Showing posts with label Crimes Against Humanity. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Crimes Against Humanity. Show all posts

24 August 2009

Mexico Frees Convicted Killers of Chiapas Indians

Relatives of those killed in the 1997 Acteal massacre carry photos and pray in San Cristobal, Chiapas, Mexico, Tuesday, August 11, 2009. Photo by Moyses Zuniga / AP.

Supreme Inpunity:
Mexico's high court frees convicted killers of 49 Indians in Chiapas


By John Ross / The Rag Blog / August 24, 2009

MEXICO CITY -- With immense sorrow etched into his weather-beaten face, the Tzotzil Indian farmer slowly mounted the imposing granite steps of Mexico's Supreme Court.

Sebastian Perez Vazquez's job was a thankless one. As president of the civil group "Las Abejas" ("The Bees"), he was obligated to communicate the bad news to the villagers who had trekked up to the capital from their homes in the highlands of Chiapas ("Los Altos") that, after 12 years, the killers who had been convicted of murdering their mothers and fathers and grandparents and children at Acteal on December 22nd 1997 would now be freed from prison on the instructions of four out of five Supreme Court justices because of procedural errors in their prosecutions.

The Abejas had dressed in their best clothes for the court hearing, the men in their short ornamental "chujs" (serapes) and the women in their finest huipiles (traditional blouses) and long embroidered skirts they wear like a proud emblem of their Tzotzil roots but they had not even been allowed inside the courtroom to bear witness to the verdict of the justices. Heavily armed federal police patrolled the marble hallways of the court building on one corner of Mexico City's great Zocalo plaza intent on keeping the Indians out in the street.

Elena Perez Perez looked like the air had been sucked out of her. She had expected the exoneration of the killers but still could not staunch the tears that washed her bladed cheekbones. "We cry because we cannot find justice anywhere," Elena, who was 19 when the accused murdered her father and two eldest siblings, told a U.S. reporter. Maria Vazquez had lost nine family members in the massacre. She too had expected the justices' decision. "This court releases the killers but it cannot resuscitate the dead."

Early on the morning of December 22nd, 1997, three dozen armed men gathered on a lonely roadside in Chenalho county in the Altos of Chiapas, Mexico's southernmost state, and began firing on women and children clustered around a clapboard chapel who were praying for peace on a promontory below. A detachment of 40 Chiapas police officers were stationed at a schoolhouse just meters away but made no effort to stop the killing.

The gunfire continued for the better part of the day, the shooters scouring the hillside for those who had escaped the first assault and finishing them off one by one. When they were done seven hours later, 49 Abejas were dead: 15 children, 21 women, nine men, and four babies who had been cut out of the wombs of their mothers and dashed against the rocks. The killers were determined to exterminate the "seed" of the Abejas.

The outside world learned of the massacre at Acteal when survivors straggled into San Cristobal de las Casas, the old colonial city that crowns the highlands, several hours later. A call went out to doctors to come to the Civil Hospital to treat the many wounded. One medic who responded to the call was Hermann Bellinghausen who doubles as correspondent for the left daily La Jornada in Chiapas. Hermann has accompanied the rebellion of the Zapatista Army of National Liberation (EZLN) since it exploded in the mountains and jungle of this deeply indigenous state on January 1st 1994. The Abejas were supporters of the Zapatistas but rejected the insurgents' use of weapons.

Around 10 p.m. that night, a Red Cross ambulance braved gunfire to reach the village of Acteal enclaved in the saw-toothed mountains about 45 minutes above San Cristobal and discovered state police officers stacking the corpses of the Indians, apparently preparing them for burning. Caught in the act, the cops gathered up the bodies and tossed them in a dump truck where they were driven down to the state capital in Tuxtla Gutierrez for "autopsies."

The contamination of the crime scene was corroborated by Bellinghausen and two colleagues Jesus Ramirez Cuevas and Juan Balboa the next morning and later that day, Hermann posted his first dispatch. Bellinghausen would go on to write a book, Acteal: A Crime of State that has become a definitive text on understanding the massacre.

The Abejas are a civil association of honey gatherers and coffee growers who had been forced from their home villages in the months previous to the murders -- the massacre took place at the height of the coffee harvest -- by armed bands affiliated with the long-ruling PRI party and its surrogates in the "Cardenas Front."

Unlike the Abejas who were devout Catholics, the PRIistas lined up with the evangelical National Presbyterian Church that first established itself in Los Altos back in the 1930s. Since spring, they had been burning the Bees' homes and stealing their coffee and their cattle. Abeja families from Quextic had been particularly persecuted and the Zapatista community of Acteal offered them sanctuary on the hillside where they would later be murdered.

All of the dead Abejas and those who killed them were Tzotzil Mayan Indians.

Although they supported the EZLN's struggle, the Abejas' allegiances were to the liberation bishop of San Cristobal Samuel Ruiz who had been instrumental in their formation. The Bees were indeed a Sui Genero grouping amongst the Tzotziles of Los Altos. They were resolutely non-violent and eschewed the "posh", sugar-cane aguardiente that is obligatory in many highland villages. Unlike their neighbors, they defended the right of women to own land in the community.

Bellinghausen's reportage triggered a chain reaction of indignation around the world. Demonstrators circled Mexican embassies in European cities. Pope John Paul II expressed his grief and U.S. president Bill Clinton lamented the violence. International human rights workers flocked to Chiapas.

As commander-in-chief, Mexican president Ernesto Zedillo ordered U.S.-trained troops into the Chiapas highlands to restore order and separate the paramilitaries responsible for the massacre from the EZLN -- the military invaded dozens of Zapatista villages purportedly looking for weapons but, at first, left the paramilitaries alone. Fear of a new massacre panicked villagers and 10,000 Indians abandoned their homes and sought refuge in Polho, a Zapatista refugee camp.

The bodies of the dead were returned to the Abejas on Christmas day for burial. As the funeral procession advanced up the mountain road from Polho to Acteal, the mourners encountered a truck speeding in the opposite direction that was carrying stolen Abeja coffee. The Abejas recognized the men in the truck as their killers -- many of them were PRIistas who had run them off their land and at least one was the cousin of a victim. Bishop Ruiz moved swiftly to prevent a lynching and 24 of the presumed assassins were taken into custody. They would not be released until the Supreme Court's August 12th decree a dozen years later.

Other suspects were rounded up by federal police during raids in Los Chorros, Quextic, and Pechiquil. One old Indian farmer was reportedly handed a list of 100 suspects and forced to sign it. Agustin Luna did not read or write Spanish.

According to Zedillo's attorney general Jorge Madrazo Cuellar, 124 arrest warrants were issued but apparently only 87 were ever served. Almost all of those who were taken into custody were Tzotziles -- 14 mostly mestizo public servants served less than six years for their roles in the massacre. Two high-ranking Mexican Army officers who functioned as commandants in Chiapas public security agencies simply disappeared and more than a decade later remain at large.

The Indians were heavily punished for the killings, dealt 20 to 40 year sentences for premeditated homicide and possession of weapons that only the military was licensed to carry. Two of the 70 Tzotzil defendants were let go because of old age and another died in custody. Several more were re-sentenced and released. Of the 57 Indians who remained in prison only five confessed to participating in the massacre.

There is little question that the prosecution of those rounded up for the killings at Acteal was slipshod. Witnesses were pressured and declarations obtained by force. In the Zedillo government's rush to judgment, many were swept up who were not in Acteal on the day of the massacre. Translators who are required by law to be available to defendants who do not speak Spanish were not. Weapons were seized that did not match the caliber of the bullets that killed the Bees. The Supreme Court decried the disappearance of evidence and the destruction of the crime scene and the falsification of testimony.

To mark the first anniversary of the killings, Madrazo's Federal Prosecutor's Office (PGR) published The White Book of Acteal that blamed the murders on "inter-communal conflicts" and underscored the savage nature of the killings, intimating that the violence had cultural roots.

Although many of the victims had been brutally slashed by machete blows, one autopsy lists gunshot wounds as the cause of death for 43 of the slain villagers and writer Carlos Montemayor, an outspoken defender of indigenous culture, concluded that the bodies of the Abejas were further brutalized by police to emphasize the "primitive" nature of the Indians. Madrazo's White Book absolved the Zedillo government of all crimes of commission and omission.

Once convictions were obtained and the presumed killers sentenced, Acteal was relegated to the cold case file. Although the PRI quickly washed its hands of the prisoners, the National Presbyterian Church soon came to their defense. The evangelicals' point man was an influential politico and preacher Hugo Eric Flores who is described as being close to the "theology of prosperity."

