Osama bin Laden statement, Oct. 7, 2001

BBC translation:

Praise be to God and we beseech Him for help and forgiveness.

We seek refuge with the Lord of our bad and evildoing. He whom God guides is rightly guided but he whom God leaves to stray, for him wilt thou find no protector to lead him to the right way.

I witness that there is no God but God and Mohammed is His slave and Prophet.

God Almighty hit the United States at its most vulnerable spot. He destroyed its greatest buildings. Praise be to God. Here is the United States. It was filled with terror from its north to its south and from its east to its west. Praise be to God.

What the United States tastes today is a very small thing compared to what we have tasted for tens of years. Our nation has been tasting this humiliation and contempt for more than 80 years. Its sons are being killed, its blood is being shed, its holy places are being attacked, and it is not being ruled according to what God has decreed. Despite this, nobody cares.

When Almighty God rendered successful a convoy of Muslims, the vanguards of Islam, He allowed them to destroy the United States. I ask God Almighty to elevate their status and grant them Paradise. He is the one who is capable to do so. When these defended their oppressed sons, brothers, and sisters in Palestine and in many Islamic countries, the world at large shouted. The infidels shouted, followed by the hypocrites.

One million Iraqi children have thus far died in Iraq although they did not do anything wrong. Despite this, we heard no denunciation by anyone in the world or a fatwa by the rulers’ ulema [body of Muslim scholars]. Israeli tanks and tracked vehicles also enter to wreak havoc in Palestine, in Jenin, Ramallah, Rafah, Beit Jala, and other Islamic areas and we hear no voices raised or moves made.

But if the sword falls on the United States after 80 years, hypocrisy raises its head lamenting the deaths of these killers who tampered with the blood, honour, and holy places of the Muslims. The least that one can describe these people is that they are morally depraved.

They champion falsehood, support the butcher against the victim, the oppressor against the innocent child. May God mete them the punishment they deserve. I say that the matter is clear and explicit. In the aftermath of this event and now that senior US officials have spoken, beginning with Bush, the head of the world’s infidels, and whoever supports him, every Muslim should rush to defend his religion.

They came out in arrogance with their men and horses and instigated even those countries that belong to Islam against us. They came out to fight this group of people who declared their faith in God and refused to abandon their religion. They came out to fight Islam in the name of terrorism.

Hundreds of thousands of people, young and old, were killed in the farthest point on earth in Japan. [For them] this is not a crime, but rather a debatable issue. They bombed Iraq and considered that a debatable issue.

But when a dozen people of them were killed in Nairobi and Dar es Salaam, Afghanistan and Iraq were bombed and all hypocrite ones stood behind the head of the world’s infidelity – behind the Hubal [an idol worshipped by pagans before the advent of Islam] of the age – namely, America and its supporters.

These incidents divided the entire world into two regions – one of faith where there is no hypocrisy and another of infidelity, from which we hope God will protect us.

The winds of faith and change have blown to remove falsehood from the [Arabian] peninsula of Prophet Mohammed, may God’s prayers be upon him. As for the United States, I tell it and its people these few words: I swear by Almighty God who raised the heavens without pillars that neither the United States nor he who lives in the United States will enjoy security before we can see it as a reality in Palestine and before all the infidel armies leave the land of Mohammed, may God’s peace and blessing be upon him.

God is great and glory to Islam. May God’s peace, mercy, and blessings be upon you.

Associated Press translation:

I bear witness that there is no God but Allah and that Mohammad is his messenger.

There is America, hit by God in one of its softest spots. Its greatest buildings were destroyed, thank God for that. There is America, full of fear from its north to its south, from its west to its east. Thank God for that.

What America is tasting now is something insignificant compared to what we have tasted for scores of years. Our nation (the Islamic world) has been tasting this humiliation and this degradation for more than 80 years. Its sons are killed, its blood is shed, its sanctuaries are attacked, and no one hears and no one heeds.

When God blessed one of the groups of Islam, vanguards of Islam, they destroyed America. I pray to God to elevate their status and bless them. Millions of innocent children are being killed as I speak. They are being killed in Iraq without committing any sins, and we don’t hear condemnation or a fatwa (religious decree) from the rulers. In these days, Israeli tanks infest Palestine – in Jenin, Ramallah, Rafah, Beit Jalla, and other places in the land of Islam, and we don’t hear anyone raising his voice or moving a limb.

When the sword comes down (on America), after 80 years, hypocrisy rears its ugly head. They deplore and they lament for those killers, who have abused the blood, honor and sanctuaries of Muslims. The least that can be said about those people is that they are debauched. They have followed injustice. They supported the butcher over the victim, the oppressor over the innocent child. May God show them His wrath and give them what they deserve.

I say that the situation is clear and obvious. After this event, after the senior officials have spoken in America, starting with the head of infidels worldwide, Bush, and those with him. They have come out in force with their men and have turned even the countries that belong to Islam to this treachery, and they want to wag their tail at God, to fight Islam, to suppress people in the name of terrorism.

When people at the ends of the earth, Japan, were killed by their hundreds of thousands, young and old, it was not considered a war crime, it is something that has justification. Millions of children in Iraq is something that has justification. But when they lose dozens of people in Nairobi and Dar es Salaam (capitals of Kenya and Tanzania, where U.S. embassies were bombed in 1998), Iraq was struck and Afghanistan was struck. Hypocrisy stood in force behind the head of infidels worldwide, behind the cowards of this age, America and those who are with it.

These events have divided the whole world into two sides. The side of believers and the side of infidels, may God keep you away from them. Every Muslim has to rush to make his religion victorious. The winds of faith have come. The winds of change have come to eradicate oppression from the island of Muhammad, peace be upon him.

To America, I say only a few words to it and its people. I swear by God, who has elevated the skies without pillars, neither America nor the people who live in it will dream of security before we live it in Palestine, and not before all the infidel armies leave the land of Muhammad, peace be upon him.

God is great, may pride be with Islam. May peace and God’s mercy be upon you.

Originally found at:

http://www.aljazeera.net/mritems/streams/video/2001/10/7/1_59233_1_12.ASF

http://news.bbc.co.uk/low/english/world/south_asia/newsid_1585000/1585636.stm

http://users.skynet.be/terrorism/html/laden_statement.htm

Continue ReadingOsama bin Laden statement, Oct. 7, 2001 

IMPORTANT MESSAGE TO OUR READERS

Dear World War 4 Report Readers:

We are one-fourth of the way to our necessary winter fund-drive goal of $2,000. Unfortunately, the carnage in Gaza is making all too clear that our mission continues even as it seems likely that the incoming Obama administration will (at least) drop the nomenclature of the “Global War on Terrorism.” So too, despite the lack of media coverage, do the ongoing US air-strikes on Pakistan’s tribal territories.

When we launched our fund-drive a month ago, we appealed to each of our readers to give something, even if it is only ten dollars. The number who have responded is:

Six.

Obviously, these six have given considerably more than ten dollars. We don’t expect all of our readers to give as much as they have. But we do need our readers to support us if we are to continue our work. Once again, if each of our readers will give even ten dollars, we will make our goal. But that means each one of you, not just the ones who have come through for us every time we have asked for money since our inception in the immediate aftermath of 9-11. And, please, not later—but now.

Once again, those of you who gave $25 or more last year are already on the list to receive the new addition in our pamphlet series, Petro-Imperialism: the Global War on Terrorism and the Struggle for the Planet’s Oil, which is now in production, and will include an analysis of the Obama cabinet. If you didn’t give $25 last year, this is your opportunity to get it hot off the presses.

We believe that we bring critical voices to bear in the issues we cover that even the rest of the left and alternative press overlook: the civil resistance in Iraq, the independent labor movement in Iran, the Palestinian village land-defense struggles on the West Bank, the Israeli anti-war and anti-occupation movement, the citizen peace initiatives in Colombia, the indigenous and campesino organizations of Mexico, Chiapas and Central America. In the media cacophony and the gazillions of blogs, these are the voices which are not heard. Please help us continue to be the voice of the voiceless. Please give something today.

Thank you, shukran and gracias,

Bill Weinberg

Editor, World War 4 Report

Send checks payable to World War 4 Report to:

World War 4 Report
121 Fifth Ave. #172
Brooklyn NY 11217

Or donate by credit card:

Or become a sustainer by signing up for an automatic monthly donation of $5, $10 or $20.

Continue ReadingIMPORTANT MESSAGE TO OUR READERS 
Mama

COLOMBIA: A DAY THAT WILL LIVE IN INFAMY—AGAIN

Indigenous Leader Assassinated on Massacre Anniversary

by Mario A. Murillo, MAMA Radio

Aida QuilcuĂ©/MAMA Radio” title=”Aida QuilcuĂ©/MAMA Radio” class=”image image-_original” width=”400″ height=”300″ />Aida QuilcuĂ©/MAMA Radio
December 16 is supposed to be a special day for most Colombians.

It’s the day that marks the start of what is called “La Novena,” the traditional nine-day countdown to Christmas.

For families around the country, rich and poor, urban and rural, “Las Novenas” are supposed to be a time of celebration, ritual gatherings with friends and loved ones. They are filled with community sing-alongs, of old-school holiday songs that take just about everybody back to their childhood.

But this Dec. 16 will not be one of joy for Aida Quilcué and her family. Indeed, Dec. 16 is once again being marked as a day of violence and terror for the indigenous communities of Cauca, and for the entire country.

This morning, at about 4:00 AM, on the road between InzĂĄ, Tierradentro, and TotorĂł, on indigenous territory, the official car of the Regional Indigenous Council of Cauca (CRIC), was shot at 19 times by a column of the Third Division of the Army, fatally wounding the driver, Edwin Legarda VĂĄzquez, QuilcuĂ©’s husband. QuilcuĂ© is the chief counsel of CRIC, and one of the most visible leaders of the recent Indigenous and Popular Minga that began on Oct. 11, culminating in a massive march and rally in downtown BogotĂĄ on Nov. 21.

Three bullets penetrated Legarda, who did not survive the emergency surgery he was given after being rushed to San José Hospital in Popayån, the departmental capital.

But most people close to CRIC believe the bullets were really meant for his wife, who apparently was just returning from Geneva where she had been participating in the United Nations Human Rights Commission sessions on Colombia. She was not in the car when the attack occurred.

Ernesto ParafĂĄn, the lawyer for CRIC, believes it was a deliberate act committed against the organization, and specifically an attempt on QuilcuĂ©’s life by the government’s security apparatus. According to the indigenous leadership, QuilcuĂ©, along with other prominent leaders, has received numerous death threats in recent months, especially during the six weeks of mobilization and protests that captured the attention of both national and international public opinion.

Gen. Justo Eliceo Peña, commander of the Army’s Third Division in Cauca, acknowledged on Caracol Radio that various members of the Army did indeed fire at CRIC’s car, a vehicle recognized throughout the area for its tinted windows, and for its countless trips throughout the mountainous terrain regularly carrying the movement’s leadership, particularly QuilcuĂ©. According to the General, his troops fired because the car did not stop at the military roadblock set up in the area. Gen. Peña later expressed regrets for the attack, recognizing that even if they had not obeyed orders to stop, the excessive volley of bullets was not appropriate, and violated the Army’s protocol.

But the indigenous movement is not accepting these words at face value, and is demanding a full, independent investigation into the incident, given the recent wave of threats against Quilcué and other leaders.

“I think the attack was for me,” QuilcuĂ© later told Caracol Radio, in reference to her role in the MINGA social.

The Association of Indigenous Councils of Northern Cauca (ACIN) pointed out on its website that the area where Legarda was killed was near the Finca San Miguel in the village of Gabriel LĂłpez in TotorĂł, “a property where there is a permanent presence of the National Army,” making it highly unlikely that the soldiers did not recognize the vehicle as being that of CRIC, one of the most prominent social organizations in the country.

Meanwhile, CRIC attorney Ernesto PerafĂĄn was quoted in El Tiempo saying that if the military does not thoroughly investigate, capture the perpetrators and bring them to justice, the Indigenous Guard of the community will do so “because these crimes were carried out within the territory of the [indigenous] community.”

Alvaro MejĂ­a, a spokesperson for CRIC, added “we demand that this crime does not remain in impunity.”

December 16th: A Day that Lives in Infamy
If one considers the long track record of the government’s deliberately lackluster investigations into crimes committed by state actors against the indigenous movement, there is considerable reason for the community to be concerned. Today’s tragic incident ironically comes on the 17th anniversary of one of the most brutal episodes of Colombia’s violent history against indigenous people, and perhaps its most despicable account of criminal cover-up and public deception.

On Dec. 16, 1991, 20 indigenous people from the Huellas-Caloto community, including five women and four children, were murdered as they met to discuss a struggle over land rights in the estate of El Nilo in northern Cauca. Some 60 hooded gunmen stormed into the building where the community was meeting and opened fire. Initial news reports indicated that the gunmen were drug traffickers who had been seizing land in the region to grow opium poppies to produce heroin, but it soon became apparent that the culprits of the massacre were much more than simple narco-traffickers operating outside of the law. The killings had followed a relentless pattern of harassment and threats against the indigenous community by gunmen loyal to local landowners who were disputing the indigenous community’s claim to ownership of the land. In many ways, it was a massacre foretold.

According to the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, the Special Investigations Unit of the Office of the Attorney General, which handled the first stages of the investigation into the massacre, uncovered evidence of the involvement of members of the National Police, both before and during the execution of these horrific events. They were working hand in hand with drug traffickers and wealthy landowners, who were not comfortable with the organizing and mobilizing capacity of CRIC and the local communities.

The Inter-American Court of Human Rights established that the Colombian state should hand back their land as part of the integral reparation to victims of the massacre committed by those ruthless death squads in collaboration with the police. In 1998, President Ernesto Samper acknowledged the responsibility of state actors in the massacre of El Nilo, and on behalf of the Colombian state, he apologized to the families of the victims and to the Nasa community of Northern Cauca, making promises to the relatives of the victims and the communities to implement the recommendations of the Inter-American Human Rights Commission.

To this day, only a small portion of the land has been returned to any of the family members of the Huellas community, despite repeated promises from various governments to do so. The issue of recuperation of the lands in the northern Cauca region continues to be a major point of contention between the government of Alvaro Uribe and the indigenous movement, and has sparked repeated mobilizations by the community.

