From debsian at pacbell.net Mon Jul 1 10:46:30 2002 From: debsian at pacbell.net (Michael Pugliese) Date: Sat Aug 5 04:33:15 2006 Subject: [R-G] Re: U. of Ottawa Professor Says Evidence Shows U.S. Helped Plan Attacks Message-ID: Ruppert The ex?LAPD cop who became a 9/11 conspiracy king http://www.laweekly.com/ink/02/30/cover-corn.php `````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````` ... WhatDIDN'Treallyhappen.com. Devoted to smashing conspiracy theories and humiliating their purveyors! Monday, June 24, 2002 :: A flimsy attempt at a snappy rejoinder. A nameless blogger (another one of those valiant dissidents who's afraid of the Treasury agents underneath his bed) has tried his hand at refuting my Ruppert timeline post below. He has his own conspiracy yarns, including a Vince Foster redux, exposing the Cliff Baxter "suicide sham." In any event, his prodding of my timeline focuses on items 3 and 4, in which Ruppert first claims the Unocal pipeline deal failed because the Taliban's price was too high (in 1997), and that Unocal VP John Maresca testified a year later that the deal would not be feasible unless and until a stable Afghan regime was in place. Predictably, this mystery blogger does not see the incongruity here. but presumably that doesn't necessarily follow. The 1997 negotiations could have failed over money, and the Unocal Vice President could also have testified before the House that the pipeline would not be built before there was a stable government in Afghanistan. I suppose you could make this argument if Afghanistan had slid into chaos between 1997 and 1998, but the truth of the matter is that the Taliban continued to consolidate its rule after 1996, and the country was certainly more stable (inasmuch as a country living under the most brutal, Luddite tyranny the world has seen since the Khmer Rouge can be called stable) in 1998 than 1997, when Unocal was supposedly haggling over a price. Prudent entrepreneurs ensure the investment is a secure one before they negotiate a price, not after. The argument then progresses to Unocal's recent press release stating that it no longer had any interest in building the pipeline, which we are to believe is "a case, I dare say, of protesting too much." Uh-huh. If Unocal had released it out of the blue, but what he doesn't tell you is that it was in response to a report that it was the "lead company" in the pipeline's construction. "Protesting too much" is something corporations sort of have to do from time to time, as they depend of what are called investors who give special slips of paper called money for their stock, based on the decisions the corporation makes. Moron. But here's the best part of the missive: Ruppert's strength isn't in any particlar part of the timeline, but in the sheer quantity of suspicious details. So you see, it doesn't matter if none of Ruppert's weak assumptions, distortions, logic fallacies, and outright factual errors, hold any water. The fact that he is able to come up with such a wealth of idiotic arguments proves him right! It should also be noted that this despicable pig also notes (again, in what is apparently his own yarn) the fact that only one flag officer - Lt. Gen. Timothy Maude - died in the attack as proof that there was foreknowledge, snidely remarking, "I guess he didn't get the memo." Thanks for reminding me why I devote so much time to humiliating you people, Mr. Xymphora. Fucktard. :: Bill Herbert 9:27 PM [+] :: ... :: Sunday, June 23, 2002 :: Mike Ruppert?s bullshit-riddled timeline (Part 1). NOTE: This is the first in what will be at least a 5-part series refuting Mike Ruppert?s conspiratorial "timeline" point by point. It may grow longer, as Ruppert continues to add more allegations, in lieu of actually providing evidence to support his older ones. David Corn may not have the space to devote to Ruppert?s entire timeline ? which contains most of his purported "evidence" of government foreknowledge of, and complicity in, the 9/11 attacks. But I do. From the top? http://mckinneysucks.blogspot.com/2002_06__mckinneysucks_archive.html From LAMZ at sympatico.ca Mon Jul 1 12:26:51 2002 From: LAMZ at sympatico.ca (Lysander Zimmerman) Date: Sat Aug 5 04:33:15 2006 Subject: [R-G] G8 Protestors agree Bush complicit in 9-11. HELP McKinney is introuble!! Message-ID: <00b701c2212c$e04c0030$33378d18@Indy1> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Find Truth" To: Sent: Saturday, June 29, 2002 11:55 PM Subject: G8 Protestors agree Bush complicit in 9-11. HELP McKinney is introuble!! > > URGENT ACTION - Cynthia's in trouble!! [G8 Story below] > > Post this EVERYWHERE, and share it with EVERYONE, before we lose the only > Congressperson who will stand up against the U.S. "endless wars" machine, > and for peace, justice, and truth in govt. > > Congresswoman McKinney is the ONLY Congressperson with the will and > integrity to demand a full inquiry of what Bush knew and when he knew it > about 9-11 attacks (and to find out where the $2.3 TRILLION the DOD "LOST" > went to), AND NOW WE MAY LOSE HER. For her courage the Democrats are trying > to get rid of her. Rather than using their resources to defeat Republicans, > they are taking aim at a 5 term Georgia Congresswoman. SHE NEEDS US, and WE > NEED HER IN WASHINGTON [I know many of you have already sent donations, etc. > BUT LET'S SEND MORE]: > > To find out how you can help Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney, contact > kharabia@khayumbia.com , or just send a donation to McKinney's campaign at: > > U.S. Representative Cynthia McKinney, > PO Box 371125, > DeCatur, GA 30037 , > USA > > "First they ignore you. > Then they laugh at you. > Then they fight you. > Then you win." > > - Gandhi > > > > U.S. COMPLICITY IN 9-11 ATTACKS WIDELY ACCEPTED AT G6B SUMMIT IN CANADA > > June 27, 2002, 16:00 PDT (FTW) -- An estimated crowd of 1,200 turned out on > June 25 at the University of Calgary's MacEwan Hall to hear FTW Publisher > Mike Ruppert and University of Ottawa Professor Michel Chossudovsky present > evidence of and a rationale for U.S. government complicity in last > September's terrorist attacks. (See photos at www.fromthewilderness.com). > Their two-and-a- half-hour presentation, including documentary evidence, was > greeted with a standing ovation. > > In a question and answer session after the lecture, not one audience member > questioned that the Bush Administration needed the attacks in order to > mobilize public support for a war to control Central Asian oil reserves and > the cash from the Afghani opium trade. Traditionally, Afghanistan has been > the world's largest producer of opium. > > The G6B -- standing for a global population of six billion people whose > interests need to be balanced against the corporate interests of the > industrialized world -- was a three-day event sponsored by, among others, > the government of Canada, Amnesty International and the University of > Calgary. It brought delegates and activists together from 60 countries. The > counter summit was timed and located in Calgary, Alberta so as to juxtapose > it with the G8 meeting in nearby Kananaskis of the world's eight largest > industrialized nations starting on June 26. > > The first-ever joint presentation involving Ruppert and Chossudovsky, an > economics professor, presented the strongest evidence to date that not only > did the Bush Administration have complete foreknowledge of the attacks and > allow them to happen, but also that the CIA had a direct hand in financing > the attacks. Chossudovsky presented documentary evidence from ABC news, > citing FBI sources, confirming a report that Gen. Mahmud Ahmad, then-chief f > the Pakistani intelligence service (ISI), ordered for $100,000 to be > wired to lead hijacker Mohammed Atta just weeks before the attacks. The new > corroboration from U.S. media, using FBI sources, gave considerable weight > to earlier press stories originating in India linking the ISI to 9/11. > [These new revelations will be the subject of an upcoming story in FTW]. > > "General Ahmad arrived in Washington on Sept. 4 and met with, among others, > his good friend [CIA Director] George Tenet, [Deputy Secretary of State] > Richard Armitage, [Sen.] Joe Biden, [D-Del.,] and the heads of the two > intelligence committees," Chossudovsky said. > > "To me the issue of foreknowledge is a red herring. Osama bin Laden is and > remains to this day a CIA asset. Even now his Al Qaeda operatives are > working with the Kosovo Liberation Army who are U.S. allies and with > U.S.-backed forces in Macedonia. Members of Al Q'aeda have been protected as > they moved into Kashmir where they are now fomenting conflict between India > and Pakistan. > > "The evidence is becoming clearer every day that the U.S. government helped > to plan and fund the Sept. 11 attacks," said Chossudovsky. > > In addition, Chossudovsky has uncovered what may be complicity on the part > of the major media in hiding the smoking gun. Using transcripts from the > Federal Records Service (FRS), Chossudovsky obtained the transcript of a > question posed to National Security Adviser Condoleeza Rica at a May 16 > press conference, in which she was asked if she had met with the "ISI chief" > while he was in Washington. The CNN transcript of the event indicated that > the words "ISI chief" were "inaudible" when, in fact, they were quite > audible to the FRS. Rice's response was a troubled, "I have not seen that > report, and he was certainly not meeting with me." > > Chossudovsky painted a broad picture of globalization pushing events toward > a possible nuclear exchange between India and Pakistan by noting that one > U.S. company with strong intelligence and military connections, MPRI of > Vienna, Va., was acting as adviser to both governments. He also noted the > strong links between CIA Director George Tenet and Deputy Secretary of State > Armitage to the leaders of both countries. Chossudovsky also pointed out > that George W. Bush receives daily "personal" intelligence briefings from > the CIA Director -- a custom that has never previously been followed by any > sitting president. Previously most CIA briefings have been delivered in > written format. > > Ruppert, using new evidence of U.S. government foreknowledge disclosed by > major media sources and through recent press conferences, established that > by using only open source material, the U.S. government had warnings that > multiple airliners, most likely from United and American Air Lines would be > hijacked during the week of Sept. 9 and crashed into the twin towers. Using > revelations of intelligence intercepts and a Pentagon drill responding to an > attack from a hijacked airliner staged prior to Sept. 11, Ruppert > established that the Bush Administration's position, which held it had no > hint that aircraft would be used as weapons, was false. Pointing to last > year's G8 summit in Genoa, Italy, Ruppert noted that extensive precautions > had been taken there (including anti-aircraft guns) to prevent just such an > attack. A Los Angeles Times story disclosed that President Bush was the > target of the suspected attacks in Genoa. > > "Bush ought to be having some interesting conversations with the leaders of > Italy, Germany, France and Russia since it was their intelligence services > who forwarded detailed advance warnings to the CIA throughout the summer of > 2001," said Ruppert. "And they referred specifically to suicide attacks with > airliners." > > Ruppert also debunked the notions that the 9-11 attacks were caused by a > lack of cooperation between agencies, and that great numbers of people would > have had to be involved in the U.S. end of the operation. Citing a BBC TV > report by Gregg Palast which showed an FBI report stating that the Bush > administration had ordered the FBI to curtail investigations into bin Laden > relatives, Ruppert demonstrated that orders were coming from levels above > FBI and CIA leadership. Additionally, referring to the recent memorandum > from FBI Special Agent Colleen Rowley and a press conference given by FBI > Special Agent Robert Wright, Ruppert popped the government's position that > somehow the so-called intelligence "failures" of 9-11 were the result of > negligence. > > "If you look at the text of Rowley's message and listen to what Wright said > at his press conference you hear and see words like, 'obstruct,' ' > deliberately thwart,' 'intimidate,' 'block,' 'harass,' 'dishonest,' > 'rewrite,' 'omit,' 'undermine,' 'suppress,' 'punish,' 'retaliate' and > 'prevent.' These are not words describing negligence. These are words > describing deliberate and willful actions. > > "And if you note from both the Rowley memo, and apparently from the Wright > press conference, it was only one supervisory special agent at FBI > headquarters who did all of the deliberate work to stop investigations that > could have prevented the attacks. And what did Rowley tell us? Right after > Sept. 11 the agent who had blocked the investigations was promoted!" > > The $64,000 question remains unanswered: Was the agent in Rowley's case also > involved in blocking Wright's Chicago-based investigations into > money-laundering for terrorist groups, including Al Qaeda? In any event, the > Rowley memorandum proves that just a few officials in key positions could > have carried out the 9-11 conspiracy successfully. > > LEAVING ANYWAY BUT KICKED OUT JUST THE SAME -- A CLOSE ENCOUNTER WITH AIR > FORCE ONE > > On entering Canada Ruppert was questioned first by Canadian Customs > officials and then by immigration officers. Upon learning that Ruppert was a > journalist and publisher of FTW the immigration officer typed Ruppert's name > into a computer and asked specifically if he was going near the G8 > conference. Ruppert stated that he was only planning on attending the G6B > conference and had plans to return to Los Angeles on June 25. Nonetheless, > the immigration officer stamped Ruppert's passport with a visa dated to > expire on June 26, requiring that he not be in the country when the > conference began. This highly unusual practice was offensive to many > Canadians who pointed out that there are no visa requirements between the > two countries. > > After the lecture, as he was hurrying to the airport, Ruppert was questioned > by the local press who photographed his passport as evidence of the Canadian > government's desire to censor coverage and public access to the conference. > > Ruppert's departure coincided with the arrival of President George Bush and > two identical 747 aircraft painted with Air Force One markings. He was able > to photograph the arrival of the president and a heavy deployment of support > and security aircraft. Ruppert's flight home was delayed by more than an > hour. He returned safely to Los Angeles while his suitcase was forced to > spend the night in San Francisco. The Calgary lecture was Ruppert's eighth > stop in a month in his "Truth and Lies of 9-11" lecture series. He plans to > spend the next six weeks working on new stories. > > > _________________________________________________________________ > Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com > > From mstainsby at tao.ca Mon Jul 1 11:31:08 2002 From: mstainsby at tao.ca (Macdonald Stainsby) Date: Sat Aug 5 04:33:16 2006 Subject: [R-G] Re: U. of Ottawa Professor Says Evidence Shows U.S. Helped Plan Attacks References: Message-ID: <001101c22125$16b0fe80$291f5318@vc.shawcable.net> Well, take all of this to Ruppert then. You can make some easy money, he states publically that if you discount even one of his sources you'll get a grand out of it. Macdonald ----- Original Message ----- From: "Michael Pugliese" Ruppert The ex?LAPD cop who became a 9/11 conspiracy king http://www.laweekly.com/ink/02/30/cover-corn.php From debsian at pacbell.net Mon Jul 1 14:58:14 2002 From: debsian at pacbell.net (Michael Pugliese) Date: Sat Aug 5 04:33:16 2006 Subject: [R-G] The Indiscreet Charm of the Bush-Nazi Web Conspiranoids Message-ID: http://www.thethresher.com/indiscreet.html "American politics has often been an arena for angry minds," historian Richard Hofstadter wrote nearly four decades ago. As the first great analyst/connoisseur of American political paranoia, or what he called "the paranoid style," Hofstadter, who died in 1970, would have been amazed by the web. As we all know, myriad versions of the perennial conspiracy theories Hofstadter knew well, the ones involving plots by Freemasons, Jesuits, Jews, and/or Communists to take over the world, are alive and thriving in the new medium. In addition, the web, as a radically accelerated technology for moving facts, rumors, myths and memes, has vastly widened the theater of the political imagination. It has become, for better and worse, the spiritual home of "conspiranoia." A quick search of the word "conspiracy" on Google turns up (as of mid-2001) just under 2 million hits. All of the modern classics are well represented. These include; JFK Assassination plots (75,000 hits) (whether by CIA, Mafia, Gusanos or the newly popular Federal Reserve theory), extraterrestrial visitations (over 75,000 sites), and shadow world governments (well over a million) (as administered by, the Trilateral Commission, Council on Foreign Relations, The UN, The Bank of England and any one of several dozen other organizations). Then there are the more recent conspiracy theories involving; the deliberate or accidental unleashing of the AIDS virus (roughly 65,000 hits), U.S. government involvement in the Oklahoma City bombing, (nearly 100,000), and collusions between DuPont Chemical and the oil Industry to squelch hemp production (10,000). Many, indeed most of these conspiracy "exposes" are illogical, if not totally incoherent, rants. Others are obsessively detailed, but ultimately implausible concoctions of fact and fantasy. And a few are well researched and documented. Not a few are a bit of all of the above. All are populist attempts to locate cracks in the official versions of history. Nowhere is this seen as clearly as in the sites devoted to the current rising stars of web conspiranoia, the Bush family. Conspiratorialists, whether their bete noire is Anglophile internationalist bankers, socialist one-world government advocates, neo-fascist state planners, or eugenic proponents of white supremacy, can and do find in the Bushes everything and more than they've ever wanted to imagine about American history and its rulers. Lurking in the shadows of nearly every major episode of recent U.S. history, from World War Two to the rise of the CIA to third world drug running to the Bay of Pigs, the Kennedy and King assassinations, Watergate and beyond, the Bushes have emerged as the Zeligs of the global power elite. At the crux of this saga are the Bushes' real and imagined relationships with Nazi Germany. Rumors about Bush-Nazi connections began circulating in earnest in the pre-web days of the late 80s. The Philadelphia Enquirer discovered a number of German Nazi military officers working as low-level operatives for the Republican National Committee in the Bush presidential campaign of 1988. Rumors of a Bush- Nazi association were kept alive on alt.news conspiracy bulletin boards through the 90s. They gained critical mass during the 2000 election campaign, generating a bewildering variety of exposes, mythic narratives and shadow histories. Below is just a sampling of some of the hottest current web forums dedicated to exploring Bush-Nazi ties: Eugenies in a Bottle Robert Lederman, a New York City artist, believes the Bush family, along with the Harrimans, Rockefellers, Nazis, neo-Nazis and leaders of the oil and pharmaceutical industries, has been instrumental in a plot to commit genetic genocide against "inferior races". This racial supremacist plot allegedly began in the 1920s with the founding of the Averill Harriman- Prescott Bush funded Eugenics Research Office. Accused accomplices include Planned Parenthood, the Nazi German government, and in post-war America, neo-Nazi led research under the auspices of the CIA, National Science Foundation, and Center for Disease Control. It has also involved such environmentalist fronts as Zero Population Growth and conservative think-tanks such as the Manhattan Institute. It is currently backed by large corporations, prominently including Alcoa (the theory flouride, tested by the Nazis, is being used in the water supply to create a submissive population), and big pharmaceutical companies (especially those, like I.G. Farben, with Nazi pasts). These companies are believed to be involved in introducing toxic, potentially genocidal vaccines and sprays. One example is malathion, used recently in New York City and vicinity to (presumably) control the West Nile virus. For Lederman, the project of genocide through eugenics reaches its apogee in the Human Genome Project, designed to enable realization of the Nazi goal of eliminating inferior genetic castes through genetic profiling. Acoording to Lederman, "Following the Holocaust it was necessary to disguise Eugenics as something more politically acceptable. This was something, of course, accomplished through birth control, vaccinations, insect control sprays, and other thinly disguised modes of genocide. There is mounting evidence AIDS was one of these programs." While for Lederman, the Bushes meet Nazism at the intersection of genetics and big pharmaceutical companies, the website Conspiracy Planet sees the Bushes, through three generations, as active, if subterranean, Nazi ideologues. In this reality, the Bush family has been financing the Nazi cause through clandestine sources, including drug dealing.. The website, which calls itself "the Alternative News and history Network", hosts a regular "Bush Crime Family" channel, exploring supposed relationships between the Bushes, Nazi groups and organized crime. One of its conspiracy researchers, writing under the moniker King Felix, declares, "George W's grandfather Prescott Bush was among the chief American fundraisers for the Nazi Party in the 1930s and '40s. In return he was handsomely rewarded with plenty of financial opportunities from the Nazis helping to create the fortune and legacy that his son George inherited." On the other hand, for Richard Draheim, columnist for the Dallas Libertarian, the Bushes' represent a traditional Republican collusion of big business and big government. Specifically, Draheim sees in the Bush Dynasty a marriage between Wall Street and the oil industry and (despite the low-tax rhetoric), a conspiracy to impose high taxes to subsidize Bush family-connected businesses. "The Bush family fortune is old, and it comes from a century old alliance with the most powerful interests on Wall Street and in industry. Worse, a big part of Dubya's money comes from Grandfather Prescott Bush's alliance with the Nazis." Less diplomatically, Marie Vance and John Cappetini claim in syninfo.com: "The silver spoon in George W. Bush's mouth was bought and paid for by Nazi butchers, who yanked the fillings from dead Jew's mouths. The Bush mob/Bush international crime family was and is a bunch of Satan worshipping Nazis." Though space doesn?t permit, it wouldn't be tough at all to find several hundred more examples. Internet rants? Technologically amplified paranoia? Indeed. It's easy enough to tear apart the notion of a still active, century- long, racist-Nazi (with a capital N) conspiracy based on the science of genetics. Many racist ideologues do use rhetoric couched in the scientific (or more often pseudo-scientific) jargon of genetic determinism. Some racist ideologues do continue to advance schemes for sterilizing "undesirable" populations, all too similar to those of Nazi Germany. Most scientists, (including most molecular biologists), most birth-control and reproductive rights advocates, as well as most environmentalists and population control proponents, have nothing to do with them, following totally divergent and conflicting social and political agendas. Wild stretches? Yes. But wrong about any Bush-Nazi connection? Not really. Or, at least, not entirely. Beating Around the Bushes The following is a thumbnail sketch of the Bush family biography from the early 1900s to the 1950s, as culled from several recent mainstream Bush (George the Father and Junior) biographies, a canon including Lone Star Yankee by Herbert S. Parmet, First Son by Bill Minutaglio and W: The Revenge of the Bush Dynasty by Elizabeth Mitchell, as well as official family memoirs. Samuel Bush (George H.W.'s paternal grandfather) was a successful Midwestern entrepreneur who ran both a small Ohio railroad and the Buckeye Steel Castings Company. A man of vaguely populist leanings, despite his affluence, Bush helped frame Ohio's first worker's compensation laws and has been said to have been a Democrat, and "friendly with organized labor." His son Prescott Bush, after attending Yale in the 1910s, worked briefly in a small, family owned rubber company in Ohio. In the early '20s, he accepted an invitation from his new father-in-law George Herbert to join the Harriman brothers' investment, a high-flying international banking house. George Herbert Walker, father of Prescott?s wife Dorothy, was the founder of GH Walker and Co. investment bank in St. Louis. While Samuel Bush might be characterized as "petit-bourgeois," GH Walker was a man of great wealth. In addition to being a major power broker in the Midwest, Walker had close connections to the Eastern banking elite as well. By the early '20s, he maintained an estate in Kennebunkport, Maine, a mansion on Long Island, and a ten thousand-acre hunting preserve called Duncannon in South Carolina. At the urging of his friend, railroad magnate E.H. Harriman, father of Averill and Roland (Bunny) Harriman (classmates of Prescott Bush at Yale), Walker had come to New York to help the younger Harrimans run the Harriman investment bank. By the late 1920s, Walker had groomed his son-in-law to handle large parts of the bank?s investments, including its interests in the fledgling Columbia Broadcasting Network, and several European projects. By the early 1930s, Walker left daily operations of the Harriman bank. Bush stayed on throughout the 30s and 40s as a partner in the firm. By 1931, Harriman Investment had merged with the British-American bank Brown Brothers, becoming Brown Brothers Harriman. During the 1940s Bush, who had shed his father?s Democratic politics for his father-in-law?s Republicanism, became active in Connecticut electoral politics. He ran unsuccessfully for the U.S. Senate in 1950, before winning a seat in 1952. Bush served 12 years in the Senate, earning a record as a moderately liberal "Rockefeller Republican" and a supporter of civil rights legislation, and a reputation for being President Eisenhower?s golfing buddy. Trading With Enemies One could read through the bulk of mainstream Bush family biographies and find no mention of a significant 1942 event: That year the U.S. federal government, under the auspices of the office of the U.S Alien Property Custodian. seized the assets of the Union Banking Corporation, a subsidiary of Brown Brothers Harriman, under authority of the "Trading with the Enemy Act." Prescott Bush served on the board. An eclectic body of revisionist work, most originally available in book form (and most now "out of print"), has been dedicated to investigating the background of this historically excised event. Though largely ignored by established book reviewing media, mainstream print, and broadcast punditry, three books in particular have attempted to explore and document the historical background of the "Bush-Nazi" connection. These attempts to fill in the gaps left by mainstream historians have found new life on the web. The most frequently cited and circulated source of Bush-Nazi investigations/conspiranoia, George Bush-The Unauthorized Biography (a biography of George Herbert Walker Bush) by Webster Griffin Tarpley and Anton Chaitkin, published in 1992, while well-documented, is also the most suspect. The problem is that Tarpley and Chaitkin are colleagues of the political cult leader Lyndon LaRouche. Not surprisingly, they insist on overlaying otherwise solidly researched data with wildly speculative interpretations. The book, originally published by LaRouche's Executive Intelligence Review, though "out of print," is ubiquitous on the web, and freely used and quoted by Bush conspiranoia buffs of all persuasions. Tarpley and Chaitkin fill in important details of the period of Prescott Bush's involvement in international investment banking. They document W.A. Harriman Bank's European operations, and the roles of Herbert Walker, who joined as president and chief executive in November, 1919, and Prescott Bush. According to Tarpley and Chaitkin, the first major German connections made by the newly minted Harriman bank took place in 1920, when Averill Harriman announced plans to re-launch the dormant Hamburg- Amerikan shipping line. The German shipping line, said to be the world?s largest private line, had been confiscated by the U.S. government at the end of World War I. Harriman purchased it from the government at a fraction of its market value. According to the terms of the deal, the original German management would buy back the line from Harriman at its market value, with the Harriman Bank gaining rights to 50% of all business originating in Hamburg and complete control of all activities of the line in the U.S. Soon after, In 1922, Harriman and Walker set up a European headquarters in Berlin, forming a relationship with the Hamburg- based Warburg Bank. Through Warburg, Harriman began a series of investments during the mid-to-late 1920s in German industry and raw materials. During this period, Harriman also set up a New York bank called the Union Banking Corporation. This was designed, primarily, to handle funds supplied by the Bank von Handel en Scheepvaart, a Dutch bank owned by German industrialist Fritz Thyssen. By personal agreement between Averill Harriman and Thyssen, Union Ba nk would transfer funds back and forth between New York and the Thyssen interests. During the 1920s and ?30s, Thyssen accounted for much of Germany?s pig iron, universal plate, heavy plate, pipes and tubes, wire and explosives. In 1926, along with another Wall Street bank, Dillon-Read, Harriman helped establish the new German Steel Trust, also largely owned by Thyssen. By the mid-1930s, GST had become Germany?s largest industrial corporation. From 1923 on, along with his industrial and financial activities, Thyssen was an instrumental early financial backer of a fledgling political group called the Nazi Party, extending a large credit line to the party through the Harriman banking subsidiary. (He admits this in a post-WW2 memoir entitled I Paid Hitler.) In January, 1931, the Harriman Bank merged with the British- American Brown Brothers' investment house to become Brown Brothers Harriman. By then, Herbert Walker had left full-time work at Harriman to devote himself to GH Walker &Co., but Prescott Bush stayed on with the Harrimans to become senior partner in the new firm. The consolidated Silesian Holding company (which included Prescott Bush as director) was another major German industrial trust that Brown Brothers Harriman partnered with in the 1930s. This was a complex of steel-making, coal-making and zinc-making operations in Germany and Poland. According to a U.S. government brief presented in 1946 at the Nuremburg war crimes tribunal, industrialist Friedrich Flick, owner of two-thirds of Silesian, was "a leading financial contributor to the Nazi Party from 1932 on and a member of the Circle of Friends of Himmler who contributed large sums to the Nazi SS." Silesian and United Steel Trust were the two primary suppliers of war material to the Nazi government throughout its arms build-up in the 1930s, and into the 1940s. US government documents also show that two other Harriman Bank affiliates, Wilhelm Cuno and Baron Rudolph von Schroder, directors of the Hamburg-Amerika line, were major contributors to the Nazi Party in its 1932 election campaign. Additionally, according to the Nye commission (a 1934 US Congressional investigation), The Hamburg- Amerika line was a primary conduit for the shipment of American guns to the Nazis. They also provided free passage to individuals going abroad for Nazi propaganda purposes, as well as subsidies for pro-Nazi newspapers and other Nazi propaganda materials throughout the 1930s, according to the Nye Report.. These activities continued until September, 1942, when the U.S. government ordered all property of the Hamburg-Amerika line seized under the Trading with the Enemy Act. Two months later, also under the authority of the Trading with the Enemy Act, the government issued Vesting Order No.248 seizing assets of the Union Banking Co. (approximately $4 million.) While the evidence amassed by Tarpley and Chaitkin in no way directly implicates Prescott Bush or Brown Brothers Harriman as Nazi supporters, a strong case is made for their complicity in aiding and abetting the Nazi cause for profit long after the nature of the Nazi regime became clear to any informed observer, and even after the US declaration of war against Germany. Unfortunately, not content with solid muckracking, Tarpley and Chaitkin insist on super-imposing their pet (entertaining but unsubstantiated, not to mention off-the-wall) conspiracy theory of US history, inspired by Lyndon LaRouche, leader of a radical left/right, right/left cult with so many political incarnations and reincarnations, it's spawned its own mini-industry of critic/conspiranoiaists. As a highbrow conspiracy theorist?s theorist, LaRouche puts poor John Birch and Bo Gritz not to mention Tom Clancy -- to shame. Indeed there are those who think posterity may yet judge him the grandest historical fictioneer of this era, surpassing Pynchon, Vidal, and DeLillo. His theory, as advanced by Tarpley and Chaitkin, involves linking the Bushes, Harrimans, and much, if not all, of the American elite to a several century old plot for world subjugation by a secret British-American cabal steeped in arcane lore, drug smuggling and pagan ritual. They attempt to trace the roots of this conspiracy to the collusion of British financiers and pro-Brit American Tories during the Revolutionary War and follow its machinations through two centuries of intrigue. As Tarpley and Chaitkin explain it: "Diehard pro-British families, known as Boston Brahmins, who had prospered in the ship transportation of rum and black slaves, regained power in Boston shortly after their British allies lost the Revolutionary war. In 1805 these cynical neo- pagan Tories succeeded in placing their representatives in the Hollis chair, parading publicly as liberal religionists called Unitarians." Thus commenced a secret war (which continues, two centuries later) between Tories and ?true American nationalists? like the Reverend Jedidiah Morse, the head of the Andover Academy, an institution set up to counter the British spies, atheists and criminals who had taken over Harvard. By 1840, when Jedidiah Morse's generation died out, the Andover nationalist movement was, say Chaikin and Tarpley, "crushed by New England's elite families, who were by then Britain's partners in the booming opium traffic." According to the authors, by the second half of the 19th century, Andover, though still ostensibly a Christian schoo,l had become (as had Yale University, the college of choice for Andover graduates) a front for occult-inspired Anglophile secret societies. These elite societies were dedicated to undermining American nationalism and replacing it with a secret government, run furtively by Anglo- American financiers. Though these cults did not fully prevail in the 19th century, as "national power was still precariously balanced between the imperial Anglo-American financiers and the heroic old-line nationalists who built America's railroads, steel and electric utilities," the "New Age Aristocrats" prevailed in the 20th century. Pivotal to that rise was Skull and Bones, the most formidable of these secret cults, which by the early 20th century had become the primary breeding ground of a new kind of American establishment, with imperial economic and political ambitions. "The 20th century," write Tarpley and Chaitkin, "owes much of its record of horrors to certain Anglophile American families which have employed Skull and Bones as a political recruiting agency, particularly the Harrimans, Whitneys, Vanderbilts, Rockefellers," and their lawyers, the Lords, Tafts, Bundys and Dulleses. Above all, they write, "Skull and Bones was dominated from 1913 onward by the circles of Averill Harriman, who succeeded in vanquishing traditional nationalists like Douglas McArthur." In addition to financial control, Tarpley anc Chaitkin claim Skull and Bones has exerted power in many other ways through politics (especially the CIA and Bush family), "environmentalist" organizations like the conservation, birth control and Zero Population Growth Movements (fronts for genocidal eugenics research). They even claim that would-be revolutionaries. such as the new left "Up Against the Wall Motherfuckers" (inspiration for the Yippies, but angrier), were furtively supported back in 1968 by McGeorge Bundy's Ford Foundation front ESSO (The East Side Service Organization) through the intermediary of none other than "former OSS operative, neo-Marxist philosopher Herbert Marcuse." Business As Usual Less flaky, The Secret War Against the Jews, by Mark Aarons and John Loftus, puts the Harriman Bank - Nazi connections in a wider, less conspiratorial (though far from innocent) context. The book, originally published in 1994 by St.Martin?s Press, is primarily focused on the relationship between Western intelligence agencies and the state of Israel, but it contains a very detailed chapter on U.S. corporate investment in Nazi Germany. Aaron and Loftus draw extensively on records of the Nye and Truman Senate committees, declassified intelligence and State Department documents, interviews with unnamed former intelligence operatives, and a rare interview conducted with former Supreme Court justice Arthur Goldberg shortly before his death. As a government attorney in the 1940s, Goldberg had extensively investigated and documented corporate ties to the German military-industrial complex, only to have his findings ignored and "buried" in State Department archives, a cover-up he blamed to his dying day on the Dulles Brothers, Allen and John Foster. Though the book has largely languished in semi-obscurity since its publication, public statements by Loftus (now president of the Florida Holocaust Museum) about the Bush family financial ties to Nazi Germany were widely circulated on the web during the 2000 election campaigns. Hopefully this will spur more conspiranoia-ists to actually study the book. According to The Secret War, Allen and John Foster Dulles, as young international finance specialists for the Sullivan and Cromwell legal firm in the 1920s, were pivotal advisors and agents for a "who's who" of major US. Corporations eager to get in on the bull market for German re-industrialization. The motivations behind these investors, which included Dupont, Alcoa, Standard Oil, General Motors, Chase Manhattan, GE, Ford and IBM, had less to do with ideology than money. In The Splendid Blonde Beast: Money, Law, and Genocide by Christopher Simpson, published in 1993, the most thoroughly investigated account yet of the period, these financial relationships are laid out in fairly exhaustive detail. According to Simpson, U.S.- German investment mania gripped the Roaring 20s financial elite. This mania was rooted in the 1919 Versailles agreements on reparations, which imposed payments of approximately $30 billion (about $600 billion in 2000 dollars) by the German government to other European countries over 30 years. By 1922, attempts to raise the money to pay reparations had driven the German economy into a deep crisis. For U.S. companies, this was a golden opportunity. John Foster Dulles masterminded a scheme wherein a consortium of banks and brokerage houses (among them the Harriman Bank, Chase Manhattan and Dillon Read) offered to loan U.S. dollars, through leading German banks and industrial firms, for the construction of factories, electrification and industrial plant. In turn, the German companies would issue millions of dollars worth of bonds and sell them to Dulles' clients for a discounted price. The U.S. banks would then turn around and sell the bonds "retail" to individual or small institutional investors at a hefty mark-up. The bonds helped jump-start German industry and, in fairly short order, provided the underpinning for German re-armament. For much of the 1930s, the German economy, sparked by the Nazi military build-up, stood out as one of the few bright investment opportunities in an internationally depressed economy. Some corporate executives (particularly Henry Ford, and top echelon DuPont executives) were sympathetic to Nazi and Fascist movements, publicly and financially supporting Hitler. Most, however, who engaged with Germany in the Nazi-era were probably motivated by profit, not ideology. They regarded the Nazis, Simpson believes, as a temporarily useful, if not entirely agreeable, "disciplinary" force, capable of maintaining economic stability and a safe investment climate. As a bonus, they were seen as a counter-weight to militant "Soviet inspired" labor and socialist movements. The probable zeitgeist of these financial high-flyers is perhaps best evoked by (current CNN News Executive Editor) Walter Isaacson and Evan Thomas in their 1988 study The Wise Men, a largely hagiographic profile of the post-World War Two foreign policy establishment that includes portraits of Averill Harriman and Robert Lovett, another Harriman bank director. As described by Isaacson and Thomas, the directors of Harriman Bank (Prescott Bush included) were less crypto- Nazi ideologues than characters out of The Great Gatsby, '20s wild kids thumbing their noses at such fuddy- duddy traditions as national borders and political moralism. As they write: "With the end of the war to end all wars, America quenched its yearning for a return to normalcy by retreating into isolation Wall Street, on the other hand, did nothing of the sort. Europe was industrially devastated and mired in debt. America was throbbing with revitalized factories. The situation was ripe for financiers interested in foreign investment and trade, internationalists who understood America?s ties to Europe. "While the rest of the country slept, a close-knit clique of Wall Street bankers and lawyers, most of whom had traveled through Europe as children met in the clubs of London, Paris and Berlin as friendly competitors putting together suitable investments for their firms. In a private and profit seeking capacity they were rebuilding a war- ravaged Europe in a manner as grandiose as any of these men would employ a world war later with the Marshall Plan." In Harriman, Isaacson and Thomas, see the prototype of the man without borders, the true pioneer elite globalist, the Elvis of the New World Order. "Harriman," they write, "would always harbor a belief that foes could be bargained with as easily as friends. Thus he had no qualms about entering into a shipping agreement with Germany before an armistice had been signed or a mining concession in the Soviet Union, even though the U.S. had spurned diplomatic relations with that country." What Isaacson and Thomas suggest here, and Aaron-Loftus and Simpson substantiate with more detail and in a far wider historical context, is that the relationships between Harriman Bank and other corporations and Nazi-era Germany need to be understood as part of a larger pattern. There is little evidence that the free-form meta- diplomatic modes of international financial deal making developed by Harriman, Bush and company in the 1920s and '30s signaled pro- Nazi or pro- fascist political ideology. However, it did help form a template for U.S. international finance and politics in which support for dictatorships, (financially in the '30s, financially and politically- militarily during the cold war) would become business as usual in U.S. foreign policy. One of the most interesting aspects of both the Simpson and the Aaron and Loftus books is their examination of how the private sector style of international affairs pioneered by Dulles, Harriman, Lovett and Bush in the '30s gradually metaphorphosed, during and after World War 2, into the official realpolitick of the U.S. government, often under the guidance of these same men. The ruling precepts of anti-communism and free trade that guided the international banking elite in the '30s in their dealings with Hitler would become the official policy through which the U.S. would support a wide variety of corporate-friendly dictators throughout the world, from the '50s to the present. A persuasive case can be made that investments by Brown Brothers Harriman and numerous other major U.S. corporations in Germany made the rise of Nazism possible. It's clear Harriman, Bush, Dulles and legions of the financial elite share a degree of (largely unacknowledged) responsibility for providing Hitler and the Nazis the wherewithal to launch World War Two and the Holocaust. However, it's an untenable leap to conclude that this banking elite exerted some sort of secret nefarious control over events of the 1930s, or that the rise of Nazism was not an unintended consequence of their own far shorter-sighted intentions. Those intentions involved using both German companies and unwary individual investors in their lucrative German bond investment scheme. Micro-conspiracies clearly planned to make money by pumping up German industry, including German armaments. For those micro-conspiracies, support for a compliant, pliable, big business friendly government capable of strong-arming labor and other anti-capitalist troublemakers was a matter of short-term expedience. "Blowback" (the title of another Simpson book) is the term Simpson uses to describe the unintended consequences. The Validity of Cranks Filling Cracks in the Historical Narrative There are sharp distinctions between the "Bush is a Nazi" vulgarizations of the conspiranoia-ists, and the documented corporate- Nazi connections delineated by Simpson or Aaron. Where one sees ideology, the other sees opportunism. Where one sees intention, the other sees unintended consequences. The theorists who see this historical episode not as evidence of Nazism but of business-as-usual are clearly the more sophisticated of the bunch, but this is small comfort. The results were (and are) the same. The vast majority of the Bush-Nazi conspiracy discourse is eccentric and clearly over-the-top. However, it is these web-based amateurs, and not our allegedly working professional journalists, who have kept alive a significant, largely ignored, body of evidence. This evidence is only partly about the Bushes. More significantly, it traces the origins of the cavalier, amoral relationship between American and global financial elites and genocidal dictatorships that has characterized U.S. policy for decades. At this stage, the radical media democracy thriving on the web, at least as evidenced by the Bush conspiranoia sites, is short on logic, investigative discipline and common sense, but long on guts and moxie. Unfortunately, Art Bell seems to be closer to the role model of DIY web muckrackers than I.F. Stone or Howard Zinn. Even so, at least partly because of the tireless circulation of facts, rumors, and speculations about "Bush Family Ties," dirty little secrets about the complicity of major American institutions in the rise of Nazism, buried for decades, have finally started emerging into mass consciousness. Despite generally supine treatment of the Bush family by mainstream media, there are signs that Prescott Bush's investment banking adventures of the '30s are coming under new scrutiny. A major two-part series on "The Rise of the Bush Family Dynasty" published in April 2001 by Michael Kranish in the Boston Globe, explores the Harriman Bank- German connection in some detail. The movement for reparations for Holocaust survivors has widened its focus. Previously focused on European banks laundering money stolen by the Nazis from German Jews, investigators have started looking also at US institutions. This process has exposed dealings by several major banks, including Chase Manhattan and JP Morgan. Chase Manhattan, in fact, publicly acknowledged culpability of its Paris branch in active collaboration with the Nazis in liquidating accounts of German Jews. In early 2001 Edwin Black published a widely publicized study of "IBM and the Holocaust" detailing how IBM's German division was instrumental in developing the Hollerith tabulators Nazis used to process concentration camp prisoners. This new wave of muckracking undoubtedly has sources besides the wild and wooly web. Still, it's quite likely that, without a touch of conspiranoia, mainstream media-maintained amnesia on these matters would have remained undisturbed. AN AFTER 9/11 ADDENDUM This piece was written before the events of 9/11/2001. Needless to say, the atrocities of that day, in addition to dramatically changing the political and cultural landscape, and provoking an open-ended "War Against Terrorism," have ushered in a new era in conspiranoia. At this very early stage, at least five major theories wholly or partially rejecting the official version of the attacks as the responsibility of Ossama BinLaden and Al Queda, have emerged, and gained currency on the web. The most plausable theory doesn?t claim direct Western/US involvement in the act. It simply claims that elements of the Bush Administration/CIA knew about the plan, but decided it would be politically advantageous not to stop it. Other versions involve Iraqi secret agents (a favorite of neo- conservatives), the Israeli Defense force, or domestic dissidents in the U.S. (mostly far right militias, but some claiming it was radical left anti-globalists). Finally, there are theories involving undefined rogue elements of U.S. intelligence or the military exploiting Middle Eastern fundamentalist assets. This is called "The Ossama Harvey Oswald theory." Mad as this last may seem, there is documented evidence that something nearly as grotesque has been planned at least once before in recent U.S. history. In his book, Body of Secrets: Anatomy of the Ultra- Secret National Security Agency, former ABC World News investigative reporter James Bamford details a plan by the US Joint Chiefs of Staff to launch terrorist activities against US people and property. The plot was put together in the early '60s, under the auspices of General Lyman Lemnitzer. The right wing extremist Lemnitzer was the powerful Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, inherited from the Eisenhower Administration by a displeased JFK. His brilliant notion was that these incidents (which might include bombings, hijackings of planes, even shooting down John Glenn?s Friendship 7 space capsule) could be blamed on Castro's Cuba. This would be used to galvanize U.S. public support for invading that island. Luckily, their plans were shot down by the administration. But the history of Operation Northwoods, as the plan was called, stands as a cautionary tale against considering anything "unthinkable." Whatever the merits (or lack thereof) of these conspiracy counter- narratives, it seems certain that the secrecy and sketchiness of government and mass media explanations about how the evil-doers were able to get into a position to terrorize the American population, will (and should) breed far more conspiranoia. Even for those of us who don't buy into any of the conspiracy arguments above, and believe that AlQueda was fully responsible and should be forcefully retaliated against, questions proliferate. For starters how involved has the U.S. been in training and supporting the growth of Islamic fundamentalist terrorism, not just (as is already well known) during the Soviet-Afghani conflict of the 80s, but long after in places like Bosnia via U.S. ?allies? like the Albanian Kosovo Liberation Army? To what extent has that semi-secret support undermined US domestic security? Any adequate history of the entanglements between U. S. foreign policy makers and the new breed of Islamo-Fascism the U.S. has helped spawn will likely find the same sort of reckless opportunism -- partly inspired by business and partly by geo-political considerations that have already been examined in the article. Only now, the "blowback" has reaches our shores and threatened the safety of U.S. civilians. As earlier, I see this as less a question of conscious design or plan than as the consequence of a chaotic set of short-term tactics motivated primarily by profit. But if it develops that the US is undergoing something akin to a real live fascist takeover under George W., I don't think that invalidates this analyses, except possibly for its failure to emphasize the fact that fascism can be the last refuge for capitalist opportunism, when it?s in crisis. It's still more about profit than ideology. Back to Current Issue From LAMZ at sympatico.ca Mon Jul 1 15:25:15 2002 From: LAMZ at sympatico.ca (Lysander Zimmerman) Date: Sat Aug 5 04:33:16 2006 Subject: [R-G] The Indiscreet Charm of the Bush-Nazi Web Conspiranoids References: Message-ID: <000901c22145$cae34ff0$33378d18@Indy1> Hey Michael, sorry to burst your fence-sitting bubble, but conspiracies are the norm for the elite in ANY class society. Adam Smith, the capitalist economist is quoted as writing that whenever the elite get together, they "CONSPIRE" against the working classes. I guess his understanding of capitalist economics is just "conspiranoia"!! Here's a CONSPIRACY REALITY for Mike: in 1975, Senator Frank Church headed the Select Committee to Study Governmental Operations With Respect to Intelligence Activities and their findings document 5 volumes of CONSPIRACIES (including assassinations, assissination plots, biological and chemical weapons programs that included SECRET testing on large parts of the population, mind-control experiments, COINTELPRO tactics, you name it....). Nope, no conspiracies here!! I guess Operation Northwoods (http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/news/20010430/doc1.pdf) and Operation Mongoose were simply plots for Hollywood movies that didn't make it on account that they were too "out there"!!! Here's another conspiracy reality for you: http://hamilton.indymedia.org:8081/front.php3?article_id=1793 Open your eyes. ____________________________________________________________ 'Naturally the common people don't want war: Neither in Russia, nor in England, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, IT IS THE LEADERS of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is TELL THEM THEY ARE BEING ATTACKED, and denounce the peacemakers for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. IT WORKS THE SAME IN ANY COUNTRY.' ?Goering at the Nuremberg Trials ----- Original Message ----- From: "Michael Pugliese" To: Cc: Sent: Monday, July 01, 2002 4:58 PM Subject: [R-G] The Indiscreet Charm of the Bush-Nazi Web Conspiranoids http://www.thethresher.com/indiscreet.html "American politics has often been an arena for angry minds," historian Richard Hofstadter wrote nearly four decades ago. As the first great analyst/connoisseur of American political paranoia, or what he called "the paranoid style," Hofstadter, who died in 1970, would have been amazed by the web. As we all know, myriad versions of the perennial conspiracy theories Hofstadter knew well, the ones involving plots by Freemasons, Jesuits, Jews, and/or Communists to take over the world, are alive and thriving in the new medium. In addition, the web, as a radically accelerated technology for moving facts, rumors, myths and memes, has vastly widened the theater of the political imagination. It has become, for better and worse, the spiritual home of "conspiranoia." A quick search of the word "conspiracy" on Google turns up (as of mid-2001) just under 2 million hits. All of the modern classics are well represented. These include; JFK Assassination plots (75,000 hits) (whether by CIA, Mafia, Gusanos or the newly popular Federal Reserve theory), extraterrestrial visitations (over 75,000 sites), and shadow world governments (well over a million) (as administered by, the Trilateral Commission, Council on Foreign Relations, The UN, The Bank of England and any one of several dozen other organizations). Then there are the more recent conspiracy theories involving; the deliberate or accidental unleashing of the AIDS virus (roughly 65,000 hits), U.S. government involvement in the Oklahoma City bombing, (nearly 100,000), and collusions between DuPont Chemical and the oil Industry to squelch hemp production (10,000). Many, indeed most of these conspiracy "exposes" are illogical, if not totally incoherent, rants. Others are obsessively detailed, but ultimately implausible concoctions of fact and fantasy. And a few are well researched and documented. Not a few are a bit of all of the above. All are populist attempts to locate cracks in the official versions of history. Nowhere is this seen as clearly as in the sites devoted to the current rising stars of web conspiranoia, the Bush family. Conspiratorialists, whether their bete noire is Anglophile internationalist bankers, socialist one-world government advocates, neo-fascist state planners, or eugenic proponents of white supremacy, can and do find in the Bushes everything and more than they've ever wanted to imagine about American history and its rulers. Lurking in the shadows of nearly every major episode of recent U.S. history, from World War Two to the rise of the CIA to third world drug running to the Bay of Pigs, the Kennedy and King assassinations, Watergate and beyond, the Bushes have emerged as the Zeligs of the global power elite. At the crux of this saga are the Bushes' real and imagined relationships with Nazi Germany. Rumors about Bush-Nazi connections began circulating in earnest in the pre-web days of the late 80s. The Philadelphia Enquirer discovered a number of German Nazi military officers working as low-level operatives for the Republican National Committee in the Bush presidential campaign of 1988. Rumors of a Bush- Nazi association were kept alive on alt.news conspiracy bulletin boards through the 90s. They gained critical mass during the 2000 election campaign, generating a bewildering variety of exposes, mythic narratives and shadow histories. Below is just a sampling of some of the hottest current web forums dedicated to exploring Bush-Nazi ties: Eugenies in a Bottle Robert Lederman, a New York City artist, believes the Bush family, along with the Harrimans, Rockefellers, Nazis, neo-Nazis and leaders of the oil and pharmaceutical industries, has been instrumental in a plot to commit genetic genocide against "inferior races". This racial supremacist plot allegedly began in the 1920s with the founding of the Averill Harriman- Prescott Bush funded Eugenics Research Office. Accused accomplices include Planned Parenthood, the Nazi German government, and in post-war America, neo-Nazi led research under the auspices of the CIA, National Science Foundation, and Center for Disease Control. It has also involved such environmentalist fronts as Zero Population Growth and conservative think-tanks such as the Manhattan Institute. It is currently backed by large corporations, prominently including Alcoa (the theory flouride, tested by the Nazis, is being used in the water supply to create a submissive population), and big pharmaceutical companies (especially those, like I.G. Farben, with Nazi pasts). These companies are believed to be involved in introducing toxic, potentially genocidal vaccines and sprays. One example is malathion, used recently in New York City and vicinity to (presumably) control the West Nile virus. For Lederman, the project of genocide through eugenics reaches its apogee in the Human Genome Project, designed to enable realization of the Nazi goal of eliminating inferior genetic castes through genetic profiling. Acoording to Lederman, "Following the Holocaust it was necessary to disguise Eugenics as something more politically acceptable. This was something, of course, accomplished through birth control, vaccinations, insect control sprays, and other thinly disguised modes of genocide. There is mounting evidence AIDS was one of these programs." While for Lederman, the Bushes meet Nazism at the intersection of genetics and big pharmaceutical companies, the website Conspiracy Planet sees the Bushes, through three generations, as active, if subterranean, Nazi ideologues. In this reality, the Bush family has been financing the Nazi cause through clandestine sources, including drug dealing.. The website, which calls itself "the Alternative News and history Network", hosts a regular "Bush Crime Family" channel, exploring supposed relationships between the Bushes, Nazi groups and organized crime. One of its conspiracy researchers, writing under the moniker King Felix, declares, "George W's grandfather Prescott Bush was among the chief American fundraisers for the Nazi Party in the 1930s and '40s. In return he was handsomely rewarded with plenty of financial opportunities from the Nazis helping to create the fortune and legacy that his son George inherited." On the other hand, for Richard Draheim, columnist for the Dallas Libertarian, the Bushes' represent a traditional Republican collusion of big business and big government. Specifically, Draheim sees in the Bush Dynasty a marriage between Wall Street and the oil industry and (despite the low-tax rhetoric), a conspiracy to impose high taxes to subsidize Bush family-connected businesses. "The Bush family fortune is old, and it comes from a century old alliance with the most powerful interests on Wall Street and in industry. Worse, a big part of Dubya's money comes from Grandfather Prescott Bush's alliance with the Nazis." Less diplomatically, Marie Vance and John Cappetini claim in syninfo.com: "The silver spoon in George W. Bush's mouth was bought and paid for by Nazi butchers, who yanked the fillings from dead Jew's mouths. The Bush mob/Bush international crime family was and is a bunch of Satan worshipping Nazis." Though space doesn?t permit, it wouldn't be tough at all to find several hundred more examples. Internet rants? Technologically amplified paranoia? Indeed. It's easy enough to tear apart the notion of a still active, century- long, racist-Nazi (with a capital N) conspiracy based on the science of genetics. Many racist ideologues do use rhetoric couched in the scientific (or more often pseudo-scientific) jargon of genetic determinism. Some racist ideologues do continue to advance schemes for sterilizing "undesirable" populations, all too similar to those of Nazi Germany. Most scientists, (including most molecular biologists), most birth-control and reproductive rights advocates, as well as most environmentalists and population control proponents, have nothing to do with them, following totally divergent and conflicting social and political agendas. Wild stretches? Yes. But wrong about any Bush-Nazi connection? Not really. Or, at least, not entirely. Beating Around the Bushes The following is a thumbnail sketch of the Bush family biography from the early 1900s to the 1950s, as culled from several recent mainstream Bush (George the Father and Junior) biographies, a canon including Lone Star Yankee by Herbert S. Parmet, First Son by Bill Minutaglio and W: The Revenge of the Bush Dynasty by Elizabeth Mitchell, as well as official family memoirs. Samuel Bush (George H.W.'s paternal grandfather) was a successful Midwestern entrepreneur who ran both a small Ohio railroad and the Buckeye Steel Castings Company. A man of vaguely populist leanings, despite his affluence, Bush helped frame Ohio's first worker's compensation