[R-G] Re: Rad-Green digest, Vol 1 #122 - 7 msgs

Thu Sep 12 16:02:43 MDT 2002

check out this first message

----- Original Message -----
From: <rad-green-request at lists.econ.utah.edu>
To: <rad-green at lists.econ.utah.edu>
Sent: Wednesday, September 11, 2002 10:35 PM
Subject: Rad-Green digest, Vol 1 #122 - 7 msgs


> Send Rad-Green mailing list submissions to
> rad-green at lists.econ.utah.edu
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/rad-green
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> rad-green-request at lists.econ.utah.edu
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> rad-green-admin at lists.econ.utah.edu
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Rad-Green digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>    1. The other September 11 (shniad at sfu.ca)
>    2. War Now! Uri Avnery - Gush Shalom (shniad at sfu.ca)
>    3. What Americans have learnt - and not learnt - since 9/11 - Noam
>        Chomsky (shniad at sfu.ca)
>    4. Iraq: US attacked itself (ProletarianNews)
>    5. En;News,Marcos breaks silence,blasts Supreme Court decision,Sep 11
(fwd) (Tom_Childs at Douglas.BC.CA)
>    6. 911 relatives protest US war plans (ProletarianNews)
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 1
> To: shniad at sfu.ca
> From: shniad at sfu.ca
> Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2002 16:24:36 PDT
> Subject: [R-G] The other September 11
> Reply-To: rad-green at lists.econ.utah.edu
>
> VEhFIFJFQ09SRAlTZXB0ZW1iZXIgMTEsIDIwMDIgDQoNCkVkaXRvcidzIENvcm5lciANCg0K
> SXQgaGFzIGJlZW4gb25lIHllYXIgdG9kYXkgc2luY2UgdGhlIFNhdWRpIEFyYWJpYW4gdGVy
> cm9yaXN0cyBhdHRhY2tlZCBOZXcNCllvcmsgQ2l0eSBhbmQgV2FzaGluZ3RvbiBEQy4gVGhl
> IGxhc3Qgd2VlayBvciBzbyB0aGUgdGVsZXZpc2lvbiBoYXMgYmVlbg0KYnV6emluZyB3aXRo
> IGNvbW1lbW9yYXRpdmUgcHJvZ3JhbW1pbmcsIGFuZCB0aGUgVVMgcHJvcGFnYW5kYSBtYWNo
> aW5lIGhhcw0KYmVlbiB3b3JraW5nIG92ZXJ0aW1lIGJ1aWxkaW5nIHVwIHRoZSBpbXBvcnRh
> bmNlIG9mIHRoZSBldmVudCBhbmQgdHVybmluZyBpdA0KaW50byBzb21lIHNvcnQgb2YgbmF0
> aW9uYWwgaG9seSBkYXkuIFNlcHRlbWJlciAxMSB3aWxsIGJlIGZvcmV2ZXIgZXRjaGVkIGlu
> DQpvdXIgbWluZHMsIHRoZXkgc2F5LCBhbG9uZyB3aXRoIHRoZSBBbGFtbywgdGhlIE1haW5l
> IGFuZCBQZWFybCBIYXJib3IuDQpQZXJoYXBzIHRoZXkganVzdCBmaW5kIGl0IGEgY29udmVu
> aWVudCBkaXN0cmFjdGlvbiB0byBrZWVwIG91ciBtaW5kcyBvZmYgb2YNCm1vcmUgc2VyaW91
> cyBtYXR0ZXJzLiANCg0KV2VsbCwgU2VwdGVtYmVyIDExIGlzIGEgZGF5IHRvIHJlbWVtYmVy
> LCBidXQgbm90IGp1c3QgU2VwdGVtYmVyIDExLCAyMDAxLg0KU2VwdGVtYmVyIDExLCAxOTcz
> IGlzIGFsc28gd29ydGggcmVjYWxsaW5nLCBwcm9iYWJseSBtb3JlIHNvIHRoYW4gbGFzdA0K
> eWVhcidzIGluY2lkZW50LiBJdCB3YXMgb24gdGhhdCBkYXkgdGhhdCB0aGUgQ2hpbGVhbiBG
> YXNjaXN0cyB3aXRoIHRoZSBoZWxwDQpvZiB0aGUgVVMgZ292ZXJubWVudCBvdmVydGhyZXcg
