For peace! No to NATO!, Pela Secção Internacional, Portuguese Communist Party, Lisbon, 30 March 2010

http://www.solidnet.org/index.php/portugal-portuguese-communist-party-/388-portuguese-cp-for-peace-no-to-nato-joint-resolution-with-up-to-date-subscribers-en-pt

---

 For peace! No to NATO!

In a context that is marked by an ever-deeper structural crisis of capitalism, by deeper exploitation of the workers and peoples, by inter-imperialist rivalries and by complex processes of realignment of forces on a world level, imperialism is embarking on new anti-democratic thrusts and militarist interventions, and is advancing with coercive solutions trying to perpetuate itself and defend its class interests.

The militarist offensive unleashed by the imperialist powers and by NATO has a global and multi-faceted nature.

Imperialist war is being intensified globally under the pretext of combat against terrorism. Imperialist blocs, like NATO, are being consolidated. The militarization of the European Union is being speeded up with the fraudulent adoption of the Lisbon Treaty that encompasses the concept of the European Union as NATO’s European pillar. There is an ongoing arms race and investment in new and deadlier weapons. Military spending reaches record levels, particularly in the U.S. and the European Union. NATO's areas of influence and imperialist military-strategic alliances, namely through the so-called “Partnership for peace” are being expanded in Asia, in the territory of the former Soviet Union, as well as in Africa.

The world-wide network of US and NATO-member countries' military bases is being expanded. Military forces are being deployed from Latin America to Africa; from the Middle East, Indian Ocean and Central Asia to Eastern Europe, the Caucasus and the Black Sea.

The occupation of Afghanistan and Iraq continues, whilst new military aggressions are being launched against various countries. Plots and interference continue in Latin America and in various countries of the African continent. Provocative maneuvers are multiplied, as in Lebanon. The Palestinian issue remains unsolved, likewise the issue of Western Sahara, while imperialist crimes continue with impunity. Provocations against the People's Republic of China, that the arms sales to Taiwan by the U.S. is a particularly serious example, and threats against countries such as Iran and Syria are being stepped up.

There are growing attacks against the sovereignty of States, notably with changes of borders, of which the self-proclamation of the independence of the Serbian province of Kosovo is a serious example. The International Law that emerged from the correlation of forces resulting from the defeat of Nazi-fascism in the Second World War is being seriously undermined and is the target of a process that aims its destruction.

In the name of “security” and the “war on terrorism” securitarian thrusts are revived; xenophobic nationalism and religious and cultural intolerance is being instigated; crimes against human rights, such as social, economic and democratic rights and the right to political and social participation and organization, are being committed; anti-Communist campaigns are being promoted and the forces that stand up against imperialism's offensive and defend the social and national rights of peoples, are persecuted.

The reality of the world at the beginning of the 21^st Century belies the campaigns to rehabilitate the image of US imperialism which were undertaken with the election of Barack Obama. The nature and goals of US and NATO policies are clear: the control over natural and energy resources; control of technology; the expansion of markets; military and geo-strategic domination. In other words, a response, based on the use of force, to the relative weakening of the position of the USA in the international framework.

The rhetoric of “multilateralism” and “dialogue” is exposed by the war-mongering and interventionist policy of the US, the European Union and NATO, by the ongoing imperialist offensive and the real risk of new military conflicts, from the Middle East and Central Asia to Latin America. Despite the antagonisms between the USA and EU, both turn against the people’s social and national rights. War and aggression are but the other side of the coin of imperialist economic globalization, and NATO is a key player in its strategy of hegemonic domination and persecution of those forces and countries that stand up in opposition. NATO plays a central role in the militarization of international relations and in the arms race and is the main driving force of conflicts and tensions today. Alluding to «new global threats» - a concept that has replaced the old pretext of the «communist threat» - NATO imposes a large-scale escalation of wars and weapons – of which the war in Afghanistan is a key aspect.

NATO will hold a Summit in Portugal, this November. It seeks to renew its strategic concept, which represents a new and highly dangerous qualitative leap in that Organization's role, mission and goals.

With its new strategic concept, NATO seeks to put in its written doctrine that which is already a reality in practice: the geographic extension of its intervention and projection of force to the entire planet; the expansion of the nature of its missions to issues such as energy, environment, migrations and internal security of the States; to reaffirm itself as a nuclear military bloc, despite the rhetoric about nuclear disarmament, by envisaging the use of nuclear weapons in military attacks; to further develop the military-industrial complex and military research and demanding an increase in military expenditures from all its members; to include in its missions acts of direct interference and occupation, under the guise of peace-keeping missions; to profound the instrumentalization of the UN in order to pursue its purposes and strength its role as the armed arm of imperialism.

Imperialism appears to be all-powerful but it is not. As the facts are proving, the major threats arising from imperialism's force-based response to the crisis of capitalism are being confronted by the progressive and even revolutionary struggle of the peoples. In various parts of the world, the peoples are taking into their own hands the defense of their rights and of their countries' sovereignty and independence. They are resisting in the most diversified ways. They are imposing defeats to imperialism's strategy of domination.

In this context, expressing our profound conviction that, through the struggle it is possible to defeat the war-mongering and militaristic goals of NATO and build a future of peace, progress, social justice in which each people can freely decide on their own future, inseparable from the struggle for Socialism, we the Communist and Workers' Parties that are signatories to this statement:

• Demand an end to the arms race, nuclear disarmament beginning by the major nuclear powers in the world as is the case of the USA, elimination of all chemical and biological weapons and an end to foreign military bases.
• Call upon the workers and peoples of the whole world, on the popular and anti-imperialist forces, on the working-class movement and other social organizations to mobilize and strengthen their struggle, for peace, against war and NATO. We reaffirm our long-standing support for the peace movement. We congratulate the World Peace Council for its 60^th anniversary and for its campaign against NATO.
• Declare our intention to mark the 65^th anniversary of the victory over Nazism and Fascism as an important day of struggle for peace and against the monumental historical distortion that attempts to erase the crucial role of Communists in the liberation of peoples from the yoke of Nazi-fascist and to equate Nazism with Communism.
• Reaffirm our solidarity with the peoples that resist imperialism’s occupations, aggressions and interference and that are waging difficult battles for their self-determination and independence, namely the peoples of the Middle East, like the Palestinian, Lebanese and Syrian peoples, and Central Asia. We demand the immediate withdrawal of all the military forces from Iraq and Afghanistan and from all the other imperialist interventions around the world.
• Demand the dissolution of NATO and support the peoples’ sovereign right to decide on the disengagement of their countries from this aggressive alliance. We reaffirm our frontal opposition to the militarization of the European Union and its militarist and interventionist policy, to the expansion of NATO and to the deployment of the new US and NATO “anti-missile shield” in Romania and Bulgaria. We express our solidarity with the Cypriot people (Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots) in its struggle against the Turkish occupation and for the reunification of its homeland, for a just solution to the Cypriot issue.
• Demand an end to the provocations and interference in Latin America and Caribbean. We express our solidarity with Socialist Cuba and with the peoples, the political forces and national governments with a democratic, progressive, popular and anti-imperialist character, such as Bolivarian Venezuela, Bolivia, Ecuador and Nicaragua. We demand the release of the five Cuban patriots unjustly imprisoned in the USA. We reiterate our support for the struggle of the people of Honduras for democracy and against the coup regime, so that the people may determine the future of their country. We demand the recall of the Fourth US Fleet deployed to South and Central America and the closing down of US military bases in the region, namely Guantanamo and the bases in Colombia. We denounce the USA’s military intervention in Haiti and we demand from the United Nations that the Haiti mission be civilian in nature. We demand that the actions of solidarity and cooperation with the Haitian people contribute to the strengthening of the independent national State and to the economic and social progress in the Country.
• Express our solidarity with the peoples of Africa in their struggle for the right to development and with the people of Western Sahara for their right to self-determination. We demand an end to imperialist interference and militarization of the continent, namely in Somalia and its shores, in the whole region of the Horn of Africa, in the Democratic Republic of the Congo and in Sudan. We reaffirm our commitment to continue the struggle against the US military Command for the continent (AFRICOM).
• Express our support for the peace movement, the class-based trade union movement, the youth, women and other organizations which, in Portugal, are promoting the campaign for peace and against NATO. We pledge to do everything we can to support and mobilize for the actions of struggle against NATO and its new strategic concept which are scheduled for November of this year in Portugal.

The Parties:

• Portuguese Communist Party
• South African Communist Party
• Workers Party of Belgium
• Communist Party of Brazil
• Communist Party of Cuba
• Progressive Party for the Working People (AKEL)
• Communist Party of Bohemia and Moravia
• Communist Party of Greece
• Communist Party of India (Marxist)
• Communist Party of India
• Lebanese Communist Party
• Communist Party of the Russian Federation
• Communist Party of Spain

• PADS Algeria
• Communist Party of Australia
• Workers Party of Bangladesh
• Communist Party of Bolivia
• Brasilian Communist Party
• Communist Party of Britain
• New Communist Party of Britain
• Communist Party in Denmark
• German Communist Party
• Hungarian Communist Workers Party
• Tudeh Party of Iran
• Iraqi Communist Party
• Communist Refoundation – Italy
• Party of the Italian Communists
• Communist Party of Luxembourg
• Party of the Communists of Mexico
• Popular Socialist Party of Mexico
• Communist Party of Norway
• Peruan Communist Party
• Communist Party of the Peoples of Spain

A Split in the Peace Movement between Opponents and Objective Supporters of the Wars, Written by Bill Preston, mltoday.com, Oct 26, 2010

http://fwd4.me/k30

On Sunday, October 3, 2010, the day after the One Nation Working Together rally, several dozen organizations sent participants to a by-invitation-only meeting in Washington, DC, called by a nine-person planning committee that included representatives of Peace Action and U.S. Labor Against the War.

