Anarchism's topics - tribe.net

Anti-Capitalist-Block RNC 2008

Sentience — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 00:42:09 GMT

Anti-Capitalist Bloc @ the RNC
by erin - anti-capitalist bloc Thursday, Jul 17 2008, 12:31am
erinzona.s@gmail.org phone: 707.499.8276
north america / mexico / anarchist movement / other libertarian press

Call out to the bloc/Principles of Solidarity

If you're planning to be in the Twin Cities during the RNC and are interested in class struggle anarchism, please contact us and hear about our events and projects!

Call out to join the Anti-Capitalist Bloc @ the RNC

***Please Forward***

A Call for an Anti-Capitalist Bloc (Red & Black Bloc) at the RNC Protests September, 2008 * Twin Cities, Minnesota * anticapbloc@iww.org

On “Labor Day” 2008, and throughout the Republican National Convention (RNC), tens of thousands of people from our community and from across the Unites States will protest against the GOP’s pro-corporate policies of war and discrimination. The Anti-Capitalist Bloc will join these mobilizations not just to protest a bad president or failed policies, but to stand up against the whole system of exploitation and oppression: capitalism.

It is the inherent character of capitalism that is creating the current economic crisis. Tens of thousands of laid-off workers, thousands of homes in foreclosure, and quickening inflation of gas and food prices are all signs of a system out of control, a system where the sins of the bosses are visited on the masses of workers.

Capitalism needs wars and exploitation to maintain itself. The war in Iraq was not simply a blunder by W., but the extension of a long-term strategy of U.S. domination of that region. The forced displacement of the poor of New Orleans is a new episode in an old legacy of racist subjugation. The recent raids against immigrant workers show the insidious connection between racism, and the system’s needs for a low waged precarious workforce. Continued oppression of women and the hatred whipped up against the GLBT community are designed to reinforce an authoritarian patriarchal culture.

Not a conspiracy or mistaken policy, capitalism is a system in which a small ruling class profits from the labor of the working class majority. The stolen wealth is used to dominate the political system (including both major political parties), and finance a massive apparatus of repression, cooptation and division necessary to maintain capitalist rule. While the earth warms, and bridges collapse, the capitalists continue to do whatever is necessary to increase their profits. To defeat their attacks we must defeat their entire system.

The Anti-Capitalist Bloc stands for solidarity, direct action, the general strike and revolution. We advocate an economic system controlled collectively and democratically, and an end to the racism, sexism and violence of the capitalist system.

Is this a black bloc like in Seattle? No. While remaining tactically flexible, our goal is not a confrontation with the police, but to raise the profile of organized working class direct action against capitalism. The Anti-Capitalist Bloc is independent from, but not competitive with or hostile to the RNC Welcoming Committee.

Join Us Under the Red & Black flags of the Anti-Capitalist Bloc!

Tentative schedule of Anti-Capitalist Bloc events:

*Saturday Night August 30th
CONCERT
Bands and DJ’s TBA

*Sunday Afternoon August 31st
DAY of ACTION AGAINST PRECARITY:
SOLIDARITY with I.W.W. IU640 ORGANIZING!

*Monday September 1st “Labor Day”
ANTI-CAPITALIST BLOC in major march against the war

*Tuesday morning September 2nd
Anti-Capitalist Bloc Panel Discussion

*Tuesday afternoon September 2nd
ANTI-CAPITALIST BLOC in POOR PEOPLE’s MARCH
also
*Solidarity with Independent Truckers Actions

To endorse the Anti-Capitalist Bloc, or to get more information:

anticapbloc@iww.org or 612-339-1266.

Initial Endorsements:

Anti-Capitalist Alliance Twin Cities
tc-anti-cap@lists.riseup.net

Twin Cities General Membership Branch
Industrial Workers of the World (I.W.W.)
TwinCities@iww.org * 612-339-1266

Macalester College chapter
Students for a Democratic Society (SDS)
macpeace.justice@gmail.com

Solidarity & Defense
P.O.Box 15024 Detroit MI 48215
sd@riseup.net * solidarityanddefense. blogspot. com

ANTI-CAPITALIST BLOC PRINCIPLES OF SOLIDARITY

1. ABOLITION OF CAPITALISM

We seek to abolish capitalism in favor of a system based on direct and democratic control of the means of production. The poverty, warfare, oppression and environmental devastation that are inherent in the capitalist system can only be ended by eliminating that system.

2. DIRECT ACTION AND DIRECT DEMOCRACY

We believe that the mass direct action of the working class and its allies, working through democratic organizations, can abolish the capitalist system. We reject the notion that we should wait for experts or politicians, elected or otherwise, to accomplish our goals on our behalf.

3. SOLIDARITY WITH ALL OPPRESSED PEOPLE

We honor the struggles and experiences of all oppressed peoples, whether their oppression is based on race, sex, gender, disability, age, sexual identity, or other social constructs. We know that defeating capitalism requires the solidarity of all oppressed peoples, and we commit ourselves to organizing in ways that do not recreate the hierarchies we resist.

4. INTERNATIONALISM

We reject national borders and nation-states as artificial barriers. We support no action or ideology that separates the working classes of the world, encouraging them to ignore each other at best, exploit each other most of the time, and kill each other at worst.

5. ORGANIZING

We will build networks of solidarity to organize and effectively support community struggles in our neighborhoods, workplaces, and cities. Protest is not enough. We participate in the Anti-Capitalist Bloc in order to promote and move toward our goal of a just and democratic world free from the disease of capitalism.

posted in Anarchism - 16 replies

U.S. strike hit wedding party, 47 civilians killed

steveargue2 — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 20:04:54 GMT

Afghan official: U.S. strike hit wedding party
47 civilians killed, commission chief says; U.S. says probe still under way

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25635571/

updated 6:38 a.m. PT, Fri., July. 11, 2008

KABUL, Afghanistan - A U.S. military airstrike this week killed 47 civilians traveling to a wedding, the head of an Afghan government commission investigating the incident said Friday.

The airstrike on Sunday in Deh Bala district of Nuristan province also wounded nine civilians, said Burhanullah Shinwari, the deputy chairman of the Senate, who led the delegation.

The U.S. military on Sunday denied that any civilians were killed in the incident. At the time Afghan officials said 27 civilians had been killed.

On Friday, U.S. coalition spokesman 1st Lt. Nathan Perry said that "any loss of innocent life is tragic."

"I assure you that civilians are never targeted, and that our forces go to great lengths to avoid civilian casualties," he said. "This incident regarding the air strike on July 6th is still under investigation by coalition forces."

Shinwari said that 39 of those killed in the airstrike were women and children, including the bride.

Dispatched by Karzai
The group was targeted twice on Sunday, as they walked along with the bride from her village toward the groom's house in another village, Shinwari said.

The nine-man commission was dispatched by President Hamid Karzai to investigate the incident on Tuesday. They returned to Kabul on Thursday. The commission included officials from the Ministry of Defense, the country's intelligence agency and parliament.

Shinwari said the group gathered information from eyewitnesses and victim's relatives.

All those killed in Deh Bala incident were buried in one cemetery near the village where the attack happened, Shinwari said.

"They were all civilians, with no links to al-Qaida or the Taliban," Shinwari said.

The members of the commission gave $2,000 for every person killed and $1,000 for those wounded, he said.

The issue of civilian casualties has caused friction between the Afghan government and U.S. and NATO troops, and has weakened the standing of the Western-backed Karzai in the eyes of the population.

More than 2,100 people — mostly militants — have been killed in insurgency-related violence in Afghanistan this year. More than 8,000 people died in attacks last year, according to the U.N., the most since the 2001 U.S.-led invasion.

U.S. Out of Afghanistan!
http://tribes.tribe.net/outnow

posted in Anarchism - 0 replies

Anarchist Black Cross Paralegals???

Gracie — Sun, 27 Jul 2008 15:28:30 GMT

So, I was on the Crimethinc website and saw that this was one of the groups listed. I work in a Criminal Defense firm, and would like to do some volunteering for defending arraigned anarchists....I tried to email the group but never heard back. Anyone know how I might get into this???

posted in Anarchism - 1 reply

New tribe against the occupation of Afghanistan

steveargue2 — Sun, 27 Jul 2008 06:13:06 GMT

New tribe against the occupation of Afghanistan
http://tribes.tribe.net/outnow#

Massive U.S. intervention in Afghanistan began in 1978 and continues to this day. The ongoing war in Afghanistan continues to kill thousands of Afghan civilians and cause extreme suffering due to horrendous injuries, the displacement of people from their homes and livelihoods, home invasions, sexual abuse, arbitrary arrests and torture, and the general humiliation of the Afghani people.

As this author stated for Liberation News on September 12, 2001:

“Americans watched in horror as the World Trade Center collapsed. Yet it was a horror no different from what the U.S. government has done with it's bombing of civilian populations in Iraq, Yugoslavia, Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, and Korea. The U.S. bombings of just these countries, not to mention many other U.S. acts of war, murdered millions of civilians. Terror against civilians is never justified…

“Today the clerical fascists of the Taliban rule Afghanistan. The CIA put them in power with billions of dollars in U.S. military aid. This massive U.S. intervention in Afghanistan was in opposition to the revolutionary PDPA government that came to power in 1978 on issues of promoting women’s rights and land reform. Literacy campaigns began teaching the poor and women how to read and write.

“Foreign religious fanatics and wealthy defenders of the old feudal system came together in a terrorist organization called the Mujahideen. With billions of dollars in assistance from the U.S. [starting under the Jimmy Carter presidency] these fanatical cutthroats waged a holy war that included killing women for teaching little girls how to read and write and throwing acid into the faces of women who had become liberated from the veil. The Taliban came to power as a result of this U.S. intervention.

“Will a U.S. war now against the Taliban and former CIA aid recipient Osama Bin Laden set things straight? No. It will be the people of Afghanistan who suffer death and destruction from war as the U.S. attempts to install a puppet government friendly to U.S. corporate (oil) interests.” Steven Argue, Liberation News, September 12, 2001

The Taliban was put in power by U.S. intervention. U.S. occupation today is a cause for war and continues to keep an extremely reactionary religious government in power. Afghanistan had secular governments with much wider women's rights before the U.S. began its massive intervention in Afghanistan in the 1970's. All U.S. imposed governments have been religious and anti-women. In Afghanistan, the Afghanis are better qualified to solve the problems caused by U.S. imperialism than U.S. imperialism is.

Yet rather than get out of Afghanistan Obama and McCain are proposing more troops, more helicopters, and more war.

NO TO THE BIPARTISAN OCCUPATION OF AFGHANISTAN!!!!

NO TO OBAMA and MCCAIN'S PROPOSED SURGE IN AFGHANISTAN!

U.S. OUT OF AFGHANISTAN NOW!

