likelihood that a child born into a poor family will make it into the top five percent is just one percent, according to 'Understanding Mobility in America', a study by economist Tom Hertz from American University.
By contrast, a child born rich had a 22 percent chance of being rich as an adult, he said.
"In other words, the chances of getting rich are about 20 times higher if you are born rich than if you are born in a low-income family," he told an audience at the Center for American Progress, a liberal think-tank sponsoring the work.
He also found the United States had one of the lowest levels of inter-generational mobility in the wealthy world, on a par with Britain but way behind most of Europe.
"Consider a rich and poor family in the United States and a similar pair of families in Denmark, and ask how much of the difference in the parents' incomes would be transmitted, on average, to their grandchildren," Hertz said.
"In the United States this would be 22 percent; in Denmark it would be two percent," he said.
***
"This debunks the myth of America as the land of opportunity, but it doesn't tell us what to do to fix it," said Bhashkar Mazumder, a senior economist at the Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland who has researched this field.
Recent studies have highlighted growing income inequality in the United States, but Americans remain highly optimistic about the odds for economic improvement in their own lifetime.
A survey for the New York Times last year found that 80 percent of those polled believed that it was possible to start out poor, work hard and become rich, compared with less than 60 percent back in 1983.
***
Hertz examined channels transmitting income across generations and identified education as the single largest factor, explaining 30 percent of the income-correlation, in an argument to boost public access to universities.
Breaking the survey down by race spotlighted this as the next most powerful force to explain why the poor stay poor.
On average, 47 percent of poor families remain poor. But within this, 32 percent of whites stay poor while the figure for blacks is 63 percent.
It works the other way as well, with only 3 percent of blacks making it from the bottom quarter of the income ladder to the top quarter, versus 14 percent of whites.
"Part of the reason mobility is so low in America is that race still makes a difference in economic life," he said.

["Women Risk Rape, Death in U.S. Journey," THE ASSOCIATED PRESS, April 27, 2006]

The increase in women migrants comes as beefed-up border security has funneled migrants through one of the world's most forbidding deserts, and as smugglers adopt increasingly violent tactics.
Some cross with their children. Others leave them behind with relatives. Pregnant women, like the one who gave birth this week, walk for days through the desert in the hope that their children will have a better life as U.S. citizens.
Rape has become so prevalent that many women take birth control pills or shots before setting out to ensure they won't get pregnant. Some consider rape ''the price you pay for crossing the border,'' said Teresa Rodriguez, regional director of the U.N. Development Fund for Women.
If caught by the U.S. Border Patrol, women are often deported to Mexico's violent border towns in the middle of the night, despite a 1996 agreement between the two countries that promised women and children would only be returned in daylight hours, according to directors of migrant shelters along the 2,000-mile border.
***
"The normal rule, according to women who migrate, is that before leaving their countries they have to take the pill for at least one to three months to ensure that they will not get pregnant after a rape," said Aguilar, of the group Carecen Internacional.
Many Central Americans crossing Mexico hop cargo trains, where Aguilar said "there's almost a 99 percent chance that a woman will get raped."

[Stephen Zunes, "The United States, Israel, and the Possible Attack on Iran," Foreign Policy in Focus, April 29, 2006]

Public opinion polls show that a majority of Israelis oppose the idea of an Israeli strike against Iran. Policy analyst Steve Clemons was quoted in the Washington Monthly as saying, "I have witnessed far more worries about Iranian President Ahmadinejad's anti-Holocaust and anti-Israel rhetoric in the U.S. than I did in Tel Aviv or Jerusalem … Nearly everyone I spoke to in Israel who ranged in political sympathies from the Likud right to Maretz left thought that … Israel thought it wrong-headed and too impulsive to be engaged in saber-rattling with Iran at this stage." He added, "Israeli national security bureaucrats -- diplomats and generals -- have far greater confidence that there are numerous potential solutions to the growing Iran crisis short of bombing them in an invasive, hot attack."
***
One Israeli analyst was quoted as saying in the Washington Post during the Iran-Contra scandal, "It's like Israel has become just another federal agency, one that's convenient to use when you want something done quietly." Nathan Shahan wrote in Yediot Ahronot that his country serves as the "Godfather's messenger," since Israel "undertakes the dirty work of the Godfather, who always tries to appear to be the owner of some large respectable business." Israeli satirist B. Michael describes U.S. aid to Israel as a situation where "My master gives me food to eat and I bite those whom he tells me to bite. It's called strategic cooperation."
Just as the ruling elites of medieval Europe used the Jews as money-lenders and tax collectors to avoid the wrath of an exploited population, the elites of the world's one remaining superpower would similarly be quite willing to use Israel to do their dirty work against Iran. That way Israel, not the United States, will get the blame. (In fact, there are those who blame Israel even when the United States takes military action itself, such as the various conspiracy theories now circulating that the U.S. invasion of Iraq was done on behalf of Israel.)

[Roee Nahmias, "Turkey Refuses U.S. Request To Allow Attack On Iran From Turkish Base," YNetNews, 04/30/06]

Report: Turkey won’t let U.S. attack Iran from its land
Turkish Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul said Sunday that his country refused a request from the United States to attack Iran from its Air Force base in Incirlik, despite the U.S. offer of a nuclear reactor, according to a report in Al Biyan.
In an interview for the United Arab Emirates newspaper, Gul noted that America’s efforts to attack Iran are "imaginary" and that Turkey’s stance is "strategic" and refuses the use of its land for any belligerent activity against neighboring countries.

This is one of the best contributions to the debate over the power of the "Israel lobby" that I've seen:
[NORMAN G. FINKELSTEIN, "It's Not Either/Or: The Israel Lobby," Counterpunch.org, May 1, 2006]

Another British official judged retrospectively that, however much Arab resentment it provoked, British support for Zionism was prudent policy, for it established in the midst of an "uncertain Arab world a well-to-do educated, modern community, ultimately bound to be dependent on the British Empire." Were it even possible, the British had little interest in promoting real Jewish-Arab cooperation because it would inevitably lessen this dependence. Similarly, the U.S. doesn't want an Israel truly at peace with the Arabs, for such an Israel could loosen its bonds of dependence on the U.S. , making it a less reliable proxy.
***
...in terms of trying to broaden public discussion here on the Israel-Palestine conflict the Lobby makes a huge and baneful difference. Especially since U.S. elites have no entrenched interest in the Israeli occupation, the mobilization of public opinion can have a real impact on policy-making which is why the Lobby invests so much energy in suppressing discussion.

Tags: juries, race, white, diversity, Halliburton, immigration, detention, IMF, World Bank, land of opportunity, rape,
immigrants, Israel

he cares.........sometimes

2006-05-10T19:56:00.000-04:00

Jimmy Carter published an op-ed decrying that "innocent Palestinian people are being treated like animals." Fine. But did he do anything about it while president?

And where was this legendary compassion while a full fourth of East Timor's population was being wiped out with arms supplied by the "human rights president's" weapons caches?

[Tag: Jimmy Carter]

when the lackey gets overzealous in licking his master's boots

2006-05-08T18:09:00.000-04:00

According to the Associated Press, Colombian President Álvaro Uribe (bizarrely referred to in the article as Alfaro Uribe) "said he would consider having Colombian workers have microchips implanted into their bodies before they are permitted to enter the United States to work on a seasonal basis," in a quote from Pennsylvania Republican Senator Arlen Specter.

And to prove his moderate status, Specter replied with profound humanitarian concern by saying that he "doubted whether the implantation of microchips would be effective since the immigrant worker might be able to remove them."

[Tags: Álvaro Uribe, immigration, Colombia]

"whether he ends up liking boys, or girls, or chemistry..."

2006-05-08T07:45:00.000-04:00

Sometimes an event or interview makes you question how such an odd couple of people were paired together - who in the Bush Administration, for example, thought it would be a good idea to let Stephen Colbert give the keynote address? But then there's just odd out of this world odd....Ali G interviews Noam Chomsky!

[Tags: Ali G, Noam Chomsky]

this will make Israel safer, right?

2006-05-06T14:45:00.000-04:00

"The World Bank estimates that it [the Palestinian economy] will shrink in 2006 by 27%.

By 2008, it projects that 74% of Palestinians will be below the poverty line and 47% will be without a job."

Clearly someone needs to step up, be it the Arab League or others, lest an already poor and oppressed people are plunged even further into the depths of misery.

[Israel, Palestine, Hamas]

if these guards want to beat the shit out of people, they should just join the army

2006-05-06T14:35:00.000-04:00

"A 14-year-old boy beaten by guards at a Florida boot camp died because guards suffocated him," reports the BBC, contradcting earlier reports that he had died of sickle cell complications.

In fact, "the camp surveillance videotape showed the guards roughing him up and shoving ammonia pills up his nose."

What kind of society sends 14-year-olds to boot camp anyway?

[Tags: Martin Lee Anderson, boot camp]

no comment

2006-05-05T20:57:00.000-04:00

First Ariel Sharon, now this.

[Tags: Suharto, Indonesia]

"You know - fiction!"

2006-05-05T19:00:00.000-04:00

Below, reprinted in its entirety, is an editorial penned by the Mexico Solidarity Network for the Chicago Tribune regarding the immigration debate. But will "the intrepid Washington reporter[s]" publish it?

The immigration experience is not for the faint of heart. Young men and women, from Mexico and further South make the often painful decision to leave their families with a strong possibility that they won’t see each other again for years. If a mother or father dies, if a brother gets married, if a sister gives birth, there’s no opportunity to share the experience with other family members.

Just looking at migration from Latin America, the cost of crossing the border has skyrocketed in recent years - $2,500 for Mexicans and as much as $20,000 for South Americans. This means assuming a substantial debt, a kind of indentured servitude very similar to slavery. Even after spending these princely sums, the border crossing is dangerous. On average, someone dies every day in the attempt, usually of heat exhaustion or dehydration. We hear that young women often take birth control pills before leaving in the expectation that they will be raped during the journey. And when migrant workers finally arrive in the US, they live under constant fear of deportation. Those that find work end up with below minimum wage jobs and are the target of fraud, unfair work practices and abuse.

So if the process is so difficult and the results are so unrewarding, why do undocumented workers come to the US? Because they have no choice - the very survival of families back home depends on the income from undocumented workers in the US. And when it comes down to questions of survival, nearly any loving, responsible family member would make the same sacrifices and the same decisions.

Why aren’t there options South of the border? Much of the problem stems from policies implemented in Washington that directly impact people throughout the South. The majority of undocumented workers come from Mexico, and the relationship between policies devised in DC and the decisions by Mexicans to migrate is very clear.

When Mexico experienced debt crises in 1982 and 1994, two different US administrations developed “rescue” packages worth billions of dollars. Rather than allowing investors to take the hit for their bad investment decisions, the debt was socialized, a form of corporate welfare dictated by the US Treasury Department. Private investors and US bankers got their money and the Mexican ruling class escaped virtually unscathed, while millions of Mexican workers will pay the bill for generations to come. About a quarter of Mexico’s federal budget each year goes to debt payments, leaving no funds for investments to create jobs. And the interest rates are double or triple what the US pays for international loans.

Equally important, the debt crisis essentially gave control of Mexico’s major economic decisions to the US Treasury Department via a series of Structural Adjustment Programs negotiated with the International Monetary Fund and bilateral agreements negotiated directly with the US. Structural Adjustment turned Mexico into an export platform. Corporations make use of cheap labor and lax environmental regulations to produce for the US market. Today about one-third of everything produced in Mexico is exported, and 90% goes to the US market. Most of the major producers are US-owned firms who also send profits back home, leaving little income for investment. Equally important, export-oriented industries don’t have the internal multiplier effect that production for internal consumption affords. Since the goods that are produced in Mexico aren’t consumed in Mexico, the consumer motor that drives the US economy is absent. Production for export at these levels deforms the economy, leaving it on a constant treadmill, producing for export to earn dollars to pay off the international debt, while leaving the economy in a constant state of low growth as profits and debt payments are quickly sent north of the border.

NAFTA also has a decisively negative impact in Mexico, driving nearly three million farmers off their lands.

Corn is the most important crop in Mexico. About 18 million people depend largely on corn production for their survival, and corn provides about half of the caloric intake of a typical campesino diet. When NAFTA forced Mexico to lower protective tariffs and flooded Mexico with US grown corn (all agricultural tariffs are schedule to end in 2009), and the price of corn dropped drastically. Small farmers were no longer able to compete. Before NAFTA, these same farmers sold excess production in local markets, providing their only source of cash income for medicines, tools, and school supplies – anything they couldn’t produce themselves.

NAFTA forced millions of Mexican farmers to abandon their fields and look for another source of income as migrant workers. The export sector was supposed to provide these jobs, but these jobs are poorly paid (averaging around a dollar an hour), difficult, and, most importantly, insufficient to cover the demand. Now as a direct effect of NAFTA they have to look elsewhere for that income, and immigration is the only available alternative.

Comprehensive immigration reform requires a comprehensive look at the causes of immigration.

Obviously the Mexican government is not without blame and the Mexican people need to hold their government accountable for its economic decisions, but until Washington accepts its role in causing undocumented immigration and re-thinks NAFTA and its other so called “free trade” agreements, there is little chance for anything but band-aid policies that will not fix the problem and migration to the US will only increase.

[Tags: immigration, Tags: NAFTA]

eminent domain, Mexican po-po style

2006-05-04T18:23:00.000-04:00

Residents of San Salvador Atenco drove police out of town on Wednesday, an action precipitated by the arrests of three street vendors - on the future site, according to the Mexico Solidarity Network, of a Wal-Mart. The area is now being occupied by some 4000 police, a sure human rights disaster in the making.
View a photo log of the events.

And Somali President Abdullahi Yusuf accuses the US, in BBC's paraphrasing, of "funding a coalition of Somali warlords" and "fuelling Somalia's civil war."

[Tags: Atenco, Somalia]

May Day in Boston

2006-05-03T21:08:00.000-04:00

I took the photo to the right at the Boston May Day celebration /protest on Monday. The turnout of about 2,000 people was, of course, nowhere near the numbers in cities like Chicago and Los Angeles but was certainly respectable in comparison with other protests that have occurred in Boston in the past year that I've lived here. From what I could find online, last year's Boston May Day event brought out around 100 people. It's great to see the event is finally clawing its way out of the memory hole here in the U.S.

Tags:[Boston, May Day]

Weekly Roundup

2006-05-03T20:25:00.000-04:00

Some articles of note from the past week:
[Gary Rivlin, "In Rebuilding as in the Disaster, Wealth and Class Help Define New Orleans," New York Times, April 25, 2006. Backup link.]

[Jad Mouawad, "For Leading Exxon to Its Riches, $144,573 a Day," New York Times, April 15, 2006]
Lee R. Raymond was paid the equivalent of $144,573 a day during his 13 year stint as the chairman and chief executive of Exxon Mobile (the company which garnered $36 billion in profits last year - the largest corporate profit posting in history).

[Eric Dash, "Off to the Races Again, Leaving Many Behind," New York Times, April 9, 2006]
Some things to think about amidst the perpetual explanations that low paying jobs are unavoidable since corporations must cut costs to maintain market viability.

The average pay for a chief executive increased 27 percent last year, to $11.3 million, according to a survey of 200 large companies by Pearl Meyer & Partners, the compensation practice of Clark Consulting... By contrast, the average wage-earner took home $43,480 in 2004, according to Commerce Department data.
***
Compensation committees, meanwhile, are often reluctant to withhold a bonus or stock award for poor performance. Many big shareholders, such as mutual funds and pension plans, have chosen not to cast votes critical of management. The results have been a growing gap between chief executives and ordinary employees, and often between the boss and managers one layer below.
***
The average top executive's salary at a big company was more than 170 times the average worker's earnings in 2004, up from a multiple of 68 in 1940, according to a study last year by Carola Frydman, a doctoral candidate at Harvard, and Raven E. Saks, an economist at the Federal Reserve.
***
About 81 percent of Americans say they think that the chief executives of large companies are overpaid, a percentage that changes little with income level or political party affiliation, according to a Los Angeles Times/Bloomberg survey in February. Many shareholders, moreover, are just plain angry.
***
The divide between executives and ordinary workers was not always so great. From the mid-1940's through the 1970's, the pay of both groups grew at about the same rate, 1.3 percent, according to the study by Ms. Frydman and Ms. Saks. They analyzed the compensation of top executives at 102 large companies from 1936 to 2003.
But starting in the 1980's, executive compensation began to accelerate. In 1980, the average chief executive made about $1.6 million in today's dollars. By 1990, the figure had risen to $2.7 million; by 2004, it was about $7.6 million, after peaking at almost twice that amount in 2000. In other words, executive pay rose an average of 6.8 percent a year.
At the same time, the growth rate slowed for the average worker's pay. That figure rose to about $43,000 in 2004 from about $36,000 in 1980, an increase of 0.8 percent a year in inflation-adjusted terms.
CORPORATIONS, meanwhile, projected that their own earnings would grow by an average of 11.5 percent a year during that 24-year stretch, by Mr. Bogle's calculations. In reality, he said, they delivered growth of 6 percent a year, slightly less than the growth rate of the entire economy, as measured by gross domestic product.
Chief executives "aren't creating any exceptional value, so you would think that the average compensation of the C.E.O. would grow at the rate of the average worker," Mr. Bogle said. "When you look at it in that way, it is a real problem."

