Tuesday, January 10, 2006

The United States' war against civilisation by John Maxwell


We cannot say we weren't warned.
On May 6, 2002, the United States denounced the International Criminal Court, telling the United Nations that it would no longer consider itself bound by the Treaty establishing the ICC - signed by President Clinton in the closing days of his administration.

Clinton had reservations about the court, but he believed that the US could negotiate compromises which would still have left the Court an effective tribunal for the trial of crimes against humanity.

The Bush administration began almost as soon as it took office to rail against the idea of the court itself, and began to blackmail smaller countries into signing bilateral treaties to (hopefully) render the court without jurisdiction in those countries. The reason, according to various spokesmen for the US, was to protect the interest of American soldiers and diplomats from frivolous prosecution.

Mr Pierre Richard Prosper, a senior US diplomat said the May 6 letter to the UN 'neutralised' Mr Clinton's signature and " ... It frees us from some of the obligations that are incurred by signature. When you sign you have an obligation not to take actions that would defeat the object or purpose of the treaty," he said.

By unsigning the treaty, the US would no longer have to extradite people wanted by the court, he said.

"What we've learnt from the war on terror is that rather than creating an international mechanism to deal with these issues it is better to organise an international mandate that authorises states to use their unilateral tools to tackle the problems we have ."

Law Free Zones

Unfortunately for the US, the world has seen what these unilateral arrangements can mean, at Abu Ghraib and Gunatanamo Bay, for example, and in the vast gulag archipelago for suspected terrorists now being operated round the world by the United States.

As one of Britian's most eminent judges, Lord Steyn, has said, the US has created a 'law-free zone' where it can commit any crime against anyone without fear of prosecuition.
Or so Mr Bush's advisers believe.

Unless Mr Bush and his party seize power in the United States and remain in power for ever, prosecution and retribution are always in the offing, as the Chilean usurper/regicide Pinochet is now discovering.
One of the key loopholes the Americans believed they had discovered is that resiling from the ICC means that they do not have to exstradite their own home-boy terrorists such as Luis Posada Carriles and his accomplice in murder, Orlando Bosch.

But the ICC renunciation was only the most significant act in a concerted US campaign to turn their backs not only on history but on civilisation itself.

It is now clear that the US Administration and its dwindling band of fanatics want to turn the world back to medieval systems of governance, Justice and knowledge.

Global Warming: The US has worked overtime, using bad science, PR spin doctors and the power of money to try to turn back the Kyoto protocol on climate change. It was sheer embarrassment which forced the US three weeks ago to agree to continue being a part of the negotiating process. The tactic here will be to talk out the decision-making process while the US continues to pollute the atmosphere and the seas and mankind's lungs and genes for as long as it is profitable.

Globalisation: The US is adamant that her merchants and usurers should be free to scrape as much in profit from the rest of the world as possible by arrangements such as the WTO and GATS (General Agreement on Trade in Services) which will allow the Walmartisation and McDonaldisation of the world, destroying local artisans and their craft and substituting the obviously superior American ersatz productions, spreading asthma, diabetes, deformity and unemployment everywhere, while discrete 'Free Zones' provide slave labour for the Cognitive Elite behind their electrified fences and shoot to kill policies.

While Jamaica and India must cough up the 'uttermost farthing' for pirated DVDs and software, Americans will legitimately patent such things as the Neem Tree, Basmati Rice and, eventually, Reggae music.

Genetics: The United States and a cadre of rogue scientists will continue to plunder the earth in search of desirable plants, for food and medicine, developed over centuries by peasants on the slopes of the Andes or the terraces of Assam. When they have found the most productive strains and patented them, they will then genetically alter them so that no further development and evolution is possible.

These seeds will have no progeny, except in the tissue culture labs of Monsanto and Dupont. At that point, selective starvation (aka Eugenics) will become possible, as the companies which have patented life protest that they have run out of material and farmers in Peru and Jamaica and Assam and Sri lanka will not be able to buy planting material.
"We have a shortage" will be the claim.

And, since Mr Bush and his merry men do not believe in evolution, all will be for the best in the best possible of all (gated) worlds.
GATS: That desirable green space in front of the University of the West indies chapel at Mona would be greatly enhanced by a small, efficient Walmart.

And American universities will demand subsidies ('national treatment') from Jamaica, if Jamaica were unwise enough to give any assistance to the poor and indigent Jamaican students attending the UWI. If the children of the elite want to go to Harvard, the Jamaican government would have to pay their fees as well, as long as Harvard set up a drop shop in Jamaica.

Small Arms and Drugs: While the United States reserves the right to kill people with alcohol and tobacco, it has set its face firmly against ganja and cocaine, which unlike alcohol and tobacco are virulently dangerous substances, notwithstanding the fact that they kill far fewer people.

And citing the immutable laws of Adam Smith and Free Trade, the Americans will refuse to control the export of small arms to places like Jamaica for the very good reason that when Jamaicans kill each other it is a purely domestic problem

Oil: It is a curious fact that petroleum, which belongs by natural right to the United States, has been secreted by God under the land area and seas of various poor and often 'failing states'.

And when reckless and dangerous agitators like Hugo Chavez claim to be the rightful owners of the oil under their feet, they need to understand that their vain presumptions are entirely without fundamentalist justification and are in sacrilegious disrespect of the bottom line.

Assaulting Liberty and Civilisation

The US Justice Department has now instituted an official probe with a view to criminal charges against the person or persons who leaked the state secret that president Bush had contravened the laws and Constitution of the United States by illegally ordering his National Security Agency to spy on Americans.

A few Americans are agitated that this may mean some infringement of their civil liberties and may turn a few of them into unlawful combatants inhabiting some 'law-free zone' for the rest of their natural lives. Mr Bush has a divine right to break the law and exposing his crime is a crime.

I remember vividly what I was doing on the morning of September 11. My hair was standing on end before the planes struck the World Trade Centre. I was trolling the web and copied several stories about a new project called Echelon, a worldwide network of satellites and computers which had the capability to read or record the secrets of anyone, any company, any government, anywhere.

The European Union was about to protest about Echelon, the stories said. After 9/11 there has been a complete absence of stories about Echelon.

Case Study: The destruction of liberty can be choreographed, as Hitler and Stalin both knew. 'Obedience is good, Control better,' Stalin is reported to have said.

And when Hitler began to enslave his people he started with blacks (Yes! Blacks! the 'spawn' of the Senegalese and Jamaican troops of the First World War armies occupying Germany). He next attacked homosexuals, Gypsies and then the Jews; picking them off one by one, choosing the most friendless - as Niemoller said- to begin with.
Mr Alex van Trotsenberg of the World bank infamously described Somalia as 'almost a non-country'. Haiti is obviously a non-country, and Iraq cannot be far behind.

What has happened to these two countries may be instructive.
It was in Iraq, 8,000 years ago, we are told, that civilisation as we understand it, first developed.

After suffering defeat in the arranged Gulf War, the Iraqis were starved and bombed continuously for ten years, their land contaminated by depleted uranium, their children poisoned, the wombs of the women so corrupted by radioactivity that many produced monsters.

One American general said in 2002 there was nothing left to bomb in Iraq but the odd outhouse and a few unsuspecting shepherds, yet the US and British unleashed 'Shock and Awe' against these people, a barbarous attempt to cow them into surrender, to un-man them and convince them to greet the 'liberators' with flowers and kisses.
The reality was different.

"She was standing in the wrong place, so I shot her," said one 18-year-old American GI.

Iraq's historic places and museums were looted and vandalised. Mr Rumsfeld was unperturbed: "Stuff happens," he said. Unlike Reichsmarshal Herman Goering, he did not reach for his revolver on hearing the word 'Culture' - He probably did not understand it.

The Fight Against Slavery

Two hundred and one years after freeing themselves from slavery, the Haitians are once again engaged in the same struggle. The Haitians have been abandoned by their friends, their relatives and the world police, terrorised by the Americans, Canadians, Brazilians and French, and by the United Nations.

Their president and his family were kidnapped, transported out of his country as 'cargo' and finally found refuge in South Africa, one of the few places with the cojones to defy the United States in such matters.
The Haitian people are being raped, tortured, falsely imprisoned, brutalised and massacred by known and convicted criminals, one of whom is now running for President under elections sponsored by George Bush and Kofi Annan.

The lawful President is being denigrated, vilified and libelled for building more schools in five years than had been built in a century, for giving the children of Haiti their own radio station, for setting up a medical school open to poor students, for instituting a disaster preparedness network, for liberty and democracy.

And, what happened ten years ago when American-sponsored Generals first removed Aristide is happening again. Rape and murder are again instruments of policy under the supervision of the man who oversaw Aristide's kidnapping, former US Ambassador Foley.

Lynn Duff, an American journalist reports on a woman she met in Haiti:
"My daughter who is four years old was sleeping on a mat on the floor. They kicked her out of the way. My other daughter is nine years old. She was so scared she didn't even cry. .The police took my husband away because they said he was a chimère. [terrorist]They shackled him and beat him on his head. Then they took him out of the house.

" . One policeman showed his identification card and said, "See what this is? It means that I can do with you whatever I want." But it was too dark for us to see the name on the card, even though we recognised it as a policeman's identification card.

". one police officer said to me, 'Don't worry, you'll enjoy it.' I think you can imagine what happened next. All of the police officers raped me, both in the natural place for having sex and also in the unnatural way, in my rear.

"The whole time my children were there watching. When the police officers finished with me, they went for my oldest girl, the one who is here with me today. They wanted to violate her as well but she is too small. One police officer put his fingers up inside of her and she bled.

