Annoying facts well documented
Roger Baker
rcbaker@eden.infohwy.com
Mon, 12 Nov 2001 18:18:58 -0800
--Apple-Mail-3--606547791
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset=WINDOWS-1252;
format=flowed
From: Roger Baker <rcbaker@eden.infohwy.com>
Date: Mon Nov 12, 2001 06:09:09 PM US/Pacific
To: rcbaker@mail.com
Subject: Annoying facts well documented
In Austin Tx, we now have anti-war rallies (Rally for America)=20
manufactured by the
right wing of Texas politics. Like in Austin on Wed., we have a rally=20
almost exclusively
generated by Texas Republicans and even the corporate TV media. =20
(Exhibit A)
Meanwhile, the national Democrats are in hiding; Al Gore's sentiments on=20=
the key
issues of our times are as rare as Elvis sightings as he nerviously=20
awaits his coronation
in the next election. Only Ralph Nader dares tells the truth, about=20
corporate looting using
patriotism as the justification -- with little resistance from=20
Congress -- since Congress is
already in the hip pocket of the corporate empire, with a few brave and=20=
notable exceptions.
(These principled braveries never involving Rep. Joe Lieberman. BTW, Is=20=
Sen. Feingold
the only Jewish progressive in Congress?; I assume he is Jewish, by his=20=
name). (Exhibit B)
In Italy, where the corporate empire has less control than here in the=20=
USA, demos against the
government and the war, the government recently mustered less half the=20=
numbers as
grassroots protestors who marched to object to war/corporate economic=20
control. (Exhibit C).
We, as a nation, are now in the difficult position of trying to define=20=
terrorism in such a way
as to not to include and tarnish our own conduct in Afghanistan. =20
(Exhibit D).
The bombing is creating support for the Taliban and making it harder for=20=
the genuine peace
movement to be noticed. (Exhibit E).
When a populist spokesmen -- the only link for civilized feedback of for=20=
millions of oppressed
poor is murdered, undoubtedly by a corrupt elite, it is not terrorism.=20=
Even though it ties down
the safety valve of democracy and leads to a massive revolutionary=20
upheaval and untold
suffering later. (Exhibit F).
The United States believes in democracy but only when it is warranted. =20=
An example of where it is
warranted is in Saudi Arabia where corruption by the Saudi monarchy=20
threatens their control
over their own monarchy -- and thus through their negligence, our own=20
supply of oil. (If Saudi oil
were to be cut off, oil would immediately skyrocket in price=20
worldwide.) So US democracy is good
and respectable in this case, since it would help continue our addiction=20=
short-term. (Exhibit G).
Peace, Roger
=20
************************************
Exhibit A, (by Stefan Wray):
"After looking into the Rally For America's Web site for a few hours,=20
here
are some observations.
According to The Rally For America's Steering Committee consists of the
Texas Attorney General, a Texas Land Commissioner, a Texas Railroad
Commissioner, two State Senators, seven State Representatives and the
chairman of the Texas State Board of Education, and the chairman of the
Travis County Republican Party. =
(http://www.rally4america.com/steer.html)
Of note is Texas Land Commissioner David Dewhurst. Dewhurst, from=20
Houston,
is a Republican candidate for Lt. Governor. Dewhurst is also ex CIA and
worked for the State Department in the 1970s.
(http://www.dewhurst.org/about)
More important is that Dewhurst is also the head of the new Texas' Task
Force on Homeland Security. Gov. Rick Perry appointed him to be the=20
chair of
this taskforce on Oct. 1. Perry appointed former FBI director William
Sessions of San Antonio to be the vice chair.
(http://www.governor.state.tx.us/homelandsecurity/index.htm)
But there=92s more. State Rep. Bob Turner is on the Rally For America's
Steering Committee and is also part of the Task Force on Homeland=20
Security.
Turner is a retired lieutenant colonel in the U.S. Army Reserve and a
graduate of every civil military operations, terrorism, and guerilla=20
warfare
school at Fort Bragg.
(http://www.governor.state.tx.us/homelandsecurity/members.htm#turner)
One of the two State Senators on The Rally For America's Steering=20
Committee
is Sen. Jeff Wentworth. He spent three years active duty as a United=20
States
Army counterintelligence officer. A few weeks ago announced that when =
the
Legislature convenes in January, 2003, he will file a bill that would=20
direct
school districts to set aside a minute of silence each day for prayer or
meditation.
(http://www.senate.state.tx.us/75r/senate/members/dist25/dist25.htm)
Another member of The Rally For American=92s Steering Commitee is Rep. =
Leo
Berman. According to the Young Conservatives of Texas, Berman is among=20=
the
most conservative Texas legislators. He shares that distinction with the
other Senator on the committee, Sen. Jane Nelson
*********************************************
Exhibit B http://www.commondreams.org/views01/1110-07.htm
Corporate Patriotism
by Ralph Nader
U. S. corporations aren't even subtle about it. Waving a flag and=20
carrying a big shovel,
corporate interests are scooping up government benefits and taxpayer=20
money in an
unprecedented fashion while the public is preoccupied with the September=20=
11 attacks
and the war in Afghanistan...]
***************************************************
Exhibit C
From: sbehrens <englishstudio@hyper.it>
Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2001 21:59:20 +0200
To: imc-editorial@lists.indymedia.org
Subject: [IMC-Editorial] Rome march(es)
Subject: 100,000-150,000 anti-war/anti-WTO march in Rome on N10 defies
Berlusconi government who had organised a pro-war march on the same day
100,000 (state media) - 150,000 (organisers) marchers demonstrated in
Rome on a broad series of topics from anti-WTO to anti-war in
Afghanistan. On the same day 30,000 (leftish media) - 50,000
(organisers) attended a government sponsored pro-war rally. The state
controlled media gave the state march 90% of the coverage. No change
there then. There was no trouble on either march and the cops were well
behaved and stayed hidden most of the day. One or two instances of black
block activities being started up were immediately defused by other
protestors, who explained that now was not the time or the place. The
explanations were listened to and accepted. The most damage the banks
along the route got was graffiti with "death to those who profit from
war". The fact that this was the ONLY damage meant that the media
******************************************
Exhibit D
Hypocrisy, hatred and the war on terror 'If the US attacks were an
assault on "civilisation", why shouldn't Muslims regard the Afganistan
attack as a war on Islam?'