laws and has been said to have been a Democrat, and "friendly with organized labor." His son Prescott Bush, after attending Yale in the 1910s, worked briefly in a small, family owned rubber company in Ohio. In the early '20s, he accepted an invitation from his new father-in-law George Herbert to join the Harriman brothers' investment, a high-flying international banking house. George Herbert Walker, father of Prescott?s wife Dorothy, was the founder of GH Walker and Co. investment bank in St. Louis. While Samuel Bush might be characterized as "petit-bourgeois," GH Walker was a man of great wealth. In addition to being a major power broker in the Midwest, Walker had close connections to the Eastern banking elite as well. By the early '20s, he maintained an estate in Kennebunkport, Maine, a mansion on Long Island, and a ten thousand-acre hunting preserve called Duncannon in South Carolina. At the urging of his friend, railroad magnate E.H. Harriman, father of Averill and Roland (Bunny) Harriman (classmates of Prescott Bush at Yale), Walker had come to New York to help the younger Harrimans run the Harriman investment bank. By the late 1920s, Walker had groomed his son-in-law to handle large parts of the bank?s investments, including its interests in the fledgling Columbia Broadcasting Network, and several European projects. By the early 1930s, Walker left daily operations of the Harriman bank. Bush stayed on throughout the 30s and 40s as a partner in the firm. By 1931, Harriman Investment had merged with the British-American bank Brown Brothers, becoming Brown Brothers Harriman. During the 1940s Bush, who had shed his father?s Democratic politics for his father-in-law?s Republicanism, became active in Connecticut electoral politics. He ran unsuccessfully for the U.S. Senate in 1950, before winning a seat in 1952. Bush served 12 years in the Senate, earning a record as a moderately liberal "Rockefeller Republican" and a supporter of civil rights legislation, and a reputation for being President Eisenhower?s golfing buddy. Trading With Enemies One could read through the bulk of mainstream Bush family biographies and find no mention of a significant 1942 event: That year the U.S. federal government, under the auspices of the office of the U.S Alien Property Custodian. seized the assets of the Union Banking Corporation, a subsidiary of Brown Brothers Harriman, under authority of the "Trading with the Enemy Act." Prescott Bush served on the board. An eclectic body of revisionist work, most originally available in book form (and most now "out of print"), has been dedicated to investigating the background of this historically excised event. Though largely ignored by established book reviewing media, mainstream print, and broadcast punditry, three books in particular have attempted to explore and document the historical background of the "Bush-Nazi" connection. These attempts to fill in the gaps left by mainstream historians have found new life on the web. The most frequently cited and circulated source of Bush-Nazi investigations/conspiranoia, George Bush-The Unauthorized Biography (a biography of George Herbert Walker Bush) by Webster Griffin Tarpley and Anton Chaitkin, published in 1992, while well-documented, is also the most suspect. The problem is that Tarpley and Chaitkin are colleagues of the political cult leader Lyndon LaRouche. Not surprisingly, they insist on overlaying otherwise solidly researched data with wildly speculative interpretations. The book, originally published by LaRouche's Executive Intelligence Review, though "out of print," is ubiquitous on the web, and freely used and quoted by Bush conspiranoia buffs of all persuasions. Tarpley and Chaitkin fill in important details of the period of Prescott Bush's involvement in international investment banking. They document W.A. Harriman Bank's European operations, and the roles of Herbert Walker, who joined as president and chief executive in November, 1919, and Prescott Bush. According to Tarpley and Chaitkin, the first major German connections made by the newly minted Harriman bank took place in 1920, when Averill Harriman announced plans to re-launch the dormant Hamburg- Amerikan shipping line. The German shipping line, said to be the world?s largest private line, had been confiscated by the U.S. government at the end of World War I. Harriman purchased it from the government at a fraction of its market value. According to the terms of the deal, the original German management would buy back the line from Harriman at its market value, with the Harriman Bank gaining rights to 50% of all business originating in Hamburg and complete control of all activities of the line in the U.S. Soon after, In 1922, Harriman and Walker set up a European headquarters in Berlin, forming a relationship with the Hamburg- based Warburg Bank. Through Warburg, Harriman began a series of investments during the mid-to-late 1920s in German industry and raw materials. During this period, Harriman also set up a New York bank called the Union Banking Corporation. This was designed, primarily, to handle funds supplied by the Bank von Handel en Scheepvaart, a Dutch bank owned by German industrialist Fritz Thyssen. By personal agreement between Averill Harriman and Thyssen, Union Ba nk would transfer funds back and forth between New York and the Thyssen interests. During the 1920s and ?30s, Thyssen accounted for much of Germany?s pig iron, universal plate, heavy plate, pipes and tubes, wire and explosives. In 1926, along with another Wall Street bank, Dillon-Read, Harriman helped establish the new German Steel Trust, also largely owned by Thyssen. By the mid-1930s, GST had become Germany?s largest industrial corporation. >From 1923 on, along with his industrial and financial activities, Thyssen was an instrumental early financial backer of a fledgling political group called the Nazi Party, extending a large credit line to the party through the Harriman banking subsidiary. (He admits this in a post-WW2 memoir entitled I Paid Hitler.) In January, 1931, the Harriman Bank merged with the British- American Brown Brothers' investment house to become Brown Brothers Harriman. By then, Herbert Walker had left full-time work at Harriman to devote himself to GH Walker &Co., but Prescott Bush stayed on with the Harrimans to become senior partner in the new firm. The consolidated Silesian Holding company (which included Prescott Bush as director) was another major German industrial trust that Brown Brothers Harriman partnered with in the 1930s. This was a complex of steel-making, coal-making and zinc-making operations in Germany and Poland. According to a U.S. government brief presented in 1946 at the Nuremburg war crimes tribunal, industrialist Friedrich Flick, owner of two-thirds of Silesian, was "a leading financial contributor to the Nazi Party from 1932 on and a member of the Circle of Friends of Himmler who contributed large sums to the Nazi SS." Silesian and United Steel Trust were the two primary suppliers of war material to the Nazi government throughout its arms build-up in the 1930s, and into the 1940s. US government documents also show that two other Harriman Bank affiliates, Wilhelm Cuno and Baron Rudolph von Schroder, directors of the Hamburg-Amerika line, were major contributors to the Nazi Party in its 1932 election campaign. Additionally, according to the Nye commission (a 1934 US Congressional investigation), The Hamburg- Amerika line was a primary conduit for the shipment of American guns to the Nazis. They also provided free passage to individuals going abroad for Nazi propaganda purposes, as well as subsidies for pro-Nazi newspapers and other Nazi propaganda materials throughout the 1930s, according to the Nye Report.. These activities continued until September, 1942, when the U.S. government ordered all property of the Hamburg-Amerika line seized under the Trading with the Enemy Act. Two months later, also under the authority of the Trading with the Enemy Act, the government issued Vesting Order No.248 seizing assets of the Union Banking Co. (approximately $4 million.) While the evidence amassed by Tarpley and Chaitkin in no way directly implicates Prescott Bush or Brown Brothers Harriman as Nazi supporters, a strong case is made for their complicity in aiding and abetting the Nazi cause for profit long after the nature of the Nazi regime became clear to any informed observer, and even after the US declaration of war against Germany. Unfortunately, not content with solid muckracking, Tarpley and Chaitkin insist on super-imposing their pet (entertaining but unsubstantiated, not to mention off-the-wall) conspiracy theory of US history, inspired by Lyndon LaRouche, leader of a radical left/right, right/left cult with so many political incarnations and reincarnations, it's spawned its own mini-industry of critic/conspiranoiaists. As a highbrow conspiracy theorist?s theorist, LaRouche puts poor John Birch and Bo Gritz not to mention Tom Clancy -- to shame. Indeed there are those who think posterity may yet judge him the grandest historical fictioneer of this era, surpassing Pynchon, Vidal, and DeLillo. His theory, as advanced by Tarpley and Chaitkin, involves linking the Bushes, Harrimans, and much, if not all, of the American elite to a several century old plot for world subjugation by a secret British-American cabal steeped in arcane lore, drug smuggling and pagan ritual. They attempt to trace the roots of this conspiracy to the collusion of British financiers and pro-Brit American Tories during the Revolutionary War and follow its machinations through two centuries of intrigue. As Tarpley and Chaitkin explain it: "Diehard pro-British families, known as Boston Brahmins, who had prospered in the ship transportation of rum and black slaves, regained power in Boston shortly after their British allies lost the Revolutionary war. In 1805 these cynical neo- pagan Tories succeeded in placing their representatives in the Hollis chair, parading publicly as liberal religionists called Unitarians." Thus commenced a secret war (which continues, two centuries later) between Tories and ?true American nationalists? like the Reverend Jedidiah Morse, the head of the Andover Academy, an institution set up to counter the British spies, atheists and criminals who had taken over Harvard. By 1840, when Jedidiah Morse's generation died out, the Andover nationalist movement was, say Chaikin and Tarpley, "crushed by New England's elite families, who were by then Britain's partners in the booming opium traffic." According to the authors, by the second half of the 19th century, Andover, though still ostensibly a Christian schoo,l had become (as had Yale University, the college of choice for Andover graduates) a front for occult-inspired Anglophile secret societies. These elite societies were dedicated to undermining American nationalism and replacing it with a secret government, run furtively by Anglo- American financiers. Though these cults did not fully prevail in the 19th century, as "national power was still precariously balanced between the imperial Anglo-American financiers and the heroic old-line nationalists who built America's railroads, steel and electric utilities," the "New Age Aristocrats" prevailed in the 20th century. Pivotal to that rise was Skull and Bones, the most formidable of these secret cults, which by the early 20th century had become the primary breeding ground of a new kind of American establishment, with imperial economic and political ambitions. "The 20th century," write Tarpley and Chaitkin, "owes much of its record of horrors to certain Anglophile American families which have employed Skull and Bones as a political recruiting agency, particularly the Harrimans, Whitneys, Vanderbilts, Rockefellers," and their lawyers, the Lords, Tafts, Bundys and Dulleses. Above all, they write, "Skull and Bones was dominated from 1913 onward by the circles of Averill Harriman, who succeeded in vanquishing traditional nationalists like Douglas McArthur." In addition to financial control, Tarpley anc Chaitkin claim Skull and Bones has exerted power in many other ways through politics (especially the CIA and Bush family), "environmentalist" organizations like the conservation, birth control and Zero Population Growth Movements (fronts for genocidal eugenics research). They even claim that would-be revolutionaries. such as the new left "Up Against the Wall Motherfuckers" (inspiration for the Yippies, but angrier), were furtively supported back in 1968 by McGeorge Bundy's Ford Foundation front ESSO (The East Side Service Organization) through the intermediary of none other than "former OSS operative, neo-Marxist philosopher Herbert Marcuse." Business As Usual Less flaky, The Secret War Against the Jews, by Mark Aarons and John Loftus, puts the Harriman Bank - Nazi connections in a wider, less conspiratorial (though far from innocent) context. The book, originally published in 1994 by St.Martin?s Press, is primarily focused on the relationship between Western intelligence agencies and the state of Israel, but it contains a very detailed chapter on U.S. corporate investment in Nazi Germany. Aaron and Loftus draw extensively on records of the Nye and Truman Senate committees, declassified intelligence and State Department documents, interviews with unnamed former intelligence operatives, and a rare interview conducted with former Supreme Court justice Arthur Goldberg shortly before his death. As a government attorney in the 1940s, Goldberg had extensively investigated and documented corporate ties to the German military-industrial complex, only to have his findings ignored and "buried" in State Department archives, a cover-up he blamed to his dying day on the Dulles Brothers, Allen and John Foster. Though the book has largely languished in semi-obscurity since its publication, public statements by Loftus (now president of the Florida Holocaust Museum) about the Bush family financial ties to Nazi Germany were widely circulated on the web during the 2000 election campaigns. Hopefully this will spur more conspiranoia-ists to actually study the book. According to The Secret War, Allen and John Foster Dulles, as young international finance specialists for the Sullivan and Cromwell legal firm in the 1920s, were pivotal advisors and agents for a "who's who" of major US. Corporations eager to get in on the bull market for German re-industrialization. The motivations behind these investors, which included Dupont, Alcoa, Standard Oil, General Motors, Chase Manhattan, GE, Ford and IBM, had less to do with ideology than money. In The Splendid Blonde Beast: Money, Law, and Genocide by Christopher Simpson, published in 1993, the most thoroughly investigated account yet of the period, these financial relationships are laid out in fairly exhaustive detail. According to Simpson, U.S.- German investment mania gripped the Roaring 20s financial elite. This mania was rooted in the 1919 Versailles agreements on reparations, which imposed payments of approximately $30 billion (about $600 billion in 2000 dollars) by the German government to other European countries over 30 years. By 1922, attempts to raise the money to pay reparations had driven the German economy into a deep crisis. For U.S. companies, this was a golden opportunity. John Foster Dulles masterminded a scheme wherein a consortium of banks and brokerage houses (among them the Harriman Bank, Chase Manhattan and Dillon Read) offered to loan U.S. dollars, through leading German banks and industrial firms, for the construction of factories, electrification and industrial plant. In turn, the German companies would issue millions of dollars worth of bonds and sell them to Dulles' clients for a discounted price. The U.S. banks would then turn around and sell the bonds "retail" to individual or small institutional investors at a hefty mark-up. The bonds helped jump-start German industry and, in fairly short order, provided the underpinning for German re-armament. For much of the 1930s, the German economy, sparked by the Nazi military build-up, stood out as one of the few bright investment opportunities in an internationally depressed economy. Some corporate executives (particularly Henry Ford, and top echelon DuPont executives) were sympathetic to Nazi and Fascist movements, publicly and financially supporting Hitler. Most, however, who engaged with Germany in the Nazi-era were probably motivated by profit, not ideology. They regarded the Nazis, Simpson believes, as a temporarily useful, if not entirely agreeable, "disciplinary" force, capable of maintaining economic stability and a safe investment climate. As a bonus, they were seen as a counter-weight to militant "Soviet inspired" labor and socialist movements. The probable zeitgeist of these financial high-flyers is perhaps best evoked by (current CNN News Executive Editor) Walter Isaacson and Evan Thomas in their 1988 study The Wise Men, a largely hagiographic profile of the post-World War Two foreign policy establishment that includes portraits of Averill Harriman and Robert Lovett, another Harriman bank director. As described by Isaacson and Thomas, the directors of Harriman Bank (Prescott Bush included) were less crypto- Nazi ideologues than characters out of The Great Gatsby, '20s wild kids thumbing their noses at such fuddy- duddy traditions as national borders and political moralism. As they write: "With the end of the war to end all wars, America quenched its yearning for a return to normalcy by retreating into isolation Wall Street, on the other hand, did nothing of the sort. Europe was industrially devastated and mired in debt. America was throbbing with revitalized factories. The situation was ripe for financiers interested in foreign investment and trade, internationalists who understood America?s ties to Europe. "While the rest of the country slept, a close-knit clique of Wall Street bankers and lawyers, most of whom had traveled through Europe as children met in the clubs of London, Paris and Berlin as friendly competitors putting together suitable investments for their firms. In a private and profit seeking capacity they were rebuilding a war- ravaged Europe in a manner as grandiose as any of these men would employ a world war later with the Marshall Plan." In Harriman, Isaacson and Thomas, see the prototype of the man without borders, the true pioneer elite globalist, the Elvis of the New World Order. "Harriman," they write, "would always harbor a belief that foes could be bargained with as easily as friends. Thus he had no qualms about entering into a shipping agreement with Germany before an armistice had been signed or a mining concession in the Soviet Union, even though the U.S. had spurned diplomatic relations with that country." What Isaacson and Thomas suggest here, and Aaron-Loftus and Simpson substantiate with more detail and in a far wider historical context, is that the relationships between Harriman Bank and other corporations and Nazi-era Germany need to be understood as part of a larger pattern. There is little evidence that the free-form meta- diplomatic modes of international financial deal making developed by Harriman, Bush and company in the 1920s and '30s signaled pro- Nazi or pro- fascist political ideology. However, it did help form a template for U.S. international finance and politics in which support for dictatorships, (financially in the '30s, financially and politically- militarily during the cold war) would become business as usual in U.S. foreign policy. One of the most interesting aspects of both the Simpson and the Aaron and Loftus books is their examination of how the private sector style of international affairs pioneered by Dulles, Harriman, Lovett and Bush in the '30s gradually metaphorphosed, during and after World War 2, into the official realpolitick of the U.S. government, often under the guidance of these same men. The ruling precepts of anti-communism and free trade that guided the international banking elite in the '30s in their dealings with Hitler would become the official policy through which the U.S. would support a wide variety of corporate-friendly dictators throughout the world, from the '50s to the present. A persuasive case can be made that investments by Brown Brothers Harriman and numerous other major U.S. corporations in Germany made the rise of Nazism possible. It's clear Harriman, Bush, Dulles and legions of the financial elite share a degree of (largely unacknowledged) responsibility for providing Hitler and the Nazis the wherewithal to launch World War Two and the Holocaust. However, it's an untenable leap to conclude that this banking elite exerted some sort of secret nefarious control over events of the 1930s, or that the rise of Nazism was not an unintended consequence of their own far shorter-sighted intentions. Those intentions involved using both German companies and unwary individual investors in their lucrative German bond investment scheme. Micro-conspiracies clearly planned to make money by pumping up German industry, including German armaments. For those micro-conspiracies, support for a compliant, pliable, big business friendly government capable of strong-arming labor and other anti-capitalist troublemakers was a matter of short-term expedience. "Blowback" (the title of another Simpson book) is the term Simpson uses to describe the unintended consequences. The Validity of Cranks Filling Cracks in the Historical Narrative There are sharp distinctions between the "Bush is a Nazi" vulgarizations of the conspiranoia-ists, and the documented corporate- Nazi connections delineated by Simpson or Aaron. Where one sees ideology, the other sees opportunism. Where one sees intention, the other sees unintended consequences. The theorists who see this historical episode not as evidence of Nazism but of business-as-usual are clearly the more sophisticated of the bunch, but this is small comfort. The results were (and are) the same. The vast majority of the Bush-Nazi conspiracy discourse is eccentric and clearly over-the-top. However, it is these web-based amateurs, and not our allegedly working professional journalists, who have kept alive a significant, largely ignored, body of evidence. This evidence is only partly about the Bushes. More significantly, it traces the origins of the cavalier, amoral relationship between American and global financial elites and genocidal dictatorships that has characterized U.S. policy for decades. At this stage, the radical media democracy thriving on the web, at least as evidenced by the Bush conspiranoia sites, is short on logic, investigative discipline and common sense, but long on guts and moxie. Unfortunately, Art Bell seems to be closer to the role model of DIY web muckrackers than I.F. Stone or Howard Zinn. Even so, at least partly because of the tireless circulation of facts, rumors, and speculations about "Bush Family Ties," dirty little secrets about the complicity of major American institutions in the rise of Nazism, buried for decades, have finally started emerging into mass consciousness. Despite generally supine treatment of the Bush family by mainstream media, there are signs that Prescott Bush's investment banking adventures of the '30s are coming under new scrutiny. A major two-part series on "The Rise of the Bush Family Dynasty" published in April 2001 by Michael Kranish in the Boston Globe, explores the Harriman Bank- German connection in some detail. The movement for reparations for Holocaust survivors has widened its focus. Previously focused on European banks laundering money stolen by the Nazis from German Jews, investigators have started looking also at US institutions. This process has exposed dealings by several major banks, including Chase Manhattan and JP Morgan. Chase Manhattan, in fact, publicly acknowledged culpability of its Paris branch in active collaboration with the Nazis in liquidating accounts of German Jews. In early 2001 Edwin Black published a widely publicized study of "IBM and the Holocaust" detailing how IBM's German division was instrumental in developing the Hollerith tabulators Nazis used to process concentration camp prisoners. This new wave of muckracking undoubtedly has sources besides the wild and wooly web. Still, it's quite likely that, without a touch of conspiranoia, mainstream media-maintained amnesia on these matters would have remained undisturbed. AN AFTER 9/11 ADDENDUM This piece was written before the events of 9/11/2001. Needless to say, the atrocities of that day, in addition to dramatically changing the political and cultural landscape, and provoking an open-ended "War Against Terrorism," have ushered in a new era in conspiranoia. At this very early stage, at least five major theories wholly or partially rejecting the official version of the attacks as the responsibility of Ossama BinLaden and Al Queda, have emerged, and gained currency on the web. The most plausable theory doesn?t claim direct Western/US involvement in the act. It simply claims that elements of the Bush Administration/CIA knew about the plan, but decided it would be politically advantageous not to stop it. Other versions involve Iraqi secret agents (a favorite of neo- conservatives), the Israeli Defense force, or domestic dissidents in the U.S. (mostly far right militias, but some claiming it was radical left anti-globalists). Finally, there are theories involving undefined rogue elements of U.S. intelligence or the military exploiting Middle Eastern fundamentalist assets. This is called "The Ossama Harvey Oswald theory." Mad as this last may seem, there is documented evidence that something nearly as grotesque has been planned at least once before in recent U.S. history. In his book, Body of Secrets: Anatomy of the Ultra- Secret National Security Agency, former ABC World News investigative reporter James Bamford details a plan by the US Joint Chiefs of Staff to launch terrorist activities against US people and property. The plot was put together in the early '60s, under the auspices of General Lyman Lemnitzer. The right wing extremist Lemnitzer was the powerful Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, inherited from the Eisenhower Administration by a displeased JFK. His brilliant notion was that these incidents (which might include bombings, hijackings of planes, even shooting down John Glenn?s Friendship 7 space capsule) could be blamed on Castro's Cuba. This would be used to galvanize U.S. public support for invading that island. Luckily, their plans were shot down by the administration. But the history of Operation Northwoods, as the plan was called, stands as a cautionary tale against considering anything "unthinkable." Whatever the merits (or lack thereof) of these conspiracy counter- narratives, it seems certain that the secrecy and sketchiness of government and mass media explanations about how the evil-doers were able to get into a position to terrorize the American population, will (and should) breed far more conspiranoia. Even for those of us who don't buy into any of the conspiracy arguments above, and believe that AlQueda was fully responsible and should be forcefully retaliated against, questions proliferate. For starters how involved has the U.S. been in training and supporting the growth of Islamic fundamentalist terrorism, not just (as is already well known) during the Soviet-Afghani conflict of the 80s, but long after in places like Bosnia via U.S. ?allies? like the Albanian Kosovo Liberation Army? To what extent has that semi-secret support undermined US domestic security? Any adequate history of the entanglements between U. S. foreign policy makers and the new breed of Islamo-Fascism the U.S. has helped spawn will likely find the same sort of reckless opportunism -- partly inspired by business and partly by geo-political considerations that have already been examined in the article. Only now, the "blowback" has reaches our shores and threatened the safety of U.S. civilians. As earlier, I see this as less a question of conscious design or plan than as the consequence of a chaotic set of short-term tactics motivated primarily by profit. But if it develops that the US is undergoing something akin to a real live fascist takeover under George W., I don't think that invalidates this analyses, except possibly for its failure to emphasize the fact that fascism can be the last refuge for capitalist opportunism, when it?s in crisis. It's still more about profit than ideology. Back to Current Issue _______________________________________________ Rad-Green mailing list Rad-Green@lists.econ.utah.edu To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/rad-green From debsian at pacbell.net Mon Jul 1 15:38:51 2002 From: debsian at pacbell.net (Michael Pugliese) Date: Sat Aug 5 04:33:16 2006 Subject: [R-G] The Indiscreet Charm of the Bush-Nazi Web Conspiranoids Message-ID: Heh, Lysander a few yrs. ago I found a copy of the Church Committee reports at a used book store. Been there done that... My motive, just like Chip Berlet's who knows this stuff better than anyone, is to get folks like you to use better sources (not the far right crap from the Liberrty Lobby's AFP) and methodology. Read lefties like Bill Domhoff and marxists like Nicos Poulantzas and Ralph Miliband. Find back issues of Jim O' Connor's neo- marxist journal, "Kapitalistate, " at an academic library. Michael Pugliese From debsian at pacbell.net Mon Jul 1 15:43:48 2002 From: debsian at pacbell.net (Michael Pugliese) Date: Sat Aug 5 04:33:16 2006 Subject: [R-G] THE ENEMY OF MY ENEMY IS NOT MY FRIEND: Message-ID: <1VSQFAXGCZTVP61GE2YID2WYTSNGVR.3d20cd14@oemcomputer> http://www.fiu.edu/~mizrachs/left-n-fascism.html The Left and the Far Right: Curious Bedfellows? The Left has been very serious in its critique of American foreign policy and its cynicism. The basis of that policy has been, "if you are an enemy of communism, you are my friend," which has led America into cooperation with a whole range of tyrannical, military- backed dictatorships. But we should be very careful about the wisdom of that statement, because those on the Left should take heed too. Not everyone who speaks out against "the government" and "the State" is on our side. Indeed, they may have an entirely different agenda, of a decidedly fascist bent. Despite the fact that they may make statements against "capital" or "the finance class" or whatever else, their real enemy is liberal democracy, which they hate with a greater passion than even the most determined Stalinist on the left. Now imagine this scenario. It's 1991, and you're at an anti-Persian Gulf "war" speakout. Someone gets up and starts blasting CIA involvement in the region and drug trafficking from the area, and everyone applauds. Then he starts saying things like "this is really the Zionists' war, fought for the Elders of Zion." Another man gets up and starts talking about the murderous policies of the IMF and World Bank in Middle East development, and the genocidal character of the war against Iraq. Some more applause. Then he follows up by saying how he sees "the hand of the Anglo- American cartel in all this." A third individual starts talking about the role of "capital" and how the war is a distraction from the S & L looters. A third round of applause. Then he starts talking about "international bankers" and the "Trilateralists" and their role in the war. At this point, you are severely confused. This war is probably about oil, the 'VietNam syndrome', maybe even Israel. But "the Elders of Zion?" What's going on? None of these three people can, in any charitable sense, be called 'anti-war' or 'anti-intervention.' They are not interested in institutional analyses of the 'military-industrial' complex or the complexities of State Department policy and the extension of American power. The first belongs to the Liberty Lobby, publishers of the Spotlight paper, known to be anti-Semitic and anti-communist. The second is a LaRouchite (follower of jailbird Lyndon LaRouche), who speaks within a conspiratorial framework of incredible paranoid depth. And the third belongs to the 'Populist' party, which claims to represent workers & farmers, but is really xenophobic, nativist, and racist. As Chip Berlet, a researcher of Right wing movements, has noted, all three of these groups have grown in strength recently. What is really scary, though, is that people on the Left have begun listening to their diatribes. They often talk about some of the same things - government complicity in drug trafficking, the role of the CIA and 'Shadow Government', even the JFK assassination - but with a decidedly different "take" on what's going on. Perhaps due to its marginalization within American politics, the democratic Left has tended to become interested in conspiracy theories, especially during the 1980s. We've all heard of them - October Surprise, Iran-Contra, JFK's assassination, the Samson Option, etc. - but we may not know that many of them have come from Rightwing sources, such as the Liberty Lobby's newspaper, in particular. Much of the Christic Institute's information in their "La Penca" case Avirgan v. Hull , which was filed by Daniel Sheehan to close down the 'secret team', came from a 'right-wing' military specialist, according to the affidavit. That source probably was Lt. Col. James "Bo" Gritz, a Vietnam vet whose adventures to rescue POWs and MIAs in southeast Asia probably provided the basis for the Rambo movies, or Air Force Col. Fletcher Prouty, who wrote in 1973 The Secret Team: The CIA and its allies in control of the U.S. and the world. Oliver Stone admits that Prouty, a former Pentagon 'insider,' was the basis for "X", his secretive informant, in the movie JFK. Unfortunately, Prouty and other CIA critics like Mark Lane, who recently defended the Spotlight against a libel suit, have begun to drift within the Liberty Lobby's orbit, with its theories about 'dual loyalty' and 'Jewish' control of American foreign policy. The Liberty Lobby recently got an award from Project Censored for its early reporting on the S & L crisis, and it was LaRouche's Executive Intelligence Review that released a lot of documents pertaining to October Surprise and Iran- Contra. Tony Avirgan and Martha Honey, the named plaintiffs in the Christic Institute's case, kept trying to get legal counsel Sheehan 'down to earth' by getting rid of right-wing conspiracy theories in his legal brief from sources such as Prevailing Winds' Guns and Drugs reader. Prevailing Winds is an anti-CIA group whose membership includes anti-Semite Eustace Mullins and Bo Gritz, and it claims that the CIA is really controlled by the Mossad and/or the KGB. In each of these cases, these right-wing groups were the first to break ground on stories that may be of extreme interest to the Left. But, in each case, the Left has to be very careful about some of the more fantastic conspiratorial assumptions offered by these groups, and stick to the facts. Liberty Lobby's founder Willis Carto is also connected to the Institute for Historical Review (IHR), a 'revisionist' group which tries to prove the Holocaust never happened. LaRouche's outfit regularly lambasts not just George Bush and the IMF, but the Anti- Defamation League, Cult Awareness Network, the British Monarchy, and the "Greenie Nazis," meaning environmentalists. The Populist Party uses bank failures in the Midwest and elsewhere to whip people up into an irrational frenzy, and it has connections to neo-Nazi groups like Posse Comitatus and the Identity movement, as well as the John Birch society. All three of these groups are active in promoting conspiratorial theories, some of which are of interest to the Left; but we must be wary of their true agendas. Right-wing radio personality Craig Hulet has quite an audience on left-leaning Pacifica radio when he criticizes the "corrupt government" of George Bush. Sadly, Hulet also talks frequently (off radio) to right-wing audiences about 'Z.O.G.,' the "Zionist Occupation Government," and how they control "most of the Left-wing groups in this country." Hulet is connected to Gritz and Carto, and other fascists who have tried to make coalitions with the Left in cynical ways. The Left's conspiratorial imagination took off once more after the release of Oliver Stone's movie JFK. We were interested in renewing our critique of covert intelligence and the shadowy spook games of the CIA. Sadly, some of Stone's information comes from an article by Medford Evans in the New American in 1967, in which Evans argued Lyndon Johnson and the 'American Establishment' engineered the assassination in the interests of Big Oil, Big Business, the CIA, the media cartel, and Big Finance. Evans has recently written that he enjoyed Stone's film, but has criticized Stone for saying it was a right-wing plot, and especially for implicating anti-Castro Cubans, the Mafia, and hawkish Vietnam anti- communists: in Evans' view, you can clearly see "international communism" at work in the assassination, a view echoed by some Birchers who think Oswald was getting orders from the KGB and Castro. Jim Garrison is the other major source of Stone's info, and while Garrison leaned toward right- wing forces being involved in the plot, he makes a curious effort to point out that his cast of villains - David Ferrie, Clay Shaw, etc. - are homosexuals and part of "some perverted subculture." Garrison is as interested in their moral depravity as he is in (curiously) covering up the role of the New Orleans mob... Mark Lane, who recently wrote Plausible Denial implicating the CIA and Watergate veteran E. Howard Hunt in the assassination, and was consulted for the film, recently acted as legal counsel for the Liberty Lobby, and admits getting some assistance from them for his theories. Lane and Sheehan are not the only lawyers on the Left to have defended some shady characters. Recently, former U.S. Attorney General Ramsey Clark has acted as legal defender for LaRouche's organization. Ramsey Clark, who was a vocal critic of the Gulf War and has spoken out on other issues (such as the L.A. riots), especially U.S. action in the Third World, may have drifted into the LaRouchians' ideological orbit, although he denies agreeing with their more extreme ideas. Other items of interest to the Left have suspicious connections. Seymour Hersh, who wrote in the Samson Option about the mysterious millionaire Robert Maxwell (who died in a suspicious 'boating accident' recently) and his role in obtaining nuclear weapons for Israel, may have gotten some leads from Liberty Lobby people as well. James Earl Ray, MLK Jr.'s assassin, has recently tried (after 20 years!) to revive the theory that he, like Oswald, was a patsy, and people should really be looking at the FBI and their involvement in a conspiracy to kill King. But Ray's new book which tries to find the "real murderers" has a laundary list of right- wing sources in its bibliography, including books by Willis Carto's Noontide Press. Returning to our little anti-Gulf War speakout, the moral of the story is : look behind the rhetoric. When a speaker blasts the "government," does he want a more democratic, just, and equal system? Is he against power and privilege, or does he just want his group in charge? Does he oppose unfair or unjust government policies, or is he more concerned with government promotion of 'race mixing'? When he starts complaining about "Zionism," does he want to see Israelis and Palestinians living together in peace and cooperation, or is he really talking about 'the Elders of Zion' and 'ZOG'? When he complains about "the war lobby," is he an anti-militarist who supports Third World autonomy in political and economic development (and opposes U.S. interference for that reason) or an anti-war pacifist, or is he really an isolationist and nationalist - like Charles Lindbergh, whose "America First" movement wanted us to stay out of opposing the Nazis during WW II, for political, not pacifistic, reasons. If the speaker talks highly of Malcolm X, is it because he wants black empowerment in the economic system, or is he someone who admires black separatism, and likes blacks who want to live apart ('race pride')? After he's done blasting the 'shadow government' and 'international finance,' ask him his attitudes about homosexuality, feminism, integration, freedom of expression, multiculturalism, the VietNam war, affirmative action, and social justice. You may be surprised (or frightened.) Does he feel we "betrayed our boys" in VietNam? Does he think the New World Order is to be "a one-world super-socialist State"? Does he think that one of America's greatest problems is immigration by non-European peoples, like David Duke or Pat Buchanan? Does he believe this is "a Christian nation, first and foremost"? Are his pet bugaboos the Trilateral Commission, the Bilderbergers, the Rockefellers & Rothschilds, the Council on Foreign Relations, etc.? If so, you may be dealing with a fascist nut. Many of these right- wingers have decided to play at being "wolves in sheep's clothing," and have infiltrated various Left coalitions, playing up (in a cynical way) supposed common agendas ("us against the center," in a way.) They also try and recruit among labor and the poor for their 'skinhead' legions. Fortunately, at least for the moment, the Far Right is even more marginal than the Left in this country. But the Left should not help them get one iota closer to power, because their racist, anti- Semitic, irrationally paranoid agenda could not be further from ours. If they start talking about crazy schemes to eliminate usury or purge 'dual loyalists,' run the other way! These days, as one political commentator has noted, everybody running for president is a populist and an outsider, from Pat Buchanan to Jerry Brown. The question is, what do they see as the Establishment against which they are tilting their lance? Is that "establishment" the dominance of government by corporate money and the wealthy classes, or do they mean the "establishment" of the welfare state, affirmative action, and 'liberal special interests' (read: ethnic groups) in Congress? In many cases, it is the latter. "Populist" movements in America have had a record of xenophobia, nativism, racism, and paranoia, crusading against Catholics, Jews, Freemasons, and southern European immigrants, as well as "big business" and "big banking." Anyone who understands ideology, and remembers the crowds at the rallies at Nuremberg and the size of the fascist mass movement in the 1930s, knows that not every 'popular' movement is the 'will of the people.' Even today, European racists like Le Pen play at being populists, by exploiting French patriotism and enthnocentrism. David Duke ran as the Populist Party candidate in 1988. The Left should remain wary of the right- wing brand of populism, because much of it still smacks of the way Hitler used to talk about his volkisch fatherland and the horrors of the "Peoples'" State in Cambodia. They should stick to their principles: the enemy of their enemies, in this case, is most assuredly not their friend. Steve Mizrach, aka Seeker1 Return to Politix From: Michael Pugliese To: NewPacifica@yahoogroups.com Date: Mon, 01 Jul 2002 13:09:03 - 0700 Subject: Re: THE ENEMY OF MY ENEMY IS NOT MY FRIEND >...Does Mr. Pugliese answer questions?... Heh, I do! A little background. On the Christic Institute, back around the summer of 89 or so, via some folks I worked with in the Jesse Jackson campaign, I spent a few weeks organizing a meeting with Father Bill Davis of the Christic Institute. Larry Bensky covered it. I still have the humongous Daniel Sheehan document submitted to the Courts on the Secret Team and the LaPenca bombing. Way too garbage in there from the likes of Liberty Lobby loon, L. Fletcher Prouty. (Sheehan, btw, more recently was a speaker a press conference on UFO's held at the National Press Club in D.C.) Along with reading magazines like Monthly Review and Socialist Review(then entitled, "Socialist Revolution, " some of the same folks like James Weinstein of In These Times were founders of SR) in my teenage days, I was radicalized by listening to KPFK esp. the Dorothy Healy Sunday show on KPFK. Under her mentoring and Blase Bonpane until I went to college at UCSC, where I was acive in the socialist-feminist group NAM that merged with DSOC later to produce DSA. (Which, I betcha makes me a tool of the Social Imperialist Bourgeoisie to some here? ;-) On Pacifica and the Left generally in AmeriKKKa, I grow more and more disheatened at the lack of knowledge and perspective by way too many more activist inclined types. Don't have the background to know the difference between COINTELPRO from Comintern. http://www.yale.edu/annals/ On covert action, the CIA and such, long ago I read such classics as the CIA Diary of Phil Agee, William Blum's vols., Cockburn & St.Clair's, "Whiteout, " , "Deep Politics and the Death of JFK, " read all the Gary Webb stuff too. What is true, in all that has been way overextended by the nuts on the far right and hard left. Just on the CIA-Drug Smuggling angle there is loads of shit on that found on far right lists like American Patriot Friends Network. Way more Amerikkkans listen to and read that swill than all the Pacifica listeners. Michael Pugliese From LAMZ at sympatico.ca Mon Jul 1 15:46:19 2002 From: LAMZ at sympatico.ca (Lysander Zimmerman) Date: Sat Aug 5 04:33:16 2006 Subject: [R-G] The Indiscreet Charm of the Bush-Nazi Web Conspiranoids References: Message-ID: <003401c22148$bc516cd0$33378d18@Indy1> Okay.....so you do agree that the elite frequently turn to secret black ops and conspiracies to maintain the class structures? If so, I'm sorry for jumping on you. I'm just sick and tired of hearing the erroneous and baseless attack "you're just a paranoid conspiratorialist" whenever I discuss true government/corporate/military conspiracies. I agree that we need more left-wing sources on this stuff but contemporaries like Chomsky are fast asleep right now -- just when we need them most. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Michael Pugliese" To: Sent: Monday, July 01, 2002 5:38 PM Subject: Re:[R-G] The Indiscreet Charm of the Bush-Nazi Web Conspiranoids > Heh, Lysander a few yrs. ago I found a copy of the Church Committee > reports at a used book store. Been there done that... > My motive, just like Chip Berlet's who knows this stuff better than > anyone, is to get folks like you to use better sources (not the far > right crap from the Liberrty Lobby's AFP) > and methodology. Read lefties like Bill Domhoff and marxists like Nicos > Poulantzas and Ralph Miliband. Find back issues of Jim O' Connor's neo- > marxist journal, "Kapitalistate, " at an academic library. > Michael Pugliese > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rad-Green mailing list > Rad-Green@lists.econ.utah.edu > To change your options or unsubscribe go to: > http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/rad-green > From debsian at pacbell.net Mon Jul 1 15:58:53 2002 From: debsian at pacbell.net (Michael Pugliese) Date: Sat Aug 5 04:33:16 2006 Subject: [R-G] Re; Chemtrails Message-ID: AKA Contrails. Jeesh, Lysander you believe Dr.Len Horowitz at tetrahedron about anything? The Man has no credibility on HIV, Anthrax, nada. http://www.centrexnews.com/ is full of Far Right Crap from LaRouche, Anthony Sutton (author of, "Wall St. and the Bolshevik Revolution."), John Birchers AND Chossudovsky and Jared Israel. Michael Pugliese Stop this nonsense! Tired of seeing IMC go off the deep end 11:05am Tue Jun 25 '02 comment#1823 I see this crap up here, and I despair about the future of Indymedia. IMC-Hamilton and IMC-Portland have been transformed into forums for disciples of Art Bell, Mike Ruppert, and other conspiracy hucksters. Whatever happened to doing solid, grassroots reports from our communities? Why in the HELL is IMC-Hamilton doing the "chemtrails" thing? Why aren't people in Hamilton putting a halt to this nonsense? There are enough terrible problems on this tattered planet of ours without having to invent new paranoid conspiracies about secret government chemical-spraying operations. Enough! From debsian at pacbell.net Mon Jul 1 16:08:50 2002 From: debsian at pacbell.net (Michael Pugliese) Date: Sat Aug 5 04:33:16 2006 Subject: [R-G] Crank Dot Net | September 11 Message-ID: http://www.crank.net/911.html From mstainsby at tao.ca Mon Jul 1 16:26:22 2002 From: mstainsby at tao.ca (Macdonald Stainsby) Date: Sat Aug 5 04:33:16 2006 Subject: [R-G] Re; Chemtrails References: Message-ID: <011f01c2214e$547c6780$291f5318@vc.shawcable.net> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Michael Pugliese" >Why in the HELL is IMC-Hamilton doing the "chemtrails" > thing? Why aren't people in Hamilton putting a halt to this nonsense? It's always more than curious how those who do not like the nasty aspects of digging in behind the "acceptable" issues always call on others to censor those who won't excersize such "self-restraint". Indymedia operates on a no-censorship policy, and you would be wise not make calls for such. Remember, Rad Green doesn't operate on the same policy. Lysander is very welcome here, and is an active member of the radical community on the Eastern side of the country I get to see far too rarely. A great disappointment to me on my last trip out East was being unable to find him and hoist a pint. He didn't lose any of his nerve to speakout after 9-11, something very few of us can say. Macdonald From LAMZ at sympatico.ca Mon Jul 1 22:59:11 2002 From: LAMZ at sympatico.ca (Lysander Zimmerman) Date: Sat Aug 5 04:33:16 2006 Subject: [R-G] Re; Chemtrails References: Message-ID: <000f01c22185$346fbbe0$33378d18@Indy1> I can't believe that you lump all of these people together. You dismiss people WAY TOO EASILY!!! LaRouche is an idiot, Chossudovsky and Israel are NOT. Their work is thousands of times more intelligent and documented then the crap that you have been posting in the last few days. As for Horowitz, I don't necesarily "believe" him, I just mentioned his theory because many people do belive what he says about chemtrails. There are plenty of historical precedents to make his story sound believable. Great comment you chose to post!! (NOT!) That comment was the LEAST intelligent one that went up to either the Hamilton or Portland posts. People are too quick at launching baseless attacks against well-documented articles. Skepticism, an open mind, a knowledge of history, and truthful questioning are required to get to the bottom of the chemtrail mystery....not baseless attacks. One thing is for sure in my mind, chemtrails ARE real and the article gives plenty of evidence for a joint geoengineering/HAARP project being carried out. Read ALL of the links before you come to any "conclusions". READ THE DAMN EVIDENCE FOR GOD'S SAKE!! IT'S ALL THERE: http://hamilton.indymedia.org:8081/front.php3?article_id=1793 http://portland.indymedia.org:8081/front.php3?article_id=13240 I'm posting more video soon (lowbandwith versions of the existing clips are going up tonight). "First they ignore you. Then they laugh at you. Then they fight you. Then you win." - Gandhi ----- Original Message ----- From: "Michael Pugliese" To: Sent: Monday, July 01, 2002 5:58 PM Subject: [R-G] Re; Chemtrails > AKA Contrails. > Jeesh, Lysander you believe Dr.Len Horowitz at tetrahedron > about anything? The Man has no credibility on HIV, Anthrax, nada. > http://www.centrexnews.com/ is full of Far Right Crap from LaRouche, > Anthony Sutton (author of, "Wall St. and the Bolshevik Revolution."), > John Birchers AND Chossudovsky and Jared Israel. > Michael Pugliese > > Stop this nonsense! > Tired of seeing IMC go off the deep end 11:05am Tue Jun 25 '02 > comment#1823 > > I see this crap up here, and I despair about the future of Indymedia. > IMC-Hamilton and IMC-Portland have been transformed into forums for > disciples of Art Bell, Mike Ruppert, and other conspiracy hucksters. > Whatever happened to doing solid, grassroots reports from our > communities? Why in the HELL is IMC-Hamilton doing the "chemtrails" > thing? Why aren't people in Hamilton putting a halt to this nonsense? > > There are enough terrible problems on this tattered planet of ours > without having to invent new paranoid conspiracies about secret > government chemical-spraying operations. > > Enough! > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rad-Green mailing list > Rad-Green@lists.econ.utah.edu > To change your options or unsubscribe go to: > http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/rad-green > From bobenoch at shaw.ca Mon Jul 1 23:20:36 2002 From: bobenoch at shaw.ca (Bob Enoch) Date: Sat Aug 5 04:33:16 2006 Subject: [R-G] The Indiscreet Charm of the Bush-Nazi Web Conspiranoids References: <003401c22148$bc516cd0$33378d18@Indy1> Message-ID: <002501bfe3e5$3bbcad20$61474d18@vf.shawcable.net> Michael Pugliesi is very wise to stick to the drill for dealing with 9/11 "conspiracists" First, wag your head in an avuncular fashion, smile sadly, and radiate pity for the mis-guided..... Then associate the offending idea with as wide a range of neo-nazis as possible... toss in a homorous reference to Mulder, and with a bit of luck, you can bail without it being noticed that you haven't addressed any of the evidence at all, merely savaged those reporting it. And if you are really slick, you can make it seem like Marx and Lenin would agree with you as a matter of course.Neat trick, that. At all costs, refuse to be drawn into a discussion of the performance of USAF and FAA and NORAD on the day. Or how the officer responsible for this "defeat" was made Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff the week following. I live in fading hope that just one of those who speak so surely to us from such a great height, chiding us for our credulity, will actually honor us with an explanation of those matters.....If it is so simple an explanation, it will only take a moment of your time to set us all straight. I, for one, would be pleased to be convinced as Michael seems to be , that our enemy lacks the imagination, or the will, or the means to carry out such a global coup. Perhaps he knows, or fears, that too much reflection on the actual events of 9/11 might lead to the opposite conclusion. So, by all means talk about Lynden Larouche, and UFOs. You are on safe, reassuring ground there. Bob From LAMZ at sympatico.ca Mon Jul 1 23:20:44 2002 From: LAMZ at sympatico.ca (Lysander Zimmerman) Date: Sat Aug 5 04:33:16 2006 Subject: [R-G] By the way.... [Re: Chemtrails] References: <000f01c22185$346fbbe0$33378d18@Indy1> Message-ID: <004901c22188$3751ece0$33378d18@Indy1> .....I witnessed 7 high-flying jets leave cloud-forming "contrails" within 40 minutes this afternoon. I videotaped 4 of them in 20 minutes (my battery went dead). These aren't civilian aircraft and they're not up there doing aerial mapping. Read the Livermore research by Cadeira and Teller....then read the patents....then read this: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2001/01/15/archive/main264362.shtml Some insane project is being carried out in secret and it wouldn't be the first time. Here's one of the better comments posted to the IMC Hamilton chemtrail article: << Nuclear weapons by Rockman comment#1852 I assume you all think that nuclear weapons were developed with full disclosure and complete knowledge of the risks, no conspiracies there... Read "The Plutonium Files" by Eileen Welsome, a chronicle of the development of nuclear weapons and the testing (in secret) of plutonium on thousands of Americans in an attempt to discover the effects on the human body. It was decades before these tests were publicly acknowledged by the government and longer still till the people involved found out the truth about their mysterious illnesses. The book won many awards. Whether you want to believe it or not, there ARE conspiracies. And eventually, through the hard work of dedicated investigative reporters and the open-mindedness of their supporters, these stories DO get broken. Discounting stories off hand because they sound outlandish is NOT logical or reasonable. Look at the facts for anything, or else we you will be ruled by your preconceptions. I'm not saying chemtrails are real or not, but it deserves a decent look, even if it sounds "nutty". >> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Lysander Zimmerman" To: Sent: Tuesday, July 02, 2002 12:59 AM Subject: Re: [R-G] Re; Chemtrails > > I can't believe that you lump all of these people together. You dismiss > people WAY TOO EASILY!!! LaRouche is an idiot, Chossudovsky and Israel are > NOT. Their work is thousands of times more intelligent and documented then > the crap that you have been posting in the last few days. > > As for Horowitz, I don't necesarily "believe" him, I just mentioned his > theory because many people do belive what he says about chemtrails. There > are plenty of historical precedents to make his story sound believable. > > Great comment you chose to post!! (NOT!) That comment was the LEAST > intelligent one that went up to either the Hamilton or Portland posts. > People are too quick at launching baseless attacks against well-documented > articles. Skepticism, an open mind, a knowledge of history, and truthful > questioning are required to get to the bottom of the chemtrail > mystery....not baseless attacks. > > One thing is for sure in my mind, chemtrails ARE real and the article gives > plenty of evidence for a joint geoengineering/HAARP project being carried > out. Read ALL of the links before you come to any "conclusions". > > READ THE DAMN EVIDENCE FOR GOD'S SAKE!! IT'S ALL THERE: > http://hamilton.indymedia.org:8081/front.php3?article_id=1793 > http://portland.indymedia.org:8081/front.php3?article_id=13240 > > I'm posting more video soon (lowbandwith versions of the existing clips are > going up tonight). > > > > > > > "First they ignore you. > Then they laugh at you. > Then they fight you. > Then you win." > > - Gandhi > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Michael Pugliese" > To: > Sent: Monday, July 01, 2002 5:58 PM > Subject: [R-G] Re; Chemtrails > > > > AKA Contrails. > > Jeesh, Lysander you believe Dr.Len Horowitz at tetrahedron > > about anything? The Man has no credibility on HIV, Anthrax, nada. > > http://www.centrexnews.com/ is full of Far Right Crap from LaRouche, > > Anthony Sutton (author of, "Wall St. and the Bolshevik Revolution."), > > John Birchers AND Chossudovsky and Jared Israel. > > Michael Pugliese > > > > Stop this nonsense! > > Tired of seeing IMC go off the deep end 11:05am Tue Jun 25 '02 > > comment#1823 > > > > I see this crap up here, and I despair about the future of Indymedia. > > IMC-Hamilton and IMC-Portland have been transformed into forums for > > disciples of Art Bell, Mike Ruppert, and other conspiracy hucksters. > > Whatever happened to doing solid, grassroots reports from our > > communities? Why in the HELL is IMC-Hamilton doing the "chemtrails" > > thing? Why aren't people in Hamilton putting a halt to this nonsense? > > > > There are enough terrible problems on this tattered planet of ours > > without having to invent new paranoid conspiracies about secret > > government chemical-spraying operations. > > > > Enough! > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Rad-Green mailing list > > Rad-Green@lists.econ.utah.edu > > To change your options or unsubscribe go to: > > http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/rad-green > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rad-Green mailing list > Rad-Green@lists.econ.utah.edu > To change your options or unsubscribe go to: > http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/rad-green From mstainsby at tao.ca Tue Jul 2 00:09:27 2002 From: mstainsby at tao.ca (Macdonald Stainsby) Date: Sat Aug 5 04:33:16 2006 Subject: [R-G] The Indiscreet Charm of the Bush-Nazi Web Conspiranoids References: <003401c22148$bc516cd0$33378d18@Indy1> <002501bfe3e5$3bbcad20$61474d18@vf.shawcable.net> Message-ID: <001f01c2218f$06401c60$291f5318@vc.shawcable.net> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bob Enoch" Excellent stuff, Bob. You forgot to mention how we are to chide one another to make sure we stay "credible". Lee Harvey Oswald shot Kennedy, remember? Macdonald From mstainsby at tao.ca Tue Jul 2 02:05:17 2002 From: mstainsby at tao.ca (Macdonald Stainsby) Date: Sat Aug 5 04:33:16 2006 Subject: [R-G] Afghans Say U.S. Aircraft Attacked Wedding, Killing 40 Message-ID: <012a01c2219f$34306a20$291f5318@vc.shawcable.net> AP. 1 July 2002. Afghans Say U.S. Aircraft Attacked Wedding, Killing 40. BAGRAM -- U.S. aircraft attacked a village Monday while a wedding was under way, killing and injuring scores, witnesses and officials said. Bismullah, communications chief of Uruzgan province where the attack occurred, said Afghans were firing weapons in the area during the wedding as is common in rural Afghanistan. He said U.S. planes attacked, killing about 40 people and injuring 70. In the southern city of Kandahar, where many of the victims were taken, Afghans said the incident occurred in the village of Kakarak in Uruzgan province, where special forces and other coalition troops are searching for al-Qaida and Taliban fugitives. Kakarak is about 175 miles southwest of Kabul. They said the attack began about 2 a.m. and lasted for about two hours. A nurse at the Kandahar hospital, Sher Mohammed, said he heard that about 120 people were killed. In Washington, a Pentagon spokesman said a coalition air reconnaissance patrol that was flying over Uruzgan province reported coming under anti-aircraft artillery fire. Other coalition aircraft opened fire on the target and at least one bomb went astray. The official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said it was not immediately clear where the errant bomb hit. The official had no other details, including the kind of U.S. aircraft that launched the errant bomb. In Kandahar, one survivor, Abdul Qayyum, told reporters at the Mir Wais Hospital that the Americans came to the area demanding to know "who fired on the helicopters." "I said 'I don't know' and one of the soldiers wanted to tie my hands but someone said he is an old man and out of the respect they didn't," he said. Afghans often fire weapons during weddings in celebration. Hospital officials said a number of wounded were being brought to Kandahar. Most of the dead and injured were women and children, they said. In Kandahar, a 6-year-old girl was brought to the hospital still wearing her party dress. She was injured, and villagers said all members of her family were killed. Another injured child, 7-year-old Malika, lost her mother, father, one brother and one sister, according to neighbors who brought her to the hospital. The injured also included Haji Mohammed Anwar, a friend of President Hamid Karzai and one of the first prominent local figures who rose up against the Taliban. "We have many children who are injured and who have no family," nurse Mohammed Nadir said. "Their families are gone. The villagers brought these children and they have no parents. Everyone says that their parents are dead." ------------------------------------------- Macdonald Stainsby http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/rad-green http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/leninist-international -- In the contradiction lies the hope. --Bertholt Brecht From nestorgoro at fibertel.com.ar Tue Jul 2 06:51:00 2002 From: nestorgoro at fibertel.com.ar (Nestor Gorojovsky) Date: Sat Aug 5 04:33:16 2006 Subject: [R-G] Help, please! Message-ID: <3D217784.30060.6CF724@localhost> Dear Cdes., I have been on the "nomail" condition for some months. Today, I begun to get a lot of unexpected mail from the list. Could the moderator help me by returning to the "nomail" condition? Thanks, N?stor Miguel Gorojovsky nestorgoro@fibertel.com.ar ********************************************************************** * Compa?eros del exercito de los Andes. ...La guerra se la tenemos de hacer del modo que podamos: sino tenemos dinero, carne y un pedazo de tabaco no nos tiene de faltar: cuando se acaben los vestuarios, nos vestiremos con la bayetilla que nos trabajen nuestras mugeres, y sino andaremos en pelota como nuestros paisanos los indios: seamos libres, y lo dem?s no importa nada... Jose de San Mart?n, 27 de julio de 1819. ********************************************************************** * ****** From hunterbadbear at earthlink.net Tue Jul 2 11:21:53 2002 From: hunterbadbear at earthlink.net (Hunter Gray) Date: Sat Aug 5 04:33:16 2006 Subject: [R-G] Anglo bigotry flares openly in Arizona fire tragedy Message-ID: <001b01c221ec$f74ef2e0$ca70fa43@intel> Note by Hunterbear: The predominately Anglo border-towns in Southwestern Indian country -- like most of their Western counterparts and many others elsewhere in the United States -- are anti-Indian as hell [and anti-Chicano, anti-Black, anti-Asian etc.] Not all the whites are bigots by any means -- but many certainly are for sure. If the prejudice/discrimination in these hostile settings isn't out and running already, it usually doesn't take much to stimulate its poisonous flow. Meanwhile, in this colossal tragedy [where more fire damage has now occurred on Apacheland than off-reservation], An Apache accused of starting one fire is in jail at Flagstaff; an Anglo woman strongly suspected of starting the other fire is still free. Conservatives across the West are now blaming environmentalists for enabling serious fire conditions -- which is demagogic and blatantly self-serving as well as being a pure damn lie. There are some very real reasons why the fires exploded and made their devastating get-away. Among other things, see -- if you haven't -- my recent [June 23] post on the matter: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Redbadbear/message/4692 And, before too long, it may well be time for Native economic boycotts of some of these border-towns. Hunter [Hunterbear] Arizona Fire Scars Apache-White Relations By MICHAEL JANOFSKY with NICK MADIGAN July 2, 2002 http://www.nytimes.com/2002/07/02/national/02FIRE.html?tntemail0 CIBECUE, Ariz., July 1 - On the first of every month, Bernice Caddo cashes her Social Security check and heads 35 miles north to Show Low to shop for food, clothing and other family needs. Today, Ms. Caddo decided not to go. She was frightened, she said, and many other members of the White Mountain Apache living here were, too. "Maybe I'll go in a few weeks, after things calm down," she said. "But not now." Ms. Caddo, 61, and the others said they feared hatred and retribution from white communities for the act of one Apache, Leonard Gregg, 29, a contract firefighter who was arrested on Sunday and charged with starting a fire that converged with a smaller one and grew into the largest wildfire in Arizona history. Known as the Rodeo-Chediski fire, it has consumed more than 467,000 acres and is only 45 percent contained. Hot, dry conditions almost guarantee that the fire will burn at least a week more. The blaze has caused economic devastation across an area famous for hunting, fishing and scenic beauty, and it has not discriminated. Show Low and other communities north of here, mostly populated by whites, have lost more than 420 homes. The Apache have lost pine forests that supported a timber industry employing tribe members. But as Mr. Gregg awaits a court appearance on Wednesday in Flagstaff to enter a plea, psychological devastation is evident as well. Here in Cibecue, home to 2,000 Apaches, it has taken the form of fear, anxiety and even anger. Since Mr. Gregg was arrested for starting the Rodeo fire, Apaches say their northern neighbors have shown little sympathy for their losses, and rumors are spreading across Cibecue that Apaches are unwelcome in white communities and that restaurants will not serve them. "This has been there a long time," Belinda Colelay, 23, a teacher's assistant, said of years of friction between the whites to the north and the Apaches. "Now it's only going to get worse. Now they have a reason to hate us; they don't have to look for excuses. Leonard gave them one." Whether or not the rumors are true, Ms. Colelay and others say they feel growing enmity from residents of Show Low and other towns. Ms. Colelay said she and friends recently waited 45 minutes at an empty Show Low fast-food restaurant before someone took their order. But just the perception of discord has convinced many Apaches that they have to change their lives. They no longer feel comfortable, they said, driving to Show Low to shop or see a movie. Now, they said, they will drive 60 mountainous miles south to Globe. "Show Low is going to direct their anger at us," said Richard Collateta, 39, who said he had Apache friends who recently got into parking-lot fights with whites in Show Low. "Look, I understand it. If they say something to me, I say something to them. It turns into a fight. I don't know how long it's going to take to cool things down, but we're not going to Show Low anymore." To some whites in Show Low, the largest of the white communities north of the Apaches, the change is understandable. David Marley, 46, a plumber who has lived in Show Low for eight years, acknowledged mutual resentment, but suggested it was stronger on the part of the Apaches. "The Native American tribes have a large amount of resentment toward those who are not of the tribe," Mr. Marley said. "They go to a bar and they keep to themselves." Mr. Marley said he had stopped going to his favorite bar and dance hall, the Lion's Den, in Pinetop a few miles southeast of Show Low, "because a lot of the Native Americans go there and it's hard for the white people to have fun." Kelvin Beach, 59, a plumbing contractor whose house in Linden was saved, although barely, said: "A lot of people are upset that it was started by one of the Indians. They're the first ones crying about how their timber industry is destroyed." For many Apaches, the feelings of fear and anger are heightened by a sense of judicial betrayal. The authorities investigating the cause of both fires said they had interest in Valinda Jo Elliott, 31, a white woman who became lost while hiking and is believed to have set the smaller blaze, the Chediski, by lighting underbrush to gain the attention of a passing helicopter. So far, no one has been charged in the Chediski fire, which burned west of the Rodeo one in an area of thick pines. Even though the circumstances were different - prosecutors said Mr. Gregg started the fire to earn money as a contract firefighter, and he all but admitted his guilt in court on Sunday - it did not make sense to many Apaches that he was in a Flagstaff jail and Ms. Elliott remained free. "That's not equal justice," said Enoch Lupe, 50. "That lady burned all our timber. She also burned sacred Indian sites. We say, `Who did this?' We hear, `It was a white lady.' So here there is blame for everybody. But only one person is in jail." Ms. Caddo said: "One Apache. One white. The way I look at it is, they're equal. So no one should say anything against each other." Mr. Marley, the Show Low plumber, said the Apache were using the two incidents as an excuse to charge racism. Not that any Apache was willing to exonerate Mr. Gregg, who was being held in a Coconino County jail. He was routinely derided by residents here as stupid and selfish for trying to solve his financial problems through fire. Many said he had deprived the tribe of its most valuable asset: timber from forests the Indians regard as sacred. As a result, the town's lumber mill has closed, costing hundreds of Apaches their jobs and adding to a tribal unemployment rate already over 60 percent. "Sure, we're angry at him," said Mr. Collateta, once a logger and avid hunter who now hunts only for work as an auto mechanic. "If a lightning bolt had struck, then it would have been different. But for him to start the fire, just to make some money, that's ridiculous." Hunter Gray [Hunterbear] www.hunterbear.org (strawberry socialism) Protected by Na?shdo?i?ba?i? From farmelantj at juno.com Tue Jul 2 07:00:47 2002 From: farmelantj at juno.com (Jim Farmelant) Date: Sat Aug 5 04:33:16 2006 Subject: [R-G] Re: [L-I] Help, please! Message-ID: <20020702.090048.