Today we are here at the clinic to see the doctor because my daughter is in a lot of pain since the attack. She has pain in her body and pain in her heart."

Paul Farmer, an American professor of medicine and medical Anthropology has spent two decades in rural Haiti, teaching people to deal with HIV/AIDS. He has devoted his life to curing the world, starting in Haiti. At this moment he is in Rwanda, pursuing his mission.

I got an email from him last week. He said that he had examined the priest, Father Gerard Jean Juste in a prison in Port au Prince. Jean-Juste has committed no crime apart from being a pastor and leader of the Haitians. He had also decided to run for President.

He was arrested and held on no charge. Farmer examined him in prison and discovered that Father Gerry is suffering from cancer, probably leukemia

According to Farmer

". he is not only a prisoner of conscience, one of hundreds in Haiti, but a sick one who needs more than prayers and letters of support. He needs proper medical care and, probably, chemotherapy. It's hard enough, as we know from our own long experience in central Haiti, to deliver chemotherapy anywhere in the country, but it's simply not possible to do so in a Haitian prison.

It was the Haitians who first abolished slavery and first proclaimed the universal rights of man, the doctrine enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights 149 years later. If their very right to Liberty is now in question, can yours be far behind?

If civilisation itself is under attack in Iraq, where next?
If Liberty itself is smothered in Haiti, where does that leave you?

Losing the War on Terrorism - Our Incompetent Commander-in-Chief

Peering ahead into what will certainly be a lively New Year: One aspect of the President's generally poor polling numbers -- which bumped up modestly thanks to a holiday propaganda onslaught about democracy, progress, and victory in Iraq (and, in the first poll to arrive in January, are already sinking again) -- remains striking. What "approval" George Bush now retains seems to rest largely on a single strand of popular feeling: the belief in the President's special aptitude for conducting his global war on terror and keeping Americans safe. Even taking a mid-December ABC/Washington Post poll (scroll down) that had anomalously high positives for the President, in no other area -- health care (37%), Iraq (46%), the economy (47%) and "ethics" (48%) -- did his approval ratings hit the 50% mark. On "terrorism," however, he was at 56%. In other polls, where the rest of those mediocre numbers aren't even matched, his "handling" of terrorism still continues to hover just above or close to 50%. For example, the latest Time magazine poll (scroll down) in early December, had the President's approval rating on terrorism at 49%. Last spring, however, the same poll had it reaching a high for the year of 63%; and let's not forget that, in early 2002, it rested at about 90%. Recent polls also seem to indicate that Americans are coming to believe either political party could handle terrorism equally well.

This is perilous territory for the President to be entering. If, as Michael Klare, author of the ever more indispensable book, Blood and Oil: The Dangers and Consequences of America's Growing Dependence on Imported Petroleum, indicates below, Americans truly come to believe that Bush has botched his war on terrorism at every level and has made Americans less secure in the world, then this year and the coming elections could prove uncomfortable indeed for the President and his associates.

The Anti-Empire Report - Some things you need to know before the world ends. by William Blum

The sign has been put out front: "Iraq is open for business."

We read about things done and said by the Iraqi president, or the Ministry of this or the Ministry of that, and it's easy to get the impression that Iraq is in the process of becoming a sovereign state, albeit not particularly secular and employing torture, but still, a functioning, independent state. Then we read about the IMF and the rest of the international financial mafia -- with the US playing its usual sine qua non role -- making large loans to the country and forgiving debts, with the customary strings attached, in the current instance ending government subsidies for fuel and other petroleum products. And so the government starts to reduce the subsidies for these products which affect almost every important aspect of life, and the prices quickly quintuple, sparking wide discontent and protests.[1] Who in this sovereign nation wanted to add more suffering to the already beaten-down Iraqi people? But the international financial mafia are concerned only with making countries meet certain criteria sworn to be holy in Economics 101, like a balanced budget, privatization, and deregulation and thus making themselves more appealing to international investors.

In case the presence of 130,000 American soldiers, a growing number of sprawling US military bases, and all the designed-in-Washington restrictive Coalition Provisional Authority laws still in force aren't enough to keep the Iraqi government in line, this will do it. Iraq will have to agree to allow their economy to be run by the IMF for the next decade. The same IMF that Joseph Stiglitz, the Nobel prize-winning economist and dissident former chief economist at the World Bank, describes as having "brought disaster to Russia and Argentina and leaves a trail of devastated developing economies in its wake".[2]

On top of this comes the disclosure of the American occupation's massive giveaway of the sovereign nation's most valuable commodity, oil. One should read the new report, "Crude Designs: The Rip-Off of Iraq's Oil Wealth" by the British NO, Platform. Among its findings:

This report reveals how an oil policy with origins in the US State Department is on course to be adopted in Iraq, soon after the December elections, with no public debate and at enormous potential cost. The policy allocates the majority of Iraq’s oilfields -- accounting for at least 64% of the country’s oil reserves -- for development by multinational oil companies.

The estimated cost to Iraq over the life of the new oil contracts is $74 to $194 billion, compared with leaving oil development in public hands.

The contracts would guarantee massive profits to foreign companies, with rates of return of 42 to 162 percent. The kinds of contracts that will provide these returns are known as production sharing agreements. PSAs have been heavily promoted by the US government and oil majors and have the backing of senior figures in the Iraqi Oil Ministry. However, PSAs last for 25-40 years, are usually secret and prevent governments from later altering the terms of the contract.[3]

"Crude Designs" author and lead researcher, Greg Muttitt, says: "The form of contracts being promoted is the most expensive and undemocratic option available. Iraq's oil should be for the benefit of the Iraqi people, not foreign oil companies."[4]
Noam Chomsky recently remarked: "We're supposed to believe that the US would've invaded Iraq if it was an island in the Indian Ocean and its main exports were pickles and lettuce. This is what we're supposed to believe."[5]

NOTES
[1] Los Angeles Times, December 28, 2005, p.1; Agence France Presse, December 23, 2005
[2] Johann Hari, "Why Are We Inflicting This Discredited Market Fundamentalism on Iraq?" The Independent (UK), December 22, 2004; yes, 2004, this has been a work carefully in progress for some time.
[3] http://www.crudedesigns.org/
[4] Interview with Institute for Public Accuracy (Washington, DC), November 22, 2005
[5] Interview by Andy Clark, Amsterdam Forum, December 18, 2005, audio and text at: http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article11330.htm

Reconstruction, thy name is not the United States by William Blum

The Bush administration has announced that it does not intend to seek any new funds for Iraq reconstruction in the budget request going before Congress in February. When the last of the reconstruction budget is spent, US officials in Baghdad have made clear, other foreign donors and the fledgling Iraqi government will have to take up what authorities say is tens of billions of dollars of work yet to be done merely to bring reliable electricity, water and other services to Iraq's 26 million people. [Washington Post, January 2, 2006, p.1]

It should be noted that these services, including sanitation systems, were largely destroyed by US bombing -- most of it rather deliberately -- beginning in the first Gulf War: 40 days and nights the bombing went on, demolishing everything that goes into the making of a modern society; followed by 12 years of merciless economic sanctions, accompanied by 12 years of often daily bombing supposedly to protect the so-called no-fly zones; finally the bombing, invasion and widespread devastation beginning in March 2003 and continuing even as you read this.
"The U.S. never intended to completely rebuild Iraq," Brig. Gen. William McCoy, the Army Corps of Engineers commander overseeing the work, told reporters at a recent news conference. In an interview this past week, McCoy said: "This was just supposed to be a jump-start." [Ibid]
It's a remarkable pattern. The United States has a long record of bombing nations, reducing entire neighborhoods, and much of cities, to rubble, wrecking the infrastructure, ruining the lives of those the bombs didn't kill. And afterward doing shockingly little or literally nothing to repair the damage.

On January 27, 1973, in Paris, the United States signed the "Agreement on Ending the War and Restoring Peace in Vietnam". Among the principles to which the United States agreed was that stated in Article 21: "In pursuance of its traditional [sic] policy, the United States will contribute to healing the wounds of war and to postwar reconstruction of the Democratic Republic of Vietnam [North Vietnam] and throughout Indochina."

Five days later, President Nixon sent a message to the Prime Minister of North Vietnam in which he stipulated the following:
(1)The Government of the United States of America will contribute to postwar reconstruction in North Vietnam without any political conditions. (2)Preliminary United States studies indicate that the appropriate programs for the United States contribution to postwar reconstruction will fall in the range of $3.25 billion of grant aid over 5 years.

Nothing of the promised reconstruction aid was ever paid. Or ever will be.

During the same period, Laos and Cambodia were wasted by US bombing as relentlessly as was Vietnam. After the Indochina wars were over, these nations, too, qualified to become beneficiaries of America's "traditional policy" of zero reconstruction.

Then came the American bombings of Grenada and Panama in the 1980s. There goes our neighborhood. Hundreds of Panamanians petitioned the Washington-controlled Organization of American States as well as American courts, all the way up to the US Supreme Court, for "just compensation" for the damage caused by Operation Just Cause (this being the not-tongue-in-cheek name given to the American invasion and bombing). They got just nothing, the same amount the people of Grenada received.