Robert Fisk
08 November 2001
"Air campaign"? "Coalition forces"? "War on terror"? How much longer
must we go on enduring these lies? There is no "campaign" ? merely an
air bombardment of the poorest and most broken country in the world by
the world's richest and most sophisticated nation. No MiGs have taken to
the skies to do battle with the American B-52s or F-18s. The only
ammunition soaring into the air over Kabul comes from Russian
anti-aircraft guns manufactured around 1943.
Coalition? Hands up who's seen the Luftwaffe in the skies over Kandahar,
or the Italian air force or the French air force over Herat. Or even the
Pakistani air force. The Americans are bombing Afghanistan with a few
British missiles thrown in. "Coalition" indeed.
Then there's the "war on terror". When are we moving on to bomb the
Jaffna peninsula? Or Chechnya ? which we have already left in Vladimir
Putin's bloody hands? I even seem to recall a massive terrorist car bomb
that exploded in Beirut in 1985 ? targeting Sayed Hassan Nasrallah, the
spiritual inspiration to the Hezbollah, who now appears to be back on
Washington's hit list ? and which missed Nasrallah but slaughtered 85
innocent Lebanese civilians. Years later, Carl Bernstein revealed in his
book, Veil, that the CIA was behind the bomb after the Saudis agreed to
fund the operation. So will the US President George Bush be hunting down
the CIA murderers involved? The hell he will.
So why on earth are all my chums on CNN and Sky and the BBC rabbiting on
about the "air campaign", "coalition forces" and the "war on terror"? Do
they think their viewers believe this twaddle? Certainly Muslims don't.
In fact, you don't have to spend long in Pakistan to realise that the
Pakistani press gives an infinitely more truthful and balanced account
of the "war" -- publishing work by local intellectuals, historians and
opposition writers along with Taliban comments and pro-government
statements as well as syndicated Western analyses -- than The New York
Times; and all this, remember, in a military dictatorship.
You only have to spend a few weeks in the Middle East and the
subcontinent to realise why Tony Blair's interviews on al-Jazeera and
Larry King Live don't amount to a hill of beans. The Beirut daily
As-Safir ran a widely praised editorial asking why an Arab who wanted to
express the anger and humiliation of millions of other Arabs was forced
to do so from a cave in a non-Arab country. The implication, of course,
was that this -- rather than the crimes against humanity on 11 September
-- was the reason for America's determination to liquidate Osama bin
Laden.
Far more persuasive has been a series of articles in the Pakistani press
on the outrageous treatment of Muslims arrested in the United States in
the aftermath of the September atrocities. One such article should
suffice. Headlined "Hate crime victim's diary", in The News of Lahore,
it outlined the suffering of Hasnain Javed, who was arrested in Alabama
on 19 September with an expired visa. In prison in Mississippi, he was
beaten up by a prisoner who also broke his tooth. Then, long after he
had sounded the warden's alarm bell, more men beat him against a wall
with the words: "Hey bin Laden, this is the first round. There are going
to be 10 rounds like this." There are dozens of other such stories in
the Pakistani press and most of them appear to be true.
Again, Muslims have been outraged by the hypocrisy of the West's =
supposed
"respect" for Islam. We are not, so we have informed the world, going to
suspend military operations in Afghanistan during the holy fasting month
of Ramadan. After all, the 1980-88 Iran-Iraq conflict continued during
Ramadan. So have Arab-Israeli conflicts. True enough. But why, then, did
we make such a show of suspending bombing on the first Friday of the
bombardment last month out of our "respect" for Islam? Because we were
more respectful then than now? Or because -- the Taliban remaining
unbroken -- we've decided to forget about all that "respect"? "I can see
why you want to separate bin Laden from our religion," a Peshawar
journalist said to me a few days ago. "Of course you want to tell us =
that
this isn't a religious war, but Mr Robert, please, please stop telling =
us
how much you respect Islam." There is another disturbing argument I hear
in Pakistan. If, as Mr Bush claims, the attacks on New York and=20
Washington
were an assault on "civilisation", why shouldn't Muslims regard an =
attack
on Afghanistan as a war on Islam?
The Pakistanis swiftly spotted the hypocrisy of the Australians. While
itching to get into the fight against Mr bin Laden, the Australians have
sent armed troops to force destitute Afghan refugees out of their
territorial waters. The Aussies want to bomb Afghanistan -- but they
don't want to save the Afghans. Pakistan, it should be added, hosts 2.5
million Afghan refugees. Needless to say, this discrepancy doesn't get
much of an airing on our satellite channels. Indeed, I have never heard
so much fury directed at journalists as I have in Pakistan these past
few weeks. Nor am I surprised.
What, after all, are we supposed to make of the so-called "liberal"
American television journalist Geraldo Rivera who is just moving to Fox
TV, a Murdoch channel? "I'm feeling more patriotic than at any time in
my life, itching for justice, or maybe just revenge," he announced this
week. "And this catharsis I've gone through has caused me to reassess
what I do for a living." This is truly chilling stuff. Here is an
American journalist actually revealing that he's possibly "itching for
revenge".
Infinitely more shameful -- and unethical -- were the disgraceful words=20=
of
Walter Isaacson, the chairman of CNN, to his staff. Showing the misery
of Afghanistan ran the risk of promoting enemy propaganda, he said. "It
seems perverse to focus too much on the casualties or hardship in
Afghanistan ... we must talk about how the Taliban are using civilian
shields and how the Taliban have harboured the terrorists responsible
for killing close up to 5,000 innocent people." Mr Isaacson was an
unimaginative boss of Time magazine but these latest words will do more
to damage the supposed impartiality of CNN than anything on the air in
recent years. Perverse? Why perverse? Why are Afghan casualties so far
down Mr Isaacson's compassion? Or is Mr Isaacson just following the lead
set down for him a few days earlier by the White House spokesman Ari
Fleischer, who portentously announced to the Washington press corps that
in times like these "people have to watch what they say and watch what
they do".