-68137885.0.farmelantj@juno.com> Hans Ehrbar has moved all of these lists to a new computer, but unfortunately, he was unable to transfer all of the subscription options for each list member to the new computer, so those apparently all have to be reset. Jim F. On Tue, 2 Jul 2002 09:51:00 -0300 "Nestor Gorojovsky" writes: > Dear Cdes., > > I have been on the "nomail" condition for some months. Today, I > begun > to get a lot of unexpected mail from the list. Could the moderator > help me by returning to the "nomail" condition? > > Thanks, > Néstor Miguel Gorojovsky > nestorgoro@fibertel.com.ar > > ********************************************************************** > * > > Compañeros del exercito de los Andes. > > ...La guerra se la tenemos de hacer del modo que podamos: > sino tenemos dinero, carne y un pedazo de tabaco no nos > tiene de faltar: cuando se acaben los vestuarios, nos > vestiremos con la bayetilla que nos trabajen nuestras mugeres, > y sino andaremos en pelota como nuestros paisanos los indios: > seamos libres, y lo demás no importa nada... > > Jose de San Martín, 27 de julio de 1819. > > ********************************************************************** > * > ****** > > > _______________________________________________ > Leninist-International mailing list > Leninist-International@lists.econ.utah.edu > To change your options or unsubscribe go to: > http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/leninist-international ________________________________________________________________ GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO! Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less! Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/web/. From mstainsby at shaw.ca Tue Jul 2 11:44:36 2002 From: mstainsby at shaw.ca (Mac Stainsby) Date: Sat Aug 5 04:33:16 2006 Subject: [R-G] Re: [L-I] Help, please! References: <20020702.090048.-68137885.0.farmelantj@juno.com> Message-ID: <001c01c221f0$225bbba0$291f5318@vc.shawcable.net> Jim is right.... anyone who is experiencing this problem, please contact me offlist and we'll fix it. Macdonald ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jim Farmelant" To: Cc: ; ; Sent: Tuesday, July 02, 2002 6:00 AM Subject: [R-G] Re: [L-I] Help, please! > Hans Ehrbar has moved all of these lists to a new computer, > but unfortunately, he was unable to transfer all of the > subscription options for each list member to the new > computer, so those apparently all have to be reset. > > Jim F. > > On Tue, 2 Jul 2002 09:51:00 -0300 "Nestor Gorojovsky" > writes: > > Dear Cdes., > > > > I have been on the "nomail" condition for some months. Today, I > > begun > > to get a lot of unexpected mail from the list. Could the moderator > > help me by returning to the "nomail" condition? > > > > Thanks, > > N?stor Miguel Gorojovsky > > nestorgoro@fibertel.com.ar > > > > ********************************************************************** > > * > > > > Compa?eros del exercito de los Andes. > > > > ...La guerra se la tenemos de hacer del modo que podamos: > > sino tenemos dinero, carne y un pedazo de tabaco no nos > > tiene de faltar: cuando se acaben los vestuarios, nos > > vestiremos con la bayetilla que nos trabajen nuestras mugeres, > > y sino andaremos en pelota como nuestros paisanos los indios: > > seamos libres, y lo dem?s no importa nada... > > > > Jose de San Mart?n, 27 de julio de 1819. > > > > ********************************************************************** > > * > > ****** > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Leninist-International mailing list > > Leninist-International@lists.econ.utah.edu > > To change your options or unsubscribe go to: > > http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/leninist-international > > > ________________________________________________________________ > GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO! > Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less! > Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit: > http://dl.www.juno.com/get/web/. > > _______________________________________________ > Rad-Green mailing list > Rad-Green@lists.econ.utah.edu > To change your options or unsubscribe go to: > http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/rad-green From debsian at pacbell.net Tue Jul 2 15:14:22 2002 From: debsian at pacbell.net (Michael Pugliese) Date: Sat Aug 5 04:33:16 2006 Subject: [R-G] 9/11 Conspiracism and the Left Message-ID: <764WOKIHUQOJWB951NJ3MGHG75E9ZU.3d2217ae@oemcomputer> http://www.publiceye.org/b_conspi.html#post911 From bobenoch at shaw.ca Tue Jul 2 18:00:13 2002 From: bobenoch at shaw.ca (Bob Enoch) Date: Sat Aug 5 04:33:16 2006 Subject: [R-G] 9/11 Conspiracism and the Left References: <764WOKIHUQOJWB951NJ3MGHG75E9ZU.3d2217ae@oemcomputer> Message-ID: <006a01bfe481$24f037a0$61474d18@vf.shawcable.net> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Michael Pugliese" < http://www.publiceye.org/b_conspi.html#post911 Same old, Michael, same old. This site mentions the basic issue, namely the "day off" taken by the Air Force, but does not address the subject at all (very wise). Wise, because there is no "explanation" for the greatest air power in the world allowing an attack on the HQ of the Empire, near the end of the second hour of of a highjacking crisis. What does an air force do during an air attack? Can you find me a doctrine which urges commanders to leave ALL of their assets on the ground during such a time ? Or a Commander-in-Chief so accepting of this dismal failure of all systems that he spikes no heads, finds no-one at fault, praises the very agencies and officers who have failed the country......? Not to mention pressuring Congress NOT to investigate the actual events. Ten minutes with an open mind looking at the detail of this op, and you know the "official" version is at best dubious and should be investigated. That should be enough to lead to a serious discussion of what really happened that day....a brilliant suprise attack by Islamicists? or the decisive move in a global coup. This is what is important about this debate; the danger of boxing oneself into the assertion that "they wouldn't do this"....in the face of all the indications that they did. They are certainly acting like it was their operation. I suggest that the post 9/11 events should lead those comrades who have dismissed this possibility to re-examine the facts. We can't afford to assume that there is anything at all that these "neo-liberals-in-a-hurry" wouldn't do. Bob From mstainsby at tao.ca Tue Jul 2 21:51:12 2002 From: mstainsby at tao.ca (Macdonald Stainsby) Date: Sat Aug 5 04:33:16 2006 Subject: [R-G] Going Down To Kananaskis: Fork in The Road for Our Movement (Part one) Message-ID: <017901c22244$f12eeca0$291f5318@vc.shawcable.net> _'It's a long road down to Kananaskis It's a short road back the other way If the cops pull you over to the side of the road You won't have nothing to say No, you won't have nothing to say There's a man waiting down the Highway 40 And he's waiting with a rifle in his hand And he's looking down the road for an out-of-province car And he thinks he's fighting for his land... ...Yes, he thinks he's fighting for his land'_ (Reworked from Phil Ochs: Going Down to Mississippi) Going Down To Kananaskis: Fork In the Road For Our Movement The "Endless War on Terror" was launched by the Bush Administration in near unanimity with the "International Community" (a sleight-of-hand term for imperial partners such as Britain, Germany and Canada) last October. The World Trade Centre Attacks are obviously the starting point for an understanding of most political events in our current situation. One of the very first "predictions" (perhaps an attempt at self-fulfilling prophecy) was that the Anti-corporate Globalisation movement would shrivel and die; That the few remaining activists of the First World would quickly be lumped in with Al Qaeda- and even the Palestinians and Colombian rebels-- as "terrorists". Indeed, here in Vancouver, Canada it was made only days after the attacks in September by columnist Michael Campbell in the Vancouver Sun, when he made the grotesque link between a crudely vague "terrorism" and the members of our ranks who wear black masks and get involved in direct actions against the symbols of the corporate states. Many of us who had been heart and mind involved in this movement for several years were deeply concerned about where our movement could go from here, if it could retain itself at all. Were we not a shallow movement, without a viable centre, without any connections to the communities in which we worked, a movement of transient troublemakers that might have the right idea only in the vaguest sense? Would we not completely drop off of the radar screen? Well, all apologies to Mark Twain, but the reports of our death have been greatly exaggerated. By March 16, 2002 we had regrouped enough to have five hundred thousand people amass in the streets in Barcelona, Spain against the EU- the largest convergence yet up until that point in our movement. Our organising also began to be able to make calculated choices based on what new situations reality placed before us here in North America- in February in New York, groups that were primarily anarchist-led put together a protest against the World Economic Forum. In the streets of New York there was almost no one who was willing to organise in the overwhelmingly hostile setting as it was laid before them. The "anarchist" groups usually associated with "violence" and "immaturity" put together an important demo of 25 thousand people in the very city that saw the beginning of the new era of reaction. This represented a tactical retreat into non-physical confrontation to simply maintain the existence of such protests, while we regrouped to rethink what to do next. In other words, we were developing a sense of thinking strategically. Perhaps the greatest aspects of our resurgence into prominence have been two recent events. First was the April 20, 2002 demonstration in Washington DC. What was originally to be a demonstration against the IMF and World Bank became a 100 000 strong demo in support of the heroic struggle of the Palestinian people against the increasingly genocidal Israeli Occupation of the West Bank and Gaza Strip. Again on this theme, a group that is called the International Solidarity Movement that sees itself as part of the resistance movement against corporate globalisation policies has been operating in Palestine, putting their bodies in between the civilians of Palestine and the advancing Israeli Defence Forces. Such a massive growth in both dedication and analysis is without precedent for us and speaks volumes as to the rising maturity of our movement. We are making the connections as a movement between an amorphous "globalisation"- policies that emanate from late imperialism and capitalism-with the horrid front lines of imperialist assaults on people, in places from Palestine to Venezuela. Nothing could be a more important growth, as what we truly need is to develop an analysis to arm ourselves. At the demonstrations in Calgary that I will discuss, we heard a slogan: "Viva viva Palestina, Venezuela, Argentina!" Accompanying that was one that came out of New York back in February: "They are Enron, we are Argentina". Such a noise was not made in the streets of Seattle in 1999. I had attended an anti-war conference in Montreal last May, and the conference itself had been organised by the same sorts of people that had built the more militant and anti-capitalist demonstrations at the Summit of the Americas in Quebec City. The conference focused on almost every spot on the globe, educating people in our movement from across the continent and involving people from around the world. That such a principled and non-dogmatic conference can come out of our movement is another sign of our advancing thinking. Aside from being denounced by the "International Bolshevik Tendency" for insufficiently fighting imperialism, the anti-imperialist, anti-war and anti-racist conference was able to produce a lot of constructive dialogue and opportunity for cross country, continental and planetary networking. Onward we march. From there, I began to hitchhike back home to stop in as many large Canadian cities as I could to help make further contacts with fellow activists. After about a week and a half, I stopped in Calgary where the main convergences against the G8 were slated to take place at the end of June. The first night I met a law student whom was a national from Africa. He attended the university, and after we debated the New Partnership for Africa's Development (NEPAD, an initiative developed for the G8 Summit. While called African, it would be best seen as made in response to the critiques made very public by our movement, so as to gloss over their persisting neo-colonial relationship with Africa- and lauded by people like U2's Bono) I spent the night on his couch in the residence. The next morning, we had a much needed coffee and I headed into town to make what I thought would be a quick opportunity to get in touch with the local organisers as they prepared their multitude of creative demonstrations and a counter summit. The counter summit was called the "People's Summit", the G6B (they are eight, we are six billion). What I discovered was a repressive atmosphere that I had never experienced before, except perhaps as a ten-year old tourist in Mexico in 1985 where soldiers wandered the streets with machine guns. The difference, of course, was that in Mexico those guns were ostensibly to "protect" people like myself, a simple North American tourist. However, here in Alberta, the measures-- grotesque media slanders, by-laws against our rights to peaceful assembly, "anti-terrorist" legislation and the refusal to grant any space in Calgary or near Kananaskis for protesters to meet-were directed at folks like myself. People were acting as if under siege, and the meetings were still more than a month away. With suspicion was how I was greeted, chaos seemed to reign in the organising (there were not many posters around, the city was working overtime to bungle any attempts at inter-activist communication), fear was the guiding factor and a feeling of impending doom prevailed. I had to walk around and ask people who looked like they might be considered 'usual suspects' in order to come into contact with radicals working in Calgary. I learned that some of the coalitions for organising had already broken down, with people on all sides of the different debates becoming married to certain "positions". I heard that the entire city had co-ordinated to deny the organisers proper spaces to hold meetings and that the use of ad-hoc spaces like college cafeterias was resulting in the activists being chased out. No halls were rented to activists to hold meetings during the summit, and that the few spaces that could be accrued were separated by vast amounts of space. The trade union bureaucrats had also broken off contacts, and all spaces applied for to be used for camping out-of-town activists had been denied by the city. The unions were planning a march called a "family march" for the afternoon of the 23rd of June. Even this seemingly harmless march, three days before the start of the G8 Summit and guaranteed to be peaceful, had not received a permit. A glimmer of hope was that the unions had vowed to carry out their march regardless of the city's ban from Mayor David Bronconnier (who had stated that public parks could not be used for political purposes, despite the fact that he had used just such a venue for a barbecue to kick off his last electoral campaign). The final and most significant measure used by the Federal Government to quash the resistance of the people to their plunderous economic rule was the systematic blocking of any attempt to set up the "Solidarity Village", a project to allow a camp near the Summit site itself (near Kananaskis, often called K-Country). The Federal Government had paid the Stony Nation $300 000 dollars to prevent them from renting any space for the Solidarity Village, which was being organised by the Canadian Labour Congress in conjunction with the Council of Canadians. All other locations were on Crown Land, and were quickly and without discussion, denied access to any single protester. After the cancellation of the Solidarity Village, a real black cloud began to hover above the organisers- and the city of Calgary continued to deny any place for use by the multitude of people coming in from all over the continent (and even the world, to a small extent). The plea made by activists in response to all of this was simply that people are coming, and they can't be stopped. Even a full month plus before the Summit was scheduled to begin in K-country people were being denied entry into Canada for declared spurious reasons and never admittedly the obvious. They were, in reality, denied entry for being opposed to corporate globalisation and coming to Calgary to voice their deep anger at the institutions of the G8 and their governing leaders- as is their right anywhere, whether governments recognise it or not. After tasting first hand what kind of brutal measures were being meted out to all who dare speak the truth to power, I decided that if we are to have any rights at all, they must be used in Calgary, and maybe even in Kananaskis itself. When our movement is confronted with draconian measures and manipulations such as these, both the legal and the machiavellian, we must respond with a show of unity and defiance. I decided to head home and try to organise people to come to Calgary to meet this dropping of the gauntlet by imperial hypocrisy. We didn't make the decision to have this summit simplified into an act of defending our rights to assemble, but we can answer this call, and indeed we must every time. One of the greatest leaps in the analysis of many of our movements' people has been the dwindling interest in "Summit Hopping". When you have a movement that speaks of ending the economic suffering of the Third World, the AIDS epidemic in Africa, the rapidly growing sector of the First World living in absolute poverty, created by the advance of the G8, WTO and the post-Cold War economic order of neo-liberalism, it is contradictory to base an over arching strategy based on trying to mobilise people to travel thousands of miles to attend mass convergences. This is one of the main reasons our movement, however much it might resonate with all the victimised sectors of society, has been overwhelmingly white, middle class, and economically privileged- secure enough in employment or sources of revenue to take large amounts of time out from home. Those who are not from these categories are people who have made a lifestyle choice to be so immersed in organising that they continually live off of scraps and dumpster-diving, travelling via train hopping and hitchhiking- again, not something that can galvanise people from all walks of society. Another point to this is that we are no longer going to win the kind of victories we had in the first couple of years. We caught them napping in Seattle, which gave us the ability to shut that fucker down. That, and to see it retrospectively, the actions of the Black Bloc anger-laced actions later in the same day, put real politics back on the agenda and buried the notion of "the end of history" once and for all, and good riddance to it. After that, in several valiant showings of initiative we were unable to actually disrupt the meetings, but we were able to continue the advancement of our movement through picking clearly legitimate targets and successfully garnering our aims. We took down that ugly blight on the landscape of The Wall in Quebec. We demanded our right to assemble in Genoa, attacking that wall too- and the capitalist state showed its true colours by killing our fallen comrade, Carlo Giuliani. Despite his tragic loss of life, that demonstration was as clearly a victory as any of the others. There were 300 000 people at the march, and even more the following day protesting his assassination. We were not divided, even though some began to call for such actions to take place, even within our own movement. However, now that we have won the final victory of the convergence battles by chasing them into the hills and fortress of K-Country in Alberta, we have continued to seek the same strategic orientation as though we could do this forever. We cannot catch them here. As heartening as it was to hear Fidel Castro ask if soon these leaders would be forced to run away with their meetings to the moon, it still appears to be the end game of attacking summit sites as a strategy for galvanisation, winning victories of the will, and disrupting the real terrorists ' agenda for "business as usual". Summit Hopping in North America will lead us to oblivion unless we can demonstrate what we have at every other turn: our ability to grow, to be flexible in our strategy as much as we are in our tactics on the streets. As well, and just as problematic, is the very nature of how Summit hopping works. People who are not working on the grassroots issues of the city holding the summit and the convergences against it are unable to contribute to a lasting legacy in these locales that can produce further activism and new activists. Community work cannot be done by people who are not part of that very community itself. To leave the city where you live to go elsewhere is often to make clearly counter-productive choices, though clearly not in every case. To speak of what I know, I live in Vancouver, BC, Canada. This is where the most reactionary provincial government Canada has ever seen is in power (and that is to say a heck of a lot). Gordon Campbell and his 'Liberal' Party are in almost absolute power, holding 77 of 79 seats in the provincial legislature. They have already ratcheted up massive racism, holding a referendum on the rights of First Nations that are guaranteed by the UN. They have gone after welfare, casting thousands onto the streets, they have attacked the labour code, assaulted post-secondary educational funding, shut down women's shelters, eliminated pay-equity legislation and even dropped the minimum wage to six bucks (Cdn) for first time workers. This government has torn up existing agreements with labour unions, which even raised the ire of our vastly right wing press, who called it dishonest. They have scrapped and regressed almost all the existing environmental regulations, weak though they were. They even cancelled and are dismantling the provincial Human Rights Commission. They have created an atmosphere of panic and anger among the populace after they were swept to power in the wake of a reactionary and scandal-ridden (but relatively middle ground) New Democratic Party. In many of the cases, as a result of the mismanagement of the prior administration, the Liberals were pushing at an open door to make this full scale, corporate globalisation assault on the people of this province. In this atmosphere and with things here so urgent, what is the value in going to Summits if one is a revolutionary? As has been said in a different context by revolutionaries of days before, the number one enemy is at home. Yet, what is this provincial regime here, if not the smug, smiling face of corporate globalisation come to the homefront? What is our strength as a response to this government, if we lose the real-life connection to what created it in the first place? The governments of Calgary, Alberta and Ottawa had tried extremely hard to prevent allowing what the APEC inquiry determined was our civil right: to see and be seen by government leaders when we protest. They had gone beyond that, and tried to kill our movement (or at least, to wound it severely) by preventing people from even peacefully protesting in the city of Calgary itself. They have gone so far as to intimidate churches into not hosting homeless travellers to try and prevent people from speaking to this gathering of terrorists being held over a hundred kilometres away. They want to destroy the cohesion of our movement right while we are hitting a turning point. They know exactly what they are doing; we must as well know what is being done and know how to respond. The fact that these leaders feel the need to retreat to the woods is a victory in and of itself, and that they fear our loud message enough to go to these lengths to prevent it from being above a whisper. This kind of direct attack on the aspects of our modern resistance to the attacks of capital that are global must be met directly- proving and demonstrating our unity in their face, despite their threats, intimidation and blackmail. We must always be prepared to stand up for our brothers and sisters who live and breathe in the same movement; we stand for a world that will be one, and we must reflect this thinking in our movement as well. As I believe Mao once penned, _A good comrade is one who is eager to go where the difficulties are greater._ While I have been assured that the story was primarily a plant by the very hostile _Calgary Herald_ (the amount of black propaganda in Calgary certainly outdid the work of the press in leading up to the summit of the Americas in 2001, Quebec City), there was a report some two weeks before the Summit quoting certain revolutionaries from Kansas, USA. Supposedly, they had denounced the work of Calgarians and Edmontonians as too scattered, too unorganised and responded that they were going to the better organised demonstrations in Ottawa, the "Take the Capital" and "the "No One Is Illegal" initiatives. I want to say, very clearly, to any who were thinking along similar lines: Are you serious about revolution or not? We have no business going out for "fun" or "tourism" in these situations where the vices of the capitalist states are clamping down on our collective heads. If you are truly concerned with building a revolution, you should be honoured to make the difficult tasks succeed. That means going into the situations where whatever skills you have are most urgently needed. Whatever my skills may actually be, that was the final reason I felt the necessity to go into Cowtown. Our responsibility to not only attend, but to try and get involved in the dirty, on-the-ground work of the demonstrations, the conferences, the running of the Convergence Centre (banished to the edge of the city, in the prostitute and industrial wasteland district, in a building marked for demolition in the near future) is a reflection of the international character of our movement. It was not "their" demos, which "we" attended, it is _our_ movement. If Calgary were to suffer a great defeat at the hands of the Albertan fear mechanisms, or as a result of disunity among our ranks, then all of our anti-capitalist organising becomes weakened. We are as strong as the ties that bind us across the spectrum of states and regions. Our movement does have multiple front lines, and these include our homefronts, but this particular clash was a defining point of advance, stagnancy or retreat for us all. That directly affects our ability to work against the corporate globalisation agendas of our local situations. Once a major amount of work had been put into calling people out to the location of the summit and the nearby city centres, our future on the larger, global level hung in the balance. (continued in part 2) From mstainsby at tao.ca Tue Jul 2 21:58:34 2002 From: mstainsby at tao.ca (Macdonald Stainsby) Date: Sat Aug 5 04:33:16 2006 Subject: [R-G] Going Down To Kananaskis: Fork in The Road for Our Movement (part 2) Message-ID: <017a01c22245$e8187540$291f5318@vc.shawcable.net> (continued from part one) I arrived back in Calgary, again hitchhiking to the city. I had been told by a friend that the CBC announced that the Alberta police were gearing up to rape our constitutional rights to free movement: they were planning on stopping people at the border between the provinces of BC and Alberta. As luck would have it, when I finally got my ride that would take me across the provincial border, I was in the car of a staff sergeant from the New Westminster Police Department. I was Safely ensconced in his car with a story about heading to Regina in one of the Prairie provinces to visit a friend (who I had warned about my cover story, and memorised his phone number) and sit around writing poetry. Thus, I now knew that should such a blockade be set up, I would get through. As it was almost two weeks before the actual Summit was to begin, nothing of any note was there, other than the giant "Welcome to Alberta, Wild Rose Country" sign. One more quick ride later, and I was back in the same coffee shop where I had tracked down summit activists two weeks before. Only, now people seemed to be even more afraid and there were not any posters up on the lampposts. Calgary media were asking people to report to the police any anti-G8 graffiti. They even set up a "volunteer squadron" of anti-graffiti citizens' patrols. Even as the air was relatively clear, the sun out and the wind blowing, the atmosphere felt utterly suffocating. I made my way out to the university to try and link up with any activities that might be going on out there. The organisers, it should be noted, did a horrible job of keeping their websites up-to-date as far as organising was concerned. It was easy for people who wanted to attend workshops to decipher what was going on by visiting the internet, but it as extremely difficult to find the actual planning. My hope was simply that this was a reflection of how busy finalising things the local planners were- and from my later experiences, this appeared to be the case. By the next afternoon I had stumbled across a couple of the good people in the city I had met by this point. They alerted me to the logistics meeting going on, in a cafeteria where the noise and echo was more disruptive than even the "zamboni" clearing off the floors all around us. The meeting went well, being facilitated by a man named Charles from the Pagan Cluster (of Starhawk fame) already in Calgary. I asked what was actually to happen on the day of the summit itself, now being referred to as J26. I was told that there was a plan for three snake marches to leave from different meeting points across the outskirts of downtown, and that these snake marches were to disrupt traffic during rush hour, calling this a form of economic disruption. My reading of the term economic disruption tells me that this is not a form of it, but that wasn't my primary concern. It wasn't clear as to what our strategy actually was. I had previously read a call to action that had come out over the internet to the same effect. I couldn't- try as I might- see the actual target. Simply causing chaos in the downtown core was not going to make a very clear point, even if our communiqu?s detailed the different corporate "targets" that were to be passed by on the march. Further, the march was organised under the banner of Quebec City and similar, much larger marches: "diversity of tactics". People can argue all they want about how that means different things to different people, and it means respecting all forms of resistance. In our movement, in most cases at least, it is code for "on this march, people are not being asked to refrain from engaging in acts that can be construed as 'violent' by the police." Such a choice, made when there were 6000 police from across the country (Ontario Provincial Police[OPP], Calgary and Albertan police, Royal Canadian Mounted Police) and we had no idea how many people were going to show up seemed to me to be begging for a massive defeat. It seemed that possibly a sad satire of victories in places like Seattle, but this time ending in chaotic mass arrests were going to befall all of our organising. I decided to try and work to help avert the disaster. The lack of a clearly defined strategy was even more disturbing than the lack of clarity as to tactics. If we had a target that was so obviously correct- such as that blasted Wall in Quebec City-that no matter what spin it was given our message would get through regardless, then our physical safety would be the only concern. As I said to some people there, I am personally fatalistic about my physical safety, but the health and advancement of our movement has the entire planet and all the inhabitants therein in the balance. We cannot afford to allow ego to cloud our judgements. People who had been working on this project for nearly a year had every reason to be tied to their original plans: They had put heart and soul into this work, and it was conceived by them. However, for the sake of any who might have emotional rather than rational reasons for wanting to try something reckless without proper consideration as to the effect on the morale of our movement, we needed to evaluate what was going on here. This is in _no way_ a morality judgement, I personally am no pacifist; it is a practical consideration. Smashing a Starbucks window is not even on the same radar screen as compared to what is going to befall our city centres when the movement of the working class to reclaim what is rightfully theirs begins in earnest. The question is one of practicality and what works to our collective advancement in "tearing the fortress down", making sure we do whatever necessary to make that fateful eventuality come sooner, for we have no time to waste. Not a single day. I had spoken directly with many different people involved in the plans, and there were as many different interpretations as there were people to talk to. As stated, there was no clearly defined target in Calgary, nothing other than the timing coinciding with the meeting some 100 plus km away. Worse still, we had no idea how many people would actually come out to these snake marches. There was and remains no place in our movement for ego about trying to be every bit as militant as the demonstrators in other flanks of our movement. It appeared that the organisation of this particular demonstration was being done in a vacuum, without paying attention to the reality of what was happening on-the-ground. We had very good reason to suspect that our numbers were going to be in the hundreds, not the thousands, for the snake marches. Labour had pulled out of the planning approximately a month before, citing safety concerns. Now, I am hardly the one to think we should ever bow before TUB's- their number of betrayals of the anti-capitalist leadership of our movement prior to this was so high I lost count long ago. However, this was not the same as in the other cases, not even close. In Calgary, the Trade Unions deserve the fullest marks at the end of all the organising. In Quebec City, the smaller anti-capitalist marches were in the tens of thousands. The organisers took great pains to accommodate everyone, through the creation of "Red, Green and Yellow" zones. They were so clearly marked and set far apart from one another as to have been able to accommodate people who could not risk arrest or didn't want to eat tear gas, but who still wanted to march under an anti-capitalist (and even anti-imperialist) banner. When the TUB's deliberately diverted their march and took their rank and file to a parking lot in the middle of nowhere, it was a grotesque paternalism being enforced on the rank and file. The leadership, being dragged by the force of history that was being created by the radicals in the forefront, could not risk having their own members wander amongst those who might have a more clearly defined critique of corporate globalisation, capitalism and imperialism than simply "working people and their families need a raise" and other such blather spoken by TUB's all too often. Worse still, these leaderships had a clear hostility to being associated in the press with the anti-capitalist leadership that has emerged in our movement. They would not demand that people have the right to take to the streets, that capital and militarism are the main problems of the day, that the FTAA was only a microcosm of the greater forces at work impoverishing us in the Global North and murdering us in the Global South. This amounts to more than a betrayal- it amounts to doing the work of the capitalists themselves in glossing over the glaring contradictions in this wretched system. When these TUB's follow our anti-capitalist leadership to a demonstration, it is because they have no other choice, and even within that situation they will resist to the bitter end the radicals who have and will maintain a real critique of the dynamics of economic, gender and racial power. We don't want more of the pie, we want to control the pie-cutter; we do not want special treatment for minorites, women and all sexual orientations, we want real freedom and diversity in equality. Calgary was not a situation where accommodation of different risk levels could realistically be done, at least not very easily. The scenario planning committee had a meeting, right after an open letter was written by one Rick Collier (of the Communist Party of Canada) citing several concerns. Some concerns I could not agree with at all- such as how he complained that blocking traffic would disrupt the lives of ordinary workers-- but on the whole the majority of what was in that widely circulated letter covered the bulk of the issues that were causing many of us to lose sleep. There were only 6 days to go until J26. Being someone who has worked on projects for months at a time before having some jackass wander in at the last minute to tell people what needed to be changed, I was very cautious, as were most people, about making my concerns loudly known. No one "knew better", but only had less attached vantagepoints, being only partially inside and partially out. All of the people like myself who heard of the scenario-planning meeting and had major concerns about where all of this was heading went directly into this meeting. Rick read out his letter, which called for one march, the march not to start at 6am but 9 and for people to give real new consideration to the numbers of people likely to attend, and to base their conduct (or at least, plans for it) on these considerations. Approximately 85% of the room stated similar points, my main one being the grave concern about how we did not appear to the outside to have a strategy. We seemed to the outside to have no other plan than to "fuck shit up". That isn't revolution- that's a stunt, to be blunt. We needed a target. Several other people pointed out that almost no activism in Calgary ever takes place, and that to have a political disaster would irreparably harm an already almost dormant city, so militance should not take place at all. Although I don't think that would be true if a more militant action could have been more direct, obvious and successful, it certainly would be if there had been a small but ultimately crushed action that served no purpose but to allow a few people to vent righteous anger. The planning committee took these concerns very seriously, and held an emergency meeting the following morning. The commitment to inclusivity was very clear, as all meetings, both semi-closed scenario planning meetings and larger, public (except to the media) spokescouncils were run via consensus. Many people complained about the amount of the work being done behind closed doors, but I think these people should give it a rest in many cases. The action that finally took shape came from a proposal at the next night's spokescouncil meeting, which was the first time I actually felt extremely elated after a 200 or so person assembly run via consensus. The enormity of the situation and the importance and gravity of keeping ourselves tight made for one of the most positive meetings I' ve ever participated in. The original time of 6am was kept according to plan, but the march had one starting place and only was to be one march. Further still, to allay concerns about personal safety of some who couldn't physically fight cops, the organisers strongly urged people to operate where only after 10am- the designated "official" end of the march-could so-called "red" high risk actions be carried out. This was a personal great relief to me, as my mother- a retired school teacher in her early sixities who has radicalised herself in the last three-odd years-had already announced to me her intention to take part in the snake march. I did not want to be in the very odd, uncomfortable position of asking her to stay away from the march. As I pointed out to a few of the people on the scenario planning committee, a 61 year old woman with a bad back taking part in an illegal snake march is already far more radical than anything any of us young'uns could do. More on that later. Sunday June 23rd was the scheduled Labour-led march, the "Family March". The event got a permit a little less than two weeks before the actual event took place. There isn't much to report on about the actual event, other than it was spirited, and saw between 3500-4000 people in attendance. Personally, since the unions had announced their willingness to march without a permit, I was upset that they received one- it would have been very good to see them take the lead in defying the attempts to crush our movement through bylaws and attacks on our civil liberties. The atmosphere and the respect given from all the different strands of demonstrators to one another probably helped give labour the confidence to do what they did in response to the re-planning and re-working of the J26 snake march. On the 23rd, the Canadian Labour Congress, the Calgary District and Labour Council, the Alberta Federation of Labour, the Communications, Energy and Paperworkers Union, the Canadian Auto Workers Union and around 40 steelworkers who flew out from Toronto (rather than go to Ottawa, because "Calgary needed the numbers") endorsed the snake march and announced their intentions to bring out their members. Many other unionists announced their intentions to bring out fellow workers, including leadership of the Alberta Nurses. The gravity of what it would mean to all aspects of the social movements, should J26 go badly, seemed to mean to these unions they could "risk" participation in the snake march. The CEP also donated $3000 to the legal team to help pay for the bail of four of our activist friends who had been arrested. Now, this was probably indicative of how small the event was in comparison to actions like Quebec City and how having a successful small march allowed people more room to wiggle in the province of Alberta, but the CEP, CAW and CLC contingents were acting in a principled solidarity fashion. There was almost no likelihood at this point of a physically confrontational march, and therein lies the main reasons they came out- but to see co-operation between anti-capitalist organisers and the trade union movement was very positive and these TUB's deserve full marks on this day of solidarity. It also goes to show that if the anti-capitalists continue to take the lead in organising and persevering to create a movement with that front and centre, eventually the TUB's will have to follow. This remains our strategy in building an anti-capitalist movement that can include the organised working class: Radical anti-capitalists of all stripes must continue to create the space that ultimately the workers movement will have to move into, as the struggle becomes more acute. If leadership and planning of the movement is surrendered to TUB's, NGO's and social democrats, it will whither and die. If a grassroots movement organises and shows the way forward, TUB's belatedly will have to come on board. I don't think there is anyway that Bono will join us, however. But Bono: We'll do it- "With or Without You." People from all over the continent, albeit in small numbers, continued to arrive in Calgary for the two days time between the Labour "Family Walk" and the J26 action. In the intervening days, on June 25th, there was another demonstration that, whether deliberately or not, was to set the tone for the main J26 action. It was the "Showdown at the Hoe-down", a mass gathering outside of the site that was (ostensibly) where several of the delegates for the G8 were meeting the press and being "welcomed Calgary style", in a sickly western themed posh gala. People were to meet at Memorial Park and march a short distance to the outside of the Roundup Centre, where a street party was to be held. This gathering ended up with some 2000 people in attendance. At first, what evolved was precisely that: we held the street that was adjacent to the Roundup Centre and DJ's set up a stage, allowing me to dance to several house and even Drum and Bass sets. A trampoline was set up, police presence was minimal and I joked to the medic team that they would probably be needed at the trampoline before long. This persisted in being the basics of the gathering for well over an hour. Then a large contingent of the demonstrators decided they wanted to get closer to a line of police behind another one of those all-too-familiar fences that are being built up by capitalists to keep out the people. This involved walking down the street and into a parking lot- where people were hemmed inside by barriers. At first, people seemed quite content to be right at the fence, and Emma Goldman 's old refrain: "If I can't dance in your revolution, I don't wanna come!" (personally, while the sentiment is okay, I'm really tired of hearing that quote everywhere) was chanted over and over while people danced in front of the fence. Then something I'm personally convinced was an operation by provocateurs began. Two drunken idiots started yanking at the fence, yelling with all their passionate idiocy, the need to tear it down. Almost immediately, I spotted a group of around 20 or so Black Bloc-type anarchists make a snake-like link up of themselves and leave the area immediately, arm in arm. When these sorts-- no strangers to physical conflict nor do they shirk from it-- decide to leave a situation, that tells me there is something really fishy going on. The tone and mood of the crowd shifted very fast and it became ominous as to what was actually going on. My personal concerns over what was happening took a few different thought patterns: A group calling themselves "the anti-globalism action network": a front for a neo-Nazi, White Nationalist organisation with connections to Tom Metzger and William Pierce had been making attempts to work inside the anti-globalisation movement. They had issued a communiqu? in several places and cities and even passed themselves off as a "legitimate" group enough to get into the _Calgary Sun_. They had already been spotted at the G6B People's Summit, trying to set up a table and hand out their trash. They had issued veiled threats to make violent conflicts and I was wondering if this was their "big move". A lot of the people congregated there believed these were police. The task became, since it was going to directly effect what we were able to do in the snake march the following day, to calm down this idiotic outburst and let people see what was happening: we were being set up. After much yelling, a few people putting themselves in between the boneheads and the fence (and the media jumped all over this, but of course), a friend got on the bullhorn and managed to get people back out onto the street where the street party was happening. End of mini-crisis and disaster averted. The party began to break up in a trickle from there and I went back to the house where I was staying to get up early (5am, to be exact) and do "runner" work in the snake march. ------------------------------------------- Macdonald Stainsby http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/rad-green http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/leninist-international -- In the contradiction lies the hope. --Bertholt Brecht From mstainsby at tao.ca Tue Jul 2 22:07:39 2002 From: mstainsby at tao.ca (Macdonald Stainsby) Date: Sat Aug 5 04:33:16 2006 Subject: [R-G] Going Down To Kananaskis: Fork in The Road for Our Movement (part three) Message-ID: <018b01c22247$2ca92460$291f5318@vc.shawcable.net> The final decisions as to how the J26 march was going to be organised and how communications were to be handled were made in primarily closed meetings. This, to a certain extent, made sense. However, from there what became clearer and clearer was that we are- at least in the pressure cooker of such a brutally repressive and surveillanced atmosphere- _*starting to cave into an internal culture of fear and paranoia*_. With the breaking up of the Black Panthers being only the most glaring and obvious example, we need to be far more concerned about this than I suspect we are. This is a disease that comes out of very real repression coming from above. With the new "anti-terror" bills in place in Canada, the United States and elsewhere, we must take this very seriously and have a look at how it played out in Calgary and quickly learn these lessons. If we do not, we might very well end up suffocating under the new pressures we are being faced with. This is urgent. What we need to know first, is something most of us already say we do. All of our organising is monitored especially when it comes to challenging these large summits. Any decision we make is most likely known by the police in a matter of a few minutes after that choice is made. When we say we already know that, we need to operate openly. A situation erupted in one of the spokescouncil meetings where the plans for the J26 march were being detailed to the crowd. It went like this. Many people, including me, were concerned that the overwhelming police presence in the city was going to mean that no one was allowed out of our starting place. I personally thought for some time that we wouldn't even get out of the park where we were set to begin, but that we would be initially surrounded and we would not be allowed to move. The police had been issuing threats, the march looked small and at this point, there was not a labour contingent ready to call out their members to the march (yet). "What was the contingency plan?" a woman asked. "We, for reasons of security are unable to tell you that", came the answer. The woman pressed that she didn't feel safe being told that "something" was in place, but that we couldn't know what it was. The answer came back, that well, there is a contingency plan if the police surround us, but for reasons of security we can't tell you. "we have a plan in place, we have worked to make this a safe march, but if you don't trust us, maybe you shouldn't come." The room went into a booing and hissing situation. Remember what was said at the beginning of this, that anything we plan the police know. Exact, absolute details were not called for here, but to absolutely deny people this information means: A) the activists on the march will be confused and less likely to participate, and in any case ill-equipped to do so, B) The only people who will know what is going on are the police and the small coterie of organisers, C) We will achieve the job of dividing and confusing the march (or any similar event), without any help from the police. Who needs a plant when we break down our own communications ourselves, before we even take to the streets? This is only one example of the sorts of actions taken, ostensibly for security, that end up being a comical farce, if it were not so deadly serious. The police will always be able to listen in on radio communications, yet during the march people who spoke to our communications team were rebuffed, including an incident where one organiser was explaining something to a woman while another was chastising them for sharing information about what was going on. Another example was that several of the organisers took to "street names" during the different events. I've got news for people: When we organise things, particularly of this level of scrutiny, then they already know who you are. This kind of behaviour again contributes to confusion during demonstrations and similar actions. We need to be open, honest and communicative and simply assume what we are doing is well known. When we took to the streets in Calgary at everything except the "Family March" we were already breaking illegitimate laws. None of the other actions were sanctioned. Yet we advertised our intentions to go to the streets. That, obviously, was the correct thing to do. We must stay open and honest and disclose as much as we possibly can- if we don't, it's at our own peril, and not the other way around. They are the only ones who have anything to hide. If we say we know that, but we act like we don't, then we need to give this serious attention. I had arranged to be picked up by a comrade so as to not walk alone to the snake march. Walking alone to an unsanctioned event is simply not a smart move, people who are seen as organisers get picked off and "detained" when they are alone. Avoiding paranoia is not an invitation to recklessness. My ride showed up a short time after 6am and we were at the march thereafter. The snake march gathered in Fort Calgary and upon my arrival I noticed huge amounts of union banners, particularly the CEP and the CAW. Once I saw this, I knew the march would get out of the park. The police may attack and beat on "uncouth" protesters, but they are loathe to get seen beating or gassing trade unionists. My anxiety dropped rapidly, and shortly after we "huddled up" to get our communications straight, the snake march got off of the ground. Aside from a few hitches, being held up at several intersections and the like-- there was never a time when the snake march was anything other than a loud, wandering band of activists, unionists, people marching simply because of the fact they had been told not to. There was another thing that had brought out a few people to this march in particular, a letter sent home by the Calgary School Board to all students in the public schools. It read: "If you see a demonstration, get out of the area immediately. Do not stand and watch. Do not engage any demonstrators in discussion or debate. If you feel at any time that you are in trouble, approach an adult you can trust." This letter infuriated many numbers of people, and it was quite the opposite to encouraging youth to think critically, as the school system likes to pretend it is about. A few parents had come out because of this letter (an unexpected bonus). The language and conduct guidelines were (my guess is, deliberately) of the same chatter that is used for warning children about pedophiles and abductors. It sent a chill through me to see this, reprinted in the _Calgary Sun_. The march had, as previously stated, been organised under the banner of "diversity of tactics". As well, there were large numbers of anarchists who had made the trek out to the summit and had things other than a walk through downtown on their collective minds. A large bloc, perhaps 50-75 of them, were marching under a banner (in black, of course) that read "against capital, against the state" with a circle @ under it. The fact that they respected the call for a relatively "peaceful" march through downtown until 10am, even with their preferred cover of the large crowd and their own numbers being significant, was a sign to me of their growth. They put the interests of the march ahead of their own desires, and they also knew how to make a tactical choice not to engage police, who had not appeared in riot gear (something that also lightened people's fears right from the start). When the march itself ended (shortly after Starhawk and the Pagan cluster had asked us to stop by City Hall so they could do a "spiral dance") by the Harry Hayes building, a huge federal office building, the crowd was told where different safety levels