From nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com Mon Aug 23 01:31:25 2004 From: nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com (nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 01:31:25 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [NYTr] DU:Dirty Bombs, Dirty Missiles, Dirty Bullets Message-ID: <200408230531.i7N5VPx22706@olm.blythe-systems.com> sent by mart ["The first DU weapons system was developed for the Navy in 1968, and DU weapons were given to and used by Israel in 1973 under U.S. supervision in the Yom Kippur war against the Arabs." Not to mention that Depleted Uranium was tested by the U.S Navy on Vieques in Puerto Rico and who's civilian population is now suffering the high rates of cancer and birth defects and other long term conesquences from D. U. exposure, that D.U. was used by the U.S military on Iraqi civilians in the first Gulf War, by the U.S and NATO against civilian populations in the former Yugoslavia, then again against civilian populations in Afghanistan and once more, again and currently on Iraqi civilian populations in the current, ongoing war. Once again, another article that mainly focuses on the "tragedy" of the poor "useful idiot" "just following orders" volunteer U.S. military personal who committed war crimes by spreading this deadly shit! Once again, hardly a word on the innocent civilian populations whom they spread this stuff on and who along with generations yet unborn will suffer the consequences of this criminal act! -mart] SFBayView.com - August 18, 2004 http://www.sfbayview.com/081804/Depleteduranium081804.shtml Depleted uranium: Dirty bombs, dirty missiles, dirty bullets A death sentence here and abroad by Leuren Moret "Military men are just dumb stupid animals to be used as pawns in foreign policy." - Henry Kissinger, quoted in "Kiss the Boys Goodbye: How the United States Betrayed Its Own POW's in Vietnam" Vietnam was a chemical war for oil, permanently contaminating large regions and countries downriver with Agent Orange, and environmentally the most devastating war in world history. But since 1991, the U.S. has staged four nuclear wars using depleted uranium weaponry, which, like Agent Orange, meets the U.S. government definition of Weapons of Mass Destruction. Vast regions in the Middle East and Central Asia have been permanently contaminated with radiation. And what about our soldiers? Terry Jemison of the Department of Veterans Affairs reported this week to the American Free Press that "Gulf-era veterans" now on medical disability since 1991 number 518,739, with only 7,035 reported wounded in Iraq in that same 14-year period. This week the American Free Press dropped a "dirty bomb" on the Pentagon by reporting that eight out of 20 men who served in one unit in the 2003 U.S. military offensive in Iraq now have malignancies. That means that 40 percent of the soldiers in that unit have developed malignancies in just 16 months. Since these soldiers were exposed to vaccines and depleted uranium (DU) only, this is strong evidence for researchers and scientists working on this issue, that DU is the definitive cause of Gulf War Syndrome. Vaccines are not known to cause cancer. One of the first published researchers on Gulf War Syndrome, who also served in 1991 in Iraq, Dr. Andras Korenyi-Both, is in agreement with Barbara Goodno from the Department of Defense's Deployment Health Support Directorate, that in this war soldiers were not exposed to chemicals, pesticides, bioagents or other suspect causes this time to confuse the issue. This powerful new evidence is blowing holes in the cover-up perpetrated by the Pentagon and three presidential administrations ever since DU was first used in 1991 in the Persian Gulf War. Fourteen years after the introduction of DU on the battlefield in 1991, the long-term effects have revealed that DU is a death sentence and very nasty stuff. Scientists studying the biological effects of uranium in the 1960s reported that it targets the DNA. Marion Fulk, a nuclear physical chemist retired from the Livermore Nuclear Weapons Lab and formerly involved with the Manhattan Project, interprets the new and rapid malignancies in soldiers from the 2003 war as "spectacular . and a matter of concern." This evidence shows that of the three effects which DU has on biological systems - radiation, chemical and particulate - the particulate effect from nano-size particles is the most dominant one immediately after exposure and targets the Master Code in the DNA. This is bad news, but it explains why DU causes a myriad of diseases which are difficult to define. In simple words, DU "trashes the body." When asked if the main purpose for using it was for destroying things and killing people, Fulk was more specific: "I would say that it is the perfect weapon for killing lots of people." Soldiers developing malignancies so quickly since 2003 can be expected to develop multiple cancers from independent causes. This phenomenon has been reported by doctors in hospitals treating civilians following NATO bombing with DU in Yugoslavia in 1998-1999 and the U.S. military invasion of Iraq using DU for the first time in 1991. Medical experts report that this phenomenon of multiple malignancies from unrelated causes has been unknown until now and is a new syndrome associated with internal DU exposure. Just 467 U.S. personnel were wounded in the three-week Persian Gulf War in 1990-1991. Out of 580,400 soldiers who served in Gulf War I, 11,000 are dead, and by 2000 there were 325,000 on permanent medical disability. This astounding number of disabled vets means that a decade later, 56 percent of those soldiers who served now have medical problems. The number of disabled vets reported up to 2000 has been increasing by 43,000 every year. Brad Flohr of the Department of Veterans Affairs told American Free Press that he believes there are more disabled vets now than even after World War II. They brought it home Not only were soldiers exposed to DU on and off the battlefields, but they brought it home. DU in the semen of soldiers internally contaminated their wives, partners and girlfriends. Tragically, some women in their 20s and 30s who were sexual partners of exposed soldiers developed endometriosis and were forced to have hysterectomies because of health problems. In a group of 251 soldiers from a study group in Mississippi who had all had normal babies before the Gulf War, 67 percent of their post-war babies were born with severe birth defects. They were born with missing legs, arms, organs or eyes or had immune system and blood diseases. In some veterans' families now, the only normal or healthy members of the family are the children born before the war. The Department of Veterans Affairs has stated that they do not keep records of birth defects occurring in families of veterans. How did they hide it? Before a new weapons system can be used, it must be fully tested. The blueprint for depleted uranium weapons is a 1943 declassified document from the Manhattan Project. Harvard President and physicist James B. Conant, who developed poison gas in World War I, was brought into the Manhattan Project by the father of presidential candidate John Kerry. Kerry's father served at a high level in the Manhattan Project and was a CIA agent. Conant was chair of the S-1 Poison Gas Committee, which recommended developing poison gas weapons from the radioactive trash of the atomic bomb project in World War II. At that time, it was known that radioactive materials dispersed in bombs from the air, from land vehicles or on the battlefield produced very fine radioactive dust which would penetrate all protective clothing, any gas mask or filter or the skin. By contaminating the lungs and blood, it could kill or cause illness very quickly. They also recommended it as a permanent terrain contaminant, which could be used to destroy populations by contaminating water supplies and agricultural land with the radioactive dust. The first DU weapons system was developed for the Navy in 1968, and DU weapons were given to and used by Israel in 1973 under U.S. supervision in the Yom Kippur war against the Arabs. The Phalanx weapons system, using DU, was tested on the USS Bigelow out of Hunters Point Naval Shipyard in 1977, and DU weapons have been sold by the U.S. to 29 countries. Military research report summaries detail the testing of DU from 1974-1999 at military testing grounds, bombing and gunnery ranges and at civilian labs under contract. Today 42 states are contaminated with DU from manufacture, testing and deployment. Women living around these facilities have reported increases in endometriosis, birth defects in babies, leukemia in children and cancers and other diseases in adults. Thousands of tons of DU weapons tested for decades by the Navy on four bombing and gunnery ranges around Fallon, Nevada, is no doubt the cause of the fastest growing leukemia cluster in the U.S. over the past decade. The military denies that DU is the cause. The medical profession has been active in the cover-up - just as they were in hiding the effects from the American public - of low level radiation from atmospheric testing and nuclear power plants. A medical doctor in Northern California reported being trained by the Pentagon with other doctors, months before the 2003 war started, to diagnose and treat soldiers returning from the 2003 war for mental problems only. Medical professionals in hospitals and facilities treating returning soldiers were threatened with $10,000 fines if they talked about the soldiers or their medical problems. They were also threatened with jail. Reporters have also been prevented access to more than 14,000 medically evacuated soldiers flown nightly since the 2003 war in C-150s from Germany who are brought to Walter Reed Hospital near Washington, D.C. Dr. Robert Gould, former president of the Bay Area chapter of Physicians for Social Responsibility (PSR), has contacted three medical doctors since February 2004, after I had been invited to speak about DU. Dr. Katharine Thomasson, president of the Oregon chapter of the PSR, informed me that Dr. Gould had contacted her and tried to convince her to cancel her invitation for me to speak about DU at Portland State University on April 12. Although I was able to do a presentation, Dr. Thomasson told me I could only talk about DU in Oregon "and nothing overseas . nothing political." Dr. Gould also contacted and discouraged Dr. Ross Wilcox in Toronto, Canada, from inviting me to speak to Physicians for Global Survival (PGS), the Canadian equivalent of PSR, several months later. When that didn't work, he contacted Dr. Allan Connoly, the Canadian national president of PGS, who was able to cancel my invitation and nearly succeeded in preventing Dr. Wilcox, his own member, from showing photos and presenting details on civilians suffering from DU exposure and cancer provided to him by doctors in southern Iraq. Dr. Janette Sherman, a former and long-standing member of PSR, reported that she finally quit some time after being invited to lunch by a new PSR executive administrator. After the woman had pumped Dr. Sherman for information all through lunch about her position on key issues, the woman informed Dr. Sherman that her last job had been with the CIA. How was the truth about DU hidden from military personnel serving in successive DU wars? Before his tragic death, Sen. Paul Wellstone informed Joyce Riley, R.N., B.S.N., executive director of the American Gulf War Veterans Association, that 95 percent of Gulf War veterans had been recycled out of the military by 1995. Any of those continuing in military service were isolated from each other, preventing critical information being transferred to new troops. The "next DU war" had already been planned, and those planning it wanted "no skunk at the garden party." The US has a dirty (DU) little (CIA) secret A new book just published at the American Free Press by Michael Collins Piper, "The High Priests of War: The Secret History of How America's Neo-Conservative Trotskyites Came to Power and Orchestrated the War Against Iraq as the First Step in Their Drive for Global Empire," details the early plans for a war against the Arab world by Henry Kissinger and the neo-cons in the late 1960s and early 1970s. That just happens to coincide with getting the DU "show on the road" and the oil crisis in the Middle East, which caused concern not only to President Nixon. The British had been plotting and scheming for control of the oil in Iraq for decades since first using poison gas on the Iraqis and Kurds in 1912. The book details the creation of the neo-cons by their "godfather" and Trotsky lover Irving Kristol, who pushed for a "war against terrorism" long before 9/11 and was lavishly funded for years by the CIA. His son, William Kristol, is one of the most influential men in the United States. Both are public relations men for the Israeli lobby's neo-conservative network, with strong ties to Rupert Murdoch. Kissinger also has ties to this network and the Carlyle Group, who, one could say, have facilitated these omnicidal wars beginning from the time former President Bush took office. It would be easy to say that we are recycling World Wars I and II, with the same faces. When I asked Vietnam Special Ops Green Beret Capt. John McCarthy, who could have devised this omnicidal plan to use DU to destroy the genetic code and genetic future of large populations of Arabs and Moslems in the Middle East and Central Asia - just coincidentally the areas where most of the world's oil deposits are located - he replied: "It has all the handprints of Henry Kissinger." In Zbignew Brzezinski's book "The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and Its Geostrategic Imperatives," the map of the Eurasian chessboard includes four regions strategic to U.S. foreign policy. The "South" region corresponds precisely to the regions now contaminated permanently with radiation from U.S. bombs, missiles and bullets made with thousands of tons of DU. A Japanese professor, Dr. K. Yagasaki, has calculated that 800 tons of DU is the atomicity equivalent of 83,000 Nagasaki bombs. The U.S. has used more DU since 1991 than the atomicity equivalent of 400,000 Nagasaki bombs. Four nuclear wars indeed, and 10 times the amount of radiation released into the atmosphere from atmospheric testing! No wonder our soldiers, their families and the people of the Middle East, Yugoslavia and Central Asia are sick. But as Henry Kissinger said after Vietnam when our soldiers came home ill from Agent Orange, "Military men are just dumb stupid animals to be used for foreign policy." Unfortunately, more and more of those soldiers are men and women with brown skin. And unfortunately, the DU radioactive dust will be carried around the world and deposited in our environments just as the "smog of war" from the 1991 Gulf War was found in deposits in South America, the Himalayas and Hawaii. In June 2003, the World Health Organization announced in a press release that global cancer rates will increase 50 percent by 2020. What else do they know that they aren't telling us? I know that depleted uranium is a death sentence . for all of us. We will all die in silent ways. To learn more Sources used in this story that readers are encouraged to consult: American Free Press four-part series on DU by Christopher Bollyn. Part I: "Depleted Uranium: U.S. Commits War Crime Against Iraq, Humanity," www.americanfreepress.net/depleted_uranium.html; Part II: "Cancer Epidemic Caused by U.S. WMD: MD Says Depleted Uranium Definitively Linked," www.americanfreepress.net/html/cancer_epidemic_.html August 2004 World Affairs Journal. Leuren Moret: "Depleted Uranium: The Trojan Horse of Nuclear War," www.mindfully.org/Nucs/2004/DU-Trojan-Horse1jul04.htm August 2004 Coastal Post Online. Carol Sterrit: "Marin Depleted Uranium Resolution Heats Up - GI's Will Come Home To A Slow Death," www.coastalpost.com/04/08/01 World Depleted Uranium Weapons Conference, Hamburg, Germany, October 16-19, 2004: www.worlduraniumweaponsconference.de/speakers/speakers.htm International Criminal Tribunal for Afghanistan. Written opinion of Judge Niloufer Baghwat: www.mindfully.org/Reform/2004/Afghanistan-Criminal-Tribunal10mar04.htm "Discounted Casualties: The Human Cost of Nuclear War" by Akira Tashiro, foreword by Leuren Moret, www.chugoku-np.co.jp/abom/uran/index_e.html [Leuren Moret is a geoscientist who has worked around the world on radiation issues, educating citizens, the media, members of parliaments and Congress and other officials. She became a whistleblower in 1991 at the Livermore Nuclear Weapons Lab after experiencing major science fraud on the Yucca Mountain Project. An environmental commissioner in the City of Berkeley, she can be reached at leurenmoret at yahoo.com.] From nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com Mon Aug 23 01:34:54 2004 From: nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com (nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 01:34:54 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [NYTr] Cuba: Hurricane Charley - Preliminary UN Report Message-ID: <200408230534.i7N5Ysn22784@olm.blythe-systems.com> sent by John Clancy - August 22, 2004 HURRICANE CHARLEY: A PRELIMINARY REPORT A report by the UN Resident Coordinator's Information Unit At Playa Caj?o, a fishermen's village on Havana Province's Southern Coast, only two of the 208 buildings survived the hurricane winds Hurricane CHARLEY struck the Cuban provinces of Havana and City of Havana on the early hours of 13 August, 2004. This area of Cuba is home to some 2,5 million persons -one fifth of Cuba's total population-- and comprises some of the country's best agricultural lands and most important industries. The Cuban Weather Bureau and Civil Defense had offered early warning notices of the vicious nature of this mayor storm and some 250 thousand persons were evacuated to safety. CHARLEY entered the Southern coast of the Western portion of Havana province as a class II hurricane at 00.10 hours 13 August, and cut a path of destruction on its way North. Its eye gained the seas north of Cuba at 01:50 hours EDT, at a point due east of Playa Baracoa, on the western-most limit between the provinces of Havana and City of Havana (please see map). The storm caused very severe damages in coastal villages in both the Southern and Northern coasts of Western Cuba. The Guan?mar and Caj?o fishing villages, in the South, were totally wiped out by giant waves and swirling winds. Their population had been evacuated to safety hours before, but they lost all their belongings. In the North, the resort coastal villages of Santa Fe and Playa Baracoa also sustained very heavy damages. On its way north, the hurricane played havoc in the rural towns of Guira de Melena, San Antonio de los Ba?os, Alqu?zar and Bauta. As it passed Guira de Melena and San Antonio de los Ba?os, towns noted for the extreme high quality of their produce, including some of the world?s best tobacco leaf wrappings for cigars, winds of 180 kilometers an hour, gusting to 210/220 kilometers, were registered at a nearby airport. Bauta, another rural town on the path of the storn, was almost destroyed by the hurricane force winds. The winds destroyed banana plantations, felled fruit trees, destroyed homes and other communal installations along its path, and caused very heavy damages in several industrial plants, educational and health institutions and local, provincial and central government offices. Very important damages were sustained by agriculture. Hundreds of hectares planted to bananas were destroyed by the winds. Even edible root plantations, such as yucca, were heavily damaged. Citrus plantations were stripped of fruit. Tens of thousands of mango, guava and avocado trees were felled and their fruit lost. Very severe damages were inflicted on the electrical and telephone systems. The hurricane felled hundreds of utility poles and at least 26 huge power transmission towers, each one of them valued at 50,000 dollars. The huge power plant at Mariel, in Western Cuba, was cut off from the nation's electricity system and ceased supplying its 400 megawatt generating capacity. As a result, the western province of Pinar del Rio has been cut from the nation's electrical supply and service has been curtailed in the neighboring city of Havana. Almost 2.5 million people had their electricity service discontinued. The piped water and gas systems were also severely crippled, but service has been progressively restored through emergency generators. Hundreds of hectares of banana plantations were destroyed According to the latest information from Civil Defense, some 40,500 homes were heavily damaged, and 8,300 of them are a total loss. As of noon 16 August, only 6,230 persons of the quarter of a million intially evacuated remained at Government-provided shelters. The safety measures conducted by Cuba's Civil Defense led to a very low level of human casualties. Despite its virulence, the storm caused four dead and five injured. Hundreds of wooden bungalows on the water front were destroyed by the winds and the storm surge. As this report is being issued, more than 1 million persons still lack electricity and running water. Relief power company teams from Central and Eastern Cuba have rushed to the affected area and are working along with the area's crews. 26 mayor high voltage pylons have to be replaced, as well as hundreds of utility poles, many of them crushed by fallen trees, which have also to be cleared. Urban and provincial transport services have been partially restored as Havana's streets and avenues and surrounding areas are being cleared of trees and debris. This task is enormous, and despite efforts some areas are going to wait at least two weeks before power is restored. The local governments supported by the Central Administration have mobilized tanker fleets to provide drinking water to communities. Food is also being provided to vulnerable groups, and special efforts are being made by the nation's health system to prevent disease outbreaks. The UN Resident Coordinator is leading UN System concerns and efforts in support of Cuba and close contacts are being held with Civil Defense and our Government counterparts. More information will be provided as it becomes available. adp Havana, Cuba, 16 August 2004 From nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com Mon Aug 23 01:35:28 2004 From: nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com (nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 01:35:28 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [NYTr] Weekly News Update #760, 8/22/04 Message-ID: <200408230535.i7N5ZSv22902@olm.blythe-systems.com> WEEKLY NEWS UPDATE ON THE AMERICAS ISSUE #760, AUGUST 22, 2004 NICARAGUA SOLIDARITY NETWORK OF GREATER NEW YORK 339 LAFAYETTE ST., NEW YORK, NY 10012 (212) 674-9499 1. Bolivia: Gas War Resumes 2. Mexico: Report Confirms Jalisco Torture 3. Mexico: US Court OKs Torture 4. Venezuela: Chavez Sweeps Referendum 5. Haiti: Death Squad Leader Acquitted 6. El Salvador: 32 Die in Prison Fight 7. Dominican Republic: New President Urges "Austerity" 8. In Other News: Brazil & Puerto Rico ISSN#: 1084-922X. Weekly News Update on the Americas covers news from Latin America and the Caribbean, compiled and written from a progressive perspective. It has been published weekly by the Nicaragua Solidarity Network of Greater New York since 1990. If this issue was forwarded to you, please write to wnu at igc.org for a free one-month subscription. The Update is produced by an all- volunteer team and is funded solely through subscription contributions. For a one-year subscription (52 issues) via email, we ask for a suggested donation of $25. Make checks or money orders payable to Nicaragua Solidarity Network, 339 Lafayette Street, New York, NY 10012 (for tax deductible donations or to send money from overseas, contact us for details.) Your support is appreciated. A print edition of the Update is also available via first class mail (a contribution of at least $30 is suggested to cover printing and postage within the US). Back issues and source materials are available on request. Update subscribers also receive, as a supplement, our own weekly Immigration News Briefs and other services focused on Central America (Centr-Am News) and Colombia (Colombia Week). In addition, discounted combined subscription rates are available for John Ross' "Blind Man's Buff (formerly "Mexico Barbaro") and the weekly Nicaragua News Service. Contact us for info. Feel free to reproduce these updates, or reprint or re-post any information from them, but please credit us as "Weekly News Update on the Americas," and include our full contact information so people will know how to find us. Send us a copy of any publication where we are cited or reprinted. We also welcome your comments and ideas: send them to us at the street address above or via e-mail to wnu at igc.org. *1. BOLIVIA: GAS WAR RESUMES At 4am on Aug. 16, some 300 campesinos from El Chore in Bolivia's Santa Cruz department seized control of a British Petroleum (BP) oil production facility in the Santa Rosa del Sara region of Santa Cruz. The campesinos were demanding recognition and titling of their land, the expulsion of large landholders, construction of a road, $5 million for agricultural production and "fulfillment of the mandate" of a July 18 referendum in which Bolivian voters approved national control of gas and other resources [see Updates #755, 756]. The company immediately issued a communique saying it was halting operations at the Humberto Suarez Roca facility "to safeguard the security of the personnel and the campesinos who are blocking the entrance." The next day, Aug. 17, the campesinos also took over the facility's Patujusal and Los Cusis oilfields. The facility, operated by BP's Chaco- Amoco subsidiary, normally produces 2,000 barrels of oil a day. The campesinos ended their takeover late on Aug. 18 after reaching an agreement with the Santa Cruz governor's office and the national government. [Econoticiasbolivia.com 8/16/04; Los Tiempos (Cochabamba) 8/19/04 from El Deber (Santa Cruz) and news agencies; El Nuevo Herald (Miami) 8/19/04 from AP; La Jornada (Mexico) 8/18/04 from AFP, DPA, Reuters] Late on Aug. 18, some 300 residents of Villamontes in Tarija department stormed the San Antonio gas compression plant, operated by the Transredes company, and shut down its valves, cutting off gas flow to the departmental capital, Tarija, as well as to Argentina and Brazil. The Villamontes residents are demanding construction of a highway linking Tarija to Paraguay via Villamontes. Residents began a civic strike on Aug. 10 or 11 after trying for more than eight months to get the government to respond to their demands. They also set up blockades along local roads leading to Argentina and Paraguay. The shutdown of the valves came at the close of a local assembly of the Villamontes Strike Committee where members discussed how to step up the pressure. [LT 8/18/04 from El Deber, 8/19/04 from El Deber and news agencies; AP 8/19/04] Bolivian president Carlos Mesa Gisbert responded to the protest actions on Aug. 19 by sending military personnel to all the gas and oil facilities in the country to prevent new takeovers. [LT 8/20/04 from El Deber & news agencies] In Santa Cruz, the government had already sent heavily armed police and military agents to protect the Palmasola refinery after the Santa Cruz Federation of Neighborhood Boards (Fejuve) staged a massive march to the refinery and threatened to take it over to protest rising fuel prices. [Econoticiasbolivia.com 8/18/04] On Aug. 19, bus drivers in Oruro department went on strike and marched through the departmental capital to demand that Mesa fulfill a promise to freeze fuel prices. Some 20 drivers in Oruro began a hunger strike on Aug. 20. Drivers are mobilizing across the country; they are planning a hunger strike and marches in La Paz and El Alto starting on Aug. 23, and have proposed taking over oil and gas refineries to pressure the government. They are also considering a general strike. [LT 8/20/04 from El Deber & news agencies; El Diario (La Paz) 8/20/04; Europa Press 8/20/04] On Aug. 20, the Villamontes residents ended their protest after reaching an agreement with the government on their demands for the highway construction. Mesa resolved the conflict with the signing in La Paz of an executive decree which instructs the National Highway Service to put the project up for bidding within 180 days. The Brazilian government has agreed to finance the road. At the same time, the government threatened on Aug. 20 to pursue legal charges against those responsible for taking over oilfields or shutting down gas valves. [LT 8/21/04 from El Deber] On Aug. 18 about 10 members of Bolivia's Landless Movement (MST) began a hunger strike at the Bolivian Workers Central (COB) headquarters in La Paz to demand the release of MST leader Gabriel Pinto [see Update #759]. MST members threatened to take over the Madrejones oil well in southern Bolivia if Pinto is not freed. Silvestre Saisari, leader of the MST's eastern bloc, said members of his organization had already taken over two oil wells. Leaders of the COB and the Coordinating Committee to Defend the Gas have announced that nationwide mobilizations will begin on Aug. 25 to reject the government's constant fuel price increases and win the nationalization of Bolivia's oil and gas resources. [Econoticiasbolivia.com 8/18/04] On Aug. 20, the Economic Development Commission of Bolivia's Chamber of Deputies put a freeze on further discussion of Mesa's proposed new Hydrocarbons Law, asking the government to address the bill's shortcomings and submit a new proposal. The proposal leaves too many legal loopholes and gives the president too much power to approve contracts by decree, the deputies said. In addition, as Oscar Arrien of the rightwing Nationalist Revolutionary Movement (MNR) later pointed out, the bill submitted by Mesa provides for taxes and royalties of less than 20% on multinational oil companies, while the July 18 referendum called for taxes and royalties of up to 50%. Mesa responded to the deputies' decision by threatening to veto any and every law passed by Congress until the Hydrocarbons Law is approved without further modifications. The threat comes as political parties prepare for muncipal elections scheduled for Dec. 5; Congress must still make modifications to the electoral code in order to allow the vote to go forward. [Econoticiasbolivia.com 8/20/04, 8/21/04] Cocalero leader Evo Morales Ayma of the Movement to Socialism (MAS)--which is expected to dominate in the municipal elections-- warned that if Mesa continues to "blackmail" Congress, he could follow in the footsteps of his predecessor, Gonzalo Sanchez de Lozada, who fled the country after being ousted in a popular rebellion last Oct. 17. "The president is digging his own grave, he's throwing the country into confusion, he's provoking the people to mobilize, to unite. The president should respect the results [of the referendum], recovering the hydrocarbons. If the transnationals want to stay, let them stay, and if we need technology from the oil companies, we'll have to do a service contract. They can't keep deciding about the natural resources," said Morales. [Econoticiasbolivia.com 8/21/04] *2. MEXICO: REPORT CONFIRMS JALISCO TORTURE On Aug. 16 the Mexican federal government's National Human Rights Commission (CNDH) issued a report condemning the government of the western state of Jalisco for its treatment of anti-neoliberal protesters at the Third Summit of Latin America, the Caribbean and the European Union (EU), held in Guadalajara May 28-29 [see Updates #749, 751, 753]. Confirming most of the charges made by protesters and their supporters, the CNDH found that on the night of May 28 the authorities arrested 73 people illegally and held them incommunicado, subjected 53 of the prisoners to cruel and degrading treatment, and tortured 19 of them. According to the report, the police conducted sweeps in the city, arresting people who "appeared suspicious" because of their style of dress, the color of their clothes or their general appearance. Many of the detainees were beaten, and some were tortured by being kept in painful positions or by being temporarily suffocated with plastic bags over their heads. Male police agents were allowed to watch as female agents strip-searched female detainees, including minors. The report called on Jalisco governor Francisco Ramirez Acuna to set guidelines for the treatment of prisoners and to start a criminal investigation of the Guadalajara events. Ramirez Acuna, of the center-right National Action Party (PAN), gave no indication that he would follow the recommendations. When CNDH president Jose Luis Soberanes offered to hold a public debate on the report, Ramirez Acuna said he refused to take part in a "duel in the marketplace." Meanwhile, 17 or 18 of the detainees are still being held. On Aug. 19 members of various anti-neoliberal organizations marched in Guadalajara to demand the prisoners' release. Protesters started an encampment outside a state government building; they said they will continue the protest until the detainees are freed. [La Jornada (Mexico) 8/17/04, 8/20/04] *3. MEXICO: US COURT OKS TORTURE In a unanimous ruling on Aug. 16, a three-judge panel of the US Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco ruled that US courts have no jurisdiction to block the extradition of a foreign suspect to a country where he or she faces torture. The ruling came in the case of Mexican citizen Ramiro Cornejo-Barreto, a US legal resident who is charged with killing a police officer during a May 1989 jewelry store robbery in Tijuana in the Mexican state of Baja California Norte. After his arrest in Tijuana, Cornejo-Barreto said he was held incommunicado for eight days, denied food and water, beaten, subjected to electric shocks to his genitals, had chili peppers shoved up his nose, and was ordered to sign blank documents that were later used in faking a confession to the killing. According to his attorney, deputy federal public defender Craig Wilke, Cornejo-Barreto escaped from jail in Tijuana in 1991 and returned home to Orange County, California. He was arrested in 1996 on an extradition warrant and has been in US custody in Los Angeles ever since. "Extradition is quintessentially a matter of foreign policy," said Judge Pamela Rymer in the 3-0 ruling. "It is the role of the secretary of state, not the courts, to determine whether extradition should be denied on humanitarian grounds or on account of the treatment that the fugitive is likely to receive upon his return to the extraditing country." A 1998 anti-torture law, which prohibits extradition to a nation where torture is likely, does not authorize a suspect to go to court to challenge an extradition order, according to Rymer, who was joined in the decision by Judges J. Clifford Wallace and Richard Tallman. The ruling means "the executive branch can do what it wants without any oversight," said Wilke, who said he would ask the full court for a rehearing. In 2000, a different panel of the appeals court ruled that Cornejo-Barreto was subject to extradition but could raise the torture issue in court if the State Department approved his extradition. The State Department issued its final extradition order in 2001--without referring to the possibility of torture, according to Wilke. In their Aug. 16 ruling, the three judges said they were not bound by the 2000 decision. [San Francisco Chronicle 8/17/04] *4. VENEZUELA: CHAVEZ SWEEPS REFERENDUM At 4am on Aug. 16, Venezuela's National Electoral Council (CNE) announced preliminary results in the Aug. 15 referendum seeking to remove left-populist president Hugo Chavez Frias from office. With 94.49% of the votes counted, 4,991,483 Venezuelans (58.25%) had voted to keep Chavez in office, against 3,576,517 (41.74%) voting to remove him. [Servicio Informativo "Alai-amlatina" 8/16/04] Chavez's percentage of the votes was about the same as in 2000, when he won reelection with 59.4% of the vote [see Update #549]. Later in the day, the main international observer groups, the Organization of American States (OAS) and the Atlanta-based Carter Center, backed the CNE's count. "There is a clear difference in favor of the government of President Chavez," said former US president Jimmy Carter, who heads the Carter Center, at a joint news conference with OAS general secretary Cesar Gaviria, a former president of Colombia. [New York Times 8/17/04] On Aug. 21 the two groups announced that an audit of 150 polling places had confirmed the official tally. [Miami Herald 8/22/04] The center-right opposition continued to insist that Chavez supporters had committed a massive fraud, possibly by tampering with the computerized voting system. Opposition spokespeople cited exit polls showing the anti-Chavez vote with a 20-point lead. These polls were conducted by a US firm, Penn, Schoen & Berland Associates, and the field work was done by a pro- opposition polling group, Sumate, which received a $53,400 grant from the US government's National Endowment for Democracy (NED). NED senior program officer Chris Sabatini insisted that Sumate is "independent and impartial." "Exit polls are notoriously unreliable," he said, to explain the disparity in the counts. [AP 8/19/04] The presidents of Argentina, Brasil, Colombia and Paraguay congratulated Chavez on Aug. 16 soon after the results were announced. [MH 8/17/04 from AFP] The US government, which strongly opposed Chavez in the past, waited until Aug. 17 to react. State Department spokesperson Adam Ereli acknowledged, without congratulating Chavez: "Based on these preliminary results, we think that the issue is settled." [NYT 8/18/04] Oil prices, which had been rising the previous week because of concerns over growing violence in Iraq and the chance of more instability in Venezuela, fell as it became clear that Chavez had won overwhelmingly. Low-sulfur crude oil ended Aug. 16 at $46.05 a barrel, down 53 cents, on the New York Mercantile Exchange. [NYT 8/16/04] Latin American leftists were encouraged by the vote. Noting that the Venezuelan opposition, backed by the US, had failed in three major attempts to drive Chavez from office, the left-leaning Mexican daily La Jornada concluded that after the collapse of Venezuela's traditional parties, the opposition had been largely a creation of the "mediocracy," the large, conservative mass media corporations. [LJ 8/17/04] Luis D'Elia, a leader of Argentina's radical piquetero movement, called Chavez's victory "a strategic triumph in the construction of an alternative model to conservative neoliberalism." Evo Morales, leader of Bolivia's cocalero movement, told the Associated Press that Chavez had become "Latin America's leader of liberation forces." [AP 8/21/04] *5. HAITI: DEATH SQUAD LEADER ACQUITTED After a hasty, all-night trial, on the morning of Aug. 17 a Haitian "special" court acquitted paramilitary leader Louis Jodel Chamblain and former police captain Jackson Joanis of charges of masterminding the Sept. 11, 1993 murder of business leader Antoine Izmery. Chamblain and Joanis were returned to prison, since Chamblain still face charges in connection with an April 1994 massacre in the Raboteau neighborhood in Gonaives [see Update #222], and Joanis is charged in the August 1994 murder of a priest, Jean-Marie Vincent, in Port-au-Prince [see Update #240]. Chamblain was second in command of the Front for the Progress and Advancement of Haiti (FRAPH), a death squad that murdered hundreds of supporters of left-populist president Jean-Bertrand Aristide after he was overthrown in a September 1991 military coup. Chamblain fled to the Dominican Republic after a US-led military intervention restored Aristide to office in 1994. In 1995 a Haitian court convicted Chamblain in absentia of murdering Izmery, a prominent Aristide supporter. Chamblain returned to Haiti early this year with other paramilitaries to start a rebellion that led to the removal of Aristide, who was serving a second term as president. Chamblain turned himself in to authorities on Apr. 22 [see Update #743]--supposedly after a meeting with interim justice minister Bernard Gousse--and requested a second trial, allowed under Haitian law for people convicted in absentia. Joanis fled to the US after Aristide's return but was deported back to Haiti in 2002. Haitian authorities jailed him, but he was freed on Feb. 29, the day Aristide was flown out of the country by the US, when all prisoners were mysteriously released from the National Penitentiary [see Update #736]. Joanis turned himself in earlier in August. The retrial was irregular, with most witnesses failing to appear, probably because of intimidation by Chamblain supporters. "We deeply regret the haste with which their cases were brought to retrial, resulting in procedural deficiencies that call into question the integrity of the process," US State Department spokesperson Adam Ereli said. The National Coalition for Haitian Rights (NCHR), which is close to the interim government put in place after Aristide's overthrow, said it had information indicating the trial was the result of a deal the government had made with the anti-Aristide paramilitaries. Eliphete St-Pierre, head of the Platform of Haitian Human Rights Organizations (POHDH), said on Aug. 17 that he had information that two former FRAPH members were on the 12-member jury. [Haiti Support Group News Briefs 8/17/04 from Reuters; Agence Haitienne de Press (AHP) 8/17/04; BBC News 8/19/04] *6. EL SALVADOR: 32 DIE IN PRISON FIGHT On Aug. 18, a fight involving about 400 jailed members of the "Mara 18" gang and about 100 other prisoners left 32 people dead and 23 wounded at La Esperanza, a maximum security prison in Mariona, just north of San Salvador. The prisoners allegedly used rocks, clubs and machetes in the fight. A grenade also exploded during the fight, but apparently did not cause any injuries. A Reuters photographer who entered the prison said most of the dead were young men with tattoos. Prison guards and special police units intervened; calm returned to the jail six hours later, after authorities promised that the gang members would be transferred. On Aug. 19 authorities transferred 360 Mara 18 members to a prison in Cojutepeque, 35 kilometers east of the capital; 80 other prisoners involved in the fight were also transferred, some to the Apanteos prison in Santa Ana and others to the San Vicente penitentiary. La Esperanza prison has the capacity to house 800 prisoners, but as of Aug. 16 it was holding 3,194. Rodolfo Garay Pineda, El Salvador's general director of prisons, said La Esperanza would be remodeled to implement a "panoptic" security plan, under which the infrastructure will be rebuilt in concrete, and the prison will have greater control over the prisoners. [CNN en Espanol 8/19/04 from Reuters; El Nuevo Herald 8/20/04 from AFP; La Prensa Grafica 8/19/04, 8/20/04; Washington Post 8/19/04 from Reuters] *7. DOMINICAN REPUBLIC: NEW PRESIDENT URGES "AUSTERITY" On Aug. 16, Leonel Fernandez Reyna of the Dominican Liberation Party (PLD) was inaugurated as president of the Dominican Republic for a four-year term, replacing Hipolito Mejia of the Dominican Revolutionary Party (PRD), whose reelection bid he defeated easily in the May 16 elections [see Update #747]. It was Fernandez's second term; he previously was president from 1996 to 2000. The new vice president is Rafael Albuquerque. [El Nacional (Santo Domingo) 8/17/04] Fernandez's government is inheriting a troubled economy: $6 billion in foreign debt, 16% unemployment, 32% inflation and a Dominican peso which has lost half its value against the US dollar in two years. "This crisis will last at least two years and will be painful," predicts Miguel Ceara-Hatton, an economist with the United Nations Development Program (UNDP) in Santo Domingo. [Miami Herald 8/16/04 from AP] In his inaugural speech before the National Assembly, Fernandez announced he would institute an austerity plan in the government, cracking down on excess government posts and perks. "But at the same time that measures are taken to significantly reduce the government's expense budget, it is essential that the National Congress approve, within the shortest time possible, the fiscal reform project which has been submitted to it, and which was the result of the previous administration's accord with the International Monetary Fund (IMF)," said Fernandez. [EN 8/17/04] The PLD's reform proposal would raise taxes between 10% and 20% on tobacco, alcohol, phone services and international travel; it has stalled in the Senate, where the PRD holds 29 of 32 seats. [MH 8/16/04 from AP] While pledging to eliminate graft and corruption, Fernandez drew criticism for giving top posts in his new administration to four former officials linked to an embezzlement scandal. All four served in the first Fernandez administration, from 1996 to 2000, and all have trials pending on charges stemming from the alleged disappearance of $100 million from the Temporary and Minimal Employment Program, a fund intended to create jobs and quell strikes. Fernandez named the program's ex-coordinator, Luis Inchausti--arrested on embezzlement charges in 2001--as secretary of state without portfolio, traditionally a top presidential adviser. Former public works secretary Diandino Pena has now been appointed to head a subway construction project; former administrative secretary Simon Lizardo is now the nation's top auditor; and former auditor Haivanjoe Ng Cortina will regulate the Santo Domingo Stock Exchange. The latter three are charged with negligence by allowing the embezzlement. All four say they are innocent. No trial dates have been set. [MH 8/21/04 from AP] On Aug. 17, Fernandez replaced all the top military brass. The new armed forces secretary is Adm. Sigfrido Pared Perez, who was intelligence chief in Fernandez's previous administration and is the brother of PLD secretary general Reinaldo Pared. Fernandez named Maj. Gen. Jose Ricardo Estrella to head the army, Vice Adm. Cesar Augusto Dewint Ruiz to lead the navy, and Maj. Gen. Nelson Marmolejos as the new air force chief. Fernandez also replaced the heads of the National Police, the National Investigations Department and the National Drug Control Department. Government sources say Fernandez will soon move to retire between 50 and 100 military generals--the country has more than 100, which Fernandez called "excessive." [CNN en Espanol 8/17/04 from Reuters; EN 8/19/04] *8. IN OTHER NEWS... The Brazilian government will inaugurate its own condom factory in the western state of Acre next year as part of its efforts to curb the spread of AIDS. The new plant will have an initial annual output of 100 million condoms, all of which will be distributed for free, said Pedro Chequer, director of the Health Ministry's Anti-AIDS Program. [Miami Herald 8/12/04 from unspecified wire services]... Puerto Rican independence activist Antonio Camacho Negron was released on Aug. 17 from a federal prison in Pennsylvania after serving 15 years in prison for robbing $7.1 million from a Wells Fargo truck in Hartford, Connecticut, in 1983. Camacho Negron was sentenced in 1988 to 15 years for conspiracy in relation to the robbery, which was carried out as an action of the independence group Macheteros. In 1999 Camacho Negron refused a clemency offer accepted by 12 other jailed Puerto Rican activists because it came with restrictive conditions [see Updates #498, 499, 501, 502]. Camacho Negron expects to be rearrested after returning to Puerto Rico, since he doesn't recognize the authority of the US government and will refuse to meet with his parole officer. [AP 8/19/04] END ======================================================================= Weekly News Update on the Americas * Nicaragua Solidarity Network of NY 339 Lafayette Street, New York, NY 10012 phone: 212-674-9499 fax: 212-674-9139 email: wnu at igc.org ======================================================================= From nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com Mon Aug 23 01:36:27 2004 From: nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com (nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 01:36:27 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [NYTr] Iran: The Babble and the Bomb Message-ID: <200408230536.i7N5aRs22957@olm.blythe-systems.com> Asia Times Online http://atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/FH21Ak01.html Iran: The babble and the bomb By Ehsan Ahrari Western experts have made an art of frightening and wrong predictions about some major issues involving the Muslim and Arab world. The uninitiated should spend some time reading reckless analyses related to the Arab "petro-power" of the 1970s. According to some of those analyses, Arabs should have owned major chunks of the US and European productive sectors merely through purchases, or by investing the billions of dollars they made in that decade though the exercise of oil power. One wonders why Arabs don't own those assets. Yet the same types of wrong-headed scenarios are being offered about a "nuclear" Iran, if it develops nuclear weapons. Let's be clear about one issue. Neither Iran nor North Korea should develop nuclear weapons. We already have too many nuclear powers on this small planet of ours, armed with enough nuclear weapons to blow it up many times over. But what if Iran does develop nuclear weapons? A number of facts and fictions about this issue should be well understood. The first fact is that Iran does not yet have nuclear weapons. Second, it aspires to develop such weapons, if not now, then certainly in the foreseeable future - say, within 10 years. Third, Iran is genuinely afraid of a militaristic United States whose military forces are lurking beyond Iran's eastern border in Afghanistan and its western borders in Iraq, and, like North Korea, considers its own nuclear weapons as a source of deterrence to potential US military action against the regime. The US under President George W Bush and his neo-conservative policymakers has every intention of unsheathing the regime-change strategy if he is re-elected in November. The neo-cons' aspirations of global hegemony have encountered a rude awakening in Iraq. However, those ambitions are neither abandoned, nor are they dead. They are undergoing a process of regrouping and rethinking about the future modalities of America's global dominance, but especially in the Middle East, in the event that Bush gets a second term. Under a re-elected Bush, Iran has most to fear about America's potential exercise of regime change, for a variety of reasons. First, there continues to be bad blood between Iran and the US related to the hostage crisis of the late 1970s. Second, after the dismantlement of Saddam Hussein's regime, Iran has emerged as a major country that is confronting US hegemony in its immediate neighborhood, and is willing to take on the lone superpower rhetorically. Third, Iran continues to exercise considerable influence in Iraq. As such, it challenges America's dream of establishing its permanent presence in a subservient Iraq by ensuring the creation of a diffident regime. Implanting Western-style democracy in Iraq and in the Middle East is the 21st-century version of the white man's burden of the lone superpower. But Iran remains a force - more symbolically than militarily - against America's desire to impose democratic liberalism on the Muslim Middle East, for Iran's rulers have their own vision for their country and for post-Saddam Iraq: that of continuing with the Islamic republic and preparing ground to ensure that some form of Islamic government is established in Iraq through elections. Because of these intricate reasons for conflict with the United States, there is no wonder fears related to regime survival drive Iran to seek a nuclear-weapons option. And that very same reason serves as just another wrinkle in the continuing - or even escalating - wrangling between Iran and the US. The chief fiction related to Iran's potential development of nuclear weapons is the frequent suggestion that Egypt and Saudi Arabia would also consider developing nuclear weapons. The fact of the matter is that Egypt has no security-related reasons to develop nuclear weapons - even though Israel is a nuclear power, it is at peace with Egypt. It is true that Egypt is not at all happy that Israel not only has nuclear weapons but is also busy developing its naval-based nuclear power, while the US is creating such a fuss about the potential nuclear weapons development by Iran and North Korea. Ideally, Egypt would like to develop nuclear weapons if for no other reasons than just to gain strategic parity with Israel. However, if Egypt were seriously to consider developing nuclear weapons, the US$1.5 billion per year in US assistance to that country would be discontinued instantly. Given its acute economic-development-related problems, Egypt can least afford a potential loss of such substantial assistance. Similarly, Saudi Arabia has no security-related reasons to develop nuclear weapons, even if Iran acquires them. Iran poses no threat to Saudi Arabia, especially considering the significance of the oil kingdom for the economies of Europe and Japan. No Iranian leader in his right mind would consider a harebrained scheme of even fomenting trouble inside Saudi Arabia, much less threatening the regime. Iran has little reason to contemplate the alternative to the current Saudi monarchy: Wahhabi extremists who don't even regard Shi'ites as Muslims. So, regardless of their mutual differences, Saudi Arabia and Iran are likely to get along even if Iran develops nuclear weapons. Besides, developing nuclear weapons is not a realistic option for Saudi Arabia, even if no stringent global nuclear-proliferation regimes were in place. Development of nuclear weapons requires an enormous amount of indigenous technical knowledge, and elaborate supporting infrastructure, which Saudi Arabia is not only sorely lacking, but which would take decades to develop under the best circumstances. No country has, nor can any country hire, expatriate technocrats who can be counted on to make it a nuclear power. Another suggestion floating in the US press is that Saudi Arabia has financed Pakistani nuclear weapons with some sort of secret understanding that it would be transferred, or at least shared, between the two countries. Needless to say, authors of this speculation are persons of the same background who invented the story that Saddam not only had nuclear weapons, but he was capable of launching them toward Britain within the span of 45 minutes. Considering the United States' earnest endeavors to forestall all global attempts related to nuclear proliferation, Pakistan would be wishing death for its own nuclear program by even contemplating a crazy scheme like transferring or sharing its nuclear weapons with Saudi Arabia. As the US waits for the International Atomic Energy Agency and the European Union Three (France, Germany and the United Kingdom) to persuade Iran to abandon all aspirations of developing nuclear weapons, it is also becoming fairly certain that Iran has already made a decision to materialize that option. We are currently given two predictions about the date by which Iran would develop nuclear weapons. The Central Intelligence Agency estimates it to be by 2010, while Israel says 2007. Bush is likely to give the international actors time to persuade Iran to come clean regarding its nuclear program until November of this year. If he is re-elected, look for a possible preemptive US unilateral attack or a combined US-Israeli attack on Iran's nuclear facilities by late this year, or early next year. [Ehsan Ahrari, PhD, is an Alexandria, Virginia, US-based independent strategic analyst.] (Copyright 2004 Asia Times Online Ltd. From nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com Mon Aug 23 01:46:56 2004 From: nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com (nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 01:46:56 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [NYTr] What Do We Call the Enemy? Message-ID: <200408230546.i7N5kun23181@olm.blythe-systems.com> Asia Times Online - August22, 2004 http://www.atimes.com What do we call the enemy? By Tom Engelhardt Last week, through a front-page reconsideration of its Iraq reporting written by media columnist Howard Kurtz ("The Post on WMDs: An inside story"), the Washington Post finally hung out a piece or two of its dirty laundry. This comes three months after the New York Times buried its Iraq mea culpa on page 10 (and then its ombudsman Daniel Okrent did a far more forthcoming consideration of the same). The fact is that while its editorial page was beating the drums for war, Post prewar reportage was in general marginally better than that of the Times. It had no obvious raging embarrassments like Times reporter Judith Miller's shameful pieces and, more recently, from Walter Pincus to Mike Allen to Dana Priest, it was on the beat of real Bush administration stories in Washington far sooner than its Times equivalents. Still, it has a good deal to apologize for ("from August 2002 through the March 19, 2003, launch of the war, the Post ran more than 140 front-page stories that focused heavily on administration rhetoric against Iraq. Some examples: 'Cheney says Iraqi strike is justified'; 'War cabinet argues for Iraq attack'; 'Bush tells United Nations it must stand up to Hussein or US will'; 'Bush cites urgent Iraqi threat'; 'Bush tells troops: Prepare for war'"), though you'll find no apologies here, certainly not for the front-paging of administration war propaganda and the nixing or burying of what prewar questioning its reporters did. You'll also find the following howler from executive editor Leonard Downie Jr: "We were so focused on trying to figure out what the administration [of President George W Bush] was doing that we were not giving the same play to people who said it wouldn't be a good idea to go to war and were questioning the administration's rationale," not to speak of Bob Woodward's claim that "We had no alternative sources of information" - at a moment when he knew from the horse's mouth, so to speak, that the Bush administration was intent on war with Iraq. (Of course, you didn't need insider sources to grasp this, just a pair of eyes and ears.) Imagine, though, that Washington's imperial paper of record was focused only on discovering what then couldn't have been more obvious to tens of millions of people around the world: that the Bush administration was hell-bent on and determined only to go to war, WMD (weapons of mass destruction) or no. So imagine, in turn, Kurtz is the best we can hope for a year and a quarter after Baghdad was taken, after a series of tsunami-like events that have sent the Bush administration reeling, long after every aspect of its WMD claims has gone down those "aluminum tubes" (doubts about which the Post admits to having back-paged) and into oblivion. And they say the president has a tough time acknowledging error! Self-censorship, conformity, and craven bowing to Bush administration propaganda of the sort admitted to by the Washington Post are, however, just the tip of the media iceberg. The Post, via Kurtz, is only not-apologizing for what was actually written and where it was placed in the paper. It remains beyond anyone's wildest dreams to hope that the United States' major papers would devote the slightest thought to stories that logically should have been covered but simply went missing in action (MIA). So for the rest of this dispatch, let me just focus on US Iraq reportage since the taking of Baghdad and offer my own little non-inclusive list of occupationwar stories that seem to me to have gone MIA - and these are only the ones that, with my limited public sources and limited knowledge, I can see from here. Then, because every war has its war words that are meant to bend embattled reality to someone's advantage, I want to consider a few recent examples of Iraq war words and how the press has dealt with them. Missing stories 1. Air power. Air power has been at the heart of the US style of war since World War II. With the sole exception of Central America in the Ronald Reagan era, from the Korean War in the early 1950s to Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia in the 1960s to the 2001 "shock and awe" bombing of Baghdad, the application of massive air power (or more recently of cruise missiles), often unopposed, has been the essence of war as Americans have fought it. It strikes us Americans as completely normal to be able to bring air power to bear in situations where the enemy of choice has neither air power of its own, nor any but the most minimal air defenses. When under the onslaught, if the enemy then takes refuge in places that would normally be forbidden to bomb - hospitals, schools, temples, mosques, or among the civilian population - this is seen as a "cowardly" act, placing our military at such a disadvantage as to nullify the "rules of war". And this is a theme sometimes taken up in the press. In a recent piece ("Why the Najaf offensive is on hold"), for instance, Time's Tony Karon, who generally writes interesting analysis, picked up a phrase made popular in the Vietnam era in discussing the recent fighting near the Imam Ali Shrine in Najaf: "While the estimated 1,000 lightly armed Mehdi militiamen," he wrote, "were no match for more than 3,000 US troops and an undisclosed number of Iraqi personnel deployed there, the political circumstances in which the battle was waged forced the marines to fight with one hand tied behind their backs." Now this is quite true. For fear of further damaging the Shrine of Imam Ali, the marines are evidently at present under orders, if fired upon from the direction of the shrine, not to fire back. What's missing in action here, however, is the other part of the story: when we employ Apache helicopters, Predator drones armed with Hellfire missiles, and F-16s (not to speak of tanks) in heavily populated urban areas against an enemy armed mainly with AK-47s and rocket-propelled grenades (RPGs), how many hands do we have in front of our backs? Six? Ten? Eighty-seven? Now that significant portions of Iraq, city by city, seem to be blinking off the US map, our military is increasingly releasing air power as the weapon of choice in those heavily populated urban areas. In the past week, we have bombed, missiled or strafed (sometimes a combination of all three) in Sadr City, the Shi'ite slum holding an estimated 2 million of Baghdad's inhabitants, Samarra, Kut, Najaf, Fallujah (more than once) and possibly in Ramadi and Hilla as well among other places. If you have the time to read deep into Iraq coverage, follow various news wires, check out historian Juan Cole's invaluable Informed Comment website, check Antiwar.com and troll various representatives of the foreign press online, you can certainly piece much of this together. So, in Kut, Agence France-Presse (AFP) reported: Heavy overnight US bombing of Kut killed 84 people and wounded nearly 180 others, a day after clashes between Iraqi police and Shi'ite militiamen in the southern city, a hospital official said ... Police Colonel Salam Fakhri said the bombing started at 1am Wednesday and lasted until 3am. "The bombing was concentrated in Al-Sharkia district as the US military felt there were a lot of Shi'ite militiamen in that area. It also has an office of [radical Shi'ite Muslim cleric and militia chief] Moqtada Sadr," he said. Meanwhile, on August 12 in Samarra, 500-pound (227-kilogram) bombs were dropped on two "known enemy locations" killing, according to the US military, a suspiciously well-rounded-off 50 "anti-Iraqi forces" ("But Dr Abdul Hamid al-Samarrai told AFP news agency at the main hospital that most of the casualties were women and children"). What's striking is that, while such bombings seem on the increase, I've noted no significant articles in the US press on the loosing of US air power in Iraq, the dangers and possible illegalities involved in bombing heavily populated civilian areas of a country you still functionally "occupy", or of the size and positioning of US air power in Iraq. If you're an Internet news junky, of course, you can go to the globalsecurity.org website and check out for yourself the US Air Force in Southwest Asia and where US planes are based in Iraq (as best as can be known), but you might think that the widespread, increasingly commonplace bombing of civilian areas in cities would be a story the media might want to cover in something more than the odd paragraph deep into pieces on other subjects. There's an old Vietnam-era lesson in this, as a friend and expert on our experience in Vietnam recently pointed out to me. Reporters can generally follow and cover fighting on the ground. It's harder to be "on the spot" for bombing, and as the military take for granted (and as was true of the United States' largely uncovered massive air assaults on the South Vietnamese countryside, and parts of Laos and Cambodia back in the late 1960s and early 1970s), for the US press, out of sight is out of mind. (See Point 4 below.) 