Needless to say, CNN has caved in to the US government's demand not to
broadcast Mr bin Laden's words in toto lest they contain "coded
messages". But the coded messages go out on television every hour. They
are "air campaign", "coalition forces" and "war on terror".
NOTE: CNN is now owned by Disney, the entertainment company that sees
the world from the eyes of an entertainer. They have created a make
believe world of their own and believe that the world is made up of only
idiots. They want to brain wash the human race into believing that
everything CNN presents is unabashed truth. Obviously, the policy
dictators at the top of CNN have succeeded in their effort. This is
obvious to any unbiased CNN news watcher that the present CNN staff on
any of the CNN channels has been the most successful candidates of this
makeover.
*******************************************************
Exhibit E
"...There is a peace movement in Pakistan to which we
belong. It is currently organised on a country-wide basis under the name=20=
of
Pakistan Peace Coalition, and consists of roughly autonomous city-based
peace groups. The Islamabad city group is called Citizens' Peace=20
Committee.
There are other peace groups in Pakistan also, but somehow we are not
impressed with their credentials.
The peace groups affiliated with the Pakistan Peace Coalition have=20
condemned
terrorism in all its forms, have sympathised with the American people =
for
the loss of innocent lives in the 11 Sept attacks, opposed the American
attack on Afghanistan and have called for alleviating the suffering of=20=
the
Afghan people. They have held indoor meetings as well as outdoor protest
demonstrations and marches in almost all the cities of the country.
But the predominant scenario in Pakistan is such that these expressions=20=
of
the peace movement have had little noticibility. Religious=20
fundamentalists,
cultivated over the years by the government of both Pakistan and the US,
know that the action against terrorists puts their survival at risk. =
They
are therefore agitating most vociferously, exactly the way you saw on
television. They also want action against the Taliban to stop. The=20
slogans
they chant are also very strongly anti-American, stronger than we can=20
raise.
They can easily mobilize tens of, if not hundreds of, thousands of=20
people.
They desire to raise the agitation to higher levels so as to make it
difficult for the Pakistan government to participate in a crackdown on
terrorism, and hence on them. The position of our peace movement is that
while we are strongly opposed to a unilateral US action against the=20
Taliban,
we would like those among the religious fundamentalists who practice
terrorism to be disarmed and disbanded. We would like the government of
Pakistan to stop harbouring terrorists for the sake of achieving its
security objectives in Afghanistan and in Kashmir. We would like the
government of Pakistan to join hands with other nations of the world in
combating terrorism. But we would like to see this happen in a=20
multilateral
way, if possible under the United Nations.
The outside world needs to understand that owing to state patronage over
some decades, the religious fanatics had gained so much organisational=20=
and
military strength (but thankfully no electoral support) that we had been
constantly living under an acute danger of 'talibanization' of Pakistan.
With a glimpse of what their rule could amount to, as in Afghanistan, to
see their illegitimately held political power being snatched back has=20
become
a primary objective of the democratic people. With our position thus=20
stated,
please see for yourself where you can make a meaningful contribution to=20=
the
objectives of peace, justice and democracy in Pakistan.
I am sorry for the delay in replying to your mail. I wrote it on the=20
22nd.
That day, the mail server was not functioning properly. Then I had to
unexpectedly leave early (on the 23rd) for Hong Kong for a meeting from
where I returned early this morning (28th).
A. H. Nayyar
*********************************
Exhibit F
The Wall Street Journal
November 12, 2001
Riots Erupt in Indonesian Province
After Independence Leader Is Killed
By TIMOTHY MAPES and RIN HINDRYATI
Staff Reporters of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL
JAKARTA, Indonesia -- In a major blow to Indonesia's hopes of easing
separatist tensions, protests broke out in the remote, resource-rich=20
province
of Irian Jaya on Sunday after the leader of the territory's independence
movement was murdered hours after he had dinner with local military=20
officers.
Police said the body of Theys Eluay, the 64-year-old chairman of the=20
Papuan
Presidium Council, was discovered early Sunday in a car at the bottom=20
of a
ravine 30 kilometers (18.6 miles) east of the provincial capital,=20
Jayapura.
The discovery followed a frantic call from Mr. Eluay's driver to the=20
wife of
the independence leader on Saturday night saying that unknown assailants=20=
had
stopped their car on a lonely stretch of road and abducted Mr. Eluay as=20=
he
was going home after a dinner with a military commander.
Police immediately opened a murder investigation, saying it appeared=20
that Mr.
Eluay had been strangled before the car was pushed over the cliff. They=20=
said
they had no immediate suspects, however. Mr. Eluay's wife, Yaneke, told=20=
the
Associated Press that she believed the military was responsible, but top
military officials declined to comment on the accusation.
Mr. Eluay's death is likely to reignite separatist sentiment and=20
undermine
recent efforts by President Megawati Sukarnoputri's government to regain=20=
the
support of the Papuan people, who have long bristled over interference =
by
Jakarta in their affairs. Although the province is among Indonesia's
wealthiest thanks to its vast deposits of minerals, oil and natural gas,
living standards for the Papuan people are the lowest in Indonesia.=20
Dozens of
people have been killed in the past year in clashes between armed rebel
groups and security forces in the region.
After coming to power in July, Ms. Megawati announced that her top=20
priority
would be holding this vast archipelago together, and her government has
pursued an aggressive campaign to crack down against those who espouse
outright independence from Jakarta, while meeting some requests for more
local control over resources and decision making. Last month, for=20
example,
Parliament passed a "special autonomy" law that will rename Irian Jaya =
as
West Papua -- the name used by the local people -- and let the province=20=
keep
70% to 80% of the tax revenue generated by local resource projects, up=20=
from
about 10% currently.