During the 2006 presidential campaign, Flores, the founder and "moral leader" of Encuentro Social ("Social Encounter"), an evangelical political association that had been tied to the PRI, met with right-wing PAN party candidate Felipe Calderon and offered to deliver the evangelical vote (the PAN had none) if Calderon would agree to reopen the cases of those he described as "political prisoners." According to La Jornada op-ed editor Luis Hernandez Navarro, the deal went down that April.

Months later, after Calderon had been awarded the fraud-marred election, Hugo Eric Flores emerged as the director of the Environmental Secretariat's PRO-ARBOL ("pro-tree") program but within a year was fired from the post and barred from working for the agency for the next ten years. No explanation has ever been offered for Flores' removal but despite the stain on his resume, the evangelical preacher had no difficulty finding ">chamba>" ("work") and today serves as back-up ("suplente") for a PANista senator.

Soon after he was fired from his environmental sinecure, Hugo Eric Flores hired on with the prestigious Center for Investigation & Teaching of Economics (CIDE), an entity of the Secretary of Public Education, and published a defense of those convicted for the Acteal massacre, "The Other Acteal," chapters of which appeared in Nexos magazine, a glossy monthly edited by the prominent PRIista writer and Televisa talking head Hector Aguilar Camin who in 1997 on the tenth anniversary of the killings published his own three part vindication of the incarcerated paramilitaries.

Amongst Aguilar Camin's revelations: there had been no massacre at Acteal, a hypothesis that rested largely on the testimony of Lorenzo Perez Vazquez who at 17 was the youngest of the convicted killers. According to Perez, the Abejas were caught in a crossfire between the Zapatistas and PRIistas. Lorenzo Perez himself was one of the five paramilitaries who confessed to the murders. Notwithstanding, his name was listed among the first batch of 20 the Supreme Court set free.

Eric Flores used his growing clout to recruit young lawyers from the CIDE's law clinic and in December 2007, the same month as Aguilar Camin's vindication appeared, they officially filed an appeal for the release of the 57 imprisoned indigenas, citing discriminatory treatment of Indians by the courts. According to the CIDE's general secretary Dr Sergio Lopez Ayllon, the legal costs were offset by sizable grants from both the Hewitt Foundation and George Soras' Open Society Institute.

How many of those released actually have blood on their hands? Miguel Angel De los Santos, a prominent human rights attorney in San Cristobal, thinks that the government case was so "flojo" (lazily assembled) that separating the guilty from the innocent at this late date may be next to impossible -- in the Mexican justice system, "fabricando cupables" (literally "manufacturing the guilty") is an "art form." De los Santos charges that government prosecutors often leave big holes in unpopular cases to establish grounds for appeal and ultimately absolution of the perpetrators. "The release of the accused paramilitaries," he writes in La Jornada, "is a confession of the Mexican state's fracaso in the impartation of justice."

During a decade and more, imprisoned first at the crumbling old Cerro Hueco fortress above Tuxtla, those convicted of the Acteal murders (the "material assassins" in legal jargon) have been demonized by the Abejas and the Zapatistas and their supporters as cold-blooded killers -- the phrase "paramilitary" is an ugly curse in the rebels' lexicon and those who suggest that some of those railroaded by the Zedillo government's inept prosecution are not guilty are deemed "politically incorrect."

On the other hand, government officials who conceived, put in motion, and covered up the Acteal killings -- "the intellectual authors" -- have evaded justice for a decade.

At the top of the list is ex-president Ernesto Zedillo whose xenophobic jeremiads against non-Mexican human rights workers animated a lethal atmosphere of fear and loathing in Chiapas. As commander-in-chief of Mexico's Armed Forces, Zedillo signed off on the counterinsurgency initiative that culminated with the massacre at Acteal. The former Mexican president now heads up the Yale University Globalization Studies Institute and sits on the board of major U.S. corporations.

Zedillo's Secretary of Defense and the commander of Mexican Army forces in the region Mario Renon Castillo collaborated on a "Chiapas Campaign Plan." a counterinsurgency strategy to develop paramilitary groups in 39 municipalities in which the EZLN had influence. Renon Castillo is a graduate of Center for Special Forces in Fort Bragg, North Carolina, where he was trained in counterinsurgency warfare. According to diplomatic cables unearthed by investigator Kate Doyle at the Washington-based National Security Archives, the Mexican military trained and financed paramilitaries in Chenalho -- one corporal was briefly jailed as a trainer.

Chiapas Governor Julio Ruiz Ferro, a Zedillo appointee, had ample prior knowledge of the violence brewing in the highlands and did nothing to head it off -- the deaths of 32 Indians in Chenalho in the months before the massacre set the stage for Acteal. Ruiz Ferro was bumped up to agricultural attaché at Mexico's Washington embassy after he resigned as governor as reward for his inattention.

Interior Secretary Emilio Chuayffet, who supervised national security, was forced to resign for failing to anticipate Acteal but remained active in the PRI hierarchy and may soon become head of the PRI's majority delegation in the lower house of congress.

Former Attorney General Jorge Madrazo's flawed prosecution may have jailed innocent Indians for a dozen years -- the National Fraternity of Christian Churches now demands that he be incarcerated.

Finally, suggests Raul Vera, auxiliary bishop of San Cristobal during Acteal, by freeing the accused killers, the justices of Mexico's Supreme Court are now "accomplices" in this lurid plot.

Although the Supreme Court did not rule on the innocence or guilt of the prisoners and only considered the poisoned judicial procedures, 20 of the accused killers were released August 13th from El Amate prison on the western edge of Chiapas and transported to a small hotel outside of Tuxtla Gutierrez where they met with worried state officials behind closed doors for 12 hours. Authorities are fearful that the ex-prisoners will return to Chenalho and seek revenge against the Abejas for their long incarceration.

Indeed, fear permeates Acteal and Polho in the wake of the prisoners' release -- the Abejas have long charged that the paramilitaries still have weapons cached in the region. "I survived the first time but I won't survive another massacre," Catalina Perez, who was shot nine times during the attack, told La Jornada.

The freed Indians are also under the gun. If they were not the real killers then they know who the real killers were and local "caciques" (rural bosses) will try to silence them.

Governor Juan Sabines, whose father was also Juan and served as Chiapas governor when dozens of Indians were gunned down by army troops in another massacre at Wolonchan in 1981, vowed that the prisoners' release would not rupture the fragile calm in the state. The ex-prisoners would be relocated as far from Chenalho as the borders of Chiapas would allow and provided with land and animals and generous pensions. Even though the accused were being closely watched by state officials, by week's end six had already escaped for parts unknown.

Conspicuously absent from the controversy over the released paramilitaries is the EZLN which has yet to comment on the Supreme Court decision. The Zapatistas' key public outpost in the highlands at Oventic has been reportedly closed to outside visitors since the Supreme Court ordered the paramilitaries released from prison.

Since the evangelical Summer Language Institute was installed in Los Altos by President Lazaro Cardenas in the 1930s, the political clout of the "sects" as the Catholic Church labels the Protestants has grown precipitously.

Each Sunday, the Army of God marches in military cadence through San Cristobal. With their red berets, spit-shined army boots, and camouflage cargo pants, the marchers are dead ringers for paramilitaries but Army of God commander-in-chief Esdras Alonso, a fiery highland preacher with connections to the National Presbyterian Church, claims that his followers are armed only with the "Word of God." According to Bellinghausen, Esdras Alonso's home base is in San Cristobal's Hormiga Colony where the killers of the Abejas are said to have acquired their weapons. Reverend Esdras also claims that fallen-away Zapatista comandantes have joined the Army of God.

Alonso's evangelicals have considerable influence in Mitziton just outside San Cristobal which Governor Sabines has designated as the starting point for a super highway that will connect up the tourist corridor between that old colonial city and the fabled Mayan ruins at Palenque in the lowlands to the east.

Although the actual route remains under wraps, the new highway is expected to invade autonomous Zapatista communities and tensions are running tall in Mitziton where farmers are aligned with the EZLN's "Other Campaign." This past July 21st, when ski-masked protestors blocked road-building equipment, the Army of God counterattacked, killing one villager.

Commander-in-chief Esdras responded to unfavorable news coverage of the confrontation by filing a complaint with the local prosecutor against both the Fray Bartolome Human Rights Center, founded by Bishop Ruiz, and Hermann Bellinghausen for allegedly spreading libelous rumors on the Internet. Esdras also demanded that Immigration authorities investigate Bellinghausen's immigration status -- the Jornada reporter is a third generation Mexican.