Called "New Priorities for a New Economy: Bringing the Economy into Line with Our Values," it sought to discuss how to achieve "a coordinated effort to cut military spending and redirect resources to fund local jobs and services." Its main aim was to lobby Congress about budget priorities. There was also talk among some participants of "reshifting the peace movement" [sic], exactly from where and to what being left mostly vague.

It was disturbing that Judith LeBlanc, a Peace Action representative, borrowed a phrase from former Secretary of State Colin Powell, claiming that "we're building on" the idea (supposedly based on an informal survey of some Oct. 2 marchers): "'You broke it. You fix it.' People worry about what's going to happen to the people of Afghanistan and Iraq" [i.e., when U.S. occupation forces leave].

This notion amounted to a suggestion of a new political foundation upon which to frame a new political house for the U.S. peace movement. Objectively, it would have the U.S. peace movement assume responsibility — not for bringing wholly illegitimate occupations to an immediate end — but for managing their "final" stages in the interest of U.S. imperialism and alleged "Western liberal" values.

Implicit in this suggested "new" peace movement is the rejection of the idea that the U.S.'s victims in Afghanistan and Iraq have the absolute right to self-determination in whatever form they choose to exercise it — notwithstanding the fact that political-religious expressions of the national sovereignties they are likely to regain will fail to conform to "Western liberal" values.

A paternalistic concern for "what's going to happen to the people of Afghanistan and Iraq" without the U.S. occupying their countries shows how far imperialist assumptions have infected sections of the US peace movement.

On the contrary, a peace movement worthy of the name ought to demand the immediate and unconditional end to the U.S. occupations and wars against Afghanistan and Iraq.

Immediate and unconditional because the discourse of timetables and preconditions for withdrawal works to divert the peace movement into helping imperialism solve its own problems.

Occupation forces in their entirety must exit this U.S. war: Not just U.S. combat troops but all U.S. and non-U.S. armed forces (including so-called "peacekeeping troops"), plus all the mercenaries and other "contractors," from both the U.S. and every other country.

Objections by politically sophisticated people on "humanitarian" grounds to the demand for an immediate and unconditional withdrawal in fact serve as objective support for imperialism: They provide peace-movement cover to an Administration and Congressional leadership that continue U.S. imperialism's war against the Afghan and Iraqi peoples.

It has not escaped notice that such a "reshifting" away from opposition to US imperialist aggressions would be acceptable to much of the present US Administration, whereas a struggle against its two major aggressions would incur its wrath.

I represented the U.S. Peace Council at this meeting. The U.S. Peace Council is a multi-racial, pro-working class, anti-imperialist organization committed to peace and justice, international solidarity with the peoples of the world against colonialism and imperialism, and universal disarmament. The U.S. Peace Council is affiliated with the World Peace Council, the world's largest peace organization.

A number of other participants and I disagreed with Peace Action and other representatives who shared or conciliated that organization's tacit support for the wars. We argued instead for the imperative need to struggle against the U.S. wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

At the meeting I also distributed the following written statement (slightly revised for clarity), which I drafted, and which I signed along with Carl Gentile, with whom I work in the Baltimore-Washington Area Peace Council. Part of it is below.

We must foreground the demand for an immediate unconditional end to the U.S. occupation wars against Afghanistan and Iraq. The trillions of dollars devoted to war industry profits feed more than 1,000 extraterritorial U.S. military bases around the world as well as U.S. and U.S.-backed occupation and wars against Palestine, Colombia, Pakistan, Lebanon, Somalia, and Yemen, threats to Iran and Democratic Korea, and the deployment of Special Operations forces in a total of about 75 countries.

These wars remain a central political fact of our time. The movement to reduce military spending and redirect resources to fund jobs and meet human needs will get nowhere without a clear and unambiguous, energetic, frontal condemnation of the U.S. occupation wars.

In sum, to redirect resources to fund jobs and meet human needs will require struggle against the occupation wars and military bases, and against the thoroughgoing enmity to the socialist countries and oppressed peoples they embody—all of which will necessitate our political confrontation with the war industry and its lobbyists and bought-and-paid-for politicians.

Weimar in Jerusalem: the rise of fascism in Israel, By Uri Avnery, Sabbah Report, October 23, 2010

Fascist slogans in Israel
http://fwd4.me/jEG

In Berlin, an exhibition entitled "Hitler and the Germans" has just opened. It examines the factors that caused the German people to bring Adolf Hitler to power and follow him to the very end…

Since childhood, precisely this question has been troubling me. How did it happen that a civilized nation, which saw itself as the "people of poets and thinkers", followed this man, much as the children of  Hamelin followed the pied piper to their doom.

This troubles me not only as a historical phenomenon, but as a warning for the future. If this happened to the Germans, can it happen to any people? Can it happen here, in Israel?

As a nine-year old boy I was an eyewitness to the collapse of German democracy and the ascent of the Nazis to power. The pictures are engraved in my memory – the election campaigns following each other, the uniforms in the street, the debates around the table, the teacher who greeted us for the first time with "Heil Hitler". I resurrected these memories in a book I wrote (in Hebrew) during the Eichmann trial, and which ended with a chapter entitled "Can it happen here?" I am returning to them these days, as I write my memoirs.

Fascism – no longer a taboo

I don't know if the Berlin exhibition tries to answer these questions. Perhaps not. Even now, 77 years later, there is no final answer to the question: why did the German republic collapse?

This is an all-important question, because now people in Israel are asking, with growing concern: is the Israeli republic collapsing?

For the first time, this question is being asked in all seriousness. Throughout the years, we were careful not to mention the word fascism in public discourse. It raises memories which are too monstrous. Now this taboo has been broken.

Yitzhak Herzog, the minister of welfare in the Netanyahu government, a member of the Labour party, the grandson of a chief rabbi and the son of a president, said a few days ago that "fascism is touching the margins of our society". He was wrong: fascism is not only touching the margins, it is touching the government in which he is serving, and the Knesset, of which he is a member.

Not a day – quite literally – passes without a group of Knesset members tabling a new racist bill. The country is still divided by the amendment to the law of citizenship, which will compel applicants to swear allegiance to "Israel as a Jewish and democratic state". Now the ministers are discussing whether this will be demanded only of non-Jews (which doesn't sound nice) or of Jews, too – as if this would change the racist content one bit.

This week, a new bill was tabled. It would prohibit non-citizens from acting as tourist guides in East Jerusalem. Non-citizens in this case means Arabs. Because, when East Jerusalem was annexed by force to Israel after the 1967 war, its Arab inhabitants were not granted citizenship. They were accorded only the status of "permanent residents", as if they were recent newcomers and not scions of families that have lived in the city for centuries.

The bill is intended to deprive Arab Jerusalemites of the right to serve as tourist guides at their holy places in their city, since they are apt to deviate from the official propaganda line. Shocking? Incredible? Not in the eyes of the proponents, who include members of the Kadima Party. A Knesset member of the Meretz party also signed, but retracted, claiming that he was confused.

This proposal comes after dozens of bills of this kind have been tabled recently, and before dozens of others which are already on their way. The Knesset members act like sharks in a feeding frenzy. There is a wild competition between them to see who can devise the most racist bill.

It pays. After each such bill, the initiators are invited to TV studios to "explain" their purpose. Their pictures appear in the papers. For obscure MKs, whose names we have never heard of, that poses an irresistible temptation. The media are collaborating.

Israel's place in the international club of fascists

This is not a uniquely Israeli phenomenon. All over Europe and America, overt fascists are raising their heads. The purveyors of hate, who until now have been spreading their poison at the margins of the political system, are now arriving at the centre.

In almost every country there are demagogues who build their careers on incitement against the weak and helpless, who advocate the expulsion of "foreigners" and the persecution of minorities. In the past they were easy to dismiss, as was Hitler at the beginning of his career. Now they must be taken seriously.

Only a few years ago, the world was shocked when Jörg Haider's party was allowed Into the Austrian government coalition. Haider praised Hitler's achievements. The Israeli government furiously recalled its ambassador to Vienna. Now the new Dutch government is dependent on the support of a declared racist, and fascist parties achieve impressive election gains in many countries. The "Tea Party" movement, which is blooming in the US, has some clearly fascist aspects. One of its candidates likes to go around wearing the uniform of the murderous Nazi Waffen-SS.

So we are in good company. We are no worse than the others. If they can do it, why not us?

But there is a big difference: Israel is not in the same situation as Holland or Sweden…

The German republic carried the name of Weimar, the town where the constituent assembly adopted its constitution after World War I. The Weimar of Bach and Goethe was one of the cradles of German culture.

It was a shiningly democratic constitution. Under its wings, Germany saw an unprecedented intellectual and artistic bloom. So why did the republic collapse?

Generally, two causes are identified: humiliation and unemployment. When the republic was still in its infancy, it was forced to sign the Versailles peace treaty with the victors of World War I, a treaty that was but a humiliating act of surrender. When the republic fell behind with the payment of the huge indemnities levied on it, the French army invaded the industrial heartland of Germany in 1923, precipitating a galloping inflation – a trauma Germany has not recovered from to this day.