had been laid out. At this point, cutting their losses, the Black Bloc-types marched around the city and several anarchists tried to engage the police in a game of "anarchist soccer" (the anarchists won by forfeit) in the streets. Two arrests occurred later when the group tried to rush and occupy a McDonald's restaurant, which was a very mild (although foolhardy) result of the end of the J26 snake march and associated actions. There was a "Di-in" action that started at noon. The idea was to get people to the Olympic Plaza downtown to "die", lying down and remaining perfectly still for a half an hour to demonstrate and highlight the number of people dying of AIDS for lack of care and funds throughout Africa. It was also to highlight the total hypocrisy of the NEPAD initiative, that speaks in favour of "helping" Africa but didn't even make the AIDS crisis an agenda item at their talks, much less have any real way to address the issues. A few years ago, Nelson Mandela tried to implement generic drugs that would reduce the cost of treatments from astronomical to almost affordable, a mild reform. His government was threatened with sanctions and his ANC successor Thabo Mbeki has since become the architect of the neo-colonial NEPAD program. This "initiative" didn't even achieve stage one of their pathetic goals. As African speakers at the end of the labour march pointed out, Africa owes no one, Africa is owed- owed for colonialism, owed for slavery, owed for the AIDS epidemic and the IMF "restructuring" programs that have exacerbated absolute poverty and furthered landlessness and starvation. This is the real African debt, owed by imperialism, yet at the end of the summit African (mis)leaders were given even less that than the pittance of crumbs being discussed in the lead up to the summit itself inside the K-Country fortress. The "Di-in" was to raise these issues, and participation meant lying in the sun on a day where record heat prevailed (36 degrees celcius). Aside from sunburnt legs, this wasn't a problem at all. After this, my friend and I were exhausted. But the day was not really even half over. The previous day, an "action" called the "People's Picnic" had been sanctioned, though a few days before the mayor "Bronco" was actually threatening a labour sponsored event with mass arrests for eating outdoors in a park. The rhetoric coming out of officialdom really took the cake so many times. but I digress. Arriving at the picnic hot, exhausted (being a runner at a march meant that I had personally covered the ground of approximately 18 snake marches), hungry and badly sunburnt (one of these years, I'll actually buy sunblock) my friend and I got in the line up for food. It was clearly a labour event, as there was far more meat-based fare than if it had been done by the activists, who are more and more seeing a need for a vegetarian lifestyle. A veggie-burger later, I was trying to find my mother to discuss the days events. I arrived in Calgary about a week before my mother, and by the time she arrived in town I had already inserted myself as much as possible into the organising being done by the different anti-capitalist collectives and organisations. So, when my mom arrived, I asked her to come to the convergence centre where people were arriving, planning and congregating for most of the day. It was an extreme pleasure for me to "show her off" to the comrades there who had already become friends. As I introduced her to as many people as I could, I began to realise the importance even more strongly of our movement making cross-generational links. People I introduced her to mentioned to me I was lucky to have that; that my mother being willing to make an eight hour drive was "really fucking cool" (she overheard that comment, and retorted "That's alright, I _am_ really fucking cool!"). Our movement runs a real danger of falling into a trap similar to what took place throughout the sixties: being looked at as a "youth" phenomenon. We don't have the "baby boom" dynamic of numbers, but we still need to make sure this does not befall us. People who may be physically weaker are often far stronger in spirit; I heard my mother say to me at the end of all of the weeks events about how she now felt in heart and not just her mind, a part of something bigger than herself absolutely. She also stated that she was now thinking in terms of "we", not "I" was one of the highlights for me on a personal level I wish I could share with every one of my counterparts. At the end, she bought me a beer and toasted the revolution (which I'll admit, made me squirm- this is still my mother, no matter how old I get). Having her take part in these demonstrations and doing so not at all because I asked her to (she informed me that she was going quite matter of factly, almost as if to say "try and stop me") was a microcosm of the kind of outreach our movement must undertake- and do so immediately. This will also add a great strength to what we accomplish. Apparently, after the day I introduced her around, for the rest of the week many 20 and 30-somethings kept calling her "mom". The matriarch of the revolution? Perhaps. I never found my mother at the People's Picnic, but I had to leave fairly quickly: a final event, organised as a symbolic one by two comrades from the Toronto chapter of the International Socialists, was about to get underway. The idea had been put forward and organised earlier in the week to go on a caravan out to Kananaskis, and drive in as far as possible before being turned around by the military. The military of Canada had been positioned in K-Country, with the right to shoot to kill and nearly three times as many troops as in the entire Afghan operation of the "War on Terror". They had anti-aircraft guns across the mountainside. There were 22 checkpoints along the highway and many more RCMP officers. Each checkpoint had another breathtakingly large fence-like wall. The operation to put radio collars on bears to avoid seeing them get shot (mistaken for "protesters", no doubt) ended up killing two grizzlies. One would hope that the outrage expressed by some over this would have been as high if they had shot G8 dissenters. At any rate, the security operation was a massive violation, unprecedented, in fact, of our civil rights. People didn't want to leave this unchallenged. The caravan was planned and 30 vehicles, containing under 100 people, had signed up to make the hour long drive from Calgary in a convoy, going at 80km an hour, driving the entire way with the hazard lights of each vehicle on, so as to be able to identify one another. No one, it was agreed at the planning meetings, was to be planning to even get themselves symbolically arrested trying to breach a part of the perimeter. This was to be a no-risk event. Things have a funny way of changing. When the caravan got under way, I saw something that is always a beautiful sight. Mass spontaneity. The caravan touched a nerve in many people's hearts, and when the announcement at the People 's Picnic was made that it was about to leave, the buzz spread quickly and soon there were over 100 cars making their ways down the highway. The police sent an escort due to the amount of congestion (and, no doubt, to watch for "terrorists"). These cars contained over 400 people, perhaps as many as 500. We arrived there in over an hour and a half, though the drive shouldn't take so long. Our police escort took us down to only 60 clicks. People are not willing to be shut out of these meetings, people are not willing to lie down for the state when they tell us to go home, and people are not interested in being told they don't have rights. The reason for so much interest in this action was clear: Anger. How dare they try to keep us out of our public spaces? How dare they protect terrorists with fences from hippies with dances? That kind of anger made the small stunt shift to a mass gathering, a people's movement. The organisers, who should be commended beyond the heights of the mountains surrounding the Kananaskis Valley for pulling together the action itself, never understood the shift in character. Or, if they did, they did not like it and were trying to reign in the aspirations of the people- something intolerable when the majority make a feeling clear. The feeling in this crowd was simple: we are now "negotiating" with the police to get into the first checkpoint. From there, we want to try our luck at getting to the second one. Well, after an hour and a half in the baking record heat, we went to the first checkpoint. As soon as the convoy stopped, people poured out of their cars and amassed in front of the fence. It was about 30 feet high, and it stretched into the edge of the mountain face. There was a line of police in front of this barricade, all on bicycles, even with some guarding the ditches around the edge. There were 22 checkpoints, and one assumes they all looked like this. With the people in the streets to discuss what to do next, several police cars pulled up behind the several hundred people gathered around, listening to Starhawk and Gordon Christie (among others) tell us our options and to try to facilitate a deeply divided crowd. The organisers reminded us of the original plan for zero-conflict, but to Hell with that, many of us thought: we are trying to meet and see the leaders making decisions that effect billions of people. We want to press on, and the cop cars are now a negotiating tactic- they get through if we do. Personally, thinking of the fact that there were over 20 more checkpoints like this one to get through, I wasn't too hopeful at the tactics being discussed here. Nonetheless, the crowds' determination was far more important than the aspirations of the few who wanted the whole project abandoned. Then, when Starhawk was asking the crowd if we should let the cop cars through, the call came out *"They are not cops, they are delegates!"* and a buzz went through me I hadn't felt in many months. That buzz was power. We had, so it seemed, functionaries from Japan and the United States (of all places) blocked and unable to get through. Maybe, just maybe, we can stop these murderers from carrying out their meetings without a hitch. What a drug that feeling is, the simple power of having control over them. There is not much like it I have ever tasted. It was the first time I had felt that rush since the FTAA summit, there had been nothing like that in Calgary. As quickly as the feeling came on, it was gone. Before we could decide whether to try to hold them in, they backed up and went out to the Highway One, where they would have undoubtedly gone down one of the back roads into K-Country. Just like that, the action had gone from stunt to movement, to militant action, back down all the way to stunt. At this point, the debates on the ground seemed lifeless and our caravan vehicle decided to round our people up and head back to Cowtown. What almost happened there reminded me in my gut of what had not happened in Calgary- we were never a threat of any sort. Not politically, not physically, not with our voices. This was our greatest loss. In many ways, simply getting through all the actions in Calgary without a massive defeat on the ground was a victory, but only a small one, and one primarily for the local activists. If I lived in Calgary, this would now look like a new dawn. But it isn't that clear for the rest of us. (completed part 4) From mstainsby at tao.ca Tue Jul 2 22:16:35 2002 From: mstainsby at tao.ca (Macdonald Stainsby) Date: Sat Aug 5 04:33:17 2006 Subject: [R-G] Going Down To Kananaskis: (Part four- Conclusion) and proposal for the movement Message-ID: <019e01c22248$6bd36140$291f5318@vc.shawcable.net> What I hope has happened is that we are saying good-bye to something we can never forget, and only give the greatest of thanks to: Summit hopping as an overarching strategy. We cannot continue in this fashion or we will perish and disappear from the horizon, something we simply cannot afford to do at all. In Europe, the peoples awakening continues unabated, with hundreds of thousands of people taking to the streets on a regular basis. There are many reasons for this, but we cannot afford to get left behind. We need to leave this strategy in the dustbin of history, as surely as we intend to with their whole imperialist system. We face this fork in our road to the New World can hopefully provide a new life to our entire movement, provided the death of summit hopping (as our main strategy, not to ignore it completely) gives us the spark to rethink where we are going. What was the purpose of Summit Hopping? Does shutting down meetings or ripping down fences help slow down the advance of corporate globalisation? No more than smashing a Starbucks window actually helps create better working conditions in Guatemalan coffee plantations. What has been the point is that it allowed people to see they are not alone, that there are people willing to risk their very lives to oppose the current system- and that these same people have no recourse left to them but to take to the streets and challenge power wherever there is a possibility that we can be seen and heard. The point has been to be heard by other people, to get them thinking outside of the box, the sandbox of the playground we are all banished to in these "democracies". When people shut down the WTO in Seattle, we alerted the world that there would be no more business as usual for the leaders who put maximum profits ahead of the lives of children in every city, country and continent of the globe. Summits have also been places where nearly the entire spectrum of issues that victimise all the inhabitants of the planet and the very planet itself are discussed. It provided the absolutely perfect place and forum for the coming together of activists from the multitude of issues to network and make the larger links in their own thinking. It also was a place where the symbols we were challenging represented the supra-state level of our current late capitalist era: the fact that decisions no longer are made at the level of a particular national state. Corporate power has gone far beyond the sovereignty of any particular state, even to a limited extent, the US. So has the response to these manoeuvres in the form of our "anti-globalisation" movement. Summits have now been driven by our increasing strength, both militant and with ideas, into nowhere: not just in K-Country, but some have indeed cancelled face-to-face meetings all together, going online for their discussions instead. As this happens, we will become disoriented if we do not foment an idea that can move us to the next level. We cannot surrender the initiative. In fact, in order to get back ahead of the elites who run the world, we need to stop being, for lack of a more accurate word, reactionary. We cannot simply sit on our hands and wait until they call another summit in a location where we might possibly be able to have a convergence. Yes, it is great news that so many people decided to stay home and work on their own local struggles this time around- but the simple fact is that there are many other reasons why we had such a low turn out in the actions in Calgary and Ottawa. One of those is simple: repression works. This is a movement that has not come to terms entirely with our new situation on the ground, and people were scared off by the repressive measures, particularly in Alberta. This should not be condemned, everyone has their own safety levels and must have them respected. However, when people lose the sense that something in front of them is self-evidently the correct choice, then we are not going to win their allegiance in getting them to the "red zones", or even the cities that are under an unofficial form of martial law. We also have yet to clearly put forward what it is we are for. My suggestion to many people is that they come out and see the planning and organising that goes into these convergences: so many of our people have made clearly defined choices to live now as they want to see the world organised, that we ourselves are trying to help create. Part of this can never truly be rectified, as the struggle itself will sweep away sloganeering and certain forms of collectivity will be made self-evident by the facts on the ground. To "blueprint" too many of our ideas for that better world would be to make false promises- ones we cannot necessarily keep. The starting point is that no real democracy can exist without economic equality. Anything else is inevitably hollow, and that is why we are the only real speakers for democracy. With every new law passed against dissent, the truth of this becomes self-evident almost to the point of parody. We are in a period of our movement in North America where we see the people's awakening going from success to success, and growing in leaps and bounds throughout Europe. Yet we ourselves are in a period of seeming stagnation. There are many reasons for this new turn, and a lot of them stem from a few planes in the air back in September 2001. The best thing to come out of the Summit in Alberta was the action in Ottawa, the capital of Canada. Their numbers were around 5000 for a militant action under the banner of "diversity of tactics" and the program of anti-capitalism and anti-imperialism. This was such a massive growth, because it represented the movement from one giant demonstration that everyone is supposed to attend to a movement that thinks in terms of itself regionally. In North America, unlike in Europe, it is simply too difficult to converge on one city for all the fighters for a just world. As well, as we move into taking our global analysis into our grassroots organising, we need to find ways to maintain our international charac ter. In many ways, that there were large demonstrations to coincide with the K-Country summit speaks to the way forward. *A Call for New Ideas: Proposal* The first thing we must maintain, at all costs- is our regional contacts. We are making larger than our own backyard leaps in inter-networking. This is nothing but to strengthen us, and it makes our own work that much easier when we see it as part of the larger world. As we work on our local fronts, the way forward seems to do several adjustments to recapture the initiative of fighting corporate globalisation. I propose, loosely, the following: We begin to set our own dates. We cannot wait for them to set things for us. If we do so, we'll become lost chasing people into the forests and getting nothing but a smaller and smaller turnout and dwindling sense of our own power, as people begin to realise that there is nothing we can do to stop these meetings. We have become horribly predictable, and we need to end that right now. We organise our convergences under a banner of "building a culture of convergence" and make it clear that this is not only to demonstrate, but to get together with other activists that are not living in our backyards. Making contacts, sharing information face-to-face can never be replicated by the internet. We are part of an international movement, and we must know each other as family. Each convergence date must also continue to build a conference around it: with focuses on three basic areas: 1) The War on Terror (and all issues that are most directly related- immigration, imperialism, environmental degradation from the fallout of war) 2) Corporate globalisation issues (such as the AIDS crisis in Africa, the decline of unionisation the world over, the privatisation of water, declining environmental standards), 3) Local issues in the province/city or state that the convergence is to take place in. (Gordon Campbell and his attacks on everyone) These will, clearly, have to be taken up as part of the same fight, making the links and avoiding seeing them as separate but similar. We cannot stand on one foot at a time, but see it as all in the same body of economic and political repression. These conferences can be best brought together by bringing unions, student unions and NGO's into their organisation- and have the whole gamut of activities spearheaded by the anti-capitalists among our ranks. The organisation of these things should allow at least 6 months and should make very clearly defined choices as to where the convergence should take place. There could be bi-monthly meetings of groups of activists from several different centres, perhaps Vancouver, Seattle, Portland, Victoria, Calgary and Edmonton could work on a North-Western convergence out here on the Pacific Coast. Each city can be independently responsible for organising a particular aspect of the conference, and we meet to share information and make group decisions as to how to bring people from our different areas to the convergence. Demonstrations should be built primarily by the organisers in the host city itself. Propaganda should be as unified and presented as a common front as possible, to help create the larger networks as a culture, and to share our own ideas and begin to synthesise an analytical framework that we can all agree upon. These ideas are to hopefully get us out of our rut, and to help us bring the local to the global, and bring the global to the local. It must be seen as part of the same basic movement we have all been working in and around, or it will not clearly make itself known as the strategic jump it must become. Finally, it gets us from where we are right now to something new. Where we are right now, was heading down a one way road. but the fork in it can be seized, and we can sustain ourselves so long as we recapture the right to determine when, where and what we will do. We all know we can't allow the ruling class to determine what our rights are. we can even less afford letting them tell us how our movement is oriented. The anti-globalisation movement must meet the contradictory glare of the local and the global head on. We will find a synthesis in this contradiction or else we will be nothing but another blip on history. However, remember the words of Bertholt Brecht: "In the contradiction lies the hope". The only thing I regret was that one of the best voices of our movement, David Rovics, was stopped at the border and unable to perform at the concert on the night of J26. So, to honour his being put on the dangerous list, I close with a line from his "Shut Them Down" about our anti-corporate globalisation selves. _'And we will build a new world Without the corporate elite And we will see the day Of their international defeat We'll have self-determination And equality for all For what choice do we really have But to rise up and see them fall'_ We have absolutely no choice at all. And yet it is a beautiful one, just the same. June 29, 30 July 1, 2 2002. ------------------------------------------- Macdonald Stainsby http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/rad-green http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/leninist-international -- In the contradiction lies the hope. --Bertholt Brecht From mstainsby at tao.ca Tue Jul 2 23:27:23 2002 From: mstainsby at tao.ca (Macdonald Stainsby) Date: Sat Aug 5 04:33:17 2006 Subject: [R-G] Globalizing And Unifying The Movement June 29, 2002 Message-ID: <030c01c22252$4feba0a0$291f5318@vc.shawcable.net> Net Commentary Globalizing And Unifying The Movement June 29, 2002 By Judy Rebick This week may very well mark a critical turning point in the movement against corporate globalization in Canada. Since last year in Quebec City there has been a growing division on the issue of diversity of tactics between anti-capitalist direct action activists on the one side and the labour movement and more moderate groups like the Council of Canadians on the other. These divisions grew deeper after September 11, when even minor violence became much riskier and less acceptable to moderate groups. In opposition to the G8 meeting in remote Kananaskis, the two wings of the movement organized in two separate cities. The more radical direct action wing, lead by Montreal's CLAC (Anti-Capitalist Convergence) and Toronto's OCAP (Ontario Coalition against Anti-Poverty) organized two days of marches in Ottawa. The labour movement and anti-globalization NGO's organized almost of week of actions, including a People's Summit in Calgary, the nearest city to Kananskis. Taken together the demonstrations were a successful protest against the G8, especially given the lengths to which the Canadian government had gone to prevent protest altogether. Not only was the meeting itself in a remote location where five checkpoints prevented anyone getting anywhere near the leaders but also the City of Calgary refused permits for city parks and the federal government paid off a farmer who had rented land to the protesters near the Summit site. Most of the media has focussed on the welcome absence of violence. For whatever reason, the RCMP, made a decision to leave the riot cops in the closet until they were needed. No visible cops, no violence. In Calgary, police on bicycles even distributed water to protesters. In Ottawa, community police mingled with demonstrators on the edges of the march. There has also been a profound discussion in the movement about "diversity of tactics." Anarchist groups insist that imposing an agreement on non-violent tactics on a demonstration is authoritarian and divisive and that only the principle of diversity of tactics will ensure that everyone can participate. But in practice, their refusal to exclude violent tactics has deepened divisions with the labour movement. On the other hand, more conservative elements in the labour movement were only too happy to sit on their hands or organize their own actions without having to deal with the unruly anarchists. Adopting the practices of either group cannot solve the clash in politics and political culture. There has to be compromise and in Ottawa there was. Unwilling to compromise for unity with the more moderate wing of the anti-corporate globalization movement, direct action activists and leaders were willing to compromise to ensure the involvement of immigrant and refugee communities. The result was that for the first time, the demonstrators started to reflect the colours of the community. The theme of the Ottawa march, "No-one is Illegal," spoke to the interests of immigrant communities particularly in light of the repressive new immigration law. The anarchist organizers of the CLAC agreed to no direct action in Thursday's march in response to the request of Palestinians and other vulnerable groups. Despite the rhetoric of diversity of tactics, there was an actual agreement that the Thursday march would be without confrontation. Since the threat of violence at demonstrations has been at the root of divisions in the movement, the peaceful nature of both Calgary and Ottawa actions should provide a basis for a reconvergence of the movement. "The largest anti-war demonstration in Ottawa since September 11," famed activist Jaggi Singh said triumphantly, "and the radical hooligans organized it." There were about 2,000 marching on Thursday in Ottawa and about 3,000 on the day before. Even taken together, the Calgary/Ottawa marches were much smaller than the massive march in Quebec City last year of almost 70,000. The Ottawa march was organized as an explicitly anti-capitalist action; although many who marched were far from drawing those conclusions. What was missing was the labour movement. Conspicuous by their absence too were many local Ottawa activists who had organized for the G20, where their differences with the CLAC resulted in two different actions. The labour movement focussed on a march last weekend in Calgary, a typically conservative town. While Calgary had never seen 2500 people in the streets before, the march was modest by movement standards. The rest of the week in Calgary saw daily actions, including a naked protest against the GAP--I'd rather wear nothing that wear GAP clothes. The People's Summit, called the G6 billion, also had an important impact in the media and on participants. The anti-capitalist organizers of the Ottawa march can claim a victory for their ability to successfully mobilize and broaden the movement to immigrant communities and people of colour. In Calgary labour and community groups were equally successful in a creative, well organized series of actions that managed to overcome serious state imposed barriers to freedom of assembly. Imagine what could be accomplished if both wings of the movement came back together again respecting their differences but working in concert to build the kind of mass movement against corporate globalization and war that is sweeping Europe and Latin America. ------------------------------------------- Macdonald Stainsby http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/rad-green http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/leninist-international -- In the contradiction lies the hope. --Bertholt Brecht From mstainsby at tao.ca Tue Jul 2 23:31:19 2002 From: mstainsby at tao.ca (Macdonald Stainsby) Date: Sat Aug 5 04:33:17 2006 Subject: [R-G] Palestinian Dahlan accuses Bush of "coup d'etat." Message-ID: <035101c22252$dc2b8ee0$291f5318@vc.shawcable.net> Reuters. 2 July 2002. Palestinian Dahlan accuses Bush of "coup d'etat." LONDON -- A former Palestinian security chief often mentioned as a possible successor to Yasser Arafat said on Tuesday U.S. calls for Palestinians to seek a new leader were effectively demands for a "coup d'etat." Mohammed Dahlan wrote in Britain's Guardian newspaper that it would be wrong to criticise or replace Arafat at a time when he is "under siege" in the West Bank, where Israeli forces have reoccupied seven cities after suicide bombings in Israel. "There is no question of changing the leadership in these circumstances," wrote Dahlan, a former peace negotiator. "As long as the Israelis are against Arafat, I'm with him -- whatever reservations I have about some of the decisions that have been made." "Bush is now effectively demanding a coup d'etat against Arafat, because the American administration says even if he is re-elected in new elections, it will not deal with him," Dahlan said. In an interview with Britain's newspaper The Times, Dahlan said he would not rule out running against Arafat in future when Palestinians were left alone to decide their own fate. "I have huge criticisms of (Arafat) but when Bush and (Israeli Prime Minister) Ariel Sharon say they want to change Arafat, I become the head of his re-election committee," he said. ------------------------------------------- Macdonald Stainsby http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/rad-green http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/leninist-international -- In the contradiction lies the hope. --Bertholt Brecht From mstainsby at tao.ca Tue Jul 2 23:38:39 2002 From: mstainsby at tao.ca (Macdonald Stainsby) Date: Sat Aug 5 04:33:17 2006 Subject: [R-G] Palestinian Dahlan accuses Bush of "coup d'etat." References: <035101c22252$dc2b8ee0$291f5318@vc.shawcable.net> Message-ID: <039d01c22253$e2ff3040$291f5318@vc.shawcable.net> ----- Original Message ----- > "I have huge criticisms of (Arafat) but when Bush and (Israeli Prime > Minister) Ariel Sharon say they want to change Arafat, I become the head > of his re-election committee," he said. That's the way it *must* be. Macdonald From mstainsby at tao.ca Tue Jul 2 23:50:17 2002 From: mstainsby at tao.ca (Macdonald Stainsby) Date: Sat Aug 5 04:33:17 2006 Subject: [R-G] Something undiscussed at the G8 summit trying to "help" Africa Message-ID: <043401c22255$82b41640$291f5318@vc.shawcable.net> (if the West wants to help Africa, go the fuck home and stay there... Macdonald. Sorry for using the word "home"...) Reuters. 2 July 2002. UN: AIDS Epidemic Surges, 70 Million May Die. UNITED NATIONS -- AIDS will kill 70 million people over the next 20 years unless rich nations step up their efforts to curb the disease, the United Nations warned on Tuesday in a report showing the epidemic is still in its early stages. More than 40 million people worldwide have AIDS or are infected with HIV, the virus that causes the disease, up from 34 million two years ago, and infection rates are climbing, said the latest report from UNAIDS, the agency that coordinates U.N. AIDS programs. "We haven't reached the peak of the AIDS epidemic yet," Dr. Peter Piot, the UNAIDS executive director, told Reuters in an interview, scotching experts' hopes it would level off. "It's an unprecedented epidemic in human history." AIDS threatens to wipe out a generation in Africa and destabilize the whole continent, warns the report, released ahead of the 14th International Conference on AIDS which opens next week in Barcelona. "From a pure medical problem, AIDS has become an issue for economic and social development and even for security," Piot warned, saying the disease was eating away Africa's work force, holding back economic development and aggravating famines. "The world can't afford a whole continent to be destabilized because of AIDS. It's going to have implications for all continents," Piot said. The report called for more money from rich countries to combat the epidemic. The world must spend $7 billion to $10 billion a year by 2005 to tackle AIDS, under targets set last year at the U.N. General Assembly Special Session on HIV/AIDS in New York. "It's not asking for the moon," said Piot. "By any standards that are used for breaches in security, that's peanuts." "The international community has not given what it should have," Piot said. "They have considered it a marginal problem." Rich countries must do more to get drugs to AIDS victims in Africa, Piot said. "It's still an enormous scandal," Piot said, pointing out that just 4 percent of infected people in developing countries have access to the latest antiretroviral drugs, as opposed to about half in North America. ------------------------------------------- Macdonald Stainsby http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/rad-green http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/leninist-international -- In the contradiction lies the hope. --Bertholt Brecht From mstainsby at tao.ca Wed Jul 3 10:24:05 2002 From: mstainsby at tao.ca (Macdonald Stainsby) Date: Sat Aug 5 04:33:17 2006 Subject: [R-G] The Analogy to Apartheid Message-ID: <003f01c222ae$0d286440$291f5318@vc.shawcable.net> The Analogy to Apartheid Ian Urbina http://www.merip.org/mer/mer223/223_urbina.html (Ian Urbina is associate editor at the Middle East Research and Information Project. His writing has appeared in the Nation, the International Herald Tribune and elsewhere.) Students for Justice in Palestine protest with mouths taped shut after UC-Berkeley Chancellor Robert Berdahl briefly banned the group in April 2002. (Rob Katzer/The Daily Californian) It was not a novel comparison, but it caused quite a stir. In June 2001, Ronnie Kasrils and Max Ozinsky, two Jewish heroes of South Africa's struggle for liberation from state-driven racism, published a letter in the Pretoria newspaper comparing Israel's occupation of Palestinian lands to South African apartheid. The letter, signed by several hundred other prominent Jewish leaders and titled "Not in My Name," called for an immediate end to the occupation and sparked a frenzy in the South African press in the months that followed. Most recently, Nobel laureate Bishop Desmond Tutu drew the apartheid parallels in his editorial calling for Israel's full withdrawal.[1] The Kasrils-Ozinsky petition continues to inspire both support and opposition in South Africa. The Israeli left has been discussing this comparison since at least the late 1980s, when Israeli anthropologist Uri Davis published his famous work, Israel: An Apartheid State. At the September 2001 UN conference on racism in Durban, South Africa, calls to compare occupation with apartheid were drowned out by the more incendiary claim that "Zionism is racism," and therefore received little substantive or even-handed coverage in the press. But suddenly, the analogy is getting wider circulation, as efforts to persuade universities and other institutions to divest from Israel gather steam internationally and in the US. Emerging Apartheid Apartheid South Africa was based on an "us here, them there" formula of territorial segregation in which the white-ruled areas consisted of 87 percent of the country, including the big cities and most of the arable land. Nominally independent bantustans, forming a horseshoe-shaped archipelago along the nation's outskirts, made up the remaining 13 percent of the land. There is striking similarity to Israel-Palestine, where the state of Israel covers 78 percent of the original British mandate territory, while Palestine, a nation-in-waiting, makes up the remaining 22 percent. In early September 2000, Israeli activists organized a conference in Neve Shalom to announce a Campaign Against an Emerging Apartheid, which some on the radical left feel is an apt description of Israel's "matrix of control" -- composed of settlements, bypass roads, security zones and checkpoints -- in Palestine. Especially after Operation Defensive Shield, when Palestinians are required to get permits from the Israelis to travel from one tank-encircled West Bank enclave to another, life for an average citizen in the Occupied Territories resembles that of the apartheid-era townships in more ways than one. Most notably, after 1967 Palestinian workers became as dependent on work inside Israel as township residents were on jobs in the white-dominated cities and equally vulnerable -- through closures and internal sieges -- to collective punishment. Meanwhile, the growing Israeli refusenik movement evokes the small anti-conscription drive that took shape in South Africa in the late 1980s. Decorated officers refusing to perform military service in the Occupied Territories are a political embarrassment to the Israel Defense Forces. Those not in prison have taken their message on the road, arguing at US synagogues and campuses that the occupation is both wrong and a formula for perpetual insecurity. Just as in contemporary Israel, mandatory military service in apartheid South Africa was integral to the national fabric, and a refusal to serve was rare and highly stigmatized. The government attempted to coopt the young officers by offering alternative forms of service, but failed. The actions helped convince Pretoria that its apartheid policies were simply untenable. The South African analogy also conjures up the international activist movement which emerged in the late 1970s and 1980s to dismantle apartheid. This grassroots effort consisted of university and government divestment efforts, consumer boycotts, arms embargoes and eventual economic sanctions of the apartheid regime. Students confronted their university administrators, union members pressured their stockholders, faith-based groups informed their parishioners and ultimately a populist force culminated in radical change. Princeton University??Ts investments in companies that have significant operations in Israel. - Name of Company Amount of Princeton's Investment Company's Relationship with Israel American International Group $6.9 million Joint venture with Aurec to form insurance company in Israel Boston Scientific $6 million Purchased 25% of Medinol Dow Chemical $3 million Invested $750,000 in Asheklon Technological Industries, a technology incubator General Electric $8.5 million Joint venture to provide electronic trade services with an investment of $2.5 million Hewlett Packard $9.5 million Owns Computation & Measurement, Ltd., a $19 million Israeli company IBM $8.5 million Owns Ubique, Softel, and IBM Israel, Ltd. Intel $9 million $1.6 billion facility in Kiryat Gat International Paper Inc. $2.5 million Owns 11% of Scitex, Ltd. Johnson & Johnson $9.8 million Took over Biosense for $400 million Lehmann Brothers $6 million Owns 4% of Bank Leumi, 8% of Nice Systems, 4.5% of Leader Investments Lucent Technologies $5.5 million Purchased Lannet for $117 million MacDermid, Inc. $2.3 million Owns 100% of MacDermid Israel, Ltd. McDonalds Corp. $5.4 million McDonalds Israel Merck $8.4 million Opened subsidiary in Israel 6/97 Motorola $5 million Owns Motorola Israel, Ltd., Motorola-Tadiran Cellular Texas Instruments $8 million Owns $50 million Butterfly and $260 million Libit TOTAL $104.3 million ------------------------------------------- Macdonald Stainsby http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/rad-green http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/leninist-international -- In the contradiction lies the hope. --Bertholt Brecht From mstainsby at tao.ca Wed Jul 3 10:51:18 2002 From: mstainsby at tao.ca (Macdonald Stainsby) Date: Sat Aug 5 04:33:17 2006 Subject: [R-G] Palestinians rally for Arafat in Gaza, slam Bush Message-ID: <009901c222b1$dae39960$291f5318@vc.shawcable.net> Reuters. 3 July 2002. Palestinians rally for Arafat in Gaza, slam Bush. GAZA -- Thousands of Palestinians chanting "more attacks and explosives belts" took to the streets of Gaza on Wednesday in a rally organised by Yasser Arafat's Fatah faction to protest against a U.S. call to replace him. An activist from the al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades, an unofficial Fatah armed group, pledged over a loudspeaker that any Palestinian openly challenging Arafat's leadership would be a dead man. "Any collaborator who would represent himself an alternative to (Arafat) will be executed in the public square," said the message, which echoed through the streets as armed men fired in the air. "I advise Bush to go to hell or to keep silent," an armed Fatah activist told Reuters during the rally. The protesters stopped in front of the United Nations headquarters in Gaza City before gathering for the rally at the wreckage of Arafat's headquarters on the beach, destroyed in an Israeli helicopter missile attack in April. "We urge Kofi Annan, the U.N. secretary general, to condemn Bush's remarks and to respect and protect the right of Palestinians to decide on their leadership," read a letter handed to U.N. officials. "This is Palestine and not Afghanistan," said protester Salim Ali, holding a poster of Arafat and a Palestinian flag. "Bush will not find a Palestinian Karzai," he added, referring to the U.S.-backed President Hamid Karzai, who has led post-Taliban rule in Afghanistan. ------------------------------------------- Macdonald Stainsby http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/rad-green http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/leninist-international -- In the contradiction lies the hope. --Bertholt Brecht From mstainsby at tao.ca Wed Jul 3 10:59:29 2002 From: mstainsby at tao.ca (Macdonald Stainsby) Date: Sat Aug 5 04:33:17 2006 Subject: [R-G] Interview with Richardo Alarcon Message-ID: <00d401c222b2$ffec6240$291f5318@vc.shawcable.net> President of Cuban National Assembly, Ricardo Alarcon, interviewed: http://www.rprogreso.com/action_alert!.htm ------------------------------------------- Macdonald Stainsby http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/rad-green http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/leninist-international -- In the contradiction lies the hope. --Bertholt Brecht From mstainsby at tao.ca Wed Jul 3 11:02:29 2002 From: mstainsby at tao.ca (Macdonald Stainsby) Date: Sat Aug 5 04:33:17 2006 Subject: [R-G] Interview with Richardo Alarcon Message-ID: <00f901c222b3$6a4b3800$291f5318@vc.shawcable.net> President of Cuban National Assembly, Ricardo Alarcon, interviewed: http://www.rprogreso.com/action_alert!.htm ------------------------------------------- Macdonald Stainsby http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/rad-green http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/leninist-international -- In the contradiction lies the hope. --Bertholt Brecht From mstainsby at tao.ca Wed Jul 3 11:04:44 2002 From: mstainsby at tao.ca (Macdonald Stainsby) Date: Sat Aug 5 04:33:17 2006 Subject: [R-G] Re: Interview with Richardo Alarcon References: <00d401c222b2$ffec6240$291f5318@vc.shawcable.net> Message-ID: <00ff01c222b3$bb9cc8e0$291f5318@vc.shawcable.net> Here is the proper link to the real audio file: http://www.rprogreso.com/Archives/bg070202.ram ----- Original Message ----- From: "Macdonald Stainsby" > President of Cuban National Assembly, Ricardo Alarcon, interviewed: > ------------------------------------------- Macdonald Stainsby http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/rad-green http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/leninist-international -- In the contradiction lies the hope. --Bertholt Brecht From mstainsby at dojo.tao.ca Wed Jul 3 12:27:37 2002 From: mstainsby at dojo.tao.ca (Macdonald Stainsby) Date: Sat Aug 5 04:33:17 2006 Subject: [R-G] The Pakistani Rich are Worse than Animals Message-ID: <20020703182738.F2A2717DC86@dojo.tao.ca> The Pakistani Rich are Worse than Animals ========================================= Taimur Rahman Communist Mazdoor Kissan Party Even animals have their limits, but the Pakistani ruling-class, arguibly the most reactionary ruling-class anywhere in the world (if not in the history of the world) are worse than animals. In Muzaffargarh the worst crime imaginable has occurred. A boy of low class peasant origin was found sitting in a field next to a girl of the feudal family. The boy was twelve years old and the girl was about 16. Obviously, these were two kids just playing in the fields. The feudal lords of the area, who live with a culture of strictly segregating their women and themselves from the manual workers were infuriated by the fact that the two were socialising. Feudal lords in Pakistan think of women as property that might become unclean if low class people come in contact with their Izzat (honour). So they kidnapped the boy and raped him. At first they thought that the 12 year boy would not leak the story. As it became clear that the boy might leak the story possibly even to the police, the feudal lords made another attack on the peasants. To cover up their earlier deed, they called a meeting of the Jirga (feudal tribal council) and alleged that the two had been found in a "compromising position" and that justice could only be served by the rule "an eye for an eye". 400 peasants were watching the meeting of the Jirga. The Jirga ordered the father of the girl to bring his 18 year old daughter (the sister of the boy) to the Jirga. He complied. She was taken to a nearby barn and gang raped by four adult men. She was sent back to her father and parents NAKED. All the low classes of the village stood-by powerless. These are the Jirgas and Panchayats that politicians such as Imran Khan and Karzai (in Afghanistan) so boldy hold up as the model of democracy. Who order the gang rape of teenagers. Some of the names of those who committed this crime are: Fayyaz, Manzoor, Allah Ditta, Maulvi Abdul Razzaq and Mazoor Jatoi. The name of the sixth member could not be ascertained. The Punjab police has allegedly arrested some people involved with this incident. But the fact is that the Punjab police is full of more rapists than the feudals of Pakistan. In my opinion they have arrested the perpetrators of this crime to save them from a possible attack by other people. There are powerful lessons to be learnt from this incident. First, this teenage girl (just like your daughter or sister) was not gang raped by some frustrated group of youngsters acting on their own (not that this would have made this henious act any less barbaric), but by the TRIBAL COUNCIL. To further humiliate the poor peasants, she was sent back home naked. This was therefore, a decision taken by the ruling-class against the poor peasants. Its intention was to "teach them all a lesson". The lesson is that the poor are the slaves of the rich ruling-class of Pakistan. If they mistakenly feel that there is any form of equality, even socialisation between the rich and the poor, the worst possible and most humiliating punishment will be metted out against them. Even the Israeli army has to maintain some semblance of democracy and concern for human rights in the international media, but the feudal lords of Pakistan are criminals beyond compare. They are worse than the zionists. Therefore, it is abundantly clear that these slave drivers are unwilling for any form of equality or democracy. Is there any solution open to the workers and peasants of Pakistan other than a revolution? No! The slave holders of Pakistan, who have denied the people the opportunity for freedom and justice have themselves sealed the fate of the future course of development of Pakistani society. They are the ones that should be held responsible for violent revolution. They have denied the people any other course of action. The peace-loving people have tried every means to achieve some semblance of equality and democracy but it has always been crushed by the military, the feudals, and the capitalists. The time has come for the people of Pakistan to take their destiny into their own hands. To not wait for the establishment, the police, the army, the courts, the judiciary, the parliament (which does not exist), and all these other institutions that are only built to protect the rich to "deliver" justice. The time has come for the people to create a peoples justice. Just like the women of the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) are arming their women, the women of Pakistan should be fully armed to defend themselves. Not only those who raped the girl, but all those who participated in anyway in the decision of to rape this girl should be given the death sentence. People talk of non-violence, they say we need reform not revolution. These are the silly dreams of utopians who are totally disconnected and unaware of the reality of the oppression on the ground. They are unaware of the barbaric character of the ruling-class of Pakistan. The first conclusion is that Pakistan needs a peoples-democratic revolution. Second, we must ask ourselves, when Pakistan was created it was said that this was in order to safeguard the Muslims. Have the Muslims been safeguarded? On the Khabarnama (news) at 9 pm our government talks of the rape of Kashmiri women by the Indian soldiers. Are the working-women of Pakistan safe from the feudals, police, and army of Pakistan? It is said that the rights of self-determination of the Kashmiri people are not safeguarded. Are the rights of self-determination of the people of Pakistan guaranteed? The answer to all these questions, and many others, is NO! Today the people of Pakistan are enslaved to the feudals, capitalists, and the civil military oligarchy. Therefore, the greatest enemy of the people of Pakistan is not the Indian aggressor. The Indian aggressor is the greatest enemy of the people of India. The greatest enemy of the people of Pakistan is the enemy at home. The ruling-class and rich of Pakistan who thrive on looting, plundering, and rape. It is against our own ruling-class that we need to make a peoples-democratic revolution. Therefore, I appeal to you: People of Pakistan, do not be fooled by the nationalist and religious sloganeering of our ruling-class. The real enemy of the poor people of Pakistan, the workers and peasants of Pakistan, the men and women of Pakistan, the Baluchi, Sindhi, Pathan, Kashmiri, Punjabi is the ruling-class, the class of rich people of Pakistan. In what sense can we talk of Independence when our daughters and sisters raped by jirgas and panchayats. Enough is enough. Unite the many to fight the few! Unite the poor to fight the rich! Unite the people to overthrow the ruling-class! Inqalab Zindabad Taimur Rahman Communist Mazdoor Kissan Party -- Macdonald Stainsby, External Relations Co-ordinator, Douglas College Students Union. ** In the contradiction lies the hope. --Bertholt Brecht. *** "`Order rules in Berlin.' You stupid lackeys! Your `order' is built on sand. Tomorrow the revolution will rear ahead once more and announce to your horror amid the brass of trumpets: `I was, I am, I always will be!'" -Rosa Luxemburg, 1918. From adurrani at yorku.ca Wed Jul 3 14:19:29 2002 From: adurrani at yorku.ca (adurrani@yorku.ca) Date: Sat Aug 5 04:33:17 2006 Subject: [R-G] Girl Ordered Gang-Raped in Pakistan Message-ID: <1025727569.3d235c511f854@mymail.yorku.ca> ===================== Tue Jul 2, 7:18 AM ET Girl Ordered Gang-Raped in Pakistan By KHALID TANVEER, Associated Press http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20020702/ap_on_re_as/pakis tan_gang_rape_3 MULTAN, Pakistan (AP) - A Pakistani tribal council ordered an 18-year-old girl to be gang-raped in order to punish her family after her brother was seen walking with a girl from a higher class tribe, police said Tuesday. The private Human Rights Commission of Pakistan demanded that all those involved in the rape, which took place June 22 in the village of Meerwala in southern Punjab province, be punished. Police said the victim's father had filed criminal charges against the four men involved in the case. Police said they picked up eight relatives of the suspects to pressure the perpetrators into surrendering. "We will spare no efforts to do justice" for the victim, police official Malik Saeed said. According to the victim, the Mastoi tribe demanded punishment after her 11-year-old brother was seen walking unchaperoned with a Mastoi girl in a deserted part of the village. The boy and his sister are from the lower class Gujar tribe. The Mastoi tribe called a meeting of the tribal council, which ordered the girl to be raped to avenge their tribal honor. The teen-ager said she was taken to a hut and assaulted as hundreds of Mastois stood outside laughing and cheering. Pakistan has a tradition of tribal justice in which crimes or affronts to dignity are punished outside the framework of Pakistani law. The Human Rights Commission of Pakistan has demanded an end to punishments by tribal councils. Kamla Hayyat, of the commission, said the group will send a fact-finding mission to the victim's village to determine what happened and provide help to her. "The increasing incidents of terrible atrocities against women are a terrible reflection on the state of society and the status of women within it," commission chairman Afrasiab Khattak said in a statement. Last month, an Islamic court overturned the conviction of a woman who was to be stoned to death for adultery. Zufran Bibi, 28, said she was raped and appealed her early May conviction in the conservative North West Frontier Province. Her case prompted demonstrations and protests by hundreds of civil and women's-rights groups nationwide. From mstainsby at dojo.tao.ca Wed Jul 3 16:39:57 2002 From: mstainsby at dojo.tao.ca (Macdonald Stainsby) Date: Sat Aug 5 04:33:17 2006 Subject: [R-G] Very suggestive reaction to Emperors Clothes article... Message-ID: <20020703223958.F075017DC30@dojo.tao.ca> URL for this article: http://emperors-clothes.com/indict/update72.htm Join our email list at http://emperors-clothes.com/f.htm. Receive articles from Emperor's Clothes Website, www.tenc.net Click here to email the link to this article to a friend. We encourage readers to reprint and re-post any Emperor's Clothes article. Please quote articles exactly and include the original URL and name of author(s). ======================================= DC AIR NATIONAL GUARD WEBSITE ARCHIVE PAGE BLOCKED! SPREAD THE WORD! [Posted 2 July 2002] ======================================= It looks like we've struck a nerve. Last night we posted an article entitled, "POWERFUL EVIDENCE THAT AIR FORCE WAS MADE TO STAND DOWN ON 9-11. We emailed it to 20,000 Emperor's Clothes list members. In that article we gave step-by step instructions for accessing the DC AIR NATIONAL GUARD Website as it appeared April 19, 2001, including the then Mission Statement: "To Provide Combat Units in the Highest Possible State of Readiness." It worked fine last night. But this morning, when I and others tried to access the DC ANG archive pages at archive.org we got sent to a porno Website. We also tried going direct to DC ANG's April 19th archive page using its direct URL which is (or was!) http://web.archive.org/web/20010203183700/http://dcandr.ang.af.mil/ The URL stayed in its little window, but below was the porno page. We tried everal times and then Windows crashed. Perhaps their choice of a porno site is symbolic. Also our donations page is under assault. If you try to make a donation and have trouble, please call our direct line at 617 916-1705 (US). Apparently you-all and we are making somebody angry. Let's keep it up! The best response is to spread the word. Emperor's Clothes backed up the April 19th DC ANG archive a few months ago. I just tried the link and it seems to (still) work. We urge everyone to back it up and post it on every Website. The backup link is http://emperors-clothes.com/9-11backups/dcandr2.htm If the pictures don't show up at first, hit the 'refresh' button. -- Jared Israel ========================= -- Macdonald Stainsby, External Relations Co-ordinator, Douglas College Students Union. ** In the contradiction lies the hope. --Bertholt Brecht. *** "`Order rules in Berlin.' You stupid lackeys! Your `order' is built on sand. Tomorrow the revolution will rear ahead once more and announce to your horror amid the brass of trumpets: `I was, I am, I always will be!'" -Rosa Luxemburg, 1918. From mstainsby at dojo.tao.ca Wed Jul 3 19:05:21 2002 From: mstainsby at dojo.tao.ca (Macdonald Stainsby) Date: Sat Aug 5 04:33:17 2006 Subject: [R-G] Winter Clouds Message-ID: <20020704010521.9A54017DC77@dojo.tao.ca> Winter clouds snow-laden, cotton fluff flying, None or few the unfallen flowers. Chill waves sweep through steep skies, Yet earth's gentle breath grows warm. Only heroes can quell tigers and leopards And wild bears never daunt the brave. Plum blossoms welcome the whirling snow; Small wonder flies freeze and perish. --- Mao Tse-tung -- Macdonald Stainsby, External Relations Co-ordinator, Douglas College Students Union. ** In the contradiction lies the hope. --Bertholt Brecht. *** "`Order rules in Berlin.' You stupid lackeys! Your `order' is built on sand. Tomorrow the revolution will rear ahead once more and announce to your horror amid the brass of trumpets: `I was, I am, I always will be!'" -Rosa Luxemburg, 1918. From mstainsby at tao.ca Thu Jul 4 11:29:51 2002 From: mstainsby at tao.ca (Macdonald Stainsby) Date: Sat Aug 5 04:33:17 2006 Subject: [R-G] Afghans Angry After U.S. Air Attack Message-ID: <002601c22380$72ce3d60$291f5318@vc.shawcable.net> Afghans Angry After U.S. Air Attack By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS Filed at 7:45 a.m. ET KABUL, Afghanistan (AP) -- Having once seen Americans as liberators, a growing number of Afghans are beginning to question the U.S. military role here and wondering if the war against al-Qaida and the Taliban is taking too high a toll on civilians. Sentiment has shifted on Kabul streets after civilian deaths, most recently Monday's U.S. airstrike that Afghan authorities say killed 40 people and injured 100 others in Uruzgan province. The dead included members of a wedding party. ``We consider the Americans our liberators, but after this, they may soon become occupiers,'' a grocer named Jabbar said in his small store on the busy Qalai-e-Fatulluh Khan street. ``They should be here for peace, not death.'' In the first anti-American protest here since the collapse of the Taliban last year, about 200 Afghans marched through the streets of Kabul on Thursday to express outrage over the attacks. The demonstrators, about half of them women covered by traditional burqas, blocked midmorning traffic in the dusty capital. ``We support coalition measures against the Taliban regime and al-Qaida, but we cannot tolerate more innocent victims in our country and American bombardment of civilian targets,'' said Theyba, one of the protest organizers, reading to the crowd from a petition outside the United Nations headquarters in Kabul The U.S. military said an AC-130 gunship that retaliated after U.S. aircraft came under ground fire may have been responsible for the deaths Monday of civilians in a cluster of Uruzgan villages. ``Americans made so many mistakes here, and we cannot accept that hitting a wedding party was just another one,'' said Raz Mohammed, 40, a customer in Jabbar's store. ``They should set their aiming devices right, or just pack up and go,'' Mohammed said. ``We fought the Russians in 1980s, we'll fight Americans if need be.'' Such sentiment was rare here after the Taliban fled the capital in November. Many Afghans wanted a larger U.S. presence in their homeland, fearing that without foreign troops, their own leaders would resort to widespread killing. But no more. Anger is rising. Afghans see a series of mistaken airstrikes as evidence that the United States is not concerned about Afghan lives. ``In case of further such incidents, Afghans may start becoming really hostile toward Americans,'' said a law student who identified himself only as Hakim. ``And that does not bode well for peace in this country.'' Conscious of such sentiment, Afghan President Hamid Karzai demanded Tuesday that the United States take ``all necessary measures'' to avoid further civilian casualties. Some Afghans believe Karzai owes so much of his power to his U.S. patrons that he is afraid of angering the U.S. administration. ``What is this 'all necessary measures?''' asked Safiqulluh, a jewelry merchant. ``He should have told the Americans: 'If this happens again, out of our country.' The Americans didn't even say 'We are sorry' for what happened. Probably they'll soon say it was Afghans who killed women and children at that wedding party.'' Clearly, however, the U.S. military is sensitive to the risks of alienating the Afghans. U.S. spokesmen were quick to express regret over the loss of civilian lives, and Lt. Gen. Dan K. McNeill, commander of the U.S. forces here, said it was ``not part of the parameters of this coalition to attack innocents.'' The U.S. command took heart in a gesture by a local warlord and tribal elders who delivered two Afghan carpets to U.S. forces at Bagram air base Wednesday in a show of support for the U.S.