The Supreme Court's decision to free those convicted of killing 49 Abejas at Acteal is the latest finding of the high court to grant impunity to those deemed responsible for notorious crimes. In 2006, the court barred citizens from access to ballots cast in the presidential elections, one of the most egregious frauds in Mexican electoral history. In 2007, the justices absolved Puebla governor Mario Marin after evidence implicated him in the kidnapping of independent journalist Lydia Cacho who had blown the whistle on the governor's pederast associates.

In 2008, the Supreme Court declared Mexico state governor and current PRI presidential front runner Enrique Pena Nieto innocent of ordering state mayhem at San Salvador Atenco where 200 protesters were attacked and arrested, a score of women sexually abused by Pena Nieto's police, and two young men gunned down by the cops. Later that year, the justices concluded that Oaxaca governor Ulysis Ruiz had used "legitimate" force to suppress protests by the Oaxaca Peoples Popular Assembly or APPO during which 26 civilians lost their lives.

Just a week before the Acteal ruling, the Supreme Court concurred that a Sinaloa woman whose husband had been shot down at an Army checkpoint bad no standing and turned the matter over to a military tribunal that has no civilian oversight. By sustaining the military's "fuero" or immunity from prosecution by civil authorities, the court assured the army of continued impunity.

Release of those prisoners sentenced for the Acteal massacre because of judicial errors will have far reaching impact on Mexican courts observes Barbara Zamora, lawyer for the prisoners of Atenco and other high profile government targets. Zamora affirms that she has never defended a case that was not contaminated by gross judicial error.

"The Mexican judicial system is rotten to the core. But from now on, whether they are guilty or not, anyone who can afford a powerful lawyer and has been sentenced for homicide, narco, kidnapping, or organized crime will be able to claim judicial impropriety and appeal to the Supreme Court to be set free. This could empty out the jails," the lawyer adds with a mischievous smile.

[John Ross's monstrous tome El Monstruo -- Dread & Redemption in Mexico City will be published by Nation Books this November. The author is soliciting venues for book presentations this fall and next spring. If you have further information, write johnross@igc.org.]

Source /

The Rag Blog

[+/-] Read More...

12 July 2009

Bhopal: Twenty-Five Years Later, Hundreds of New Victims Born Each Year

Nida, 17 months old Bhopali girl with a congenital birth defect. Photograph: Money Sharma/EPA.

Poisoned legacy
By Billy Briggs / July 12, 2009

The Hiroshima of the chemical industry is still claiming victims – babies born 25 years later with serious birth defects.

Bhopal -- UNABLE TO steer safely in the mud, the driver of our rickshaw pulls into the side of the road to allow us to take shelter from torrential rain. There, under a shop's awning, a small crowd of people are standing together waiting for the weather to break. They include Sapna Sharma and her brother-in-law, Sanjay. Sanjay is holding his 18-month-old nephew, Anshul, who has kohl-rimmed eyes and silver bracelets on his ankles. As we stand talking, some of the people start pointing to the child's hands and feet while speaking animatedly to us in Hindi. Through our translator, Sapna then explains that her son was born with 12 toes and 12 fingers.

Shortly afterwards, about half a mile away in the Shankar Nagar area of Bhopal, we meet another Indian child with congenital defects, three-year-old, Raj, who is blind, cannot walk and whose head is oversized.

"The doctors said bad water could have been a cause of my son's condition. Older people here are gas victims and now the younger people are victims of the water," says his mother, Poona.
advertisement

Here, in the capital city of Madhya Pradesh in India, hundreds of children are being born with deformities and mental health problems. As we walk back to our rickshaw after the interview we come across more afflicted youngsters who have followed us along the road out of curiosity. They include Rajesh, 12, who is barefoot and bald. The other children make fun of him - his mother, Yashdabai, explains that they do so because they believe that her son is "mad".

Rajesh's older sister, Sonia, a pretty girl with her black hair pulled back off her face, scolds the other children and tells us that she always has to protect her brother from bullies. Sonia is barefoot, too, and as she speaks a colleague notices that the young girl has huge feet.

This is the horrendous legacy the city of Bhopal is facing 25 years on from one of the world's worst industrial accident. The Bhopal gas disaster, as it became known, occurred shortly after midnight on December 3, 1984, when a cloud of poisonous gas escaped from a Union Carbide pesticide plant in the city. It has been dubbed the "Hiroshima of the chemical industry". The accidental release of 42 tonnes of methyl isocyanate (MIC) from the factory exposed more than 500,000 people to toxic gases and up to 10,000 inhabitants are thought to have died within the first 72 hours after the leak.

At least 25,000 people exposed to the gas have since died, and today in Bhopal tens of thousands more Indians suffer from a variety of debilitating gas-related illnesses such as respiratory and psychiatric problems, joint pains, menstrual irregularities, tuberculosis and cancers. More disturbingly, the escalating number of birth defects in children include cleft palates, webbed feet and hands, twisted limbs, brain damage and heart problems.

Shankar Nagar is a slum area of the city just north of the derelict Union Carbide factory site. For years local campaigners have been demanding that Union Carbide - now owned by US multinational Dow Chemicals - clean up the abandoned pesticide plant, but so far their pleas have been ignored.

In 1999, a Greenpeace investigation found severe chemical contamination of the environment surrounding the former Union Carbide factory, including pollution with heavy metals and chemical compounds.

The Greenpeace report also said: "Analysis of water samples drawn from wells serving the local community has also confirmed the contamination of groundwater reserves with chemicals arising either from previous or ongoing activities and/or incidents.

"As a result of the ubiquitous presence of contaminants, the exposure of the communities surrounding the plants to complex mixtures of hazardous chemicals continues on a daily basis. Though less acute than the exposure which took place as a result of the 1984 MIC release, long-term chronic exposure to mixtures of toxic synthetic chemicals and heavy metals is also likely to have serious consequences for the health and survival of the local population."

Amnesty International's 2004 Clouds Of Injustice report said: "Toxic wastes continue to pollute the environment and water supply and it is appalling that no-one has been held account for the leak and its appalling consequences."

The abandoned factory site is now a vast wasteland of weeds and trees that is home to packs of wild dogs. The buildings and structure have been left to rot while tank 610, from where the poison gas escaped, sits like an old rusting locomotive in the sun. Piles of dangerous chemicals are lying in the open air and inside one of the abandoned labs we saw dozens of dusty brown bottles containing chemicals. Campaigners say drums of Sevin - the pesticide Union Carbide was producing at the time using MIC - have never been removed from the site and remain locked in one of the sheds under police guard.

"There are sacks of poisons, mercury drops, toxic carbaryl rocks from which toxic tars ooze into the earth, and subsoil water and tarry liquids that overflow when the monsoon comes," explained our translator and guide, Sanjay Sharma, 24, a student who lost his three sisters, two brothers and parents in the 1984 disaster. He has one sister left after his only other brother, Sunil, committed suicide on July 26, 2006. Sunil had been 12 at the time of the disaster and was a vociferous campaigner on behalf of victims until be became severely depressed.

"My brother hanged himself. When they found him he was wearing a T-shirt that said, No More Bhopalis'."

Survivors campaigning for clean water petitioned the Supreme Court of India, which in May 2004 ordered that clean, safe water be piped into the communities, but to date the state government has ignored this order.

In January this year, a major study was embarked upon to try to ascertain the extent of the current health problems facing the population. The year-long investigation is being carried out by the Sambhavna Clinic in Bhopal, an innovative medical facility built in the centre of the city most badly affected by the gas leak. Researcher Santosh Kshatria said 22 different communities near the factory site were believed to be drinking from a contaminated water supply.

"There are 10 researchers. I'm covering 20,000 people in 17 neighbourhoods. So far I have surveyed 5000 people and found more than 200 cases of children with congenital defects. Many have twisted limbs and many have mental health issues. Anecdotally, this is a very high rate of incidence," she says.

In many cases these are the same families from the poorest slum areas who were decimated by the gas in 1984. They have no option but to drink the water and complain of aches and pains, rashes, fevers, eruptions of boils, headaches, nausea, lack of appetite, dizziness and constant exhaustion.

Lead, mercury and organochlorines have been found in the milk of nursing mothers living near the factory with the result that women are terrified to breastfeed their babies in case they are giving them poison.

Another legacy for Bhopali females is that men have reservations about marrying so-called "gas victims" so many young local women face living in dire poverty having been stigmatised and left single.

Investigations into the 1984 disaster revealed that something had gone fundamentally wrong with a tank that stored methyl isocyanate. During the early hours of December 3, 1984, large amounts of water entered tank 610, containing the highly toxic chemical. The resulting reaction increased the temperature inside the tank to more than 200C, raising the pressure to a level it was not designed to withstand and eventually releasing a large volume of toxic gases.