When the world economic crisis broke out in 1929, the German economy broke down. Millions of despairing unemployed sank into abject poverty and cried out for salvation. Hitler promised to wipe out both the humiliation of defeat and the unemployment, and fulfilled both promises: he gave work to the unemployed in the new arms industry and in public works, like the new autobahns, in preparation for war.

And there was a third reason for the collapse of the republic: the growing apathy of the democratic public. The political system of the republic just became loathsome. While the people were sinking into misery, the politicians went on playing their games. The public was longing for a strong leader, to impose order. The Nazis did not overthrow the republic. The republic imploded, the Nazis only filled the void.

In Israel there is no economic crisis. On the contrary, the economy is flourishing. Israel did not sign any humiliating agreement, like the Treaty of Versailles. On the contrary, it won all its wars. True, our fascists speak about the "Oslo criminals", much as Hitler ranted against the "November criminals", but the Oslo agreement was the opposite of the Versailles treaty, which was signed in November 1919.

If so, what does the profound crisis of Israeli society stem from? What causes millions of citizens to regard with complete apathy the doings of their leaders, contenting themselves with shaking their heads in front of the TV set? What causes them to ignore what's happening in the occupied territories, half an hour's drive from their home? Why do so many declare that they do not listen to the news or read newspapers anymore? What is the origin of the depression and despair, which leave open the road to fascism?

The state has arrived at a crossroads: peace or eternal war. Peace means the foundation of a Palestinian state and the evacuation of the settlements. But the genetic code of the Zionist movement is pushing towards the annexation of the whole of the historical country up to the Jordan River, and – directly or indirectly – the transfer of the Arab population. The majority of the people is evading a decision by claiming that "we have no partner for peace" anyhow. We are condemned to eternal war.

Democracy is suffering from a growing paralysis, because the different sectors of the people live in different worlds. The secular, the national-religious and the Orthodox receive totally different educations. Common ground between them is shrinking. Other rifts are gaping between the old Ashkenazi community, the Oriental Jews, the immigrants from the former Soviet Union and Ethiopia, and the Arab citizens, whose separation from the rest is increasing all the time.

For the second time in my life, I may have to witness the collapse of a republic. But that is not predestined. Israel is not the goose-stepping Germany of those days, 2010 is not 1933. The Israeli society can yet sober up in time and mobilize the democratic forces within itself.

But for that to happen, it must awake from the coma, understand what is happening and where it is leading to, protest and struggle by all available means (as long as that is still possible), in order to arrest the fascist wave that is threatening to engulf us.

* Uri Avnery is an Israeli journalist, writer and peace activist.

The Perfect Storm, by Robert Reich, Robert Reich's Blog, 18 October 10

Portrait, Robert Reich, 08/16/09. (photo: Perian Flaherty)

http://fwd4.me/iFV

It's a perfect storm. And I'm not talking about the impending dangers facing Democrats. I'm talking about the dangers facing our democracy.

First, income in America is now more concentrated in fewer hands than it's been in 80 years. Almost a quarter of total income generated in the United States is going to the top 1 percent of Americans.

The top one-tenth of one percent of Americans now earn as much as the bottom 120 million of us.

Who are these people? With the exception of a few entrepreneurs like Bill Gates, they're top executives of big corporations and Wall Street, hedge-fund managers, and private equity managers. They include the Koch brothers, whose wealth increased by billions last year, and who are now funding tea party candidates across the nation.

Which gets us to the second part of the perfect storm. A relatively few Americans are buying our democracy as never before. And they're doing it completely in secret.

Hundreds of millions of dollars are pouring into advertisements for and against candidates - without a trace of where the dollars are coming from. They're laundered through a handful of groups. Fred Maleck, whom you may remember as deputy director of Richard Nixon's notorious Committee to Reelect the President (dubbed Creep in the Watergate scandal), is running one of them. Republican operative Karl Rove runs another. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, a third.

The Supreme Court's Citizens United vs. the Federal Election Commission made it possible. The Federal Election Commission says only 32 percent of groups paying for election ads are disclosing the names of their donors. By comparison, in the 2006 midterm, 97 percent disclosed; in 2008, almost half disclosed.

We're back to the late 19th century when the lackeys of robber barons literally deposited sacks of cash on the desks of friendly legislators. The public never knew who was bribing whom.

Just before it recessed the House passed a bill that would require that the names of all such donors be publicly disclosed. But it couldn't get through the Senate. Every Republican voted against it. (To see how far the GOP has come, nearly ten years ago campaign disclosure was supported by 48 of 54 Republican senators.)

Here's the third part of the perfect storm. Most Americans are in trouble. Their jobs, incomes, savings, and even homes are on the line. They need a government that's working for them, not for the privileged and the powerful.

Yet their state and local taxes are rising. And their services are being cut. Teachers and firefighters are being laid off. The roads and bridges they count on are crumbling, pipelines are leaking, schools are dilapidated, and public libraries are being shut.

There's no jobs bill to speak of. No WPA to hire those who can't find jobs in the private sector. Unemployment insurance doesn't reach half of the unemployed.

Washington says nothing can be done. There's no money left.

No money? The marginal income tax rate on the very rich is the lowest it's been in more than 80 years. Under President Dwight Eisenhower (who no one would have accused of being a radical) it was 91 percent. Now it's 36 percent. Congress is even fighting over whether to end the temporary Bush tax cut for the rich and return them to the Clinton top tax of 39 percent.

Much of the income of the highest earners is treated as capital gains, anyway - subject to a 15 percent tax. The typical hedge-fund and private-equity manager paid only 17 percent last year. Their earnings were not exactly modest. The top 15 hedge-fund managers earned an average of $1 billion.

Congress won't even return to the estate tax in place during the Clinton administration – which applied only to those in the top 2 percent of incomes.

It won't limit the tax deductions of the very rich, which include interest payments on multi-million dollar mortgages. (Yet Wall Street refuses to allow homeowners who can't meet mortgage payments to include their primary residence in personal bankruptcy.)

There's plenty of money to help stranded Americans, just not the political will to raise it. And at the rate secret money is flooding our political system, even less political will in the future.

The perfect storm: An unprecedented concentration of income and wealth at the top; a record amount of secret money flooding our democracy; and a public becoming increasingly angry and cynical about a government that's raising its taxes, reducing its services, and unable to get it back to work.

We're losing our democracy to a different system. It's called plutocracy.



Robert Reich is Professor of Public Policy at the University of California at Berkeley. He has served in three national administrations, most recently as secretary of labor under President Bill Clinton. He has written twelve books, including "The Work of Nations," "Locked in the Cabinet," "Supercapitalism" and his latest book, "AFTERSHOCK: The Next Economy and America's Future." His 'Marketplace' commentaries can be found on publicradio.com and iTunes.

Communist Party of Puerto Rico Founded, Written by Juan Zapata, in Marxism-Leninism Today, Sunday, Oct 17, 2010

http://mltoday.com/en/subject-areas/communist-forum/communist-party-of-puerto-rico-founded-963-2.html

After an absence of almost 20 years, Puerto Rico once again has a Communist Party, founded on June 19 in the city of San Juan at the Electrical Workers union hall. News of the refounding of a communist party in Puerto Rico was reported in newspapers throughout Latin America, Spain and in Spanish-language newspapers of the United States.

In a resolution proclaiming the founding of the Communist Party of Puerto Rico, they state: “The deepening of the now irreversible capitalist crisis and its ever worsening effects against the working, dispossessed and exploited masses makes it more necessary than ever” that there be an active Communist Party in Puerto Rico.
The crisis in the world communist movement of the early 1990's resulted in confusion among Marxist-Leninist parties throughout the world, leading to the demise of a number of communist parties. One of these was the Puerto Rican Communist Party, founded in 1934, though another factor leading to the destruction of that party was the merger of another a left group which acted as a faction.

Ten years later in 2001 a group of former members of the PCP and others formed Communist Refoundation of Puerto Rico with the goal of reconstituting a Marxist-Leninist party in Puerto Rico.

One of the goals of Communist Refoundation was educational, to prepare communist cadre with the study of economic, history of the labor and communist movements in the world and in Puerto Rico, and Marxist theory and practice. To this end they formed the Lenin School which has classes in the south and western parts of the country.

“We direct this ideological work mainly to the youth and the working class,” CPPR spokesman Miguel Cruz Santos told progressive Swedish journalist Dick Emanuelsson. “Socialist organizations had let go of the work of educating cadre and we have retaken that as a basic task to move our work forward. We cannot develop the revolutionary struggle of our class without having cadre that is prepared.”

Cruz Santos told Emanuelsson that the lapse in ideological and educational work has led to a “social-democratization” of the revolutionary movement.

Another goal of Communist Refoundation is the unity of all forces that fight for socialism, irrespective of their ideology. In this regard, the communists have participated in the Socialist Front, a coalition of different socialist organizations and individuals. Even though the members of the Socialist Front work together to develop joint policies in struggle without attacking one another within it, each organization is free to develop its own ideological perspective and criticize opposing ones in its own work.

The CPPR will continue this work, according to its 74-page political program, but not the exclusion of other practical political work.

Among the immediate tasks that Puerto Rican communists have decided to work on is to fight to restructure the unfair and regressive tax structure. Communists are demanding the end of the sales tax imposed a few years ago after the government stop providing almost all services due to a financial crisis.

The CPPR also demands the end of highway tolls “which fall upon the backs of wage workers” as well as raising taxes on corporations and even higher taxes on “non-productive, speculative, financial corporations,” as well as cutting deductions which only benefit the rich.