Mr. Eluay and his Presidium have strongly opposed the autonomy package,
however, arguing that nothing short of full independence from Jakarta=20
will
satisfy the local people.
"One thing is sure: We will fight to our deaths for independence," Mr.=20=
Eluay
said in an interview earlier this year. He said rule from Jakarta isn't
suitable for the Papuan people, who are culturally distinct from=20
Indonesia's
dominant ethnic groups. "Our hair is different, our skin is different;=20=
we are
not Indonesian people," he said.
At the time of his death, Mr. Eluay was free on bail while awaiting=20
trial on
charges of plotting to undermine the Indonesian government by working to=20=
set
up an independent state. But he also had foes within his own movement =
who
questioned his tactics and were angered by his attempts to maintain a
dialogue and build friendships with some Indonesian generals and=20
officials.
Some observers have said the Presidium's political clout has fallen in=20=
recent
months because of those criticisms.
As news of Mr. Eluay's death spread, about 400 to 500 independence=20
supporters
took to the streets near Jayapura's airport at Sentani, not far from Mr.
Eluay's home, said Jayapura Police Chief Lt. Col. Daud Sihombing. At=20
least
six shops were burned. Police dispersed the crowd as darkness fell,=20
however,
and there were no immediate reports of injuries.
While Papuan leaders appealed for calm, they also warned that further=20
trouble
could lie ahead.
"Our struggle will continue. But we do not want an armed struggle; we=20
simply
ask to open a peaceful dialogue with the government," said Tom Beanal,=20=
the
Presidium's deputy chairman and Mr. Eluay's likely successor.
"We ask the Indonesian government to have a dialogue with us, but =
instead
they only create suffering for the people in Papua. They have killed =
many
people here," he said in an interview Sunday.
***********************************************
Exhibit G
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A8805-2001Nov10.html
=09
Reconsidering Saudi Arabia
Sunday, November 11, 2001; Page B06
THE CONTRADICTIONS that lie at the heart of relations between the United=20=
States and Saudi Arabia are encapsulated by two simple facts: On the one=20=
hand, the Saudi government is allowing the United States to direct the=20=
war in Afghanistan from a state-of-the-art command center outside=20
Riyadh; on the other, it is afraid to tell the Saudi people that it is=20=
providing this material support. Such political jujitsu has become so=20
familiar to both Saudis and Americans over the years that it is usually=20=
taken for granted. The Saudi princes know that overt dependence on a=20
Western power incites the rage of Islamic militants at home, but feel=20
they must preserve a military alliance with the United States in order=20=
to ensure their own security. The United States, in turn, knows that its=20=
backing of the corrupt and authoritarian Saudi regime damages its image=20=
throughout the Middle East and makes it a target of terrorism, but sees=20=
that as the necessary price for stable oil supplies and secure Middle=20
Eastern bases. That logic, and the alliance that goes with it, have so=20=
far survived Sept. 11 and the first weeks of war in Central Asia. But=20
the Bush administration needs to carefully consider how to manage the=20
relationship through a broader war against terrorism that, to succeed,=20=
must change much about the Middle East.
The starting point for change must be a recognition that Saudi Arabia's=20=
domestic political order is a vital U.S. interest, not a matter that can=20=
be subordinated to military or energy-supply priorities. That 15 of the=20=
Sept. 11 hijackers were Saudi nationals, and that Osama bin Laden's most=20=
cherished aim is the overthrow of the Saudi monarchy, only make more=20
obvious what should have been faced in Washington long ago: Saudi=20
Arabia's autocratic system, while convenient for negotiating arms and=20
oil deals, is itself one of the root causes of Islamic extremism. That=20=
doesn't mean that the United States should adopt Osama bin Laden's goal=20=
of destroying the House of Saud. Nor is it sensible to expect a country=20=
whose identity is so bound to Islam to abandon its strict adherence to=20=
religious custom, or adopt Western-style democracy overnight.
Yet accepting the view -- pressed hardest by the Saudi princes=20
themselves -- that political change is unnecessary or excessively risky=20=
is also no longer reasonable. Though none are full-fledged democracies,=20=
most of Saudi Arabia's monarchial Gulf neighbors have already recognized=20=
that expanding personal and political liberty is necessary for stability=20=
in rapidly modernizing societies, and is the best way to head off=20
Islamic extremism. Bahrain, which faced a serious internal challenge=20
from religious militants, has opened its political system to them; Qatar=20=
has removed controls on the media, allowing the television network al=20
Jazeera to broadcast interviews with both Osama bin Laden and senior=20
aides to President Bush. Kuwait and Yemen have had democratic elections=20=
to parliamentary bodies, and Kuwait is now debating whether to give=20
women the vote. Contrary to what the defenders of the Saudi system might=20=
suggest, these countries have become more rather than less stable=20
through their reforms, and more rather than less friendly to the United=20=
States.
The Bush administration has said all along that the war on terrorism=20
must be conducted on a number of fronts simultaneously. Rather than=20
catering to short-term Saudi anxieties about Afghanistan, or caving in=20=
to Crown Prince Abdullah's attempts to change the subject to Israel, it=20=
should begin now to prepare an initiative to promote greater political=20=
freedom in Saudi Arabia, Egypt and the rest of the Arab world. One=20
possible model is the Helsinki process of the 1970s and '80s, in which=20=
the West negotiated and then pressed a "basket" of human rights=20
standards on Soviet-bloc countries that, at the time, also appeared=20
impervious to democracy. By championing those values the United States=20=
achieved a triumph of public diplomacy, winning over millions of average=20=
people in the East bloc while preserving ties to their governments, and=20=
inspiring domestic reform movements that, over the course of 15 years,=20=
laid the groundwork for a democratic transformation. While the United=20
States cannot abruptly abandon its alliances in the Middle East,=20
defeating terrorism will require a similarly bold and creative=20
commitment to long-term political change.