In 1998, Washington, in its grand wisdom, fired more than a dozen cruise missiles into a building in Sudan which it claimed was producing chemical and biological weapons. The completely pulverized building was actually a major pharmaceutical plant, vital to the Sudanese people. The United States effectively admitted its mistake by releasing the assets of the plant's owner it had frozen. Surely now it was compensation time. It appears that nothing has ever been paid to the owner, who filed suit, or to those injured in the bombing. [William Blum, "Freeing the World to Death: Essays on the American Empire", p.134-8]

The following year we had the case of Yugoslavia; 78 days of round-the-clock bombing, transforming an advanced state into virtually a pre-industrial one; the reconstruction needs were breathtaking. It's been 6 1/2 years since Yugoslavian bridges fell into the Danube, the country's factories and homes leveled, its roads made unusable, transportation torn apart. Yet the country has not received any funds for reconstruction from the architect and leading perpetrator of the bombing campaign, the United States.

The day after the above announcement about the US ending its reconstruction efforts in Iraq, it was reported that the United States is phasing out its commitment to reconstruction in Afghanistan as well. [Washington Post, January 3, 2006, p.1] This after several years of the usual launching of bombs and missiles on towns and villages, resulting in the usual wreckage and ruin.

Hmmm, perhaps we really are in danger of a biological attack ... but not from al Qaeda. by William Blum

A week after the massive anti-war demonstration in Washington on September 24, it was revealed that deadly bacteria had been detected at several sites in the city, including by the Lincoln Memorial, situated very close to the demonstration. Biohazard monitors installed at various sites gave positive readings on the 24th and 25th for the bacterium francisella tularensis, which causes the infectious disease tularemia, a pneumonia-like ailment that can be acquired by inhaling airborne bacteria and can be fatal. This biological agent is on the "A list" of the Department of Homeland Security's biohazards, along with anthrax, plague and smallpox. [Washington Post, October 2, 2005, p.C13]

My first thought upon reading about this was: Those bastards, they'd love to punish people who protest against the war. There's nothing I would put past them.

My second thought was: Oh stop being so paranoid. The news report cited federal health officials saying that the tularemia bacterium can occur naturally in soil and small animals.

My third thought came more than a month later, when I happened to be reading about a US Army program of the 1960s which carried out numerous exercises involving aircraft spraying of American warships with thousands of servicemen aboard. A wide variety of chemical and biological warfare agents were used to learn the vulnerabilities of these ships and personnel to such attacks and to develop procedures to respond to them. Amongst the CBW agents used were pasteurella tularensis (another name for francisella tularensis), which, said the Department of Defense later, causes tularemia, can produce very serious symptoms, and has a mortality rate of about six percent. [Part of Project Shipboard Hazard and Defense (SHAD), Department of Defense “Fact Sheets” released in 2001-2, "Shady Grove" test; http://www.deploymentlink.osd.mil/current_issues/shad/shad_intro.shtml
See also Associated Press, October 9, 2002, The New York Times May 24, 2002, p.1]


These tests in effect used members of the armed forces as guinea pigs, without their informed consent and without proper medical follow-up. This was a scenario enacted on numerous occasions during the Cold War, and subsequently as well, involving literally millions of service members, with frequent harmful effects, including at least several deaths, military and civilian. It's a good bet that on some future date we'll learn that similar tests are still going on as part of the war on terrorism. I conclude from all this that if our glorious leaders are not particularly concerned about the health and welfare of their own soldiers, the wretched warriors they enlist to fight the empire's wars, how can we be surprised if they don't care about the health and welfare of those of us standing in opposition to the empire?

Civil liberties holds an important place in the heart of the Bush administration's rhetoric. by William Blum

Civil liberties holds an important place in the heart of the Bush administration's rhetoric.

"This is a limited program designed to prevent attacks on the United States of America and, I repeat, limited,"
said President Bush about the National Security Agency's domestic spying on Americans without a court order. [Associated Press, January 2, 2006]

Let's give the devil his due. It's easy to put down the domestic spying program, but the fact is that the president is right, it is indeed limited. It's limited to those who are being spied upon. No one -- I repeat, no one -- who is not being spied upon is being spied upon.

On the other hand, there have been legal scholars, such as former Supreme Court Justice Lewis Brandeis, who have felt strongly that all wiretapping by the government should be considered an unconstitutional search under the Fourth Amendment, which, we should remember, states:
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
Thomas Jefferson said that the price of freedom is eternal vigilance. But, as someone has pointed out, he was talking about citizens watching the government, not the reverse.

Not Proud to Be an American By Molly Ivins

We live in a great nation. The police blotter of the Mill Valley Herald in California informs us that the constabulary there had to be called out on account of a citizen "dressed like a penguin" who was "standing on a street corner playing a ukulele." Makes me proud to be an American.

What does not make me proud to be an American is a specific twist in the Jack Abramoff-Tom DeLay scandal -- in fact, this makes me want to urp despite the fact that I have a strong stomach when it comes to political corruption. Practice, practice, practice, that's what Texas provides when it comes to sleaze and stink. Who can forget such great explanations as "Well, I'll just make a little bit of money, I won't make a whole lot"? And "There was never a Bible in the room"?

But this is a reach too far, just that little extra that takes normal putrid corruption and moves it to the ranks of "Excuse me, I have to throw up." Both Abramoff and DeLay and many of their web of colleagues have consistently used nonprofit organizations ostensibly formed for charitable purposes to launder money, to move peculiar proceeds and to pay for high-flying perks. Come on, guys, give us a break -- if you're going to make a mockery of democracy and show your mastery at flipping money, wiring the system and fixing the odds -- please don't use charitable organizations designed to help crippled children to do it. That's Bad Taste.

According to the Associated Press, Tom DeLay,

"visited cliff-top Caribbean resorts, golf courses designed by PGA champions and four-star restaurants, all courtesy of donors who bankrolled his political empire. "Over the past six years, the former House majority leader and his associates have visited places of luxury most Americans have never seen, often getting there aboard corporate jets arranged by lobbyists and other special interests.

"Public documents reviewed by the Associated Press tell the story: at least 48 visits to golf clubs and resorts with lush fairways, 100 flights aboard company planes, 200 stays at hotels, many world-class, and 500 meals at restaurants, some averaging nearly $200 for a dinner for two.

"Instead of his personal expense, the meals and trips for DeLay and his associates were paid with donations collected by the campaign committees, political action committees and children's charity the Texas Republican created during his rise to the top of Congress."
How cynical does that make you? When I hear Speaker Dennis Hastert is returning his campaign contributions from Jack Abramoff or "donating it to charity," I wonder which little charmer of a Republican campaign fund masquerading as a charity he's sending it to.

The DeLay Foundation for Kids was set up 18 years ago and works on behalf of foster children. But it is also a way for companies to give unregulated and undisclosed funds: It's a way for companies to get into DeLay's good graces or, as Fred Lewis from Campaign for People says, "another way for donors to get their hooks into politicians."

Meanwhile, Abramoff was even more cavalier about "charity." He created the Capital Athletic Foundation supposedly to help inner-city children through organized sports. There is no evidence any of the money ever went to that purpose, but the Washington Post reports it went to a sniper school for Israelis on the West Bank, a golf trip to Scotland for Rep. Bob Ney, R-Ohio, and a Jewish religious academy in Columbia, Md. Abramoff's hapless Indian clients were generous contributors: I wonder if he thought it was funny that Indians would more likely identify with Palestinians than Israelis.

Believe it or not, there are nonprofit organizations in this country where the CEO barely makes more than the janitor, where nickels and pennies are saved so the clients or the cause can get a little more. There are nonprofits where good and faithful servants have spent decades devoting their entire lives to helping those less fortunate than themselves -- without ever going to a cliff-top Caribbean resort. There are nonprofits where extra-bright young people from top schools work for peanuts because they want to make a better world. While Jack Abramoff padded his bills and falsified expenses to tribal clients, there are people who work for minimum wages on Indian reservations to help some of the poorest people in America get a minimally decent chance at life.

Abramoff and DeLay and their crummy hangers-on haven't just cheated and lied. They have dishonored the work of many, many people who are devoted to helping others without even expecting a decent salary for it.

Molly Ivins writes about politics, Texas and other bizarre happenings.
View this story online at: http://www.alternet.org/story/30595/

Monday, January 09, 2006

Attack on Iran: A Looming Folly

The wires have been humming since before the New Year with reports that the Bush administration is planning an attack on Iran. "The Bush administration is preparing its NATO allies for a possible military strike against suspected nuclear sites in Iran in the New Year, according to German media reports, reinforcing similar earlier suggestions in the Turkish media," reported UPI on December 30th.

"The Berlin daily Der Tagesspiegel this week," continued UPI, "quoted 'NATO intelligence sources' who claimed that the NATO allies had been informed that the United States is currently investigating all possibilities of bringing the mullah-led regime into line, including military options. This 'all options are open' line has been President George W Bush's publicly stated policy throughout the past 18 months."

An examination of the ramifications of such an attack is desperately in order.

1. Blowback in Iraq

The recent elections in Iraq were dominated by an amalgam of religiously fundamentalist Shi'ite organizations, principally the Dawa Party and the Supreme Council for Islamic Revolution in Iraq (SCIRI). Both Dawa and SCIRI have umbilical connections to the fundamentalist Shi'ite leadership in Iran that go back decades. In essence, Iran now owns a significant portion of the Iraqi government.

Should the United States undertake military action against Iran, the ramifications in Iraq would be immediate and extreme.

In the first eight days of January, eighteen US troops have been killed in Iraq, compounded by another twelve deaths from a Black Hawk helicopter crash on Saturday. Much of the violence aimed at American forces is coming from disgruntled Sunni factions that have their own militias, believe the last elections were a sham, and hold little political power in the government.

