Wednesday, September 17, 2008
Tuesday, September 16, 2008
Bolivia Update 16th Sept
Bolivia and the Echoes of Allende
Morales Confronts the Insurrection
By ROGER BURBACH
September 15, 2008
As Bolivia teeters on the brink of civil war, President Evo Morales staunchly maintains his commitment to constructing a popular democracy by working within the state institutions that brought him to power. The show down with the right wing is taking place against the backdrop of the thirty-fifth anniversary of the overthrow of Salvador Allende, the heroic if tragic president of Chile who believed that the formal democratic state he inherited could be peacefully transformed to usher in a socialist society.
Like Allende, Morales faces a powerful economic and political elite aligned with the United States that is bent on reversing the limited reforms he has been able to implement during his nearly three years in power.
Early on, Morales--Bolivia's first indigenous president--moved assertively to exert greater control over the natural gas and oil resources of the country, sharply increasing the hydro-carbon tax, and then using a large portion of this revenue to provide a universal pension to all those over sixty years old, most of whom live in poverty and are indigenous.
The self-proclaimed Civic Committees in Media Luna (Half Moon)--Bolivia's four eastern departments--have orchestrated a rebellion against these changes, demanding departmental autonomy and control of the hydro-carbon revenues, as well as an end to agrarian reform and even control of the police forces. The Santa Cruz Civic Committee, dominated by agro-industrial interests, is supporting the Cruceno Youth Union (UJC), an affiliated group that acts as a para-military organization, seizing and fire bombing government offices, and attacking Indian and peasant organizations that dare to support the national government.
Morales' efforts to transform the institutions of the country have focused on the popularly elected Constituent Assembly to draft a new constitution. The assembly was convened in mid 2006 with representatives from Morales' political party, the Movement Towards Socialism (MAS) holding 54 percent of the seats. In the drafting of the new constitution, the right wing political parties, led by Podemos (We Can), insisted that a two-thirds vote was needed even for the working committees to approve the different sections of the constitution. When they were overruled and a new constitution was close to being approved in November, 2007, members of the assembly, including its indigenous president, Silvia Lazarte, were assaulted in the streets of Sucre, the old nineteenth century capital where the assembly was being held.
Using words that evoked Allende's last stand in the Chilean presidential palace, Evo Morales declared "dead or alive, I will have a new constitution for the country." He quartered the assembly in an old castle under military protection where it adopted a constitution that has to be approved in a national referendum. Labeling Morales a "dictator," the civic committees and the departmental prefects (governors) of Media Luna were able to stall the vote on the referendum, and instead organized departmental referendums for autonomy in May of this year that were ruled unconstitutional by the National Electoral Council.
Taking recourse in democracy rather than force, and searching for a national consensus, Morales then held up the vote on the new constitution, and instead put his presidency on the line in a recall referendum in which his mandate as well as that of the prefects of the departments could be revoked. On August 10, voters went to the polls and Morales won a resounding 67 percent of the vote, receiving a majority of the ballots in 95 of the country's 112 districts with even the Media Luna department of Pando voting in his favor.
However, the insurgent prefects also had their mandates renewed. Based on the illegal, departmental plebiscites held in May, they moved to take control of Santa Cruz, the richest department. UJC shock troops roamed the streets of the city and surrounding towns, attacking and repressing any opposition by local indigenous movements and MAS-allied forces. Not wanting to provoke an outright rebellion, Evo Morales did not deploy the army or use the local police, leaving the urban area under the effective control of the UJC.
Simultaneously, the right wing--led by the Santa Cruz Civic Committee--began sewing economic instability, seeking to destabilize the Morales government much like the CIA-backed opposition did in Chile against Salvador Allende in the early 1970s. As in Chile, the rural business elites and allied truckers engaged in "strikes," withholding or refusing to ship produce to the urban markets in the western Andes where the Indian population is concentrated, while selling commodities on the black market at high prices. The Confederation of Private Businesses of Bolivia called for a national producers' shutdown if the government refused "to change its economic policies."
The social movements allied with the government have mobilized against this right wing offensive. In the Media Luna, a union coalition of indigenous peoples and peasants campaigned against voting in the autonomy referendums, and have taken on the bands of the UJC as they try to intimidate and terrorize people. In the Andean highlands, the social movements descended on the capital La Paz in demonstrations backing the Morales'
government, including a large mobilization in June that stormed the American embassy because of its support for the right wing. In July, the federation of coca growers in the Chapare, where US anti-drug operations are centered, expelled the US Agency for International Development.
This past week the Civic Committees stepped up their efforts to take control of the Media Luna departments.
In Santa Cruz on September 8, crowds of youth lead by the UJC seized government offices, including the land reform office, the tax office, state TV studios, the nationalized telephone company Entel, and set fire to the offices of a non-governmental human rights organization that promotes indigenous rights and provides legal advice. The military police, who had been dispatched to protect many of these offices, were forced to retreat, at times experiencing bloody blows that they were forbidden from responding to due to standing orders from La Paz not to use their weapons.
The commanding general of the military police, while angrily denouncing the violent demonstrators, said that the military could take no action unless Evo Morales signed a degree authorizing the use of firearms.
What was in effect occurring was a struggle between Morales and the military over who would assume ultimate responsibility for the fighting and deaths that would ensue with a military intervention in Media Luna. The armed forces do not support the autonomous rebellion because it threatens the geographic integrity of the Bolivian nation. Yet they are reluctant to intervene because under past governments, when they fired on and killed demonstrators in the streets of La Paz, they were blamed for the bloodshed.
On September 10, as violence intensified throughout Media Luna, Evo Morales expelled US ambassador Philip Goldberg for "conspiring against democracy." The month before, Goldberg had met with the prefect of Santa Cruz, Ruben Costas, who subsequently declared himself "governor" of the autonomous department and ordered the formal take over of government offices--including those collecting tax revenues. Costas is the principal leader of the rebellious prefects, and the main antagonist of Evo Morales.
September 11, the 35th anniversary of the coup against Allende, was the bloodiest day in the escalating conflict. In the Media Luna department of Pando, a para-military band with machine guns attacked the Indian community of El Porvenir, near the departmental capital of El Cobija, resulting in the death of at least 28 people. In a separate action, three policemen were kidnapped. The Red Ponchos, an official militia reserve unit of Indians loyal to Evo Morales, mobilized its forces to help the indigenous communities organize their self defense.
The next day Morales declared a state of siege in Pando and dispatched the army to move on Cobija and to retake its airport that had been occupied by right wing forces. Army units are also being sent to guard the natural gas oleoducts, one of which had been seized by the UJC, cutting the flow of gas to neighboring Brazil and Argentina. General Luis Trigo Antelo, the commander in chief of the Bolivian Armed Forces declared: "We will not tolerate any more actions by radical groups that are provoking a confrontation among Bolivians, causing pain and suffering and threatening the national security." In signing the order authorizing the use of force in Pando, Morales stated that he felt responsible for the humiliation of the military and the police by radicals and vandals because he had not authorized them to use their weapons. This was the quid pro quo for getting the military high command to act.
After sustained fighting with at least three dead, the army took control of the airport and moved on the city.
An order for the arrest of the prefect of Pando was issued for refusing to recognize the state of siege and for being responsible for the massacre in El Porvenir.
In Santa Cruz, the police arrested 8 rioters of the UJC. Peasant organizations have announced they will march on the city to retake control of the government offices. The dissident prefects, led by Costas, are still demanding departmental autonomy and refusing to accept a national vote on the referendum for the new constitution.
Evo Morales refuses to back down, declaring in a meeting with supportive union leaders, "we will launch a campaign to approve the new constitution." He did, however, indicate he may modify the draft to accommodate some of the demands for autonomy by the prefects. Like Allende, Morales continues to search for a democratic solution to the crisis in his country. For the moment, he has the backing of the Bolivian armed forces along with overwhelming popular support, thereby avoiding the ultimate fate of the Chilean president.
Roger Burbach is Director of the Center for the Study of the Americas (CENSA) based in Berkeley, CA. He has written extensively on Latin America and is the author of "The Pinochet Affair: State Terrorism and Global Justice."
_____________________________________________
Portside aims to provide material of interest to people on the left that will help them to interpret the world and to change it.
Submit via email: moderator@portside.org Submit via the Web: portside.org/submit Frequently asked questions: portside.org/faq
Subscribe: portside.org/subscribe
Unsubscribe: portside.org/unsubscribe
Account assistance: portside.org/contact Search the archives: portside.org/archive
Morales Confronts the Insurrection
By ROGER BURBACH
September 15, 2008
As Bolivia teeters on the brink of civil war, President Evo Morales staunchly maintains his commitment to constructing a popular democracy by working within the state institutions that brought him to power. The show down with the right wing is taking place against the backdrop of the thirty-fifth anniversary of the overthrow of Salvador Allende, the heroic if tragic president of Chile who believed that the formal democratic state he inherited could be peacefully transformed to usher in a socialist society.
Like Allende, Morales faces a powerful economic and political elite aligned with the United States that is bent on reversing the limited reforms he has been able to implement during his nearly three years in power.
Early on, Morales--Bolivia's first indigenous president--moved assertively to exert greater control over the natural gas and oil resources of the country, sharply increasing the hydro-carbon tax, and then using a large portion of this revenue to provide a universal pension to all those over sixty years old, most of whom live in poverty and are indigenous.
The self-proclaimed Civic Committees in Media Luna (Half Moon)--Bolivia's four eastern departments--have orchestrated a rebellion against these changes, demanding departmental autonomy and control of the hydro-carbon revenues, as well as an end to agrarian reform and even control of the police forces. The Santa Cruz Civic Committee, dominated by agro-industrial interests, is supporting the Cruceno Youth Union (UJC), an affiliated group that acts as a para-military organization, seizing and fire bombing government offices, and attacking Indian and peasant organizations that dare to support the national government.
Morales' efforts to transform the institutions of the country have focused on the popularly elected Constituent Assembly to draft a new constitution. The assembly was convened in mid 2006 with representatives from Morales' political party, the Movement Towards Socialism (MAS) holding 54 percent of the seats. In the drafting of the new constitution, the right wing political parties, led by Podemos (We Can), insisted that a two-thirds vote was needed even for the working committees to approve the different sections of the constitution. When they were overruled and a new constitution was close to being approved in November, 2007, members of the assembly, including its indigenous president, Silvia Lazarte, were assaulted in the streets of Sucre, the old nineteenth century capital where the assembly was being held.
Using words that evoked Allende's last stand in the Chilean presidential palace, Evo Morales declared "dead or alive, I will have a new constitution for the country." He quartered the assembly in an old castle under military protection where it adopted a constitution that has to be approved in a national referendum. Labeling Morales a "dictator," the civic committees and the departmental prefects (governors) of Media Luna were able to stall the vote on the referendum, and instead organized departmental referendums for autonomy in May of this year that were ruled unconstitutional by the National Electoral Council.