[Claudia H. Deutsch, "Behind Big Dollars, Worrisome Boards," New York Times, April 9, 2006]
It seems that extremely high pay for executives stems from the fact that the upper management of these corporations is not particularly vested in the performance of the company. The bureaucratic nature of these organizations tends to allow the people at the top to use their companies, to some extent, as merely a structure for funneling wealth to themselves. This creates a certain tension with other sectors of the elite in our society (namely the shareholders) who have an interest in seeing the company behave effectively in the market.

That is the question that worries Charles M. Elson, the director of the John L. Weinberg Center for Corporate Governance at the University of Delaware. As he sees it, forcing companies to bring excessive pay to light is, at best, treating a symptom. It does little to cure the underlying diseases: runaway compensation packages, granted by boards that barely monitor the performance of the chief executive.
"Disclosure is like aspirin; it can make you feel a little better, but it can't even cure the common cold," he said. "The fact is, a board that overpays the C.E.O. is in all probability not minding the store on other issues, either."
***
The real problem is that institutional investors have traditionally seen excessive pay as a minor if not nonexistent issue when it comes to earnings.
***
Q. So what's an enlightened shareholder to do? Fight for the right to vote out the whole slate of overpaying directors?
A. That will help only if they can be sure that the directors they choose as replacements are better than the ones that were ousted. We really need the institutional investors themselves to sit on the boards. Or at least they should vote in people who are sympathetic to their financial goals and are deeply enmeshed in shareholder responsibility. And they should insist that every director invest a personally meaningful amount into the company's stock. If you do your job right, it can be a very nice investment. And it can help contain runaway compensation.
I did a study in 1992 that showed that companies whose directors owned an average of $100,000 worth of shares were much less likely to be overpaying their executives. And I did a follow-up study that showed that the more equity directors held, the more likely they were to replace the C.E.O. when the company performed poorly. When you think it's your money you are about to pay to the C.E.O., you might drive a harder bargain. Otherwise, it's like going to a car dealership to bargain for a friend; if you're not writing the check yourself, you don't try as hard.

["CNN's Immigration Problem," Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting, 4/24/06]
"When the Wall Street Journal (4/13/06) surveyed economists on whether illegal immigration provided a net gain to the U.S. economy, 44 of 46 said that it did."

["Wounded Soldiers Fight Off Bill Collectors at Home," ABC News, April 26, 2006]

Hundreds of soldiers wounded in battle in Iraq have found themselves fighting off bill collectors on the home front, according to a report to be released tomorrow. The draft report by the Government Accountability Office, which ABC News obtained, said that hundreds of wounded soldiers had military debts incurred through no fault of their own turned over to collection agencies.
***
Army specialist Tyson Johnson of Mobile, Ala., had just been promoted in a field ceremony in Iraq when a mortar round exploded outside his tent, almost killing him.
"It took my kidney, my left kidney, shrapnel came in through my head, back of my head," he recounted.
His injuries forced him out of the military, and the Army demanded he repay an enlistment bonus of $2,700 because he'd only served two-thirds of his three-year tour.
When he couldn't pay, Johnson's account was turned over to bill collectors. He ended up living out of his car when the Army reported him to credit agencies as having bad debts, making it impossible for him to rent an apartment.
"Oh, man, I felt betrayed," Johnson said. "I felt like, oh, my heart dropped."
And there are many more like Johnson. Staff Sgt. Ryan Kelly lost his leg in a roadside bomb attack in Iraq.
He didn't realize it, but the Army continued to mistakenly pay him combat bonus pay, about $2,000, while he was in the hospital rehabilitating, and then demanded that he pay it back.
He, too, was threatened by the Army with debt collectors and a negative credit report.
"By law, he's not entitled to the money, so he must pay it back," said Col. Richard Shrank, the commander of the United States Army Finance Command.
The Army said it moved wounded soldiers out of the battlefield so quickly its accounting office could not keep up, resulting in numerous payroll errors.
"This is no way to win a war, I can tell you that," said Davis. "You'd think after four years after fighting a war in Iraq, the government would have its act together."
But the Army said it is now trying to correct the problem. Since ABC News first reported on the plight of soldiers, featuring Johnson and Kelly in a "Primetime" investigation in October 2004, the Army has forgiven most of their debts.

"It's not working. It's not working."

2006-05-03T19:33:00.000-04:00

Isn't there something cruel and unusual about this?

Tags: [death penalty]

a brief history of May 1

2006-05-03T08:01:00.000-04:00

While much of the rest of the world (and indeed, many in the US) celebrated May Day or some variant thereof on Monday, the US had - no, really - "Loyalty Day." What in the name of bizarre propaganda inventions, you may be asking, is Loyalty Day? King George'll tell ya - it apparently has a lot to do with the "light of freedom" and "support[ing] our troops," and not so much with the 8-hour workday.

And, continuing with the chain of creepy, fascistic names, Loyalty Day - first proclaimed by President Eisenhower - replaced a prior holiday on May 1, known as "Americanization Day." As if this all weren't already enough to drive you into a chorus of Sieg Heils, then wait, there's more; May 1 is also "Law Day," which calls for red-blooded gringos to celebrate a "reaffirmation of their loyalty to the United States" and a "cultivation of the respect for law", which, of course, both directly opposed everything that the non-jingoist version of May 1 signifies.

You just couldn't make this shit up - no, not even us at Que Se Vayan Todos, the most jaded and cynical of the most jaded and cynical, though apparently not enough in either category to approach reality.

Tags: [May 1, May Day]

how could the PR firm masquerading as a presidential administration let this happen?

2006-05-02T18:52:00.000-04:00

Watch parts 1 and 2 of Stephen Colbert laying into President Bush, the media, and beyond at a Washington DC press banquet.

Some favorite excerpts:

The greatest thing about this man [Bush] is he's steady. You know where he stands. He believes the same thing Wednesday that he believed on Monday, no matter what happened Tuesday. Events can change; this man's beliefs never will.
...
John McCain is here...By the way, Senator McCain, it's so wonderful to see you coming back into the Republican fold. I have a summer house in South Carolina; look me up when you go to speak at Bob Jones University. So glad you've seen the light, sir.

Tags: [Stephen Colbert, Colbert Report, Washington Correspondents' Association]

Morales sets out gas nationalization plan

2006-05-01T22:47:00.000-04:00

This may temper some of the criticism that Morales has received from the left and mobilized indigenous sectors as of late; no word as of yet on reactions from foreign energy concerns (then again, they react with coups, not words, don't they?). And there are a lot of Bolivians waving Cuban flags in the BBC photo.

Tags: [Evo Morales, Bolivia,]

Happy May Day - except for Lou Dobbs

2006-05-01T18:44:00.000-04:00

CNN analyst Lou Dobbs is squirming in his white robe over the May 1 protests, both because he's further to the right on the immigration debate than Pat Buchanan and Samuel Huntington combined, and because of the involvement of ANSWER - as if authentic leftists weren't at the forefront of criticizing said group.

And a Burger King in Mexico City gets "only one customer" after being open for an hour and a half.

Tags: [May 1, Lou Dobbs, protest, ANSWER,]

we only protest when noone will take it the wrong way

2006-04-30T21:59:00.000-04:00

How pathetic is the political ethos in the US when labor unions and other supposedly progressive groups are withdrawling support for a May Day work stoppage just because some might cast participants as "anti-American and anti-business"?

Tags: [May Day, May 1, immigration]

"Socialist presidents of Latin America unite"

2006-04-30T20:42:00.000-04:00

Is that a BBC caption or a Che call to arms?

It's the former, in an article describing how Bolivia, Cuba, and Venezuela are uniting not only for trade, but to "to work towards the eradication of illiteracy and the expansion of employment."

Tags: [Cuba, Venezuela, Bolivia, ALBA]

tiene tremendo....culo

2006-04-28T19:40:00.000-04:00

Needless to say, I was caught a bit off guard when, while searching for songs by Colombian hip-shaking superestrella Shakira (known more for her ass than her social commentary), I found a song called "Timor." Yes, that Timor - the land which saw upwards of an entire fourth of its population wiped out by Jimmy Carter's good ole pal General Suharto.

Not often the topic of any music, pop or otherwise.

A few excerpts:

It's alright, it's alright
'Cause the system never fails
The good guys are in power
And the bad guys are in jail

It's alright, it's alright
Just as long as we can vote
We live in democracy
And that's what we promote

Isn't it? Isn't it?
...

How about the people who don't matter anymore?
...

It's alright, it's alright
For a flag we die or kill
As long as we don't know it
Do it just to pay the bills

The Democratic Party Parasite

2006-04-28T14:34:00.000-04:00

History shows social movements are the decisive factor in spawning change, not the party affiliation of those in office. Consider some of the major achievements in our country's history and how they have been won: the end of slavery (fought for a prolonged period of time by the abolitionist movement; against this backdrop, a series of events compelled Lincoln to free the slaves against his preference), the 8-hour day (vibrant labor organizing), the institution of a modest welfare state (fear of radical discontent arising from the Great Depression), the attainment of black rights (civil rights movement), the end of the Vietnam war, the legalization of abortion, the women's rights and environmental movements (all fruits of the widespread discontent of the era). Why is Nixon often referred to as the last liberal president? Not because he was an enlightened fellow but because the social movements of the time period compelled government concessions. I can't think of a contrary instance in which major change occurred not because of a large scale grassroots movement but rather because a Democrat was elected (if a Democrat is elected in the course of events or is already in office, all to the better, but the key to past change is the movements not the parties).

Seeking to improve the Democratic Party machine from within (the inside/outside strategy, etc) is (with only slight exaggeration) like seeking to turn Archer Daniels Midland into Oxfam. There's a reason the Democratic Party leadership and elected representatives are far more conservative than registered Democrats as a whole (that is, ordinary people) - the Party is irreconcilably tied to elite influence. Moreover, there's never been an instance in our country's history when the ruling parties haven't been tied to the elite. The reasons are structural so it's not a matter of entering the Party machine and changing people's minds as if they just don't see the errors of their ways.

Take for example the argument offered by some that it is important to actively support Democratic candidates to further the impeachment of Bush. The most obvious problem with this reasoning is that almost all the elected Democrats on the federal level oppose impeachment proceedings (contrary to their own constituency; polls show registered Democrats largely in favor) or even the mild censure resolution put forth by Senator Feingold.

True, it's obvious that, all other things being equal, it's better to have a Democrat than a Republican in office. Hence, in many circumstances it makes sense to vote for a Democratic candidate. I voted for Kerry in the "battleground state" of Pennsylvania in '04 despite the fact that I despised him. But it's quite another matter to devote one's limited time and resources as an activist to promoting a Democratic candidate. If indeed, social change comes from movements, not parties, than that is where one should put one's efforts. As a general rule, supporting Democrats should be limited to the 5 minutes it takes to vote for them when circumstances dictate and nothing else.

The Democratic Party is little more than a parasite on the Left. It absorbs the discontent of the population and directs it towards harmless ends. Again, history is instructive. Take the justly famous book, Howard Zinn's "A People's History of the United States." These lessons are illustrated quite explicitly time and again in this book and in many other sources.

The issue is of course subjective but nonetheless rather straightforward I think. I'd be very interested to learn of any instances in which significant change in this country has come from activists devoting their energies to electing Democrats rather than (or even, in addition) to building independent movements.

Tags: [Democratic Party, left, social movements, activists, activism,]

Dick Cheney is long gone, but the evilness lives on

2006-04-27T22:20:00.000-04:00

Halliburton recently won itself a $385 million contract to build immigrant detention centers in the US. I don't know - oil refineries, chemical plants, air traffic control support - now immigrant detention centers? Is there anything they won't take a contract to do?

Weekly Roundup

2006-04-24T22:09:00.000-04:00

I attended the New England Anarchist Bookfair this past weekend in Boston and what I saw of it was inspiring. The best t-shirt for sale: "Don't rock the boat. Sink the fucker."

In an unrelated note, I was scanning the shelves at my local library and came across a book entitled "Leadership Secrets of Attila the Hun" - no lie. The dust jacket made it plain that the book was written for business leaders and featured praise from Ross Perot, William Coors, the vice pres of GM, and the president of American Airlines. It was published in, you guessed it, the 1980s. You just can't make this stuff up.

Some of the news and analysis of note we've come across in the past week:
Kevin Mattson, "What The Jungle Tells Us Today," CommonDreams.org, April 19, 2006

What’s surprising is how upset Sinclair was with the limited nature of reform The Jungle helped win. Sinclair was a socialist and an admirer of the municipal slaughterhouse system that had grown up in Europe. He grew so disgruntled with the shortcomings of Roosevelt’s support for federal oversight (Sinclair worried about bribery of inspectors, among other things) that he seemed to give up on reform for a period of time and turned instead to exploring numerous dietary fads – including fasting and an array of vegetarian regiments (one he learned at the Kellogg Sanitarium) and even an odd beefsteak diet.

It’s this detail that troubles me. Because I realize that Sinclair’s hibernation from politics and his search for "perfect health," as he called it, symbolized a broader change in American history. Today, Sinclair’s experimentation in lifestyle change has replaced the more public solutions captured in the Meat Inspection Act and Sinclair’s dream for socialized slaughterhouses. This displacement suggests a wider transformation in the American conscience. We seem to have a hard time talking about public solutions for the many problems we face.

Ken Silverstein, "Our Friend Teodoro," Harper's Magazine, April 19, 2006
An article on the cozy relationship of the Bush Administration with the dictator of the oil exporting Equatorial Guinea.

"Thank you very much for your presence here," Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said to Obiang at a press conference last week. "You are a good friend and we welcome you." Rice didn't mention that her own department's 2006 human rights report on Equatorial Guinea, released 35 days before the press conference, laid out a laundry list of abuses that included torture, arbitrary arrest, judicial corruption, child labor, forced labor, and "severe restrictions" on freedoms of speech and press.

I happened to read the Mother Jones article on Obiang when it came out over a year ago and it's worth reading and is available online surprisingly enough (backup link).

Scott Shane, "National Archives Pact Let C.I.A. Withdraw Public Documents," New York Times, April 18, 2006"
In the latest example of the Bush Administration's exceptional mania for government secrecy, it has come to light that two government agencies with much to hide have been reclassifying huge numbers of government documents that were previously available to researchers.

The National Archives signed a secret agreement in 2001 with the Central Intelligence Agency permitting the spy agency to withdraw from public access records it considered to have been improperly declassified, the head of the archives, Allen Weinstein, disclosed on Monday.

The revelation drew a comparison with "a similar 2002 agreement with the Air Force that was made public last week."
"Thomas S. Blanton, director of the private National Security Archive at George Washington University," stated that "The National Archives aided and abetted a covert operation to lie to researchers and white-out history." The article reports that since 1999 more than 55,000 pages of historical documents (dating as far back as the 1950s) have been removed from accessibility at the archives. It appears the CIA and Air Force made the agreements with an assistant archivist at the Archives without the knowledge of the directors of the Archives - an underhanded tactic in a thoroughly underhanded agreement.

"Study: Health Insurers Are Near-Monopolies," Associated Press, April 18, 2006
"Consolidation among health insurers is creating near-monopolies in virtually all reaches of the United States," according to a recent study by the American Medical Association (in the words of the article). The study shows "that in each of 43 states, a handful of top insurers have gained such a stronghold that their markets are considered "highly concentrated" under U.S. Department of Justice guidelines, often far exceeding the thresholds that trigger antitrust concerns."
"The AMA says there have been more than 400 mergers among health-care insurers in the past decade. As they've consolidated and presumably eliminated duplicative functions, they're not passing the savings in personnel and administrative costs on to consumers. Rate increases, though slowing, are higher than ever and growing at a near double-digit pace."
"The AMA says it has taken up this antitrust issue with the Department of Justice, but says it has run into roadblocks with regulators. AMA officials say regulators seem uninterested, even though government officials are more than willing to target doctors' groups and hospitals on antitrust matters."

Stephen R. Shalom, "In Search of Economic Justice: A Review Essay," New Politics, April 19, 2006

One problem with many of the existing sects is that they employ "democratic centralism," a principle that says once the party or organization has reached a democratic decision, all members are bound to accept and follow it. In practice, in many such organizations the decisions are not reached democratically, but even when they are, democratic centralism will often be experienced negatively by those who are not members of the party or organization. It is extremely alienating to have a discussion with someone only to discover that no matter how persuasive your arguments, no matter how much effort you make to find some middle ground, your interlocutor is bound by democratic centralism to maintaining the party line.

I would only add that members are bound to not only accept but also to promote to non-members the line decided upon by the group. So no matter what one's personal opinions are, the member is supposed to publicly favor the decision taken by the group as a whole. The potentially alienating and demoralising impact of such a policy on the membership should be obvious.

Shoot first....

2006-04-19T23:20:00.000-04:00

One of the victims of a shooting by US military forces in Afghanistan had this to say about the recent incident when this individual, and five others, were wounded:

"We were on our way back home from the clinic. The American patrol was driving and as they stopped, we stopped. They started driving, we did the same.

As we got close to our house they stopped, and we started driving towards our house. They opened fire on us. Minutes later a translator came to us and asked who we were."

Such is the rigorous world of identity verification in the US armed forces, where AFTER wounding six civilians - including a newborn baby, and a woman who was left with gunshot wounds in her mouth - the crack squad of heroic liberators decided to actually find out at whom they were so valiantly shooting.