If the US attacks Iran, it is probable that American forces - already taxed by attacks from Sunni factions - will also face reprisal attacks in Iraq from Shi'ite factions loyal to Iran. The result will be a dramatic escalation in US and civilian casualties, US forces will be required to bunker themselves further into their bases, and US forces will find themselves required to fight the very government they just finished helping into power. Iraq, already a seething cauldron, will sink further into chaos.

US troops seize award-winning Iraqi journalist working for the Guardian

American troops in Baghdad yesterday blasted their way into the home of an Iraqi journalist working for the Guardian and Channel 4, firing bullets into the bedroom where he was sleeping with his wife and children.

Ali Fadhil, who two months ago won the Foreign Press Association young journalist of the year award, was hooded and taken for questioning. He was released hours later.

Dr Fadhil is working with Guardian Films on an investigation for Channel 4's Dispatches programme into claims that tens of millions of dollars worth of Iraqi funds held by the Americans and British have been misused or misappropriated.

The troops told Dr Fadhil that they were looking for an Iraqi insurgent and seized video tapes he had shot for the programme. These have not yet been returned.
The director of the film, Callum Macrae, said yesterday: "The timing and nature of this raid is extremely disturbing. It is only a few days since we first approached the US authorities and told them Ali was doing this investigation, and asked them then to grant him an interview about our findings.

"We need a convincing assurance from the American authorities that this terrifying experience was not harassment and a crude attempt to discourage Ali's investigation."

Dr Fadhil was asleep with his wife, their three-year-old daughter, Sarah, and seven-month-old son, Adam, when the troops forced their way in.

"They fired into the bedroom where we were sleeping, then three soldiers came in. They rolled me on to the floor and tied my hands. When I tried to ask them what they were looking for they just told me to shut up," he said.

Will Jackgate Destroy the GOP?

Is Jack Abramoff the gift that will keep on giving? And will he destroy the Republican Party?

It's not a coincidence that Tom DeLay resigned his leadership post-which he was forced to temporarily abdicate once he was indicted in Texas on charges of laundering campaign funds-days after Abramoff, the corrupt-Republican-lobbyist-turned-snitch, cut a deal with the feds that will require him to tell all. That certainly will entail sharing whatever he knows about his intimate relationship with DeLay and DeLay's closest political associates, as well as what he knows about other GOP lawmakers, staffers and high-powered Republican operatives (such as Ralph Reed and Grover Norquist). News reports have already said that up to twenty lawmakers and aides are already in the crosshairs of federal prosecutors thanks to Abramoff and Michael Scanlon, his former partner in sleaze, who also has been cooperating with the feds.

With nervous Republicans angling to toss DeLay overboard, the indicted ex-House majority leader had not much choice but to jump before being unceremoniously shoved aside. But GOPers still have reason for fear for at least two reasons:

1. The Abramoff inquiry is big.

2. As big as the Abramoff probe is, it could extend far beyond the corrupt dealings of Jack Abramoff and his pals on Capitol Hill and K Street.

My friend Karen Tumulty reports in this week's Time that Justice Department prosecutors are running a decent-sized investigation:

China Set To Reduce Exposure To Dollar (Move Would Probably Push Currency Down)

China has resolved to shift some of its foreign exchange reserves -- now in excess of $800 billion -- away from the U.S. dollar and into other world currencies in a move likely to push down the value of the greenback, a high-level state economist who advises the nation's economic policymakers said in an interview Monday.

As China's manufacturing industries flood the world with cheap goods, the Chinese central bank has invested roughly three-fourths of its growing foreign currency reserves in U.S. Treasury bills and other dollar-denominated assets. The new policy reflects China's fears that too much of its savings is tied up in the dollar, a currency widely expected to drop in value as the U.S. trade and fiscal deficits climb.

China now boasts the world's second-largest cache of foreign exchange -- behind only Japan -- and is on pace to see its reserves climb past $1 trillion later this year. Even a slight diminishing of the dollar as a percentage of those holdings could exert significant pressure on the U.S. currency, many economists assert.

In recent years, the value of the dollar has been buoyed by major purchases of U.S. Treasury bills by Japan, China and oil-exporting countries -- a flow of capital that has kept interests rates relatively low in the United States and allowed Americans to keep spending even as debts mount. Some economists have long warned that if foreigners lose their appetite for American debt, the dollar would fall, interest rates would rise and the housing boom could burst, sending real estate prices lower.

The comments of the Chinese senior economist, made on the condition of anonymity because the government disciplines those who speak to the press without express authorization, confirmed an analysis in Monday's Shanghai Securities News stating that China is inclined to shift some its savings into other currencies such as the euro and the yen, or into major purchases of commodities such as oil for a long-discussed strategic energy reserve.

Imagine All the People, Living Like Mindless Lambs by Gabriel Ash

The paper of record broke a record on Friday, when it invited Benny Morris to write an advanced epitaph for Israel’s ailing PM Sharon for its op-ed page.

Morris's byline describes him as a professor of history at Ben-Gurion University in Beersheba, Israel and the author of "The Birth of the Palestinian Refugee Problem Revisited,"

Here's an alternative byline: Benny Morris is the Israeli historian who told Haaretz that the extermination of Native Americans by European settlers was a good thing, a step in human progress, and so was the expulsion of 700,000 Palestinians in 1948. (see Haaretz, January 8, 2004)

Imagine had someone claimed that the holocaust was a good thing, because, for example, it contributed to the "progress" of Europe towards peace, the creation of the European Union, etc. Would that person be welcome on the op-ed pages of The New York Times?

There are things that one can get away with saying today in the U.S. about Native Americans, or Arabs that would be scandalous (and rightly so) if one said them about Jews. There is only one good name for it—racism. It isn’t the uncouth, bare knuckled racism of a KKK cross burning. It is an urbane, genteel, footnoted and fact-checked racism, one that goes well with a clean white shirt and a cup of Starbucks Venti Latte in the morning. But it is the same stuff, and not just theoretically. The media dispenses this subtle racism from op-ed and editorial pages as necessary grease to the cogs of the killing machines whose actions are often mentioned in the news section. It reassures the readers that nothing is wrong with the news, like a disclaimer—no human beings were harmed during the production of the following news item.

Morris doesn’t disappoint. His ode to Sharon is chockablock with the nasty, the misleading and, as expected, the racist.

Care to join a trip to the heart of darkness?

December Blues for the Miami Five

Another December gone by. Seven Decembers in jail for Gerardo, Rene, Antonio, and Ramón, four of them since the end of the embarrassing trial in Miami that taints the history of jurisprudence in the land of Washington, Jefferson and Lincoln. On the other hand, in 2005, two events came to the fore - for those who are too blind to see the truth that Cuba says over and over: the true nature of this process is not legal, but political.

Last August 9th, a three judge panel from the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta declared, the warped trial that occurred in Miami between December 2000 and June 2001 null and void. This decision was written by highly regarded federal judges, none of whom have any links to the Island.

In a tightly worded 93 page decision, the judges annulled the guilty verdicts that resulted from that twisted process: alluding to the numerous unheeded requests made by the defense for a change of venue; the three-judge panel emphasized the evidence offered concerning the contaminated political climate in Miami, hazardous to a fair trial and also mentioned the harassment of jurors who complained that local television stations filmed during their deliberations. The judges also remarked on the unprofessional behavior by the district attorneys.

Yet the Five remain behind bars, because the U.S. Attorney successfully appealed for an en banc hearing. Oral arguments are scheduled for the week of February 13th, 2006.

Prior to the Three-Judge Panel decision, The Working Group on Arbitrary Detentions of the United Nations Human Rights Commission declared on May 27, 2005, that the detention of the Five is illegal and in violation of International Law.

The U.N. decision is based on three grounds: 1. Rene, Ramon, Fernando, Gerardo and Antonio were kept in solitary confinement for 17 months, making it difficult for counsel to communicate with them; 2. Defense counsel was prevented from complete access to the evidence, 3. and Miami's contaminated climate of bias and prejudice against the accused made a fair trial impossible.

The United Nations specialists - men and women of unsurpassed authority on such matters of justice - concluded that those three considerations "in unison, are of such significance that they grant arbitrary character to the incarceration of these five men." In consequence, they requested the government of the United States take the necessary measures to remedy this.

The White House ignored the U.N. decision despite the jurisdiction of U.N. organizations to oversee international law, irrespective of the peculiarities of local legal systems. It is so stipulated in article 14 of the International Convention on Civil and Political Rights, paradoxically, the only one of the thirteen legal instruments of the United Nations Human Rights subsystem that the US government has ratified in recent years.

Then, why are they still incarcerated?

The issue goes beyond justice. It grows out of the ancient battle the United States has waged against the small Island that dares to express its sovereignty under its very nose. With the Five, Cuba is on trial. Any delay is welcome to condemn rebellion, to satisfy anti Castro extremists in Miami, and to justify the presence of this tiny country on the list of presumed terrorist nations threatening the "free world." Meanwhile, the United States government continues to practice terrorism all over the globe. Prisoners are tortured by American troops in Iraq, Guantanamo Bay and Afghanistan. Others are "rendered" for torture abroad in clandestine prisons, beyond the reach of the Bill of Rights. Cruelty has replaced the Constitution.

Ethics dictates that the Five be freed. Anything less will bring discredit on the U.S. government.

However with the years in captivity piling up - we remember Rene's words a few Decembers ago at his sentencing-- "we will continue appealing to the American people's desire for the truth. We will do so with the patience, faith and courage that falls upon those of us whose only crime is our dignity."

No one cares about Iraqis

For six days I have been bombarded by relentless coverage of the 12 miners who died in West Virginia.