*~U.S. and Allies Out of Afghanistan!!~*
http://tribes.tribe.net/outnow#

posted in Anarchism - 0 replies

YouTube of RNC/DNC conventions

Tedster — Wed, 23 Jul 2008 06:48:52 GMT

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=magUBVXrgiQ

posted in Anarchism - 0 replies

2012 End Times & Global Paradise

Esoteknic — Wed, 16 Jul 2008 09:57:21 GMT

I wrote this stuff a while ago, but revised it after great feedback here on Tribe...
It's a pretty lengthy post, and it covers a broad spectrum of topics,
so you may find it in other tribes as well - plz forgive me for cross posting ;)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-2012 and the great Pyramid-

These days, many people feel they might actually become witness to the End of the World.
But for as long as humans existed, it seems they have always at certain points in time believed the End of the World had arrived, when nothing actually happened. So what's up with all these prophecies and this End-Time belief among humans of all ages and times?

How can anyone look into the future anyway? Well, perhaps the only things you need in order to look into the future is knowledge of cycles, and experience with the cycle. You know the cycle of your washing machine, the processes it goes through, and how long it takes. You can look into the future and estimate if the sun will still be up to dry the laundry, since you know about the Sun's cycle as well. This way, people look into the future all the time, and plan their actions according to knowledge of cycles like pregnancy, menstruation or the seasons. If a cycle is longer that the general life span of a human being, the information about the cycle could be recorded on a medium with a longer lifespan than carbon based lifeforms, and passed on to future generations. Is this what the ancient civilizations did?
Those tablets, monuments, documents and artworks would become like a road map of time, especially usefull if positioning of stars and planets have an actual affect on our planet through energy and magnetism.
The Mayans apparently spoke of a cycle 25,800 years long, and they spoke of (or wrote about) a certain point within that cycle. According to some people's calculations, this point, or event, which the Mayans called the "Sacred Tree", will next occur on December 21, 2012. There is a heap of different perspectives on this 2012 'event' online, and I leave it up to you to draw your own conclusions, as I am by no means a scholar of any kind, and all I'm offering here is my perspective.

Did the ancients believe there was ultimately One Order and One Truth to the way of the Everything, Universe, or whatever you wish to name it, much like religion does, even science? I personally believe so, and I assume that many different cultures and religions contain fragments of knowledge of it. Maybe many 'different' cultures and religions have intuitively discovered these truths, shared such truths and recycled them, or purposefully changed them to fit an oppressive agenda. Is it a coincidence that while the Mayan's "Sacred Tree" approaches, other cultures also expect certain prophetic events? Besides most muslims, even Iran's current leader Ahmadinejad firmly believes the awaited "Mahdi" is near, at the same time as many christians are preparing for Jesus' 2nd coming, rapture and Armageddon? Also we now have a profit in the form of Al Gore, with his doomsday scenario's, and the internet has blasted open total access of information; almost making it seem as if we are living in the times of revelation. The worlds religions grow stronger, seemingly with more fanaticism than ever, inspired by each other's hatred, violence and repression, back in full force and worse, since September 11th. The U.S. and E.U. Governments are increasingly more violent and oppressive towards their people and other nations, with permission of the United Nations. Many people strongly believe 9-11 was like Nero's Rome, or Hitler's Reichstag; an attack on us, from our own leaders, to set something in motion.
Do 'they' know something about our imminent future that we don't - but the Mayans did?
And who is 'they'?

It's widely known and accepted that most of our planet's resources are basically 'owned' and controlled by a small group of people, which have passed that control down from generation to generation. I always wondered how these 'royal' families came to 'own' the land and orchards in ancient times, and I assume it's got something to do with the religious/spiritual beliefs of the people back then. The abundant wealth of the Vatican is a perfect example of how religious belief can make people give up their money or freedom voluntarily, and I suspect the origins of royal families also lie in the spheres of religion, mystery and spirituality.
Nowadays, it's obvious there's nothing magic or special about the royal families and their big business,
and many people have stopped supporting and believing in the Vatican.
Now more than ever I wonder why these families still 'own' most of our planet.
What is ownership anyway?
The dictionary states: The state, relation, or fact of being an "owner".
An 'owner' is: to have or hold as property, and for 'property' it states: "something owned or possessed"
The dictionary says of "possession": something owned, occupied or controlled.
My guess is that they claimed "God" had told them they have more rights to the land than the people,
and performed a nifty magic trick to support their claims of divine descent.
Wheter they were masters of slight of hand, or Aliens from outer space, is up to you to decide.
I personally feel there's absolutely no reason for anyone to own more than he can occupy;
the land under his feet, the apple in his hand, the air in his lungs, the light in his eyes, the sound in his ears.

If you claim ownership of a huge orchard filled with apple trees, then after the harvest the thousands of apples will start to rot before you can eat them all. Of course you can 'exchange' some apples with your neighbour, who claims ownership of a thousand chickens, and you both agree to the exchange rate of one apple for one egg. But eggs rot too.
So those who claimed to own the land and the fruits it bears, needed an exchange medium that doesn't rot, and metal coins were born. The root of all evil isn't money, but the idea of "ownership".
The knights who used to collect the physical taxes with their swords are now collecting digital numbers with computers, and the royal families have spread their control over our planet's resources through banking, business and government.
With the trouble this planet is in, and the obvious connection of our problems to the destructive forces of greed, you'd think we'd form a strong alliance for the annihilation of ownership, and the fair distribution and sharing of our planet's resources,
but this has still yet to occur.
Why is this?
Well, first of all, their property is protected by laws, contracts and other written documents.
And these contracts have not been signed by God, nor by Mother Nature, nor by the people.
They are merely words on paper; nothing that can't be burned.
How can it be this injustice has been tolerated for so long?

In order for a few to control so many, they use hierarchical structures of authority, creating pyramids of possession and power, and reflect that in every aspect of society. In the military, in schools, companies, etc. you are positioned somewhere on the pyramid; most people start at the bottom, a few people are born at the top. It is evident that our planet's abundance is greedily controlled with these pyramids and it is evident to me that together with the "property-illusion" this is the only real problem this planet faces. All other problems are mere symptoms. War, starvation, poverty, crime, and even many seemingly 'natural' problems like disasters, diseases and extinction of species. All these are after effects of the growth of these pyramids, as people desperately try to climb them, trampling those below them, including Mother Earth. The bigger the Pyramid, the more possession and power for those at the top, and the more degrading and miserable the situation at the bottom is. People that rise to higher levels on the pyramid, or are born there, are not likely to give up their position as they know what awaits them below. People like you and me, with generally 'normal' lives, but not so much compared to the lives of people in Somalia for example. With a system like this, the most uncompassionate, ruthless people around rise to the top, or are born and raised there. I would not be surprised that the idea of different classes of humans also has it's roots in religion and mysticism. A good magic trick could easily make people believe you are closer to God then they are. Of course the ramification of the pyramid shape is that most people are at the bottom, carrying the heaviest weight, putting the ones on top in a fragile position. The magic tricks don't work anymore, and they need to keep those at the bottom distracted, to prevent them from looking up.

One of these distractions is fascism, the highly delusional, contagious and effective "we" versus "them" syndrome. Some examples are Christian vs. Muslim (marketed heavily since 9-11), Nazis vs. Jews, Humans vs. Animals, or "consciousness vs. matter". In reality All is ultimately One, and variety in this Universe is created through subdivisions of polar opposites. For example, the subdivision of a human being is Male/Female, opposites indeed, yet when you zoom out one level, you will conclude they are both the same thing. The strength of the pyramid relies on the belief of those below in the illusion of separation. Most violence, murder and massacre is the result from this concept of we vs. them, or even "we vs. everyone else", and these ideas are propagated through religious or cultural media, education or propaganda.
Not only does it serve the divide & conquer technique, but it also gives people enemies to fear, so you may be their saviour and provide protection and security.
It's also a very lucrative business model if you can sell weapons to both sides of a fight.
Of course there's also the continuous flood of "entertainment", elevating the artists involved to 'star' heights, and giving them a great abundance of wealth. Millions of dollars for something as fun as acting in a movie, playing sports or performing music, while those behind the conveyer belts get minimum wage.
Some of these 'celebrities' are so super-special that they have many talents, and appear in music, movies, tv, videogames - you name it, they have the talent. They give us rags-to-riches stories and TV talent shows so we think the ones at the top deserve to be there, and one glance at the tabloids in the supermarket can give you an idea of the psychological effects these stars apparantly have on the masses.
"They" may not be able to control the people whose talents and creations inspire the masses,
but they do control who gets the stage and the spotlight.
"They"???

Many people believe (some of) the royal families have over the course of centuries been collaberating on the construction of an all-encompassing global pyramid that would grant the people at the top total global control.
There are all kinds of stories out there as to the origins of these royal families, including alien DNA bloodlines, fallen angels and such, and again I leave it up to you to draw your own conclusions. But is it possible that a multi-generational elite is working towards a global empire? Is this something you witness around you? You might live in Europe, and have witnessed the change of currency there. All money was collected, and exchanged for the Euro. Who collected the money, who printed the new money, and for who? How do they know how much to print? Who decides the value of an apple? It was them, at the top of the pyramid, and it shows how big the pyramid already is. Now they are working on the "Amero" in the US, and I'm sure we'll get universal medical care soon, with required microchip implant? Yes, it is possible, if not likely, that this 'obscured' elite exists, and there is a lot of information on this subject online. Wasn't it Bush Senior himself who in September 11th 1990 coined the term "New World Order"? What? 11 years before 11-11-2001 when the big 11 in new york was attacked? The same 11 as in the $ symbol, or the two pillars of Solomon? FTW?

For as long as man existed, it has discovered truths about the world he lived in, truths about reality. Truths such as the inevitability of death, or that fire is warm, truths which he can use to plan his activities. With these pyramid structures it becomes possible to keep knowledge at the top hidden from those below. People are "initiated" to this knowledge when they are considered 'ready' by those above them, who know they need successors. The elite certainly uses knowledge of reality for their agenda on a material level, with advanced weaponry, telecommunications and machines to name but a few, but many suggest they also seem to believe in a non material level - the paranormal, witchcraft and magic stuff. Even though Bush Junior pleads us to not allow ridiculous conspiracy theories, he himself is part of the Skull and Bones society. I'm sorry, but having a secret club with skeletons and secret meetings is more ridiculous than the people wondering about them, unless you guys have some really cool secret knowledge - which makes conspiracy theories all but ridiculous.
There is reason to believe that the elite uses occult knowledge on numerology, astrology, symbolism, ritual and even sacrifice, besides modern technology, to increase their chances of success. One look on your dollar bill will tell you.
Actually, many people worldwide firmly believe in this spiritual world, and even though always opposed by science,
string theory and quantum physics seem to move into the spiritual domain. It is as if science deals with the separateness of everything, and spirituality focusses on the interconnectedness of everything, yet upon further investigation this is just a spectrum of polar opposites meeting in the middle. Perhaps the popularity of the 'scientific' atheist perspective is a result of the military campaigns against the Gnostics, Cathars, and of course the burning of "witches" on the stake, which pushed personal spiritual experience into the dungeons of the pyramid. Not to mention the "War on Drugs"; many plants in nature provide people with strong personal spiritual experiences. Even in Holland now magic mushrooms are illegal, as the attack on individual spiritual freedom continues. In the meantime, of course, institutionalized religions with pyramid-style organization thrive. It seems as if those above us at the top of the pyramid don't want us to find out our own gnosis, our Truth. If that's the case, perhaps that explains why people feel the world is being so radically changed by them. Maybe the Mayans were right about 2012, and the elite want their global Pyramid ready for this mysterious date?