"Yes, We Are Racist Motherfuckers," Announces Milwaukee Jury

2006-04-17T20:57:00.000-04:00

...well, in effect at least. The photo at right (from the Feb. 6, 2005 MJS article mentioned below) depicts Frank Jude shortly after an encounter with a gang of off-duty white policemen at a party. His crime was to arrive at the event with white women (obviously his alleged theft is almost certainly manufactured, though it would be only marginally relevant even if true). An all-white jury deliberated for 26 hours before determining that white is indeed the color of innocence.

The following two articles from the Milwaukee Journal Sentinal provide an overview of the case: [JOHN DIEDRICH, "Police suspected in man's beating," Feb. 6, 2005]; [MEG JONES, "Leaders call for calm, change in aftermath of Jude verdict," April 16, 2006]. A quick search on Google turns up remarkably little coverage of the incident outside of Milwaukee. Performing a direct search of the New York Times and Washington Post websites reveals that both carried short pieces from the Associated Press. I wouldn't have learned of the case at all were it not for the brief mention on today's Democracy Now!

About a dozen police dragged him out of a truck and assaulted him before on-duty police arrived in response to a 911 call and proceeded to join in the fun (according to the telephone transcript with the eye-witness, who was still on her cell with 911).

He suffered a concussion, a broken nose and fractured sinus cavity, cuts in both ears, cuts and swelling to his left eye, neck, head, face, legs and back, and a severely sprained left hand, his attorney said. His left eye was swollen shut and continued to bleed for 10 days, he said. [Feb. 6, 2005 MJS article]

Many of the police officers on the force with the assailants are, of course, refusing to cooperate with the investigation. In other news, the city announced it intends to replace its entire staff with Nazi stormtroopers in an effort to employ a more tolerant and professional officer corps.

The Federal Government is reportedly considering whether to get involved - it will be of some interest to see if this case gains wider attention from the media and the government or vanishes before most in this country ever even heard of it.
Tags: [Frank Jude, police brutality, Milwaukee]

Keeping Venezuela off the Security Council

2006-04-13T17:32:00.000-04:00

One of Latin America's two, veto-less (and thus, largely symbolic) seats on the United Nations Security Council will be vacant as of January 1. Given that one of the two countries in the running is Venezuela, Washington is throwing its weight around in support of the candidacy of the other - Guatemala.

"Throwing its weight around," of course, is a euphemism for applying "great pressure on South American governments" to ensure that Venezuela's nomination fails.

Not like the US would listen to the UN even if Venezuela were able to accomplish anything as a Security Council member.

Colombia's Indigenous Communities Face Extinction

2006-04-12T13:28:00.000-04:00

A United Nations news brief (April 4, 2006) is warning that "Colombia's indigenous communities face extinction." The document is worth quoting nearly in full:

A humanitarian emergency is looming among Colombia's indigenous communities, with some threatened with extinction in the South American country's decades-long civil conflict, as irregular armed groups encroach upon their land, even torturing and killing their leaders, the United Nations refugee agency warned today.

In the north-western region of Choco, more than 1,700 Wounaan indigenous people are fleeing their traditional territory following the murder last week of two of their leaders, the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) said in the latest of a long series of warnings it has issued over the past two years.

"We have repeatedly warned that some of the world's oldest and smallest indigenous groups are at high risk not only of displacement, but even of extinction because of the Colombian conflict," UNHCR spokesman William Spindler told a news briefing in Geneva. "All indigenous communities have close links to their ancestral land, on which their cultural survival depends."

More than 40 years of fighting between Government forces, leftist rebels and rightist paramilitaries, as well as other violence, has already displaced 2 million Colombians, with the country's 1 million indigenous people particularly affected.
***

Panic spread among the Wounaan after an irregular armed group killed two of their leaders in the space of 24 hours last week. Last Thursday, armed men burst into a classroom in Union Wounaan and left with the school's 37-year-old teacher. He was found dead a few hours later, his body showing signs of torture.

The following day, the leader of the Wounaan community was also found dead after being taken away by members of the same irregular armed group. He too was a schoolteacher. There are fears that more assassinations could follow as other leaders have received threats.

On the other side of the country in the south-eastern department of Guaviare, 77 Nukak indigenous people arrived last week in the town of San Jose del Guaviare, having walked for four months after being forced to leave their ancestral territory.

The Nukak are an indigenous group of very limited numbers that until 1988 was unknown to the outside world and lived a nomadic existence of hunting and gathering. In recent years, they have become targets for irregular armed groups who have taken over large parts of their territory. They appeared to be in poor health and clearly malnourished. However, their long-term future remains uncertain. It is crucial to find a solution that will allow them to resume their way of life and preserve their culture.

"Armed groups" in Colombia come in two flavors: pro-government (the paramilitaries and military) and anti-government ("leftist" guerrillas such as the FARC and ELN). All of them treat human rights with contempt. The pro-government forces are aided substantially by the U.S. government and have a long history of attacking indigenous communities. While the UN report is too polite to implicate the world's only superpower and a major source of its funding, it's clear that Uncle Sam is one of the guiding hands behind the looming extinction of entire peoples by force of arms.

Military Promotes Zarqawi to U.S. Public

2006-04-10T11:18:00.000-04:00

Glancing through this morning's Boston Globe, I found this explosive tidbit:

For the past two years, US military leaders have been using Iraqi media and other outlets in Baghdad to publicize Zarqawi's role in the insurgency. The documents explicitly list the "US Home Audience" as a target of a broader propaganda campaign.

This can hardly come as a great surprise to anyone following the course of the occupation. However, this is the first solid evidence of the US's strategy that I'm aware of. Journalists like Robert Fisk and Dahr Jamail have been questioning whether Zarqawi is even alive for quite some time. Casting a murderous lunatic like Zarqawi in the role of villain is a well-worn strategy of the US government when it's looking to justify some military adventure. It's important that the American public identify the Iraqi resistance forces with sectarian violence and bombings of civilians rather than a struggle against foreign occupying forces that might inevitably lead to comparisons with our own revolutionary war.
[Thomas E. Ricks, "US seen boosting Zarqawi's profile," Washington Post, April 10, 2006]
Tags:[Iraq, Zarqawi, propaganda]

Who says Latin America is swinging to the left?

2006-04-09T22:27:00.000-04:00

President Tony Saca's El Salvador - which, in a pathetic, banana republic attempt to curry favor with Washington, has a convoy of troops in Iraq - is now bringing a part of Southwest Asia (incorrectly labelled the "Middle East" in mainstream discourse) back home: training by the Israel Defense Forces.

According to YNet News, the IDF is being sought to help "in building a modern and efficient army" for El Salvador.

No word on whether the IDF will also provide counsel on colonial dispossession and how to bulldoze homes with people inside of them.

And for the irony record, Mr. Saca is the descendant of Palestinian immigrants.

Tags:[Tony Saca El Salvador IDF Israel]

A town looking beyond the immigration debate

2006-04-03T18:46:00.000-04:00

While the children of privilege sit in their Washington chambers discussing varied plans to address the "problem" of "illegal" immigration, Maywood, California, a Los Angeles suburb with a population that is 97 percent Latino, is singing its own tune:

In the midst of an intense national debate about immigration the city council has officially declared Maywood a safe haven for illegal immigrants.

At a weekly immigrants' support group meeting there is a sense of purpose in the air.

It is chaired by the driving force behind the controversial decision, Maywood's deputy mayor Felipe Aguirre.

"We don't think that people are breaking the law if they simply don't have documents, so we decided to turn this place into a sanctuary city," he said.

...

When he is not preaching to his flock, Pastor David Velasquez is speaking in revolutionary tones.

"The people felt that they were being persecuted, but now they have the power over the police. They can't tell us what to do."

...

Felipe Aguirre says he has had threatening phone messages and other council members have received physical threats. But he remains defiant.

"We don't consider these immigration laws to be just. It's not right that if I'm talking to someone who doesn't have the correct papers, I could be considered a felon. No, we answer to a higher law."

And other communities are beginning to follow Maywood's lead.

[Latino suburb welcomes illegals, BBC, 1 April 2006]

One can only wonder when the higher law will be struck by the cruel baton of those seeking to "secure the border."

Extra! Extra!: society still racist!

2006-03-31T12:16:00.000-05:00

A recent report by the Urban League has been in the headlines and highlights the ongoing discrimination in our society against blacks. A few excerpts from the New Standard article on the report:

Unemployment remains twice as high for blacks, and median "net worth" of African-American households is just one-tenth that of their white counterparts. That is, half the families in black America have less than $6,166 when their debts are subtracted from their assets, while among whites, half could cash in for more than $67,000. The federal government’s own figures from 2000 indicate the same disparity, but with higher medians: $79,400 for white families compared to $7,500 for blacks and $9,750 for Latinos.
***
Lance Freeman, professor of urban planning at Columbia University, said that an increase in home ownership for blacks does not mean comparable increases in home equity, which would begin to address the staggering disparity in "net worth." In the report, Freeman states that a high level of residential segregation between blacks and whites continues a dual housing market in which many blacks are limited to buying homes in neighborhoods with higher poverty rates, fewer or poorer amenities and services, and consequently lower property values.
***
According to 2001 statistics from the Centers for Disease Control, the death rate from heart disease for black Americans was 30 percent higher than that for whites, and the death rate for cancer was just over 25 percent higher. Additionally, blacks are twice as likely to have diabetes and accounted for more than 50 percent of new HIV/AIDS cases, though they make up about 13 percent of the US population.
***
The group also found that, while African-Americans constitute only 13 percent of drug users, they represent 35 percent of drug possession arrests, 55 percent of convictions and 74 percent of prison sentences.
["Blacks Losing Ground in Economic Race," The New Standard, March 30, 2006

Unfortunately, the solutions suggested in the report seem to be rather inadequate, despite the assertion of the report's authors that "'more than simply describing the problems, the report offers concrete solutions for moving Americans from poverty to self-sufficiency to prosperity' through a 'five-point empowerment agenda.'"

Take the astounding racism in the criminal justice system suggested by the above figures. The Standard reports that "To reduce this disparity, the Sentence Project suggests reforming drug laws to focus more on treatment and less on incarceration, and to eliminate harsh sentencing rules that by extension have a disproportionate affect on minorities." Undoubtedly these measures are extremely necessary - but they seem somewhat tangential in relation to the specific problem of racist police, courts, (juries?), and so forth.

The Standard does get in a good dig, reminding you that you're definitely not reading the New York Times:

The Urban League did not express its findings or recommendations to the people most affected. Rather, the authors address public officials, scholars and policymakers, who the group asks to use the annual State of Black America report as ammunition to "attack" persistent racial and class inequities. A full copy of the report is available for $29.95.

American misperceptions of Iraqis

2006-03-31T10:25:00.000-05:00

A recent comparison of opinion polls in the US and Iraq found that:

Americans... underestimate the extent to which the Iraqi public soundly rejects terrorism as they define it. In the January poll—a virtually unanimous 99 percent of Iraqis said it was a good idea for Iraqi leaders to have agreed in a statement at an Arab League conference late last year that terrorism should be rejected. However, only 14 percent of Americans correctly identified a "large majority" as the proportion of the Iraqi public that approved of the statement. Another 35 percent estimated that it would be a majority. Forty-six percent of Americans thought that half or less of the Iraqi public approved of the statement rejecting terrorism.

Naturally some may be perplexed by the overwhelming rejection of terrorism coupled with support among nearly half of Iraqis for attacks on US-led forces. It is clear that many Iraqis do not define attacks on US-led forces as terrorism. According to most expert definitions of terrorism, this is valid—terrorism is generally defined as attacks on civilians, not an occupying military force.
["Comparing Americans and Iraqis," World Public Opinion, March 24, 2006]

Indeed, quoting from the first news article I found in a Google search, the statement made at the Arab League conference,

condemned terrorism, but was a clear acknowledgment of the Sunni position that insurgents should not be labeled as terrorists if their operations do not target innocent civilians or institutions designed to provide for the welfare of Iraqi citizens.
["State Department denies Iraqis back terrorism," Associate Press, Nov. 22, 2005]

It's not hard to see how the distorted understanding of terrorism and resistance in the American mind (shaped in large part by the media of course) could influence attitudes towards the occupation and US foreign policy in general. It's not clear to what extent the results are due to a belief that attacking the occupying forces is terrorism versus a belief that large numbers of Iraqis sympathize with genuine terrorism.

Another finding of the poll comparison was that:

Americans underestimate the extent to which Iraqis believe the overthrow of Saddam Hussein was worthwhile. Three-fourths of Iraqis (77%) said in January that ousting Saddam was worth it despite any hardships they may have suffered since the 2003 invasion, while 22 percent said it was not worth it. Fifty-five percent of Americans underestimated this support, assuming that most Iraqis feel it was not worth it (22%) or that Iraqis are evenly split on the question (33%). Forty-four percent of Americans correctly assumed that most Iraqis say it was worth it. (It should be noted, though, that among Iraqi Arab Sunnis, large majorities regret the overthrow of Saddam, and that some Americans may have been influenced by that when they opted for the position that views are evenly split.)

Such results seem to be fairly consistent with earlier polls of Iraqi attitudes. Iraqi opinion seems to be, basically, widely shared dislike and distrust of the US government coinciding with a feeling that the US invasion (though undertaken for imperial reasons) had net positive side-effects. The exception is the Sunnis, who were less oppressed under Saddam than most Iraqis and are now bearing the brunt of the violence of the occupation.

Puerto Rico reacts to FBI

2006-03-30T16:13:00.000-05:00

After I recently blogged about the systematic disenfranchisement of Puerto Ricans both in Puerto Rico and in the mainland U.S., another aspect of the general story of the utter lack of Puerto Rican sovereignty presented itself through the killing of a Puerto Rico independence activist.

Filiberto Ojeda Rios, the 72-year-old founder of Puerto Rico's radical Boricua Popular Army, also known as the Macheteros or machete-wielders, was fatally wounded in a shootout with FBI agents in western Puerto Rico in September.

He had been a fugitive from justice for 15 years and was found shot in the neck and shoulder with a single bullet, the FBI said at the time. Local authorities quickly questioned whether his life could have been spared if he had been given speedy medical attention.

Puerto Rico responded by suing several U.S. law enforcement officials - amongst them, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, and FBI Director Robert Mueller - for "allegedly failing to cooperate with a probe into the killing" and operating within a "mantra of absolute immunity."

On a further note:

In a separate lawsuit filed on Thursday, [head of Puerto Rico's Justice Department Roberto] Sanchez Ramos accused Gonzales, Mueller and [head of San Juan's division of the FBI Luis] Fraticelli of refusing to hand over information about the FBI's alleged use of pepper spray on journalists during the raids.

[Puerto Rico sues U.S. over killing of militant, Reuters, 24 March 2006]

This, along with the allegation that the FBI agents involved deliberately "let him bleed to death", has rightfully sparked protests on the island.

The Immigration Debate

2006-03-29T23:42:00.000-05:00

Lost in the chilling rhetoric about building walls between Mexico and the U.S. (or, better said, between Mexico and land that the U.S. stole from Mexico) and forbidding social service agencies from assisting "illegal aliens" is the fact that if there is indeed a "crisis" of undocumented immigrants, then much of the blame can be squarely placed at the feet of the U.S. government.

As a recent op-ed in the Washington Post seeks an explanation for their increasing numbers:

Why? It's not because we've let down our guard at the border; to the contrary, the border is more militarized now than it's ever been. The answer is actually simpler than that. In large part, it's NAFTA.

The North American Free Trade Agreement was sold, of course, as a boon to the citizens of the United States, Canada and Mexico -- guaranteed both to raise incomes and lower prices, however improbably, throughout the continent. Bipartisan elites promised that it would stanch the flow of illegal immigrants, too. "There will be less illegal immigration because more Mexicans will be able to support their children by staying home," said President Bill Clinton as he was building support for the measure in the spring of 1993.

But NAFTA, which took effect in 1994, could not have been more precisely crafted to increase immigration -- chiefly because of its devastating effect on Mexican agriculture. As liberal economist Jeff Faux points out in "The Global Class War," his just-published indictment of the actual workings of the new economy, Mexico had been home to a poor agrarian sector for generations, which the government helped sustain through price supports on corn and beans. NAFTA, though, put those farmers in direct competition with incomparably more efficient U.S. agribusinesses. It proved to be no contest: From 1993 through 2002, at least 2 million Mexican farmers were driven off their land.

The experience of Mexican industrial workers under NAFTA hasn't been a whole lot better. With the passage of NAFTA, the maquiladoras on the border boomed. But the raison d'etre for these factories was to produce exports at the lowest wages possible, and with the Mexican government determined to keep its workers from unionizing, the NAFTA boom for Mexican workers never materialized. In the pre-NAFTA days of 1975, Faux documents, Mexican wages came to 23 percent of U.S. wages; in 1993-94, just before NAFTA, they amounted to 15 percent; and by 2002 they had sunk to a mere 12 percent.

The official Mexican poverty rate rose from 45.6 percent in 1994 to 50.3 percent in 2000.

[Meyerson, Harold. NAFTA and Nativism." Washington Post, 8 February 2006]

Also lost in media commentary (commentary, in this instance, being used in a generous sense) is the notion that Mexicans don't inherently deserve to live in poverty. As human beings, alongside their mighty gringo neighbors to the north, they are the same, and deserve the same rights, standards of living, and opportunities. Those who argue that immigration to the U.S. should be reduced because it lowers living standards are in effect saying the opposite: that for being born on the wrong side of a border that is the product of imperialist aggression, Mexicans - and all the other backwards, brown-skinned peoples - are to be caged into what's left of their homeland, trapped into eternal poverty so that the "developed" countries may continue in their enlightened development.