> dGhlaXIgZGVtb2NyYXRpY2FsbHkgZWxlY3RlZCBnb3Zlcm5tZW50IGluIGENCnZpb2xlbnQg
> Y291cCwgYnV0Y2hlcmluZyB0aG91c2FuZHMgYW5kIHNldHRpbmcgaW50byBtb3Rpb24gYSBy
> ZWlnbiBvZiB0ZXJyb3INCmFuZCB0b3J0dXJlIHRoYXQgbGFzdGVkIGZvciB5ZWFycy4gSW5z
> dGVhZCBvZiBzb21lIE9zYW1hIGJpbiBMYWRlbiwgU2FkZGFtDQpIdXNzZWluIG9yIG90aGVy
> IHJhZGljYWwgdHlwZSB0ZXJyb3JpemluZyBpbm5vY2VudCBjaXZpbGlhbnMsIGl0IHdhcyB0
> aGUNCmFnZW50cyBvZiB0aGUgTml4b24gYWRtaW5pc3RyYXRpb24gY3VsbWluYXRpbmcgMTUg
> eWVhcnMgb2YgbmFzdHksIGRpcnR5DQp0cmlja3MgaW4gdGhlIFNvdXRoIEFtZXJpY2FuIHJl
> cHVibGljLiANCg0KVGhlIGRpcnR5IHRyaWNrcyBzdGFydGVkIGluIDE5NTggd2hlbiBpdCBh
> cHBlYXJlZCB0aGF0IFNhbHZhZG9yIEFsbGVuZGUsIGENCnNvY2lhbCBkZW1vY3JhdCwgaGFk
> IGEgY2hhbmNlIGF0IGZvcm1pbmcgZ292ZXJubWVudC4gT3ZlciB0aGUgeWVhcnMgbW9uZXkN
> CndhcyBwb3VyZWQgaW4gdG8gdGhlIGNvdW50cnkgZm9yIGJsYWNrIHByb3BhZ2FuZGEsIGZl
> YXIgbW9uZ2VyaW5nIGFuZA0Kc3VwcG9ydCBvZiBwb2xpdGljaWFucyBhbmQgb3RoZXJzIHdp
> bGxpbmcgdG8gdG9lIHRoZSBsaW5lIG9mIFVTIGJ1c2luZXNzDQppbnRlcmVzdHMgaW4gdGhl
> IGNvdW50cnkuIA0KDQpEZXNwaXRlIHRoaXMgZWZmb3J0IEFsbGVuZGUncyBzdXBwb3J0IGdy
> ZXcsIGFuZCBpbiAxOTcwIGhlIHdvbiB0aGUgZWxlY3Rpb24uDQpUaGlzIGJyb3VnaHQgYWJv
> dXQgYXR0YWNrcyBieSB0aGUgVVMgb24gdGhlIENoaWxlYW4gZWNvbm9teSB0byBjYXVzZSB1
> bnJlc3QNCmFuZCBkZXN0YWJpbGl6ZSB0aGUgZ292ZXJubWVudC4gVGhlIHBsYW4gd2FzIHRv
> IHVwc2V0IHRoZSB2b3RlcnMgYW5kIGNhcHR1cmUNCmEgc2lnbmlmaWNhbnQgYW50aS1BbGxl
> bmRlIG1ham9yaXR5IGluIHRoZSAxOTczIGNvbmdyZXNzaW9uYWwgZWxlY3Rpb25zLg0KSW5z
> dGVhZCwgaGlzIGdvdmVybm1lbnQgZ2FpbmVkIGluIHBvcHVsYXJpdHkuIEl0IHdhcyB0aGlz
> IGdyb3dpbmcgcG9wdWxhcml0eQ0KdGhhdCB0cmlnZ2VyZWQgdGhlIGNvdXAgdG8gdGFrZSBj
> b250cm9sIHdoZXJlIG9wZW4gZWxlY3Rpb25zIGhhZCBmYWlsZWQuIA0KDQpXaHkgd2FzIGl0
> IHRoYXQgdGhlIFVTIHdhbnRlZCB0byBzdWJ2ZXJ0IGRlbW9jcmFjeSBhbmQgZWxpbWluYXRl
> IFNhbHZhZG9yDQpBbGxlbmRlPyBIZSByYWlzZWQgd2FnZXMsIGhlIGluY3JlYXNlZCB0aGUg
> aW5jb21lIHRheCBkZWR1Y3Rpb24sIGhlDQplbGltaW5hdGVkIGNhcGl0YWwgdGF4ZXMgZm9y
> IHNtYWxsIGJ1c2luZXNzZXMgYW5kIGluY3JlYXNlZCBwdWJsaWMgd29ya3MNCnByb2plY3Rz
> IHRvIHJlZHVjZSB1bmVtcGxveW1lbnQuIEhlIHJhaXNlZCB0aGUgaW5jb21lIGZvciBwZW5z
> aW9uZXJzIGFuZA0KZXh0ZW5kZWQgbGFib3VyIGluc3VyYW5jZSB0byBzbWFsbCBidXNpbmVz
> c2VzLCBwcm92aWRlZCBmcmVlIG1pbGsgdG8NCmNoaWxkcmVuIGFuZCBpbmNyZWFzZWQgaW5k
> dXN0cmlhbCBwcm9kdWN0aXZpdHkuIFdoYXQgaGUgYWxzbyBkaWQgd2FzDQpuYXRpb25hbGl6
> ZSB0aGUgbWluaW5nIGNvbXBhbmllcywgYmFua3MgYW5kIHN0cmF0ZWdpYyBpbmR1c3RyaWVz
> LCBhbmQNCmluc3RpdHV0ZSBhZ3JhcmlhbiByZWZvcm0sIHB1dHRpbmcgbW9yZSBwZW9wbGUg
> b24gdGhlIGxhbmQuIA0KDQpIaXMgY3JpbWUgd2FzIHR3b2ZvbGQsIGdldHRpbmcgaW4gdGhl
> IHdheSBvZiB3ZWFsdGh5IGxhbmRvd25lcnMgYW5kDQptdWx0aW5hdGlvbmFsIGNvcnBvcmF0
> aW9ucywgYW5kIHByb3ZpbmcgdGhhdCBzb2NpYWxseSByZXNwb25zaWJsZSBlY29ub21pYw0K
> cGxhbm5pbmcgY291bGQgd29yay4gSXQgbWFkZSBoaW0gYSB0YXJnZXQgZm9yIHRoZSBVUyB0