High on the priority for the Puerto Rican communists is fighting for labor rights. The “CPPR is on the front lines in the struggle in defence of the labor rights won and for the ongoing broadening of those rights...” declares the party program.

Currently the pro-statehood government of Luis Fortuño is attempting a “labor law reform without loss of rights” to bring Puerto Rican employment laws to follow US labor laws. This would mean rolling back rights and benefits that Puerto Rican workers have won which are better than those under US laws.

Another part of fighting the anti-worker plans of Gov.  Fortuño is revving up the fight against his neo-liberal Public-Private Alliances (PPA) which seeks to privatize services provided by the government and has resulted in the lay-off of tens of thousands of workers.

Other arenas of struggle for the Puerto Rican communists include the fight to preserve and strengthen the co-operative enterprises by exempting them from taxation, strengthening the Co-op Bank, and stopping the privatization of co-ops through the PPAs. Puerto Rico has historically had a vibrant co-op movement.

Besides other questions like defense of the rights of immigrants, women, LGBT people, education and the environment, Puerto Rican communists put a special emphasis on the national question.

While there continues to exist a “relationship of colonial subjugation” of Puerto Rico by the United States,  “the colonial question is a priority political issue” states the PRCP Program.

“Humanity has categorically condemned colonialism since the middle of the 20th Century, and for good reasons; it embodies a form of exploitation that is particularly repugnant since it destroys the opportunity nations have to organize and establish their own State for their own economic, social and cultural benefit and not for the colonizing country's thieving capitalists. Colonialism tends to corrupt and make vile the peoples dominated by this form of oppression, creating sick and mutilated societies, lacking feelings of solidarity and with an absence of a vision for the future,” proclaims the CPPR.

They note that even though the world condemns colonialism to the point where “Puerto Rico is one of the few countries” that is still under colonial domination, that still doesn't prevent the bourgeosie of the imperialist countries from such a system of colonial exploitation. “Puerto Rico is effectively one of the last colonies on the planet and home to 80% of the peoples of the world under this shameful system of exploitation.”

Conscious of countries that have obtained their formal independence but are under neocolonial economic and political domination by the imperialist countries, the Communist Party says a sovereign Puerto Rican national state cannot be designed the “colonial burocracy of the United States” nor can there be any restrictions on political nor social liberties, type of social system the people decide upon, nor relationships with any other country and this includes whether to form a “federation with republics of the Caribbean or Latin America.”

France : Support for the Protest Movement Is Still Gathering Momentum, Translated Sunday 17 October 2010, by Isabelle Metral and reviewed by Bill Scoble, l humanite in english

ORIGINAL FRENCH ARTICLE: Le soutien au mouvement prend encore de l’ampleur
by Paule Masson



Far from being on the ebb, social anger against the French government’s pensions reform grows stronger every day. The IFOP poll we publish today shows that 57% of French people want discussions to start fresh over “another pensions reform project”. Only 16% simply want the bill to be withdrawn, proof that little by little the idea that another reform is possible and alternative proposals must be discussed is gaining strength.

Young people between 18 and 24 (to the tune of 64%) and blue-collar workers (59%) are the categories that are the most favourable to this position. Our poll is only one in a series of many, notably the BVA poll (before last Tuesday’s general strike), in which 54% of French people say they support the idea of “a general strike as in 1995”.

Our poll also confirms what is taking place at the grassroots level. For the last few days, the social conflict has been expressing itself in a multitude of initiatives that prove it’s a round-the-clock protest. “A lot of the information available concerns” oil refineries or transport, “but that’s only the surface of things”, Bernard Thibault, general secretary of the Labour General Confederation (CGT) keeps saying, as opposed to statements that the movement is “running out of steam”. General assemblies are taking place in hundreds of plants or services; a lot of them don’t vote for a daily renewable strike, or “not yet”. But most discuss the possible forms of the movement, of its extension, and prepare multi-branch actions, like last Saturday’s demonstrations. At least 230 demonstrations have been called across the country.

In many towns demonstrations take place on a daily basis, whether among secondary school pupils or multi-branch workers. That was true last Friday of Marseille, Rouen, Montpellier, Nantes, Tours, Saint-Nazaire and elsewhere. Other actions develop that block access to and operations in strategic sites like oil depots; but also roads, round-abouts, and tunnels are being blocked.

For the last few days, local public services have been seething. The CGT numbered some 120 local government services in at least 50 départements (against 43 last Thursday) that were disrupted. Garbage collectors are on strike in Marseille and Paris. In Bordeaux, 46 school canteens are closed, while in Nantes the central kitchen does not supply any meals to the town’s schools. The contempt the government has shown towards young people who supposedly “have no reason to demonstrate” and “are only skipping classes”, has given a kick-start to the movement. The schools union (UNL) said 400 schools were mobilized last Tuesday at midday, and 1100 two days later. Now on the ropes, the government is trying the tactic of repression in order to divide protesters, notably against young marchers. In doing so, it is raking the embers of accumulated rancour and some of the rallies have gotten out of control. Yesterday police forced demonstrators out of the oil depots they were occupying.

In choosing the strategy of fear-mongering, the government is taking the risk of further widening the clash. “This reform symbolizes all the injustices in this country,” François Chérèque, the general secretary of the CFDT (a more moderate labour confederation) concedes. Interviewed by AFP, Guy Groux, a specialist on social movements, wonders “whether we are not witnessing a more global rejection that extends even beyond the pensions reform to a rejection of the government.”

Indeed the nature of the movement may be changing. But it is certainly not on the ebb. As (...) Saturday’s demonstration may [1] once more show.

[1] This article was published in the October 16 issue

"PROFUNC " A Draconian Canadian Anti-Communist Govt Programme Revealed to exist from 1950-1984, transl. by Andy Taylor from Radio Canada story, Wednesday, October 13, 2010 at 20 h 26

See: http://www.radio-canada.ca/nouvelles/Politique/2010/10/13/004-crise-octobre-communisme.shtml
40 years ago, police in Quebec began to list the people who would be arrested within days under the War Measures Act, adopted October 16, 1970, in the wake of the October crisis.
In the hours that followed the proclamation of this law, nearly 500 people were arrested by police.
 
Since then, a  mystery has existed about the true motives of arrests made during this period because we know that anti-terrorism experts of the three police forces - municipal, provincial and federal - had at most a few dozen suspects.
 
"The largest number [of names of suspected FLQ] I've seen on console, it was about sixty," said Julien Giguère, who was then director of intelligence of the Anti-Terror Branch of police in Montreal .
 
But the Surete du Quebec, responsible for arrests, judge this number to be  ridiculous considering the scale of the resources in place, with  The War Measures Act and the presence of 8000 soldiers. They appealed to the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) to extend its list so that the scale of operation would better reflect the resources deployed.
Waterlot Daniel, who was then a communist bookstore in Montreal, was among those who were arrested. "On 16, at 4 am, boom, there is the War Measures Act . They go into my library, they break everything! [...] Me, I'm not the FLQ. I am of the Communist Party, this is not the same! " 

This extensive record of the RCMP, consulted by Radio-Canada, in fact contains no reference to the FLQ, but there is a form of arrest linked to a top secret program set up in 1950 , during the Cold War and the era of McCarthyism in the United States. This included the imprisonment of Canadian Communist Party activists in the event of a conflict with the USSR.
 
The program, called PROFUNC, aimed at ensuring continuous monitoring of thousands of leftists and their detention in internment camps, without charge and without time limit. Officially, it was dismantled in 1984 when the RCMP was split into two to create the Service.
PROFUNC had its only practical application in October 1970 , as accredited by a draft of a secret report of the  Duchaine Committee, which investigated the events surrounding the October crisis.
 
In this document, which Radio-Canada has studied, it was reported that the names proposed by the RCMP had no connection with  FLQ terrorism, but were actually activists known for their Communist activities.
 
The information was not found in the official report, as the existence of  national camps for political prisoners was top secret.
With reporting by Guy Gendron. 

University of Johannesburg threatens to sever ties with Israeli Ben-Gurion University if certain conditions are not met. Al Jazeera, Azad Essa 30 Sep 2010