2. Permanent bases. Here's another desperately uncovered story of the Iraq waroccupationwar, one I've harped on since April 2003 - America's permanent bases (charmingly referred to as "enduring camps") in Iraq. The possibility that four of these might be built was discussed on the front page of the New York Times while the invasion of Iraq was still in progress (and vehemently denied by the Pentagon). A year later, in the spring of 2004, the Chicago Tribune had a couple of pieces on the up to 14 enduring camps being prepared. Otherwise, as far as I can tell, permanent US bases, plans for them, the building of them, and what they might mean, strategically speaking, have gone almost completely unmentioned in the US media. And enormous as they evidently are, they should be hard to overlook. Here's the only reference I've found, in an obscure engineering journal, to their overall size and the enormousness of the funds being pouted into them, based on an e-mail interview with Lieutenant-Colonel David (Mark) Holt of the Army Corps of Engineers, "who is tasked with facilities development". It reads: US Base Construction - The third major mission the army's engineers are engaged in is building facilities for the bed-down of US forces. "Again the numbers are staggering," Holt says. Most of work is being done through KBR. "Interesting program in the several-billion-dollar range," Holt says. Imagine, "in the several-billion-dollar range" and being built by Halliburton subsidiary KBR. Some of them, such as Camp Anaconda, are evidently comparable in size to the vast Vietnam-era bases that the US built in such places as Danang. These go unmentioned and yet if you don't grasp that, from the beginning, the Pentagon was planning a major string of "enduring camps" in Iraq, then you really can't grasp why the Bush administration had no exit strategy from that country - because, of course, it had no plans to depart. These permanent bases also help explain why the Coalition Provisional Administration of L Paul Bremer so confidently disbanded the Iraqi military of 400,000 and made plans instead to rebuild a modest-sized force (but not an air force) of perhaps 35,000-40,000 lightly armed, tankless troops (as was said again and again from the time of the invasion on). Instead of maintaining anything close to a Saddam Hussein-sized military, the neo-cons and Pentagon hawks in Washington planned to stick around and have the US provide the air power and muscle needed in such a heavily armed region itself, as indeed is happening, though under far different circumstances than our policymakers imagined. Of all the subjects one can understand not being covered in Iraq right now due to the obvious dangers to foreign reporters, these US bases certainly should be a reasonably safe exception. 3. Urban warfare and slaughter. One of the fears of the military at the time of invasion of Iraq was that US troops might be bogged down in urban guerrilla warfare in Baghdad, a situation in which our immense technological advantages in war-fighting could be constrained or partially nullified in a maze of city streets. There were scores of articles about this fearful possibility then and a slew of reports about US preparations for such a fate. (A good example of such pieces is New York Times reporter Alan Cowell's "House to house: Urban warfare: Long a key part of an underdog's down-to-earth arsenal", published on March 27, 2003.) In the end, Baghdad fell largely without a struggle. Critics - and there were many, including military ones, who raised the possibility of urban warfare - were in essence laughed off the premises as what in the Vietnam era would have been known as "nervous Nellies", and the subject was forgotten. Now, this nightmare seems to be coming true. From Mosul in the north to Basra in the south, US and British troops are involved in spreading urban guerrilla warfare. Yet while this is obvious, it also goes largely uncommented upon. There is no real discussion or analysis of this in our press that I've seen, though reporters would largely only have to revisit their own or their colleagues' reportage from the spring of 2003 to begin. Certainly, the recent warfare in the streets of, and amid the tombstones of, Najaf has been covered in some daily detail. There have been descriptions of "bloody" fighting and fierce "hand to hand" combat in Najaf's vast holy cemetery and in the alleyways of the old city. These accounts give a sense of equality in struggle (as in hands tied behind backs). However, if you look at the casualty figures, it seems that so far perhaps eight American soldiers have died in the fighting as opposed to many hundreds of Iraqis. Even if US "body counts" of dead Mahdi Army militiamen, announced at more than 300 almost as the battle began, are exaggerated (and even if some of those dead are assumed to be civilians caught up in fighting in a sizable city rather than "anti-Iraqi forces"), the casualty figures are still grotesquely disproportionate (though remarkably similar to those in most 19th-century colonial wars). On the face of it, this should really not simply be labeled "bloody fighting" or "fierce hand-to-hand combat" (however fearsome and dangerous it may be for American soldiers). Another word should be added: "slaughter". On this, the casualty figures do not lie. I assure you, though, that you can search the US media high and low and not find that word, or anything similar. 4. US strategy in Iraq. When the new State DepartmentCIA (Central Intelligence Agency) team arrived during the June "transition", led by soft-spoken Ambassador John Negroponte, they clearly had a plan - put new Prime Minister Iyad Allawi and other Iraqi spokesmen in front of the cameras and get US policymakers inside the Green Zone to shut up. They did so and, miraculously, evidently lacking access, sources, leaks, or quotable voices, reporters simply stopped writing accounts, analyses, speculations on the nature of or meaning of US strategic planning in Iraq. Green Zone officialdom simply disappeared from our press, which largely dealt with the fighting that could be seen in Najaf and Allawi's supposed decisions in relation to Najaf. It may be obvious to any sane observer that the Americans are still in charge and that US strategic decisions are largely being implemented by Americans, not Iraqis; it may also be plausible that the offensive against Najaf results from a US urge (however ill-advised) to crush what looked to be the easiest of the oppositional forces in the country, Muqtada al-Sadr's lightly armed, ill-trained militiamen, and perhaps somehow take Iraq off front pages until November, but as a news story, all strategic thinking in Baghdad is, at the moment, missing in action. 5. The Imam Ali Shrine and Shi'ism. In the context of points 1-4, this may seem a small matter, but while the Imam Ali Shrine is almost generically referred to as "holy" in any story or perhaps as Shi'ism's most holy site or one of Islam's most holy sites, and its golden dome is sometimes mentioned, and the shrine itself has regularly been front-paged in stories in the past weeks and can be found near the top of the TV news, I have yet to see a full background piece on the shrine or a full description of its history and meaning. The best I've noticed anyway was a sidebar prepared by the "staff" of the Christian Science Monitor, for Scott Balduff's canny piece "Sadr plays to power of martyrdom". Generally speaking, the same goes for Shi'ism itself. With the exception of Juan Cole, an expert on Shi'ism, who has been a one-man press corps when it comes to explaining the Shi'ite world to those of us who visit his site regularly, I would nominate "Shi'ite" as the least defined noun and the least meaning-filled adjective in the US press at the moment. Why should this matter? One answer is: Because Islam is not a familiar religion to most Americans (despite growing numbers of converts here), and so, unlike more familiar "holy" sites, either religious or political, the Imam Ali Shrine has no resonance for us. The impact of the fighting so near to, and the threat to the shrine, doesn't really register here, even as it is deeply unnerving Muslims (not to speak of others) elsewhere in the world. If (in some fantasy future) a rebellious priest, no matter how extreme his views, were locked inside the Vatican with his self-appointed militia fending off an occupying army from some powerful Arab state, I assure you the reporting would be different indeed. It matters that we, who simply read about this, can't even begin to put ourselves in the shoes of Iraqis experiencing it - although this should at least give us insight into why US policymakers and military men, no less ignorant than the rest of us, can make such staggering tactical blunders. War words What do we call the enemy? George and Laura Bush were the guests on CNN's Larry King Live last Sunday. In the context of the latest fighting in Najaf, King said to the president: "We've had more today, there are more eruptions in Iraq. And it seems never-ending, does[n't] it? What does it do to you?" The president replied: We've got a great leader in Prime Minister Allawi. He's a tough guy who believes in free societies. And more and more Iraqis are being trained. And more and more Iraqis are stepping up to do the hard work of bringing these terrorists, these former Ba'athist and some foreign fighters to justice. And that's why we are going to prevail. So the president thinks that in Najaf we're up against Ba'athists, foreign fighters, and terrorists. In a similar vein, Secretary of State Colin Powell said the following of the fighting in Najaf at a recent press conference: In this case, the violence is being perpetrated by outlaws and by former regime elements and by terrorists who respect no truce, respect nothing except force. And as long as those individuals don't understand the spirit of peace and reconciliation, are not willing to work for democratic, free Iraq, they have to be dealt with. And so your question really should not be addressed to us. It should be addressed to those who are causing the violence, who are setting off the bombs, who are destroying the hopes of the Iraqi people. Now statements like Powell's tend to be reported quite straightforwardly in the US press even though the one thing you certainly couldn't say about the Mahdi Army in Najaf is that it's made up of former "regime elements" or "Ba'athists". These are, after all, the Shi'ites of southern Iraq whom Saddam brutally repressed in 1991 and whom we claimed our invasion was meant to liberate. It should be remembered, in fact, that the last army to reach the Imam Ali Shrine with intent to harm was Saddam's. Should you want to imagine what the present situation looks like from the point of view of many Shi'ites and you're willing to search, you can probably find the odd comment buried somewhere in our torrent of Iraq reportage ("Saddam made mass graves in 1991," Abbos fumed. "Now the Americans are making mass graves in 2004, filled with Shi'ites again"), or you can go offshore or into cyberspace, where, for instance, Jim Lobe of Inter Press Service offers the following in Asia Times Online (US poised for killer blow against Muqtada , Aug 14), quoting (the ubiquitous) Juan Cole: "What's going on right now looks a lot like April 1991, when it was [Iraqi president] Saddam [Hussein] who was crushing a Shi'ite uprising. But now it's the marines who are playing the role of the Republican Guard," Cole told Inter Press Service, adding that US policy in Iraq was looking increasingly like "Ba'ath lite", particularly under Allawi. Or you can read the piece (mentioned above) by Scott Balduff, who has done some superb on-the-spot reporting from Najaf, and writes: If the Americans and Iraqi army do end up assaulting the Shrine of Ali, they will not be the first. Hussein threw the full force of his military against the shrine in 1991 after Shi'ite rebels launched an abortive rebellion. Artillery barrages damaged the shrine complex and special-forces soldiers killed the rebels inside the complex itself. The brutality of this crackdown at such a holy site turned most Shi'ites against Hussein, even those who had defended him in the past. Of course, the labeling of guerrillas, rebels and insurgents, religious or otherwise, as "outlaws" and "terrorists" has a long history in European colonial wars as also, for instance, in Japanese depredations in China in the 1930s. Similarly the language in the statements coming out of the US military in Iraq these days has a familiar ring for anyone who knows something of the history of counterinsurgency warfare. For instance, here's part of a statement quoted in the Washington Post by Brigadier-General Erv Lessel, identified by the Post reporter as "deputy director for operations of the US-led multinational force": Clearing operations by Iraqi Security Forces and Multi-National Forces today in Najaf continue to further isolate the militia and restore control of the city to the government and people of Najaf ... The combined Iraqi and multinational security forces continue to operate in strict compliance with guidance from the prime minister [interim Iraqi Prime Minister Ayad Allawi] to safeguard and prevent possible harm to these holy shrines as well as protect the citizens and future of Iraq. US operations involving Predator drones, Apache helicopters, and jets in downtown Najaf, then, are "clearing operations" (though who exactly is being "cleared" isn't made particularly clear), and the forces, almost totally American, conducting these clearing operations are dubbed "multinational", and all this is supposedly being done under the "guidance" of Prime Minister Allawi to "safeguard ... these holy shrines". Of course, it's obviously in the interest of US policymakers and military men to put forward such lies even at a moment when the only non-US troops fighting on our side in Najaf, the sparse Iraqi battalions we've trained, are evidently deserting in droves, as Hannah Allam, Tom Lasseter and Dogen Hannah of Knight Ridder have recently reported. ("'I'm ready to fight for my country's independence and for my country's stability,' one lieutenant-colonel said. 'But I won't fight my own people.'") But if this sort of language is simply reproduced without comment in our news, then Americans will have little way to grasp the nature of what's happening in Iraq. Who is Muqtada al-Sadr? In the Washington Post Outlook section last Sunday, correspondent Robin Wright wrote a particularly execrable piece ("Not just a battle for Najaf") about the situation in Iraq, whose language might have been taken directly from Bush administration press releases. There are fantasy passages like the following, no less pure in their deceptions than those of Brigadier-General Lessel: "A deepening backlash [in Iraq] could further complicate this second phase of the three-part political transition and damage the quest to build a model new democracy that would inspire a wider transformation in the Arab and l[sl]amic worlds." I'm sorry, but you'll have to remind me: What was the first phase of that three-part transition? And I was under the obviously mistaken impression that the new, silent US occupation regime inside Baghdad's Green Zone had left all thoughts of building "a model new democracy that would inspire ..." etc behind and opted instead for an ex-Ba'athist thug who has an iron fist tied behind his back. But I wander. What I wanted to focus on was a relatively innocuous sentence about Muqtada al-Sadr and his men in Wright's piece: "The stakes are now far greater than whether a rogue cleric and his renegade militia can diminish the fledgling Iraqi government and its US patrons." It's a modest but interesting example of how word choice sets the frame within which we view the world. On the one side Wright has marshaled two negative adjectives: "rogue" and "renegade". Both work well within the framework laid out by Colin Powell. After all, "rogue clerics", like "rogue elephants", and their "renegade militias" fit easily enough into the category of "outlaws". In such a context, you couldn't even bring to mind an adjective like "nationalist" or "patriot" (even though we, here in the US, don't necessarily find any necessary contradiction between US religious fundamentalism and US patriotism). On the other side, you have that wonderful adjective "fledgling" linked to "government". No rogue elephants here, just a fragile little government chick in a nest overseen by "patrons" (a word that, while it may have some modest negative connotations, brings to mind rich people who give money to the arts or museums). As a start then Wright accepts that, whatever Allawi's group may be, it is indeed a "government", and Americans are nothing but its "patrons". No "puppets" and "masters" possible here. Not even "interim administration" and "occupiers". So before you get near the supposed content of what she's writing about, so much is already settled - and settled in favor of a useful official fantasy about the nature of reality in Iraq; useful, that is, for an administration trying desperately to limp through to presidential elections in November. Perhaps it's the nature of reporting, a trade done on the run and at top speed, that much of reality must regularly fall into a series of easily reused set phrases and descriptions. After all, familiar modifiers have been wielded this way since Homer ("the fleet-footed Achilles") to remind, identify, and categorize. So it's always interesting when you see one or two of those identifying phrases change, as I did last week in reports by Alex Berenson and John Burns of the New York Times on the fighting in Najaf. It's always a small indication that journalists are registering a change in the landscape. So twice in that week in front-page stories those two reporters put an adjective in front of al-Sadr that hadn't been used before - "populist" ("Guns fell silent across most of the city as Iraqi government representatives met into the night at the provincial governor's headquarters with emissaries of Mr Sadr, the populist Shi'ite cleric"). That description was followed by another word that, I believe, had simply not appeared previously in Times reportage: "insurrection". In regard to the Sunni areas to the north, the word "insurgency" and "insurgents" had long been used to describe what was happening (a cautious usage I adopted myself), but here they suddenly wrote of a "widespread insurrection", as in general uprising. ("His stand against American forces here has stirred a widespread insurrection across southern Iraq, starting in Najaf and then quickly setting off fighting in at least eight other predominantly Shi'ite cities.") Burns and Berenson used these two words last Saturday and then repeated them on Sunday. This represented a small but telling shift in the Times' assessment of what's happening in Iraq. What to call - how to label and categorize - Muqtada al-Sadr has been a curious problem for American reporters, and the Times reporting has reflected that. In one of the earliest Times references to Muqtada, on May 12, 2003, Susan Sachs referred to him as "another ambitious cleric, Moktada al-Sadr" ("Iraqis more bemused than enthused by cleric"). Generally, when he appeared as a bit player in the paper's pages in the early months after Baghdad fell, he was little more than "young" or "ambitious". In his initial appearance on the Times op-ed page on August 29, 2003, Reuel Marc Gerecht referred to him as "a 22-year-old firebrand" (though the age was wrong, he's about 10 years older than that). On September 24, Muqtada was still imagined to be nothing but a "marginal" figure and Noah Feldman wrote of him as "the rejectionist Moktada al-Sadr" ("Wisely, the coalition has declined to arrest Mr Sadr; his hopes for a living martyrdom denied, he increasingly looks more like a small-time annoyance than the catalyst of a popular movement" - from "Democracy: Closer every day"). In October, in "Bomb at Turkish Embassy In Baghdad kills bystander", Alex Berenson and Ian Fisher spoke of him as " a radical, anti-American Shi'ite cleric". This May, Ed Wong uniquely spoke of him as "the maverick Shi'ite cleric" ("US military says Shiite rebels seem to have ceded Karbala"), but generally in these months he was referred to in headlines and texts simply as "the radical cleric". In a headline for a piece reported by "Alex Berenson; Sabrina Tavernise and Iraqi employees of The Times, whose names have been withheld for security" ("Radical cleric in Iraq sets off day of fighting) on August 6, he was still being called this. But on August 11, a change set in. In the very first paragraph of a Berenson piece that day ("US forces, close to attack in Najaf, decide to hold off"), he was referred to as "the rebel Shi'ite cleric", as he was again the next day, before, on the 13th, he morphed into a "populist" cleric (populist, or agrarian rebel, still has quite a positive ring in the American lexicon) "sparking" a "widespread insurrection", before this week in two front-page pieces (Alex Berenson and John Burns, "8-day battle for Najaf: From attack to stalemate", and Alex Berenson and Sabrina Tavernise, "Cleric in Najaf refuses to meet Iraqi mediators"), he once again became a "rebel Shi'ite cleric" or a "rebel cleric". (The Berenson and Burns piece, by the way, quotes for the first time in a while "senior officers in Baghdad, as well White House officials", who throw the blame for the launching of the Najaf offensive largely on to the shoulders of local marine commanders, with Ambassador Negroponte only later deciding "to pursue the case". Although anything is possible, this seems unlikely to me.) If you want a fuller picture of Muqtada, you might - and I apologize for directing you to his work so often - check out Juan Cole's piece "It takes a following to make an Ayatollah" in the Washington Post Sunday Outlook section on him, his movement, and the larger Shi'ite context of the moment and consider the wonderful, unexpected adjective he uses to describe him (along with "lower-ranking cleric" and "fiery") - "beefy". Or consider the Scott Balduff piece mentioned above, which quotes "Amatzia Baram, a noted scholar on Shi'ite Islam at the United States Institute for Peace in Washington" as calling him a "shrewd politician". Not a description we would normally read here. In fact, while most of the Times' descriptive adjectives seem to catch something of Muqtada, they do so within the context of his relationship to the United States, or at least within the context of the words available to us to describe political actors who fall somewhere between Colin Powell's very American "outlaw" and the Times' recent very American "populist". None of them surely catch Muqtada his Iraqi context particularly well and, given the general lack of Iraqi voices in the US media, we're not soon likely to find out what the Iraqi descriptive range might be. How the naming of embattled reality is brokered in US newsrooms and how it changes is a fascinating subject, though one you're unlikely ever to find discussed in the press itself. A couple of passing phrases from that inadvertently revealing Howard Kurtz mea-almost-culpa in the Washington Post might, however, offer a little help. For instance, the editorial decision-making that resulted in the highlighting of administration prewar propaganda and the burying of all critical thought in the back pages of the paper is referred to in the piece as "groupthink", or as Karen DeYoung, reporter and former assistant managing editor, commented bluntly: "We are inevitably the mouthpiece for whatever administration is in power ... If the president stands up and says something, we report what the president said." Amen. (Author's note: Thanks to Nick Turse for his research help on the Times and Muqtada.) Tom Engelhardt is editor of Tomdispatch http://www.tomdispatch.com and the author of "The End of Victory Culture." Copyright 2004 Tomdispatch. Used by permission From nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com Mon Aug 23 01:50:19 2004 From: nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com (nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 01:50:19 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [NYTr] With Castro watching, Cuba wants nothing but baseball gold Message-ID: <200408230550.i7N5oJ923299@olm.blythe-systems.com> sent by Walter Lippmann (cubanews) USA TODAY - August 22, 2004 http://www.usatoday.com/sports/columnist/zillgitt/2004-08-22-zillgitt_x.htm With Castro watching, Cuba wants nothing but baseball gold ATHENS - Where's Fidel Castro? "At this very moment, at 4:30 in the morning in Cuba, Fidel Castro is watching the game," Cuba's national sports spokesperson, Pedro Cabrera Isidron, said during the fourth inning of Saturday's Cuba-Canada Olympic baseball game. Castro is almost always watching Cuba play baseball. The country's citizens are watching, hoping its national team restores order to international baseball. For Cuba, the disappointment in Sydney four years ago pangs like a called third strike with two out in the bottom of the ninth and the bases loaded. It lost the 2000 gold in baseball to - of all teams - the United States. Cuba won gold in the 1996 and 1992 Games, and had won six consecutive World Cup baseball titles since 1984 prior to that defeat. All was right with Cuban baseball. Castro, known for his passion of the game, savored the success. Then came the 2000 Olympics. "Yes, there still is disappointment from Sydney," Isidron said. The "failure" triggered change. Cuba revamped the selection process, giving more weight to recent performances and youth instead of reputation and experience. Cuban baseball officials also created a super-league after its regular National League season. The top 100 players are dispersed among four teams, and they play 30 games. There is more evaluation. The result: 70% of the players on Cuba's 2004 Olympic team did not play in Sydney, and more than half of its 24-man roster is 26 years old or younger. On Saturday in front of about 1,500 fans, Cuba defeated Canada 5-2, advancing to the medal round of the Olympic baseball tournament. The tournament matters little in the United States because the U.S. did not qualify. But 90 miles south of Key West, in Cuba, that's about all that mattered. There is immense pressure on the Cuban baseball team. Anything short of gold seems unacceptable. "Cuban players know they are golden," Isidron said. "They have pressure in their blood. It begins in the first years of age when they start playing in neighborhoods." Pitcher Pedro Luis Lazo said, "There was no pressure because we are used to it. We are used to playing at a high level, and we all cooperate and work well together." Cuba is synonymous with baseball, cigars, exotic culture and strained political relations with the United States. Cuban baseball and politics can also be one and the same (i.e., players defecting to the United States to play Major League Baseball). But nothing captivates Cuba's soul like beisbol. The aura is not confined to Cuba. Several fiction and non-fiction books have been written about Cuban baseball by American writers. "For us, baseball is like soccer for the Italians," said Cuban native Alexander Vidal Garcia, who lives in Luxembourg and traveled to Greece just to watch Cuba play baseball. "This represents a dream to support our own team and country in the national sport in a foreign land." That mystique might be close to disappearing. There is speculation U.S.-Cuba relations will ease when the 78-year-old Castro dies, possibly making it easier for Cuban players to play professionally in the United States. Let's not get ahead of ourselves. Cuba still takes pride in its baseball, a game played without agents, million-dollar contracts, labor stoppages and luxury boxes, a game more reminiscent of U.S. baseball 50-60 years ago. "It is more than a sport. Baseball is our culture and part of our tradition and we will keep on going like this," Isidron said. "It is the baseball that was played 40 years ago - not influenced by advertising or commercialism." *** For years, Cuba has dominated international competition. Since the IOC added baseball to the Olympics in 1992, Cuba has won two gold medals and a silver. It has won 24 World Cup titles, including eight consecutive from 1984-2003 and 11 of 14 from 1952-1980. There is one way to rectify what happened at the last Olympics. Cuba must win. "It is an important medal - the only one we cannot afford to lose," Isidron said. "If we don't win gold in baseball, it's like not winning a medal at all." Cuban coaches and players concur. "Just the one gold one, it's the only one that concerns us," Cuba manager Higinio Velez said. "If we don't win, it will be very bad," outfielder Frederich Cepeda said. After winning its first two games, Cuba dropped its next game to Japan, which is, along with Canada, a medal favorite and Cuba's toughest opponent. Cuba won its next three games and re-established itself as the team to beat after Japan lost to Australia. Cuba will play Canada in Tuesday's semifinals. "The team is playing very well," Isidron said. "I am pretty sure that there is no team in Athens that can beat this team. Youth is what this team needed." Eighteen players have less than 30 international appearances, and eight players entered the Olympics with zero international appearances. The youngsters have contributed. Left fielder Frederich Cepeda, 24, is batting .400 with seven runs scored; second baseman Yulieski Gourriel, 20, is hitting .308 and has scored six runs; outfielder Alexei Ramirez, 22, owns a .313 batting average; third baseman, Michel Enriquez, 25, has knocked in six runs; pitcher Luis Borroto, 21, is 2-0 with eight strikeouts in 8 1/3 inning and a 0.00 ERA; pitcher Norberto Gonzalez, 24, is 1-0 with a 0.77 ERA. "We have a lot of young players, but after each game we get better step by step," Enriquez said. "I'm happy at how well these guys are playing together." The veterans have mixed in well. Catcher Ariel Pestano is batting .519 with 12 RBI, right fielder/DH Osmani Urrutia is batting .360 with four runs and four RBI and DH Eriel Sanchez is hitting .353. Whenever Cuba plays in another country, there is always the possibility of a defection. It is a prime opportunity for Cuban players to seek fortune in Major League Baseball. This is a sore spot with Cuban sports officials. According to a story in the Miami Herald, the Cuban team promised to "reject any offer that goes against Cuban principles" in Athens. Do Cuban players want to play in the majors? Isidron turns that question around. "This is a question that you should ask the U.S. government," he said. "If the U.S. lifted the embargo, changed its politics and the countries have normal relations, there could be a Cuban team in Major League Baseball." What about individuals? "I'm sure a lot would like to play in Major League Baseball," Isidron said. "But they don't do it out of respect to their country and the system. It is also a refusal of the U.S. government and its system." And what about defectors? "Those we will reject," Isidron said. "In almost all cases, they have left the team in the middle of important events and all the good work we had previously done needs to be reorganized due to this." From nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com Mon Aug 23 02:01:33 2004 From: nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com (nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 02:01:33 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [NYTr] Cuba to Panama: Terrorists' Pardon Will Sever Relations Message-ID: <200408230601.i7N61XP23552@olm.blythe-systems.com> Cuba Warns Panama: Terrorists' Pardon Will Sever Relations [This is an unofficial translation by Simon Wollers at Radio Havana Cuba of the original Spanish note from Cuba's Ministry of Foreign Relations] OFFICIAL NOTE FROM THE REVOLUTIONARY GOVERNMENT OF CUBA August 22, 2004 On August 14, the Cuban Foreign Ministry publicly condemned before the international community rumors circulating in the terrorist mafia media in Miami indicating that the President of Panama, Mireya Moscoso, would pardon terrorist prisoners in Panama and that this decision would be made between August 15-30. In the past few hours, comments on the imminent pardon of four anti-Cuban terrorists have gained strength both in Panama and Miami. Counter-revolutionary circles in Miami are saying with certainty that Mireya Moscoso will fulfill her promise and pardon the terrorists in the next few days before she completes her mandate. Friends in Panama have confirmed the rumors and are certain that the Panamanian president has already taken the decision to pardon Luis Posada Carriles, Gaspar Jim=E9nez Escobedo, Pedro Rem=F3n and Guillermo Novo Sampol - all terrorists of Cuban origin. They were arrested, tried and sentenced by the Republic of Panama for attempting to assassinate compa=F1ero Fidel during the Iberoamerican Summit being held in the country, in which they would have also massacred hundreds of people from our sister nation. The Revolutionary Government of Cuba condemns this new affront on the people of Cuba and repeats that, as a result of the pardon of these terrorist prisoners in Panama, historical responsibility and the consequences that derive from this outrageous decision will fall squarely upon President Mireya Moscoso and her government. For more than four decades, the people of Cuba have been the victims of the most vicious terrorism. The families of the more than three thousand dead caused by terrorist acts, along with the thousands of injured, will never understand this infamous and treacherous act by Ms. Moscoso. The Panamanian president will bear the stigma and immorality of having freed confessed murderers - terrorists of the worst nature. She will pass into history as a benefactor of terrorism and of these criminals of Cuban origin. The outrage that she is about to commit will not only constitute an aberration from a political point of view, but also from a legal one. It should be pointed out that according to established Panamanian legislation, the President of the Republic is ascribed with the power to pardon once the judicial process has concluded and a definitive sentence exists. This is not the case with the trial of these terrorists, which is currently in the appeal process. Thus, the granting of a pardon in this case would be an act contrary to actual Panamanian legislation. It is very clear that the pretext for this came from the terrorists' defense attorneys using the argument they have used from the beginning - that these are old and infirm men. This is precisely the excuse sought by the President to justify her "humanitarian gesture". This element is sufficient to confirm from where the pressure and political blackmail that has moved this entire case originated. The deceitful and deceptive manner in which this pardon has been planned could not better reflect the moral and ethical decay that accompanies the decision. The counter-revolutionary mafia in Miami and the ringleaders of the terrorist gangs that operate from there have persistently demanded that President Moscoso free these terrorists. It is known that the Panamanian president's sister, Ruby Moscoso, remains in constant communication with Miami counter-revolutionaries and has been a key part in the negotiations for the release. It is also well known that during a visit by the US Secretary of State to Panama for the 100th anniversary of the Republic, he requested in a meeting with President Mireya Moscoso that she free these four terrorists after their trial had ended. Within the present US electoral context, the Bush administration is striving for the votes and money of the most recalcitrant sectors of the Cuban-American community in Florida. This administration has constantly demonstrated that, in seeking to achieve its political aims, neither ethical or moral principles nor international rights will get in its way. Unfortunately, the Panamanian president - in open disregard for the praiseworthy struggle against terrorism being carried out by many governments and peoples throughout the world - is turning her back on justice; on the victims of the criminal acts of these terrorists; on the people of Cuba; on the people of Panama; and on all those who sincerely fight against this international scourge. We forever thank the people of Panama for having joined us all these long years with their solidarity and support. The people and the government of Cuba will always be able to distinguish between the exploits of the valiant people of Panama and the duplicity of its leaders. In the name of the families of the victims of the acts of terrorism committed by these assassins and of all of the people of Cuba, we call upon international opinion and all the world's governments to condemn and prevent this absurd decision by Mireya Moscoso. Finally, in all sincerity, we would like to advise that if this decision is not reversed and the pardons of these monstrous criminals are carried out, diplomatic relations between the Republic of Cuba and the Republic of Panama will be automatically broken at the very same moment that the news is received. Espanol: NOTA OFICIAL DEL GOBIERNO REVOLUCIONARIO DE CUBA. El pasado d=EDa 14 de agosto, el Ministerio de Relaciones Exteriores denunciaba a la opini=F3n p=FAblica internacional rumores que circulaban en medios de la mafia terrorista de Miami que indicaban que la Presidenta de Panam=E1, Mireya Moscoso, indultar=EDa a los terroristas presos en Panam=E1 y que esta decisi=F3n se tomar=EDa entre el 15 y el 30 de agosto. En las =FAltimas horas han tomado fuerza en Panam=E1 y Miami los comentarios sobre la inminencia del indulto a los cuatro terroristas anticubanos. En c=EDrculos contrarrevolucionarios en Miami se habla con seguridad de que Mireya Moscoso cumplir=E1 su compromiso de indultar a los terroristas en los pr=F3ximos d=EDas antes de culminar su mandato. Amigos en Panam=E1 han confirmado los mencionados rumores y aseguran que la Presidenta paname=F1a, ha tomado ya la decisi=F3n de indultar a los terroristas de origen cubano, Luis Posada Carriles, Gaspar Jim=E9nez Escobedo, Pedro Rem=F3n y Guillermo Novo Sampol; detenidos, enjuiciados y sancionados en la Rep=FAblica de Panam=E1 por intentar asesinar al compa=F1ero Fidel, en ocasi=F3n de la Cumbre Iberoamericana realizada en ese pa=EDs, y en el que hubieran sido masacrados tambi=E9n, cientos de hijos de esa hermana naci=F3n. El Gobierno Revolucionario de Cuba denuncia esta nueva afrenta al pueblo cubano y reitera que, de producirse el indulto a los terroristas presos en Panam=E1, la responsabilidad hist=F3rica y las consecuencias que se deriven de esta indigna decisi=F3n caer=E1n enteramente sobre la presidenta Mireya Moscoso y su gobierno. El pueblo de Cuba, que ha sido v=EDctima del terrorismo m=E1s feroz durante m=E1s de cuatro d=E9cadas, los familiares de los m=E1s de tres mil muertos causados por acciones terroristas, los miles de heridos, no podr=E1n comprender nunca este acto infame y traidor de la se=F1ora Moscoso. La presidenta paname=F1a cargar=E1 con el estigma y la inmoralidad de haber liberado a asesinos confesos, a terroristas de la peor cala=F1a. Pasar=E1 a la historia como benefactora del terrorismo y de estos connotados criminales de origen cubano. La infamia que est=E1 a punto de ejecutarse no solo constituye una aberraci=F3n desde el punto de vista pol=EDtico sino tambi=E9n desde el punto de vista legal, vale la pena se=F1alar que en Panam=E1, el indulto, de acuerdo con lo que establece la legislaci=F3n de ese pa=EDs, es una atribuci=F3n del Presidente de la Rep=FAblica, la cual para que pueda ser ejercida, requiere que el proceso judicial haya concluido y exista una sentencia firme. Este no es el caso del proceso contra los mencionados terroristas, el cual a=FAn se encuentra en fase de apelaci=F3n. De manera que, el otorgamiento del indulto en este caso, ser=EDa un acto contrario a la propia legislaci=F3n paname=F1a. Resulta sumamente esclarecedor comprobar que el pretexto que han estado utilizando desde el principio los abogados defensores de los terroristas, de que estos son unos ancianos enfermos es, precisamente, el que pretende utilizar la Presidenta para justificar su "gesto humanitario". Este elemento ser=EDa suficiente para confirmar de d=F3nde provienen las presiones y el chantaje pol=EDtico que mueve todo este caso. La perfidia y falacia con que se ha planificado este indulto, no podr=EDa reflejar mejor la podredumbre =E9tica y moral que acompa=F1a a esta decisi=F3n. La liberaci=F3n de los terroristas ha sido insistentemente exigida a la presidente Moscoso por la mafia contrarrevolucionaria de Miami y los cabecillas de las bandas terroristas que desde all=ED operan. Se ha conocido que la hermana de la presidente paname=F1a, la se=F1ora Ruby Moscoso, se mantiene en comunicaci=F3n constante con la contrarrevoluci=F3n miamense y ha sido pieza clave en las gestiones para su liberaci=F3n. Es ampliamente conocido que durante la visita del Secretario de Estado de los Estados Unidos a Panam=E1 con motivo del Centenario de la Rep=FAblica, en su entrevista con la Presidenta Mireya Moscoso, =E9ste solicito la liberaci=F3n de los cuatro terroristas despu=E9s que concluyera el juicio. En el marco del actual contexto electoral estadounidense, la Administraci=F3n Bush, busca afanosamente los votos y el dinero de los sectores m=E1s recalcitrantes de la poblaci=F3n de origen cubano de la Florida. Esta Administraci=F3n norteamericana ha demostrado con creces que en aras del logro de sus objetivos pol=EDticos, no se detiene ante principios =E9ticos, morales o del derecho internacional. Desafortunadamente, la presidenta paname=F1a, en franco desconocimiento de la digna lucha que muchos gobiernos y pueblos en el mundo llevan a cabo contra el terrorismo, da la espalda a la justicia, a las v=EDctimas de las criminales acciones de estos terroristas, al pueblo cubano, al pueblo de Panam=E1 y a todos aquellos que honestamente luchan contra este flagelo mundial. Para el pueblo de Panam=E1 nuestro eterno agradecimiento por habernos acompa=F1ado durante todos estos largos a=F1os con su solidaridad y apoyo. El pueblo y gobierno cubanos siempre sabr=E1n distinguir entre las acciones del heroico pueblo paname=F1o y la perfidia de sus gobernantes. El Gobierno Revolucionario de Cuba en nombre de los familiares de las v=EDctimas de los actos de terrorismo cometidos por estos asesinos y de todo el pueblo cubano, llama a la opini=F3n p=FAblica internacional y a todos los gobiernos del mundo a condenar e impedir esta irracional decisi=F3n de la se=F1ora Mireya Moscoso. Deseamos por =FAltimo advertir, con toda seriedad, que si no se rectifica la decisi=F3n tomada, y se lleva a cabo el indulto de los monstruosos criminales mencionados, las relaciones diplom=E1ticas entre la Rep=FAblica de Cuba y la Rep=FAblica de Panam=E1 quedar=E1n autom=E1ticamente rotas en el mismo instante en que se produzca la noticia. La Habana, 22 de agosto de 2004 From nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com Mon Aug 23 10:53:15 2004 From: nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com (nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 10:53:15 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [NYTr] Larry and Sergey are Evil Message-ID: <200408231453.i7NErFj02542@olm.blythe-systems.com> Sent by Daniel Brandt Reuters via CNN Money - August 23, 2004 http://money.cnn.com/2004/08/23/technology/google_gov.reut/?cnn=yes Group: Google governance flawed Proxy adviser says search engine is weaker in oversight than any S&P 500 company. NEW YORK (Reuters) - Google Inc. ranks lower in corporate governance than any company in the Standard & Poor's 500 stock index, according to influential proxy adviser Institutional Shareholder Services, said a newspaper report published Monday. ISS, which advises shareholders on how to vote, found 21 weaknesses in the governance practices of Mountain View, Calif.-based Google, which is expected to join the S&P 500, said the Financial Times. These flaws, it said, include a dual-class capital structure that gives effective control to insiders, too few outside directors and a lack of stock ownership guidelines for executives and independent directors. The adviser also found problematic the company's compensation plan that lets Google reprice stock options if the stock price falls, as well as loans to company insiders. The proxy adviser assigned Google, the world's leading Web search engine, a corporate governance quotient of 0.2 out of a possible 100, the newspaper said. "I'd say those numbers sound pretty darn evil," Patrick McGurn, ISS's senior vice president, told the newspaper. A Google slogan is "Don't Be Evil." Google and ISS did not immediately return calls seeking comment. Google (GOOG: Research, Estimates) made a long-awaited initial public offering last Wednesday. Its shares closed Friday on the Nasdaq at $108.31, or 27 percent above their $85 offering price. The company's market capitalization now exceeds $29 billion. The Securities and Exchange Commission has started an informal inquiry into Google's offer to buy back 23.2 million shares it may have issued illegally. Separately, Google has said the SEC may pursue civil remedies against the company's general counsel for securities law violations related to his prior job. In addition, the SEC has requested additional information on a Playboy magazine interview with Google founders Sergey Brin and Larry Page. The company has said it does not believe the interview, which took place before it filed to conduct its IPO, violated U.S. securities rules. Copyright 2004 Reuters From nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com Mon Aug 23 10:55:35 2004 From: nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com (nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 10:55:35 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [NYTr] UN Expert Denounces Afghan Prison Conditions Message-ID: <200408231455.i7NEtZd02645@olm.blythe-systems.com> >From walterlx at earthlink.net Mon Aug 23 10:03:52 2004 Return-Path: Received: from olm.blythe-systems.com (root at localhost) by blythe.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id i7NE3ql01247 for ; Mon, 23 Aug 2004 10:03:52 -0400 X-ClientAddr: 207.217.120.253 Received: from audiogram.mail.pas.earthlink.net (audiogram.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.253]) by olm.blythe-systems.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id i7NE3q101242 for ; Mon, 23 Aug 2004 10:03:52 -0400 Received: from hsa081.pool013.at101.earthlink.net ([216.249.84.81] helo=inspiron) by audiogram.mail.pas.earthlink.net with asmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1BzFPs-0004de-B7; Mon, 23 Aug 2004 07:03:22 -0700 set by Walter Lippmann (cubanews) UN News via Truthout - August 23, 2004 http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/082404Z.shtml Afghanistan: UN Expert Denounces Abuses in Illegal Prisons By UN News Centre YubaNet A United Nations Independent Expert on Afghanistan is denouncing abuses taking place at an illegal jail there, and seeking answers from the United States on getting the prisoners released. Briefing reporters in Kabul on Saturday, Professor Cherif Bassiouni referred to a group of 725 out of some 3,200 persons originally detained by the Northern alliance -- "and apparently some US forces were involved" -- who then were transferred from Shibergan to Pul --e-Charkhi prison under the authority of the Government. The expert, who visited the prison, called conditions there inhuman. "They violate every standard of human rights whether under UN standards of minimum rules for the treatment of offenders or under international humanitarian law," he said. He also called the detention illegal, because the suspects were arrested as combatants and therefore as prisoners of war. "Every Government official I have discussed this matter with has agreed that there's no legal basis for their detention, and everyone has said that they should be released," he said. "There are allegations that the US authorities ask that they continue to be kept in detention," he said. "I have protested this situation with the appropriate government officials and I will continue to do so." Asked what Washington's reaction was, he said, "The official response is that the US has never asked to put a hold on their release. But, it is quite clear having spoken to almost every senior official other than the President, that all of the indications are that they want them to be released and that there's someone else who's putting the hold on them." "It seems that there's a question of credibility at stake here," he added. Professor Bassiouni said about half of those detained at the site -- an estimated 350 -- are Pakistanis. The expert also raised the issue of US forces holding between 300 and 400 detainees in Kandahar and Bagram. "Nobody has had a chance to visit them," he noted. "The lack of giving an opportunity for people to go and see these facilities is a lack of transparency that raises serious concerns about the legality of detention as well as the condition of those detentions." Since Afghanistan is a sovereign State with its own an interim government, he said that when foreign forces operate in its territory, they must have a 'status of forces agreement,' or SOFA. "To the best of my knowledge there is no SOFA between the US and the Government of Afghanistan, which raises another serious legal question," he observed. Mr. Bassiouni's concerns will be transmitted to the UN in a forthcoming report, which will also touch on the problems faced by women tried and sentenced by tribal councils for "social and alleged moral violations but not legal violations." He said the condition of these women could be compared to modern slavery. From nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com Mon Aug 23 11:04:04 2004 From: nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com (nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 11:04:04 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [NYTr] Not-So-Swift Boat Veterans Message-ID: <200408231504.i7NF44V02858@olm.blythe-systems.com> sent by Shanti Renfrew Truthout - August 21, 2004 http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/082204A.shtml Not So Swift Boat Veterans by William Rivers Pitt Ever hear the old story of the lady and the snake? A lady finds a snake injured in the road. She takes it home, cares for it, helps it heal, and the two become friends. One day, the lady is in her garden with the snake, and the snake suddenly bites her in the throat. The lady lays dying and gasps, "Why did you bite me? I was your friend?" The snake replies, "Lady, you knew I was a snake when you picked me up." This is a parable the Bush/Cheney campaign is getting to know with suddenness and venom. They apparently picked up a snake named the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, and that snake just took a mighty big chomp out of them. It started at the end of July with the Democratic National Convention. The central theme was Kerry's Vietnam service record, and the convention brought out so many Generals and Admirals to vouch for Kerry, you thought the Fleet Center was hosting a brass festival. Couple that with Kerry's "Band of Brothers," the men who served with him and are now campaigning with him, and at the end of the thing you had the Democratic candidate packaged as a genuine American hero. After 9/11, after Afghanistan, after Iraq and all the casualties, having a blooded veteran standing forth was an image many Americans could get behind. The polls started to move in Kerry's favor. Bush, who had been depending on an overwhelming military vote come November, saw Kerry gathering the approval of 50% of veterans. Karl Rove and the Bush election team smelled bad juju in the wind. They could not campaign on the administration's record regarding health care, education, environmental protections, justice or national defense, because Bush's record on these issues is startlingly abominable. The Bush campaign pursued the only option left to them, the option Lee Atwater taught Karl Rove how to use in the 'Willie Horton' episode. They went negative. Or, rather, they had someone else go negative for them. Not long after the convention, a commercial came out from the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, an independent political group under section 527 of the Internal Revenue Code. The commercial showed several Vietnam veterans who claimed they knew Kerry had exaggerated his service in the war, that he did not deserve the Bronze Star, Silver Star and three Purple Hearts he earned in the war, and that the wound that got him his first purple heart was self-inflicted. The ads ran in several battleground states, and pretty much wall-to-wall on the Fox News Channel. It didn't take long for the charges, and resulting hullaballo, to descend into the realm of farce. One Kerry accuser,George Elliott,was the man who signed the recommendation for Kerry's Bronze Star and who defended Kerry in 1996 when others raised the claim that he didn't deserve his Silver Star. Elliot, writing Kerry's fitness report in 1969, stated, "In a combat environment often requiring independent decisive action, Lt. j.g. Kerry was unsurpassed." It was quite a flip-flop, then, when Elliott came out with the Swift Boat Vets to attack Kerry after the convention, stating Kerry lied about his service. He even signed an affidavit on the matter. When the Boston Globe confronted Elliott about his prior remarks and written statements clashing with his new description of events, Elliott beat a rapid retreat, stating that signing the affidavit was "a terrible mistake." There is also the strange tale of Larry Thurlow, a leader of the Swift Boat Vets, who is claiming Kerry doesn't deserve his Bronze Star. Kerry earned that citation when he maneuvered his swift boat through enemy fire to save First Lieut. Jim Rassmann, who had been blown off Kerry's boat by an explosion and was about to die. Raussmann was saved, but Thurlow, who was in his own boat at the scene during the incident, now claims there was no enemy fire at all, and so Kerry should have gotten no medal. Here's the weird bit, though. Three men got a Bronze Star citation for bravery in action that day: Kerry, Thurlow, and radarman first class Robert Lambert, a petty officer in the boat captained by Thurlow. The citation for Thurlow's Bronze Star states that "all units came under small arms and automatic weapons fire from the river banks." According to the citation, Thurlow "directed accurate suppressing fire at the enemy," and lauds Thurlow's "coolness, professionalism and courage under fire." This begs the question: If there was no enemy fire, as Thurlow claims, doesn't that mean that he does not deserve his Bronze Star any more than Kerry does? Shouldn't Thurlow give his medal back? And what of radarman first class Robert Lambert? Did Kerry somehow fake Lambert's claim to the award? With the predictable exception of the Fox News Channel, most of the mainstream cable news shows began poking holes in the Swift Vets' unlikely tale. Even so, the commercials began to do damage to Kerry. After the convention, Bush and Kerry enjoyed an even split of the veteran vote. Once the Swift Boat ad did a few rotations, however, those numbers moved. A recent CBS poll showed Bush getting 55% of the veteran vote to Kerry's 37%. The Kerry campaign had been holding fire on the issue, believing Bush would publicly distance himself from the ad. Bush didn't. Kerry, who to this point had been working hard to maintain a relentlessly upbeat and non-negative tone, saw the writing on the wall. His people realized that sometimes you have to wrestle the alligator where you find him, be it up on the high road or down in the scum vats. They strapped on helmets and hip waders, and got to work. What followed was a marvelous bit of political theater. In rapidfire succession over the last 100 hours, the Kerry campaign revealed: * Funding for the Swift Boat Vets activities came from men with umbilical financial ties to the Bush family, and to Karl Rove specifically. * The team that made the anti-Kerry commercial was the same group that made commercials for Bush Sr. against Dukakis in 1988. * The group that got the whole ball rolling were the same fellows who engineered the despicable smearing of John McCain in the 2000 South Carolina primary, on behalf of George W. Bush. More interesting, perhaps, were the Kerry accusations: * Citing "overwhelming evidence? that the Swift Boat group is ?coordinating its expenditures on advertising and other activities designed to influence the presidential election with the Bush-Cheney Campaign,? Kerry's campaign filed an FEC complaint against the Bush campaign. The Swift Boat group is a 527, and if they got funding or assistance for their work from the Bush campaign, it would be a clear-cut violation of the law. * On the same day these accusations were made, Bush campaign officials in Florida were caught handing out Swift Boat Vets promotional flyers at Bush/Cheney headquarters. * Adding to the weight of evidence that the Swift Boat Vets were working fist-in-glove with the Bush campaign, an enterprising blogger named digby revealed that a member of the Swift Boat Vets steering committee, Ken Cordier, was listed on the Bush campaign website as a member of the campaign team until August 19th. His name has since been removed, but as digby points out, you can still see it there if you visit the cached version of the site. If Kerry's people do indeed have "overwhelming evidence" of collusion between the Swifties and Bush, they have proof of a criminal conspiracy. Tie this in with the fact that none of the accusations leveled by the Swifties are borne out by any evidence whatsoever, and that many of the accusers are contradicted by their own words. The ugliest aspect of this episode is two-fold. You have a sitting President of the United States allowing a decorated veteran to be slandered in public in order to advance his political aspirations. While Bush may denounce the spending rules that allow 527s to operate this way, he did nothing to stop them, and if the evidence bears out, he in fact went out of his way to promote them. Worse, you have an entire administration filled with men who had "other priorities" and important family connections when the call to service in Vietnam came. These are the same men, now, who have sent almost 1,000 American soldiers home in steel coffins in the name of lies and profiteering. If ever one needed evidence of the ruthless and utterly shameless nature of the Bush crew, they have it here before them. In a just world, the final word on this disgraceful episode would come from William Rood, a Swift Boat officer who was part of one of the disputed Vietnam battles being flogged by these Swift Boat Vets. Rood has written an account of February 28, 1969 for the Chicago Tribune titled 'Anti-Kerry Vets Not There That Day.' Rood writes: "There were three swift boats on the river that day in Vietnam more than 35 years ago - three officers and 15 crew members. Only two of those officers remain to talk about what happened on February 28, 1969. One is John Kerry, the Democratic presidential candidate who won a Silver Star for what happened on that date. I am the other. For years, no one asked about those events. But now they are the focus of skirmishing in a presidential election with a group of swift boat veterans and others contending that Kerry didn't deserve the Silver Star for what he did on that day, or the Bronze Star and three Purple Hearts he was awarded for other actions." "Many of us wanted to put it all behind us," continues Rood, "the rivers, the ambushes, the killing. Ever since that time, I have refused all requests for interviews about Kerry's service - even those from reporters at the Chicago Tribune, where I work. But Kerry's critics, armed with stories I know to be untrue, have charged that the accounts of what happened were overblown. The critics have taken pains to say they're not trying to cast doubts on the merit of what others did, but their version of events has splashed doubt on all of us. It's gotten harder and harder for those of us who were there to listen to accounts we know to be untrue, especially when they come from people who were not there." >From people who were not there. One hopes Mr. Bush pays some attention to that last line. He picked up this snake, and now must deal with the poison. From nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com Mon Aug 23 11:07:09 2004 From: nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com (nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 11:07:09 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [NYTr] Cuba: "Faith-Based" NGO Praises Bush Sanctions Message-ID: <200408231507.i7NF79e02954@olm.blythe-systems.com> sent by Walter Lippmann (cubanews) [One has to wonder what kind of activities this group is conducting inside of Cuba when you read an article such as this, which constitutes a big public relations boost costing them nothing. The talk about uniting Cubans is all the more weird with the Bush admistrations's measures success in dividing Cubans further than ever.-WL] MIAMI HERALD - August 18, 2004 http://www.miami.com Bush plan cultivates democracy by Teo A. Babun, Jr. www.echocuba.org On May 30, President Bush announced the results of the Commission for Assistance to a Free Cuba. As expected, Cuba's government denounced the report as "maniacal and crazed" and said that the proposals would punish Cubans in the United States as well as those on the island. Unfortunately, similar denigrations can be found in the editorial pages of many U.S. newspapers. On July 1, the Cuban government hastily convened the members of its National Assembly to Havana to formally condemn the new U.S. actions. The official government statement said that the report was ``an attack on Cuba's sovereignty and an intervention of the Christian churches in Cuba." The Rev. Ra?l Su?rez, a member of the National Assembly and a former president of the Cuban Council of Churches (the Cuban government's religious front group) was more subtle. He said that Bush's strategy was asking them (presumably Christians in Cuba) to ``take on the role of Judas Iscariots." Based on the specificity of the attacks from the Cubans, I have no doubt that they read the full 420-page commission's report. But I can't say the same of the editorial boards of the U.S. newspapers that have relied on selective sanctions to craft their condemnation of Bush's new Cuba policy -- albeit the negative ones. Besides being unfair, the attacks have been ruthless. The New York Times said that "it is outrageous that the people can see their relatives only once every three years." The Baltimore Sun was no less harsh in its opinion of the new sanctions, calling them ``a political play for votes in the powerful anti-Castro community in South Florida." But by all accounts, the report represents the most comprehensive effort by our government to articulate a pro-active and all-inclusive policy regarding Cuba since 1959. The policy is based on engaging Cubans to help develop their emerging civil society and to help bring an end to Castro's dictatorship and a transition. This is the only time that the U.S. government has been ahead of a communist country's transition to democracy with an assistance road map. Perhaps the U.S. media are so used to "bullet-point plans" and "sound-bites strategies" that they just can't believe that the government would publish a wide-ranging and broad policy statement on anything, let alone Cuba. Why else would they focus only on three items of a report that has more than 650 sanctions and recommendations? Cubans united The favorite areas for attack are the new restrictions that cut back family visits to Cuba by Cuban Americans from once a year to once every three years and those that tighten the list of Cubans on the island who can receive cash remittances and packages from the United States. Another preferred target is a criticism on Bush on the appearance of the tough stance on Cuba as a way to earn Cuban-American votes in November. But there is not a word about the $36 million to carry out democracy-building activities, to support family members of the political opposition and dissidents and to help youth, women and Afro-Cubans secure their rightful place in a pro-democracy movement. Or that the new rules do not affect individuals and NGOs currently licensed to provide humanitarian assistance or support for the Cuban people (e.g., to civil society or religious groups) and that they do not impose any more stringent requirements for obtaining such licenses in the future, among others. However, my greatest amazement is that not a single article has been written about the commission's recommendation to create a "Foundation for Assistance to a Free Cuba." With help from the U.S. government, the foundation would help organize the efforts of Cuban-American organizations and individuals to prepare a coordinated, unified and massive response and provide humanitarian assistance to Cuba following a transition. Imagine a unified effort by us Cuban Americans! [Teo A. Babun Jr. is the executive director of ECHO-Cuba, a faith-based NGO with humanitarian projects throughout Cuba.] From nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com Mon Aug 23 11:14:38 2004 From: nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com (nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 11:14:38 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [NYTr] Trinidad PM Gets Pacemaker in Cuba Message-ID: <200408231514.i7NFEcj03131@olm.blythe-systems.com> sent by Walter Lippmann (cubanews) [How many times have you read in the Miami Herald and others of its ilk about Cuba's failed health care system. Well, time to chalk up another in their list of flops. Note, too, the eighty Cuban doctors who are working in this English-speaking country. And none have "defected." So how, you wonder, do I know this? It's because I read the MIAMI HERALD every day and I know it would tell me if any of the Cuban doctors defected. About a year and a half ago there were two who did defect, in South Africa, if memory serves me correctly on this case. And among the thousand who are working in Venezuela, I cannot remember any who have defected. Everything that goes wrong in Cuba, whether it is real or imagined, they're all reported quite faithfully in the MIAMI HERALD.