The Social and Community Minga that was initially launched in September 2004, but was re-initiated this year with the above-mentioned six-week mobilization, made the government’s fulfillment of its pledges to the community one of its five main rallying points, although it was not the only issue on their agenda of protest. The organizers of the Minga recognize that the failure of the government to come clean on its pledges to the community is just one manifestation of a much larger strategy of pushing back the indigenous movement’s national, broad-based call for social transformation on several different platforms. This platform of resistance includes a rejection of the government’s counter-reform measures that negate protections afforded to indigenous peoples across the country, measures that have opened the way for free trade agreements that in essence will rob the communities of their territories and the resources within. And it is a platform that is openly calling for an end to the government’s militarization of their territories, what President Uribe calls “Democratic Security,” but in the end results in the kinds of state-sponsored violence that took the life of Edwin Legarda VĂĄzquez in the early morning hours of December 16th.

Aida Quilcué has been one of the most eloquent voices promoting this agenda. Are we jumping to premature conclusions in assuming those bullets were meant for her?

Will there be justice in this latest case of violence against the Nasa people, or will it be as slow in coming as it was (and still is) for the many victims of the Nilo massacre?

Silencing the Truth in Northern Cauca
The senseless tragedy befalling QuilcuĂ©, her family, CRIC and the entire indigenous community of Colombia is currently being reported peripherally by the corporate national news media such as El Tiempo, Caracol Radio and other sources. However, one media outlet where it is not currently being reported is on the community radio station of the Nasa people of northern cauca, Radio Pa’yumat, licensed to the ACIN.

Over the weekend, the station’s transmitter equipment and antenna were severely damaged in an act of sabotage by as of yet unnamed actors, although the community refers to the perpetrators as the same forces of terror that continue to try to silence the indigenous movement with acts of violence. ACIN has denounced the latest assault on their primary communication vehicle on its website, stating that it is part of an ongoing process of intimidation and fear:

Not coincidentally, these prior acts of sabotage have occurred at the precise time that our communities were initiating major mobilizations and important actions against the armed actors that constantly provoke war in our territories. Therefore, the assault against our community radio station is not an isolated incident, but is part of a deliberate strategy of silencing the indigenous movement of northern Cauca, because the radio station is the most important medium within the community. It allows us to listen to one another, to discuss important issues, reflect on them, make decisions in the interest of the community, and take actions collectively in defense of life and of our territory.

It is understood by most observers that the indigenous communities that have been most successful over the years at confronting the myriad threats to their autonomy throughout the country are those with the strongest organizational structures, legitimized by being in a constant dialogue with the base. These are the same communities that continue to play the role of interlocutor with other, non-indigenous actors, be they state institutions, different social sectors like the peasant or trade union movements, and international solidarity organizations.

And not surprisingly, many of these communities, like the cabildos [traditional indigenous authorities] that make up ACIN, maintain their own independent media channels as essential components of their collective resistance. These community media channels spring from a long tradition of grassroots, independent, citizens’ media projects that have emerged throughout Colombia over the past 35 years, and that coalesced alongside broad-based social movements with the rewriting of the Constitution in 1991. Naturally, these community-based media are only as effective as their organizations’ capacity to successfully confront the destructive, militarist, and undemocratic models that surround them. In the long run, strong organizational bases make them more secure and protect them from the inevitable, reactionary backlash, given the high levels of violence that has always been directed towards independent voices in Colombia. But sometimes that high level of organizing is not enough to prevent the kind of sabotage that occurred over the weekend.

“Those who carried out this act of sabotage knew what they were doing,” said Dora Muñoz, coordinator of the radio station. She added “all of this points to a systematic wave of terror. I’m afraid we’re only just beginning to see what may come in the coming days and weeks, directed against us.”

The Nasa communities of Cauca, with their long trajectory of mobilization spearheaded by CRIC and ACIN, in the spirit of constructing sustainable, democratic alternatives, are working alongside truly revolutionary, transformative practices in communication. Radio Pa’yumat happens to be one of the national models of these transformative communication practices, rooted in indigenous traditions of bottom-up consultation and community reflection. However, it is not supported in any way by state institutions.

“If there were some state communication policies that were in defense of the rights of the people, the immediate reaction of the government would have been to repudiate these acts of sabotage and provide some resources to support the radio station’s efforts, efforts that we depend on for our security and well-being while we are under constant attack,” said Ezequiel VitonĂĄs, a member of the council of chiefs of ACIN.

Today, December 16th, 2008, on the 17th anniversary of the massacre of 20 Nasa on the Nilo estate, on the same day that the husband of CRIC’s chief spokesperson was killed by a fusillade of Army bullets, ACIN’s radio station remains off the air due to ruthless acts of sabotage.

Is this all a tragic coincidence?

Too often these types of stories are completely ignored by the Colombian corporate media, which are perpetually stuck on the faulty narratives relating to guerilla terrorism, false victimization, and celebrity gossip. These patterns of media obsession were evident most clearly this past Sunday, when El Tiempo released its list of personalities of the year. Topping the list was pop-super star and pretty boy Juanes, whose ambiguous politics—supposedly “committed to social change”—make him a safe bet for the editorial writers of the nation’s establishment newspaper of record. The multi-Grammy Award winner was followed on the year-end list by two of the principal architects of the government’s Democratic Security strategy, Defense Minister Juan Manuel Santos and Armed Forces Chief Freddy Padilla, lauded for their so-called victories against FARC guerillas. These are the same individuals who are responsible for the False Positives scandal that only temporarily rocked the top brass of the military in 2008.

And perhaps these are the same individuals who ultimately should be held accountable for the criminal act of violence perpetrated this morning against Legarda VĂĄzquez.

So in his memory, and in the memory of Jairo SecuĂ©, Domingo Calis, Daniel PetĂ©, AdĂĄn MestĂ­zo, DarĂ­o CoicuĂ©, Feliciano Otelo, Calicio Chilhueso, Mario JuliquĂ©, Edegar Mestizo, JesĂșs PetĂ©, Julio Dagua, Carolina TombĂ©, Ofelia TombĂ©, Jose ElĂ­as TombĂ©, Foresmiro ViscuĂ©, Leonidas CasamchĂ­n, and JosĂ© ElĂ­as UlcuĂ©, and all the other victims of state-sponsored terror in Colombia, let’s not be silent today.

In the spirit of Manuel QuintĂ­n Lame!

Let our voices of rage be the megaphones projecting through the heroic signal of Radio Pa’yumat, temporarily silenced by reactionary forces. Let’s shout out collectively, in order to drown out the tacky melodies that will be sung throughout the country on this first night of the Christmas novena, in the spirit of resistance.

So that the tears of Aida Quilcué can be converted into the fire of a people that will not be silenced!

—-

This story first appeared Dec. 17 on MAMA Radio.

RESOURCES

Association of Indigenous Councils of Northern Cauca (ACIN)
http://www.nasaacin.org

See also:

Colombia: army kills indigenous leader
World War 4 Report, Dec. 21, 2008

——————-

Reprinted by World War 4 Report, Jan. 1, 2009
Reprinting permissible with attribution

Continue ReadingCOLOMBIA: A DAY THAT WILL LIVE IN INFAMY—AGAIN 

THE FINANCIAL CRISIS HITS THE IMMIGRATION DEBATE

by David L. Wilson, MR Zine

Part of the right wing routinely blames undocumented immigrants for just about everything. On Sept. 24, nine days after the financial meltdown started in earnest, the National Review website carried an article by columnist and blogger Michelle Malkin blaming “illegals” for the crisis and the subsequent bailout of the banks. “The Mother of All Bailouts has many fathers,” she wrote. “But there’s one giant paternal elephant in the room that has slipped notice: how illegal immigration, crime-enabling banks, and open-borders Bush policies fueled the mortgage crisis.”

Malkin’s pieces often read like parodies of conservative punditry, and there’s something distinctly comical about the idea that a few undocumented homeowners caused a multi-trillion dollar financial crisis. Less than a month after Malkin’s article was posted, the Wall Street Journal showed that in fact mortgages bought by out-of-status immigrants have performed rather well. But the Malkin diatribe is a useful indication of how the immigration debate is likely to change over the next months.

Until this September, informed opinion was that whichever party won the November elections, Congress and the new president would move in 2009 to revive the Comprehensive Immigration Reform (CIR) package that was voted down in the summer of 2007. CIR (which started as the “McCain-Kennedy Bill” in 2005) would combine stepped-up enforcement, a limited program for legalization, and a greatly expanded guest worker program like the notorious “bracero” operation of 1942-1964.

It is no longer clear whether Congress will proceed with CIR; the politicians may put immigration on the back burner as they try to deal with more pressing economic issues. The crisis has taken much of the urgency away from “immigration reform.” Undocumented immigration had already begun to decline as the US economy slowed in 2007, and the employer associations that pushed CIR for the sake of the guest worker provision may be losing interest: there will be less desire to import easily exploited workers from abroad as the crisis creates a pool of jobless workers here at home.

What is clear is that immigrants will continue to serve as convenient scapegoats for the economic disaster. Analyst Tom Barry of the Americas Policy Program’s TransBorder Project reports that immigration restrictionists are planning to “retain their dominance in the immigration debate” by “reframing the immigration issue as a threat to ever-scarcer jobs in the context of the national economic crisis.”

Return of the “Welfare Queen”?
Barry suggests that the right may be “wildly overreach[ing]” in this effort to shift the blame to immigrants, but we shouldn’t forget how successfully Ronald Reagan and others implicated the mythical “welfare queen” in the recurring economic crises of the 1970s and early 1980s. Never mind that welfare was a minuscule part of local and federal budgets—and that the great majority of welfare recipients were white—much of the country came to believe that the source of all economic problems was a fictitious Cadillac-driving African-American woman who drained services and raised taxes with the payments she received for her ten illegitimate children.

Even before the present crisis, anti-immigrant forces had had similar success with racist and xenophobic myths about immigrants getting welfare checks, bearing “anchor babies,” and straining medical and education services, even though these were all long since exposed as fictions. Unfortunately, there’s an easy way to measure the success of the right-wing propaganda: the 40% rise of hate crimes against Latinos since 2003 as the anti-immigrant drive stepped up. (Latinos are often perceived as immigrants even if they are native-born).

But can the right pull it off again? It may be harder to shift the blame this time around. After all, contrary to Malkin, the “giant paternal elephant in the room” isn’t immigration—it’s the neoliberal economic policies that have dominated for the past thirty years.

Since the end of the Carter administration, working people in this country have been promised economic well-being from the “free market,” from Reagan’s tax reforms, from the Bush-Clinton “free trade” pacts and “globalization,” from the “end of welfare as we know it,” from the dot-com bubble, and from the housing bubble. What they’ve actually gotten is stagnating wages, a sinking standard of living, a failing environment, and an infrastructure literally collapsing around them. Now, facing layoffs and foreclosures, wage earners have to watch as their taxes provide massive handouts to bank presidents and corporate CEOs, the real welfare queens.

People are not just angry; they are specifically angry at the plutocrats who brought them this disaster. And they’re open to new ideas and ways of thinking: the November elections may have been less important for any changes they could bring to Washington than for what they show about changes in the consciousness of the US public.

Facing Economic Realities
The immigration debate brings together many of the economic issues that need to be discussed at this point: the effects of “free trade” policies, the government’s anti-labor measures, the fomenting of divisions among working people.

The majority of undocumented immigrants come here to flee the results of neoliberal policies in Latin America and the Caribbean—policies that were pushed by the same Wall Street wizards that brought us the collapse at home. Once here, the immigrants are forced into low-wage, high-risk jobs through repressive anti-labor measures disguised as immigration enforcement (massive workplace raids are the extreme example). This repression keeps the undocumented immigrants’ wages down and thus creates downward pressure on the wages of native-born workers as well.

The obvious solution for the native-born is to organize alongside their immigrant co-workers to raise wages, improve labor conditions, and demand jobs for all. But politicians and the media stir up racism and fear of “the other” to prevent or at least slow class-based organizing. And it’s clear which side these anti-immigrant forces are really on, despite their populist rhetoric. Their lead media spokesperson is Lou Dobbs, former host of the pro-business “Moneyline” TV show. One of their main voices in Congress is Rep. James Sensenbrenner, who, as labor journalist David Bacon points out, promotes xenophobia in Washington while his family’s Grupo MĂ©xico business associates help cause migration from Mexico, and Kimberly-Clark, the Sensenbrenner family paper business, profits from low-wage immigrant workers in U.S. forests.

In the 1930s many working people allowed themselves to be divided along ethnic and racial lines, but many others overcame those divisions to organize the protests, boycotts, and strikes that led to the labor protections and social services we have today. In the current crisis, a lot will depend on how quickly and aggressively activists challenge the right wing on immigration by organizing around the real economic issues.

—-

David L. Wilson is co-author, with Jane Guskin, of The Politics of Immigration: Questions and Answers (Monthly Review Press, July 2007).

This story first appeared Nov. 30 in MR Zine, online journal of Monthly Review.

RESOURCES

Michelle Malkin, “Illegal Loans: A Criminal Business”
National Review Online, September 24, 2008

Miriam Jordan, “Mortgage Prospects Dim for Illegal Immigrants”
Wall Street Journal, October 22, 2008.

Walter A. Ewing, “Immigration Fairytales”
New America Media, August 4, 2008.

Tom Barry, “Both Sides of Immigration Debate Retrench”
Americas Updater, November 14, 2008.

“Anti-Latino Hate Crimes Rise for Fourth Year in a Row”
Hatewatch/Southern Poverty Law Center, October 29, 2008,

Peter Cervantes-Gautschi, “Wall Street and Immigration: Financial Services Giants Have Profited from the Beginning”
Americas Program, Center for International Policy, December 4, 2007.

David Bacon, Illegal People: How Globalization Creates Migration and Criminalizes Immigrants, September 2008, p. 64-67

——————-

Reprinted by World War 4 Report, Jan. 1, 2009
Reprinting permissible with attribution

Continue ReadingTHE FINANCIAL CRISIS HITS THE IMMIGRATION DEBATE 

WILL THE BORDER WALL STAND?

Obama’s Southwest Challenge: “Tear It Down”

by Kent Paterson, Frontera NorteSur

As the Bush Administration enters its final weeks, pressure is building to halt construction of the Department of Homeland Security’s unfinished US-Mexico border wall. The controversial project, which was originally slated to be completed by Dec. 31, is the target of reinvigorated opposition from border residents, elected officials, indigenous communities, human rights activists, and environmentalists. Buoyed by changes coming to Washington, border wall opponents are stepping up their lobbying of President-elect Barack Obama’s transition team to ensure the fencing is halted and even reversed.