Taking recourse in democracy rather than force, and searching for a national consensus, Morales then held up the vote on the new constitution, and instead put his presidency on the line in a recall referendum in which his mandate as well as that of the prefects of the departments could be revoked. On August 10, voters went to the polls and Morales won a resounding 67 percent of the vote, receiving a majority of the ballots in 95 of the country's 112 districts with even the Media Luna department of Pando voting in his favor.
However, the insurgent prefects also had their mandates renewed. Based on the illegal, departmental plebiscites held in May, they moved to take control of Santa Cruz, the richest department. UJC shock troops roamed the streets of the city and surrounding towns, attacking and repressing any opposition by local indigenous movements and MAS-allied forces. Not wanting to provoke an outright rebellion, Evo Morales did not deploy the army or use the local police, leaving the urban area under the effective control of the UJC.
Simultaneously, the right wing--led by the Santa Cruz Civic Committee--began sewing economic instability, seeking to destabilize the Morales government much like the CIA-backed opposition did in Chile against Salvador Allende in the early 1970s. As in Chile, the rural business elites and allied truckers engaged in "strikes," withholding or refusing to ship produce to the urban markets in the western Andes where the Indian population is concentrated, while selling commodities on the black market at high prices. The Confederation of Private Businesses of Bolivia called for a national producers' shutdown if the government refused "to change its economic policies."
The social movements allied with the government have mobilized against this right wing offensive. In the Media Luna, a union coalition of indigenous peoples and peasants campaigned against voting in the autonomy referendums, and have taken on the bands of the UJC as they try to intimidate and terrorize people. In the Andean highlands, the social movements descended on the capital La Paz in demonstrations backing the Morales'
government, including a large mobilization in June that stormed the American embassy because of its support for the right wing. In July, the federation of coca growers in the Chapare, where US anti-drug operations are centered, expelled the US Agency for International Development.
This past week the Civic Committees stepped up their efforts to take control of the Media Luna departments.
In Santa Cruz on September 8, crowds of youth lead by the UJC seized government offices, including the land reform office, the tax office, state TV studios, the nationalized telephone company Entel, and set fire to the offices of a non-governmental human rights organization that promotes indigenous rights and provides legal advice. The military police, who had been dispatched to protect many of these offices, were forced to retreat, at times experiencing bloody blows that they were forbidden from responding to due to standing orders from La Paz not to use their weapons.
The commanding general of the military police, while angrily denouncing the violent demonstrators, said that the military could take no action unless Evo Morales signed a degree authorizing the use of firearms.
What was in effect occurring was a struggle between Morales and the military over who would assume ultimate responsibility for the fighting and deaths that would ensue with a military intervention in Media Luna. The armed forces do not support the autonomous rebellion because it threatens the geographic integrity of the Bolivian nation. Yet they are reluctant to intervene because under past governments, when they fired on and killed demonstrators in the streets of La Paz, they were blamed for the bloodshed.
On September 10, as violence intensified throughout Media Luna, Evo Morales expelled US ambassador Philip Goldberg for "conspiring against democracy." The month before, Goldberg had met with the prefect of Santa Cruz, Ruben Costas, who subsequently declared himself "governor" of the autonomous department and ordered the formal take over of government offices--including those collecting tax revenues. Costas is the principal leader of the rebellious prefects, and the main antagonist of Evo Morales.
September 11, the 35th anniversary of the coup against Allende, was the bloodiest day in the escalating conflict. In the Media Luna department of Pando, a para-military band with machine guns attacked the Indian community of El Porvenir, near the departmental capital of El Cobija, resulting in the death of at least 28 people. In a separate action, three policemen were kidnapped. The Red Ponchos, an official militia reserve unit of Indians loyal to Evo Morales, mobilized its forces to help the indigenous communities organize their self defense.
The next day Morales declared a state of siege in Pando and dispatched the army to move on Cobija and to retake its airport that had been occupied by right wing forces. Army units are also being sent to guard the natural gas oleoducts, one of which had been seized by the UJC, cutting the flow of gas to neighboring Brazil and Argentina. General Luis Trigo Antelo, the commander in chief of the Bolivian Armed Forces declared: "We will not tolerate any more actions by radical groups that are provoking a confrontation among Bolivians, causing pain and suffering and threatening the national security." In signing the order authorizing the use of force in Pando, Morales stated that he felt responsible for the humiliation of the military and the police by radicals and vandals because he had not authorized them to use their weapons. This was the quid pro quo for getting the military high command to act.
After sustained fighting with at least three dead, the army took control of the airport and moved on the city.
An order for the arrest of the prefect of Pando was issued for refusing to recognize the state of siege and for being responsible for the massacre in El Porvenir.
In Santa Cruz, the police arrested 8 rioters of the UJC. Peasant organizations have announced they will march on the city to retake control of the government offices. The dissident prefects, led by Costas, are still demanding departmental autonomy and refusing to accept a national vote on the referendum for the new constitution.
Evo Morales refuses to back down, declaring in a meeting with supportive union leaders, "we will launch a campaign to approve the new constitution." He did, however, indicate he may modify the draft to accommodate some of the demands for autonomy by the prefects. Like Allende, Morales continues to search for a democratic solution to the crisis in his country. For the moment, he has the backing of the Bolivian armed forces along with overwhelming popular support, thereby avoiding the ultimate fate of the Chilean president.
Roger Burbach is Director of the Center for the Study of the Americas (CENSA) based in Berkeley, CA. He has written extensively on Latin America and is the author of "The Pinochet Affair: State Terrorism and Global Justice."
_____________________________________________
Portside aims to provide material of interest to people on the left that will help them to interpret the world and to change it.
Submit via email: moderator@portside.org Submit via the Web: portside.org/submit Frequently asked questions: portside.org/faq
Subscribe: portside.org/subscribe
Unsubscribe: portside.org/unsubscribe
Account assistance: portside.org/contact Search the archives: portside.org/archive
Monday, September 15, 2008
American Interrence in Bolivia Sept 15th
(1) Bolivia - Revolt Of The Rich
(2) South American Leaders Hope Diplomacy Can Save Bolivia
(1)
Bolivia - Revolt Of The Rich
By Michael Miller
Newsweek Web Exclusive
September 13, 2008
http://www.newsweek.com/id/158825
Relations between Bolivia and the United States have quickly deteriorated as well. Bolivia expelled U.S.
ambassador Philip Goldberg for "conspiring against
democracy" and in response the Bush administration
sent the Bolivian ambassador in Washington packing. In a show of support, Hugo Chavez, Venezuela's president and staunch Evo ally, ejected the American envoy from Caracas. On Friday, Morales sent troops into the eastern provinces to restore order. To find out where it's all headed, Newsweek's Michael Miller talked with economist and Bolivia expert Mark Weisbrot, co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research in Washington, D.C. Excerpts:
Relations between Bolivia's President, Evo Morales, and the country's wealthy easterners were tense from the start. Since Morales's election in 2005, the eastern provinces, known as the "Media Luna," or half moon, which have grown rich on natural gas, have fought bitterly over a new constitution that would redistribute some of that wealth to the western provinces. The opposition has requently waged disruptive strikes.
Protests began to take a more violent turn after Morales trounced the opposition in last month's recall election.
This week at least eight Bolivians were killed in clashes. Opposition groups blew up part of a natural gas pipeline and vandalized government offices, causing millions of dollars worth of damage. They have also succeeded in disrupting trade with Brazil and Argentina, which rely on Bolivia's natural gas.
Relations between Bolivia and the United States have quickly deteriorated as well. Bolivia expelled U.S.
ambassador Philip Goldberg for "conspiring against
democracy" and in response the Bush administration
sent the Bolivian ambassador in Washington packing. In a show of support, Hugo Chavez, Venezuela's president and staunch Evo ally, ejected the American envoy from Caracas. On Friday, Morales sent troops into the eastern provinces to restore order. To find out where it's all headed, Newsweek's Michael Miller talked with economist and Bolivia expert Mark Weisbrot, co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research in Washington, D.C. Excerpts:
Newsweek: How serious is the fallout between the United States and Bolivia? Weisbrot: I think it's serious. I think that this thing was coming for a long time. There had been a number of incidents. There was the incident with the Peace Corps and the Fulbright scholar [asked to spy by the U.S. Embassy]. And then there are the
meetings between the ambassador and the opposition.
Obviously he's the ambassador: he should meet with
everybody. But the way he did and the timing of it was
considered unfriendly. I think you have a bigger structural problem, which is that you have USAID funding groups in Bolivia but they won't disclose who they are. They are doing this now in Venezuela too.
These are polarized countries. So on that basis both of these governments [Bolivia and Venezuela] just assume that Washington is doing what it has always done, which is to fund the people that they are sympathetic to.
How much influence do eastern Bolivia's large estate owners have? What kind of pressure do opposition groups exert in Bolivia? Quite a bit. That's what this conflict is really about. You have the most concentrated land ownership in almost the entire world in Bolivia, with around two thirds of the land owned by six tenths of one percent?not even one percent?of the landowners.
Obviously Evo Morales ran on a platform of land reform.
He is not talking about confiscating huge amounts of land, but there is going to be some redistribution.
There is the hydrocarbon revenue, which goes disproportionately to the Media Luna states with the opposition governors. So those are the two big economic reasons for this conflict.
Which one, land or hydrocarbons, is really the central issue? That is a tough question. The hydrocarbons are more immediate because [the government has] already begun some redistribution there. Morales has not touched the landowners. So I guess you could say that [hydrocarbons] are the bigger issue.
I was in Bolivia a couple months ago and I met with the Central Bank and the ministries. The government has $ 7 billion in reserves right now in the Central Bank, which
is an awful lot [considering] their whole GDP is only
$13.2 billion. Most of it is owned by the prefectures, the provinces, so they have a lot of money. So it is hard to explain why they would raise such a fuss over the government wanting to take a small part of that and use it for some pensions for people over 60, which also goes to their own residents.
How does this tie into the recent recall election in Bolivia? Wasn't that election meant to resolve this impasse between the Morales government and the opposition provinces? It did show some things. First of all, Morales got 67 percent of the vote, which is as big as you get in politics in the world without fixing the election. And the other thing it showed is if you look at the Media Luna provinces, while it's true that the opposition won, the vote for Morales also went up enormously as compared to what he got in 2005. So his support, his mandate, really increased quite a bit since the 2005 election. What you are seeing right now is that the people who could not win anything at the ballot box are trying to use other means. They are cutting off the gas, which is very serious.
What are the financial consequences of opposition groups disrupting Bolivia's natural gas pipeline? It's huge.
It's more of a problem for Brazil than it is for
Bolivia: they get half their gas from Bolivia and more than half in the industrial region of Sao Paolo. For Bolivia it is quite a lot of money. It is a $100 million estimated just to fix [the gas pipeline] and $8 million per day of revenue lost as well. But it is even worse than that because the opposition can really sabotage the whole economy. Everything that the government is doing in terms of the next five years as
far as extending gas supply to Brazil and Argentina,
if Bolivia can't be a reliable gas supplier then those countries are going to have to look elsewhere. So it is a form of serious sabotage. The [Morales government] is calling it "terrorism."