> ZXJyb3Jpc3RzLiANCg0KSW4gdGhlIHllYXJzIHRoYXQgZm9sbG93ZWQgQWxsZW5kZSdzIG92
> ZXJ0aHJvdyB0aGUgVVMgcmVnaW1lIHRvcnR1cmVkIGFuZA0Ka2lsbGVkIG1hbnkuIFNwZWNp
> YWwgdW5pdHMgb2YgdGhlIG1pbGl0YXJ5IHRyYXZlbGVkIHRoZSBjb3VudHJ5IHJvdW5kaW5n
> IHVwLA0KYnJ1dGFsaXppbmcgYW5kIGV4ZWN1dGluZyBzdXNwZWN0ZWQgZGlzc2lkZW50cywg
> Ym90aCBDaGlsZWFucyBhbmQNCmZvcmVpZ25lcnMuIExpa2UgaW4gQXJnZW50aW5hIGFuZCBv
> dGhlciBMYXRpbiBBbWVyaWNhbiBuYXRpb25zIG1hbnkgcGVvcGxlDQp3ZXJlIGRpc2FwcGVh
> cmVkLCBsZWF2aW5nIHNvbWUgZmFtaWxpZXMgc3RpbGwgbG9va2luZyB0b2RheSB0byBmaW5k
> IG91dCB3aGF0DQpiZWNhbWUgb2YgdGhlaXIgbG92ZWQgb25lcy4gVGhpcyBhbGwgZG9uZSB3
> aXRoIHRoZSBrbm93bGVkZ2UgYW5kIG9mdGVuDQphc3Npc3RhbmNlIG9mIHRoZSBVUyBnb3Zl
> cm5tZW50LiANCg0KU2VwdGVtYmVyIDExIHNob3VsZCBiZSBhIGhvbGlkYXksIGJ1dCBub3Qg
> anVzdCB0byByZW1lbWJlciB0aGUgZmV3IHdobyBkaWVkDQppbiB0aGUgc3VpY2lkZSBhdHRh
> Y2sgaW4gTmV3IFlvcmsgYW5kIFdhc2hpbmd0b24uIEl0IHNob3VsZCBiZSBhIGRheSB0bw0K
> cmVtZW1iZXIgYWxsIHRlcnJvcmlzbSBhbmQgdGhvc2Ugd2hvIGFyZSByZXNwb25zaWJsZSBm
> b3IgaXQuIEl0IHNob3VsZCBiZSBhDQpkYXkgdG8gcmVtZW1iZXIgdGhlIGlubm9jZW50IHBl
> b3BsZSBvZiBDaGlsZSB3aG8gbG9zdCB0aGVpciBsaXZlcyBhdCB0aGUNCmhhbmRzIG9mIFVT
> IHN1cHBvcnRlZCB0ZXJyb3Jpc20sIGFuZCB0aG91c2FuZHMgb2Ygb3RoZXJzIHRocm91Z2hv
> dXQgdGhlDQp3b3JsZCB3aG8gaGF2ZSBzaW1pbGFybHkgc3VmZmVyZWQuIEFuZCwgYXMgd2Ug
> cmVtZW1iZXIgdGhlIGhlcm9lcyBvZiBsYXN0DQpTZXB0ZW1iZXIsIHdlIHNob3VsZCBhbHNv
> IHJlbWVtYmVyIHRob3NlIGJyYXZlIHBlb3BsZSB3aG8gc3Rvb2QgdXAgdG8NCnJlcHJlc3Np
> b24gYW5kIHN0cnVnZ2xlZCBkYWlseSBmb3IgeWVhcnMgaW4gdGhlIGZhY2Ugb2YgVVMgc3Bv
> bnNvcmVkIHRlcnJvci4NCg0KDQpKZXJyeSBXZXN0IA0KDQpDb3B5cmlnaHQgqSAyMDAyLCBX
> ZXN0J3MgSW50ZXJuYXRpb25hbCANCg0KLS0gSmVycnkgV2VzdCBUSEUgUkVDT1JEIEVkaXRv
> ci9QdWJsaXNoZXIvSmFuaXRvcg0KaHR0cDovL3d3dy5pc2xhbmQubmV0L35yZWNvcmQNCg0K
> DQoNCg==
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 2
> To: shniad at sfu.ca
> From: shniad at sfu.ca
> Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2002 16:26:38 PDT
> Subject: [R-G] War Now! Uri Avnery - Gush Shalom
> Reply-To: rad-green at lists.econ.utah.edu
>
> http://www.gush-shalom.org/archives/article210.html
>
> Gush Shalom  7.9.02
>
> War Now!
>
> Uri Avnery
>
> Slowly, President Bush's war plan against Iraq is emerging from the thick
> fog. At first it looked like a collection of hazy slogans, but gradually
it
> is becoming clear that it has definite - if hidden - aims.
>
> The plan is unconnected to the famous "war on terrorism", to the
personality
> of Saddam Hussein or to the weapons of mass destruction that Iraq is
> producing, like all the other states in the region, from Pakistan to
Israel
> and Egypt.
>
> Critics of the war plans (including myself) have pointed to the disastrous
> political results that must be expected: Iraq would break into three parts