In a letter sent to members of Obama’s Department of Interior transition team this week, the Lipan Apache Women Defense group of south Texas requested an end to fencing, demanded a halt to “illegal” seizures of border communities’ properties and appealed for respect of the rights of indigenous people.

In a telephonic press conference with reporters, tribal member Margo Tamez said fencing on the Lipan Apaches’ lands would constitute a gross violation of the human rights of land-based people who depend on border and river access for the collection of medicinal herbs and other cultural practices.

Tamez charged that the US government’s planned fences, border checkpoints and other measures are “criminalizing” her people. Indigenous lives, Tamez asserted, are being “radically altered” by the burgeoning border security complex. “We are assumed to be the criminals on our lands,” Tamez said “We belong the lands, and the lands belong to us.”

Tamez’s mother, Dr. Eloisa Garcia Tamez, credited public opposition to the border wall for preventing any construction on her land so far. Garcia Tamez said the border fencing planned near her home in El Calaboz Rancheria would actually be built one mile north of the Rio Grande boundary between Mexico and the US. Adding she first met Barack Obama during a campaign stop early last year in Brownsville, Tex., Garcia Tamez said she hoped the president-elect would prevent any additional fence construction.

“That is my hope, that is my prayer,” she said.

As an Illinois senator, Obama voted for the 2006 Secure Fence Act that paved the way for the current round of border fencing. A border wall critic, however, Arizona Gov. Janet Napolitano, has been nominated to serve as Obama’s secretary of Homeland Security. If confirmed by the Senate, Napolitano will have a critical role in the fate of the project.

The Opposition Expands
Lipan Apache border wall opponents are supported in their stance by many national and regional organizations, including the National Network for Immigrant and Refugee Rights, the International Indian Treaty Council and Alianza Sin Fronteras.

The Lipan Apaches Women Defense group’s letter followed a similar appeal this month to Obama by elected officials from El Paso, Tex. Initial signatories of the El Paso letter included Texas state Sen. Eliot Shapleigh (D-El Paso), El Paso city Councilman Steve Ortega and US Rep. Silvestre Reyes (D-El Paso). Reyes is a former Border Patrol sector chief for the El Paso area.

Citing close trade relationships with Mexico, as well as the economic and budget crisis, the letter urged the president-elect to “stop building these ill-conceived walls founded in current notions of racism.”

In an interview with Frontera NorteSur, Sen. Shapleigh said he would like to see the new president “tear down this wall” and construct a new friendship with the Americas “like we have seen under Kennedy.” The El Paso Democrat, who plans to travel to Washington next month to press the message conveyed in the letter, added that the sooner the wall is torn down, the better.

“If not tomorrow, in a month,” he said. “If not in a month, in three months, but the important thing is begin with a strong and united border voice to make a new era in Washington, D.C.”

On Capitol Hill, legislation to consider alternatives to border fencing is still pending in the House. Sponsored by Rep. Raul Grijalva (D-AZ), HR 2593, the Borderlands Conservation and Security Act, proposes repealing Section 102 of the REAL ID Act that gives the DHS authority to waive laws for the border fencing, expanding local, state and tribal participation in border infrastructure decision-making, and funding initiatives to help mitigate damages from fencing to wildlife and cultural resources.

Inside the beltway, organizations like the Sierra Club vow to make the border wall an issue the new administration must reexamine.

“We’ll be looking to President Obama and Secretary Napolitano for that leadership,” said Michael Degnan, the Sierra Club’s Washington representative for national forests and wildlife.

The Sierra Club earlier joined with Defenders of Wildlife in an unsuccessful lawsuit that challenged the authority of Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff to waive dozens of environmental and other laws in order to proceed with the border wall construction.

“The beauty of democracy is that we do have the opportunity to make a difference,” Degnan said, “and that’s what we’re looking to do. We need to repeal this waiver.”

The Bush administration and border wall supporters insist the 670 miles of planned pedestrian and vehicle barriers are needed to stem drug trafficking, stop terrorism and curb illegal immigration. A recent blog posting linked to the Washington DC- based Center for Immigration Studies website captures the sentiments of many border wall supporters. Titled “Better Get That Wall Built,” the posting consisted of a news summary of criminal violence in Ciudad JuĂĄrez and northern Mexico, including the Nov. 13 murder of El Diario de JuĂĄrez reporter Armando RodrĂ­guez.

In border areas where construction is underway, work crews have been busy in recent weeks. As of mid-November, the United States Customs and Border Protection agency (CBP), the division of DHS responsible for overseeing the fencing, stated on its website that about 375 miles the planned fencing and vehicle barriers had been completed. Less than five weeks later, on Dec. 18, the DHS said more than 520 miles of barriers were done. The latest number means that about 145 miles of barriers were erected in a few weeks, according to the federal government.

CBP spokesman Lloyd Easterling recently told Frontera NorteSur that the government planned to have “90 or 95” percent of the fencing terminated by the end of December. The pace of construction, Easterling maintained, has been a “huge feat” so far.

Although the fencing is unfinished, Easterling said no further appropriations for the fencing will be requested from Congress. Earlier this year, the DHS was allowed to reprogram $400 million to cover cost overruns. Depending on the source, the total price tag for the massive project is estimated from $2 billion to $49 billion. Bills for maintaining the fencing from erosion, flooding, wear and tear, and other damages are expected to considerably push up the wall’s cost over time, according to many analysts.

Legal Challenges Move Forward
In addition to political opposition and civil disobedience, exemplified by the arrest of activist Judy Ackerman, who physically blocked a construction crew south of El Paso last week, the fencing project continues to face multiple courtroom challenges on constitutional and other legal grounds.

The County of El Paso, for instance, filed an appeal in its lawsuit with the US Supreme Court earlier this month. On another front, the Los Angeles-based Center for Human Rights and Constitutional Law and Texas Rio Grande Legal Aid (TRLA) are defending individual landowners, including Lipan Apaches, in property condemnation proceedings pursued by the federal government.

A big issue in the landowner cases is the 2008 Appropriations Act, which requires the DHS to consult with property holders to reduce the impact of walls on cultural, environmental and economic resources. Mandated by Congress, the consultation process between south Texas landowners and the DHS has been a thorny one so far, with federal officials, landowners and members of the Texas Border Coalition, a group of elected officials opposed to the wall, disagreeing over the scope, timing and make-up of the consultations.

Jerry Westervich, an attorney for TRLA who is defending two landowners in the US District Court for the Southern District of Texas, said he is trying to make sure the federal government complies with the 2008 law. “We have no idea what President Obama will do when he has the keys to the bulldozers,” Westervich maintained.

A group of legal activists based at the University of Texas (UT), meanwhile, is exploring national and international law issues as they relate to the border wall, including the equal protection clause of the US Constitution.

Jeff Wilson , an assistant professor of environmental science at the University of Texas-Brownsville and a member of the UT law group, said researchers studied census data for Texas’ Cameron County to compare the socio-economic characteristics of border residents who would and would not be directly impacted by the fence construction.

Research revealed that that lower-income Latinos, especially immigrants, are disproportionately targeted for fencing on or near their properties, Wilson said, but more affluent residents and businesses such as River Bend Resort would actually escape having fences run through their lands.

Denise Gilman, a UT clinical law professor who is also a member of the activist group, said student and faculty activists delivered a report on the border wall to the Organization of American States’ Inter-American Commission on Human Rights in Washington, DC last October. Commission members are very concerned about the wall’s effects on cultural rights, Gilman said, but can’t take any action until domestic avenues for redress are exhausted. Criticizing the DHS’ project for lacking accountability and transparency, Gilman contended that the federal government has not fully responded to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request filed by the UT law group last April.

Gilman told reporters that Washington finally sent her group a copy of the main border wall contract with the Boeing company this month, but sub-contracts and payment information which were also requested under the FOIA were not delivered. Asked if contract lock-in provisions that could tie Washington’s hands regardless of the incoming administration’s policy desires were an issue, Gilman said, “It’s an area of concern.”

—-

This story first appeared Dec. 26 on Frontera NorteSur.

RESOURCES

National Network for Immigrant and Refugee Rights
http://www.nnirr.org

International Indian Treaty Council
http://www.treatycouncil.org

Center for Immigration Studies
http://www.cis.org

Center for Human Rights and Constitutional Law
http://www.centerforhumanrights.org

Texas Rio Grande Legal Aid
http://www.trla.org

Texas Border Coalition
http://www.texasbordercoalition.org

See also:

THE GREAT WALL OF BOEING
Corporate Power and the Secure Border Initiative
by David L. Wilson, MR Zine
World War 4 Report, October 2008

From our Daily Report:

Lipan Apache to Obama: stop border wall construction
World War 4 Report, Dec. 23, 2008

Protester halts border wall construction in El Paso
World War 4 Report, Dec. 19, 2008

Mexico: gunmen kill reporter, kidnap farmworkers
World War 4 Report, Nov. 15, 2008

——————-

Reprinted by World War 4 Report, Jan. 1, 2009
Reprinting permissible with attribution

Continue ReadingWILL THE BORDER WALL STAND? 

BORDER UNDER SIEGE

US Military Training and Texas Guns Fuel Mexico’s Narco Wars

by Peter Gorman, Fort Worth Weekly

The sun is shining on the low rolling hills covered in Texas short grass and dotted with cattle along the southern end of I-35, the road that stretches from Duluth, Minn., to the Texas-Mexico border at Laredo. Little interrupts the bucolic scene for miles in any direction except for electric towers strung together like alien giants on a forced march across the vast plains. Towns that are little more than gas-stops appear and disappear beside the highway. On the other side of the Rio Grande, the countryside looks to be more of the same.

At the border, one way to cross is via a footbridge over the river. Last spring, a banner hung on the Mexican side of the bridge turned out to be a recruiting poster for the Zetas, a murderous drug cartel that had recently taken over much of Nuevo Laredo.

At the end of I-35, Laredo and Nuevo Laredo face each other across that shallow river. It’s a famously porous international border that, given the shared culture of people on the two sides, has always seemed seriously smudged.

And yet few countries could be as different as the United States and Mexico these days. The critical nature of that difference takes hold as soon as a southbound traveler sets a foot—and it had better be a cautious foot—past the border formalities. In Nuevo Laredo, the walls of many homes and government buildings are pockmarked with bullet holes. Some have high concrete walls, four inches thick, in front of their property—protection against grenades and assault weapons. Nuevo Laredo hasn’t had a police chief in two years. The last one quit in fear of his life after only three months in office. The one before that was shot and killed in broad daylight after seven hours on the job.

Up the river in JuĂĄrez, across from El Paso, about 1,200 people have been murdered thus far this year, and the total could hit 1,500. The brutality of many of the murders is stunning. Newspaper headlines announce decapitations, people being burned alive or tortured to death, mass murders. In early November, a headless body was hung from an overpass over the city’s main road.

The story is the same, with variations, all along the US-Mexico border, as various Mexican drug cartels fight each other and the government: This is no longer the drug war that has chugged along for decades along this border, where there was always violence, to be sure, but where headlines were more likely to be about the size of drug shipments seized or the latest local Customs or Border Patrol agent found to be in cahoots with the smugglers. Nor is US involvement any longer limited simply (and profoundly) to providing the market for drugs that makes the whole narcotrafficking world possible, or to low-level corruption of the occasional border cop.

Interviews with agents in numerous federal and local law enforcement agencies, border residents, and drug-war journalists paint a picture of a war beyond anything anyone has ever seen here before, an epidemic of murder and sadistic violence that’s being waged with US weapons and aided by US government dollars, led by forces trained by the US military. The level of power of the Mexican drug cartels is completely out of control, and nothing the US and Mexican governments are doing seems to be working to slow it down.

Instead, the money generated by the sale of drugs in this country is so impossibly vast that corruption in local Mexican police forces, the Mexican military, and even the federal government is at the saturation point—and many times more lucrative, not to mention healthier, than staying honest. The drug gangs are now recruiting and killing people on the US side of the border, and murders and corruption are on the rise in towns from El Paso to Brownsville. Unless something changes quickly, it looks as though things are going to get a lot worse before they get better. Already, the Mexican side of the border has become such a horror show that many Americans will find it difficult to comprehend, no matter how many movies about it they have seen. The transformation of Mexico into a drugocracy is nearly complete, with no institution completely free from its influence, including the US Embassy in Mexico City.

Thousands of Mexicans have paid dearly to have tracking chips embedded under their skin, so that they can be located if they are kidnapped. More Mexican citizens than ever are showing up in hospitals on the US side to be treated for gunshot wounds—because there’s less chance in the United States of their attackers following them to a hospital ward to finish the job. And record numbers of Mexicans are fleeing to Canada to seek political asylum.

The firepower of the cartels is as frightening as their ruthlessness. Where do they get their weapons? From Texas and other border states, where the gun lobbies have kept the gun laws weak. Texas is considered to be the number-one supplier of weapons to the cartels.

But their artillery goes beyond anything found at your local gun shop. The cartels have M-16s, hand grenades, grenade launchers—that is, US military weapons, by the truckload.

Many of the most murderous units of the drug armies know very well how to use those weapons because they were taught by the US military—on the assumption that they were going to fight against the cartels. Now they fight for the cartels—or control them. What’s more, US corporations are getting into the act, working under contract with the Mexican and US governments to train specialized soldiers, including in torture techniques, and to act as private security agents on both sides of the border.

A recent government report said one Mexican cartel, angered at raids in the US that targeted their people (including in North Texas) has threatened retaliation. The cartel is calling on the American gangs that are its business partners to “confront US law enforcement agencies.” One cartel boss allegedly has ordered reinforcements to Reynosa, the report said, “armed with assault rifles, bulletproof vests, and grenades…occupying safe houses throughout the McAllen area.”

What’s more, the sign on the bridge was just one example of the cartel’s new practice of brazenly advertising for foot soldiers. In Reynosa and Nuevo Laredo, their fliers were plastered everywhere recently.

The banner on the bridge echoed the words of the old US military recruiting poster, and it specifically targeted members of the military: “The Zetas operations group wants you, soldier or ex-soldier,” it read. “We offer you a good salary, food, and attention for your family. Don’t suffer hunger and abuse any more.” It listed a cell phone number to call to sign up.

In Nuevo Laredo, things are much quieter now than they were two years ago, when gunfights broke out almost daily. But even now, entering Mexico at Laredo is intimidating, because the town is still tense with the memory of those battles. Stores are boarded up, international medical and dental clinics that used to cater to Texans have for-rent signs on their doors, and it’s not a safe place to wander around. The relative peace is not the result of any law enforcement victory over the drug traffickers—far from it. The warring cartels in Nuevo Laredo have simply reached a dĂ©tente.