Fine. It's a tragic loss. Cover it and move on.

But no. In those six days we have been shown hour by hour reports of happiness turned to grief, what the miners ate, what they thought of before they died, how the doctors could have misdiagnosed, how the community is handling it, each and every memorial service, each and every public official make a statement, each and every friend and family member delivering each and every eulogy.

And the minute-by-minute update on the condition of the sole survivor.

On and on and on. CNN showed half a dozen special reports on the issue. And when they weren't doing that, they were epitomizing Ariel Sharon, the Butcher of Beirut, as a courageous man of peace for pulling out of Gaza while his fighter jets bombed the fuck out of it every now and then.

During that very same period, 30 US soldiers and Marines were killed in Iraq - 17 in just one day.

More than 200 Iraqis were also killed in that period.

US generals reported the war was going terribly. Some warned of civil war. Others warned of the danger of the murderous Shia Badr and SCIRI militias.

And then another report comes out that the war will cost between 1 and 2 trillion dollars in real expenditure.

Nothing. These news items are buried beyond reach of the American viewer, reader.

Why?

Because the war has been a failure of morality, ethics, international law and a deep, wounding embarassment for the US government, US intelligence agencies, US think tanks, US proponents of the war, and the American people.

Why talk about how so many Blackhawks could be downed at the same time US officers say they are winning hearts and minds?

Why talk about how so many Iraqis can be killed in such an abject state of lawlessness when you were already told that the elections were a victory for Iraqis and all freedom-loving french fry eating peoples around the world?

Why discuss the real cost of the war at a time when Bush's first radio address of the New Year emphasizes the resounding improvement in the US economy?

Why talk of the Abramoff scandal when you have Bush and Rice tell you how Israel is your best friend?

Why talk of Netanyahu (the likely winner in Sharon's demise) as the greatest proponent of the Iraq war when people like Cheney and Coulter still get kudos for linking Iraq to 9-11?

"But we are talking about Iraq and we do care about Iraqis," say the befuddled stateside sheep pointing to the Baby Noor story.

That's the problem. US media, and the ignorant masses which continue to bankroll it, likes to focus on one story, one person. Baby Noor is now THE story of the hour.

We're saving her. We are good people. We invaded Iraq to save Baby Noor. See, had we not invaded her country or raided her family's home, she would be dead. See? See? Do you understand now how raping a country of its wealth and destroying its infrastructure is worth it?

I guess the two kids pulled out of the rubble, lifeless and limbless, thanks to a US air strike last week are jealous of Baby Noor just about now.

Or all the thousands of other children who died.

Nope, let's focus on Baby Noor, because it makes us feel like we fulfilled our Boys Scout honor code. Shhh ... sweep the rest under the proverbial rug.

In the meantime, the US military has quietly clamped down on military blogs (you'd think there would be something of this mentioned somewhere) and lowered the aptitude scores on its enlistment tests.

Great. Send more dumbed down youth who believe they will die for freedom in Iraq.

The Iraqi quicksand welcomes them.

*** MAN OF THE YEAR 2005: HUGO CHÁVEZ OR FIDEL CASTRO? ***

In his 1970 book, Future Shock, Alvin Toffler wrote about the difference between a fad and a trend. And, if my memory serves me correctly: the first could be found by reading the big city dailies; the latter by observing smaller newspapers scattered throughout the U.S.

It is no longer a secret that TIME magazine chose Bill Gates, Melinda Gates and Bono as their people of the year, 2005. But probably relatively few will be aware that a magazine published in Colombia, SEMANA, has named Venezuelan president, Hugo Chávez, as their man of the year. In Ecuador, the daily EL COMERCIO put Chávez at the top of their list of international leaders that they consider to have been the "winners" of 2005. (They also placed President George W. Bush at the top of their list of "losers.") Time (not TIME) will tell which publications had the better judgment and whether we are looking at fads or at trends.

It should be noted that this is the first time in its history that SEMANA, a very conservative publication, has chosen someone outside of Colombia for this designation. On the other hand, TIME's list of other significant people indicates to me their obsession with the importance of U.S. personalities and events. How many people in the world give a hoot about the teen golfer, Michelle Wie, for example?

The SEMANA article is currently available online in Spanish. I don't plan to translate it here, but a few sentences from the opening paragraph should give an idea of the contents of the article and the reasons for SEMANA's choice.
"... In the last 12 months he has altered the political map of this continent, distributed Venezuela's petroleum wealth to the four corners of the earth, challenged the United States, and from being perceived as a tropical clown he has positioned himself as the most influential Latin American leader on the global level. In a world that is more and more interdependent, what the president of a country indelibly linked to Colombia has done has a historic appearance."

The article gives four principal reasons for their choice: Chávez has led the integration of Latin America; he has bettered relationships with Colombia (South America's closest ally to the U.S.); he has gained international respect; and, he is the only world leader that has openly challenged President George W. Bush of the United States.

Comparing the Gates and Bono with Chávez, I sense that the choices of both magazines were heavily influenced by the way all of them secured funds and how they distributed them for the benefit of others. But there are some differences involved.

In the case of the Gates, we are talking about sharing some of their personal wealth, a matter of philanthropy. In regard to Bono, his efforts have been in motivating governments and others in an effort to eliminate poverty. The efforts of Chávez, however, have not been as a private citizen, but as an elected leader of a government.

What the Gates and Bono have done is good, but no one elected them to do what they are doing. At least theoretically, what Chávez is doing is what those who have elected him to be their world representative want him to do. By a quirk of nature, Venezuela has oil. But what is done with the wealth it produces is another question. Do the natural resources of the world belong only to the nation where they are found, or are they to be shared for the benefit of all? This sharing is not a charitable act; it is a matter of justice.

Charitable foundations and private initiatives can do a lot; but a new world order demands social justice more than charity. This, I feel, is the thrust of Chávez's efforts.

I may be wrong in thinking of the efforts of the Gates and Bono as a fad, but I have seen so many attempts (most on smaller scales) come and go. Let's face it, lots of major corporations have had foundations distributing some of their surplus funds for years--and have received tax benefits as a result and the executives of the foundations have gained good salaries for these "philanthropical" efforts.

Maybe the efforts of Chávez will also end up being classified as a fad. But deep down, as I watch what is happening in Latin America, I hope we are beginning to witness a trend.

Finally, speaking of trends, the first country that the new president of Bolivia, Evo Morales, visited was Cuba. Not even Chávez merited the honor that Fidel Castro gained. And the country chosen by Colombia to hold their negotiations with the ELN was Cuba. And, when Colombian president Uribe needed help mending his disastrous handling of the kidnapping of Rodrigo Granda, a former militant of the FARC (the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia) and the "chancellor" of the FARC in Latin America, it was Fidel Castro and not George W. Bush who diplomatically saved the day for him. And, how often is it mentioned that only three nations voted with the U.S. last year to continue the blockade of Cuba: Israel, the Marshall Islands (with about 72,000 people) and Palau. Yes, Palau with 17,000 inhabitants. Wow! What a political victory for the U.S.! And, after Jesus and Bolivar, who does Hugo Chávez see as his hero? Fidel.

Having written this last paragraph, not only do I have my criticism about TIME’s myopic selections but I also have to wonder as to whether Chávez was SEMANA’s best selection for the Man of the Year. Is it possible that Fidel Castro should have been chosen?

EZLN: Subdelegado Zero's Trip Resumes

Communiqué from the Clandestine Revolutionary Indigenous Campaign – General Command of the Zapatista Army of National Liberation

Mexico


January 8, 2006


To the Supporters of the Sexta and the Other Campaign
To the People of Mexico:

Compañeros and Compañeras:
Brothers and Sisters:

As you already know, our compañera Comandanta Ramona, a member of our political organizational leadership, died on January 6.

Comandanta Ramona, in addition to being our leader, had become a symbol of the struggle, of the struggle built from below and to the left. Her loss has meant great pain for us, and it is very difficult to talk about it. That is why we are unable to say anything else about our Comandanta and about what her absence means, and will mean, to us.

On that very day, January 6, the EZLN's Sixth Committee (as part of the first stage of our participation in the "Other Campaign") was in the city of Tonala, Chiapas when we learned of the great sorrow which came into our hearts. Given the magnitude of the loss, activities were then suspended, and the EZLN’s Sixth Committee delegate returned to the city of San Cristóbal de Las Casas in order to wait there for directions from the CCRI-CG of the EZLN.

While still sorrowing over the death of Comandanta Ramona, the Comandantes and Comandantas met in their respective regions to review, discuss and decide on the Sixth Committee's national trip. They decided on the following:

They ordered the EZLN's Sixth Committee, following our Comandanta Ramona's internment, to resume their trip throughout all the states of the Mexican Republic and to carry out their mission of listening to our compañeros and compañeras of the "Other Campaign" throughout Mexico and the United States, of calling on the people of Mexico to join in with the Sixth Declaration and of uniting those struggles which are by themselves. To this end, some adjustments were made in the trip’s program so that the activities which were suspended in the Coast and Sierra of Chiapas can be carried out.

We respectfully ask supporters in Mexico and the American Union to excuse us for the problems that these changes may cause them. Regarding Chiapas, Quintana Roo and Yucatán, we have already been in contact with their respective committees, and they have, nobly and generously, agreed to make the necessary changes so that, respecting the number of days which had been established for each state, the calendar can be modified.