Argentina bows out of SOA/WHISC

2006-03-28T20:32:00.000-05:00

The School of the Americas Watch (or is it WHISC, the Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation?...rolls right off the tongue) has reported that a third South American country, Argentina, is joining Uruguay and Venezuela in not sending troops to receive training at the Fort Benning, Georgia facility.

While the move is largely symbolic - SOA Watch notes there is currently only one Argentine enrolled at the institution - it is nevertheless an important step for a country that recently marked the 30th anniversary of a military coup whose protagonists initiated a campaign of terror that "disappeared" an estimated 30,000 Argentines.

Immigrant's rights rally

2006-03-27T21:58:00.000-05:00

I attended the rally for the rights of immigrants today in Boston that attracted perhaps 1500 people (I have no confidence in my crowd estimating abilities). The best sign read (from memory): "Treat an alien in your land as you would treat a native born son"--God, Leviticus. Now, really, who can argue with God?

The Limitations of UFPJ: On Liberal Leninism

2006-03-25T09:05:00.000-05:00

Almost all activists I encounter agree that ANSWER is an undemocratic group with bad politics. However, the nature of UFPJ (the other national antiwar group that regularly organizes major demonstrations) is more interesting. Criticism is fairly common but often not specific enough to be productive. Charges of liberalism (as opposed to radicalism) and bureaucratism are frequent enough to have made me suspicious. The activist Brian Dominick (whose writings lead me to respect his opinion) wrote back in 2004 that "UFPJ has proven itself a massive waste of energy and resources."
["Mediocrity on the Left," Brian Dominick, 8/26/2004] My own frustrations are born out of the lack of transparency in UFPJ. How is one to evaluate an organization when meeting notes and discussion listservs are not publicly available online? What follows is an attempt to asses the problems in UFPJ based on what I was able to find on the internet.

A Tendency to be Overly Cautious and Deferential to the Authorities in Planning Protests
Dominick writes:

When NYC turned down the group's march permit for the February 15, 2003 antiwar demonstrations in NYC, and offered a protest pen in exchange, UFPJ rolled over and took it like good collaborators -- with an obedient grin. The group's leadership discouraged wildcat actions and basically relegated the 400,000-strong crowd -- the largest to assemble at a peace demonstration in the US since the Vietnam War, and the largest ever assembled in a pre-war action -- to filing up and down the avenues of the Manhattan's East Side like a bunch of mice (I was one of them -- I vividly recall the feeling). ["Mediocrity on the Left," Brian Dominick, 8/26/2004]

See also:
[Michelle Goldberg, "New York Lockdown," The Guardian, August 12, 2004]

A recent article in Left Turn by Ak Gupta is also of interest in this regard:

Max Uhlenbeck, a former organizer with UFPJ, points to a fear of "strategic militancy" within UFPJ as part of the problem. He argues that on two critical occasions UFPJ had "support for mass direct action and blinked," referring to Feb. 15, 2003 and the massive Republican National Convention protest on Aug. 29, 2004. Both times "UFPJ took the legal route" by letting lawyers negotiate with the city over march routes and plans, and both times the city strung UFPJ along and quashed their desired protest plans.

While it was clear that UFPJ had the widespread support of its base, it chose not to employ a call for mass direct action or rely on a more "people powered strategy," instead haggling with various city bureaucracies. Uhlenbeck adds that on the evening before the historic Feb 15th, 2003 rally a UFPJ staffer told him privately that "they did not want to see a front-page story about how thousands of young people were arrested in the paper the next morning."

Laursen adds that, "at best" direct action proponents "get friendly toleration from UFPJ. It’s an attitude of ‘Please don’t do anything embarrassing.’" He also says that in some ways, having such dominant anti-war groups can be a hindrance. "The Vietnam-era movement had less centralized leadership than now, which was a good thing because it led to more creativity. There was no UFPJ or even ANSWER." [Ak Gupta, "Moving Forward: UFPJ and the Anti-war Movement," Left Turn Magazine #19, Feb/March 2006]

The Left Turn article also notes that:

Since the start of the war, the creative street actions that came out of the global justice movement have been largely absent from the anti-war movement. In the Bay Area, Direct Action to Stop the War (DASW) mobilized an impressive 20,000 people and shut down San Francisco in March 2003. While this showed the possibilities of applying affinity group and direct action strategy to the more traditional protest-oriented anti-war movement, DASW was not able to maintain the infrastructure that it had built up after war began, and eventually disintegrated.

Once it was clear that the war was becoming a prolonged occupation, it became much harder to organize a specific mass action against it. While various pockets of the former "Direct Action Network" have stayed involved, there have been more critiques leveled at the "liberal anti-war movement" than attempts to actually self-organize and build alternatives on the national level.

Liberalism
Here's an account of the February 2005 national assembly where UFPJ's plans for the next 18 months were decided:

Throughout the weekend, no one addressed the elephant in the living room--the decision of leading members and forces in UFPJ to campaign for John Kerry, a pro-war presidential candidate. For most of last year, the antiwar movement was at a standstill--even as the potential audience for antiwar opposition increased, and the U.S. occupation was shaken by the Abu Ghraib torture scandal and a growing Iraqi resistance.
***
...by the narrowest of margins, a proposal for a UFPJ legislative and lobbying strategy passed, garnering 68 percent (a “super-majority” vote of two-thirds was required to adopt a proposal). And a proposal for UFPJ to mobilize demonstrations and direct action against corporate war profiteers, the pro-war mainstream media and the military--dubbed “People Power” by its sponsors--was narrowly defeated, winning only 61 percent support. ["Debating UFPJ’s direction," ERIC RUDER, February 25, 2005]

Gupta writes:

...UFPJ seems to argue privately for political "concessions" to prevent isolating the left in a "corner"—namely its abandonment of anti-imperialist politics. If discussed publicly, this would cause tremendous controversy on the left. Stanley Aronowitz, a labor historian, says precisely the reason such issues are not discussed openly is because if UFPJ leaders had to defend their positions they might very well lose. So, he argues, UFPJ takes a political position of not debating politics.

One longtime volunteer with UFPJ present in Washington in September disagrees with the notion that the group doesn’t grapple with politics. He contends the leadership wrestles with and agonizes over political decisions all the time, but he admits that the group’s decision-making process is not transparent to the broader anti-war movement.

One group that has been noticeably less prominent within the anti-war movement is the global justice movement. Eric Laursen, a veteran direct action activist, says, "I think there was a lot of annoyance and discouragement among anti-authoritarians that UFPJ and ANSWER emerged so quickly and were so conservative in their style of organizing as opposed to the Direct Action Network." DAN, as it was known, gained considerable prominence and support after its role in 1999 Seattle protests, but collapsed after the Sept. 11th attacks.

Hierarchical Organizational Methods
The Mobilization for Global Justice, which worked closely with UFPJ, issued an open letter after the September 2005 demonstration in Washington D.C. making a number of complaints. Among other things, the letter stated that,

We believe there is a connection between the failures of political analysis on the part of UFPJ, and their logistical failures. The connection lies in an elitist mode of organizing that treats the grassroots as a resource to exploit rather than as a source of leadership. The grassroots has no role in determining the political vision of the coalition; the vision and message are driven by the needs of getting on CNN and the New York Times. Yet, the grassroots is expected to do the “grunt work” of arranging for housing, medical support, and legal support, without any help from the so-called "leadership." ["An Open Letter to United for Peace and Justice (UFPJ) From the Mobilization for Global Justice," February 9, 2006]

The reply from UFPJ ["United For Peace and Justice letter of response to Mobilization for Global Justice," February 10, 2006] does not address this particular allegation.

Thomas Good spent a year as a national delegate to UFPJ, first for the Socialist Party and then for the War Resisters League. He wrote an article ["UFPJ Diary: The Case For Participatory Democracy,"] in the Fall of 2005 that provides the most substantive critique of UFPJ that I'm aware of and is worth reading in full. I'll excerpt some of the most telling passages:

The WRL, ...partly to point out that no matter who is in the White House the Iraq War would not stop, staged a civil disobedience at the New York Stock Exchange on November 3rd. By this time I had been to several New York City Coordinating Committee meetings at the UFPJ offices on 38th Street and knew Leslie Cagan [head of UFPJ] slightly...I called her and asked if UFPJ would consider supporting our action. I was told that UFPJ's primary concern was the election and that if it was stolen (was there any other possible outcome?) they would need to act quickly and therefore could not support us. We held our CD as scheduled, the day after the election... Although irregularities plagued the election UFPJ did not organize a mass protest. This left some of us in the WRL wondering what it would have cost UFPJ to promote our action - via simple endorsement and perhaps email outreach.
***
We traveled together to St. Louis in February, 2005. At the assembly we listened to speeches by Movement stalwarts Angela Davis and Tom Hayden and voted on a wide variety of proposals. But our primary reason for being in St. Louis was to push the proposal for the creation of a Nonviolent Direct Action Working Group - an idea put forward by the Iraq Pledge of Resistance, the Brandywine Peace Community and the War Resisters League national office. Things went well initially and our proposal made it out of subcommittee...but on the day of the actual vote we were badly burned by a combination of rigid bureaucratic process and the actions of a steering committee member named Lisa Fithian who, in the opinion of many, misused her position to block our initiative by speaking against it as an officer of UFPJ (it is my view that she was responding to a perceived territorial threat as the proposal's primary author was someone with whom she had personal issues). After the vote, Sam and I sat down with a delegate from Madison and drafted a motion of reconsideration citing the irregularities that resulted in our proposal going down to defeat. At the next day's plenary we presented the motion to the appropriate committee, expecting to be tossed aside with a recitation of some arcane procedural rule. This did not happen - to our astonishment an administrative committee member named Judith LeBlanc asked me to meet with Cagan in the hall...this was my first exposure to the extraordinary administrative processes in UFPJ. I quickly found two of the other proposal endorsers and we met with with Leslie outside the plenary. She apologized for the actions of the steering committee member who spoke against our proposal and asked me to withdraw our motion as, at best, it would lengthen the assembly considerably, and at worst, might invalidate the entire affair due to some of the voting irregularities cited in it. She offered us a deal: Fithian would apologize from the podium and we would be guaranteed the working group we had asked for. We took the deal and only later did it occur to me that this sort of thing might be a symptom of a serious problem within UFPJ. {2} I fully believe that Leslie felt she was doing the right thing by all concerned and probably she did - but what troubles me is that she was ABLE to do this, without any process whatsoever. After the Assembly the NVDA proposal was brought to the Steering Committee where there was a vote on it. This provided a post hoc veneer of democratic process. It was a pretty thin veneer. Leslie had made a backroom deal that essentially circumvented the assembly altogether. I think, in retrospect, it was a Faustian bargain for all concerned. Had I been a delegate who voted against the NVDA I would have been very surprised to see it created - despite the proposal being defeated on the floor of the assembly by what was supposed to be a democratic process. The fact that the national coordinator was able to reintroduce a defeated proposal to the steering committee is problematic in terms of process but the fact that she negotiated with me using this as a bargaining chip, guaranteeing its passage, would seem to be an even larger issue. (The fact that this deal was struck in order to prevent public scrutiny of alleged voting irregularities is also an issue worthy of further examination).
***
Even though UFPJ-NYC is not a national body (UFPJ has a Steering Committee which meets monthly via teleconference and presently has 42 members) it is very influential. It meets in the UFPJ national office and 2 members of the Administrative Committee (a subset of the Steering Committee which meets biweekly and is UFPJ's most powerful body) rotate facilitation of the meetings. In addition to this, Leslie Cagan, the national coordinator, frequently sat in on the UFPJ-NYC meetings I attended...

The Communist Party is a major player in UFPJ New York. This is a mixed blessing - on the one hand the administrative expertise and resources are very valuable. On the other hand, the legacy of Gus Hall and the years of democratic centralism being abused by CP leadership (which came to a head in 1991 at the 25th National Convention where 1/3 of the Party was expelled by Gus Hall - the expelled becoming the nucleus of the Committees of Correspondence for Democracy and Socialism) has produced something that those of us who were once in the CPUSA call "CP Style". For the uninitiated, this is an organizational style that is not particularly subtle about being top down. It is my understanding that Sam Webb, the CP's current chair, is invested in making the CP a more democratic organization (and perhaps he has succeeded, I wouldn't know) but they have yet to jettison democratic centralism, i.e., Leninism. Judith LeBlanc, in her capacity as UFPJ admin committee member, once remarked in a UFPJ-NYC meeting that the role of the CP was critical in UFPJ as "when you say Communist Party" people know what you mean - "it has name recognition." Setting aside the issue of whether or not this name recognition is always positive, this is an interesting point as UFPJ is big on name recognition and sucks in a fair number of celebrities which it then husbands as a resource. Brian Flanagan once remarked that the Democratic Party is like "a black hole with an event horizon surrounding it" that sucks in peace activists who are "never to be seen again" {3} - this could well describe UFPJ as it is presently constituted. Indeed, it is my view that organizers as well as celebrities are sucked into UFPJ and become "resources" (in the case of skilled organizers they are all too often treated as go-fers - Jim Crutchfield, a member of the IWW General Executive Board, attended a UFPJ NYC meeting in 2003 where "everybody sat in a big circle and talked for hours, and then four people made all the decisions after the meeting." This is very similar to my experience). Whether or not this approach was influenced by the CP is anyone's guess but there is a striking similarity in terms of the management of human resources between UFPJ today and the CP of the 1980s. It is significant that two of the most influential officers in UFPJ: Judith LeBlanc and Leslie Cagan, are vice-chair of the Communist Party and co-chair of the Committees of Correspondence for Democracy and Socialism, respectively.

It became clear to Sam and I, as we attended UFPJ NYC CC meetings, that they bore the hallmarks of top down organizational model. In the course of struggling for acceptance of direct action we began to notice that agendas appeared to be preset and that agenda changes were not encouraged due to the ever present urgency of some upcoming meeting or event. We also noticed that no minutes were ever distributed to attendees. There was a weekly email but it did not contain the previous week's minutes - it focused on announcements. Sam and I began to joke that, even though we had not signed enlistment papers, we were becoming foot soldiers in "CP-UFPJ". This was all sort of acceptable until the CC began having "Citywide Mobilization" meetings. These were held at 23rd Street, in the Communist Party's building which once housed the Daily World and the storefront Unity Book Store, now an artists' supply shop. Sam and I attended the meeting but it became obvious that there was little planning happening...this was really an opportunity for UFPJ to pass the hat - my first exposure to just how relentless UFPJ fundraising can be. It is my contention now that they differ little from any capitalist charity in that over one third of the annual revenue ($288,000 of $800,000 in 2004 {4}) goes to payroll. This is an astounding sum for most Leftists used to running their organizations with volunteer staff and a shoestring budget. Why is the budget so large? Clearly, maintaining the budget dictates the need for constant fundraising - but where is the public accounting of where the money goes? The balance sheet available on the UFPJ website is somewhat lacking in terms of specifics.
***
The M19 civil disobedience went well for the War Resisters League. A couple dozen of us were arrested at Times Square. Both Reverend Sekou and Leslie Cagan of UFPJ showed up at Times Square - to urge us on, not to risk arrest. I was pleased to see them, especially Sekou as, although he is a cleric and I have a secular orientation, he is a rank and file organizer, a straight shooter and a very likeable and committed activist. As I was loaded into the police van with my fellow arrestees I saw Leslie being interviewed by a TV crew. The media frenzy at Times Square was in part orchestrated by Bill Dobbs, UFPJ's masterful media person (Bill has an acerbic wit and is as likeable for his candor as he is valuable for his skill). Sitting at the Seventh Precinct I had time to reflect on my being in a dingy little cell with 3 other comrades and Leslie being on TV, speaking about OUR action - which got almost no support from UFPJ other than from Bill. Despite my gratitude for Leslie coming to our CD I was simultaneously angered that UFPJ would, perhaps unintentionally, co-opt it...while doing little to help build it. I had tried several times to post our call to action on the UFPJ NYC listserv and although no posts were bounced, none appeared on the list - this sort of thing is common in UFPJ as the centralization and hoarding of all resources, including information, is clearly a serious issue for anti-authoritarians concerned with democratic process. UFPJ's co-optation of the action was, in my view, very similar to what they often accuse ANSWER of doing. (UFPJ's criticisms of ANSWER, which we took at face value in CC meetings, was that they are impossible to work with as they argue over everything from major issues down to font size on fliers - and that they take credit for the actions of others).
***
Our WRL April Action was a Tax Day vigil outside the Internal Revenue Service. It was another successful action, again with no visible UFPJ presence...despite my agitating for assistance in the context of our weekly NYC CC meetings. Again, no listserv announcements made it through, no announcements at the citywide pass the hat meeting reached our friends in the Movement and yet the action was a success. I began to wonder what I was doing suffering through the UFPJ meetings at which I had little input and was simply there to be assigned a task for an upcoming UFPJ meeting or event...on some occasions the meetings were indeed hard to sit through. One of the issues confronting UFPJ is the lack of diversity, in terms of racial composition, in its officers and constituents. Obviously, UFPJ appeals to middle America with its focus on legislative action and attempts to find a lowest common denominator in terms of positions. This has an impact on diversity. Yet this fact seems to elude UFPJ officers...