Union Carbide has always claimed that its Indian subsidiary - Union Carbide India Limited, which was 49%-owned by the state - was solely responsible for the management of the plant and that the accident was the result of sabotage.

Union Carbide was taken over by Dow Chemicals, one of the producers of Agent Orange, in 2001, and the latter insists that all liabilities were settled in 1989 when Union Carbide paid around £300 million to the Indian government to be allocated to survivors. Furthermore, Union Carbide says it did all it could to alleviate the human suffering following the disaster and that it paid for a hospital in Bhopal to offer free medical care to victims.

The company also denies allegations that it abandoned the plant and says UCIL removed tens of thousands of pounds of MIC from the plant and spent around £1.5m undertaking additional clean-up work. The firm also says that a 1998 study of water sources near the plant site by the Madhya Pradesh Pollution Control Board did not find any traces of chemicals linked to any substance used at the UCIL plant.

In 1991, however, Bhopal's authorities charged Union Carbide's chief executive, Warren Andersen, with manslaughter. To date the retired American has avoided an international arrest warrant and a US court summons. Andersen was declared a fugitive from justice by the Chief Judicial Magistrate of Bhopal in 1992 for failing to appear at court. Although orders were passed to the Indian government to press for his extradition from America, Bhopal campaigners say ministers have not pushed the case, fearing a backlash from foreign investors.

A quarter of a century on the campaign for justice in Bhopal continues unabated. In June, 27 members of the US Congress appealed to Dow Chemicals to pay to clean up the derelict site and to meet survivors' demands for medical and economic rehabilitation. The politicians also asked the company to send a representative to take part in court proceedings in India.

"Bhopal is widely regarded as the worst industrial disaster in human history, a catastrophe with widespread implications for the chemical industry, globalisation and human rights," they said in a letter initiated by Frank Pallone, a Democrat from New Jersey.

They say the polluter, rather than taxpayers, should bear responsibility for environmental damage. Meanwhile, Bhopal's environmental crisis continues.

Source / Scotland Sunday Herald

The Rag Blog

[+/-] Read More...

The Spirit of Humanity: An Interview with Cynthia McKinney


Cynthia McKinney is a former US Representative who served from 1993-2003 and from 2005-2008 . She was the 2008 Green Party presidential nominee and has been an active member of the Free Gaza Movement. In 2004, The Backbone Campaign awarded her the fifth annual Backbone Award "because she was willing to challenge the Bush administration and called for an investigation into 9/11 when few others dared to air their criticism and questions." Here, Ishmahil Blagrove, Jr. talks to McKinney about her experience with the situation in Gaza and her views on today’s political landscape.

Last year in the midst of the Israeli onslaught against the people of Gaza, you attempted to break the Israeli siege by entering by boat. What happened?

We were rammed by the Israelis. There I got a chance to see the complicity of the media. We had CNN on board and the CNN reporter was literally arguing in the midst of a tragedy; he was arguing with headquarters because they didn’t believe what he was telling them. They would have rather run the story as the Israelis told them. I have seen how the media self-censor, twist, contort themselves to report misleading stories and then they report outright lies.

What is the situation in Gaza and explain to me why you feel so passionate about getting into Gaza and assisting?

I think we all know at least what we all saw on Al Jazeera Arabic and Press TV: the images of white phosporous and the F16’s and the helicopters. We saw all of that and those two stations in particular ran almost 24-hour coverage. People in the United States couldn’t see those images on CNN because CNN was missing in action, but through the power of and access to the internet, people in the United States were able to see the images. Never have we been able to discuss what US policy is in Israel, but we were able to see the F16’s given to Israel by the United States, the depleted Uranium munitions given to Israel by the United States, the white phosperous given to Israel by the United States. And so the United States is as complicit and even more complicit; the Israelis used it but the Americans gave them the wherewithal to use it.

Why do believe there has not been more international attention given to the plight of the Palestinians?

The media as we know it – and I can only speak mainly about US media and the media that is owned by the US media in other parts of the world – they are what I call special interest media and the special interest media have demonstrated amply that they serve the political aims and values of certain special interests inside the United States, whose goal is to affect the formulation of policy. And so we don’t get a discussion of Gaza and the Palestinian plight inside the United States as we should because it doesn’t serve the special interests in Washington, DC who lobby for a particular point of view that does not favor the Palestinians. There was an advert for Gaza that the BBC were supposed to run and they refused to run it and it was unprecedented that they would refuse to run an advert requesting help, relief for besieged people; but that shows the power of special interests operating in Britain. The Zionist lobby is powerful in the United States; it is the most powerful lobby that operates in Washington, DC and we saw it flex its muscle in Britain during Operation Cast Lead with the BBC.

What are President Obama’s policies in the region?

On the day that we were turned away from embarking upon our peace mission in Cyprus, President Obama signed over a 100 billion dollar supplemental appropriation for more war and occupation in Iraq and Afghanistan. The drones continue to kill people in Pakistan, the increase level of troops in Afghanistan, the perception of Russia and China as enemies throw back to the days of the cold war, the continued search for a home for AFRICOM: these are not things that we should be proud of coming from a President with the name Barrack Hussein Obama. But, in fact, this is what is happening under his administration. We also have seen the greatest transfer of wealth out of the hands of African Americans that we have ever seen probably since slavery, not only out of the hands of African Americans, but out of the hands of Latinos and increasingly out of the hands of middle-class white Americans as well

Many people suggest that because there is an African American president, that change has come. Are you hopeful?

What American people and the global community were subjected to was very well financed Madison Avenue propaganda. A slick media campaign to promote someone whom the United States people didn’t even know. He and I were sworn in together in 2005 in the Congress; this was when he walked into a Senate seat virtually unopposed. Now, when was the last time an African American ever was given a Senate seat? I don’t think it’s ever happened, even during the times of reconstruction when we had black Senators, black Governors; those positions of power were earned, through the blood and the toil of black people who went to the polls and voted in what, at that time, were fair elections.

Then why do you believe that President Obama was elected?

I think the American people were looking for dignity. I think the dignity of our country had been stripped from us as a result of the publication of the photos around Abu Ghraib, the information came out about the lies of Iraq and we had been through 9/11 and the Administration knowingly lied and tied 9/11 to Iraq and so there were a lot of things that the American people wanted desperately to take a blue pill for. And I’m referring to the blue pill of the Matrix, where one takes the blue pill and slips into a world of make believe and so that’s where many people are.

What do you think it will take to get that dramatic shift in American public opinion?

The American people need information. If you look at what happened in Vietnam, the policy was taken out of the hands of the joint Chiefs and put into the hands of the people. When the television images came into every living room in the United States, people understood that they needed to change policy themselves. I hope the American people only need information because once their conscience is pricked with that information then they will be compelled to do something different.

You are back in Cyprus for a second time; what is the purpose of your mission now?

The purpose of the mission is to assert our belief in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. That it is our right to travel anywhere in the world that we so choose and it is the right of people in other parts of the world to receive us, if they choose to do so.

Why have you taken up the cause of the Palestinian people?

I have been asked that a lot because I am not Arab, I’m not Muslim. So, why do I care? Well, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. said it best: “Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.” And this is clearly a gross injustice; this is genocide, crimes against humanity. How can anyone remain silent in the face of this? During the civil rights movement, we were outraged at our treatment and we just couldn’t vote; here, Palestinians can’t live.

July 2009

This video is the last footage taken onboard the Spirit Of Humanity before its voyage to bring humanitarian aid to Gaza was prematurely halted by Isreali special forces. It shows the atmosphere inside the cabin as the crew try to negotiate with the Israeli ship via radio.

Source / Rice 'N' Peas

Thanks to Jeffrey Segal / The Rag Blog

[+/-] Read More...

05 July 2009

Mairead Maguire Interviewed by Al Jazeera

Mairead Corrigan-Maguire talks to Al Jazeera from Israeli jail - July 4, 2009


Mary Maguire Speaks from Israeli Jail
By Juan Cole / July 5, 2009

Aljazeera English reports on the activists abducted by Israel as they attempted to deliver food and other civilian aid to Gaza, which is under a debilitating blockade by Israel.

This site explains the dire character of the Palestinians' straits.

A reader asked what would happen if someone tried to get food aid to Cuba. That person unwittingly underlined how extreme Israel's policies are, since Russia and others routinely ship food aid to Cuba despite the US embargo.

Source / Informed Comment

The Rag Blog

[+/-] Read More...

01 July 2009

Israel: Going Out of Their Way to Maintain Their Pariah Status

The Spirit of Humanity shortly before leaving Cyprus. Photo: Free Gaza.