If you are a devout Christian or Muslim, or any other organized religion, you will probably feel that you already know the Truth, since it is written in your holy scriptures. But do you really feel with your whole being that it is the Truth that the Almighty Creator has written those books for us? There are a lot of very disturbing, conflicting and violent passages in those books, as well as some beautiful teachings.
Can you find it in your heart to give this consideration? Could it be we are born with free will, imagination, a conscious and intelligence, among all the other things we need to try to make the right decisions in our unique situations? I personally believe that the All is so glorious and perfect, that creation is perfect, has been, and always will be, and doesn't need an instruction manual. It doesn't need a Great Flood for Plan B. And yet, with all these 'blasphemous' thoughts, I still feel a strong connection with the All. Is it possible the All will create this connection with anyone seeking it, regardless of religion, culture, ritual or intention? I believe so, and I suggest to the devout among you to consider an even closer relationship with the All, where you can truly believe in the perfection and glory of the almighty.
Where you don't have to invent strange excuses for the derogatory, hypocritical, and violent characteristics attributed to your god through the scriptures. Where you don't have to be afraid of laws written on paper, but gratefully use your free will to make the decisions you feel are in correspondence to the way of the All. And where you respect God's decision to give each individual a spark of life and free will, confident that all roads lead back to him, live and let live. "Your freedom to punch ends where my nose begins."
Perhaps not for you, but for millions of people around you, these scriptures have done more wrong than good, and need to be taken less seriously. I'm suggesting that your connection with the All will increase if you have faith in yourself, and start filtering the scriptures for what they are worth. Have faith and trust that the All has made you in his/her image. That you are a tiny holographic cell of the All, and as such have all the answers safely stored within. Findings of modern technology actually support the idea of a holographic, fractalized universe, with "Sacred Geometry" woven throughout it.

On the other side of the spectrum we find the atheists. They wonder why scriptures and religion have such a strong hold on so many people? I think that is because they feel a connection, a connection with the All. Some atheists argue none of it is real, but these people feel the connection is real, and don't want to let go of this feeling. We are all connected, regardless of what vile and disgusting scripture, behaviour or worship people surround it with. Instead of denying this connection, we should argue that people can let go of the scriptures without losing this sacred connection. We all are perfectly capable of living together harmoniously if we live in accordance to the logic and flow of the All. We need to use a balance of logical intelligence and emotional intuition, to filter the crap of the scriptures of all traditions,
and the Truth and Order of the universe will emerge, and set us free.

The only things we need to do is to stop supporting the Pyramid, and realize that property is theft, as Proudhon noted,
that the fruits of Mother Earth belong to all of her inhabitants equally. Bloody revolutions don't work. Revolutions have to come from within, for people just need to drop their destructive habits. We need to realize we are all connected, and that separation is an illusion.
I believe, and many others with me, that the All is the ultimate Parent, and has ensured we all can always "call back home", from wherever we are in the universe. The phone will always be answered. There are telephone booths all around us, all we gotta do is pick up the phone, and the All will comfort us, guide us, teach us, and make us laugh, or it will help us through the darkness back into the light. The call might not always be pleasurable, there might be tears, letting go, fear, self-reflection, and such. But if you prepare for the call, and surround yourself with your loved ones in a comfortable and familiar environment, I believe your phone-call with the All will be productive and helpful. I don't suggest a prank-call. The telephone booths I am talking about here are Entheogens: any substance, such as a plant or drug, taken to bring on a spiritual experience.

Did you know mushrooms can be extremely usefull in the cleaning up of toxic and even nuclear waste? Did you know you have a neurological landscape that looks like mycelium? That your brain neurons and astrocytes are similarly arranged to the mycelia network aka the mushroom's underground web below the forest floor? These patterns are even discovered in outer space, between solar systems. Quantum 'String' theory speaks of a similar web. Or how about this one - that all humans, and probably loads of animals, produce DMT naturally in their physical body? DMT is considered to be the most powerful psychedelic on earth. With meditation or dance techniques, you can probably trigger the secretion of DMT, and feel drastic emotional or mental changes. DMT is also the active ingredient of Ayahuasca, a psychedelic brew people have consumed for years. There are those that suggest the small photonic light your DNA transmits could be the intense lights people see behind closed eyelids while under the influence of DMT. There are people who feel a full grown amanita muscaria clearly resembles a cup, and can easily hold some psychedelic rainwater, suggesting this magic mushroom might be the fabled 'Holy Grail'. In the past, the US Military tried LSD on soldiers to see if it could be useful for mind control, but they discovered instead that LSD made people peaceful, ecstatic and 'enlightened'. Soldiers dropped their guns, and picked up flowers in awe of the beauty and glory of God. Psychedelics like MDMA continuously proof very beneficial in trauma therapy and humans with terminal diseases. With many traumatized veterans coming home from Iraq & Afghanistan, researchers are 'ecstatic' about the results of treating Post Traumatic Stress Disorder with MDMA. Then of course worth mentioning is the psychedelic African root Iboga, which is extremely powerful against addiction, curing some heroin addicts instantly. The benefits of the Marihuana plant are seemingly boundless.

Why is it the liquor stores, pharmacies, and streets are flooded with all kinds of drugs, except for Iboga, Peyote, Amanita Muscaria, Psylocibin, Ayahuasca, LSD, Salvia Divinorum, Marihuana, etc. etc. Except for the "psyche-delics", the "mind clarifying" plants? Because the international "War on Drugs" is a war on psychedelics, and has resulted in the world we see today. In light of the hypocrisy of this war, I dare to state we need to re-connect with these psychedelics. I believe it is the most basic of solutions, and they are way more safe than cigarette's, pharmaceuticals, crack and alcohol. I think it is especially important for our younger generations, as it is the ultimate right of passage, if done with the proper respect, education, care, timing and love. We all long back to our 'childhood happy carelessness',
and I suggest the only reason we've lost it is because we were not given our rites of passage, our psychedelics. Instead we get schools with pyramid structures, where some teenagers feel so disconnected that we see more suicidal massacres nowadays.
Most of these kids were on anti-depressants, not MDMA or Ayahuasca. At home a perpetual horse-and-pony show is blasted onto billions of retina's worldwide through television, internet and handhelds, solely for the purpose of misdirection and distraction. Will Brad Pitt ever marry Christina Aguilera? I believe a good psychedelic trip will benefit people and families, and the internet provides sufficient information for all to do it safe and wisely. Perhaps instead of prozac, try and and visit the forest's pharmacy. Mother Nature's pharmacy.
You go to her for your food, so what's wrong with her medicine? Who tell us they are wrong? Right, those above you...
Believe in your own judgement, not in the judgement of those above you. It's your choice.
Even though I believe people need to "call back home" more often, I strongly discourage the macho "getting F'd up!" approach. "How many do you dare to eat?" is the same as "How fast do you dare to drive this car?", and will get you in trouble. It is this sort of reckless carelessness that results in a "bad trip", and if you aren't like this, the chances of having one of the most wonderful times of your life are huge. A great mindset, a comfortable familiar setting, the right dose, the right choice of psychedelic, proper preparedness, a company of people that you completely love and trust, and an experienced "trip-sitter". These are the ingredients that will almost certainly guarantee a good time, and inspire you for a lifetime. If we want, we can drop the pyramids, and pick up the pieces. Drop our money and power, and share the abundance. Us below will have to welcome those that fall down from the top with open arms, if we ever want to make something really beautiful on this planet. Entire industries and avenues of 'employment and deployment' will evaporate, and we need to welcome back everybody that drops their weapons, or had a part in such destructive or meaningless industries. The wealthy need to give up their wealth, and the poor need to forgive them, a tough process with which the clarifying and connecting properties of psychedelics will help. With voluntary mutual cooperation we can turn this planet around, and the more people help, the easier it gets.

2012:

If nothing happens, we might by then be well on our way to paradise on earth.
If something great happens, we will be ready to integrate it into our sustainable earthly paradise, and take it to the next level.
If the earth explodes, we'll meet again.
Either way, there should not be a Great Pyramid of Tyranny in place, I assume, and we should aim for the destruction of the Pyramid, the New World Order, or whatever they call it, to the best of our individual capacity. This could be the moment billions of humans have talked about for millennia... now what are you going to do? If something as huge as all this End Time stuff can't make us all synchronize a global effort, then what will? The internet is the connection we have with each other, as Nationless, Global citizins. We need to have a good look at the Pyramid, not just at its symptoms.
-------------------------

I dedicate this Tribe to everyone working towards a global paradise through the way they live and act.

tribes.tribe.net/global-utopia

Cheers,

Ramon

posted in Anarchism - 1 reply

Obama Lays Out Plans for Continued War

steveargue2 — Tue, 15 Jul 2008 03:59:13 GMT

Obama Lays Out Plans for Continued War

By Steven Argue

In a July 14, 2008 New York Times Op Ed, Barack Obama says:

"As I’ve said many times, we must be as careful getting out of Iraq as we were careless getting in. We can safely redeploy our combat brigades at a pace that would remove them in 16 months. That would be the summer of 2010 — two years from now, and more than seven years after the war began. After this redeployment, a residual force in Iraq would perform limited missions: going after any remnants of Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia, protecting American service members and, so long as the Iraqis make political progress, training Iraqi security forces."

In other words, he does not plan to get all of the troops out of Iraq and he will only get most of the troops out in two years. And what does he explain he will do with these troops? Redeploy them. Redeployed where? His rhetoric has been clear: Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Iran.

Obama goes on to call for a surge in Afghanistan as well as war in Pakistan:

"Ending the war [in Iraq] is essential to meeting our broader strategic goals, starting in Afghanistan and Pakistan [...] As president, I would pursue a new strategy, and begin by providing at least two additional combat brigades to support our effort in Afghanistan. We need more troops, more helicopters [...]"

U.S. intervention has also been very bad for the people of Pakistan. It is US intervention that has kept a long series of dictators in power there. The US has no right to intervene against those fighting that dictatorship that it labels "terrorists". Likewise, it is US intervention in support of a long series of Pakistani dictators that is the cause of Bhutto's death, brutal repression against the majority, exploitation, and poverty, all of which has resulted in rebellion against the Pakistani government. The US has already harmed the Pakistani people enough with massive aid to dictators and would do more harm by sending in troops.

NO TO OBAMA’S PROPOSED MILITARY INTERVENTION IN PAKISTAN!