During one of the last UFPJ NYC CC meetings I attended, Judith was center stage complaining about the lack of diversity in the assembled activists. She pointed out more than once that she was the "only person of color in the room" and that this had to change, we had to reach out to communities of color. Unfortunately, she did not indicate that UFPJ was going to take political positions (e.g. on Palestine) that would allow us to attract a more diverse group. Judith was again stating she was "the only person of color here" when Sam Morales spoke, reminding Judith that he was Puerto Rican and knew all about discrimination from firsthand experience. Judith didn't miss a beat, continuing on to her next point. I was left wondering if her idea of outreach to communities of color consisted solely of getting big names like Danny Glover to speak at UFPJ fundraisers (Danny spoke eloquently at the National Assembly but UFPJ's celeb envy is highly problematic). What struck me was that Sam, the rank and file organizer, was almost invisible to Judith. I was dismayed by this as I believe that the myopic view she espoused is not an isolated phenomenon: there is an authoritarian hierarchy within UFPJ wherein steering committee members alone have the right to lecture the faithful on the evils of white supremacy (which none of the rank and file dispute and in fact address in our political work) even when their own political positions reinforce it.
***
Steve and I posted our Unity Proposal to the NVDA working group email listserv feeling cautiously optimistic. To my dismay, Leslie Cagan immediately wrote in essentially saying that UFPJ had agreed to direct action, this was a big step and why did we have to have an autonomous component? {5} My response to her note was to indicate that I did not feel it appropriate that the national coordinator of a very hierarchical organization should use her position to kill off a democratic initiative that was an attempt to find common ground. (Shades of St. Louis...) Leslie replied, arguing that her power had been overstated in my note. {6} I had some difficulty accepting this assertion, however, it did not surprise me. UFPJ has never been big on self criticism. And all of this was occurring at a time when: UFPJ was under fire for refusing to include support of the (Palestinian) right of return in their Mobilization slogans (from Mahdi Brae and others) and from some of its conservative members for even considering this; ANSWER and UFPJ were both organizing separate marches on the same day in DC; CALC had a minor controversy (Sekou had invited the Dalai Lama to speak at the Mobe without consulting the CALC rank and file), and; anti-authoritarian members of the coalition were decrying the lack of democracy within UFPJ (rumblings in DAWN and other concerned parties were getting louder).
***
After the Mobilization, many of us in September Action, the NVDA caucus turned autonomous collective, struggled with the issue of whether to work with United for Peace and Justice. I have come to accept the position of Jim Macdonald, a DAWN organizer and fellow founding member of September Action. Jim has argued that we must work with UFPJ, continuing to speak truth to power even though this promises to be a very difficult task. {10} Believing that Jim's analysis is correct, I have resigned myself to the fact that, just as the IWW seeks to build a new society in the shell of the old {11}, we must seek to democratize the Old Left by building the Next Left in its corridors. And so, grumbling all the way, I will continue to agitate for reform within UFPJ, this time from the outside, while simultaneously looking to build a new organizational model external to UFPJ wherein participatory democracy and direct action inform our approach. Each member of September Action will have to decide this question individually, as a matter of conscience. The collective has no stated position on this issue. It is my personal conviction that the struggle to define a new organizing model and the struggle for democratization of the organization that claims to speak for the mainstream anti-war movement are both essential components of a dialectic whose synthesis holds out the promise of a stronger movement for peace and progress.

Anti-authoritarians who have spent long hours building the UFPJ coalition and its actions now feel trapped in what has become an entrenched system. In private conversation with other activists on the libertarian Left I have called this system Social Democratic Centralism. This treacherous pun encapsulates the following alleged attributes of UFPJ: a corporate liberal agenda; an anti-democratic (Leninist) organizational model, and; the careerist impulse of an upper echelon preoccupied with self preservation and self promotion. It is my belief that United for Peace and Justice must perform a serious self examination prior to the next National Assembly if it is to survive peace in Iraq. The American war in Viet Nam also seemed never ending to those resisting it but 30 years ago it did come to a close and the peace movement stumbled badly - this mistake should not be repeated. The intensely bureaucratic organizational model of UFPJ stifles creativity, simultaneously hoards and squanders resources, and alienates anti-authoritarian activists and people of color. UFPJ needs to look at why this is so and to explore possible corrective action in order to redefine itself as an organization that embraces participatory democracy and has an agenda that ensures the struggle for justice will continue after the Iraq War is ended.
***
...it is my view that UFPJ and ANSWER share a common, bureaucratic, organizational model, albeit each with its own unique features. Both organizations are administered by what I would term Peace Bureaucrats: for all of their assertions to the contrary, in its internal functioning UFPJ is not that dissimilar from ANSWER - it is top down and the administrative committee can overrule decisions made at the level of the steering committee. The national coordinator wields influence not unlike a Leninist general secretary or chair and, armed with "name recognition" (the net result of celebrity envy), is certainly equipped to use the cult of personality as necessary to influence decisions. {12}
{12}The CPUSA (where Judith LeBlanc is Vice Chair) and CCDS (where Leslie Cagan is Co-Chair) are both Leninist organizations, one with a self described democratic centralist model (CP) and one with a de facto democratic centralist structure (CCDS). This should surprise no one familiar with the history of the US Left as CCDS was formed via a split (the CP members who signed Angela Davis' letter - the "Initiative" - were expelled from the CP in 1991 and went on to found CCDS).

(Whether or not this occurs is arguable. I witnessed what seemed to be unilateral administrative decisions overruling plenary votes in St. Louis and an attempt to quash a motion on the NVDA listserv. It is my opinion this sort of thing does go on and the office of national coordinator should be abolished or its power curtailed by some rudimentary sanity checks).

In speaking with various steering committee members, and based on my experiences working within UFPJ, it has become clear that, contrary to UFPJ's Structure and Functioning document, which defines the Steering Committee as the highest decision making body, the real power resides in the Administrative Committee. Within the Administrative Committee, the national coordinator and co-chairs make the lion's share of decisions. Thus what I've experienced at the level of the NYC CC appears to be true of the steering committee as well: power is concentrated in a very small number of hands; decisions arrived at by democratic process (voted on at the National Assembly) appear to be discarded or overturned; no minutes from Steering or Admin Committees are published on the UFPJ website or distributed to member groups. There is precious little transparency or accountability to member groups. The fact that the national coordinator and a co-chair are officers of organizations with Leninist organizational models is possibly a factor...

The democratization of UFPJ is an interesting puzzle because, although UFPJ is run in what appears to be a highly bureaucratic, centralized manner, its constituents would be appalled to be called either "communist" or "democratic centralist". What's more, despite the fact that many affiliates willingly submit to an arguably anti-democratic organizational model, they voice objections to many of its decisions if not its overall direction (or lack thereof). This is not unlike the American electoral system which UFPJ is, superficially at least, wedded to: many Americans appear to regard democratizing "democracy" as impossible and decline to challenge the apparently immovable bureaucracy. And so it is in UFPJ as well: the members rarely challenge the bureaucracy which clings to a corporate liberal agenda which in turn fails to challenge the war machine head on.

...There is some, at least stated, anxiety within UFPJ over alienating the base which is presumed to be centrist. There is a feeling among the libertarian Left wing of UFPJ that the organization's desire to be a one size fits all coalition is at the root of the diversity issue identified by ANSWER. UFPJ's hesitation to take a principled stand out of concern that it might anger centrists (and their corporate liberal friends in Congress) doubtless alienates marginalized groups that will not join a coalition that refuses to even pay lip service to their concerns.

When looking at the UFPJ/ANSWER duality it is interesting to read the memorandum of understanding between UFPJ and ANSWER issued prior to the joint rally and march that occurred on September 24, 2005. In the document, specific slogans to be borne on banners in the march's lead contingent are described in detail. ANSWER announced its intent to use "anti-imperialist" slogans on their banners while UFPJ planned to use slogans that "address the war in Iraq and issues connected to that war". {14} ANSWER throws out the usual revolutionary slogans and other stirring rhetoric but is hampered in terms of PR by its symbiotic relationship with the Workers World Party which continues to defend the Soviet model. Meanwhile, UFPJ offers a familiar corporate liberalism, with demands that won't frighten its corporate apologist friends in Congress. Hence the lack of any slogans that go beyond "bring the troops home". It is my view that ANSWER will not be reformed. While there are doubtless many members of the coalition that are not Workers World cadre the organization is routinely referred to as a front group by independent leftists and I believe this is an accurate description although I will surely be called sectarian for saying publicly what many believe privately. That leaves one large coalition left to speak for the peace community that is not willing to be identified with vanguardist front groups. Unfortunately, this coalition speaks the language of corporate liberalism which many, myself included, regard as a dead end.

A Lack of Racial Diversity
Gupta writes:

[Barbara] Epstein points out that, "The problems of the anti-war movement are in many respects very much like the problems of the left as a whole." One of those problems is that the left has virtually no national presence at the moment other than UFPJ, so the anti-war coalition gets saddled with the responsibility of fixing many of the left's shortcomings. And perhaps the most persistent shortcoming is racial representation, which is all too evident within the anti-war movement.

According to a Gallup Poll taken in mid-November an astonishing 95 percent of blacks say the war as a mistake, yet one finds relatively few African Americans in attendance at the major demonstrations. Kamau Karl Franklin of the Malcolm X Grassroots Movement argues that "Black people as a racial group are against the war more than any other group, but they’re not out there marching. Their priorities is issues in their community —housing, jobs." Franklin says, "Unless anti-war organizers can connect those issues to the war you’ll never get Black people out there in a meaningful way."

Epstein, somewhat unintentionally, highlights a key contradiction over race within the anti-war movement. She says one of the things "going very well" within UFPJ is that "the role of both women and people of color is improving dramatically. There are now a lot of people of color in the leadership of the organization." But then she admits that "the number of people of color involved" is lacking.

One former steering committee member with UFPJ contends the group tends toward tokenization. The member, who wished to remain anonymous, says there are a fair number of people of color on the steering committee, but "not many of them have ties to actual communities." With quotas for various categories—people of color, women, LGBT—there’s also a tendency in UFPJ to engage in "counting," seeing whether people fit diversity categories rather than if they are really rooted in the communities and the struggles they’re supposed to represent.

I would add that, while it is quite commonly argued among antiwar activists that we must link war abroad with domestic problems, it is far from obvious that opposing the Iraq War should take primacy over struggle against the injustices present within the U.S. It seems to me that strengthening our movement and attracting more lower income folks and people of color requires giving priority to an array of issues confronting U.S. citizens alongside the Iraq War.

Ultimately, however, the best way to demonstrate the flaws of UFPJ and the hierarchical organization models used by so much by the left is through the creation of large organizations that embody participatory democracy. I hope the above analysis of some of the flaws of UFPJ will assist in an understanding of what must be avoided if such groups are to be formed.
Tags:[UFPJ hierarchical liberal antiwar]

Protests Target Draconian Immigration Measures

2006-03-24T23:18:00.000-05:00

It's not France, but several areas of the U.S. have seen impressive numbers involved in protests regarding recent Congressional efforts to criminalize "illegal" immigration and build a wall along sections of the U.S.- Mexican border. High school students walked out in Los Angeles, workers stayed home in Georgia, and some 300,000 marched in Chicago. Such signs of hope in a heavily depoliticized society are regrettably few and far between.

Haitian children face greatest challenges to life in Western Hemisphere

2006-03-24T15:48:00.000-05:00

"Haitian children face greatest challenges to life in Western Hemisphere" announced a United Nations press release on Wednesday.

More children are likely to die during early childhood in Haiti than in any other country in the Western Hemisphere, with one in eight likely to succumb before the age of five, according to a United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF) report released today.

The UNICEF Country Representative for Haiti, Adriano Gonzalez-Regueral, said that,

While Haiti accounts for only two per cent of births in Latin America and the Caribbean, it accounts for 19 per cent of deaths for children under five. It has by far the highest death rates for children under five, with 117 children dying for every 1,000 births.

He praised the "public commitment" of the incoming president, Rene Preval (whom the U.S. opposed), "to improving the lives of Haiti's children." The comment implicitly contrasts Preval with the U.S. steward, in power since Aristide was compelled to leave by Western powers in February 2004.

[HAITIAN CHILDREN FACE GREATEST CHALLENGES TO LIFE IN WESTERN HEMISPHERE, UN News, Mar 22 2006]

Denying the Vote to Puerto Rico

2006-03-22T23:10:00.000-05:00

The BBC reports on a challenge lodged by residents of Puerto Rico seeking to vote in U.S. presidential elections:

The US Supreme Court has rejected an attempt to give residents of the territory of Puerto Rico the right to vote in US presidential elections.
...
Attorney Gregorio Igartua, who filed the appeal, said the citizens of Puerto Rico "have been unfairly treated" for more than a century.
He complained that residents have "an inferior type of American citizenship."

While the article goes on to mention low support in Puerto Rico for independence from the U.S. - there are some fringe economic (and migration) benefits to being on the periphery of the empire, after all - the U.S. itself clearly has a long way to go in recognizing the implications of its annexation-happy past. Puerto Ricans living in the mainland U.S. are routinely denied the opportunity to vote with Spanish-language ballots, despite being U.S. citizens - a clear violation of voting rights as supposedly protected in the Constitution. And just as Puerto Ricans themselves are often excluded from the world-renowned U.S. democratic process, the island finds itself with nothing but a token voice in Washington. Such is the fate of a people annexed to be canon fodder for further U.S. military adventures.

[Court denies Puerto Rico US vote, BBC, 21 March 2006]

Selective Attention to Narcotrafficking

2006-03-19T23:11:00.000-05:00

The BBC reports that:

The Colombian authorities have seized a shipment of cocaine with a street value of $540m (£300m) on board a ship in the Caribbean port of Cartagena.
...
The cocaine was thought to belong to the main right-wing paramilitary group, the AUC.

Important to remember is that U.S. intervention in Colombia is largely predicated on the basis of the ever-successful "War on Drugs." Yet while the AUC is known for its involvement in narcotrafficking and is rightfully on the U.S. State Department's lists of terrorist organizations for its widespread human rights abuses, it's also widely believed by human rights groups to be linked to elements of the right-wing Colombian government itself - the same Uribe administration that receives more foreign aid from the U.S. than any government in the world, outside of Israel and Egypt. Not surprisingly, a close correlation between U.S. aid and human rights abuses is readily evident.

Now if only the FARC had done it, it would be of propaganda value to Washington.

[Colombia makes $540m cocaine haul, BBC, 19 March 2006]

Crash: A Liberal Wreckage

2006-03-16T16:31:00.000-05:00

With the recent Best Picture award at the Oscars going to Crash, I feel the need to review a movie I found boring and rather annoying. This might seem an unusual departure from the normal subjects of this blog but I think the acclaim Crash has received indicates something about the limited understanding of race in this country.

The film fails on both an artistic and a political level. Artistically, Crash is "crudely manipulative," as A.O. Scott wrote for the New York Times. The director,

Mr. Haggis[,] is eager to show the complexities of his many characters, which means that each one will show exactly two sides. A racist white police officer will turn out to be physically courageous and devoted to his ailing father; his sensitive white partner will engage in some deadly racial profiling; a young black man who sees racial profiling everywhere will turn out to be a carjacker; a wealthy, mild-mannered black man will pull out a gun and start screaming. No one is innocent. There's good and bad in everyone.
[May 6, 2005]

The characters feel inauthentic and the plot is implausible and contrived. It might be possible to overlook all of this if the message was actually compelling but unfortunately, it's not.

Politically, Crash suffers from portraying racism as predominantly a problem of individual prejudice. There is little indication that it has any systemic roots. In actuality of course both factors are integral, which is what makes it so enduring.

I can't say I'm surprised the Academy missed these subtleties. Hollywood may be famously liberal - but it's the liberalism of the elite. Roger Ebert was so impressed with the film he called it the year's best film and even implied it has the possibility of making its audiences better people.
["In defense of the year's 'worst movie'," January 8, 2006]

Thandie Newton, just one of the film's many famous actors, said of the script of Crash that it showed:

that racism was just a tool to deal with frustration and pain. That we were in denial about the way we feel and desperately trying to control their environment the way their lives are. And, ultimately, their scapegoats aren't going to make them feel better. It's just going to increase hatred and the problem gets worse and worse. That's what's so wonderful about the film is that it allows you to see their motivation and to see that behind the aggressive cop is a man in pain. Behind the frustrated housewife is a woman who feels betrayed. You see the motivation, which is so much more valuable than the stereotypes that we usually see in the movies. Racism is just one piece to the whole puzzle that the film offers.
["Matt Dillon and Thandie Newton Discuss 'Crash'," Rebecca Murray, Your Guide to Hollywood Movies]

All of this is well and good and might be the basis for a fine movie if it wasn't so poorly executed.

As film critic Scott Foundas harshly writes:

...Crash is an Important Film About the Times in Which We Live, which is another way of saying that it's one of those self-congratulatory liberal jerk-off movies that rolls around every once in a while to remind us of how white people suffer too, how nobody is without his prejudices, and how, when the going gets tough, even the white supremacist cop who gets his kicks from sexually harassing innocent black motorists is capable of rising to the occasion. How touching. Haggis is trafficking in much the same territory here as Michael Haneke is in Cache, only he lacks the guts to pull out his paring knife and fillet his bourgeois characters with the mercilessness they deserve.
["The Movie Club 2005," Slate.com, Dec. 29, 2005]

The movie is ultimately, as Scott observes, "profoundly complacent in spite of its intention to unsettle and disturb."