=A9 2001 The Washington Post Company
--Apple-Mail-3--606547791
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/enriched;
charset=WINDOWS-1252
<bold>From: </bold>Roger Baker <<rcbaker@eden.infohwy.com>
<bold>Date: </bold>Mon Nov 12, 2001 06:09:09 PM US/Pacific
<bold>To: </bold>rcbaker@mail.com
<bold>Subject: </bold>Annoying facts well documented
<fontfamily><param>Geneva</param>In Austin Tx, we now have anti-war
rallies (Rally for America) manufactured by the=20
right wing of Texas politics. Like in Austin on Wed., we have a rally
almost exclusively=20
generated by Texas Republicans and even the corporate TV media.=20
(Exhibit A)
Meanwhile, the national Democrats are in hiding; Al Gore's sentiments
on the key=20
issues of our times are as rare as Elvis sightings as he nerviously
awaits his coronation=20
in the next election. Only Ralph Nader dares tells the truth, about
corporate looting using=20
patriotism as the justification -- with little resistance from
Congress -- since Congress is=20
already in the hip pocket of the corporate empire, with a few brave
and notable exceptions. =20
(These principled braveries never involving Rep. Joe Lieberman. BTW,
Is Sen. Feingold=20
the only Jewish progressive in Congress?; I assume he is Jewish, by
his name). (Exhibit B)
In Italy, where the corporate empire has less control than here in
the USA, demos against the=20
government and the war, the government recently mustered less half the
numbers as=20
grassroots protestors who marched to object to war/corporate economic
control. (Exhibit C).
We, as a nation, are now in the difficult position of trying to define
terrorism in such a way =20
as to not to include and tarnish our own conduct in Afghanistan.=20
(Exhibit D).
The bombing is creating support for the Taliban and making it harder
for the genuine peace=20
movement to be noticed. (Exhibit E).
When a populist spokesmen -- the only link for civilized feedback of
for millions of oppressed=20
poor is murdered, undoubtedly by a corrupt elite, it is not terrorism.
Even though it ties down
the safety valve of democracy and leads to a massive revolutionary
upheaval and untold=20
suffering later. (Exhibit F).
The United States believes in democracy but only when it is warranted.=20=
An example of where it is=20
warranted is in Saudi Arabia where corruption by the Saudi monarchy
threatens their control=20
over their own monarchy -- and thus through their negligence, our own
supply of oil. (If Saudi oil
were to be cut off, oil would immediately skyrocket in price
worldwide.) So US democracy is good
and respectable in this case, since it would help continue our
addiction short-term. (Exhibit G).
Peace, Roger
=20
************************************
Exhibit A, (by Stefan Wray):
"After looking into the Rally For America's Web site for a few hours,
here
are some observations.
According to The Rally For America's Steering Committee consists of the
Texas Attorney General, a Texas Land Commissioner, a Texas Railroad
Commissioner, two State Senators, seven State Representatives and the
chairman of the Texas State Board of Education, and the chairman of the
Travis County Republican Party.
=
(<underline><color><param>1A1A,1A1A,FFFF</param>http://www.rally4america.c=
om/steer.html</color></underline>)
Of note is Texas Land Commissioner David Dewhurst. Dewhurst, from
Houston,
is a Republican candidate for Lt. Governor. Dewhurst is also ex CIA and
worked for the State Department in the 1970s.
=
(<underline><color><param>1A1A,1A1A,FFFF</param>http://www.dewhurst.org/ab=
out</color></underline>)
More important is that Dewhurst is also the head of the new Texas' Task
Force on Homeland Security. Gov. Rick Perry appointed him to be the
chair of
this taskforce on Oct. 1. Perry appointed former FBI director William
Sessions of San Antonio to be the vice chair.
=
(<underline><color><param>1A1A,1A1A,FFFF</param>http://www.governor.state.=
tx.us/homelandsecurity/index.htm</color></underline>)
But there=92s more. State Rep. Bob Turner is on the Rally For America's
Steering Committee and is also part of the Task Force on Homeland
Security.
Turner is a retired lieutenant colonel in the U.S. Army Reserve and a
graduate of every civil military operations, terrorism, and guerilla
warfare
school at Fort Bragg.
=
(<underline><color><param>1A1A,1A1A,FFFF</param>http://www.governor.state.=
tx.us/homelandsecurity/members.htm#turner</color></underline>)
One of the two State Senators on The Rally For America's Steering
Committee
is Sen. Jeff Wentworth. He spent three years active duty as a United
States
Army counterintelligence officer. A few weeks ago announced that when
the
Legislature convenes in January, 2003, he will file a bill that would
direct
school districts to set aside a minute of silence each day for prayer
or
meditation.
=
(<underline><color><param>1A1A,1A1A,FFFF</param>http://www.senate.state.tx=
.us/75r/senate/members/dist25/dist25.htm</color></underline>)
Another member of The Rally For American=92s Steering Commitee is Rep.
Leo
Berman. According to the Young Conservatives of Texas, Berman is among
the
most conservative Texas legislators. He shares that distinction with
the
other Senator on the committee, Sen. Jane Nelson
*********************************************
Exhibit B =20
=
<underline><color><param>1A1A,1A1A,FFFF</param>http://www.commondreams.org=
/views01/1110-07.htm</color></underline>
Corporate Patriotism=20
by Ralph Nader
U. S. corporations aren't even subtle about it. Waving a flag and
carrying a big shovel,=20
corporate interests are scooping up government benefits and taxpayer
money in an=20
unprecedented fashion while the public is preoccupied with the
September 11 attacks=20
and the war in Afghanistan...]