Will Morales's mandate enable him to act more forcefully toward the breakaway provinces or is he going to have to wait for the constitutional referendum in December?
I think he is going to have to do something. The government has been very pacifist and I think they don't get enough credit for that. Most governments in the world would have sent in the military in force and a lot of people would have been killed. He has been extremely restrained. He has tried to avoid violence at
all costs and the opposition has been emboldened by
that. They just keep escalating. Now they are taking
it to a different stage and I don't know how much more the government can just try to ignore it. They really depend on these gas exports, as do Brazil and Argentina.
Brazil issued a statement the other day that said they will not tolerate an interruption in the constitutional order in Bolivia. Whether that means they will send troops, I don't know.
Does this have a financial impact on the United States?
Or is the decision to expel the Bolivian ambassador simply a quid pro quo response? Is there real money at stake for the United States? I don't think there is really anything at stake for the United States. If [by antagonizing Morales] they push Chavez too far, there is always the chance that he could cut off oil. But it is unlikely.
What type of fallout will there from Morales' use of troops in the eastern provinces? It depends on what the [government forces do] and on their capacity for crowd control and using non-lethal weapons. Look at what happened prior to Morales: they are still trying to extradite the former president [Gonzalo Sanchez de Lozada] for all the people who were killed in the demonstrations back then. Morales has been on the other side of this and he knows that things can get out of control. So he is trying to do everything to avoid that but it's not easy when you have an opposition that is not operating by the same rules.
(2)
South American Leaders Hope Diplomacy Can Save Bolivia By Monica Vargas Reuters September 15, 2008 http://uk.reuters.com/article/oilRpt/idUKN1445720620080915?sp=true
SANTIAGO, Sept 14 (Reuters) - South American presidents are racing to prevent a deeper political crisis in Bolivia, where President Evo Morales has accused right- wing opponents of trying to topple him, but diplomacy may not be enough to avert more deadly protests.
Regional leaders will gather in the Chilean capital Santiago on Monday, hoping to repeat a diplomatic success scored in March when they coaxed Andean nations away from armed conflict that would have pitted Colombia, a U.S. ally, against Venezuela and Ecuador.
At that time, like now, the United States, which has seen its influence in Latin America wane because of President George W. Bush's war on terrorism and the rise of leftist leaders in the region, was not at the negotiating table.
Other regional heavyweights, especially Brazil, are stepping in to fill the void. And virtually all South American leaders, be they left-wing or conservative, have rallied around Morales, Bolivia's first indigenous president.
The Bolivian government said on Sunday that Morales would fly to Santiago for the meeting with the leaders of Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, Uruguay and Venezuela.
"A civil war in Bolivia would be terrible not just for Bolivia but for the region. It would would affect the national security of many countries," said Ricardo Israel, a professor of international relations in Chile.
"Expectations are too high. The only thing the leaders can do is encourage both sides in Bolivia to negotiate, and it's not clear they will agree to do that."
TESTING TIMES
Bolivia, a volatile country in the center of South America, has suffered chaos in the past week during clashes between supporters of Morales and right-wing governors who want more autonomy. About 30 people have died.
The summit will be a test of the nascent South American Union of Nations, or Unasur, a 12-member group created in May. Its key members participated in a Group of Rio summit in March that quickly ended the Andean crisis.
Both groups are seen as alternatives to the U.S.- dominated Organization of American States, or OAS.
In an unusual move, right-wing governors opposed to Morales' plans for deep socialist reforms demanded a seat at the table in Santiago with regional heads of state, though their plea could be denied.
The leaders may have their hands full just trying to craft a diplomatic response that pleases everybody.
Brazil, which depends on natural gas imports from Bolivia, is keenly worried about energy security, while Venezuela's Hugo Chavez, a close ally of Morales, has entered a loud diplomatic dispute with Washington.
Chavez expelled the U.S. ambassador on Thursday -- after Morales threw out the American ambassador in La Paz and accused him of fomenting protests against his leftist government.
Washington, in retaliation, sent home diplomats from the two countries and imposed sanctions on Venezuelan officials it accused of helping Colombian rebels smuggle drugs.
"The Unasur leaders are in somewhat of a trap. On the one hand, they want to show their support to a democratic, unified and stable Bolivia. On the other, they need to distance themselves from Chavez's personal feud with the U.S.," said Patricio Navia, a political scientist at New York University.
(Additional reporting by Ray Colitt in Santa Cruz, Bolivia; Writing by Terry Wade; Editing by Fiona Ortiz and David Wiessler)
(2) South American Leaders Hope Diplomacy Can Save Bolivia
(1)
Bolivia - Revolt Of The Rich
By Michael Miller
Newsweek Web Exclusive
September 13, 2008
http://www.newsweek.com/id/158825
Relations between Bolivia and the United States have quickly deteriorated as well. Bolivia expelled U.S.
ambassador Philip Goldberg for "conspiring against
democracy" and in response the Bush administration
sent the Bolivian ambassador in Washington packing. In a show of support, Hugo Chavez, Venezuela's president and staunch Evo ally, ejected the American envoy from Caracas. On Friday, Morales sent troops into the eastern provinces to restore order. To find out where it's all headed, Newsweek's Michael Miller talked with economist and Bolivia expert Mark Weisbrot, co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research in Washington, D.C. Excerpts:
Relations between Bolivia's President, Evo Morales, and the country's wealthy easterners were tense from the start. Since Morales's election in 2005, the eastern provinces, known as the "Media Luna," or half moon, which have grown rich on natural gas, have fought bitterly over a new constitution that would redistribute some of that wealth to the western provinces. The opposition has requently waged disruptive strikes.
Protests began to take a more violent turn after Morales trounced the opposition in last month's recall election.
This week at least eight Bolivians were killed in clashes. Opposition groups blew up part of a natural gas pipeline and vandalized government offices, causing millions of dollars worth of damage. They have also succeeded in disrupting trade with Brazil and Argentina, which rely on Bolivia's natural gas.
Relations between Bolivia and the United States have quickly deteriorated as well. Bolivia expelled U.S.
ambassador Philip Goldberg for "conspiring against
democracy" and in response the Bush administration
sent the Bolivian ambassador in Washington packing. In a show of support, Hugo Chavez, Venezuela's president and staunch Evo ally, ejected the American envoy from Caracas. On Friday, Morales sent troops into the eastern provinces to restore order. To find out where it's all headed, Newsweek's Michael Miller talked with economist and Bolivia expert Mark Weisbrot, co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research in Washington, D.C. Excerpts:
Newsweek: How serious is the fallout between the United States and Bolivia? Weisbrot: I think it's serious. I think that this thing was coming for a long time. There had been a number of incidents. There was the incident with the Peace Corps and the Fulbright scholar [asked to spy by the U.S. Embassy]. And then there are the
meetings between the ambassador and the opposition.
Obviously he's the ambassador: he should meet with
everybody. But the way he did and the timing of it was
considered unfriendly. I think you have a bigger structural problem, which is that you have USAID funding groups in Bolivia but they won't disclose who they are. They are doing this now in Venezuela too.
These are polarized countries. So on that basis both of these governments [Bolivia and Venezuela] just assume that Washington is doing what it has always done, which is to fund the people that they are sympathetic to.
How much influence do eastern Bolivia's large estate owners have? What kind of pressure do opposition groups exert in Bolivia? Quite a bit. That's what this conflict is really about. You have the most concentrated land ownership in almost the entire world in Bolivia, with around two thirds of the land owned by six tenths of one percent?not even one percent?of the landowners.
Obviously Evo Morales ran on a platform of land reform.
He is not talking about confiscating huge amounts of land, but there is going to be some redistribution.
There is the hydrocarbon revenue, which goes disproportionately to the Media Luna states with the opposition governors. So those are the two big economic reasons for this conflict.
Which one, land or hydrocarbons, is really the central issue? That is a tough question. The hydrocarbons are more immediate because [the government has] already begun some redistribution there. Morales has not touched the landowners. So I guess you could say that [hydrocarbons] are the bigger issue.
I was in Bolivia a couple months ago and I met with the Central Bank and the ministries. The government has $ 7 billion in reserves right now in the Central Bank, which
is an awful lot [considering] their whole GDP is only
$13.2 billion. Most of it is owned by the prefectures, the provinces, so they have a lot of money. So it is hard to explain why they would raise such a fuss over the government wanting to take a small part of that and use it for some pensions for people over 60, which also goes to their own residents.
How does this tie into the recent recall election in Bolivia? Wasn't that election meant to resolve this impasse between the Morales government and the opposition provinces? It did show some things. First of all, Morales got 67 percent of the vote, which is as big as you get in politics in the world without fixing the election. And the other thing it showed is if you look at the Media Luna provinces, while it's true that the opposition won, the vote for Morales also went up enormously as compared to what he got in 2005. So his support, his mandate, really increased quite a bit since the 2005 election. What you are seeing right now is that the people who could not win anything at the ballot box are trying to use other means. They are cutting off the gas, which is very serious.
What are the financial consequences of opposition groups disrupting Bolivia's natural gas pipeline? It's huge.
It's more of a problem for Brazil than it is for
Bolivia: they get half their gas from Bolivia and more than half in the industrial region of Sao Paolo. For Bolivia it is quite a lot of money. It is a $100 million estimated just to fix [the gas pipeline] and $8 million per day of revenue lost as well. But it is even worse than that because the opposition can really sabotage the whole economy. Everything that the government is doing in terms of the next five years as
far as extending gas supply to Brazil and Argentina,
if Bolivia can't be a reliable gas supplier then those countries are going to have to look elsewhere. So it is a form of serious sabotage. The [Morales government] is calling it "terrorism."
Will Morales's mandate enable him to act more forcefully toward the breakaway provinces or is he going to have to wait for the constitutional referendum in December?
I think he is going to have to do something. The government has been very pacifist and I think they don't get enough credit for that. Most governments in the world would have sent in the military in force and a lot of people would have been killed. He has been extremely restrained. He has tried to avoid violence at
all costs and the opposition has been emboldened by
that. They just keep escalating. Now they are taking
it to a different stage and I don't know how much more the government can just try to ignore it. They really depend on these gas exports, as do Brazil and Argentina.
Brazil issued a statement the other day that said they will not tolerate an interruption in the constitutional order in Bolivia. Whether that means they will send troops, I don't know.
Does this have a financial impact on the United States?
Or is the decision to expel the Bolivian ambassador simply a quid pro quo response? Is there real money at stake for the United States? I don't think there is really anything at stake for the United States. If [by antagonizing Morales] they push Chavez too far, there is always the chance that he could cut off oil. But it is unlikely.
What type of fallout will there from Morales' use of troops in the eastern provinces? It depends on what the [government forces do] and on their capacity for crowd control and using non-lethal weapons. Look at what happened prior to Morales: they are still trying to extradite the former president [Gonzalo Sanchez de Lozada] for all the people who were killed in the demonstrations back then. Morales has been on the other side of this and he knows that things can get out of control. So he is trying to do everything to avoid that but it's not easy when you have an opposition that is not operating by the same rules.