Massive U.S. intervention in Afghanistan began in 1978 and continues to this day. The ongoing war in Afghanistan continues to kill thousands of Afghan civilians and cause extreme suffering due to horrendous injuries, the displacement of people from their homes and livelihoods, home invasions, sexual abuse, arbitrary arrests and torture, and the general humiliation of the Afghani people.

As this author stated for Liberation News on September 12, 2001:

“Americans watched in horror as the World Trade Center collapsed. Yet it was a horror no different from what the U.S. government has done with it's bombing of civilian populations in Iraq, Yugoslavia, Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, and Korea. The U.S. bombings of just these countries, not to mention many other U.S. acts of war, murdered millions of civilians. Terror against civilians is never justified…

“Today the clerical fascists of the Taliban rule Afghanistan. The CIA put them in power with billions of dollars in U.S. military aid. This massive U.S. intervention in Afghanistan was in opposition to the revolutionary PDPA government that came to power in 1978 on issues of promoting women’s rights and land reform. Literacy campaigns began teaching the poor and women how to read and write.

“Foreign religious fanatics and wealthy defenders of the old feudal system came together in a terrorist organization called the Mujahideen. With billions of dollars in assistance from the U.S. [starting under the Jimmy Carter presidency] these fanatical cutthroats waged a holy war that included killing women for teaching little girls how to read and write and throwing acid into the faces of women who had become liberated from the veil. The Taliban came to power as a result of this U.S. intervention.

“Will a U.S. war now against the Taliban and former CIA aid recipient Osama Bin Laden set things straight? No. It will be the people of Afghanistan who suffer death and destruction from war as the U.S. attempts to install a puppet government friendly to U.S. corporate (oil) interests.” Steven Argue, Liberation News, September 12, 2001

The Taliban was put in power by U.S. intervention. U.S. occupation today is a cause for war and continues to keep an extremely reactionary religious government in power. Afghanistan had secular governments with much wider women's rights before the U.S. began its massive intervention in Afghanistan in the 1970's. All U.S. imposed governments have been religious and anti-women. In Afghanistan, the Afghanis are better qualified to solve the problems caused by U.S. imperialism than U.S. imperialism is.

Yet rather than get out of Afghanistan Obama is proposing more troops, more helicopters, and more war.

NO TO OBAMA”S PROPOSED SURGE IN AFGHANISTAN!

U.S. OUT OF AFGHANISTAN NOW!

In addition, at AIPAC, Obama’s speech laid the groundwork for war with Iran:

“The Iranian regime supports violent extremists and challenges us across the region. It pursues a nuclear capability that could spark a dangerous arms race and raise the prospect of a transfer of nuclear know-how to terrorists. [...] The danger from Iran is grave, it is real, and my goal will be to eliminate this threat.”

A war on a major oil producing nation under the imperialist excuse of weapons of mass destruction. Sound familiar? Bush would have a good case for a charge of plagiarism against Obama.

And what will the Iranians think of more imperialist intervention?

In 1953 the CIA overthrew the democratically elected government of Mohammed Mossadegh in Iran and put the brutal dictatorship of the Shah in power. Mossadegh had plans to nationalize the Iranian oil fields, a plan that would have taken a good chunk of the oil profits out of the private control of major international oil companies. Such nationalizations have greatly helped people in other countries, such as Venezuela, where oil wealth is used to better the conditions of the poor and provide needed programs like healthcare.

The CIA sponsored overthrow of the Mossadegh government paved the way for 26 years of dictatorship under the U.S. backed Shah. Freedom of speech did not exist under the Shah, and the CIA participated in the torture of political opponents to the Shah. Meanwhile, U.S. oil corporations made massive profits from Iranian oil while the vast majority of the Iranian people lived in extreme poverty and did not benefit from the oil wealth.

The Iranian people rightly saw the Shah as a puppet of U.S. imperialism, and finally overthrew his dictatorship in 1979. Unfortunately, repression was so bad under the Shah that the only place that people could organize opposition was in the Mosques. This gave the Mullahs a tremendous advantage in taking control of the revolution. The Islamic nature of the revolution led to a deterioration of women's rights and socialists, many of whom had naively supported the Islamic Revolution, were executed by the clerical fascist state.

Despite the brutal nature of the new Iranian government, in that respect the same as the old regime the U.S. had supported, the U.S. was not satisfied. The new regime nationalized the Iranian oil fields under government control. In addition, the new government was full of anti-imperialist rhetoric and took American hostages; a natural result of 26 years of U.S. imposed dictatorship and exploitation. The U.S. government hated the Iranian revolution most for nationalizing the oil, and they feared that the Iranian Revolution may become an influence for similar anti-imperialist revolutions in the region.

As a result, the U.S. encouraged then ally, Saddam Hussein to send Iraqi troops to invade Iran. During the war, the U.S. armed both sides, but most armed Iraq and provided Iraq with military intelligence. The Iraqi invasion of Iran began on September 22, 1980 and the war continued until 1988. As a result of the war, between half million and a million and a half people died. This U.S. support to Iraq also helped enable Iraq to murder between 50,000 and 100,000 Kurds in the Anfal campaign of 1988. At the time, the U.S. corporate media was silent about this crime, and only exposed it later when U.S. alliances changed.

So U.S. intervention against Iran imposed decades of dictatorship, repression, war, exploitation, poverty, and, just in the Iran-Iraq war alone, the deaths of around a million Iranian people. Like Iraq, U.S. troops on the ground in Iran will not be treated as liberators.

The Iranian working class has many scores to settle with their Iranian rulers, but as bad as the current regime in Iran is, Iranians need only look across the border into Iraq to see that U.S. occupation will be much worse. War, a puppet capitalist regime, a million dead, torture, millions of refugees, and an occupier mainly interested in privatization to loot resources. As Iraq shows, there is no liberation at the hands of U.S. occupation. And as the CIA’s Shah showed, there is no liberation under a U.S. imposed puppet. Only anti-imperialist socialist revolution can begin to solve the problems faced by women, ethnic minorities, and the working class of Iran.

NO TO OBAMA’S THREATS AGAINST IRAN!

U.S. HANDS OFF IRAN!

On Iraq, Obama has never promised to fully withdraw. In a debate in September 2007, when asked if he would have U.S. troops out of Iraq by 2013 Barack Obama said "I believe that we should have all our troops out by 2013, but I don't want to make promises not knowing what the situation's going to be three or four years out." ("The Democratic Presidential Debate on MSNBC", New York Times 9/26/07).

The U.S. must leave by air, sea, and land as quickly as possible. U.S. imperialism has created a horrible situation, but that is no excuse to stay, and U.S. troops, Halliburton, etc. are only making matters worse. Over a million Iraqis are dead. These deaths are not just caused by the civil war that the U.S. has ignited, nor are they just caused by the death-squad government that the U.S. has put in power. U.S. guns and bombers are also the direct cause of a large number of deaths. Iraq needs to be turned over to the Iraqi people through immediate withdrawal.

In addition, Obama has directly supported the U.S. war and occupation of Iraq by voting in the Senate to fund it. If it were not for the Democrat votes in congress, the recent $162 billion dollars for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan would have never passed.

This most recent New York Times Op Ed from Obama continues on with a pro-war position. Obama is clear. He wants a gradual redeployment of the majority of troops to fight other wars while calling for continuing keep some troops fighting in Iraq.

On Blackwater mercenaries fighting in Iraq Obama also refuses to support a ban, and promised to continue to use Blackwater when he becomes president (Democracy Now!, June 2, 2008).

The US government has no right to be in Iraq murdering, torturing, and humiliating their people while making massive profits for the military industry and other contractors. The U.S. is attempting to privatize Iraqi oil to eliminate Iraqi control over this most important resource and give U.S. and British oil companies control over the oil. The puppet government the US has set up is a death squad government that should not be protected by U.S. troops. Continued occupation of Iraq is a continued attempt to subvert the national will of the Iraqi people and it must end immediately, yet Obama's plan is to only leave, partially, after a couple years, and this, assuredly, only after the oil law has been passed and oil ownership handed over to the multi-nationals. This, as Obama's own use of the term "redeployment" indicates, will free U.S. troops up for other oil wars.

NO TO OBAMA’S “PHASED REDEPLOYMENT”!

U.S. OUT OF IRAQ AND AFGHANISTAN NOW!

U.S. HANDS OFF THE WORLD!

Another major cause for war in the Middle East is U.S. military support to the racist regime in Israel. Obama promises to continue this practice. At AIPAC Obama promised:

“Defense cooperation between the United States and Israel is a model of success, and must be deepened. As president, I will implement a Memorandum of Understanding that provides $30 billion in assistance to Israel over the next decade — investments to Israel's security that will not be tied to any other nation. First, we must approve the foreign aid request for 2009. Going forward, we can enhance our cooperation on missile defense. We should export military equipment to our ally Israel under the same guidelines as NATO.”

This despite Israel’s recent war of aggression against Lebanon, a war that, if it were not for the heroic resistance of Hezbollah fighters, would have ended in another Israeli occupation like Israel’s brutal occupation of Lebanon that took place in the 1980’s. That occupation included crimes against humanity committed by Israeli and allied Christian Phalangists when they massacred thousands of Palestinians in cold-blood at the Sabra and Chatila refugee camps.

In addition, Obama’s speech made no reference to the suffering faced by the Palestinian people as a result of the creation and continuation of the Jewish state. Israel is a state that created a homeland for one people, through force and violence, by denying the homeland of Palestine’s original inhabitants. Also missing from Obama’s speech was the brutal blockade currently being carried out against Palestinians in Gaza. Obama expressed zero sympathy for the Palestinians and other Arabs, only promises to supply Israel with the weapons to kill more Arabs.

Massive U.S. military aid helps keep the repressive governments of Israel, Egypt, and Saudi Arabia in power. Instead of promising more U.S. military aid, that aid should be cut off to better allow the people of the Middle East to decide their own future.

NO TO OBAMA’S PROMISE OF BILLIONS TO ISRAEL!

Another indicator of where Obama stands on imperialist war is how he sees the past wars of the United States. Of H. W. Bush and his war on Iraq Obama recently stated, "I have enormous sympathy for the foreign policy of George H. W. Bush. I don't have a lot of complaints about their handling of Desert Storm." (Barack Obama, from David Brooks article, "Obama Admires Bush, NY Times, May 16, 2008)

Leading up to that war, Kuwait was slant drilling into Iraqi Ramaila oil fields. Iraq saw this as theft. In addition, the Kuwaiti monarchy went against OPEC quotas and increased oil production by 40%, bringing down the price of oil on the world market, something Saddam Hussein called economic warfare.

Before Iraq invaded Kuwait, Saddam Hussein was, at that time an ally of the United States in the wars against Iran and the Kurds. He had received massive U.S. military backing in those wars. When he assembled troops on the Kuwaiti border, US ambassador April Glaspie met with Saddam Hussein and told him, "We have no opinion on the Arab-Arab conflicts, like your border disagreement with Kuwait."