> (Kurds in the north, Sunnis in the center, Shi'ites in the south), the
> Middle East would be exposed to the onslaught of Iranian fanaticism,
> pro-Western Arab regimes would collapse. Israel would be surrounded by
> aggressive Islamic fundamentalism, like the Crusader kingdom with the
advent
> of Saladin.
>
> This evaluation is based on an assumption that has been true for some
time:
> the United States is not ready to keep large numbers of troops in far-away
> countries. This would mean that after the conquest of Iraq the troops
would
> return home, leaving Iraq to its fate. But it is quite possible that this
> assumption is not valid anymore.
>
> The war plan of the Bushies makes sense only if the US leadership is
ready -
> more than that, is actually longing for - the occupation of Iraq in order
to
> remain there for many-many years.
>
> Such an occupation will necessitate a big investment of troops and
> resources. It will commit large military forces for a long time. That is
why
> the plan is opposed by the American generals (including the Secretary of
> State, General Colin Powell). But in the eyes of Bush and his advisers,
this
> is a very worthwhile investment that would yield immense benefits. Among
> others:
>
> * The main objective of the American economy (and therefore of American
> policy) is the oil of the Caspian Sea. The exploitation of this gigantic
> reservoir, the biggest in the world, has not yet started. Its control will
> ensure that America has cheap fuel for decades to come. Bush, a typical
oil
> man who despises alternative "environment friendly" sources of energy,
> considers this a major aim.
>
> * On its way to the market, the oil must reach the open sea. There are
> several possible routes - via Afghanistan and Pakistan or Turkey. Iraq is
> close to all of them, and American air and ground forces stationed there
> will guarantee American domination over the entire region.
>
> * The existence of a secure American base in the heart of the Arab world
> will also enable Washington to bully all the Arab regimes, lest they stray
> from the straight and narrow. The pressure on Saudi Arabia will be
immense.
> Not only will the American bases in Saudi Arabia become redundant, but by
> manipulating the oil prices America could bring the kingdom to the brink
of
> bankruptcy.
>
> * The new situation would finally break OPEC. Washington will decide the
> price of oil and how it is distributed.
>
> * The new situation will destroy the last remnants of Arab independence.
> Even today, almost all the Arab countries are dependent on America. A
> massive American physical presence in their midst will put an end to any
> pretense of Arab power and unity.