The new calendar is as follows (program details for each location will be released, in due course, by the committees of each state):


January 9 and 10 – Coast of Chiapas. Base: Tonala
January 11 – Sierra and Coast of Chiapas. Base: Huixtla
January 12 - Travel from Huixtla – San Cristobal de Las Casas
January 13 - Travel from San Cristobal – Palenque
January 14 - Travel to Quintana Roo
January 15, 16 and 17 - Quintana Roo
January 18, 19 and 20 - Yucatan

January 21 - Traveling to Campeche-Tabasco
January 22, 23 and 24 - Campeche
January 25, 26 and 27 - Tabasco

January 28 - Travel to Veracruz
January 29, 30 and 31 and February 1, 2 and 3 - Veracruz

February 4 - Travel to Oaxaca
February 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10 - Oaxaca

February 11 - Travel to Puebla
February 12, 13, 14, 15, 16 and 17 - Puebla
February 18, 19, 20, 21, 22 and 23 - Tlaxcala

February 24 - Travel to Hidalgo
February 25, 26, 27 and 28 and March 1 and 2 - Hidalgo and part of Veracruz

March 3 - Travel to Queretaro
March 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9 - Queretaro

March 10 - Travel to Guanajuato-Aguascalientes
March 11, 12, 13, 14, 15 and 16 - Guanajuato-Aguascalientes

March 17 - Travel to Jalisco
March 18, 19, 20, 21, 22 and 23 - Jalisco

March 24 - Travel to Colima or Nayarit
March 25, 26, 27, 28, 29 and 30 - Colima-Nayarit

March 31 - Travel to Michoacan
April 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 - Michoacan

April 7 - Travel to Morelos
April 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 and 13 - Morelos

April 14 - Travel to Guerrero
April 15, 16, 17, 18, 19 and 20 - Guerrero

April 21 – Travel to the State of Mexico – Federal District
April 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29 and 30 and May 1, 2 and 3 – DF - EDOMEX

May 5 - Travel to San Luis Potosi
May 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 and 11 - San Luis Potosi

May 12 - Travel to Zacatecas
May 13, 14, 15, 16, 17 and 18 - Zacatecas

May 19 - Travel to Nuevo Leon – Tamaulipas
May 20, 21, 22, 23, 24 and 25 - Nuevo Leon –Tamaulipas

May 26 - Travel to Coahuila – Durango
May 27, 28, 29, 30 and 31 and June 1 - Coahuila – Durango

June 2 - Travel to Chihuahua – the Other Side
June 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 - Chihuahua – the Other Side

June 9 - Travel to Sinaloa – Sonora
June 10, 11, 12, 13, 14 and 15 - Sinaloa – Sonora

June 16 - Travel to Bajas – the Other Side
June 17, 18, 19, 20, 21 and 22 - Bajas – the Other Side

June 23, 24 and 25 – Return and Informative Plenary in DF
June 26 – 30 - Return to the mountains of the Mexican Southeast

These are our thoughts, compañeros and compañeras. Hopefully adjusting your program of activities to this new calendar will not cause you many problems. We await your proposals.

We send you our zapatista greetings and abrazos from compas of this "other" struggle we are moving forward.

Democracy!
Liberty!
Justice!


By the Clandestine Revolutionary Indigenous Committee – General Command of the Zapatista Army of National Liberation and the Sixth Committee of the EZLN

Subcomandante Insurgente Marcos
Mexico, January of 2006

Likely U.S. Plans for Regime Change in Venezuela, Pt. II

Ever since the National Security Act of 1947 established the Central Intelligence Agency, the CIA has engaged in activities far beyond information collection and analysis. It has been involved many times in covert efforts to achieve U.S. foreign policy goals, inlcuding regime change in nations whose leaders were not subservient to U.S. interests.

Beginning in 1953, CIA operative Kermit Roosevelt, grandson of Theodore Roosevelt and cousin of Franklin, successfully engineered a coup against Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadeq of Iran after he nationalized the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company following a dispute about revenue sharing. The CIA then helped execute another coup, ousting President Jacobo Arbenz in Guatemala in 1954 because of his modest land reform program and labor reforms the well-connected United Fruit Company, which operated out of the country, opposed. Since then, this agency has had a long and tainted record of helping to destabilize and topple those governments the U.S. wishes to replace. Much of that has occurred in Latin America, most often by coup or assassination often disguised as an "accident" (like an "unfortunate" plane crash).

Investigative journalist and author Eva Golinger has uncovered CIA documents, obtained through Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests, that exposes U.S. involvement in the two-day April 2002 coup which temporarily ousted President Chavez. It involved CIA complicity and an intricate financing scheme beginning in 2001 involving the quasi-governmental agency National Endowment for Democracy (NED), funded entirely by the Congress, and the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID). These agencies, in turn, provided funding to Chavez opposition groups (USAID through its Office of Transition Initiatives -OTI) which, in turn, were involved in staging the mass and violent street protests leading up to and on the day of the coup. NED and USAID also funded other destabilizing activities such as the crippling oil strike in late 2002 and 2003 and the August 2004 recall referendum that failed to unseat the President. The documents Golinger obtained clearly showed the U.S. State Department, National Security Agency and White House had full knowledge of these activities and must have approved of them.

Sunday, January 08, 2006

Harry Belafonte calls President Bush "the greatest terrorist in the world''

CARACAS, Venezuela (AP) - The American singer and activist Harry Belafonte called President Bush "the greatest terrorist in the world'' on Sunday and said millions of Americans support the socialist revolution of Venezuelan leader Hugo Chavez.

Belafonte led a delegation of Americans including the actor Danny Glover and the Princeton University scholar Cornel West that met the Venezuelan president for more than six hours late Saturday. Some in the group attended Chavez's television and radio broadcast Sunday.

"No matter what the greatest tyrant in the world, the greatest terrorist in the world, George W. Bush says, we're here to tell you: Not hundreds, not thousands, but millions of the American people ... support your revolution,'' Belafonte told Chavez during the broadcast.

The 78-year-old Belafonte, famous for his calypso-inspired music, including the "Day-O'' song, was a close collaborator of the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. and is now a UNICEF goodwill ambassador. He also has been outspoken in criticizing the U.S. embargo of Cuba.

Chavez said he believes deeply in the struggle for justice by blacks, both in the U.S. and Venezuela.

"Although we may not believe it, there continues to be great discrimination here against black people,'' Chavez said, urging his government to redouble its efforts to prevent discrimination.

Belafonte accused U.S. news media of falsely painting Chavez as a "dictator,'' when in fact, he said, there is democracy and citizens are "optimistic about their future.''

Dolores Huerta, a pioneer of the United Farm Workers labor union also in the delegation, called the visit a "very deep experience.''

Chavez accuses Bush of trying to overthrow him, pointing to intelligence documents released by the U.S. indicating that the CIA knew beforehand that dissident officers planned a short-lived 2002 coup. The U.S. denies involvement, but Chavez says Venezuela must be on guard.

Belafonte suggested setting up a youth exchange for Venezuelans and Americans. He finished by shouting in Spanish: "Viva la revolucion!''

Newly elected President Evo Morales promises to break with 20 years of U.S.-imposed conservative economics

A new path for Bolivia
Newly elected President Evo Morales promises to break with 20 years of U.S.-imposed conservative economics

By Jim Shultz --

Late last year, Bolivians made history, for their own country and for all of Latin America, when they elected, by a wide margin, an Aymara Indian as their next president. The victory of Evo Morales signals many things here, but first and foremost it marks a broad popular rejection of two decades of conservative economic policies imposed on Bolivia from Washington.
The vote brought to the ballot box a wave of public anger that has been exploding in Bolivia's streets for more than five years.

The poorest nation in South America, for two decades Bolivia has been the unwilling lab rat for a set of economic experiments known as the "Washington Consensus." These policies have included giving control of national resources to foreign corporations and economic belt-tightening that hits the poor hardest. The World Bank and International Monetary Fund - both Washington-based and dominated by the United States - made the adoption of these policies a condition of receiving critical foreign aid.

In Bolivia, one government after another has dutifully followed those orders from Washington. The nation's economy, however, has only gotten worse. Five years ago, Bolivians began to take to the streets to demand reversal of those policies, winning one major victory after another.

In 2000, the citizens of the city of Cochabamba stood down government troops to take back their public water system from the U.S. corporate giant, Bechtel, reversing a privatization forced by the World Bank. In February 2003 in the nation's capital, La Paz, mass protests that included national police, forced the government to drop plans for a tax increase on the poor, a program initiated under IMF pressure.

In October 2003, Bolivians took to the streets again to block a mistrusted government plan to export the nation's gas to California. After soldiers killed more than 50 protesters, the president backing the plan was forced to resign, setting up the chain of political events that eventually led to last month's early elections.

Morales and his Movement Towards Socialism party have played a key role in many of these protests. Recently he told his supporters, "We will change the economic models that have blocked development for the people."

That change begins with Morales' plans to take back control of the nation's vast gas and oil reserves and renegotiate all the nation's contracts with foreign oil companies.

The economic battle that led to Morales' huge victory is less a debate between left vs. right ideology than about the staggering gap between Washington economic theory and Bolivian economic reality.

Time and time again, Bank and IMF officials proclaimed that privatization and austerity would deliver huge leaps in economic growth, new jobs and skilled management of the nation's resources. Time and time again, however, Bolivia's economy contracted and faltered. Austerity translated into tax increases on people earning $120 per month. Privatization produced huge leaps in water prices and backroom deals that made foreign companies the owners of the nation's resources at bargain prices.