Saddam Hussein saw this as a green light from his powerful U.S. ally to invade Kuwait. Soon after, he did.

But Saddam Hussein was set up by the United States because the U.S. wanted a war. The reason for this was to prop up the profits of the military industrial complex. The Soviet Union had just fallen, and the military industries needed an excuse to keep spending billions of dollars of our tax dollars on the military.

Saddam Hussein was the perfect boogie-man to meet their needs. The U.S. corporate media pointed out that he had murdered tens of thousands of Kurds, never mentioning why they were silent when the operations were taking place with weapons supplied by the United States.

The U.S. corporate media also claimed that premature babies in Kuwait had been taken out of incubators and left to die so that the incubators could be shipped back to Baghdad. The whole story was a complete fabrication, and the corporate media even admitted it after the war, but the lie served its purpose in swaying many people who otherwise questioned going to war for the repressive Kuwaiti monarchy.

In addition, President H.W. Bush claimed as reason for war, "Within three days, 120,000 Iraqi troops with 850 tanks had poured into Kuwait and moved south to threaten Saudi Arabia. It was then that I decided to act to check that aggression." This was based on supposed Pentagon satellite photos. Yet, from commercial satellite photos acquired by the St. Petersburg Times, this was proven to be a lie, the desert Bush senior and the Pentagon referred to was nothing but empty desert.

While playing up false stories of baby killers and the new Hitler that was going to march across the Middle East, the U.S. corporate media ignored Kuwait’s theft of Iraqi oil as well the historic claim of Iraq to Kuwait, with Kuwait being a construct of British imperialism to divide the territory and limit Iraqi access to the sea.

In addition, the U.S. corporate media completely ignored the repressive nature of the Kuwaiti monarchy that U.S. troops were sent to fight and die for. The vast majority of those living in Kuwait were denied the right to vote and other more basic rights. This included women and people labeled foreigners, many of whom had been in Kuwait for generations. Some who had ancestors in Kuwait prior to 1920 were even denied Kuwaiti citizenship. Palestinian workers built modern Kuwait, but they were kept in second class status. This situation was so bad that many Palestinians aided the Iraqi troops and saw them as a liberation army. After the U.S. re-installed the monarchy, most Kuwaiti Palestinians were driven out of Kuwait.

For women in Kuwait the Iraqi invasion also brought hope. Unlike all of the US supported governments and forces in the Arab World, Iraqi women have many rights found nowhere else in the Arab World except in the Asian republics of the former Soviet Union. Under Saddam Hussein, over 50% of Iraqi doctors were women. Iraqi women were allowed to walk unescorted in the streets. They were allowed to drive. Iraqi women could even freely criticize men. In addition, Iraqi women had the right to work and control their own funds. This was in stark contrast to the treatment of women under the repressive monarchy of Kuwait where women had / have no rights what-so-ever.

In carrying out the war to defend the Kuwaiti monarchy the U.S. used depleted uranium (DU) weapons that have contaminated Iraqi water, soil, and food with radiation. This radiation has caused large numbers of birth defects and other diseases for the Iraqi people. In addition, U.S. soldiers were not given protection and, as a result, became ill in massive numbers with the symptoms of radiation poisoning. Like Agent Orange poisoning in Vietnam, the military brass pretended they had no clue to the cause of this illness that became dubbed “Persian Gulf War Syndrome”. Yet this was later exposed as a lie when reports were made public warning the military brass of the health risks of DU weapons before the war.

Government demographer Beth Osborn Duponte lost her job when she estimated the civilian loss of life in Iraq to be around 83,000, 13,000 directly from U.S. bombing and another 70,000 civilians dead as a result of U.S. targeting of civilian necessities such as water treatment facilities, medical facilities and supplies, and the electric power grid.

In addition, Duponte estimated deaths of Iraqi troops to be around 40,000. Many of the Iraqi troops killed were buried alive. In defense of U.S. actions Col. Lon Maggart said, "People somehow have the notion that burying guys alive is nastier than blowing them up with hand grenades or sticking them in gut with bayonets, well it's not."

So Obama has no problems with Bush targeting civilians, irradiating U.S. troops and the Iraqi people, burying people alive, and re-installing a repressive monarchy in Kuwait. In addition, Obama wants to escalate the war in Afghanistan, send troops into Pakistan, is already threatening Iran with war, will never fully pull out of Iraq and only promises to pull out most troops in two years after an extended gradual re-deployment of troops to other wars, will continue to use murderous Blackwater mercenaries in Iraq, and promises billions in military aid to Israel. Enough said.

Obama will be nominated the presidential candidate of the Democrat Party on August 24-28 at the Democrat Party National Convention (DNC). In opposition to the DNC convention, protests are being organized, with organizers stating:

"On August 24-28, the ruling elite and their defenders will converge in Denver Colorado, in an attempt to recuperate the gains of global social movements and produce another myth of progress. Lip service to global warming, the economic crisis and the war will endow them with the magic to spread amnesia across the hearts and minds of North America... Outside those doors, however, so many will exclaim, smash and sing a harmonious ‘no.’...”

In addition, there will be protests at the equally pro-war Republican National convention being held September 1-4 in Minneapolis, Minnesota.

Although virtually ignored by the corporate press, there are other presidential candidates who are running in opposition to the Democrats and Republicans who are for immediate withdrawal from Iraq and Afghanistan. These include Cynthia McKinney running on the Green Party ticket, Brian Moore of the Socialist Party, Gloria La Riva on the Party for Socialism and Liberation ticket, and Róger Calero on the Socialist Workers Party ticket. Corporate controlled elections and media assure that these authentic anti-war candidates will not get elected, but these candidacies do help expose people to positions of politicians not controlled by corporate interests and the pro-war Democrat Party machine. In addition, through some of these campaigns, more people become exposed to socialist ideas and the ideas of class struggle methods to bring about change.

A vote for Obama or McCain is a vote for war! So that's what, in active terms, you're really voting for when you vote Democrat or Republican. Those of us voting for third parties, or refusing to vote, will not change the country directly through the elections either, but at least we won’t be dumb enough to vote for own oppressors and exploiters that are waging imperialist war. Instead, we will have the sense to be working for something different.

And those of us in unions should be angry that our hard earned union dues are being squandered on the Democrat Party when that money should instead be put into stronger strike funds to strengthen our ability to fight for better contracts, for socialized medicine, and for bigger strikes against the wars.

Build the Anti-War Movement! For More Strikes for Immediate Withdrawal Like the May 1st ILWU Anti-War Strike That Shut Down 29 Ports! Support Soldiers Refusing to Fight Including the 10,000 U.S. Soldiers Who Have Gone AWOL! Build the Socialist and Anti-Imperialist Movements! U.S. Hands off Iran! U.S. Out of Iraq and Afghanistan Now!

This is an article of Liberation News, subscribe free:
https://lists.riseup.net/www/info/liberation_news

Join the Cool Earth Party
http://tribes.tribe.net/coolearth

posted in Anarchism - 0 replies

Unionists Protest Uribe Venezuela Visit

steveargue2 — Fri, 11 Jul 2008 15:23:27 GMT

Uribe visit to Venezuela

STATEMENT OF CCURA UNION TENDENCY ON URIBE VISIT

July 6--The Corriente Clasista Unitaria Revolucionaria y Autonoma of the National Union of Workers (U.N.T.) rejects categorically the visit that has announced of Alvaro Uribe to Caracas, top representative of the bloody Colombian oligarchy. Venezuelan workers have shown that we are anti-imperialist fighters in fact and not just in words. We do not share the judgment issued by President Chavez when he referred to the Colombian president as a "brother" and "friend" in the opening event of the Non-Aligned Ministers Conference, We know he represents the drug traffickers and paramilitarists that kill Colombian workers and peasants. He can never be a friend or brother of our people.

The Venezuelan government has announced a meeting between Chavez and Uribe on July 11th. It will be one month since the infamous act of President Chavez, together with representatives of the Venezuelan bourgeoisie, announced "the productive reimpulse" through a strategic alliance with the exploiters. Just as the class enemies of Venezuelan workers form alliances with the government, now the maximum representative of imperialism in South America, Alvaro Uribe, will visit Caracas to give a "reimpulse" to relations with the Venezuelan government.

But the workers know who Uribe is and no government can fool us and present him as a friend or ally. Our class brothers are persecuted and murdered by the paramilitaries headed by Uribe, as Colombia has been the country where the largest number of trade unionists in the world have been murdered. This year several activists and worker fighters were murdered because they participated in a national march against the paramilitaries and state terrorism. Our brothers and friends are those who are carrying the democratic struggles against the fascist government of Uribe.

We salute the action of community radio ECOS 93.9 of Merida and other revolutionary collectives to organize a massive mobilization in repudiation of the visit of Uribe, and our organization will join this action which will class struggle, revolutionary and anti-imperialist.

(translated by Earl Gilman)

Distributed by Liberation News
https://lists.riseup.net/www/info/liberation_news

Cool Earth Party
http://tribes.tribe.net/coolearth

posted in Anarchism - 0 replies

Iran redux

Tedster — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 23:35:58 GMT

ZNet ZNet

United States and Israel against Iran

Flashpoints Interview

June, 26 2008

By Gareth Porter
and Dennis Bernstein

Source: Flashpoints

Gareth Porter's ZSpace Page
Join ZSpace

Dennis Bernstein: We focus on potential war by the United States and Israel against Iran. We're watching that closely. The drums of war are beating again in the Middle East, as we say. And the war that may be brewing between Israel and the U.S. and Iran has the potential to dwarf the consequences of the U.S. invasion of Iraq, as deadly and horrific as that's been. The latest warning sign came in the New York Times reported last Friday that in early June, Israel had carried out a major military exercise. U.S. officials called it "a rehearsal for a potential bombing attack on Iran's nuclear facilities." The exercise involved more than a hundred Israeli F-16 and F-15 fighters. The same week, Germany's Der Spiegel reported that Israel's leadership has concluded that diplomacy has failed to stop Iran's nuclear program and that military action is unavoidable, a warning that was earlier sounded by the German foreign minister. These ominous developments come after months of escalating threats and charges by the U.S. and Israel against Iran for its actions in Iraq and Lebanon and Gaza and for supposedly pursuing nuclear weapons despite repeated international atomic agency findings to the contrary. Top Bush officials have taken trips to the region, perhaps for military consultations. Andrew Cockburn reports that earlier this year, the Bush administration secretly authorized a sweeping covert action program against Iran, including assassinating officials. And there have been reports in The Asian Times, the Times of London, and by former CIA officer Philip Giraldi that a U.S. strike on Revolutionary Guard camps inside Iran has already been authorized. So is this all for show simply to pressure Iran or is a war really possible?

With us to examine these developments is Gareth Porter. He is the author of Perils of Dominance: Imbalance of Power and the Road to War in Vietnam. He is a contributor to InterPress News Service, The American Prospect, The Nation, and Salon.com...