***************************************************
Exhibit C
From: sbehrens <<englishstudio@hyper.it>
Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2001 21:59:20 +0200
To: imc-editorial@lists.indymedia.org
Subject: [IMC-Editorial] Rome march(es)
Subject: 100,000-150,000 anti-war/anti-WTO march in Rome on N10 defies
Berlusconi government who had organised a pro-war march on the same day
100,000 (state media) - 150,000 (organisers) marchers demonstrated in
Rome on a broad series of topics from anti-WTO to anti-war in
Afghanistan. On the same day 30,000 (leftish media) - 50,000
(organisers) attended a government sponsored pro-war rally. The state
controlled media gave the state march 90% of the coverage. No change
there then. There was no trouble on either march and the cops were well
behaved and stayed hidden most of the day. One or two instances of
black
block activities being started up were immediately defused by other
protestors, who explained that now was not the time or the place. The
explanations were listened to and accepted. The most damage the banks
along the route got was graffiti with "death to those who profit from
war". The fact that this was the ONLY damage meant that the media
******************************************
Exhibit D
Hypocrisy, hatred and the war on terror 'If the US attacks were an
assault on "civilisation", why shouldn't Muslims regard the Afganistan
attack as a war on Islam?'
Robert Fisk
08 November 2001
"Air campaign"? "Coalition forces"? "War on terror"? How much longer
must we go on enduring these lies? There is no "campaign" ? merely an
air bombardment of the poorest and most broken country in the world by
the world's richest and most sophisticated nation. No MiGs have taken
to
the skies to do battle with the American B-52s or F-18s. The only
ammunition soaring into the air over Kabul comes from Russian
anti-aircraft guns manufactured around 1943.
Coalition? Hands up who's seen the Luftwaffe in the skies over
Kandahar,
or the Italian air force or the French air force over Herat. Or even
the
Pakistani air force. The Americans are bombing Afghanistan with a few
British missiles thrown in. "Coalition" indeed.
Then there's the "war on terror". When are we moving on to bomb the
Jaffna peninsula? Or Chechnya ? which we have already left in Vladimir
Putin's bloody hands? I even seem to recall a massive terrorist car
bomb
that exploded in Beirut in 1985 ? targeting Sayed Hassan Nasrallah, the
spiritual inspiration to the Hezbollah, who now appears to be back on
Washington's hit list ? and which missed Nasrallah but slaughtered 85
innocent Lebanese civilians. Years later, Carl Bernstein revealed in
his
book, Veil, that the CIA was behind the bomb after the Saudis agreed to
fund the operation. So will the US President George Bush be hunting
down
the CIA murderers involved? The hell he will.
So why on earth are all my chums on CNN and Sky and the BBC rabbiting
on
about the "air campaign", "coalition forces" and the "war on terror"?
Do
they think their viewers believe this twaddle? Certainly Muslims don't.
In fact, you don't have to spend long in Pakistan to realise that the
Pakistani press gives an infinitely more truthful and balanced account
of the "war" -- publishing work by local intellectuals, historians and
opposition writers along with Taliban comments and pro-government
statements as well as syndicated Western analyses -- than The New York
Times; and all this, remember, in a military dictatorship.
You only have to spend a few weeks in the Middle East and the
subcontinent to realise why Tony Blair's interviews on al-Jazeera and
Larry King Live don't amount to a hill of beans. The Beirut daily
As-Safir ran a widely praised editorial asking why an Arab who wanted
to
express the anger and humiliation of millions of other Arabs was forced
to do so from a cave in a non-Arab country. The implication, of course,
was that this -- rather than the crimes against humanity on 11
September
-- was the reason for America's determination to liquidate Osama bin
Laden.
Far more persuasive has been a series of articles in the Pakistani
press
on the outrageous treatment of Muslims arrested in the United States in
the aftermath of the September atrocities. One such article should
suffice. Headlined "Hate crime victim's diary", in The News of Lahore,
it outlined the suffering of Hasnain Javed, who was arrested in Alabama
on 19 September with an expired visa. In prison in Mississippi, he was
beaten up by a prisoner who also broke his tooth. Then, long after he
had sounded the warden's alarm bell, more men beat him against a wall
with the words: "Hey bin Laden, this is the first round. There are
going
to be 10 rounds like this." There are dozens of other such stories in
the Pakistani press and most of them appear to be true.
Again, Muslims have been outraged by the hypocrisy of the West's
supposed
"respect" for Islam. We are not, so we have informed the world, going
to
suspend military operations in Afghanistan during the holy fasting
month
of Ramadan. After all, the 1980-88 Iran-Iraq conflict continued during
Ramadan. So have Arab-Israeli conflicts. True enough. But why, then,
did
we make such a show of suspending bombing on the first Friday of the
bombardment last month out of our "respect" for Islam? Because we were
more respectful then than now? Or because -- the Taliban remaining
unbroken -- we've decided to forget about all that "respect"? "I can
see
why you want to separate bin Laden from our religion," a Peshawar
journalist said to me a few days ago. "Of course you want to tell us
that
this isn't a religious war, but Mr Robert, please, please stop telling
us
how much you respect Islam." There is another disturbing argument I
hear
in Pakistan. If, as Mr Bush claims, the attacks on New York and
Washington
were an assault on "civilisation", why shouldn't Muslims regard an
attack
on Afghanistan as a war on Islam?
The Pakistanis swiftly spotted the hypocrisy of the Australians. While
itching to get into the fight against Mr bin Laden, the Australians
have
sent armed troops to force destitute Afghan refugees out of their
territorial waters. The Aussies want to bomb Afghanistan -- but they
don't want to save the Afghans. Pakistan, it should be added, hosts 2.5
million Afghan refugees. Needless to say, this discrepancy doesn't get
much of an airing on our satellite channels. Indeed, I have never heard
so much fury directed at journalists as I have in Pakistan these past
few weeks. Nor am I surprised.
What, after all, are we supposed to make of the so-called "liberal"
American television journalist Geraldo Rivera who is just moving to Fox
TV, a Murdoch channel? "I'm feeling more patriotic than at any time in
my life, itching for justice, or maybe just revenge," he announced this
week. "And this catharsis I've gone through has caused me to reassess
what I do for a living." This is truly chilling stuff. Here is an
American journalist actually revealing that he's possibly "itching for
revenge".