Mexican President Felipe CalderĂłn came to power in 2006 vowing to eliminate the drug scourge and its attendant violence. George W. Bush’s administration handed over hundreds of millions to help with that quest. But all that’s happened since CalderĂłn took office, despite his efforts, is that the violence and corruption have increased. It’s not just the death toll that’s up; robberies, extortions, and kidnappings are on the rise as well.

The next-to-last Nuevo Laredo police chief was murdered because he promised to crack down on drug violence, which claimed 170 lives in that city in 2005 alone, not to mention dozens of kidnappings or the assassinations carried out on the US side.

“It’s a war zone,” Webb County Sheriff Rick Flores told ABC News at the time. “We’ve got level-three body armor; they’ve got level-four. We’ve got cell phones; they’ve got satellite cell phones that we can’t tap into… We’re being out-gunned.”

In the fight against drug-based corruption, there has been no dĂ©tente. In the last five months, 35 agents with the Mexican federal prosecutor’s office were arrested for corruption. According to Mexican Attorney General Eduardo Medina Mora, each was being paid between $150,000 and $450,000 monthly by the cartels. In late October, two high-ranking officials with Mexico’s Office on Organized Crime, part of the attorney general’s office, were arrested for supplying a Sinaloa-based cartel with information on possible drug seizures. Each was being paid $400,000 per month. An Interpol agent working with the US Drug Enforcement Administration at the US embassy in Mexico City, caught supplying the same cartel with inside information last month, was thought to have been earning $30,000 monthly.

The current rash of violence in Mexico, as well as the violence that erupted in Nuevo Laredo a couple of years ago, can be traced to CalderĂłn’s policy of going after cartel leaders. His belief was that the cartels would be destroyed with their capos gone. So he sent 32,000 federal soldiers out across Mexico with orders to bring the peace by eliminating cartel bosses. Dozens were captured or killed, including many who have since been extradited to the US for prosecution. But the push also had two negative side effects: First, the cartels were able to corrupt large segments of those military forces sent out against them; and secondly, the removal of the bosses created a power vacuum that’s led to the current violence among those seeking to become the new cartel leaders.

In many ways, it’s a repeat of what happened in Colombia in the late 1980s and early 1990s, when the MedellĂ­n and Cali cartel leaders were eliminated. Violence in that country escalated to brutal heights. But interestingly, the victor in those internecine wars turned out not to be any of the Colombian cartel lieutenants, but the drug bosses in Mexico, who moved up from being middle men to running the cartels themselves.

The campaigns then didnïżœt stop corruption or even slow it down, and the same has been true of Calderonïżœs efforts thus far. Much of the violence in Nuevo Laredo was carried out by municipal police, including gun battles between them and federal officers. Eventually more than half of Nuevo Laredo’s 700-man police force was fired for corruption. In June 2007, CalderĂłn purged 284 federal police commanders from all 31 Mexican states and the Mexico City federal district. All that did, one DEA source said, was to raise the cost of monthly payments to corrupt federal agents and prosecutors.

US drug agents estimate that, every day, $10 million worth of drugs cross over the Laredo bridges— not to mention the rest of the 2,000-mile long US-Mexico border—and heads up I-35. It’s enough to pay for a lot of corruption and a lot of weaponry. Unfortunately for their victims, the drug lords don’t have to go far to do their gun-shopping.

The Texas-Mexico frontier has always been a smuggler’s paradise, and through the decades, the trade—in whatever goods were in demand at the moment—has gone both ways. These days, although the drugs traveling north grab most of the headlines, there’s an equally deadly trade: in weapons, going into Mexico, since that country has no arms manufacturing industry. According to US officials, nearly all of Mexico’s drug-war violence is done with US-manufactured weapons. The worst-offending states are Texas, Arizona, and New Mexico, all of which permit almost anyone to purchase and own as many pistols, machine pistols, rifles, and assault rifles as they want, with no waiting time and no record of the sale going beyond the gun dealers’ files.

In those states, only an instant background check is done. According to Stephen Fischer, a spokesman for the FBI’s National Instant Criminal Background Check System, anyone who sells a gun in this country—with a major and troublesome exception—must notify NICS. “The buyer is required to fill out a form, and the dealer then calls an 800 number, enters the buyer’s information, and either gets an OK or a ‘red light.'” If it’s the latter, Fischer said, “the information will get transferred to the FBI, and we’ll make a decision whether the transaction can go through or not.”

A would-be buyer can be turned down for things as simple as not having gotten a new driver’s license after a move or as serious as being in this country illegally or having a felony criminal record. But Fischer noted that the form does not include the number of weapons being purchased. “So in theory a person could buy 100 or more at a time if they want.”

He also said that information on green-lighted purchasers is purged within 24 hours. Red-lighted forms are kept until the FBI determines the cause of the warning flag.

One Texas gun owner, a former NASA engineer who asked not to be identified, said he sees the problem with a system that doesn’t flag purchases of multiple guns. “Maybe something should be in place even in Texas that would call that sale into question,” he said. “I mean, how many AK-47s does a person need to have fun target shooting?”

He himself owns an Uzi, a semi-automatic bought over the counter at a gun store. “But you go to any gun show, and it doesn’t take long to find someone who’ll offer to take your semi-automatic and turn it into a fully automatic weapon,” he said.

Mexican authorities have repeatedly called on the US to pass laws to stop or slow the estimated 2,000-weapon-a-day pace of gun sales into Mexico. But gun restrictions are extremely unpopular in Texas and other border states, an easy way for any politician to get unelected.

“Texas is probably the biggest supplier of guns that make their way into Mexico,” said Tom Crowley, special agent for the US Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms. “That’s both because of that long border they share and the number of gun dealers in the state.” BATF’s job is to handle the investigation of illegal gun and arms sales, as well as to trace guns that have been used in criminal activity.

“Now let’s say I’m a Mexican cartel member or illegal gun dealer, and I want to get my hands on some weapons,” Crowley said. “I’ll get a friend to purchase the guns I want and have him deliver them to me in Mexico. That’s called a straw-man purchase, and it’s illegal, but it’s done. And until one of those weapons is recovered at a crime scene, no one is going to know about it. Of course, that’s where BATF comes in: If the Mexican government provides us with that gun—and they’ve been more and more cooperative—we can trace it back to the manufacturer. They’ll tell us to which gun dealer it was shipped, and that gun dealer had better have kept the paperwork… And with that, we’ll be coming after you, to ask what the heck a gun you purchased is doing in Mexico in the hands of someone in a cartel gun battle.”

The system is flawed, Crowley admitted, both because of people obliterating serial numbers and because of the “gun show loophole.” The exception allows individuals to sell their own weapons at a gun show, such as the regular events held in large coliseums in the Dallas-Fort Worth area. No NICS check is done, and often no names are exchanged. If the gun later turns up to have been used in a multiple murder in JuĂĄrez and gets traced back to the legitimate owner, he can just say he sold it at a gun show to a stranger. And that’s the end of the case.

But Celerino Castillo, the former DEA agent who blew the whistle on the US-backed contras’ arms-for-drugs deals during the Nicaraguan civil war in the mid-1980s, said the problem isn’t limited to weapons being sold legally by individuals and then being resold to the cartels. The author of Powderburns, an account of the cocaine-for-arms scandal, Castillo worked undercover with the DEA for 12 years, mostly in Mexico and Central and South America.

“The majority of the weapons being used by the cartels these days are US military weapons and explosives,” he said. “They’ve got M-16s, hand grenades, grenade launchers. Even in Texas you can’t buy those. Those are US military weapons. Last year an 18-wheeler full of M-16s was stopped headed to Matamoros, a border town controlled by the Gulf Cartel. Our US military is either supplying the Mexican military with that weaponry, and corrupt elements in the Mexican military are selling it to the cartels, or someone in the US military is supplying them. Either way, those are US military guns being used in very violent cartel rivalries.”

“So the responsibility still lies with the US, whether it’s military or gun shop owners,” Castillo said. “Without the guns, there would be less violence.”

Whatever version of corruption or bad policy is responsible for massive amounts of US military weapons ending up in the hands of the cartel, there is little mystery about the more routine forms of drug-money corruption being practiced, another longstanding border tradition. In October, FBI agents arrested a South Texas sheriff and charged him with “conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute cocaine and marijuana” among several other offenses. Starr County Sheriff Reymundo Guerra, who faces life imprisonment, follows in the footsteps of his predecessor, Sheriff Eugenio FalcĂłn, who pleaded guilty to non-drug-related conspiracy charges in 1998. Among many other law enforcement officers caught dealing with the cartels, in 2005 former Cameron County Sheriff Conrado Cantu was sentenced to 24 years in prison for running a criminal enterprise out of his office.

The corruption extends as far as the drug supply lines themselves. In September, 175 people thought to have ties to the Gulf Cartel were arrested in several US states, including 22 in North Texas. The raids netted $1 million in cash, 400 pounds of methamphetamine, and 300 kilograms of cocaine—and drew the anger of drug bosses.

The Gulf Cartel isn’t exactly subtle in its recruitment of the military and others to its ranks. The Gulf Cartel has been plastering signs all over Reynosa and at times in Nuevo Laredo and elsewhere, asking soldiers and police officers to desert their posts and join the Zetas. One sign posted recently in Tampico asked soldiers and ex-soldiers to “Join the ranks of the Gulf Cartel. We offer benefits, life insurance, a house for your family and children. Stop living in the slums and riding the bus. A new car or truck, your choice.”

In JuĂĄrez, the war between cartels is still going full bore.

“What we have are factions of the old JuĂĄrez Cartel that were followers of Amado Carrillo Fuentes fighting it out with followers of Joaquin GuzmĂĄn Loera, known as El Chapo, head of the Sinaloa Cartel. And it is hell there,” said Diana Washington Valdez, a reporter with the El Paso Times. JuĂĄrez has been the site of some of the most horrific killings along the border.

“Our paper won’t even let us go across into JuĂĄrez for stories anymore because they have no way to protect us. The US Army at Fort Bliss here has warned their troops to stay out of JuĂĄrez,” Valdez said. According to news reports, one of the 1,200 or so people killed this year in JuĂĄrez in the internecine drug war was an American living in JuĂĄrez who was assassinated in October after he posted a sign asking the cartels not to leave any dead bodies in front of his house.

“You’ve got to understand that these guys are hitting night clubs, burning tourist clubs, kidnapping people, targeting payroll trucks,” Valdez said. “People who are not involved at all with the cartels are getting caught in the crossfire. That’s what makes it all so dangerous. If you’re in a club they’re going to burn down—well, that’s just that.”

Whoever can flee is doing so, she said. “Here in El Paso we’ve got a lot of people coming over to stay with relatives, but we’ve also got a lot of people just wandering around the bus station with nowhere to go, just to avoid being in JuĂĄrez.”

Along the California-Mexico stretch of the border, similar death tolls are being rung up in Tijuana, where the Arellano-Felix Cartel—headed by Fernando SĂĄnchez Arellano, known as “The Engineer”—is being challenged by several other cartels. In all, more than 3,500 people have died in drug-related violence in Mexico in 2008. Included in that number are several Mexican journalists who were killed in reprisal for writing about the drug wars or cartel activities. The most recent was Armando RodrĂ­guez, a crime reporter for Juarez’ El Diario, who was shot numerous times while sitting in his car in front of his home three weeks ago. These days, many newspapers, radio shows, and television stations in Mexico won’t cover drug issues at all, for fear of deadly reprisals.

The violence associated with the cartel wars is spreading north of the Rio Grande in different ways than in the past. In April 2007, Gabriel Cardona, then 18, pleaded guilty to five murders carried out in or near Laredo at the behest of then-Gulf Cartel leader Miguel Trevino Morales. Cardona was part of a group of teens who acted as cartel hitmen on the US side of the border. Among Cardona’s hits was the kidnapping and murder of a former Laredo police officer. Rosario Reta, a Cardona associate, was recently convicted of a separate murder committed in Laredo in 2006.

US drug officials have suggested that Cardona and Reta were part of a group known as the Zetitas, or Little Zetas, recruited from street gangs in Laredo and trained by the paramilitary group that calls itself the Zetas. Cardona and Reta both allegedly began working for the Gulf Cartel by delivering weapons from Laredo to Nuevo Laredo, and were subsequently singled out for hitman training.

Javier Sambrano, the El Paso police department’s public information officer, said there is no such spillover happening in his city. “There has been no spillover [of the violence from JuĂĄrez] at all,” he said. “Those individuals on the Mexican side of the border committing those atrocities have no incentive to come here and commit those sorts of crimes.” It’s true that some murders in El Paso are linked to drugs, he said, “but we have solved them, which is further discouragement to people imagining they could come here and commit them” without getting caught.

That might be good public relations for El Paso, but it’s also nonsense, said one border-area journalist who asked not to be named—and who pointed out that members of an El Paso gang called the Aztecas have recently been found operating in JuĂĄrez as hitmen for the JuĂĄrez cartel. The gang started in an El Paso prison, with the idea of protecting prisoners of Mexican descent, but has been suspected of cartel ties for years, particularly in connection with drug distribution and weapons smuggling. “We’ve long suspected the tie between the cartel and the Aztecas from El Paso,” the reporter said, “but now that some of them are on trial, we’ve got it in testimony being given in federal court.”

In November, El Paso children on their way to school found the body of a man tied to window bars, his feet dangling just above the ground. He was wearing a pig’s mask. A sign above his head said: “This is going to happen to all Aztecas.”

Another sign of the spillover, the reporter said, are the number of people who’ve been shot in Mexico but brought to the US for treatment: “The Thomason Hospital here in El Paso has received more than 30 people this year who have been shot in JuĂĄrez. They get shot there and brought here, because if those people were targets, the gangs will go into the hospitals [in Mexico] and make sure they’re dead.”

The rumor is that federal agents are allowing Mexican cartel victims to be brought to El Paso for treatment “because they want a chance to interview them,” the reporter said. “On the other hand, a lot of people here in El Paso are worried that they might be followed into Thomason Hospital and killed.”

Two days after the reporter spoke to Fort Worth Weekly, the El Paso Times carried a story about a wounded man whose attackers followed him into a JuĂĄrez hospital and finished the job.

If the paramilitaries in the Mexican drug trade are recruiting killers from US streets, one could say they are only returning a favor.