Gareth Porter, it is good to have you in the studio... You've done some interesting investigations in terms of what has been leading up to this, and the role that the U.S. is playing with Israel in a potential attack on Iran. In particular, you found out and wrote about how Cheney and his allies actually tried to win approval for strikes against Iran's Revolutionary Guard camps last August. Can you talk about this incident and why there was a little bit of restraint?

Gareth Porter: Right. This is, I think, very important for the simple reason that it does provide a kind of smoking gun evidence, if you will, that this whole unfolding threat to Iran has not been simply a psyops, simply an intimidation operation. We know now for a fact that Dick Cheney did, in fact, propose within the Administration that they attack Revolutionary Guard bases in Iran that were supposedly connected with supplying or training the Iraqi Shiite militiamen coming back to Iraq to fight U.S. occupation forces. And this would be done if and when they could get some kind of concrete evidence that would basically convict the Iranians of some direct involvement in the fight in Iraq.

What we now know is that the Pentagon responded to that proposal very quickly and very strongly by arguing that it's not going to be on to simply go out and launch a so-called limited strike without considering what is going to be the consequence of that in terms of escalation on the Iranian side and then what are we going to do, assuming as they did assume, that the Iranians would in fact respond by targeting probably American bases, American personnel in the Middle East and probably in Iraq. And assuming that, then what would the United States do in response and how far are we going to go up the escalatory ladder?

That was the issue that they raised, according to a former State Department official who went on the record with me: Jay Scott Carpenter. This is the first time that a former Bush administration official had actually gone on the record and said yes, there was in fact not only a Cheney proposal officially within the Administration, but a very important and very high-level debate over that. And the result of it was, in effect, that the Pentagon -- and the Joint Chiefs of Staff were supporting them on this, according to Jay Scott Carpenter. They supported the Pentagon officials who said, "No, we can't do this without figuring out how far we're going to go", and the implication being that we're not going to support an all-out war with Iran, which would -- certainly, the obvious implication that was being drawn from the Cheney proposal, that that's what he really wanted.

Dennis Bernstein: Any sense how close Cheney got to having his way?

Gareth Porter: No, you can't really find out from a single source who was obviously getting this somewhat indirectly, because he was not personally involved in the meetings themselves, just how close we might have come to that. But the impression that I got was that the response was so negative and so strong, and that it was so unanimous within the Pentagon, including the military leadership, that Cheney was really put on the defensive, that he did not have the kind of arguments that he could come back with to basically counter this very strong argument by the Pentagon against his proposal. But what I did point out in my article is that this was the second time that Cheney had been, in a way, checkmated or stopped by the National Security bureaucracy in Washington - if you will, the permanent government - from making moves toward sort of setting up a war with Iran.

The first time was in early 2007. It was in February 2007 - or January/February 2007 - when Cheney essentially ordered the military in Baghdad to put out a briefing that would essentially take the position that Iran had been manufacturing these explosively formed projectiles which were armor-penetrating explosives, which were killing American troops in Iraq. And he was arguing that Iran is really fighting a proxy war by supplying these to the Iraqi Shiite militia. Well, the Defense Department, the State Department, and the NSC all said, "We can't say that. There's no evidence for it. And we've already been through this once with Iraq. And we'll all have egg all over our faces and our credibility will be shot." And so they said no to that. And so it looked like Cheney was checkmated because it went into the interagency process and essentially they sent the briefing back to the authors and said, "Do it again and do it right so that it's consistent with the evidence." Well, this time, in February 2007, Cheney did an end-run around the bureaucracy by getting Petraeus, who was going out to become the top commander in Baghdad of the U.S. forces, to agree that as soon as he arrived, they would, in fact, give that same military briefing that gave the Cheney line that the bureaucrats said no to. And that's exactly what happened. Within 24 hours of Petraeus's arrival in Baghdad and his taking over the command of U.S. forces, that briefing was given. The State Department, I guarantee you, did not know it was coming until two days beforehand.

Dennis Bernstein: Now you're saying then, you are suggesting - or more - that General Petraeus was an active player, that he was a willing partner in what appears to be a Cheney operation or deception

Gareth Porter: Absolutely. There is no doubt in my mind.

Dennis Bernstein: Say a little more about that.

Gareth Porter: Clearly, what happened was that Petraeus, when he got his job, it was on the condition that he would support the Bush-Cheney policy, both in Iraq and with regard to Iran. And that's exactly what happened. When he went out there, from the White House, from the Cheney wing of the White House, to have the military briefers give that briefing, which had been vetoed in Washington.

Now, that was just the first step in this. We later see Petraeus in September of 2007, after he's been out there several months, give an interview with Brit Hume of Fox News Television in which he said - I won't try to put forward the same words that he used - but he said, in effect, that we have been saying to the White House and to CENTCOM that we need to do something about the allegation or reality of Iranian interference in Iraq, implying very clearly that he was supporting the Cheney proposal to attach the Iranian bases, which are connected, supposedly, with that issue.

Dennis Bernstein: And, of course, given the short tenure that he had in Iraq, it gives one the impression that he was really an agent in this process. So he gets in, he does a few things, and then he's kicked upstairs. That was very interesting. Everybody wondered if he was so successful, so effective, The Man, then why did they take him out so fast? But maybe he had a mission.

Gareth Porter: He is not an independent actor. Petraeus is a man who has been sent to Iraq to carry out the policy of the Bush White House, and he will do the same thing on Iran. And that is why his being named to replace, in effect, Admiral Fallon as commander of CENTCOM is so important and why it sets up a situation in which Cheney and Bush can do an end-run around the opponents of war with Iran in Washington.

Dennis Bernstein: And, of course, you take out the unwilling general and you put in the willing general.

Gareth Porter: Exactly. And he's arriving - and this is very important - the timing of his arrival is late summer, early fall. It's going to be August or September. So I think that we can say that the period of maximum danger about U.S. intentions -- which I think that there is a serious possibility that they do intend to attach Iran - it will be after the arrival at CENTCOM in Tampa of General Petraeus in later summer or early fall.

Dennis Bernstein: ...We did hear - and Reese Ehrlich did some significant reporting on what was happening at the border, and the fact that the United States, with Israeli intelligence such as Mossad, were already busy going back and forth over the border. There was a great deal of counterinsurgencies. There are connections between what was going on there and this.

Gareth Porter: If you mean the connection between the Israeli role in Iraq and Iran, of course they're connected in the sense that Israel is very deeply involved in all of the Cheney -Bush policies in the Middle East. There's a very, very close working collaboration across the board, whether it's Lebanon, Iran, Iraq, or other parts of the Middle East. They are very, very closely working together on a common strategy. At least they discuss common strategies. That is not to say that everything Israel does has been planned ahead of time by the White House with the Israelis. In fact, the White House neocons, including Cheney, wanted Israel to go much farther in 2006 than they actually did. They wanted them to take down the Syrian regime instead of stopping in Lebanon. So there's not a perfect correlation, by any means.

Dennis Bernstein: Now following up right on that, that brings us to these recent exercises. The United States reported them as if they were surprises. It's like, oh, they'd better tell the New York Times that Israel did an exercise because they didn't know it was happening. Let's talk about what this exercise has to do with the relationship between the U.S. and their push toward war in Iran. What about this story?

Gareth Porter: First of all, I think we have to see that the purpose of this story -- from both Israeli and Bush Administration point of view - was to implicate the United States more deeply in the Israeli policy, to give the appearance to the world and to the American people that the Bush Administration is speaking, not on behalf of Israel, but speaking with Israel, announcing that this is taking place and giving it their interpretation, in a way that was useful to Israel.

But there's a second point here that I think you also need to keep in mind. That is that Israel is not likely to strike Iran without the direct involvement, militarily, of the United States. The United States will be involved in some way if Israel strikes Iran, whether it's sending American bombers or simply providing the intelligence and other support for an Israel strike. They have to do it with the Americans; they can't do it successfully without the Americans.
From: Z Net - The Spirit Of Resistance Lives
URL: http://www.zcommunications.org/znet/viewArticle/18006

posted in Anarchism - 2 replies

Message From Iraqi Resistance

steveargue2 — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 21:34:01 GMT

While I have disagreements with the following group, they make many good points in this video, and I agree most fundamentally with the right of Iraqis to run their country as they see fit without the US occupation.

Message From Iraqi Resistance
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ccMuRyBnTIs&feature=related

The following are insane US troops caught on tape in Iraq. Would you want this occupation army in your country?

US Marines Throw Puppy Off Cliff
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K6zXpgcpW5w&feature=related

US Soldier on tape admits to rape and torture in Iraq!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O3dvoBhevOQ&feature=related

Iraq - Soldiers shoot civilians
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hWE5hu4z_8Y&NR=1

Abu Ghraib - Iraq
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rz7UNxnOI3M&NR=1

American Soldiers attack on Terrorist sheep
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3TQdgyEapvw&feature=related

KILL EVERYBODY: American soldier exposes US policy in Iraq
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VwwMF6biCJU&feature=related

Iraqi Kids Begging For Water
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tSnHudm5Cmk&feature=related

Apache killing Iraqi Truck drivers
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LbVTfrm06v8&feature=related

Winning the hearts and minds of the Iraqis
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CyRPYMTICRM&feature=related

Soldiers beat teenage Iraqis
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mnp0C0PNZT4&feature=related

US Soldiers Shoot A Dog!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5bQU89FyVw0&feature=related

US soldiers Killing a wounded Iraqi
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z0qs71TYwoM&feature=related

American Soldiers having fun Killing Civilians in Iraq
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7FD1jHueZZc&feature=related

American Soldiers Taunt Thirsty Iraqi Kids
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=667SaGS-Jqg&feature=related

US / British Troops Out of Iraq!

posted in Anarchism - 0 replies

Obama on Blackwater-A glaring hint that he isn't going to pull out.

Tedster — Sat, 07 Jun 2008 05:41:33 GMT

AMY GOODMAN: I want to talk about the future of Blackwater and also the bases here in the United States. But first, let me play for you a little exchange I had with Barack Obama, asking him about Blackwater. He had come to Cooper Union a few months ago to talk about the economy, and afterwards in the rope line, I asked him.

AMY GOODMAN: Would you call for a ban on the private military contractors like Blackwater?

SEN. BARACK OBAMA: I’ve actually—I’m the one who sponsored the bill that called for the investigation of Blackwater in [inaudible], so—

AMY GOODMAN: But would you support the Sanders one now?

SEN. BARACK OBAMA: Here’s the problem: we have 140,000 private contractors right there, so unless we want to replace all of or a big chunk of those with US troops, we can’t draw down the contractors faster than we can draw down our troops. So what I want to do is draw—I want them out in the same way that we make sure that we draw out our own combat troops. Alright? I mean, I—

AMY GOODMAN: Not a ban?

SEN. BARACK OBAMA: Well, I don’t want to replace those contractors with more US troops, because we don’t have them, alright? But this was a speech about the economy.