-led coalition. Baba Jan, who says he has 2,000 local fighters around Bagram, also delivered a petition he said was signed by the tribal elders in support of the coalition forces. The carpets and petition were prearranged, but their delivery in the wake of the air strike was significant. ``They still came through,'' Col. Roger King told The Associated Press. ``They could have canceled.'' However, Baba Jan, a former northern alliance commander who does business with the Americans at Bagram, may not reflect widespread public sentiment. After 23 years of war, there is a sense of resignation among some Afghans. ``There are so many people, hundreds of thousands, who have died in this poor country over the past two decades in wars and misery,'' said Hakim, the student. ``Another 100 and so dead is just a drop in the ocean.'' ------------------------------------------- Macdonald Stainsby http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/rad-green http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/leninist-international -- In the contradiction lies the hope. --Bertholt Brecht From mstainsby at tao.ca Thu Jul 4 20:54:00 2002 From: mstainsby at tao.ca (Macdonald Stainsby) Date: Sat Aug 5 04:33:17 2006 Subject: [R-G] Israel deports American and British women Message-ID: <00b701c223cf$374eaaa0$291f5318@vc.shawcable.net> AP. 4 July 2002. Court upholds decision to deport American, British women arrested in Palestinian refugee camp. JERUSALEM -- A district judge on Thursday upheld a decision to deport two women, an American and Briton, who were arrested last month in a closed military area inside a Palestinian refugee camp. The women -- Darlene Wallach, 51, from San Jose, Calif., and Josie Sandercock, 32, of Birmingham, England -- were arrested June 1 in Balata refugee camp near Nablus in the West Bank. The women were among 17 foreigners who had entered Israel to show solidarity with Palestinians. Eight were arrested for being inside the closed camp and five of them were immediately deported. Sandercock, Wallach and a Japanese citizen, Makoto Hibbino, remained behind to contest the decision. Hibbino returned to Japan before the district court's decision. The women have a week to leave the country but said they would appeal. Sandercock said she was acting as a "human shield" providing protection for Palestinians against Israeli forces. The foreigners also were escorting ambulances through Israeli checkpoints. "Our presence provided protection for Palestinians," Wallach said. Israel has expelled 120 foreigners and more than 200 have been refused entry since March. ------------------------------------------- Macdonald Stainsby http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/rad-green http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/leninist-international -- In the contradiction lies the hope. --Bertholt Brecht From debsian at pacbell.net Thu Jul 4 21:46:35 2002 From: debsian at pacbell.net (Michael Pugliese) Date: Sat Aug 5 04:33:17 2006 Subject: [R-G] Re: GUILTY FOR 9-11: BUSH, RUMSFELD, MYERS by Jared Israel and Illarion Bykov Message-ID: Message: 12 Date: Thu, 04 Jul 2002 22:04:42 -0000 From: "chipberlet" Subject: Re: Trilaterals Over Washington by Anthony Sutton --- In NewPacifica@y..., heidichesney@a... wrote: > Chip, > > please clarify the questions i posed to you regarding how it is you KNOW (for > a fact) which military air bases were "combat ready" and which were not... > > I asked twice for clarification and i have not received a response yet. > > Thanks, > > ~Heidi Hi, You are completely missing the point. "Combat Ready" is a term used by the U.S. military to describe a unit with a sufficient number of properly trained troops; and a full inventory of equipment and ordanance that is functional and with the proper maintenance, so as to be able to be deployed into combat. It DOES NOT mean the people in the unit are sitting around on their butts on benches ready to leap into tanks and jets in ten minutes. Many "combat ready" units are Reserve units or National Guard units and most of the people in those units hold full-time jobs outside of their military commitment. Some "combat ready" units are part of the full-time military and live on or near their bases, but even in these units some people are on leave or off duty. NONE OF THESE PEOPLE ARE AUTOMATICALLY ON DUTY FOR ANYTHING UNLESS THEY ARE ASSIGNED TO A SPECIFIC TASK. We can agree that it would have been a good idea to have several jet pilots and several jet planes assigned to alert duty and on call for a scramble (5-10 minutes to be airborne) at Andrews field. There were not. It is certainly appropriate to ask why not. Nontheless, the duty assigments on 9/11 for scramble alert jet aircraft on the east coast were Langley in coastal Virginia to cover Washington, D.C. and Otis on the coast on the Cape in Massachusetts to cover New York City (and Boston). How do I know this? Because the pilots have given interviews describing their duty assignment and how the were scrambled on 9/ 11. Were their other bases with scramble-ready jets? Quite probably there were. My argument is that the article claiming that there were actually jets ready to scramble and take off at Andrews (because some web page described some of the jet units stationed there as "combat ready") is flat out wrong and based on total ignorance of the meaning of the term "combat ready." There are plenty of DOD documents explaining the term "combat ready." And "combat ready 24/7" is just a slogan to keep units on their toes as a goal, because in actual practice, when a "combat ready" unit is called up from the Reserves or National Guard, the DOD goal is 24-72 hours before embarcation. Even an active duty full time military unit can take many hours to get assembled for transport. There is NO EVIDENCE that has been produced so far that demonstrates that there were jets ready to scramble at Andrews. -Chip Berlet p.s. This means that the following article is wrong: = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = GUILTY FOR 9-11: BUSH, RUMSFELD, MYERS Introduction & Section 1 by Illarion Bykov and Jared Israel [Posted 14 November 2001] [Updated 17 November 2001] Dedicated to the firemen of New York. ======================================= INTRODUCTION TO SUMMARY OF EVIDENCE Andrews Air Force Base is a huge military installation just 10 miles from the Pentagon. From debsian at pacbell.net Thu Jul 4 22:11:41 2002 From: debsian at pacbell.net (Michael Pugliese) Date: Sat Aug 5 04:33:17 2006 Subject: [R-G] Fw:URL's About Otis & Langley Airbases Message-ID: Message: 24 Date: Fri, 05 Jul 2002 02:05:02 -0000 From: "chipberlet" Subject: URL's About Otis & Langley Airbases Hi, See below: --- In NewPacifica@y..., RoadsEnd@a... wrote: > > In a message dated 7/4/02 3:05:35 PM, cberlet@i... writes: > > >-Chip Berlet > > > >p.s. This means that the following article is wrong: > > > > So, because Mr. Berlet says that he has s different definition of "combat > ready" nothing in the article by Jared Israel is true? Why should we use that > logic? Is Mr. Israel a conspracist, also? Is Mr. Israel a right- winger or > just a "duped" left-winger or duped "middle-winger" or what? > > Would Mr. Berlet be as kind as to actually post something factual or where > they can be heard these interviews and such that gives some factual basis to > your unsubstantiated claims? > Sorry for the split URL's. Paste them into a notepad program, fix them, then use them in your browser. See: http://www.capecodonline.com/ cctimes/archives/2001/sep/12/ wasotis12.htm http://www.capecodonline.com/ cctimes/archives/2001/ sep/15/reportotis15.htm http://www.capecodonline.com/ cctimes/archives/2001/ sep/16/didhijackers16.htm http://september11.natca.org/ NewsArticles/Wald1016.htm http://www.sptimes.com/News/ 101701/Worldandnation/ On_cockpit_radio__ter.shtml http://www.s-t.com/daily/09-01/ 09-16-01/a03wn013.htm http://www.csmonitor.com/2002/ 0416/p01s04-usmi.htm -Chip Berlet From bobenoch at shaw.ca Thu Jul 4 23:24:21 2002 From: bobenoch at shaw.ca (Bob Enoch) Date: Sat Aug 5 04:33:17 2006 Subject: [R-G] Re: GUILTY FOR 9-11: BUSH, RUMSFELD, MYERS by Jared Israel and Illarion Bykov References: Message-ID: <001901bfe641$41a10e80$61474d18@vf.shawcable.net> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Michael Pugliese" > Message: 12 > Date: Thu, 04 Jul 2002 22:04:42 -0000 > From: "chipberlet" > Subject: Re: Trilaterals Over Washington by Anthony Sutton > > "Combat Ready" is a term used by the U.S. military to describe a > unit > with a sufficient number of properly trained troops; and a full > inventory of equipment and ordanance that is functional and with the > proper maintenance, so as to be able to be deployed into combat. It > DOES NOT mean the people in the unit are sitting around on their > > butts on benches ready to leap into tanks and jets in ten minutes. > > Many "combat ready" units are Reserve units or National Guard units > and most of the people in those units hold full-time jobs outside of > their military commitment. Some "combat ready" units are part of the > full-time military and live on or near their bases, but even in > these > units some people are on leave or off duty. > > NONE OF THESE PEOPLE ARE AUTOMATICALLY ON DUTY FOR ANYTHING UNLESS > THEY ARE ASSIGNED TO A SPECIFIC TASK. > > We can agree that it would have been a good idea to have several jet > pilots and several jet planes assigned to alert duty and on call for > a scramble (5-10 minutes to be airborne) at Andrews field. There > were > not. It is certainly appropriate to ask why not. > > Nontheless, the duty assigments on 9/11 for scramble alert jet > aircraft on the east coast were Langley in coastal Virginia to cover > Washington, D.C. and Otis on the coast on the Cape in Massachusetts > to cover New York City (and Boston). > > How do I know this? Because the pilots have given interviews > describing their duty assignment and how the were scrambled on 9/ 11. > Were their other bases with scramble-ready jets? Quite probably > there were. > > My argument is that the article claiming that there were actually > jets ready to scramble and take off at Andrews (because some web > page > described some of the jet units stationed there as "combat ready") is > flat out wrong and based on total ignorance of the meaning of the > term "combat ready." There are plenty of DOD documents explaining > the > term "combat ready." And "combat ready 24/7" is just a slogan to > keep units on their toes as a goal, because in actual practice, when > a "combat ready" unit is called up from the Reserves or National > > Guard, the DOD goal is 24-72 hours before embarcation. Even an > active duty full time military unit can take many hours to get > assembled for transport. > > There is NO EVIDENCE that has been produced so far that demonstrates > that there were jets ready to scramble at Andrews. > > -Chip Berlet An attempt, at least.....thank you. The DCANG, based at Andrews, describes its mission as "the defense of the District of Columbia" Now, it could be that they meant to say "defense against attacks that take 24-72 hours to develop" That's possible. Maybe the "Home of Air Force One" sends ALL their pilots home at the same time, I guess that's possible too.(all ang units retain a nucleus of trained personnel at all times) So if it seems to you reasonable to believe that the main base for the defense of the capital was incapacitated because all their personnel were too busy, or all off duty at the same time, then I guess Americans should be very afraid. Not much of a return on all those trillions...... None of this, however, explains why none of those bases "chip" describes as being "up" that day (Langley and Otis) managed to scramble a single fighter until it was too late. Militaries have procedures for things for good reason. They mean that the Command can set procedures in advance, so that the danger of enemy surprise is reduced . Surprise attacks are designed to exploit existing procedures, so far as they are known. This one succeeded because sop was NOT followed.There is no doubt that sop for a highjacking, or even an un-explained course deviation, is (of course) to get up in the air and go have a look How could any terrorist organization assume that the USAF, having procedures in place which would have foiled the attempt, would somehow fail to carry out the most obvious of these measures, such as scrambling a plane or two? Is Osama(remember him?) a mind reader, or possessed of psychic powers? Almost two hours passed with highjacked planes filling the skies, and nary an F-16 in sight. This violates not only common sense but the regs. of the FAA, NATO, and the USAF. It is therefore difficult to avoid the inference that someone senior ordered the jets to stay put. Bob . From mstainsby at tao.ca Thu Jul 4 23:36:49 2002 From: mstainsby at tao.ca (Macdonald Stainsby) Date: Sat Aug 5 04:33:17 2006 Subject: [R-G] US bombs Iraqi defense system. Message-ID: <021401c223e5$f63ef800$291f5318@vc.shawcable.net> AP. 4 July 2002. US bombs Iraqi defense system. ANKARA -- American warplanes bombed an Iraqi air defense system Thursday after coming under attack from Iraqi anti-aircraft artillery, the U.S. military said. The aircraft were making routine patrols when Iraqi forces fired artillery at them near the northern city of Mosul, the U.S. European Command said in a statement. "Coalition aircraft responded to the continued Iraqi attacks by dropping precision ordnance on elements of the Iraqi integrated air defense system," the Germany-based command said. "All coalition aircraft departed the area safely." In Iraq, the official news agency said U.S. and British warplanes damaged a house and killed several cows and sheep in the airstrikes, but the report did not cite any human casualties. An unidentified military official told the Iraqi News Agency that the allied warplanes "bombed our civil and service installations in Mosul." ------------------------------------------- Macdonald Stainsby http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/rad-green http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/leninist-international -- In the contradiction lies the hope. --Bertholt Brecht From info at cinox.demon.co.uk Fri Jul 5 08:47:02 2002 From: info at cinox.demon.co.uk (Tim Murphy) Date: Sat Aug 5 04:33:17 2006 Subject: [R-G] Fw: Pilger: Rise of a new imperialism Message-ID: The link is http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2002/07/02/1023864733062.html Rise of a new imperialism July 3 2002 In his latest book, The New Rulers of the World, John Pilger argues that the "war on terrorism" is a charade, masking an all-powerful oppressor that dares not speak its name. It is nearly 10 months since September 11, and still the great charade plays on. Having appropriated our shocked and humane response to that momentous day, the rulers of the world have since ground our language into a paean of cliches and lies about the "war on terrorism" - when the most enduring menace, and source of terror, is them. The fanatics who attacked America came mostly from Saudi Arabia, the spiritual home of al-Qaeda and the tutors of the Taliban, but no bombs fell on that oil-rich American protectorate. According to an American study, 5000 civilians were bombed to death in stricken, impoverished Afghanistan, where not a single al-Qaeda leader of importance has been caught, or to anyone's knowledge, killed. Osama bin Laden got clean away, as did the Taliban ruler Mullah Omah. After this "victory", hundreds of prisoners, including the Australian David Hicks, were shipped to an American concentration camp in Cuba, where they have been held against all conventions of war and international law. No evidence of their alleged crimes has been produced. In the United States, more than 1000 people of Muslim background have "disappeared"; none has been charged. Legislation undermining the Bill of Rights has been rushed through Congress. For example, the FBI now has the power to go into libraries and find out who is reading what. Meanwhile, the British and Australian governments made fools of their soldiers by insisting they followed America's orders and pursued Afghan tribesmen opposed to this or that favoured warlord. This is what British squaddies in puttees and pith helmets did over a century ago when Lord Curzon, Viceroy of India, described Afghanistan as one of the "pieces on a chessboard upon which is being played out a great game for the domination of the world". There is no war on terrorism. It is the great game speeded up, and now more dangerous than ever. Having delivered the Palestinians into the arms of Ariel Sharon, the Christian Right fundamentalists running the plutocracy in Washington turn their priorities to manufacturing more bombs and missiles to hurl at the 22 million suffering people of Iraq. Should anyone need reminding, this is a nation held hostage to an American-led embargo every bit as barbaric as their dictator. Iraq is the world's second greatest source of oil - the reason for the attack is that America wants another, less uppity thug to run it. The Pentagon told former president Bill Clinton that an all-out attack on Iraq might kill "at least" 10,000 civilians. In a sustained propaganda campaign, journalists on both sides of the Atlantic have been used as "conduits" for rumours and lies. These ranged from allegations about an Iraqi connection with anthrax attacks in the US to a link between the leader of the September 11 hijacks and Iraqi intelligence. Both have been discredited. The great charade is imperialism's return journey to respectability. As the historian Frank Furedi reminds us in The New Ideology of Imperialism, it is not long ago "that the moral claims of imperialism were seldom questioned in the West. Imperialism and the global expansion of the Western powers were represented in unambiguously positive terms as a major contributor to human civilisation". The quest went wrong when it was clear that fascism, with all its ideas of racial and cultural superiority, was imperialism too, and the word vanished from academic discourse. In the best Stalinist tradition, imperialism no longer existed. When the Soviet Union collapsed, a new opportunity arose. The economic and political crisis in the developing world, largely the result of post-colonialism, such as the blood-letting in the Middle East and the destruction of commodity markets in Africa, served as retrospective justification for imperialism. Although the word remains unspeakable, the Western intelligentsia, conservatives and liberals alike, boldly echo the preferred euphemism, "civilisation". >From Italy's Prime Minister, Silvio Berlusconi, an ally of crypto-fascists, to impeccably liberal commentators, the new imperialists share a concept whose true meaning relies on a comparison with those who are uncivilised, inferior and might challenge the "values" of the West. The great divisions opening up between the rich and poor are reduced to platitudes of how best "we" deal with "them" - an attitude expressed in the return of xenophobia and racism towards refugees, led aggressively by the Howard Government. There are many blueprints for the new imperialism, but none as cogent as that of Zbigniew Brzezinski, adviser to several American presidents and one of the most influential gurus in Washington, whose 1997 book is said to have biblical authority among the George W. Bush gang and its "endless war" intelligentsia. In The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and its Geostrategic Imperatives, Brzezinski writes: "Ever since the continents started interacting politically, some 500 years ago, Eurasia has been the centre of world power." The key to controlling this vast area of the world is Central Asia. Dominance of Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan ensures not only new sources of energy and mineral wealth but a "guard post" over American control of the oil of the Persian Gulf. "What is most important to the history of the world?" asked Brzezinski. "The Taliban or the collapse of the Soviet Empire? Some stirred-up Muslims or the liberation of central Europe ...?" The "stirred-up Muslims" replied on September 11 last year. Nation states, says Brzezinski, will be incorporated in the "new order". "To put it in a terminology that harkens back to the more brutal age of ancient empires," he says, "the three grand imperatives of imperial geostrategy are to prevent collusion and maintain security dependence among the vassals, to keep tributaries pliant and protected, and to keep the barbarians from coming together." Brzezinski is not from the lunar right. He is as mainstream as Bush. He was President Jimmy Carter's national security adviser, who persuaded Carter to sign a secret executive order in 1979, funding a new Islamic terrorist movement, the Mujihadeen, which the CIA trained in Pakistan and Virginia and from which emerged Osama bin Laden, al-Qaeda and the Taliban. Brzezinski's followers include John Negroponte, the mastermind of American terror in Central America under Ronald Reagan in the 1980s, now Bush's ambassador to the United Nations. It was Negroponte who first warned the world, after September 11, that the US planned to attack any country it wished. For those in thrall to, and neutered by, the supercult of America, the most salient truths remain taboos. Perhaps the most important taboo is the longevity of the US as both a terrorist state and a haven for terrorists. That the US in the only state on record to have been condemned by the World Court for international terrorism (in Nicaragua) and has vetoed a UN Security Council resolution calling on governments to observe international law, is unmentionable. "In the war against terrorism," said Bush, "we're going to hunt down these evil-doers wherever they are, no matter how long it takes." Strictly speaking, it should not take long, as more terrorists are given training and sanctuary in the US than anywhere in the world. They include mass murderers, torturers, former and future tyrants and assorted international criminals. There is no terrorist sanctuary to compare with Florida, currently governed by the President's brother, Jeb. In his book Rogue State, former senior State Department official Bill Blum describes a typical Florida trial of three anti-Castro terrorists who had hijacked a plane to Miami at knifepoint. "Even though the kidnapped pilot was brought back from Cuba to testify against the men," he wrote, "the defence simply told the jurors the man was lying, and the jury deliberated for less than an hour before acquitting the defendants." General Jose Guillermo Garcia has lived in Florida since the 1990s. He was head of El Salvador's military during the 1980s when death squads closely linked to the army murdered thousands of people. General Prosper Avril, the Haitian dictator, liked to display the bloodied victims of his torture on television. When he was overthrown, he was flown to Florida by the US Government. Thiounn Prasith, Pol Pot's henchman and apologist at the UN, lives in Mount Vernon, New York. General Mansour Moharari, who ran the Shah of Iran's notorious prisons, is wanted in Iran, but is untroubled in the US. Al-Qaeda's training camps in Afghanistan were kindergartens compared with the world's leading university of terrorism at Fort Benning in Georgia. Known until recently as the School of the Americas, it trained 60,000 Latin American soldiers, policemen, paramilitaries and intelligence agents in terrorism. In 1993, the UN Truth Commission on El Salvador named the army officers who had committed the worst atrocities of the civil war; two-thirds of them had been trained at Fort Benning. In Chile, the school's graduates ran Pinochet's secret police and three principal concentration camps. In 1966, the US government was forced to release copies of the school's training manuals. For aspiring terrorists, these recommended blackmail, torture, execution and the arrest of witnesses' relatives. The irony is that the US is also the home of some of history's greatest human rights movements, such as the 1960s epic campaign for civil rights. Having just returned from the US, it seems the stirring has begun again. In an open letter to their compatriots and the world, published in the Herald on June 17, almost 100 of the US's most distinguished names in art, literature, journalism and education wrote: "Let it not be said that people in the US did nothing when their government declared war without limit and instituted stark new measures of repression. We believe that nations have the right to determine their own destiny, free from military coercion by great powers. We believe that all persons detained and prosecuted by the US Government should have the same right of due process. We believe that questioning, criticism and dissent must be valued and protected. Such rights are always contested and must be fought for. We, too, watched with shock the horrific events of September 11. But the mourning had barely begun when our leaders launched a spirit of revenge. The Government now openly prepares to wage war on Iraq - a country that has no connection with September 11. We say this to the world: too many times in history people have waited until it was too late to resist. We draw on the inspiration of those who fought slavery and all those other great causes of freedom that began with dissent. We call on all like-minded people around the world to join us." It is time we joined them. This is an edited extract from The New Rulers of the World, by John Pilger, published this month by Pan Macmillan Australia. ===================== From mstainsby at tao.ca Fri Jul 5 12:37:41 2002 From: mstainsby at tao.ca (Macdonald Stainsby) Date: Sat Aug 5 04:33:17 2006 Subject: [R-G] RED FLAG RED FLAG!! U.S. Plan for Iraq LEAD STORY in NYtimes. Message-ID: <000901c22453$0c925f80$291f5318@vc.shawcable.net> U.S. Plan for Iraq Is Said to Include Attack on 3 Sides By ERIC SCHMITT ASHINGTON, July 4 - An American military planning document calls for air, land and sea-based forces to attack Iraq from three directions - the north, south and west - in a campaign to topple President Saddam Hussein, according to a person familiar with the document. The document envisions tens of thousands of marines and soldiers probably invading from Kuwait. Hundreds of warplanes based in as many as eight countries, possibly including Turkey and Qatar, would unleash a huge air assault against thousands of targets, including airfields, roadways and fiber-optics communications sites. Special operations forces or covert C.I.A. operatives would strike at depots or laboratories storing or manufacturing Iraq's suspected weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to launch them. Rest: http://www.nytimes.com/2002/07/05/international/middleeast/05IRAQ.html ------------------------------------------- Macdonald Stainsby http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/rad-green http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/leninist-international -- In the contradiction lies the hope. --Bertholt Brecht From ewokateur at yahoo.ca Fri Jul 5 14:13:11 2002 From: ewokateur at yahoo.ca (High Hopes) Date: Sat Aug 5 04:33:17 2006 Subject: [R-G] Thoughts on the aftermath, if any, of the G-8 protest In-Reply-To: <20020705194750.51499.qmail@web21209.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20020705201311.44356.qmail@web14911.mail.yahoo.com> I kept away from media accounts of unofficial G-8 events, but I tell you, dear G-8ers, in the public mind of this town that I had asked you to help ventilate in transit, mud's the word. Mud is all that history will have to remember your risky efforts by, so maybe it's time to decide whether summit-hopping will become a permanent and increasingly inconsequential art form of the Left, especially as these meetings need not have any content at all (and was just that, perchance, the Message of the Mud?). I managed to debunk an alleged media allegation, triumphantly trumpeted by a neighbour, to the effect that a thousand randomly interviewed protesters could not explain their presence, but the mud kept my mental wheels spinning. Yes, I initially thought of the mudding as a brilliant strategy to keep the resplendently attired police scuffle-shy, then as another case of compulsive catch-up with America: a Canadian Woodstock, only 33 years later! Was it a highly sublimated statement? The Buddha once acted similarly with a flower and a smile in answer to a complex question. Finally I decided that everyone was aloft on something nifty from the rave pharmacopoeia that unexpectedly gave the mud both erotic and philosophical importance beyond all resisting. Look, outside of Castlegar just about everybody understands the neo-lib pox by now, so maybe it's also time to review the relationship between form and function, lest G-8 mud appear in the stores to mock you one of these summers. [ The following text is taken from pages 269-270 of "Men and Powers," the 1989 English edition of a 1987 book by Helmut Schmidt, West German chancellor, 1974-82. Francois Mitterand is the president referred to as in opposition to Reagan. The eighth economic summit evidently had some serious political sap flowing in it; what has changed since then and what not? ] "Consequently the economic summit held in Versailles in June 1982 witnessed a head-on confrontation between the two presidents. The so-called pipeline embargo (a misleading term, since it was merely a matter of supplying a few pumps) that Reagan imposed a few days after the summit aggravated the situation, until malevolent polemics were issued by all sides. Reagan's "crusade against trade with the East," as several European newspapers called it, surely made a good impression on the American television audience, since it was a concept easily understood by laymen. For the Soviet Union it meant no more than a policy of pinpricks, but the European allies saw this plan as an attempt to undermine their sovereignty and turn the United States into the economic commander of the Western world. The French media coined a term for the United States that became popular: 'economie dominante -- the United States as dominating national economy. Similarly, an American political scientist spoke of an "imperious economy." This concept was met with vehement protest not only in France; not a single government in the rest of the Western world, from Canberra and Tokyo through Ottawa to Europe, was prepared to accept the economic sovereignty of the United States. Though all of us found Reagan's vigorous presidency more reliable than the preceding Carter era, it was specifically in the economic arena that Reagan could gain neither credibility nor legitimacy." Mark Lewis Castlegar, BC "People were in prison so that prices could be free" -- Eduardo Galeano ______________________________________________________________________ Post your ad for free now! http://personals.yahoo.ca From debsian at pacbell.net Fri Jul 5 17:19:05 2002 From: debsian at pacbell.net (Michael Pugliese) Date: Sat Aug 5 04:33:17 2006 Subject: [R-G] Anti-Globalization and the Far Right Message-ID: <8493HG3XB6B6LHC7D9VUMI72WRZWVB6.3d262969@oemcomputer> So, I see that Mac agrees now with Chip Berlet and me about the far right and it's menace to the anti-globalization movement. This so called social democrat, is one who has never let far right loons table or march at any event I've been involved in. Now, if Mac had more of an understanding like Hitchens about the irreconciliable conflict between theocratic, anti-modernist, counter- enlightenment ideologies and movements like al-Quaeda...Not as if others his age, like Owen Jones, aren't so equpped to understand the counter-revolutionary nature of a Milosevic. Or the silliness of believing anything the KCNA says. http://www.columbia.edu/~lnp3/msg17963.html http://www.columbia.edu/~lnp3/msg17964.html http://www.columbia.edu/~lnp3/msg17965.html http://www.columbia.edu/~lnp3/msg17966.html http://www.columbia.edu/~lnp3/msg17967.html Michael Pugliese, kick me off if you wish Mac...I need less e-mail anyway ;-) And I need to re-read my Nicos Poulantzas and E.P. Thompson. From mstainsby at tao.ca Fri Jul 5 19:02:59 2002 From: mstainsby at tao.ca (Macdonald Stainsby) Date: Sat Aug 5 04:33:17 2006 Subject: [R-G] Venezuela's Chavez chides top world powers. Message-ID: <006d01c22488$df452cc0$291f5318@vc.shawcable.net> Reuters. 5 July 2002. Venezuela's Chavez chides top world powers. CARACAS -- Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, praising the "beautiful medicine of revolution," accused industrialized powers on Friday of trying to impose their models of free trade and democracy on the developing world. "They all try to impose economic and political models on us. No. We can construct our own models," said Chavez. In a ceremony marking the 191st anniversary of his country's independence from Spain, he said Venezuela was working to create an alternative to "neo-liberalism" -- the term he uses to describe globalized free-market capitalism. Slamming this form of unbridled capitalism as "the road to hell," Chavez said his populist government was applying "the beautiful medicine of revolution" to close the gap between rich and poor in the world's fifth-largest oil exporter. The Venezuelan leader, who says he is neither a Marxist nor a capitalist, has sought to introduce nationalist, anti-poverty policies, reaffirming state control over the strategic oil industry and distributing rural plots to landless families. The Venezuelan leader chided the world's richest nations for trying to dictate to developing countries. "They demand free trade from us, which isn't free or anything of the kind," he said, adding that the world's trading powers did not practice what they preached. "This is the height of immorality," he said. "What we ask for is equality, justice, for us to be better understood and respected." The Venezuelan leader was due to attend an independence day military parade later on Friday. ------------------------------------------- Macdonald Stainsby http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/rad-green http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/leninist-international -- In the contradiction lies the hope. --Bertholt Brecht From mstainsby at tao.ca Fri Jul 5 19:25:17 2002 From: mstainsby at tao.ca (Macdonald Stainsby) Date: Sat Aug 5 04:33:17 2006 Subject: [R-G] A critique from a friend: Re: Calgary Message-ID: <007d01c2248b$fcd70800$291f5318@vc.shawcable.net> THE ANTI-G8 PROTESTS IN CALGARY: SOME CONTRIBUTIONS TO A CRITIQUE OF THE ANTI-GLOBALIZATION MOVEMENT By Tom Keefer, July 2nd, 2002. (tom@tao.ca) [Synopsis: An analysis from an anarcho-communist perspective of the anti-globalization movement in the context of the G8 protest in Calgary with a special focus upon the impact of Sept 11th, and contradictions between the movement's reformist and revolutionary tendencies. Contains a discussion on the weaknesses of the concepts of "anti-capitalism" and "diversity of tactics" as expressed by the movement's radical wing. Tom Keefer is a member of the North Eastern Federation of Anarcho-Communists (NEFAC) http://flag.blackened.net/nefac/.] THE LONG SHADOW OF THE TWIN TOWERS It is clear that after a string of successes (beginning with Seattle and carried on in Washington and Quebec City), that the anti-globalization movement has lost ground in its ability to mobilize large numbers in North America in the wake of September 11th and the attendant "war on terrorism" launched by US imperialism. The forces of reaction have been strengthened by the attacks of Sept 11th, and many of those we would seek to rally to our cause have lined up behind the flags of patriotism or have been intimidated into silence by a dramatic increase in state surveillance and repression in conjunction with the mass detention and deportation of "suspect" Muslims, Arabs and undocumented immigrants. >From the perspective of the global capitalist ruling class, the development of the anti-globalization movement has been one of the most threatening forces to its hegemony in past decade. With the collapse of the Soviet Union and the seeming end to any alternatives to the consolidation of world imperialism, the mass protests against capitalist globalization have broken the illusion of a national and global consensus in favour of privatisation, de-regulation and corporate rule, as well as holding within them the seeds of real alternatives to capitalism. Within this movement, the rise of anarchist principles and ideology, the organizing of grass roots, democratically controlled affinity groups and federative structures willing to step outside the bounds of legality, the eschewing of tactics of lobbying and reformism and the turning towards direct confrontation with the defenders of the status quo, have alarmed the capitalist class and its social democratic appendages to no end. The capitalist class clings to power above all else, and threatened by a rising anti-globalization movement, it has sought to portray "violent" anti-globalization activists as part of the same attack on "western civilization" as the suicide bombers of the Al-Qaeda network. In the wake of the September 11th attacks, the capitalist state has taken the offensive in linking up the "war against terrorism" to the criminalization of the radical wing of the anti-globalization movement. In the lead up to the June G8 summit, under the guise of defending state interests from the twin evils of Osama Bin Laden and violent protestors, the Prime Minister of Canada, various military officials, and local politicians all announced steps that made even simple protest illegal at the G8 events in Kananaskis and Calgary. In the context of the largest military operation to take place on Canadian soil this century, protestors were warned that they would be shot on sight should they breach the conference's security perimeter, and in Calgary, all public protests of the G8- with the exception of a labour/community march and a picnic- were declared illegal assemblies by the Mayor who promised hundreds of jail cells as homes for any activists bold enough to disobey him. SOCIAL DEMOCRATS, TRADE UNION BUREACRATS AND NGO MANDARINS Hand in hand with attempts to smash the anti-globalization movement through state repression have come numerous attempts to co-opt and integrate the liberal "main stream" elements of this movement into a "loyal opposition" limited to critiques of the worst excesses of the system and proposing only mild reforms. Just as one wing of the movement has moved into criticizing the capitalist system as a whole and has advanced the question of its abolition; the mirror image of this tendency- generalled by social democrats, trade union bureaucrats, and NGO mandarins, has also sought ascendancy within the movement by seeking to corall protest within the bounds of legality and to mitigate the system's outrages through the charade of electoralism and surface reforms. The ruling class is aware of this split, which historically speaking has been present in every social movement, and has sought to buy off the reformists and to increase their strength by providing hundreds of thousands of dollars in direct funding to large numbers of "non governmental organizations", their conferences and "people's summits" as well as by seeking to create and solidify a "dialogue" between state, capital and "responsible" NGO's capable of reining in and isolating the young malcontents and their allies. Perhaps one of the most visible manifestations of this tendency of betrayal can be seen at repeated anti-globalization protests where the labour bureaucracy has repeatedly and consciously lead tens of thousands of their members into isolated areas far away from the scenes of action and protest, to misinform and demobilize them through lengthy speeches and boring music, and to physically separate "their" members from radical protest elements through the muscle of their marshals. ORGANIZATION OF THE PROTESTS IN CALGARY As has often been the case, the activist "leadership" that organized the latest protests against capitalist globalization in Calgary was, split between a would be more "radical" youth wing espousing the values of "anti-capitalism" and of a "diversity of tactics" and a more conservative layer made up of labour, community and NGO activists which sought to organize "non-confrontational" and educational events. As both groups accepted that protest directed at the summit location itself in far off Kananaskis was unfeasible due to the difficulties of blockading a remote backcountry location under the threat of severe state repression, organizers settled on a focus in Calgary itself. Broadly speaking, the youth focused on street protests (J-26) aimed to disrupt the interests of the corporate interests behind the G8 while the established social democratic leadership held an "alternative" summit and sought to bring out their members to a large, non-controversial protest and a picnic in the park. Throughout the course of the week of protests and educational activities, approximately 3000 and 4000 people participated in the range of activities against the G8 in Calgary. There was a small degree of support from the local population of Calgary, but no major groundswell of popular support, and no widespread "buzz" in the air in the weeks before the protests as there was in Quebec City. A significant reason for this low turnout was no doubt the difficulties that many local activists faced in trying to organize events on the scale and with the same expectations of previous anti-globalization protests, away from the continent's major population centres and in communities with a much weaker tradition of radical organizing. Nonetheless, even though organizers had been working on the G-8 protests for almost a year, there was very little communication with out of town activists as to what was going on, about what to expect, and in what specific ways those coming from out of town could be of assistance. Mainstream media organizations played up the risks of "violence" and gleefully trumpeted the military and police preparations being undertaken to repress dissent. Participation by coherently structured affinity groups active in the lead-up to the protests with a clear idea of what they wanted to accomplish was also almost non-existent. There were approximately 20-25 affinity groups present at the last spokescouncil before the G8 summit opened, and they seemed to be for the most part very loosely organized as well as not incorporating the majority of participants in the actions of J-26. The focus of the J-26 direct actions was against the corporate sponsors of the G8, and was aimed at creating maximum economic disruption to the down town core. It would seem that the media inspired hype in the weeks before the protests was more effective in doing this that the J-26 protest itself. Businesses were boarded up, special security measures were taken, and workers were told not to come into work in "business clothes" due to the threat of "violence" from protestors. The plans for J-26 were based upon having a so called "snake march", an idea apparently derived from OCAP's campaign of economic disruption in November of 2001 in the province of Ontario. Unfortunately, the "snake march" proved to be little different from a typical disorganized protest march with organizers bereft of sound equipment and lacking a clear sense of what to do. The radical youth leadership that organized the direct action "disruptive" actions against the G8 was largely made up activists from anarchist based "anti-capitalist" youth groups based in Calgary and Edmonton who it would seem leaned heavily on the activities and ideological perspectives of such anti globalization based groups as the Montreal based Convergence of Anti-Capitalist Struggles (CLAC). The political orientation of Calgary based organizers group could be largely summed up by two political concepts which for them underlined the best way to confront the G8: a commitment to "anti-capitalism" and to a "diversity of tactics". However, there was never any clear political elaboration or discussion of what these terms actually meant, rather, these terms came to be treated as fetishized commandments which had fallen from the skies of Quebec City. THE POVERTY OF "PROTEST PORN" An "anti-capitalist caucus" was held to incorporate "anti-capitalists" involved with the J-26 actions. Unfortunately, other than a vague consensus that they were opposed to "capitalism" there was no understanding or agreement by this caucus as to what exactly capitalism is, how it operates, or how and by whom it can best be opposed. There was next to no meaningful discussion of how class, race, patriarchy and struggles for native sovereignty impacted upon capitalism or movements for its abolition, nor was there any discussion and analysis of what capitalism could be replaced with and what role could be played by various social movements and the working class (who, in withdrawing their labour, can bring about an immediate cession to capitalist production.) Instead "anti-capitalism" became a strategy of producing "shocking" and symbolic spectacles- "protest porn" -which had the effect of neither shutting down the corporate center of Calgary, nor of reaching out to un-politicized workers and linking up to their struggles or concerns. Some of these actions included a "die-in" in a park, getting naked in front of the Gap, having a group of people take off their clothes and cover themselves in mud and grunt as they cavorted through the streets, and the playing of two 5 minute games of "anarchist" soccer on a downtown intersection following the snake march protest. It thus seems that an "anti-capitalist" strategy was believed by most attendees of the anti-capitalist caucus to consist of either an irrelevant fashion statement or an apolitical and unplanned clash with the forces of authority, and given the balance of forces confronting activists in Calgary, most chose to opt for the former. From the caucus one would never have guessed of the existence of something called the working class and that it might have any relationship to capitalism worthy of the name, or that the broad masses of that class need to consciously mobilize themselves for the creation of a fundamentally different kind of social system, should any anti-capitalist struggle seek to be ultimately successful. Nor did it strike members of the caucus that perhaps some of the many people we were supposedly trying to reach with our message might be interested in hearing about what kinds of alternatives we might propose to the capitalist order that we criticize so voraciously. The actions proposed in both the spokescouncil and the anti-capitalist caucus, would have been appropriate (or would have been at least a benignly irrelevant) had Calgary in fact been shut down by protestors due to a broad based and effective conjuncture of social upheaval and confrontation with the forces of state and capital. But in the context of a social movement in the process of becoming isolated from its would be supporters by a state orchestrated campaign of repression, and given the crying need for the movement to deepen and extend its influence at this critical junction, these actions were a useless diversion at best, and a stupid farce at worst. "Actions" like this serve only to draw a line between the radical "anti-capitalists" and ordinary working people who while exploited by capitalism, can see pretty clearly that a movement made up of naked, grunting, mud covered middle class "earth people" has little to concretely offer them in overcoming the oppressive conditions of their lives. Similarly, how a handful of people playing soccer, watched by a passive mass of 500 others for a short period of time in the context of a crassly commercial and profoundly nationalistic ongoing World Cup event constitutes a relevant representation of "anarchism" or for that matter, "anti-capitalism", was never explained by anyone inside the caucus. The police realized their position of strength sooner than the protestors realized their weaknesses, and having already succeeded in keeping the activists on the defensive through draconian security measures, they saw no need whatsoever to intervene against the marches and protests being planned as long as no effective forms of protest occurred (i.e. civil disobedience or direct action). They were tolerant of a badly organized "snake march" wandering around town for some 4 hours on the 26th, and tolerant of the anarchist football players for an hour or two after that, tolerant of anti-McDonalds protestors, and indeed as long as the whole affair remained a minor inconvenience, they were unwilling to tip their hand. Instead, roving squadrons of bicycle cops cordoned off potential targets of vandalism, while riot police were kept carefully hidden, and no arrests were made. From reports after the fact in the mainstream media it was clear that the police were aware that they would lose the propaganda war should they start breaking heads without any provocation whatsoever. The reason for the relative police inaction, is that there is still widespread if passive support for the anti-globalization movement, and the forces of order could not risk that the brutally oppressive nature of the capitalist state would be further thrown into relief by attacking deliberately peaceful protestors. Resistance to police repression in Seattle and Quebec City and the representation of this resistance in popular culture severely undermined the legitimacy of the state, and in Calgary as long as things "didn't get out of hand" the police were content to regain legitimacy through such media stunts as providing free bottled water to dehydrated activists, and to portray themselves as consensus building "partners" with the "responsible" section of protestors in keeping the event "safe" and "respectful" of the interests of all parties. In both the "anti-capitalist caucus" and in the larger spokescouncil there was very little willingness to organize direct actions or civil disobedience activities similar to those that have happened in other anti-globalization protests. In the case of the Calgary protests, a clear and open discussion of the actual state of struggle, the level of state repression, and what our goals and tactics were to be given that the summit couldn't be shut down, was necessary - but totally discouraged. The fact was that the defining moments in Calgary consisted of spectacles devoid of meaningful political content. This was a direct reflection of the success of state repression on one hand, and our poverty of political analysis and inability to respond by modifying tactics and strategy on the other. In the immediate run up to the summit, it became clear that the forces of law and order were well organized and prepared to unleash a campaign of mass violence and arrest upon any effective form of protest. This was compounded by the fact that anti-globalization activists were in a state of strategic retreat and tactical incoherence. The protest organizers were idealistically hoping for a simple replay of the protests of Quebec City, and were either unable or unwilling to take into account global, regional and local changes that had occurred and which had altered the balance of forces in the interval. At first, the organizers refused to entertain any suggestion that the concept of "diversity of tactics" could be flawed when considered from a revolutionary perspective. Yet several days later, under the pressure of events, the organizers abandoned this principle, deciding that they would permit no "civil disobedience" or direct action during the course of the J26 snake march and "economic disruption". While this may have been in fact a correct decision in order to incorporate last minute participation from labour to save the march from an embarrassing lack of numbers, it should have been clear weeks if not months earlier on that this was the case, and direct action alternatives to the snake march should have been prioritised instead. As it was, direct action was ephemerally relegated to the realm of various imaginary affinity groups who would be free to organize there actions free from the support of those who came out for the snake march. A DIVERSITY OF RADICAL LIBERALS The concept of a "diversity of tactics" (an understanding that a full range of tactical options from civil disobedience to physical confrontation with the police) which was an unshakable basis of unity of the direct action grouping that organized J-26, first came to the attention of the movement when the sell out wing of the anti-globalization movement sought to eliminate more militant direct action groups (such as CLAC-CASA) from participation in the movement in the lead up to the Quebec City protests. It should be clear to all revolutionaries that a wide variety of tactics, up to and including physical confrontation with the agents of the ruling class will be necessary if we are to defeat this system. It should be equally clear that a process of self discipline and democratic determination of how and when to use "violent" tactics is of paramount importance in order that it be effective. Otherwise, a blanket statement of being in support of "diversity of tactics" draws no lines between the black block clashing with police lines; the indiscriminate violence engaged in and encouraged by undercover cops acting as 'agents provocateurs' (this was a significant feature of the Genoa demonstrations); the armed violence and bombing campaigns carried out by groups like ETA or the Red Brigades (or, in Italy again, by the secret police, as in their bombing of the Bologna railway station); and finally, the kind of operations that might be mounted by Al-Queda agents should they happen to target a pro-globalization summit. This refusal to actually define what kinds of "violence" we see as necessary and useful and in what conditions, will not only leave us open to attack from the state but will give right wing propagandists a golden opportunity to lump us in with Al-Queda and co. and to justify our wholesale repression. The concept of "diversity of tactics" is problematic for its extreme liberalism and its tendency to avoid self discipline, mutual accountability and the important debate as to which tactics at a given moment are actually necessary to achieve victory or to avoid defeat. A movement where anyone and any group carries out "violent" attacks on the state and capital whenever they please and regardless of whether or not its actions are harmful to the overall movement is no movement at all. Supporters of "diversity of tactics" may argue that any attempt to limit anyone else's tactics is "authoritarian", but if we are not able to democratically come up with a strategy that works given our particular conditions, it is clear that our movement, in lacking any kind of self discipline will never succeed. It is clear that reformists, social democrats and trade union bureaucrats will try with all their might to keep protests "respectable" and "legal" and will seek to strangle all forms of protest which break from passive symbolism or lobbying. Nonetheless, we must be clear that to defeat the tyranny of capitalism with its riot police, SWAT teams, army, secret services, our use of "violence" will be undeniably necessary for own self defence, not to mention our eventual victory. This does not mean that success can be achieved from going head to head with the forces of repression- that is a recipe for disaster. What we need is an ability within the radical movement of being able to democratically decide what level of confrontation is tactically necessary given current conditions and to be able to carry it out on our own terms and within the limits that we set. As summits are held in more and more inaccessible locations and strategies of attempting to "shut them down" become less feasible, our movement needs to discover how to use tactics of civil disobedience and direct action in ways that accomplish objectives other than shutting down summits, such as through opening squats, occupying government or corporate offices, joining striking workers on picket lines and otherwise concretely connecting with ongoing local struggles which can be tied into the larger struggle against capitalist globalization. To take just one example of thinking differently, if protestors in Calgary had sought to fight the criminalization of dissent by for example setting up half a dozen "free speech zones" with sound trucks in a variety of busy intersections in the down town area and then used these platforms as a means to simultaneously engage with passer by's and to disrupt business as usual, matters might have gone quite differently on J-26. These free speech zones, surrounded by phalanxes of disciplined protestors willing to defend them with civil disobedience and direct action would in effect become our own "mini-summits" engaging, dialoguing with and entertaining many of those not reached by our message of solidarity and struggle. The mass media would have had difficulty in disguising the fact that it was police trying to crash through our lines, and not our attacks on them, that was the source of "violence" due simply to the fact that protestors were attempting to engage in free speech. There are many other kinds of actions acceptable to a wide variety of people willing to take different kinds of risks than either passively marching around or seeking to break through summit perimeters. What is key in any of these actions is a) engaging in open discussion facilitated by decent intelligence gathering methods to come to a correct understanding of the balance of forces facing us, b) having well organized, disciplined and coherent affinity groups able to take on and carry out specific tasks and projects within the event, and c) a process of mass mobilization and education that is able to bring out enough protestors to be able to avoid wholesale repression from police. SUMMIT HOPPING AND BUILDING A MOVEMENT In recent months, many critiques have been made about "summit hopping", and it is indeed true that those who do little radical work in their own communities and who, lemming like, just hop on a bus and arrive at the scene of the protest without an affinity group or plan of action are perhaps deserving of this critique. However, what critics of "summit hopping" tend to forget is that these summit protests and the movement they have given rise to have been the single most significant development in the past decade of resistance to the capitalist status quo. The key thing about these summit actions is that they allow us to multiply our strength and to reach a critical mass that we are not yet able to even come close to in the many isolated local struggles in which we engage. In Seattle and Quebec City, we were able to directly confront the powers that be and in doing so, were able to capture the imaginations of millions of people across the world in a way that has not been seen since the struggles of the 1960's. A break was created in capitalist hegemony and legitimacy, and through it the groundwork has been laid for a potential mass radicalisation of staggering proportions. This is the real reason as to why the capitalist state has responded so seriously to our movement and why it seeks to suppress us. They see perhaps more clearly than we do, that these various summit protests over the past several years have provided us with a sort of "short cut" method that has enabled us to bring together a wide tendency of activist currents and openly confront the state and capital in a manner not seen in a generation. BY MEANS OF A CONCLUSION The location of events in Calgary, the spectre of state repression, and the fallout of Sept 11th mingled with the poverty of political analysis and organizational abilities of the activists concerned all contributed to this defeat. It should be noted that many of these factors are not as pronounced in Europe, where protests against capitalist globalization are involving ever increasing numbers as well as significant amounts of industrial action from striking workers. It is possible that the sagging fortunes of the North American anti-globalization movement will have to be revived through inspiration from "a new Seattle" coming from Latin America or Europe, but regardless, the only way for our movement to consolidate its gains to date and to further advance the struggle is to take stock of our weaknesses and to combat them. In doing so anti-globalization activists must come to realize the importance of developing a coherent political analysis capable of understanding what "capitalism" is and how it can be overcome. We must realize that nothing can ever be truly destroyed until is replaced, and thus come up with visions of what kind of a system it is that we wish to replace capitalism with, as well as to construct revolutionary organizations which can aid us in that task. If we hope to succeed, another area in which the "anti-capitalist" wing of the anti-globalization movement needs to develop is in being able to contest areas of work that has until now overwhelmingly been the preserve of the reformists. The building of international networks, the organizing of alternative summits, mass circulation periodicals, and coherent media strategies with deep going anti-capitalist analyses desperately need to be provided so that we can win the battle of ideas against reformist ideologues who seek to use our movement for the purposes of gaining narrow reforms through the dead end of social democracy and electoralism. Coming up with and popularizing truly anti-capitalist perspectives will be impossible without the creation of genuine revolutionary organizations with a mass base within the ranks of the oppressed and exploited . In constructing these organizations and in being able to gain tactical and strategic victories at various summits and protests, the creation of ongoing affinity groups and revolutionary federations that continue to exist, and indeed thrive on carrying out local actions in between major mobilizations will be essential. The balance sheet from the G8 protests in Calgary adds up to a clear defeat for those in the anti-globalization camp. Even considering the objective difficulties encountered in organizing the protests, measured from the standpoint of our numbers, the self organization of affinity groups, internal democracy and political analysis, our tactical successes in causing economic disruption to downtown Calgary, and most importantly in our ability to intelligently reach out the general public and express what we are fighting for, the protests in Calgary were a failure. The defeat could have certainly been worse, but the anti-G8 protests in Calgary should come as a wake up call to our movement that a profound re-thinking of how we combat capitalist globalization is in order. The chief cause of this failure lies in our ideological weaknesses and in a crisis of self-organization and radical institution building at the grassroots of our movement. By entering into a period of meaningful reflection and self organization, we can learn from our mistakes and come out of this process strengthened and re-invigorated to continue the battle against global capitalism at a new and higher level. The alternative that faces us is further retreat and co-option, widespread demoralization and the eventual demise of one of the most important movements to challenge global capitalism in the past decade. ------------------------------------------- Macdonald Stainsby http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/rad-green http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/leninist-international -- In the contradiction lies the hope. --Bertholt Brecht From furuhashi.1 at osu.edu Sat Jul 6 09:15:56 2002 From: furuhashi.1 at osu.edu (Yoshie Furuhashi) Date: Sat Aug 5 04:33:17 2006 Subject: [R-G] Anti-US protest in Kabu Message-ID: "Anti-US protest in Kabul: A Sign of Wider Anger in Afghanistan," . -- Yoshie * Calendar of Events in Columbus: * Anti-War Activist Resources: * Student International Forum: * Committee for Justice in Palestine: From mstainsby at tao.ca Sat Jul 6 19:35:35 2002 From: mstainsby at tao.ca (Macdonald Stainsby) Date: Sat Aug 5 04:33:17 2006 Subject: [R-G] Denmark prepares for anti-EU riots: repression again. Message-ID: <004301c22556$975461a0$291f5318@vc.shawcable.net> Independent. 