-WL] AP via Jamaica Observer - August 23, 2004 http://www.jamaicaobserver.com/ Trinidad PM has pacemaker installed in Cuba PORT OF SPAIN, Trinidad (AP) - Trinidad and Tobago's Prime Minister Patrick Manning had a pacemaker installed in Cuba and will return home on Thursday, government officials say. Manning had the pacemaker installed in a 45-minute procedure on Friday and was able to speak to top advisers several hours later, according to two senior officials who spoke on condition of anonymity. One official said Manning was in "good spirits". Manning left for Cuba on August 14. The Government initially said Manning would stay in Cuba for four days. The officials refused to comment on the delay, and the Government has refused to discuss the matter publicly. Manning, 57, had heart surgery in Cuba in 1998 to replace valves damaged because of rheumatic fever he had suffered. When he went for a medical check-up in Cuba on August 4, doctors told him he should return to have the pacemaker installed. Manning chose to have the initial operation in Cuba in part to avoid questions of blame that could arise if something were to go wrong during an operation in Trinidad, a Manning spokesman has said. Trinidad's doctors union has often been at odds with Manning's Government, striking twice last year. He was opposition leader at the time of the initial surgery. Manning, who also served as prime minister from 1991-1995, has praised Cuba's health system and sought assistance from the Cuban Government on health issues. Last year, the two countries agreed to allow 80 doctors and nurses from Cuba to work in Trinidad for three years to help ease a shortage of medical professionals. From nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com Mon Aug 23 11:17:16 2004 From: nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com (nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 11:17:16 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [NYTr] A Venezuelan Paradox Message-ID: <200408231517.i7NFHGG03256@olm.blythe-systems.com> sent by Walter Lippmann (cubanews) [Moises Naim was minister of trade and industry under a government dominated by the Venezuelan oligarchy in 1992. Now he's in Washington, editing FOREIGN POLICY magazine: http://www.ceip.org/files/projects/g50/board/bio_naim.htm He also writes for the rightist "vcrisis.com" website. This article was published over a year ago, but it makes for delicious reading now, in the aftermath of the defeat of the oligarchy's latest attempt to turn back the clock. Just read the first paragraph and that should give you all the reason you'll need to follow it all the way through to the end. Merry Christmas. Feliz Pasqua! -WL] Foreign Policy - March/April 2003 http://www.foreignpolicy.com/story/files/story9.php A Venezuelan Paradox How Latin America?s sole remaining dictator outsmarted the world?s sole remaining superpower. By Mois?s Na?m Oil and beauty queens. For decades, those were the main story lines about Venezuela that caught the attention of the international media. Not anymore. Now the country seems to spring another surprise every other week. One of the greatest surprises of the Venezuelan crisis is how little Washington has mattered. Another is that Fidel Castro?s Cuba?small, poor, and isolated?has been far more influential in Venezuela than George W. Bush?s mighty America. Few episodes better illustrate the limitations of modern superpowerdom than the outmaneuvering of Uncle Sam by Fidel in a neighboring country that also happens to be one of the United States? biggest oil suppliers. The United States could not do much as Hugo Ch?vez took Venezuelan politics by storm and almost overnight transformed one of the United States? most reliable partners into its most adversarial neighbor in South America. Last year, despite common perceptions to the contrary, the United States was also surprised when a cabal of Venezuelan military officers and business leaders hijacked a massive civil protest and briefly ousted Ch?vez. The clumsy, antidemocratic behavior of the plotters and the swift, effective reaction of Ch?vez?s supporters returned the president to power, once more startling the United States and leaving the Bush administration?s spokespeople sputtering awkwardly about their hesitation to unequivocally condemn the coup. Recently, the U.S. government was surprised again by labor strikes disrupting its oil supplies, just as the superpower contemplated military action in Iraq. The United States has been just too busy to worry about Venezuela. September 11 took all of Latin America off the map for top U.S. policymakers. Without Islamic terrorists and nuclear capabilities, the region cannot compete for the time of U.S. leaders, who have given scant and intermittent attention to Venezuela?s crisis. Moreover, when a democratically elected president engages in thuggish, undemocratic practices but doesn?t cross lines that trigger international outrage or directly threaten U.S. interests, the options for intervention available to even a superpower remain limited. The tardy, ambiguous U.S. reaction to last April?s attempt to oust Ch?vez further constrains Washington?s ability to intervene. Democrats in the U.S. Congress wasted no time in denouncing the Bush administration for its handling of the situation. In effect, U.S. policy toward Venezuela was paralyzed by a lack of clear options, an outburst of partisan politics, and the almost exclusive focus of Washington?s policymaking apparatus on neutralizing al Qaeda and Iraqi President Saddam Hussein. In contrast, Cuba?s attention to Venezuela has been sustained and effective. That is because Havana has had the need, the opportunity, and the means to be the most significant foreign influence in the Venezuelan crisis. Cubans have no foreign policy goal more fundamental to their economic well-being than ensuring Ch?vez stays in power. Venezuela?s oil, ?sold? under highly advantageous conditions to Cuba, is an important reason but not the only one. The alliance with Venezuela has done wonders to help Cuba ease the political and economic isolation that, thanks to the shortsighted U.S. embargo, has choked the country since the collapse of the Soviet Union. Indeed, Venezuelan Air Force pilots report that the equivalent of an airlift between Caracas and Havana has been established. Cuba is cementing its presence in Venezuela by sending thousands of sports trainers, health workers, and other government employees to spend extended periods there; at the same time, a large number of Ch?vez?s supporters are training in a variety of fields on the island. Most of the Cuban advisers are doctors and athletes, but some of them are political operatives and intelligence officers. Commenting on last year?s abortive coup against Ch?vez, a European ambassador in Caracas said, ?I don?t know which was a bigger factor in returning Ch?vez to power, the ineptitude of his enemies or the effectiveness of the Cubans, but I do know that both played a role.? Havana not only has strong motives to support President Ch?vez; it also has the talent and the institutions to do so with great efficacy. The New York Times recently reported that Cuban intelligence has been able to infiltrate some of the most sensitive spy agencies in the United States. Historically, Cuban agents have been either directly involved or have had front-row seats in almost all the revolutions, coups, and guerrilla movements in the Third World. Such experience certainly comes in handy when helping a valuable ally such as Ch?vez. Cuban diplomacy supported by Venezuelan oil money has also made significant inroads among Caribbean nations, which control an influential voting bloc in the Organization of American States (OAS). Such ties may well help sway the OAS, which, together with a recently created group of friendly nations, is attempting to mediate between Ch?vez and the opposition. The Venezuelan situation can only be solved by Venezuelans. But, as the crisis deepens, the role of other countries will be crucial. Perhaps, even the sole remaining superpower will be able to find a way to avoid being outsmarted again by the hemisphere?s sole remaining Cold War dictator. Mois?s Na?m is editor of FOREIGN POLICY. From nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com Mon Aug 23 12:55:12 2004 From: nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com (nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 12:55:12 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [NYTr] Abu Ghraib Torture: Legal Updates Message-ID: <200408231655.i7NGtCa06025@olm.blythe-systems.com> [Graner is the cracker scum who was Lynndie England's boyfriend and who has been named as one of the sadistic leaders of the torture ring at Abu Ghraib. Now he's whining about not being about to get a "fair trial" outside the US. His lawyers' attempts to get the venue changed were rejected. Over the weekend, General Karpinski, the relieved MP commander at Abu Ghraib, blasted the whitewash Army report on prisoner "abuse," which cleared the top brass of direct involvement in the scandal, but criticized the military for gross failures of leadership from the top. Also, a military judge has refused to suppress photos of the torture.-NY Transfer] Reuters via Yahoo - August 23, 2004 http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20040823/us_nm/iraq_abuses_hearing_dc&cid=1896&ncid=1480 U.S. Soldier Wants Abuse Trial Moved from Baghdad By Philip Blenkinsop MANNHEIM, Germany (Reuters) - A U.S. soldier at the center of the Iraqi prisoner abuse scandal wants his pending court martial to be moved from Baghdad as he believes he has no chance of a fair trial there, his lawyers said on Monday. Specialist Charles Graner and three others are accused of sexually humiliating and, in some cases, beating detainees at Iraq's notorious Abu Ghraib prison. Photos of them tormenting naked Iraqis aroused worldwide outrage when they emerged in April and sparked criticism that sweeping U.S. anti-terror policies had encouraged the abuses. Graner, 35, who faces the most serious accusations and who featured prominently in the abuse photographs, was the first to appear at the pre-trial hearing at a U.S. army base in Germany. His lawyers argued that publicity surrounding events at Abu Ghraib meant it would be impossible to find an unbiased jury among Graner's peers. "While the prejudice would be worldwide, it is extremely acute in Baghdad as the feeling would be that he has hurt the mission," Captain Jay Heath, one of Graner's two lawyers, told the judge. "There are some suggestions his actions have caused the death of some U.S. soldiers," Heath added. However, Judge James Pohl said it was premature to rule on the matter. Graner's second lawyer, Guy Womack, later told reporters it would be almost impossible to persuade civilian witnesses to travel to Iraq. "While I enjoy traveling to Iraq, most civilians would not, and U.S. courts lack the authority to make them do so," he said. OBEYEING ORDERS Womack said he would press for the case to be moved from Baghdad at the next hearing, scheduled to take place in the Iraqi capital on October 21. He said he planned to lodge a complaint against statements by President Bush and his government implying Graner was guilty. Womack also insisted the reservists were only obeying orders to soften up detainees that they believed to be legal. Dressed in desert fatigues, Graner answered questions about the long hours in Iraq, sometimes 17 hours a day transferring detainees, and the stress of being under fire. "We worked every day... Several of our platoon had taken fire. Both my roommates had been injured, took blasts... It was one of the most stressful times," the military policeman said. Earlier, a military investigator referred to CDs, taken from Graner's room during a search in January, with hundreds of photographs, featuring detainees being abused. Graner's lawyers said the photographs were taken without his full consent, but Judge Pohl dismissed a motion to strike the potentially incriminating images from his court martial. Graner is accused of photographing a detainee being dragged by Private First Class Lynndie England on a leash, and posing for a picture by a pile of naked detainees in November. He is also said to have forced prisoners to strip naked and masturbate in front of each other, and one to simulate oral sex on another, before taking pictures. Graner is also charged with committing adultery, an offence against military discipline. Defense lawyers for the accused -- Specialists Graner and Megan Ambuhl, Staff Sergeant Ivan Frederick and Sergeant Javal Davis -- argue all four were following orders to systematically break inmates for interrogation. Davis's lawyers are set to bring a motion compelling Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld to testify. The hearings continue on Tuesday. *** AP via Yahoo - August 23, 2004 http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20040823/ap_on_re_eu/germany_iraq_prisoner_abuse&cid=518&ncid=1480 Judge Urges U.S. to Speed Abu Ghraib Case 4 minutes ago By DAVID RISING, Associated Press Writer MANNHEIM, Germany - A military judge hearing evidence in the alleged abuse of prisoners at Iraq's Abu Ghraib prison demanded Monday that prosecutors speed up the investigation, warning that further delay could derail the case against at least one of the accused soldiers. Col. James Pohl expressed displeasure after being told a lone Army criminal investigator was reviewing thousands of pages of records contained in a secret computer server at Abu Ghraib. Turning to the military prosecutor, Pohl said he wanted a report on the server inquiry available by Dec. 1. But he then added that he would "seriously revisit" a defense motion to dismiss the case against Spc. Charles Graner if there was no sign of progress. "The government has to figure out what they want to do with the prosecution of this case," the judge said testily. Pohl, who is holding preliminary hearings at a U.S. military base in Mannheim before returning the proceedings to Baghdad, also issued a Sept. 10 target for the government to complete three investigative reports so they can be used as evidence. The three reports include one conducted by U.S. Army Maj. Gen. George R. Fay that examined the role of military intelligence, including the 205th Military Intelligence Brigade, the unit that was in control of interrogations at Abu Ghraib. That report had been expected to be finished in July. The U.S. Navy's inspector general is due to report on practices at detention centers in Iraq, Afghanistan and Guantanamo Bay. A Pentagon-appointed panel led by former Defense Secretary James Schlesinger is due to review previous reports and suggest further areas that should be investigated. Graner, alleged in previous testimony to have been the ringleader in the abuse at Abu Ghraib, had his case heard for several hours Monday ? the first of four U.S. soldiers facing hearings at Mannheim this week. His lawyers suggested Graner had been too tired to make a clear decision about his rights when he allowed investigators to take a laptop and CDs from his quarters at the prison in January. Pohl rejected a defense request to bar anything found on the laptop as evidence, but said the point could be revisited later once it became clear what exactly was on the computer. He granted a motion to suppress a statement by Graner that "everything you want is in my computer." Wearing desert fatigues, Graner appeared calm and listened intently to the proceedings. When he testified, he said he had little choice but to agree when investigators confronted him with the search request in the middle of the night Jan. 14. Graner, 35, said he had been in Iraq for months on an extremely stressful assignment, when he was awakened after no more than 90 minutes of sleep and was told by an Army investigating agent, Manora Iem, that he could not return to his quarters until it had been searched. Graner said he finally signed the search order because he thought it was a "done deal" anyway. "Special Agent Iem said it would look favorable if anything derogatory was found, my quarters were going to be searched anyway, so I just signed it," he testified. Iem testified that Graner appeared to understand his rights. "He was alert, he was very cooperative," but feared he was being made a scapegoat, Iem said. When computer specialists looked at the laptop and 11 CDs found in the search, they discovered "numerous, dozens of pictures related to the investigation," another investigating agent, Tyler Pieron, testified. Graner's civilian lawyer, Guy Womack, maintained his client was simply doing what he was ordered by superiors. Graner and others questioned their command, "but they were consistently told to follow those orders," Womack told reporters outside the courtroom. The Abu Ghraib scandal broke in April when photographs of hooded and naked prisoners were made public, touching off furious international criticism. Graner, of Unionstown, Pa., became known worldwide from the picture of him posing for the camera with his thumbs up behind a pile of naked prisoners. He has been accused of jumping on prisoners as they lay on the ground, stomping on the hands and bare feet of several prisoners, and punching an inmate in the temple so hard he lost consciousness. Additionally, he faces adultery charges for having sex with Pfc. Lynndie England, who is now pregnant with his child and is facing a pretrial hearing on Abu Ghraib-related charges at Fort Bragg, N.C. Adultery is a crime under the U.S. military code. Graner risks the harshest sentence of the four who have hearings this week: up to 24 1/2 years in prison, forfeiture of pay, reduction of rank and a dishonorable discharge. The four soldiers are among seven charged with abuse at Abu Ghraib. One of the seven, Spc. Jeremy C. Sivits, pleaded guilty May 19 and was sentenced to a year in prison. All were in Iraq as members of the 372nd Military Police Company, a reserve unit based in Cresaptown, Md. Later Monday, Pohl cut short a hearing for Spc. Megan Ambuhl of Centreville, Va., because it emerged that some of the abuse-related charges against her were filed after her "Article 32 investigation," the military equivalent of a grand jury hearing. The judge ordered Ambuhl's Article 32 hearing reopened in Baghdad to determine whether the additional charges are warranted. [Associated Press reporters Robert H. Reid and Panos Kakaviatos contributed to this report. ] *** AFP via Yahoo - August 23, 2004 http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=1504&e=3&u=/afp/20040823/ts_afp/iraq_us_prisoners_040823143433 Judge rejects attempts to have Iraq prison abuse photos quashed MANNHEIM, Germany (AFP) - A military judge rejected a request to exclude potentially incriminating photographs from the court martial of a soldier suspected of being the ringleader in the Iraqi prisoner abuse scandal. The judge leading the pre-trial hearing in Mannheim, western Germany, James Pohl, also denied efforts by lawyers for Corporal Charles Graner to have his future court martial moved to the United States. But he threatened to have the case against Graner suspended if military police investigators did not move quickly to sort out hundreds of thousands of files stored on a secret military computer that the defence needs as evidence. "I will reconsider whether this case should be dismissed," said Pohl, if he was not happy with progress made by the investigators by October 21. Graner is charged with cruelty and maltreatment, assault, conspiracy and dereliction of duty over the abuses at the notorious Abu Ghraib prison outside Baghdad which were captured on film by some of the seven people accused so far. The photographs, released by the media in April, caused outrage around the world and came as a further blow to US reputation in the Middle East. The prisoners were photographed naked, in itself deeply humiliating and even more so for Muslims, and being forced to perform sexual acts, piled in a pyramid, cowering from dogs or with electrodes attached to them. An investigator told the judge that Graner had given a CD to a colleague containing dozens of photographs of Iraqi prisoners being abused. Defence lawyers Jay Heath and Guy Womack argued that it would be impossible for Graner to get a fair trial in Baghdad because of the unfair influence the photographs had on all who had seen them. "This is the functional equivalent of a confession, almost," said Heath, a military captain. "There are some suggestions that his actions have caused the deaths of other Americans." But Pohl argued that it would be difficult for Graner, whose face was seen worldwide smiling, arms folded behind a mound of hooded, naked Iraqi prisoners, to find a panel of judges anywhere who had not heard of the case. When questioned, the 35-year-old military policeman, told of how he had been living on three to four hours of sleep a night was under extreme stress when questioned by investigators in the early hours of January 14, 2004. "Several of our platoon had taken fire ... both of my roommates had been injured in an IED (home-made bomb) blast," he said. "Many times we went out without armour, a few times we went out without doors" on the vehicles. "It was one of the more stressful times," he said. The court heard that Graner, who was dressed in desert fatigues and is the first of four soldiers involved in the two-day hearing, was of above average intelligence and had himself been trained in search and seizure procedures. "It is simply inconceivable that the accused was not acting in a voluntary manner in this case," said Major Michael Holly, essentially a military prosecutor representing the US government. Later, outside the court, Womack played down the judge's rulings. "We don't really see this as a set back," he told reporters, "Our defence has always been that the actions at Abu Ghraib were lawful," that they were ordered from above. The hearing, known as an Article 39a session, is a one-off procedure, and was moved to Germany after lawyers voiced fears for witness safety. Graner and Sergeant Javal Davis, who is facing similar charges, have both submitted a motion for the location of the trial to be changed. Specialist Megan Ambuhl was also appeared Monday, with Davis and the last of the four, Staff Sergeant Ivan Frederick being heard on Tuesday. The scandal has seen blame pushed from the guards up the military ranks and embarrassed US Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, whom Davis wants interviewed for his trial, but has yet to claim the job of any high-ranking official. From nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com Mon Aug 23 12:56:09 2004 From: nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com (nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 12:56:09 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [NYTr] Iraq War Update from AFP 8/23/04 Message-ID: <200408231656.i7NGu9Y06077@olm.blythe-systems.com> AFP via Yahoo - August 3, 2004 http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=1504&e=2&u=/afp/20040823/ts_afp/iraq_040823152426 US planes bomb Najaf, hopes of peace fade NAJAF, Iraq (AFP) - US planes pounded Najaf's cemetery and historic centre near the Imam Ali shrine, dimming hopes of a peaceful end to a near three-week stand-off between US-led Iraqi troops and Shiite militia. Although American journalist Micah Garen was recuperating after an eight-day hostage ordeal in southern Iraq, fears were growing for two French journalists and an Italian, who has not been heard from since Thursday. Dense, black smoke spewed into the sky above the enormous, sacred Valley of Peace burial ground after a deafening explosion followed by a second blast in the early afternoon as a US plane flew overhead. Hours later, another two raids targeted the Old City around a world famous Shiite Muslim shrine, as sporadic gunfights and mortar attacks continued to reverberate through the ravaged streets, said an AFP correspondent. A dent measuring about one metre (three feet) square had been punched about 30 centimetres (one foot) into the shrine's outer compound wall overnight, with rubble and spent parts of a rocket littered on the marble floor. Supporters of militia leader and radical cleric Moqtada Sadr said a helicopter fired a missile into the wall, but the US military denied that the shrine had been targeted. No US tanks could be seen in the immediate surroundings and there were fewer militiamen than usual around the mosque. "Two rockets were fired from an American Apache. One hit the western wall of the shrine and the other a nearby hotel," said Sadr official Sheikh Ali Hussein Ali. The hotel is a known resting place for captains in the Mehdi Army. "The fire was not directed at the shrine. It did not hit the wall or any other holy site in the area," a US military spokesman said. Despite US and Iraqi assertions to the contrary, Iran's President Mohammad Khatami on Monday denied any "provocative interference" in the strife-torn neighbouring country and denied offering any support to Sadr. One person was killed and three wounded in overnight violence, said a doctor at the Imam Ali's clinic, with another four patients brought in since daybreak. Meanwhile, three days after Sadr's fighters said they would hand over control of the shrine to representatives of Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, Iraq's top Shiite religious authority, the deal was still in limbo. "There is no fresh development (on the handover)... There is contact between them and us, but there are differences on forming the committee due to the security situation," said Shaibani. The Mehdi Army has occupied the Imam Ali complex since their April uprising, and 73-year-old Sistani is recovering in London after medical treatment. He has been reluctant to take back the shrine without ensuring that nothing is missing, and the Mehdi Army is unwilling to surrender control amid any suggestion of impropriety. One of the eight-member team who tried but failed to meet Sadr last week in a bid to persuade him to lay down his arms and leave the shrine said they were waiting for a signed letter from the cleric himself before trying again. "We are waiting his response. When we receive it, we will go back again," said Sheikh Mohammed Mohammed Ali. Asked why there were fewer militiamen than usual visible on the streets, Shaibani said tactics had shifted up a gear. "The war has developed and the Mehdi Army is now organised and using military tactics of hiding. It is not run randomly anymore," he said. Despite a resumption of crude exports from southern Iraq, world oil prices rose again in London as hopes dimmed of a resolution of the Najaf conflict, opening at 43.85 dollars a barrel of Brent North Sea crude, up 33 cents. One Turkish national and five Iraqis were killed in a string of deadly roadside attacks across the country, US military and police sources said. US military officials have said it could take up to 10 years to crush Iraq's insurgency, the USA Today reported. There was still no news Monday of French reporters Georges Malbrunot and Christian Chesnot, who were last seen in Baghdad on Friday and are thought to have been kidnapped on their way to Najaf. Italian reporter Enzo Baldoni has also been missing since Thursday. The body of what was thought to have been his driver was discovered near Najaf. From nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com Mon Aug 23 13:00:36 2004 From: nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com (nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 13:00:36 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [NYTr] Miami Protests of Bush Policy Continue Message-ID: <200408231700.i7NH0aB06207@olm.blythe-systems.com> Agencia Cubana de Noticias (AIN) http://www.ain.cu Miami Protests of Bush?s Cuba Policy Continuing Havana, August 23 (AIN) Over 240 Cuban-Americans protested in Miami on Saturday against the Bush administration?s recent measures that include limiting family visits to the island to one every three years. According to Cuban-American solidarity activist Andres Gomez, this latest demonstration was held in front of the offices of the US Treasury Department in Miami. For about two hours the participants ? mainly of Cuban origin ? chanted slogans against the travel limitations and against President George W. Bush, according to Monday?s edition of Granma. The organizers of the demonstrations said that their objective was to pressure the Bush administration into lifting the travel prohibition or risk losing a huge number of votes in the upcoming November presidential elections. Saturday?s demonstration was the sixth of its type in Miami in the last 8 weeks. Cuban-Americans in Miami are also planning to collect humanitarian donations next Saturday for victims of Hurricane Charley which hit the western part of the island two weeks ago. This donation campaign, being organized by the Association of Christian Women in Defense of the Cuban Family and Jewish Solidarity, is sponsored by the Antonio Maceo Brigade, the Alliance of Cuban Workers, the Alianza Martiana and the Jose Marti Association. From nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com Mon Aug 23 13:02:15 2004 From: nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com (nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 13:02:15 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [NYTr] Cuban Sharpshooter Wins Bronze in Athens Message-ID: <200408231702.i7NH2FL06263@olm.blythe-systems.com> Agencia Cubana de Noticias (AIN) http://www.ain.cu Cuban Marksman Wins Olympic Medal as Family Celebrates at Home Havana, August 23 (AIN) Cries of emotion and joy shot out at the home of Cuban marksman Juan Miguel Rodr?guez as he picked up a bronze medal at the Athens Olympic Games . ?You can imagine how happy we feel about Juan Miguel?s victory, since this is Cuba?s second Olympic medal in the history of shooting, said Juan Miguel?s father, Roberto Rodriguez, as he watched the games along with a group of neighbors and relatives in the Havana neighborhood of Santiago de las Vegas. Cuban shooter Roberto Castrillo was the first islander to garner an Olympic Medal ? also bronze ? in 1990 at the Moscow games. Juan Miguel, a skeet shooter, missed his first two shots forcing him to improve his performance in a competition against the world?s best, people like Italian and Olympic champion Andrei Benelli, and Finland?s Marko Keimpainnen. The Cuban went on to win his medal after shattering 147 out of 150 targets. The Cuban sharpshooter had previously won a gold medal at the 1995 World Shooting Cup. ?He left very secure of himself and said he was sure he would performance well in Athens. He had that same spirit [in Athens] as when he won his earlier medal?, said his wife Ana Margarita, mother of Juan Miguel?s young daughter. With the Olympic victory in hand, Juan Miguel is now looking forward to the September Shooting Cup where he will face Olympic champs and the winners of this year?s top shooting matches. From nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com Mon Aug 23 13:14:36 2004 From: nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com (nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 13:14:36 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [NYTr] Poland Wants Out of Iraq ASAP Message-ID: <200408231714.i7NHEab06690@olm.blythe-systems.com> sent by Dave Muller (southnews) AFP via Yahoo - August 22, 2004 Poland wants to leave Iraq as soon as possible: Szmajdzinski WARSAW (AFP) - Poland wants to pull out of Iraq as soon as possible, Defence Minister Jerzy Szmajdzinski said as he arrived at a Polish military base in southern Iraq, the PAP news agency reported. Szmajdzinski left Warsaw for Iraq overnight Saturday, on a mission to assess the political and military situation in the area under Polish command, his office said in a statement Sunday. "We want to get out of Iraq as soon as possible, but first we have to build solid security conditions there," the minister was quoted as saying following a religious ceremony for a Polish soldier who was killed in a car bomb attack on Saturday. "Only a democratic Iraq" can ensure world security and therefore Poland's security, he said. The defence minister announced that he would travel to Iraq to see the situation for himself following the car bombing, the third of a string of attacks that have left three soldiers dead and more than a dozen wounded in the past week. "Our contingent is carrying out its mission at a difficult time, marked by a power struggle, which explains the attacks and guerrilla activities," the minister added. Szmajdzinski said the next Polish contingent to leave for Iraq would be "smaller", without giving further details. US ally Poland heads a multinational force of 6,500 administering a swathe of Iraq south of Baghdad. Warsaw has already said it hopes to reduce the number of troops it has in the country from 2,500 to 1,500 soldiers in early 2005. Fourteen Poles have been killed in the country since the start of the US-led war -- 10 were soldiers and four were civilians. Polish public opinion remains overwhelmingly opposed to Poland's participation in the US-led multinational force in Iraq. The archives of South News can be found at http://southmovement.alphalink.com.au/southnews/ From nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com Mon Aug 23 13:16:11 2004 From: nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com (nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 13:16:11 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [NYTr] Aussie PM Was Warned Iraq War Would Spur Terrorism Message-ID: <200408231716.i7NHGBD06813@olm.blythe-systems.com> Sydney Morning Herald - August 23, 2004 http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/08/22/1093113058224.html?oneclick=true PM was told war would spur terrorism By Tom Allard, Foreign Affairs Reporter The Federal Government was warned repeatedly by intelligence analysts before the Iraq war that the conflict would harm the war on terrorism by fanning Islamic extremism and spurring terrorist recruiting. An investigation by the Herald, which has included interviews with several serving and retired intelligence figures, has uncovered that John Howard and his senior colleagues were briefed on the dangers, verbally and in written reports. Yet the Prime Minister told Australians on the eve of the conflict that the war would lessen the terrorist threat, contradicting his intelligence advice. The revelation raises serious questions about the inquiry into the intelligence services commissioned by the Government and conducted by Philip Flood. The inquiry never mentioned the warnings about an increased terrorist threat. "They were very, very aware of our views," one former intelligence analyst said. "We believed it would inflame extremism and increase terrorist recruitment." The source said these views were relayed in written reports and in verbal briefings to Mr Howard and his ministers in the months and weeks leading up to the conflict. The sources said senior Government members were constantly being briefed on al-Qaeda and terrorism, including the impact of the Iraq war on the jihad being carried out by al-Qaeda. Another intelligence analyst pointed to additional reporting on how the war would be viewed on the "Arab street" and elsewhere. "We thought the Arab governments, the Gulf states, would keep a lid on demonstrations in the lead-up to the war. But we were sure, in the longer term, there would be a lot of anger towards the West," the analyst said. "We would see there was a risk here that this is going to provoke more support for terrorism and violent responses." The assessments proved prescient. The war has led to a surge in anti-Western sentiment and has become a powerful recruitment tool for terrorists, as the Government now acknowledges. "A lot of our terrorism reporting predicted what is going on at the moment," one of the sources said. "We were thinking about it and writing about it." The sources also said the Government was told there was no operational link between al-Qaeda and Saddam Hussein, and the Iraq war could not be seen as part of the broader global war on terrorism. Mr Howard, unlike his US counterpart, George Bush, never played up the link between Saddam and Osama bin Laden but he did assure the public that the terrorist threat would be diminished by invading Iraq. "Far from our action in Iraq increasing the terrorist threat, it will, by stopping the spread of chemical and biological weapons, make it less likely that a terrorist attack will be carried out against Australia," Mr Howard said in a televised address to the nation on the eve of the war. Australian intelligence agents said their views on terrorism accorded with those of the British intelligence services. It was revealed last year that Britain's joint intelligence committee said one month before the war that "al-Qaeda and associated groups continued to represent by far the greatest terrorist threat to Western interests, and that threat would he heightened by military action against Iraq". Mr Howard has confirmed Australia received this advice and it went into the decision-making "mix", but has studiously avoided comment on what the Australian agencies told him on the subject. Last night his spokeswoman said: "We will not respond to unsourced, non-specific allegations of this kind." Asked by the Herald on July 15 about what the Government was told by its intelligence services about the war's impact on terrorism, the Foreign Minister, Alexander Downer, said he could not answer. "I don't have that information with me here today. I didn't come prepared to answer that question. "Regardless of what intelligence agencies may or may not say, it isn't the intelligence agencies that make the decisions. It's the governments that make the decisions, and governments make the decisions not just on the basis of information provided by intelligence agencies." Mr Howard attacked the Federal Police Commissioner, Mick Keelty, when he observed in March that the war had made participants, including Australia, bigger terrorist targets. The Flood inquiry found the intelligence services did little by way of strategic assessment but never outlined what those assessments were. It also never canvassed what was said in verbal briefings to Mr Howard and senior ministers. Labor yesterday reaffirmed its commitment to a judicial inquiry into the intelligence services, citing gaps in Mr Flood's report. From nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com Mon Aug 23 13:16:53 2004 From: nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com (nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 13:16:53 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [NYTr] Afghan Trial of "Vigilantes" Resumes Message-ID: <200408231716.i7NHGrO06872@olm.blythe-systems.com> AP via Yahoo - August 23, 2004 http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=535&e=7&u=/ap/20040823/ap_on_re_as/afghan_us_vigilantes Trial of Accused U.S. Vigilantes Resumes By PAUL HAVEN, Associated Press Writer KABUL, Afghanistan - A defense lawyer for one of three Americans accused of torturing a dozen Afghan prisoners in a private jail showed a video in court Monday of Afghanistan's former education minister congratulating the group and offering his help in arresting terrorists. In the footage, former minister Yunus Qanooni, an influential figure in the Northern Alliance that helped the United States oust the hardline Taliban regime in late 2001, is shown meeting with Jonathan Idema, leader of the counterterrorism group, and promising help. "Any cooperation, we are ready. We have a small security group," Qanooni says on the tape in broken English. Another video appears to show Qanooni's security forces coming along on a raid on the home of a suspect that Idema claims was plotting to kill the Afghan politician. Idema claims his activities were sanctioned by the Pentagon, and says the Afghan government was also behind his efforts to track down terrorists. He and two other Americans ? Edward Caraballo and Brent Bennett ? were arrested July 5 by Afghan intelligence agents. Authorities found about a dozen prisoners tied up at the site and say there is evidence of torture. The trio face up to 20 years in jail if convicted. Four alleged Afghan accomplices are also on trial. A verdict had been expected Monday, but the judge postponed the proceedings for a week to allow Bennett more time to get a lawyer. Idema is representing himself. The footage of Qanooni, also a senior Afghan government security adviser, appeared to support Idema's claim that he had official sanction. Chief prosecutor Mohammed Nahim Dawari conceded that Idema had contacts with Afghan officials, but he said they were held on the presumption that the American was a legitimate operative backed by the United States government. The Afghan government and U.S. military insist the men were operating without their knowledge, and outside the law. Still, the American military has admitted receiving from Idema a prisoner, who was subsequently released. NATO peacekeepers, known as the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF), also say they were duped into helping the men on three raids in the capital, footage of one of which was shown in court Monday. On two of the raids, traces of explosives were found. "Does the court think that ISAF would send me 50 soldiers and 10 vehicles if they didn't know who we were?" Idema told the court. "ISAF knew exactly who we were." In an interview from custody on Saturday, Idema told The Associated Press that he had been hot on the trail of al-Qaida leaders Osama bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahri at the time of his arrest. Caraballo's lawyer, Michael Skibbie, said his client was a journalist who fully believed that Idema's operation was legitimate. Another tape played in court Monday showed Idema interrogating a prisoner, Ghulam Saki, who was heard describing how he was paid to commit acts of terrorism. However, Saki who was seated in the courtroom, told AP that his confession was false and that he'd been tortured. "It's not true. They put hot water on my body and tortured me and that is why I made these statements," he said. The American defendants have complained repeatedly that they've been unable to review the evidence against them and the indictment, and that parts of the court proceedings were not translated from Dari. They say the FBI has withheld evidence handed over to it by Afghan intelligence agents, making it impossible to present a defense. The proceedings Monday were often chaotic, with Idema, the prosecutor and witnesses in the gallery shouting out at once. On Monday, Caraballo was walking with a limp and using a crutch. The prosecutor said Caraballo had slipped, and wasn't hurt as a result of any physical abuse. Skibbie said he was "not in a position to comment" on the injuries. Idema, from Fayetteville, N.C., is a colorful character with a checkered history. He was in the Army from 1975 to 1984, and received some special forces training. In 1984, he was convicted of fraud for bilking investors in a fake company out of hundreds of thousands of dollars. He spent three years in a federal prison. From nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com Mon Aug 23 13:17:46 2004 From: nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com (nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 13:17:46 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [NYTr] Haiti: US Treasury Says Private Sector Is Key Message-ID: <200408231717.i7NHHkj06921@olm.blythe-systems.com> [No surprise here... This is, after all, why the US mounted a coup against Jean-Bertrand Aristide.] Reuters via Yahoo - August 23, 2004 http://biz.yahoo.com/rf/040823/economy_haiti_taylor_1.html Private sector key in Haiti-U.S. Treasury's Taylor WASHINGTON, Aug 23 (Reuters) - The Bush administration will work closely with Haiti to help rebuild its economy but wants to ensure the private sector has a key role in the effort, U.S. Treasury Under Secretary John Taylor said on Monday. In remarks prepared for delivery to a gathering in Miami of Haitian community leaders, Taylor noted that the international community had pledged in July to supply more than $1 billion in aid to Haiti, with the United States to provide $230 million. A text of Taylor's remarks was issued in Washington. Official aid alone will not create jobs and the sustainable economic growth needed to reduce poverty, said Taylor, who visited Haiti to assess its needs. Haiti "... understands the importance of sound economic policies to encourage the private sector," he said, adding it could benefit by seeking broader export markets, which are now only about 5 percent the size of those of its neighbor, the Dominican Republic. From nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com Mon Aug 23 13:19:45 2004 From: nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com (nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 13:19:45 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [NYTr] Kerry vs Bush: The Fake Debate Message-ID: <200408231719.i7NHJj707010@olm.blythe-systems.com> sent by MichaelP (activ-l) In the rush to silence which goes with the "Anyone except BUSH bandwagon", here's a reminder that warmongering is wrong - holding your nose while supporting Kerry won't do much for self-respect either yours as an individual or the you which belongs to "we the people". MichaelP Now read on . ================================ New Statesmann 23 Aug 2004 http://pilger.carlton.com BUSH V. KERRY: THE FAKE DEBATE by John Pilger On 6 May last, the US House of Representatives passed a resolution which,in effect, authorised a "pre-emptive" attack on Iran. The vote was 376/3. Undeterred by the accelerating disaster in Iraq, Republicans and Democrats, wrote one commentator, "once again joined hands to assert the responsibilities of American power." The joining of hands across America's illusory political divide has along history. The native Americans were slaughtered, the Philippines laid to waste and Cuba and much of Latin America brought to heel with "bi-partisan" backing. Wading through the blood, a new breed of popular historian, the journalist in the pay of rich newspaper owners, spun the heroic myths of a super sect called Americanism, which advertising and public relations in the 20th century formalised as an ideology, embracing both conservatism and liberalism. In the modern era, most of America's wars have been launched by liberal Democratic presidents - Truman in Korea, Kennedy and Johnson in Vietnam, Carter in Afghanistan. The fictitious "missile gap" was invented by Kennedy's liberal New Frontiersmen as a rationale for keeping the cold war going. In 1964, a Democrat-dominated Congress gave President Johnson the authority to attack Vietnam, a defenceless peasant nation offering no threat to the United States. Like the non-existent WMDs in Iraq, the justification was a non-existent "incident" in which two North Vietnamese patrol boats were said to have attacked an American warship. More than three million deaths and the ruin of a once bountiful land followed. During the past 60 years, only once has Congress voted to limit the president's "right" to terrorise other countries. This abberation, the 1975 Clark Amendment, a product of the great anti-Vietnam war movement, was repealed in 1985 by Ronald Reagan. During Reagan's assaults on Central Amercia in the 1980s, liberal voices such as Tom Whicker of the New York Times, doyen of the "doves", seriously debated whether or not tiny, impoverished Nicaragua was a threat to the United States. These days, terrorism having replaced the red menace, another fake debate is under way. This is lesser evilism. Although few liberal-minded voters seem to have illusions about John Kerry, their need to get rid of the "rogue" Bush administration is all consuming. Representing them in Britain, the Guardian says the coming presidential election is "exceptional". "Mr Kerry's flaws and limitations are evident," says the paper, "but they are put in the shade by the neo-conservative agenda and catastrophic war-making of Mr Bush. This is an election in which the whole world will breathe a sigh of relief if the incumbent is defeated." The whole world may well breathe a sigh of relief; the Bush regime is both dangerous and universally loathed; but that is not the point. We have debated lesser evilism so often on both sides of the Atlantic that it is surely time to stop gesturing at the obvious and to examine critically a system that produces the Bushes and their Democratic shadows. For those of us who marvel at our luck in reaching mature years without having been blown to bits by the warlords of Americanism, Republican and Democrat, conservative and liberal, and for the millions all over the world, who now reject the American contagion in political life, the true issue is clear. It is the continuation of a project that began more than 500 years ago. The privileges of "discovery and conquest" granted to Christopher Columbus in 1492, in a world the Pope "considers his property to be disposed according to his will", have been replaced by another piracy transformed into the divine will of Americanism and sustained by technological progress, notably that of the media. "The threat to independence in the late 20th century from the new electronics," wrote Edward Said in Culture and Imperialism, "could be greater than was colonialism itself. We are beginning to learn that de-colonisation was not the termination of imperial relationships but merely the extending of a geo-political web which has been spinning since the Renaissance. The new media have the power to penetrate more deeply into a "receiving" culture than any previous manifestation of western technology." Every modern president has been, in large part, a media creation. Thus, the murderous Reagan is sanctified still; Murdoch's Fox Channel and the post-Hutton BBC have differed only in their forms of adulation. And Clinton is regarded nostalgically by liberals as flawed but enlightened; yet Clinton's presidential years were far more violent than Bush's and his goals were the same: "the integration of countries into the global free market community", the terms of which, noted the New York Times, "require the United States to be involved in the plumbing and wiring of nations' internal affairs more deeply than ever before". The Pentagon's "full spectrum dominance" was not the product of the "neo-cons" but of the liberal Clinton who approved what was then the greatest war expenditure in history. According to the Guardian, John Kerry sends us "energising progressive calls". It is time to stop this nonsense. Supremacy is the essence of Americanism; only the veil changes or slips. In 1976, the Democrat Jimmy Carter announced "a foreign policy that respects human rights". In secret, he backed Indonesia's genocide in East Timor and established the muhajideen in Afghanistan as a terrorist organisation designed to overthrow the Soviet Union, and from which came the Taliban and al-Qaeda. It was the liberal Carter, not Reagan, who laid the ground for Bush. In the past year, I have interviewed Carter's principal foreign policy overlords, Zbigniew Brezinski, his national security advisor, and James Schlesinger, his defence secretary. No blueprint for the new imperialism is more respected than Brezinski's. Invested wtih biblical authority by the Bush gang, his 1997 book The Grand Chessboard: American primacy and its geostrategic imperatives, describes American priorities as the economic subjugation of the Soviet Union and the control of Central Asia and the Middle East. His analysis says that "local wars" are merely the beginning of a final conflict leading inexorably to world domination by the US. "To put it in a terminology that harkens back to a more brutal age of ancient empires," he writes, "the three grand imperatives of imperial geostrategy are to prevent collusion and maintan security dependence among the vassals to keep tributaries pliant and protected, and to keep the barbarians from coming together". It may have been easy once to dismiss this as a message from the lunar right. But Brzezinski is mainstream. His devoted students include Madeleine Albright, Clinton's secretary of state, who described the death of half a million infants in Iraq under the American-led embargo as "a price worth paying", and John Negroponte, the mastermind of American terror in Central America under Reagan and currently "ambassador" in Baghdad. James Rubin, who was Albright's enthusiastic apologist at the State Department, is being considered as John Kerry's national security adviser. He is also a zionist; Israel and its role as a terror state, is beyond discussion. Cast an eye over the rest of the world. As Iraq has crowded the front pages, American moves into Africa have attracted little attention. Here, the Clinton and Bush policies are seamless. In the 1990s, Clinton's African Growth and Opportunity Act launched a new scramble for Africa. Humanitarian bombers wonder why Bush and Blair have not attacked Sudan and "liberated" Darfur, or intervened in Zimbabwe or the Congo. The answer is that they have no interest in human distress and human rights and are busy securing the same riches that led to the European scramble in the late 19th century by traditional means of coercion and bribery known as multilateralism. The Congo and Zambia possess 50 per cent of world cobalt reserves; 98 per cent of the world's chrome reserves are in Zimbabwe and South Africa. More importantly, there is oil and natural gas in west Africa, from Nigeria to Angola, and in the Higleig Basin in Sudan. Under Clinton, the African Crisis Response Initiative (Acri) was set up in secret. This has allowed the US to establish "military assistance programmes" in Senegal, Uganda, Malawi, Ghana, Benin, Algeria, Niger, Mali and Chad. Acri is run by Colonel Nestor Pino-Marina, a Cuban exile who took part in the 1961 Bay of Pigs landing, and went on to be a special forces officer in Vietnam and Laos, and, under Reagan, helped lead the contra invasion of Nicaragua. The pedigrees never change. None of this is discussed in a presidential campaign in which John Kerry strains to out-Bush Bush. The multilateralism or "muscular internationalism" that Kerry offers in contrast to Bush's unilateralism is seen as hopeful by the terminally naive; in truth, it beckons even greater dangers. Bush, having given the American elite its greatest disaster since Vietnam, writes the historian Gabriel Kolko, "is much more likely to continue the destruction of the alliance system that is so crucial to American power. One does not have to believe the worse the better, but we have to consider candidly the foreign policy consequences of a renewal of Bush's mandate. As dangerous as it is, Bush's re-election may be a lesser evil." With Nato back in train under President Kerry, and the French and Germans compliant, American ambitions will proceed without the Napoleonic hindrances of the Bush gang. Little of this appears even in the American papers worth reading. The Washington Post's hand-wringing apology to its readers on 14 August for not "pay[ing] enough attention to voices raising questions about the war [against Iraq]" has not interrupted its silence on the danger that the American state presents to the world. Bush's rating has risen in the polls to more than 50 per cent, a level at this stage in the campaign at which no incumbent has ever lost. The virtues of his "plain speaking", which the entire media machine promoted four years ago, Fox and the Washington Post alike, are again credited. As in the aftermath of the 11 September attacks, Americans are denied a modicum of understanding of what Norman Mailer has called "a pre-fascist climate". The fears of the rest of us are of no consequence. The professional liberals on both sides of the Atlantic have played a major part in this. The campaign against Michael Moore's Fahrenheit 9/11 is indicative. The film is not radical and makes no outlandish claims; what it does is push past those guarding the boundaries of "respectable" dissent. That is why the public applaud it. It breaks the collusive codes of journalism, which it shames. It allows people to begin to deconstruct the nightly propaganda that passes for news: in which "a sovereign Iraqi government pursues democracy" and those fighting in Najaf and Fallujah and Basra are always "militants" and "insurgents" or members of a "private army", never nationalists defending their homeland and whose resistance has probably forestalled attacks on Iran, Syria or north Korea. The real debate is neither Bush nor Kerry, but the system they exemplify; it is the decline of true democracy and the rise of the American "national security state" in Britain and other countries claiming to be democracies, in which people are sent to prison and the key thrown away and whose leaders commit capital crimes in faraway places, unhindered, then, like the ruthless Tony Blair, invite the thug they instal to address the British Labour Party conference. The real debate is the subjugation of national economies to a system dividing humanity as never before and sustaining the deaths, every day, of 24,000 hungry people. The real debate is the subversion of political language and of debate itself and perhaps, in the end, our self respect. From nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com Mon Aug 23 13:21:36 2004 From: nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com (nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 13:21:36 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [NYTr] Non-Aligned Nations Urge Sanctions Against Israel Message-ID: <200408231721.i7NHLau07133@olm.blythe-systems.com> sent by Dave Muller (southnews) Palestine Media Cener (PMC) - August 22, 2004 115 Non-Aligned Nations Urge Sanctions Against Israel Durban Declaration Avoids US Veto, Condemns Arafat's Siege The 115-member developing states of the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM), meeting in South Africa at the weekend, has condemned Israels Apartheid Wall, saying it infringes Palestinians rights, and urged all of its members to act individually or collectively to impose sanctions both against Israeli settlements and international companies that participate in settlement activity, including construction of the Wall. At least eighty foreign ministers attending a Non-Aligned Movement meeting in Durban, South Africa, on Thursday unanimously passed the Durban declaration pressing for a peaceful, political settlement of the conflict between Palestinians and Israel. The ministers called on the (UN) Security Council to fulfill its responsibilities by adopting a clear resolution and undertaking necessary measures to stop Israel from constructing its Apartheid Wall on occupied Palestinian land in the West Bank, said the declaration. South Africa hosted the14 th Ministerial Conference of NAM, a mid-term review between the last heads of state and governments summit in Malaysia last year and the next in Cuba in 2006 . The Durban meeting endorsed the recent International Court of Justice (ICJ) advisory decision against Israels building of its Apartheid Wall. In the following days, the Non-Aligned Movement will be calling on UN Secretary General Kofi Annan to expedite the register of damages caused by the construction of the Wall, and will be convening a further conference to consider how member states can build a broad coalition together to work towards a peaceful resolution of the entire Middle East situation. The NAM foreign ministers reaffirmed the need for an early convening of a special meeting of regional and international groupings aimed at building a broad partnership for achieving a peaceful solution to the long-running conflict, further mobilizing the international community in support of the two-State solution, based on the pre- 1967borders and on international law, the declaration said. The conference noted Israels negative reaction to the ICJs decision that the Wall was a breach of international law, and called on member states to take measures collectively, regionally and individually to prevent any products of illegal Israeli settlements from entering their markets. In a final document, NAM wanted the United Nations Security Council to adopt a resolution chastising Israel and to take other measures to force Israel to stop building the600 -kilometer Wall. The group also urged the Security Council to establish a register of damages caused by the Wall and then require Israel to pay reparations. With regard to member states, the ministers called upon them to undertake measures ... to prevent any products of illegal Israeli settlements from entering their markets, the declaration said. It also called on them to decline entry to Israeli settlers and to impose sanctions against companies and entities involved in the construction of the wall and other illegal activities in the occupied Palestinian territory. In the declaration, the ministers also urged Israel to respect and abide by the ICJ ruling. Such respect and compliance would positively influence efforts for achieving a peaceful, political settlement of the conflict based on international law, the NAM foreign ministers said. Arafats Siege Denounced The declaration also condemned the virtual imprisonment to which Israel has subjected Palestinian President Yaser Arafat for the past two and a half years, and denounced in strong terms what it said were repeated threats against his life. Arafat, in a message to a gathering of the Non-Aligned Movement in Durban, appealed for a ceasefire with Israel and reconfirmed the Palestinian Leaderships commitment to peace as a strategic option and to a negotiated settlement of the conflict with the Jewish state. In 2002 , South African Minister of Foreign Affairs Zuma led a Non-Aligned Movement delegation to meet with Arafat in an expression of solidarity with the people of Palestine. The accompanying Department of Foreign Affairs release declared: The NAM delegation reiterated the movements outrage at the intensification of the illegal Israeli occupation, the killing, vast destruction, the economic strangulation and other atrocities committed against Palestine and its people. Israel condemned NAM as the diplomatic rear guard for the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO). The Non-Aligned Movement is the PLOs diplomatic rear guard at the UN, and the reservoir from which the bulk of the automatic majority against Israel comes, an Israeli diplomat told Haaretz. The Palestinians always recruit the non-aligned countries to adopt resolutions and instructions that later become the basis for anti-Israel initiatives in the General Assembly. The non-aligned countries with which Israel maintains close relations are India, Thailand, Colombia, Chile, Peru, Ecuador, Cyprus, Kenya, Angola, Cameroon, South Africa, Seychelles and the Philippines. NAM Declaration Avoids US Veto Speaking as observer at the conference, the Palestinian ambassador to the United Nations Dr. Nasser Al Kidwa said that the beauty of the proposals is that they do not have to go through the UN Security Council, and face a possible United States veto. In October 2003 , the United States vetoed a draft UN Security Council resolution condemning Israel for building its Apartheid Wall. After the setback, the Palestinians turned to the General Assembly. The assembly passed a resolution denouncing Israel in last October and then asked the ICJ in last December to rule whether the Wall is illegal. The Hague-based ICJ ruled on July that, the construction of the wall being built by Israel, the occupying power, in the occupied Palestinian Territory, including in and around east Jerusalem, and its associated regime, is contrary to international law." At the request of NAM and Arab nations, the UN General Assembly held an emergency special session on July 16 to examine the world courts ruling and finally adopted a resolution to demand that Israel comply with the ICJ advisory opinion. Al-Kidwa said he was delighted by the movements support, saying Israel had virtually colonized the Palestinians. Our right to self-determination must not be conditional to anything, it is a basic human right, he said. At least 16 of the NAM members held a meeting of the special committee on Palestine on Wednesday to consider further action after the ICJs ruling. They prepared a document that was handed on Wednesday to the movements Committee on Palestine, which is chaired by Malaysia and also includes, Algeria, Bangladesh, Colombia, Cuba, India, Indonesia, Senegal, South Africa, Zambia, Zimbabwe, Angola, Benin, Chile, Pakistan, the Philippines and the Palestinians. PLOs chief of the foreign affairs Farouq Al-Kaddoumi told reporters that the Palestinian state wanted the movement to seek international sanctions against Israel to pressure it to accept the decision of the ICJ. Al-Kaddoumi was backed separately by Egypt, which said in a statement in Durban: Egypt calls upon the United Nations...to consider what further action is required to end the illegal situation resulting from the construction of the wall, taking into account the present advisory opinion issued by the International Court of Justice. Egypt calls upon the member states to ensure cessation of the construction of the wall and not to render any assistance to its construction nor recognize any situation created by or as a consequence of the construction, the statement said. NAM, the largest political grouping outside the United Nations, mainly consisting of developing countries, originated in the 1955 meeting of 29 Asian and African countries, at which heads of state discussed issues of common concern including colonialism and the influence of the West. The principles of the movement, including respect for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of all nations, and settlement of all international disputes by peaceful means in conformity with the United Nations Charter, remain valid more than 40 years later. The archives of South News can be found at http://southmovement.alphalink.com.au/southnews/ From nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com Mon Aug 23 13:53:10 2004 From: nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com (nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 13:53:10 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [NYTr] What Role for Iraqi Working Class in the Resistance? Message-ID: <200408231753.i7NHrAd08180@olm.blythe-systems.com> sent by Cort Greene In Defence of Marxism - August 22, 2004 http://www.marxist.com What role for the Iraqi working class in the resistance movement? By Yossi Schwartz The severe fighting taking place in Iraq is presented to us as some inexplicable phenomenon, produced by ?dark forces? resisting the march of ?progress and democracy?. In reality what we are facing is a mass resistance movement aimed at expelling a foreign army of occupation. This movement is fuelled by the terrible conditions Iraqi workers are facing, conditions created by the domination of imperialism. Every informed person knows that Bush and Blair lied about the reasons for the war against the people of Iraq. They were not motivated by the threat of Saddam Hussein, lack of democracy, nor for his alleged connections to al-Qaeda, neither by the alleged WMDs. These were all lies, served up to convince the public in Britain, the USA and beyond, that the war was a ?just war?. The real reasons for the war were a mix of greed for oil, military strategy, the need to push to one side European competition and a desperate attempt to preserve the dollar as the world's reserve currency. Now we are being fed new lies regarding the new US-appointed Allawi interim government which ?took office? on June 28, 2004. According to Bush and Blair, ?It is a government whose role is to restore stability and end the occupation?. At the end of June they declared that, ?We are handing over sovereignty to Iraqis." In spite of the claims of both the UN and Bush that the US is preparing to leave Iraq, and sovereignty is on the horizon, the number of imperialist troops in the country is actually increasing and the war between the masses fighting for national liberation and the imperialist occupiers is becoming more intense with every passing day. While the imperialist propaganda claims that their role is to install democracy and that Iraq is almost a sovereign state, the suppression of all forms of genuine democracy is a daily occurrence. According to an Al Jazeera report (August 15), a spokesman for the Association of Muslim Scholars in Iraq (AMS), Muhammad Ayash al-Kubaisi, cited the recent arrest of the editor-in-chief of the association's newspaper al-Basaer (Insight) as an example of "absent" sovereignty. "How can a group of foreign soldiers stop an Iraqi citizen like Dr Muthana al-Dhari and arrest him if there is a sovereign government? What are those soldiers doing in the heart of Baghdad? Why did the Iraqi police not arrest him instead?" al-Kubaisi said. The status of Iraqi detainees, who are held without charge by the US army in Iraq, has not changed since the handover of power to the new government. The US army continues to be in charge of the notorious prisons, and the same US army is in control of the Iraqi police. The newly appointed president of Iraq, Ghazi al-Yawir, announced last month that there would be a pardon for those Iraqis who carried guns before the formation of Iyad Allawi?s government, but the US ambassador to Iraq, John Negroponte, quickly intervened to make it clear that those who killed Americans would not be pardoned, thus showing who is the real boss. That explains why on August 7 the interim government did what it was told to do. Those Iraqis who have committed minor crimes were pardon, but not those who have fought against US soldiers and Iraqi police. In spite of the black out of information about the Iraqi labour movement, and the lies about sovereignty, there has actually been an explosion of workers? struggles in this - supposedly - wonderful new Iraq. Low wages, terrible working conditions, very high levels of unemployment, widespread robbery, the lack of water and electricity, the suppression of elementary rights are all behind the rise of the class struggle in Iraq. The horrific conditions the masses are suffering are not only due to the destruction of the infrastructure of Iraq caused by the bombing by the imperialists. These are being exacerbated by privatisation, tax cuts for the rich and economic policies aimed at keeping wages at starvation levels while allowing the bosses to make huge profits. Last September Bremer issued an order, which allows 100% foreign ownership of businesses, except for the oil industry that is still nationalized. The same order allows the companies to repatriate 100% of their profits. At the same time, Bremer issued another order cutting Iraq?s highest income tax bracket from 45% to 15% of earnings. While the workers are living on slave wages the foreign companies - most of them owned by Bush and his friends - are making very high profits not only through the super exploitation of the workers in Iraq, but also through another simple method known to most people as ?grant theft?. According to Ariana Eunjung Cha (Washington Post Staff Writer, Wednesday, August 4, 2004, Page A01), ?Halliburton Co. and other U.S. contractors are being paid at least $1.9 billion from Iraqi funds under an arrangement set by the U.S.