If the economic prescriptions handed down from Washington had worked, Bolivians would likely have embraced them. I have lived here among Bolivia's poor for eight years. Ideology, left or right, is generally a luxury that poor people can't afford. They are more interested in practical things. Do they have water? Are there jobs? Do they have any economic hope for the future? The Washington Consensus has been rejected soundly here - first in the streets and now at the polls - not because of ideology but because it just plain failed to deliver the goods after a 20-year opportunity to do so.

I knew that Morales might well be on his way to the presidency last October, when I spent five days in a small Quechua Indian village. One sunny afternoon I sat with the village leader. I asked him if the coming election was big on people's minds.

"No, we are really more worried about whether it will rain soon."

I asked him if people were excited about Evo Morales and the prospect of electing an Indian as president.

"Well, he is really just a politician."

Then I asked him whether the people of the village would vote.

"Oh yes, we will vote. All 400 of us will walk together 45 minutes to the place where we vote and we will all vote for Evo."

On Dec. 18, Bolivians by the millions marched distances short and far to give Morales the biggest mandate of any president in half a century. Now Morales will seek to turn that mandate into a new economic course, including a reversal of the market fundamentalism brought here from the north.

To be sure, there are many in Washington who would love to see Morales fail. He rose to political prominence here as leader of the nation's coca growers and has been a nemesis of the U.S. government's "war on drugs."

For months U.S. officials have been pounding out the message that he and the social movements that back him are pawns of Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez and Cuban President Fidel Castro.

But, as the United States claims to be fighting a war in one part of the world to support the cause of democracy, it will now need to demonstrate whether it means those words here, with a clear democratic choice not to its liking. Last month Bolivians chose a new course, whether those in Washington agree with it or not.


About the writer:
Jim Shultz, formerly of Sacramento, is the executive director of the Democracy Center in Cochabamba, Bolivia and author of, most recently, "Deadly Consequences," a study of the IMF in Bolivia. The Democracy Center investigates and reports on the impact of globalization.

Harry Belafonte, Cornell West, Danny Glover, Dolores Huerta, Malia Lazu and many other U.S. Progressive Leaders Visit Venezuela

Delegation of Prominent U.S. Progressive Leaders Visits Venezuela

Caracas, Venezuela, January 7, 2006—The singer, actor, and civil rights activist Harry Belafonte visited Venezuela this week, leading a delegation of 13 other prominent activists from the U.S. During their visit, the delegation toured the complex of cooperatives, known as the Endogenous Development Nucleus Fabricio Ojeda, visited with ministers, Venezuelan community leaders, opposition leaders, and President Chavez.

"I would hope the people of Venezuela will take a good look at our visit and truly believe that we come with no agenda and come with no conclusion in hand and we’ve come to learn and to be touched by those who care to reach out to us and inform us," said Harry Belafonte during the delegation’s press conference on Thursday.

Belafonte explained that the purpose of their visit was to see with their own eyes, how Venezuela handles its affairs, with the hope that it could, “become a role model for the rest of Latin America and others in the world.”

Other members of the delegation included Princeton theology and social history professor Cornell West. West emphasized that visits such as those of the delegation are necessary because, "We in the United States have [been told] so many lies about President Hugo Chavez and the Bolivarian Revolution."

Dolores Huerta, the long-time farm workers’ organizer, who worked closely together with the Latino union organizer Cesar Chavez in the U.S., said that her visit to Venezuela would help inspire organizing efforts in the U.S. "We are inspired by what is happening here. The revolution here is electoral. It has inspired us to take these lessons to our country and to inspire our people too," said Huerta.

Another delegation member, Malia Lazu of the group Hip Hop Coalition, which organizes youth in the U.S., said that she could tell that the government has turned over power to Venezuelan poor. "Here in this country, for the few days I have been here, I have been able to see what happens when you give power to the people," said Lazu. For her, the struggle of Venezuelans for greater social justice, "has breathed life into our [struggle]."

The Hollywood actor and President of the TransAfrica Forum, Danny Glover, was also present, on his fourth trip to Venezuela. "I've been excited to get back to the United States to talk about what is happening [in Venezuela], knowing that you are in a transformative stage and that you are the architects of your own destiny," said Glover. Glover also praised the Venezuelan Ambassador to the U.S., saying to Venezuelans, "I think you should be proud that you have a representative who is able to reach out to the communities."

Other members of the delegation included the President of the community organization coalition Barrios Unidos, Nane Alejandrez, the Director of the Federation of Southern Cooperatives, Ralph Paige, the PBS radio and TV talk show host Tavis Smiley, the Director of the Simthsonian Institution’s Cultural Heritage Policy, James Earley, and the Vice-President of the progressive satellite TV channel Link TV, Jack Willis.

The delegates commented on U.S. funding for oppositional groups in Venezuela, via the National Endowment for Democracy and the U.S. Agency for International Development, which both recently increased their funding of Venezuelan groups. Dolores Huerta, Harry Belafonte, and Cornell West said that activists in the U.S. will have to work hard to change the majorities in the U.S. Congress so that funding of opposition groups in countries such as Venezuela will be stopped.

"If the United States has said that it has publicly designated $9 million to support the opposition to undermine Hugo Chavez, then you can rest assured that it is really spending $27 or $30 million because there are covert funds that they won’t let the public know," said Cornell West. He added, "You have to recognize that the only thing that stands in the way of the United States undermining this revolution are institutions like this," referring to the organization of delegations, "that convince people that this revolution is real."

Decades of harboring torturers and terrorists

While we're on the subject of the possibility that terrorist and torturer Luis Posada Carriles will be released on probation into the United States, along comes another story to remind us that other Latin American torturers (and torture is, in fact, a form of terrorism) have been living in the U.S. since 1989 -- two Salvadoran generals who have just been found liable for $54 million (a civil case, natch, you wouldn't expect the U.S. government to prosecute them, would you?) for torturing three Salvadorans. will be released on probation into the United States, along comes

Their lawyer's "defense" was quite instructive:

"In the war against communism, they did what the United States government wanted them to do and paid them to do."

Ain't that the truth.

Leaked Swiss intelligence report confirms presence of secret CIA prison facilities

Leaked Swiss intelligence report confirms presence of secret CIA prison facilities in locations reported by WMR on Nov. 11 and Nov. 28, 2005.
BERNE AND WASHINGTON -- January 8, 2006 -- According to a report in today's Swiss newspaper Sonntagsblick, Swiss intelligence intercepted a November 10, 2005 fax from Cairo to the Egyptian embassy in London confirming the presence of secret CIA detention centers in Eastern Europe. The fax was intercepted by the Swiss military's Onyx satellite interception system, which has intercept ground stations in cantons Valais, Schaffhausen, and St. Gallen.
Swiss signals intelligence operations are handled by the Division Conduite de la Guerre Electronique (CGE), a part of the armed forces Groupe Renseignements (Intelligence Group's) Office Federal des Troupes de Transmissions (OFTT).

The Egyptian fax confirms that 23 Iraqi and Afghan nationals were transferred to the Mihail Kogalniceanu airbase near Constanta, Romania. The Egyptian fax also confirmed the presence of CIA detention centers in Kosovo, Bulgaria, Ukraine, and Macedonia. The Swiss signals intelligence intercept confirms WMR's November 11 and 28, 2005 reports about CIA prison facilities in all these locations. Swiss authorities claim they will open an investigation into the leak of the Secret Swiss intelligence report.

Bush Advisor John Yoo Says President Has Legal Power to Torture Children ...including by crushing that child's testicles.

John Yoo publicly argued there is no law that could prevent the President from ordering the torture of a child of a suspect in custody – including by crushing that child's testicles.

This came out in response to a question in a December 1st debate in Chicago with Notre Dame professor and international human rights scholar Doug Cassel.

What is particularly chilling and revealing about this is that John Yoo was a key architect post-9/11 Bush Administration legal policy. As a deputy assistant to then-Attorney General John Ashcroft, John Yoo authored a number of legal memos arguing for unlimited presidential powers to order torture of captive suspects, and to declare war anytime, any where, and on anyone the President deemed a threat.

It has now come out Yoo also had a hand in providing legal reasoning for the President to conduct unauthorized wiretaps of U.S. citizens. Georgetown Law Professor David Cole wrote, "Few lawyers have had more influence on President Bush’s legal policies in the 'war on terror’ than John Yoo."

This part of the exchange during the debate with Doug Cassel, reveals the logic of Yoo's theories, adopted by the Administration as bedrock principles, in the real world.

Cassel: If the President deems that he's got to torture somebody, including by crushing the testicles of the person's child, there is no law that can stop him?
Yoo: No treaty.
Cassel: Also no law by Congress. That is what you wrote in the August 2002 memo.
Yoo: I think it depends on why the President thinks he needs to do that.

US Propaganda vs. Iraqi Reality

It appears as though the Cheney administration will soon "redeploy" thousands of US troops out of Iraq. While several permanent US military bases are under construction there as I type this, the Capital Hill Cabal, desperate to paint the Iraq disaster in a glorious hue, are working their pundits and spokespeople overtime to convince the ill-informed they have not failed dismally in every aspect of their illegal invasion and occupation of Iraq.

In his weekly radio address on Saturday, Mr. Bush did not mention Iraq once. Instead, he spoke of the bright and shining US economy and the need to maintain current tax cuts.

"Unfortunately, just as we're seeing new evidence of how our tax cuts have created jobs and opportunity, some people in Washington are saying we need to raise your taxes," he said, "They want the tax cuts to expire in a few years, or even repeal the tax cuts now."

What better time to maintain tax cuts in the US, particularly when a new study by Nobel Laureate Joseph Stiglitz and Harvard budget expert Linda Bilmes estimates the cost of the Iraq war to be between $1-2 trillion, and the national debt already over $8 trillion?