(2)
South American Leaders Hope Diplomacy Can Save Bolivia By Monica Vargas Reuters September 15, 2008 http://uk.reuters.com/article/oilRpt/idUKN1445720620080915?sp=true
SANTIAGO, Sept 14 (Reuters) - South American presidents are racing to prevent a deeper political crisis in Bolivia, where President Evo Morales has accused right- wing opponents of trying to topple him, but diplomacy may not be enough to avert more deadly protests.
Regional leaders will gather in the Chilean capital Santiago on Monday, hoping to repeat a diplomatic success scored in March when they coaxed Andean nations away from armed conflict that would have pitted Colombia, a U.S. ally, against Venezuela and Ecuador.
At that time, like now, the United States, which has seen its influence in Latin America wane because of President George W. Bush's war on terrorism and the rise of leftist leaders in the region, was not at the negotiating table.
Other regional heavyweights, especially Brazil, are stepping in to fill the void. And virtually all South American leaders, be they left-wing or conservative, have rallied around Morales, Bolivia's first indigenous president.
The Bolivian government said on Sunday that Morales would fly to Santiago for the meeting with the leaders of Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, Uruguay and Venezuela.
"A civil war in Bolivia would be terrible not just for Bolivia but for the region. It would would affect the national security of many countries," said Ricardo Israel, a professor of international relations in Chile.
"Expectations are too high. The only thing the leaders can do is encourage both sides in Bolivia to negotiate, and it's not clear they will agree to do that."
TESTING TIMES
Bolivia, a volatile country in the center of South America, has suffered chaos in the past week during clashes between supporters of Morales and right-wing governors who want more autonomy. About 30 people have died.
The summit will be a test of the nascent South American Union of Nations, or Unasur, a 12-member group created in May. Its key members participated in a Group of Rio summit in March that quickly ended the Andean crisis.
Both groups are seen as alternatives to the U.S.- dominated Organization of American States, or OAS.
In an unusual move, right-wing governors opposed to Morales' plans for deep socialist reforms demanded a seat at the table in Santiago with regional heads of state, though their plea could be denied.
The leaders may have their hands full just trying to craft a diplomatic response that pleases everybody.
Brazil, which depends on natural gas imports from Bolivia, is keenly worried about energy security, while Venezuela's Hugo Chavez, a close ally of Morales, has entered a loud diplomatic dispute with Washington.
Chavez expelled the U.S. ambassador on Thursday -- after Morales threw out the American ambassador in La Paz and accused him of fomenting protests against his leftist government.
Washington, in retaliation, sent home diplomats from the two countries and imposed sanctions on Venezuelan officials it accused of helping Colombian rebels smuggle drugs.
"The Unasur leaders are in somewhat of a trap. On the one hand, they want to show their support to a democratic, unified and stable Bolivia. On the other, they need to distance themselves from Chavez's personal feud with the U.S.," said Patricio Navia, a political scientist at New York University.
(Additional reporting by Ray Colitt in Santa Cruz, Bolivia; Writing by Terry Wade; Editing by Fiona Ortiz and David Wiessler)
Friday, September 12, 2008
Democracy In America !!!!!!!!!
Republicans plan to foreclose African American voters
By Eartha Jane Melzer
Michigan Messenger - September 10, 2008
http://www.michiganmessenger.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/09/ohio-vote1-300x185.jpgMichigan
The chairman of the Republican Party in Macomb County Michigan, a key swing county in a key swing state, is planning to use a list of foreclosed homes to block people from voting in the upcoming election as part of the state GOP's effort to challenge some voters on Election Day.
'We will have a list of foreclosed homes and will make sure people aren't voting from those addresses,' party chairman James Carabelli told Michigan Messenger in a telephone interview earlier this week. He said the local party wanted to make sure that proper electoral procedures were followed.
State election rules allow parties to assign 'election challengers' to polls to monitor the election. In addition to observing the poll workers, these volunteers can challenge the eligibility of any voter provided they 'have a good reason to believe' that the person is not eligible to vote. One allowable reason is that the person is not a 'true resident of the city or township.'
The Michigan Republicans' planned use of foreclosure lists is apparently an attempt to challenge ineligible voters as not being 'true residents.'
One expert questioned the legality of the tactic.
'You can't challenge people without a factual basis for doing so,' said J. Gerald Hebert, a former voting rights litigator for the U.S. Justice Department who now runs the Campaign Legal Center, a Washington D.C.- based public-interest law firm. 'I don't think a foreclosure notice is sufficient basis for a challenge, because people often remain in their homes after foreclosure begins and sometimes are able to negotiate and refinance.'
As for the practice of challenging the right to vote of foreclosed property owners, Hebert called it, 'mean- spirited.'
GOP ties to state's largest foreclosure law firm
The Macomb GOP's plans are another indication of how John McCain's campaign stands to benefit from the burgeoning number of foreclosures in the state.
McCain's regional headquarters are housed in the office building of foreclosure specialists Trott & Trott. The firm's founder, David A. Trott, has raised between $100,000 and $250,000 for the Republican nominee.
The Macomb County party's plans to challenge voters who have defaulted on their house payments is likely to disproportionately affect African-Americans who are overwhelmingly Democratic voters. More than 60 percent of all sub-prime loans - the most likely kind of loan to go into default - were made to African-Americans in Michigan, according to a report issued last year by the state's Department of Labor and Economic Growth.
Challenges to would-be voters
Statewide, the Republican Party is gearing up for a comprehensive voter challenge campaign, according to Denise Graves, party chair for Republicans in Genessee County, which encompasses Flint. The party is creating a spreadsheet of election challenger volunteers and expects to coordinate a training with the regional McCain campaign, Graves said in an interview with Michigan Messenger.
Whether the Republicans will challenge voters with foreclosed homes elsewhere in the state is not known.
Kelly Harrigan, deputy director of the GOP's voter programs, confirmed that she is coordinating the group's 'election integrity' program. Harrigan said the effort includes putting in place a legal team, as well as training election challengers. She said the challenges to voters were procedural rather than personal. She referred inquiries about the vote challenge program to communications director Bill Knowles who promised information but did not return calls.
Party chairman Carabelli said that the Republican Party is training election challengers to 'make sure that [voters] are who they say who they are.'
When asked for further details on how Republicans are compiling challenge lists, he said, 'I would rather not tell you all the things we are doing.'
Vote suppression: Not an isolated effort
Carabelli is not the only Republican Party official to suggest the targeting of foreclosed voters. In Ohio, Doug Preisse, director of elections in Franklin County (around the city of Columbus) and the chair of the local GOP, told The Columbus Dispatch that he has not ruled out challenging voters before the election due to foreclosure-related address issues.
Hebert, the voting-rights lawyer, sees a connection between Priesse's remarks and Carabelli's plans.
'At a minimum what you are seeing is a fairly comprehensive effort by the Republican Party, a systematic broad-based effort to put up obstacles for people to vote,' he said. 'Nobody is contending that these people are not legally registered to vote.
'When you are comprehensively challenging people to vote,' Hebert went on, 'your goals are two-fold: One is you are trying to knock people out from casting ballots; the other is to create a slowdown that will discourage others,' who see a long line and realize they can't afford to stay and wait.
Challenging all voters registered to foreclosed homes could disrupt some polling places, especially in the Detroit metropolitan area. According to the real estate Web site RealtyTrac, one in every 176 households in Wayne County, metropolitan Detroit, received a foreclosure filing during the month of July. In Macomb County, the figure was one household in every 285, meaning that 1,834 homeowners received the bad news in just one month. The Macomb County foreclosure rate puts it in the top three percent of all U.S. counties in the number of distressed homeowners.
Wayne, Oakland, Macomb, Kent and Genessee counties were
- in that order - the counties with the most homeowners facing foreclosure, according to RealtyTrac. As of July, there were more than 62,000 foreclosure filings in the entire state.
Joe Rozell, director of elections for Oakland County in suburban Detroit, acknowledged that challenges such as those described by Carabelli are allowed by law but said they have the potential to create long lines and disrupt the voting process. With 890,000 potential voters closely divided between Democratic and Republican, Oakland County is a key swing county of this swing state.
According to voter challenge directives handed down by Republican Secretary of State Terri Lynn Land, voter challenges need only be 'based on information obtained through a reliable source or means.'
'But poll workers are not allowed to ask the reason'
for the challenges, Rozell said. In other words, Republican vote challengers are free to use foreclosure lists as a basis for disqualifying otherwise eligible voters.
David Lagstein, head organizer with the Michigan Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN), described the plans of the Macomb GOP as 'crazy.'
'You would think they would think, `This is going to look too heartless," said Lagstein, whose group has registered 200,000 new voters statewide this year and also runs a foreclosure avoidance program. 'The Republican-led state Senate has not moved on the anti- predatory lending bill for over a year and yet [Republicans] have time to prey on those who have fallen victim to foreclosure to suppress the vote.'
_____________________________________________
Portside aims to provide material of interest to people on the left that will help them to interpret the world and to change it.
Submit via email: moderator@portside.org Submit via the Web: portside.org/submit Frequently asked questions: portside.org/faq
Subscribe: portside.org/subscribe
Unsubscribe: portside.org/unsubscribe
Account assistance: portside.org/contact Search the archives: portside.org/archive
By Eartha Jane Melzer
Michigan Messenger - September 10, 2008
http://www.michiganmessenger.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/09/ohio-vote1-300x185.jpgMichigan
The chairman of the Republican Party in Macomb County Michigan, a key swing county in a key swing state, is planning to use a list of foreclosed homes to block people from voting in the upcoming election as part of the state GOP's effort to challenge some voters on Election Day.
'We will have a list of foreclosed homes and will make sure people aren't voting from those addresses,' party chairman James Carabelli told Michigan Messenger in a telephone interview earlier this week. He said the local party wanted to make sure that proper electoral procedures were followed.
State election rules allow parties to assign 'election challengers' to polls to monitor the election. In addition to observing the poll workers, these volunteers can challenge the eligibility of any voter provided they 'have a good reason to believe' that the person is not eligible to vote. One allowable reason is that the person is not a 'true resident of the city or township.'
The Michigan Republicans' planned use of foreclosure lists is apparently an attempt to challenge ineligible voters as not being 'true residents.'
One expert questioned the legality of the tactic.
'You can't challenge people without a factual basis for doing so,' said J. Gerald Hebert, a former voting rights litigator for the U.S. Justice Department who now runs the Campaign Legal Center, a Washington D.C.- based public-interest law firm. 'I don't think a foreclosure notice is sufficient basis for a challenge, because people often remain in their homes after foreclosure begins and sometimes are able to negotiate and refinance.'
As for the practice of challenging the right to vote of foreclosed property owners, Hebert called it, 'mean- spirited.'
GOP ties to state's largest foreclosure law firm
The Macomb GOP's plans are another indication of how John McCain's campaign stands to benefit from the burgeoning number of foreclosures in the state.
McCain's regional headquarters are housed in the office building of foreclosure specialists Trott & Trott. The firm's founder, David A. Trott, has raised between $100,000 and $250,000 for the Republican nominee.