Pirates of the Mediterranean
By Yvonne Ridley / July 1, 2009

The arrogance of Israel is nothing short of breath-taking.

On the eve of one of the most damning reports ever to be published on human rights abuses and suspected war crimes, Israel committed an act of piracy.

While western naval fleets are patrolling the waters off the coast of Africa, acts of piracy are being carried out routinely in the Mediterranean.

But the international community leaders couldn’t care less because most of those who are kidnapped, shot at and hijacked at sea are Palestinian fishermen from Gaza.

However yesterday Israel crossed a line after firing on and boarding a boat carrying aid and peace activists to Gaza.

The 21 on board included former US Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney and Nobel laureate Mairead Maguire, who were taken prisoner by the Israeli navy after gunboats surrounded and seized the Free Gaza Movement relief boat 'Spirit of Humanity' on Monday.

The aid was seized, their mobile phones confiscated and no doubt cameras capturing the illegal actions of the Israelis were also removed.

"This is an outrageous violation of international law against us. Our boat was not in Israeli waters, and we were on a human rights mission to the Gaza Strip," said Cynthia McKinney, the Green Party's 2008 candidate for President of the United States.

"President Obama just told Israel to let in humanitarian and reconstruction supplies, and that's exactly what we tried to do. We're asking the international community to demand our release so we can resume our journey."

In the past the Israeli Navy has claimed that boats have entered their territorial waters and breached their part of the sea in the eastern Med.

However, thousands across the world who followed the progress of the Free Gaza Movement boat Spirit of Humanity by internet, GPS, Twitter and various other means of communications over the last 30 hours know for sure that the boat was illegally stopped in international waters.

This is piracy. Nothing more. Nothing less.

It’s anyone’s guess what will happen to the Humanity’s cargo of medical supplies, cement, olive trees, and children's toys.

But what we need from Barak Obama and Gordon Brown (there are at least half a dozen Brits on that boat) is strong leadership in which Israel apologises and allows the boat and its passengers to continue the journey into Gaza.

The G8 leaders all know what the Israeli Army did in Gaza and the war crimes that were carried out making it impossible for the Zionist military to travel into most European countries for fear of being arrested.

And in the next 24 hours Amnesty International will spell out exactly what was done on the ground during that 22-day war.

We know that the fourth largest military in the world, a military given weapons by Britain and the US, destroyed 50,000 homes, 800 industrial properties and 200 schools.

During a recent trip to Gaza with the Viva Palestina convoy, I saw the scores of mosques bombed - even orphanages had been targeted. The net result was the slaughter of more than 1,400 civilians, including hundreds of children.

How long is Israel going to be allowed to behave as it wants ... and even likes?

I saw, with disbelief, some of the taunting, sadistic messages scrawled on lounge walls in bombed out homes by departing Israeli soldiers - one even left his email for “any complaints”.

I remember when Tony Blair, called the Taliban the most evil, brutal regime in the world and he justified this statement because he said they didn’t even allow children to fly kites.

He wondered at the mentality of a regime which could be so cruel to children.

That was way back in November 2001. Well I wonder what he would think of a regime which blocks cherries, kiwi fruit and chocolate from reaching the hands of the children in Gaza? Yes, that’s how evil this Zionist regime is ... it can’t even bear the thought of these poor kids receiving a few tasty treats.

Every week, about 10 officers from the Israel Defense Force's Coordinator of Government Activities in the Territories (COGAT) unit meet to decide what sort of food the 1.5 million inhabitants of the Gaza Strip can eat.

Let’s name and shame the men this gruesome threesome - Colonel Moshe Levi, Colonel Alex Rosenzweig, and Colonel Doron Segal. All three decided a few days back that apricots, plums, grapes, avocados, cherries, kiwi fruit, green almonds, pomegranates and chocolate were "delicacies" and therefore expressly prohibited.

I will return to these three shameful soldiers at a later date, but let’s return to today’s events which has, in my view, reconfirmed Israel as a rogue state by launching into international piracy yet again.

You will notice the top of this story is called Pirates of the Mediterranean II - that’s because I wrote an article in December revealing how another free Gaza Movement boat, the SS Dignity, was rammed by an Israeli naval gunboat.

The act of aggression on a peace mission was launched in international waters 90 miles off Gaza, without any warning to the captain of the Dignity or the crew. Israel claimed the incident was an accident and that its naval officers had made numerous attempts to communicate with the Dignity. The israelis ‘accidentally’ rammed the boat no less than three times.

The Israelis accused the international activists then of "seeking provocation more than ever." Isn’t it amazing how the Zionist State suddenly goes belly up and adopts a victim mentality?

Exactly what the hell is Israel up to by banning or trying to prevent boats from entering waters not in its territory? This is the Mediterranean. Just when did Israel assume complete authority of the Med?

Israel's deplorable attack yesterday, and its previous one on the unarmed Dignity is a violation of both international maritime law and the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, which states, "the high seas should be reserved for peaceful purposes."

Delivering aid to the needy is just such a "peaceful purpose." Deliberately ramming or hijacking mercy ships and endangering its passengers is an act of terrorism and piracy.

I say Western fleets should now head to the Mediterranean to crack down on this breed of pirates who make the Somali gangs look like Captain Pugwash and co.

The Somali pirates are motivated by money - that makes them criminals. The Israelis commit these acts out of sadistic pleasure ... what does that make them?

And if they are allowed to continue, what will that make the likes of Obama, Brown and the other cabal of foreign leaders who look the other way?

Enough is enough. The time has come to acknowledge that Israel is a failed project, a rogu e state - and a danger to ordinary, decent, law-abiding members of the public.

Until it comes to heel the international community needs to impose sanctions, freeze its assets, stop selling arms and installing a UN peacekeeping Force to bring it under control because it is a menace to its neighbours and the wider world.

For more information and updates, see the Free Gaza Movement web site, including the latest release on the seizure of the relief boat.

For communications and updates from Cynthia McKinney, visit her Green Party page and blog.

[Journalist Yvonne Ridley and film-maker Aki Nawaz sailed to Gaza with the FGM on the first mission to break the siege in August 2008. Ridley was given a media award at the annual Muslim News awards. Her website is www.yvonneridley.org.]

Source / Information Clearing House

The Rag Blog

[+/-] Read More...

13 May 2009

William Blum: On Enhanced Interrogation, Enhanced Explosive Devices, and Other Matters

An "enhanced explosive device" in action, aka the atomic bombing of Nagasaki on August 9, 1945. The picture was taken from one of the B-29 Superfortresses used in the attack.

The Anti-Empire Report: Some thoughts about torture. And Mr. Obama.
By William Blum / May 4, 2009

Okay, at least some things are settled. When George W. Bush said "The United States does not torture", everyone now knows it was crapaganda. And when Barack Obama, a month into his presidency, said "The United States does not torture"1, it likewise had all the credibility of a 19th century treaty between the US government and the American Indians.

When Obama and his followers say, as they do repeatedly, that he has "banned torture", this is a statement they have no right to make. The executive orders concerning torture leave loopholes, such as being applicable only "in any armed conflict"2 What about in a "counter-terrorism" environment? And the new administration has not categorically banned the outsourcing of torture, such as renditions, the sole purpose of which is to kidnap people and send them to a country to be tortured. Moreover, what do we know of all the CIA secret prisons, the gulag extending from Poland to the island of Diego Garcia? How many of them are still open and abusing and torturing prisoners, keeping them in total isolation and in indefinite detention? Total isolation by itself is torture; not knowing when, if ever, you will be released is torture. And the non-secret prisons? Has Guantanamo ended all its forms of torture? There's reason to doubt that.3 And what do we know of what's happening now in Abu Ghraib and Bagram?

And when Obama says "I don't believe that anybody is above the law", and then acts in precisely the opposite fashion, despite overwhelming evidence of criminal torture — such as the recently leaked report of the International Committee of the Red Cross and the Bush Justice Department "torture memos" — it's enough to break the heart of any of his fans who possess more than a minimum of intellect and conscience. It should be noted that a Gallup Poll of April 24/25 showed that 66% of Democrats favored an "investigation into harsh interrogation techniques on terrorism suspects". If the word "torture" had been used in the question, the figure would undoubtedly have been higher.

Following the US invasion of Iraq in March 2003, President Bush went on TV to warn the people of Iraq: "War crimes will be prosecuted. War criminals will be punished. And it will be no defense to say, I was just following orders."4

"Objectively, the American public is much more responsible for the crimes committed in its name than were the people of Germany for the horrors of the Third Reich. We have far more knowledge, and far greater freedom and opportunity to stop our government's criminal behavior," observed James Brooks in the Online Journal in 2007.