-led occupation authority, according to a review of documents and interviews with government agencies, companies and auditors. ?Most of the money is for two controversial deals that originally had been financed with money approved by the U.S. Congress, but later shifted to Iraqi funds that were governed by fewer restrictions and less rigorous oversight. ?Analysis of those and other records shows that 19 of 37 major contracts funded by Iraqi money went to U.S. companies and at least 85 percent of the total $2.26 billion was obligated to U.S. companies ? The name of KBR (Kellogg Brown & Root Inc.), a subsidiary of Halliburton, is surfacing again and again in these reports. It was paid $1.66 billion from Iraqi money, primarily to cover the cost of importing fuel from Kuwait. In all - according to an analysis for The Washington Post by Andre Verloy, a researcher for the Center for Public Integrity - KBR was paid $2.53 billion, $1.64 billion of which came from the Iraqi funds. Halliburton: a long history of profit from war It is of interest to know something more about this company. Halliburton has become a symbol for the close connection between the White House and Texan big business. The Guardian (Thursday, July 22, 2004) reviewed a new book: The Halliburton Agenda by Dan Briody, published by John Wiley and Sons Ltd., that tells the story of this company. The following is a short summary. On January 12, 1991, Congress authorized President George HW Bush to engage Iraq in war. Just five days later, Operation Desert Storm commenced in Kuwait. The war was over by the end of February - but the clean up would last longer, and was far more expensive than the military action itself. The Iraqi troops set fire to more than 700 Kuwaiti oil wells. Halliburton angled its way into the clean-up and rebuilding effort that was expected to cost around $200bn (?163bn) over the next 10 years. The company sent 60 men to help with the firefighting effort. Meanwhile, its engineering and construction subsidiary KBR won an additional $3m contract to assess the damage that the invasion had done to Kuwait's infrastructure - a contract whose value had multiplied seven times by the end of KBR's involvement. More significantly still, KBR won a contract to extract troops from Saudi Arabia after their services were no longer needed in the Gulf. American military outsourcing was not new. Private firms had been making huge profits in wars even before KBR won its first naval shipbuilding contract. But the nature of military outsourcing has changed dramatically in the last decade. The trend towards a "downsized" military began because of the "peace dividend" at the end of the cold war, and continued throughout the 1990s. This combination of a reduced military but continued conflict gave rise to an unprecedented new industry of private military firms. These firms would provide the military with everything from weapons procurement and maintenance to training of troops and logistics. In the decade after the first Gulf war, the number of private contractors used in and around the battlefield increased tenfold. It has been estimated that there is now one private contractor for every 10 soldiers in Iraq. Companies such as Halliburton, which became the fifth largest defence contractor in the nation during the 1990s, have played a critical role in this trend. The story behind America's "super contract" begins in 1992, when the department of defence, then headed by Dick Cheney, was impressed with the work Halliburton did during its time in Kuwait. In preparation of further imperialist aggressions, the Pentagon asked private contractors to bid on a $3.9m contract to write a report on how a private firm could provide logistical support to the army in the case of further military action. Thirty-seven companies tendered for the contract. KBR won it. The company was paid another $5m later that year to extend the plan to other locations and add detail. As the agreement was signed, the US army was deployed to Somalia in December 1992 as part of Operation Restore Hope. KBR employees were there before the army even arrived, and they were the last to leave. The firm made $109.7m in Somalia. In August 1994, they earned $6.3m from Operation Support Hope in Rwanda. In September of that same year, Operation Uphold Democracy in Haiti netted the company $150m. And in October 1994, Operation Vigilant Warrior made them another $5m. Cheney has been part of Donald Rumsfeld's rise to power. In the 1970s, Rumsfeld became Gerald Ford's White House chief-of-staff, with Cheney as his deputy. In those days, Cheney was assigned a codename by the secret service that perfectly summed up his disposition: "Backseat". Halliburton understood Cheney's value. With him as CEO, the company gained considerable leverage in Washington. Until Cheney's appointment in the autumn of 1995, Halliburton's business results had been decent. After a loss of $91m in 1993, the company had returned to profitability in 1994 with an operating profit of $236m. With the new revenues Halliburton and its main subsidiary, KBR, were doing great business. In December 1995, just two months after Cheney assumed the post of CEO, when the US sent thousands of troops to the Balkans as a peace-keeping force. As part of Operation Joint Endeavour, KBR was dispatched to Bosnia and Kosovo to support the army in its operations in the region. KBR's profits under Cheney, jumped from $144m in 1994 to more than $423m in 1996, and the Balkans was the driving force. By 1999, the army was spending just under $1bn a year on KBR's work in the Balkans. A report in September 2000 indicated to serious cost-control problems in Bosnia, but KBR retains the contract to this day. Cheney developed Halliburton's business in other parts of the world. In particular, Cheney objected to sanctions against Libya and Iran, two countries with which Halliburton was already doing business The company did business in Iraq as well. Cheney was in charge of Halliburton when it was circumventing strict UN sanctions, helping to rebuild Iraq and enriching Saddam Hussein. After 9/11, KBR went to work on the ?war on terrorism?, building the 1,000 detention cells at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, for ?terrorist suspects?, at a cost of $52m. The work must have been familiar to KBR: it had done the exact same job 35 years earlier in Vietnam. When troops were deployed to Afghanistan, so was KBR. It built US bases in Bagram and Kandahar for $157m. Halliburton won the contract for restoring the Iraqi oil infrastructure ? a no bid contract. In September 2003, Cheney, trying to distance himself from all this, insisted: "Since I've left Halliburton to become George Bush's vice-president, I've severed all my ties with the company, gotten rid of all my financial interests. I have no financial interest in Halliburton of any kind and haven't now for over three years." However, the Congressional Research Service (CRS), a non-partisan agency that investigates political issues at the request of elected officials, says otherwise. Cheney has been receiving a deferred salary from Halliburton in the years since he left the company. In 2001, he received $205,298. In 2002, he drew $162,392. He is scheduled to receive similar payments through 2005, and has an insurance policy in place to protect the payments in the event that Halliburton should fold. In addition, Cheney still holds 433,333 unexercised stock options in Halliburton. He has, of course, agreed to donate any profits ?to charity?. No doubt he has made enough money over all these years to be able to pay a small amount in an attempt to cover up what he has been really doing. It is this enormous exploitation of Iraqi labour which is stimulating a revival of the Iraqi labour movement. The struggle for Trade Union rights in Iraq David Bacon, (Foreign Policy in Focus/AlterNet.org July 29, 2004) who visited labour movement activists in Iraq recently wrote a report, which we summarize in the following lines: Once the U.S. occupation of Iraq was under way over a year ago, Iraqi workers immediately started reorganizing themselves. Labour movement activity, which had started in Baghdad, also spread to the Kurdish north, with the focal point, however, being in the south, in the oil and electrical installations around Basra, and the port of Um Qasr. Workers quickly discovered that the occupation authorities had a different view to what democratic rights involve, especially labour rights. Once the US-led Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA) had taken over in Baghdad in March of 2003, it began enforcing an old 1987 law (of the Saddam Hussein regime!) which banned unions in public enterprises - where most Iraqis are employed. On top of this, CPA head Paul Bremer added his own Public Order Number 1, banning pronouncements that ?incite civil disorder, rioting, or damage to property.? The phrase ?civil disorder? can easily be applied to such activity as organizing strikes. Under these laws leaders of both the Iraqi Federation of Trade Unions (IFTU) and Iraq?s Union of the Unemployed have been arrested a number of times. Low wages have driven the revival in Iraqi labour activity, including three general strikes in Basra alone. Following US occupation, Iraqi public sector workers were given emergency salaries set by the Coalition Provisional Authority ? roughly between $60 to $120 a month. Then the CPA?s Order Number 30 on ?Reform of Salaries and Employment Conditions of State Employees? last September lowered the minimum to $40, and eliminated subsidies for housing and food. Wages for Iraqi dockers, working for the Um Qasr port authority, were cut even more when the occupation started. This was because their ?profit sharing? arrangement, in which they had been receiving two percent of unloading fees, had been terminated. In October the authorities decided to pay the workers in Iraqi dinars instead of dollars. This involved another sizeable loss and so the workers decided to organise a trade union. On the day the dockers were to elect their new union officers, the Port Director Abdel Razzaq told them the elections had been cancelled, quoting the 1987 prohibition. In November, he followed this with the sacking of three port workers for trying to organize a union in spite of the previous order. In January the dockers organised a brief strike against low wages, picketing the main gate and stopping anyone from entering. They became even angrier when their bosses decided to pay them with old banknotes, worth only 75 percent of new ones. In the conflict that ensued, Razzaq?s office was occupied, and the demonstration only came to an end when occupation troops rescued him. The workers have reported that since then, a private militia has been taken on to protect Razzaq. However, in spite of the attempts to block any news about the development of the labour movement inside Iraq, the news of what was happening in Um Qasr got back to the US dockers. On hearing about the firing of the Um Qasr dockers, San Francisco?s International Longshore and Warehouse Local 10 immediately condemned the action. ?You are not alone,? President Henry Graham told them. ?If dockworkers in the rest of the world hear about your situation, you can count on their support.? West coast dock unions organised a one-day strike on March 20 in solidarity with the Iraqi dockers, to coincide with worldwide demonstrations on the anniversary of the Iraq invasion. Iraqi workers and unions have explained that the U.S. is clearly keeping wages low in order to attract foreign investment, as Washington prepares to privatise Iraq?s economy. The Bush administration sees Iraq as a means of imposing so-called ?free-market? criteria on the whole of the Middle East and South Asia. A year ago Bush placed Tom Foley, one of his own fundraisers, in charge of private sector development for the CPA. His task was clear: on September 19, 2003 the CPA published Order Number 39, permitting 100 percent foreign ownership of businesses, except for the oil industry, and allowing repatriation of profits. Foley then went on to list the state enterprises to be sold off. These included cement and fertiliser plants, phosphate and sulphur mines, pharmaceutical factories and the country?s airline. For cosmetic reasons, the actual sales were delayed until after the June ?handover?. It would have looked bad if the Americans had sold directly to themselves! But the essence of the manoeuvre remained unchanged. Adding insult to injury, Iraq?s new constitution forbids changing those measures that were decided by the Americans. So much for ?sovereignty?. The planned privatisations and the handing over of Iraq?s assets to US contractors have provoked more labour protests. Workers rightly fear that the new owners will try and cut costs by laying off workers. Companies that have won very profitable reconstruction contracts are already trying to take on work that was previously done by Iraqis. As Iraq has no unemployment benefits or any welfare system, the loss of a stable job in a state enterprise condemns a family to hunger and misery. This explains why Iraqi workers are increasingly turning to the unions and building their own organisations to defend themselves against this onslaught. Challenging the Contractors This ongoing conflict over reconstruction work came to a head last October in a two-day wildcat strike at the Bergeseeya Oil Refinery near Basra. KBR ? again ? had been given a ?no-bid? reconstruction contract to repair oil facilities. No ?free market? when it comes to US companies! KBR brought in a Kuwaiti sub-contractor, construction company, Al Khoorafi, using cheaper Indian and Pakistani workers. To protect their jobs, the Iraqi workers threw them out and protested outside the company?s offices. At the Southern Oil Company (SOC), workers then organized a union, headed by Hassan Ju? ma, and they banned the use of foreign labour following the Bergeseeya action. KBR tried to get them to accept its foreign staff but local workers refused to budge. ?Iraq will be reconstructed by Iraqis, we don?t need any foreign interference,? Ju? ma said. Then, in December, SOC workers began demanding higher wages. They proposed a monthly minimum of $85. The workers threatened strike action and to shut off oil production. They added that they would join the armed resistance if occupation troops were called in to suppress their protest. The situation was so tense that the Oil Minister flew to Basra and agreed to return to the pre-September wage levels. In January, similar protests erupted in the Najibeeya, Haartha, and Az Zubeir power stations, where workers organised a wildcat strike. They occupied the administration buildings, declared the September wage schedule void, and threatened to shut off power if wages were not raised. Again the ministry was forced to back off and agree to return to the old scale. Southern Oil Company trade unionists finally succeeded in getting the CPA to raise wages. They also won extra pay for working in dangerous or isolated locations. This was especially important as the oil industry?s infrastructure is often targeted by the armed opposition. Following another strike in February at the Basra Oil Pipeline Company, the SOC wage schedule was eventually adopted at most worksites in the oil sector. The workers then spread the struggle to the power industry, where they threatened to bring the power stations to a halt. The workers in this industry are potentially the most powerful as their actions could paralyse the whole of the Iraqi economy. New Trade Unions Under the brutal regime of Saddam Hussein the workers were organized in state controlled trade unions, the General Federation of Trade Unions in Iraq (GFTU). This was established by Saddam Hussein in 1987 as a means of cutting across any kind of working class independent trade union activity. Now the same federation is controlled directly by the US occupation forces. Again, we see how the US imperialists can put to good use pieces of the old Saddam Hussein regime. However, the workers of Iraq are not stupid. Since the collapse of the old regime, many new trade unions have been set up. The workers instinctively feel the need for organisations that they control directly. All this has happened in spite of the US and British occupation forces? attempts to stifle any form of independent trade union organisation. As a result of this process several trade unions now exist in Iraq. The biggest of these is the Iraqi Federation of Workers? Trade Unions - the IFTU - which was set up on 16 May 16, by activists from the Workers? Democratic Trade Union Movement, an underground workers? organization, led by the Communist Party, under the Saddam regime. 400 trade unionists working in 12 different industries formed the IFTU. However, the IFTU leadership has links with the present interim government, no doubt reflecting the influence of the leadership of the Iraqi Communist Party. The other union is the Federation of Workers Councils and Unions in Iraq (FWCUI). It was formed on December 8, 2003 by workers? representatives from all over Iraq, and is under the leadership of the Communist Workers? Party. The third union is the Union of Unemployed in Iraq (UUI) formed in May and is affiliated to the FWCUI. The UUI is campaigning for ?Jobs for all Iraqi workers or social security of $100 per month for the unemployed,? the old and tested demand of the international labour movement, ?work or full pay?. These two unions ? the FWCUI and the UUI ? gather the most militant workers. That explains why they have been targeted by the occupying forces. The aim is to break the morale of the most advanced workers in Iraq. A few examples will suffice. On July 29, US soldiers detained 21 UUI leaders for the terrible crime of setting up a tent in front of the US military?s compound to demand jobs! Last November UUI general secretary Qasim Hadi and UUI leader Adil Salih. Hadi were arrested for leading unemployed workers? demonstrations. Last December armed military vehicles smashed their way into the IFTU headquarters and arrested eight IFTU executive members. On January 10, British troops killed six and wounded eight unemployed protesters in Imara, and 12 January 12, they dispersed another unemployed protest in Imara. On January 12, Ukrainian forces used tear gas and fired warning shots to disperse unemployed demonstrators in Kut. They physically attacked at least one demonstrator. On January 13, Ukrainian forces again fired upon and injured unemployed demonstrators. These organisations are destined to play a key role in future developments in Iraq. Their existence is testimony to the fact that even in the most difficult and barbaric conditions, the labour movement can rise up and offer the whole nation a way out. Unfortunately, while these two unions gather some of the best militants they suffer a sectarian leadership that refuses to participate in the armed resistance of the mass movement against the forces of occupation. This means that the leadership of the resistance is falling into the hands of reactionary elements, such as sections of the Islamic clergy. It is a rather unfortunate development, and all thinking workers and youth in Iraq should look to neighbouring Iran to see what these clergy are capable of once they are in power. There too, the movement of the masses was hijacked by the Islamic clergy, and this led to the coming to power of a monstrous regime. The workers of Iran are now beginning to organise against that regime, but they have suffered terribly for 25 years because of the mistakes of the Iranian Communists at the end of the 1970s. In the next period in Iraq there will be many more struggles of the working class. However, in order to win the struggle against the imperialist occupation and the horrible conditions the workers face, it is necessary to organize the struggle with a perspective, strategy and tactics that will bring the workers and the peasant to power. The struggle to build trade independent unions is a very important struggle and all the workers should throw themselves into this struggle. However, struggling only for bread and butter issues will leave the imperialists in Iraq with their puppet government in overall control. This means that while they may be forced to make concessions in the short term, in the long term they will plan to take back by various means the gains the workers will win. Unless the workers take all power in their hands this will be the perspective. What is necessary is a revolutionary leadership based on the working class struggles. Working class must put itself at head of the nation For the working class to win, the class must struggle not only in the battle for trade union rights but also in the war against the imperialist occupier. At the moment the leadership of the resistance movement is mainly in the hands of the reactionary Islamic clergy. This means that although there are similarities with the situation during the Vietnam War, there are also differences. The reactionary Islamic clergy cannot have the same effect on the US troops as the poor peasants of Vietnam. However, all this means is that the process can take longer. We cannot predict how long the revolutionary movement, struggling with arms in hand, but under a reactionary leadership, will take to inflict so much pain on the coalition army as to provoke - like during the Vietnam War - a massive opposition of the American working class and youth that would force the retreat of the imperialists. The imperialist war machine is a very powerful one and the American ruling class has many more reserves. It cannot be defeated merely by military means, just as it was not defeated in that way in Vietnam. What defeated the US army in Vietnam was a people struggling for control of its own destiny, and most importantly for control of its own economic resources. This had a huge impact on the thinking of millions of workers and youth in the USA. In the end the most powerful army in the world began to break down in the face of such determined opposition. That should be the aim today in Iraq. Before the war started in Iraq, there were significant mass protests in the USA, far bigger than the early protests against the war in Vietnam. This bodes well for the future. But so far there has been no massive protest movement in the US since the war started. But the process of demoralisation of the US troops has already begun. The mood in the USA is changing. Support for the war is no way near as strong as it was. Added to that the economy is beginning to slow down. This is an election year and many of the measures that the US bourgeois need to carry out against the US workers will be held over until after the elections. Therefore things will be very different next year. The attacks on the US workers of the past few years will be intensified. This combined with the continuing mess in Iraq will provide an explosive mix. That is why the resistance movement in Iraq needs the leadership of the working class. Under a revolutionary, internationalist and working class leadership the process would be much quicker and clearer. The resistance movement, while fighting the US troops, would also be in a position to wear them down and show them that their war is an unjust one. This would mark the beginning of the end of the US occupation. Therefore to defeat the imperialists, the working class in Iraq must lead the struggle to overthrow imperialism and Iraqi capitalism and take power. Marxists in Iraq must be involved in all the forms of struggle in order to build a working class revolutionary party at the head of the masses. Both working class parties have abstained from any form of armed resistance - the Iraqi Communist Party because it sits in the puppet government. The Workers? Communist Party because it fails to see the contradiction between the revolutionary resistance movement and its reactionary leadership. While Marxists oppose acts of individual terrorism they approach the guerrilla war in Iraq, as a tactic subordinated to the revolutionary struggle of the working class. The people of Iraq have every right ? in fact it is their duty ? to struggle to expel the imperialist armies form their country. It is an elementary duty of Marxists to support the people of Iraq in their struggle against imperialism. What we say is that it is not enough to give general support. It is our duty to indicate a way out. While we support the resistance, we do not support the reactionary leaders who are attempting to divert the movement away from class politics. The lessons of history must be studied and absorbed by the Iraqi Communists. The experience of peasant and urban guerrillaism as a strategy to win socialism has been proven the wrong method. In many cases it has led to defeats. Where it has led to victories we have seen the coming to power of regimes, such as the Chinese or the Vietnamese, where power was not in the hands of the working class, but in those of a bureaucracy. In Iraq, if the resistance remains under the leadership of the Islamic clergy the result could be far worse. If the ayatollahs win it may lead to a capitalist state with a reactionary religious regime as in the case of Iran. Lenin on guerrilla warfare Lenin explain this important question of the attitude of Marxists to guerrilla warfare already in 1905 in his article The War Against Imperialism. He wrote: ?What are the fundamental demands, which every Marxist should make of an examination of the question of forms of struggle? In the first place, Marxism differs from all primitive forms of socialism by not binding the movement to any one particular form of struggle. It recognizes the most varied forms of struggle; and it does not ?concoct? them, but only generalizes, organizes, gives conscious expression to those forms of struggle of the revolutionary classes, which arise of themselves in the course of the movement. Absolutely hostile to all abstract formulas and to all doctrinaire recipes, Marxism demands an attentive attitude to the mass struggle in progress, which, as the movement develops, as the class-consciousness of the masses grows, as economic and political crises become acute, continually gives rise to new and more varied methods of defence and attack. Marxism, therefore, positively does not reject any form of struggle ?The phenomenon in which we are interested is the armed struggle. ?The example of the Letts clearly demonstrates how incorrect, unscientific and unhistorical is the practice so very common among us of analysing guerrilla warfare without reference to the circumstances of an uprising. ?A Marxist bases himself on the class struggle, and not social peace. In certain periods of acute economic and political crises the class struggle ripens into a direct civil war, i.e., into an armed struggle between two sections of the people. In such periods a Marxist is obliged to take the stand of civil war. Any moral condemnation of civil war would be absolutely impermissible from the standpoint of Marxism. ?When I see Social Democrats proudly and smugly declaring ?we are not anarchists, thieves, robbers, we are superior to all this, we reject guerrilla warfare?, ?I ask myself: Do these people realise what they are saying? Armed clashes and conflicts between the Black-Hundred government and the population are taking place all over the country. This is an absolutely inevitable phenomenon at the present stage of development of the revolution. The population is spontaneously and in an unorganised way ? and for that very reason often in unfortunate and undesirable forms ? reacting to this phenomenon also by armed conflicts and attacks. ?At different periods Social Democracy applies different methods, always qualifying the choice of them by strictly defined ideological and organizational conditions.? For a revolutionary programme and leadership While the tactic of guerrilla warfare is necessary in Iraq in this period, it cannot replace the struggle of the working class in the factories, in the trade unions, in strikes, in demonstrations, and in the struggle for political power. What is necessary is to combine the struggles for reforms and military actions with a transitional programme leading to working class power. Workers must demand of the leadership of the ICP to break with its policy of class collaboration and lead the struggle or be replaced by a new leadership that wants to fight the class enemy, not collaborate with him. Workers of the Workers? Communist Party must demand of its leadership to enter the military struggle and win the leadership rather than desert the masses to the reactionary Ayatollahs. It is from within these two working class organizations and from the trade unions that a new revolutionary leadership must emerge. While the struggle for decent wages and conditions is important it is necessary to connect this to such demands such as: *Workers? democratic control in the nationalized industries. *Take over the foreign companies under workers? control. *For a workers? militia. *Based on workers? action committee build a national organization, fully democratic with an elected leadership that can be recalled if it fails to lead the struggle adequately. A revolutionary party of the Iraqi working class would also seek to speak with the soldiers most of them poor workers who detest the liars that sent them to Iraq. They should be told that they are not the enemy, but the real enemy are the imperialists who sent them to kill and die for their own selfish interest. These soldiers should be convinced to turn their guns away from the Iraqi people and against their own ?leaders?. Such a revolutionary leadership would also appeal to all the workers and the peasants within the entire region to join the struggle against the imperialists and all the local despotic regimes that simply do the bidding of their imperialist masters. They would call on them to mobilise to overthrow their own capitalists and work towards the building of a socialist federation across the whole region. Such a party would call on all the workers of the world, and in particular on the American and the British working class: ?Brothers and sisters, our struggle is your struggle. Join us by removing from power all the imperialists, whether Republican and Democrat. Replace them with the power of our class.? August 22, 2004 From nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com Mon Aug 23 13:55:04 2004 From: nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com (nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 13:55:04 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [NYTr] L.A.-Report Back from Venezuela Sept 3 Message-ID: <200408231755.i7NHt4K08281@olm.blythe-systems.com> sent by Cort Greene - August 23, 2004 REPORT BACK FROM ON ONE OF THE MOST CRUCIAL, HISTORIC POLITICAL MOMENTS OF VENEZUELAN DEMOCRACY! ALONG WITH IMAGES OF THE MOST INTENSE MOMENTS OF THE REFERENDUM INCLUDING CHAVEZ'S VICTORY SPEECH THE DAY AFTER THE REFERENDUM OF AUGUST 15th, 2004 Come and listen to Pedro Arias a member of the USA Observer's Delegation who traveled to Venezuela and witnessed one of the most challenging moments that President Hugo Chavez has endured through his political career such as the one lived during the April 11, 2002 Coup which ousted him for 48 hours and shortly after brought back to his presidential seat by the majority of the glorious and brave people of Venezuela: the poor. As expected, this immense majority were the same authors whom this time during the recall referendum of August 15, 2004 reaffirmed him stunningly with 4.991.483 of the votes (58.25 %) to continue the presidency of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela. HEY - HEY, HO - HO, CHAVEZ DIDN'T GO! IN CELEBRATION OF VENEZUELAN DEMOCRACY AND TO THE OVERWHELMING VICTORY OF PRESIDENT CHAVEZ, THE EVENT WILL BE FREE TO PUBLIC! When: Friday, September 03, 2004 @ 7:00 P.M. Where: Echo Park United Methodist Church located @ 1226 North Alvarado, Los Angeles, CA 90026 SPONSOR: "Comando Maisanta International of the Bolivarian Circle of Los Angeles Ezequiel Zamora" ENDORSERS: FMLN of Los Angeles, CISPES, America Latina En Lucha (ALEL) and others adding???. For More Information Call: (818) 402-8360 From nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com Mon Aug 23 14:02:20 2004 From: nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com (nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 14:02:20 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [NYTr] Growing List of Doped Athletes Worries Olympic Organizers Message-ID: <200408231802.i7NI2Ki08474@olm.blythe-systems.com> Agencia Cubana de Noticias (AIN) http://www.ain.cu Growing List of Doped Athletes Worries Greek Olympic Organizers by C?sar L?pez Gil Athens, Aug 23(AIN) Russian Olympic champion shot putter Irina Korzhanenko has become the sixteenth doping case at the Athens games. Korzhanenko?s was stripped of the gold medal and expelled from the games after anti-doping tests revealed the presence of the anabolic steroid estanozonol in her system. The 30 year-old Russian shot putter was disqualified from the world championship in 1999 for a similar reason after she having placed second in her specialty. She now risks being suspended for life. Juan Antonio Samaranch, honorary president of the International Olympic Committee (IOC) praised the firmness of the actions taken to prevent doping in Athens. According to Samaranch, despite important achievements made in the anti-doping control, it remains a difficult task that must be carried out strictly. The IOC lab, located in the Onassis Hospital, has been equipped with state of the art technology where anti-doping tests are being conducted on the four leading winners of each competition and on two other athletes picked up at random from each contest. More than 1,600 control tests have been conducted over 21 days in August, with the number of tests expected to exceed by 25 percent those carried out at the Sydney 2000 games. Some 380 tests were conducted before the competitions and 2,385 will be done after the games, reported the international committee. ?It is a curse without limit?, said Gianna Angelopoulos, president of the Athens 2004 organizing committee, worried about the fact that the doping cases are likely shed a negative light on the image of the games. Angelopoulos expressed her concern to Jacques Rogge, IOC president, though Greek organizers had strived to make the world event being held in the Olympic cradle unblemished. Amid an intense campaign in the Greek press, an editorial in the newspaper Avriani commented that ?the stench of doping is sinking the games.? Since this past July 30, the list of doped athletes at the 2004 Athens competition has included baseball players Andrew James Brack and Derek Nicholson (Greek-Americans) and Anthony Francia (Italy); boxer David Munyasia (Kenya); weightlifters Aye Khine Nan (Burma, Sule Sahbaz (Turkey), Pratima Kumari Na (India), Wafa Ammouri (Morocco), Viktor Chislean (Maldives), Zoltan Kecskes (Hungary), Sanamacha Chanu (India) and Leonidas Sampanis (Greek); shot putters Olga Shchukina (Uzbekistan) and Irina Korzhanenko (Russia); and the two Greek athletes, Costas Kenteris and Ekaterini Thanou, who refused to undergo the tests. From nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com Mon Aug 23 14:03:33 2004 From: nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com (nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 14:03:33 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [NYTr] Bottom-of-the-Barrel Biosafety at Universities Message-ID: <200408231803.i7NI3Xb08525@olm.blythe-systems.com> The Sunshine Project News Release - 23 August 2004 http://www.sunshine-project.org Research Transparency: Federal Complaint Against "Bottom of the Barrel" Biosafety Committees (Austin - 23 August 2004) - Today, the Sunshine Project has filed a complaint with the National Institutes of Health against four US universities that have the worst biosafety transparency out of more than 225 institutions nationwide that have replied to a Sunshine Project survey of Institutional Biosafety Committees. The complaint names Princeton University (Princeton, NJ), the University of Texas Southwestern (Dallas, TX), the University of Vermont (Burlington, VT), and the University of Delaware (Newark, DE). "It was difficult selecting only four institutions to label as the worst", says Sunshine Project Director Edward Hammond, "hundreds of labs have lousy biosafety recordkeeping or haven't replied to the Sunshine Project's requests at all." However, Hammond says "These four schools fall into a special category of rotten." Their biosafety committees function, but "these universities' biosafety committees have nothing but contempt for public disclosure. They black out their meeting minutes or write down virtually nothing, so as to frustrate public access." The Sunshine Project's complaint was filed with the National Institutes of Health Office of Biotechnology Activities, which oversees the NIH Guidelines on Research Involving Recombinant DNA Molecules. It is under these federal guidelines that the Sunshine Project is conducting its survey of biosafety committees. According to the Guidelines, minutes of biosafety committee meetings "shall be made available to the public upon request". Briefly, on each institutional biosafety committee (IBC): - Princeton University provides useless documents to the public because it records nothing of substance about safety review of its biological research in its IBC minutes. Says Hammond, "Princeton might have impressed the editors of US News," who this week named it a top US university, "but its biosafety committee's sense of public responsibility is bottom of the barrel." - Like Princeton, the University of Vermont records virtually nothing of substance when its IBC reviews project safety. Vermont took six months to reply to a request for its IBC minutes, and then provided no useful information. - The University of Delaware takes a different approach. It replied quickly to the Sunshine Project's request; but not before applying a fat magic marker to its IBC minutes, blacking out page upon page about biosafety at the university, and rendering its minutes completely useless. - In Dallas, UT-Southwestern takes a novel approach to evading public accountability: It puts all the substance of its IBC meeting in an "annex", which it does not release to the public. Then, in its sparse committee minutes, it records that the annexes are approved "without additional comment". The Sunshine Project's complaint asks NIH to terminate biotechnology research funding to the four institutions until they comply with the federal research guidelines. Minutes of one biosafety committee meeting of each university are available online: Princeton University: http://www.sunshine-project.org/biodefense/IBC/pu.pdf University of Vermont: http://www.sunshine-project.org/biodefense/IBC/uvm.pdf University of Delaware: http://www.sunshine-project.org/biodefense/IBC/udel.pdf University of Texas Southwestern: http://www.sunshine-project.org/biodefense/IBC/utswmed.pdf From nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com Mon Aug 23 14:05:07 2004 From: nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com (nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 14:05:07 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [NYTr] Malaysia's Call to Stop Najaf Violence Message-ID: <200408231805.i7NI57f08610@olm.blythe-systems.com> sent by Dave Mujller (southnews) Malaysia Calls On All Parties To Stop Violence In Najaf KUALA LUMPUR, Aug 23 (Bernama) -- Gravely concerned over the escalating violence in Najaf, Iraq, Malaysia Monday called on all parties involved to stop violence and fully engage in peaceful negotiations to seek an amicable solution. Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi said it was necessary for the United Nations to act to address the situation in Najaf and end the people's suffering there. He said the escalating violence there was undermining efforts to bring back normalcy throughout Iraq. "If the confrontation in Najaf is not diffused, it will inflame emotions and may create unpredictable conditions. "It will also erode the fragile stability in the country and affect the preparations for the holding of the national elections in Iraq scheduled in January 2005," he said in a statement issued through the Foreign Ministry. Abdullah is now in South Korea for a three-day visit at the invitation of South Korean President Roh Moo-hyun. Abdullah, who is Chairman of the Non-Aligned Movement and also the Organisation of the Islamic Conference, said advancing any agenda through acts of violence would not achieve the desired results. "The people of Iraq deserve to have peace and not more suffering," he said. The Prime Minister said Malaysia strongly believed that peace and stability was imperative for Iraq to continue with the processes of re-establishing a fully independent and sovereign government in the country. All efforts should be made to ensure that the people of Iraq will be able to exercise their right in determining the future of their homeland, Abdullah added. From nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com Mon Aug 23 14:06:36 2004 From: nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com (nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 14:06:36 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [NYTr] Big Bad Uncle Roasted at Non-Aligned Meeting Message-ID: <200408231806.i7NI6bF08674@olm.blythe-systems.com> The Sunday Tribune (S.Africa) - August 22, 2004 http://iol.co.za/index.php?set_id=1&click_id=3&art_id=vn20040822182107999C581515 Big Bad Uncle Gets a Roasting By Jani Meyer For the sake of diplomacy, they may not have said it officially, but this week's Non-Aligned Movement gathering in Durban was really about the perceived arrogance of the United States of America. The Non-Aligned Movement was established in 1961 as an alternative to the world order of the West and the Eastern bloc, which then held sway. Its member states are drawn from Africa, Asia, Latin America and the Caribbean, as well as Europe. Since the end of the Cold War, the movement's relevance has been in the balance, and it has sought to reinvent itself as the voice of developing countries, speaking up against what it sees as the overwhelming power of the US and its allies. The movement's 14th ministerial conference in Durban, attended by foreign affairs ministers of the 113 member states, was officially described as a "mid-term review". But the real agenda was clear from the start of the meeting But the real agenda was clear from the start of the meeting when, in a speech, South Africa's Deputy Foreign Affairs Minister Sue van der Merwe attacked "unilateral action" as being responsible for the ills of the developing world. In a coded reference to the US, Van der Merwe continued, "Powerful and dangerous forces have been unleashed through the international effects of economic globalisation on the one hand and the threat of terrorism on the other". She also accused the North (diplomat-speak for the US and Western Europe) of mounting a global campaign against perceived threats originating in countries of the South (Africa, Asia and the Middle East). "These unilateral actions, disregarding the centrality of the United Nations Charter and international law, have become the flagrant response. "This is further exaggerated by the re-emergence of a type of behaviour reminiscent of the colonial era, with the emphasis on greater interference in the domestic affairs of the developing world," said Van der Merwe. 'Even without saying who it is, you should know who is implied' And in every speech, the words "multilateralism" and "unilateralism" cropped up, as well as a call for the strengthening of the UN. But only at the final press conference of the gathering did the Malaysian Foreign Affairs Minister and chairman of the conference, Syed Hamid Albar, more or less say who was the target of all the venom. "It's about diplomacy. Even without saying who it is, you should know who is implied," said Albar. President Thabo Mbeki set the tone of the conference by urging Non-Aligned Movement members to stand united and to find answers to their problems and ways to transfer resources from more powerful countries. "It relates to the global exercise of power, because the people who have those resources are the same people who exercise that respondent power in the world which enable unilateral actions to take place," said Mbeki. On Iraq, Mbeki said the non-aligned organisation should not act as a protest movement, but take action. It should also act on other issues the movement had agreed on - and for this the support of the United Nations was needed. But the UN itself is in need of a make-over if it is to continue having global influence. Resolutions and recommendations by the UN have been disregarded by member countries, most notably in the war on Iraq. Non-Aligned Movement member countries make up half of the UN, and in its Durban Declaration it affirmed its support to the UN. Referring to the UN, Mbeki said the restructuring of the body was taking too long and should be speeded up. Addressing the conference, the president of the UN's 58th session of the General Assembly, Julian Hunte, agreed that the UN should reassesses its role and revitalise itself. The UN realised its diminishing position as a leading authority and asked for the support of its members. "We need the full support of the entire membership if we want a future role in the global environment." And taking another thinly disguised swipe at the US, Hunte said it was not about wealth and economic power, but the unity and energy of member states. In an effort to reinvent itself, the UN has appointed a panel of 16 people to examine threats and policies and to make "bold recommendations for reform". In a message to the meeting, Secretary General Kofi Annan said the panel would submit its report by the end of the year when "far-reaching steps will be taken". But it is clear that as long as countries like the US snub the UN's rulings, it will take more than the Non-Aligned Movement to restore it to its former capacity. The UN recently condemned the building of a wall separating Palestinians from Israeli settlers, while the International Court of Justice found that the building of the wall was contrary to international law. The Palestinian delegation made full use of the conference to draw attention to its cause, calling an unscheduled press briefing before the official declaration of the meeting. Palestinian Ambassador Nasser al-Kidwa called on the movement's member states and the rest of the world to impose sanctions on the people and products of the Israeli settlements until they withdrew from the occupied territory and destroyed the wall. Al-Kidwa said while the Palestinian Authority was calling for sanctions, these would only be applied to the settlers, and not to Israel. "Our political position is still commitment to a two-state solution and we will continue to work towards that. But it cannot be achieved until there is a full and complete withdrawal," said Al-Kidwa. He also called on South Africa to take a more active role in facilitating the peace process. Al-Kidwa said that Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat had admitted that the Palestinians had made some mistakes, but said there was no monopoly on mistakes. "There cannot be excellence in governance while a nation is under occupation; where there is active colonisation," said Al- Kidwa. At the end of the three-day conference, the Palestinian declaration was adopted by the movement, supporting its call for sanctions against the settlers. The brief on the Durban Declaration, as delivered by Foreign Minister Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma and chairman Albar, was a bit of a damp squib compared with the tough talk of the ministers and delegates, but it reaffirmed the movement's commitment to fighting unilateralism, and its support for the UN. Abar said the key to the credibility of the movement was a strengthened union and an enhanced UN. He also pledged continued solidarity with Palestine. If the Non-Aligned Movement succeeds in what it has set out to do, the US and its allies will not call the shots, the UN will be restored as ultimate arbiter and the world's resources will be equally shared. A tall order, perhaps, for countries that up to now have carried very little clout and have been plagued by war and disease. From nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com Mon Aug 23 14:07:41 2004 From: nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com (nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 14:07:41 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [NYTr] CARICOM Under Pressure on Haiti Message-ID: <200408231807.i7NI7fo08721@olm.blythe-systems.com> Prensa Latina, Havana http://www.plenglish.com Antigua-Barbuda Reiterates Call for CARICOM to Engage Haiti St. John's, Aug 23 (Prensa Latina) Antigua and Barbuda's Prime Minister Baldwin Spencer has made a further call for CARICOM to engage Haiti in the interest of the Haitian people, the Caribbean Net News reported Monday. Spencer made the call during his weekly radio address to the nation, outlining that the issue was also the focal point of discussion with Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva during a recent meeting in the Dominican Republic. In his weekly address to the nation, Spencer said that he was impressed by President da Silva's insight into and concern over CARICOM'S current division on engaging with the interim administration in Haiti. "We insist that the government of Haiti and those of all member CARICOM states must be democratically elected. At the same time, we cannot ignore the plight of the Haitian people," the Prime Minister stated. Last week when a number of regional governments announced that they are not prepared to engage the interim administration in Haiti, Prime Minister Spencer noted that if CARICOM is concerned about free and fair elections in 2005, that process cannot be achieved if the regional grouping does not participate in efforts to achieve such ends. "CARICOM must be proactive and enlist all the players and parties involved in Haiti and move to arrest the unfortunate developments there," he stressed. Ile/Ajs CARICOM in the Balance Bridgetown, Aug 23 (Prensa Latina) The United States has been acting "behind-the-scenes", putting pressure on the Caribbean Community states to allow the Gerard Latortue regime to take up Haiti's seat in the councils of CARICOM, local media reflected here Monday. On February 29 midnight, heavily armed United States marines, accompanied by personnel from the United States embassy, invaded the home of Head of State of a CARICOM country - Haiti's President Jean Bertrand Aristide - extracted a signed document from the hapless president, which they later claimed to be a letter of resignation, and hustled him out of his country on a US airplane. The hijacked and bemused Caribbean leader was taken, against his will, thousands of miles away from his Caribbean region, to one of the world's most unstable and lawless countries - the Central African Republic. Meanwhile, the United States of America and the Republic of France connived with a heavily armed gang of Haitian criminals, thugs, convicted murderers and death squad leaders, to remove the legitimate, constitutionally elected Government of Haiti from office. The United States then proceeded to oversee the installation of a new set of rulers, led by one Gerard Latortue - a Haitian who has been resident in the United States for the past decade. Mr. Latortue was brought directly from the United States and installed as the new Prime Minister of our CARICOM sister state of Haiti. CARICOM called for an international investigation into Aristide's unconstitutional ouster; and refused to recognize the new regime or to allow Mr. Latortue to occupy Haiti's seat within the councils of CARICOM. The regional bloc has also expressed their deep concern over the continuing instability, insecurity, violence and violation of human rights in Haiti; and reiterated their view that there had been an interruption of the democratic process in Haiti, and that no action should be taken to legitimise the insurgent forces. A number of CARICOM governments have demonstrated a readiness to allow Haiti as member of the Caribbean bloc, so there is a scenario within CARICOM in which a group of foreign ministers and the three-nation CARICOM Bureau are urging that CARICOM fully engage with the Latortue interim government. St Vincent and the Grenadines Prime Minister Ralph Gonsalves is one of the Caribbean prime ministers who have stepped forward to trenchantly maintain the original CARICOM position. Prime Minister Gonsalves went on to lay down five principled pre-conditions for any such CARICOM engagement, including "an end to political terror and wanton victimisation" and "a return to genuinely competitive political democracy in which all political parties and their leaders can function freely". Now the question is what CARICOM will do. Ile/ajs Copyright (c) 2004 Prensa Latina, SA. All rights reserved. From nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com Mon Aug 23 14:08:53 2004 From: nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com (nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 14:08:53 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [NYTr] Bury Remains of Old Corrupt State: Chavez Message-ID: <200408231808.i7NI8sp08773@olm.blythe-systems.com> Prensa Latina, Havana http://www.plenglish.com Chavez Urges Burial of Old Corrupt State's Remains Caracas, Aug 23 (Prensa Latina) Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez has called for the burial of the remains of the old corrupt and corrupting state and shape the country according to new forms of law and justice. In his Sunday program "Alo Presidente" (Hello President), Chavez did not elaborate on how he would achieve such goals , but noted that those in government post should be committed to making sacrifices, for the sake of a "noble people still shouldering the necessities that have been piling for so long." Chavez said the his country's biggest project is the revolution and the political transformation of the country, adding that making changes means that new institutions should be created with efforts by all sectors. He went on to announce the approval of a $36 million-package to build the first trolleybus line in the state of Merida, a plan to be concluded by mid 2005. The line is to benefit some 350,000 Venezuelans and is part of a national program to cope with local inadequate transportation facilities. Other similar projects are the extension of subway lines in Caracas, Los Teques, Maracaibo and Valencia. ile/ima/wap Copyright (c) 2004 Prensa Latina, SA. All rights reserved. From nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com Mon Aug 23 14:09:59 2004 From: nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com (nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 14:09:59 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [NYTr] Chile Supports Cuba for Rio Group Message-ID: <200408231809.i7NI9xc08824@olm.blythe-systems.com> Prensa Latina, Havana http://www.plenglish.com Chile Supports Dialogue Leading to Cuban Entry in Rio Group Santiago, Chile, Aug 23 (Prensa Latina) Chilean Foreign Minister Soledad Alvear has stated her support for a political dialogue with Cuba, ahead of the island's eventual entrance to the Rio Group, local media confirmed Monday. The Chilean State secretary denied some Brazilian media versions on the contrary and explained that her country has always been willing to negotiate the possibility for Cuba to access the Group. The State secretary voiced her denial after weekend reports asserting that the Chilean government had vetoed the entrance of the Caribbean nation to the continental organization in a MERCOSUR foreign-minister summit. According to Brazilian O Globo news agency, the Brazilian proposal to include Cuba in the group was rejected by Chile, Costa Rica, El Salvador, Mexico, Nicaragua, and Uruguay. "That is a mistake, Foreign Minister Celso Amorin expressed in the Rio Group meeting the possibility to hold a dialogue with Cuba, which we support as a country, and I even proposed to do it in the next UN meeting in September," the Chilean State secretary said. The Chilean minister clarified the reports hours before the beginning of Brazil's President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva's official visit to Chile. iom/apr Copyright (c) 2004 Prensa Latina, SA. All rights reserved. From nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com Mon Aug 23 14:10:53 2004 From: nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com (nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 14:10:53 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [NYTr] Renewed 6-Party Talks 'Impossible'-DPRK Message-ID: <200408231810.i7NIArR08930@olm.blythe-systems.com> Prensa Latina, Havana http://www.plenglish.com Renewed Six-Party Talks Impossible, Says DPRK Pyongyang, Aug. 23 (Prensa Latina) The Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK) said Monday that the meeting of the working group for six-party talks is "impossible" due to the US' hostile policy toward Pyongyang. "The US has become more undisguised in pursuing its hostile policy toward the DPRK, backtracking on all agreements and common understandings reached at the third round of the six-party talks,"a DPRK Foreign Ministry spokesman said in a statement released