AMY GOODMAN: The war is costing $3 trillion, according to Stiglitz.

SEN. BARACK OBAMA: That’s what—I know, which I made a speech about last week. Thank you.

AMY GOODMAN: That was Barack Obama.

JEREMY SCAHILL: This is interesting. I mean, this is one of the more interesting exchanges I’ve seen with a presidential candidate on this issue. I mean, it almost never gets raised at all.

Barack Obama—this is the reality about this. Barack Obama understands this issue extremely well. His staff has been on top of this for quite some time. He—what he said to you is true. He did introduce the legislation in the Senate that has become the Democrats’ official legislation on these private security companies, and he did it eight months before Nisour Square. So, clearly, Barack Obama is someone who has been following this very closely. He understands it very intimately.

What’s interesting—and you raised this with him—is that he won’t take the step toward actually trying to ban these companies. Representative Jan Schakowsky and Senator Bernie Sanders have put forward legislation called the Stop Outsourcing Security Act in the Congress, and Barack Obama has said he’s not going to come onboard and support that legislation.

Interestingly, when I reported in The Nation that Obama would not support that legislation, which seeks to ban the use of these companies in US war zones, Hillary Clinton, five days before the Texas and Ohio primaries, the day my piece comes out, she responds by putting a statement on her website saying that she’s going to endorse Bernie Sanders’ legislation, and she becomes the single most important US political figure to come out for a ban. Now, I’m glad that Hillary Clinton did that, and I look forward to her making this one of her top legislative priorities after the primary season is over.

But on Barack Obama, he’s in a very complicated situation, because his Iraq plan actually is not a plan to end the occupation of Iraq. It’s to continue it with a different label attached to it. And so, you hear him there talking about how “I don’t want to replace contractors with US troops.” The reality is, and Barack Obama knows this very well, his Iraq plan could not be implemented if he was against the use of Blackwater or other private security forces. And the reality is, he’s probably going to have to use these companies for two to three years at a minimum, unless he makes it an aggressive point of trying to shut them down. He might even have to use Blackwater for the first year of his administration.

http://www.democracynow.org/2008/6/2/blackwater_jeremy_scahill_on

posted in Anarchism - 0 replies

Raygun used against mock protesters.

Tedster — Mon, 02 Jun 2008 23:52:02 GMT

60 Minutes: Pentagon's raygun demonstrated on mock protesters
06/02/2008 @ 10:01 am
Filed by David Edwards and Muriel Kane

The Pentagon has been developing a raygun which can harmlessly repel enemies by causing a burning sensation in the top layer of the skin. However, according to CBS's 60 Minutes, the military is unwilling to actually trust this weapon enough to deploy it in Iraq.
Advertisement

"We are now stepping into the Buck Rogers scenario," explained Colonel Kirk Hymes, who is in charge of testing the "Active Denial System" at Moody Air Force Base in Georgia.

Hymes demonstrated the weapon by staging what CBS somewhat oddly called "a scenario soldiers might encounter in Iraq" -- a handful of military volunteers, dressed as civilian protesters, who carried signs saying "peace not war" and threw objects at a small group of soldiers. A series of raygun blasts from half a mile away disrupted their chants and finally sent them running.

Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Acquisiton Sue Payton calls the Active Denial System a "huge game-changer" which "would save huge numbers of lives." She told CBS, "It could be used to read someone's mind, in effect. ... If they continue to come at you, then you're fairly sure ... they're probably a terrorist or an adversary who wants to do you harm."

The Active Denial System was developed in secret for ten years before being unveiled by the Pentagon in 2001. As of 2004, it was being described as ready for use in Iraq within the next 12 months. This has still not occurred, and according to Secretary Payton, use of the weapon in Iraq is now "not politically tenable" because after Abu Ghraib "you don't ever, ever, ever want a system like this to be thought of as a torture weapon."

However, the failure to deploy the weapon as planned has raised suspicions that the real intention is to use it for domestic crowd control.

In 2006, Air Force Secretary Michael Wynne was quoted as saying that the device should be used first on Americans, because "if we're not willing to use it here against our fellow citizens, then we should not be willing to use it in a wartime situation. ... If I hit somebody with a nonlethal weapon and they claim that it injured them in a way that was not intended, I think that I would be vilified in the world press."

Raytheon, which developed the system for the Pentagon, is currently selling a more limited-range civilian version of the system, under the name "Silent Guardian," which it promotes as being suitable for "law enforcement, checkpoint security, facility protection, force protection and peacekeeping missions."

Commander Charles "Sid" Heal of the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department, who advised Raytheon in developing the raygun, told CBS that the real reason the system has not been deployed in Iraq is "cowardice." Heal, a former Marine, took a variety of non-lethal weapons to Somalia in 1995 and was dismayed to find that his superiors felt their supposedly humanitarian mission was better accomplished by killing. He would love to have the Pentagon's raygun available for such purposes as controlling prison riots.

The Pentagon is spending just $13.1 million on the raygun this year. Secretary Payton agrees this is "absolutely peanuts ... chump change," but she explained to CBS that with only a $475 billion annual budget, "we don't have enough money to do things that are the here and now." The raygun is seen as unproven because it has never been deployed in the field, and it has not been deployed in the field because it is unproven.

"Lethal weapons have an easier time getting into our system," acknowledges Colonel Hymes.

This video is from CBS's 60 Minutes, broadcast June 1, 2008.

http://rawstory.com/news/2008/60_Minutes_Pentagons_ray_gun_tested_0602.html

posted in Anarchism - 0 replies

Iraqi Oil Workers Tell Chevron "Hands Off Iraq"

steveargue2 — Mon, 26 May 2008 22:13:52 GMT

Iraqi Oil Workers Tell Chevron "Hands Off Iraq"

In a letter to Chevron executives and shareholders (and to ExxonMobil, who meet the same day), Iraqi Oil Workers Unions call on Chevron to end the occupation and stop pushing for the Iraq Oil [Theft] Law. This message will be delivered by antiwar, environmenta, and labor organizers as a protest converges on Chevrons annual shareholder meeting. Their message is below. This event will be on Wednesday May 28, at 7am at Chevrons Corporate headquarters in San Ramon. For more information, see: http://bayareadirectaction.wordpress.com/2008/05/14/may-28-demand-justice-from-chevron/

******************
To: The Shareholders of ExxonMobil and Chevron Corporations and All Peace Loving People of the World

From: Hassan Juma’a Awad, President, Iraqi Federation of Oil Unions (IFOU)

We call upon the governments, corporations and other institutions behind the ongoing occupation of Iraq to respond to our demands for real democracy, true sovereignty and self-determination, free of all foreign interference.

Five years of invasion, war and occupation have brought nothing but death, destruction, misery and suffering to our people. In the name of our “liberation,” more than a million of our citizens have been killed or wounded, our nation’s schools, hospitals and other infrastructure have been destroyed, our neighbourhoods have been bombed, our homes have been broken into, our children have been traumatized, many of our family members and neighbours have been assaulted and arrested, our national treasures have been looted, and nearly twenty percent of our people have been turned into refugees.

The continued occupation fuels the violence in Iraq rather than alleviating it. The occupation has helped to foment and then exploit sectarian divisions and terror attacks where there had been none.

The Ba’athist legislation of 1987, which banned trade unions in the public sector and public enterprises (80% of all workers), is still in effect and continues to be enforced against us. Our union offices have been raided. Union property has been seized and destroyed. Our bank accounts have been frozen. Our leaders have been beaten, arrested, abducted and assassinated. Our rights as workers are routinely violated. This is an attack on our rights and the basic precepts of a democratic society. It is a grim reminder of the shadow of dictatorship still stalking our country.

We call upon you and all the world’s peace-loving peoples to help us to end the nightmare of occupation and restore our sovereignty and national independence so that we can chart our own course to the future.

1) We demand an immediate withdrawal of all foreign troops from our country, and utterly reject the agreement being negotiated with the USA for long-term bases and a military presence. Iraq must be returned to full sovereignty.

2) We demand the passage of a labour law promised by our Constitution, that adheres to ILO principles to protect the rights of workers to organize, bargain and strike, independent of state control and interference and on which Iraqi trade unionists have been fully consulted.

3) We demand an end to meddling in our sovereign economic affairs by the International Monetary Fund, the USA and UK, and multinational energy corporations, and recognition that no major economic decisions concerning our services and resources can be made while foreign troops occupy our country.

4) We demand that the US government, oil companies and others immediately cease lobbying for the oil law which would fracture the country and hand control over our oil to multinational companies like ExxonMobil and Chevron. We demand that all oil companies be prevented from entering into any long-term agreement concerning oil while Iraq remains occupied. The Iraqi government must tear up the current draft of the oil law, and begin to develop a legitimate oil policy based on full and genuine consultation with the Iraqi people. Only after all occupation forces are gone should a long term plan for the development of our oil resources be adopted.

We seek your support and solidarity to help us end the military and economic occupation of our country.

We look forward to the day when we have a world based on co-operation and solidarity.

We look forward to a world free from war, sectarianism, competition and exploitation.

******************
Also See:

Take the Profit Out of Global Warming and War, Nationalize the Oil Industry
http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2008/05/24/18501994.php

Clinton and Obama: Failures on War and Global Warming
http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2008/02/10/18478172.php

Join the Cool Earth Party
http://tribes.tribe.net/coolearth

Distributed by Liberation News, Subscribe Free:
https://lists.riseup.net/www/info/liberation_news

posted in Anarchism - 0 replies

1950: 100,000 Executed by Imperialism's Korean Dictatorship

steveargue2 — Mon, 19 May 2008 17:50:49 GMT

[The US war of aggression in Korea murdered 5 million Koreans. Part of that murder was the cold blooded executions of over 100,000 leftists and suspected leftists by the South Korean government in 1950. Over 54,000 U.S. soldiers died in the U.S. war to defend that murderous U.S. imposed regime. The following AP article exposes what many on the left have known about for decades, but has been hidden from the general public in the United States by the government and corporate media. -Steven Argue]

AP Probes 'Cold-Blooded Slaughter' in South Korea
http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003805038

By CHARLES J. HANLEY and JAE-SOON CHANG, The Associated Press

Published: May 18, 2008 4:15 PM ET

DAEJEON Grave by mass grave, South Korea is unearthing the skeletons and buried truths of a cold-blooded slaughter from early in the Korean War, when this nation's U.S.-backed regime killed untold thousands of leftists and hapless peasants in a summer of terror in 1950.

With U.S. military officers sometimes present, and as North Korean invaders pushed down the peninsula, the southern army and police emptied South Korean prisons, lined up detainees and shot them in the head, dumping the bodies into hastily dug trenches. Others were thrown into abandoned mines or into the sea. Women and children were among those killed. Many victims never faced charges or trial.

The mass executions - intended to keep possible southern leftists from reinforcing the northerners - were carried out over mere weeks and were largely hidden from history for a half-century. They were ``the most tragic and brutal chapter of the Korean War,'' said historian Kim Dong-choon, a member of a 2-year-old government commission investigating the killings.