http://fwd4.me/UAf

S African academics allege that Ben-Gurion university has collaborative projects with the Israeli army [REUTERS] The South African University of Johannesburg (UJ) senate has threatened to end its relationship with the Israeli university, Ben-Gurion (BGU), unless certain conditions are met. In a statement released on Wednesday, the South African university's highest academic body said Ben-Gurion University would have to work with Palestinian universities on research projects and stop its "direct and indirect support for the Israeli military and the occupation". "The conditions are that the memorandum of understanding governing the relationship between the two institutions be amended to include Palestinian universities chosen with the direct involvement of UJ," the university said in a statement. "Additionally, UJ will not engage in any activities with BGU that have direct or indirect military implications, this to be monitored by UJ's senate academic freedom committee. "Should these conditions not be met within six months, the memorandum of understanding will automatically lapse on April 1 2011," UJ said. Describing the afternoon senate meeting on Wednesday as mostly "tense", the UJ senate also called on BGU to "respect UJ's duty (and) to take seriously, allegations of behaviour on the part of BGU's stakeholders that is incompatible with UJ's values". 'Human dignity' Adam Habib, the UJ's vice-chancellor told Al Jazeera that the decision was based on two principles. "Firstly it was important to identify with an oppressed population and secondly, it was about creating an enabling environment for reconciliation and the achievement of human dignity." Habib said his university will be engaging Palestinian academic institutions in a bid to solicit advice on mapping a way forward, and that the current memorandum of understanding (MOU) between UJ and Ben-Gurion would have to broaden. "For instance, we know that the BGU has collaborative projects with the Israeli army and we also know that the university implements state policy, which invariably results in the discrimination of the Palestinian people," Habib said. "Crucially, there can be no activities between UJ and an Israeli educational institution that discriminated against the Palestinian people." Habib said that while the decision still had to be ratified by the university council, these changes would have to happen over the next six months, or the existing MOU would collapse. 'Unprecedented momentum' Salim Vally, a senior researcher at the Faculty of Education and spokesman for the Palestinian Solidarity Committee (PSC), told Al Jazeera that the move to sever academic ties with BGU "has created an unprecedented momentum and has galvanised academics towards fighting for social justice". "While the PSC supports an unequivocal and unambiguous boycott of all Israeli state institutions, this is a move in the right direction and we are confident that it would lead to a more comprehensive boycott of Israel in the future. "We know that they have a relationship with the military, making them complicit in the acts of the army, and in the next six months we will prove that the relationship with BGU should be severed completely," Vally said. Relations between Ben-Gurion University and the University of Johannesburg, formerly the Rand Afrikaans University, a formerly all-white university under South Africa's apartheid system, began in 1987. The University of Johannesburg, created in 2005, took over various campuses including Rand Afrikaans University and a university in the black township of Soweto as part of efforts to ensure higher education was transformed with the rest of South Africa after the end of apartheid. The current partnership with Ben Gurion dates back to August 2009 when the universities signed an academic cooperation and staff exchange agreement, concerning water purification and micro-algal biotechnology research. Academic dissonance The re-established relationship drew sharp criticism from the university community and catalysed the formation of a petition that has drawn some of the biggest academics, authors and social activists in South Africa. Desmond Tutu and around 250 other prominent South African academics have supported ending UJ's links with the Israeli institution. "Israeli universities are an intimate part of the Israeli regime, by active choice,'' Tutu wrote in an essay that appeared in a South African newspaper on Sunday. "While Palestinians are not able to access universities and schools, Israeli universities produce the research, technology, arguments and leaders for maintaining the occupation.'' Academic boycotts of Israeli universities have been inspired by boycotts of South African institutions during apartheid. A 2003 proposal for British universities to sever all ties with Israeli academic institutions was defeated. Two years later Britain's Association of University Teachers voted to boycott Israel's Haifa and Bar Ilan universities. That decision was overturned only a month later under fierce international pressure. US professors and students also have called for academic and cultural boycotts of Israel. The moves have prompted sharp criticism. Harvard University law professor Alan Dershowitz once threatened legal action that would "devastate and bankrupt'' anyone who boycotts Israeli universities. The New York-based Anti-Defamation League described the British moves as anti-Semitic, arguing Israel was being singled out while human rights violators such as Iran, Sudan, Venezuela and Zimbabwe were ignored.

Peace is possible, but not the Obama-Netanyahu way, by Central Committee of the Communist Party of Israel, October 10, 2010

http://www.maki.org.il/he/english-mainmenu-106

Resolutions of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Israel

"The key to success for any political negotiations is the will on the Israeli side to put an end to the occupation and to remove the settlements in order to enable the creation of a Palestinian state with its capital in East Jerusalem, besides Israel, whose capital is West Jerusalem", insists the Central Committee of the CPI in its 12th session, which took place in Haifa on 3 Sept. 2010.
The opening ceremony for direct negotiations between the Netanyahu government and the PLO, apparently served US President Obama as a diplomatic and political achievement in the run-up to the Congressional elections in November. Nevertheless, it does not seem that the planed negotiations between PM Netanyahu and PLO Chairman Mahmoud 'Abbas will bring about a peace agreement.

The CPI continues to support the attainment of a just, stable peace through negotiations based on the relevant UN resolutions, on the ending of the Israeli occupation and on the recognition of the Palestinian people's right to sovereignty and independence in the territories occupied in 1967. The experience of the 17 years since the signing of the Oslo Accords has taught us that without prior agreement on a timetable for the negotiations and their goal – the creation of a Palestinian state with its capital in East Jerusalem and the resolution of all final status issues, including the refugee issue – the negotiations have no chance of bringing about an end to the conflict.

The right-wing government led by Netanyahu is interested in direct negotiations as a means of escaping the trough which it has found itself stuck in vis-à-vis international public opinion since the Gaza war (2008/9) and the criminal killing of the passengers aboard the Gaza solidarity flotilla. Netanyahu also considers that ostensible progress will assist the US in pressuring the Arab states to join the conspiratorial offensive on Iran, which is an American-Israeli strategic target. What Netanyahu's government does not have, as is clear from statements by foreign minister Avigdor Lieberman and other ministers, is the will to dismantle the settlements and end the occupation.
Netanyahu and his government do not only reject the principles of retreat from all territories occupied in 1967, the dismantling of the settlements and the solution of the refugee question in accordance with UN resolutions – they are preparing to renew construction in the settlements at the end of the current freeze period. And if that is not enough, they demand that as a precondition for any progress towards an accord, the Palestinian leadership recognize the annexation of territories to Israel and the "Jewish character" of the Israeli state, by which is meant its exemption from the demand for equal national and civil rights for the Arab population in Israel.

We Israeli Communists, Jews and Arabs, warn that Netanyahu's positions and demands, backed up by the Obama administration, will not lead to a peace accord but to another war. The Israeli army's provocations on the northern border and in the Gaza Strip, the accelerated arms race and the various maneuvers all indicate preparations for a military offensive against targets near (Lebanon, Syria) and far (Iran).
Many Palestinian voices have been raised in criticism of President Abu-Mazen, who has vacillated in the face of the Obama administration's threats to block all economic aid and decided to join the talks. The Palestinian left has published an important and unequivocal proclamation calling to abstain, under current circumstances, from participation in US-sponsored talks, and warning that these will weaken the Palestinian Authority.

The CPI stands in solidarity with the left forces within the Palestinian people, who are struggling against all setbacks in the fight to end the occupation and the attainment of a just and stable peace, and who demand that the Palestinian Authority take a firm stand on Israel's complete retreat from the territories occupied in 1967.

The CPI calls upon the lovers of peace in Israel, Jews and Arabs, to struggle together against Netanyahu's right-wing government and its disastrous policy and for an Israeli-Palestinian peace without occupation or annexation.

The CPI salutes the courage of the many theater workers, authors and scholars who have declared their refusal to perform in the settlement of Ariel, as in any other settlement, and who have called upon their theaters' managements to work within Israel only. This resistance contributes to the effort to end the occupation and dismantle the settlements, which are an obstacle to a life of peace and good neighborly relations.

The hysteric attempts of government ministers, right-wing MKs (members of the Knesset – the Israeli parliament) and proto-fascist organizations to terrorize theater professionals and artists and to threaten critical academics with dismissal and withdrawal of funding, all point to the strong link between the defense of democracy and freedom of thought and putting an end to the occupation of the Palestinian people.

The Central Committee of the CPI denounces the bullying campaign against theater professionals, artists and academics, as well as the ongoing arrests of those resisting dispossession and settlement in Sheikh Jarrah and Silwan in East Jerusalem.

Escalation in the policy of dispossession

The repeated demolitions of the unrecognized village of al-'Araqib in the Negev, entailing the abuse and exposure of its residents, are an expression of the escalating policy of racist dispossession, disrespect for basic human rights and ethnic cleansing.
Arab and Jewish egalitarians have mounted militant opposition to the demolitions, aiding in rebuilding the village. The CPI is proud of their action and commends them.
The CPI denounces the demolitions, the police brutality, and the arrest and court proceedings against fighters for peace and equality – among them Ayman 'Odeh, Secretary of Hadash (The Democratic Front for Peace and Equality).
The CPI reiterates its support for the right to shelter and the right of the Bedouin Arabs to live on their land. The CPI's Political Bureau calls upon the party's organs to continue their actions of solidarity with the residents of Al-'Araqib, to gather donations for them and to do all they can to support the village's reconstruction.

The tenth anniversary of October 2000 events

A decade has passed since police and Border Guard personnel shot 13 Palestinian citizens of Israel dead after these protested the oppression of the Palestinian people. Ten years have gone by, but the shooters and those responsible for the killings have not been put on trial and the important findings of the investigative commission headed by Judge Theodor Orr have not been implemented.
The Central Committee supports the declaration of a general strike by the Arab public to commemorate the tenth anniversary of the October events and to highlight the struggle against dispossession and all forms of discrimination, including budgetary discrimination against Arab local councils.

The Central Committee calls upon the party's organs and the Communist Youth to mobilize their forces for the success of the Jewish-Arab event to be held in Nazareth on 2 Oct., marking a decade since the October events and calling for joint struggle against the danger of fascism and for a future of equality. The Central Committee also calls for similar events to be organized in additional cities.

Taking the Socialist out of the NDP, John Ivison, Nat'l Post, October 7, 2010

http://fwd4.me/POl


Jack Layton used to boast about being a socialist. “I’m proud to call myself a socialist. I prefer it by far to democratic socialist,” he said in an interview seven years ago.

Yet when I posed the same question yesterday, he was less strident. “I’m not into labels, but I prefer the description ‘social democrat’. I am the leader of Canada’s social democratic party and proud of it,” he said.

He sounded like former British Labour leader, Tony Blair, who also preferred the “social democrat” tag.

This is appropriate since Mr. Layton is preparing for his own “Clause Four Moment” — a shift that he hopes will symbolize the metamorphosis of an old 20th century socialist party into a vibrant 21st century social democratic party.