>
> * Neighboring Iran, too, will lose its appetite for opposing the American
> Big Satan. Iran will be threatened on both sides by the American bases in
> Afghanistan and Iraq.
>
> * Total American control over all the oil resources, from Kazakhstan in
the
> north to Saudi Arabia in the south, will put an end to any European hopes
of
> competing with the economic and political might of the United States. He
who
> controls the oil controls the economy. Increased oil prices might throw
> millions of workers into the streets of Europe and East Asia.
>
> How will the occupation function? When Americans think of occupation, they
> rely on their experience in Japan. There, after the capitulation, an
> American general, Douglas McArthur, reigned without limits. The Japanese
> obeyed dutifully, because they were instructed to do so by their revered
> emperor, the Mikado.
>
> Now some people in Washington dream of installing an Iraqi Mikado,
somebody
> from the Hashemite dynasty that ruled Iraq until 1958, when the last king
> was murdered. Why not put another family member on the throne, some
relative
> of the king of Jordan - or, come to think of it, why not unite Iraq and
> Jordan under one crown?
>
> A grandiose, world-embracing, yet simple and logical design. What does it
> remind me of? Indeed, the style sounds vaguely familiar. In the early
80's,
> I heard about several plans like this from Ariel Sharon (which I published
> at the time). His head was full of grand designs for restructuring the
> Middle East, the creation of an Israeli "security zone" from Pakistan to
> Central Africa, the overthrow of regimes and installing others in their
> stead, moving a whole people (the Palestinians) and so forth.
>
> I can't help it, but the winds blowing now in Washington remind me of
> Sharon. I have absolutely no proof that the Bushies got their ideas from
> him, even if all of them seem to have been mesmerized by him. But the
style
> is the same - a mixture of megalomania, creativity, arrogance, ignorance
and
> superficiality. An explosive mixture.
>
> Sharon's grand design floundered, as we know. The bold flights of
> imagination and the superficial logic did not help - Sharon simply did not
> understand the real currents of history. I fear that the band of Bush,
> Cheney, Rumsfield, Rice, Wolfowitz, Pearl and all the other little Sharons
> are suffering from the same syndrome.
>
> Iraq is not Japan, and the Iraqis will not obey a Mikado brought in by the
> Americans as they now obey a local nationalist dictator. Islamic
> fundamentalism is not an animal that can be tamed easily. Hundreds of
> millions of enraged human beings all over the Arab and Muslim world are a
> great danger, even for a mighty military power.
>
> Sharon may believe that he will be the big winner of such an American
move,
> though history may show that he brought a historical disaster on us. He
may
> succeed in exploiting the ensuing anarchy in order to drive the
Palestinians
> out of the country. But within a few years Israel could find itself
> surrounded by a new Middle East - and not the one Shimon Peres is
driveling
> on about. A region full of hatred, dreaming of revenge, driven by
religious
> and nationalist fanaticism. And in the end, the Americans will go home. We
> will be left here alone.
>
> But people like Bush and Sharon do not march to the beat of history. They
> are listening to a different drummer.
>
>
>
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 3
> To: shniad at sfu.ca
> From: shniad at sfu.ca
> Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2002 16:26:17 PDT
> Subject: [R-G] What Americans have learnt - and not learnt - since 9/11 -
Noam
>  Chomsky
> Reply-To: rad-green at lists.econ.utah.edu
>
> http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2002/09/06/ 1031115935105.html
>
> The Age  September 7, 2002
>
> What Americans have learnt - and not learnt - since 9/11
>
> By Noam Chomsky
>
> September 11 shocked many Americans into an awareness that they had better
> pay much closer attention to what the United States Government does in the
> world and how it is perceived.
>
> Many issues have been opened for discussion that were not on the agenda
> before. That is all to the good.
>
> It is also the merest sanity, if we hope to reduce the likelihood of
future
> atrocities. It may be comforting for Americans to pretend that their
enemies
> "hate our freedoms", as President Bush stated, but it is hardly wise to
> ignore the real world, which conveys different lessons.
>
> The President is not the first to ask: "Why do they hate us?"
>
> In a staff discussion 44 years ago, president Dwight Eisenhower described
> "the campaign of hatred against us (in the Arab world), not by the
> governments but by the people". His National Security Council outlined the
> basic argument: the US supports corrupt and oppressive governments and is
> "opposing political or economic progress" because of its interest in
> controlling the oil resources of the region.
>
> Post-September 11 surveys in the Arab world reveal that the same reasons
> hold today, compounded with resentment over specific policies. Strikingly,
> that is even true of privileged, Western-oriented sectors in the region.