Jeff Chang and Sylvia Chan, cultural critics for Alternet, make some very insightful comments which I'll excerpt at length:

JC: ...we have to go back to the 80s. After the blaxploitation era, a particular kind of race movie really took off: stories that were essentially about blacks or people of color redeeming whites. Start with Spielberg and "The Color Purple" and move on to "Mississippi Burning," "Cry Freedom," "Driving Miss Daisy." "Grand Canyon" is the crowning point of this genre.
SC: It continues to now with "Monster's Ball."
JC: And let's please ignore most of Queen Latifah's recent work. At the end of the 80s, Spike Lee says that he wrote "Do The Right Thing" to confront exactly this kind of movie. In turn, "Do The Right Thing" opened up the door to Black films being financed by the major studios, a trend that accelerated after the Los Angeles riots in 1992.
***
SC: Ludacris' character Anthony is the most ridiculous kind of black nationalist. He looks like a fool most of the time. Then it turns out he's a criminal, too. Radical thought has to be associated with petty criminality. It parallels how radical thought was criminalized in the American justice system during the Reagan era.
JC: During the 60s, Tom Wolfe portrayed black and Samoan activists in San Francisco and New York City as race hustlers and poverty pimps in "[Radical Chic and] Mau-Mauing the Flak Catchers." Anthony is just an update of a kind of 60s white liberal take on radicals of color.
He is redeemed at the end of the movie, after taking a lesson from the Terence Howard's bourgeoisie, white-identifying black director Cameron, who sheds his Oreo aspirations by confronting the police harder than Anthony ever would. Anthony then goes on to free the Thai slave workers.
***
JC: The main reversal of the movie is when Officer Ryan, who humiliates Cameron's light-skinned wife Christine (Thandie Newton), is forced to save her from a burning car. He learns that he can't blame his problems on blacks, or take it out on them. He needs them to save his father and himself.
***
SC: Bringing it back to this post 9/11 moment, "Crash" is coming out during a time of war. Our nation is in "crisis," we have a "deeply divided nation," as the media keeps telling us. When "Grand Canyon," and one of the first white liberal Hollywood movies, "Guess Who's Coming To Dinner," were released, the nation was at war. Times of crisis and war are when whites have the strongest desire for reconciliation with blacks, when blackness is most desired as part of a triumphant narrative of nation.
Don Cheadle's character is a type of black male protagonist who's very common these days: a proxy for the state, working against all the unruly elements of internal diversity and external threat. Think Denzel Washington in "The Siege," Will Smith in "Men In Black" and "Independence Day," Samuel L. Jackson in "Rules of Engagement," Morgan Freeman as the president in "Deep Impact." This is the type of narrative Hollywood needs to keep putting out there right now--the black man as the symbol for our nation, the guy who's going to provide order for not only the U.S., but for the world. And let's be real: this isn't happening in real life.
In the end, the film paints racism as a postmodern malaise where conflict happens because we don't touch each other except when we crash. That's bullshit. Racism is structural and institutional more than it is personal and sentimental.
JC: The pitch is go to see "Crash," then go home and ponder your prejudices. For some people it may do that. For a lot of people, though, it won't. It's the feel-good race hit movie of the summer.
["Can White Hollywood Get Race Right?," AlterNet, July 19, 2005]

So to amplify on Chan and Chang, the climactic dramatic moments of the film feature a racist white cop finding redemption in heroism and a "bourgeoisie, white-identifying black director" finding redemption in heroically opposing racism - and doing so more boldly than the poor black character (who only manages to follow his lead with some lesser heroics after a tongue lashing from his wealthier social better).

Why would a movie made by such a talented group of people that sincerely wishes to address racism fail so badly? Well, there are the obvious filters that tend to strain out anything too critical of the system: the movie is financed by huge corporations and many of those involved in making the film are themselves part of the elite. To this list one might also add a belief that audiences will prefer to be pandered to rather than challenged. Thus, to this way of thinking, the predominance of whites in this country means it is good business to always have white characters in leading roles (a strikingly consistent phenomenon; movies targeting specific niche markets like blacks are a separate category), often also male. In a liberal movie, the white character starts out flawed and a central element of the movie revolves around the growth of that character. Crash merely adds an additional element by letting the black middle-class get in on the fun too. There's always a danger of reading too much into fiction but I think these observations are at least plausible.

On the 2006 Social Forum of the Americas

2006-03-14T12:36:00.000-05:00

Lydia Sargent's report-back from the Americas World Social Forum mentions that:

On the morning of the fourth day, word of mouth indicated that Hugo Chavez was going to speak that evening, even though the program listed him as apearing (sic) two days later. We were hustled onto a bus of "important guests" for a 30-minute ride to an indoor stadium. There we were split into more "important guests" who were taken to a room to wait for a quick meeting with Chavez and the "less important guests" (us) who were taken to a special section on the stadium floor.

This sort of tendency within the organizing of the forum is troubling as it belies an anti-democratic, elitist streak. Organizing a massive event such as this is no doubt a major challenge and I don't want to impugn the intentions of the organizers. Often when faced with the need to accomplish something quickly (Chavez wants to meet with luminaries at the Social Forum - how do we decide who gets to sit down with him? It's far easier to simply pick some of the best known individuals than to consider other, less obvious options such as a lottery.) It is easiest to fall back on established practices that we're all familiar with from being immersed in hierarchical societies. Even consciously anti-Leninist activists can make these mistakes. What is needed is more conscious awareness and acceptance of the importance of non-hierarchical organizing.

Incidentally, I agree with Sargent that "organizing a movement and continuing a forum structure" can and should be done simultaneously. No forced unity on how to build a movement is necessary. It is to be expected that differing factions will arise over how best to build movements. What is important is that they continue to work together in the large areas where they are in agreement and maintain fraternal discussions in those areas of disagreement. All of this is far easier said than done of course.
[The Social Forum of the Americas, ZMag, March 2006]

Colombian IDPs

2006-02-04T08:03:00.000-05:00

A high level UNHCR official is currently visiting Colombia and Ecuador to highlight the attention of displaced persons.

The refugee agency is concerned about the living conditions of nearly 250,000 Colombians residing in Ecuador.
***

The vast majority of Colombia's IDPs end up living in economically depressed areas in and around large cities all around the country, according to UNHCR.

In Altos de Cazucá, the Bogotá suburb that Ms. Feller visited, makeshift housing, high unemployment, and poverty are the norm. Displaced people who fled armed groups are still suffering from their activities. There have been numerous reports of youngsters being murdered in the area by members of irregular armed groups, UNHCR said.

“The challenges are not to be underestimated,” said Ms. Feller. “Physical security, particularly for women, youth and IDPs community leaders is a serious concern.”

After more than 40 years of armed conflict, Colombia counts more than 2 million internally displaced persons (IDPs) and the numbers keep increasing, UNHCR said. Preliminary reports from the Government indicate that in 2005 alone there were more than 131,000 new cases of forced displacement, while non-governmental organizations put the figure much higher.

["UN REFUGEE AGENCY OFFICIAL SPOTLIGHTS PLIGHT OF DISPLACED COLOMBIANS," UN News Service, New York, Feb 3 2006]

Latin America Most Unequal Region in the World

2006-02-04T07:52:00.000-05:00

A United Nations press release noted today that:

With the number of people in poverty and extreme poverty in the area having almost doubled over the last couple of decades, Latin America remains the most unequal region in the world, with high levels of unemployment and with spikes in crime and violence that threaten not only citizens’ lives but hamper the growth of such income sources as tourism and foreign investment.

Soure:["DEPUTY SECRETARY-GENERAL PLEDGES UN SUPPORT TO CONSOLIDATE PROGRESS IN LATIN AMERICA," New York, Feb 3 2006 (emphasis mine)]

Chavez Elected Legally Just Like Hitler

2006-02-03T21:23:00.000-05:00

Democracy Now! reports that:

At a press luncheon, US Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said: "You've got Chavez in Venezuela with a lot of oil money. He's a person who was elected legally just as Adolf Hitler was elected legally."

[Headlines for February 3, 2006, Democracy Now!]

The NYTimes on the Overthrow of Aristide

2006-02-03T12:12:00.000-05:00

Excerpts from the Times long and revealing article [Walt Bogdanich and Jenny Nordberg, "Democracy Undone: Mixed U.S. Signals Helped Tilt Haiti Toward Chaos," New York Times, January 29, 2006] on the coup that evicted Aristide:

Mr. Curran accused the democracy-building group, the International Republican Institute, of trying to undermine the reconciliation process after disputed 2000 Senate elections threw Haiti into a violent political crisis. The group's leader in Haiti, Stanley Lucas, an avowed Aristide opponent from the Haitian elite, counseled the opposition to stand firm, and not work with Mr. Aristide, as a way to cripple his government and drive him from power, said Mr. Curran, whose account is supported in crucial parts by other diplomats and opposition figures. Many of these people spoke publicly about the events for the first time.

Mr. Curran, a 30-year Foreign Service veteran and a Clinton appointee retained by President Bush, also accused Mr. Lucas of telling the opposition that he, not the ambassador, represented the Bush administration's true intentions.

Records show that Mr. Curran warned his bosses in Washington that Mr. Lucas's behavior was contrary to American policy and "risked us being accused of attempting to destabilize the government." Yet when he asked for tighter controls over the I.R.I. in the summer of 2002, he hit a roadblock after high officials in the State Department and National Security Council expressed support for the pro-democracy group, an American aid official wrote at the time.

The International Republican Institute is one of several prominent nonprofit groups that receive federal funds to help countries develop the mechanisms of democracy, like campaigning and election monitoring. Of all the groups, though, the I.R.I. is closest to the administration. President Bush picked its president, Lorne W. Craner, to run his administration's democracy-building efforts. The institute, which works in more than 60 countries, has seen its federal financing nearly triple in three years, from $26 million in 2003 to $75 million in 2005. Last spring, at an I.R.I. fund-raiser, Mr. Bush called democracy-building "a growth industry."

These groups walk a fine line. Under federal guidelines, they are supposed to nurture democracy in a nonpartisan way, lest they be accused of meddling in the affairs of sovereign nations. But in Haiti, according to diplomats, Mr. Lucas actively worked against President Aristide.
***

But in a recent interview, Otto J. Reich, who served under Mr. Powell as the State Department's top official on Latin America, said that a subtle shift in policy away from Mr. Aristide had taken place after Mr. Bush became president — as Mr. Curran and others had suspected.

"There was a change in policy that was perhaps not well perceived by some people in the embassy," Mr. Reich said, referring to Mr. Curran. "We wanted to change, to give the Haitians an opportunity to choose a democratic leader," said Mr. Reich, one of a group of newly ascendant policy makers who feared the rise of leftist governments in Latin America.
***

In Haiti, Mr. Lucas's partisan activities were well known. Evans Paul, a leader of the anti-Aristide movement and now a presidential candidate, said Mr. Lucas's stand against negotiating was "a bit too harsh" even for some in the opposition.

Jean-Max Bellerive, an official in three Haitian administrations, including Mr. Aristide's, added, "He said there was a big plan for Haiti that came from Washington, that Aristide would not finish his mandate." As for the ambassador, Mr. Bellerive said, "he told me that Curran was of no importance, that he did not fit in the big picture."

Micha Gaillard, a former spokesman for the main anti-Aristide coalition, the Democratic Convergence, said Mr. Lucas went so far as to act as its representative in Washington.

With Washington's approval, Mr. Lucas used taxpayer money to fly hundreds of opposition members — but no one from Mr. Aristide's Lavalas party — to a hotel in the Dominican Republic for political training that began in late 2002. Two leaders of the armed rebellion told The Times that they were in the same hotel during some of those meetings, but did not attend.

The I.R.I. said the sessions were held outside Haiti because Lavalas had physically threatened its staff, including Mr. Lucas. But another American democracy-building group, the National Democratic Institute, said it was able to work successfully with Mr. Aristide's party in Haiti.

Mr. Curran left Haiti in August 2003 for a new assignment, and by fall, Mr. Aristide's political opponents had decided there was little point in negotiating. Still, there was one last hope. Mr. Einaudi persuaded some opposition leaders to meet with Mr. Aristide at the home of the new American ambassador, James B. Foley. But while the president was prepared to give up much of his power, Mr. Einaudi said, American officials "pulled the rug out," abruptly canceling the meeting without consulting him.

Several months later, the rebels marched on Port-au-Prince and Mr. Aristide left Haiti on a plane provided by the American government. Since then, Haiti has become even more chaotic, said Marc L. Bazin, an elder statesman of Haitian politics.
***

President Aristide promised not only to give voice to the poor in the poorest country in the Western Hemisphere, but also to raise the minimum wage and force businesses to pay taxes. He rallied supporters with heated attacks on the United States, a tacit supporter of past dictatorships and a major influence in Haitian affairs since the Marines occupied the country from 1915 to 1934.

"He wasn't going to be beholden to the United States, and so he was going to be trouble," said Senator Christopher J. Dodd of Connecticut, a Democratic critic of Bush administration policy on Latin America. "We had interests and ties with some of the very strong financial interests in the country, and Aristide was threatening them." Those interests, mostly in the textile and electronic assembly businesses, sold many of their products cheap to the United States.
***

Mr. Curran was supposed to have help from the I.R.I., which had been active in Haiti since 1990. Along with the National Democratic Institute, the I.R.I. was formed in the early 1980's after President Ronald Reagan called on Americans to fight totalitarianism.

Its board includes Republican foreign-policy heavyweights and lobbyists, and its chairman is Senator John McCain, the Arizona Republican, who did not answer requests for an interview. The group's financing comes from the Agency for International Development, as well as the State Department, foundations and corporations like Halliburton and Chevron.

More than its sister group, the International Republican Institute tends to work in countries "it views as being strategically important to U.S. national foreign policy interests," according to a 1999 report by the international development agency.

The I.R.I.'s Republican affiliations did not go unnoticed on the streets of Port-au-Prince. Graffiti condemning the I.R.I. had been showing up for some time, the work of Aristide supporters. "I think they distrusted I.R.I. as an organization because they were affiliated with the Republican Party, and Lavalas just felt the Republican Party was out to get them," said David Adams, a former A.I.D. mission director in Haiti.
***

The anti-Aristide message had currency around Washington. Mr. Einaudi, the veteran diplomat, recalled attending the I.R.I.'s 2001 fund-raising dinner and being surrounded by a half-dozen Haitian businessmen sounding a common cry: "We were foolish to think that we could do anything with Aristide. That it was impossible to negotiate with him. That it was necessary to get rid of him."

A year later, the I.R.I. created a stir when it issued a press release praising the attempted overthrow of Hugo Chávez, the elected president of Venezuela and a confrontational populist, who, like Mr. Aristide, was seen as a threat by some in Washington. The institute has since told The Times that praising the attempted coup was wrong.
***

Mr. Gaillard, the former spokesman for the Democratic Convergence, the main anti-Aristide coalition, said he also did not like that Mr. Lucas was acting as the Haitian opposition's representative in Washington. "That really disturbed us, because we didn't know exactly what he was saying," he said.

Mr. Bazin added that Mr. Lucas "was prepared to act aggressively to get Aristide out of power."
***

Mr. Curran sent his cables to the Bush administration's Latin American policy team, records show. In addition to Mr. Reich, then assistant secretary of state for Latin American affairs, that group included Elliott L. Abrams, a special assistant to the president and senior director for democracy and human rights, and Daniel W. Fisk, a deputy to Mr. Reich.

These men were veteran fighters against the spread of leftist political ideology in Latin America, beginning with Fidel Castro and Cuba. Mr. Fisk's former boss, Jesse Helms, then a Republican senator from North Carolina, had once called Mr. Aristide a "psychopath," based on a C.I.A. report about his mental condition that turned out to be false.

In the 1980's, Mr. Reich and Mr. Abrams had become ensnared in investigations of Reagan administration activities opposing the socialist government of Nicaragua. The comptroller general determined in 1987 that a public diplomacy office run by the Cuban-born Mr. Reich had "engaged in prohibited, covert propaganda activities." In 1991, Mr. Abrams pleaded guilty to withholding information from Congress in connection with the Iran-contra affair. He was pardoned by the first President Bush.
***

Records show that in the summer of 2002, Mr. Curran sought tighter control over the I.R.I. before signing off on a politically delicate program that Mr. Lucas had organized in the Dominican Republic to teach the opposition the art of campaigning.

Washington officials opposed Mr. Curran's request. Not only was there pressure from Congress, according to an e-mail message from Mr. Adams of A.I.D., but "there were senior State/N.S.C. officials who were sympathetic to I.R.I.'s position as well."
***

In December 2002, the I.R.I. began training Haitian political parties there, at the Hotel Santo Domingo, owned by the Fanjul family, which fled Cuba under Mr. Castro and now runs a giant sugar-cane business.

The training was unusual for more than its location: only Mr. Aristide's opponents, not members of his party, were invited.

Institute officials said this was because the opposition parties were less powerful and needed more help. The goal, Mr. Fauriol said, "was to broaden, if you will, the ability of various actors to participate in the political process."