As the NDP prepares to celebrate its 50th anniversary at a convention next June, senior staff are busy re-writing the preamble to the party’s constitution — a move that was quietly approved by the rank and file at the last convention in Halifax in 2009.

The preamble currently states the NDP believes in the need “to modify and control the operation of the monopolistic productive and distributive organizations through economic and social planning, … where necessary [through] the principle of social ownership.”

One senior New Democrat strategist said that the move is part of a broader “overhaul” of NDP policy and beliefs. “There’s no more mention of a radical overthrowing of capitalism … Socialism is a word we don’t use,” he said.

The editing of the preamble echoes moves made by Mr. Blair, when he became leader of the Labour Party in the mid-1990s. For 80 years, the Labour Party had committed itself to “common ownership of the means of production, distribution and exchange,” under its notorious Clause Four. The abandonment of Clause Four by Mr. Blair was seen as a break with the party’s past — the moment Old Labour became New Labour.

The NDP’s move is likely to inflame left-wing rank-and-file members, who already think the party has moved too far toward the centre of the political spectrum.

James Laxer, a political science professor at York University and a former NDP leadership candidate, said the preamble changes reflect a longer term evolution in the party under Mr. Layton.

“The party has moved a long way from any real critical stance about the present economic system and a formal commitment to changing it.

“People say right now ‘what does the NDP stand for?’ It is hard to distinguish between them and the Liberals and some people are asking why we need two parties.”

However, he downplayed the prospect of a merger between the Liberals and the New Democrats. “Organizations have their own culture and part of the NDP culture is that they hate the Liberals,” he said.

A comparative look at the NDP’s 1997 election platform and the raft of policies on the current website reveals just how far the party has moved toward the centre.

Under former leader Alexa McDonough, the party proposed an excess profit tax on financial institutions, which would then finance a National Investment Bank managed by “business, labour, government and the community.” There was much talk of ending privatization and increasing public ownership; of raising corporate tax rates and imposing a “Millionaires’s Tax” on inheritances over $1-million. On foreign policy, the party proposed dissenting from NATO over the use of nuclear weapons.

The image presented today is very different. The “squeeze the rich” rhetoric has been abandoned, in favour of moderate language that tries to reconcile equality and economic well-being. “These goals….are not in conflict, rather they depend on each other. This is likely to be the tenor of the new preamble being written by Mr. Layton’s office.

“This is not the wild, wooly 1970s, when we had to own everything,” said the senior NDP strategist. “We know we need to create wealth and growth in order to allow the Treasury to intervene when it’s prudent and responsible.”

The message is clear — today’s NDP is not your Daddy’s Caddy.

The Cuban Government urges President Obama to abide with his commitment to fight terrorism, RAÚL CASTRO RUZ, 6 Oct 2010

SPEECH DELIVERED BY ARMY GENERAL RAÚL CASTRO RUZ, PRESIDENT OF THE COUNCILS OF STATE AND OF MINISTERS AT THE CEREMONY COMMEMORATING THE  VICTIMS OF STATE TERRORISM DAY AT THE REVOLUTIONARY ARMED FORCES “UNIVERSAL” THEATER ON OCTOBER 6, 2010.

http://www.cubadebate.cu/raul-castro-ruz/2010/10/06/the-cuban-government-urges-president-obama-to-abide-with-his-commitment-to-fight-terrorism/

Relatives of the victims of State Terrorism against Cuba,

Comrades:

As set out in the Council of State Decree-Law published today, beginning this year, October 6 will be commemorated as “Victims of State Terrorism Day.”

Exactly 34 years ago, 73 innocent people were assassinated: 11 Guyanese, 5 citizens of the Democratic Popular Republic of Korea and 57 Cubans. They were killed in midair when a bomb exploded aboard a Cubana de Aviación passenger plane that had just taken off from Barbados. Among them were 24 young Cubans from the national youth fencing team who had just swept all the gold medals at the Fourth Central-American and Caribbean Championships held in Venezuela.

For the Cuban people, who have been the target of state terrorism since the very triumph of the Cuban Revolution, the painful losses suffered that day were added to the numerous other victims for whom we are still seeking justice today.

The phenomenon dates back to 1959 when the newly-formed Revolution passed the first of a series of measures to benefit the people.

As early as March 1960, President Eisenhower approved a program of covert actions against Cuba that were declassified a few years ago. The U.S. Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) took over the lead role in planning, logistics, and the recruiting and training of mercenaries to carry out terrorist actions under the protection of the U.S. Government.

Fires, bombings and all sorts of acts of sabotage were carried out; airplanes and boats were hijacked; Cuban citizens were kidnapped; there were attacks against our embassies and assassinations of diplomats; dozens of our facilities were machine-gunned; multiple assassination attempts were carried out against the main leaders of the Revolution; and in particular, hundreds of assassination plans and attempts were carried out against the life of the Commander in Chief.

This year we are commemorating five decades since the brutal sabotage against the French steamship La Coubre in the port of Havana. The attack was planned to set off a double detonation of explosive charges that would greatly increase the number of victims. This crime caused the death of 101 people and left hundreds injured, including members of the French crew.

Every new aggression strengthened the Revolution across all sectors and levels. The consolidation of the revolutionary process forced the CIA terrorists and their bosses -who with their actions intended to provoke panic and demoralize the Cuban people- to draw up a plan to invade Cuba and create, in Florida, the largest intelligence center outside of their main headquarters in Langley.

The attack against Playa Girón (Bay of Pigs) caused the death of 176 compatriots and left 50 others permanently disabled. The sacrifice of these citizens helped our impassioned combatants defeat the invasion in less than 72 hours, preventing the arrival of a puppet government that was being safeguarded by the CIA in a military base in Florida. After arriving in Cuba, their plan was to request the intervention of the United States with the complicity of the OAS.

The recently elected President Kennedy inherited the invasion plan from the previous government and approved its implementation. However, he refused to accept responsibility for its resounding failure and instead decided to carry out Operation Mongoose that consisted of 33 projects that included plans to assassinate leaders of the Revolution, terrorist actions against socioeconomic objectives, and the introduction of arms and agents to Cuba to be used in espionage and subversive activities.

From the approval of the Operation Mongoose until January 1963, some 5,780 terrorist actions against Cuba have been carried out: 716 of which were full-scale sabotages against industrial facilities.

In this context, US-based terrorist organizations that were financed and protected by the CIA were the precursors to the use of airplane hijackings and civilian aircraft for military actions against Cuba.

Such actions soon turned against them, leading to a world pandemic of airplane hijackings which encouraged international terrorists to employ these methods. The situation was only resolved once the Cuban government unilaterally decided to return the hijackers.

Following the assassination of Kennedy, the new US president, Lyndon Johnson, continued with terrorist plans against the island. Between 1959 and 1965, the CIA organized, financed and supplied, from US territory, an estimated 229 armed counter-revolutionary groups, and some 3,995 mercenaries. These terrorists killed 549 Cuban combatants, farmers and teachers working in the national literacy campaign; and left thousands wounded and hundreds permanently disabled.

Shortly after, terrorist actions against Cuban embassies, offices and diplomatic officials abroad increased drastically causing the deaths of several brave comrades and many material losses.

On September 11, 1980, the Cuban representative at the UN, Félix García Rodríguez, was murdered by Cuban-born terrorist Eduardo Arocena, a member of the terrorist group “Omega 7.”

On May 5 that year 570 children and 156 workers were trapped by a fire set by terrorists at the Le Van Tan daycare center. These peoples lives were saved thanks to the quick and heroic actions by specialized forces and the solidarity of the Cuban people.

At the same time, another form of State Terrorism employed against Cuba is biological warfare developed by successive U.S. administrations. These methods included introducing diseases into Cuba that significantly affected the health of the Cuban people. In 1981, agents under the service of the U.S. government disseminated the hemorragic dengue epidemic that killed 156 people, including 101 children.

Several plagues were also introduced into Cuban territory to destroy the agriculture and livestock sector, causing incalculable losses in food stocks destined for the population and significant losses of export commodities.

The U.S. intelligence services, particularly the CIA, were directly or indirectly involved in the majority of these actions, in large part under the umbrella of Cuban counterrevolutionary organizations. It would be impossible to mention the endless chain of terrorist plans, actions and attacks committed against our country in just one address.

However, the list of perpetrators is quite short, because they are always the same.

Today we are here to pay tribute to the 3,478 Cubans who have died and the 2,099 that have become permanently disabled due to terrorist acts carried out against our homeland during half a century that add up 5,577 victims. The Barbados martyrs are part of the long list of fallen comrades who we have not forgotten nor ever will forget.

Orlando Bosch and Luis Posada Carriles, the authors of the Barbados crime and countless others against Cuba have lived and still live with impunity in Miami. Bosch, thanks to an executive pardon given by Bush Sr. the CIA director when Bosch´s agents committed sabotage against the Cuban plane; and Posada Carriles, thanks to the support of Bush Jr., walks freely while he awaits a trial for minor offences and not for the multiple charges of international terrorism that correspond to him.

Until very recently, these groups publicly proclaimed their crimes and cynically announced new acts of terror.

Had impunity not prevailed, 68 acts of terrorism against Cuba would have been prevented in the 1990s and we would not be regretting the death in Havana of Fabio di Celmo, a young Italian, who perished during the wave of terrorists attacks against tourism facilities in Havana in 1997.