by the Korean Central News Agency (KCNA). During his recent election campaign in Wisconsin State, US President George W. Bush "asserted that it is necessary for the US, China, Japan, South Korea and Russia to unite and urge 'the tyrant' ruling the DPRK to disarm himself," KCNA added. The DPRK spokesman accused Bush of hurling "malignant slanders and calumnies" against the DPRK leadership. "This made it quite impossible for the DPRK to go to the talks and deprived it of any elementary justification to sit at the negotiating table with the US," he added. Representatives from China, the DPRK, the United States, South Korea, Russia and Japan held their third round of talks in Beijing last June on the issue of the Korean Peninsula. ile/rma Copyright (c) 2004 Prensa Latina, SA. All rights reserved. From nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com Mon Aug 23 14:12:13 2004 From: nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com (nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 14:12:13 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [NYTr] Equatorial Guinea Coup Trial Begins Message-ID: <200408231812.i7NICDW08980@olm.blythe-systems.com> Prensa Latina, Havana http://www.plenglish.com Equatorial Guinea Coup Trial Starts on Monday Johannesburg, Aug 23 (Prensa Latina) The trial of eight South Africans, accused of plotting a coup d',tat in Equatorial Guinea, starts in Malabo on Monday, with claims of torture and denial of due process casting doubts over the proceedings, local Guinean media reported. The eight men were detained early March at the notorious Black Beach prison in Malabo, along with six Armenians and a German, who died in custody, for conspiring to oust Equatorial Guinea President Teodoro Obiang Nguema. South African President Thabo Mbeki, after a meeting with Obiang in July, said his government would send a team to Malabo, on request from Equatorial Guinea, "to assist them in understanding what would represent a free, fair and just trial", Bill Masetlha, advisor of the South Africa president, said. The 15 men arrested in Equatorial Guinea were captured two days after Zimbabwean security authorities detained 70 suspected mercenaries at Harare International Airport, following a tip-off from the South African government. The men, who are awaiting judgement in Harare, say they were on their way to guard diamond mines in the Democratic Republic of Congo, while the Equatorial Guinea detainees deny any involvement in the alleged plot. ile/iff Copyright (c) 2004 Prensa Latina, SA. All rights reserved. From nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com Mon Aug 23 14:15:27 2004 From: nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com (nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 14:15:27 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [NYTr] Massive Theft of Equipment, Money in Iraq Message-ID: <200408231815.i7NIFRZ09126@olm.blythe-systems.com> Prensa Latina, Havana http://www.plenglish.com The Thief of Baghdad Washington, Aug 23 (Prensa Latina) One-third of the Pentagon's equipment and $1.9 billion of Iraqi money in that country is missing, according to alternative media sources. While much of the media is focused on the pitched battle over the control of the holy shrine in Najaf, a bigger scandal is brewing in Iraq that may well have an equally important effect on the future of the U.S. occupation, says Pratap Chatterjee in Alternet on Monday. A team of auditors was dispatched to Iraq in late January this year after a string of internal reports showed that the military was wasting billions of dollars of taxpayer money, says the Alternet report. They have issued eleven reports since June 25, almost all of which have pointed to the misuse of the money allocated for reconstruction, be it Iraqi or Congress-appropriated funds, says Chatterjee, who is managing editor of Corpwatch and the author of Iraq Inc., published by Seven Stories Press and to be out on September, 2004. According to two of these reports issued in late July by Stuart Bowen, the auditor-inspector general of the Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA), not only have a full one-third of the items purchased by the Pentagon gone MIA, including a generator worth over 700 thousand dollars, but a whopping. $1.9 billion or more of Iraqi oil revenue has also mysteriously disappeared. Embarrassed military authorities did eventually track down the missing generator and much of the money, both of which seemed to have ended up with none other than Halliburton. As it turns out they weren't missing after all; it's just that Dick Cheney's former employer had misplaced or conveniently forgotten to turn in the receipts to the correct people. But the Pentagon was not able to explain just how Halliburton gained possession of Iraqi funds when neither the United States Congress nor the Iraqi government authorized their transfer to Halliburton in the first place. Worse yet, the man who authorized the allocation - CPA chief Paul Bremer - had already quietly left Iraq just as the reports were being released. Yet days after the much-touted "transfer of sovereignty," the White House revealed an even more startling detail about the reconstruction effort: In over a year, the CPA had managed to spend just 2 percent of the $18.4 billion earmarked for the immediate reconstruction of Iraq. And not a penny was spent on the two areas where the Iraqi people were suffering the most: healthcare or water and sanitation, denounces Chatterjee. Ef/ Copyright (c) 2004 Prensa Latina, SA. All rights reserved. From nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com Mon Aug 23 14:18:12 2004 From: nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com (nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 14:18:12 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [NYTr] Quote of the Day Message-ID: <200408231818.i7NIICn09192@olm.blythe-systems.com> sent by Andy Pollack The Independent - August 23, 2004 http://news.independent.co.uk/low_res/story.jsp?story=554117&host=3&dir=70 'Once you accept the anything-but-Bush position, the brain really does close down' Nader refuses to quit race for White House By Andrew Buncombe in Washington Ralph Nader, the independent candidate accused by Democrats of threatening to wreck their chances of beating George Bush in November's election, has said there are no circumstances in which he will drop out of the contest. Throwing down the gauntlet to Democrats who have pleaded with him to stand down, Mr Nader said to do so now would be an insult to his supporters and make people even more cynical about politics. He said it was damaging to democracy that voters should have a choice between two parties that he claimed were controlled by lobbyists and corporate interests. In an interview with The Independent, Mr Nader, said: "Under no circumstances would we drop out ... [That would be an insult] to all the people who have sweated their hearts out for us and add to the cynicism of the public." Mr Nader also said that in the unlikely circumstances that John Kerry offered him a position in a future government he would not accept it. The comments from Mr Nader, 70, will add to the fury with which many Democrats anticipate his participation in the election. Party activists still blame Mr Nader for taking crucial support from the Democrats in the 2000 election, which saw Mr Bush assume the presidency despite having lost the popular vote. The anger directed at Mr Nader often appears to have a sharper edge than the emotions directed at Mr Bush. Polls suggest this year's election will be equally close and that the outcome will be decided by a sliver of undecided voters in a dozen battleground states. Latest figures show that in many of these places Mr Kerry is leading Mr Bush by a small margin, but the pollster John Zogby said Mr Nader was "the difference in virtually every battleground state". When Mr Nader ran in 2000, obtaining 2.74 per cent of the total vote, he was the official candidate of the Green Party. This time he and his running mate Peter Camejo are standing as independents and their attempt to get on the ballot has not been easy. Mr Nader accused the Democrats of running a sordid "dirty tricks campaign", doing everything they can to undermine his efforts. In addition, an umbrella group called United Progressives for Victory has initiated a series of measures to counter Mr Nader state by state. As a result of lawsuits filed by Democratic supporters, Mr Nader has so far only managed to get on to the ballot in 11 states. "Once you accept the 'anybody-but-Bush' position, the brain really does close down," said Mr Nader. The veteran consumer rights advocate said he was the only candidate running on a truly populist platform: a rapid withdrawal from Iraq, healthcare for everyone, a living minimum wage and environmental protection. He said that while he expected Mr Bush to lose the election and Mr Kerry to become the next president, he was running to try to "pull the other way" and ensure that certain issues were debated. "I said to Kerry months ago that we should take on Bush together - the Democrats in their way and us in ours," said Mr Nader, who said his offer of a tactical pact was ignored. The Democrats have highlighted how in certain states Republicans are fighting to get Mr Nader on the ballot - helping to collect signatures and even organising donations - in an effort to split the anti-Bush vote. It was recently revealed that one in 10 people who donated more than $1,000 to Mr Nader is a long-time contributor to the Republicans. Mr Kerry, meanwhile, has stepped up his demands that President Bush "stand up and stop" personal attacks that have been made by a group of Vietnam veterans questioning his claims about his military record. At a fund-raiser on Saturday night Mr Kerry said the attacks by the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth group - closely linked to senior Republicans - had intensified "because in the last months they have seen me climbing in America's understanding that I know how to fight a smarter and more effective war" against terrorists. From nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com Mon Aug 23 17:11:06 2004 From: nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com (nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 17:11:06 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [NYTr] News Summary from RHC - August 23, 2004 Message-ID: <200408232111.i7NLB6J13436@olm.blythe-systems.com> News Summary from RHC - August 23, 2004 * Cuba Warns of Possible Panamanian Pardon for Imprisoned Terrorists * Havana Rejects Washington's Crumbs in Wake of Hurricane Charley * Hundreds in Miami Protest Recent US Measures against Cuba * Volunteers Pitch In to Clean Up the Cuban Capital * Silvio Rodr?guez to Perform in Havana Next Weekend * Hopes of Negotiated Settlement Fade as Battles Rages In Najaf * US Tribunals for Guant?namo Detainees Called Grossly Unfair * After US Green Light, Israel Announces Plans for 530 More Settler Homes * Anger as US George Bush Bids to Exploit Olympic Games for Re-Election * Editorial - Do Terrorists Deserve 'Humanitarian' Pardon? Cuba Warns of Possible Panamanian Pardon for Imprisoned Terrorist Havana, August 23 (RHC)-- Cuba has issued an appeal to world public opinion and governments, calling for efforts to prevent an eventual presidential pardon for four Cuban-born terrorists -- including the notorious Luis Posada Carriles -- currently imprisoned in Panama. The appeal is part of an official declaration issued Sunday in Havana by the Cuban Foreign Ministry following reiterated rumors that Panamanian President Mireya Moscoso is likely to pardon Posada Carriles, Gaspar Jim?nez Escobedo, Pedro Rem?n and Guillermo Novo Sampol. The four were detained, tried and convicted in Panama for trying to assassinate Cuban President Fidel Castro during his participation in the Ibero-American Summit of 2000 in that country. Cuba said diplomatic relations with Panama would be immediately and automatically broken should that country decide to release what it called such "monstrous criminals" -- a decision, according to rumors, that could come sometime before August 30th as the current Panamanian administration steps down before the end of Moscoso's term on September 1st. The Cuban Foreign Ministry said that such a decision would make President Moscoso a benefactor of terrorism. Havana accused the Panamanian president and her family of maintaining close ties with anti-Castro groups in Miami, demanding that the terrorists be released, and that such a move on her part would also play into the hands of US President George W. Bush, who is desperately seeking the votes and the money of rightwing Cuban-Americans in Florida. On April 20th, Posada Carriles and Jim?nez Escobedo were sentenced to eight years in prison, while Rem?n and Novo Sampol received seven year sentences. Thus far, Panama has not responded to the warning from the Cuban Foreign Ministry. Havana Rejects Washington's Crumbs in Wake of Hurricane Charley Havana, August 23 (RHC)-- Cuba has bluntly rejected an offer from the United States government to send a ridiculously small amount of money to the island to supposedly help with recovery efforts in the wake of Hurricane Charley. A statement released by the Cuban Foreign Ministry on Sunday describes the offer as "another insult and an offense to the hundreds of thousands of Cuban families who have suffered the damages of this natural phenomenon." The Foreign Ministry statement notes that on August 13th, after Hurricane Charley left Cuba, a spokesman for the US State Department, Richard Boucher, announced that "the United States laments the damages caused by Hurricane Charley and expresses its solidarity with the Cuban people." Pointing to the "total cynicism and hypocrisy" with which the State Department indicated that "the Cuban people can count on America's support in these difficult times" -- the statement says the US government conveniently forgets to mention more than 40 years of its economic war against Cuba. The statement released Sunday by the Cuban Foreign Ministry says that Washington has shown its scorn towards Cuba and its people by announcing that the US Interests Section would give "the ridiculous and humiliating" sum of 50,000 dollars, supposedly in order "to take care of the humanitarian needs of the Cuban people." On August 16th, the Foreign Ministry statement notes, the Head of the US Interests Section in Havana, James Cason, suggested that the director of the island's North America Department at MINREX make use of those funds, which are similar to others available in US embassies throughout the world for natural disasters and other emergencies. Cason voiced his wishes that the money be channeled to different Cuban "independent" non-governmental organizations, to be used for the victims of the hurricane. The statement emphasizes that the US official received a firm response and total rejection of this "new insult" -- a highly cynical offer of such an irrelevant sum, while the US government seeks to economically suffocate the Cuban people through its a criminal blockade. Choosing to deal with the issue on a diplomatic level at first, the Cuban Foreign Ministry now feels compelled to bring the subject into the open, after several international news agencies published reports on Washington's offer and Havana's response. Emphasizing that the donation "brazenly chooses to ignore the damages caused for more than four decades by the economic war waged by successive administrations against Cuba," the Foreign Ministry believes that the US government is suffering from total amnesia. There is no other way to explain how the United States assumes the role of "benefactor" of the Cuban people, just after tightening its cruel blockade and enforcing new restrictions to that effect, even hampering relations between Cuban citizens and their relatives living in the United States. "Cuba will move ahead, relying on the efforts and dedication of its people and their Revolution. No Cuban has ever been left abandoned to their fate after a natural disaster or any other emergency. The human and solidarity nature of the project we are defending would never allow it." Hundreds in Miami Protest Recent US Measures against Cuba Miami, August 23 (RHC)-- More than 250 people took part in demonstrations over the weekend in Miami -- protesting the recent US measures against Cuba. The demonstrators told reporters that the measures, imposed by US President George W. Bush, restrict their right to visit their country of origin. According to Andr?s G?mez, a leader of the Antonio Maceo Brigade and director of the Web page Areito, the protest was staged in front of Miami's offices of the US Treasury Department and was covered extensively by local press and TV channels. For two hours, Cuban-Americans living in the United States chanted slogans against travel prohibitions and the current occupant of the White House -- such as "Vote Against Bush" and "Our Families Are Our Treasure." The rally urged the Bush administration to immediately lift travel restrictions, threatening to vote him out of office in November if the president keeps the prohibitions in force. Demonstrators agreed to collect goods next Saturday, the 28th, to send to victims of Hurricane Charley in Cuba, as a part of a humanitarian campaign coordinated by the Association of Christian Women in Defense of the Cuban Family and Jewish Solidarity, and sponsored by the Antonio Maceo Brigade, the Cuban Community Worker's Alliance (ATC) and the Jos? Mart? Association. Volunteers Pitch In to Clean Up the Cuban Capital Havana, August 23 (RHC)-- Thousands of volunteer workers pitched-in over the weekend to clean up the Cuban capital from the effects of Hurricane Charley. Trade unionists and members of student and youth organizations rolled-up their sleeves on Saturday and Sunday, helping to clear Havana's streets and sidewalks of the trees and branches that remained from last week's storm. Meanwhile, electrical power was restored in almost all areas of the Cuban capital this weekend. Electricians worked overtime to make sure area residents had power, as promised, by Sunday. Radio Havana Cuba -- the island's international shortwave voice -- is still experiencing problems with its transmissions. When Charley slammed into Cuba on August 13th, hurricane-force winds damaged the radio station's antennas. For now, Radio Havana can only be heard on its Real Audio channel on the Internet -- www.radiohc.cu. Silvio Rodr?guez to Perform in Havana Next Weekend Havana, August 23 (RHC)-- Noted Cuban singer/songwriter Silvio Rodr?guez -- one of the most outstanding representatives and founding member of the Cuban New Song Movement -- is scheduled to hold a concert entitled "Appointment with Angels." The concert will be held at Havana's Karl Marx Theater on Sunday, August 29th. "Appointment with Angels" is the title of a well-known song dedicated to the victims of the attack on New York City's World Trade Center and against war and injustices in the world. "Appointment with Angels" is also the title of Silvio's most recent CD. At the concert, Silvio Rodr?guez will sing selections from that successful album and will be accompanied by the trio Trovarroco -- a vocal group from the central province of Villa Clara, led by guitarist Rachid L?pez and percussionist Oliver Vald?s. Hopes of Negotiated Settlement Fade as Battles Rages In Najaf Najaf, Iraq, August 23 (RHC) - Hopes for a negotiated settlement to the three-week standoff in the Iraqi holy city Najaf continued to fade Monday as the battle raged on and a US rocket damaged the sacred Imam Ali shrine. Militiamen loyal to radical Shiite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr said a US helicopter gunship missile slammed into the shrine's outer compound wall Sunday night, though American military commanders deny the charge. Three days after an agreement was announced for al-Sadr's fighters to hand over the keys to the shrine to representatives of Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, Iraq's top Shiite religious authority, the deal was still in limbo. And the al-Mahdi Army militia said it had enough food, water and ammunition to last for weeks, maybe months. Interim Iraqi government officials - who days earlier had said Iraqi troops were going to storm the shrine - continued counseling patience Monday after toning down their belligerent rhetoric in an apparent acknowledgement that any such attack would definitively turn the Shiite majority against them. Concern over the fallout have fueled calls for international action to end the Najaf fighting. The governments of Syria and Malaysia called Monday for an end to the violence and warned of unforeseeable consequences for Iraq and its neighbors. Malaysian Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, chairman of the 57-member Organization of the Islamic Conference, urged the United Nations to act to end the fighting. Elsewhere in Iraq, US journalist Micah Garen was released eight days after being taken hostage in southern Iraq, but fears continued to grow for two French journalists and an Italian reporter who have not been heard from since Thursday. Garen was released Sunday after al-Sadr's office mediated with his kidnappers in the southern city of Nasiriyah. And in fresh attempts to force foreign firms to leave Iraq, a Turkish contractor and two Iraqis who worked for a construction company were killed when gunmen opened fire on their vehicle in the northern city of Tikrit, while an Indonesian worker was killed and a Filipino wounded in the northern Iraqi city of Mosul. The US military said five of its troops were killed over the weekend. US Tribunals for Guant?namo Detainees Called Grossly Unfair Washington, August 23 (RHC) - The US military tribunals scheduled to begin Tuesday against terrorism suspects held at the Guant?namo Bay prison camp are being called grossly unfair and an unprecedented violation of the Geneva Conventions and other international laws. Human Rights Watch noted that in the first such tribunals since the Second World War the military serves as prosecutor, judge, jury, appeals court and, potentially, even as executioner. The group said that the military commissions set up to oversee the trials offer no possibility for independent appeal, no matter how serious the error. The four Guant?namo prisoners to be tried are David Hicks, an Australian citizen, Salim Ahmed Hamdan and Ali Hamza Ahmed Sulayman al-Bahlul, who are Yemeni, and Ibrahim Ahmed Mahmoud al-Qosi, from Sudan. Two of the four British prisoners, Feroz Abbasi and Moazzam Begg, also face military trial. Louise Christian, an attorney who represents Abbasi's family, said the tribunals "breach every norm for a fair trial." Defendants and their lawyers have no right to see evidence used by prosecutors, conversations between defendants and their lawyers will be monitored, there will be no jury, just a panel of military judges, and the legal standard required for a conviction is lower than in normal civilian courts. Defense lawyers have also been told that even if they do learn of classified information they will not be permitted to inform clients. Information obtained through torture or coercive interrogations will be permitted. As a result, the US government is facing what's being called an epic legal battle. American lawyers for Hamdan and others among the suspected 585 Taliban and al-Qaida detainees have already started legal action in US courts that is expected to end at the Supreme Court. Hamdan's military-appointed lawyer, Lieutenant Commander Charlie Swift, has been one of the leading critics of the US military. Swift said he and other attorneys have not been given enough information and access to proceed with hearings as important as these. Swift said he will concentrate this week on trying to convince the commission of five military officers that US courts should first rule on the legality of the tribunals before full trials go ahead. The Supreme Court ruled in June that military authorities had not given inmates their full rights, and legal experts predict a new ruling will be made on the military commissions. After US Green Light, Israel Announces Plans for 530 More Settler Homes Jerusalem, August 23 (RHC) - The Israeli government announced Monday plans to build another 530 settler homes, in addition to the 1,000 approved last week, following signals from Washington that the Bush administration approves expansion of illegal settlements in the West Bank. The construction will be concentrated mostly in settlements close to Jerusalem, and half a dozen bulldozers were already hard at work Monday churning up a rocky hillside beyond the last line of houses in the Har Gilo settlement south of the holy city. Many believe that Israel wants to unify West Bank settlements with Jerusalem with an unbroken string of Jewish colonies. The plans drew immediate condemnation from Palestinians, who warned Sunday that an apparent US policy shift on settlements would destroy the Middle East peace process and their dreams of an independent state. Palestinian Negotiations Minister Saeb Erekat said the planned expansion of Jewish settlements would simply leave the Palestinians without enough space to establish their state. Washington signaled Saturday it could accept building within existing boundaries of settlements, after previously insisting on a total construction freeze under its own roadmap peace plan that has been stalled by violence. Reuters news agency quoted an unnamed source close to Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon as saying that Israel would not issue such authorization without a green light from the United States. US Military Judge Calls on Washington to Speed Abu Ghraib Hearings Manheim, Germany, August 23 (RHC) - A US military judge hearing evidence about the abuse of prisoners at Iraq's Abu Ghraib prison pressed Washington Monday to speed up its investigation, warning that delays could derail the case against at least one of the accused soldiers. Judge Colonel James Pohl issued a September 10 target date for the government to complete three long-awaited investigative reports so they could be used as evidence in Army hearings of soldiers charged with abuse at the prison. At a hearing at a US military base in Germany, Pohl said he would "seriously revisit" a request by lawyers for Specialist Charles Graner for his case to be dismissed at the next hearing, set for October 21 in Baghdad, if there are no signs of progress on the reports by then. He also showed frustration at the slow pace of the military's probe into records of a secret computer server at the prison, saying a lone investigator was reviewing thousands of pages of evidence. He said he would like to see the inquiry completed by December 1. One of the three reports include the investigation launched by Major General George Fay that had been expected to be finished in July. It's rumored that this report, focusing on the role of military medical personnel and intelligence soldiers, will be released this week. Fay is expected to recommend criminal proceedings against two-dozen low-ranking soldiers, CIA personnel and civilian interrogators, but only disciplinary action against the colonel who headed military intelligence at the prison and the brigadier general who commanded the military police brigade involved, while at the same time exonerating the top brass of any wrongdoing. Observers say such a report is bound to draw new charges of a cover up. Anger as US George Bush Bids to Exploit Olympic Games for Re-Election Washington/Athens, August 23 (RHC) - US President George Bush stood accused late Sunday of appropriating the Olympic movement for political means, amid reports he was planning to visit Athens later this week to watch some sporting events, including a potential gold-medal winning bid by the Iraqi soccer team. The potential presidential visit to the games is expected to fuel a dispute between Bush's election campaign and the US Olympic Committee over an advert which links Iraq's and Afghanistan's participation in the games with the US administration's "war on terror". Initially, the committee reportedly called for the advert to be withdrawn, but its spokesman retreated from that late Sunday. A committee spokesman said they've asked the Bush campaign to forward them a copy of the advert to determine the type and extent of the use of the Olympic name. But while the committee seems inclined to avoid a confrontation with Bush, the Iraqi soccer team doesn't. To the embarrassment of their media handlers in Athens, members of the team have reacted furiously to the news that their efforts are being used to aid Bush's efforts to win a second term in the White House. The team's coach, Adnan Hamad, told Sports Illustrated magazine that the US military has killed so many people and destroyed so much in his country that amid so much violence he does not feel that neither he nor Iraq are free. One of the team's midfield players, Ahmad Manajid, accused Bush of "slaughtering" Iraqi men and women, and wondered how the US president was going to meet his God after being responsible for so much carnage. Mark Clark, the American spokesman for the Iraqi Olympic squad in Athens, accused journalists of taking advantage of the players, who he described as "politically unsophisticated." Bush, not hitherto known as a keen soccer fan, has made repeated references to the performances of the Iraqi soccer team in his campaign speeches, linking its presence in Athens to what he described as the freedom that US forces brought to Iraq. Editorial Do Terrorists Deserve 'Humanitarian' Pardon? On Sunday, the Cuban government denounced the fact that the outgoing administration of Panamanian President Mireya Moscoso is preparing to sink its country in shame and disgrace by granting official pardons to a group of notorious and self-confessed terrorists whose judicial process remains open. Why President Moscoso wants to join her name in the history books with the likes of Luis Posada Carriles, who confessed to the 1976 bombing of a Cuban plane that killed all 73 people on board, or to terrorists Guillermo Novo Sampol, Pedro Rem?n and Gaspar Jim?nez Escobedo is a mystery to people in Cuba, Panama and around the world. Is the Panamanian President truly prepared to face the consequences of such actions? Is she ready to accept the title "friend to terrorists"? Will she be able to face the families of these four men's victims? How can she justify her actions for the good of her country or her people? It will be very difficult indeed for the hundreds of Panamanian students, who narrowly escaped death at the 2000 Ibero American summit where Posada Carriles and his cronies planned to blow Cuban President Fidel Castro and any unfortunate bystanders to pieces, to understand how their President can now grant those same men "humanitarian" pardons. Moscoso plans to defy not only all national pride and decency, but also Panamanian law itself that grants the President the right to pardon convicted criminals only when their case is closed. These terrorists' appeals have yet to be heard. Is this why the Panamanian Foreign Minister remained totally silent when questioned by local press on the Cuban declaration. What on earth was he going to say? They are rather old and we think they should be at home in Miami with their families! Tell that to all the families who have lost loved ones to terrorism. Tell that to the relatives of those killed on the 1976 Cuban flight. Tell that to the families of those murdered on September 11th 2001. Of course, from the minute the four killers were arrested thanks to the information supplied by Cuban intelligence services, the Panamanian government has been under pressure to release them. This pressure comes not only from terrorist sects in southern Florida and the radical Cuban Americans that support them, with whom President Moscoso and her family reputedly have close links, but also from the government of the United States itself. US Secretary of State Colin Powell personally requested a pardon for the terrorists on a visit to commemorate the Panamanian Republic's centenary. These four self-confessed murderers certainly seem to have friends in high places. If President Moscoso does bow to pressure from her mighty northern neighbour and her friends in Miami then the Cuban government, obeying universal principles of decency, legality and respect for the suffering of innocent people, would have no choice but to immediately sever diplomatic relations with Panama and a new and tragic chapter in the fight against terrorism would begin. compiled by NY Transfer from http://www.radiohc.cu From nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com Tue Aug 24 12:40:11 2004 From: nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com (nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 12:40:11 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [NYTr] Tribunals to Begin for 4 Guantanamo Captives Message-ID: <200408241640.i7OGeC107159@olm.blythe-systems.com> Simon McGuinness (cubanews) Comments: [It should be pointed out that these are not "trials". The use of this term is part of the Bush administrations spin on the administrative process involved in confirming their continued military detention. ] LA Times - August 24, 2004 http://www.latimes.com Trials to Begin for Four Inmates at Guantanamo Terror suspects will be the first tried by a U.S. military commission since World War II. By John Hendren GUANTANAMO BAY, Cuba - Opening new and uncertain chapters in both the war on terrorism and the history of American criminal justice, four men go on trial this week before a special commission of military judges and prosecutors on charges growing out of the Sept. 11 attacks. The men - one from Australia, one from Sudan and two from Yemen who were swept up on battlefields in Afghanistan - face prosecution before a military commission, a bitterly contested judicial mechanism that lay dormant for half a century until it was resurrected by President Bush to deal with terrorism. The trials, which begin today at the U.S. naval base at Guantanamo Bay, have drawn comparisons to the Nuremberg war crimes trials that followed World War II, in which Allied prosecutors verbally jousted with sometimes unrepentant Nazi officers - some of whom eventually were executed. But although the international trials after World War II may have helped quench a thirst for justice, the proceedings at Guantanamo reflect deep differences between then and now. A chief distinction is that, unlike the Nuremberg military trials, the United States is conducting the Guantanamo proceedings alone, not in cooperation with its allies in the war on terrorism. Another difference is that the Nuremberg trials sought to redress wrongs that occurred during a conflict that had ended. Not so with the Guantanamo trials. "They're unique because they're not taking place at a time when, from a conventional point of view, there is no war going on," said Detlev Vagts, an authority on international law and treaties at Harvard Law School. "The war on terrorism could go on forever, and orthodox wars come to ends." Also, though the Nuremberg trials featured prominent members of Adolf Hitler's leadership - air force chief Hermann Goering, Hitler deputy Rudolf Hess and others - none of the four facing preliminary hearings in Cuba this week was a top figure in Al Qaeda or the deposed Taliban regime. "The people being tried are quite small fry, or so it seems," said Eugene R. Fidell, president of the National Institute of Military Justice, a nonprofit organization of attorneys who represent military defendants. "You don't have a general officer here, or the equivalent." Those who have been charged at Guantanamo so far have included a driver and bodyguards for Al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden, a bookkeeper and others who are charged with conspiring against the U.S. forces in Afghanistan. Neither Bin Laden nor Taliban leader Mullah Mohammed Omar has been caught. Kuwaiti Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, the accused Sept. 11 mastermind, is in U.S. custody along with reputed fellow plotter Ramzi Binalshibh, a Yemeni. Both are being questioned in ongoing investigations, but have not been charged. Other accused members of Bin Laden's network have been apprehended in Britain and Pakistan, and the United States plans to seek their extradition. Other defendants - Zacarias Moussaoui, who is being prosecuted in Virginia on conspiracy charges, and Richard C. Reid, who was convicted of trying to blow up a Miami-bound plane with explosives in his shoe - have faced conventional U.S. trials. But each of the more than 580 detainees at Guantanamo is subject to trial by military commission, which the U.S. last used during World War II for Nazi saboteurs and was revived by Bush two months after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. The first of the four defendants, Salim Ahmed Hamdan of Yemen, has admitted to driving a pickup truck in Bin Laden's fleet of cars. Two more, Ali Hamza Ahamad Sulayman al Bahlul of Yemen and Ibrahim Ahmed Mahmoud al Qosi of Sudan, were allegedly Bin Laden bodyguards. Al Bahlul and Al Qosi are charged with conspiring to commit war crimes. Hamdan is charged with conspiring to commit murder and attacks on civilians. A fourth defendant, Australian David Hicks, is charged with conspiring to commit war crimes and attempted murder. "What makes [the trials] historic is it's the first use of this institutional machinery in over half a century," Fidell said. "That's a long hiatus for an institution." Though the Bush administration has singled out 11 other prisoners for trials by military commission, there are 570 detainees at the U.S. naval brig at Guantanamo Bay who have not been charged. All are undergoing separate, one-day proceedings that will determine whether they are being properly held as enemy combatants or should be released. Those determinations were begun by the Pentagon after the Supreme Court ruled in June that detainees must be allowed access to U.S. courts. But they have no bearing on the cases of those already charged. The military commission trials will be heard by a Pentagon-appointed panel of five officers, who will arrive at verdicts based on evidence and arguments presented by military prosecutors and challenged by military and civilian defense lawyers. In a windowless, fluorescent-lighted room that seats fewer than 80, the first four trials will begin with what Pentagon officials describe as an unspectacular series of preliminary hearings this week that will resemble the dull and motion-filled opening proceedings of trials everywhere. Perhaps the most dramatic day is likely to be Wednesday, when Hicks - unrestrained and in civilian clothes rather than the orange jumpsuit he has worn for more than two years - is reunited with his family in the hearing room. It is a sight no one outside the courtroom will ever see. TV cameras will produce closed-circuit videos, delayed to give the presiding officer, retired Army Col. Peter Brownback III, the equivalent of the judge in a conventional trial, a chance to stop classified information from being disseminated beyond the eight reporters allowed in the room at any time. But the cameras will not store film. No photos or tape recordings will be allowed. Reporters briefly threatened not to attend the hearing sessions when Brownback sent word late Monday that reporters must write in longhand and in English and that if national security information were released, military officers would seize reporters' notebooks, rip out the offending pages, redact them and give the reporters back photocopies. Brownback relented after being told that reporters had signed ground rules agreeing not to disclose national security secrets and would not agree to the late change in the rules. The hearings begin today with the case of Hamdan, who has acknowledged to his lawyer that he drove Bin Laden and others around in a pickup truck and various cars from the Al Qaeda fleet. Although the military lawyers assigned to defend the prisoners work for the Pentagon, they have challenged the basic structure of a military commission. "The structure is very discouraging and inadequate. It's essentially a denial of due process," said Joshua Dratel, a New York criminal lawyer who is assisting in Hicks' defense. Lawyers for the accused have asserted, among other things, that the government obtained confessions and other evidence through coercive techniques. They are expected to tie documented abuses at the U.S.-run Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq with testimony that recently released Guantanamo detainees similarly were stripped and physically abused. Hamdan's attorney, Navy Lt. Cmdr. Charles Swift, has filed a series of motions, many of which challenge the commission's legality. The National Assn. of Criminal Defense Lawyers, on whose board Dratel sits, has declared that the tribunal rules offer such weak protections that lawyers could not ethically claim to represent their clients. Nevertheless, the specific terms negotiated with U.S. officials for Hicks by Dratel and the Australian government are fair enough that he can participate, the attorney says, although he plans to challenge a broad range of commission rules. Among human rights groups, the American Civil Liberties Union and Amnesty International plan to act as observers. British and Australian officials have protested the system as a "kangaroo court." The military is expected to work to maximize the legitimacy of the commissions in the eyes of critics. From nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com Tue Aug 24 12:41:41 2004 From: nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com (nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 12:41:41 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [NYTr] Goss Tried to Gut Key Intel Programs Message-ID: <200408241641.i7OGfgS07277@olm.blythe-systems.com> [Not exactly something that we'd think badly of Goss for doing...] =============================== THE DAILY MIS-LEAD < www.Misleader.org > =============================== BUSH'S CIA NOMINEE TRIED TO GUT KEY INTELLIGENCE PROGRAMS President Bush has repeatedly criticized his opponent[1] for joining with Republicans to slightly reduce funding for intelligence after the end of the Cold War.[2] But a new report shows that the President recently nominated a CIA Director who tried to make far deeper cuts in intelligence, even as terrorist attacks against the United States increased. Despite the known threat of terrorism, Bush nominated Rep. Porter Goss (R-FL) to be the new CIA Director - a man who has led the effort to cut the very intelligence priorities that are most critical to the fight against terrorism. As the Washington Post reports, Goss actually "sponsored legislation that would have cut intelligence personnel by 20 percent in the late 1990s." Goss insisted on these cuts even after the 1993 World Trade Center attack when America became aware of the serious terrorist threat. As the story notes, the cuts Goss supported are far larger than those proposed by Sen. John Kerry (D-MA) and were specifically targeted at "human intelligence." That is the very same priority which the 9/11 Commission and other independent experts say was lacking in the days and months leading up to the 9/11 attacks.[3] The revelations about Goss come only a few weeks after similar evidence came to light showing that Vice President Cheney has also repeatedly tried to stop intelligence reforms and cut critical defense programs. For instance, in 1992, Cheney led the effort to block the very same intelligence reforms the 9/11 Commission said would have made the United States better prepared to deal with the threat of al Qaeda. Similarly, while the Bush-Cheney campaign has attacked Kerry for supposedly reducing defense spending,[4] it was Cheney himself in 2000 who admitted that as Defense Secretary, he "did in fact significantly reduce the overall size of the U.S. military."[5] And in 1990, it was Cheney who went to Capitol Hill to tout his effort to slash defense, bragging about "programs that I have recommended for termination."[6] Sources: 1. "Bush chides Kerry on intelligence cuts," Washington Times, 3/09/04, http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=1435098&l=51637. 2. "Bush Strains Facts Re: Kerry's Plan To Cut Intelligence Funding in '90's," FactCheck.org, 3/15/04, http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=1435098&l=51638. 3. "Goss Backed '95 Bill to Slash Intelligence," Washington Post, 8/24/04, http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=1435098&l=51639. 4. "Remarks by the Vice President at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library and Museum," WhiteHouse.gov, 3/17/04, http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=1435098&l=51640. 5. "latimes.com: Cheney acknowledges defense cuts began on his watch," CNN.com, 8/24/00, http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=1435098&l=51641. 6. Congressional Testimony, 2/01/90. Visit www.Misleader.org for more about Bush Administration distortion. From nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com Tue Aug 24 12:49:52 2004 From: nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com (nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 12:49:52 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [NYTr] Violence pays: Joost's 49th Letter Message-ID: <200408241649.i7OGnq507571@olm.blythe-systems.com> Sent by Joost van Steenis - August 24, 2004 Dear reader, If you are a poor black man serving a long prison sentence in an American jail (and there are too many, see the sixth Letter, http://members.chello.nl/letter6.htm), you may not agree that violence pays. But in many cases even small groups of masspeople get results by using some violence. Anyhow, violence brings something about that never can be achieved by peaceful means. Shocks, that contain always some violence, are indispensable to advance society. (see my series "Political Catastrophes" http://members.chello.nl/jsteenis/catastrophes.htm). The American army was chased away from Vietnam, Lebanon and Somalia. Saddam Hussein and Noriega were arrested by American violence. The Spanish and the Philippine army left Iraq after violent incidents against their citizens. Jordanian, Saudi and Turkish firms stopped their business in Iraq after employees were abducted. Medicins sans Frontieres left Afghanistan after the death of five collaborators. Many hostages were freed after the payment of ransom. The list can be made very long and includes many small acts of unknown people that never reach the News. Nations and governments often use violence to confirm their leading position and their superior power. Relatively small groups of masspeople, who seem to have no real power, also can get positive results by using some violence (including the threat with violence). It does not matter if you agree with what is wanted or with the used violent methods (I often do not) but I have to confirm that violence sometimes (or is it often?) pays. Successes are numerous. The positive results - the perpetrators get what they want - are in flagrant contradiction to the results of peaceful actions in which many more people are involved. These activities demand much more energy than violent and direct actions. Peaceful, decent or dignified demonstrations against the Vietnam War, the Gulf Wars and the ABC-weapons or in connection with human rights, genetic manipulation of crops, the continuing existence of widespread poverty and preventable illnesses have had hardly any positive result. Many inhuman situations continue to exist on our world in spite of (or is it because of) the fact that most political activity of masspeople is restricted to peaceful methods. By the way, why should you be afraid for violence because our society is drenched by violence and the threat of violence and we have to live with that. Maybe in another thousand years violence will have disappeared but for the time being it is very much present. . My book "About Violence and Democracy" includes the following chapters: 10. Psychological violence http://members.chello.nl/jsteenis/violencedemocracy10.htm 11. The phenomenon violence http://members.chello.nl/jsteenis/violencedemocracy11.htm 12. Kinds of violence http://members.chello.nl/jsteenis/violencedemocracy12.htm 14. Creative violence http://members.chello.nl/jsteenis/violencedemocracy14.htm 15. Violence in history http://members.chello.nl/jsteenis/violencedemocracy15.htm 16. Revolutionary violence http://members.chello.nl/jsteenis/violencedemocracy16.htm Yours truly, Joost van Steenis http://members.chello.nl/jsteenis Ways to increase masspower From nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com Tue Aug 24 12:51:05 2004 From: nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com (nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 12:51:05 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [NYTr] Yay for CNN... almost Message-ID: <200408241651.i7OGp6F07682@olm.blythe-systems.com> Yay for CNN ... almost. Andy Pollack - August 23, 2004 At about 5:30 today they ran a piece on Kerry's 1971 testimony detailing atrocities and Dole's demand for an apology. After showing clips of the testimony, they mentioned My Lai (including photos of those murdered), the testimony of hundreds of vets on which his testimony was based who themselves said there were atrocities, and the convictions of hundreds of US soldiers for committing atrocities! Unfortunately they followed it up with a live interview with war criminal and babykiller Bob Kerrey, who defended Kerry by denying atrocities happened.... Needless to say if this angle of the Swift Boat controversy happened we need to dredge up all the old documentation of US war crimes. From nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com Tue Aug 24 12:53:49 2004 From: nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com (nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 12:53:49 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [NYTr] The Impact of "Fahrenheit 9/11" Message-ID: <200408241653.i7OGrn707769@olm.blythe-systems.com> Michael Moore's newletter - August 24, 2004 Dear friends, I came across this article about "Fahrenheit 9/11" in Britain's Guardian newspaper today (the Guardian is one of the U.K.'s largest and most respected daily newspapers). It was written by the acclaimed author John Berger (winner of the Booker Prize) and I thought you might like to see how our fellow "Coalition of the Willing" members are responding to the movie. Hope you haven't been wondering where I've been. All is well. Just making plans for the fall adventure. Michael Moore ------------------------------------------------------ The Guardian - August 24, 2004 http://www.guardian.co.uk THE BEGINNING OF HISTORY Fahrenheit 9/11 has touched millions of viewers across the world. But could it actually change the course of civilisation? by John Berger Fahrenheit 9/11 is astounding. Not so much as a film - although it is cunning and moving - but as an event. Most commentators try to dismiss the event and disparage the film. We will see why later. The artists on the Cannes film festival jury apparently voted unanimously to award Michael Moore's film the Palme d'Or. Since then it has touched many millions across the world. In the US, its box-office takings for the first six weeks amounted to more than $100m, which is, astoundingly, about half of what Harry Potter made during a comparable period. Only the so-called opinion-makers in the media appear to have been put out by it. The film, considered as a political act, may be a historical landmark. Yet to have a sense of this, a certain perspective for the future is required. Living only close-up to the latest news, as most opinion-makers do, reduces one's perspectives. The film is trying to make a small contribution towards the changing of world history. It is a work inspired by hope. What makes it an event is the fact that it is an effective and independent intervention into immediate world politics. Today it is rare for an artist to succeed in making such an intervention, and in interrupting the prepared, prevaricating statements of politicians. Its immediate aim is to make it less likely that President Bush will be re-elected next November. To denigrate this as propaganda is either naive or perverse, forgetting (deliberately?) what the last century taught us. Propaganda requires a permanent network of communication so that it can systematically stifle reflection with emotive or utopian slogans. Its pace is usually fast. Propaganda invariably serves the long-term interests of some elite. This single maverick movie is often reflectively slow and is not afraid of silence. It appeals to people to think for themselves and make connections. And it identifies with, and pleads for, those who are normally unlistened to. Making a strong case is not the same thing as saturating with propaganda. Fox TV does the latter; Michael Moore the former. Ever since the Greek tragedies, artists have, from time to time, asked themselves how they might influence ongoing political events. It's a tricky question because two very different types of power are involved. Many theories of aesthetics and ethics revolve round this question. For those living under political tyrannies, art has frequently been a form of hidden resistance, and tyrants habitually look for ways to control art. All this, however, is in general terms and over a large terrain. Fahrenheit 9/11 is something different. It has succeeded in intervening in a political programme on the programme's own ground. For this to happen a convergence of factors were needed. The Cannes award and the misjudged attempt to prevent the film being distributed played a significant part in creating the event. To point this out in no way implies that the film as such doesn't deserve the attention it is receiving. It's simply to remind ourselves that within the realm of the mass media, a breakthrough (a smashing down of the daily wall of lies and half-truths) is bound to be rare. And it is this rarity which has made the film exemplary. It is setting an example to millions - as if they'd been waiting for it. The film proposes that the White House and Pentagon were taken over in the first year of the millennium by a gang of thugs so that US power should henceforth serve the global interests of the corporations: a stark scenario which is closer to the truth than most nuanced editorials. Yet more important than the scenario is the way the movie speaks out. It demonstrates that - despite all the manipulative power of communications experts, lying presidential speeches and vapid press conferences - a single independent voice, pointing out certain home truths which countless Americans are already discovering for themselves, can break through the conspiracy of silence, the atmosphere of fear and the solitude of feeling politically impotent. It's a movie that speaks of obstinate faraway desires in a period of disillusion. A movie that tells jokes while the band plays the apocalypse. A movie in which millions of Americans recognise themselves and the precise ways in which they are being cheated. A movie about surprises, mostly bad but some good, being discussed together. Fahrenheit 9/11 reminds the spectator that when courage is shared one can fight against the odds. In more than a thousand cinemas across the country, Michael Moore becomes with this film a people's tribune. And what do we see? Bush is visibly a political cretin, as ignorant of the world as he is indifferent to it; while the tribune, informed by popular experience, acquires political credibility, not as a politician himself, but as the voice of the anger of a multitude and its will to resist. There is something else which is astounding. The aim of Fahrenheit 9/11 is to stop Bush fixing the next election as he fixed the last. Its focus is on the totally unjustified war in Iraq. Yet its conclusion is larger than either of these issues. It declares that a political economy which creates colossally increasing wealth surrounded by disastrously increasing poverty, needs - in order to survive - a continual war with some invented foreign enemy to maintain its own internal order and security. It requires ceaseless war. Thus, 15 years after the fall of communism, a decade after the declared end of history, one of the main theses of Marx's interpretation of history again becomes a debating point and a possible explanation of the catastrophes being lived. It is always the poor who make the most sacrifices, Fahrenheit 9/11 announces quietly during its last minutes. For how much longer? There is no future for any civilisation anywhere in the world today which ignores this question. And this is why the film was made and became what it became. It's a film that deeply wants America to survive. From nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com Tue Aug 24 12:58:40 2004 From: nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com (nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 12:58:40 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [NYTr] Iraqi cleric slams media war coverage Message-ID: <200408241658.i7OGweP07939@olm.blythe-systems.com> sent by Neil Wollman ALJAZEERA - August 23, 2004 Iraqi cleric slams media war coverage By Ahmed Janabi The secretary-general of al-Irshad and al-Fatwa Association in Iraq has accused world media of colluding with US-led occupation forces in imposing a media blackout on Iraqi resistance operations. Shaikh Mahdi al-Sumaidaie accused the media of deliberately distorting the "honourable" image of Iraqi resistance, and sticking to the information and figures provided by the US authorities. "I call on world media to stop twisting the news, and portraying Iraqi resistance actions as the mere killing of Iraqi citizens," he told Aljazeera.net. "If media provides one hour of honest coverage to what the Iraqi resistance are doing on a daily basis, I bet you the mothers and sisters of US soldiers in Iraq will pour into the streets of America screaming at Bush to pull the troops from Iraq," he said. He accused the US and its "traitor agents" of planning attacks against Iraqis and their religious sites, stressing that Iraqi resistance fighters attack only foreign military in the country. Witness Umar Zeidan, an Iraqi journalist and editorial secretary of the Iraqi newspaper al-Basaer said there is a media blackout on armed operations aginst US-led occupation forces in Iraq. "It is something all armies do in war time. You do not want the enemy to know about your actual loss, and whether he was successful in the attack he carried out on your troops or not." Lt-Colonel TV Johnson, a Marines Public Affairs officer "Apart from the fact that I am an editorial secretary of a newspaper, I am a citizen of al-Ramadi city, known for constant attacks on US forces, and I have witnessed many attacks on US soldiers and installations. "For example early in this month, I witnessed an attack on a US check point at al-Ramadi's eastern entry. There were at least 20 either killed or wounded, but the news reported only two casualties," Zeidan told Aljazeera.net. He accused some media organisations of word manipulation to hide the truth that they were created to reveal. "Usually we use of the word "casualties" at the beginning of an incident when the situation is not clear. "But after we get enough information we say a number of dead and a number of wounded, and sometimes we should elaborate how serious the wounds are, but with US forces in Iraq it is always casualties and the number always less than the truth," he said. Tactical Aljazeera.net spoke to Lieutenant Colonel TV Johnson, the Public Affairs officer of the First Marines Expeditionary Force who said the amount of information given to the media is based on tactical necessities. "It is something all armies do in war time. You do not want the enemy to know about your actual loss, and whether he was successful in the attack he carried out on your troops or not," he said. Aljazeera From nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com Tue Aug 24 13:06:40 2004 From: nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com (nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 13:06:40 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [NYTr] A Chill in Florida Message-ID: <200408241706.i7OH6eX08226@olm.blythe-systems.com> The New York Times - August 23, 2004 http://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/23/opinion/23herbert.html A Chill in Florida by Bob Herbert The state police investigation into get-out-the-vote activities by blacks in Orlando, Fla., fits perfectly with the political aims of Gov. Jeb Bush and the Republican Party. The Republicans were stung in the 2000 presidential election when Al Gore became the first Democrat since 1948 to carry Orange County, of which Orlando is the hub. He could not have carried the county without the strong support of black voters, many of whom cast absentee ballots. The G.O.P. was stung again in 2003 when Buddy Dyer, a Democrat, was elected mayor of Orlando. He won a special election to succeed Glenda Hood, a three-term Republican who was appointed Florida secretary of state by Governor Bush. Mr. Dyer was re-elected last March. As with Mr. Gore, the black vote was an important factor. These two election reverses have upset Republicans in Orange County and statewide. Moreover, the anxiety over Democratic gains in Orange County is entwined with the very real fear among party stalwarts that Florida might go for John Kerry in this year's presidential election. It is in this context that two of the ugliest developments of the current campaign season should be viewed. "A Democrat can't win a statewide election in Florida without a high voter turnout - both at the polls and with absentee ballots - of African-Americans," said a man who is close to the Republican establishment in Florida but asked not to be identified. "It's no secret that the name of the game for Republicans is to restrain that turnout as much as possible. Black votes are Democratic votes, and there are a lot of them in Florida." The two ugly developments - both focused on race - were the heavy-handed investigation by Florida state troopers of black get-out-the-vote efforts in Orlando, and the state's blatant attempt to purge blacks from voter rolls through the use of a flawed list of supposed felons that contained the names of thousands of African-Americans and, conveniently, very few Hispanics. Florida is one of only a handful of states that bar convicted felons from voting, unless they successfully petition to have their voting rights restored. The state's "felon purge" list had to be abandoned by Glenda Hood, the secretary of state (and, yes, former mayor of Orlando), after it became known that the flawed list would target blacks but not Hispanics, who are more likely in Florida to vote Republican. The list also contained the names of thousands of people, most of them black, who should not have been on the list at all. Ms. Hood, handpicked by Governor Bush to succeed the notorious Katherine Harris as secretary of state, was forced to admit that the felons list was a mess. She said the problems were unintentional. What clearly was intentional was the desire of Ms. Hood and Governor Bush to keep the list secret. It was disclosed only as a result of lawsuits filed under Florida's admirable sunshine law. Meanwhile, the sending of state troopers into the homes of elderly black voters in Orlando was said by officials to be a response to allegations of voter fraud in last March's mayoral election. But the investigation went forward despite findings in the spring that appeared to show that the allegations were unfounded. Why go forward anyway? Well, consider that the prolonged investigation dovetails exquisitely with that crucial but unspoken mission of the G.O.P. in Florida: to keep black voter turnout as low as possible. The interrogation of elderly black men and women in their homes has already frightened many voters and intimidated elderly get-out-the-vote volunteers. The use of state troopers to zero in on voter turnout efforts is highly unusual, if not unprecedented, in Florida. But the head of the Florida Department of Law Enforcement, Guy Tunnell, who was also handpicked by Governor Bush, has been unfazed by the mounting criticism of this use of the state police. His spokesmen have said a "person of interest" in the investigation is Ezzie Thomas, a 73-year-old black man who just happens to have done very well in turning out the African-American vote. From the G.O.P. perspective, it doesn't really matter whether anyone is arrested in the Orlando investigation, or even if a crime was committed. The idea, in Orange County and elsewhere, is to send a chill through the democratic process, suppressing opposing votes by whatever means are available. From nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com Tue Aug 24 13:08:00 2004 From: nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com (nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 