During the 1980s and early 1990s, the United States began to train Special Forces for the Mexican government, called the Zetas, to enable them to better confront the emerging Mexican drug cartels. Earlier, in the mid-70s, the US also undertook to train another Special Forces group, in Guatemala, which then was in the midst of a civil war. That group specialized in guerilla warfare and counter-insurgency tactics.

In both cases, the American military training backfired. Many of the specially trained units defected from the Mexican and Guatemalan armies and went to work for the cartels. Then they became the cartels.

“A lot of Zetas broke away from the Mexican military in the 1990s,” said Castillo, the former DEA agent. The Zetas, he said, “began working as enforcers for the Gulf Cartel, which controlled Mexico’s Caribbean coast and several inland border cities.” The Zetas were ruthless and fearless. “They were some of the best-trained Special Forces anywhere,” Castillo said. “Well now it’s gotten to the point where they pretty much control the cartels.”

When stories first broke about the Zetas working for the cartels, the Mexican government denied it. But in recent reports, Castillo said, Mexican officials have finally admitted that there is a “paramilitary arm in the Mexican military,” meaning that some members of the military are also active paramilitaries with the cartels.

And, he said, “don’t forget the Kaibiles”—although there are probably a lot of people in the US government and military who would like to. The Kaibiles, named after a Guatemalan indigenous leader who fought the Conquistadors, were the Special Forces unit the US trained in Guatemala, many of whose members also went over to the drug lords, for much higher wages.

“The Kaibiles started working for the cartels, but they are now working for the Zetas, and they’re the ones responsible for the beheadings,” Castillo said. “That’s their trademark.” In one case last year, several human heads were tossed onto a dance floor in MichoacĂĄn. In October of this year, four heads in an ice chest were sent to the JuĂĄrez police headquarters.

The Zetas, Castillo said, have now realigned with corrupt elements in the Mexican army, a marriage that is spreading the infection in the military, particularly among the 32,000 troops CalderĂłn sent into nine Mexican states specifically to stamp out the cartels. “And so the military is sort of running the whole show down there,” said Castillo. “You’ve got thousands of military put all over the country, a lot of them corrupt, a lot of them also working as paramilitaries. They’re operating under the guise of stamping out drugs when they’re actually moving [the drugs] and stamping out rivals for the drug trade.”

CalderĂłn’s strategy of fanning out the army to try to regain some semblance of control from the cartels in those states has worked about as well as the US Special Forces training. Rather than restoring government control, in many areas the military has wreaked havoc with the citizenry, prompting calls for CalderĂłn to remove them.

Bill Weinberg, an award-winning journalist who specializes in Latin American and drug-war issues, said the situation is incomprehensible for many Americans. “You’ve got to understand that the military and the cartels overlap, so the military isn’t necessarily worse than the cartels; they are the cartels,” he said. “Then you have the police, who in some places, like Reynosa—across the border from McAllen—have been completely co-opted.”

Mexico’s National Human Rights Commission issued a report in July about four particularly grave cases of recent military abuse in different Mexican states, Weinberg said. “All of those cases involved torture of civilians, some of it very brutal, [including] electric shock and rape… In MichoacĂĄn, soldiers at a roadblock shot up a car and killed some kids.”

The human rights commission called on the Mexican defense secretary to punish those who violate human rights. “Up until now, those recommendations have been ignored,” Weinberg said, “and so the abuses keep occurring.”

Human rights groups fear that another set of new players in the drug war won’t help that situation— companies like Blackwater and DynCorp that carry their own bloody baggage.

Blackwater USA, the private security firm already accused of atrocities in Iraq, is negotiating with CalderĂłn’s government to train specialized soldiers in the Mexican army and to also act as a private security force.

“But you know they’re going to be all over everything, doing a little busting of people, doing a little dirty work for people … It’s what they do,” Castillo said.

Made up primarily of former members of the US Special Forces, Blackwater, like DynCorp and several other private companies, has been used extensively by the US Department of Defense in Iraq, Afghanistan, and elsewhere to provide security and other services. Blackwater came under intense media scrutiny in September 2007 when several of its contractors opened fire on unarmed civilians in Iraq, killing 17 people. Nonetheless, with former CIA higher-ups in its ranks, the company continues to get lucrative federal contracts.

Blackwater will soon have a large presence on the US-Mexican border: An 824-acre training complex in California, just 45 miles from Mexico, should be open soon. The company already has a contract with the US government to train Border Patrol agents, and there is speculation that once their presence is established there, they will vie for contracts to work border security alongside US government agents.

“Plan Mexico”—formally the Merida Initiative—recently signed by President Bush, may ratchet up the use of mercenaries. It promises an immediate $400 million to CalderĂłn to help fight drugs in Mexico, with an additional $1.1 billion in the next two years.

The plan includes an unspecified amount of money for contracts to US private security companies. A year ago, the Army Times reported that the Defense Department had just given Blackwater a sizable chunk of a grant that, over time, could total $15 billion, “to deploy surveillance techniques, train foreign security forces, and provide logistical and operational support” for drug war initiatives.

That could mean the US government is already funding a mercenary force of former US Special Forces soldiers operating on both sides of the border but not accountable to anyone in Mexico. Blackwater already employs 1,200 Chileans, former members of ex-dictator Augusto Pinochet’s military, some of whom are thought to be working in Mexico.

“You have to be very wary of mercenary soldiers in a democracy, which is more fragile than people think,” Rep. Bob Filner told Salon.com last year. “You don’t want armies around who will sell out to the highest bidder.”

At least one other US-based security firm is already operating in Mexico. In July, the day after Bush signed Plan Mexico, two different videos of a torture training session for police in the city of León, Guanajuato, were released by the local paper El Heraldo de León. The tapes showed graphic images of torture techniques (as practiced on police volunteers)—including images of one volunteer having his head forced into a pit of rats and feces, and another being dragged through his own vomit after he was beaten.

Kristin Bricker, an investigative reporter with NarcoNews.com, subsequently uncovered evidence that the trainers in the video were from Risks Incorporated, a Miami-based private security outfit that specializes in, among other things, teaching psychological torture techniques.

“There is no question that the US is involved in every aspect of the drug war in Mexico,” Castillo said. And if you don’t believe the author and former DEA undercover agent, how about the departing US ambassador to Mexico? Tony Garza is now saying that they United States must accept responsibility for the gun trade and for providing the market for Mexican drugs. The Dallas Morning News reported last week that Garza said in a recent speech that Mexico “would not be the center of cartel activity or be experiencing this level of violence, were the United States not the largest consumer of illegal drugs and the main supplier of weapons to the cartels.”

But Castillo has an even darker vision of what sustains the drug war. In essence, he said, the economy of Mexico is addicted to drug money, and no one, not even CalderĂłn, would completely shut off that spigot, even if it were possible. Castillo’s judgment of the United States is similar: The war on drugs provides a huge boost to the economy, via private prisons, the gun industry, and the federal forces arrayed against it.

CalderĂłn “absolutely would not” stop the drug trade if he could, Castillo said. “Mexico’s economy depends too heavily on drug money.”

On a beautiful fall afternoon in Nuevo Laredo, sun sparkles off the pastel-colored walls. The streets are quiet. At an open-air taqueria not far from a border crossing, the staff is smoking meats and vegetables on flat grills, getting ready for a busy night.

The proprietor, Maria (she asked that her last name not be used), said she was lucky: The taqueria came through the violence of a year or two ago unscathed. But she worried when members of one cartel or the other would occasionally come in to eat, for fear that her staff and other customers could get caught in the crossfire.

“It was not good. Gunfights. Dead people. Crying mothers. It was having a war in your own house,” she said. “Wars are cleaner when they happen somewhere else.”

A customer at a nearby grocery store was equally glad the shooting war had quieted down on his stretch of the border for the moment.

“It’s much better that they stopped the gun battles,” he said. “Now everybody can get back to making money with the drugs instead of dying over them.”

—-

This story first appeared Dec. 3 in the Fort Worth Weekly.

RESOURCES

“Blackwater’s run for the border,” by Eilene Zimmerman
Salon, Oct. 23, 2007

See also:

THE U.S. THREAT TO MEXICAN NATIONAL SECURITY
Narco Gangs Armed by Gringos—Despite Border Militarization
by Bill Weinberg, NACLA Report on the Americas
World War 4 Report, April 2008

From our Daily Report:

Mexico: Zetas planning attacks on US Border Patrol?
World War 4 Report, Nov. 6, 2008

Mexico: gunmen kill reporter, kidnap farmworkers
World War 4 Report, Nov. 15, 2008

Mexico: narco-Satanism in Ciudad JuĂĄrez?
World War 4 Report, Nov. 10, 2008

National Human Rights Commission blasts Mexican army
World War 4 Report, July 14, 2008

US Senate approves “Plan Mexico”; narcos keep up pressure
World War 4 Report, June 28, 2008

“Wild West bloodbath” in Ciudad JuĂĄrez
World War 4 Report, April 17, 2008

Mexico: presidential guard, beauty queen busted in narco wars
World War 4 Report, Dec. 29, 2008

Mexico: US-UK firm teaches torture?
World War 4 Report, July 14, 2008

——————-

Reprinted by World War 4 Report, Jan. 1, 2009
Reprinting permissible with attribution

Continue ReadingBORDER UNDER SIEGE 

CZECH REPUBLIC FROM VELVET TO VIOLENT

Neo-Nazis Prepare Pogroms Ten Years After Revolution

by Gwendolyn Albert, World War 4 Report

January 2009 marks a handover of power not only in the United States, but also in the European Union. As part of the rotating presidency of the Council of the EU, the Czech Republic will step up for its first-ever shot at managing the agenda for the 27 EU member states. Instead of French President Nicolas Sarkozy representing the union on the international stage, the EU will be represented by Czech Prime Minister Mirek Topolanek of the right-wing Civic Democrats. Topolanek will not be alone, as many predict Czech President Vaclav Klaus will do his best to elbow his way into the limelight as well, despite the fact that his position is essentially that of a figurehead. Long an admirer of Margaret Thatcher, Klaus is infamous for his opposition to the Lisbon Treaty (a document aiming for greater political union between the EU Member States—and more powers for Brussels—which the Topolanek cabinet supports) as well as for his belief that global warming and climate change are utter nonsense.

The transition from Sarkozy to Topolanek is nowhere near as dramatic as the psychological shift underway in the US, where the country has elected its first-ever non-white president in an election largely seen as a referendum on the past eight years of the Bush administration’s neoconservative corruption. However, within the Czech Republic itself, a definite shift has occurred recently on the extreme right, where more political parties espousing blatantly racist views are receiving more support than ever before—and this on the eve of the EU presidency, an event which will expose the country to more international scrutiny than it has seen since the days of the “Velvet Revolution” in 1989. The international image of the country, which is still largely identified with the gentle, intellectual demeanor of its first post-communist president, the dissident playwright Vaclav Havel, is about to be revised, and the face it is now showing the world is about as far from a philosopher-proponent of nonviolence as it could be. It is also, arguably, a much more accurate representation.

This past fall, the Czech authorities were caught completely off guard by the activities of a small extreme-right political party, active since 2003 and calling itself the Workers’ Party (Delnicka Strana—DS). In recent Senate elections, the party garnered 29 000 votes—not enough to bring them anywhere near parliament, but the most support they had ever received and a number they are fond of quoting. The DS announced that it had received a “plea for help” from what it called the “decent citizens” of Litvinov, a town in North Bohemia not far from the German border, and that the party would therefore be “patrolling” the Janov housing estate in the town due to complaints about the behavior of “inadaptable citizens” there.

Ever since the communist era, the term “inadaptable” has served as a circumlocution for referring to members of the Roma minority (also known as “Gypsies”) without seeming to single them out by ethnicity. As a result of the town privatizing much of its housing stock, developers had attracted low-income residents, many of them Roma, to a particular section of the Janov housing estate, causing property values to fall and social tensions to rise. The DS saw a perfect opportunity to exploit local discontent and profile themselves as the solution ahead of the upcoming elections to the European Parliament next June.

Anti-Roma sentiment in Central Europe has been deep-rooted for centuries—think of it as the “ur-prejudice” in this part of the world—and while it was not clear what the results of the DS vigilante activity would be, the announcement of the “patrols” received a high degree of support from many self-described “decent” citizens. Even now it is not clear how many of these “decent” folk genuinely understood the full extent of what they were supporting. However, even if the neo-Nazi nature of the DS were not completely clear (to any educated reader) from the material on the party’s website, their exploitation of the terminology of “adaptability” should be enough to give any student of the Holocaust pause. Unfortunately, since this term was widespread under communism (which contributed its own particular set of horrors to the history of Czech-Roma relations), this language is still considered part of the “normal” vocabulary for discussing Roma-related matters in the Czech Republic.

After announcing their intention to “patrol” on the web, the DS members came to the housing estate dressed in uniforms of their own design. The event marked a turning point in Czech-Roma relations. The usual response of Roma communities throughout the Czech Republic, when faced with organized right-wing aggression of the sort that has resulted in murder and violence against them and other minorities ever since 1989, is to disappear indoors, if not to flee the country altogether. In Litvinov, however, the local Roma turned out with makeshift weapons and made it very clear that they would not submit to being “patrolled.” Unfortunately, this moment of self-defense produced images of the Roma that racists will be mining for their “scare value” for some time to come.

Undaunted, the DS returned to Litvinov several weeks later. They convened an unannounced “demonstration” on the town square, which was also attended by members of two other neo-Nazi skinhead groups (the Autonomous Nationalists and National Resistance). The “demonstration” then turned into a march on Janov that was clearly a prelude to a pogrom, if the rhetoric of the speakers and their obvious preparations for violence were anything to go by. When the mayor attempted to disperse the gathering, on the grounds that it had not been properly announced to the authorities beforehand, the crowd turned on him, and he would have been injured but for the police presence; one officer and several bystanders were injured as a result of the violence. At the housing estate itself, observers later reported that it was only through sheer luck that the police managed to avert a major clash between the Roma community, ready to defend itself should the police fail them, and the neo-Nazi thugs.

As a result of this event, civic groups around the country began circulating petitions calling for the DS to be banned. Defamation of any group is a crime in the Czech Republic, and the party’s activities were clearly in violation of the law. Police observers were sharply critical of how ill-prepared the police had been to respond to the threat which a gathering of this sort obviously posed to anyone familiar with the neo-Nazi scene. Roma community groups from Janov traveled to Prague to plead with Interior Ministry officials and the Human Rights and Minorities Ministry to do something about the unrelenting attack on their community. Already the DS had properly registered its next demonstration there for Nov. 17, a state holiday honoring what is known to the rest of the world as the “Velvet Revolution,” the transition to democracy in 1989.