The Macomb County party's plans to challenge voters who have defaulted on their house payments is likely to disproportionately affect African-Americans who are overwhelmingly Democratic voters. More than 60 percent of all sub-prime loans - the most likely kind of loan to go into default - were made to African-Americans in Michigan, according to a report issued last year by the state's Department of Labor and Economic Growth.
Challenges to would-be voters
Statewide, the Republican Party is gearing up for a comprehensive voter challenge campaign, according to Denise Graves, party chair for Republicans in Genessee County, which encompasses Flint. The party is creating a spreadsheet of election challenger volunteers and expects to coordinate a training with the regional McCain campaign, Graves said in an interview with Michigan Messenger.
Whether the Republicans will challenge voters with foreclosed homes elsewhere in the state is not known.
Kelly Harrigan, deputy director of the GOP's voter programs, confirmed that she is coordinating the group's 'election integrity' program. Harrigan said the effort includes putting in place a legal team, as well as training election challengers. She said the challenges to voters were procedural rather than personal. She referred inquiries about the vote challenge program to communications director Bill Knowles who promised information but did not return calls.
Party chairman Carabelli said that the Republican Party is training election challengers to 'make sure that [voters] are who they say who they are.'
When asked for further details on how Republicans are compiling challenge lists, he said, 'I would rather not tell you all the things we are doing.'
Vote suppression: Not an isolated effort
Carabelli is not the only Republican Party official to suggest the targeting of foreclosed voters. In Ohio, Doug Preisse, director of elections in Franklin County (around the city of Columbus) and the chair of the local GOP, told The Columbus Dispatch that he has not ruled out challenging voters before the election due to foreclosure-related address issues.
Hebert, the voting-rights lawyer, sees a connection between Priesse's remarks and Carabelli's plans.
'At a minimum what you are seeing is a fairly comprehensive effort by the Republican Party, a systematic broad-based effort to put up obstacles for people to vote,' he said. 'Nobody is contending that these people are not legally registered to vote.
'When you are comprehensively challenging people to vote,' Hebert went on, 'your goals are two-fold: One is you are trying to knock people out from casting ballots; the other is to create a slowdown that will discourage others,' who see a long line and realize they can't afford to stay and wait.
Challenging all voters registered to foreclosed homes could disrupt some polling places, especially in the Detroit metropolitan area. According to the real estate Web site RealtyTrac, one in every 176 households in Wayne County, metropolitan Detroit, received a foreclosure filing during the month of July. In Macomb County, the figure was one household in every 285, meaning that 1,834 homeowners received the bad news in just one month. The Macomb County foreclosure rate puts it in the top three percent of all U.S. counties in the number of distressed homeowners.
Wayne, Oakland, Macomb, Kent and Genessee counties were
- in that order - the counties with the most homeowners facing foreclosure, according to RealtyTrac. As of July, there were more than 62,000 foreclosure filings in the entire state.
Joe Rozell, director of elections for Oakland County in suburban Detroit, acknowledged that challenges such as those described by Carabelli are allowed by law but said they have the potential to create long lines and disrupt the voting process. With 890,000 potential voters closely divided between Democratic and Republican, Oakland County is a key swing county of this swing state.
According to voter challenge directives handed down by Republican Secretary of State Terri Lynn Land, voter challenges need only be 'based on information obtained through a reliable source or means.'
'But poll workers are not allowed to ask the reason'
for the challenges, Rozell said. In other words, Republican vote challengers are free to use foreclosure lists as a basis for disqualifying otherwise eligible voters.
David Lagstein, head organizer with the Michigan Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN), described the plans of the Macomb GOP as 'crazy.'
'You would think they would think, `This is going to look too heartless," said Lagstein, whose group has registered 200,000 new voters statewide this year and also runs a foreclosure avoidance program. 'The Republican-led state Senate has not moved on the anti- predatory lending bill for over a year and yet [Republicans] have time to prey on those who have fallen victim to foreclosure to suppress the vote.'
_____________________________________________
Portside aims to provide material of interest to people on the left that will help them to interpret the world and to change it.
Submit via email: moderator@portside.org Submit via the Web: portside.org/submit Frequently asked questions: portside.org/faq
Subscribe: portside.org/subscribe
Unsubscribe: portside.org/unsubscribe
Account assistance: portside.org/contact Search the archives: portside.org/archive
Thursday, September 11, 2008
Zinn: US 'In Need of Rebellion'
Zinn: US 'In Need of Rebellion'
Al Jazeera speaks to Howard Zinn, the author, American historian, social critic and activist, about how the Iraq war damaged attitudes towards the US and why the US "empire" is close to collapse.
AlJazeera.net - September 8, 2008
http://english.aljazeera.net/news/americas/2008/09/20089814415795791.html
Commondreams.org - September 9, 2008
http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2008/09/09-0
Q: Where is the United States heading in terms of world power and influence?
HZ: America has been heading - for some time, and is heading right now - toward less and less world power, less and less influence.
Obviously, since the war in Iraq, the rest of the world has fallen away from the United States, and if American foreign policy continues in the way it has been - that is aggressive and violent and uncaring about the feelings and thoughts of other people - then the influence of the United States is going to decline more and more.
This is an empire which is on the one hand the most powerful empire that ever existed; on the other hand an empire that is crumbling - an empire that has no future ... because the rest of the world is alienated and simply because this empire is top-heavy with military commitments, with bases around the world, with the exhaustion of its own resources at home.
[This is] leading to more and more discontent and home, so I think the American empire will go the way of other empires and I think it is on its way now.
Q: Is there any hope the US will change its approach to the rest of the world?
HZ: If there is any hope, the hope lies in the American people.
[It] lies in American people becoming resentful enough and indignant enough over what has happened to their country, over the loss of dignity in the world, over the starving of human resources in the United States, the starving of education and health, the takeover of the political mechanism by corporate power and the result this has on the everyday lives of the American people.
[There is also] the higher and higher food prices, the more and more insecurity, the sending of the young people to war.
I think all of this may very well build up into a movement of rebellion.
We have seen movements of rebellion in the past: The labour movement, the civil rights movement, the movement against the war in Vietnam.
I think we may well see, if the United States keeps heading in the same direction, a new popular movement.
That is the only hope for the United States.
Q: How did the US get to this point?
HZ: Well, we got to this point because ... I suppose the American people have allowed it to get it to this point because there were enough Americans who were satisfied with their lives, just enough.
Of course, many Americans were not, that is why half of the population doesn't vote, they're alienated.
But there are just enough Americans who have been satisfied, you might say getting some of the "goodies"
of the empire, just some of them, just enough people satisfied to support the system, so we got this way because of the ability of the system to maintain itself by satisfying just enough of the population to keep its legitimacy.
And I think that era is coming to an end.
Q: What should the world know about the United States?
HZ: What I find many people in the rest of the world don't know is that there is an opposition in the United States.
Very often, people in the rest of the world think that Bush is popular, they think 'oh, he was elected twice', they don't understand the corruption of the American political system which enabled Bush to win twice.
They don't understand the basic undemocratic nature of the American political system in which all power is concentrated within two parties which are not very far from one another and people cannot easily tell the difference.
So I think we are in a situation where we are going to need some very fundamental changes in American society if the American people are going to be finally satisfied with the kind of society we have.
Q: Do you think the US can recover from its current position?
HZ: Well, I am hoping for a recovery process. I mean, so far we haven't seen it.
You asked about what the people of the rest of the world don't know about the United States, and as I said, they don't know that there is an opposition.
There always has been an opposition, but the opposition has always been either crushed or quieted, kept in the shadows, marginalised so their voices are not heard.
People in the rest of the world hear the voices of the American leaders.
They do not hear the voices of the people all over this country who do not like the American leaders who want different policies.
I think also, people in the rest of the world should know that what they see in Iraq now is really a continuation of a long, long term of American imperial expansion in the world.
I think ... a lot of people in the world think that this war in Iraq is an aberration, that before this the United States was a benign power.
It has never been a benign power, from the very first, from the American Revolution, from the taking-over of Indian land, from the Mexican war, the Spanish-American war.
It is embarrassing to say, but we have a long history in this country of violent expansion and I think not only do most people in other countries [not] know this, most Americans don't know this.
Q: Is there a way for this to improve?
HZ: Well you know, whatever hope there is lies in that large number of Americans who are decent, who don't want to go to war, who don't want to kill other people.
It is hard to see that hope because these Americans who feel that way have been shut out of the communications system, so their voices are not heard, they are not seen on the television screen, but they exist.
I have gone through, in my life, a number of social movements and I have seen how at the very beginning of these social movements or just before these social movements develop, there didn't seem to be any hope.
I lived in the [US] south for seven years, in the years of the civil rights movements, and it didn't seem that there was any hope, but there was hope under the surface.
And when people organised, and when people began to act, when people began to work together, people began to take risks, people began to oppose the establishment, people began to commit civil disobedience.
Well, then that hope became manifest ... it actually turned into change.
Q: Do you think there is a way out of this and for the future influence of the US on the world to be a positive one?
HZ: Well, you know for the United States to begin to be a positive influence in the world we are going to have to have a new political leadership that is sensitive to the needs of the American people, and those needs do not include war and aggression.
[It must also be] sensitive to the needs of people in other parts of the world, sensitive enough to know that American resources, instead of being devoted to war, should be devoted to helping people who are suffering.
You've got earthquakes and natural disasters all over the world, but the people in the United States have been in the same position as people in other countries.
The natural disasters here [also] brought little positive reaction - look at [Hurricane] Katrina.
The people in this country, the poor people especially and the people of colour especially, have been as much victims of American power as people in other countries.
Q: Can you give us an overall scope of everything we talked about - the power and influence of the United States?
HZ: The power and influence of the United States has declined rapidly since the war in Iraq because American power, as it has been exercised in the world historically, has been exposed more to the rest of the world in this situation and in other situations.
So the US influence is declining, its power is declining.
However strong a military machine it is, power does not ultimately depend on a military machine. So power is declining.
Ultimately power rests on the moral legitimacy of a system and the United States has been losing moral legitimacy.
My hope is that the American people will rouse themselves and change this situation, for the benefit of themselves and for the benefit of the rest of the world.
[Howard Zinn is the author of, most notably, A People's History of the United States, a National-Book-Award- nominated text that investigates US history from the standpoint of the oppressed. Other books by Zinn include Declarations of Independence: Cross-Examining American Ideology and his 1995 autobiography, You Can't be Neutral on a Moving Train.]
c 2008 Aljazeera.net/English
_____________________________________________
Portside aims to provide material of interest to people on the left that will help them to interpret the world and to change it.
Submit via email: moderator@portside.org Submit via the Web: portside.org/submit Frequently asked questions: portside.org/faq
Subscribe: portside.org/subscribe
Unsubscribe: portside.org/unsubscribe
Account assistance: portside.org/contact Search the archives: portside.org/archive
Al Jazeera speaks to Howard Zinn, the author, American historian, social critic and activist, about how the Iraq war damaged attitudes towards the US and why the US "empire" is close to collapse.