13:08:00 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [NYTr] Beyond Populism: Venezuela & the Int'l Left Message-ID: <200408241708.i7OH80F08300@olm.blythe-systems.com> ZNet - August 21, 2004 http://www.zmag.org Beyond Populism: Venezuela and the International Left by Jonah Gindin All over the world, the international Left -- including the global social justice movement -- is peering sceptically at Venezuela, unsure of what to make of President Hugo Chavez' alleged democratic revolution. Is Chavez the next Allende? Is the 'Bolivarian revolution' really revolutionary? Is it anti-capitalist? Or does he merely represent another chimera in a long line of populists who rile up the masses with rousing condemnations of US Imperialism, only to quietly cut deals with international capital? Hesitation, wariness, doubts -- these feelings are understandable; the Left has been taken in before by Latin America's infamous, ephemeral caudillo. But it is wrong to merely lump Chavez in with that sordid history of pseudo-revolutionaries. Yet placing him in Allende's lineage is not entirely accurate either. Chavez is, after all, not exactly socialist. He hasn't even nationalized anything (yet). But the relevance of the Venezuelan experience to the Left is fundamental. Something is happening in Venezuela that should inspire progressives everywhere, and it is the responsibility of the Left to learn from this experience -- and more than that -- to ensure that it is not extinguished before it has a chance to catch. At this key and contested juncture in Latin American history, the Bolivarian revolution has been leading the regional struggle against neoliberalism, including the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA); it has been fomenting regional cooperation; and developing elements of a hopeful model of participatory democracy. Venezuela's leadership has been based on a serious alternative model of democratic development, backed by a politicized and well-organized alliance between grassroots organizations and the executive of the state. Since Venezuela's 'democracy' was born in 1958 the political system has been dominated by Accion Democratica (AD -- social-democratic) and Copei (social-christian) -- essentially a two-party polyarchy that kept oil-rents circulating in elite circles. But by the 1990s corruption and unpopular structural adjustment programs led to a nationwide rejection of traditional politics and opened a space for an alternative political movement. Hugo Chavez, a former paratrooper, filled the void with a radical critique of the old politics, and a new constitution aimed at profoundly transforming the economic, political, and social organization of Venezuelan society. Chavez won the presidential elections in 1998 and again in 2000 with over 50 per cent of the vote, and his movement has since won a series of elections, plebiscites and referenda. Anti-Neoliberal Article 73 of the Constitution obliges the state to keep its citizens informed about the implications of issues under negotiation in the FTAA." It states that, "International treaties, conventions, and agreements that could compromise national sovereignty or transfer power to supranational entities shall be submitted to referendum." This position on the FTAA is more than xenophobia, more than casual resistance to US influence, more, even, than anti-neoliberal: it is democratic. In attempting to foster a viable challenge to US-led neoliberalism, the Bolivarian revolution has developed a broad, participatory democratic model that includes economic and social rights as well as the goal of a complete redefinition of political rights. Venezuela's unusual combination of oil wealth and the considerable support for the revolution within the military has allowed it to limit the degree of its dependence on international financial institutions and the US. The Revolution on the Ground Unlike the populist caudillos who promised, and occasionally actually did things for the working poor, Chavez' emphasis and commitment have been to providing support and resources for developing their organizational capacities. One of the most interesting examples of this revolutionary redefinition of democracy is the funding of community organizations such as the Organizaciones Comunitario Viviendo (OCVs -- Community Living Organizations) -- the most local level of a network of community, district, and municipal organizations at the centre of the Bolivarian revolution's project of decentralization. These OCVs are made up of one member from a maximum of 30 families who allocate funding received from the municipality (and ultimately from the state oil company PDVSA) according to their needs. Autonomous decision-making at the community level and the broader movement towards decentralization have combined with access to free education, childcare and health-care to politicize many Venezuelan communities, providing them with the impetus and the ability to lay the foundation for a more profound, long-term revolutionary transformation. Free educational projects now provide education from basic literacy to university-level in classrooms located in poor areas all over the country. Free childcare facilities are coming to more and more communities, extending the right to education to overwhelmed parents. A similar project known as 'Barrio Adentro' (Inside the Neighbourhood) uses Cuban doctors to provide primary health-care in some of Venezuela's poorest and most inaccessible hillside barrios. Yet it is difficult to completely transform political, economic and social relations overnight -- especially in a country with so much wealth at stake. Many elements of the old state remain, and a forty-year tradition of bureaucratic corruption will not disappear quietly. At root is the fact that Venezuela remains a capitalist state and state structures remain oriented towards the global economy, rather than towards extending and applying Venezuelan democracy to the economy. Compounding these internal limitations is the Venezuelan opposition, at core the old elite, who remain in control of production and of the media. Internal and External Opposition Domestic opposition to Chavez comes for the most part from the old ruling elite, and their reach is considerable: many white collar workers in the state oil company (PDVSA); media magnates controlling all mainstream private television and most print media; and big-business interests in oil, finance, and industry. But a key element of the opposition also comes from the middle class -- the journalists, lawyers, doctors, and other professionals who have been turned off the Bolivarian revolution mostly due to economic policies that have benefited the 80 per cent of the population living in poverty, at the expense of the middle- and upper-classes. The same disenchantment with traditional politics that brought Chavez to power in 1998 dealt such a blow to AD and Copei that they did not even field candidates. Six years later they have begun to recover and represent the foundation of the Coordinadora Democratica-a political body lumping together the fractious, chaotic mish-mash of 'anti-chavists' who form a large part of 'the opposition'. The political campaign to topple Chavez is being waged on several fronts: extra-legal/violent, legal/political, and the all-important realm of public opinion. The most striking example of the extra-legal/violent strategy was the briefly successful coup of April 11, 2002, reversed 48 hours later by the alliance of loyal elements in the Military and the determined support of millions of Venezuelans who gathered outside the Presidential palace to demand Chavez's return. The legal/political route has only been considered recently, and in the face of the failure of violent, extra-legal means. It centres around a recall referendum scheduled for August 15, 2004. Arguably the most important, and certainly the most international, aspect of opposition to Chavez is the battle is being waged predominantly in the mainstream media -- joined regularly by certain human rights groups -- often outweighing their commitment to objective-reporting. These news organizations, while pretending to objectivity, actually held meetings of the coup conspirators in news stations and private residences of reporters and station owners prior to the coup. International print and television media are also guilty of employing active members of the Venezuelan opposition as correspondents. It is on this last front that many believe the battle for Venezuela will be lost; for, even many on the Left appear to have been dissuaded from taking much interest in Venezuela by the constant barrage of misreportage. A Space for the Left Whatever the limitations and flaws of Venezuela's revolutionary process, activists in the 'North' have a responsibility to participate, criticize, advise, and agitate. Two main areas demand the Left's attention: international policies towards (against) Venezuela; and contributions to the movement itself. The Canadian government's differences with the U.S. on Iraq did not signal a fundamental break in their relationship. In fact, since the tensions over Iraq, the Canadian government has been bending over backwards to confirm its place within the American empire. This was evident in Haiti, and it continues to be so as the Canadian government toes the OAS line on Venezuela. The OAS being what it is -- a cosmetic front for U.S. meddling -- Canada is partly responsible for the reactionary role the OAS has played to date in Venezuela. It is for the Canadian Left to make this an issue in Canada, to force the government to defend its position and the hardly objective role of the OAS to the Canadian public. However, in the final analysis what is missing most in Venezuela is the kind of international solidarity that those fighting from below deserve. More than anything, it is up to the Left to realize that there is a uniquely significant social, political, economic-humanist revolution at stake in Venezuela. And it is up to us to commit to participating, criticizing, and supporting the Venezuelan revolution in order to ensure that it is not extinguished by the machinations of the U.S., that it does not disappear from Left consciousness before it has even arrived. [Jonah Gindin is a Canadian journalist living and working in Caracas, Venezuela. He writes regularly for http://www.venezuelanalysis.com ] From nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com Tue Aug 24 13:43:55 2004 From: nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com (nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 13:43:55 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [NYTr] China Fears Food Crisis; Imports at $14 Billion Message-ID: <200408241743.i7OHhtJ09351@olm.blythe-systems.com> sent by Riaz K. Tayob (activ-l) Financial Times - August 22, 2004 China fears food crisis as imports hit $14bn By James Kynge in Beijing China has become a net importer of farm produce, raising concerns at the highest levels of government about the security of the food supply for 1.3bn people as land and water shortages put pressure on domestic grain production. Hu Jintao, China's president, has commissioned urgent studies on food security after evidence in 2003 and this year that China's grain output was dwindling as demand rises in the long term, officials and academics said. China's growing dependence on western imports comes as trade in agriculture has become one of the most bitterly fought-over aspects of the Doha global trade round. The three biggest exporters to China were the US, Canada and Australia. "The leadership is very concerned about food security. They were all young men during the famine of the late 1950s and 1960s. It is not only a strategic issue of dependence on foreign markets for them, it is also a very personal issue of food self-sufficiency," said one academic who advises the government on food security issues. The latest official figures show an unprecedented deficit in agricultural trade in the first six months of the year. Total imports of farm produce in the first half of the year rose 62.5 per cent to $14.35bn. Exports totalled $10.62bn, an 11 per cent increase on the same period a year ago. The US alone exported $4.96bn worth of farm produce to China, a jump of 68.1 per cent compared with the same period in 2003. The biggest changes were seen in grain imports as strategic stocks fell because of declining annual harvests every year since 1998. In the first half, China imported 4.1m tonnes of grain, or 1.8 times as much as in the same period a year ago. The level of China's national grain reserves is a state secret. But several academics said although the total harvest this year is expected to exceed last year's by a small margin, burgeoning demand would ensure that grain reserves continue to come under pressure this year and possibly in 2005. Chen Xiwen, a senior state council official, said recently that the deficit in grain production compared with demand this year would be about 37.5m tonnes. Another senior official, who declined to be named, said falling water tables, drying rivers and polluted water sources were taking their toll on the productivity of China's fields, making it unlikely that domestic grain production could be increased much. In addition, farmland is being absorbed rapidly by the expansion of cities and industrial parks. The movement to cities of 10m-20m Chinese each year, the vast expansion of industrial parkland, sprawling networks of roads and railways and other construction have reduced farmland by 6.7m hectares since 1996 to a total of 123.4m hectares last year. Lester Brown, president of the Earth Policy Institute and an authority on Chinese agriculture, said recently that as well as importing wheat, Chinese would start buying foreign rice and corn in years to come. A year or two from now, he said, China might be importing "30m, 40m, 50m tonnes" of grain, more than any other country. From nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com Tue Aug 24 13:45:22 2004 From: nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com (nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 13:45:22 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [NYTr] Sherman Austin: Anarchist, Interrupted Message-ID: <200408241745.i7OHjMF09453@olm.blythe-systems.com> sent by Dan Clore (activ-l) L.A. Weekly - AUGUST 20-26, 2004 Anarchist, Interrupted Sherman Austin may face state charges by Steven Mikulan Last Friday the 13th was Sherman Austin's lucky day. After serving a one-year sentence for distributing explosives information over the Internet, the 21-year-old anarchist walked out of an Echo Park halfway house and into a summer's morning a free man. He was met by his mother, girlfriend and the family dog -- which he took for a walk before leaving for home. Austin had finished his federal term in the Gateway correctional facility after spending most of it in a medium-security lockup near Tucson. During the job searches that were part of his Echo Park regimen, Austin got a taste of problems that may lie ahead when he was forced to turn down a canvassing job that required using a company cell phone. Under the terms of Austin's three-year probation, the Raise the Fist Webmaster may only use a cell phone that is owned in his name; he may use a computer -- but only a laptop that he must bring in for government examination at any time, and he cannot associate with individuals thought to advocate political violence. In other words, don't expect him to show up at the Republican convention in New York. [Well, associating with Republicans certainly would qualify as a violation of that prohibition.--DC] Worse, according to his new attorney, William Paparian, Austin is still subject to state prosecution not only for the same count for which he was indicted, but also for an incendiary-devices charge that the feds had agreed to drop as part of a plea bargain. Unfortunately for Austin, that agreement didn't include immunity from future California indictments. Deputy L.A. County District Attorney Jonathan Fairtlough is currently reviewing documents on the case prepared for him by the FBI. When contacted, Fairtlough declined to answer questions about Austin's possible case, saying, "The District Attorney's Office cannot comment on cases that have not been filed." "It offends anyone's fundamental feelings of fairness," Paparian told the Weekly by phone. In addition to guiding Austin through his probation, Paparian is trying to get the government to return computer hardware seized from Austin's home during a 2001 raid. "Sherman could be in violation of his parole," the Pasadena lawyer said, "if he's at a meeting of the Daughters of the American Revolution and they're talking about the Declaration of Independence. There's a myth being perpetuated here -- the stereotype of the black-masked anarchist breaking the plate-glass windows of Starbucks. It's part and parcel of the demonization of [Sherman's] anarchist philosophy." Indeed, Austin has come to represent an American radicalism endangered by post-9/11 crackdowns on civil liberties. So much so that he has become a kind of touchstone to the young left (even Hustler ran a spread on his case) -- sometimes to the ire of older radicals who don't view him as an Angela Davis or a George Jackson. "Celebrity feels kinda weird," Austin told the Weekly a few days after his release, shortly before a homecoming party at his mother's Valley Village apartment. "My reason for starting Raise the Fist wasn't to be a celebrity." While in Tucson he played in prison rock bands and moved from his old love, the drums, to bass guitar. In between looking for work and enrolling in Harbor City College, Austin has busied himself by recording songs he wrote in Tucson and honing his new bass skills. Meanwhile, he must navigate between expressing his beliefs and abiding by the terms of his probation -- as well as his relative fame. "I don't mind speaking in public, but there's a certain point where someone might use you as a poster for their own agenda. I don't want to only talk about my case or because I went to prison. I want to move forward to find solutions." Today the drummer who learned bass is adapting to a different personal environment, one that could drastically change should the deputy D.A. decide to prosecute him. "I'm just trying to get back on my feet," Austin said before his party began. "I'm still going to do organizing, but I have to watch out what scenery I'm around." From nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com Tue Aug 24 13:47:11 2004 From: nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com (nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 13:47:11 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [NYTr] The Woolly-Jumpered Anarchist Message-ID: <200408241747.i7OHlCt09508@olm.blythe-systems.com> sent by Peter Bell If we buy her the wool, will she make us one, too? The author of "Granny Made Me an Anarchist" is interviewed in the Guardian. I couldn't resist borrowing a friend's line about "Mom made me a queer." Nice interview. I expect the book will be worth a read. The Guardian - August 23, 2004 http://www.guardian.co.uk/g2/story/0,,1288671,00.html Just how did an 18-year-old lad from Glasgow get mixed up in a plot to assassinate General Franco in 1964? Duncan Campbell meets veteran anarchist Stuart Christie, and in an exclusive extract from his new book Christie relates the unlikely escapade that led to him being sentenced to 20 years in a Spanish jail The woolly-jumpered anarchist by Duncan Campbell Forty years ago, when A Hard Day's Night was at the top of the hit parade and Harold Wilson was prime minister, a long-haired teenage Glaswegian anarchist was arrested in Madrid on a mission to assassinate General Franco with some plastic explosives he had smuggled across the border from France under his woolly jumper. He faced the possibility of death by Franco's favoured method of execution, the garrotte. He was spared that dance of death and served his sentence in Spain, only to return to England and, a few years later, find himself in the dock at the Old Bailey, accused of being a member of the Angry Brigade, which had been engaged in its own, more modest, efforts to change society in Britain. Now Stuart Christie, that young anarchist, is a 58-year-old freelance writer and publisher, husband and father, living in a seaside town in the south of England. Next week his autobiography, Granny Made Me An Anarchist, will be published. My first political demonstration, as a law student in Edinburgh, was when we marched down the high street in a torchlight procession carrying an effigy of said anarchist with a garrotte round his neck to protest against the arrest. The generalissimo was clearly frightened by this. Christie was sentenced to a mere 20 years in jail. "I wish you'd kept the effigy," says Christie, now smartly turned out in a suit and a Christie tartan tie, when we meet in his local winebar. What Christie did keep, throughout his time inside and ever since, was his sense of humour: Granny Made Me An Anarchist is a wonderfully funny, engaging and self-deprecating account of a life that might easily have been snuffed out all those years ago in the shadows of Carabanchel prison, an account peppered with cultural and political reference points, from Just William and Leslie Howard in Pimpernel Smith, to Hegel and Hank Locklin's Wild Side of Life, to C Day Lewis and Bu?uel's Viridiana. Born in Partick, the son of a hard-drinking trawlerman and a hairdresser, Christie was named after the country's best-known Stuart, Bonnie Prince Charlie - "the only man in history to be named after three separate sheepdogs" as his fellow Partiquois, Billy Connolly, once said. His father departed one day for the legendary packet of fags and did not return for 20 years, so young Stuart was brought up by his mum, his grandad and his redoubtable, eponymous gran. She had been in service all her life, growing up in the gatekeeper's house in Lochnaw Castle in Galloway. He describes her ethical make-up as "equal parts John Knox and village community." "Basically, what she did was provide a moral barometer which married almost exactly with that of libertarian socialism and anarchism, and she provided the star which I followed," he says. "She kept me on the straight and narrow and was a real influence in my life." The straight and narrow was soon to take a few twists. As an apprentice in a dental laboratory, Christie joined the Labour party Young Socialists in Glasgow, one of whose members was a young Daily Record reporter called Paul Foot. He did not linger there long. "I was soon disillusioned with the chicanery of Labour politics, and [I was disgusted] with the executive committee going out with Rangers scarves on to make sure that the Protestant candidates were accepted." It was the early 60s and the US Polaris nuclear submarines had been sited at the Holy Loch. Christie joined the Scottish Committee of 100, which was dedicated to their removal and whose direct-action politics appealed. "The idea of revolution was quite alive in Scotland at the time," he says. "There was the political radicalisation of the 50s, satire, rock music and the collapse of the credibility of the Communist party." But a greater influence was Spain and the cause that had prompted many of his compatriots to join the International Brigade a quarter of a century earlier. He moved south to London where he worked as a sheet-metal apprentice and on an ironmongery stall in Shepherd's Bush. He met Spanish anarchist exiles in Bristol and decided that "I had to do more than just demonstrate and leaflet. I offered my services." The mission he was assigned was to deliver explosives to Madrid for the latest attempt - the 30th, as it happened - to blow up Franco. In Paris, he met his fellow desperadoes, who were tickled when he introduced himself with the phrase, "Zut alors!" His limited knowledge of French had led him to believe that that was what one said in the circumstances. Was he frightened? "Not really," he says. "It was fun. I got an adrenaline buzz and I was doing good at the same time. No one knew. My mother thought I was grape-picking." He hitchhiked south, having packed his kilt, which he had found was a great way to get lifts. This was to lead to some confusion: it was reported in the Argentinian press that the man trying to kill Franco was a Scots transvestite. But the movement had already been heavily infiltrated, and Christie was arrested at the handover spot in Madrid, along with his Spanish contact. He was not tortured but his companion was, in front of him. He signed a confession after four days and was jailed. In prison, he was warmly welcomed. The anarchists sent him money, but did not want to use their own names so signed them with the only English names they knew: John, Paul, George and Ringo. The prison authorities assumed he was being funded by the Beatles. His incarceration prompted many protests, including from Jean-Paul Sartre and Bertrand Russell. "I was told by the British consul that there were demonstrations all over the world. The most beneficial thing was that my arrest provided a focus for what Franco was doing. Here he was trying to pass himself off as an old avuncular gentleman on a white charger while in fact he had all these political prisoners, thousands of them who were tortured and some of them killed. The monster was growing again." One of his unlikely supporters was the late Malcolm Muggeridge, the author, journalist and television pundit who, on a programme called Why Anarchism?, had asked Christie just before his mission to Spain if he thought it was justifiable to assassinate Franco. "I knew I was going to Spain, and here I was presenting myself as a radical revolutionary anarchist, so what could I do but say yes," says Christie. "He sent me a Christmas card every year for the rest of his life." In prison he studied for A-levels in history, English and Spanish and read anarchist books smuggled into the jail. His mother wrote to Franco to ask for clemency. The Spanish authorities responded to what they described as "her dignity and motherly concern" and released him after three-and-a-half years. In London, Christie became friends with some of the people who were later to form the Angry Brigade which, in the early 70s, carried out a number of small bombing expeditions aimed at the Ted Heath government. Not entirely to his surprise, he was arrested again and faced another 20 years in jail, but at his trial at the Old Bailey he told the jury that the police had planted two detonators on him and was acquitted. But rearrest, he soon realised, would only be a matter of time. He moved first to Yorkshire and then to Sanday in the Orkneys, an island that had the twin advantages of a complete absence of officers of the law and a plentiful supply of Glenmorangie. Now married, for the next seven years he worked on local farms, ran the anarchist Cienfuegos Press and started a radical newspaper called the Free-winged Eagle. The local minister denounced him as "the anti-Christ" and advised his parishioners to boycott it. A degree in history and politics followed. There was a job as sub-editor for the launch of Media Week and a series of other magazine ventures which included editing the British edition of Pravda - "I said I'd do it as long as I didn't have to join the politburo". His past has not dogged him. "Occasionally, I would be introduced to someone and they would say: 'You're not that Stuart Christie?' and my response is, 'You mean the west of Scotland ballroom dancing champion?' The poor guy had the same name as me." He voted for the first time in the European elections. "I voted against Tony Blair and for Respect. The furore it caused from anarchists when it appeared on a website! The next thing, I'm getting emails from Italy saying, 'What are you doing voting?' It was because of the war primarily, but also everything else. I can feel the hairs on the back of my neck when I see Blair on television. He has subverted the good name of Scottish radicalism with the people he surrounds himself with." He is glad, after everything, that his assassination attempt was unsuccessful. "The arrest turned out for the better. I probably did more for the cause of anti-Francoism by not killing him. There is that law of unintended consequences." Now he is working on a documentary about the Spanish civil war and thinking of a novel about a Scot joining the International Brigade. Current reading is Hadrian the Seventh by Baron Corvo, "and I'm trying to plough my way through Robert Burton's Anatomy of Melancholy, an extraordinary book written in the 17th century, full of insights." Just like granny. From nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com Tue Aug 24 13:48:46 2004 From: nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com (nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 13:48:46 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [NYTr] Kerry Shoots Self: Guardian Message-ID: <200408241748.i7OHmk309576@olm.blythe-systems.com> sent by Peter Bell [The headline makes reference to 'friendly fire,' but really 'own goal' is the term in play here. If Kerry wants us to suffer through more of his Vietnam experience than he actually had - and it appears he's hell-bent on doing just that - he gets to deal with the whole nine yards of it. He does not get to refashion brutal privilege with a license to kill as heroic myth, much though he seems to think that that's just how stupid we are. Wonderful lead-in quote from Tim O'Brien. -Peter ] The Guardian - August 23, 2004 http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,1288586,00.html Wounded by friendly fire This has become one of the most nationalistic US elections in living memory - and it is all Kerry's doing by Gary Younge "A true war story is never moral. It does not instruct, nor encourage virtue, nor suggest models of proper human behaviour, nor restrain men from doing the things men have always done. If at the end of a war story you feel that some small bit of rectitude has been salvaged from the larger waste, then you have been made the victim of a very old and terrible lie." - Tim O'Brien, The Things They Carried Vietnam war veteran and Democratic presidential hopeful John Kerry has been ambushed and, for the moment, remains caught in enemy fire. Having made his five-month stint of decorated service in Vietnam the heart of his platform, it is now emerging as his achilles heel. A group of veterans financed by Republicans from Texas and close to President George Bush are airing ads calling him a liar for the claims he has made about his service and suggesting that he did not come by his military medals honestly. Their case is shoddy, given that none of the Swift-boat Veterans for Truth were with Kerry at the time and their claims have been refuted by those who were. Their motivation is shabby, as most of them are piqued by the fact that Kerry returned home to campaign against the war. All of which makes the fact that their attacks have had such a huge impact that much more revealing. For since the ads began screening, Kerry's slight lead in the polls has been shaved away. Two weeks ago, before the ads appeared, he was running even with Bush among the nation's 26 million veterans. Now Bush has a 24-point lead. The issue dominating the news cycle is not what is happening in Najaf today but what happened in the Mekong delta 35 years ago. There are three things we can learn from this. First, there is no level to which Republicans will not stoop to besmirch a character, belittle an issue or befuddle the electorate. Second, there is no level to which the Democrats will not stoop to attempt to neutralise these attacks. And third, that the Republicans will always win in this race to the bottom because so much less is expected of them and, when it comes to muck-slinging, they have no qualms about getting their hands dirty. Take Vietnam. At first sight this is an issue you would think the Bush administration would want to keep away from. Thanks to family connections, the president served his war in the Texas National Guard - and even then it is debatable whether he showed up. The vice-president, Dick Cheney, managed to defer being drafted five times, until the war was over, claiming he had "other priorities". Nine months and two days after the army changed the regulations so that married men with no children were no longer exempt, Cheney had his first child, Elizabeth, bringing a whole new meaning to the term family planning. Nobody is questioning their record in Vietnam for the simple reason that, unlike Kerry, neither them ever served there. For them to raise Kerry's service is a mixture of chutzpah and desperation that could backfire. Bush has tried to distance himself from the ads, saying they were put out by an independent group. But since the money trail leads back to his friends in Texas, this won't wash. The trouble for Kerry is that, in all likelihood, none of this will matter. The Bush campaign knows the attention span of the public is short and that few will sweat the details. Their hope is that by the time the claims of the Swift-boat Veterans have been discredited, a stubborn question mark will remain hanging over Kerry's military record. If you spread enough dung, goes the logic, then some seeds of doubt will grow. There is nothing new in this. The Bush team employed the same strategy in 2000 against Al Gore, forcing him to refute claims he never made about inventing the internet and being the basis for Love Story. In 2002, Republicans managed to unseat senator Max Cleland of Georgia by branding him unpatriotic because he opposed the creation of the homeland security department. Cleland lost three limbs in Vietnam and is a former head of the Veterans' Administration. But if the method of attack by Republicans is underhand, the issue they have chosen for this attack is understandable. For it was Kerry, not Bush, who placed his military service centre stage in this election campaign. The logic of doing so was clear enough. Clips of Kerry striding through the delta carrying a gun while his band of brothers (those who served with him) offered testimony of his heroics, served as a double whammy. They established Kerry in the public mind as a strong leader in wartime while providing a contrast with Bush, who stayed at home. But by the time of the Democratic convention, the party had elevated his service 35 years ago from one aspect of his personal history to his principle selling point in his campaign for the presidency. Refusing to spell out what plans he had for the future in Iraq or the war on terror, he was forced to exploit this one moment in his past for all it was worth. "If we do not speak of it others will surely rewrite the script," said Vietnam veteran George Swiers shortly after returning. "Each of the body bags, all of the mass graves will be reopened and their contents abracadabraed into a noble cause." And so it was that Kerry referred to his military service alone to qualify him for the presidency. He delivered a string of nationalist non sequiturs: "As president, I will wage this war with the lessons I learned in war"; "I defended this country as a young man and I will defend it as president"; and "I learned a lot about these values on that gunboat patrolling the Mekong delta". Then towards the end he reached for the stars and stripes. "That flag flew from the turret right behind my head. And it was shot through and through and tattered, but it never ceased to wave in the wind. It draped the caskets of men that I served with and friends I grew up with." In so doing, Kerry may have neutralised charges that he will be weak on defence. But he also made his war record fair game and set the ground work for one of the most nationalistic elections in living memory: a campaign that offers the choice between a Republican candidate who wants America to be obeyed and a Democrat who wants it to be "looked up to" and become "once again a beacon in the world". Kerry is not only running for president, but in flight from a history he knows only too well. When he returned from Vietnam he testified before the Senate foreign relations committee that American troops had "raped, cut off ears, cut off heads, taped wires from portable telephones to genitals and turned up the power, blown up bodies, randomly shot at civilians [and] razed villages in fashion reminiscent of Ganghis Khan." Just a few reasons why that beacon has burned so dimly for so long, and why Americans deserve a better choice. From nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com Tue Aug 24 13:50:16 2004 From: nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com (nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 13:50:16 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [NYTr] Kerry: Slo-Mo on Swifties Message-ID: <200408241750.i7OHoHA09721@olm.blythe-systems.com> New York Times - August 22, 2004 http://www.nytimes.com Kerry: Slo-Mo on Swifties by Maureen Dowd WASHINGTON - It's easy for the Bushes to stay gallant. They delegate the gutter. There are always third-party political assassins, ostensibly independent, to do the dynasty wet work. W.'s old pal and running partner, Lee Atwater, set up the Bush modus operandi: Lay in the weeds while craftily planting plausibly deniable surrogates to slice up your rival. The New Yorker editor David Remnick, writing in Esquire in 1986, limned the 1980 Congressional race in South Carolina's Second District "between Atwater's man, Republican Floyd Spence, and a Faulknerian figure named Tom Turnipseed At one press briefing, Atwater planted a reporter who rose and said, 'We understand Turnipseed has had psychotic treatment.' Atwater played it cool and refused to comment, but later told the reporters off the record, 'In college I understand he got hooked up to jumper cables.' " Karl Rove is Atwater's protigi on jumper cable politics. The weird thing is, given how transparently the Bushes play the game of staying above the fray even as their creepy-crawly surrogates do dishonorable and undignified things, their rivals always seem caught off guard when the third parties show up to rip their throats out. The phlegmatic Michael Dukakis never knew what hit him with Mr. Atwater's Frankenstein monster Willie Horton coming at him in a third party scare ad and G.O.P. smear leaflets and letters. John McCain should have known what was coming in South Carolina, but he acted stunned and hurt when he was hit with the Atwater/Rove mud treatment by shadowy Bush supporters. Just as the Bush campaign dragged out fringe veteran surrogates in South Carolina to slime the former P.O.W. for being antiveteran, now the stomach-turning Swift boat attackers are sliming a war hero as a war criminal. They started their vengeful and brazen campaign in May, after plotting since winter. But John Kerry is only now forcefully responding - though he should have had a response ready, since the Nixon tool John O'Neill has dogged him since '71. Charging on Thursday that Mr. Bush wants the Swift boat sleazoids "to do his dirty work," Mr. Kerry reached for yet another Vietnam reference and water metaphor: "When you're under attack, the best thing to do is turn your boat into the attack." The Skipper would do well to get a swifter boat. How pathetic is it that he's playing defense on Vietnam when W. didn't even serve? Bill Clinton implied two weeks ago that Mr. Kerry was acting sluggish. "Whenever they hit me, I hit 'em back," he told Jon Stewart. "And whenever they came up with a charge I didn't believe was true, I answered back." Reports in The New York Times and The Washington Post last week made it clear that the vile Swift boaters have told wildly varying accounts, sometimes supportive of Mr. Kerry. The Times revealed that Swift Boat Veterans for Truth - is that like the administration's Clear Skies Act for spewing pollution? - has a trellis of ties to Karl Rove, the Bush family and Bush supporters. "A Texas publicist who once helped prepare Mr. Bush's father for his debate when he was running for vice president provided them with strategic advice," Kate Zernike and Jim Rutenberg wrote. Indeed, it was the same woman who worked for a third party group that slimed Mr. McCain on the environment in the 2000 primaries. And the group's ad was produced by the Dukakis tank ad wizards. The Kerry camp knows the Swift boat snipers are hurting the Democrat and fears the Bush oppo campaign will soon move from tarnishing Mr. Kerry's war record to dwell on his days as a shaggy-haired antiwar spokesman. The White House must tear down his heroism before it can tear down his patriotism. Meanwhile, the Bush crew is shamelessly doing to Mr. Kerry what it once did to Mr. McCain: suggesting that the decorated Vietnam vet has snakes in his head and a temperament problem. "Senator Kerry appears to have lost his cool," Scott McClellan told reporters in Crawford on Friday. And the Bush campaign chairman, Marc Racicot, said on CNN that Mr. Kerry looked "wild-eyed" responding to Swift boat muck. It makes sense for W. to use surrogates to do his fighting, just as he did when he slid out of Vietnam and just as he did when he sent our troops to fight his administration's misbegotten vanity war in Iraq. From nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com Tue Aug 24 13:51:31 2004 From: nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com (nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 13:51:31 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [NYTr] News from Brazil No.515 - August 20, 2004 Message-ID: <200408241751.i7OHpWD09798@olm.blythe-systems.com> NEWS FROM BRAZIL supplied by SEJUP (Servico Brasileiro de Justica e Paz). Number 515, August 20, 2004 Visit our home page: http://www.oneworld.org/sejup/index.htm This week4s edition of NEWS FROM BRAZIL focuses on the Campaign to Demarcate Quilombo Territories. The National Campaign to Demarcate Quilombo lands in Brazil was officially kicked off on August 18, 2004 by the National Coordination of the Quilombo Communities (CONAQ). The campaign is being sponsored by diverse entities who are committed to pressure for the land regulation of almost 1,100 remnant quilombo territories identified in Brazil (only 29 areas are currently demarcated). The objective of the campaign is to enlarge and secure the land ownership of these communities so as to avoid illegal evictions and forced relocations, as well as to give access to programs and public projects for basic sanitation, family agriculture, education, culture, heath and housing. Leadership courses and activities for the communities are also part of the campaign. In 2003, CONAQ initiated a process in the quilombos to promote human rights and to offer courses to increase knowledge regarding national and international laws that can be helpful in guaranteeing rights to the quilombo lands as well as to provide for adequate housing. The course will also provide a forum for quilombos and urban housing movements to share experiences and information thus enlarging the social networks Quilombos, in the Banto language, means a settlement. Quilombos are rural Afro-Brazilian communities that distinguish themselves from other sectors of the population because of their customs, traditions, culture, social and economic conditions. These communities are ethnic territories that originated principally in the seventeenth century with the rebellion of African slaves in Brazil. They emerged in colonial Brazil as a form of organization and resistance against the institution of slavery. Palmares, the most famous quilombo in the state of Alagoas, had a population of more than 30,000 people by 1700 and functioned like an autonomous state, resisting attacks from colonists from Holland, luso-Brazilians, and slave hunters. Palmares was led by Zumbi, in whose memory the Day of Negro Consciousness is celebrated on November 20th each year. Unfortunately, Palmares was completely destroyed in 1716. The 1988 Brazilian Constitution gives the descendants of quilombo communities the right to their land and guarantees the right to the maintenance of their culture. Since 1988, many judicial and political errors have been committed in the process of demarcation. The goal of the current campaign is to correct these errors and implement the law. The Palmares Cultural Foundation is promoting an official registration of communities that are remnants of quilombos in Brazil. The National Institute of Colonization and Agrarian Reform (INCRA) is responsible for the demarcation of the land, which has become more and more difficult because of invasions and land conflicts by squatters and land grabbers. The delimitation of the quilombo includes the geographic area used by the communities for social, economic, and cultural activities as well as the areas of habitation, planting, fishing, and forestry. Once an area is demarcated and identified as a historic remnant of a quilombo, the Palmares Foundation will designate the land as Afro-Brazilian Cultural Territory, and will begin the process of registry as a national historic and artistic patrimony of Brazil. Judicial assistance will be guaranteed to all quilombos to guard them from usurpation and land conflicts, thus protecting the territorial integrity of the land. The identification, delimitation, demarcation and titling of quilombo lands is now the responsibility of INCRA, the Minister of Agricultural Development, the Palmares Foundation, the Minister of Culture, and the Special Secretary for the Promotion of Racial Equality, the movement of communities of Quilombos, and the President of the Republic. Source: Adital, August 17, 2004 The reproduction of this material is permitted as long as the source is cited. If you wish to contact us or receive NEWS FROM BRAZIL free of charge by e-mail send a message to sejup1@ alternex.com.br From nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com Tue Aug 24 13:53:48 2004 From: nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com (nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 13:53:48 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [NYTr] Iraq Communique: People's Struggle Movement Message-ID: <200408241753.i7OHrmI09875@olm.blythe-systems.com> Sent by Dave Muller (southnews) - August 23, 2004 Al Kifah http://www.iraq-news-net.de/?/news/political-declarations/1222/ The Peoples Struggle Movement was originally established back in2003 , immediately after the imperialists occupied our beloved country. It continued to grow until it was possible to organise the Founding Conference in Amman, Jordan that has been attended by large number of its cadre. In that conference, the general secretariat was elected, which comprised of eight people including the secretary general. Because of security reasons, the movement cannot reveal the names of the secretariat members working inside Iraq. The Peoples Struggle Movement Political Communiqui Our dear Iraqi brothers and sisters, In spite of the Iraqi peoples opposition to a number of colonial invasions throughout their long history, the latest Anglo-American occupation of our people poses the greatest danger to their interests, sovereignty and the future of the next generation, as this occupation seeks to change their national and ethnic identity and regional borders. The American administration and its numerous allies have exploited the situation in Iraq, Arab countries and the world, its authority relying on international resolutions to sanction the dirty war and illegal occupation of Iraq and control of Iraqs resources. The experiences of the last few months have, without a doubt, demonstrated the duplicity of the justifications offered by the American administration to market its aggressive war against the Iraqi people and the occupation of Iraq; in particular, its accusations of Iraq possessing weapons of mass destruction and having links to terrorist organisations, particularly Al-Qaeda, claiming that the country poses a threat to world peace and security. These are merely false accusations concocted to misinform international public opinion and to promote the logic of war and hostility. The unpleasant experience of occupation has also revealed its true aims of strengthening America's hegemony over Iraq's oil wells and guaranteeing Israel the security requirements it needs to realise the aims of the Zionist project of creating a Greater Israel according to the borders defined in the Torah, a project whose success depends on the complete annihilation of the state of Iraq, the military and human resources of which pose a real danger to Zionist ambitions. The American administration has previously threatened to destroy Iraq and control its resources, this being a fundamental goal of American political strategy since the end of the 1980s. At that time George Bush Seniors administration worked hard, in coordination with the Kuwaiti government, to provoke Iraq by launching an economic war against its people in a manner orchestrated for Iraqi forces to enter Kuwait, then by launching a war on Iraq and imposing an oppressive blockade against the country, thereby leading to the destruction of the main urban centres and causing the deaths of more than one and a half million Iraqis. It has now become accepted that this aggressive war and terrible occupation represents a repulsive crime and an act of international vandalism through which the governments of the United States, the United Kingdom and the nations allied to them violate all international laws, treaties and practices, and disregard international law in a disgraceful manner, through their barefaced aggression against an independent sovereign state, occupying it by force and wresting power from it, destroying and plundering it, and taking control of its resources and treasures. The occupation authority and the militias of the political groups allied to them have, in the past, practiced the most offensive and savage forms of oppression, arbitrary arrest, torture and murder sanctioned against the people of our country. Their abnormal and perverted crimes in Abu Ghraib, other prisons and prison camps bear historical witness to the inhumane and abnormal character of the occupation forces, the savagery of their methods and their gross violation of Iraqi human rights by which they seek to destroy and deny Iraqs patriotic and cultural values. The latest American occupation has resulted in Iraq losing more than 420 billion dollars, not to mention the loss of human lives. These losses are represented in the destruction of military installations and sites, airports, weapons, factories producing military equipment and stocks, as well as hundreds of other civilian factories and installations, the complete destruction of subsurface structures and the destruction, smuggling and sale of other commodities seized by the occupying forces aides in foreign countries at very low prices. Occupation has caused the ruin of human resources and raised the unemployment rate through thoughtless policies that have caused tens of thousands of Iraqis to lose their jobs. This is in addition to the tragedy of forced migration, ethnic cleansing and the assassination of religious scholars and academics. The American administration has exploited the collapse of Iraqi state institutions and has taken over Iraqs frozen assets: this makes a total of 17 billion dollars in addition to the 11 billion dollars Iraq amassed under the oil-for-food program. The occupation forces and authority have taken over the Iraqi states reserve funds of 7 billion dollars and have also taken control of Iraqi oil export operations and the financial revenue derived therefrom. Furthermore, the occupation authority has amplified the catastrophic consequences of its actions by issuing a number of biased laws and resolutions aimed at changing the composition of Iraqi society: by imposing sectarian and racial norms, by annulling the laws that regulate economic life and by imposing law (crime) no.39, which appropriates Iraqs treasures to the foreign exploiter. The American occupation and destruction of Iraq have created a significant political vacuum that has helped the occupation authority to take control of Iraq's political decisions and to withdraw its national sovereignty. The exceptional political events that have taken place in Iraq over the last two decades and the helpless situation of patriotic political movements and forces both within and outside of Iraq have helped to exacerbate this political vacuum. The Iraqi political movement has suffered the treacherous duplicity of forces outside of the country who present empty slogans promising democracy, freedom, pluralism and the construction of an infrastructure in the interests of the Iraqi people. At the same time, however, these groups have dealt directly with the forces opposed to the Iraqi people and have helped them to create the causes and environment of hostility. These movements did not consider the interests of the Iraqi people and chose instead to withdraw from the arena of confrontation in Iraq. Their leaders preferred to live a life of comfort abroad, leaving the people to bear the burden of facing catastrophes. Furthermore, organisations abroad set up by western intelligence agencies, or those linked in one way or another to international organisations, have a great interest in seeing the destruction of the state of Iraq. They have also helped to bring about a policy preventing the formation of opposition political parties in Iraq, suppressing a free press and thus depriving citizens of information about political, economic and social developments, whilst, in turn, providing a small group of vagabonds, scholars, separatist and sectarian forces and ineffectual political parties with a major opportunity to play their unscrupulous role in urging the enemy to enter Iraq and work hand in hand with the invading forces and subsequently the occupation administration. These groups made the fall of the regime their sole aim, even if this had to be achieved through the occupation and destruction of Iraq. They seek to justify the policies of murder and destruction inflicted on Iraq and the Iraqi people by the occupation, claiming that these policies will result in democracy and a better life for Iraqis and security in the region. All of this has been in return for them receiving funds and support from the agencies to which they are linked and the promises of them taking over the key positions of power in Iraq once the former regime is disposed of. The momentous events and restrictions through which our people have lived over the last few months since the beginning of the recent aggression have shown the treachery of the agents cooperating with the occupation authorities and have demonstrated the failure of their program and the limitations of their ideas to build a democratic system based on sound pluralist party politics. These events have also revealed the insincerity of the claims of their American masters, from the various justifications for prolonging the blockade against Iraq for 13 years to their reasons for this latest savage aggression against Iraq, which has led to the occupation of Iraq and the destruction of the Iraqi state. The political vacuum resulting from the occupation has brought about the emergence of a large number of political parties, movements and groups. Some of these groups have set forth patriotic political programs, whilst others have worked positively with the occupation authority to achieve selfish personal or sectarian goals, heedless of the interests of the people and the occupied nation. We hold the efforts and positions of many of the patriotic movements in great estimation, even if their programs have failed to embrace fully the ambitions of our people and even though many of them have failed to incorporate minority and sectarian issues. The exceptions are those who have chosen to stand with the people and support the resistance and the heroes who work to liberate Iraq and are aware of the dangers of the American plan, and thus urge the defenders of Iraq to face the occupation forces and their agents. From the early days of the occupation, the American administration decided to force those groups allied to them onto the Iraqi people in contradiction to the slogans of democracy, a New Iraq and their other false claims. Once they had become aware of the failure of the American administrations direct style of rule, they decided on a tough style of Iraqi rule, resorting to a frightful quota system to elect the so-called interim ruling council which over the past few months has proved a complete failure in finding solutions to the problems and challenges faced by Iraqi society, both politically and socially. This failure has forced the American government to seek other means to strengthen its grasp on Iraqs treasures and it has thus resorted to a game called transferring power to the Iraqis. They have been urged by a new group of their agents to grant some administrative tasks and mandates to the government of Ayad Allawi. There are a number of indicators that show that Allawis government will fare no better than the interim ruling council. Nor does the legitimacy of his government extend to patriotic support. At best, it can be considered an illegitimate government imposed by illegitimate occupying authority. The next few months will show the impotence of this perverse arrangement in achieving national goals and accomplishments. Our national duty requires that they are confronted and exposed and that people work to bring them down for being a vital part of the occupation plan. One of the most prominent positive features of the recent past has been the emergence of the heroic armed Iraqi resistance that has risen against the occupation and its helpers in a fashion that asserts the strength of this nation, its effective forces and its determination to face the defeat of this catastrophe and to use all resources to confront the occupation and to defeat and remove all traces of it. The national resistance has achieved national accomplishments militarily and politically in spite of its recent emergence and the policies of tyranny and terrorism used by the occupation authority, the major media deception, the confusion of issues and the treacherous positions of local groups. They have also been able to introduce themselves and impose their will. They have changed the nature and future of the occupation, not only in Iraq - they have also brought about a change in the priorities of the American plan for the region and caused the failure of their plans for military expansion. We would not be exaggerating if we say that Iraqs future and the development of its Arab-Islamic nation depends on the success of the resistance and its development into a comprehensive national liberation movement. Thus all Iraqi people and national forces must offer support to the resistance and help them with all means in order to continue their onward drive. In launching our movement, we do not expect to make a new addition to the existing political groups; rather, our movement has been set up to respond to the needs of our nation and the challenges our people and our occupied nation face. We hope to challenge the goals of the American occupation plan based on our appraisal of the Iraqi political map and its needs. Based on our determination to adopt the national cause in spite of all difficulties, our movement represents the natural development of the noble national struggle of our people, the noble political defence forces and the men of the resistance who have stood with all their strength and rigidity against the plan to occupy Iraq and those executing it. The starting point of our political program is to work to strengthen the most important axes of the national struggle at this present stage to bring it to the level of establishing a broad national political front able to confront and get rid of the occupation, delivering us from the political vacuum created by the enemy in Iraq through occupation and the destruction of all the state's existing structures. We will do this by defining our program of work in accordance with the national will, in the true interest of our people, in order to achieve liberation and real national sovereignty, which requires that we join forces in all efforts for the good of the nation. The methodology of our political movement is based on the following principles: 1) The outright rejection of the Anglo-American occupation plan; belief in the right of the Iraqi people and their political forces to reject occupation, its programs and institutions; and belief in their legitimate right to resist occupation through political and armed means and to declare support for the Iraqi national resistance in consideration of it being a legal right of the rights of people oppressed under occupation enshrined in international laws and conventions according to article 42 of the annex to the Hague Convention of 1907 and resolutions no. 1514, 1960, no. 3103, 1973 and no. 324, 1974. 2) Not to acknowledge the legitimacy of any laws, legislations and legal, political, security, economic and social systems, etc., imposed directly by the occupation authority or any organisations or administrations appointed by the occupation authority. 3) Rejection of all resolutions biased against the Iraqi people, whether they are issued by the Security Council or other official Arab or international bodies. 4) Declaration that all contracts and agreements imposed on Iraq after 19 April 2003 as nonbinding, including agreements, contracts and treaties that have been ratified by ministries and government administrations set up by the occupation authority. 5) Declaration of the necessity of legally pursuing and demanding full material damage claims from the American administration for all that has resulted from the persistent American aggression against Iraq from 1991 up until now, as well as damages resulting from the economic blockade against Iraq imposed through false justifications and perpetuated for 13 years, not to mention damages that will result from agreements and contracts ratified during the occupation and a demand for full compensation. This is in addition to prosecuting companies and individuals, both Iraqis and foreign nationals, responsible for damages and demanding legal compensation from them. 6) A commitment to the right of the Iraqi people to retribution in the sentencing of criminals who assisted in the hostility against Iraq and cooperated with the foreign occupier by having them transferred to Iraqi tribunals, in order that they may be called to account in accordance with Iraqi laws effective before 9 April 2003, in particular the Iraqi penal code and the military penal code. 7) An unwavering commitment to the unity of Iraqi territory and the historical unity of the Iraqi people: Iraqi territory is to be considered an integral and cohesive whole, division and partition of the land unacceptable, and those who call for separation are to be resisted and their guises exposed. We will work to raise the flag of Iraqi unity as an inviolable national principle. We also reject all ideas, proposals and plans aimed at fragmenting the unity of Iraqi territory, including the idea of a federal state and administrative divisions based on racial and sectarian bases. 8) Rejection of the use of quotas to fill government jobs and political positions. A total rejection of the principle of coordination along religious, sectarian, racial or denominational lines. Construction of a free, unified Iraqi society depends on the principle of developing the nation and being absolutely loyal to it as the sole priority for allocating government responsibilities and positions in all the institutions of Iraqi society. 9) Preservation of Iraq's historical national and patriotic identity; and the complete rejection of programs to change the historic specificity of Iraqi society adopted by the occupation authority or by authorities or bodies appointed by it. 10) The belief that Iraq and its people are an inseparable part of the Arab nation. We confirm the position of our people and nation in the continuing struggle against plans to resolve the Palestinian issue and to support the struggle of the Palestinian people in establishing their free and independent state. 11) Belief in the necessity of setting up a secular democratic society based on noble values, emphasising the importance of divine values and principles, at the fore of which are the principle of the Islamic faith in supporting moral aspects and strengthening society against negative social trends. We assert that Iraq's future and wellbeing require an independent and free pluralist society founded on political and economic bases, in which the people are a source of authority, with the supreme goal of all social legislation and programs being to give the Iraqi people the opportunity to exercise their human rights. 