By Nov. 17, the authorities seem to have gotten the message that the DS and their hangers-on are not some sort of glorified Dungeons and Dragons group, but a serious organization completely committed to harassing the “inadaptable.” Since the town authorities refused to exercise their prerogative to ban the gathering, the state police were out in force for the “demonstration”—at least a thousand riot squad officers were on the ground, backed up by a helicopter. The marchers were cheered on by local non-Roma residents, who yelled “Let them through!” at the police and hurled racist epithets at the Roma who had gathered for their own demonstration in their part of the estate. At the first opportunity—when the marchers attempted to deviate from their originally announced route and to disperse into the Janov housing estate—the police cracked down.

This marked yet another turning point; instead of standing down, as they usually do when confronted by a superior force, the neo-Nazis seemed eager for the clash and engaged the police long into the evening—ultimately injuring seven officers, including ones on horseback. Thus it was that on the 19th anniversary of the peaceful transition to democracy, Janov was like a war zone, covered with tear gas and echoing with the crackle of the firecracker-like devices used by the police for crowd control. It was the largest police operation in the country since the 2000 demonstrations against the IMF and World Bank in Prague.

Subsequent reporting and video footage taken from the police helicopter showed that at least one segment of the neo-Nazis were extremely organized. Not only did they simultaneously attack different points on the estate (where they were routed by groups of police strategically placed in between the buildings), but police also later confirmed that the neo-Nazis themselves had access to materiel which could only be purchased by members of the armed forces. In other words, people with fairly high-level military and/or police training were involved in the assault on the side of the neo-Nazis.

The Roma of Janov were unarmed this time. In the aftermath of the ordeal their leaders officially thanked the police for protecting them. The town of Litvinov was flooded with announcements by various groups—from a Jewish group to local residents to other neo-Nazi organizations—of various demonstrations there in the days to come. But this time the town hall decided to ban almost all of the other events in the interests of preserving the peace.

The DS is not the only party of its kind in the Czech Republic. However, it is causing trouble as no other extremist group has here for some time. The Topolanek government has asked the Supreme Administrative Court to review whether it should be banned in light of these events, but other voices critical of its methods were and are few and far between. Their fellow racists seem to be emboldened now, especially with regard to confronting the police. In the aftermath of Litvinov, even as racist attacks on the Roma occurred across the country, the police themselves were singled out for attack in Brno, the Czech Republic’s second largest city. A group of 70 armed, drunken and masked neo-Nazis demolished two parked city police cars and the entrance to a hotel there; they also attacked officers in a vehicle responding to the incident. Nine of the rioters were arrested.

The neo-Nazi movement seems to be energetically embracing its “outlaw” profile, and there is relatively little public condemnation of it. On the contrary, recent reporting in the Czech press has revealed that skinheads serving time for violent offenses in Czech prisons are well-served by organizations that send them racist literature and pay their legal fees. Ironically, as the content of their websites is illegal in the Czech Republic, these groups use US-based web servers, an issue the Czech Helsinki Committee has recently raised with US authorities.

—-

See also:

ROMA DEMAND REMEMBRANCE
Czech Republic Intransigent on Honoring the Forgotten Holocaust
by Gwendolyn Albert, World War 4 Report
World War 4 Report, March 2008

From our Daily Report:

Czech security forces participated in anti-Roma pogrom?
World War 4 Report, Nov. 24, 2005

——————-

Special to World War 4 Report, Jan. 1, 2009
Reprinting permissible with attribution

Continue ReadingCZECH REPUBLIC FROM VELVET TO VIOLENT 

OPUS DEI: THE VATICAN-PENTAGON CONNECTION

by Frank Morales, The Shadow

While visiting New York City last spring, Pope Benedict surely visited the offices of his “personal prelature”—the Opus Dei organization. Most certainly, he marveled at their spanking new 17-story national headquarters, an imposing red brick building on 34th and Lexington, which the highly secretive Catholic lay organization purchased for a cool $69 million back during all the hoopla over the Da Vinci Code, a timely public relations boon to their efforts. Opening for business during the fateful year of 2001, at the dawn of the new crusades against the oil-rich Islamic infidels of Eurasia, Opus Dei and its elite backers—most prominently Pope Benedict—have since continued to manifest a singular Holy Coincidence of agendas with Bush administration foreign policy…particularly the kind that does not always make the headlines.

Opus Dei, Decoded
Opus Dei is arguably the most powerful and virulent exponent of the fundamentalist religious fervor sweeping the globe; only this time it’s Catholic fundamentalists we’re talking about, hard-liners who trace their origins back to the Holy Inquisition and the bloody Crusades. These guys make Jerry Falwell and his Protestant come-latelies look like Little Leaguers. Now mind you, they have a somewhat different opinion of themselves. According to their website, “Opus Dei is a Catholic institution and adheres to Catholic doctrine, which clearly condemns immoral behavior, including murder, lying, stealing, and generally injuring people.”

It was in 1928 Spain that Catholic priest José María Escriva de Balaguer founded the Opus Dei organization. As spiritual advisor to General Francisco Franco, Balaguer chose and trained the elite members of the dictatorship the general established after the Spanish Civil War in 1939, placing him and his Opus Dei at the center of authoritarian power.

Later, Balaguer was sent to the Vatican, and from there he worked to spread the influence of Opus Dei—especially to Latin America, where it sought to carry out its ongoing campaign to tame those Liberation Theology priests, condemned for appreciating Marxist analyses and opposing right-wing military dictatorships.

Balaguer, who was fast-tracked into sainthood in 2002, concocted a series of axioms for a radically right-wing, anti-women lay movement which has over the years aligned itself with some of the most brutal dictatorships in modern times, including that of Augusto Pinochet’s Chile in the 1970s. Most recently, it supported the 2002 aborted coup in Venezuela. While exceedingly sophisticated in its political and business practice, Opus Dei is profoundly anti-modern in its ideology. Half of Franco’s cabinet, back in the dark ages of World War II, were members of Opus Dei.

These were also formative years for Josef Ratzinger—the future Pope Benedict. Though he was never a member of the Nazi party, as a seminarian Ratzinger, was briefly enrolled in the Hitler Youth in the early 1940s. In 1943 he was conscripted into an anti-aircraft unit guarding a BMW plant outside Munich. Later, he was sent to Austria’s border with Hungary to erect tank traps. After being shipped back to Bavaria, he apparently deserted. When the war ended, he was an American prisoner of war.

In 1982, the Opus Dei organization became a personal prelature of the Vatican—that is, a separate church entity beholden only to the Pope. From that moment on, Opus Dei members escaped the authority of the bishops in the territories in which they reside. Consequently, they function as a sort of instrument of Vatican social control—bringing to mind another Vatican body that ruled with
religious terror in the Spain of the 16th Century before imposing and exporting its fanaticism to the universal Church: the Inquisition.

Although Opus Dei is a part of the church’s structure, it’s not like traditional dioceses, which are defined geographically, but instead by its “worldwide purpose”— to dominate the church and selected governments while promoting extremist policies. With roughly 88,000 members worldwide, including about 2,000 priests, the organization spans some 61 countries, including roughly 3,000 members in the United States.

Estimated to hold assets of about $3 billion, the free-floating personal prelature, which purports to do “the work of God” (“Opus Dei” translated), is beholden to no one but the Pope, whose personal spokesman, Cardinal Joaquin Navarro-Valls, is also an Opus Dei member. Appointing its own priests and bishops to rule over the lay membership, it runs 15 universities, seven hospitals, 11 business schools and a great number of primary, secondary and technical schools, functioning as an underground force for political reaction within the Catholic church.

The organization’s membership includes elite elements who wield influence at the highest levels of government, the Vatican, and the Vatican Bank. The individuals that Opus Dei chooses to recruit for membership are the cream of American, European and Latin American society. They include owners of big multinational companies, the press and finance institutions, as well as figures at the highest levels of the world’s most powerful governments. US Supreme Court justices Antonin Scalia and Samuel A. Scalia have rumored links to Opus Dei, as do Sen. Sam Brownback and former Rep. Rick Santorum.

One current Opus Dei member worth noting is Joseph E Schmitz. A former Pentagon inspector general, he became chief of operations for Blackwater Worldwide, the private security firm, back in 2005. While at the Pentagon, he’d been tasked with the job of overseeing all war contracts in Iraq and Afghanistan. His connection to war profiteers became well known. At least $2 trillion went “missing” from the Pentagon during his watch. Shortly after Schmitz exonerated his friends in the war industry, he announced that he was going to work for Blackwater, where he is today.

In a 2004 speech Schmitz said, “No American today should ever doubt that we hold ourselves accountable to the rule of law under God. Here lies the fundamental difference between us and the terrorists.” Aside from his membership in Opus Dei, Schmitz is also a member of the Sovereign Military Order of Malta, a Christian militia formed in the 11th century, before the first Crusades, with the mission of defending territories that the Crusaders had conquered from the Muslims. The Blackwater leadership apparently think they are following in that tradition.

To target our own nation’s brightest students, Opus Dei runs off-campus housing and centers around Harvard University in Cambridge, Mass.; Brown University in Providence, RI; Princeton University in New Jersey; and numerous other elite universities and business schools. Situated out front of these institutions, along with military recruiters, they troll for the young and impressionable.

As mentioned, Opus Dei has thus far signed up about 3,000 US members and are on the way to fulfilling their goal, which their founder articulated some years back when he stated, “What is the end? To promote in the world the greatest possible number of souls dedicated to God in Opus Dei.” In her book, People of God, Penny Lernoux notes that Opus Dei “is an efficient machine run to achieve world power.” Their reactionary politics and globalist pretensions just so happen, in a match surely not made in heaven, to coincide with the Bush agenda for world domination.

Vatican meets Pentagon Inc.
Evidence of the hand of Opus Dei within the machinations of US imperialism becomes manifest when one examines the manner by which the Catholic organization secures it financing. According to Charity Navigator, a philanthropic evaluation service, “The Woodlawn Foundation supports activities conducted by the Roman Catholic Prelature Opus Dei [whose] services extend to the broad general public.” Located in New Rochelle, the Woodlawn Foundation is the primary conduit of financing for the Opus Dei organization. According to Guidestar research, Woodlawn provides “grants to over 40 Opus Dei-affiliated foundations,” while maintaining assets of about $15 million. John B. Haley, an Opus Dei member, is the president and director of the foundation.

According to Hoover On-Line, a business database and information resource, the Woodlawn Foundation, as of June 2001, controlled some 10,000 shares, with estimated proceeds of $415,000, of the AES Corporation, or the Advanced Energy Systems Corporation. Who are they? Well, only the largest producer of energy in the world, with nearly $12 billion in revenue!

Again, according to Hoover: “The right place at the right time—is it kismet? No, it’s AES, one of the world’s leading independent power producers. The company has interests in 120 generation facilities in the Americas, Europe, Asia, Africa, and the Caribbean that give it a combined net generating capacity of more than 44 gigawatts of power (primarily fossil-fueled); it also has power plants under construction. AES sells electricity to utilities and other energy marketers through wholesale contracts or on the spot market. AES also sells power directly to customers worldwide through its interests in distribution utilities, mainly in Latin America.”

A Nov. 17, 2002 Associated Press piece entitled “Evidence of Price Gouging During California Energy Crisis,” reported that the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), which was looking into corruption in the California energy industry, focused on “discussions between employees of Williams and AES Corporation about prolonging an outage at a power plant to take advantage of higher prices the state was paying at the height of the crisis.” Corp Watch, meanwhile, pointed out in August 2003 that “Virginia-based AES, the world’s largest independent energy producer, is currently under investigation by the Ugandan Inspectorate of Government and the US Justice Department for alleged bribery, in violation of the US Foreign Corrupt Practices Act.”

Dennis Bakke, a co-founder of AES in the mid-80s, is a devotee of Opus Dei and their way of doing business. In 2005, Bakke, CEO of AES, preached a sermon in Falls Church, Va., during which he intoned that, “labor and opus are two Latin words for work. Labor…conjures up work as hard, something I have to do but would rather not… Our Catholic friends use the word opus in their Opus Dei, or “God’s work,” that celebrates our calling to secular work in a profoundly Biblical way. On Monday when we go back to God’s work, Opus Dei, secular work to which we are called, let us do it with passion, with joy, and with love, befitting God’s call on our life. It is our primary mission, done for the glory of God. Do it and enter into the Master’s joy.”

The former master chairman of AES, recently deceased, was Richard G. Darman, former director of the US Office of Management and Budget; former deputy secretary of the US Treasury; former Assistant US Secretary of Commerce; and member of the Council on Foreign Relations and the Trilateral Commission. A director of AES from July 2002; he was elected chairman of the board on May 1, 2003. Strikingly, in addition to his service as chairman of AES, he was a partner and managing director of the Carlyle Group, joining the company in February 1993, after serving in the cabinet of the first Bush administration.

The Carlyle Group is, according to the Washington Post, “the largest private equity manager in the world,” which “buys and sells whole companies the way some firms trade shares of stock.” It specializes in defense contractors. Other Carlyle Group members include Secretary of State James Baker, former UK Prime Minister John Major, and former president and CIA chief George Bush Sr. In short, Carlyle is the high-flying financier of the military-industrial complex—a complex blessed, apparently, by the likes of Opus Dei.

Holy Counterinsurgency
Over the years, Pope Benedict has served Balaguer’s vision and the Opus Dei brand of fascist social policy with zeal. According to Thierry Meyssan’s article, “Opus Dei Sets Out to Conquer the World,” as president of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith—formerly the Office of the Holy Inquisition—the former Josef Ratzinger oversaw, during the Reagan era, the setting up of a “surveillance center in BogotĂĄ, Colombia, with a powerful computer of strategic capacity that was connected to the Vatican.” Its purpose: to record all data and political activities of designated leftist Latin American priests and religious people dedicated to the vision and practice of Liberation Theology, a movement that sees justice for the poor as synonymous with God’s will.

As a consequence of the intelligence data that was gathered, and its dissemination to US trained so-called counterinsurgency experts, the death squads were able to identify and assassinate many people—as was the case in El Salvador, with the murder of scores of religious workers, including the outspoken “voice of the poor,” Archbishop Oscar Romero. According to a 2000 article by Marianne Johnson entitled, “The Hand of Opus Dei in El Salvador,” “under Archbishop SĂĄenz Lacalle, an Opus Dei man,” who in 1997 accepted the title of brigadier general from the US-backed Salvadoran military, “the strategy has not been to reform liberation theology, but to undo and remove all traces of it.” The ground for this strategy had been prepared by Cardinal Ratzinger, who in 1996
made the nakedly fraudulent claim, during a Mexico City press conference, that liberation theology is an “ideological stream which is the source of many violent actions on the Continent.”