On February 10, the Obama Justice Department used the Bush administration's much-reviled "state secrets" tactic in a move to have a lawsuit dismissed — filed by five detainees against a subsidiary of Boeing aircraft company for arranging rendition flights which led to their torture. "It was as if last month's inauguration had never occurred", observed the New York Times.5

And when Obama says, as he does repeatedly, "We need to look forward as opposed to looking backwards", why is it that no one in the media asks him what he thinks of the Nuremberg Tribunal looking backwards in 1946? Or the Church Committee of the US Senate doing the same in 1975 and producing numerous revelations about the criminality of the CIA, FBI, and other government agencies that shocked and opened the eyes of the American people and the world?

We're now told that Obama and his advisers had recently been fiercely debating the question of what to do about the Bush war criminals, with Obama going one way and then another and then back again, both in private and in his public stands. One might say that he was "tortured". But civilized societies do not debate torture. Why didn't the president just do the obvious? The simplest? The right thing? Or at least do what he really believes.

The problem, I'm increasingly afraid, is that the man doesn't really believe strongly in anything, certainly not in controversial areas. He learned a long time ago how to take positions that avoid controversy, how to express opinions without clearly and firmly taking sides, how to talk eloquently without actually saying anything, how to leave his listeners' heads filled with stirring clichés, platitudes, and slogans. And it worked. Oh how it worked! What could happen now, as President of the United States, to induce him to change his style?

The president and the Director of the CIA both insist that no one at the CIA who was relying on the Justice Department's written legal justification of methods of "enhanced interrogation" should be punished. But the first such approval was dated August 1, 2002, while many young men were arrested in Afghanistan and Pakistan during the previous nine months and subjected to "enhanced interrogation". Many were sent to Guantanamo as early as January 2002. And many others were kidnaped and sent to Egypt, Jordan, Morocco and other secret prisons to be tortured beginning in late 2001. So, at least for some months, the torturers were not acting under any formal approval of their methods. But they still will not be punished.

I love that expression "enhanced interrogation". How did our glorious leaders overlook calling the atomic bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki "enhanced explosive devices"?

Lord High Dungeon Master Richard Cheney is upset about the recent release of torture memos. He keeps saying that the Obama administration is suppressing documents that show a more positive picture of the effectiveness of interrogation techniques, which he claims produced very valuable information, prevented certain acts of terrorism, and saved American lives. Hmmm, why am I skeptical of this? Oh, I know, because if this is what actually happened and there are documents which genuinely and unambiguously showed such results, the beleaguered Bush administration would have leaked them years ago with great fanfare, and the CIA would not have destroyed numerous videos of the torture sessions.

But in any event, that still wouldn't justify torture. Humankind has aspired for centuries to tame its worst behaviors; ridding itself of the affliction of torture has been high on that list. There is more than one United States law now prohibiting torture, including a 1994 law making it a crime for US citizens to commit torture overseas. This was recently invoked to convict the son of former Liberian dictator Charles Taylor. There is also the Geneva Convention Relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War, ratified in 1949, which states in Article 17:

No physical or mental torture, nor any other form of coercion may be inflicted on prisoners of war to secure from them information of any kind whatever. Prisoners of war who refuse to answer may not be threatened, insulted, or exposed to any unpleasant or disadvantageous treatment of any kind.

Thus it was that the United States has not called the prisoners of its War on Terror "prisoners of war". But in 1984, another historic step was taken, by the United Nations, with the drafting of the "Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment" (came into force in 1987, ratified by the United States in 1994). Article 2, section 2 of the Convention states:

No exceptional circumstances whatsoever, whether a state of war or a threat of war, internal political instability or any other public emergency, may be invoked as a justification of torture.

Such marvelously clear, unequivocal, and principled language, to set a single standard for a world that makes it increasingly difficult for one to feel proud of humanity. We cannot slide back. If today it's deemed acceptable to torture the person who supposedly has the vital "ticking-bomb" information needed to save lives, tomorrow it will be acceptable to torture him to learn the identities of his alleged co-conspirators. Would we allow slavery to resume for just a short while to serve some "national emergency" or some other "higher purpose"?

If you open the window of torture, even just a crack, the cold air of the Dark Ages will fill the whole room.

"I would personally rather die than have anyone tortured to save my life." - Craig Murray, former British Ambassador to Uzbekistan, who lost his job after he publicly condemned the Uzbek regime in 2003 for its systematic use of torture.6

With all the reports concerning torture under the recent Bush administration, some people may be inclined to think that prior to Bush the United States had very little connection to this awful practice. However, in the period of the 1950s through the 1980s, while the CIA did not usually push the button, turn the switch, or pour the water, the Agency ...

* encouraged its clients in the Third World to use torture;
* provided the host country the names of the people who wound up as torture victims, in places as bad as Guantanamo, Abu Ghraib and Bagram;
* supplied torture equipment;
* conducted classes in torture;
* distributed torture manuals — how-to books;
* was present when torture was taking place, to observe and evaluate how well its students were doing.7

I could really feel sorry for Barack Obama — for his administration is plagued and handicapped by a major recession not of his making — if he had a vision that was thus being thwarted. But he has no vision — not any kind of systemic remaking of the economy, producing a more equitable and more honest society; nor a world at peace, beginning with ending America's perennial wars; no vision of the fantastic things that could be done with the trillions of dollars that would be saved by putting an end to war without end; nor a vision of a world totally rid of torture; nor an America with national health insurance; nor an environment free of capitalist subversion; nor a campaign to control world population ... he just looks for what will offend the fewest people. He's a "whatever works" kind of guy. And he wants to be president. But what we need and crave is a leader of vision.

Another jewel in the crown, Miss Hillary

During the presidential campaign much was made of Obama's stated promises to engage in direct talks with Iran, as opposed to the Bush administration's refusal to speak to the Iranians and threatening to attack them and bomb their nuclear facilities. This was one more example of the much-vaunted "change" that Obama was going to bring. But, in actuality, it wouldn't be much of a change. Mid-level American officials did in fact occasionally meet with Iranian officials, most notably after the September 11 attacks in 2001 and in mid-2003 after the US invasion of Iraq. These meeting were always in secret.8 There were also at least three publicly-announced meetings between the US and Iran in 2007, primarily dealing with the fighting in Iraq. And now that Obama is in power, what do we find? We find his Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, testifying April 22 before the House Foreign Affairs Committee and stating:

"We actually believe that by following the diplomatic path we are on [speaking to Iran], we gain credibility and influence with a number of nations who would have to participate in order to make the sanctions regime as tight and as crippling as we would want it to be."

Would it be unfair to say that she's implying that a reason for talks with Iran is that the US could get more international support when it decides to cripple that country? Is crippling a country the United States is at peace with supposed to be part of the "change" in US foreign policy? Is Iran expected to be enthusiastic about such talks? If the talks collapse, will the United States use that as an excuse for bombing Iran? Or will Israel be given the honor?

Later in the hearing, Clinton declared: "We are deploying new approaches to the threat posed by Iran."

I would love to have been a member of the House committee so I could have had the following exchange with the Secretary of State:

Cong. Blum: Do we plan to impose sanctions on France?

Sec. Clinton: I don't understand, Congressman. Why would we impose sanctions on France?

Cong. Blum: Well, if we impose sanctions on Iran on the mere suspicion of them planning to build nuclear weapons, it seems to me we'd want to impose even stricter sanctions on a country which already possesses such weapons.

Sec. Clinton: But France is an ally.

Cong. Blum: So let's make Iran an ally. We can start with ending our many sanctions against them and calling off our Israeli attack dogs.

Sec. Clinton: But Congressman, Iran is a threat. Surely you don't see France as a threat? What reason would France have to use nuclear weapons against the United States?

Cong. Blum: What reason would Iran have to use nuclear weapons against the United States? Other than an irresistible desire for mass national suicide.

If Congressman Blum had pursued this line of questioning, it might well have culminated in some Orwellian remark by dear Hillary, such as the one she treated us to a few days later when speaking to reporters in Iraq. As the Washington Post reported it: "Clinton played down the latest burst of violence, telling reporters she saw 'no sign' it would reignite the sectarian warfare that ravaged the country in recent years. She said that the Iraqi government had 'come a long, long way' and that the bombings were 'a signal that the rejectionists fear Iraq is going in the right direction'."9

So ... the eruption of violence is a sign of success. In October 2003, President George W. Bush, speaking after many resistance attacks in Iraq had occurred, said: "The more successful we are on the ground, the more these killers will react."10

And here is Gen. Richard B. Myers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, speaking in April 2004 about a rise in insurrection and fighting in Iraq over nearly a two-week period: "'I would characterize what we're seeing right now as a — as more a symptom of the success that we're having here in Iraq,' he said ... explaining that the violence indicated there was something to fight against — American progress in building up Iraq."11

War is Peace ... Freedom is Slavery ... Ignorance is Strength. I distinctly remember when I first read "1984" thinking that it was very well done but of course a great exaggeration, sort of like science fiction.