12) Recognition of the right of minority groups freedom of expression to practice their cultural and religious duties and obligations in a manner similar to the rights of the Arab Muslim majority. Through our acknowledgement of the truth of the diversity of the makeup of Iraqi society, we refuse to use this diversity to fragment Iraqi society as pursued under the plan of the occupiers and their aides. The diversity that distinguishes Iraqi society, whether it be ethnic or religious, is a source of the Iraqi people's strength and a cause of the cultural wealth and the collective ideal of Iraqi society, strengthening Iraqs role in helping to build a humanitarian civilisation, which it has achieved in history when all of these Iraqi groups took part in making this history, based on faith and pride in belonging to one nation - Iraq. 13) Belief in the role of women in building and developing Iraqi society and their right to carry out all their social duties and to enjoy human and political rights. 14) Commitment to the right of the people to control the sources of national wealth and to guarantee the independence of national ownership of natural and economic treasures and resources. We unequivocally reject the privatisation of Iraqs oil sector and the public industrial sector. 15) A refusal to make our countrys economic resources subject to the policies of international financial and global capitalist institutions currently imposed on Iraq at the expense of the interests of the Iraqi people. 16) Application of true national interests. This must happen between the notable patriotic forces without interference from the occupation and the forces linked to it that supported the enemy against Iraq and encouraged them. 17) Our movement also believes that the Arab combatants who have helped to defend Iraq have done so out of patriotic, national and Islamic duty towards their nations, their principles and their brothers in Iraq. We must look to them with admiration and pride and be strengthened by the sincerity of these combatants in defending Iraq's land and people. These combatants seek martyrdom, honour and glory for their nation, their people and the Iraqi people by joining in battle with them. Our movement calls on all Arabs and Muslims and all honourable people in this world to help to defend Iraq, its civilisation and sacred sites against the crime of occupation by the American administration and its agents who have brought with them soldiers and mercenaries from various parts of the rest of the world to help kill Iraqi people and pollute their soil. It is an unparalleled obligation and a necessary part of belonging to the Arab nation and conscience and of having mutual ties. Our movement also calls on all notable patriotic and political forces and all Iraqi people to form popular committees to support the resistance and its heroic men through all possible means, in order to strengthen its existence and to help perpetuate it. We also call on Iraqis who are obliged to join the "New Iraqi Army" or the Iraqi National Defence Force and all the other troupes that one finds under the puppet government to leave these organisations and join the ranks of the resistance, so that history does not record the black episode of their lives when they collaborated with the occupier and its agents. Those who are not able to do so due to extenuating circumstances may continue working with them, but they must not raise arms against the national resistance: they must cooperate with these men carrying out their heroic duties. The Iraqi army, against whom the enemy administration issued a resolution disbanding it, is the great Iraqi army, the army of the people, and no one has the right to issue any such resolution against it. We must all affiliate to this heroic army, joining the heroic Iraqi resistance and offering technical, logistic and material support to it. For its part, it must record the personal histories of its members heroic stand and must not overlook the opportunity for the people to help in their heroic struggle to liberate Iraq and drive away the invaders and their helpers. Whoever abandons this national duty will be damned by the people and history. Our movement makes an open, genuine call to all the patriotic forces that reject the occupation to join together in battle and coordinate among themselves to work together against this occupation, the forces representing it and to define the common denominators of their work and joint effort. Our dear patient Iraqi people, We are aware that the responsibility is great and requires all Iraqis to defend their country and values and to liberate their land from the occupation, to build a strong Iraq based on the interests, hopes and ambitions of the Iraqi people to live in peace and freedom under patriotic, democratic rule. We call on all honourable and good people to join our movement, not only through organisational engagement, but through adherence to the national principles mentioned in this program and determined adherence to rejection of the occupation and everything that comes of it, including the puppet government and all the resolutions issued by it or by the occupation authority. Furthermore, we must strengthen the momentum of the political struggle of the nascent patriotic movement, which is growing in strength with the firm resolution that the resistance will not yield to this extraordinary situation and has assigned an identity and methodology to all patriotic Iraqi soldiers. We are fully aware of how the powerful and influential drive of the hostile media is used to distort the truth about the national resistance and the strong popular rejection of the occupation and its aides, and attempts to hide the evil aims of this hostility, occupation and the government born of it. However, we must not stand as an obstacle to the good, noble people and all the Iraqi people who are active in the patriotic political forces and movements close to the people and who work in their interests. Victory to Iraq and its great people! The General Secretariat of the Peoples Struggle Movement Baghdad - Iraq Al Kifah The archives of South News can be found at http://southmovement.alphalink.com.au/southnews/ From nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com Tue Aug 24 13:56:37 2004 From: nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com (nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 13:56:37 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [NYTr] Fleecing the New Zealand Lamb Message-ID: <200408241756.i7OHubB09988@olm.blythe-systems.com> Fleecing the New Zealand Lamb by Harry Saloor The Management School of Restorative Business http://www.restorative-business.org Fleecing the NZ lamb is one thing; cutting its meat to the bone and bleeding it dry is another. Once again the IMF and its hunting party seem to be brandishing their guns and polishing their carving knives (cleaning off the blood of African, Asian and Latin American nations). Their bloodhounds are going into a killing frenzy caused by the smell of fresh blood. Wounded by the high value of kiwi (NZ dollar), bleeding because of the rising interest rates, and hindered by the rising oil prices (inevitable consequence of Peak Oil - ultimately, the dependency on fossil fuel would prove to be New Zealand?s undoing) their new prey, NZ economy, is limping. Perhaps the Argentina model could help explain the stages that the NZ economy seems to be undergoing. Argentina?s GDP composition by sector (agriculture 5%, industry 28%, services 67%) in 2000 (before its recession deepened) compares with New Zealand?s GDP composition. Argentina is a vast country, rich in natural resources with a sophisticated and highly educated population. Like New Zealand, Argentina was a prosperous country by capitalistic standards. Yet more than 51% of Argentines now live below the poverty line (the Argentine peso is now worth one third of its dollar-pegged value in 1991). So what went wrong? Argentina?s economy died because IMF made them ?an offer they couldn't refuse.? To spill their blood, IMF demanded that Argentina cut its budget deficit on the eve of Argentina?s deepening recession in 2001. After the second round of ?Tequila Effect? in Latin America, IMF was about to transform the tango into a 4-step dance macabre in Argentina. In ?The Best Democracy Money Can Buy? Greg Palast describes the 4 steps as follows. Step One Privatization. That is, stripping the nation?s assets. Or ?Briberization? as Palast quotes Stiglitz, former chief economist of the World Bank. Palast writes, ?Rather than object to the sell-offs of state industries, [Stiglitz] says national leaders?using the World Bank?s demand to silence local critics?happily flog their electricity and water companies.? Added to Stiglitz? list of privatized national assets are the oil pipelines, roads, waterways, ports and national parks (could they?) which are equally under the threat of privatization. For more information on the ?Necessity Test?, ?efficiency principle?, GATS tribunal and the rejection of defense of ?safeguarding public interest? see . Step Two Capital Market Deregulation. ?After briberization, Step 2 of the IMF/World Bank?s one-size-fits-all rescue-your-economy plan is Capital Market Liberalization. This means repealing any nation?s law that slows down or taxes money jumping over the borders.? Palast adds, ?Cash comes in for speculation in real estate and currency, then flees at the first whiff of trouble. A nation?s reserves can drain in days, hours. And when that happens, to seduce speculators into returning a nation?s own capital funds, the IMF demands these nations to raise interest rates ? Invariably, the higher interest rates further stifle the nation causing a downward spiral in property values, increasing unemployment, declining industrial production, economic stagnation and depleted national treasuries. Step Three Market-Based Pricing. ?At this point, the IMF drags the gasping nation [into] Market-Based Pricing, a fancy term for raising prices on food, water and domestic gas.? In Latin Americas IMF also included a built in module ?The IMF Riot,? Palast says, which was predictable. Losers are the ordinary people, naturally. Also predictable are the winners: the World Bank (51 percent owned by the U-S Treasury) and its commercial partners - international financiers and currency speculators. Step Four Free Trade. At this stage, the last of the nation?s assets are up for grabs for next to nothing. WTO, World Bank and IMF (a three-headed dragon) set the rules and conditions in complete secrecy. People complain bitterly and might even demonstrate for a day or two because the last of the family silver, or the ?grandma?s jewels? as one reporter put it, were handed over to offshore entities owned by faceless strangers, who might as well be reptiles from another dimension. But the details become much more nauseating once some of the ugly reasons behind the privatization and free trade emerge, when people suddenly wake up to the bitter reality of having to pay extortionate rates to the faceless aliens for their local services - the very utilities that their community previously paid for and operated. August 24, 2004 [Next: Saving the lamb?s neck] From nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com Tue Aug 24 13:58:22 2004 From: nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com (nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 13:58:22 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [NYTr] VOA: US Begins Cuba Broadcasts Message-ID: <200408241758.i7OHwM310043@olm.blythe-systems.com> sent by Walter Lippmann (cubanews) [The remarkable thing about this is that they say openly they've been broadcasting this stuff for over a decade and it hasn't gotten through.-WL] Voice of America - August 24, 2004 US Begins Cuba Broadcasts Relayed by Military Planes The State Department says the United States has begun relaying its Radio and TV Marti broadcasts into Cuba with military aircraft. The operations were authorized by President Bush in May as a way of overcoming Cuban jamming of the U.S.-funded stations. The State Department says the transmissions began Saturday and that Radio and TV Marti broadcasts were relayed into Cuba for several hours by specially-equipped U.S. Air National Guard transport planes operating outside of Cuban airspace. The unusual effort to overcome Cuban jamming of the U.S. broadcasts was authorized by President Bush in May, as part of a series of measures recommended by the U.S. Commission for Assistance to a Free Cuba headed by Secretary of State Colin Powell. Radio Marti began in the mid-1980s and Cuba started heavily jamming both it and its counterpart TV Marti when the television station began operations in 1990. The jamming of TV Marti has been especially effective despite extensive efforts to overcome it. State Department Deputy Spokesman Adam Ereli said the aim of the new effort is to provide free information to Cubans and in the process, hasten the end of the Communist government of Fidel Castro. "Radio and TV Marti have transmitted their signals for over a decade and they are routinely jammed by the authorities in Cuba who fear the truth being known by their own people," he said. "Our view is that these broadcasts will give the Cuban people uncensored information about their country and will help serve to bring about a more rapid and peaceful transition to democracy." President Bush adopted several other recommendations of the commission, including limiting the remittances U.S. family members may send to relatives in Cuba and limiting the number of visits family members can make to Cuba, a step that drew broad criticism in the Cuban-American community. In another development, spokesman Ereli shrugged off Cuba's rejection of a U.S. offer of $50,000 in relief aid to help deal with damage from Hurricane Charley earlier this month. Cuba termed the U.S. gesture "humiliatingly meager" and "hypocritical." Mr. Ereli said the United States offered the aid, through the U.S. Interests Section in Havana, in a spirit of humanitarian concern, and said he hoped the Cuban government would see it that way, and act to help its people. From nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com Tue Aug 24 13:59:24 2004 From: nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com (nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 13:59:24 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [NYTr] Invasion of Cuba Unlikely, But on the Other Hand... Message-ID: <200408241759.i7OHxOY10090@olm.blythe-systems.com> sent by Walter Lippmann (cubanews) [Thanks to Robert Sandels and Cuba-L listserv for permission to share this assessment of the mixed signals being sent by Washington on the prospects of a U.S. invasion of Cuba.-WL] August 20, 2004 Cuba-L Analysis Invasion of Cuba Unlikely Say U.S. Officials, But on the Other Hand... By Robert Sandels While official Washington rejects Cuban claims that a U.S. invasion is imminent, Cuba's uneasiness seems soundly based. For one thing, there is President George W. Bush's bellicose Cuba policy, and for another, the central role the administration has assigned to Cuba as an antagonist in the war on terror. Administration denials that it has any invasion plans are contradicted by all the qualifications thrown in. And ambiguity may well be our Cuba policy in a nutshell. Bush needs Fidel to get the Cuban exile votes in Florida and he can only get them by making believable threatening gestures against Cuba. Thus, Bush carries on two distinct public relations campaigns, promising Cuban-American voters that he has plans to bring down Castro's government and end his iron-fisted rule, while simultaneously accusing Castro of manufacturing invasion threats as an excuse to maintain his iron-fisted rule. Cuba goes on war footing Since early 2003, Defense Minister Raul Castro has warned the United States that his forces are ready to meet an invasion in what was officially called "The year of Defense Preparation." "Anyone who sets foot here will at least leave his boot behind with his leg inside it," he said. According to an official announcement from Cuba in January, the military planned to step up training and to increase its reserves by reducing the number of exemptions from conscription. The Madrid daily El Pais (2/24/04) reported that foreign observers in Cuba thought the training of workers militias and preparation of bunkers and shelters went much further than in previous invasion scares. One rumor was that some officials and archives had been moved to safer locations. Nevertheless, James Cason, chief U.S. diplomat in Havana, said the Cuban government was "fabricating the threat of a U.S. military attack to engender fear in the Cuban population, to spend scare resources to maintain large military, security and intelligence structures, and to justify extreme measures in a vain attempt to crush Cuba's nascent independent civil society." Despite all the preparations for war, there are indications that Cuba has not increased military spending and intends to make do with its limited military assets. In November 2003, a Foreign Relations Ministry official said military expenditures had been drastically reduced over the past decade. By way of confirmation, the Mexico City daily La Jornada (02/02/04), citing foreign diplomatic sources in Cuba, said the Revolutionary Armed Forces had been reduced in recent years from around 300,000 troops to about 55,000. Cuba sees pattern of threats Cuba appears to be taking the rid-Cuba-of Castro side of administration talk more seriously than in the past. And why not. In 2002, Bush declared his radical foreign-policy doctrine, the National Security Strategy, in which the United States declared its unilateral preemptive-war and regime-change intentions. In May 2002, Bush announced his "initiative for a new Cuba," yet another crackdown that seemed a logical application of the new doctrine. Cuban concerns increased after the U.S. invasion of Iraq in March 2003. When Cuban authorities arrested and jailed 75 opponents and others and convicted them of working as paid agents of the United States, the administration said Castro was taking advantage of the war to eliminate dissent, and there were loud cries among exiles in Miami for an immediate invasion. That was followed by a rash of highjackings that the Cuban government said was a U.S.-coordinated provocation to justify a naval blockade of the island or even an invasion. Bush sharpened that suspicion with a Rose Garden speech in October 2003, in which he announced the formation of the Commission for Assistance to a Free Cuba, charged with drawing up plans to "hasten" Castro's demise. The Cuban government has also been concerned about appearances on Miami television of anti-Castro leaders advocating terrorism and assassination in clear violation of U.S. law. In July, Rodolfo Fromenta, leader of the Miami-based F4 militia commandos, said on television that his group had agents ready in the United States and in Cuba for an armed attack against Castro's government with weapons obtained in the United States. Since the collapse of the Soviet Union, the United States has had a hard time explaining exactly why Cuba remains on its enemies list. Bush solved the problem by sweeping Cuba up into his global ambition to carry on perpetual war against terrorism. Just as the United States defined the Cuban revolution as a security threat during the Cold War, it is now defined as a threat in Bush's war on terror and a menace to the stability of Lain American governments. It used to be that instability in Latin American was supposed to weaken a country's defenses against communist subversion. Now, instability is said to invite the terrorists in. Cuba has been drawn into the administration's policy of promoting the end of Hugo Chavez's presidency in Venezuela. Administration officials claim that Venezuela has joined with Cuba to forge the core of a subversive alliance intent on destabilizing the region. The accusations bear an unmistakable similarity to Bush's famous declaration that Iraq, Iran, and North Korea were an "axis of evil" badly in need of regime change. To illustrate how the administration's rhetorical flourishes can quickly evolve into accepted truths, a group of Republican lawmakers, led by Rep. Henry Hyde (R-IL), warned the White House in 2002 that Castro and Chavez were leading an "axis of evil." Supporting the charge, media reports later cited anonymous administration advisors suggesting Chavez had a hand in deposing Bolivian President Gonzalo Sanchez de Lozada in October 2003. One of those advisors may well have been Roger Noriega, assistant secretary of State for Western Hemisphere affairs, who was active early this year criticizing Argentina and Brazil for moving too close to Castro. Both he and Secretary of State Colin Powell accused Cuba and Venezuela of collaborating to destabilize democratically elected governments in the region. Threat from southern flank The Heritage Foundation, a think tank with ties to the Republican Party and the Bush administration, offered a theoretical framework for combating terrorism and destabilization. In a foundation report issued this year titled Strengthening America's Southern Flank Requires a Better Effort, authors James Carafano and Stephen Johnson warn against the seven or more "major terrorist organizations" identified by the State Department as active in Latin America. These include the Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias de Colombia (FARC), the Ejercito de Liberacion Nacional de Colombia (ELN), and the Islamic groups Hamas and Hezbollah. The authors advise the administration to apply the National Security Strategy with greater zeal in Latin America. They note that the strategy calls for the United States to step in with its resources whenever countries in other regions are unable effectively to fight terrorism. Since they find no countries in Latin America capable of fighting terrorism,, they recommend a U.S.-led militarization of the region's efforts. This would include: - Revising the 1947 Inter-American (Rio) Treaty of Reciprocal Assistance, once focused on the Cold War, to deal collectively with terrorism, international crime, and natural disasters; - Considering the transfer of U.S. planes, advisors, and other assets in the Andean region from the State Department to the military or to civilian agencies with experience in combat and law enforcement; - "Revitalizing the Pentagon's U.S. Southern Command to promote regional security; - Promoting closer ties between U.S. military and civilian agencies and their Latin American counterparts; and - Improving intelligence gathering in the region, necessary in part, because the United States failed to uncover evidence of "Cuba's reported coordination of leftist movements in Latin America." The most specific threat mentioned in the analysis is Chavez, whom they describe as a regional troublemaker who has "reportedly been fanning flames of social unrest" in Bolivia and Ecuador, and selling oil cheap to Cuba. As is so often the case, think tank proposals for the future can be descriptions of what is already under way. In his discussion of American militarism, Chalmers Johnson (Blowback. The Costs and Consequences of American Empire, 2000) describes a 1991 law that set up the Pentagon's Joint Combined Exchange Training (JCET) program, which put American special forces in over 100 countries including 28 in Latin America and the Caribbean. A Defense Department publication says the JCETs are charged with training local counterparts in "foreign internal defense." "In other words," Johnson writes, "most of the training exercises are meant to prepare foreign militaries for actions against their own populaces or rebel forces in their countries" (p.73). JCET personnel are not required to observe U.S. prohibitions against military assistance to countries with bad human rights records. U.S. says no invasion planned The State Department replied to Cuba's complaints about imminent invasion by saying the programs for transition from Castro to capitalism meticulously laid out in the commission report "are not intended to be a prescription for how Cuba organizes itself or what policies it decides ultimately to pursue." But that answer is not very convincing since the commission's report is a blueprint for how massive U.S. pressure and funding can unseat Castro and install "a free and sovereign Cuban government." According to Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, military action against Cuba was not contemplated "at this time." The "at this time" qualifier referred to the possibility that military action would be considered in case Cuba threatens U.S. security. "To the extent our country is threatened or our people are threatened, then the president and the government -- that's the first responsibility of government, is to see to the protection and security of our country." The qualification could not have been reassuring to the Cubans because the foundation for justifying an attack on Cuba is already in place. The 1996 Helms-Burton Act stipulates that a mass emigration from Cuba to Florida would be considered "an act of aggression"; the State Department lists Cuba as a state sponsoring terrorism, and the U.S. government is officially committed to regime change in such states or in states that harbor terrorists. Furthermore, the United States regularly if half-heatedly accuses Cuba of producing biological weapons or at least of making the technology to produce them available to terrorist states. Echoing the administration's official policy statement, Cason said the goal was "a rapid, peaceful transition to a democratic, market-oriented Cuba." But it is hard to see how Cuba would rapidly convert to both without greater force from the United States than it has applied for more than four decades. And nowhere in its pronouncements has the Bush administration offered to accept a democratic but socialist Cuba. From nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com Tue Aug 24 14:00:41 2004 From: nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com (nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 14:00:41 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [NYTr] Policy Met Politics in Cuba Rules Message-ID: <200408241800.i7OI0fB10185@olm.blythe-systems.com> sent by Walter Lippmann (cubanews) [This is an account of how the Bush Commission's recomendations came to be, tracing their origins to Otto Reich and others in his corner of the Cuban exile ultra-right. The absolute secrecy of the commission's deliberations isn't mentioned at all. An effort is made to humanize Bush himself who is presented as the one who decided not to terminate all remittances to Cuba completely. No mention here that Otto Reich has resigned nor of what Reich is doing with his time now. many more questions are asked than answered.-WL] The Washington Post - August 24, 2004 Policy Met Politics in Cuba Rules Fla. Anti-Castro Forces Helped Shape Laws By Peter Slevin Washington Post Staff Writer Early last year, Otto Reich shopped a new project to his boss, national security adviser Condoleezza Rice. A Havana-born hard-liner with a habit of picking verbal fights with Cuban President Fidel Castro, Reich believed the United States was unprepared for Castro's fall and needed a transition strategy. Rice liked the idea. The White House was overwhelmed with preparations for invading Iraq, so she told her new special envoy for Latin America to proceed and promised to pay closer attention after the war. Reich and a close-knit team of State Department political appointees felt they had, at last, an insider's chance to undo Castro. As Reich's initiative gathered steam, word kept reaching the White House that Cuban Americans in Miami felt that President Bush had broken his promises to challenge Castro more sharply. Worse, Republican political figures warned that Cuban Americans crucial to Bush's 537-vote margin in Florida in 2000 might stay home in 2004. It was a matter, state Rep. David Rivera said, of "telling the White House we need some help down here. We need something to motivate people." This confluence of policymaking and politics led to the tightest restrictions on Cuban Americans' interactions with the island in decades: a limit of one visit every three years, a sharp reduction in how much they can spend there and new curbs on the goods they can send. Cuba policy has historically been driven by domestic politics, but this episode -- in accounts given by participants and close observers in Miami and Washington -- offers an exceptional glimpse into how the two interact. The policy, imposed this summer, prompted a revolt in Congress and angered some of the Cuban Americans it was intended to please; it also produced enough animosity, Democrats hope, to help throw Florida to Sen. John F. Kerry (Mass.). Officials said critical political input came from the president's brother Jeb Bush, who is Florida's governor and an avid cultivator of the state's Cuban American population. State Department officials confirmed that, in a Congress severely divided on how to produce democracy in Cuba, they reached out only to the three Cuban American Republican representatives from South Florida -- all strong proponents of the U.S. economic embargo against Cuba. Assistant Secretary of State Roger F. Noriega, who managed the policy review, said he and his aides had numerous conversations with members of the White House political staff under Karl Rove, Bush's chief political adviser and a fierce supporter of travel limits. Politics played a "natural" role in shaping the strategy, Noriega said. "Politics intersect with the policy. In a democracy, it always should," he said. The role of foreign policy experts at the National Security Council, said one participant, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, was "as great as, or greater than, the politics shop." In fact, the opinions of the most hard-line administration figures and some members of the White House political staff dovetailed significantly, even if their ambitions for the policy were different: One was focused on Bush's reelection, the other on Castro's demise. Defenders of the policy said discussions inside the administration were intense and final decisions were made by Bush. They describe him as convinced that the strategy would wound Castro and energize more voters than it alienated. Former diplomat Wayne Smith, an opponent of sanctions, said: "I've been involved in U.S.-Cuba policy since 1958. This is the stupidest policy I've ever seen, bar none." The Plan The story begins with Reich, a lobbyist and former diplomat. Bush named him assistant secretary of state for Latin America in 2001 after Jeb Bush recommended him and Rep. Lincoln Diaz-Balart (R-Fla.) -- a Cuban American hard-liner whose aunt was married to Castro -- appealed to Rove. The Senate never confirmed him. Democrats blasted Reich as a divisive, one-issue figure, and the White House found no enthusiasm among moderate Republicans for a fight. When Reich's recess appointment expired, he moved to the NSC under Rice. With him, he carried his idea for developing a transition plan for Cuba. By October 2003, Reich's proposal had taken shape as the President's Commission for Assistance to a Free Cuba, with Secretary of State Colin L. Powell and Cuban-born Housing Secretary Mel R. Martinez as co-chairmen. The commission would "plan for Cuba's transition from Stalinist rule to a free and open society, to identify ways to hasten the arrival of that day," Bush said in the Rose Garden. The administration was not in good favor at the time with an important segment of the Cuban American community, according to political figures and analysts interviewed in Miami and Washington. Strongly anti-Castro activists believed that Bush had not delivered on promises to revise Clinton administration policy and crack down on Castro. "There were tremendous expectations that something would happen in Cuba. Here was someone who was rough and tough," said Dennis K. Hays, former head of the State Department's Cuba desk. Yet nearly three years into Bush's term, Hays said, the disillusionment was powerful. The last straw for some Bush supporters was the July 2003 decision to repatriate a dozen Cubans intercepted after hijacking a Cuban government boat. The State Department negotiated a promise from Cuba to impose 10-year prison terms instead of executing them. Calling the negotiations "offensive and misguided," 13 Republican Florida legislators sent a letter to Bush -- with copies to Rove and Republican National Committee Chairman Ed Gillespie -- describing "great disappointment and outrage" over the lack of a comprehensive Cuba policy. "We fear," they wrote, "the historic and intense support from Cuban American voters for Republican federal candidates, including yourself, will be jeopardized." Bush's commission, composed solely of government officials, first met in December. Martinez soon resigned to run for the U.S. Senate in Florida, leaving Powell in charge. Given a deadline to file a report in six months -- and barely six months before the November elections -- the authors worked fast. Powell assigned Noriega to coordinate the effort. To run the crucial working group that would design plans to destabilize Castro, Noriega drafted his deputy, Daniel Fisk. Fisk was a fellow staff member to former senator Jesse Helms (R-N.C.), an ardent Castro opponent. The report's editor was Jose Cardenas, who worked for the Cuban American National Foundation when it dominated U.S. policy. The staff consulted principally with individuals and groups whose hard-line opinions were well advertised. When others later objected, one U.S. official argued that "trying to wade through all the different people who had an interest in Cuba was going to be very complicated and was not necessarily going to make the report any better." No issues were more sharply argued than the rules for remittances and travel to the island. The theory behind 40 years of U.S. sanctions is that economic hardship will squeeze Castro from power, or at least force change. But Reich, Noriega, Helms and others have long argued that prevailing restrictions were not strong enough to punish a government that profits enormously from travel dollars and money shipped to Cubans by relatives and friends abroad. The Rules As the president's commission did its work, some of Bush's most vocal supporters in Miami called for a nonnegotiable end to trips to Cuba. Others said exiles should not be permitted to return to the island until they had received U.S. citizenship. At the time, Cuban Americans were officially restricted to one trip per year, but exceptions were routine. Within the commission, one group argued that remittances -- then limited to $100 a month -- should be eliminated. Someone else proposed a 90-day moratorium. Among those seeking a firm line were Noriega and Diaz-Balart, who noted in an interview, "I've been on the record for cutting as much of the flow of currency to the regime as possible." Sources said members of the White House political staff pressed the mid-level State Department officials to push ever harder on Castro -- harder than even the veteran anti-Castro players had intended. They found themselves pushing back as they drafted their final recommendations. For a final review by Powell, Rice and other Cabinet-level appointees on the presidential commission, Noriega's team produced a strongly worded document. It called for a 50 percent reduction in remittances and a cut in travel by Cuban Americans to once every three years, with no exceptions for illness or death in the family. The travel rule would be adopted and approved by Bush, along with a cut from $164 to $50 in the amount Cuban Americans visiting relatives could spend per day. Also adopted was a prohibition on sending gift packages with such items as soap, deodorant, seeds and clothing. The remittance decision proved the most difficult, participants said, and it fell to Bush. As the pressure built, Reich and human rights activist Frank Calzon, one of Washington's most outspoken Castro opponents, urged decision makers not to go too far. Calzon's voice carried weight because no one could accuse him of being soft on Castro. Powell and Rice asked whether a cut in remittances would do more harm than good to Cubans and to U.S. policy. Bush decided in a session in the White House's Roosevelt Room that cutting the remittances would risk an accusation that he was needlessly preventing money from reaching Cuban families. When the policy was released May 6, the administration declared that only immediate relatives could receive money but the amounts would stay the same. "There was a clash. The guy who made the final decision on remittances was George W. Bush. The president said, 'No, I'm not going to hurt abuelita. That's not the purpose of this,' " said someone who was present, quoting Bush as using the Spanish diminutive for "grandmother." When the policy was announced, the outcry from angry Cuban Americans registered loudest. Diaz-Balart and others dismissed the complainers as an insignificant minority, but the opposition made headlines. "I get very offended with someone telling me how to engage with my family," said Ana Karim, 32, a Cuban American pastor in Richmond. "I don't want to go illegally, but if I need to go see my family because my uncle's not doing well or somebody's dying, I'll figure out a way to get there." Kerry made a gamble of his own after seeing that the rules governing family visits and remittances had gone so far. Although candidates typically race to see who can talk the toughest, he staked out a more liberal position. In a community that voted more than 4 to 1 for Bush in 2000, Democrats argued that Cuban American families and their Cuban relatives were being unfairly penalized. Vowing to organize a new voting bloc, leaders said enough Republican voters might stay home to tip the Florida race to Kerry. Confusion defined the implementation of the regulations, which were hurried into place June 30 without the usual comment period. It quickly became clear that the administration had not considered all ramifications. Countless Americans traveling in Cuba discovered they had lost permission to be there, while charter companies had lost permission to retrieve them. The U.S. administration granted a 30-day reprieve. Cuban Americans accustomed to sending gift packages objected after being told they could no longer ship certain goods. The State Department said it would relax the rules to allow the shipment of toiletries -- only to reverse course again. Hispanic and black representatives persuaded Powell to exempt from the new rules a program in Cuba for U.S. medical students. In a rebuke to Bush, the House voted 221 to 194 to block the administration from enforcing the restrictions on gift packages. Officials now say all the regulations will be reviewed after a comment period that ended Aug. 16. Reich, the man who started it all, was pleased that the U.S. government finally had a comprehensive strategy. So were Noriega and Fisk. All three told others that they anticipated the reaction. The benefits of the policy, they said, would justify the short-term pain. Rivera, the Florida legislator, was also pleased, even if the policy was not as rigorous as he had wanted. "It's no coincidence," he said, "that the three major changes in Cuba policy came in election years." From nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com Tue Aug 24 14:03:24 2004 From: nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com (nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 14:03:24 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [NYTr] The 9/11 Cell Phone Calls that Weren't Message-ID: <200408241803.i7OI3OK10268@olm.blythe-systems.com> Centre for Research on Globalisation - August 10, 2004 http://globalresearch.ca/articles/CHO408B.html More Holes in the Official Story: The 9/11 Cell Phone Calls by Michel Chossudovsky "We Have Some Planes" The 9/11 Commission's Report provides an almost visual description of the Arab hijackers. It depicts in minute detail events occurring inside the cabin of the four hijacked planes. In the absence of surviving passengers, this "corroborating evidence", was based on passengers' cell and air phone conversations with their loved ones. According to the Report, the cockpit voice recorder (CVR) was only recovered in the case of one of the flights (UAL 93). Focusing on the personal drama of the passengers, the Commission has built much of its narrative around the phone conversations. The Arabs are portrayed with their knives and box cutters, scheming in the name of Allah, to bring down the planes and turn them "into large guided missiles" (Report, Chapter 1, http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report_Ch1.pdf ). The Technology of Wireless Transmission The Report conveys the impression that cell phone ground-to-air communication from high altitude was of reasonably good quality, and that there was no major impediment or obstruction in wireless transmission. Some of the conversations were with onboard air phones, which contrary to the cell phones provide for good quality transmission. The report does not draw a clear demarcation between the two types of calls. More significantly, what this carefully drafted script, fails to mention is that, given the prevailing technology in September 2001, it was extremely difficult, if not impossible, to place a wireless cell call from an aircraft traveling at high speed above 8000 feet: "Wireless communications networks weren't designed for ground-to-air communication. Cellular experts privately admit that they're surprised the calls were able to be placed from the hijacked planes, and that they lasted as long as they did. They speculate that the only reason that the calls went through in the first place is that the aircraft were flying so close to the ground" ( http://www.elliott.org/technology/2001/cellpermit.htm ) Expert opinion within the wireless telecom industry casts serious doubt on "the findings" of the 9/11 Commission. According to Alexa Graf, a spokesman of AT&T, commenting in the immediate wake of the 9/11 attacks: "it was almost a fluke that the [9/11] calls reached their destinations... From high altitudes, the call quality is not very good, and most callers will experience drops. Although calls are not reliable, callers can pick up and hold calls for a little while below a certain altitude" ( http://wirelessreview.com/ar/wireless_final_contact/ ) New Wireless Technology While serious doubts regarding the cell calls were expressed in the immediate aftermath of 9/11, a new landmark in the wireless telecom industry has further contributed to upsetting the Commission's credibility. Within days of the release of the 9/11 Commission Report in July, American Airlines and Qualcomm, proudly announced the development of a new wireless technology --which will at some future date allow airline passengers using their cell phones to contact family and friends from a commercial aircraft (no doubt at a special rate aerial roaming charge) (see http://www.qualcomm.com/press/releases/2004/040715_aa_testflight.html ) "Travelers could be talking on their personal cellphones as early as 2006. Earlier this month [July 2004], American Airlines conducted a trial run on a modified aircraft that permitted cell phone calls." (WP, July 27, 2004) Aviation Week (07/20/04) described this new technology in an authoritative report published in July 2004: "Qualcomm and American Airlines are exploring [July 2004] ways for passengers to use commercial cell phones inflight for air-to-ground communication. In a recent 2-hr. proof-of-concept flight, representatives from government and the media used commercial Code Division Multiple Access (CDMA) third-generation cell phones to place and receive calls and text messages from friends on the ground. For the test flight from Dallas-Fort Worth, the aircraft was equipped with an antenna in the front and rear of the cabin to transmit cell phone calls to a small in-cabin CDMA cellular base station. This "pico cell" transmitted cell phone calls from the aircraft via a Globalstar satellite to the worldwide terrestrial phone network" Needless to say, neither the service, nor the "third generation" hardware, nor the "Picco cell" CDMA base station inside the cabin (which so to speak mimics a cell phone communication tower inside the plane) were available on the morning of September 11, 2001. The 911 Commission points to the clarity and detail of these telephone conversations. In substance, the Aviation Week report creates yet another embarrassing hitch in the official story. The untimely July American Airlines / Qualcomm announcement acted as a cold shower. Barely acknowledged in press reports, it confirms that the Bush administration had embroidered the cell phone narrative (similar to what they did with WMDs) and that the 9/11 Commission's account was either flawed or grossly exaggerated. Altitude and Cellphone Transmission According to industry experts, the crucial link in wireless cell phone transmission from an aircraft is altitude. Beyond a certain altitude which is usually reached within a few minutes after takeoff, cell phone calls are no longer possible. In other words, given the wireless technology available on September 11 2001, these cell calls could not have been placed from high altitude. The only way passengers could have got through to family and friends using their cell phones, is if the planes were flying below 8000 feet. Yet even at low altitude, below 8000 feet, cell phone communication is of poor quality. The crucial question: at what altitude were the planes traveling, when the calls were placed? While the information provided by the Commission is scanty, the Report's timeline does not suggest that the planes were consistently traveling at low altitude. In fact the Report confirms that a fair number of the cell phone calls were placed while the plane was traveling at altitudes above 8000 feet, which is considered as the cutoff altitude for cell phone transmission. Let us review the timeline of these calls in relation to the information provided by the Report on flight paths and altitude. United Airlines Flight 175 United Airlines Flight 175 departed for Los Angeles at 8:00: "It pushed back from its gate at 7:58 and departed Logan Airport at 8:14." The Report confirms that by 8:33, "it had reached its assigned cruising altitude of 31,000 feet." According to the Report, it maintained this cruising altitude until 8.51, when it "deviated from its assigned altitude": "The first operational evidence that something was abnormal on United 175 came at 8:47, when the aircraft changed beacon codes twice within a minute. At 8:51, the flight deviated from its assigned altitude, and a minute later New York air traffic controllers began repeatedly and unsuccessfully trying to contact it." And one minute later at 8.52, Lee Hanson receives a call from his son Peter. [Flight UAL 175] "At 8:52, in Easton, Connecticut, a man named Lee Hanson received a phone call from his son Peter, a passenger on United 175. His son told him: 'I think they've taken over the cockpit?An attendant has been stabbed? and someone else up front may have been killed. The plane is making strange moves. Call United Airlines?Tell them it's Flight 175, Boston to LA. Press reports confirm that Peter Hanson was using his cell (i.e it was not an air phone). Unless the plane had suddenly nose-dived, the plane was still at high altitude at 8.52. (Moreover, Hanson's call could have been initiated at least a minute prior to his father Lee Hanson picking up the phone.) Another call was received at 8.52 (one minute after it deviated from its assigned altitude of 31,000 feet). The Report does not say whether this is an air phone or a cell phone call: "Also at 8:52, a male flight attendant called a United office in San Francisco, reaching Marc Policastro. The flight attendant reported that the flight had been hijacked, both pilots had been killed, a flight attendant had been stabbed, and the hijackers were probably flying the plane. The call lasted about two minutes, after which Policastro and a colleague tried unsuccessfully to contact the flight." It is not clear whether this was a call to Policastro's cell phone or to the UAL switchboard. At 8:58, UAL 175 "took a heading toward New York City.": "At 8:59, Flight 175 passenger Brian David Sweeney tried to call his wife, Julie. He left a message on their home answering machine that the plane had been hijacked. He then called his mother, Louise Sweeney, told her the flight had been hijacked, and added that the passengers were thinking about storming the cockpit to take control of the plane away from the hijackers. At 9:00, Lee Hanson received a second call from his son Peter: It's getting bad, Dad?A stewardess was stabbed?They seem to have knives and Mace?They said they have a bomb?It's getting very bad on the plane?Passengers are throwing up and getting sick?The plane is making jerky movements?I don't think the pilot is flying the plane?I think we are going down?I think they intend to go to Chicago or someplace and fly into a building?Don't worry, Dad? If it happens, it'll be very fast?My God, my God. The call ended abruptly. Lee Hanson had heard a woman scream just before it cut off. He turned on a television, and in her home so did Louise Sweeney. Both then saw the second aircraft hit the World Trade Center.50 At 9:03:11, United Airlines Flight 175 struck the South Tower of the World Trade Center. All on board, along with an unknown number of people in the tower, were killed instantly." American Airlines Flight 77 American Airlines Flight 77 was scheduled to depart from Washington Dulles for Los Angeles at 8:10... "At 8:46, the flight reached its assigned cruising altitude of 35,000 feet." At 8:51, American 77 transmitted its last routine radio communication. The hijacking began between 8:51 and 8:54. As on American 11 and United 175, the hijackers used knives (reported by one passenger) and moved all the passengers (and possibly crew) to the rear of the aircraft (reported by one flight attendant and one passenger). Unlike the earlier flights, the Flight 77 hijackers were reported by a passenger to have box cutters. Finally, a passenger reported that an announcement had been made by the 'pilot' that the plane had been hijacked.... On flight AA 77, which allegedly crashed into the Pentagon, the transponder was turned off at 8:56am; the recorded altitude at the time the transponder was turned off is not mentioned. According to the Commission's Report, cell calls started 16 minutes later, at 9:12am, twenty minutes before it (allegedly) crashed into the Pentagon at 9.32am: " [at 9.12] Renee May called her mother, Nancy May, in Las Vegas. She said her flight was being hijacked by six individuals who had moved them to the rear of the plane." According to the Report, when the autopilot was disengaged at 9:29am, the aircraft was at 7,000 feet and some 38 miles west of the Pentagon. This happened two minutes before the crash. Most of the calls on Flight 77 were placed between 9.12am and 9.26am, prior to the disengagement of automatic piloting at 9.29am. The plane could indeed have been traveling at either a higher or a lower altitude to that reached at 9.29. Yet, at the same time there is no indication in the Report that the plane had been traveling below the 7000 feet level, which it reached at 9.29am. At some point between 9:16 and 9:26, Barbara Olson called her husband, Ted Olson, the solicitor general of the United States. [using an airphone] (Report p 7, see http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report_Ch1.pdf ) United Airlines Flight 93 UAL flight 93 was the only one of the four planes that, according to the official story, did not crash into a building. Flight 93 passengers, apparently: "alerted through phone calls, attempted to subdue the hijackers. and the hijackers crashed the plane [in Pennsylvania] to prevent the passengers gaining control." ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Airlines_flight_93 ). Another version of events, was that UAL 93 was shot down. According to the Commission's account: "the first 46 minutes of Flight 93's cross-country trip proceeded routinely. Radio communications from the plane were normal. Heading, speed, and altitude ran according to plan. At 9:24, Ballinger's warning to United 93 was received in the cockpit. Within two minutes, at 9:26, the pilot, Jason Dahl, responded with a note of puzzlement: 'Ed, confirm latest mssg plz?Jason.'70 The hijackers attacked at 9:28. While traveling 35,000 feet above eastern Ohio, United 93 suddenly dropped 700 feet. Eleven seconds into the descent, the FAA's air traffic control center in Cleveland received the first of two radio transmissions from the aircraft...." At least ten cell calls are reported to have taken place on flight 93. The Report confirms that passengers started placing calls with cell and air phones shortly after 9.32am, four minutes after the Report's confirmation of the plane's attitude of 35,000 feet. These cell calls started some 9 minutes before the Cleveland Center lost United 93's transponder signal (9.41) and more than 30 minutes before the crash in Pennsylvania (10.03). "At 9:41, Cleveland Center lost United 93's transponder signal. The controller located it on primary radar, matched its position with visual sightings from other aircraft, and tracked the flight as it turned east, then south.164" This suggests that the altitude was known to air traffic control up until the time when the transponder signal was lost by the Cleveland Center. (Radar and visual sightings provided information on its flight path from 9.41 to 10.03.) Moreover, there was no indication from the Report that the aircraft had swooped down to a lower level of altitude, apart from the 700 feet drop recorded at 9.28. from a cruising altitude of 35,000 feet: "At 9:32, a hijacker, probably Jarrah, made or attempted to make the following announcement to the passengers of Flight 93:'Ladies and Gentlemen: Here the captain, please sit down keep remaining sitting. We have a bomb on board. So, sit.' The flight data recorder (also recovered) indicates that Jarrah then instructed the plane's autopilot to turn the aircraft around and head east. The cockpit voice recorder data indicate that a woman, most likely a flight attendant, was being held captive in the cockpit. She struggled with one of the hijackers who killed or otherwise silenced her. Shortly thereafter, the passengers and flight crew began a series of calls from GTE airphones and cellular phones. These calls between family, friends, and colleagues took place until the end of the flight and provided those on the ground with firsthand accounts. They enabled the passengers to gain critical information, including the news that two aircraft had slammed into the World Trade Center.77...At least two callers from the flight reported that the hijackers knew that passengers were making calls but did not seem to care. The hijackers were wearing red bandanas, and they forced the passengers to the back of the aircraft.80 Callers reported that a passenger had been stabbed and that two people were lying on the floor of the cabin, injured or dead?possibly the captain and first officer. One caller reported that a flight attendant had been killed.81 One of the callers from United 93 also reported that he thought the hijackers might possess a gun. But none of the other callers reported the presence of a firearm. One recipient of a call from the aircraft recounted specifically asking her caller whether the hijackers had guns. The passenger replied that he did not see one. No evidence of firearms or of their identifiable remains was found at the aircraft's crash site, and the cockpit voice recorder gives no indication of a gun being fired or mentioned at any time. We believe that if the hijackers had possessed a gun, they would have used it in the flight's last minutes as the passengers fought back.82 Passengers on three flights reported the hijackers' claim of having a bomb. The FBI told us they found no trace of explosives at the crash sites. One of the passengers who mentioned a bomb expressed his belief that it was not real. Lacking any evidence that the hijackers attempted to smuggle such illegal items past the security screening checkpoints, we believe the bombs were probably fake. During at least five of the passengers' phone calls, information was shared about the attacks that had occurred earlier that morning at the World Trade Center. Five calls described the intent of passengers and surviving crew members to revolt against the hijackers. According to one call, they voted on whether to rush the terrorists in an attempt to retake the plane. They decided, and acted. At 9:57, the passenger assault began. Several passengers had terminated phone calls with loved ones in order to join the revolt. One of the callers ended her message as follows: 'Everyone's running up to first class. I've got to go. Bye.' The cockpit voice recorder captured the sounds of the passenger assault muffled by the intervening cockpit door. Some family members who listened to the recording report that they can hear the voice of a loved one among the din. We cannot identify whose voices can be heard. But the assault was sustained. In response, Jarrah immediately began to roll the airplane to the left and right, attempting to knock the passengers off balance. At 9:58:57, Jarrah told another hijacker in the cockpit to block the door. Jarrah continued to roll the airplane sharply left and right, but the assault continued. At 9:59, Jarrah changed tactics and pitched the nose of the airplane up and down to disrupt the assault. The recorder captured the sounds of loud thumps, crashes, shouts, and breaking glasses and plates. At 10:00:03, Jarrah stabilized the airplane. Five seconds later, Jarrah asked, 'Is that it? Shall we finish it off?' A hijacker responded, 'No. Not yet. When they all come, we finish it off.' The sounds of fighting continued outside the cockpit. Again, Jarrah pitched the nose of the aircraft up and down.At 10:00:26, a passenger in the background said, 'In the cockpit. If we don't we'll die!' Sixteen seconds later, a passenger yelled,'Roll it!' Jarrah stopped the violent maneuvers at about 10:01:00 and said, 'Allah is the greatest! Allah is the greatest!' He then asked another hijacker in the cockpit,' Is that it? I mean, shall we put it down?' to which the other replied, 'Yes, put it in it, and pull it down.' The passengers continued their assault and at 10:02:23, a hijacker said, 'Pull it down! Pull it down!' The hijackers remained at the controls but must have judged that the passengers were only seconds from overcoming them. The airplane headed down; the control wheel was turned hard to the right. The airplane rolled onto its back, and one of the hijackers began shouting 'Allah is the greatest. Allah is the greatest. 'With the sounds of the passenger counterattack continuing, the aircraft plowed into an empty field in Shanksville, Pennsylvania, at 580 miles per hour, about 20 minutes' flying time from Washington D.C. Jarrah's objective was to crash his airliner into symbols of the American Republic, the Capitol or the White House. He was defeated by the alerted, unarmed passengers of United" The Mysterious Call of Edward Felt from UAL 93 Earlier coverage of the fate of UAL 93 was based in part on a reported cell call from a passenger named Edward Felt, who managed to reach an emergency official in Pennsylvania. How he got the emergency supervisor's number and managed to reach him remains unclear. The call was apparently received at 9.58 am, eight minutes before the reported time of the crash at 10.06 am in Pennsylvania: "Local emergency officials said they received a cell phone call at 9.58 am from a man who said he was a passenger aboard the flight. The man said he had locked himself in the bathroom and told emergency dispatchers that the plane had been hijacked. "We are being hijacked! We are being hijacked!" he was quoted as saying. A California man identified as Tom Burnett reportedly called his wife and told her that somebody on the plane had been stabbed. "We're all going to die, but three of us are going to do something," he told her. "I love you honey." The alleged call by Edward Felt from the toilet of the aircraft of UAL 93 was answered by Glenn Cramer, the emergency supervisor in Pennsylvania who took the call. It is worth noting that Glenn Cramer was subsequently gagged by the FBI." (See Robert Wallace`s incisive analysis published in Sept 2002 by the Daily Mirror, ( http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/WAL403A.html ). Ironically, this high profile cell call by Ed Felt, which would have provided crucial evidence to the 9/11 Commission was, for some reason, not mentioned in the Report. American Airlines Flight 11 Flight 11 took off at 7:59. Just before 8:14. The Report outlines an airphone conversation of flight attendant Betty Ong and much of the narrative hinges upon this airphone conversation There are no clear-cut reports on the use of cell phones on Flight AA11. According to the Report, American 11 crashed into the North Tower of the World Trade Center at 8.46. Concluding Remarks A large part of the description, regarding the 19 hijackers relies on cell phone conversations with family and friends. While a few of these calls (placed at low altitude) could have got through, the wireless technology was not available. On this issue, expert opinion within the wireless telecom industry is unequivocal. In other words, at least part of the Commission's script in Chapter 1 on the cell phone conversations, is fabricated. According to the American Airline / Qualcomm announcement, the technology for cell phone transmission at high altitude will only be available aboard commercial aircraft in 2006. This is an inescapable fact. In the eyes of public opinion, the cell phone conversations on the Arab hijackers is needed to sustain the illusion that America is under attack. The "war on terrorism" underlying the National Security doctrine relies on real time "evidence" concerning the Arab hijackers. The latter personify, so to speak, this illusive "outside enemy" (Al Qaeda), which is threatening the homeland. Embodied into the Commission's "script" of 911, the narrative of what happened on the plane with the Arab hijackers is therefore crucial. It is an integral part of the Administration's disinformation and propaganda program. It constitutes a justification for the anti-terror legislation under the Patriot acts and the waging of America's pre-emptive wars against Afghanistan and Iraq. (c) Copyright MICHEL CHOSSUDOVSKY 2004 From nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com Tue Aug 24 14:20:47 2004 From: nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com (nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 14:20:47 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [NYTr] Chavez Victory: A Rout for the Rich Message-ID: <200408241820.i7OIKln10818@olm.blythe-systems.com> Socialist Worker http://www.socialistworker.co.uk/article.php4?article_id=1881 Chavez victory is a rout for rich by Mike Gonzalez PRESIDENT HUGO Chavez has won a resounding victory in a referendum designed to topple him and the government of Venezuela-a government hated by the rich and powerful in both Caracas and Washington. After the threats and ultimatums, nearly five million Venezuelans, just over 58 percent, backed Chavez in the referendum of 15 August. In 2000, 3.8 million first elected Chavez president. In 2004, that number increased by over a million. The referendum was the latest attempt by the right to unseat Chavez. An attempted coup in April 2002 failed when the masses took to the streets in support of the "Bolivarian Revolution". Eight months later oil executives and business people launched a "bosses' strike", supported by the big media moguls (the so called Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse). The "strike" failed. The next stage was the collection of two million signatures to call a referendum. Under the new Venezuelan constitution framed by Chavez himself, a president can be removed from office when half his term has run. The condition is that the vote for his resignation has to be a majority and greater than the number of votes cast for him in the original presidential elections. Despite all the efforts of the oligarchs who control much of the Venezuelan media, and despite the entreaties of CNN, the right failed miserably to win a majority. Now, of course, the right wing is crying "fraud". But former US president Jimmy Carter and the other international observers don't agree. They have confirmed the results, and the turnout of over 90 percent. (It's worth comparing that with the 40 percent who voted for Bush or Gore in 2000.) Their deep hatred of Chavez comes from the fact that he provided free education for a million of the country's poorest children-many from the shanty towns-and attempted to tackle illiteracy. He also began providing healthcare and university education for the poor-modest steps, but enough to make the right wing seek to unseat Chavez by any means necessary. Of course, the right will not give up. For years they enjoyed the gravy train of oil profits at the expense of Venezuela's poor. For years these same people ran political life through graft and corruption. On the other hand, their US government friends have been making some unexpected noises recently, having supported the enemies of Chavez for several years. It is oil that is making them change their mind. Venezuela's oil reserves are only slightly less than Iraq's. It exports 1.4 million barrels a day to the United States. In recent weeks, as the Iraqi resistance has successfully and repeatedly stopped the flow of oil and as tensions grew in Venezuela, the price of oil kept on rising. The current $46 a barrel is the highest it has reached in over 20 years. Whatever Bush's plans might have been, the reality is that Iraq is a quagmire where the US military will be stuck for a long time to come. The US economy is far from healthy, and the November elections are likely to be dominated by a growing disillusionment with Iraq. The last thing Bush needs now is rising petrol prices. The referendum has shown beyond any doubt that the vast majority of Venezuelans want oil profits to be used to improve their lives-to finance health and education programmes, and transform the miserable housing so many of them live in. Their support for Chavez is based on the promise that his "Bolivarian Revolution" will bring those changes, and in turn change the face of Venezuelan society. Up until now the Venezuelan national oil company was virtually a state within a state. Its managers are as rich as any oil executive, and growing richer as they make deals with multinational corporations. This vote was much more than simply an expression of support for Hugo Chavez himself. His revolution has up until now produced a lot of promises but only limited changes. And, after the vote became known, Chavez's first declarations offered open doors to the opposition. The US government for its part is suggesting that it will have to learn to work with this oil-rich country. And Chavez himself is very keen to build alliances and coalitions with other Latin American states, to lobby and negotiate with the international financial agencies. For those on the ground who mobilised to win, the referendum victory is a major step forward. But it should also demonstrate that in the end it is what those masses do that will shape the future. After the failed coup of 2002 Chavez thanked the people and asked them to return home while he continued making the revolution. This time they should build on what they gained on 15 August and drive the "revolution" from below. Their allies are in the movements in Bolivia, Ecuador and the popular assemblies of Argentina. Their victories against imperialism were won by mass struggles and mobilisations. That will be true of Venezuela too, though this referendum victory should give a huge boost of confidence. For now the right are on the run-they should be forced to keep on running. From nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com Tue Aug 24 14:22:55 2004 From: nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com (nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 14:22:55 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [NYTr] Ramsey Clark's Indictment of George W. Bush Message-ID: <200408241822.i7OIMtH10913@olm.blythe-systems.com> International Action Center - August 23, 2004 http://www.PeopleJudgeBush.org Below is the indictment written by former U.S. Attorney General Ramsey Clark. Join us on Thursday, August, 26, to hear the reading of the indictment and presentation of evidence from expert witnesses, eyewitnesses, GI resisters, and representatives from international sessions of the World Tribunal on Iraq. Thursday, August 26 3-9 pm Marin Luther King Auditorium 65th & Amsterdam INDICTMENT This Criminal Indictment Charges George W. Bush, Richard B. Cheney, Colin Powell, Donald H. Rumsfeld, John D. Ashcroft, Tommy Franks, and his successors as Commander of U.S. Forces in Iraq, George J. Tenet, L. Paul Bremer, III, John Negroponte and others to be named with Crimes Against Peace, War Crimes, Crimes Against Humanity and other criminal acts in violation of the Charter of the United Nations, International Law, the Constitution of the United States and Laws Made in Pursuance Thereof. The Crimes Charged are: 1. Waging a War of Aggression against the sovereignty of Iraq and the rights of its people, resulting in tens of thousands of deaths and injuries among the people of Iraq, most civilians, from military violence and thousands of U.S. G.Is. War of aggression is defined as the Supreme international crime in the Nuremberg Judgment. 