The Coup in Venezuela
Interestingly, the Popes’ April 2008 visit to New York just about coincided with the sixth anniversary of the abortive US-backed Venezuelan coup attempt, which was in no small measure aided and abetted by Opus Dei. According to the Los Angeles Times of April 22, 2002, following the April 11 coup attempt, newly appointed president Pedro Carmona “had named a government that included several members of the ultraconservative Roman Catholic group Opus Dei.” The Guardian reported that same day that after “the military appeared in full uniform on national television to announce that [legitimate President Hugo] ChĂĄvez had resigned, Carmona was installed and almost immediately issued a decree dissolving the national assembly and the supreme court, and announced a far-right government including, as foreign minister, JosĂ© RodrĂ­guez Iturbe, a member of the right-wing Catholic organization Opus Dei.”

And though the coup was relatively bloodless, the London Observer (April 21, 2002) reported that “more than 100 people died in events before and after the coup.” It’s probable that it was worse than that. According to eye-witness reports, the newly installed Opus Dei cabinet under Carmona went about some frenzied house-cleaning. Luis Duno Gottberg, reporting from Venezuela, told Left Turn magazine that immediately following the coup, “a cabinet composed of high bourgeois elements and members of Opus Dei, a conspiratorial right wing Catholic organization, suspended the National Assembly and began the removal of various democratically elected state governors.”

According to Gottberg, “brutal repression was not long in coming. There were house-to-house searches, lynchings and executions of community leaders and ChĂĄvez partisans that took place with the utmost impunity. The television stations and the national press supported the new de facto government and silenced dissident voices.” Well, as we know, what came to pass was that a few days later—by April 13—ChĂĄvez was back in the driver’s seat, heading a victorious counter-coup, sparked by an uprising of the poor and workers of Venezuela.

Since that time, further information has surfaced pointing to the fact that elements of the Bush regime were also involved in the attempted removal of Hugo ChĂĄvez from power in Venezuela. The Observer pointed this out in a bold headline, “Venezuela Coup Linked to Bush Team,” making reference to certain American “specialists in the ‘dirty wars‚ of the eighties,” who “encouraged the plotters who tried to topple President ChĂĄvez.” These officials were named: Otto Reich, John Negroponte (our former intelligence czar, currently envoy to Iraq), and Elliot Abrams—all veterans of the Reagan administration’s illegal and bloody wars throughout Central America.

According to an Associated Press (Dec. 3, 2004) report entitled “Documents Show CIA Knew of Venezuelan Coup,” the CIA was on board nearly a week before the doomed putsch. According to the AP story, “an April 6 senior intelligence executive brief—just five days before a coup that briefly ousted ChĂĄvez—said ‘disgruntled senior officers and a group of radical junior officers are stepping up efforts to organize a coup against President ChĂĄvez, possibly as early as this month.” This “executive brief,” along with others, are available at www.venezuelafoia.info, albeit in a somewhat censored form.

In addition, as reported in the UK Guardian (April 29, 2002), the “American Navy Helped Venezuelan Coup,” Venezuelan congressman Roger RondĂłn “claimed that the [US] military officers, whom he named as [James] Rogers and [Ronald] MacCammon, had been at the Fuerte Tiuna military headquarters with the coup leaders during the night of April 11-12. The congressman went on, accusing the US ambassador to Venezuela, Charles Shapiro, and two US embassy military attachĂ©s of involvement in the coup. RondĂłn said, “we saw [Shapiro] leaving Miraflores palace [the presidential residence], all smiles and embraces, with the dictator Pedro Carmona Estanga… [His] satisfaction was obvious. Shapiro’s participation in the coup d’Ă©tat in Venezuela is evident.”

The Bushes and the Pope
Finally, according to the Israeli journalist Zvi Ba’rel, writing in Haaretz (July 7, 2004), the “British American Security Information Council (BASIC), a Washington, DC think tank, revealed that a Carlyle consultant, Richard Burt, former US Ambassador to Germany, also heads another company, Diligence, a firm that provides private security services in Iraq.” Set up in 2003, “Diligence was founded by William Webster, a former director of the CIA and the FBI. Former senior CIA officials are now at its helm, among them Whitley Bruner, formerly head of the agency’s Baghdad station, now director of the Iraq branch of Diligence. The deputy chairman of Diligence, Joe Allbaugh, was the current President Bush’s campaign manager in 2000. Diligence is a member of the Private Security Company Association of Iraq.

According to Ba’rel, in 2004, “Diligence signed a contract with New Bridge Strategies, a firm headed by Allbaugh, to supply business information about postwar Iraq.” New Bridge Strategies provides “security services and intelligence information to private companies seeking to do business in Iraq. According to one US diplomat recently back from Iraq, these companies are a kind of private army. They have their own security personnel and their own intelligence corps. They even make agreements with heads of local tribes to supply defense and information, a major source of their income, according to the diplomat.”

New Bridge has a presence in Baghdad, Beirut, Geneva, Houston, Kuwait, and Washington, DC. According to their former website, www.newbridgestrategies.com, “the opportunities evolving in Iraq today are of such an unprecedented nature and scope that no other existing firm has the necessary skills and experience to be effective both in Washington, DC, and on the ground in Iraq.” And the opportunities involve more than contracting for “private security,” which we already know is big business. According to Douglas Jehl, writing in the New York Times (Sept. 30, 2003), in an article entitled, “Washington Insiders’ New Firm Consults on Contracts in Iraq,” “a group of businessmen linked by their close ties to President Bush, his family and his administration have set up a consulting firm to advise companies that want to do business in Iraq, including those seeking pieces of taxpayer-financed reconstruction projects.” With praise from the likes of former Iraqi golden boy Ahmed Chalabi—who stated that, “New Bridge Strategies has done a stellar job of recommending to me the best contractors for the jobs to be done”—they can’t go wrong, especially when they have the Bushes around. And they do.

According to the Financial Times of Dec. 11, 2003, in a piece entitled, “Middle East: Bush’s Brother Helped New Bridge Strategies Businessmen,” “two businessmen instrumental in setting up New Bridge Strategies, a well-connected Washington firm designed to help clients win contracts in Iraq, have previously used an association with the younger brother of President George W. Bush to seek business in the Middle East… John Howland, the company president, and Jamal Daniel, a principal, have maintained an important business relationship with Neil Bush stretching back several years.”

Ah yes, the young Neilster, an embarrassment to not one, but two presidents. According to the Washington Post (Dec. 28, 2003), in a piece entitled “The Relatively Charmed Life Of Neil Bush,” “in the late ’80s and early ’90s, Bush embarrassed his father, George HW Bush, with his shady dealings as a board member of the infamous Silverado Savings and Loan, whose collapse cost taxpayers $1 billion… Now, Bush has embarrassed his brother George W. Bush with a made-for-the-tabloids divorce that featured paternity rumors, a defamation suit and, believe it or not, allegations of voodoo.” Apparently, “during Bush’s very nasty divorce battle” when asked by his wife’s attorney whether he’d had any extramarital affairs, Bush told the story of his Asian hotel room escapades. “Mr. Bush,” said the attorney, Marshall Davis Brown, “you have to admit that it’s a pretty remarkable thing for a man just to go to a hotel room door and open it and have a woman standing there and have sex with her.” “It was very unusual,” Bush replied. Actually, it wasn’t that unusual. It happened at least three or four times during Bush’s business trips to Asia. “I don’t remember the exact number,” Neil admitted.

Neil‚s womanizing, divorcing and dabbling in voodoo, though, wasn’t sufficient to alienate one very important business co-partner—namely the future Pope Benedict XVI, Josef Ratzinger. According to New York Newsday (April 21, 2005), “Neil Bush, the president’s controversial younger brother, six years ago joined the cardinal who this week became Pope Benedict XVI as a founding board member of a little known Swiss ecumenical foundation. The charter members of the board were all well-known international religious figures, except for Bush and his close friend and business partner, Jamal Daniel, whose family has extensive holdings in the United States and Switzerland, public records show. The Foundation for Interreligious and Intercultural Research and Dialogue was founded in Geneva, Switzerland, in 1999 to promote ecumenical understanding and publish original religious texts, said a foundation official.”

In conclusion, the cozy relationship between the Woodlawn Foundation, financiers of Opus Dei, and the AES Corp/Carlyle Group signal a tangible connection between the machinations of the Vatican and the Pentagon, and US intelligence intrigues such as the coup attempt in Venezuela. This marriage, surely made in hell, is not surprising when we consider the ideological requirements of a so-called “war on terror” which trumpets an Islamic “axis of evil”—a throwback to the days of the bloody Crusades. Exposing these connections helps to undermine the deeply reactionary basis for the war-making.

—-

A different version of this story appeared in the summer 2008 edition of the lower Manhattan sporadical The Shadow.

RESOURCES

Opus Dei
http://www.opusdei.org/

Josemaria Escriva: Founder of Opus Dei
http://www.josemariaescriva.info//

VENEZUELAFOIA.info
http://www.venezuelafoia.info

“Breaking The Opus Dei Code” by Rob Boston
Americans United for Separation of Church and State, May 2006

“The Opus Dei Sets Out to Conquer the World” by Thierry Meyssan
Voltaire.net, January 1996

“The Hand of Opus Dei in El Salvador,” by Marianne Johnson
The Tablet, Nov. 18, 2000

“Bush’s Brother Helped New Bridge Strategies Businessmen”
by Stephen Fidler and Thomas Catn, Financial Times, Dec. 11, 2003 via CorpWatch

See also:

JOHN NEGROPONTE & THE DEATH-SQUAD CONNECTION
Bush Nominates Terrorist for National Intelligence Director
by Frank Morales, The Shadow
World War 4 Report, April 2005

THE DA VINCI CODE: DECODING THE HYPE
The Paradoxes of Mainstreaming Esoterica
by Mark Sanborne, World War 4 Report
World War 4 Report, June 2006

From our Daily Report:

Opus Dei in the news
World War 4 Report, April 16, 2005

Pope Benedict XVI: The empire strikes back
World War 4 Report, April 19, 2005

Benedict backs Pius XII beatification, bestirring Judeo-backlash
World War 4 Report, June 2, 2005

NYC activists get $2 million settlement in Carlyle Group case
World War 4 Report, Aug. 22, 2008

Blackwater mercs indicted in Baghdad atrocity
World War 4 Report, Dec. 9, 2008

Anti-Semitism at Gitmo?
World War 4 Report, June 2, 2005

——————-

Reprinted by World War 4 Report, Jan. 1, 2009
Reprinting permissible with attribution

Continue ReadingOPUS DEI: THE VATICAN-PENTAGON CONNECTION 

Year-end Message to Our Readers

Dear World War 4 Readers:

When we began publication in the immediate aftermath of 9-11, we pledged we would publish “until peace.” Today, we almost dare to hope we can cease publication sometime over the next four years. But this is not the time to let our guard down. We will be watching the transition to the Obama administration closely. We note with alarm that the Bush White House in its endgame has been bombing Pakistan almost weekly—to little media outcry. And while the leaders of Iran, Venezuela and Bolivia have hailed Obama’s election as a new era, the cabinet he is assembling does not seem to indicate a real break with the ultra-interventionist status quo.

So we will endeavor to continue our exacting daily news digest and commentary, as well as our monthly reprints and original journalism. Among the exclusives you’ve received from us over the past 12 months are Nava Thakuria‘s on-the-scene reports from violence-torn Northeast India, Sarkis Pogossian‘s detailed deconstruction of the Eritrea-Djibouti war, Gwendolyn Albert‘s first-hand accounts of persecution of the Roma in the supposedly “post-totalitarian” Czech Republic, Nikolas Kozloff‘s provocative analyses of Venezuela’s Bolivarian Revolution, and my own reportage on Iraq’s civil resistance. We hope to bring more coverage of such forgotten stories in the months to come.

But we’ve met some unexpected expenses this year. We forfeited our summer fund-drive because we were experiencing technical difficulties, including bugs with our mailing list, and were in the midst of switching to a new server. Now the transition is complete, and we are in the middle of a long-overdue site redesign. (Refresh the page if you don’t see the changes.) So we really need our readers’ support at this moment.

Your donations will sustain our work—and, if we are successful enough, facilitate on-the-scenes reportage from South America by yours truly in the coming months.

Those of you who gave $25 or more last year are already on the list to receive the new addition in our pamphlet series, Petro-Imperialism: the Global War on Terrorism and the Struggle for the Planet’s Oil, which is now in production, and will include an analysis of the Obama cabinet. If you didn’t give $25 last year, this is your opportunity to get it hot off the presses.

We understand that times are tough. For this reason, we’d rather meet our necessary $2,000 goal in small donations from each one our readers rather than a few fat checks from sugar daddies. We also prefer this because it meets our ethical philosophy. Just like we don’t take corporate advertising, we feel that having a broad base of small supporters keeps us honest. We don’t have endorsement blurbs from leftist celebrities like Noam Chomsky because we want to be free to criticize them too.

So please do your part and help us out today. No donation is too small. It is more important that you send what you can today than send something big. We’d really like to reach our goal by year’s end and not have to go into extra innings in 2009.

Make sure our critical voice is around to keep you informed and provoked at this critical moment in history.

Thank you, shukran and gracias,

Bill Weinberg

Editor, World War 4 Report

Send checks payable to World War 4 Report to:

World War 4 Report
121 Fifth Ave. #172
Brooklyn NY 11217

Or donate by credit card:

Click Here to Pay Learn More

Continue ReadingYear-end Message to Our Readers 

A QUANTUM OF ANTI-IMPERIALISM

James Bond Saves Evo Morales from the CIA!

by Juan Cole, Informed Comment

The reviews of director Marc Forster’s Quantum of Solace have complained about the film’s hectic pace (reminiscent of Doug Liman’s and Paul Greengrass’s Bourne thrillers), about the humorlessness of Daniel Craig’s Bond, and even about the squalid surroundings, so unlike Monaco and Prague, in which the film is set (with many scenes in Haiti and Bolivia). They have missed the most remarkable departure of all. Forster presents us with a new phenomenon in the James Bond films, a Bond at odds with the United States, who risks his career to save Evo Morales’ leftist regime in Bolivia from being overthrown by a “General Medrano”—who is helped by the CIA and a private mercenary organization called Quantum. In short, this Bond is more Michael Moore than Roger Moore.