The revealing declarations by self-confessed terrorist Chávez Abarca -broadcasted on Cuban television September 27 and 28– who was arrested by Venezuelan authorities as he planned to attack and undermine the stability of that brother country and other Latin American nations, confirm the existence of new methods of international terror and provide irrefutable proof about the guilt of Posada Carriles and his sponsors in the United States.

Despite all these crimes, Cuba has always been an example in the fight against terrorism and has ratified the condemnation of all such acts, in all its forms and manifestations.

Our country has signed all 13 existing international conventions on this issue and strictly abides by the commitments and obligations of the UN General Assembly resolutions and those of the Security Council. It does not possess nor intends to possess any type of weapons of mass destruction, and fully complies with its obligations under existing international instruments on nuclear, chemical , and biological weapons.

The Cuban territory has never been and never will be used to organize, finance or carry out terrorist acts against any other country, including the United States.

On several occasions the Cuban government has informed the U.S. Government about its willingness to exchange information regarding assassination plans and terrorist acts against objectives in both countries.

We have also provided ample information to the U.S. Government on terrorist acts against Cuba, particularly between 1997 and 1998 when we provided the FBI with abundant evidence on the bombings of several Cuban tourists resorts, and even gave them access to the perpetrators of these crimes, under arrest here, as well as to several witnesses.

In response, the FBI in Miami, closely linked to the Cuban-American extreme right that openly sponsors terrorism against Cuba, concentrated all of its efforts on chasing and prosecuting our fellow citizens Antonio, Fernando, Gerardo, Ramón, and Rene whom the US Government should have never arrested and imprisoned.

Today, thanks to international solidarity, the entire world knows about the unjust and inhumane treatment applied to the Five Cuban Heroes who fought in order to protect the Cuban people and even the American people from terrorism.

For how long will President Obama ignore international demands and allow injustice to prevail, something that is in his hands to eliminate? Until when will our Five Cuban Heroes remain in jail?

The current government of the United States of America, by their recent ratification of the arbitrary inclusion of our country in the State Department‘s annual list of “States Sponsors of Terrorism,” in addition to this infamous measure, has ignored once again the exemplary records of Cuba in this respect.

The United States of America also has disregarded the cooperation received from Cuba. In three occasions (November and December 2001, and March 2002) our representatives proposed to the U.S. authorities a draft project for bilateral cooperation to fight against terrorism, and in July 2009 reiterated their willingness to cooperate in this area without ever receiving a response.

The Cuban Government urges President Obama to abide with his commitment to fight terrorism and to act with determination and without double standards against those who from U.S. territory have perpetrated and continue to perpetrate terrorist acts against Cuba. This would be an honorable response to the open letter published today and sent by the Committee of Relatives of the Victims of the Cubana airplane that was blown up midair over the coast of Barbados.

Not for a moment can we forget that, as a result of State terrorism, the toll of dead and missing people we have suffered is higher than those who died during the attempt against the Twin Towers and the Oklahoma bombing combined.

I would like to conclude our tribute by recalling the unforgettable memorial service given to the victims of the Barbado`s crime on October 15, 1976, when we all swore to remember and condemn with unrelenting outrage the vile assassination.

Let us repeat Comrade Fidel`s statement on that occasion:
When an energetic and forceful people cry, injustice trembles!
We shall always remain loyal to those who have fallen in battle!

Glory to our heroes and martyrs!

International Flaw: With New Iran Sanctions, POTUS Calls Tehran’s Kettle Black, Posted by Nima Shirazi, blogs.alternet.org

Article printed from speakeasy: http://blogs.alternet.org/wideasleepinamerica

http://blogs.alternet.org/wideasleepinamerica/2010/10/06/international-flaw-with-new-iran-sanctions-potus-calls-tehrans-kettle-black/

    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact, non-Westerners never do.” - Samuel P. Huntington


“By alleging Iran has some problems, America’s problems aren’t resolved. Just alleging that Iran has a problem is not going to resolve Mrs. Clinton’s problems for her.”

- President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, speaking with Charlie Rose, May 3, 2010

On Wednesday afternoon, in a joint press conference, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Secretary of the Treasury Timothy Geithner announced that the United States had imposed a new set of unilateral sanctions, including a travel ban and freezing of assets, against a number of top-ranking Iranian officials whom it accused of “serious and sustained human rights abuses” since the presidential election last year. The measure, which comes less than four months after the UN Security Council’s latest illegalresolution and the Obama administration’s last round of economic sanctions, was enacted via an Executive Order signed into effect last night by the President.

This marked, as Clinton pointed out, “the first time the United States has imposed sanctions against Iran based on human rights abuses.” Every US administration since Carter’s has issued unilateral sanctions against Iran due to its continued opposition to US imperialism and insufficient deference to American diktat. However, the sanctions have previously been justified using the pretense of Iran’s alleged “active support of terrorism,” its totally legal and fully monitored nuclear energy program, as well as thewholly fabricated notion that “the actions and policies of the Government of Iran constitute an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security, foreign policy, and economy of the United States” and required “the declar[ation of] a national emergency to deal with that threat.” This last hysterical claim was introduced by the Secretary of State’s Presidential husband back in 1995.

This time around, Hillary Clinton stated, with regard to the eight government officials specifically targeted by the new order, “on [their] watch or under their command, Iranian citizens have been arbitrarily arrested, beaten, tortured, raped, blackmailed, and killed. Yet the Iranian Government has ignored repeated calls from the international community to end these abuses, to hold to account those responsible and respect the rights and fundamental freedoms of its citizens. And Iran has failed to meet its obligations under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.”

Apparently, the United States’ own recent history regarding the invasion and occupation of two foreign countries, the kidnapping, indefinite detention without charge, and thephysical and psychological torture of thousands of people, including at places likeGuantanamo, Bagram, and Abu Ghraib (where prisoners were raped by their American captors) is irrelevant to the administration’s finger-pointing charade and ongoing demonization campaign against Iran. Prisoners held by the United States in Afghanistanand Guantanamo, in addition to being “chained to the ceiling, shackled so tightly that the blood flow stops, kept naked and hooded and kicked to keep them awake for days on end,” have also been beaten to death by their interrogators. Of the fifteen soldiers chargedwith detainee abuse ranging from “dereliction of duty to maiming and involuntary manslaughter,” all but three have been acquitted. Those three received written reprimands and served, at most, 75 days in prison for their crimes.

In contrast, after reports of torture at Iran’s Kahrizak prison surfaced, the Iranian government moved swiftly to close the facility because it “lacked the standards” to maintain “rights of detainees” and launched an investigation into the allegations. Around the same time, 140 detainees were released from Tehran’s Evin Prison at the urging of the head of the Judiciary and Majlis ministers.

Additionally, according to a Financial Times report from June 25, 2009 and featured only as an insert in the print edition, several students who had been arrested during the post-election protests, rallies, and riots, were freed in order to join 1.3 million other young Iranians in taking the national university entrance exam.

In December 2009, Iranian authorities announced that twelve prison officials from Kahrizak had been arrested and charged with murder and other crimes, including abuse, negligence and deprivation of prisoners’ legal rights. This past June, courts passed down prison sentences and other punishment to those accused and two prison guards wereconvicted of murder and “intentional assault and battery” and were sentenced to death. It was reported this week that the death sentences have been rescinded at the request of the families of the victims.

Of course, human rights abuses in Iran are indeed serious and deserve condemnation. Most recently, Hossein “Hoder” Derakhshan, Iran’s so-called “blogfather,” has beenconvicted of “collaborating with hostile governments, committing blasphemy and propaganda against the Islamic Republic, and managing an obscene website” and sentenced to 19.5 years in prison.

Meanwhile, the United States continues firmly protecting its own war criminals, maintains a two-tiered justice system, routinely criminalizes dissent and whistleblowing, and breeds soldiers who kill civilians for sport and dismember corpses for fun.

“The steady deterioration in human rights conditions in Iran has obliged the United States to speak out time and time again. And today, we are announcing specific actions that correspond to our deep concern. The mounting evidence of repression against anyone who questions Iranian Government decisions or advocates for transparency or even attempts to defend political prisoners is very troubling,” Clinton continued, at the press conference. The Secretary of State also noted the distressing treatment of Iranian “human rights lawyers, bloggers, journalists and activists for women’s rights.”

This heartfelt announcement came just five days after the FBI launched its latest surrealassault in the US government’s “war on dissent” (as termed by former FBI agent and courageous whistleblower Coleen Rowley) by kicking down doors, raiding homes atgunpoint, issuing grand jury subpoenas, and seizing the personal property, including “documents, files, books, photographs, videos, souvenirs, war relics, notebooks, address books, diaries, journals, maps, or other evidence,” such as computers, cell phones, and emails of several American peace and justice activists in the Midwest. The raids were conducted under the guise of determining whether the targeted peace organizers and human rights advocates were actually devious supporters of “foreign terrorist organizations.”

Elderly anti-war protesters, graduate students, neuroscientists, and civil rights attorneyshave all been held for years by the US government and sentenced to lengthy prison terms on bogus charges.

Furthermore, the claim that the US government supports “transparency” is deeply ironic, considering Obama’s obsession with invoking “state secrets” and “sovereign impunity” in order to shield illegal programs like warrantless wiretapping and spying, extraordinary rendition, torture, drone warfare, and the extrajudicial assassination of American citizens from proper scrutiny and prosecution.