Clinton was equally profound on May 1, speaking to an assemblage of State Department employees. Discussing Venezuela and Bolivia, she said that the Bush administration "tried to isolate them, tried to support opposition to them, tried to turn them into international pariahs. It didn't work. We are going to see what other approaches might work." Oh ... uh ... how about NOT trying to isolate them, NOT supporting their opposition, NOT trying to turn them into international pariahs? How about the National Endowment for Democracy, the Agency for International Development, and the US Embassy NOT trying to subvert their revolutions? And when she says "It didn't work", one must ask: Work to what end? To return the two countries to their previous condition of client-states? Perhaps like with Nicaragua, about whom the Secretary of State said improving relations was important to counter Iran's growing influence. She noted that "the Iranians are building a huge embassy in Managua. You can only imagine what it's for."12 I can only imagine what Ms. Clinton imagines it's for. What is the new American Embassy in Iraq — the biggest embassy in the entire history of the world, in the entire universe — What is that for? Another example of Obamachange that means no change. What is it with American officials? Why are they so insufferably arrogant and hypocritical?

Notes

1. Washington Post, February 24, 2009 ↩
2. See, for example, "Executive Order – Ensuring Lawful Interrogations", January 22, 2009 ↩
3. See The Observer (London), February 8, 2009 for an account of how conditions were still very awful at Guantanamo as of that date. ↩
4. Video of Bush ↩
5. New York Times, February 10, 2009, plus their editorial of the next day. In April, a federal appeals court ruled that the detainees' lawsuit could proceed. ↩
6. Testimony before the International Commission of Inquiry On Crimes Against Humanity Committed by the Bush Administration, session of January 21, 2006, New York City ↩
7. See William Blum, "Rogue State: A Guide to the World's Only Superpower", chapter 5. ↩
8. The Independent (London), May 27, 2007 ↩
9. Washington Post, April 26, 2009 ↩
10. Washington Post, October 28, 2003 ↩
11. New York Times, April 16, 2003 ↩
12. Associated Press, May 1, 2009 ↩

Source / Anti-Empire Report

The Rag Blog

[+/-] Read More...

07 March 2009

The Problem Is That the Democrats Will Implicate Themselves If There Are Prosecutions for Torture


"I Was Only Following Orders!" Being serious about torture. Or not.
By William Blum / March 5, 2009

In Cambodia they're once again endeavoring to hold trials to bring some former senior Khmer Rouge officials to justice for their 1975-79 war crimes and crimes against humanity. The current defendant in a United Nations-organized trial, Kaing Guek Eav, who was the head of a Khmer Rouge torture center, has confessed to atrocities, but insists he was acting under orders.1

As we all know, this is the defense that the Nuremberg Tribunal rejected for the Nazi defendants. Everyone knows that, right? No one places any weight on such a defense any longer, right? We make jokes about Nazis declaring: "I was only following orders!" ("Ich habe nur den Befehlen gehorcht!") Except that both the Bush and Obama administrations have spoken in favor of it.

Here's the new head of the CIA, Leon Panetta: "What I have expressed as a concern, as has the president, is that those who operated under the rules that were provided by the Attorney General in the interpretation of the law [concerning torture] and followed those rules ought not to be penalized. And ... I would not support, obviously, an investigation or a prosecution of those individuals. I think they did their job."2 Operating under the rules ... doing their job ... are of course the same as following orders.

The UN Convention Against Torture (first adopted in 1984), which has been ratified by the United States, says quite clearly, "An order from a superior officer or a public authority may not be invoked as a justification of torture." The Torture Convention enacts a prohibition against torture that is a cornerstone of international law and a principle on a par with the prohibition against slavery and genocide.

Of course, those giving the orders are no less guilty. On the very day of Obama's inauguration, the United Nation's special torture rapporteur invoked the Convention in calling on the United States to pursue former president George W. Bush and defense secretary Donald Rumsfeld for torture and bad treatment of Guantanamo prisoners.3

On several occasions, President Obama has indicated his reluctance to pursue war crimes charges against Bush officials, by expressing a view such as: “I don't believe that anybody is above the law. On the other hand I also have a belief that we need to look forward as opposed to looking backwards.” This is the same excuse Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Sen has given for not punishing Khmer Rouge leaders. In December 1998 he asserted: "We should dig a hole and bury the past and look ahead to the 21st century with a clean slate."4 Hun Sen has been in power all the years since then, and no Khmer Rouge leader has been convicted for their role in the historic mass murder.

And by not investigating Bush officials, Obama is indeed saying that they're above the law. Like the Khmer Rouge officials have been. Michael Ratner, a professor at Columbia Law School and president of the Center for Constitutional Rights, said prosecuting Bush officials is necessary to set future anti-torture policy. "The only way to prevent this from happening again is to make sure that those who were responsible for the torture program pay the price for it. I don't see how we regain our moral stature by allowing those who were intimately involved in the torture programs to simply walk off the stage and lead lives where they are not held accountable."5

One reason for the non-prosecution may be that serious trials of the many Bush officials who contributed to the torture policies might reveal the various forms of Democratic Party non-opposition and collaboration.

It should also be noted that the United States supported Pol Pot (who died in April 1998) and the Khmer Rouge for several years after they were ousted from power by the Vietnamese in 1979. This support began under Jimmy Carter and his National Security Adviser, Zbigniew Brzezinski, and continued under Ronald Reagan.6 A lingering bitterness by American cold warriors toward Vietnam, the small nation which monumental US power had not been able to defeat, and its perceived closeness to the Soviet Union, appears to be the only explanation for this policy. Humiliation runs deep when you're a superpower.

Neither should it be forgotten in this complex cautionary tale that the Khmer Rouge in all likelihood would never have come to power, nor even made a serious attempt to do so, if not for the massive American "carpet bombing" of Cambodia in 1969-70 and the US-supported overthrow of Prince Sihanouk in 1970 and his replacement by a man closely tied to the United States.7 Thank you Richard Nixon and Henry Kissinger. Well done, lads.

By the way, if you're not already turned off by many of Obama's appointments, listen to how James Jones opened his talk at the Munich Conference on Security Policy on February 8: "Thank you for that wonderful tribute to Henry Kissinger yesterday. Congratulations. As the most recent National Security Advisor of the United States, I take my daily orders from Dr. Kissinger."8

Lastly, Spain's High Court recently announced it would launch a war crimes investigation into an Israeli ex-defense minister and six other top security officials for their role in a 2002 attack that killed a Hamas commander and 14 civilians in Gaza.9 Spain has for some time been the world's leading practitioner of "universal jurisdiction" for human-rights violations, such as their indictment of Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet a decade ago. The Israeli case involved the dropping of a bomb on the home of the Hamas leader; most of those killed were children. The United States does this very same thing every other day in Afghanistan or Pakistan. Given the refusal of American presidents to invoke even their "national jurisdiction" over American officials-cum-war criminals, we can only hope that someone reminds the Spanish authorities of a few names, names like Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Powell, Rice, Feith, Perle, Yoo, and a few others with a piece missing, a piece that's shaped like a conscience. There isn't even a need to rely on international law alone, for there's an American law against war crimes, passed by a Republican-dominated Congress in 1996.10

The noted Israeli columnist, Uri Avnery, writing about the Israeli case, tried to capture the spirit of Israeli society that produces such war criminals and war crimes. He observed: "This system indoctrinates its pupils with a violent tribal cult, totally ethnocentric, which sees in the whole of world history nothing but an endless story of Jewish victimhood. This is a religion of a Chosen People, indifferent to others, a religion without compassion for anyone who is not Jewish, which glorifies the God-decreed genocide described in the Biblical book of Joshua."11

It would take very little substitution to apply this statement to the United States — like "American" for "Jewish" and "American exceptionalism" for "a Chosen People".