2. Authorizing, encouraging and condoning the use of excessive force, in terrorem, tactics called Shock and Awe, targeting defenseless civilians and, civilians facilities and indiscriminate bombing and assaults. 3. Authorizing and ordering the use of illegal weapons including super bombs, cluster bombs, depleted uranium enhanced bombs, missiles, shells and bullets and threatening the use of nuclear weapons. 4. Authorizing, ordering, concealing and condoning assassinations, summary executions, murders, disappearances, kidnappings and torture. 5. Authorizing, financing, utilizing and condoning illegal violence, use of force and torture by highly paid paramilitary civilian forces operating anonymously and not accountable to U.S. supervisors for their acts, who kill, coerce, control and contain the Iraqi population. 6. Authorizing, ordering and condoning the systematic destruction of economic, social, cultural, medical, educational, governmental and diplomatic resources, properties and facilities throughout Iraq. 7. Authorizing, ordering and condoning acts designed to divide the Iraqi population to cause internal conflict and violence among major segments of the society, ethnic, religious, political and economic, in order to weaken and exhaust the population and bring all segments under the control of a new surrogate government submissive to U.S. command. . 8. Authorizing, imposing and maintaining a violent, criminal military occupation over Iraq which kills defenseless Iraqis daily and fans the flames of anti-U.S. anger worldwide. 9. Defying and incapacitating the peace making capacity and role of the United Nations by unilateral actions to undermine its potential effectiveness while continuing to coerce and use the U.N. to pursue U.S. policies in Iraq and elsewhere, and coercing and enticing other nations to support U.S. policies and actions in violation of international law in the U.N. Security Council and against Iraq and other nations. 10. Engaging in systematic acts to undermine and destroy international laws and treaties designed to prevent and control war, weapons of mass and indiscriminate destruction; limit participants in military service; protect the environment; prevent the economic exploitation of poor nations; and engaging systematic acts to obstruct justice by the evisceration of the International Criminal Court and manipulation or defiance of other international judicial and regulatory bodies that might seek to hold the U.S. accountable to international law and the will of the majority of the people of the international community. 11. Manifesting their continuing commitment to world domination by ordering, directing and condoning violent regime change in Haiti in March 2004 to replace the independent, elected democratic President Jean Bertrand Aristide with a U.S. selected and controlled neo Duvalierist surrogate causing growing violence, hundreds of deaths and further impoverishment of the Haitian people. 12. Threatening the sovereignty and independence of nations, and acting to change regimes that refuse to yield to U.S. demands for economic subservience and political control for U.S. corporate and government interests, including most prominently Cuba, Iran, a divided Korea, the Philippines, Syria, Sudan and Venezuela; and supporting Israels illegal occupation, brutalization and expanding settlement of Palestine in defiance of the United Nations, international law and world opinion; all of which adds to international anger and violence against the United States and its citizens. 13. Destroying the sovereignty, right to self determination, cultural integrity and control of its own resources of Iraq and its peoples by imposing an interim government headed by a long time C.I.A. asset who directed violence against Iraqi civilians for the U.S. in the 1990's; and manipulating procedures for the imposition of a new Constitution drafted by and installation of a new government chosen through controlled electoral processes and subservient to the will and command of the U.S. government. 14. Usurping the war powers delegated in the constitution to the Congress to pursue wars of aggression and other unlawful military actions; and attempting to pack the federal courts with judges committed to ideologies in conflict with the Constitution of the United States to achieve judicial decisions supporting those ideologies. 15. Systematically weakening fundamental human rights globally and the Bill of Rights of the U.S. Constitution within the U.S. enabling U.S. forces to unlawfully seize individuals in 100 countries, including U.S. citizens and arrest thousands of aliens in the U.S. and hold them, transport them, torture many, deny all access to courts to determine the legality of such seizures, arrest and treatment. 16. Making Guantanamo [U.S. Naval Base at Guantanamo Bay?] a symbol of U.S. power to imprison and abuse persons on the soil of a foreign sovereign nation, Cuba, against its will and to publicize U.S. contempt for human rights by displaying its power to arbitrarily seize, confine and abuse persons without revealing who they are, any charges against them, or what their future may be, placing U.S. power above all laws, international and national, and beyond the reach of all courts, including those of the U.S. 17. Giving economic preferences to favored corporations and business interests to extract enormous profits in both war and peace sectors of the economy from impoverished Iraq and U.S. taxpayers. 18. Systematically utilizing, controlling, directing, manipulating, misinforming and restricting press and media coverage and deliberately presenting false and misleading reports to obtain support for U.S. military and political and actions; and to deprive the American people of knowledge essential to develop an informed opinion , which is essential to democratic processes and elections. 19. All for the purpose of dominating, controlling, and exploiting Iraq and other non compliant nations by military force and economic coercion. In addition to full accountability for the foregoing crimes and full reparation to victims, the offenses constitute high Crimes and Misdemeanors under Article II, Section 4 of the Constitution of the United States requiring the removal from office of all the participating civil Officers of the United States upon impeachment for and conviction for their acts. Dated: August 5, 2004 Ramsey Clark The International Action Center http://www.iacenter.org From nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com Tue Aug 24 14:24:35 2004 From: nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com (nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 14:24:35 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [NYTr] El Salvador: Romero's killers facing US civil suit Message-ID: <200408241824.i7OIOZG10983@olm.blythe-systems.com> sent by Sanjoy Mahajan (activ-l) Because the US was involved in training and harbouring Romero's killers, the US press is unlikely to cover this case. The only articles I found about it on Google News: 1. In the Independent (the article below). 2. In 'The Tidings', the newspaper of the Catholic archdiocese of Los Angeles . Romero was a Catholic archbishop and the trial is taking place in Fresno (not too far from Los Angeles). 3. In the Modesto Bee (Aug 19), not a wide-circulation newspaper and again from the area. The article below says that Saravia, one of those accused of Romero's murder, had "gone to ground" before papers could be served on him. I wonder how that happened. Maybe he vanished with help from other pieces of the US government (which helped Gen. Hector Gramajo flee to Guatemala in similar circumstances). -Sanjoy `A society of sheep must in time beget a government of wolves.' --Bertrand de Jouvenal The Independent - August 24, 2004 http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americas/story.jsp?story=554530 The archbishop, the death squad and the 24-year wait for justice It was the crime that broke El Salvador's heart. A good man was murdered in broad daylight, yet no attempt was made to bring his assassin to justice. Until today. by Andrew Buncombe It is a warm Monday evening in spring and in the Chapel of Divine Providence in El Salvador's capital city, San Salvador, a small, bespectacled priest is performing Mass. Having completed his sermon, the priest is standing close to the altar, blessing the wafer discs that represent the body of Christ. >From the rear of the church there is the sound of a single shot. The priest crumples to the floor of the chapel fatally wounded, blood seeping from a small hole in his chest and soaking his vestments. Outside the small chapel, a bearded man armed with a .223 high-velocity weapon, is seen in the back seat of a red, four-door Volkswagen which then drives away. The priest was Oscar Arnulfo Romero, the Archbishop of El Salvador and an outspoken champion of the poor, and he was assassinated by right-wing paramilitaries, on 24 March 1980. Though the identity of the assassin remains unknown, many of the alleged conspirators have long been identified and live on untouched, a sore that has continued to fester within Salvadoran society. Now, more than 24 years later, a court in California will today hear evidence against one of those accused of orchestrating the murder of Archbishop Romero. That man, Alvaro Rafael Saravia, the right-hand man to the leader of El Salvador's death squads of the 1980s, has lived in the US for the past 19 years but has not been seen in public since papers were filed against him last September. The hearing will be held in his absence. The civil action is designed to establish Mr Saravia's alleged complicity in the killings and seek damages against him. Archbishop Romero often spoke critically of the US, which supported the right-wing government of El Salvador and those of other Latin American countries in their so-called "dirty wars", training and funding paramilitary forces. Among those trained by the US was Mr Saravia's boss, the late Major Roberto D'Aubuisson who is said to have ordered the archbishop's assassination. He studied at the notorious School of the Americas, a US military college in Fort Benning, Georgia, which for decades taught counter-insurgency to more than 60,000 cadets from Latin American regimes, It was renamed in 2001 after a series of scandals, including the discovery there of stacks of torture manuals. Esther Chavez worked with the archbishop in El Salvador and fled to New Jersey when she was threatened by death squads after his assassination. She said: "[This trial] is very important not only at a personal level, but for Salvadorans. Even though it took 24 years, justice is prevailing." Ms Chavez is among witnesses who will give evidence to the hearing in Fresno, held after a lawsuit was brought by the San Francisco-based Centre for Justice and Accountability (CJA). The group says it will introduce new evidence including testimony from an as-yet-unidentified witness who will attest to Mr Saravia's involvement in the killing. Matt Eisenbrant, the CJA's litigation director, who is serving as co-counsel, said: "The US should not be a safe haven for those responsible for this heinous crime. This is the first trial [in regard to] the assassination. For a long time it was too dangerous to do anything in El Salvador, and since 1993 there has been an amnesty law which means you cannot do anything there. Then we found Saravia was living in California." The death of Archbishop Romero, 63, was a seminal event, not only for El Salvador but for international followers of his liberation theology, a radical interpretation of the Gospels which tried to reconcile Marxist philosophy and Christian social thinking. At his funeral, more than 40 people were shot dead by government soldiers firing on the huge crowds of poor people paying homage to their champion outside the city's cathedral. A quarter of a century on, even in death, Archbishop Romero remains a powerful and influential figure. Thousands of pilgrims travel to San Salvador to visit his tomb, and the small, three-room house in which he lived, next to the chapel on the grounds of a hospital. He has also been nominated for recognition by the Vatican as a saint. The present Archbishop of El Salvador, Fernando Saenz Lacalle, a member of the right-wing Catholic sect Opus Dei and politically very different from Archbishop Romero, has said this trial could help justify the move. In a letter obtained by The Independent, he wrote: "I consider it a positive development that the murder of my illustrious predecessor is being investigated. More information about the author or authors of this sacrilegious murder and about the circumstances under which it was carried out will provide valuable information to the movement for his beatification." An investigation by a UN Truth Commission in 1992 concluded that the murder had been ordered by Mr D'Aubuisson, who led a network of death squads. It also concluded that Mr Saravia and others were "actively involved in planning and carrying out the assassination". The UN investigators found Mr Saravia had ordered his driver, Amado Garay, to drive the gunman to the chapel. Mr Garay, who fled El Salvador shortly after the killing, saw the shooting. He said that three days later, he had driven Mr Saravia to a house, and his chief had told Mr D'Aubuisson there: "We've already done what we planned about killing Monsignor Arnulfo Romero." An investigation into the killing - based partly on a diary found on Mr Saravia that contained notes about the conspiracy to kill Archbishop Romero - was launched by Judge Ramirez Amaya until he too was forced to flee the country after death threats. He will also appear as a witness this week. Records show Mr Saravia has been living in the US since 1985, first in Florida, then in Modesto, California. He was detained in 1987 by the US authorities after Salvadoran prosecutors sought his extradition. That extradition was later withdrawn by the Supreme Court of El Salvador in a decision that the truth commission said was "dubious and politically motivated". He was released from US custody in 1988. Mr Saravia has never been charged over the murder of the archbishop. Mr D'Aubuisson, who went on to form the National Republican Alliance, considered to be the political arm of the death squads, was later accused of Archbishop Romero's killing but was not charged. He died in 1992, still denying guilt. Lawyers are bringing the action under the 1991 Torture Victim Protection Act which allows suits to be brought against foreign nationals accused of summary killings and torture. They said they delivered legal papers to Mr Saravia's address but he had "gone to ground". Mr Eisenbrant said he hoped the civil action could lead to either the US Justice or Immigration departments bringing charges. It is understood Mr Saravia entered the US on a six-month tourist visa. "This lawsuit has unquestionably disrupted Saravia's life," he said. "And it ensures he cannot live openly in the US for fear his victims could seize his assets and he could be arrested and prosecuted for alleged immigration violations." Nico van Aelstyn, a partner with the law firm Heller, Ehrman, White and McAuliffe, who is helping to bring the case, said: "The assassination of Archbishop Romero was one of the most outrageous single crimes of the last quarter of the 20th century. Given that one of the [suspects] has lived in the US for [at least] 17 years, we Americans have an obligation to bring him to justice. We hope this lawsuit will encourage additional witnesses to come forward with evidence that will enable the courts to bring to justice all those responsible for the crime." Archbishop Romero had been leading the struggle for human rights in El Salvador when the recently imposed junta, headed by Jose Napoleon Duarte Fuentes, of the Partido Democrata Cristiano (Christian Democratic Party, PDC) was mounting a bloody counter-insurgency campaign, nominally against the revolutionary forces of the FMLN, but essentially against all political dissidents. From that time to 1992, more than 75,000 civilians were killed by the military and paramilitary death squads closely linked to the troops. Archbishop Romero had been outspoken against such terror. A month before his death he wrote to then US President Jimmy Carter, asking him to suspend financial aid for the country. Mr Carter, who sent millions in aid and riot equipment to the Salvadoran military and dispatched US trainers to help them, suspended support months later, but only after paramilitaries murdered four nuns. Robert White, the former US ambassador to El Salvador, had heard Archbishop Romero preach the day before his death. Then the priest appealed directly to the soldiers involved in the killings. "Brothers, you came from your own people," he told them. "You are killing your own brothers. The Church cannot remain silent before such an abomination. In the name of God, I implore you, I beg you, I command you, 'Stop the killing'." Mr White said last week: "I really worried about him and his forthrightness. There were limits to how far you could go. I would have preferred that he would have been more prudent." The lawsuit in California has been filed on behalf of Archbishop Romero's surviving family; two brothers, Tiberio, 77, and Santos, 74, the last of the archbishop's six brothers and sisters. Both have travelled to California from El Salvador. "We try to give testimony to our brother's life and live our lives the best we can, with humility and honesty," Tiberio told The Tidings, the weekly paper of the archdiocese of Los Angeles. Marie Dennis, one of the authors of Oscar Romero: Reflections on His Life and Writings, said she believed the hearing in California would remind people of his role as a champion of the poor. "I think he represented just the best there is," she said. "He actually started out conservative. It took a while to see the way in which the political powers and economic powers were creating a [situation] that was exploiting the people. As soon as he saw how that power was perpetuated he became very clear." Archbishop Romero often talked of sacrifice. In his final sermon on that Monday evening, moments before the gunman's bullet struck, he had reminded the two dozen or so gathered to celebrate Mass, of Christ's parable of wheat. "Those who surrender to the service of the poor through love of Christ, will live like the grains of wheat that dies," he said. "It only apparently dies. If it were not to die, it would remain a solitary grain. The harvest comes because of the grain that dies ... We know that every effort to improve society, above all, when society is so full of injustice and sin, is an effort that God blesses, that God wants, that God demands of us." From nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com Tue Aug 24 14:37:56 2004 From: nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com (nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 14:37:56 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [NYTr] Forest Conservation in Nicaragua - Nov, 2004 Message-ID: <200408241837.i7OIbu411510@olm.blythe-systems.com> sent by Nicaragua Network - August 24, 2004 The Nicaragua Network has received this announcement about a volunteer/study opportunity in Nicaragua this Fall from Dr. Jeffrey McCrary. Reply to: eco-nic at guegue.com.ni "Forest Conservation in Nicaragua" Service and Learning Course Sponsored by the Gaia Association of Nicaragua November 20-29, 2004 How tropical forests are used and how one can be more "forest-friendly" is the subject of this service and learning course sponsored by a Nicaraguan organization, the Gaia Association, during the period November 20-29, 2004. Students will plant trees, meet with local community leaders, conservation professionals, and forest users, and discuss forest conservation issues in a variety of forums. Protected area management will be the focus and students will visit three protected areas in the course. The course is led by Dr. Jeffrey McCrary, a specialist in natural resource management with experience throughout Latin America. The cost, including all meals, lodging and transportation from Managua, is $550 per person. For registration or more information, write eco-nic at guegue.com.ni, or call the Gaia Association at 011-505-882-3992. BACKGROUND: Most people remember Nicaragua for its painfully colorful history conflicts and violence. Peace has arrived, but not prosperity! A little-recognized dimension of the new peace in Nicaragua is its rapid loss of natural resource base through poorly managed utilization. The plague of deforestation has arrived in a big way in Nicaragua. For instance, today Nicaragua has approximately 700,000 acres of land deforested for cattle use but without a single cow to be found. Traditional and sustainable forest uses have been left by the wayside in a wave of social change throughout the country. The traditional agriculture frontier was described well by the English engineer Thomas Belt in the 19th century as it crept across Nicaragua. Forests were cut and planted with corn and beans by frontiersmen, who turned over these plots to cattle or abandoned them entirely upon soil fatigue within a few years, to march forward with another cycle of deforestation. The agricultural frontier still exists in Nicaragua, but the dynamics of deforestation are much richer and more complex today. In the highly populated western region of Nicaragua, where most of its people live, remnant forests exist in patches, holding captive populations of animals and plants which may die out due to the pressures on them for fuelwood, timber, hunting and other land uses. Nature reserves and other protected areas are not exempt from unsustainable uses, and the forests and wildlife in some of them are vanishing before our eyes. The environment with its forests, rivers and lakes, is often described by scholars and activists as pitted against development. Politicians and aid workers often defend development policies in Nicaragua which later result in exacerbated effects of weather and climate events, sending the country downward in a spiral of emergency aid and impoverishment due to hampered food security. To gain a better understanding of these problems, sign up for this opportunity to learn and at the same time make a contribution by planting trees. From nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com Tue Aug 24 14:38:38 2004 From: nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com (nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 14:38:38 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [NYTr] Nicaragua Network Hotline - August 23, 2004 Message-ID: <200408241838.i7OIccx11561@olm.blythe-systems.com> Nicaragua Network Hotline August 23, 2004 Topics included in this hotline are: Literacy Veterans Kick off Commemorative Year, Calls for National Dialogue as Fiallos Jailed, Medicines Set to Rise by 15%, Gold Miners Poisoning River, Wrecking Environment, and, Nicaraguans "Dying Like Dogs" in Costa Rica for Lack of Medical Care. TOPIC 1: Literacy Veterans Kick off Commemorative Year In a moving tribute to the thousands of volunteers who brought the beginnings of literacy to over half a million Nicaraguans in the early days of the revolution, representatives of the original "band of compas" lit a torch at the tomb of Carlos Fonseca in the heart of old Managua, to recall how German Pomares had launched the original literacy campaign in the mountains quoting Fonseca's immortal dictum, "Teach our campesino brothers to use guns, but also teach them to read." The renewed flame was transferred to a succession of Coleman lanterns in remembrance of the "irresistible will of the people to learn." "In those days, there was no slackening of effort as the light faded," he said. Mauricio Polanco, himself a lifelong teacher said, "These lamps were shining all over Nicaragua as the volunteers went looking for people to teach and as the windows of the improvised schoolrooms glowed against the surrounding darkness." Despite all the devastation and diversion of resources caused by the contra war, the campaign was extremely successful. By 1990, when the Revolution lost political power to the resurgent conservative forces within Nicaragua, more than three quarters of the population had become literate. However, according to many speakers at the event (which concluded with nearly one hundred vehicles setting out in caravan for Palacaguina in the extreme north of the country to declare it "illiteracy-free"), the successes of that era have been seriously eroded during the intervening years of Liberal Party governments. Orlando Pineda, who was in the van of the first campaign, joined Tom?s Borge, deputy leader of the FSLN, in condemning the fact that, while during the revolutionary years the level of complete illiteracy had been reduced to just over 10%, "in these days of enlightenment and 'free trade' progress" that figure was again hovering around 40%. FSLN General Secretary, Daniel Ortega, hailed Pineda's organization, the Association for the Popular Education for Adults as the vanguard of the first great battle against illiteracy; while Pineda himself, referring to his trademark straw hat, "which I always wear as a reminder of my vow to bring literacy to every Nicaraguan," declared that he would continue to honor his father through education for as long as he lived. In a moving address, he told how his father had fought all his working life to obtain the right for his fellow-miners to "at least eat their meals above ground and in the fresh air," and how, as he lay dying, he had placed his miner's helmet on his young son's head, calling on him to carry on his education work for his people. In one of the most powerful and encouraging presentations, the Venezuelan Ambassador to Nicaragua, Juan Gomez, described how the Chavez government had been inspired by Nicaragua's example, and how, on July 10, 2003, three thousand Venezuelan literacy volunteers had begun their formation. "One year later," he declared proudly, "the results of their efforts are already manifest. We now have more than one million Venezuelans who never before held a book or used a pencil, now able to read and write." He went on to describe how the campaign was now entering its second phase, in which "free education will become a right for all impoverished Venezuelans as we open more than 3000 new schools which, besides offering education, will also make sure that students receive two good meals each day." Speaking for the organizers of the caravan, Ajax Delgado called on all present to participate in "receiving anew the flame from Venezuela. We must begin the second phase of the campaign ourselves, here in Nicaragua," he concluded. "Unless we do so, the number of people who are illiterate here will soon pass the one million mark." TOPIC 2: Calls for National Dialogue as Fiallos Jailed Alejandro Fiallos was seen by many as Arnoldo Alem?n's anointed heir in the Constitutional Liberal Party (PLC) before he moved his loyalty to President Enrique Bola?os, running for Mayor of Managua on Bola?os? new Alliance for the Republic ticket. Abruptly, last week he was suddenly jailed on corruption charges. Fiallos immediately cried foul. "It's quite obvious why they're doing this," he declared. "They are mortally afraid of my candidacy." His reaction was predictable, if perhaps somewhat fanciful, given the drubbing he suffered when he ran against the FSLN's Herty Lewites in the last election. Lewites? performance in office is widely seen as giving the advantage in November?s municipal election to FSLN candidate Dionysio Marenco. In any case, to date, the Bola?os Alliance has gained very little national attention or credibility. One of the objectives of the Ortega-Aleman pact was to ensure that only the PLC and FSLN would be electorally competitive. Cynicism with regard to the Fiallos arrest does not seem entirely misplaced as two PLC judges, Ivan Escobar and Silvio Calderon, observed that, "political prisoners, such as Arnoldo Alem?n and now Alejandro Fiallos, should be released before any national dialogue can take place." Their remarks came in the context of a growing chorus of calls from a range of prominent figures demanding that Nicaraguan government and other leaders should engage in a dialogue to obviate the "crisis of institutionality" which continues to beset the country even as the Bola?os "New Era" enters its latter years. Despite the Machiavellian intricacies of Nicaraguan political life, such people are saying, the current situation is so bad that, not only will society simply break apart like a rotten fruit, but the country will be left without any significant external financial support as potential investors shy away from such a cauldron of uncertainty. While dragging out the "political prisoner" issue seems like yet another increasingly desperate attempt to rescue Alem?n, whose once all-dominant figure and presence seems daily more insubstantial, the reality of the institutional and investment crisis is indisputable, with even the Papal Nuncio Jean Paul Gobel warning that, "while the Executive and Judiciary continue to refuse to resolve their differences, it is the ordinary Nicaraguans in the street and in the countryside who are suffering and will suffer the consequences of instability." TOPIC 3: Medicines Set to Rise by 15% From the end of this month, most commonly prescribed medicines will suffer a steep rise in their price as national drug manufacturing and distribution companies claimed they had to make up for the constant and continuing devaluation of the Nicaraguan c?rdoba against the US dollar. Rarpe, one of the largest national laboratories, began the trend by announcing it would begin "adjusting its prices upwards" from the beginning of September. Pharmacy owners were sure that the move would be followed by all the other national distributors in rapid succession. Most of the medicines to which the new charges will apply are in common use by Nicaragua's widely-impoverished population. "As a result," said one pharmacist, "we are extremely concerned that these hikes will affect our business to a considerable degree. People are already scratching around to buy these medicines at current prices; they will simply cut back once they go up again." He cited various common treatments for colds and respiratory ailments, together with others for diarrhea, birth control pills and for the control of parasites in children, as among those most widely used and most affected by the price rises. The hikes are confined to the national distributors for the moment. However, the international companies raised their prices by nearly 7% this past April, and the raise will clearly pressure them to take their prices higher yet again. TOPIC 4: Gold Mining Company Poisoning River, Wrecking Environment A Spanish company is mining for gold without a proper permit and too close to the banks of the Rio Negro in the north of Nicaragua, according to accusations leveled against it by the Humboldt Center, Nicaragua's pre-eminent environmental watchdog. Mining Iberoamerica has based its operations near the small town of Somotillo, where it is in flagrant violation of its government license because it abandoned the permitted site for the new location. Given the weight of accusations against the company, the Ministry for the Environment and Natural Resources (Marena) ordered the company to cease its operations, so far to no effect. According to Felipe Ortiz, Humboldt's projects coordinator, MARENA representatives spoke to the mining company in May, ordering it to cease operations immediately on the grounds that it had no permission to work in the northern zone. He went on to show evidence of the damages that had been occasioned by the mining processes. "We are especially concerned by the use of cyanide in the cleaning process for the ore," he noted, "particularly as the area chosen for that work is right beside the Rio Negro. Beyond that, there are acres of land poisoned, some forty wells perforated, huge quantities of excavated earth piled into streams and rivers, and access roads driven deep into the hinterland." Over and above all these direct effects, he explained further, the company was also using vast quantities of water to complete its separation of the precious metal, and was damming the river to achieve a sufficient head of pressure to run its machines and processes. Even before the mining began, the Rio Negro was already under assault from the Honduran side of the border, with people diverting it wholesale in order to irrigate their crops. "The essential problem is lack of personnel to maintain proper vigilance in these matters," Ortiz concluded. "MARENA has only four technical people suitably qualified to oversee operations across the whole region: it's virtually impossible for them to put an end to this kind of abuse; there's just too much land, too few people; there's simply no way they can enforce the law." TOPIC 5: Nicaraguans "Dying Like Dogs" in Costa Rica for Lack of Medical Care Orfa Estela Flores has lived and worked in Costa Rica for some time. Recently, she took her tiny baby to hospital for emergency treatment. She had little or no money, certainly not enough to pay the fee demanded of her. "No money, no treatment," she was told; and within a few hours her child was dead. Now the Nicaraguan Organized Union (NOU) is demanding an investigation to determine whether in fact the infant did die due to refusal of emergency care because her mother lacked funds. Orfa's story seems to be factual despite the doubts expressed by the director of the medical center concerned. At least it echoes similar experiences narrated by other Nicaraguans in Costa Rica who claim to have been refused treatment in similar emergency situations, again for lack of money to pay the fee demanded. Besides the child, a similarly chilling incident occurred when Rodolfo Gutierrez Gutierrez, a Nicaraguan who worked as a security guard, was gunned down in the course of his duties. He surprised a couple of burglars and they opened fire with hand guns. Despite the fact that Gutierrez had served his masters well on other such occasions when his intervention had prevented serious robberies of their precincts, he died without treatment, apparently because he had not been paying into the Costa Rican Social Security system. The murderers were never apprehended. According to a spokesperson for the NOU, these are not isolated cases and the organization is making representation to the Costa Rican authorities to demand proper investigations. ********** This hotline is prepared from the Nicaragua News Service and other sources. To receive a more extensive weekly summary of the news from Nicaragua by e-mail or postal service, send a check for $60.00 to Nicaragua Network, 1247 E St., SE, Washington, DC 20003. We can be reached by phone at 202-544-9355. Our web site is: www.nicanet.org. To subscribe to the Hotline, send an e-mail to nicanet-hotline-on at afgj.org from the address which should receive the Hotline. To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to nicanet-hotline-off at afgj.org From nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com Tue Aug 24 14:39:45 2004 From: nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com (nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 14:39:45 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [NYTr] Carter in Venezuela (WW Edit'l) Message-ID: <200408241839.i7OIdjC11617@olm.blythe-systems.com> Workers World - August 26, 2004 issue http://www.workers.org/ww/2004/edit0826.php Editorial Carter in Venezuela What's an old imperialist like Jimmy Carter doing validating the results of the referendum in Venezuela--results that show the large majority of the Venezuelan people support President Hugo Ch?vez and his Bolivarian Revolution, which seeks to free Latin Americans from the domination of U.S. imperialism and is raising the living standards of the masses? It is being reported that Carter "stunned" the elites in the Venezuelan opposition by disputing their charges of voting fraud and telling them in a face-to-face meeting to accept the results of the referendum. The former U.S. president and his Carter Center have a history of paving the way for elections that have produced quite the opposite result. Carter went to Nicaragua in 1990, supposedly to observe the election. But on the eve of the voting, he bolstered the opposition candidate, Violeta Chamorro, by allowing a photo to be run on the front page of the daily newspaper she owned that showed the two of them with hands clasped and raised in a victory gesture. Carter then convinced Daniel Ortega, leader of the Sandinistas, to accept his party's election defeat. Of course, behind the outcome of this "democratic process" was the terrible U.S.-sponsored war that threatened to become even worse if the Sandinistas held on to power. The Sandinistas had overthrown the hated Somoza dictatorship in a heroic guerrilla struggle, but they then faced a bloody counter-revolution--organized, armed and financed by the U.S.--that kept them from realizing their promises to the people. Hunger and violence wore them down. The cynical imperialists were very happy that they could overthrow the Nicaraguan Revolution and make it look like an exercise in democracy. This time the results of an election monitored by Carter are very different. Venezuela has been able to use its significant oil income to improve the lives of the people, and that has brought many who had nearly lost hope into political activism in a big way. They turned out in huge numbers for the referendum. But is Carter any different? What does he represent? Throughout his political career Carter has been consistent in this respect: He always seems to know which way the wind is blowing. When he began his political career in Georgia, open racism dominated Southern politics. In his 1970 bid for governor, Carter chastised his opponent "for failing, during his governorship, to invite Alabama's outspoken segregationist governor, George C. Wallace, to address the Georgia General Assembly." (The New Georgia Encyclopedia) On taking office, however, Carter softened his attitude toward the growing civil rights movement. But he hedged his bets by naming arch-segregationist Lester Maddox as lieutenant governor. Carter moved onto the national stage in 1976, when he captured the Demo cra tic nomination for president after having been endorsed by Time, Newsweek and the major newspapers of the imperialist political establishment. By then he had been schooled in foreign policy by the Trilateral Commission, a Rockefeller-sponsored think tank that has groomed presidents, secretaries of state and other political heavies from both the Republican and Democratic parties. As president from 1977 to 1981, he did what he was supposed to do for U.S. glo bal imperialist interests. His national security adviser, Zbigniew Brzezinski, who had been appointed the first director of the Trilateral Commission by David Rocke feller, presided over the covert campaign to overthrow the secular democratic government in Afghanistan, directing the CIA to set up a guerrilla army of right-wing fundamentalists there. That secret U.S. intervention eventually led the Afghan government to call on the Soviet Union for support, and a terrible war followed. Brzezinski later boasted that he had drawn the USSR into a quagmire. Since 9/11, has one major newspaper or television channel asked Carter about how his multi-billion-dollar CIA operation may have set the stage for the rise of al-Qaeda? Maybe Carter himself is reflecting on that, but not publicly, of course. Carter's role in the Venezuelan referendum undoubtedly helps those Demo crats who want the world to believe that a Kerry administration will not resort to the blatant imperialist tactics of Bush. And this is what a growing section of the billionaire class in the U.S. wants right now. They see how hated the U.S. has become in the world. No matter how the Pentagon, the CIA and other instruments of repression try to stamp out wildfires with their hobnail boots, new ones flare up immediately. Latin America has become a cauldron. All over the continent broad struggles of the people are changing the political climate. The knee-jerk reaction of some of the ultras in the Bush administration was undoubtedly to support the opposition's fraudulent charges of election fraud in Venezuela--in the same way that they called the 2002 military coup against Ch?vez a triumph for democracy, until the intervention of the people made it fail. But Carter and the more wily imperialists know that wouldn't do them a bit of good now. It would only further enrage the people and make it impossible for the U.S. to talk to any Latin American leaders. After the triumph of the Cuban Revolution in 1959, the new Kennedy administration launched the Alliance for Progress, offering Latin America billions for development so more countries would not go the way of Cuba. But in the end, according to former CIA officer Philip Agee in his book "Inside the Com pany," U.S. corporations were taking out even bigger profits from the area while U.S. agents worked with the generals to strengthen their hold, ushering in a period of military coups throughout the region. Kennedy, Carter, Kerry--the same old imperialism, but with a smile. (Copyright Workers World Service: Everyone is permitted to copy and distribute verbatim copies of this document, but changing it is not allowed. For more information contact Workers World, 55 W. 17 St., NY, NY 10011. via email: ww at workers.org. Subscribe wwnews-subscribe at workersworld.net. Unsubscribe wwnews-unsubscribe at workersworld.net. From nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com Tue Aug 24 14:41:06 2004 From: nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com (nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 14:41:06 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [NYTr] 9/11 Summer of Truth Events - NYC Message-ID: <200408241841.i7OIf6r11749@olm.blythe-systems.com> Dear 9/11 Truth activists and concerned citizens, Are you going to be in New York City on or around the time of the Republican National Convention? If so, participate in the Summer of Truth! Attend one or more of a series of 9/11 Truth events organized by 911Truth.Org. A calendar of events starting this Friday and rolling through Sept. 16 has been updated and is available at the following site: http://summeroftruth.org Below are more details of some of these events from 911Truth.Org organizer, Nicholas Levis, in New York. Emanuel Sferios Webmaster, 9/11 Visibility Project http://www.septembereleventh.org ----- Summer of Truth Some event descriptions (full calendar at http://summeroftruth.org) from Nicholas Levis There are gatherings and parties, but the first big landmark is no doubt the Green Festival on Aug. 28, which presents an opportunity to get thousands of signs, leaflets and t-shirts out to willing distributors in advance of the massive Aug. 29th UFPJ rally. For more sublime enjoyments, you should consider the big jazz concert on Aug. 28th and the peace-and-justice reception at the Brecht Forum on Aug. 29th after the mammoth NoRNC rallies. Complimentary tickets to the Jazz Concert are available (write back for info). Sibel Edmonds will be addressing the rally by National Organization of Women on Sept. 1st. The New York chapter of NOW has taken a surprising and courageous stand by holding a protest directly related to the 9/11 cover-up! It's all heading to the 9/11 Citizens' Commission hearings chaired by Cynthia McKinney on Sept. 9, the rallies and the giant televised Town Hall Meeting on Sept. 11 - but starting this week there are many events and opportunities to meet 9/11 skeptics and truth activists, join the protests around the RNC, see excellent films, and hear great speakers in the "Summer of Truth" in New York. If you are coming from New York from out of town and intend to participate in the 9/11 truth actions, please e-mail Les and Christian at info at ny911truth.org and consider yourself invited to the open house at the Brecht Forum starting at 4PM on Friday, with an informal meeting followed by a party at 7PM. The site will tell you all you need to know. From nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com Tue Aug 24 14:44:22 2004 From: nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com (nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 14:44:22 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [NYTr] Redgrave on Shameful Torture at Guantanamo Message-ID: <200408241844.i7OIiMc11837@olm.blythe-systems.com> The Independent - August 23, 2004 http://www.independent.co.uk Guantanamo's torture regime is a shameful disgrace by Vanessa Redgrave I have just returned from a theatre workshop in Croatia, with women who survived Tito's concentration camp for political prisoners on the island of Goli Otok. Officially this was a "work site" or "labour camp", and was opened by the Yugoslav State Security Service in 1948, when Tito split from Stalin. The women prisoners were suspected of being pro-Stalin. They were never formally charged with a crime, and were never tried or given access to lawyers or a chance to defend themselves. On the island they were subjected to hideous beatings, forced to stand over urine buckets or against a wall for hours on end in "stress-positions"; they were deprived of sleep, denied food and drinking water as punishment and locked away in isolation. They were prohibited from washing even in the sea, and had to endure repeated interrogations and "self-criticism". They were called "bandits", "scum", "traitors", "enemies of the state". In effect, Stalin's methods were being used by the State Security Service against those suspected of being "pro-Stalin". No one knows how many went mad, how many died, or how many attempted suicide. In Tito's time, this was a "State Secret". All the survivors of Goli Otok (the island had a camp for men as well) agree that under prolonged conditions of torture, they would do anything, say anything, write anything and sign anything that was demanded of them in the hope of being released. I have also just finished reading the 115-page document Detention in Afghanistan and Guantanamo Bay compiled by Birnberg Pierce & Partners, lawyers for the three British citizens released from Guantanamo Bay without charge in March. Their accounts of detention are horrifyingly similar to the conditions in Goli Otok. In both cases, the denial of a trial, and a specified date of release added to the physical torture the three endured. Shafiq Rasul, Asif Iqbal and Rhuhel Ahmed were captured in northern Afghanistan in November 2001. All three state that they were physically tortured in Sherbagan, Kandahar, before being consigned to the psychological and physical hell of Guantanamo Bay. In March this year they were sent back to England and released without charges. Asif and Shafiq say they were interrogated by an SAS officer in Kandahar before they were flown to Guantanamo. Rhuhel states that he was questioned in Kandahar by MI5 and separately by someone from the Foreign Office. He was in a terrible state from prolonged sleep deprivation, starvation and dehydration. The MI5 officer told him he would be sent home if he agreed to "admit to everything" that was put to him. "I just said 'OK' to everything they said to me. I agreed with everything, whether it was true or not. I just wanted to get out of there." During their two years of incarceration in Guantanamo M15 officers and a representative of the British embassy in Washington made six or seven visits/interrogations. All three men made complaints about the conditions under which they were being held; and about the interrogations by US military intelligence and other US agencies. The British intelligence services and the Foreign Office appear therefore to be complicit in the conditions of psychological and physical torture in Afghanistan and Guantanamo Bay. The document depicts a Kafkaesque nightmare combined with a barbaric system of punishments, including "short-shackling" for hours on end. Any decent person, British or American, could only feel the utmost shame and revulsion that such methods should be used. It is clear from the accounts of the three British detainees that many prisoners have gone mad and many have attempted suicide. The Foreign Office has evaded the requests of family lawyers to allow independent doctors to see the British citizens and UK residents who still remain in Guantanamo. Torture is morally repugnant, degrading both the tortured and the torturers. It is also wholly destructive of security, which in part depends on intelligence. Torture produces dysfunctional intelligence since the suspect is being forced to give only the answers the interrogators want. Article 2 of the UN Convention on Torture, 1984, states: "No exceptional circumstances whatsoever, whether a war or a threat of war, internal political instability or any other public emergency, may be invoked as a justification of torture." Both the UK and the US signed and ratified this convention. Yet our Appeal Court has upheld our Government's case for accepting evidence extracted under torture. In the name of security, our Government is destroying the principles and the laws which are the foundations of the security of all citizens; these principles were proclaimed by the American Patriots in their Declaration of Independence and after the war, in their constitution which also prohibits cruel and degrading treatment. It is a spine-chilling disgrace that the Blair government has supported the Guantanamo torture regime, and agreed to the pre-tribunal hearings that have been repudiated by US civil rights lawyers and human-rights NGOs. From nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com Tue Aug 24 14:45:46 2004 From: nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com (nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 14:45:46 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [NYTr] Panama recalls ambassador from Cuba Message-ID: <200408241845.i7OIjkY11964@olm.blythe-systems.com> sent by Walter Lippmann (cubanews) [The Panamanian government denies Posada & Company are on a list to be released before September 1, but complains about Cuban interference in Panama.-WL] AP via The Miami Herald - August 23, 2004 http://www.miami.com Panama recalls ambassador from Cuba Associated Press PANAMA CITY, Panama - Panama recalled its ambassador from Cuba on Monday after the Cuban government threatened to break off relations in a dispute over four anti-Fidel Castro exiles imprisoned in Panama. Panama "cannot be subjected to interference or threats by any foreign government," President Mireya Moscoso said, referring to Cuba's warning to her not to pardon the four men. She added her government's "most energetic protest at the repeated and unacceptable interference by the government of Cuba. The Cuban government said Sunday it will cut diplomatic ties if Moscoso pardons the four exiles, who were accused by Cuba of plotting to kill Castro during a summit in Panama four years ago. "We wish to warn, with all seriousness, that if the decision taken is not rectified, and the pardon of the monstrous criminals is carried out, diplomatic relations between the republic of Cuba and the Republic of Panama will be automatically broken," the statement read. Moscoso on Monday denied the Cubans are on any list of inmates to be pardoned before she leaves office Sept. 1. The four exiles include Luis Posada Carriles, who has long been involved in anti-Castro activities, including participating in the ill-fated CIA-sponsored Bay of Pigs invasion in 1961. While Panamanian courts ruled there was not enough evidence to charge the men with attempted murder in connection with the alleged assassination plot, the four were convicted of endangering public safety and sentenced in April to prison terms of seven to eight years. Cuba's government criticized the penalties as too lenient. In recent weeks, Cuban officials have alleged the exiles were planning to escape from prison and said they would hold Moscoso's administration responsible if they succeeded. Posada once escaped from a Venezuelan prison while awaiting retrial on charges he blew up a Cuban airliner. From nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com Tue Aug 24 14:49:22 2004 From: nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com (nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 14:49:22 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [NYTr] What's Wrong with Being a Populist? Message-ID: <200408241849.i7OInM812083@olm.blythe-systems.com> VHeadline.com - August 23, 2004 http://www.vheadline.com/readnews.asp?id=22556 Originally published in The Manila Bulletin http://www3.mb.com.ph/index.html Populism: False democrats and tin pan dictators have misused the concept by Gemma Araneta To denigrate him, the enemies of Venezuelas President, Hugo Chavez, call him a populist ... as if that were the greatest insult in the glossary of political science. Frankly, there is nothing inherently diabolic about populism, if you ask me. But, since a handful of false democrats and tin pan dictators have misused the concept, it now connotes a devious setting out to curry favor among the masses, inevitably resulting in bad governance. In its true sense, populism is not the road to perdition; in fact, it can fill that yawning abyss between promises and performance, that is why it is so politically alluring. Obviously, it requires oodles of money, government funds equitably disbursed and distributed; so if a leader is secretly avaricious, downright spineless and standing on gelatinous economic ground, s/he had better not even mention the P word. The redoubtable Hugo Chavez is a populist of the good kind and fortunately, he can very well afford to be one. For the first time, the Venezuelan government has full control of its oil industry, the 5th largest in the world. Fourteen percent of Venezuelas oil production goes to the USA because the colossus of the North, despite G. W. Bushs virulent anti-Chavez machinations, imports some 1.5 million barrels a day. Business is business, but Venezuela has also committed to supply Cuba, a number of Caribbean and Central American governments with oil at more friendly terms. With world prices of crude heading towards US$50 a barrel by winter time, President Hugo Chavez can expect to have even more resources to fund and nurture his brand of populism. As basic as they are massive, his social programs comprise of literacy missions, primary and secondary education for the deprived, employment opportunities, affordable food, medicines and health care for the destitute, and social security for "un-waged" women who head 65% of Venezuelas households. Over 250,000 drop-outs now have access to secondary education and unused buildings of Petroleos de Venezuela have been converted into schools. A cultural TV station -- Vive -- was set up as a shield against North American cultural invasion. There are 11,000 more neighborhood clinics in shanty towns around urban centers. Long-term immigrants from neighboring countries have been granted citizenship, a measure denounced by the opposition as vote-generating. Relentless, President Chavez describes his governments agenda as "people empowerment;" the grassroots are the protagonists in Venezuela, the "pueblo protagonico." Evidently, it is President Chavez channeling of oil revenues to social use that has helped him survive three grave threats to his life and government. In April 2002, there was a coup detat, reminiscent of the Pinochet/CIA offensive that overthrew (and killed) Chiles President Salvador Allende in 1973. Significantly, an alliance of loyal military officers and civilian groups (Circulos Bolivarianos) restored Hugo Chavez to power in less than two days. At year end, there was a labor lock-out in Venezuelas oil industry, obviously aimed at undermining Chavezs vital social programs. Its impact could have been worse than the general transport strike that bedeviled the Allende government. It can be argued that international events affecting the worlds oil supply were not favorable to the economic saboteurs and political de-stabilizers. Then came the August referendum with the crucial question, answerable by either a YES or NO: "Should the mandate of the Chavez administration be revoked?" Out of 14 million registered voters, 8.6 million cast their votes ... a bigger turnout than the 7.5 million in 1998 when Hugo Chavez was elected President. He said: "I am pleased to be the first President to submit himself to the peoples judgment halfway through his term and to be ratified in office." I guess the 59% who reaffirmed his mandate believe that populist Hugo Chavez is a president worth defending. From nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com Tue Aug 24 14:50:12 2004 From: nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com (nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 14:50:12 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [NYTr] Bush Misleads on Connection to Smear Campaign Message-ID: <200408241850.i7OIoDG12187@olm.blythe-systems.com> =============================== THE DAILY MIS-LEAD < www.Misleader.org > =============================== BUSH MISLEADS ON CONNECTION TO SMEAR CAMPAIGN President Bush has adamantly denied any connection to discredited and unsubstantial attack ads, run by the so-called Swift Boat Veterans for Truth (SBVT), a group that aims to smear John Kerry's record of honorable military service. On Friday, White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan said that the White House and the Bush/Cheney campaign "weren't involved in any way in these [SBVT] ads."[1] McClellan neglected to mention that Kenneth Cordier, who appears prominently in the SBVT ads, was a member of the Bush/Cheney veterans steering committee.[2] According to the campaign website, members of the veterans steering committee "serve as messengers for the President's re-election campaign."[3] After the Kerry campaign exposed Cordier's involvement, a spokesman for Bush, Steve Schmidt, announced Cordier would "no longer participate" in the campaign.[4] According to Schmidt, the campaign had no idea that Cordier was involved in the SBVT ads - which have been a major issue in the campaign for weeks and replayed repeatedly on national television. Also skipped over by McClellan: The primary financial backer of the SBVT is Bob Perry - the top donor to Republicans in the state of Texas.[5] Perry has also been a friend of Karl Rove, Bush's top political advisor, for nearly 20 years.[6] Perry ponied up $46,000 for Bush's gubernatorial campaigns and contributed generously to Bush's presidential races.[7] Sources: 1. "Press Gaggle by Scott McClellan," The White House, 08/20/04, http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=1435098&l=51503. 2. "Bush Campaign Drops Swift Boat Ad Figure," The Washington Post, 8/22/04, http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=1435098&l=51504. 3. "U.S. Rep. Jim Gibbons Announces Nevada Veterans for Bush Leadership Team," GeorgeWBush.com, 8/20/04, http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=1435098&l=51505. 4. "Bush Campaign Drops Swift Boat Ad Figure," Washington Post, 8/22/04, http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=1435098&l=51504. 5. "Ad Wars: Behind an Attack on Kerry," International Herald Tribune, 8/20/04, http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=1435098&l=51506. 6. Ibid, http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=1435098&l=51506. 7. Ibid, http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=1435098&l=51506. Visit www.Misleader.org for more about Bush Administration distortion. From nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com Tue Aug 24 14:51:42 2004 From: nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com (nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 14:51:42 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [NYTr] Najaf: Cost Outweighs Gain for US Message-ID: <200408241851.i7OIphd12250@olm.blythe-systems.com> The Daily Star - August 24, 2004 http://www.thedailystar.net/2004/08/24/d408241503115.htm Najaf: Cost outweighs gain for US by Sirajul Islam The claims and counter-claims make it hard to discern the strategies behind the showdown in Najaf, and the language that is used blurs the situation even more. US military spokesmen, for example, always call the young men who are defending the rebel Shiite cleric Moqtada Sadr 'anti-Iraqi forces', although not one in a hundred of them has ever been outside Iraq. But why the US authorities in Iraq chose this moment to try to eliminate Sadr and his Al Mahdi militia? From the start, the biggest obstacle to the creation of a compliant, pro-American regime