They also said they were not required to work with Lavalas because its members condoned violence and the institute's workers were threatened, which was why the meetings were held outside Haiti. And they pointed out that no American officials had objected to excluding Lavalas.

There were perhaps a dozen sessions, spread over a year, the institute said. Hundreds of opposition members came.

"The training programs were really run-of-the-mill political party programs," Mr. Fauriol said. To the Dominican ambassador who issued the travelers' visas in Haiti, though, the meetings "clearly conveyed a confrontation, not a dialogue."

"For the opposition, it was interesting to know that the American government, or people from the American government, supported and validated its politics," the former ambassador, Alberto Despradel, said last fall at the Hotel Santo Domingo.
***

Mr. Bazin, a moderate Aristide opponent, sent representatives to the Hotel Santo Domingo. They came away believing that more was going on than routine political training.

"The report I got from my people was that there were two meetings — open meetings where democracy would be discussed and closed meetings where other things would be discussed, and we are not invited to the other meetings," said Mr. Bazin, who is now running for president as the candidate of a faction of Lavalas.

Mr. Bazin said people who had attended the closed meetings told him that "there are things you don't know" — that Mr. Aristide would ultimately be removed and that he should stop calling for compromise.
***

It turns out there was another matter, one that federal officials apparently did not know about: two leaders of the armed rebels told The Times they were spending time at the Hotel Santo Domingo while the training was under way.

Guy Philippe, a former police commander who had fled Haiti after two failed coup attempts, said in an interview that he had seen Mr. Lucas at the hotel.

"I was living in the hotel, sleeping in the hotel," Mr. Philippe said. "So I've seen him and his friends and those guys in the opposition, but we didn't talk politics." He said he had not attended any I.R.I. meetings.

Paul Arcelin, an architect of the rebellion, said he, too, had seen Mr. Lucas at the hotel during the training sessions. In an interview there last fall, Mr. Arcelin said, "I used to meet Stanley Lucas here in this hotel, alone, sitting down talking about the future of Haiti." But he said they had not discussed overthrowing Mr. Aristide.

Mr. Lucas said Mr. Arcelin showed up at an I.R.I. meeting and was told to leave. He also disputed Mr. Philippe's account.

Several opposition activists said they wanted nothing to do with the armed rebels. "Participation in our seminars was from a very restricted list of people," Mr. Fauriol said.

The seminars were still under way in September 2003 when the Bush administration sent a new ambassador to Haiti. Mr. Curran wanted to stay longer, Mr. Reich said. But he said Mr. Curran was replaced because "we did not think the ambassador was carrying out the new policy in the way we wanted it carried out."
***

Over four years, Mr. Einaudi, a former acting secretary general of the Organization of American States, had made some 30 trips to Haiti trying to prevent such a moment. Yet he had failed. Mr. Aristide was finally willing to share power, Mr. Einaudi said, but the opposition, emboldened, felt no need to deal with him.

With time running out, Mr. Einaudi hit upon a new approach — one he hoped would take advantage of the arrival of the new American ambassador, Mr. Foley. Mr. Einaudi invited Mr. Aristide and his opponents to meet at the ambassador's home — a clear signal that the United States wanted negotiations, not regime change.

When members of both sides agreed to come, there was a glimmer of hope, Mr. Einaudi said.

Terence A. Todman, a retired American diplomat who also worked in Haiti for the O.A.S, said: "We knew there would be shouting. But at least they were together."

Then, suddenly, it was over. In a move that stunned Mr. Einaudi, the United States canceled the meeting, killing "what was in fact my last move," he said.

His colleague was more blunt. "That blew it," said Mr. Todman, who like Mr. Einaudi was speaking publicly about the scuttled meeting for the first time. "That was the end of any effort to get them together."
***

Several months later, the rebels crossed into Haiti and began their final push. There were perhaps 200 in all, many of them former soldiers in the army Mr. Aristide had disbanded years before. Leading the final assault were Mr. Philippe and Louis-Jodel Chamblain.

Rights groups have identified Mr. Chamblain as the leader of death squads when the military ran Haiti after Mr. Aristide's first ouster in 1991. He had twice been convicted in absentia — for his role in a massacre in Gonaïves in 1994 and in connection with the 1993 killing of an Aristide supporter.

As for Mr. Philippe, Mr. Curran said he was suspected of having had ties to drug traffickers before leaving Haiti after a failed coup attempt.

Mr. Philippe, who is now running for president of Haiti, denies any connection to the drug trade, pointing out that he has never been charged with such a crime.
***

When rebels reached the city of Cap Haitien on Feb. 22, the police chief, Hugues Gabriel, told his 28 officers to flee. "They had machine guns," he said. "We have little handguns with little ammunition."

In Washington, the Bush administration voiced its official policy. "We cannot buy into a proposition that says the elected president must be forced out of office by thugs and those who do not respect law and are bringing terrible violence to the Haitian people," Secretary of State Powell said.

But when Mr. Aristide asked for international troops, he did not get them.

Mr. Powell said he continued to press for a political settlement to keep Mr. Aristide in office. "We were doing everything we could to support his incumbency," he said in a recent interview. Only in the last days, when Port-au-Prince appeared "on the verge of a serious blood bath," he said, did the United States explore other options. "There comes a point when you have to make a judgment as to whether you should continue to support President Aristide or whether it is better to try another route," he said.

On Feb. 29 — Mr. Philippe's birthday — the United States flew President Aristide to exile in South Africa.
***

Their activities there had not gone unnoticed by Haitian authorities. Edwin M. Paraison, a former Haitian diplomat in the Dominican Republic, said his government contacted authorities there three times to express concern "about subversive actions that were being planned on the Dominican territory." But, he said, little was done.

American officials said they did not take the rebels terribly seriously. "Our sense was that they were not a large force, not a well-trained force, and not in any way a threat to the stability then in Haiti," said Mr. Foley, the American ambassador at the time. "Now that proved to be otherwise."

Mr. Despradel, the former Dominican ambassador, said American authorities had to have known what the rebels were doing.

"Given the intelligence the United States has in place throughout the Caribbean and their advanced technology that lets them hear a mosquito in outer space — I think Guy Philippe is bigger than that," he said.

At a Senate hearing in 2004, Mr. Noriega was asked if he knew of any ties between Mr. Philippe and the I.R.I. — specifically Mr. Lucas — during the training meetings in the Dominican Republic. He said he did not.
***

Mr. Philippe tells a different story. In interviews with The Times, he called Mr. Lucas "a good friend" whom he has known much of his life. "He used to be my teacher in Ping-Pong," Mr. Philippe said.

Not only did he say he saw Mr. Lucas during the training at the Hotel Santo Domingo; he said he met with him once or twice in 2000 or 2001, while in exile in Ecuador. "He was working for I.R.I.," Mr. Philippe said. "It was not a planned meeting." They did not discuss politics, he said, adding, "It's like someone I knew when I was young."

Mr. Voltaire, the former minister in the Aristide administration, recalled meeting Mr. Lucas at a diplomatic reception in Lima, Peru, in September 2001. He said Mr. Lucas told him he was headed to Ecuador to meet with a small group of former Haitian policemen who had trained there. Mr. Philippe was known to belong to that group.

Mr. Craner, the I.R.I. president, said Mr. Lucas might have been in a bar in Ecuador when Mr. Philippe was present, though Mr. Lucas could not be sure. Mr. Lucas said, "We dug down deep into scenarios where Guy Philippe was potentially present in the room, even if I could not confirm that." He did acknowledge being in Peru during the time frame cited by Mr. Voltaire.
***

Assassinations, mob violence, torture and arbitrary arrests have created a "catastrophic" human rights problem, a top United Nations official said in October.
***

Mr. Latortue's government, set up as an unelected caretaker, dashed any hope of reconciliation when the prime minister praised the rebels as "freedom fighters." Then, Mr. Chamblain, the rebel convicted twice in absentia for his role in political killings, was acquitted of one murder in a retrial that rights groups called a sham. His other conviction was dismissed as well.

At the same time, Mr. Aristide's former prime minister, Yvon Neptune, was jailed for a year without charges, prompting an international outcry. Only after a hunger strike left him near death did the government bring murder-related charges. Another prominent Aristide supporter, the Rev. Gérard Jean-Juste, has been repeatedly arrested; Amnesty International calls Father Jean-Juste, who has leukemia, "a prisoner of conscience."

Map of the US Military in South America

2006-02-02T00:58:00.000-05:00

Check out this map of US military forces in South America (in Portuguese), brought to my attention by André Deak, "Brazilian Army Study Details North American Military Presence in South America," MRZine, Jan., 02, 06.

Trade in the Americas Updates

2006-02-01T12:35:00.000-05:00

AFTA ALERT: "The Bush administration appears to be closing in fast on a new NAFTA-style trade agreement with three countries in South America - Colombia, Ecuador, and Peru," writes Public Citizen's Global Trade Watch (1/25). Current negotiations could add Colombia and Ecuador to an agreement which was reached between the U.S. and Peru in December - making an Andean Free Trade Agreement (AFTA). "The proposed AFTA is a cookie-cutter copy of the same failed NAFTA and CAFTA model - bad news for us and them, but Corporate America will love it," Global Trade Watch writes. They note that Colombia is "a labor-rights-free zone" where over 2,100 labor union activists have been assassinated since 1991. "Such a deal would spell the end of any meaningful leverage against the Colombian government's rampant human rights violations - literally an issue of life or death," the alert says. Global Trade Watch notes that Peruvian president Alejandro Toledo suggested including stronger labor provisions in AFTA, "but this offer was harshly rejected by the Republican congressman in charge of trade policy," Rep. Bill Thomas (R-CA) and "is not included in the text of the U.S.-Peru deal reached in December that Colombia and Ecuador are being pressured now to join." The Bush administration "is forcing a deal that will allow U.S. companies to relocate jobs to places where unions are suppressed with frequent assassinations-with absolutely no enforceable recourse for beleaguered workers."
***

Corporate lobbyists have an undue influence on current global trade talks, says a new report by ActionAid International... The report cites examples of "privileged corporate access to, and excessive influence over the WTO policymaking process," and notes 93% of the official external advisors to the US Trade Representative are from corporate lobby groups and multinational companies such as Burger King, Coca-Cola, McDonalds, and Pfizer. For a copy of the report visit here.
***

U.S. Trade Representative Rob Portman last week said the administration hopes to move trade agreements negotiated with Oman and Peru through Congress this year despite the crowded legislative calendar, Inside US Trade reports (1/27). Portman said he was hopeful Congress could approve the Peru agreement before July, when a new Peruvian government will take office. He signaled, "it may be safer to act before a new government, which could be left-leaning, comes into office. Portman said that a Peru FTA has "good prospects" for passage, but a Democratic Senate aide says that the Peru FTA will "likely be controversial" because it is "close enough" to the hard-fought CAFTA deal.
***

The economic situation in Bolivia explains much about that nation's election of Evo Morales as President, writes Mark Weisbrot of the Center for Economic and Policy Research on Alternet.org (1/21). Weisbrot notes that for nearly 20 years Bolivia implemented the demands of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) for privatization and other market-driven economic policies, but those changes "have brought little in the way of economic benefits to the average Bolivian." The country's per capita income is actually lower today than it was 25 years ago, with 63% of Bolivians living below the poverty line. Weisbrot says that Bolivia's slow economic growth during the period of U.S. driven economic policies resulted in the "worst long-term economic failure in modern Latin American history." This difference over economic policy "is the main thing that has set Washington on a collision course with most of Latin America," Weisbrot explains, noting that Morales is now the sixth candidate in the last seven years to win a presidential race in Latin America while campaigning explicitly against free-market "neoliberalism." With help from oil-rich Venezuela, Bolivia may be able to stand up against the IMF. "At some point Washington policymakers and economists will revisit the economic evidence and decide that perhaps some of their policy prescriptions have been wrong," Weisbrot says. "But by that time, Latin America will have long passed them by."

Source: Jim Jontz, Americans for Democratic Action - Trade Bits, January 29, 2006

On the Victory of Hamas

2006-01-31T20:48:00.000-05:00

I wrote this in response to the Boston Globe's editorial today on the victory of Hamas in the Palestinian elections:

To the Editor,
The Boston Globe’s editorial, “Fund peace, not terror,” January 31, 2006, congratulates Secretary of State Rice for her “firm but fair” demand that Hamas accept “the premise of a negotiated peace…” A worthy requirement indeed, that would have been far more admirable if she had extended the demand to include the two major obstacles to a peaceful solution since the 1970s – the United States and Israel.
To take but one example, in 1976 the Security Council voted on a resolution (S/11940) calling for a two-state solution, the return or compensation of the refugees, and the security of all states. The PLO supported the measure; the US provided the sole vote against, killing it.
The Globe sternly writes that “Hamas cannot receive foreign donations if it persists in suicide bombings and its call for a one-state solution…” - no doubt a sensible sentiment. Meanwhile, Israel remains the leading recipient of US foreign aid despite killing far more civilians (often deliberately targeted, contrary to mythology) and annexes valuable portions of the West Bank, destroying the possibility of a viable Palestinian state – all without a peep from the Globe.
The Globe Editorial Board’s touching belief in the fairy tale of benevolent US foreign policy does not speak well to the state of our democracy.
Sincerely,
Steven Fake
Brookline

Outlook on it getting printed: not good.

A few updates on Colombia

2006-01-31T11:10:00.000-05:00

A few updates on Colombia:

The Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights in Colombia deplored the murder of political leaders Jaime Romero and Eduardo Hernandez in Valle del Cauca. According to information obtained by the office, the killers are connected to paramilitary groups. The UN described the violent deaths as a grave threat to democracy and to the free exercise of political rights, the United Nations News Service reports.
***

After a series of threats by alleged paramilitaries, Diro Cesar Gonzalez, director and owner of the weekly newspaper La Tarde in Barrancabermeja, was forced to suspend his business indefinitely and leave the city, the Foundation for the Freedom of the Press (FLIP) reports.
***

According to the UNICEF annual report, Colombia and Haiti are the two countries in Latin America where children and women suffer the most. Daniel Toole, Director of the UNICEF Emergency Office, stated that the Colombian conflict has led to a serious human rights violations and a critical humanitarian situation. UNICEF will concentrate its efforts in the region on assisting national institutions to increase their response capacities, EFE reports.
***

Fernando Ramirez Gonzalez, member of the trade union Sintraminercol-Fenasintrap was illegally dismissed by the national mining company Minercol LTDA. Sintraminarcol members have also been victims of threats, harassments and intimidation for their stance against the privatization of the company, according to Colombian organisation Justicia y Paz.
***

The manual eradication of coca crops in the Macarena National Park has so far led to the displacement of 341 families, due to confrontations between guerrillas and the army, El Colombiano reports.

Source: Jan 30, 2006 edition of Colombia This Week, put out by ABColombia Group.

Illegal Force Routinely Used Against Mexican Immigrants

2006-01-30T20:58:00.000-05:00

Apparently the US routinely violates its diplomatic agreements with Mexico and international law with lethal consequences for the migrants so often vilified in our country. Excerpts from the report:

Guillermo Martinez was only 20 years old when he was shot in the back at close range by an agent of the U.S. Border Patrol in the state of California.

Scores of migrants have been shot by U.S. immigration enforcement officers. Mexican human rights organizations count four cases just in the past six months and warn that the number is on the rise. Most fail to make the headlines. But Martinez's death comes at the same time as a series of measures to further criminalize migrants, measures that are likely to increase the chances that more young men and women lose their lives on what has become the world's most contradictory border...

As immigration mounts, so do the deaths. The Border Patrol seems to view Martinez's death as a cautionary tale for other undocumented workers rather than a red flag on its own practices. In statements to the press, the San Diego region boasted that its members are routinely equipped with expanding-bullet weapons. These are more lethal and more painful than conventional firearms, thus explaining how a man shot in the shoulder could be dead two hours later. The use of firearms against migrants is prohibited under binational agreements and the use of expanding bullets has been banned in international pacts.

Source: [Laura Carlsen, "Bad Blood on the Border," (Silver City, NM: International Relations Center, January 30, 2006)]

While I'm on the topic of border control, consider some more general aspects of the issue. I suppose a society has a legitimate right to bar outsiders from entering their nation, however I can think of no ethical justification for doing so (outside of very limited circumstances such as hostile spies, etc). Suppose people of a country with lower living standards flood another nation to improve their lives and thereby drag down the quality of life in their new homeland (a hypothetical situation - I'll put aside the question of its applicability to the US) because of an unsustainable population boom. The phenomenon would tend to equalize living standards for the populations of the two nations - and there can be no moral justification for preserving one's material wealth at the expense of others. When the more affluent country (and more specifically the elites of both countries, as in the case of the US and Mexico) bears considerable responsibility for the economic plight of the poorer nation the moral responsibility heightens.

Do Not Open - Cheney Inside

2006-01-29T19:04:00.000-05:00

I've cut the photo at right from an image montage available here: [Andrei Codrescu and Nils Juul-Hansen, "If These Refrigerators Could Speak," New York Times, January 29, 2006]. Excerpts:

WHEN New Orleanians returned to their homes after the Storm they were struck by a smell that has no equivalent: a stupefying blend of decaying flesh as layered as the city's history. The sweet rankness of animal and human death floated around the city as it might have in the aftermath of a yellow fever epidemic in the 18th century, but added to it was the putrid efflorescence of 20th-century grocery store meat inside thousands of refrigerators.