7 July 2002. Denmark prepares for anti-EU riots. COPENHAGEN -- Denmark is building cells in underground car parks and drawing up contingency plans to evacuate pensioners from Copenhagen city centre in readiness for possible riots during its six-month European Union presidency. The unprecedented security measures arise from last year's anti-globalisation protests at an EU summit in neighbouring Sweden, when many of those arrested turned out to be Danes. The Danish government has announced that, as key meetings approach, it will suspend an EU free travel agreement and, if necessary, draft in hundreds of extra police. Specially armoured vehicles have been brought in from the Netherlands to transport police in safety, and the police plan to use a website to present their side of the story if they are accused of violent tactics during protests. Most controversial, however, is a plan to build temporary holding centres in two underground car parks of Copenhagen police stations. Facing criticism that detainees could be held in temperatures as low as minus 15C at the December summit of EU leaders in the capital, Danish police showed the cells to the local media last week. They say the units will allow about 300 people to be held at one time but that no one will be in a unit for more than 24 hours. Suspects will have access to food, water and toilet facilities, and the cells will be 6ft high, 6ft wide and 12ft deep. By day they will hold six people, and at night no more than four, police say. The first potential flashpoint of the presidency will be a meeting of EU and Asian finance ministers in September. In December the heads of government will gather in the Danish capital, but police hope that cold weather will inhibit protests. For key EU meetings, levels of policing are to be more than doubled if necessary, with hundreds drafted in from the provinces to boost the normal 1,800 officers to a maximum of 4,000. Concerned that they stand to lose a propaganda battle, the authorities have announced that two officers from the police information department will be writing news stories from the perspective of the security forces. Jorgen Poulsen, professor of journalism at Roskilde University, told the paper: "You could imagine situations where the press don't have access and where then the police's own journalists will be the only ones reporting." ------------------------------------------- Macdonald Stainsby http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/rad-green http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/leninist-international -- In the contradiction lies the hope. --Bertholt Brecht From mstainsby at tao.ca Sun Jul 7 02:06:04 2002 From: mstainsby at tao.ca (Macdonald Stainsby) Date: Sat Aug 5 04:33:17 2006 Subject: [R-G] The world's ticking timebomb Message-ID: <012901c2258d$2424c080$291f5318@vc.shawcable.net> http://www.observer.co.uk/international/story/0,6903,750783,00.html The world's ticking timebomb Earth 'will expire by 2050' Our planet is running out of room and resources. Modern man has plundered so much, a damning report claims this week, that outer space will have to be colonised Mark Townsend and Jason Burke Sunday July 7, 2002 The Observer Earth's population will be forced to colonise two planets within 50 years if natural resources continue to be exploited at the current rate, according to a report out this week. A study by the World Wildlife Fund (WWF), to be released on Tuesday, warns that the human race is plundering the planet at a pace that outstrips its capacity to support life. In a damning condemnation of Western society's high consumption levels, it adds that the extra planets (the equivalent size of Earth) will be required by the year 2050 as existing resources are exhausted. The report, based on scientific data from across the world, reveals that more than a third of the natural world has been destroyed by humans over the past three decades. Using the image of the need for mankind to colonise space as a stark illustration of the problems facing Earth, the report warns that either consumption rates are dramatically and rapidly lowered or the planet will no longer be able to sustain its growing population. Experts say that seas will become emptied of fish while forests - which absorb carbon dioxide emissions - are completely destroyed and freshwater supplies become scarce and polluted. The report offers a vivid warning that either people curb their extravagant lifestyles or risk leaving the onus on scientists to locate another planet that can sustain human life. Since this is unlikely to happen, the only option is to cut consumption now. Systematic overexploitation of the planet's oceans has meant the North Atlantic's cod stocks have collapsed from an estimated spawning stock of 264,000 tonnes in 1970 to under 60,000 in 1995. The study will also reveal a sharp fall in the planet's ecosystems between 1970 and 2002 with the Earth's forest cover shrinking by about 12 per cent, the ocean's biodiversity by a third and freshwater ecosystems in the region of 55 per cent. The Living Planet report uses an index to illustrate the shocking level of deterioration in the world's forests as well as marine and freshwater ecosystems. Using 1970 as a baseline year and giving it a value of 100, the index has dropped to a new low of around 65 in the space of a single generation. It is not just humans who are at risk. Scientists, who examined data for 350 kinds of mammals, birds, reptiles and fish, also found the numbers of many species have more than halved. Martin Jenkins, senior adviser for the World Conservation Monitoring Centre in Cambridge, which helped compile the report, said: 'It seems things are getting worse faster than possibly ever before. Never has one single species had such an overwhelming influence. We are entering uncharted territory.' Figures from the centre reveal that black rhino numbers have fallen from 65,000 in 1970 to around 3,100 now. Numbers of African elephants have fallen from around 1.2 million in 1980 to just over half a million while the population of tigers has fallen by 95 per cent during the past century. The UK's birdsong population has also seen a drastic fall with the corn bunting population declining by 92 per cent between 1970 and 2000, the tree sparrow by 90 per cent and the spotted flycatcher by 70 per cent. Experts, however, say it is difficult to ascertain how many species have vanished for ever because a species has to disappear for 50 years before it can be declared extinct. Attention is now focused on next month's Earth Summit in Johannesburg, the most important environmental negotiations for a decade. However, the talks remain bedevilled with claims that no agreements will be reached and that US President George W. Bush will fail to attend. Matthew Spencer, a spokesman for Greenpeace, said: 'There will have to be concessions from the richer nations to the poorer ones or there will be fireworks.' The preparatory conference for the summit, held in Bali last month, was marred by disputes between developed nations and poorer states and non-governmental organisations (NGOs), despite efforts by British politicians to broker compromises on key issues. America, which sent 300 delegates to the conference, is accused of blocking many of the key initiatives on energy use, biodiversity and corporate responsibility. The WWF report shames the US for placing the greatest pressure on the environment. It found the average US resident consumes almost double the resources as that of a UK citizen and more than 24 times that of some Africans. Based on factors such as a nation's consumption of grain, fish, wood and fresh water along with its emissions of carbon dioxide from industry and cars, the report provides an ecological 'footprint' for each country by showing how much land is required to support each resident. America's consumption 'footprint' is 12.2 hectares per head of population compared to the UK's 6.29ha while Western Europe as a whole stands at 6.28ha. In Ethiopia the figure is 2ha, falling to just half a hectare for Burundi, the country that consumes least resources. The report, which will be unveiled in Geneva, warns that the wasteful lifestyles of the rich nations are mainly responsible for the exploitation and depletion of natural wealth. Human consumption has doubled over the last 30 years and continues to accelerate by 1.5 per cent a year. Now WWF wants world leaders to use its findings to agree on specific actions to curb the population's impact on the planet. A spokesman for WWF UK, said: 'If all the people consumed natural resources at the same rate as the average US and UK citizen we would require at least two extra planets like Earth.' The world's ticking timebomb Marine crisis: North Atlantic cod stocks have collapsed from an estimated 264,000 tonnes in 1970 to under 60,000 in 1995. Pollution: The United States places the greatest pressure on the environment, with its carbon dioxide emissions and over-consumption. It takes 12.2 hectares of land to support each American citizen and 6.29 for each Briton, while the figure for Burundi is just half a hectare. Shrinking Forests: Between 1970 and 2002 forest cover has dwindled by 12 per cent. Endangered wildlife: African elephant numbers have fallen from 1.2 million in 1980 to half a million now. In the UK the songbird population has fallen dramatically, with the corn bunting declining by 92 per cent in the past 30 years. ******************************* Alternative Press Review - www.altpr.org Your Guide Beyond the Mainstream PO Box 4710 - Arlington, VA 22204 Infoshop.org - www.infoshop.org News Kiosk - www.infoshop.org/inews ------------------------------------------- Macdonald Stainsby http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/rad-green http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/leninist-international -- In the contradiction lies the hope. --Bertholt Brecht From debsian at pacbell.net Sun Jul 7 11:38:10 2002 From: debsian at pacbell.net (Michael Pugliese) Date: Sat Aug 5 04:33:17 2006 Subject: [R-G] "Never listen to a man named Michel." Chossudovsky Message-ID: Heh, the URL is sure to raise hackles too! http://mckinneysucks.blogspot.com/ Devoted to smashing conspiracy theories and humiliating their purveyors! Michael Pugliese From mstainsby at tao.ca Sun Jul 7 16:01:59 2002 From: mstainsby at tao.ca (Macdonald Stainsby) Date: Sat Aug 5 04:33:17 2006 Subject: [R-G] KCNA on U.S. diatribe against DPRK Message-ID: <01b101c22601$eb0cc2a0$291f5318@vc.shawcable.net> KCNA on U.S. diatribe against DPRK Pyongyang, July 5 (KCNA) -- As already reported, an unexpected exchange of fire between naval vessels of the north and the south occurred in the West Sea of Korea on June 29 owing to the reckless armed provocation on the part of South Korean warships, causing a loss of human lives of both sides and a warship of the south side. In this connection, U.S. secretary of defense Rumsfeld and a spokesman for the U.S. state department Boucher at a press conference on July 2 let loose sheer sophism, describing the incident as a "provocation of the north" and a "breach of the armistice agreement". This is oft-repeated remarks made by the united states whenever a incident occurred. But we cannot but clarify once again the truth behind the incident as the U.S. is resorting to such a dastardly campaign intended to spread misinformation. The incident occurred in the West Sea of Korea as the South Korean warships made preemptive strikes at the patrol boats of the navy of the Korean People's Army under the patronage of the United States. The United States and the South Korean military authorities are claiming that the KPA naval patrol boats crossed the "northern boundary line", talking about the "breach of the armistice agreement". The "northern boundary line" advocated by them is not mentioned in the aa. It is a bogus line unilaterally drawn by the U.S. as it pleased in the territorial waters of the DPRK without any agreement with it after the signing of the aa. In view of the situation on September 2, 1999 the general staff of the KPA drew the sea demarcation line in the West Sea of Korea and proclaimed it to the world and as a follow-up measure the naval command of the KPA was authorized to fix and proclaim the "order of sailing through five islets" under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Forces' side that are located in the territorial waters of the DPRK side. However, the U.S. Forces and the South Korean military have ceaselessly infiltrated warships and fishing boats deep into the territorial waters of the DPRK side under the pretext of this bogus line and such provocations reached an extremely dangerous phase from early June. Prompted by the desire to defuse the military tensions on the Korean Peninsula and considerate of the world soccer championships that was under way in South Korea, the DPRK navy has exercised maximum restraint. The United States that has the prerogative of supreme command over the South Korean army took this as a golden opportunity to achieve its aim. On June 29 the U.S. instigated the South Korean military to infiltrate warships deep into the territorial waters of the DPRK side and mount a surprise attack on the patrol boats of the KPA navy on routine coastal guard duty, thus causing such tragedy in the long run. Such being the case, the U.S. let senior officials pull up the DPRK over "its alleged provocation" before probing the truth of the incident. This proves that the U.S. was deeply involved in the incident. In recent years the desire for the independent and peaceful reunification of Korea is mounting higher than ever before on the Korean peninsula and the anti-U.S. Forces are rapidly growing in South Korea. Upset by this, the U.S. has waited for an opportunity to orchestrate a shocking incident intended to chill the atmosphere of inter-Korean reconciliation. It is a well-known fact. The U.S. orchestrated this at a time when the world soccer championships was at its height, focusing the attention of the world community on the Korean Peninsula. The United States is well advised to admit the illegality of the bogus line so-called "northern boundary line" and make an apology for its backstage manipulation of the incident, instead of letting Rumsfeld and other officials be busy with anti-DPRK diatribe. ------------------------------------------- Macdonald Stainsby http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/rad-green http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/leninist-international -- In the contradiction lies the hope. --Bertholt Brecht From mstainsby at tao.ca Mon Jul 8 01:52:05 2002 From: mstainsby at tao.ca (Macdonald Stainsby) Date: Sat Aug 5 04:33:17 2006 Subject: [R-G] G-8 EPILOGUE: Movement at the Crossroads Message-ID: <013a01c22654$5abded20$291f5318@vc.shawcable.net> Another Vancouver comrade and friend from the trip to Calgary here. (Tony, that was the third time Tom's bit got to the Marxmail list) G-8 EPILOGUE: Movement at the Crossroads Garth Mullins VANCOUVER: Given the blanket prohibition on public assembly, and the largest peacetime deployment of the repressive apparatus of the Canadian state, it is a victory that our movement defied authorities and held a series of anti-G8 events in Calgary and Kananaskis. However, this is a qualified victory - we cannot paint a sunny face on a movement that is at a crucial moment in its development. We face some serious political questions and are at a strategic crossroads. The limited numbers and support we were able to mobilize against the G8 reflects our slow recovery from the conservative backlash and political disorientation of 9/11, as well as internal contradictions and weaknesses that were only exacerbated by the September attacks. G8 summit deliberations were eclipsed not by insurrections like those of Quebec or Seattle, but rather by a growing crisis of corporate corruption at World Com and Xerox. Plummeting investor confidence sent global markets into a tailspin, losing almost 10% by the close of the summit. George W. Bush felt compelled to speak out against the state of business ethics from the foothills of Alberta. Official discussions on terrorism were likewise overshadowed. Instead, Bush unilaterally called for a market-driven, democratic Palestinian state, where he chooses the non-Arafat-leadership. Chretien, after agreeing with Bush, then not knowing, finally decided he might leave the choice of a leader up to the Palestinians themselves. In terms of reforms, the presence of an African delegation at the G8 table and of NEPAD on the agenda (with its many well-documented shortcomings) reflects the growing influence of civil society and of the anti-corporate globalization movement. Critics at the "Peoples Summit - G6B" were right to point out that the New Partnership for African Development is largely an attempt to give the G8 a kinder, gentler face. The Movement The ruling class is on the offensive, retaking legitimacy and political ground lost to us over the last several years. Last week's G8 resistance represents a crisis in the development of our movement and its ability to mobilize significant numbers and support. The plateau we have now stalled-out at is an expression of a convolution of objective political forces and subjective dynamics. Kananaskis was no Genoa - it was not a political victory for us. Neither was it a shocking defeat. Rather, it was a concrete indicator of the health of the movement. Our numbers were dramatically fewer, our politics insufficiently confrontational, our strategy in a state of retreat, our tactics unclear, and our organization mal-functioning and inadequately transparent. The Canadian state made its boldest moves in the weeks before the summit; deploying the army on citizens with the use of lethal force, denying protesters any physical presence at the summit site, etc. Our actions were a defensive response to these initial moves. Officials read the public mood and realized that they could get away with a much more aggressive orientation towards dissent than they were previously able. Organizers were likewise aware. Our movement did not rise to the violence mongering of politicians and the media. But neither did the army shoot nor police attack. They realized how insignificant a treat we represented. We must arrest the decline of our movement, or face political irrelevance. Our immediate task is to come together in our local communities and figure out where we are now and what we can do about it. In Vancouver, such a meeting will take place on July13. Everybody should be included in a frank discussion on the direction of the movement, and how we organize in this brave new era of reaction. Authorities use the carrot and the stick approach to dispensing with their political opposition - repression and co-optation. Radical tactics and militant analysis are the best defense against the latter. The radical grassroots must not leave national and global networking to the NGOs. While maintaining our local roots and organic connections to local struggles, we must rid ourselves of our parochial blinders. The radical grassroots must play a more active role in the direction of the global movement and its national constituency. Over the past year or so, a consensus has been building among activists to move beyond "summit hopping" While abandoning summit hopping is wise in terms of mass strategy, we cannot leave world leaders to meet in peace, and we cannot leave the NGO's to form the infrastructure and leadership of the movement. Further, the corresponding links to organic, local and regional struggles are still in their beginning stages. In stopping hopping to K- Country, we fail to recognize everything that made this summit qualitatively more fascist other international summits. Kananaskis was the first test sight of the government's new approach to civil rights, as seen in recent security / anti- terrorist legislation. The voices of anti-corporate globalization protesters across the country were peripheral to G8 discourse. Unlike other summits where we radically undermined the leaders' hegemony, we were unable to significantly call into doubt the legitimacy of the G8, its agenda or the system it perpetuates. But neither were the issues framed entirely by G8 leaders. However, the Chretien government was able to achieve a broader victory - the further limiting of the right to protest, and forcing our movement into retreat. Kananaskis was the feds' first highly visible test of its post-9/11 approach to democracy and civil liberties. At last April's Summit of the Americas, outrage at the fence in Quebec City resonated with folks across the Country. There was no similar outrage about the qualitatively larger G8 security operation echoing off the mountains of K-Country. The lack of mass- opposition to the massive G8 security operation gives the government carte blanche to implement its new package of security legislation (bills C-35, C- 36, C-55, etc.) to designate dissent free zones as it deems politically necessary. Chretien has longed for such power since trying to make protest invisible at APEC five years ago. In the wake of the 9/11 attacks there has been a qualitative re-polarization of the political landscape and a reactionary ideological backlash to rival that of the '80s. Our movement has shifted from a 'war of position' to a more defensive posture. In the war of ideas, our movement must seek to deconstruct hegemonic discourses relating to terrorism and security, and to reframe these themes in terms of state terror, state repression, racism and imperialism. In the days following the 9/11 attacks, dissent became a dirty word, people rallied around their leaders and flags and our movement became disoriented. Some labour leaders and environmental organization representatives called for the cancellation of everything we were doing. Others at the grassroots proposed that we continue as if nothing has changed. A third current within the movement argued for a shift to anti-war work. Things have changed, and our political perspective and strategy must reflect this. We are still recovering momentum lost during this period of confusion. Without a sufficiently developed analysis of how the political landscape had moved, the movement engaged the Canadian state from a weakened position - we were unaware of how different the world had become. The summit drew closer and the government was armed with scary new legislation. Terrorist bogeymen were around every corner. We retreated in the face of this state repression, before the mayor was placing cowboy hats on delegates' heads. Before 9/11, the government would have found it much more difficult to deploy the army against its own citizens, and give soldiers permission to use lethal force. Our movement arises from diverse political backgrounds, different communities, and we are bound to disagree about assessments of conditions and appropriate strategies and tactics. However, the phrase "diversity of tactics" is now being used to avoid a desperately needed discussion about tactics and political perspective. In such a climate, I watched our G8 Spokescouncils devolve into logistical Q&A sessions rather than the models of radical democracy and alternative vision they can be. As much as possible, participants in an action must have agency. This cannot be downloaded to the affinity groups. Mass actions are not just cattle-drives; they are fundamentally acts of self-emancipation. Some organizations use marches to let their leaders flex their muscle at the negotiating table or as they lobby governments or corporations. Participants are turned on and off like a tap. This is obvious to those to whom it is done, and merely continues their alienation. That is not what our movement is about and we cannot afford to let parts of it slip back into that mode of operating. We then lose that spark that has grabbed the imagination and commitment of so many. This movement is founded on the principle of direct confrontation with the enemy - in the streets, at the point of production or consumption, or in the ideological arena. As opposed to lobbying elected officials to enact incremental change on our behalf. Most of the time we are political spectators, on the sidelines, watching as our leaders make a history we do not condone. We are encouraged to express ourselves through the products we consume. But in resistance, we have the opportunity to defiantly step out of our prescribed role of consumer or spectator, and to become an active agent in the political process, to step up to history, and play an active part. Over the past year or so, a consensus has been building among activists to move beyond "summit hopping" However, the corresponding links to organic, local and regional struggles are still in their beginning stages. Further, this strategy fails to recognize everything that makes the Kananaskis summit qualitatively different from other summits, as well as the impact of recent security / anti- terrorist legislation.. Conclusion At Calgary and Kananaskis, the movement defied attempts by authorities to completely stifle dissenting voices and prevent public assembly. Given our disorientation in the wake of the 9/11 backlash, strategic retreats in the face of elevated state repression, and the resultant decrease in numbers, we posed little threat to the legitimacy of the G8 agenda. Nationally, we were unable to mobilize a meaningful challenge to the hegemony of corporate globalization as embodied in the G8 summit. This campaign reflects a movement still trying to find its feet in a massively repolarized political landscape. In missives to these lists, some people have described G8 resistance as a nail in our movement's coffin. Others are singing in the rain. The G8 will only be a defeat for our movement if we fail to learn from it, grow, deepen our analysis, build our links and move forward. There will only be cause for pessimism if we do not take this opportunity and learn from these lessons. An ideological security perimeter is being erected around a renewed hegemony of world leaders and forces of corporate globalization. Where they haul out their terrorist bogeymen at the slightest criticism. We must not respond to this Brave New 9/11 World Hegemony with accommodation and retreat. Rather, we must regroup, debate, deepen our analysis of current political situation and decide to answer the gathering forces of reaction with bold ideological initiative, and an escalation of tactics. Garth Mullins, July 5, 2002 G8 Resistance Columns from the Vancouver Sin The following are four pieces I wrote from Calgary on G8 resistance. They were published in the Vancouver Sun during the summit, on June 25, 26, 27 and 28, 2002, on the "Commentary" and "Insight - G8 in Kananaskis" pages. I did not write the headlines. The Vancouver Sun is a Can West paper, subject to the decrees and censorship of the Aspers. Incredibly, there was no political editing on my pieces. The paper is not the tabloid / page three girl rag that is found elsewhere in Canada. It is more like the Toronto Star, or Ottawa Citizen, but a bourgeois corporate broadsheet none the less. June 25, 2002 -- The Vancouver Sun, Insight, A11 Why protesters bother to go at all Garth Mullins (1087 words) CALGARY Anti-corporate globalization activists from around the country have been converging on Calgary over the last several days. Despite reports of the police turning people away at the BC / Alberta boarder, Vancouver activists have organized a bus to bring themselves to Calgary. Many of us have come a long way, at great expense and inconvenience, and are concerned about the huge multi-agency, multi-national security operation that is being deployed. Since protesters have been denied the use of any public lands to set up a camp, there is a great deal of uncertainty about where to stay. We know that Kananaskis itself is sealed off behind a perimeter of police and we may not even get within one hundred kilometres of the G8. We'll be risking arrest and injury and everybody remembers last year's G8 summit in Genoa, Italy, where a young activist was shot and killed by police. Given all this, why go at all? The most powerful leaders on the planet will meet as far from the critical eyes of their electors as Jean Chretien could arrange. For many different reasons, and in many different ways, a growing number of people want to express their deeply felt concerns about the type of world that organizations like the G8 are perpetuating and creating. The G8 attracts protest for a wide range of reasons. They are the architects of corporate globalization and have perpetrated the so-called "War Against Terrorism" in Afghanistan. Collectively the G8 owns most of the world's wealth, the majority of "Third World" debt and creates the most pollution per capita. They are home to the Fortune 500 corporations. Individually, member countries are criticized for foreign and domestic policy decisions, such as the US's ongoing support of the occupation of Palestine by Israel and Canada's treatment of its indigenous peoples. Protesters are concerned about what is on the agenda of this G8 summit - terrorism, Africa and the global economy, as well as what's missing - human rights, social justice and the environment. Some want to include a broader social agenda and more voices at the table. Others reject the system over which the G8 presides, and want to scrap the institution. The "nix it or fix it" debate rages across the movement. But more than the specifics, the G8 is a symbol of a set of values, processes and priorities that those converging on Calgary find repugnant. The G8 envisions an increasingly homogenous world that looks like Disney, smells like McDonalds and tastes like Coke. The defining principles are greed and profit maximization. Without global governance or democracy, corporate rule has triumphed. Transnational corporations and supra-national organizations like the G8 and WTO are the dominant institutions of the corporate global order. The only laws are drawn up by the institutions themselves in documents like NAFTA, the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA) or General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS). But the people converging on Calgary are not pessimists. We believe that it is possible to change the world. Why bother to show up? Because most of the time we are political spectators, on the sidelines, watching as leaders and celebrities make a history we do not condone. We are encouraged to show our creativity and identity through the products we consume. But through social activism we have the opportunity to defiantly step out of our prescribed role of consumer or spectator, and to become an active agent in the political process, to step up to history, and play an active part. Over the last five years, a social movement has coalesced across the planet that is concerned about the processes of economic globalization. Since the "Battle of Seattle" issues of corporate rule, trade, social justice and the environment have emerged from the margins to become part of the mainstream political discourse. The movement is diverse and messy. It contains many ideologies, communities, issues and strategies. There is often little agreement. The road to Kananaskis has seen a great deal of debate and discussion, about logistics, tactics, messages, strategies, issues, everything. This summit's agenda will also consider Africa, and NEPAD (the New Partnership for Africa's Development.) Critics say that historically, G8 member states have been responsible for the underdevelopment of Africa. Among the industrialized west, Canada has also maintained the highest level of tariffs against trade with Africa. African civil society was not consulted in the development of NEPAD. Most in the movement see the current "War on Terrorism" as the most recent chapter in a centuries old story of colonial and imperial military conquest to serve the political and economic interests of an elite group of states and corporations. Afghanistan is at the top of a long list of countries invaded by the US and other western countries. Among G8 countries themselves, anti-terrorist legislation has lead to an erosion of civil liberties. Racial profiling, arbitrary arrests, detention without charge and the denial of access to legal council have become more common. In Canada, preventing terrorism meant Bill C42, which allowed for the designation of a "military exclusion area," where extra security measures could be taken and charter rights were optional. This was later amended so that such an area could only be declared for the protection of military equipment or personnel. The choice of such a remote site as Kananaskis is in keeping with the WTO's last meeting in Quitar, a remote Persian Gulf state that was impossible to get to and where protest was all but illegal. Except for stage-managed press events, these summits are held behind closed doors and largely in secret. Members of civil society are not invited. With 5 000 Canadian forces personnel in Kananaskis (more than in Afghanistan) activists have speculated about a "military exclusion zone" being declared around the G8. We realize that since the law has never been enacted, we don't know what (if any) rights we will have. Along with the army being granted permission to use "lethal force," activists face the next few days with a great deal of uncertainty and trepidation. Tonight, the city of Calgary is hosting a "western themed" party to showcase the City to the G8 delegates and the international media. The corporate backed "Hoedown" has been targeted by the grassroots activist groups, who are holding a "Showdown at the Hoedown;" anti-G8 march and street party. The police have denied activists permission for the event, but organizers plan to go ahead anyway. How police respond to tonight's protest activities will set the tone for the next few days. Stay tuned.. - 30 - Garth Mullins is a Vancouver based anti-globalization activist. He will be filing daily on the G8 summit. June 26, 2002 - The Vancouver Sun Insight: G8 in Kananaskis, A21 Protesters lack base, feel hemmed in, face phone jamming Garth Mullins (1090 words) CALGARY It has become clear to activists that there is no room for critical voices at the G8 summit - both politically and physically. Kananaskis and the summit are now sealed up behind a tight security perimeter. Protest organizers have been forced to move most all activities to Calgary. Activists are frustrated, and trying to creatively make the best of a bad situation. We are loath to let Chretien keep G8 delegates out of sight and earshot of dissent. The Prime Minister has been trying to create a "protest-free zone" since APEC in 1997. Chretien barked to the media that nobody will upstage him and his party. The intense and often violence-prone security measures that keep the public away are endemic to the anti-democratic principles that are part of the agendas of corporate globalization. G8 delegates are protected by a security perimeter that extends in a 6.5- kilometre radius around Kananaskis Village. To enter, the media, workers and 500 residents must be accredited - protesters need not apply. Security personnel from G8 countries, the army, RCMP, CSIS and over 20 other law enforcement agencies are part of the security operation. Overhead, a "no fly zone" is patrolled by jet fighters. Highway 40, the only road in, has many police patrols and checkpoints. Brigadier-General Ivan Fenton told the Calgary Herald on May 31 that Canadian soldiers have been granted permission to use "lethal force." And there's nowhere to sleep. Originally, plans were made for "Solidarity Village," a protest camp close to Kananaskis. Alberta unions and the Council of Canadians negotiated with the Stony First Nation to rent part of their reserve land. At the last minute, the deal fell through, and the camp was called off. It has since been revealed that the federal government are paying the First Nation $300 000 for "security costs." Those at the negotiations find this highly suspect. David Robbins, trade campaigner for the Council of Canadians said "We suspected there was interference when our discussions about a venue for Solidarity Village broke down for no apparent reason. Now we know that the federal government paid to prevent G8 dissenters from being able to organize a peaceful response to the Summit." With our protest camp gone, and other Kananaskis based actions looking unlikely, discussions began several days ago among local Calgary activists, and across the country by internet, about expanding the role and significance of regional protests, including events in Calgary. As the summit itself arrives, people are worried, and nobody knows what to expect. Having to reconsider all our plans has caused disagreements, tension and splits among activist ranks. On the 23rd a 2500 strong, union organized march against the G8 raised everybody's spirits for a time. The march was loud and energetic, without police violence or arrests. Late Sunday, after a trip across Rogers Pass in my late grandmother's land yacht Oldsmobile, I arrived in Calgary. Although others were stopped and searched by the RCMP, our ride must have been good camouflage. We went to the "Convergence Space," where meetings are held, events planned and housing, medics and legal assistance organized. Spokescouncils, caucuses and affinity groups had been meeting in the crowded space for several days, analysing conditions and revisiting strategy. Organizers worry that in the confusion of shifting the focus to Calgary at the last minute, we may lose people. On the various anti-G8 websites calls to action have been posted, changed and withdrawn. Our movement's ability to spontaneously organize itself will be crucial. About 300 other activists and concerned citizens are meeting at the Peoples Summit: G6B (Group of Six Billion) at the University of Calgary. Speakers, academics and activists from all over the world are proposing reforms or alternative models to corporate globalization and other policies of the G8. A sub-committee of the main activist council is revisiting the idea of making a small caravan of cars out to Kananaskis, or as close as the police will let us get. The idea is to peacefully illustrate that the summit has been sanitized of critical ideas, and removed from the sight of those who elect the leaders who meet within. Even with most activities limited to Calgary, authorities are dead set against us. Police have been reticent to grant permission to anti-G8 public events. The City of Calgary and mayor Dave Bronconnier have opposed our use of city parks and municipal property because 'public spaces are not appropriate venues for "political" events.' Mayor Bronco said that activists hold marches "at they're own risk" and that he had plenty of cells for us. Bronco used a city park to launch his election campaign with an 800-person barbeque- certainly not a political event. The Civil Liberties Association and the Alberta Federation of Labour are now in court to challenge the city's "blanket prohibition against assembly in public" and denial of any protest permits. Activists are getting around the permit issue by calling for a picnic in the park. There will be veggie burgers and soda, but also speakers, music and much criticism of the G8 agenda. Police have also announced that they intend to make use of cell phone and radio jamming equipment. We need cell phones and walkie-talkies to communicate among ourselves, to let our volunteer medics know if anybody is hurt or needs help, steer marches through city streets, communicate with activists in other cities, talk to the media and even the police. When police reduce our ability or organize ourselves, it makes it much more difficult to get our message out, and to have a coherent and safe event. As I file this column, meetings and discussions in living rooms and pubs continue as to the character of actions for the first day of G8 meetings. With all these obstacles and concerns, activists will surely talk late into the night, and most will have little or no sleep. As the sun rises tomorrow, protesters will roll out of their tents, get up off the floors of church basements, and raise themselves from the couches of friends, determined that regardless of the location, we will make the June 26 anti-G8 actions loud, effective, militant and safe. At 6am, people will began to converge at Fort Calgary for the "J26 Global Day of Action." The main goal of the Calgary march is to cause "economic disruption" throughout the downtown core, and to call attention to the transnational corporations that are the main beneficiaries of the G8 agenda. As I write, nobody knows if the police will even let us out of our 6 a.m. rallying place. - 30 - Garth Mullins is a Vancouver based anti-globalization activist. He will be filing daily on the G8 summit. June 27, 2002 - The Vancouver Sun, Insight: G8 in Kananaskis, A10 'People's Summit' sticks up for Africa Garth Mullins (1374 words) CALGARY On the night before the summit begins, as the last of the leaders arrive in town, the city of Calgary hosted a "Hoedown" to showcase "western culture" to G8 delegates and the international media. Anti-G8 protesters organized a "Showdown at the Hoedown," with a street party, complete with music, dancing and a trampoline. Three thousand people took the streets for this un-permitted rally, chanting "this is what democracy looks like," and "They are the G8 we are the G6B" (Group of Six Billion) According to email from the organizers, Calgary Anti-Capitalist Collective and Anti-Capitalist Edmonton, the idea is to "disrupt the facade of the 'Alberta advantage' [a promotional business slogan] and the racist imagery of cavalier/cowboy capitalism." We had trained medics and legal observers on hand, but they had nothing to do, as there were no injuries or arrests. For activists, the event was a massive success. We were able to defy the police and gather peacefully, but without a permit. The street party got bery close to the Round Up Centre, where the "Hoedown" took place. There were some tense moments as protesters faced off with police at the security fence, but conflict never erupted. For activists, the event represented an end to strategic retreating - from police intimidation, from Kananaskis, and from media stereotypes. Protesters have been feeling under fire from an often hostile and sensational press. In the wake of the 9/11 the media have taken a decidedly more negative approach to dissent. A national editorial last week on the op/ed page of Can West papers described protesters as "unable to win political or public support, a furtive cabal of self-appointed world savers, out to lead the masses in breaking glass, spray-painting buildings, throwing bricks at police and often, creative uses of urine and faeces." We may be pissed off, but that's as close as anybody comes to the creative use of urine. Earlier in the day, about 200 gathered to draw attention the poor labour practices of Gap sweat shops. Protesters marched down city streets, through Calgary's shopping district to its flagship Gap shop, where some got naked, pronouncing that they'd "rather wear nothing than wear Gap." Again, there were no arrests and no police violence. Across town, in the crowded Convergence Space, spokescouncil meetings continued right up until the Hoedown action began. The space is where all the organizing and logistical planning takes place. It is like an old school gymnasium, sweltering and overflowing with 200 plus activists, chairs, tables full of literature and the smell of burnt Fair Trade coffee. The walls alre plastered with various announcements and information. There are a few slow Internet access computers. Final discussions were had about the early morning J26 march for the first day of the summit. The group, which is a delegated structure and runs on a consensus process, debated the various contingencies and responses to possible police repression, violence or mass arrests. Activists argued on the need for total democracy and disclosure of strategy on the one hand, versus the need for security to outfox police informants on the other. People are clearly tired, tense and feeling the effects of the heavy police presence. The Space is constantly observed by a variety of bicycle, cruiser and patty wagon driving police, who drive around and around the block. The meeting erupted into applause when a member of the Alberta Federation of Labour announced their success this morning in court, where along with the Civil Liberties Association, challenging the city on its blanket refusal to allow any type of public gathering in opposition to the G8. We (and the Charter of Rights and Freedoms) won and a permitted "picnic" will take place in the afternoon. One of the points of major interest to protesters is Africa. This summit's agenda includes Africa, and NEPAD (the New Partnership for Africa's Development.) It is arguable that Africa is even being considered by the G8 as a result of pressure from civil society and the changes in the political landscape caused by the anti-globalisation movement. . Critics say that historically, G8 member states have been responsible for the underdevelopment of Africa. Among the industrialized west, Canada has also maintained one of the highest level of tariffs against trade with Africa. The west is happy to strip Africa of its raw resources, but erects large barriers to the import of any value added products. The G8 approach will demand of African nations that they make massive cuts into their social programs and health care and privatize public resources, further hurting those already at the bottom of the world's economic ladder. The People's Summit - G6B is a G8 counter conference that runs in Calgary during this week is in full swing. Many sessions and speakers will focus on Africa, and the negative role that Canada and the G8 have played (and continue to play) on the continent. Discussions and statements made so far indicate that members of African labour movement, farmers' groups, women's organizations and other community organizations participating in the People's Summit see the approach of the G8 largely as a continuation of the policies that have ravaged the continent, rather than a departure from them. Moreover, African unions and civil society were not consulted in the negotiation of NEPAD. At six in the morning of June 26, the J26 march began at Fort Calgary. Thousands gathered, ready to defy the city and police's ban on public assembly with a peaceful march through Calgary. In my capacity as one of the communications people, I helped to facilitate the movement of the "Snake March" through the mystifying grid of Calgary's downtown core. We kept track of any medical issues, the location and attitude of police and our own ranks over walkie -talkie. The event was entirely peaceful, and without police violence. There was even a spontaneous game of anti-capitalist street soccer. The police were invited to play the anarchists, but declined, and thus forfeited. Protesters 1: Police 0. Calgary is home to the corporate headquarters to many transnational corporations that have played a role in the exploitation of Africa, the global south, the planet's environment and the systematic prioritization of profit over people. They are also beneficiaries of the global economic order that the G8 maintains and expands. The early morning march disrupted traffic and drew attention to the role of these organizations by stopping at their headquarters or local buildings: Sun Life Financial, Shell, McDonalds, the Gap, Ralph Klein's conservative government, the federal government and the posh hotels where G8 delegates are staying were all political targets on the march route. Helicopters buzzed overhead as about 2500 marched through downtown. The police presence was heavy, with riot troops waiting in the wings, and cruisers, vans and bike cops dogging us all the way. Two activists were arrested as they tried to occupy a McDonalds restaurant on Stephan Avenue Mall. The legal team was quickly put in touch with police. One person was treated for dehydration by our volunteer medics. The march ended with a "die- in" where activists played dead to represent the 8000 people that die each day of HIV/AIDS in Africa. The morning's events were followed by an anti-G8 picnic in Riley Park. Under a scorching sun, activists enjoyed veggie burgers and other free food and drink, listened to speakers talk on various aspects of G8 policy, and danced to live music. The permission for this event was won in court only yesterday, but still over 1000 people attended. People are feeling very positive about events so far. After the picnic, a caravan of about 100 activists will get as close to the G8 summit and delegates in Kananaskis as police will let us. About 20 cars will leave together from Riley Park, Calgary and drive out to Kananaskis, and make our presence known in a peaceful fashion. The government and police have taken extreme measures to sanitize the summit sight of any dissenting viewpoints. These ideas are being kept out with a massive security operation and the threat of lethal force. Later today we will challenge the legitimacy of this body to meet in secret, behind so much firepower and out of the sight of the people to whom the politicians owe their livings. - 30 - Garth Mullins is a Vancouver based anti-globalization activist. He will be filing daily on the G8 summit. June 28, 2002 - The Vancouver Sun, Insight: G8 in Kananaskis, A6 Draconian policy marks a declining state of democracy Garth Mullins (1443 words) CALGARY As the G8 Summit concludes, protesters and activists, sleep-deprived and sun-stroked, assess what has been accomplished, what has been learned, and what should be forgotten. Meanwhile the police, media and authorities scratch their heads, wondering why the violence they promised the rest of Canada didn't materialize. Jean Chretien and the federal government, citing bill C36 re the protection of international dignitaries, made Kananaskis and the G8 a dissent-free zone. Meetings took place beyond the sight of media, taxpayers, electors and protesters. What you know of summit deliberations is only what the G8 leaders want you to know. This week, Canadian "democracy" has seen a radical erosion of the right to protest and expression - the right to be seen and heard by leaders, as determined in the APEC inquiry and by other legal opinion. Kananaskis was a Charter-free zone. In the protest camp, we learned that to retreat and not defy such draconian policy is to essentially forfeit our rights. And on June 26 we did stand up. About 102 cars full of five hundred activists (five times what organizers had anticipated) drove out to where highway 40 turns off to Kananaskis from the Trans-Canada. We were well aware of the comments of a commanding officer, who a member of the media overheard say that if anybody without security accreditation tries to go to Kananaskis, "we'll take 'em out." We were met by hordes of RCMP and fatigue wearing soldiers. Our convoy went as far as the second security checkpoint, of which there are over a dozen between the Trans Canada and Kananaskis Village. Apparently, once you get closer to the site, tanks, rocket launchers, radar dishes and command posts become visible. These checkpoints are huge steel fences that bridge the road, guarded by rows of bicycle cops, riot troops waiting in the wings, and a team of RCMP videographers filming our every move from atop a police van. We stood face to face with police at the G8 security checkpoint and drew the attention of the world to the declining state of Canadian democracy. This extreme security operation made it impossible for protesters and activists to set up a peaceful presence at the G8. In making this statement, there were many sun burns, but no violence and no arrests. A delegation from Japan was delayed for 20 minutes because of our presence. We were still 25km from the G8 leaders. Meanwhile across the country, anti-G8 activities drew thousands. This is an intentional strategy of the movement to broaden out its ranks and audience. There is an emerging consensus that "summit hopping" is not the most effective way to get messages out or build our movement. Given the obligations of family, work and school, along with the expense of travel, most people cannot pick up and spend a week in another city attending a counter-conference or protesting a summit. On June 26, the movement held regional events in Victoria, Vancouver, Calgary, Edmonton, Winnipeg, Ottawa and Halifax to demonstrate concerns about the G8, and to connect the sometimes-abstract processes of economic globalization with local struggles at home. The media and Calgary Mayor Dave Bronconnier have learned that no protester would rise to their violence mongering. But after the first day of the summit, disappointed at the lack of spectacle on hand, media asserted that activist numbers are shrinking. Certainly across the country about 10,000 took part, and this is a smaller number than other events like it. The explanation is in our leaders and the media's hostility towards dissent in the wake of 911, and the qualitative step up in security restrictions on protesters. Through the weeks leading up to the G8, activists had to redraft our plans several times, leading to confusion and smaller numbers. "If anyone is to blame for the fewer that felt they could raise their voices," commented Sharmeen Khan, a Victoria based activist who made the trek out "it is the scare tactics of the Prime Minister and police authorities." But numbers don't tell the whole story. Myself and a dozen friends and activists occupied the Calgary small house of an old acquaintance from back in the day when we both played in little punk bands. Colin put up with a near home invasion as gracefully as Martha Stewart with a gas mask. The floor was wall-to-wall-protesters, trying to fit in three of four hours sleep. Julia got up early with me and drove me to my various engagements, and to our never-ending meetings. I am fortunate to have a thoughtful group to consider strategy and tactics with over six am coffees. Many of the ideas advanced in these essays have been developed through discussions among my posse. Certainly, along with frayed nerves and tactical disagreements, a feeling of sharing and community was firmly entrenched by the time the leaders were packing their cowboy hats and assorted Canadianna souvenirs. Early on the morning of the second day of the summit, I did an interview with CTV's "Canada AM." However, CTV was broadcasting from the Mariott, where G8 delegates stay, inside the secure zone in downtown Calgary. My cab pulled up front about 4:30am and a gaggle of police immediately confronted me. I told them I was on the security list, that the producer had done this days ago. One of the cops said "Mullins, I don't care what your story is, you ain't coming in here." After much argument, the producer escorted me through three checkpoints, a search and metal detector. A little crew of six stood frowning at me, just out of camera frame. Heather, an intern at CTV told me that she overheard journalists pitching their stories yesterday, and paraphrased "since there was no violence what will we write about? We may have to cover their issues!" A central issue now facing activists and organizers in the wake of the G8 is how our movement responds to the repressive apparatus of the state when it is unleashed upon us in protection of a fundamentally undemocratic agenda. One of the major strengths of the anti-globalization movement in its first few years was its use of civil disobedience and direct action to challenge the processes and mechanisms of corporate globalization. This does not mean just lobbying political leaders and waiting for them to enact incremental change on our behalf. Rather, it is to directly confront supra-national organizations and transnational corporations with thousands and thousands of activist bodies. It is to put ourselves in the way. It does not mean random acts of violence and property damage by frustrated individuals - that is not a tactic but an emotional outburst. Civil disobedience and direct action captured the imagination of a populace that had grown cynical with parliamentary machinations and suspicious of professional politicians. It is a direct confrontation between the engines of capitalism and the people who oppose and are victimized by them - fundamentally an act of self-liberation, where everyone has agency. With the level of security so cracked up, and the city of Calgary and its mayor making a total ban on any public gathering during the G8, the mere act of public assembly (once described as a right) becomes a radical, law- breaking act of civil disobedience. This can threaten more conservative movement constituents and divide us. Fortunately, at the eleventh hour, labour decided to give the G8 actions its full support, and such divisions were avoided. Another strength of the anti-corporate globalization movement is its radical democracy. Decisions are made democratically and by consensus across a wide geography and diverse constituency. The "Spokescouncil" model helped to share a vision and organize ten thousand to shut down the WTO in Seattle. In Calgary it was used to constantly reassess conditions and try to find a workable action given tough circumstances. This model allows every participant the potential to become an organizer and have a say. Activists now must determine how to face these elevated levels of repression that have come about with the passage of "anti-terrorism" laws and the Public Security Act since 911. I hope we have learned that the answer is not to retreat, but rather to raise our voices and escalate our tactics. However, analysis, debate and discussion will continue among activists long after summit delegates have split Cow Town. As I file this piece, activists are meeting to discuss actions for the last half of the second day of the G8 summit. The question of retreat or advance seems to have been on many minds, as suggestions for a variety of civil disobedience actions are being put forward at a mid-morning Spokescouncil. After being pushed and pushed, the movement seems to be regaining its confidence and initiative. - 30 - Garth Mullins is a Vancouver based anti-globalization activist. _______________________________________________ antiwar-van mailing list antiwar-van@resist.ca http://resist.ca/mailman/listinfo/antiwar-van ------------------------------------------- Macdonald Stainsby http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/rad-green http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/leninist-international -- In the contradiction lies the hope. --Bertholt Brecht From hunterbadbear at earthlink.net Mon Jul 8 04:07:11 2002 From: hunterbadbear at earthlink.net (Hunter Gray) Date: Sat Aug 5 04:33:17 2006 Subject: [R-G] NATIVES, ISSUES, AND RADICALS [Hunter Gray] Message-ID: <00c301c22667$3be203b0$f170fa43@intel> Note by Hunterbear: I'm pleased to note that my article, NATIVE PEOPLES AND THE LEFT, has recently appeared in the Spring 2002 issue of DIALOGUE AND INITIATIVE -- the official [and excellent] journal of Committees of Correspondence for Socialism and Democracy [CCDS]. NATIVE PEOPLES AND THE LEFT [Hunter Gray] My father was an essentially full-blooded Native American [Micmac, St. Francis Abenaki, and St. Regis Mohawk] and my mother an Anglo from old Western American stock. I grew up in a rough and racist quasi-frontier setting in Northern Arizona. Our identity lies on the Indian side of our family -- which has been closely involved with many Native nations -- and I've been privileged to work congenially, as a grassroots social justice organizer and college/university teacher, with people from a wide range of ethnic backgrounds in many parts of this country. I was in my teens when I began to read radical literature -- ranging from the I.W.W. Preamble to the Communist Manifesto and Granville Hicks' John Reed: The Making of a Revolutionary. Aware from the outset that this all meshed congenially with that ethos of communalism and mutual responsibility inherent in every Native tribal culture, I became a life-long socialist. I vigorously believe that Native Americans are certainly part of that great world which needs bona fide socialist democracy -- something that offers Humanity much, much more of the good things of life than capitalism ever could or would. But only a relatively few Native Americans in the United States are avowed people of the Left. Why? Let me give some thoughts -- and let me make some suggestions. I'm the first to concede that Indian people are often too reluctant to listen to worthwhile ideas if they come from non-Indians and are frequently too wary of entering into association with them. Many Native people fear that alien ideas and associations could somehow threaten one's aboriginal identity. But there are grounds for optimism: slowly growing numbers of Native people are becoming aware that that essential of tribalism -- "an injury to one is an injury to all" -- has to be extended to the dispossessed of all humanity and that loss of socio-cultural identity will not occur in the framework of healthy political association and coalition [e.g., the anti-nuclear struggle or the fight for Leonard Peltier's life and liberty.] And non-Native radicals ought to be aware by now that it takes much more than mechanical arrangements and presumably altruistic politicians to build and maintain genuine humanistic socio-economic democracy -- especially in a predominately urban/industrial context. They can learn much from the First People about faithful commitment to economic communalism, to equalitarian democracy and classless societies, and to a practical recognition of the spiritual foundations and interdependence of every component of the Creation. The U.S. census of 2000 indicates that 2.4 million people identified themselves as Native Americans: up 25% since 1990. This is a clear and unequivocal statement of basic Indian identity -- although almost all of these would be of some mixed [ Native and non-Native] ancestry, a very common situation throughout Indian country in this day and age. [In addition, slightly over four million other people indicated some Indian ancestry -- but this category is not accepted by many Native people as indicative of basic Native identity.] There are almost 600 tribal societies in the United States, each perceived by its people [though not by Federal and state governments] as a sovereign entity; more than two-thirds of Native people are from "Federally-recognized" tribes, covered by treaties or other Federal ties, and hold about 55 million acres of reservation land. [An additional 40 million acres have been set aside for Alaskan Natives.] If physically resident on their Indian lands, Federal Indians are eligible for Indian trust services [such as they are]: health, education, socio-economic development. Non-Federal Indians, mostly in the East, receive no Federal Indian services and often have little or no reservation land base. In a few instances, they may receive minimal Indian services from the state in which they reside. Urban Indians, and Native people in off-reservation rural settings -- and these are now much more than one-half the total Native population in the United States -- receive no Federal Indian services, even if they are from Federally-recognized tribes. The Native American population in the United States may be changing -- indeed, is growing with rapidity -- but some other things are certainly not changing. Indian people are at the bottom when it comes to education and income and housing and life-expectancy -- and they're at the top in unemployment, sub-employment, and suicide. The development of casinos -- over three hundred of them -- in Indian country is often seen by outsiders as much more of a positive and beneficent economic phenomenon than they are; the cold reality is that, while the casinos have helped the economic picture of the tribes involved to some extent -- but not all that much -- they have also engendered no small amount of corruption, skim-offs from outsiders, and much venomous intra-tribal factionalism. In addition, since tribes are not covered by Federal labor laws, it's been very difficult for almost all tribal casino employees to unionize -- and pay and conditions are often extremely poor. And, further, however slowly, the states themselves are beginning their own legalization of non-Indian casino gambling. Something else that has certainly not changed is the fact that, despite transitory periods of faint sunlight, the enduring common denominator of United States [and Canadian] Native policy is -- however veiled -- to get rid of Native people via socio-cultural assimilation; end all treaty obligations; and secure remaining Native land, water, and other natural resources. And again, there is another unchanging dimension: that mountain of Native commitment -- of all Native people, whoever and wherever -- to a cohesive family and clan, to one's tribal nation [essentially one big family] and to its inherent sovereignty and self-determination; and to the critical values so deeply rooted in the tribal cultures: strongly religious, a pervasive identification with the whole Creation, no coincidence or happen-chance in the Universe, an essentially communalistic view of land use, democracy, egalitarianism, classlessness. And all of this is