>
> To cite just one recent example, in the August 1 issue of Far Eastern
> Economic Review, internationally recognised regional specialist Ahmed
Rashid
> writes that, in Pakistan, "there is growing anger that US support is
> allowing (Musharraf's) military regime to delay the promise of democracy".
>
> Today, Americans do themselves few favours by choosing to believe that
"they
> hate us" and "hate our freedoms". On the contrary, these are people who
like
> Americans and admire much about the US, including its freedoms. What they
> hate is official policies that deny them the freedoms to which they, too,
> aspire.
>
> For such reasons, the post-September 11 rantings of Osama bin Laden - for
> example, about US support for corrupt and brutal regimes, or about the US
> "invasion" of Saudi Arabia - have a certain resonance, even among those
who
> despise and fear him. From resentment, anger and frustration, terrorist
> bands hope to draw support and recruits.
>
> We should also be aware that much of the world regards Washington as a
> terrorist regime. In recent years, the US has taken or backed actions in
> Colombia, Nicaragua, Panama, Sudan and Turkey, to name a few, that meet
> official US definitions of "terrorism" - that is, when Americans apply the
> term to enemies.
>
> In the most sober establishment journal, Foreign Affairs, Samuel
Huntington
> wrote in 1999: "While the US regularly denounces various countries as
'rogue
> states', in the eyes of many countries it is becoming the rogue superpower
.
> . . the single greatest external threat to their societies."
>
> Such perceptions are not changed by the fact that on September 11, for the
> first time, a Western country was subjected on home soil to a horrendous
> terrorist attack of a kind all too familiar to victims of Western power.
The
> attack goes far beyond what is sometimes called the "retail terror" of the
> IRA or Red Brigade.
>
> The September 11 terrorism elicited harsh condemnation throughout the
world
> and an outpouring of sympathy for the innocent victims. But with
> qualifications.
>
> An international Gallup Poll in late September found little support for "a
> military attack" by the US in Afghanistan. In Latin America, the region
with
> the most experience of US intervention, support ranged from 2 per cent in
> Mexico to 16 per cent in Panama.
>
> The present "campaign of hatred" in the Arab world is, of course, also
> fuelled by US policies towards Israel-Palestine and Iraq. The US has
> provided the crucial support for Israel's harsh military occupation, now
in
> its 35th year.
>
> One way for the US to lessen Israeli-Palestinian tension would be to stop
> refusing to join the long-standing international consensus that calls for
> recognition of the right of all states in the region to live in peace and
> security, including a Palestinian state in the currently occupied
> territories (perhaps with minor and mutual border adjustments).
>
> In Iraq, a decade of harsh sanctions under US pressure has strengthened
> Saddam while leading to the death of hundreds of thousands of Iraqis -
> perhaps more people "than have been slain by all so-called weapons of mass
> destruction throughout history", military analysts John and Karl Mueller
> wrote in Foreign Affairs in 1999.
>
> Washington's present justifications to attack Iraq have far less
credibility
> than when President Bush No. 1 was welcoming Saddam as an ally and a
trading
> partner after the Iraqi leader had committed his worst brutalities - as in
> Halabja, where Iraq attacked Kurds with poison gas in 1988. At the time,
the
> murderer Saddam was more dangerous than he is today.
>
> As for a US attack against Iraq, no one, including Defence Secretary
Donald
> Rumsfeld, can realistically guess the possible costs and consequences.
>
> Radical Islamist extremists surely hope that an attack on Iraq will kill
> many people and destroy much of the country, providing recruits for
> terrorist actions.
>
> They presumably also welcome the "Bush doctrine" that proclaims the right
of
> attack against potential threats, which are virtually limitless. The
> President has announced that: "There's no telling how many wars it will
take
> to secure freedom in the homeland". That's true.
>
> Threats are everywhere, even at home. The prescription for endless war
poses
> a far greater danger to Americans than perceived enemies do, for reasons
the
> terrorist organisations understand very well.
>
> Twenty years ago, the former head of Israeli military intelligence,
> Yehoshaphat Harkabi, also a leading Arabist, made a point that still holds
> true. "To offer an honourable solution to the Palestinians, respecting
their
> right to self-determination - that is the solution of the problem of
> terrorism," he said. "When the swamp disappears, there will be no more
> mosquitoes."
>
> At the time, Israel enjoyed the virtual immunity from retaliation within
the
> occupied territories that lasted until very recently. But Harkabi's
warning
> was apt, and the lesson applies more generally.
>
> Well before September 11, it was understood that, with modern technology,
> the rich and powerful would lose their near-monopoly of the means of
> violence and could expect to suffer atrocities on home soil.