Whereas American officials are quick to declare their unqualified promotion of “new tools of communication” and support for “a free and open Internet,” as President Obama did last week at the United Nations General Assembly, the US is itself a surveillance state, which relentlessly monitors its own citizens. The CIA and other intelligence agencies have invested in technology and companies that specialize in monitoring social media and, this past summer, a Senate committee approved a wide-ranging cybersecurity bill that may grant the US president the authority to unilaterally shut down parts of the Internet during a “national cyber-emergency.” Just this week, the New York Timesreported that the Obama administration will propose new legislation to mandate US government access to all forms of electronic communications, “including encrypted e-mail transmitters like BlackBerry, social networking Web sites like Facebook and software that allows direct ‘peer to peer’ messaging like Skype.”

“In signing this Executive Order,” Clinton declared on Wednesday, “the President sends the message that the United States stands up for the universal rights of all people” and serves “as a voice for the voiceless.”

Obviously, she didn’t mean the universal right of self-determination for or the cries for human dignity of the Palestinian people, who have been ethnically cleansed from their homeland to make room for US-backed and nuclear-armed colonial settlers and serial human rights abusers who systematically, and with total impunity, continue to dispossess, disenfranchise, displace, demolish, and destroy the indigenous population of the stolen land they occupy and control.

This should hardly be surprising due to the fact that during the “carefully choreographed” meeting between the American President and Israeli Prime Minster Benjamin Netanyahu in July 2010, described as “empty theater” by Atlanta Journal-Constitution columnist Jay Booker, Obama pointed out that his administration is “unwavering in our commitment to Israel’s security,” while making sure to specifically not affirm the safety, human rights, or self-determination of Palestinians.

Last week, at the UN, Obama went even further in demonstrating the blatant hypocrisy entrenched in the United States doctrine of defending Zionist war crimes while condemning human rights abuses elsewhere around the world. The President stated, as he has so many times before, that any “efforts to chip away at Israel’s legitimacy [sic] will only be met by the unshakeable opposition of the United States,” continuing that “efforts to threaten or kill Israelis will do nothing to help the Palestinian people. The slaughter of innocent Israelis is not resistance – it’s injustice.”

No mention was made of the constant Israeli murder – with US weaponry – of Palestinian civilians, despite the fact that, in the past decade alone, Israeli security forces have killed 6,371 Palestinians, of whom 1317 were minors, about 250 were police officers bombed to death during the 2008-9 Gaza massacre, and 240 were targets of assassinations. Apparently, this is not “injustice,” according to the President, it’s just a necessary side-effect of Zionism that didn’t warrant a mention.

Hillary Clinton, after announcing the new Iran sanctions, claimed that “[the US] will hold abuse of governments and individuals accountable for their actions.” The simplicity of this statement is profound considering it is a complete and provable lie.

Last year, when the United Nations released the Goldstone Report, which foundoverwhelming and irrefutable evidence that Israel had committed gross “violations of international human rights and humanitarian law and possible war crimes and crimes against humanity” during its 2008-9 Gaza assault, the US government roundly condemned the findings and refused to hold Israel accountable for anything.

Last week, the day before Obama addressed the General Assembly, the UN itself released its findings with regard to the Gaza Freedom Flotilla massacre. The report stated, not only that the ongoing Israeli blockade of Gaza is illegal under international law and constitutes collective punishment (which is a war crime), but also:

    “The conduct of the Israeli military and other personnel towards the flotilla passengers was not only disproportionate to the occasion but demonstrated levels of totally unnecessary and incredible violence. It betrayed an unacceptable level of brutality. Such conduct cannot be justified or condoned on security or any other grounds. It constituted grave violations of human rights law and international humanitarian law.”

The UN report also found “clear evidence to support prosecutions of the following crimes within the terms of article 147 of the Fourth Geneva Convention: willful killing; torture or inhuman treatment; willfully causing great suffering or serious injury to body or health,” and stated that Israel had seriously violated its obligations under the United Nations International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, including the “right to life…torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment…right to liberty and security of the person and freedom from arbitrary arrest or detention…right of detainees to be treated with humanity and respect for the inherent dignity of the human person…[and] freedom of expression.”

Additionally, in July 2010, domestic Israeli policy and its occupation conduct had beenfound to violate these very same statutes (among others) by the United Nations Human Rights Committee.

Based on both “forensic and firearm evidence,” the fact-finding panel concluded that thekilling of American citizen Furkan Dogan and that of five Turkish citizens by the Israeli troops on the Mavi Marmara “can be characterized as extra-legal, arbitrary and summary executions.”

It has also been reported that Israel is not only proud of its actions, but actually awardedthe Israeli commando who single-handedly shot most of those killed on the Mavi Marmara with a medal of valor, despite the fact that the government refuses to publicly release the soldier’s name. What a hero.

In response, the United States voiced its objections to what it termed the UN report’s “unbalanced language, tone and conclusions.” It seems that the US government won’t hold Israel accountable for the intentional murder of its own citizens, just as it has looked the other way when Israel has killed American sailors, severely injured American peace activists, and blinded American art students.

The same day the US dismissed the UN Flotilla report, President Obama signed his Executive Order sanctioning Iranian officials for human rights violations.

Despite Israel’s constant ignoring of international law, UN Security Council resolutions, and blatant disregard for human rights, including brutal torture, beating and raping Palestinian children in prison, rampant police brutality and the aggressive stifling of peaceful dissent and demonstrations in East Jerusalem, the deliberate killing of protesters, the raiding of peace and justice organizations, the restriction of press freedomand enforcing media blackouts, the kidnapping and torture of democracy advocates, thedestruction of Bedouin villages in the Negev, and the arresting of Torah-carrying womenwho dare approach the male side of the Western Wall to pray, the US government continues to provide political cover, financial assistance, and tremendous military aid without reservation.

The US Congress endorses each and every illegal act of Israeli aggression, defends West Bank colonization, praises the flotilla massacre.

In his much-lauded June 2009 speech in Cairo, President Obama declared, “The United States does not accept the legitimacy of continued Israeli settlements. This construction violates previous agreements and undermines efforts to achieve peace. It is time for these settlements to stop.”

But the illegal colonization of the occupied West Bank didn’t stop. Not only that, massiveUS aid to Israel was completely unaffected by Israel’s refusal to abide by international law and weapons trade between the countries actually increased. Eventually, the US justdropped any demand for a settlement freeze of any kind.

Between last year’s UN General Assembly address and the one delivered last Thursday, it appears that Obama has also dropped any real demands regarding permanent borders, Palestinian refugees, and the status of Jerusalem.

During Wednesday’s press conference, Clinton, on behalf of the American government, declared “solidarity with their victims and with all Iranians who wish for a government that respects their human rights and their dignity and their freedom” and “convey[ed] our strong support for the rule of law.” Whose rules and which law she was referring to is unclear.

Among the latest stipulations of the new UNSC sanctions, bullied into approval this past June, is the insistence that “States will be required to block Iranian investments outside the Islamic Republic in uranium mining or the production of nuclear materials and technology” and that “States will be barred from supplying Iran with specified categories of heavy weaponry that could potentially be used in offensive military operations,” due toIran’s perceived violations of international law.

Nevertheless, the US government has continued to violate international and domestic laws regarding Israel’s undeclared nuclear program and the constant shipment ofAmerican-made weaponry to the so-called Jewish State.

Recently, the United States has “sold” Israel, among other armaments, AH-64 and AH-64D Apache Longbow fighter helicopters, F-16 and F-15 Eagle fighter planes, F-16 Peace Marble II and III Aircraft, F-35 fighter jets, Boeing 777s, Hercules C-130J airplanes, Arrow missiles, Arrow II interceptors, AGM-114 D Longbow Hellfire missiles, GBU-9 small diameter bombs, bunker buster bombs, Tomahawk missiles, Patriot and Hellfire precision-guided missile systems, D9 Caterpillar military bulldozers, specifically designed for Israel’s use in invasions of built-up areas.

Such sales are governed by the US Arms Export Control Act, which limits the use of US military aid to “internal security” and “legitimate self defense” and prohibits its use against civilians along with the Foreign Assistance Act which explicitly prohibits US assistance “to the government of any country which engages in a consistent pattern of gross violations of internationally recognized human rights, including torture or cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment, prolonged detention without charges, causing the disappearance of persons by the abduction and clandestine detention of those persons, or other flagrant denial of the right to life, liberty, and the security of person, unless such assistance will directly benefit the needy people in such country.”

A more appropriate and accurate description of the State of Israel can not be found.

And yet, the United States shipped 3,000 tons of “ammunition” to Israel in the middle of the 2008-9 Gaza massacre. US weaponry was undoubtedly used in the assault, during which gross violations of international law, abrogation of human rights, and crimes against humanity were committed.

The connection of US outrage and sanctions to international human rights is, quite simply, absurd. One look at the recent $60 billion arms deal the US made with thehuman rights-challenged Kingdom of Saudi Arabia makes the American contention ridiculous and embarrassing.

The United States fetes European and Israeli war criminals, all of whom call for military aggression against the Islamic Republic, while imposing a travel ban on Iranian officials.

The double standards of the US government continue to betray its real intentions and motivations regarding the Middle East, namely the maintenance of military hegemony, allegiance to Zionist mythology, and the continued demonization and threatening of any country that dares question the moral superiority of the United States or opposes American and Israeli imperialism in the region. While Barack Obama continues to claimthat he is “willing to reach out with an open hand to the Iranian government,” it seems he’s forgotten to first wash off the blood.

*****
Nima Shirazi is a writer, musician, and political commentator from New York City. His political commentary is published on his website, Wide Asleep in America.com. His analysis of United States policy and Middle East issues, particularly with reference to current events in Iran, Israel, and Palestine, can also be found in numerous other online and print publications.