in the context of the fundamental principle of tribal [mutual] responsibility: i.e., the society has an obligation to the individual and the individual has an obligation to the society; if these conflict, the position of the society prevails -- but there are certain clearly defined areas of individual and family autonomy into which the society -- the tribe -- cannot intrude. And from Native American perspectives, these basic issues stand very much to the fore -- issue/goals which warrant the full support of every person of good will and certainly every person of the Left: Federal adherence to treaty and related obligations. Treaties between the United States and the Indian nations are, however occasionally mangled by the Federal government, part of "the Supreme Law of the Land" -- completely in the context of Article 6, Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution. Although Congress ended treaty making with the tribal nations in 1871, the hundreds of treaties then in existence continue with full legal validity. Federal protection of Native land, water, and other natural resources -- and substantial Federal funding to build back the badly shrunken reservation land base. Federal recognition of the non-Federal tribes. This was supposed to have been effected by the 1921 Snyder Act which guaranteed Federal Indian services to all Native Americans in the U.S. -- but the Act's coverage and Indian services were restricted immediately to only those Federally-recognized Indian people resident on reservations. Removal of the Bureau of Indian Affairs from the Department of Interior [perennially dominated by the corporations] and its elevation to cabinet status. The B.I.A. is presently under very heavy fire from the tribes and their advocates for massive mismanagement of Native trust funds and the mishandling of other trust responsibilities. Substantial Federal funds for Indian-controlled and Indian-directed programs -- in the areas of health, welfare and education, among others -- on reservations, in non-reservation rural settings, and in urban areas. The 1975 Indian Self-Determination Act involving Federal reservations is a promising first step. Substantial Federal funding for tribally-owned and tribally-controlled development of natural resources and other economic programs. Correction and reinterpretation of the 1988 Indian Gaming Act in such a fashion as to allow tribes to operate their casinos without non-tribal -- e.g., state -- interference. As it stands, the Act and a subsequent 1996 Supreme Court decision [Seminole], force tribes to reach agreements with states, thus undercutting Worcester v. Georgia [1832], the key [Cherokee Nation] case blocking state jurisdiction over Indian tribes. Establishment of full tribal civil and criminal jurisdiction on Indian lands. Most of this is now held by the Federal government. Cessation of Federal and state attacks on Native activists and immediate freedom for persons such as Leonard Peltier. Elimination of racism and cultural ethnocentrism wherever they may exist. These are critical issues for Native people in any setting but are frequently -- and often brutally -- to the fore in police, employment, housing, and education situations involving urban Indians. Where do radicals -- the Left -- come into all of this? First, a revealing little story: Some years ago, in a very tough and very big-city urban context, a situation developed where racist Anglo youth gangs were attacking Native American kids -- and the predominately white police in that particular district were doing virtually nothing about it. We called a public mass meeting and demanded, successfully, that police representatives be present. A large number of people -- Native and non-Native -- came to the basement of a Catholic Church. I chaired the meeting. However turbulently, it moved along through grievances and demands -- and then, suddenly! Two non-Indian radicals arose to harangue -- not the deserving cops -- but each other: over conflicting mini-visions and perceptions of peripheral socialist ideology. With some difficulty and banging of my fist, I ended the escalating oratory and returned the discussion to the matter at hand. And, in due course, we arrived at a functional resolution of the situation -- which the police, however reluctantly, effectively honored. As we were leaving the meeting, a young Native activist asked me, "What were those guys yelling at each other about? Some religious thing?" And I could only answer, "Pretty much." And, indeed, the behavior of some non-Indian radicals -- certainly not all by any means -- can easily lend toward a religiously fundamentalist interpretation! Past relationships between Native Americans and American radical organizations and movements, although not antagonistic, have generally not been close. In the pre-World War I and post-war period, the Industrial Workers of the World, with minimal ideological rigidity and very substantial democracy; and its close relative, the Socialist Party [especially in heavily Native American Oklahoma], did have very meaningful Indian membership and support. [Always remember Frank H. Little, Cherokee Indian, metal miner, Wobbly organizer and chairman of the I.W.W. General Executive Board, mutilated and lynched at Butte on August 1, 1917, by thugs employed by Anaconda Copper.] And, especially in the Rocky Mountains after World War II, the International Union of Mine, Mill and Smelter Workers [another relative of the old I.W.W.], radical and militant, the epitome of democracy, and thoroughly committed to full racial equality, reached out and attracted many Native metal miners -- who always functioned very comfortably and loyally within Mine-Mill. But, at the present , there are, sadly, too few Indian people in American radical organizations. The Peltier case has brought some Native activists and non-Indian radicals into quite congenial and determined association. Although hard specific data are almost impossible to come by, local reports from around the United States -- including many coming to me personally, often from former Indian students of mine -- certainly indicate that the Nader/LaDuke campaign stimulated an unusual amount of Native voting activism. I should add that the "two old parties" each have token Indian figures of sometime conspicuous presence -- the Democrats more than the Republicans -- but neither has attracted a consistently loyal Native American following. Most Indians who actually vote in mainline elections -- not a pervasive pattern at all, but a slowly growing one -- are Democratic. But that party's position on Native issues is only tepidly better than the Republicans. [The Canadian situation is in many respects different than the one in the 'States. In the central provinces, many decades ago indeed, activists of the well-organized and radical Metis [ off-reserve mixed-blood category] and on-reserve tribal people were much involved in the initial formation of the Cooperative Commonwealth Federation which eventually, in 1961, became the New Democratic Party --of somewhat socialist perspective but presently faltering.] Even when interested in active participation in U.S. Left organizations, Native people often encounter a kind of indifference. In a recent and probably not atypical situation, younger Anglo radicals became interested in placing a Native activist -- and member -- on that particular socialist organization's national political commission. But other commission members, with profuse apologies, were reluctant to agree to even consider approving compensation for a small part of the Native person's [not an individual of means] transportation from the "remote" hinterland to New York City -- site of almost all of that group's occasional political commission gatherings. Partial travel compensation for other persons, geographically closer, has always been the general rule. The Native person was never named to the political body. But I reiterate: We all need each other. And big things usually start with small steps on a strange trail. I think non-Indian radicals need to reach out, in personally affirmative ways, to make contact with Native American people. Without limiting the initial arena exclusively to the urban settings, the cities -- often with Indian people of many tribes represented, and generally characterized by a somewhat greater degree of acculturation -- offer some of the most promising possibilities for mutually productive involvements: urban Indian centers, protest meetings around racial and ethnocentric prejudice and discrimination issues, Native public pow-wows, Native speakers. Opportunities to assist Indian people in good causes will always present themselves -- and, furthermore, well written articles on Native issues are always helpful. Here now is some very friendly -- comradely -- advice to non-Indian radicals: Don't see Native Americans as one monolithic group. Although there certainly is a basic Native racial togetherness, remember that there are literally hundreds of distinct tribal nations -- each with its own unique culture and ethos. Recognize, too, that there are many degrees of acculturation [but not assimilation.] Be aware, also, that there are many different factions in any tribe. And: "Not all Indians these days look like Indians." The generally mixed-blood situation has produced many Native people who don't fit the grand old face in the old American nickel. But it certainly doesn't mean they are any less committed to tribe, culture, and race -- and, frequently, militant activism. Genuinely accept and respect the socio-cultural validity of the tribal societies and cultures. Each has its own origin, vision, history and destiny. Avoid ethnocentric terms like "primitive" and "civilized," recognizing that almost all Native people do not think in traditional "western" linear terms [are much more "circlic/cyclic."] But, although change comes slowly in the Indian cultures, it does come in its own way and, in the last analysis, on the terms of the people. [A pickup truck, used by the Navajo for purely Navajo purposes, is called a "Navajo Cadillac."] Religion pervades -- usually in a non-pretentious and almost always non-sanctimonious fashion -- every Native American culture. Regardless of one's view of "religion," it -- or the lack of it -- should be up to the individual. As a life-long working organizer and teacher, I can't think of anything more counter-productive in any setting -- Native or otherwise -- than cutting at someone's religious beliefs. Go rather easy on the intricacies of radical ideology -- especially at the outset of a relationship. Native Americans are going to be much more impressed with a person's individual commitment to people and demonstrated service than they are in one's ability to quote the great socialists. I've talked socialism to all of my students, Native and non-Native, over many, many years indeed -- and likewise to my organizing constituents -- but I always take it in at a deliberate and steady pace. And this approach builds an understanding in a step-by-step fashion. With Native people, the basic communalism -- the mutual responsibility -- of the tribal cultures is the obvious context in which to discuss socialist vision and practice. And, in due course, there'll certainly be many Native people who'll join Left organizations and participate vigorously and effectively within them. Recognize that Native Americans, like all people, are very much committed to making the decisions that affect them. Self-determination is something Indians hold as critically important. Don't stereotype. Most sensitive non-Indians are certainly not going to demean Native people. But, on the other hand, don't exalt us, either. People are very much people indeed. Be a good listener. [The art of listening, to which we all pay lip service, is of course 'way too rare -- but it's within the reach of everyone!] Recognizing that there is a lot of downright hokey stuff floating about, learn all you can about Native Americans: histories and visions, centuries of Euro-American genocide and attempted genocide, massive Anglo theft of land and resources, frequently totalitarian Federally-imposed "educational" systems visited upon Indian youth, the vicious governmental and corporate efforts to "terminate" treaties and tribes and people, the great and enduring Native persistence and commitment through all of these blood-dimmed centuries. Here are a few helpful books: Ward Churchill, ed., Marxism and Native Americans [Boston: South End Press, 1989.] Barbara Graymont, ed., Fighting Tuscarora: The Autobiography of Chief Clinton Rickard [Syracuse, New York: Syracuse University Press, 1984.] Hazel W. Hertzberg, The Search for an American Indian Identity: Modern Pan-Indian Movements [Syracuse, New York: Syracuse University Press, 1971.] Laurence M. Hauptman, The Iroquois Struggle for Survival: World War II to Red Power [Syracuse, New York: Syracuse University Press, 1986.] James S. Olson, ed., The Encyclopedia of American Indian Civil Rights [Westport, Connecticut: Greenwood Press, 1997.] Susan Power, The Grass Dancer [New York: G.P. Putnam's Sons, 1994.] [Fiction] Paul Chaat Smith and Robert Allen Warrior, Like a Hurricane: The Indian Movement from Alcatraz to Wounded Knee [New York: The New Press, 1996.] Steve Talbot, Roots of Oppression [New York: International Publishers, 1981 and 1985.] We all need each other. And we can all learn from each other. We all need socialist democracy and a world in which -- to state that essential ideal of Native tribalism -- we develop people who serve their communities rather than simply serve themselves. All of this is as inextricably bound together in our human destiny as fused copper wires. Hunter Gray 2000 Sandy Lane Pocatello Idaho 83204 hunterbadbear@earthlink.net Hunter Gray [Hunterbear] www.hunterbear.org (strawberry socialism) Protected by Na?shdo?i?ba?i? From Johannes.Schneider at gmx.net Mon Jul 8 10:23:26 2002 From: Johannes.Schneider at gmx.net (Johannes Schneider) Date: Sat Aug 5 04:33:17 2006 Subject: [R-G] 'Jews-only' law sparks firestorm Message-ID: <018701c2269b$ca2c9160$4a1e050a@fgl.atitech.com> From the Israeli paper Haaretz: Background / 'Jews-only' law sparks firestorm By Bradley Burston, Ha'aretz Correspondent A proposed law that would allow Jews to bar Arabs from buying homes in their communities could expose Israel to a fresh wave of condemnation recalling the now-rescinded UN resolution equating Zionism and racism, critics of the bill said Wednesday. In a decision that set off a storm of debate, Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's cabinet Sunday voted to endorse a bill that would allow areas within Israel which have been designated as state land to be devoted to residential use by Jews alone. The bill still faces considerable legislative hurdles before it can be passed into law. Although worded in the gray phraseology of legislative practice, the measure goes to the heart of a crucial dichotomy of modern Israel: how to maintain a pluralistic state that is at once formally Jewish in character and genuinely democratic in practice. "If we are not already totally an apartheid state, we are getting much, much closer to it," said former cabinet minister and leftist Meretz party founder Shulamit Aloni. Full text at: http://makeashorterlink.com/?Z3F026731 From mstainsby at tao.ca Mon Jul 8 19:26:36 2002 From: mstainsby at tao.ca (Macdonald Stainsby) Date: Sat Aug 5 04:33:17 2006 Subject: [R-G] Peru peasants march to Lima Message-ID: <009b01c226e7$ab632ea0$291f5318@vc.shawcable.net> Reuters. 8 July 2002. Peru peasants march to Lima, protest mining damage. LIMA -- After a week of marching from villages across Peru, some 1,000 peasants arrived in Lima on Monday to demand government action against what they say is the contamination or seizure of land by big mining companies. "We're not against mining development but we want local communities to be ... consulted," said Miguel Palacin, head of a pressure group for 1,135 communities affected by mining. "The government is not interested in solving our problems caused by mining companies that contaminate land, rivers and undermine our health," he told Reuters. Mining is big business for Peru, the world's No. 5 producer of copper and No. 8 of gold, and the industry earns half of this poor Andean nation's annual export income. But a culture clash between mining companies seeking to exploit the rich mineral wealth and farmers who say their livelihood is at risk is fast becoming a headache for unpopular President Alejandro Toledo as he seeks to lure foreign investment. In the fruit-growing northern valley of Tambogrande, for example, residents in June overwhelmingly rejected a planned $315 million gold and copper mine that the proposed investor, Manhattan Minerals Corp., says will create jobs. Palacin said his group's members wanted technological development to help make more of their traditional farming and livestock jobs and the repeal of the so-called "law of mining servitude," whereby mining companies negotiate payment for agricultural land and the government relocates farmers. "Southern Peru Copper Corp. contaminates our water, our pasture land, and our animals die. There are 150 families who are being thrown off their land without being given alternatives," said Lucas Serrano, from the village of Quishque in Peru's southern Andes. "Our animals are dying. There are no fish or frogs in the rivers any more. There's no life. Our children are sick because all of the mining waste is filtering into the water we drink," said Melchora Surco, from near the southern city of Cusco. "We want to be moved and we want justice. We want to be heard -- because we never have been," she added. Filomeno Aylas, from La Oroya in central Peru, a desperately polluted Peruvian refinery town where people have shown blood lead content close to biological tolerance levels, said children as young as three were showing lead in their blood. "It's a calamity," he said. ------------------------------------------- Macdonald Stainsby http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/rad-green http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/leninist-international -- In the contradiction lies the hope. --Bertholt Brecht From Tom_Childs at Douglas.BC.CA Mon Jul 8 19:41:14 2002 From: Tom_Childs at Douglas.BC.CA (Tom_Childs@Douglas.BC.CA) Date: Sat Aug 5 04:33:17 2006 Subject: [R-G] Columbian U'wa Indians Brace for New Battle Message-ID: <200207090141.SAA19286@Douglas.BC.CA> http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20020708/lf_nm/colombia_in dians_dc_1 Colombian U'wa Indians Brace for New Battle Mon Jul 8,12:37 PM ET By Ibon Villelabeitia CUBARA, Colombia (Reuters) - Roberto Perez chews a cluster of dry coca leaves as he stands near a precipice overlooking a valley of rain forest and swift rivers. Legend has it that Perez's U'wa Indian ancestors jumped to their deaths from a similar ridge 500 years ago to avoid enslavement by Spanish conquistadors. Perez, a shy and mild-mannered U'wa leader, says his people will not commit mass suicide this time, but warns they will do whatever it takes to defend their land from the latest "intrusion" -- a planned U.S. aid package to train an army battalion. The $98 million in aid is aimed at preparing Colombian forces to protect an oil pipeline that runs near U'wa territory from attacks by Marxist rebels, but tribal leaders fear it will spread Colombia's 38-year-old war across their land. The U'wa, an impoverished semi-nomadic indigenous group in northeastern Colombia, gained international attention two years ago when they fought a protracted battle against Los Angeles-based Occidental Petroleum that sought to drill next to their reservation. Occidental withdrew from the project this year after failing to find commercially viable oil deposits. The controversy had been a public relations nightmare for the U.S. company as vociferous international environmental organizations cast the dispute as a David versus Goliath struggle between indigenous groups and corporate power. Now U'wa leaders fear Washington's plan, which is being discussed in the U.S. Congress, could drag them into a military conflict that kills thousands of people every year. "We have our own law. The army and the rebels should respect us. We don't want them on our land," said Roberto Cobaria, an U'wa leader with a wispy mustache. International green groups are bracing for a new battle. "Our campaign is not over. We campaign for the indigenous groups' right to self-determination, be that against oil or U.S. military aid," said Kevin Koenig, a spokesman for Amazon Watch, a group based in Oakland, California, that has taken up the U'wa cause. 'THINKING PEOPLE' SUFFER DISCRIMINATION The U'wa, which means "the thinking people" in their language, are one of Colombia's 80 indigenous ethnic groups. For centuries they have suffered oppression and discrimination at the hands of Spanish colonizers and Colombian government. Their numbers have dwindled dramatically -- to 5,000 from 20,000 in 1940. They live in remote mist-shrouded mountains, having lost large parts of their ancestral land to government expropriations and incursions by displaced peasants fleeing the violence of the country's largely rural war. Near Cubara, the main town on the tribe's reservation, children with stomachs swollen from malnutrition sat in the dirt in one settlement of mud huts inside the reservation. There is no electricity or running water. One girl, barely 15, breast-fed two babies as scrawny chickens pecked around pools of rain water. Inside a smoky hut, elders gathered around a wood fire and drank "chicha," a traditional beer made of fermented maize. Most didn't speak Spanish and seemed suspicious of foreigners. The lifestyle of most U'wa has changed little in 500 years although tribe leaders have set up a campaign office in Cubara equipped with telephones and fax machines. The leaders live in the town, and dress in the same shirts and trousers as other country Colombians. WRATH OF GOD The U'wa, a firmly religious people, believe that exploiting their sacred rivers and forests would unleash the wrath of "Sira" (God). They regard oil as the "blood of Mother Earth" and say drilling is like "stabbing a knife into your stomach." They carry coca leaves -- the raw material for cocaine -- in gourds around their necks and chew them to "gain strength and wisdom." The land dispute with Occidental entered the U.S. presidential election in 2000 as environmental groups criticized Democratic candidate Al Gore ( news - web sites) for owning company shares. When Occidental won a court order to sink a test well after a seven-year legal wrangle, Colombian soldiers were deployed near the reservation and military helicopters hovered in the skies to prevent protesters from blocking the drilling. Word that the U'wa were considering walking off the 1,400-foot (400-meter) "Cliff of Death" to fight the "invaders" as they did against the Spanish caused a media frenzy even though the U'wa later ruled out such drastic action. "The collective suicide was something our ancestors did 500 years ago to avoid becoming slaves. We are going to fight until the end to defend our land but we are not thinking of jumping off the cliff," said Perez, 60, who has 10 children. OIL IS TROUBLE History of Colombia shows that oil means trouble. Discoveries of oil -- the country's main export -- have brought violence from all sides fighting in Colombia's war and done little in the way of lifting the people from poverty. After the Cano Limon pipeline opened in the 1980s the two Marxist rebel groups that operate in the area grew fat by extorting private companies servicing the pipeline. Right-wing paramilitary outlaws have also moved into the area. In 1999, the rebels of the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia -- known as "FARC" -- kidnapped and killed three U.S. Indian activists who were visiting U'wa territory. When the oil controversy faded away, the television cameras went home and the U'wa were left to their poverty and mud huts. Tall grass is overtaking the old drilling site and the sound of the rushing waters fills the air. The U'wa said they want the government to invest in hospitals and schools, not oil or war. After the White House announced the new aid package earlier this year, U.S.-based environmental groups began mobilizing a new campaign and U'wa leaders were back in the spotlight. U'wa leaders say they appreciate the solidarity received from international groups. Occidental and government officials say the Indians have been manipulated by outsiders. U'wa leaders have flown to Los Angeles, Washington and many European capitals -- paid by foreign support groups -- to promote the U'wa plight at anti-globalization forums. "These are groups that depend on fund-raising to survive and are always looking for causes in developing countries to raise their profile," an Occidental spokesman said. "They don't seem to have a problem when they fly the U'wa leaders around the world burning the 'blood of Mother Earth."' U'wa support groups say such claims are ridiculous and accuse big oil companies of trying to silence the voice of the indigenous community. Amazon Watch spokesman Koenig, who has never been to Colombia, said his group's job is "to shed the media spotlight so that the voices of the U'wa can be heard." -- Tom Childs - Audio/Visual Resources Douglas College Library New Westminster, B.C. Canada T: 604 527-5187 - library T: 604 524-9316 - home E: childst@douglas.bc.ca W: http://www.globaljustice.ca -- From Tom_Childs at Douglas.BC.CA Mon Jul 8 19:52:18 2002 From: Tom_Childs at Douglas.BC.CA (Tom_Childs@Douglas.BC.CA) Date: Sat Aug 5 04:33:17 2006 Subject: [R-G] [Infoshop News] Defy Columbus Day 2002 - CACC Call to Action Message-ID: <200207090152.SAA19372@Douglas.BC.CA> ------ Forwarded message: ------ Delivered-To: infoshop-news@flag.blackened.net From: Chuck Munson To: "acc@lists.mutualaid.org" , "infoshop-news@infoshop.org" Subject: [Infoshop News] Defy Columbus Day 2002 - CACC Call to Action Date: Mon, 08 Jul 2002 21:43:49 -0400 -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Defy Columbus Day 2002 - CACC Call to Action Date: Mon, 8 Jul 2002 18:28:46 -0700 (PDT) From: Mile High Resistance Reply-To: mhr@coloradicals.org To: info@abolishthebank.org There is a tradition in the United States. A tradition that dates back longer than any of us can remember. A tradition that celebrates events that lead to the annihilation of entire groups of people, slavery of thousands, violent conquest of land and the beginning of the end of vibrant cultures throughout the Americas. Indeed the beginning of what we now know as Westernization began with the landing of Christopher Columbus. The American values of cultural, economical and ecological domination were set on that day in 1492. Now, 510 years later, the American government and its hordes of capitalist fat cats continue in the fashion of their hero, Christopher Columbus. When US corporations worm their way into local marketplaces of Third World nations across the globe, the US military is not far behind to secure the place for their own way of life. Just as it was long ago, indigenous peoples and cultures are threatened in the name of progress. From the oil fields to the banana fields, people are forced to play ball with Western capitalists or starve as their lands are stripped out from under their feet by organizations like FTAA NAFTA), IMF, and if it comes to it, the CIA. It is for these reasons that the Anarchists, Socialists, and other activists of the Colorado Anti-Capitalist Convergence reject the celebration of Columbus Day. We cannot, as part of the Anti-Capitalist and Anti-Globalization movement, allow the celebration of domination, genocide and colonization continue. The fact that the annual parades began in Colorado make us feel a certain responsibility to end them in Colorado. Festivals in the name of Columbus destroy all that we anti-capitalists and anti-authoritarians hold in our hearts and in our minds. This is why we are calling out to anti-capitalists and anti-authoritarians of all stripes to converge on Denver, Colorado, for a weeklong festival of total liberation from the ghost of Christopher Columbus. The colonization of out people, land, hearts and minds end in October 2002 as we unite in opposition to the celebration of Columbus Day and to the system of domination itself; as we take the streets back from the Columbus Day parade and from the neo-colonists, the Capitalist State. This call to action goes out in solidarity with the struggle against the IMF and the World Bank in Washington DC. We see each as an equal part of the same struggle, which is why we are calling for a West coast mobilization to Denver. As the Phoenix Anarchist Coalition has stated, we are not trying to trump or out-organize the mobilization in D.C. In fact, some of the anti-Columbus Day organizers will be attending the action against the IMF/WB. Unfortunately big actions far away only leave room for a couple activists in a collective to attend. We intend to create a space for those in the West to converge for a weekend, make some solid connections and hopefully communicate more effectively in the future. Join us to liberate out culture from this sick festival! Join us to create an NEW tradition! Join us to turn October into a month that celebrates life, diversity, equality and liberation! For a new world, Colorado Anti-Capitalist Convergence http://acc.coloradicals.org ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ _______________________________________________ infoshop-news mailing list infoshop-news@infoshop.org http://www.infoshop.org/mailman/listinfo/infoshop-news -- Tom Childs - Audio/Visual Resources Douglas College Library New Westminster, B.C. Canada T: 604 527-5187 - library T: 604 524-9316 - home E: childst@douglas.bc.ca W: http://www.globaljustice.ca -- From LAMZ at sympatico.ca Mon Jul 8 22:15:58 2002 From: LAMZ at sympatico.ca (Lysander Zimmerman) Date: Sat Aug 5 04:33:18 2006 Subject: [R-G] BBC video implicates Israelis - tanks shown killing fleeing children in Jenin Message-ID: <000501c226ff$56713190$33378d18@Indy1> BBC video implicates Israelis - tanks shown killing fleeing children in Jenin BBC article and a video of the Jenin incident contradicts story by Israelis. People are clearly running away from the position. A tank then fires. Article and video here: http://portland.indymedia.org/front.php3?article_id=13942&group=webcast From LAMZ at sympatico.ca Mon Jul 8 22:52:20 2002 From: LAMZ at sympatico.ca (Lysander Zimmerman) Date: Sat Aug 5 04:33:18 2006 Subject: [R-G] "Experts" Urge Mass Vaccination for Smallpox Attack Message-ID: <000e01c22704$6a5d0a30$33378d18@Indy1> PLEASE FORWARD AS WIDELY AS POSSIBLE In the wake of a global coup d'etat, here's what we are seeing! Next there will be a suspicious "outbreak" and EVERYONE will be forced vaccinated. Time for everyone to start waking up their friends, neighbours and communities. Enough lies and state-terror! [please note: this is now also part of Canadian law under Bill C42] ____________________________________________ "Experts" Urge Mass Vaccination for Smallpox Attack The government has announced plans to vaccinate 500,000 healthcare workers. They have also said that "anyone who may have had contact with the infected patients would be tracked down and vaccinated." Full article here: http://portland.indymedia.org:8081/front.php3?article_id=14049&group=webcast ____________________________________________ Important further reading: http://portland.indymedia.org/archive/features/2002/06/2002-06.html#3901 http://portland.indymedia.org/front.php3?article_id=13240&group=webcast From Johannes.Schneider at gmx.net Tue Jul 9 03:39:10 2002 From: Johannes.Schneider at gmx.net (Johannes Schneider) Date: Sat Aug 5 04:33:18 2006 Subject: [R-G] Re: 'Jews-only' law sparks firestorm Message-ID: <005101c2272c$7c5e6300$4a1e050a@fgl.atitech.com> More on the background of land distribution in the state of Israel from Haaretz: State lands bill sticks to reality on ground By Zafrir Rinat When the cabinet approved a bill on Sunday that would permit state lands to be allocated to exclusively Jewish townships, it was giving legal backing to a situation that has existed in practice since the establishment of the state. Full: http://makeashorterlink.com/?N2F800831 From shniad at sfu.ca Tue Jul 9 09:46:01 2002 From: shniad at sfu.ca (shniad@sfu.ca) Date: Sat Aug 5 04:33:18 2006 Subject: [R-G] Doonesbury on Afghanistan Message-ID: <200207091546.g69Fk1mC020953@rm-rstar.sfu.ca> Check out the July 1 and 2 strips at http://www.doonesbury.com/strip/dailydose/ From shniad at sfu.ca Tue Jul 9 10:03:30 2002 From: shniad at sfu.ca (shniad@sfu.ca) Date: Sat Aug 5 04:33:18 2006 Subject: [R-G] We Need a Global Declaration of Interdependence - Wade Davis Message-ID: <200207091603.g69G3VmC003234@rm-rstar.sfu.ca> The Globe & Maill July 6, 2002 We Need a Global Declaration of Interdependence The Western ideal of comfort and wealth holds a hollow promise for the rest of the world and provides fodder for extremists by Wade Davis   On Sept. 11, in the most successful act of asymmetrical warfare since the Trojan horse, the world came home to America. "Why do they hate us?" asked George W. Bush. This was not a rhetorical question. Americans really wanted to know -- and still do, for their innocence had been shattered. The President suggested that the reason was the very greatness of America, as if the liberal institutions of government had somehow provoked homicidal rage in fanatics incapable of embracing freedom. Other, dissenting voices claimed that, to the contrary, the problem lay in the tendency of the United States to support, notably in the Middle East, repressive regimes whose values are antithetical to the ideals of American democracy. Both sides were partly right, but both overlooked the deeper issue, in part because they persisted in examining the world through American eyes. The United States has always looked inward. A nation born in isolation cannot be expected to be troubled by the election of a President who has rarely been abroad, or a Congress in which 25 per cent of members do not hold passports. Wealth too can be blinding. Each year, Americans spend as much on lawn maintenance as the government of India collects in federal tax revenue. The 30 million African-Americans collectively control more wealth than the 30 million Canadians. A country that effortlessly supports a defense budget larger than the entire economy of Australia does not easily grasp the reality of a world in which 1.3 billion people get by on less than $1 a day. A new and original culture that celebrates the individual at the expense of family and community -- a stunning innovation in human affairs, the sociological equivalent of the splitting of the atom -- has difficulty understanding that in most of the world the community still prevails, for the destiny of the individual remains inextricably linked to the fate of the collective. Since 1945, even as the United States came to dominate the geopolitical scene, the American people resisted engagement with the world, maintaining an almost willful ignorance of what lay beyond their borders. Such cultural myopia, never flattering, was rendered obsolete in an instant on the morning Sept. 11. In the immediate wake of the tragedy, I was often asked as an anthropologist for explanations. Condemning the attacks in the strongest possible terms, I nevertheless encouraged people to consider the forces that gave rise to Osama bin Laden's movement. While it would be reassuring to view al-Qaeda as an isolated phenomenon, I feared that the organization was a manifestation of a deeper and broader conflict, a clash between those who have and those who have nothing. Mr. bin Laden himself may be wealthy, but the resentment upon which al-Qaeda feeds springs most certainly from the condition of the dispossessed. I also encouraged my American friends to turn the anthropological lens upon our own culture, if only to catch a glimpse of how we might appear to people born in other lands. I shared a colleague's story from her time living among the Bedouin in Tunisia in the 1980s, just as television reached their remote villages. Entranced and shocked by episodes of the soap opera Dallas,the astonished farm women asked her, "Is everyone in your country as mean as J.R.?" For much of the Middle East, in particular, the West is synonymous not only with questionable values and a flood of commercial products, but also with failure. Gamel Abdul Nasser's notion of a Pan-Arabic state was based on a thoroughly Western and secular model of socialist development, an economic and political dream that collapsed in corruption and despotism. The shah of Iran provoked the Iranian revolution by thrusting not the Koran but modernity (as he saw it) down the throats of his people. The Western model of development has failed in the Middle East and elsewhere in good measure because it has been based on the false promise that people who follow its prescriptive dictates will in time achieve the material prosperity enjoyed by a handful of nations of the West. Even were this possible, it is not at all clear that it would be desirable. To raise consumption of energy and materials throughout the world to Western levels, given current population projections, would require the resources of four planet Earths by the year 2100. To do so with the one world we have would imply so severely compromising the biosphere that the Earth would be unrecognizable. In reality, development for the vast majority of the peoples of the world has been a process in which the individual is torn from his past and propelled into an uncertain future only to secure a place on the bottom rung of an economic ladder that goes nowhere. Consider the key indices of development. An increase in life expectancy suggests a drop in infant mortality, but reveals nothing of the quality of the lives led by those who survive childhood. Globalization is celebrated with iconic intensity. But what does it really mean? The Washington Post reports that in Lahore, one Muhammad Saeed earns $88 (U.S.) a month stitching shirts and jeans for a factory that supplies Gap and Eddie Bauer. He and five family members share a single bed in one room off a warren of alleys strewn with human waste and refuse. Yet, earning three times as much as at his last job, he is the poster child of globalization. Even as fundamental a skill as literacy does not necessarily realize its promise. In northern Kenya, for example, tribal youths placed by their families into parochial schools do acquire a modicum of literacy, but in the process also learn to have contempt for their ancestral way of life. They enter school as nomads; they leave as clerks, only to join an economy with a 50-per-cent unemployment rate for high-school graduates. Unable to find work, incapable of going home, they drift to the slums of Nairobi to scratch a living from the edges of a cash economy. Without doubt, images of comfort and wealth, of technological sophistication, have a magnetic allure. Any job in the city may seem better than backbreaking labor in sun-scorched fields. Entranced by the promise of the new, people throughout the world have in many instances voluntarily turned their backs on the old. The consequences can be profoundly disappointing. The fate of the vast majority of those who sever their ties with their traditions will not be to attain the prosperity of the West, but to join the legions of urban poor, trapped in squalor, struggling to survive. As cultures wither away, individuals remain, often shadows of their former selves, caught in time, unable to return to the past, yet denied any real possibility of securing a place in the world whose values they seek to emulate and whose wealth they long to acquire. Anthropology suggests that when peoples and cultures are squeezed, extreme ideologies sometimes emerge, inspired by strange and unexpected beliefs. These revitalization movements may be benign, but more typically prove deadly both to their adherents and to those they engage. China's Boxer Rebellion of 1900 sought not only to end the opium trade and expel foreign legations. The Boxers arose in response to the humiliation of an ancient nation, long the center of the known world, reduced within a generation to servitude by unknown barbarians. It was not enough to murder the missionaries. In a raw, atavistic gesture, the Boxers dismembered them and displayed their heads on pikes. However unique its foundation, al-Qaeda is nevertheless reminiscent of such revitalization movements. Torn between worlds, Mr. bin Laden and his followers invoke a feudal past that never was in order to rationalize their own humiliation and hatred. They are a cancer within the culture of Islam, neither fully of the faith nor totally apart from it. Like any malignant growth they must be severed from the body and destroyed. We must also strive to understand the movement's roots, for the chaotic conditions of disintegration and disenfranchisement that led to al-Qaeda are found among disaffected populations throughout the world. In Nepal, rural farmers spout rhetoric not heard since the death of Stalin. In Peru, the Shining Path turned to Mao. Had they invoked instead Tupac Amaru, the 18th-century indigenous rebel, scion of the Inca, and had they been able to curb their reflexive disdain for the very indigenous people they claimed to represent, they might well have set the nation aflame, as was their intent. Lima, a city of 400,000 in 1940 is today home to 9 million, and for the majority it is a sea of misery in a sun-scorched desert. We live in an age of disintegration. At the beginning of the 20th century there were 60 nation states. Today there are 190, many poor and unstable. The real story lies in the cities. Throughout the world, urbanization, with all its fickle and forlorn promises, has drawn people by the millions into squalor. The populations of Mexico City and Sao Paulo are unknown, probably immeasurable. In Asia there are cities of 10 million people that most of us in the West cannot name. The nation state, as Harvard sociologist Daniel Bell wrote, has become too small for the big problems of the world and too big for the little problems of the world. Outside the major industrial nations, globalization has not brought integration and harmony, but rather a firestorm of change that has swept away languages and cultures, ancient skills and visionary wisdom. Of the 6,000 languages spoken today, fully half are not being taught to children. Within a single generation, we are witnessing the loss of half humanity's social, spiritual and intellectual legacy. This is the essential backdrop of our era. In the immediate aftermath of 9/11, I was asked at a lecture in Los Angeles to name the seminal event of the 20th century. Without hesitation I suggested the assassination of Archduke Ferdinand in 1914. Two bullets sparked a war that destroyed all faith in progress and optimism, the hallmarks of the Victorian age, and left in its wake the nihilism and alienation of a century that birthed Hitler, Mao, Stalin and another devastating global conflict that did not fully end until the collapse of the Soviet empire in 1989. The question then turned to 9/11, and it struck me that 100 years from now that fateful date may well loom as the defining moment of this new century, the day when two worlds, long kept apart by geography and circumstance, came together in violent conflict. If there is one lesson to be learned from 9/11, it is that power does not translate into security. With an investment of $500,000, far less than the price of one of the baggage scanners now deployed in airports across the United States, a small band of fanatics killed some 2,800 innocent people. The economic cost may well be incalculable. Generally, nations declare wars on nations; Mr. Bush has declared war on a technique and there is no exit strategy. Global media have woven the world into a single sphere. Evidence of the disproportionate affluence of the West is beamed into villages and urban slums in every nation, in every province, 24 hours a day. Baywatch is the most popular television show in New Guinea. Tribesmen from the mountainous heartland of an island that embraces 2,000 distinct languages walk for days to catch the latest episode. The voices of the poor, who deal each moment with the consequences of environmental degradation, political corruption, overpopulation, the gross distortion in the distribution of wealth and the consumption of resources, who share few of the material benefits of modernity, will no longer be silent. True peace and security for the 21st century will only come about when we find a way to address the underlying issues of disparity, dislocation and dispossession that have provoked the madness of our age. What we desperately need is a global acknowledgment of the fact that no people and no nation can truly prosper unless the bounty of our collective ingenuity and opportunities are available and accessible to all. We must aspire to create a new international spirit of pluralism, a true global democracy in which unique cultures, large and small, are allowed the right to exist, even as we learn and live together, enriched by the deepest reaches of our imaginings. We need a global declaration of interdependence. In the wake of Sept. 11 this is not idle or naïve rhetoric, but rather a matter of survival. Vancouve From debsian at pacbell.net Tue Jul 9 12:50:08 2002 From: debsian at pacbell.net (michael pugliese) Date: Sat Aug 5 04:33:18 2006 Subject: [R-G] FW: AUT: Re: THE ANTI-G8 PROTESTS IN CALGARY Message-ID: <090702190.42595@webbox.com> >--- Original Message --- >From: cwright >To: aut-op-sy@lists.village.virginia.edu >Date: 7/8/02 8:08:08 PM > >In a different vein Chris Hurl has picked up on some of this (diversity of >tactics, relationship between different anarchists, etc.) I don't know >diddly about cognitive mapping, so I'll just read what you all write, thank >you. > >But the question of the way in which some of this is raised has problems, >useful problems. > >I just want to take up the idea of diversity of tactics. For people I know, >diversity of tactics was originally a slogan aimed at opening up >demonstrations, of breaking the stage-managing by Leninists and Liberals. >Diversity of tactics was actually a concrete demand made to the burgeoning >movement against 'neo-liberalism' (for lack of an immediately better term.) >Diversity of tactics was a way to generate support for 'direct action' >(which, as Harald rightly points out, is more 'symbolic action' when not >carried out as simultaneously mass action or the self-activity of specific >oppressed and exploited people.) Diversity of tactics was originally not >used by everyone as a strategy, but as an attempt to push the recognition >that direct action had as much, if not more, validity than passive actions. >Now, my clear differentiation was not made by most people calling for >diversity of tactics, nor was it made by me here in Chicago, but it seems >that that was its core effort in the beginning. > >Diversity of tactics started as a way to break the hold of state-centric >politics. But in that sense, diversity of tactics was a tactical call, a >call to open up what was 'legitimate' protest, or rather, to legitimize what >the liberals and Leninists wanted to call illegitimate. Tom Keefer's >article does not seem to grasp this and its vital importance. > >Second, diversity of tactics was always consciously intended to allow people >to participate in ways that reflected their level of readiness to act, >without attempting to allow too much or too little. After all, who were we >to 'allow'? At the same time, Tom and others are right to raise the need to >open up a discussion of tactics around a given event. For example, his >specific criticism of the Calgary events may be pretty good. Diversity of >tactics does not mean a refusal to discuss tactics and, except for more >opportunistic elements who saw every demonstration that they did not call or >run as 'restrictive' or as one person I know said, as 'an opportunity to >fuck shit up', it has always meant a discussion of tactics and an attempt to >accomodate that diversity in creative ways (zones, public organizing, >alternative events, etc.) So Tom's idea about 'free speech zones', while >nothing new, was certainly creative and might have been excellent, given >what was possible. And that's the key. What was possible? > >At the same time, Tom Keefer tends to indulge in separating capital and its >functioning from labor and its resistance. Does this come up in his >discussion practically? I think it does in the way that he criticizes >diversity of tactics across the board. He focuses on 'self-discipline and >democracy' versus 'protest porn'. Being no great fan of a lot of what he >criticizes, I am sympathetic to the intent. But the execution is a problem. >As Harald pointed out in a post on 'cognitive mapping', the majority of >people will not be able to participate in deciding the character and actions >of a mass demonstration. In fact, a successful demonstration will draw in >people who did not hear about it or who did not originally intend to >participate. The problem is not technical (democracy and self-discipline), >but political. The technical problem will never be solved because the >political problem is omni-present. The question of 'what relation between >organizers/activists/revolutionaries and the rest of our class or that >fragment participating in any given action' is an unending question, but one >which is about what politics. At that moment, the questions of >self-determination vs. party, diversity vs. stage-management, etc. all >become very important, and only our politics decide what approach wins or >loses. > >That's why diversity of tactics requires an explicit discussion, on as broad >a basis as possible, of what type of action we want in each case. The >organizers certainly can take responsibility for a certain tenor and even >for the bulk of the marchers in one sense, but I have seen too many >demonstrations where the same type of direct action has had opposite >effects, either infusing a demonstration with passion and vitality and power >or turning it into a chaotic mess. Or taking a lively crowd and deadening >them into a submissive funeral march, but in another case taking a tense and >dangerous situation and giving it a quiet dignity which draws onlookers in >as the police obviously act out their premeditated violence. The right and >wrong choices are almost always political choices (although in smaller >demonstrations the actions of a few individuals has a greater impact). >Negatively, I always think of demonstrations to free Mumia Abu-Jamal where >the loval Maoists decide to run rampant regardless of the balance of forces, >at one demonstration leaving one hundred protesters (including small >children) facing one hundred angry cops, while at another breaking open a >realy dull march and making it exciting. But in neither case did they >really think about tactics. They just went for 'direct confrontation with >the police' in a 'liberal' demonstration, actions they would never do in a >march organized through politicos in the African American community (this I >have also witnessed over years.) > >What diversity of tactics should remind us is not simply a diversity between >tendencies, allowing anarcho-whatevers to do their thing, alongside Black >Blockers, alongside Autnonomist-whatevers, alongside liberal pacifist nuns >and priests, alongside Leninist paper-hawkers. Diversity of tactics (DOT) >should remind us, the libertarian revolutionaries of all stripes, of our >ability to fight for a diversity of tactics in our own approach to each and >every action. This, alongside of the the DOT slogan as a wedge against the >movement police who want to repress direct action and any confrontation with >the state or the smashing of corporate property, etc., needs to be foremost >in our own heads. > >I know that in my experience in the Chicago Direct Action Network, the >willingness to discuss politics always takes second place (actually has no >place) to 'the next big action' or 'real organizing'. As a result, a >handful of politicos dominate meetings and the e-mail listserve, while a >group of 'militants' (and I mean that in the worst, most Situationist way) >run around 'doing work'. [If anyone ever wondered where my hatred of the >idea of work or labor comes from, its mostly from the Leninist notion of >'political work', which is just another sweatshop, except that the money >goes to the organization and to the 'paid organizers' who run the >organization.] the abscence of the politicization of tactics is far more >important and in that discussion, multiple meanings of DOT, good and bad, >limited and more profound. > >Cheers, >Chris >"In a world which really is topsy-turvy, the true is a moment of the >false." - Debord > > > > > --- from list aut-op-sy@lists.village.virginia.edu --- > From Tom_Childs at Douglas.BC.CA Tue Jul 9 13:58:02 2002 From: Tom_Childs at Douglas.BC.CA (Tom_Childs@Douglas.BC.CA) Date: Sat Aug 5 04:33:18 2006 Subject: [R-G] Ecologist online debate on Oxfam's trade campaign (fwd) Message-ID: <200207091958.MAA28579@Douglas.BC.CA> ----- Forwarded message: -----From: Chris Keene Date: Tue, 09 Jul 2002 17:53:57 +0100 Subject: Ecologist online debate on Oxfam's trade campaign Is Oxfam right to insist that increased access to Northern markets is a solution to the Third World's problems? Go to http://www.theecologist.org/ to join in the debate -- Chris Keene 90 The Parkway, Canvey Island, Essex SS8 0AE, England Tel 01268 682820 Fax 01268 514164 Mobile 07801 250982 -- From mstainsby at tao.ca Tue Jul 9 18:41:23 2002 From: mstainsby at tao.ca (Macdonald Stainsby) Date: Sat Aug 5 04:33:18 2006 Subject: [R-G] Israeli government adopts proposal to keep some rural communities Jewish only Message-ID: <010501c227aa$84bb82c0$291f5318@vc.shawcable.net> AP. 9 July 2002. Israeli government adopts proposal to keep some rural communities Jewish only. JERUSALEM -- The Israeli government has approved a proposal that would prevent Arab citizens of Israel from purchasing land in some rural communities, effectively restricting them to Jewish residents. The plan must still clear several hurdles in parliament, though it is considered likely to win approval. Meanwhile, liberal and moderate Israelis vowed Monday to fight the proposal, saying it amounts to discrimination. Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's coalition government adopted the plan at a Cabinet meeting Sunday, where it was backed by right-wing and religious parties. Dan Meridor, a minister who formerly belonged to Sharon's right-wing Likud party but has since moved to the political center, said if the law is passed it would be seen by Israel's enemies as proof that Zionism is racism, a charge made by some in the Arab and Muslim world. "Israel is the state of the Jewish people, but because it is a Jewish state it must not practice against its non-Jewish citizens the kind of discrimination to which Jews were subjected in the diaspora," Meridor told Israel Radio. Attorney General Elyakim Rubinstein strongly advised the Cabinet not to adopt the proposal on the grounds that it would deepen the rift between Jewish and Arab citizens of Israel, his spokesman Yaakov Galanty said. Arabs make up more than 1 million of Israel's 6.5 million citizens. Most Arabs and Jews live in separate communities although the cities of Jerusalem, Haifa and Acre are mixed. Many Arabs from Nazareth have rented or bought apartments in the neighboring Upper Nazareth unhindered, even though the government intended it to be a Jewish town. However, anyone wishing to move into a rural area that the government has designated as a "community settlement," has to be accepted by a reception committee. The Cabinet decision goes against a Supreme Court ruling in March 2000 that held that Adel Qaadan, an Israeli Arab, must be allowed to build his home in the Jewish community settlement of Katzir. He has been repeatedly rejected. That court decision overturned a 52-year-old state policy of restricting land sales to Arabs while building towns and villages for Jews all over the country. Despite the court ruling two years ago, Qaadan and his family have continued to be turned down when making applications to lease land in Katzir. Qaadan accused the local authority in Katzir of contempt of court. "Now they (the Cabinet ministers) have fanned the flames with this wretched decision - it is discrimination pure and simple," Qaadan told Israel Radio. However, Education Minister Limor Livnat, who submitted the proposal to the Cabinet, said all Israeli governments had supported the idea of achieving a Jewish majority in Galilee, where Katzir is located. Livnat, who belongs to the Likud party, said Katzir was founded for reasons of national security, with the express purpose of having a Jewish community in a predominantly Arab area, close to the border with the West Bank. The chairman of the local authority in Katzir, Dubi Sandrov, said that following the Supreme Court ruling two years ago, the Israeli Islamic movement has been encouraging Arabs to apply to move to Katzir. He said the Israel Lands Administration offers to lease plots for homes in Arab towns for as little as $1,000. Some Arabs are prepared to pay $80,000 for a plot in Katzir. Other Arabs offer to buy homes from Jewish residents in Katzir for double the going rate or more, he said. "There are (Arab) political elements that are trying to push the Jewish population out," he said. However some Israeli Arabs are attracted to Jewish areas because the schools, infrastructure and services are much better than in the underfunded Arab towns. Qaadan said he is willing to send his children to Jewish schools where the language of instruction is Hebrew, not Arabic. "My dream is to live as an equal among equals," he said. If the Cabinet proposal is submitted to parliament it will probably pass because the right wing and religious parties have a solid majority. However, the process of legislation could be long, and the legality of the Cabinet decision may also be challenged in the Supreme Court. ------------------------------------------- Macdonald Stainsby http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/rad-green http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/leninist-international -- In the contradiction lies the hope. --Bertholt Brecht From LAMZ at sympatico.ca Tue Jul 9 22:56:24 2002 From: LAMZ at sympatico.ca (Lysander Zimmerman) Date: Sat Aug 5 04:33:18 2006 Subject: [R-G] Officials Work on Quarantine Plans Message-ID: <027701c227ce$24ebbad0$33378d18@Indy1> ----- Original Message ----- From: "msswv123" To: Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 7:16 AM Subject: [Chem Trail Tracking USA] Re: OT "Experts" Urge Mass Vaccination for Smallpox Attack Hope everybody is praying....and got those immune systems in high gear..blessings T JULY 08, 18:40 ET Feds Prepare for Smallpox Quarantine By LAURA MECKLER Associated Press Writer http://www.newsday.com/news/health/ny-dsbelow2777934jul09.story ATLANTA (AP) - Federal health officials are quietly making plans for quarantining Americans who might be exposed to a highly contagious smallpox patient, addressing sensitive questions of how to hold people, ****possibly against their will****, in case of a bioterror attack. The planning, still in draft form, addresses complex logistical and policy questions, including where people would be kept while waiting for officials to confirm a smallpox case and, if necessary, administer vaccinations. ``It's not pretty to think through these type of doomsday scenarios, but it's important to start to put yourself there and imagine things unfolding if you want to anticipate how to react,'' said Dr. Marty Cetron, a quarantine expert at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. << http://www.newsday.com/news/health/ny-dsbelow2777934jul09.story? coll=ny%2Dhealth%2Dheadlines > > Full article here: > http://portland.indymedia.org:8081/front.php3? > article_id=14049&group=webcast > > ____________________________________________ > > Important further reading: > > http://portland.indymedia.org/archive/features/2002/06/2002- > 06.html#3901 > > http://portland.indymedia.org/front.php3? > article_id=13240&group=webcast ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~--> Free $5 Love Reading Risk Free! http://us.click.yahoo.com/TPvn8A/PfREAA/Ey.GAA/g6eqlB/TM ---------------------------------------------------------------------~-> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ From nick at faunusherbs.com Wed Jul 10 09:52:16 2002 From: nick at faunusherbs.com (Nicholas Morcinek) Date: Sat Aug 5 04:33:18 2006 Subject: [R-G] Officials Work on Quarantine Plans In-Reply-To: <027701c227ce$24ebbad0$33378d18@Indy1> Message-ID: <000501c22829$c4ede390$8c2ce2d1@faunusp41800> Reminds me of a very old proverb... "The thought is father to the deed" Take care all! Nicholas -----Original Message----- From: rad-green-admin@lists.econ.utah.edu [mailto:rad-green-admin@lists.econ.utah.edu] On Behalf Of Lysander Zimmerman Sent: Wednesday, July 10, 2002 12:56 AM To: 9/11 Inquiry Subject: [R-G] Officials Work on Quarantine Plans ----- Original Message ----- From: "msswv123" To: Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 7:16 AM Subject: [Chem Trail Tracking USA] Re: OT "Experts" Urge Mass Vaccination for Smallpox Attack Hope everybody is praying....and got those immune systems in high gear..blessings T JULY 08, 18:40 ET Feds Prepare for Smallpox Quarantine By LAURA MECKLER Associated Press Writer http://www.newsday.com/news/health/ny-dsbelow2777934jul09.story ATLANTA (AP) - Federal health officials are quietly making plans for quarantining Americans who might be exposed to a highly contagious smallpox patient, addressing sensitive questions of how to hold people, ****possibly against their will****, in case of a bioterror attack. The planning, still in draft form, addresses complex logistical and policy questions, including where people would be kept while waiting for officials to confirm a smallpox case and, if necessary, administer vaccinations. ``It's not pretty to think through these type of doomsday scenarios, but it's important to start to put yourself there and imagine things unfolding if you want to anticipate how to react,'' said Dr. Marty Cetron, a quarantine expert at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. << http://www.newsday.com/news/health/ny-dsbelow2777934jul09.story? coll=ny%2Dhealth%2Dheadlines > > Full article here: > http://portland.indymedia.org:8081/front.php3? > article_id=14049&group=webcast > > ____________________________________________ > > Important further reading: > > http://portland.indymedia.org/archive/features/2002/06/2002- > 06.html#3901 > > http://portland.indymedia.org/front.php3? > article_id=13240&group=webcast ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~--> Free $5 Love Reading Risk Free! http://us.click.yahoo.com/TPvn8A/PfREAA/Ey.GAA/g6eqlB/TM ---------------------------------------------------------------------~-> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ _______________________________________________ Rad-Green mailing list Rad-Green@lists.econ.utah.edu To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/rad-green From debsian at pacbell.net Wed Jul 10 15:34:51 2002 From: debsian at pacbell.net (michael pugliese) Date: Sat Aug 5 04:33:18 2006 Subject: [R-G] West Nile Virus Message-ID: <100702191.52489@webbox.com> Heh, Lysander, the Conspiracy Theory Research List, with the great graphic of The Star Spangled Octopus (calling Danny Casolaro!) this morning had story that said Saddaam Hussein set loose the West Nile Virus in the upper Northeast USA. Myself, I don't think so. Michael Pugliese From mstainsby at dojo.tao.ca Wed Jul 10 15:44:05 2002 From: mstainsby at dojo.tao.ca (Macdonald Stainsby) Date: Sat Aug 5 04:33:18 2006 Subject: [R-G] West Nile Virus In-Reply-To: <100702191.52489@webbox.com> Message-ID: <20020710214405.BFF6517DC3A@dojo.tao.ca> michael pugliese said: > > Heh, Lysander, the Conspiracy Theory Research List, with the > great graphic of The Star Spangled Octopus (calling Danny Casolaro!) > this morning had story that said Saddaam Hussein set loose the > West Nile Virus in the upper Northeast USA. Myself, I don't think > so. > Michael Pugliese Michael, you are just being a pain. Take each issue one at a time and deal with it exactly as such, don't flame people, and provide evidence not a bunch of inference designed merely to inflame. I won't kick you off for being a loser, I'll kick you off for blocking constructive debates. Do you have an explanation for the following: No planes went into the air in the hour between the crashes into the WTC and the Pentagon. The man who was responsible for defense got promoted (after Pearl Harbour, the same position-filler was fired). the government of the US has blocked any and all inquiry into what happened, citing "national security". They knew all the names of the hijackers and beamed them into out homes before lunch was cold on September 11th. The media tried, and failed, to get the Iraqi government indicted along with Al Qaeda and the Taliban. The Pakistani government was told (this was reported on the BBC) to watch for an attack on Afghanistan in October back in July, 2001- not after the planes hit. Hosni Mubarak has publically announced more than once that his government was raising red flags on the 9th. Since 9-11, the former conspiracists of the Iran Contra days have been not only rehabilitated, but given high ranking posts in the national security state (Otto Reich, among others). I'll stop there for now, but please no stupid innuendo. This is a serious list that wants to work to figure out these things in a respectful manner. You are obliged to do the same, or exit stage right. Macdonald moderator, Rad Green. From LAMZ at sympatico.ca Wed Jul 10 22:40:52 2002 From: LAMZ at sympatico.ca (Lysander Zimmerman) Date: Sat Aug 5 04:33:18 2006 Subject: [R-G] Ruppert/Chossudovsky Draw Crowd of 1,200 Message-ID: <000e01c22895$237d7d60$33378d18@Indy1> Ruppert/Chossudovsky Draw Crowd of 1,200This one is especially for you Michael Pugliese! ----- Original Message ----- From: Paul Grignon To: LifeboatNews Sent: Wednesday, July 10, 2002 11:09 AM Subject: Ruppert/Chossudovsky Draw Crowd of 1,200 An update from http://www.lifeboatnews.com If you do not wish to continue receiving these updates please reply to this e-mail and request to be removed from this list. Paul Grignon http://www.lifeboatnews.com http://www.paulgrignonart.