>
> If America insists on creating more swamps, there will be more mosquitoes,
> with awesome capacity for destruction.
>
> If America devotes its resources to draining the swamps, addressing the
> roots of the "campaigns of hatred", it can not only reduce the threats it
> faces but also live up to ideals that it professes and that are not beyond
> reach if Americans choose to take them seriously.
>
>
> American academic Noam Chomsky is the author, most recently, of the
> bestseller September 11.
>
>
>
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2002 20:25:47 -0400
> From: ProletarianNews <bstoller at utopia2000.org>
> To: ANTINATO at topica.com, rad-green at lists.econ.utah.edu
> Subject: [R-G] Iraq: US attacked itself
> Reply-To: rad-green at lists.econ.utah.edu
>
>
> BBC. 11 September 2002. Iraqi TV says US attacked itself.
>
> BAGHDAD -- Iraqi TV has commented on the first anniversary of the 11
> September attacks in two special reports.
>
> State media said that the US itself planned last year's attacks on New
> York and Washington to justify its war against terror.
>
> The reports also said that any future attack on Iraq would end in defeat
> for the Americans.
>
> The two reports came as Iraqis were sitting down to watch the lunchtime
> news bulletins.
>
> The first said the US was an evil administration which continued to
> carry out its daily aggression. Washington, it said, was using the
> attacks as a pretext to wage war, but it would be defeated if it
> attacked Iraq.
>
> The second 20-minute programme was called "Who planned the 11 September
> events?"
>
> It said the attacks were knowingly prepared within the US to justify an
> unlimited war by the US and Israel against Arabs and Muslims.
>
> The report continued that such a war was intended to allow America to
> dominate the world after its defeat in the Gulf War and the end of
> hostilities in the former Yugoslavia.
>
> The commentator said Washington would also use the war as a marketing
> showcase for American weaponry.
>
> The programme ended by accusing the US of imposing state terrorism on
> the peoples of the world in the name of fighting terrorism.
>
> . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
>
> ProletarianNews
> http://www.utopia2000.org
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2002 19:30:45 -0700
> From: <Tom_Childs at Douglas.BC.CA>
> To: rad-green at lists.econ.utah.edu, project-x at resist.ca
> Cc: mobglob-discuss at resist.ca
> Subject: [R-G] En;News,Marcos breaks silence,blasts Supreme Court
decision,Sep 11 (fwd)
> Reply-To: rad-green at lists.econ.utah.edu
>
> ...The Sup reappears after sooo long!  Regards,  -tc
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>   ----- Forwarded message: -----
> Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2002 21:00:14 -0500 (CDT)
> To: chiapas95-english at eco.utexas.edu
> From: owner-chiapas95-english at eco.utexas.edu (Chiapas95-english)
> Subject: En;News,Marcos breaks silence,blasts Supreme Court decision,Sep
11
>
> --
> This message is forwarded to you by the editors of the Chiapas95
> newslists.  To contact the editors or to submit material for posting send
> to: <chiapas-i at eco.utexas.edu>.
>
>
> From: dana.aldea at t-online.de (Dana)
> To: <chiapas-i at eco.utexas.edu>
> Subject: News,Zapatista leader breaks silence, blasts Supreme Court
decision,Sep 11
> Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2002 15:09:03 +0200
>
> Zapatista leader breaks silence, blasts Supreme Court decision
>
> Zoltan Simon, TheNewsMexico.com - 9/11/2002
>
> Zapatista rebel leader Subcommander Marcos broke more than a year's
silence
> Tuesday by blasting last week's Supreme Court ruling that upheld a
> controversial Indian Rights law.
>
> In a brief statement published on the Zapatista National Liberation Army's
> (EZLN) Website, Marcos equated the Court decision to the federal
government
> "turning (its) back on Zapatista efforts to search for a peaceful and
> negotiated end to war."
>
> His comments came four days after the high court ruled it had no
> jurisdiction to overturn the Indian Rights Law, which was originally
> negotiated between the EZLN and the government to grant greater autonomy
to
> indigenous communities.
>
> But critics charge the law passed by Congress is a watered-down version of
> that agreement and actually weakens Indian communities' control over
natural
> resources located on their land. Indigenous groups arguing they were not
> adequately consulted about the final legislation filed 330 constitutional
> challenges to have the law annulled.
>
> Soon after Congress approved the law in April 2001, the EZLN broke off all
> contact with the government in protest.
>
> The Zapatistas have maintained a tense truce with the government since
> staging a brief armed uprising in 1994 in the name of Indians rights and
to
> call attention to the plight of Mexico's 12 million indigenous, most of
whom
> live in marginalized conditions.