Hundreds of sets of remains have been uncovered so far, but researchers say they are only a tiny fraction of the deaths. The commission estimates at least 100,000 people were executed, in a South Korean population of 20 million.

That estimate is based on projections from local surveys and is ``very conservative,'' said Kim. The true toll may be twice that or more, he told The Associated Press.

In addition, thousands of South Koreans who allegedly collaborated with the communist occupation were slain by southern forces later in 1950, and the invaders staged their own executions of rightists.

Through the postwar decades of South Korean right-wing dictatorships, victims' fearful families kept silent about that blood-soaked summer. American military reports of the South Korean slaughter were stamped ``secret'' and filed away in Washington. Communist accounts were dismissed as lies.

Only since the 1990s, and South Korea's democratization, has the truth begun to seep out.

In 2002, a typhoon's fury uncovered one mass grave. Another was found by a television news team that broke into a sealed mine. Further corroboration comes from a trickle of declassified U.S. military documents, including U.S. Army photographs of a mass killing outside this central South Korean city.

Now Kim's Truth and Reconciliation Commission has added government authority to the work of scattered researchers, family members and journalists trying to peel away the long-running cover-up. The commissioners have the help of a handful of remorseful old men.

``Even now, I feel guilty that I pulled the trigger,'' said Lee Joon-young, 83, one of the executioners in a secluded valley near Daejeon in early July 1950.

The retired prison guard told the AP he knew that many of those shot and buried en masse were ordinary convicts or illiterate peasants wrongly ensnared in roundups of supposed communist sympathizers. They didn't deserve to die, he said. They ``knew nothing about communism.''

The 17 investigators of the commission's subcommittee on ``mass civilian sacrifice,'' led by Kim, have been dealing with petitions from more than 7,000 South Koreans, involving some 1,200 alleged incidents - not just mass planned executions, but also 215 cases in which the U.S. military is accused of the indiscriminate killing of South Korean civilians in 1950-51, usually in air attacks.

The commission last year excavated sites at four of an estimated 150 mass graves around the country, recovering remains of more than 400 people. Working deliberately, matching documents to eyewitness and survivor testimony, it has officially confirmed two large-scale executions - at a warehouse in the central South Korean county of Cheongwon, and at Ulsan on the southeast coast.

In January, then-President Roh Moo-hyun, under whose liberal leadership the commission was established, formally apologized for the more than 870 deaths confirmed at Ulsan, calling them ``illegal acts the then-state authority committed.''

The commission, with no power to compel testimony or prosecute, faces daunting tasks both in verifying events and identifying victims, and in tracing a chain of responsibility. Under Roh's conservative successor, Lee Myung-bak, whose party is seen as democratic heir to the old autocratic right wing, the commission may find less budgetary and political support.

The roots of the summer 1950 bloodbath lie in the U.S.-Soviet division of Japan's former Korea colony in 1945, which precipitated north-south turmoil and eventual war.

In the late 1940s, President Syngman Rhee's U.S.-installed rightist regime crushed leftist political activity in South Korea, including a guerrilla uprising inspired by the communists ruling the north. By 1950, southern jails were packed with up to 30,000 political prisoners.

The southern government, meanwhile, also created the National Guidance League, a ``re-education'' organization for recanting leftists and others suspected of communist leanings. Historians say officials met membership quotas by pressuring peasants into signing up with promises of rice rations or other benefits. By 1950, more than 300,000 people were on the league's rolls, organizers said.

North Korean invaders seized Seoul, the southern capital, in late June 1950 and freed thousands of prisoners, who rallied to the northern cause. Southern authorities, in full retreat with their U.S. military advisers, ordered National Guidance League members in areas they controlled to report to the police, who detained them. Soon after, commission researchers say, the organized mass executions of people regarded as potential collaborators began - ``bad security risks,'' as a police official described the detainees at the time.

The declassified record of U.S. documents shows an ambivalent American attitude toward the killings. American diplomats that summer urged restraint on southern officials - to no obvious effect - but a State Department cable that fall said overall commander Gen. Douglas MacArthur viewed the executions as a Korean ``internal matter,'' even though he controlled South Korea's military.

Ninety miles south of Seoul, here in the narrow, peaceful valley of Sannae, truckloads of prisoners were brought in from Daejeon Prison and elsewhere day after day in July 1950, as the North Koreans bore down on the city.

The American photos, taken by an Army major and kept classified for a half-century, show the macabre sequence of events.

White-clad detainees - bent, submissive, with hands bound - were thrown down prone, jammed side by side, on the edge of a long trench. South Korean military and national policemen then stepped up behind, pointed their rifles at the backs of their heads and fired. The bodies were tipped into the trench.

Trembling policemen - ``they hadn't shot anyone before'' - were sometimes off-target, leaving men wounded but alive, Lee said. He and others were ordered to check for wounded and finish them off.

Evidence indicates South Korean executioners killed between 3,000 and 7,000 here, said commissioner Kim. A half-dozen trenches, each up to 150 yards long and full of bodies, extended over an area almost a mile long, said Kim Chong-hyun, 70, chairman of a group of bereaved families campaigning for disclosure and compensation for the Daejeon killings. His father, accused but never convicted of militant leftist activity, was one victim.

Another was Yeo Tae-ku's father, whose wife and mother searched for him afterward.

``Bodies were just piled upon each other,'' said Yeo, 59, remembering his mother's description. ``Arms would come off when they turned them over.'' The desperate women never found him, and the mass graves were quickly covered over, as were others in isolated spots up and down this mountainous peninsula, to be officially ``forgotten.''

When British communist journalist Alan Winnington entered Daejeon that summer with North Korean troops and visited the site, writing of ``waxy dead hands and feet (that) stick through the soil,'' his reports in the Daily Worker were denounced as ``fabrication'' by the U.S. Embassy in London. American military accounts focused instead on North Korean reprisal killings that followed in Daejeon.

But CIA and U.S. military intelligence documents circulating even before the Winnington report, classified ``secret'' and since declassified, told of the executions by the South Koreans. Lt. Col. Bob Edwards, U.S. Embassy military attache in South Korea, wrote in conveying the Daejeon photos to Army intelligence in Washington that he believed nationwide ``thousands of political prisoners were executed within (a) few weeks'' by the South Koreans.

Another glimpse of the carnage appeared in an unofficial U.S. source, an obscure memoir self-published in 1981 by the late Donald Nichols, a U.S. Air Force intelligence officer, who told of witnessing ``the unforgettable massacre of approximately 1,800 at Suwon,'' 20 miles south of Seoul.

Such reports lend credibility to a captured North Korean document from Aug. 2, 1950, eventually declassified by Washington, which spoke of mass executions in 12 South Korean cities, including 1,000 killed in Suwon and 4,000 in Daejeon.

That early, incomplete North Korean report couldn't include those executed in territory still held by the southerners. Up to 10,000 were killed in the city of Busan alone, a South Korean lawmaker, Park Chan-hyun, estimated in 1960.

His investigation came during a 12-month democratic interlude between the overthrow of Rhee and a government takeover by Maj. Gen. Park Chung-hee's authoritarian military, which quickly arrested many then probing for the hidden story of 1950.

Kim said his projection of at least 100,000 dead is based in part on extrapolating from a survey by non-governmental organizations in one province, Busan's South Gyeongsang, which estimated 25,000 killed there. And initial evidence suggests most of the National Guidance League's 300,000 members were killed, he said.

Commission investigators agree with the late Lt. Col. Edwards' note to Washington in 1950, that ``orders for execution undoubtedly came from the top,'' that is, President Rhee, who died in 1965.

But any documentary proof of that may have been destroyed, just as the facts of the mass killings themselves were buried. In 1953, after the war ended in stalemate, after the deaths of at least 2 million people, half or more of them civilians, a U.S. Army war crimes report attributed all summary executions here in Daejeon to the ``murderous barbarism'' of North Koreans.

Such myths survived a half-century, in part because those who knew the truth were cowed into silence.

``My mother destroyed all pictures of my father, for fear the family would get an image as leftists,'' said Koh Chung-ryol, 57, who is convinced her 29-year-old father was innocent of wrongdoing when picked up in a broad police sweep here, to die in Sannae valley.

``My mother tried hard to get rid of anything about her husband,'' she said. ``She suffered unspeakable pain.''

Even educated South Koreans remained ignorant of their country's past. As a young researcher in the late 1980s, Yonsei University's Park Myung-lim, today a leading Korean War historian, was deeply shaken as he sought out confidential accounts of those days from ordinary Koreans.

``I cried,'' he said. ``I felt, 'Oh, my goodness. Oh, Jesus. This was my country? It was true?'''

The Truth and Reconciliation Commission can recommend but not award compensation for lost and ruined lives, nor can it bring surviving perpetrators to justice. ``Our investigative power is so meager,'' commission President Ahn Byung-ook told the AP.

His immediate concern is resources. ``The current government isn't friendly toward us, and so we're concerned that the budget may be cut next year,'' he said.

South Korean conservatives complain the ``truth'' campaign will only reopen old wounds from a time when, even at the village level, leftists and rightists carried out bloody reprisals against each other.

The life of the commission - with a staff of 240 and annual budget of $19 million - is guaranteed by law until at least 2010, when it will issue a final, comprehensive report.

Later this spring and summer its teams will resume digging at mass grave sites. Thus far, it has verified 16 incidents of 1950-51 - not just large-scale detainee killings, but also such events as a South Korean battalion's cold-blooded killing of 187 men, women and children at Kochang village, supposed sympathizers with leftist guerrillas.

By exposing the truth of such episodes, ``we hope to heal the trauma and pain of the bereaved families,'' the commission says. It also wants to educate people, ``not just in Korea, but throughout the international community,'' to the reality of that long-ago conflict, to ``prevent such a tragic war from reoccurring in the future.''

CHARLES J. HANLEY and JAE-SOON CHANG, The Associated Press
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Distributed by Liberation News, Subscribe free:
http://lists.riseup.net/www/info/liberation_news

Join the Cool Earth Party
http://tribes.tribe.net/coolearth

posted in Anarchism - 0 replies

NYT: Obama admires Bush Sr.: ''no complaints about handling of Desert Storm"

steveargue2 — Sat, 17 May 2008 18:33:07 GMT

Support for Empire is support for Empire -- any way you cut it. There's a reason Corporate American bankrolled Obama's campaign
...
**************
"I have enormous sympathy for the foreign policy of George H. W. Bush. I don't have a lot of complaints about their handling of Desert Storm."

Source:
- Barack Obama, from David Brooks article, "Obama Admires Bush, NY Times, May 16, 2008
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/16/opinion/16brooks.html?em&ex=1211169600&en=1577a90ae5048a04&ei=5087%0A

See:
Clinton and Obama: Failures on War and Global Warming
by STEVEN ARGUE
http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2008/02/10/18478172.php

posted in Anarchism - 0 replies