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------- http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/g6b_calgary.html Ruppert/Chossudovsky Draw Crowd of 1,200 U. of Ottawa Professor Says Evidence Shows U.S. Helped Plan Attacks Ruppert Kicked Out of Canada -- But He Was Leaving Anyway U.S. COMPLICITY IN 9-11 ATTACKS WIDELY ACCEPTED AT G6B SUMMIT IN CANADA June 27, 2002, 16:00 PDT (FTW) -- An estimated crowd of 1,200 turned out on June 25 at the University of Calgary's MacEwan Hall to hear FTW Publisher Mike Ruppert and University of Ottawa Professor Michel Chossudovsky present evidence of and a rationale for U.S. government complicity in last September's terrorist attacks. (See photos at www.fromthewilderness.com). Their two-and-a- half-hour presentation, including documentary evidence, was greeted with a standing ovation. In a question and answer session after the lecture, not one audience member questioned that the Bush Administration needed the attacks in order to mobilize public support for a war to control Central Asian oil reserves and the cash from the Afghani opium trade. Traditionally, Afghanistan has been the world's largest producer of opium. The G6B -- standing for a global population of six billion people whose interests need to be balanced against the corporate interests of the industrialized world -- was a three-day event sponsored by, among others, the government of Canada, Amnesty International and the University of Calgary. It brought delegates and activists together from 60 countries. The counter summit was timed and located in Calgary, Alberta so as to juxtapose it with the G8 meeting in nearby Kananaskis of the world's eight largest industrialized nations starting on June 26. The first-ever joint presentation involving Ruppert and Chossudovsky, an economics professor, presented the strongest evidence to date that not only did the Bush Administration have complete foreknowledge of the attacks and allow them to happen, but also that the CIA had a direct hand in financing the attacks. Chossudovsky presented documentary evidence from ABC news, citing FBI sources, confirming a report that Gen. Mahmud Ahmad, then-chief of the Pakistani intelligence service (ISI), ordered for $100,000 to be wired to lead hijacker Mohammed Atta just weeks before the attacks. The new corroboration from U.S. media, using FBI sources, gave considerable weight to earlier press stories originating in India linking the ISI to 9/11. [These new revelations will be the subject of an upcoming story in FTW]. "General Ahmad arrived in Washington on Sept. 4 and met with, among others, his good friend [CIA Director] George Tenet, [Deputy Secretary of State] Richard Armitage, [Sen.] Joe Biden, [D-Del.,] and the heads of the two intelligence committees," Chossudovsky said. "To me the issue of foreknowledge is a red herring. Osama bin Laden is and remains to this day a CIA asset. Even now his Al Qaeda operatives are working with the Kosovo Liberation Army who are U.S. allies and with U.S.-backed forces in Macedonia. Members of Al Q'aeda have been protected as they moved into Kashmir where they are now fomenting conflict between India and Pakistan. "The evidence is becoming clearer every day that the U.S. government helped to plan and fund the Sept. 11 attacks," said Chossudovsky. In addition, Chossudovsky has uncovered what may be complicity on the part of the major media in hiding the smoking gun. Using transcripts from the Federal Records Service (FRS), Chossudovsky obtained the transcript of a question posed to National Security Adviser Condoleeza Rica at a May 16 press conference, in which she was asked if she had met with the "ISI chief" while he was in Washington. The CNN transcript of the event indicated that the words "ISI chief" were "inaudible" when, in fact, they were quite audible to the FRS. Rice's response was a troubled, "I have not seen that report, and he was certainly not meeting with me." Chossudovsky painted a broad picture of globalization pushing events toward a possible nuclear exchange between India and Pakistan by noting that one U.S. company with strong intelligence and military connections, MPRI of Vienna, Va., was acting as adviser to both governments. He also noted the strong links between CIA Director George Tenet and Deputy Secretary of State Armitage to the leaders of both countries. Chossudovsky also pointed out that George W. Bush receives daily "personal" intelligence briefings from the CIA Director -- a custom that has never previously been followed by any sitting president. Previously most CIA briefings have been delivered in written format. Ruppert, using new evidence of U.S. government foreknowledge disclosed by major media sources and through recent press conferences, established that by using only open source material, the U.S. government had warnings that multiple airliners, most likely from United and American Air Lines would be hijacked during the week of Sept. 9 and crashed into the twin towers. Using revelations of intelligence intercepts and a Pentagon drill responding to an attack from a hijacked airliner staged prior to Sept. 11, Ruppert established that the Bush Administration's position, which held it had no hint that aircraft would be used as weapons, was false. Pointing to last year's G8 summit in Genoa, Italy, Ruppert noted that extensive precautions had been taken there (including anti-aircraft guns) to prevent just such an attack. A Los Angeles Times story disclosed that President Bush was the target of the suspected attacks in Genoa. "Bush ought to be having some interesting conversations with the leaders of Italy, Germany, France and Russia since it was their intelligence services who forwarded detailed advance warnings to the CIA throughout the summer of 2001," said Ruppert. "And they referred specifically to suicide attacks with airliners." Ruppert also debunked the notions that the 9-11 attacks were caused by a lack of cooperation between agencies, and that great numbers of people would have had to be involved in the U.S. end of the operation. Citing a BBC TV report by Gregg Palast which showed an FBI report stating that the Bush administration had ordered the FBI to curtail investigations into bin Laden relatives, Ruppert demonstrated that orders were coming from levels above FBI and CIA leadership. Additionally, referring to the recent memorandum from FBI Special Agent Colleen Rowley and a press conference given by FBI Special Agent Robert Wright, Ruppert popped the government's position that somehow the so-called intelligence "failures" of 9-11 were the result of negligence. "If you look at the text of Rowley's message and listen to what Wright said at his press conference you hear and see words like, Oobstruct,' O deliberately thwart,' Ointimidate,' Oblock,' Oharass,' Odishonest,' Orewrite,' Oomit,' Oundermine,' Osuppress,' Opunish,' Oretaliate' and Oprevent.' These are not words describing negligence. These are words describing deliberate and willful actions. "And if you note from both the Rowley memo, and apparently from the Wright press conference, it was only one supervisory special agent at FBI headquarters who did all of the deliberate work to stop investigations that could have prevented the attacks. And what did Rowley tell us? Right after Sept. 11 the agent who had blocked the investigations was promoted!" The $64,000 question remains unanswered: Was the agent in Rowley's case also involved in blocking Wright's Chicago-based investigations into money-laundering for terrorist groups, including Al Qaeda? In any event, the Rowley memorandum proves that just a few officials in key positions could have carried out the 9-11 conspiracy successfully. LEAVING ANYWAY BUT KICKED OUT JUST THE SAME -- A CLOSE ENCOUNTER WITH AIR FORCE ONE On entering Canada Ruppert was questioned first by Canadian Customs officials and then by immigration officers. Upon learning that Ruppert was a journalist and publisher of FTW the immigration officer typed Ruppert's name into a computer and asked specifically if he was going near the G8 conference. Ruppert stated that he was only planning on attending the G6B conference and had plans to return to Los Angeles on June 25. Nonetheless, the immigration officer stamped Ruppert's passport with a visa dated to expire on June 26, requiring that he not be in the country when the conference began. This highly unusual practice was offensive to many Canadians who pointed out that there are no visa requirements between the two countries. After the lecture, as he was hurrying to the airport, Ruppert was questioned by the local press who photographed his passport as evidence of the Canadian government's desire to censor coverage and public access to the conference. Ruppert's departure coincided with the arrival of President George Bush and two identical 747 aircraft painted with Air Force One markings. He was able to photograph the arrival of the president and a heavy deployment of support and security aircraft. Ruppert's flight home was delayed by more than an hour. He returned safely to Los Angeles while his suitcase was forced to spend the night in San Francisco. The Calgary lecture was Ruppert's eighth stop in a month in his "Truth and Lies of 9-11" lecture series. He plans to spend the next six weeks working on new stories. Michael Chossudovsky's website is at www.globalresearch.ca From debsian at pacbell.net Thu Jul 11 00:58:55 2002 From: debsian at pacbell.net (Michael Pugliese) Date: Sat Aug 5 04:33:18 2006 Subject: [R-G] Re: west nile virus In-Reply-To: <18b.a779883.2a5e0626@aol.com> Message-ID: <5VR8D725ZFWQSPD0HENK0YT64SN.3d2d2caf@oemcomputer> Heh, this isn't a computer virus! http://directory.google.com/Top/Health/Conditions_and_Diseases/Infecti ous_Diseases/Viral/West_Nile_Virus/ M.P. 7/10/02 2:50:30 PM, Malky53@aol.com wrote: > > > Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2002 17:50:30 -0400 (EDT) > > From: Malky53@aol.com > Subject:west nile virus > To: debsian@pacbell.net > > > > symantec does not even list a west nile virus From debsian at pacbell.net Thu Jul 11 01:16:28 2002 From: debsian at pacbell.net (Michael Pugliese) Date: Sat Aug 5 04:33:18 2006 Subject: [R-G] Re: Re: West Nile Virus Message-ID: Click the archive on the tentacle of the AmeriKKKan Octopus! http://www.ctrl.org/graphicHome/CTRLhome.html Some pieces of interest on the Conspiracy Theory Research List! [CTRL] Fwd: [NewPacifica] The Indiscreet Charm of the Bush- Nazi Web ... , potentially genocidal vaccines and sprays. One example is malathion, used recently in New York City and vicinity to (presumably) control the West Nile virus. For Lederman, the project of genocide through eugenics reaches its apogee in the Human Genome Project, designed to enable realization of the ... http://www.mail-archive.com/ctrl@listserv.aol.com/msg93495.html 07/02/02, 45962 bytes [CTRL] Fwd: [CIA-DRUGS] Re: FTW Economic Alert - Global Economic Collapse Imminent, Pension Fund [CTRL] Fwd: RE: [CIA-DRUGS] Re: RUPPERT'S VIEW, RoadsEnd [CTRL] EMPEROR'S CLOTHES INTERVIEWS UNOCAL OIL, Steve Wingate [CTRL] ritual crimes, Gore Vidal on the US, Smart News [CTRL] A Golden Era for Iraqi Kurds, William Shannon [CTRL] CHENEY SUED PERSONALLY FOR ALLEGED STOCK FRAUD, William Shannon [CTRL] Fisk: Threat To Liberty From New Fundamentalism, William Shannon Re: [CTRL] Fisk: Threat To Liberty From New Fundamentalism, thew Re: [CTRL] Fisk: Threat To Liberty From New Fundamentalism, InfoWarz Re: [CTRL] Fisk: Threat To Liberty From New Fundamentalism, thew Re: [CTRL] Fisk: Threat To Liberty From New Fundamentalism, InfoWarz Re: [CTRL] Fisk: Threat To Liberty From New Fundamentalism, thew Re: [CTRL] Fisk: Threat To Liberty From New Fundamentalism, InfoWarz Re: [CTRL] Fisk: Threat To Liberty From New Fundamentalism, Joshua Tinnin Re: [CTRL] Fisk: Threat To Liberty From New Fundamentalism, thew Re: [CTRL] Fisk: Threat To Liberty From New Fundamentalism, InfoWarz Re: [CTRL] Fisk: Threat To Liberty From New Fundamentalism, thew Re: [CTRL] Fisk: Threat To Liberty From New Fundamentalism, InfoWarz Re: [CTRL] Fisk: Threat To Liberty From New Fundamentalism, William Shannon [CTRL] Gore Vidal: America, Land of the Wannabe Slaves, William Shannon From hunterbadbear at earthlink.net Thu Jul 11 09:56:16 2002 From: hunterbadbear at earthlink.net (Hunter Gray) Date: Sat Aug 5 04:33:18 2006 Subject: [R-G] Blood Over The Copper Skies [We Never Forget] Message-ID: <002e01c228f3$80e0df20$0b70fa43@intel> Note by Hunterbear: A portion of this is taken from our large radical website, Lair of Hunterbear: www.hunterbear.org This is July, going on August. And all through these days -- hot and dry, as we fight in the Great Contemporary Struggle, there are things that we -- Indians, metal miners, radicals, Arizonians, Westerners -- always remember. Some of those things are truly hideous. And some are the epitome of great courage and honor -- and martyrdom. Let's start this off with the Wobblies. The Industrial Workers of the World. The IWW was founded in 1905, primarily through the efforts of the radical, frontier hard-rock (metal) miners' union -- the Western Federation of Miners and its vigorous, visionary leadership: William D. "Big Bill" Haywood, Vincent St. John, Father Thomas Hagerty and many, many others. Its philosophy, almost from the outset, came to be a uniquely frontier American variety of syndicalism -- the primacy of democratic revolutionary unions in effecting systemic change and administering the new cooperative society. In a very real sense, the IWW was the first homegrown American revolutionary movement since 1775: fearless, hard-driving, visionary -- and the epitome of grassroots democracy reaching out to all workers, unskilled as well as skilled, regardless of race or ethnicity or gender. And one of its major spokespersons and organizers was Frank H. Little, born of a "Quaker father" and a Cherokee Indian mother, in Indian Territory [later Oklahoma] in 1879, a metal miner who became chairman of the General Executive Board of the IWW and was lynched at Butte on August 1 1917 by thugs employed by Anaconda Copper. Tough and hard-fighting, Frank Little was a sworn foe of capitalism and an outspoken opponent of the World War. The lynching of Frank Little was in the context of very widespread, prolonged, and extraordinarily bloody and brutal repression levied against the IWW by company gunmen, state and local "lawmen," vigilantes, and then increasingly by the Federal Government. This was strike-breaking and union-busting wrapped up in the hypocritical cloth of a phony World War I "patriotism." Frank Little's murder was preceded, for example, by the "Loyalty League" deportation of almost 100 Wobbly copper strike activists at the rugged mountain town of Jerome, Arizona (southwest of Flagstaff) on July 10 1917. They were dumped in the California desert without food or water and were next forced back into Arizona at gun-point by a California sheriff's posse -- and then imprisoned at Prescott, Arizona. This operation was directed by the United Verde Copper Company. On July 12, at Bisbee, Arizona (on the Mexican border), a very large, so-called "Loyalty League" rounded up 1200 IWW-led copper strikers (not counting three that they killed), loaded them onto cattle cars, and dumped them into the desert near Columbus, New Mexico, without food or water. All of this was carried out under the direction of the Phelps-Dodge Copper Corporation. And all of these events and others are still very much a part of the living, blood-dimmed legacy of labor relations in the Western hard-rock metal mining industry -- an industry characterized consistently by the utter recalcitrance of the mine owners and managers. One of Frank Little's closest friends was Ralph H. Chaplin, IWW editor and poet and author of the primary American labor anthem, "Solidarity Forever." In his colorful and fast-moving memoir, Wobbly: The Rough and Tumble Story of an American Radical (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1948), Chaplin recounts his last visit with Frank Little during an IWW General Executive Board meeting at Chicago that fateful summer of 1917: "Frank Little was the first to arrive. This time he was on crutches. One leg was in a plaster cast. There had been an automobile accident in Jerome, Arizona, where he had been directing I.W.W. organization in the copper mines of the Southwest. But Frank wore his Stetson at the same jaunty angle, and his twisted grin was as aggressive as ever. . .Frank was leaving that day for Butte, Montana, to direct the organizational drive on Anaconda Hill. I marveled at his courage at taking on a difficult and dangerous assignment like that in his present condition. "It's a fine specimen the I.W.W. is sending into that tough town," I chided him. "One leg, one eye, two crutches -- and no brains!" Frank laughed. He lifted a crutch as though to crown me with it. "Don't worry, fellow-worker, all we're going to need from now on is guts." That was the last time I saw Frank Little alive." My youngest son, Peter, a born newspaperman, was running the Anaconda MT office of the Butte-based Montana Standard a few years ago. Thanks to him I have a copy of Frank Little's death certificate issued by Silver Bow County. Among other things, it notes his age [38], his birthplace [Oklahoma], occupation [Labor Organizer], and cause of death: "Strangulation from Hanging. Homicidal". The document indicates that the personal information was provided by the Miners Union, Butte. Thanks also to Pete, I have a copy of the August 2 edition of The Butte Miner. Its front page, framed in glass, hangs now on our dining room wall. And here are some of the things it told its world on the very grim morn of August 2, 1917: ARMED VIGILANTES LYNCH I.W.W. LEADER [Big, banner headline] Frank Little, First Lieutenant Of W.D. Haywood, Surprised And Overpowered In His Room And Hanged From Trestle On Outskirts Of The City File photo of Frank Little [wearing his Stetson] LITTLE'S DEATH CAUSES GRIEF TO I.W.W. OFFICER [W.D. Haywood says victim of vigilantes was an earnest and active worker in the interests of the laborer.] FIVE OF SEVEN MEN WHO FORMED LYNCHING PARTY ARE KNOWN, SAYS LAWYER MAYOR AFTER THE LYNCHERS ACT BRANDED AS DEVILISH Miners Tobacco Fund LAST WIRE FLASHES Leadville Strike Over I.W.W.s to Work in Montana and North and South Dakota [harvest stiffs] Miners Will Be Protected [Lt. Colonel George P. White on protecting scabs in the Globe/Miami (Arizona) Copper District] Frank Little's funeral at Butte was the largest ever held in Montana. I have a photo of the funeral procession which is eerily similar to ours in Jackson in June, '63 when 6,000 of us marched in 102 degree heat through the city -- in Mississippi's first "legal" civil rights march in history -- immediately following the massive funeral of murdered Medgar Evers on Lynch Street. No one was ever arrested for Frank Little's murder -- nor was anyone punished for their role in kidnapping and killing and deporting striking miners at Jerome and Bisbee. All of the perpetrators were well known. Jerome, as I've indicated, is close to my home town of Flagstaff, and down in the Verde Valley country, on the slope of Mingus Mountain. A tough old copper miner-turned-barber over there, Markovitch, used to cut my hair in the latter '50s. Always so pleased to see me, a very hot-eyed Red in my early 20s, he consistently gave me, as he clip-clipped along, the same running talk on Revolution. Brother Markovitch had been a Jerome deportee. And he never forgot. In early September, 1917, the liberal Woodrow Wilson administration finally acted -- not on behalf, of course, of the massively victimized American working class. Its Justice Department agents, using the spurious Federal "Espionage Act" -- which had nothing to do with "espionage" and everything to do with labor militancy and anti-War positions -- rounded up 150 major IWW leaders. [And then, of course, Gene Debs was arrested as well.] The Wobblies and Debs et al. were speedily convicted in an atmosphere of extreme fear and hysteria. In due course, they were pardoned by the conservative Warren Harding. By that time, most Western states and a few others had passed the infamous "criminal syndicalism" acts making membership in the IWW or even possession of its "Little Red Songbook: Songs to Fan the Flames of Discontent" a felony offense. Hundreds of IWWs were imprisoned across the West. [Idaho's all-encompassing "criminal syndicalism" statute remains on the books to this day. Mississippi passed one back in our civil rights days -- but, apparently, never enforced it. [I, myself, arrested there on many charges and targeted by injunctions [which we defied], was indicted by a county grand jury on "inciting to riot" charges -- first cousin, anyway, of "criminal syndicalism."] Woodrow Wilson, who supervised one of the country's most infamous witch-hunts, died early-on, in 1924. He left office in 1921 but, before he did, he toured Seattle. There he was greeted by cheering throngs -- until, suddenly, dead silence for block after block after block. His motorcade had entered the working-class district where hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of IWWs lined the streets, arms folded and eyes stony-cold. They say an ashen Wilson slumped deep into his seat, eyes staring directly downward -- block after block after block. The IWW survived, kept fighting. In 1949, the IWW -- its philosophy unchanged -- was designated "subversive" by the United States Attorney General and placed on his infamous Red Scare "subversive list." And the IWW continues to fight. And so do many, many others valiantly fight on -- individuals and outfits -- in our present era so increasingly similar to Other Great And Infamous Witch-Hunts: World War I/Red Scare and the very prolonged Red Scare of the Cold War. In a long and stirring memorial poem always contained in the editions of the old-time Wobblies' Red Song Books, Phillips Russell concluded: "We'll remember you, Frank Little! The papers said: "So far as known, He made no outcry." No, not you! Half Indian, half white man, All I.W.W. You'd have died a thousand deaths Before you'd have cried aloud Or whimpered once to let them enjoy your pain. We'll remember you, Frank Little! Long after the workers have made the world Safe for Labor, We'll repeat your name And remember that you died for us. The red flag that you dropped A million hands will carry on; The cause that you loved A million tongues will voice. Good bye, Frank Little! Indian, white man, Wobbly true, Valiant soldier of the great Red Army, We'll remember you!" ["IWW Songs To Fan The Flames Of Discontent" 1930 edition] Since 1955, a photo of Frank Little has always been on the wall of wherever I live. It's always joined by an excellent sketch of Joseph Brant [Thayendanegea], Mohawk leader, watching his warriors burning out the settlers in the Cherry Valley section of New York -- a sketch my father gave me when I was still jailed in my crib. A photo of John Reed, at his typewriter, has joined them. We fight on. Always have, always will. It's the same fight for all of us on the Side of the Sun. And, as the old Western Wobblies always put it so well, "It's better to be called Red than be called Yellow." Fraternally And In Solidarity - Hunter Gray [Hunterbear] www.hunterbear.org (strawberry socialism) Protected by Na?shdo?i?ba?i? From mstainsby at tao.ca Thu Jul 11 12:52:27 2002 From: mstainsby at tao.ca (Macdonald Stainsby) Date: Sat Aug 5 04:33:18 2006 Subject: [R-G] Barghouti to be tried Message-ID: <012001c2290c$1a3c48e0$291f5318@vc.shawcable.net> Reuters; AP. 11 July 2002. Barghouti to be tried in connection with attacks on Israelis. JERUSALEM -- Israel plans to put a prominent Palestinian, Marwan Barghouti, on trial soon in connection with deadly attacks on Israelis, a Justice Ministry spokesman said Thursday. The trial would be the first in years of a senior Palestinian in Israel. Barghouti, one of the most visible Palestinian leaders in the 21-month uprising against Israel, was arrested in April in the West Bank city of Ramallah during an Israeli incursion. He had not been charged. Justice spokesman Yaakov Galanti said Israel intended to try Barghouti together with four other Palestinians in civilian court because of their connection "to several attacks in Israel" -- as opposed to attacks carried out in the West Bank. Some of the four could be charged in the coming days, but charges against Barghouti are only likely in a few weeks, he said. In placing Barghouti, a key leader of Arafat's Fatah movement in the West Bank, on trial, Israel is apparently hoping to prove the complicity at the highest levels of the Palestinian leadership in terror attacks against its civilians. But the tactic could also backfire, turning Barghouti into a symbol of Israeli oppression and further increasing his popularity among Palestinians. Barghouti was often present at Palestinian street protests in the early days of the Palestinian uprising, which began in September 2000, where he delivered impassioned speeches on confronting the Israeli forces. Barghouti was gradually drawn into involvement in attacks, first defending them, then funneling funds to militants, and finally orchestrating them with the approval of Arafat, said a senior Israeli security official, who spoke on condition of anonymity. His lawyer, Jawad Boulos, has denied the claim. On Thursday, Boulos said Barghouti did not care what kind of trial Israel carried out. "Israel has no right to try him in front of a civil or military court, and we are not going to cooperate with the court," he said. "Israel will build charges around whatever it wants. We don't recognize them and we won't recognize this trial," he said. The 42-year-old Bargouthi, whose lawyer said he began a hunger strike on Thursday to protest against jail conditions, has denied the allegations, maintaining that he is a political leader resisting Israeli occupation. "We have said we do not recognize his detention and so we will not deal with any court, civilian or military," Boulos told Reuters. "I see no significance in turning him over to a civilian court. Israel is saying the move will allow an open and public trial with better legal conditions. This could be done in military courts, too," he said. "It's a weak pretext, and an admission by Israel that its military (detention) system is not fair." Barghouthi had begun refusing food after his request for another cell in a Jerusalem-area prison was refused. "He is locked in a small cell with five other inmates. It is very hot and full of insects," Boulos said. He told Reuters Barghouthi had been repeatedly threatened and deprived of sleep. In a recent public opinion survey he emerged as second in popularity only to Arafat himself. ------------------------------------------- Macdonald Stainsby http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/rad-green http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/leninist-international -- In the contradiction lies the hope. --Bertholt Brecht From mstainsby at dojo.tao.ca Thu Jul 11 13:52:58 2002 From: mstainsby at dojo.tao.ca (Macdonald Stainsby) Date: Sat Aug 5 04:33:18 2006 Subject: [R-G] Former Yugoslav President Is Taken by Force to Testify Message-ID: <20020711195258.3673B17DC99@dojo.tao.ca> AP. 11 July 2002. Former Yugoslav President Is Taken by Force to Testify Before U.N. Tribunal. BELGRADE -- Former Yugoslav President Zoran Lilic was detained Thursday and flown to the Netherlands to testify in the U.N. war crimes trial of his successor, Slobodan Milosevic, Lilic's lawyer and wife said. Lilic - the country's figurehead president from 1993 to 1997 - had refused a subpoena from the U.N. tribunal, based in The Hague, so police forced him onto the plane, according to his lawyer, Dragan Saponjic. "Mr. Lilic refused to testify before the court," Saponjic told The Associated Press. Lilic's wife Ljubica, sobbing when reached by telephone by reporters, said her husband was picked up in his office in Belgrade. "Zoran refused to sign anything," when presented with the official request to testify before the U.N. war crimes court. "Then they took him away," she said. The time of his arrival in the Netherlands was not immediately known. War crimes prosecutors have said they would call former members of Milosevic's inner circle to testify in his trial on charges of genocide and crimes against humanity in three Balkan wars during the 1990s. Saponjic said Lilic had previously considered testifying voluntarily before the U.N. court on condition that Yugoslav officials first release him from the duty to keep state secrets in court or elsewhere. "But no steps were taken to prepare legal conditions for my client's appearance in court," Saponjic said. Officials of the Yugoslav and Serbian governments declined comment. -- Macdonald Stainsby, External Relations Co-ordinator, Douglas College Students Union. ** In the contradiction lies the hope. --Bertholt Brecht. *** "`Order rules in Berlin.' You stupid lackeys! Your `order' is built on sand. Tomorrow the revolution will rear ahead once more and announce to your horror amid the brass of trumpets: `I was, I am, I always will be!'" -Rosa Luxemburg, 1918. From mstainsby at dojo.tao.ca Thu Jul 11 14:14:05 2002 From: mstainsby at dojo.tao.ca (Macdonald Stainsby) Date: Sat Aug 5 04:33:18 2006 Subject: [R-G] Venezuelan [Quisling]s Demand Chavez's Ouster Message-ID: <20020711201405.ECC3817DC9B@dojo.tao.ca> This story was very briefly linked to by the NYtimes all the way back in their AP wire extra links....but it has been removed already. For that reason, as well as others, I post it in full. Macdonald http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/international/AP-Venezuela-Protest.html Venezuelans Demand Chavez's Ouster By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS Filed at 3:22 p.m. ET CARACAS, Venezuela (AP) -- Dissonance from whistles, drums, horns and fireworks accompanied more than a half million Venezuelans who clogged downtown Caracas Thursday demanding President Hugo Chavez's ouster. Laborers and business executives, leftists and conservatives chanted ``Out! Out!'' in an 8-mile-long march underscoring the political divisions gripping this South American nation, a top supplier of oil to the United States. Caracas police chief Emigdio Delgado estimated the crowd at 600,000. Chavez, who was ousted April 12 but restored to power two days later, earlier appealed for calm. Thursday's march was the fifth, and perhaps the largest, since the April coup and followed a peacemaking mission this week by former President Carter. ``The turnout surpassed all our expectations -- maybe even bigger than April 11,'' Miranda state Gov. Enrique Mendoza said. Carter's efforts were rebuffed by Chavez's opposition, though Carter did persuade Chavez to accept international mediation in Venezuela's political crisis. Thursday's march was called by opposition groups commemorating the shooting deaths of 18 people by guardsmen and civilians during an April 11 protest. Hundreds more were wounded. The violence and Chavez's order to deploy the army prompted dissident generals to oust him the next day. But the leftist Chavez was restored to power in two days on a popular rebellion against an interim government that abolished the constitution. Dozens died during that weekend of rioting and looting. Investigations into who committed the April slayings have stalled. After the coup, Chavez removed unpopular ministers from his Cabinet and offered to change laws opposed by the private sector. International observers, including Carter Center delegates, monitored Thursday's demonstration. National guard troops and riot police manned barricades to keep demonstrators away from Chavez supporters and the presidential palace, hoping to avoid bloodshed. Opponents insist Chavez, a former paratrooper who staged a failed 1992 coup and was elected in 1998, cannot govern the country, which is mired in recession because of low oil prices and political instability. Venezuela's main opposition parties demand Chavez leave power well before the 2007 end of his term. They have brought court cases alleging corruption, are organizing a referendum on his rule and are demanding justice for the April 11 victims. ``We are on a war footing,'' said Carlos Ortega, head of Venezuela's largest labor group, the 1 million-member Venezuelan Workers Confederation. Ortega was surrounded by protest signs reading ``No More Deaths'' and ``Chavez, Assassin.'' Ortega, Greater Caracas Mayor Alfredo Pena and other organizers were incensed that the government prevented marchers from going to the palace, which is heavily defended by Chavez supporters. ``We decided to change the route because we have evidence that violent groups were posted near the palace,'' rights activist Elias Santana said. Jose Saldana, an unemployed 35-year-old Chavez supporter, said, ``Let them come, because they will find a people ready to give their lives for their revolution.'' Chavez appealed Wednesday for ``calm, prudence and patience. ... My government respects human rights, and I'm sure that there won't be anything to regret (Thursday) and democracy will be strengthened.'' Army commander Gen. Julio Garcia Montoya said troops were on standby in their barracks. Chavez said Wednesday he would accept an offer by the Organization of American States to help defuse Venezuela's crisis. -- Macdonald Stainsby, External Relations Co-ordinator, Douglas College Students Union. ** In the contradiction lies the hope. --Bertholt Brecht. *** "`Order rules in Berlin.' You stupid lackeys! Your `order' is built on sand. Tomorrow the revolution will rear ahead once more and announce to your horror amid the brass of trumpets: `I was, I am, I always will be!'" -Rosa Luxemburg, 1918. From debsian at pacbell.net Thu Jul 11 16:04:53 2002 From: debsian at pacbell.net (michael pugliese) Date: Sat Aug 5 04:33:18 2006 Subject: [R-G] Chossudovsky Message-ID: <110702192.54284@webbox.com> Among other criticisms, Harald Beyer-Arneson, an anarcho-communist makes of Michel C. is his citation of far right canadian loon, John Whitely, of the, "New World Order Intelligence, " Website. On the UFO'ology radio talk show hosted by Jeff Rense, last time i listened to him w/Whitely, he raved about The Illuminati. http://www.csf.colorado.edu/mail/pen-l/apr99/msg02924.html Michael Pugliese From debsian at pacbell.net Thu Jul 11 16:09:05 2002 From: debsian at pacbell.net (michael pugliese) Date: Sat Aug 5 04:33:18 2006 Subject: [R-G] RE: Chossudovsky Message-ID: <110702192.54545@webbox.com> Just tried that URL. Some server glitch. Go to http://www.google.com type in, "pen-l csf, " the critique of Chossudovsky will come right up in the first set of, "hits, " on google. M.P.--- Original Message --- >From: "michael pugliese" >To: rad-green@lists.econ.utah.edu >Date: 7/11/02 3:04:44 PM > Among other criticisms, Harald Beyer-Arneson, an anarcho-communist makes of Michel C. is his citation of far right canadian loon, John Whitely, of the, "New World Order Intelligence, " Website. On the UFO'ology radio talk show hosted by Jeff Rense, last time i listened to him w/Whitely, he raved about The Illuminati.http://www.csf.colorado.edu/mail/pen-l/apr99/msg02924.htmlMichael Pugliese > From LAMZ at sympatico.ca Thu Jul 11 20:32:12 2002 From: LAMZ at sympatico.ca (Lysander Zimmerman) Date: Sat Aug 5 04:33:18 2006 Subject: [R-G] Justice Department to Attempt Shut Down of 9/11 Evidence Message-ID: <004501c2294c$55c851c0$33378d18@Indy1> On June 20, Bush Administration officials quietly informed a New York judge of their intention to commence legal actions...to control access to all evidence and documents related to all private litigation...regarding the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 -- citing grave national security concerns as their motivation. Full Story: http://indymedia.org:8081/front.php3?article_id=191632&group=webcast From LAMZ at sympatico.ca Thu Jul 11 20:50:37 2002 From: LAMZ at sympatico.ca (Lysander Zimmerman) Date: Sat Aug 5 04:33:18 2006 Subject: [R-G] Chossudovsky References: <110702192.54284@webbox.com> Message-ID: <009301c2294e$e6e30220$33378d18@Indy1> So what's the big deal???? Rense.com deals with EVERYTHING that the mainstream press won't cover. SO WHAT if it also deals with UFO'logy!?!? Man you are small-minded. Just because there are articles about UFO's (let us be reminded that UFO's literally stand for "UNIDENTIFIED flying objects" and very well could be experimental aircraft -- the first sightings of the F-117A were described as "spacecraft") does not mean that the site is void of useful information. In fact, it is full of it. If you are willing to step out of your established-left bubble for five minutes to explore it, you would come o the same conclusions. By the way, if you haven't noticed, Chomsky frequently quotes right-wing sources to back up his arguments. I guess he is a right-wing conspiratorialist as well!! Also, anyone can label themselves "anarcho-communist" without truly understanding that the struggle against capitalism in NOT one-dimensional and sectarian. I might not totally agree with Chossudovsky's politics, nor do I totally agree with Chomsky's political vision (especially his post-9/11 analysis), but they are both still valuable resources in our fight for human liberation from the technofascist monopoly-capitalist system. ----- Original Message ----- From: "michael pugliese" To: Sent: Thursday, July 11, 2002 6:04 PM Subject: [R-G] Chossudovsky > > > Among other criticisms, Harald Beyer-Arneson, an anarcho-communist > makes of Michel C. is his citation of far right canadian loon, > John Whitely, of the, "New World Order Intelligence, " Website. > On the UFO'ology radio talk show hosted by Jeff Rense, last time > i listened to him w/Whitely, he raved about The Illuminati. > http://www.csf.colorado.edu/mail/pen-l/apr99/msg02924.html > Michael Pugliese > > > > _______________________________________________ > Rad-Green mailing list > Rad-Green@lists.econ.utah.edu > To change your options or unsubscribe go to: > http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/rad-green > From mstainsby at tao.ca Thu Jul 11 20:11:02 2002 From: mstainsby at tao.ca (Macdonald Stainsby) Date: Sat Aug 5 04:33:18 2006 Subject: [R-G] FARC cooperates with ELN Message-ID: <010401c22949$5f713000$291f5318@vc.shawcable.net> Reuters. 11 July 2002. Colombian mountain clashes claim at least 35 lives. BOGOTA -- Mountain clashes in northeast and southwest Colombia have claimed 35 lives, the army said on Thursday, with Marxist rebels, Colombian troops and civilians added to the growing body count of the country's 38-year guerrilla war. The heaviest combat took place near the town of La Plata, in southwestern Huila Province, with 17 leftist guerrillas killed in clashes with government soldiers. In a battle in the northeast, 14 soldiers were killed in ongoing fighting that began on Tuesday. Colombian jets bombed rebel positions more than 9,850 feet (3,000 meters) above sea level, some 185 miles (300 km) northeast of Colombia's capital, Bogota, the commander of the army's first brigade, Gen. Fabio Bedoya, told reporters. Bedoya said his soldiers were fighting a combined contingent from the country's two largest leftist rebel armies, the Marxist-inspired Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, known by its Spanish initials FARC, and the Cuban-inspired National Liberation Arm, or ELN. The 17,000-member FARC and the 5,000-member ELN have increasingly joined forces to stave off incursions by the army and far-right paramilitary outlaws, who are funded by the drug trade and wealthy cattle-ranchers to kill leftist rebels. In the mountains of Huila province, south of Bogota, guerrilla fighters attacked a police station in the small town of Maito with gas-cylinder bombs, grenades and gunfire, laying waste to several buildings and killing two police officers and two civilians, the army said. It was possible that more dead and injured were buried in the rubble. ------------------------------------------- Macdonald Stainsby http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/rad-green http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/leninist-international -- In the contradiction lies the hope. --Bertholt Brecht From jmarshal at ol.com.au Fri Jul 12 06:28:48 2002 From: jmarshal at ol.com.au (Jon Marshall) Date: Sat Aug 5 04:33:18 2006 Subject: [R-G] Chossudovsky References: <110702192.54284@webbox.com> Message-ID: <3D2ECB80.1C747435@ol.com.au> I may be missing the point, but how does someone having some crazy views mean they can't ever be correct. And how does the existence of crazy conspiracy theories lead us to conclude that all conspiracy theories are crazy? Did not Lenin and Co. conspire to establish communism in Russia? Didn't they succeed in having an effect? How come its inherently impossible for the powerful to also conspire against everyone else? Now as it happens I don't hink Bush had to go to anything like the lengths of planning the attack on Sept 11 himself, to get a state of continual war, and to get his policies legitimated, but that does not mean that it is impossible, that someone in the US state thought otherwise. There is an important question about how we act, and it might be the case that as we (say) don't understand chemtrails we should not bother about them and get on with the real action. but, if Lysander will forgive me putting words in his mouth, the people in his area may not be about to strike against capitalism, but they might distrust the government, and they might worry about chemtrails, and it might be useful as leading on to other things.. the right manages to work together with all kinds of conflicting beliefs as long as they support established power, but the left always seems to splinter. The question perhaps should be what do we do? what are we aiming at? jon michael pugliese wrote: > > Among other criticisms, Harald Beyer-Arneson, an anarcho-communist > makes of Michel C. is his citation of far right canadian loon, > John Whitely, of the, "New World Order Intelligence, " Website. > On the UFO'ology radio talk show hosted by Jeff Rense, last time > i listened to him w/Whitely, he raved about The Illuminati. > http://www.csf.colorado.edu/mail/pen-l/apr99/msg02924.html > Michael Pugliese > > _______________________________________________ > Rad-Green mailing list > Rad-Green@lists.econ.utah.edu > To change your options or unsubscribe go to: > http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/rad-green From LAMZ at sympatico.ca Fri Jul 12 15:58:51 2002 From: LAMZ at sympatico.ca (Lysander Zimmerman) Date: Sat Aug 5 04:33:18 2006 Subject: [R-G] WHO IS DICK CHENEY? Message-ID: <000d01c229ef$5010dc40$33378d18@Indy1> WHO IS DICK CHENEY? ----- Original Message ----- From: Paul Grignon To: LifeboatNews Sent: Friday, July 12, 2002 4:37 PM Subject: WHO IS DICK CHENEY? An update from http://www.lifeboatnews.com If you do not wish to continue receiving these updates please reply to this e-mail and request to be removed from this list. Paul Grignon http://www.lifeboatnews.com http://www.paulgrignonart.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------- http://www.moveon.org WHO IS DICK CHENEY? MoveOn Bulletin Thursday, July 11, 2002 Edited by Eli Pariser (eli.pariser@moveon.org) Subscribe online at: http://www.moveon.org/moveonbulletin INTRODUCTION: MAN OF MYSTERY "Cheney and Bush want privacy for their conversations, but not for anyone else's." --Tony Mauro in USA Today, Feb. 27, 2002 Since September 11, Vice President Dick Cheney has kept a low profile. For months, he rarely appeared at all, emerging only to sell his political ideas on CNN or to dismiss allegations of corporate wrongdoing. Even now, Cheney mostly stays in a "secure location," ready to spring into action if President Bush is attacked. Unlike most politicians, Cheney actually enjoys working in the background. By his own account, he doesn't relish campaigning, and he's hardly a natural spokesman, but Cheney excels at assembling and managing teams of people to "get stuff done." Since he and Bush arrived at the White House, Cheney has managed to accomplish quite a bit. He's met with the heads of oil, gas, and nuclear power companies, assembled their "wish lists," and turned them into a new national Energy Plan. Cheney's close relations with folks like Ken Lay of Enron have made this one of the most corporation-friendly administrations in history. In this issue of the MoveOn Bulletin, we take an in-depth look at Dick Cheney. It's not surprising that Cheney is avoiding the limelight: an SEC investigation is under way on accounting practices at Halliburton, the company he ran, and Congress's investigative body is still trying to determine how much of the Energy Plan he organized was shaped by oil, coal, and nuclear energy executives. Given his key role in determining the policy and practice of the Bush administration, an understanding of Cheney's history is important. When Cheney was Chief of Staff for President Gerald Ford, his code name was "Backseat." Perhaps these days President Bush's nickname suits him better: for Cheney, it's "Big Time." ONE LINK "[S]triking another blow for freedom from government interference, Mr. Cheney led Halliburton into the top ranks of corporate welfare hogs, benefiting from almost $2 billion in taxpayer-insured loans from the U.S. Export-Import Bank and the Overseas Private Investment Corp. In the five years before Mr. Cheney joined the company, it got a measly $100 million in government loans." Molly Ivins' article, "Cheney's Mess Worth a Close Look" is online at: http://www.commondreams.org/views02/0610-03.htm CHENEY IN NUMBERS Cheney's 2000 income from Halliburton: $36,086,635 Increase in government contracts while Cheney led Halliburton: 91% Minimum size of "accounting irregularity" that occurred while Cheney was CEO: $100,000,000 (One hundred MILLION dollars) Number of the seven official US "State Sponsors of Terror" that Halliburton contracted with: 2 out of 7 Pages of Energy Plan documents Cheney refused to give congressional investigators: 13,500 Amount energy companies gave the Bush/Cheney presidential campaign: $1,800,000 HALLIBURTON DAYS "[W]hen I was Secretary of Defense, my biggest problem was with the Congress of the United States. Now that I'm chairman and CEO of a Fortune 500 company, my biggest problem is the Congress of the United States." --Dick Cheney, during an address to the Export-Import Bank Conference, May 8, 1997. Cheney was asked to assume the helm of Halliburton in 1995. As one of the largest global providers of equipment and services to the oil industry, Halliburton needed a chief executive who could ensure that the company had the government's full support. Cheney's close connections to top government and industry decision makers made him perfect for this role. In a debate with Vice Presidential candidate Joe Lieberman in 2000, Lieberman noted that Cheney had done well for himself as CEO of Halliburton. Cheney responded flatly, "I can tell you, Joe, the government had absolutely nothing to do with it." But even a glance at Cheney's tenure at Halliburton suggests otherwise. During his five years as CEO, Cheney nearly doubled the size of Halliburton's government contracts, totaling a whopping $2.3 billion. He convinced the Export-Import Bank of the U.S. to lend Halliburton and oil companies another $1.5 billion, backed by U.S. taxpayers. As exposed in the article below, some of these loans went to a Russian company with ties to drug dealing and organized crime. http://www.public-i.org/story_01_080200.htm Cheney's rule at Halliburton was characterized by a ruthless geopolitical strategy that put aside political beliefs whenever they were inconvenient. In a number of cases, Halliburton and its subsidiaries supported or even ordered human rights violations and broke international laws. Consider the following examples: * Libyan dictator and suspected anti-U.S. terrorist Moammar Gadhafi engaged a foreign subsidiary of Halliburton company Brown & Root to perform millions of dollars worth of work. According to the Baltimore Sun, Brown & Root was fined $3.8 million for violating Libyan sanctions. (Although Cheney wasn't leading Halliburton when these sales started, subsidiaries' sales to Libya continued throughout his tenure.) * Cheney claimed that he supported the U.S. sanctions on Iraq, but the Financial Times of London reported that through foreign subsidiaries and affiliates, Halliburton became the biggest oil contractor for Iraq, selling more than $73 million in goods and services to Saddam Hussein's regime. (See http://gwbush.com/spots/postpage.html for a Washington Post article on the matter.) * In Burma, Halliburton joined oil companies in working on two notorious gas pipelines, the Yadana and Yetagun. According to an Earth Rights report, "From 1992 until the present, thousands of villagers in Burma were forced to work in support of these pipelines and related infrastructure, lost their homes due to forced relocation, and were raped, tortured and killed by soldiers hired by the companies as security guards for the pipelines. One of Halliburton?s projects was undertaken during Dick Cheney?s tenure as CEO." (The full report is linked to below.) Halliburton is now being investigated by the Securities and Exchange Commission for Enron-style accounting practices that took place while Cheney was CEO. http://www.nytimes.com/2002/05/30/business/30HALL.html More on Cheney and Halliburton: For an extensive briefing on Halliburton and Cheney's foreign policy impact, check out this well-written and thorough report: http://www.earthrights.org/halliburton/report.pdf Cheney made $36 million at Halliburton in 2000 alone. Thesmokinggun.com has his tax returns to prove it: http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/dicktax1.shtml A LOT OF ENERGY "Conservation may be a sign of personal virtue, but it is not a sufficient basis for a sound, comprehensive energy policy." --Cheney, in a speech in Toronto, Canada, May 1, 2001. The ongoing fracas over Cheney's Energy Plan ties together many of the themes of his working life: his corporate alliances, especially with energy companies; his view of oil as integral to U.S. foreign policy; and his insistence on secrecy for the activities of the Executive branch. On May 16, 2001, Cheney revealed the results of months of meetings of his Energy Task Force: a national energy plan. President Bush had established the Task Force in January 2001, under Vice President Cheney's leadership. (See http://www.whitehouse.gov/energy for the final plan.) The plan essentially made Cheney's statement about 'personal virtue' national policy. It put a premium on exploring for and extracting more oil, and proposed that the Arctic National Wildlife Reserve be used for this purpose. While it paid lip service to alternative energy sources, its recommendations focused almost exclusively on the need for more "energy supply" -- more oil, more nuclear plants, more coal. According to the Natural Resources Defense Council, "the Bush plan would provide no short-term relief for Americans struggling to pay their gasoline and electric bills this summer. And, over the long-term, it would increase pollution, despoil the environment, threaten public health and accelerate global warming. Moreover, it would have no impact on energy prices, and no practical effect on U.S. dependence on foreign sources of oil. Who would benefit? The oil, coal and nuclear industries that shoveled millions of dollars into Bush campaign coffers." Shortly before the Plan was revealed, controversy arose. On April 19, 2001, Representatives Henry Waxman (D-CA) and John Dingell (D-MI) wrote to the General Accounting Office (GAO), asking it to investigate the Task Force. According to the GAO, "The congressional investigation of the task force was prompted by news reports that the task force had met privately with major campaign contributors, such as Kenneth Lay, the CEO of Enron, to discuss energy policy. According to these reports, major Republican contributors attended private sessions with Vice President Cheney and the task force met secretly with other contributors in formulating the President's National Energy Policy." In response, Cheney's counsel returned a letter, refusing to disclose whom Cheney and the Task Force had met with and even who was on the Task Force's staff. The GAO made a formal demand for information; Cheney rebuffed it, citing Executive Privilege. It's worth noting that the GAO wasn't even requesting the minutes of the Task Force meetings; it merely wanted to know who the Task Force met with, and when. In late August 2001, a Los Angeles Times article exposed the connections between Cheney's Task Force and Bush's campaign contributors. The article described how the final report adopted verbatim a global warming policy suggested by the U.S. Energy Association (an energy industry group), how language was altered to favor Halliburton, and how a company called Peabody Coal and its affiliates gave more than $900,000 to the Bush campaign and "gained extraordinary access" to the Task Force. (See http://www.commondreams.org/headlines01/0826-02.htm for a copy of the article.) As Enron collapsed, Cheney continued to refuse access to the documents of the Task Force. In February 22, 2002, the GAO filed suit to obtain the documents, some of which have since been turned over. But large questions about the circumstances under which the Bush Administration's energy policy was formed remain. The evidence indicates that the final product was a gift for the energy industry from Cheney, their former colleague. More on Cheney and the Energy Plan: The GAO's comprehensive timeline of the Cheney failure to turn over the Task Force documents is viewable at: http://www.9-11%70%65%61%63%65.org/r2.php3?r=60 You can search the documents that Cheney was ordered to make public at: http://www.nrdc.org/air/energy/taskforce/tfinx.asp You can read NRDC's "Slower, Costlier, and Dirtier: A Critique of the Bush Energy Plan" at: http://www.nrdc.org/air/energy/scd/execsum.asp "With so many new international crises erupting every day, it is hard to detect any clear forward direction to American U.S. foreign policy. At times, it appears that providing a response to the latest upheaval is about all that Washington can accomplish. But beneath the surface of day-to-day crisis management, one can see signs of an overarching plan for U.S. policy: a strategy of global oil acquisition." --Michael Klare, Pacific News Service: http://www.9-11%70%65%61%63%65.org/r2.php3?r=61 Satire: Cheney's 10 energy tips http://www.9-11%70%65%61%63%65.org/r2.php3?r=62 MORE ABOUT CHENEY The White House's official page on the Vice President: http://www.whitehouse.gov/vicepresident A short, and perhaps too sweet, biography that captures the highlights of Cheney's career: http://www.infoplease.com/spot/cheney1.html The Christian Science Monitor offers a little more background on Cheney, prior to the 2000 election. "Cheney's connections and influence are seen everywhere these days - giving rise to talk that he's CEO to Bush's Chairman of the Board. Most people around Cheney probably suffer from something like Rolodex-envy." http://www.csmonitor.com/durable/2000/12/20/fp1s2-csm.shtml A PBS Newshour report on Cheney's management style and personality. http://www.9-11%70%65%61%63%65.org/r2.php3?r=63 ABOUT THE MOVEON BULLETIN AND MOVEON The MoveOn Bulletin is a free, biweekly email bulletin providing information, resources, news, and action ideas on the political issues that shape our lives. The full text of the MoveOn Bulletin is online at http://www.moveon.org/moveonbulletin/; users can subscribe at that address. The MoveOn Bulletin is a project of MoveOn.org. ____________________________________________________________ 'Naturally the common people don't want war: Neither in Russia, nor in England, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, IT IS THE LEADERS of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is TELL THEM THEY ARE BEING ATTACKED, and denounce the peacemakers for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. IT WORKS THE SAME IN ANY COUNTRY.' -Goering at the Nuremberg Trials From LAMZ at sympatico.ca Fri Jul 12 16:07:04 2002 From: LAMZ at sympatico.ca (Lysander Zimmerman) Date: Sat Aug 5 04:33:18 2006 Subject: [R-G] Chossudovsky References: <110702192.54284@webbox.com> <3D2ECB80.1C747435@ol.com.au> Message-ID: <001d01c229f0$74f79e30$33378d18@Indy1> Thanks Jon. I would just like to add that, in my mind (and in the mind of EVERYONE who witnessed the chemtrails over Hamilton today), they are real, and yes, they are part of a huge conspiracy. Today, I left work for twenty minutes only to bear witness to 5 high-flying jets leaving behind chemtrails SIMULTANEOUSLY! The sky was already saturated with them and the spraying continued all day. I rushed inside to get others and they were completely shocked at what they were witnessing. People said that it made them sick to their stomachs and had to go back inside. One of the secretaries exclaimed "something is definitely up because those are not passenger planes". I called friends to take pictures and they will go up to the Hamilton Indymedia site along with video of heavy spraying that I took yesterday. Stayed tuned for Hamilton Indymedia for the on-going feature. Peace, Lysander ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jon Marshall" To: Sent: Friday, July 12, 2002 8:28 AM Subject: Re: [R-G] Chossudovsky > > I may be missing the point, but how does someone having some crazy views > mean they can't ever be correct. > > And how does the existence of crazy conspiracy theories lead us to > conclude that all conspiracy theories are crazy? > > Did not Lenin and Co. conspire to establish communism in Russia? > Didn't they succeed in having an effect? > > How come its inherently impossible for the powerful to also conspire > against everyone else? > > Now as it happens I don't hink Bush had to go to anything like the > lengths of planning the attack on Sept 11 himself, to get a state of > continual war, and to get his policies legitimated, but that does not > mean that it is impossible, that someone in the US state thought > otherwise. > > There is an important question about how we act, and it might be the > case that as we (say) don't understand chemtrails we should not bother > about them and get on with the real action. > > but, if Lysander will forgive me putting words in his mouth, the people > in his area may not be about to strike against capitalism, but they > might distrust the government, and they might worry about chemtrails, > and it might be useful as leading on to other things.. > > the right manages to work together with all kinds of conflicting beliefs > as long as they support established power, but the left always seems to > splinter. > > The question perhaps should be what do we do? what are we aiming at? > > jon > > michael pugliese wrote: > > > > Among other criticisms, Harald Beyer-Arneson, an anarcho-communist > > makes of Michel C. is his citation of far right canadian loon, > > John Whitely, of the, "New World Order Intelligence, " Website. > > On the UFO'ology radio talk show hosted by Jeff Rense, last time > > i listened to him w/Whitely, he raved about The Illuminati. > > http://www.csf.colorado.edu/mail/pen-l/apr99/msg02924.html > > Michael Pugliese > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Rad-Green mailing list > > Rad-Green@lists.econ.utah.edu > > To change your options or unsubscribe go to: > > http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/rad-green > > _______________________________________________ > Rad-Green mailing list > Rad-Green@lists.econ.utah.edu > To change your options or unsubscribe go to: > http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/rad-green > From aaron at istop.com Fri Jul 12 16:17:30 2002 From: aaron at istop.com (aaron@istop.com) Date: Sat Aug 5 04:33:18 2006 Subject: [R-G] Re: Going Down To Kananaskis: Fork in The Road for Our Movement (Part one) In-Reply-To: <017901c22244$f12eeca0$291f5318@vc.shawcable.net> Message-ID: <20020712221730.DDB4E17013@ns.istop.com> hi all! I have not got a chance to read all 4 parts of this but I will run it off and read it when I have time. On the first day we went out to "k" Country, there was aproximatly 110 or so vehicles in our convoy. we were ill prepared to stay in the heat on highgway40 and some people had heat exhoustion. if we were more prepared,I am certain that we would have had a tent city on the side of the road. we will know better next time. The proplem with the action or lack there of as some may sayat the first fence perimiter on highway 40 in my opinion was those that organisesd the caravan had come up with a agenda of getting as far as we could and then giving a message to the police to somehow get it to the delagates. wE did have a chance to convey a message if we has of elected one person to go and giv it to the delegates, but it was agree that all of us go or none. When we got there, in my opinion, starhawk chucked the original dicision out the window and rightly so, because it did not take into account last minute sign ups to th