Infinitely more shameful -- and unethical -- were the disgraceful
words of
Walter Isaacson, the chairman of CNN, to his staff. Showing the misery
of Afghanistan ran the risk of promoting enemy propaganda, he said. "It
seems perverse to focus too much on the casualties or hardship in
Afghanistan ... we must talk about how the Taliban are using civilian
shields and how the Taliban have harboured the terrorists responsible
for killing close up to 5,000 innocent people." Mr Isaacson was an
unimaginative boss of Time magazine but these latest words will do more
to damage the supposed impartiality of CNN than anything on the air in
recent years. Perverse? Why perverse? Why are Afghan casualties so far
down Mr Isaacson's compassion? Or is Mr Isaacson just following the
lead
set down for him a few days earlier by the White House spokesman Ari
Fleischer, who portentously announced to the Washington press corps
that
in times like these "people have to watch what they say and watch what
they do".
Needless to say, CNN has caved in to the US government's demand not to
broadcast Mr bin Laden's words in toto lest they contain "coded
messages". But the coded messages go out on television every hour. They
are "air campaign", "coalition forces" and "war on terror".
NOTE: CNN is now owned by Disney, the entertainment company that sees
the world from the eyes of an entertainer. They have created a make
believe world of their own and believe that the world is made up of
only
idiots. They want to brain wash the human race into believing that
everything CNN presents is unabashed truth. Obviously, the policy
dictators at the top of CNN have succeeded in their effort. This is
obvious to any unbiased CNN news watcher that the present CNN staff on
any of the CNN channels has been the most successful candidates of this
makeover.
*******************************************************
Exhibit E=20
"...There is a peace movement in Pakistan to which we
belong. It is currently organised on a country-wide basis under the
name of
Pakistan Peace Coalition, and consists of roughly autonomous city-based
peace groups. The Islamabad city group is called Citizens' Peace
Committee.
There are other peace groups in Pakistan also, but somehow we are not
impressed with their credentials.
The peace groups affiliated with the Pakistan Peace Coalition have
condemned
terrorism in all its forms, have sympathised with the American people
for
the loss of innocent lives in the 11 Sept attacks, opposed the American
attack on Afghanistan and have called for alleviating the suffering of
the
Afghan people. They have held indoor meetings as well as outdoor
protest
demonstrations and marches in almost all the cities of the country.
But the predominant scenario in Pakistan is such that these
expressions of
the peace movement have had little noticibility. Religious
fundamentalists,
cultivated over the years by the government of both Pakistan and the
US,
know that the action against terrorists puts their survival at risk.
They
are therefore agitating most vociferously, exactly the way you saw on
television. They also want action against the Taliban to stop. The
slogans
they chant are also very strongly anti-American, stronger than we can
raise.
They can easily mobilize tens of, if not hundreds of, thousands of
people.
They desire to raise the agitation to higher levels so as to make it
difficult for the Pakistan government to participate in a crackdown on
terrorism, and hence on them. The position of our peace movement is
that
while we are strongly opposed to a unilateral US action against the
Taliban,
we would like those among the religious fundamentalists who practice
terrorism to be disarmed and disbanded. We would like the government of
Pakistan to stop harbouring terrorists for the sake of achieving its
security objectives in Afghanistan and in Kashmir. We would like the
government of Pakistan to join hands with other nations of the world in
combating terrorism. But we would like to see this happen in a
multilateral
way, if possible under the United Nations.
The outside world needs to understand that owing to state patronage
over
some decades, the religious fanatics had gained so much organisational
and
military strength (but thankfully no electoral support) that we had
been
constantly living under an acute danger of 'talibanization' of
Pakistan.
With a glimpse of what their rule could amount to, as in Afghanistan,
to
see their illegitimately held political power being snatched back has
become
a primary objective of the democratic people. With our position thus
stated,
please see for yourself where you can make a meaningful contribution
to the
objectives of peace, justice and democracy in Pakistan.
I am sorry for the delay in replying to your mail. I wrote it on the
22nd.
That day, the mail server was not functioning properly. Then I had to
unexpectedly leave early (on the 23rd) for Hong Kong for a meeting from
where I returned early this morning (28th).
A. H. Nayyar
*********************************
Exhibit F
The Wall Street Journal
November 12, 2001
Riots Erupt in Indonesian Province
After Independence Leader Is Killed
By TIMOTHY MAPES and RIN HINDRYATI
Staff Reporters of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL
JAKARTA, Indonesia -- In a major blow to Indonesia's hopes of easing
separatist tensions, protests broke out in the remote, resource-rich
province
of Irian Jaya on Sunday after the leader of the territory's
independence
movement was murdered hours after he had dinner with local military
officers.
Police said the body of Theys Eluay, the 64-year-old chairman of the
Papuan
Presidium Council, was discovered early Sunday in a car at the bottom
of a
ravine 30 kilometers (18.6 miles) east of the provincial capital,
Jayapura.
The discovery followed a frantic call from Mr. Eluay's driver to the
wife of
the independence leader on Saturday night saying that unknown
assailants had
stopped their car on a lonely stretch of road and abducted Mr. Eluay
as he
was going home after a dinner with a military commander.
Police immediately opened a murder investigation, saying it appeared
that Mr.
Eluay had been strangled before the car was pushed over the cliff.
They said
they had no immediate suspects, however. Mr. Eluay's wife, Yaneke,
told the
Associated Press that she believed the military was responsible, but
top
military officials declined to comment on the accusation.
Mr. Eluay's death is likely to reignite separatist sentiment and
undermine
recent efforts by President Megawati Sukarnoputri's government to
regain the
support of the Papuan people, who have long bristled over interference
by
Jakarta in their affairs. Although the province is among Indonesia's
wealthiest thanks to its vast deposits of minerals, oil and natural
gas,
living standards for the Papuan people are the lowest in Indonesia.
Dozens of
people have been killed in the past year in clashes between armed rebel
groups and security forces in the region.