>
> Marcos' communique' also coincided with a march by hundreds of Zapatista
> supporters in the Chiapas city of San Cristobal de las Casas who were
> protesting the Court ruling.
>
> The march became violent after protesters overturned a vehicle belonging
to
> the National Security Agency (CISEN) and threw rocks at the office of the
> government's peace negotiator.
>
> Social organizations warned the Supreme Court's ruling could lead to
> increased violence in Chiapas, a state ravaged by political, religious,
land
> and ethnic disputes.
>
> Blanca Martinez, director of the Fray Bartolome de las Casas Human Rights
> Center in San Cristobal, told TheNewsMexico.com Indians feel state and
> federal government officials, as well as Congress and the courts have
> ignored their demands.
>
> "Whenever you feel excluded in this way, violence can't be ruled out,"
> Martinez said.
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list send a message containing the words
> unsubscribe chiapas95 (or chiapas95-lite, or chiapas95-english, or
> chiapas95-espanol) to majordomo at eco.utexas.edu.  Previous messages
> are available from
http://www.eco.utexas.edu/faculty/Cleaver/chiapas95.html
> or gopher to Texas, University of Texas at Austin, Department of
> Economics, Mailing Lists.
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> soup.comandante/tomato..;-)
> Douglas College Library
> New Westminster, B.C. Canada
> T: 604 527-5187 - library
> T: 604 524-9316 - home south shore Lulu Island
> E: childst at douglas.bc.ca
> U: BCGEU Local 703
> W: http://www.globaljustice.ca
>
>       "There's no way to delay, that trouble comin' everyday."
>     -Frank Zappa
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2002 22:36:31 -0400
> From: ProletarianNews <bstoller at utopia2000.org>
> To: ANTINATO at topica.com, awip at topica.com,
>   rad-green at lists.econ.utah.edu
> Subject: [R-G] 911 relatives protest US war plans
> Reply-To: rad-green at lists.econ.utah.edu
>
> Guardian. 12 September 2002. Relatives protest at war plans.
>
> LOS ANGELES, Calif. -- Relatives of the victims of the September 11
> attacks brought a packed Baptist church to its feet in downtown Los
> Angeles on the eve of the anniversary, with calls against a war on Iraq.
>
> The meeting was one of many addressed by relatives of those who died but
> who are opposed to military action in retaliation.
>
> The occasion at the First Baptist church was advertised as A Gathering
> for Civil Liberties and Peaceful Tomorrows and as a way of remembering
> those who had been killed. Its organisers said they hoped it would be a
> forerunner of many others aimed at stopping a war in Iraq and addressing
> the issue of civil liberties.
>
> Kelly Campbell, the sister-in-law of Craig Amundson, who was killed in
> the Pentagon, and Craig's brother, Barry, are one of 40 sets of
> relatives involved in the organisation, September 11 Families for
> Peaceful Tomorrows.
>
> The title is taken from Martin Luther King's saying that "wars are poor
> chisels for peaceful tomorrows."
>
> Both told the gathering they did not believe that a war was a suitable
> memorial for the dead.
>
> "After Craig was killed, there were so many memorials that turned into
> war rallies," said Kelly Campbell. "This September 11 we wanted there to
> be alternatives in a way that looked at where we go as Americans, where
> we go as humans."
>
> Ms Campbell said at previous rallies people had told them: "Go back to
> the 60s." "As someone born in the 70s," she said, "I think what we need
> to do is say, 'We're building a movement, we're not throwbacks, we're
> living in the present time.'"
>
> "With regard to Iraq, we can stop this but it's going to take all of us
> and then some to stop the suffering of Iraqi families and American
> military families. Our grief is not a cry for war."
>
> Earlier this year the organisation visited Afghanistan to meet families
> of those killed in theconflict there.
>
> The Rev Jim Lawson, one of the original Freedom Riders and a colleague
> of Dr King, said: "All patriotic Americans ought to be drawn to places
> like this. Justice is to peace as oxygen is to breathing."
>
> The Rev George Regas said: "God save us from another war... Join us in a
> new peace movement."
>
> Medea Benjamin, founding director of Global Exchange, won a standing
> ovation when she called for a "regime change here at home."
>
> Maria Elena Durazo, the president of the local branch of the catering
> workers' union, said, "They should arrest the real criminals -- and
> start with Enron."
>
> . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
>
> ProletarianNews
> http://www.utopia2000.org
>
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> _______________________________________________
> Rad-Green mailing list
> Rad-Green at lists.econ.utah.edu
> To change your options or unsubscribe go to:
> http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/rad-green
>
>
> End of Rad-Green Digest