The plot of the film was developed by producer Michael G. Wilson during the filming of Casino Royale. New York-born Wilson is from a show-business family (his father, Lewis Wilson, was the first actor to play Batman on screen, and his step-father, Albert Broccoli, was long the producer of the Bond films). But Wilson did a law degree at Stanford in the 1960s and worked for a while at a firm specializing in international law. Outrage at offenses against international law are as much at the heart of this film as the more personal vendettas of Bond and Camille (Olga Kurylenko).

Kurylenko, a Ukrainian, is the first Bond girl actually played by an actress from the former Soviet Union, and the St. Petersburg-based KPLO, a Communist group, denounced her, saying, “The Soviet Union educated you, cared for you, and brought you up for free, but no one suspected that you would commit this act of intellectual and moral betrayal.”

The KPLO then called James Bond “the killer of hundreds of Soviet people and their allies,” which suggests why they are still Communists—they have difficulty distinguishing between reality and fantasy.

The St. Petersburg Communists got the politics of the work all wrong. It is the closest thing to a progressive Bond film ever made, more Graham Greene (admittedly, Graham Greene on steroids) than Ian Fleming. Kurylenko, who grew up in a poor family headed by her mother, plays a Bolivian girl whose family was destroyed (and her mother and sister raped) by the haughty General Medrano. She is so organically a figure of the left that no distinction can be made between her private quest for vengeance on Medrano and the salvation of the pro-peasantry government of Bolivia.

The Bond films were never quite as right-wing as had been the novels. In From Russia with Love, Ian Fleming had the Soviet assassination unit, SMERSH, deploy the crazed serial killer Red Grant for its nefarious purposes. The films instead made SPECTRE, a private terrorist organization, the villain, depicting it as working against both Soviet intelligence and MI6 or British international intelligence. (Admittedly, the films were reflecting the steps toward détente that in some ways began with Johnson). The films were prescient about the potential for the rise of private terrorist organizations such as al-Qaeda as major players in their own right, able to confound the intelligence agencies even of powerful states.

Still, East Bloc leaders and troops are often depicted as sinister. An example is the rogue Soviet General Orloff in Octopussy, who conspires to set off an atomic bomb, made to look like an American device, to give aid to the peace groups in Western Europe in their quest to make it a nuclear-free zone, thus setting the stage for a successful Soviet take-over. (That film implicitly configures the movement against stationing nuclear warheads in Europe, spearheaded by figures such as the leftist historian E.P. Thompson, as advocates of a surrender to Moscow. That is about as far-right a position as you could take on the European peace groups of that time).

The present film takes, to say the least, a different view of popular movements of the left. Morales is not mentioned in the film, but his movement was in the headlines while Casino Royale was being shot, as he challenged the old “white” elite and was denounced by the US ambassador as an “Andean bin Laden” and his peasant followers (many of them of largely native stock) as “Taliban.” Morales’ nationalization of Bolivia’s petroleum and natural gas and his redistribution of wealth from the wealthy elite to villagers were among the policies drawing the ire of George W. Bush and his cronies.

If Morales is not mentioned, Jean-Bertrand Aristide of Haiti is. The villain, Dominic Greene (Mathieu Amalric) remarks that while Aristide was president 2001-2004, he raised the minimum wage from 25 cents an hour to a dollar an hour. It was, he said, little enough, but caused the corporations that benefited from cheap Haitian labor to mobilize to have Aristide removed. (Aristide himself maintained that US and Canadian intelligence connived with officers at the coup against him and kidnapped him, taking him to southern Africa.) The Left analysis of American imperialism in the Western hemisphere is put in the mouth, not of a worker or ideologue, but rather of the collaborator in capitalist exploitation of America’s poor neighbors. Aristide’s story is a clear parallelism for the fate the CIA and Quantum are depicted as plotting for Morales.

Note that director Marc Forster’s father was from conservative Bavaria, and that the family was forced to relocate to Davos in Switzerland because they were targeted by the radical Baader-Meinhoff gang after the father became wealthy on selling his pharmaceutical company. Forster’s previous film, The Kite-Runner, sympathized with the Afghans oppressed by the Soviet invasion and even shows one character refusing to be treated by a Russian-American physician. That is, Forster is no glib Third Worldist. He and his screenwriters are simply performing the work of the intellectual, interrogating the way the wealthy and powerful in the Bush era casually overthrew (or tried to overthrow) foreign governments in the global south to get at the resources they coveted.

In the new film, Dominic Greene is a secret member of Quantum, a mercenary coup-making consulting firm. That is, it is represented as a private contractor to which the CIA is willing to farm out coup-making instead of doing it directly. Greene’s cover is that of the head of a conservation organization that buys up land in poor countries to ensure it is preserved from despoilment. In fact, he despoils it. In a complicated and not very plausible plot twist, Greene appears to be buying up land under which he is convinced there is oil, but in fact is trying to corner the market on Bolivia’s aquifers so as to overcharge the country for its water after the military coup unseats Morales.

The CIA is convinced to back Quantum both because it wants leftist governments in Latin America overthrown and because Quantum would re-privatize Bolivia’s fossil fuels. Greene observes to CIA field officer Greg Beame that the way the Bush administration bogged the US down in the Middle East allowed several Latin American countries to move left (obviously, the referents are Venezuela, Bolivia and Brazil). Beame’s partner, Felix Leiter (Jeffrey Wright) is uncomfortable with the coup plot and the collaboration with Quantum.

Britain’s own elite comes in for a drubbing. Quantum has placed a man close to the British prime minister, who is thus duped. M tries to call off Bond, with no success, and she is pressured by her superiors to bow to the CIA plan. This plot element is a veiled reference to Blair’s knee-jerk support for Bush. The notion of a mole from a mercenary corporation close to the PM recalls the allegations that far-right billionaire Rupert Murdoch was a spectral presence at every Blair cabinet meeting.

Of course, in real life the CIA did use a private set of organizations, the Mujahidin or Muslim holy warriors (Afghans and the Arab volunteers who became al-Qaeda) to overthrow the leftist government of Afghan leaders Karmal Babrak and later Najeebullah. CIA consultants with Hollywood have been careful, in films such as Charlie Wilson’s War, to play down the element here of “blowback” (where a covert operation goes rogue and produces an attack on the sponsoring country).

But this Bond film is explicit that the United States under Bush has become the bad guy, that US intelligence is in league with rogue mercenaries and brutal, rapist-generals who plot coups against elected governments. Bond therefore has to take on the United States government. (At one point, a SWAT team from the CIA Special Activities Division tries to capture Bond in a bar in La Paz, but fails because Leiter tips Bond off to their approach. The good American in this film is the one willing to betray the US government to a more virtuous MI6 field officer).

George W. Bush is a lurking presence in this film, and appears to have almost single-handedly pushed Bond into championing the indigenous peasants against the white-tie global elite. The plotting of millionaires at a performance in Bregenz in Austria of Puccini’s opera, “Tosca,” to devastate and brutalize for their own gain the poor of Bolivia half a world away, recalls the scene in Michael Moore’s Fahrenheit 9/11 where Bush toasts his super-wealthy “base.” He was implicitly promising that their enterprises will be deregulated and their taxes lowered and the costs of those things passed on to the middle classes and workers.

The original Bond began his education at Eton (he was thrown out) and was a member of the British elite, even if he exhibited its otherwise hidden rough edges and occasionally ruthless methods (deployed against still more ruthless opponents such as Soviet assassination squads). Still, he defended the interests of his social class against challengers.

With this film, Daniel Craig’s Bond, who is from a considerably lower social class than Flemings’, has chosen to defy the white-tie set, and the Bush administration’s greed and lawlessness, and to stand up for the little people (including Camille, who symbolizes Morales’ Indios). At one point the smarmy CIA man Beame rejects any criticism from Bond of US imperialism, given Britain’s own long and sordid imperial history. But a country, and a people, always has a choice in each generation, of whether to do the right thing. They are not prisoners of their ancestors.

Craig’s Bond is an intimation of the sort of Britain that could have been, if Tony Blair had stood up to Bush and refused to be dragged into an illegal war of choice, and into other actions and policies that profoundly contradicted the principles on which the Labour Party had been founded (and you could imagine Craig’s Bond voting for Old Labour, while Flemings’ was obviously a Tory). In a way, this Bond stands in for Clare Short, who resigned as a cabinet minister from Blair’s government in 2003 over the illegitimacy of the Iraq War.

It is a sad state of affairs that Bush’s America now appears in a Bond film in rather the same light as Brezhnev’s Soviet Union used to. One can only hope that President Barack Obama can adopt the sort of policies that can get Bond back on our side.

NOTE: We take issue with the notion that the water-control angle is “not very plausible.” It is clearly a reference to the Bechtel corporation’s take-over of the water system in the Bolivian region of Cochabamba, sparking a local uprising in 2000.—World War 4 Report

—-

This piece first appeared Nov. 16 on Juan Cole’s InformedComment blog.

From our Daily Report:

Bolivia: Bechtel surrenders
World War 4 Report, Jan. 24, 2006

RESOURCES

Ukrainian Bond girl is traitor to USSR, say Russian communists
Unian News Agency, Ukraine, Oct. 27

Bolivian president censures United States
CNN, Sept. 24, 2007

Ryan Gilbey talks to Bond director Marc Forster
The Guardian, Oct. 24, 2008

Body of Lies: The CIA’s involvement in US film-making
The Guardian, Nov. 14, 2008

——————-

Reprinted by World War 4 Report, Dec. 1, 2008
Reprinting permissible with attribution

Continue ReadingA QUANTUM OF ANTI-IMPERIALISM 

NATIONALIZE THE BANKS!

by William Wharton, CounterHegemonic

Yes, “nationalize the banks!”—the thoughtless slogan advanced by any number of ultra-left groups engaged in gross public displays of political masturbation. Yet, like the old saying goes, even a broken clock is correct twice a day. So, perhaps we can have a few words on the notion of bank nationalization in this tumultuous financial crisis which threatens to extend into every area of the economy with dire consequences for working people.

The banks, instead of acting like banks and extending credit to enterprises in need of capital, they are hording cash in fear of becoming entangled with other institutions that are hiding assets which are essentially worthless on their books. Such uncertainty has led to substantial freezing-up of lending activity.

The Federal Reserve and Congress have tried a series of measures to gently coax the banking sector into once again performing its role. First, they decreased the cost of money by lowering interest rates. This did not work. Then the Fed moved to end the logjam more directly by purchasing commercial paper—short-term no-collateral loans frequently used by businesses to cover shortfalls. This has apparently not worked either. Finally, the interest rate cut was made into a global action as central banks around world implemented cuts in unison. This also appears to have had little positive effect.

The only option left is to cut to the root of the problem—that’s right, the US state will have to take direct control of the banks. Provisions of the recently passed “Bailout Bill” allow the Treasury Department to take an ownership stake inside of financial institutions that decide to accept state funding. This represents a partial nationalization of the banks and will allow state actors a voice in decisions made by previously wholly private enterprises.

Such a move should allow socialists to move beyond just the blanket rhetorical call for nationalization to a more detailed, and far more useful, conversation of just what nationalization could mean. Economist Doug Henwood, for example, has consistently advocated for the creation of a banking sector in the image of a highly-regulated state utility. Even more radical is his proposition that such a banking utility could also be de-centralized and serve as means to foster local community development and undercut other predatory lenders such as check-cashing and pay-day loan businesses.

Such a socialist vision understands banking as less of a profit-generating enterprise and more of a financial traffic cop moving funds rationally and efficiently from one productive enterprise to another. Such discussion is not held entirely on a theoretical plane. A bank such as the one roughly described above exists in the MondragĂłn cooperative sector in the Basque area of Spain. The Caja Laboral Popular (Working People’s Bank) serves to ensure the financial viability of this network of worker-run cooperatives by allocating social capital and servicing the financial needs of cooperative members. The CLP has allowed cooperative production to move beyond the boundaries which would have been placed on it by private investment banks while serving as a key reserve to allow the network to weather downturns, even severe ones, in the general capitalist-directed economy.

There are however, important differences between the CLP and the impending maneuver by the US Treasury Department. The CLP rests upon and emerged out of a democratically run socio-economic project. The MondragĂłn cooperatives produce useful items for domestic and global consumption. Conversely, US banks are part and parcel of an economic system with a logic dictated in important ways by financial capital. Instead of useful items, financial capital logic results in speculative bubbles as it desperately attempts to replicate itself in the most rapid and voluminous ways. Even if partial nationalization steadies credit markets, it will do little to change the fundamentals of the US economy. What is most needed at this moment is a change in both form and content.

The great challenge for the left in the US in the coming period is twofold. On the one hand we need to use the conceptual and economic opening provided by the failure of the banking system to agitate around concrete demands for publicly-controlled essentials—healthcare, water, education… Private enterprise has not only ruined the financial system; it has made our bodies less healthy, our environment less livable, and our minds less enlightened.

Simultaneously, we must develop imaginative and innovative schemes to re-start useful productive enterprises in the US. In doing so, we should be careful to remember the need to transform both form and content. There are no easy solutions or pre-fabricated schemes to employ here. The MondragĂłn cooperative sector, for instance, has run into serious problems regarding democratic functioning and social equity as it has spread its production globally. As a general guide though, we can say that production can best be organized and the economy can most efficiently be re-started by worker-run cooperatives which develop into interlinked beehives of productive activity.

If we leave either task—securing social necessities or re-starting production—up to the capitalists, we can be certain that far bleaker days of permanent war, debtor’s prison and general state-sponsored repression are ahead.

So, go ahead Henry Paulson, nationalize the banks. Let it be a wakeup call to democratic socialists and anarcho-syndicalists that the moment for serious politics, and serious thinking, has begun.

—-

William Wharton is editor of The Socialist, monthly magazine of the Socialist Party USA.

This piece first appeared Oct. 9 on the blog CounterHegemonic.

See also:

BEHIND THE ECONOCATACLYSM
Globalization, Oil Shock and the Iraq War
by Vilosh Vinograd
World War 4 Report, September 2008

RESOURCES

Doug Henwood’s Left Business Observer
http://www.leftbusinessobserver.com

——————-

Reprinted by World War 4 Report, Dec. 1, 2008
Reprinting permissible with attribution

Continue ReadingNATIONALIZE THE BANKS!