AlJazeera.net - September 8, 2008
http://english.aljazeera.net/news/americas/2008/09/20089814415795791.html
Commondreams.org - September 9, 2008
http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2008/09/09-0
Q: Where is the United States heading in terms of world power and influence?
HZ: America has been heading - for some time, and is heading right now - toward less and less world power, less and less influence.
Obviously, since the war in Iraq, the rest of the world has fallen away from the United States, and if American foreign policy continues in the way it has been - that is aggressive and violent and uncaring about the feelings and thoughts of other people - then the influence of the United States is going to decline more and more.
This is an empire which is on the one hand the most powerful empire that ever existed; on the other hand an empire that is crumbling - an empire that has no future ... because the rest of the world is alienated and simply because this empire is top-heavy with military commitments, with bases around the world, with the exhaustion of its own resources at home.
[This is] leading to more and more discontent and home, so I think the American empire will go the way of other empires and I think it is on its way now.
Q: Is there any hope the US will change its approach to the rest of the world?
HZ: If there is any hope, the hope lies in the American people.
[It] lies in American people becoming resentful enough and indignant enough over what has happened to their country, over the loss of dignity in the world, over the starving of human resources in the United States, the starving of education and health, the takeover of the political mechanism by corporate power and the result this has on the everyday lives of the American people.
[There is also] the higher and higher food prices, the more and more insecurity, the sending of the young people to war.
I think all of this may very well build up into a movement of rebellion.
We have seen movements of rebellion in the past: The labour movement, the civil rights movement, the movement against the war in Vietnam.
I think we may well see, if the United States keeps heading in the same direction, a new popular movement.
That is the only hope for the United States.
Q: How did the US get to this point?
HZ: Well, we got to this point because ... I suppose the American people have allowed it to get it to this point because there were enough Americans who were satisfied with their lives, just enough.
Of course, many Americans were not, that is why half of the population doesn't vote, they're alienated.
But there are just enough Americans who have been satisfied, you might say getting some of the "goodies"
of the empire, just some of them, just enough people satisfied to support the system, so we got this way because of the ability of the system to maintain itself by satisfying just enough of the population to keep its legitimacy.
And I think that era is coming to an end.
Q: What should the world know about the United States?
HZ: What I find many people in the rest of the world don't know is that there is an opposition in the United States.
Very often, people in the rest of the world think that Bush is popular, they think 'oh, he was elected twice', they don't understand the corruption of the American political system which enabled Bush to win twice.
They don't understand the basic undemocratic nature of the American political system in which all power is concentrated within two parties which are not very far from one another and people cannot easily tell the difference.
So I think we are in a situation where we are going to need some very fundamental changes in American society if the American people are going to be finally satisfied with the kind of society we have.
Q: Do you think the US can recover from its current position?
HZ: Well, I am hoping for a recovery process. I mean, so far we haven't seen it.
You asked about what the people of the rest of the world don't know about the United States, and as I said, they don't know that there is an opposition.
There always has been an opposition, but the opposition has always been either crushed or quieted, kept in the shadows, marginalised so their voices are not heard.
People in the rest of the world hear the voices of the American leaders.
They do not hear the voices of the people all over this country who do not like the American leaders who want different policies.
I think also, people in the rest of the world should know that what they see in Iraq now is really a continuation of a long, long term of American imperial expansion in the world.
I think ... a lot of people in the world think that this war in Iraq is an aberration, that before this the United States was a benign power.
It has never been a benign power, from the very first, from the American Revolution, from the taking-over of Indian land, from the Mexican war, the Spanish-American war.
It is embarrassing to say, but we have a long history in this country of violent expansion and I think not only do most people in other countries [not] know this, most Americans don't know this.
Q: Is there a way for this to improve?
HZ: Well you know, whatever hope there is lies in that large number of Americans who are decent, who don't want to go to war, who don't want to kill other people.
It is hard to see that hope because these Americans who feel that way have been shut out of the communications system, so their voices are not heard, they are not seen on the television screen, but they exist.
I have gone through, in my life, a number of social movements and I have seen how at the very beginning of these social movements or just before these social movements develop, there didn't seem to be any hope.
I lived in the [US] south for seven years, in the years of the civil rights movements, and it didn't seem that there was any hope, but there was hope under the surface.
And when people organised, and when people began to act, when people began to work together, people began to take risks, people began to oppose the establishment, people began to commit civil disobedience.
Well, then that hope became manifest ... it actually turned into change.
Q: Do you think there is a way out of this and for the future influence of the US on the world to be a positive one?
HZ: Well, you know for the United States to begin to be a positive influence in the world we are going to have to have a new political leadership that is sensitive to the needs of the American people, and those needs do not include war and aggression.
[It must also be] sensitive to the needs of people in other parts of the world, sensitive enough to know that American resources, instead of being devoted to war, should be devoted to helping people who are suffering.
You've got earthquakes and natural disasters all over the world, but the people in the United States have been in the same position as people in other countries.
The natural disasters here [also] brought little positive reaction - look at [Hurricane] Katrina.
The people in this country, the poor people especially and the people of colour especially, have been as much victims of American power as people in other countries.
Q: Can you give us an overall scope of everything we talked about - the power and influence of the United States?
HZ: The power and influence of the United States has declined rapidly since the war in Iraq because American power, as it has been exercised in the world historically, has been exposed more to the rest of the world in this situation and in other situations.
So the US influence is declining, its power is declining.
However strong a military machine it is, power does not ultimately depend on a military machine. So power is declining.
Ultimately power rests on the moral legitimacy of a system and the United States has been losing moral legitimacy.
My hope is that the American people will rouse themselves and change this situation, for the benefit of themselves and for the benefit of the rest of the world.
[Howard Zinn is the author of, most notably, A People's History of the United States, a National-Book-Award- nominated text that investigates US history from the standpoint of the oppressed. Other books by Zinn include Declarations of Independence: Cross-Examining American Ideology and his 1995 autobiography, You Can't be Neutral on a Moving Train.]
c 2008 Aljazeera.net/English
_____________________________________________
Portside aims to provide material of interest to people on the left that will help them to interpret the world and to change it.
Submit via email: moderator@portside.org Submit via the Web: portside.org/submit Frequently asked questions: portside.org/faq
Subscribe: portside.org/subscribe
Unsubscribe: portside.org/unsubscribe
Account assistance: portside.org/contact Search the archives: portside.org/archive
Remembering Imam W.D. Mohammed
Remembering Imam W.D. Mohammed
1. Honorable Minister Louis Farrakhan and the Nation of Islam 2. Rabbi Arthur Waskow, The Shalom Center 3. Rabbi Michael Lerner Chair, The Network of Spiritual Progressives 4. Obituary, Chicago Tribune
===
IN THE NAME OF ALLAH, THE BENEFICENT, THE MERCIFUL.
Official Statement from the Honorable Minister Louis Farrakhan and the Nation of Islam on the passing of Imam W. Deen Mohammed
Sep 9, 2008
http://www.finalcall.com/artman/publish/article_5190.shtml
(FinalCall.com) - The following statement was released today by the Honorable Minister Louis Farrakhan and the Nation of Islam regarding the passing of Imam W. Deen Mohammed.
CHICAGO - We mourn the loss of our brother Imam W. Deen Mohammed. We thank Allah for him and his great contribution to the ongoing work of Prophet Muhammad ibn Abdullah (P.B.U.H) and his work of helping to create a better understanding and image of Islam in America and throughout the world. Our prayers and our thoughts are with the Mohammed family, with the followers and all those who feel our great loss.
===
The Shalom Center mourns the death of Imam W. Deen Mohammed, may the memory of this righteous and loving leader be a blessing to us all.
This national leader of the American Muslim community died yesterday in Illinois.
Imam Mohammed, 74, was the son of Elijah Muhammad, the founder of the "Nation of Islam." After his father's death in 1975, Imam Mohammed led his community to mainstream Islam. Those who followed him took a path similar to that of El-Hajj Malik el-Shabazz ("Malcolm X" ) in his last months after his pilgrimage to Mecca, leaving racial and ethnic animosity behind in the true spirit of Islam.
The communities that followed W. Deen Mohammed are both more numerous and more deeply rooted than the "Nation of Islam" -- while it became better known in white America because of the animosities expressed by some of its leaders.
May his following continue to grow in numbers and in spiritual depth, and may other Americans learn to practice a loving and people-healing ministry, as he did and they do.
Asalaam aleikum, shalom aleichem - May peace rest upon
us:
Arthur (Rabbi Arthur Waskow)
The Shalom Center: A prophetic voice in Jewish, multireligious, and American life office@shalomctr.org
===
We at the Network of Spiritual Progressives (NSP) mourn the death of Imam W. Deen Mohammed, a leading voice of rationality, love and goodness in the Muslim American community.
The account below from the Chicago Tribune gives some sense of his history in building positive interfaith relations and in providing a powerful alternative to the voice of the notorious anti-Semite and homophobe who heads the Nation of Islam: Rev. Farrakhan.
I was personally grateful for the several opportunities I had to work with Imam W. Deen Mohammed. I found him to be a man of great wisdom and compassion. He was a strong supporter of Tikkun Magazine and the Network of Spiritual Progressives and we had hoped to have him speak at our 2009 convention in Washington, D.C. and we were simply waiting to find a specific location and date for that event before finalizing the arrangements with him. Imam Mohammed provided me personally with important protection when Cornel West and I wrote our book together (Blacks and Jews: Let the Healing Begin) and found ourselves facing hostile audiences of Black Muslims who were repeating some of Farrakhan's hateful teachings and expressing hostility toward me that verged on overt violence.
It was a tragedy, though typical, that the American media gave far more attention to Farrakhan, because his hateful teachings were provocative and attention- grabbing, than to W. Deen Mohammed whose teachings of love and cooperation were largely unknown beyond the Muslim community.
We at Tikkun and the Network of Spiritual Progressives are saddened and mourn our loss of this inspirational
leader. Baruch Dayan Emet.
--Rabbi Michael Lerner Chair, The Network of Spiritual Progressives
===
Imam W.D. Mohammed, African-American Muslim leader, dies at 74; son of Elijah Muhammad
By Ron Grossman and Margaret Ramirez
Chicago Tribune
September 9, 2008
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/chi-090908-mohammed-islam-obit,0,1809841.story
Imam W. Deen Mohammed, one of the most prominent African-American Muslim leaders in the nation and the son of the late Nation of Islam leader Elijah Muhammad, died Tuesday, sources told the Tribune. "Brother Imam,"
as he was affectionately known, was 74.
There was no immediate confirmation of his death by his family. The Cook County medical examiner confirmed that a Wallace Mohammed was pronounced dead at his home in the 16100 block of Cambridge Drive in Markham, a spokesman said. Muslim community leaders said Mohammed was scheduled to speak Tuesday in Chicago, and many grew concerned when he did not appear. His last speaking engagement was at the monthly 1st Sunday Address he gave on Sept. 7 in Homewood. Mohammed inherited from his father the Nation of Islam, a religious movement crafted out of black nationalism and bits and pieces of Muslim practice. He immediately tried to move its followers toward mainstream Islam, eventually leading to a split between those who agreed with Mohammed's approach and those who joined a revived Nation of Islam under Louis Farrakhan.