For a week or so after the storm, when the city wallowed in its filth and misery without help from the United States of America, which it had mistakenly believed it was part of, people helped one another drag the taped-up fridges outside. Rows and rows of white metal boxes cradling generations of maggots began to fill the narrow byways of one of America's oldest cities. Waves of putrefaction rolled over the streets. New Orleans sank into the funk like a corpse into the embrace of the earth...

And here were all these metal tombs stretching as far as the eye could see, more numerous than the graves they resembled. The art appeared instantly and it was, appropriately, political.

"Chem Trails Are Real: Weather Control Is Here," was scrawled on a refrigerator below a drawing of a jet leaving behind what looked like a trail of poison. Another fridge warned severely: "Do Not Open: Cheney Inside." Inside others one could find President Bush, Condoleezza Rice, Ray Nagin and Michael Brown doing obscene things with the maggots and with each other. In a short time, there were thousands of art works in the city, an exhibition that stretched for miles, that had no official opening, that was constantly in progress.

Today most of the show is closed. National Guardsmen, volunteers and city workers have incinerated the art after hauling it to vast refrigerator graveyards.

The Way Forward

2006-01-28T22:44:00.000-05:00

Michael Albert's presentation ["Anti Capitalist Strategy: Opening Presentation by Michael Albert for A Debate on Anti Capitalist Strategy (with John Holloway)", January 26, 2006] at the World Social Forum of the Americas lays out nothing less than the proper roadmap for worldwide revolution.

His talk briefly expands upon the immensely valuable contributions he and Robin Hahnel have made to theories of economic vision and democratic structure (see parecon.org). While I identify as an anarchist, the inadequate ideology of most strains of anarchism has long frustrated me. This short passage resolves two centuries of inept debate between anarchists and Marxists:

Winning the state isn't the goal. Eliminating the state isn't the goal.

Turning the state, or polity, into what we desire partly by transforming it and partly by creating new structures that will replace it, is our goal - or it should be.

Applying those principles to Venezuela, Albert continues:

In this last case the Venezuelan example, the Bolivarian Revolution, throws up incredible hope and also some worry.

That Venezuela has embarked on creating institutions of direct self management is inspiring and I think hopeful for the whole world.

That this is being initiated not so much from the bottom up, but rather at the initiative and with the full force of the existing government - which is in some sense trying to build its own replacement - is both remarkable, I think pretty much unprecedented, and certainly very hopeful, but it is also a little worrying.

It is what should be done by a revolutionary government, I think.

But the sooner the initiative and energy of popular movements in local communities and institutions throughout Venezuela starts being the driving force, the better, I also think.

U.S. is Kidnapping Iraqi Civilian Women

2006-01-28T22:04:00.000-05:00

I'm posting this explosive report in full. Be sure to view the actual documents too, available at the links provided below.

Documents Show Army Seized Wives as Tactic

By CHARLES J. HANLEY, AP Special CorrespondentSat Jan 28, 2:50 AM ET

The U.S. Army in Iraq has at least twice seized and jailed the wives of suspected insurgents in hopes of "leveraging" their husbands into surrender, U.S. military documents show.

In one case, a secretive task force locked up the young mother of a nursing baby, a U.S. intelligence officer reported. In the case of a second detainee, one American colonel suggested to another that they catch her husband by tacking a note to the family's door telling him "to come get his wife."

The issue of female detentions in Iraq has taken on a higher profile since kidnappers seized American journalist Jill Carroll on Jan. 7 and threatened to kill her unless all Iraqi women detainees are freed.

The U.S. military on Thursday freed five of what it said were 11 women among the 14,000 detainees currently held in the 2 1/2-year-old insurgency. All were accused of "aiding terrorists or planting explosives," but an Iraqi government commission found that evidence was lacking.

Iraqi human rights activist Hind al-Salehi contends that U.S. anti-insurgent units, coming up empty-handed in raids on suspects' houses, have at times detained wives to pressure men into turning themselves in.

Iraq's deputy justice minister, Busho Ibrahim Ali, dismissed such claims, saying hostage-holding was a tactic used under the ousted Saddam Hussein dictatorship, and "we are not Saddam." A U.S. command spokesman in Baghdad, Lt. Col. Barry Johnson, said only Iraqis who pose an "imperative threat" are held in long-term U.S.-run detention facilities.

But documents describing two 2004 episodes tell a different story as far as short-term detentions by local U.S. units. The documents are among hundreds the Pentagon has released periodically under U.S. court order to meet an American Civil Liberties Union request for information on detention practices.

In one memo, a civilian Pentagon intelligence officer described what happened when he took part in a raid on an Iraqi suspect's house in Tarmiya, northwest of Baghdad, on May 9, 2004. The raid involved Task Force (TF) 6-26, a secretive military unit formed to handle high-profile targets.

"During the pre-operation brief it was recommended by TF personnel that if the wife were present, she be detained and held in order to leverage the primary target's surrender," wrote the 14-year veteran officer.

He said he objected, but when they raided the house the team leader, a senior sergeant, seized her anyway.

"The 28-year-old woman had three young children at the house, one being as young as six months and still nursing," the intelligence officer wrote. She was held for two days and was released after he complained, he said.

Like most names in the released documents, the officer's signature is blacked out on this for-the-record memorandum about his complaint.

Of this case, command spokesman Johnson said he could not judge, months later, the factors that led to the woman's detention.

The second episode, in June 2004, is found in sketchy detail in e-mail exchanges among six U.S. Army colonels, discussing an undisclosed number of female detainees held in northern Iraq by the Stryker Brigade of the 2nd Infantry Division.

The first message, from a military police colonel, advised staff officers of the U.S. northern command that the Iraqi police would not take control of the jailed women without charges being brought against them.

In a second e-mail, a command staff officer asked an officer of the unit holding the women, "What are you guys doing to try to get the husband — have you tacked a note on the door and challenged him to come get his wife?"

Two days later, the brigade's deputy commander advised the higher command, "As each day goes by, I get more input that these gals have some info and/or will result in getting the husband."

He went on, "These ladies fought back extremely hard during the original detention. They have shown indications of deceit and misinformation."

The command staff colonel wrote in reply, referring to a commanding general, "CG wants the husband."

The released e-mails stop there, and the women's eventual status could not be immediately determined.

Of this episode, Johnson said, "It is clear the unit believed the females detained had substantial knowledge of insurgent activity and warranted being held."

On the Net:

First document: pdf document 1

E-mail exchange: pdf document 2

Copyright © 2006 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. The information contained in the AP News report may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without the prior written authority of The Associated Press.

Quote of the Day

2006-01-28T21:43:00.000-05:00

Hersch Lauterpacht (perhaps the most influential figure in international law of the 20th century):
"So long as international society did not effectively guarantee the rights of men against arbitrariness and oppression by governments, it could not oblige states to treat subversive activities... as a crime."
[(1954-I) International Law Commission Yearbook 141, cited in Ben Saul, "Two Justifications for Terrorism: A Moral Legal Response," (Silver City, NM & Washington, DC: Foreign Policy In Focus, January 10, 2006)]

Though Lauterpacht uses the past tense, the sentiment is still sadly relevant.

US Promotes Bigotry at the UN

2006-01-28T20:12:00.000-05:00

Human Rights Watch reports on the latest outrageous action by the global champion of human rights and democracy at the UN ["United Nations: U.S. Aligned With Iran in Anti-Gay Vote," Human Rights Watch, January 25, 2006]: "In a reversal of policy, the United States on Monday backed an Iranian initiative to deny United Nations consultative status to organizations working to protect the rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people."

The U.S. was joined in this shameful action by Cameroon, China, Cuba, Iran, Pakistan, the Russian Federation, Senegal, Sudan, and Zimbabwe. Scott Long, director of the LGBT rights program at Human Rights Watch, termed it "a coalition of the homophobic." Chile, France, Germany, Peru, and Romania summoned the courage to vote for recommending consulatative status for the two groups and Colombia, India, Turkey, and Cote d' Ivoire all at least managed to not get in the way.

Background on the vote from the HRW release:

Consultative status is the only official means by which non-governmental organizations (NGOs) around the world can influence and participate in discussions among member states at the United Nations. Nearly 3,000 groups enjoy this status.
States opposed to the two groups' applications moved to have them summarily dismissed, an almost unprecedented move at the UN, where organizations are ordinarily allowed to state their cases. The U.S. abstained on a vote which would have allowed the debate to continue and the groups to be heard. It then voted to reject the applications.

The US is justifying the vote by casting aspersion. A New York Times article [Warren Hoge, "Rights Groups Fault U.S. Vote in U.N. on Gays," NYT, January 27, 2006] on the vote discusses the pretext being used by the Administration of dubiously associating one of the groups with pedophilia. The absurdity of the rational is clear from the media bulletin [ECOSOC/6184] released by the Economic and Social Council, the UN body the organizations would have gained consultative status with, which indicates that a separate vote was taken for each organization seeking consultative states. In other words, even if one accepted the notion that the group which expelled an affiliate of NAMBLA in 1994 is tainted by pedophilia, that would have no bearing on the other organization which was rejected by the same vote count.

The vote was taken by nations that compose a committee with the task of recommending NGOs for consultative status. It's not clear to me if the recommendation is authoritative or might be ignored.

I'll close with an excerpt from the UN bulletin:
Emphasizing that the Committee had taken two decisions which "will haunt us for a long time," Germany's representative said it had committed an act of discrimination against two NGOs whose sole purpose was to combat discrimination. The message the majority of the Committee had sent to the NGOs and to the world was clear: discrimination against persons on the grounds of their sexual orientation was okay.

Paradise Now

2006-01-28T19:55:00.000-05:00

For those who haven't yet seen Paradise Now, the tale of two young Palestinian men who commit themselves to carrying out a suicide bombing, I highly recommend it. Lori Allen has written a very perceptive review for MERIP, "Paradise Now's Understated Power," Middle East Report Online, January 2006.

Region of Norway to Boycott Israel

2006-01-27T11:35:00.000-05:00

End the Occupation is reporting the following:

The Norwegian region of Sor-Trondelag has passed a motion to boycott Israeli goods as a way of pressuring Israel to end the occupation and the oppression of the Palestinian people...The representatives of Sor-Trondelag have experienced massive Zionist pressure after the passing of the motion and some fear that they will vote against the boycott in a new vote. The Simon Wiesenthal Centre and other Zionist organizations called the elected representatives of Sor-Trondelag "Nazis" and "racists".

A translation of the resolution is available here.

Bachelet Washington's Best Ally?

2006-01-26T23:39:00.000-05:00

James Petras is not always the most reliable commentator but the following article is worth a read nonetheless: "Chile's New President: Washington's Best Ally?," CounterPunch, January 25, 2006

Hugo Chavez the Anti-Semite

2006-01-25T21:59:00.000-05:00

Some folks may have come across accusations that Chavez recently made anti-Jewish remarks. The media advisory ["Editing Chavez to Manufacture a Slur," FAIR, 1/23/06] put out by Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting is the most thorough refutation I've seen. The role of the Simon Wiesenthal Center in initiating the whole affair is interesting. Rather than consult with the Jewish communities of Venezuela for their interpretations of the remark, the Center issued its bulletin without conveying the slightest doubt of the anti-Semitic character of the comment.

The Center goes so far as to "call on governments of Argentina, Brasil, Paraguay and Uruguay, as well as on the Presidency of MERCOSUR (South American Common Market), to freeze the process of incorporation of Venezuela to this bloc until Chavez makes a public apology for his antisemitic statements."

In actuality, Chavez's comments plainly refer to the minority of the opulent (the unedited passage makes this clear enough, and in the context of Chavez's well known leftism and the absence of any anti-semitic past, crystalline). The history of the unethical activities of the Center is explored at length in Norman Finkelstein's revealing book, The Holocaust Industry.

Monitoring Hope in Peru

2006-01-25T20:25:00.000-05:00

Track the poll numbers for Ollanta Humala, who is running for the Peruvian presidency on a Hugo Chávezesque platform of nationalizations and inter-Latin American solidarity. Needless to say, his victory in the April election would represent yet another step forward for a progressive Latin American alliance opposed to subservience to U.S. and corporate interests.

How Much Is an Iraqi Life Worth to the US?

2006-01-24T20:39:00.000-05:00

Okay, it's a trick question...we already know, for all intents and purposes, that the answer is zero. But what if the military brass, faced with mounting public opposition and an Abu Ghraib image problem, is forced to throw a sacrificial lamb into the prison yard to give the appearance of humanity?

Then the answer becomes a less-than-whopping $6000, the amount a US officer was fined for the "negligent homicide" of Major General Abed Hamed Mowhoush - "negligent," in this context, meaning that US Officer Lewis Welshofer Jr. fully intended to tie up Mowhoush, place him into a sleeping bag, and sit on him, but apparently couldn't have reasonably expected that this might be a death-inducing measure. Why do plastic bags have suffocation warnings on them again?

Of course, don't expect those who order the carrying out of such techniques to ever see the inside of a courtroom.

Rumsfeld: Venezuela "Overspending"

2006-01-23T12:22:00.000-05:00

I really can't add anything to this:
DAVE LINDORFF, "It Would be Funny, If It Weren't So Tragic - Rumsfeld: Venezuela 'Overspending,'" January 21/22, 2006

U.S. Government Planting Questions with Journalists

2006-01-23T11:57:00.000-05:00

At the risk of being ridiculous in blogging another blog... Jim Shultz's post yesterday at his blog had the following interesting passage:

Yesterday Morales passed through another inauguration, standing atop the 1000 year old ruins at Tiahuanaco. In a ceremony that hasn’t taken place since the consquest half a millenia ago, Bolivia´s first indiginous president was granted powers by the indian communities of the altiplano. Indiginous leaders from throughout the Americas and elsewhere were on hand to participate – from Guatemala to the USA. An indiginous leader from the US handed Morales an eagle feather, noting that the eagle would fly with the condor.

Reporters, many sunburned from yesterday´s harsh altiplano sun in Tiahuanaco, asked me all the usual questions. Won´t MAS screw up at governing? What government have they ever run?...

The U.S. government has planted some of these questions I learn, at a private off-the record chat the ambassador held at his house the other night with visiting US journalists.

He's Wearing a (gasp) Sweater!

2006-01-22T16:12:00.000-05:00

A writer for the BBC (which seems to have something of an obsession with Evo Morales' wardrobe and world travels) has editorialized that "The era of the conservative middle-aged man in a grey suit, representing the white-skinned landed elite across Latin America appears to be coming to an end."

One can only hope. Needless to say, turning this hope into reality has much to do with our foiling of whatever imperial adventures the world power is concocting.

Stupidity Outdoes Itself

2006-01-22T10:35:00.001-05:00

It is almost uncanny the degree to which four-and-a-half decades worth of U.S. administrations has engaged in the same collossally repugnant attempts to isolate Cuba, efforts ranging from the extremely damaging in terms of human consequences (the embargo/blockade), to the extremely petty.

In a renewed attempt at the extremely petty (which, not surprisingly, backfired), Washington initially blocked Cuba's athletes from participating in the upcoming World Baseball Classic, for the imagined fear of propping up Castro.

And, as is the typical outcome of pathetic U.S. attempts to isolate Castro, Cuba has made the U.S. look the geopolitical fool by announcing that it will donate all proceeds from the Classic to Hurricane Katrina victims.

I'll update later with the announcement of my personal campaign to block the U.S. team from the World Cup because I don't wany tax money filtering down to the Bush Administration's coffers.

Morales as Pacifier?

2006-01-20T13:34:00.000-05:00

An excerpt from a recent COHA release:

Evo Morales has inspired the country to believe in politics once again, but there is no guarantee that he too will not disappoint it and break its heart. Since the colonial era, the indigenous were fed first class promises, which eventually led to steerage class realities. Such betrayals traditionally have registered few political repercussions. Morales, however, faces a startling new element in the equation as a result of recent experiences, namely the realization by highland Bolivians that they have the power to unseat governments. Therefore, Evo sits on a very troubled throne, and the indigenous will soon discover whether they have a principled leader or some sweet-talking political hustler. In a very real sense, Morales is untested and the next four months will reveal whether he has the right stuff.

["Bolivia’s Morales to be Inaugurated on Sunday," COHA Memorandum to the Press, January 20, 2006]

The "the realization by highland Bolivians that they have the power to unseat governments" is a profoundly hopeful phenomenon that moves the country towards a much more meaningful form of democracy than exists in most of the world's variations of the parliamentary system (such as the U.S.). It isn't Evo's (or Lula's, etc) right to determine how much compromise with the forces of neoliberalism is necessary - only the citizens themselves can decide that. The situation in Bolivia almost amounts to a form of unofficial instant recall, the mechanism so sorely lacking in almost all standard democracies. Recall that many global elites were content with Morales' election because they felt it would bring stability to the country. As leftists, we can only hope it won't bring too much.

Can Humanitarian Aid Be a Crime?

2006-01-20T13:14:00.000-05:00

A federal judge in Tucson is now deciding whether to dismiss charges against two humanitarian workers who are being accused of "taking three dying migrants to the hospital." If you needed any more evidence of the dehumanization of Latinos in U.S. society, the mere idea that taking dying people to the hospital could constitute a crime (one, evidently, punishable by "up to 15 years in prison") should be enough to convince anyone to the left of Pat Buchanan that we are living in a deeply sick and racist society.