After coming to power in July, Ms. Megawati announced that her top
priority
would be holding this vast archipelago together, and her government has
pursued an aggressive campaign to crack down against those who espouse
outright independence from Jakarta, while meeting some requests for
more
local control over resources and decision making. Last month, for
example,
Parliament passed a "special autonomy" law that will rename Irian Jaya
as
West Papua -- the name used by the local people -- and let the
province keep
70% to 80% of the tax revenue generated by local resource projects, up
from
about 10% currently.
Mr. Eluay and his Presidium have strongly opposed the autonomy package,
however, arguing that nothing short of full independence from Jakarta
will
satisfy the local people.
"One thing is sure: We will fight to our deaths for independence," Mr.
Eluay
said in an interview earlier this year. He said rule from Jakarta isn't
suitable for the Papuan people, who are culturally distinct from
Indonesia's
dominant ethnic groups. "Our hair is different, our skin is different;
we are
not Indonesian people," he said.
At the time of his death, Mr. Eluay was free on bail while awaiting
trial on
charges of plotting to undermine the Indonesian government by working
to set
up an independent state. But he also had foes within his own movement
who
questioned his tactics and were angered by his attempts to maintain a
dialogue and build friendships with some Indonesian generals and
officials.
Some observers have said the Presidium's political clout has fallen in
recent
months because of those criticisms.
As news of Mr. Eluay's death spread, about 400 to 500 independence
supporters
took to the streets near Jayapura's airport at Sentani, not far from
Mr.
Eluay's home, said Jayapura Police Chief Lt. Col. Daud Sihombing. At
least
six shops were burned. Police dispersed the crowd as darkness fell,
however,
and there were no immediate reports of injuries.
While Papuan leaders appealed for calm, they also warned that further
trouble
could lie ahead.
"Our struggle will continue. But we do not want an armed struggle; we
simply
ask to open a peaceful dialogue with the government," said Tom Beanal,
the
Presidium's deputy chairman and Mr. Eluay's likely successor.
"We ask the Indonesian government to have a dialogue with us, but
instead
they only create suffering for the people in Papua. They have killed
many
people here," he said in an interview Sunday.
***********************************************
Exhibit G
=
<underline><color><param>1A1A,1A1A,FFFF</param>http://www.washingtonpost.c=
om/wp-dyn/articles/A8805-2001Nov10.html</color></underline>
=20
Reconsidering Saudi Arabia=20
Sunday, November 11, 2001; Page B06=20
THE CONTRADICTIONS that lie at the heart of relations between the
United States and Saudi Arabia are encapsulated by two simple facts:
On the one hand, the Saudi government is allowing the United States to
direct the war in Afghanistan from a state-of-the-art command center
outside Riyadh; on the other, it is afraid to tell the Saudi people
that it is providing this material support. Such political jujitsu has
become so familiar to both Saudis and Americans over the years that it
is usually taken for granted. The Saudi princes know that overt
dependence on a Western power incites the rage of Islamic militants at
home, but feel they must preserve a military alliance with the United
States in order to ensure their own security. The United States, in
turn, knows that its backing of the corrupt and authoritarian Saudi
regime damages its image throughout the Middle East and makes it a
target of terrorism, but sees that as the necessary price for stable
oil supplies and secure Middle Eastern bases. That logic, and the
alliance that goes with it, have so far survived Sept. 11 and the
first weeks of war in Central Asia. But the Bush administration needs
to carefully consider how to manage the relationship through a broader
war against terrorism that, to succeed, must change much about the
Middle East.
The starting point for change must be a recognition that Saudi
Arabia's domestic political order is a vital U.S. interest, not a
matter that can be subordinated to military or energy-supply
priorities. That 15 of the Sept. 11 hijackers were Saudi nationals,
and that Osama bin Laden's most cherished aim is the overthrow of the
Saudi monarchy, only make more obvious what should have been faced in
Washington long ago: Saudi Arabia's autocratic system, while
convenient for negotiating arms and oil deals, is itself one of the
root causes of Islamic extremism. That doesn't mean that the United
States should adopt Osama bin Laden's goal of destroying the House of
Saud. Nor is it sensible to expect a country whose identity is so
bound to Islam to abandon its strict adherence to religious custom, or
adopt Western-style democracy overnight.
Yet accepting the view -- pressed hardest by the Saudi princes
themselves -- that political change is unnecessary or excessively
risky is also no longer reasonable. Though none are full-fledged
democracies, most of Saudi Arabia's monarchial Gulf neighbors have
already recognized that expanding personal and political liberty is
necessary for stability in rapidly modernizing societies, and is the
best way to head off Islamic extremism. Bahrain, which faced a serious
internal challenge from religious militants, has opened its political
system to them; Qatar has removed controls on the media, allowing the
television network al Jazeera to broadcast interviews with both Osama
bin Laden and senior aides to President Bush. Kuwait and Yemen have
had democratic elections to parliamentary bodies, and Kuwait is now
debating whether to give women the vote. Contrary to what the
defenders of the Saudi system might suggest, these countries have
become more rather than less stable through their reforms, and more
rather than less friendly to the United States.
The Bush administration has said all along that the war on terrorism
must be conducted on a number of fronts simultaneously. Rather than
catering to short-term Saudi anxieties about Afghanistan, or caving in
to Crown Prince Abdullah's attempts to change the subject to Israel,
it should begin now to prepare an initiative to promote greater
political freedom in Saudi Arabia, Egypt and the rest of the Arab
world. One possible model is the Helsinki process of the 1970s and
'80s, in which the West negotiated and then pressed a "basket" of
human rights standards on Soviet-bloc countries that, at the time,
also appeared impervious to democracy. By championing those values the
United States achieved a triumph of public diplomacy, winning over
millions of average people in the East bloc while preserving ties to
their governments, and inspiring domestic reform movements that, over
the course of 15 years, laid the groundwork for a democratic
transformation. While the United States cannot abruptly abandon its
alliances in the Middle East, defeating terrorism will require a
similarly bold and creative commitment to long-term political change.
=A9 2001 The Washington Post Company
</fontfamily>=
--Apple-Mail-3--606547791--