Imam W. Deen Mohammed Photos Mohammed was a spiritual wanderer who was banished several times by his father for filial impiety?once for remaining close to Malcolm X, Muhammad's prized disciple who turned into a critical voice within the Nation of Islam before he was slain. In 1961, Mohammed refused to serve in the U.S.
military and went to prison in accordance with his father's teaching that African- Americans shouldn't defend a land of lynching and segregation. While incarcerated, Mohammed studied the Quran and found its teachings at considerable variance with his father's.
After his father's death, Mohammed in 1975 took the bold step of aligning the Nation of Islam with mainstream Muslim beliefs and giving the movement a new name, the first of several. In 1976, Mohammed made a public appearance carrying an American flag. He proclaimed the time had come for black Americans to celebrate America. The following year, Farrakhan broke away to revive the Nation of Islam and its traditional teachings.
Mohammed's lifestyle was markedly different from that of his father, who presided over a religious empire from a family compound he constructed amid the historic mansions of the Kenwood neighborhood on Chicago's South Side. Muhammad was surrounded by a phalanx of bodyguards, dubbed the Fruit of Islam. Mohammed also rejected his father's sometimes overtly anti-white preaching?a rhetorical style continued by the fiery Farrakhan, Mohammed's rival for leadership of African- American Muslims. Farrakhan and Mohammed long traded barbs and theological jabs before publicly reconciling at a joint worship service in 2000.
"For me, [Islam] is too big a cause for our personal problems and differences to stand in the way," Mohammed said.
Mohammed was also deeply committed to building bridges between African-American Muslims and the increasing numbers of immigrants from the Middle East and Asia. In 2003, Mohammed unexpectedly announced his resignation from his organization, the American Society of Muslims, saying he was frustrated that many of its imams had refused to adopt mainstream Muslim thinking. During his final years, Mohammed lived quietly in a modest home in south suburban Markham. He headed a charitable organization, Mosque Cares, and spoke to congregations across the nation. His lectures were reprinted in the movement's newspaper, the Muslim Journal. But he had no mosque of his own.
rgrossman@tribune.com
maramirez@tribune.com
1. Honorable Minister Louis Farrakhan and the Nation of Islam 2. Rabbi Arthur Waskow, The Shalom Center 3. Rabbi Michael Lerner Chair, The Network of Spiritual Progressives 4. Obituary, Chicago Tribune
===
IN THE NAME OF ALLAH, THE BENEFICENT, THE MERCIFUL.
Official Statement from the Honorable Minister Louis Farrakhan and the Nation of Islam on the passing of Imam W. Deen Mohammed
Sep 9, 2008
http://www.finalcall.com/artman/publish/article_5190.shtml
(FinalCall.com) - The following statement was released today by the Honorable Minister Louis Farrakhan and the Nation of Islam regarding the passing of Imam W. Deen Mohammed.
CHICAGO - We mourn the loss of our brother Imam W. Deen Mohammed. We thank Allah for him and his great contribution to the ongoing work of Prophet Muhammad ibn Abdullah (P.B.U.H) and his work of helping to create a better understanding and image of Islam in America and throughout the world. Our prayers and our thoughts are with the Mohammed family, with the followers and all those who feel our great loss.
===
The Shalom Center mourns the death of Imam W. Deen Mohammed, may the memory of this righteous and loving leader be a blessing to us all.
This national leader of the American Muslim community died yesterday in Illinois.
Imam Mohammed, 74, was the son of Elijah Muhammad, the founder of the "Nation of Islam." After his father's death in 1975, Imam Mohammed led his community to mainstream Islam. Those who followed him took a path similar to that of El-Hajj Malik el-Shabazz ("Malcolm X" ) in his last months after his pilgrimage to Mecca, leaving racial and ethnic animosity behind in the true spirit of Islam.
The communities that followed W. Deen Mohammed are both more numerous and more deeply rooted than the "Nation of Islam" -- while it became better known in white America because of the animosities expressed by some of its leaders.
May his following continue to grow in numbers and in spiritual depth, and may other Americans learn to practice a loving and people-healing ministry, as he did and they do.
Asalaam aleikum, shalom aleichem - May peace rest upon
us:
Arthur (Rabbi Arthur Waskow)
The Shalom Center: A prophetic voice in Jewish, multireligious, and American life office@shalomctr.org
===
We at the Network of Spiritual Progressives (NSP) mourn the death of Imam W. Deen Mohammed, a leading voice of rationality, love and goodness in the Muslim American community.
The account below from the Chicago Tribune gives some sense of his history in building positive interfaith relations and in providing a powerful alternative to the voice of the notorious anti-Semite and homophobe who heads the Nation of Islam: Rev. Farrakhan.
I was personally grateful for the several opportunities I had to work with Imam W. Deen Mohammed. I found him to be a man of great wisdom and compassion. He was a strong supporter of Tikkun Magazine and the Network of Spiritual Progressives and we had hoped to have him speak at our 2009 convention in Washington, D.C. and we were simply waiting to find a specific location and date for that event before finalizing the arrangements with him. Imam Mohammed provided me personally with important protection when Cornel West and I wrote our book together (Blacks and Jews: Let the Healing Begin) and found ourselves facing hostile audiences of Black Muslims who were repeating some of Farrakhan's hateful teachings and expressing hostility toward me that verged on overt violence.
It was a tragedy, though typical, that the American media gave far more attention to Farrakhan, because his hateful teachings were provocative and attention- grabbing, than to W. Deen Mohammed whose teachings of love and cooperation were largely unknown beyond the Muslim community.
We at Tikkun and the Network of Spiritual Progressives are saddened and mourn our loss of this inspirational
leader. Baruch Dayan Emet.
--Rabbi Michael Lerner Chair, The Network of Spiritual Progressives
===
Imam W.D. Mohammed, African-American Muslim leader, dies at 74; son of Elijah Muhammad
By Ron Grossman and Margaret Ramirez
Chicago Tribune
September 9, 2008
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/chi-090908-mohammed-islam-obit,0,1809841.story
Imam W. Deen Mohammed, one of the most prominent African-American Muslim leaders in the nation and the son of the late Nation of Islam leader Elijah Muhammad, died Tuesday, sources told the Tribune. "Brother Imam,"
as he was affectionately known, was 74.
There was no immediate confirmation of his death by his family. The Cook County medical examiner confirmed that a Wallace Mohammed was pronounced dead at his home in the 16100 block of Cambridge Drive in Markham, a spokesman said. Muslim community leaders said Mohammed was scheduled to speak Tuesday in Chicago, and many grew concerned when he did not appear. His last speaking engagement was at the monthly 1st Sunday Address he gave on Sept. 7 in Homewood. Mohammed inherited from his father the Nation of Islam, a religious movement crafted out of black nationalism and bits and pieces of Muslim practice. He immediately tried to move its followers toward mainstream Islam, eventually leading to a split between those who agreed with Mohammed's approach and those who joined a revived Nation of Islam under Louis Farrakhan.
Imam W. Deen Mohammed Photos Mohammed was a spiritual wanderer who was banished several times by his father for filial impiety?once for remaining close to Malcolm X, Muhammad's prized disciple who turned into a critical voice within the Nation of Islam before he was slain. In 1961, Mohammed refused to serve in the U.S.
military and went to prison in accordance with his father's teaching that African- Americans shouldn't defend a land of lynching and segregation. While incarcerated, Mohammed studied the Quran and found its teachings at considerable variance with his father's.
After his father's death, Mohammed in 1975 took the bold step of aligning the Nation of Islam with mainstream Muslim beliefs and giving the movement a new name, the first of several. In 1976, Mohammed made a public appearance carrying an American flag. He proclaimed the time had come for black Americans to celebrate America. The following year, Farrakhan broke away to revive the Nation of Islam and its traditional teachings.
Mohammed's lifestyle was markedly different from that of his father, who presided over a religious empire from a family compound he constructed amid the historic mansions of the Kenwood neighborhood on Chicago's South Side. Muhammad was surrounded by a phalanx of bodyguards, dubbed the Fruit of Islam. Mohammed also rejected his father's sometimes overtly anti-white preaching?a rhetorical style continued by the fiery Farrakhan, Mohammed's rival for leadership of African- American Muslims. Farrakhan and Mohammed long traded barbs and theological jabs before publicly reconciling at a joint worship service in 2000.
"For me, [Islam] is too big a cause for our personal problems and differences to stand in the way," Mohammed said.
Mohammed was also deeply committed to building bridges between African-American Muslims and the increasing numbers of immigrants from the Middle East and Asia. In 2003, Mohammed unexpectedly announced his resignation from his organization, the American Society of Muslims, saying he was frustrated that many of its imams had refused to adopt mainstream Muslim thinking. During his final years, Mohammed lived quietly in a modest home in south suburban Markham. He headed a charitable organization, Mosque Cares, and spoke to congregations across the nation. His lectures were reprinted in the movement's newspaper, the Muslim Journal. But he had no mosque of his own.
rgrossman@tribune.com
maramirez@tribune.com
The Hidden Truth
I am grateful for the Socialist organisation in Ireland called Eírígí for this piece for more on them check.www.eirigi.org
Independent Media - A Threat to the State?
06/09/08
As the mainstream, international news media dedicates hours of TV coverage and acres of newsprint to the US Republican National Congress taking place in St Paul, Minnesota, little, if any, mention will be made concerning the hidden, parallel operation being mounted by armed police on the civil liberties of independent press and other political activists before and during that Convention.
Both the FBI and Minneapolis police have targeted independent media journalists in the days leading up to the Republican Convention, in an attempt to obstruct alternative media coverage of protest events being planned near the convention centre.
On Saturday (August 30), up to 20 St Paul police officers, carrying firearms (including at least one AR-15 automatic rifle), tasers, pepper spray and accompanied by the FBI, surrounded a house at Iglehart Avenue. Inside were members of the New York city-based I-Witness Video collective and journalist Elizabeth Press from 'Democracy Now'.
Sarah Coffey, a legal observer from the National Lawyers Guild, which represents over 4,000 legal practitioners across the US, was detained in handcuffs outside the building while attempting to liaise with the police as they tried to serve a search warrant that had the wrong address. After being denied entry they stormed the building through the attic, having gained access from an adjacent property. The warrant covered searching of all types of journalistic equipment, including privileged notes, computers, cameras, videotapes and communication devices. People inside were forcefully detained, handcuffed and photographed by police. After the search, the police released all detainees and left without confiscating any items.
Five other members of I-Witness Video who were not present at the house were detained simultaneously in what was clearly a coordinated and well-planned operation. Three of them were detained while riding their bicycles a mile away from the house search and the other two as they were driving in a car. The raid and detention of the independent media journalists prevented the group from documenting three other synchronised raids happening against activist groups in Minneapolis and St Paul.