Meanwhile, the reality in Iraq is the opposite of that generated by the Cheney administration as the carnage and chaos in Iraq worsens each day.

A quick look at foreign media outlets yields the following developments that were either not reported or under-reported in the US:

January 4:

-Unidentified gunmen assassinated Rahim Ali al-Sudani, director-general of the Iraqi Oil Ministry, and his son early on the morning of 4 January in Al-Amiriyah area in northern Baghdad.

-Clashes broke out between civilians protesting against unemployment and Iraqi police in Al-Nasiriyah city in Dhi Qar Governorate, wounding scores of civilians and police officers. The TV added within the same news summary that two civilians were "martyred" and two others were injured when an explosive charge missed a US patrol unit in Kirkuk.

-Al Sharqiyah television reported that a US plane had crashed in Mosul. Quoting its correspondent in the city, the TV said that US forces had rushed to the area and sealed off the scene where the crash occurred.

January 5:

-At least 130 Iraqis and 11 US soldiers die (highest number of US soldiers killed in one day since August) in one of the bloodiest days in Iraq since the invasion.

January 6:

-A medical source at Al-Ramadi State Hospital [speaking on condition of anonymity] reports that 14 civilians, including three children, "were martyred at the hands of US snipers today." The source added that “the snipers stationed on roof tops of high buildings in Al-Ramadi, killed those victims in the Al-Ma’arid district in the city center this morning”. Al Sharqiyah correspondent adds that "Al-Ramadi has witnessed massive protests against the presence of US snipers who have been deployed throughout the city, spreading fear among residents." Al-Sharqiyah says that the US armed forces have yet to comment on this incident.

-For security purposes, Iraq has suspended its daily pumping of 200,000 barrels of crude oil to major oil refineries in Bayji, north of Baghdad.

-A US convoy came under attack in Samarra when an explosive device planted near a petrol station was detonated. Four children were injured in the attack and were rushed to Samarra State Hospital.

-A doctor at Nasiriyah Hospital reported that two Iraqis were killed and 23 were injured today as clashes between demonstrators, who were protesting against unemployment, and Iraqi police continued in Nasiriyah in southern Iraq.

January 7:

-Fierce clashes broke out between resistance fighters and US forces in Fallujah when armed men battled with the US troops in al-Tharthar Street in the eastern part of the city as the latter tightened security measures, blocking all main entrances to the city. Local residents also reported fierce clashes between US soldiers and resistance fighters on Arba’ien Street in central Fallujah.

-Earlier in the day, a roadside bomb went off at about 7:30 a.m. (0430 GMT) in eastern Fallujah as a US military patrol was passing by, destroying a US Humvee, killing or wounding the soldiers aboard, the source said. An Iraqi doctor from Fallujah General Hospital was killed by a US sniper, according to residents.

A recent email from a good friend in Baghdad sums up life for Iraqis in their new "democracy":

"We are living in a very critical situation now, for the ING [Iraqi National Guard] are covering every corner around us wherever you go inside Baghdad. The killings are ongoing everywhere inside and outside the city."

"Everybody in my family is safe for now only because no one is interested in putting themselves in danger. Demonstrations are going on all over Iraq for different reasons; price of fuel, lack of security, jobless people are having demonstrations as well as those who do not accept the presence of the Badr Brigades or the American forces. [Meanwhile others are demonstrating in support of the Badr Brigades but against the Americans.]"

"This is some kind of situation around us. The last four nights without electricity…only half an hour every six hours. Fuel prices prevent people from running their generators at home. Fuel on the black market is fifty times the price what it used to be, and nobody can stand waiting at the pumps for days anymore. The minister of oil resigned for this, and Ahmed Chalabi is now the minister…everybody is frustrated yet life is still going on as if the people are hypnotized."

"Nothing has changed except that we see US Humvees and pick-up trucks full of Iraqi National Guard everywhere [in Baghdad,]" he concluded.

Masters of War by Bob Dylan

Come you masters of war
You that build all the guns
You that build the death planes
You that build the big bombs
You that hide behind walls
You that hide behind desks
I just want you to know
I can see through your masks

You that never done nothin'
But build to destroy
You play with my world
Like it's your little toy
You put a gun in my hand
And you hide from my eyes
And you turn and run farther
When the fast bullets fly

Like Judas of old
You lie and deceive
A world war can be won
You want me to believe
But I see through your eyes
And I see through your brain
Like I see through the water
That runs down my drain

You fasten the triggers
For the others to fire
Then you set back and watch
When the death count gets higher
You hide in your mansion
As young people's blood
Flows out of their bodies
And is buried in the mud

You've thrown the worst fear
That can ever be hurled
Fear to bring children
Into the world
For threatening my baby
Unborn and unnamed
You ain't worth the blood
That runs in your veins

How much do I know
To talk out of turn
You might say that I'm young
You might say I'm unlearned
But there's one thing I know
Though I'm younger than you
Even Jesus would never
Forgive what you do

Let me ask you one question
Is your money that good
Will it buy you forgiveness
Do you think that it could
I think you will find
When your death takes its toll
All the money you made
Will never buy back your soul

And I hope that you die
And your death'll come soon
I will follow your casket
In the pale afternoon
And I'll watch while you're lowered
Down to your deathbed
And I'll stand o'er your grave
'Til I'm sure that you're dead

Legendary Zapatista Leader Comandanta Ramona Has Died - "Other Campaign" Temporarily Suspended for Her Funeral


Legendary Zapatista Leader Comandanta Ramona Has Died She Struggled with Cancer for Ten Years; "Other Campaign" Temporarily Suspended for Her Funeral

By Andrew Kennis
Special to The Narco News Bulletin
January 7, 2006

TONALÁ AND SAN CRISTÓBAL DE LAS CASAS, CHIAPAS, MÉXICO: After a decade-long bout with cancer of the kidney, Zapatista leader Comandanta Ramona died early yesterday morning. Choking back tears and with a wavering voice, Subcomandante Marcos made the public announcement of Ramona's death in the midst of the Chiapas segment of the nationwide six month Zapatista led "Other Campaign."


Comandanta Ramona, 1959-2006
“I want everybody to listen to what I am about to say without any interruptions. Comandanta Ramona died yesterday… The world has lost one of those women it requires. Mexico has lost one of the combative women it needs and we, we have lost a piece of our heart,” said Marcos. The self-nicknamed “Delegate Zero” went on to say that the activities planned for the next few days would be cancelled and that the Other Campaign delegation would be immediately travel to Oventic for funeral activities that were closed to the public. The emotional announcement came around 4pm central time yesterday, after an abrupt hour-long pause to a nearly six-hour long town-hall like meeting in the small coastal town of Tonalá.

An advocate for women’s rights and artisanship, Ramona woke up yesterday feeling weak, but still traveled from Oventic to San Cristóbal de las Casas. During the course of the trip, she passed away.

The last public appearance by Comandanta Ramona came this past September, when she spoke in front of the plenary sessions that were held to plan the Other Campaign deep in the Lacandon Jungle, in the heart of Zapatista territory.

Ramona was the first member of the Clandestine Indigenous Revolutionary Committee (CGRI), the leadership body of the Zapatista Army of National Liberation (EZLN), to have died since the end of their uprising twelve years ago. Her struggle with cancer was a long one, in which she received a kidney transplant in 1996 after extensive grassroots fundraising. Most sympathizers consider the transplant as having brought her an extra decade of life. As a result of her illness, Ramona made few public appearances since the Zapatistas came into the public eye following their uprising, but she nonetheless made her mark in a number of ways within the influential indigenous rebel group and far beyond, with its supporters.

In 1993, Comandanta Ramona, together with Major Ana María, extensively consulted indigenous Zapatista communities (back then, still underground and not public) about the exploitation of women and subsequently penned the Revolutionary Laws of Women. On March 8 of that year, the Revolutionary Laws were passed (in English, and in Spanish).

Ramona was a petite, soft-spoken woman charged with significant responsibilities, such as having been entrusted with the military leadership in San Cristóbal during the uprising in 1994. In February of that year and after the Zapatistas called a cease-fire to the twelve-day long uprising in response to mass peace marches, Ramona was the first Zapatista representative to speak during peace talks with the government. Two years later, when the Mexican authorities forbade the Zapatistas from participating in the National Indigenous Congress in Mexico City, the frail and ill-struck Ramona was asked to represent the Zapatistas. The plan worked as the government conceded to Ramona and she went on to represent the Zapatistas, speaking in front of 100,000 supporters in Mexico City’s Zocalo during the important nation-wide indigenous gathering.

The Mexican government, baffled by the popularity of a poor indigenous woman, made numerous attempts to undermine her influence. In 1997, it went so far as to state that the rebel leader had died and when she made public appearances that proved otherwise, authorities accused the Zapatistas of having used a "double."

Ramona's death is reflective of a health care crisis that the impoverished indigenous communities of Chiapas continue to suffer from. In the highlands of the southeastern Mexican state, where most of Chiapas’ indigenous residents live, there are no hospitals. The state government has promised for years to build a hospital in San Andrés Larráinzar (the same town that peace accords between the Zapatistas and the Mexican federal government were signed in 1996 but never implemented). However, the promise to build such a hospital has not been acted upon and Chiapas continues to lack crucial health care resources in its remote regions. Only in San Cristóbal, which is anywhere between two and twelve hours away from most indigenous communities, can women access preventative studies that could save the lives of women with early detections of cancer. In addition to the lack of hospitals, medical costs are often prohibitive to many of Chiapas’s poor and infirm.