And it was exactly for this reason – to prevent I-Witness Video from recording the other raids against those activist groups – that the raid on Iglehart Avenue was mounted.
I-Witness Video was formed in an attempt to protect civil liberties in the US and to probe various police actions at public events. I-Witness Video has uncovered perjury and abuse by police officers and prosecutors, revealed illegal police surveillance, exposed official lies, and has had a number of notable successes.
One of the founders of I-Witness Video, Eileen Clancy, is well known in many nationalist communities across the Six Counties. Eileen was one of the regular international observers who travelled to Ireland from the US during the mid-1990s in response to an appeal from within those beleaguered communities for human and civil rights NGOs to come and monitor and report on the situation on the ground.
Eileen and others were extremely effective in ensuring the documentation, through the use of both video and stills photography, of many of the worst excesses of violence being inflicted on both the Garvaghy Road and Ormeau Road communities during the “Orange marching season”. Eileen also travelled to other communities in many other parts of the Six Counties to ensure that what was occurring in those communities was also recorded by video.
She and her colleagues proved to be an invaluable resource to many communities at that time and in subsequent years.
These independent watchdog groups are a positive and important presence. They need to be able to function free from fear of harassment and arrest for simply documenting police actions against protests, because the mainstream media so rarely covers them. Activists in the US and in Ireland need to be able to document what is happening around them for the benefit of the community at large. Whether in St Paul or in Rossport, it's essential that all voices be permitted to speak and be heard so that citizens can educate themselves and come closer to understanding the objective truth behind different events.
Interviewed at the beginning of August, Eileen Clancy offered this advice:
“The [federal] government is trying to criminalize video because it has tremendous power to expose bad acts by the police and federal agents. The best way for people to document police misconduct is to band together in video activist groups such as I-Witness Video, work in pairs or affinity groups, protect their footage by making back-up copies, publish their work in the media or on the Internet, and vigorously challenge any arrests, detentions and police orders to erase photos or videotapes.”
In a world of increased attacks upon civil liberties by the state, of increasing restrictions on the right to peacefully protest or to engage in civil disobedience, those resisting need to make full use of, and to protect, the independent alternative media. Activists who engage in protest across Ireland are no exception to this.
For information about I-Witness, go to http://iwitnessvideo.info/about/index.html
Independent Media - A Threat to the State?
06/09/08
As the mainstream, international news media dedicates hours of TV coverage and acres of newsprint to the US Republican National Congress taking place in St Paul, Minnesota, little, if any, mention will be made concerning the hidden, parallel operation being mounted by armed police on the civil liberties of independent press and other political activists before and during that Convention.
Both the FBI and Minneapolis police have targeted independent media journalists in the days leading up to the Republican Convention, in an attempt to obstruct alternative media coverage of protest events being planned near the convention centre.
On Saturday (August 30), up to 20 St Paul police officers, carrying firearms (including at least one AR-15 automatic rifle), tasers, pepper spray and accompanied by the FBI, surrounded a house at Iglehart Avenue. Inside were members of the New York city-based I-Witness Video collective and journalist Elizabeth Press from 'Democracy Now'.
Sarah Coffey, a legal observer from the National Lawyers Guild, which represents over 4,000 legal practitioners across the US, was detained in handcuffs outside the building while attempting to liaise with the police as they tried to serve a search warrant that had the wrong address. After being denied entry they stormed the building through the attic, having gained access from an adjacent property. The warrant covered searching of all types of journalistic equipment, including privileged notes, computers, cameras, videotapes and communication devices. People inside were forcefully detained, handcuffed and photographed by police. After the search, the police released all detainees and left without confiscating any items.
Five other members of I-Witness Video who were not present at the house were detained simultaneously in what was clearly a coordinated and well-planned operation. Three of them were detained while riding their bicycles a mile away from the house search and the other two as they were driving in a car. The raid and detention of the independent media journalists prevented the group from documenting three other synchronised raids happening against activist groups in Minneapolis and St Paul.
And it was exactly for this reason – to prevent I-Witness Video from recording the other raids against those activist groups – that the raid on Iglehart Avenue was mounted.
I-Witness Video was formed in an attempt to protect civil liberties in the US and to probe various police actions at public events. I-Witness Video has uncovered perjury and abuse by police officers and prosecutors, revealed illegal police surveillance, exposed official lies, and has had a number of notable successes.
One of the founders of I-Witness Video, Eileen Clancy, is well known in many nationalist communities across the Six Counties. Eileen was one of the regular international observers who travelled to Ireland from the US during the mid-1990s in response to an appeal from within those beleaguered communities for human and civil rights NGOs to come and monitor and report on the situation on the ground.
Eileen and others were extremely effective in ensuring the documentation, through the use of both video and stills photography, of many of the worst excesses of violence being inflicted on both the Garvaghy Road and Ormeau Road communities during the “Orange marching season”. Eileen also travelled to other communities in many other parts of the Six Counties to ensure that what was occurring in those communities was also recorded by video.
She and her colleagues proved to be an invaluable resource to many communities at that time and in subsequent years.
These independent watchdog groups are a positive and important presence. They need to be able to function free from fear of harassment and arrest for simply documenting police actions against protests, because the mainstream media so rarely covers them. Activists in the US and in Ireland need to be able to document what is happening around them for the benefit of the community at large. Whether in St Paul or in Rossport, it's essential that all voices be permitted to speak and be heard so that citizens can educate themselves and come closer to understanding the objective truth behind different events.
Interviewed at the beginning of August, Eileen Clancy offered this advice:
“The [federal] government is trying to criminalize video because it has tremendous power to expose bad acts by the police and federal agents. The best way for people to document police misconduct is to band together in video activist groups such as I-Witness Video, work in pairs or affinity groups, protect their footage by making back-up copies, publish their work in the media or on the Internet, and vigorously challenge any arrests, detentions and police orders to erase photos or videotapes.”
In a world of increased attacks upon civil liberties by the state, of increasing restrictions on the right to peacefully protest or to engage in civil disobedience, those resisting need to make full use of, and to protect, the independent alternative media. Activists who engage in protest across Ireland are no exception to this.
For information about I-Witness, go to http://iwitnessvideo.info/about/index.html
Wednesday, September 10, 2008
The Rich keep on Getting Richer
World's Richest Got Even Richer Last Year: Report By Joseph A. Giannone Reuters September 4, 2008 http://www.reuters.com/article/domesticNews/idUSN0437922320080904?sp=true
NEW YORK (Reuters) - The old saying holds true: The rich do get richer.
Even as world financial markets broke down last year, personal wealth around the world grew 5 percent to
$109.5 trillion, according to a global wealth report released on Thursday by Boston Consulting Group.
It was the sixth consecutive year of expanding wealth.
The fastest growth was among households in developing regions, such as China and the Gulf States and among families who were already rich.
That wealth also is increasingly concentrated among the richest.
The top 1 percent of all households owned 35 percent of the world's wealth last year. Meanwhile, the top 0.001 percent, ultra-rich households holding at least $5 million in assets, commanded $21 trillion -- a fifth of the world's wealth.
The planet also continues to mint new millionaires rapidly. The biggest jumps in 2007 came from emerging countries in Asia and Latin America. Overall, the number of millionaire households grew 11 percent to 10.7 million last year.
BCG notes that, while the rich are still rich, they have been making some adjustments as a result of the financial crisis.
This year, assets are being shifted to more conservative investments, more money is being kept onshore in home markets and some individuals have curtailed new investment.
Yet BCG cautioned the outlook for wealth markets and the banks who serve them, is dimmed by the current financial crisis.
North American personal wealth growth slowed to 3.8 percent last year, compared with 9 percent in 2006, reflecting the the mortgage crisis and the onset of the credit crunch last summer.
"The financial crisis continue to cast a pall over established wealth markets," said Victor Aerni, a Zurich based partner who coauthored the report.
BCG, which advises banks and wealth managers, forecasts personal wealth will continue growing, but at a slower pace. This year, with Wall Street suffering through one of its worst slumps in decades, growth in assets is expected to rise less than 1 percent.
Things will improve over the next five years, BCG said, with personal wealth growing more than 3 percent annually -- well off the 8.5 percent set between 2002 and 2007.
Wealth is growing at much faster rates among the rest of the world. Households in Asia, the Pacific Rim excluding Japan and Latin America saw the greatest growth, with wealth rising 14 percent. That growth was fueled by manufacturing in Asia and commodities in Latin America and the Middle East, as well as more currency and political stability.
BCG observed that banks, brokerages and money managers will have little choice, but to expand their presence in these fast growing centers. Dubai and Singapore, the firm said, are becoming regional private banking centers offering greater competition to traditional havens such as Switzerland.
(Editing by Andre Grenon)
NEW YORK (Reuters) - The old saying holds true: The rich do get richer.
Even as world financial markets broke down last year, personal wealth around the world grew 5 percent to
$109.5 trillion, according to a global wealth report released on Thursday by Boston Consulting Group.
It was the sixth consecutive year of expanding wealth.
The fastest growth was among households in developing regions, such as China and the Gulf States and among families who were already rich.
That wealth also is increasingly concentrated among the richest.
The top 1 percent of all households owned 35 percent of the world's wealth last year. Meanwhile, the top 0.001 percent, ultra-rich households holding at least $5 million in assets, commanded $21 trillion -- a fifth of the world's wealth.
The planet also continues to mint new millionaires rapidly. The biggest jumps in 2007 came from emerging countries in Asia and Latin America. Overall, the number of millionaire households grew 11 percent to 10.7 million last year.
BCG notes that, while the rich are still rich, they have been making some adjustments as a result of the financial crisis.
This year, assets are being shifted to more conservative investments, more money is being kept onshore in home markets and some individuals have curtailed new investment.
Yet BCG cautioned the outlook for wealth markets and the banks who serve them, is dimmed by the current financial crisis.
North American personal wealth growth slowed to 3.8 percent last year, compared with 9 percent in 2006, reflecting the the mortgage crisis and the onset of the credit crunch last summer.
"The financial crisis continue to cast a pall over established wealth markets," said Victor Aerni, a Zurich based partner who coauthored the report.
BCG, which advises banks and wealth managers, forecasts personal wealth will continue growing, but at a slower pace. This year, with Wall Street suffering through one of its worst slumps in decades, growth in assets is expected to rise less than 1 percent.
Things will improve over the next five years, BCG said, with personal wealth growing more than 3 percent annually -- well off the 8.5 percent set between 2002 and 2007.
Wealth is growing at much faster rates among the rest of the world. Households in Asia, the Pacific Rim excluding Japan and Latin America saw the greatest growth, with wealth rising 14 percent. That growth was fueled by manufacturing in Asia and commodities in Latin America and the Middle East, as well as more currency and political stability.
BCG observed that banks, brokerages and money managers will have little choice, but to expand their presence in these fast growing centers. Dubai and Singapore, the firm said, are becoming regional private banking centers offering greater competition to traditional havens such as Switzerland.
(Editing by Andre Grenon)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)