Notes

1. Associated Press, August 1, 2007 ↩
2. Press conference, February 25, 2009, transcript by Federal News Service ↩
3. Agence France Presse (AFP), January 20, 2009 ↩
4. New York Times, December 29, 1998 ↩
5. Associated Press, November 17, 2008 ↩
6. See William Blum, "Rogue State", chapter 10 ("Supporting Pol Pot") ↩
7. See William Blum, "Killing Hope", chapter 20 ("Cambodia, 1955-1973") ↩
8. http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2009/02/jones_munich_conference.html ↩
9. Reuters news agency, January 30, 2009 ↩
10. The War Crimes Act (18 U.S.C. 2441) ↩
11. Haaretz, leading Israeli newspaper, January 30, 2009 ↩

[William Blum is the author of:

* Killing Hope: US Military and CIA Interventions Since World War 2
* Rogue State: A Guide to the World's Only Superpower
* West-Bloc Dissident: A Cold War Memoir
* Freeing the World to Death: Essays on the American Empire

Portions of the books can be read, and signed copies purchased, at www.killinghope.org.]


Source / Information Clearing House

The Rag Blog

[+/-] Read More...

17 February 2009

Compassion Is the Only Course, Even When the Crimes Are Atrocious

This is a profoundly important piece, written by a victim of a Cambodian war criminal. When the author writes that "We shall all be at the trial — not just as judges, but also as victims, and the accused," his words penetrate to the core of many human issues we have always faced.

Richard Jehn / The Rag Blog

Graphic: Emiliano Ponzi.

My Savior, Their Killer
By François Bizot / February 16, 2009

Phnom Penh, Cambodia -- AFTER 10 years of detention, Kaing Guek Eav, alias Comrade Duch, is to appear today before the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia, charged with war crimes and crimes against humanity. He was arrested in 1999, after 20 years of living incognito, for crimes committed on his orders as commander of the Tuol Sleng prison in Phnom Penh from 1975 to 1979, when the Khmer Rouge controlled Cambodia and were responsible for the deaths of more than a million people.

I was his prisoner for three months in 1971, in a camp known as M13 hidden in the forest of the Cardamom mountains. I had been doing field work in the Cambodian countryside, searching for ancient Khmer Buddhist manuscripts, when I was ambushed by Khmer Rouge militants fighting Cambodia’s American-backed government. I was accused of being a C.I.A. spy and sentenced to death.

Duch was in charge of the jungle camp, both my jailer and my prosecutor. I was kept in chains and interrogated daily by him. Somehow, during the strange dialogue that began between us, he became convinced that I really was just a Frenchman who wanted to study Buddhist texts. Duch undertook to secure my release. My two Khmer assistants did not have the same good fortune: despite Duch’s promise to me, they were executed soon after I left the camp, as so many thousands were in the years to come under his meticulous supervision.

I did not see Duch again until 2003, in the military prison in Phnom Penh. Conditions there were rudimentary, but the general feel was not that of a jail. I remember that he had the same look of determination that he had had 32 years earlier, though the smile that he had occasionally flashed when he ruled over my fate was gone.

In the whirl of conflicting emotions provoked by seeing him again, I asked him: “How are things here? Is it all right?” Compelled to repeat the question, I felt its incongruity: the executioner was now on the other side of the gate, as I had foreseen in my dreams, in the place once occupied by his victims.

In July 2007, he was transferred to one of the eight cells in the detention center that is part of the vast complex where the war crimes court is based and where his trial will take place. I visited him there. At the time, he enjoyed the relative comfort of his new surroundings. Four other elderly Khmer Rouge leaders were also incarcerated there. They were well cared for; food, cells, a television room, a visiting room — everything was in conformance with international rules, enough to make the guards jealous.

But Duch may today regret having left the tedium of the military prison. After years of stalling, and many months of thorough preliminary investigations, the trial that so few people wanted is about to begin. The sound of the preparations for it rings out in the detention center as if it were an execution.

The death penalty, which Duch ordered at least 12,380 times, does not exist in United Nations-backed tribunals like this one. His condemnation will not have the too-familiar instantaneousness of the Khmer Rouge hoe striking the back of the neck, but his sentence will be long and relentless.

The worst that he risks, however, is not imprisonment itself, but seeing his reasons for living disappear. His life now revolves around the visits from his children, a right that was denied to his victims, and his faith in the judicial process — a process that did not exist at Tuol Sleng.

Duch does not raise any objection to his trial. In his heart lie the same fears that haunted each of his victims — ancient fears that have never ceased to haunt mankind. Thus he has admitted his guilt, bowed over and humbled by the horror of what he has done.

Last February, Duch was led, with his consent, to the scenes of his crimes. The visit was a shock for all who witnessed it. This major judicial step took place in an atmosphere of intense, palpable emotion.

“I ask for your forgiveness — I know that you cannot forgive me, but I ask you to leave me the hope that you might,” he said before collapsing in tears on the shoulder of one of his guards.

I was not there — it was a closed hearing — but those who were reported that the cry of the former executioner betrayed such suffering that one of the few survivors of Tuol Sleng screamed out, “Here are the words that I’ve longed to hear for 30 years!”

It could be that forgiveness is possible after a simple, natural process, when the victim feels that he has been repaid. And the executioner has to pay dearly, for it is the proof of his suffering that eases ours.

Let us not fool ourselves. Beyond the crimes that Duch committed against humanity, those of the Khmer Rouge will also be judged. And beyond the crimes of the Khmer Rouge, the capacity of the tribunals to mete out justice will be tested, as well as our ability to judge man himself, and history. We shall all be at the trial — not just as judges, but also as victims, and the accused.

The genocide of the Khmer Rouge will be judged as a “crime against humanity,” a crime against ourselves. As such, Duch’s guilt exceeds his immediate victims; it becomes the guilt of humanity, in the name of all victims. Duch killed mankind. The trial of the Khmer Rouge should be an opportunity for each of us to gaze at the torturer with some distance — from beyond the intolerable cry of the suffering, which may veil the truth of the abomination. The only way to look at the torturer is to humanize him.

[François Bizot is the author of “The Gate,” a memoir. This essay was translated by The Times from the French.]

Source / New York Times

The Rag Blog

[+/-] Read More...

07 December 2008

The Secret Laos Bombing and Legacies of War


Drawing the Future from the Past
By Channapha Khamvongsa / December 5, 2008

The bombing was relentless. From 1964 to 1973, the United States dropped more than 2 million tons of ordnance on Laos. That's a planeload of bombs every eight minutes, 24 hours a day, for nine years. Laos has the unfortunate distinction of being the most heavily bombed country in the history of the world.

"In the area of Xieng Khoang, the place of my birth, there was health, good earth, and fine weather," one survivor, a 33-year-old man, recalls of that period. "But then the airplanes came, bombing the rice fields and the forests, making us leave our land and rice fields with great sadness. One day a plane came bombing my rice field as well as the village. I had gone very early to harrow the field. I thought, ‘I am only a village rice farmer, the airplane will not shoot me.’ But that day truly it did shoot me and wounded me together with my buffalo, which was the source of a hundred thousand loves and a hundred thousand worries for me."

For nearly three decades, the U.S. secret war in Laos and the impact of the most massive bombing campaign in the world was nearly forgotten. For those who remembered, the events seemed surreal. They witnessed the reckless destruction of a people and their land, and careful efforts by the U.S. government to conceal it. For those too young to know, gathering information and knowledge of this history was scattered and fragmented. It seemed the secret war in Laos and its aftermath would remain a secret.

But then a remarkable set of drawings and eyewitness accounts came to light. Laotian villagers put their memories on paper in the 1970s to depict the secret bombing of their country. This trove of reminiscences became the inspiration for Legacies of War. Founded by Laotian Americans in 2004, the project raises awareness about the history of the Vietnam War-era bombing in Laos. Using a unique combination of art, culture, education, community organizing, advocacy, and dialogue, Legacies of War also works for the removal of unexploded bombs in Laos, to provide space for healing the wounds of war, and to create greater hope for a future of peace.

A Secret War, a People Scattered

When the United States withdrew from Indochina, the "Secret War" in Laos was lost to history. But the legacy of the war lives on. Up to 30% of the cluster bombs dropped by the United States in Laos failed to detonate, leaving extensive contamination from unexploded ordnance (UXO) in the countryside. That translates into 78 to 130 million unexploded bomblets. Over one-third of the land in Laos is contaminated. These "bombies," as the Lao now call them, have killed or maimed more than 34,000 people since the war's end, and continue to claim more innocent victims every day. About 40% of accidents result in death, and 60% of the victims are children. UXO remains a major barrier to the safety, health, livelihoods, and food security of the people of Laos.



The war also displaced up to one-third of the Lao population. Nearly 750,000 would eventually become refugees in France, Australia, and Canada, among other countries. Over 350,000 refugees from Laos came to the United States after having experienced war, destruction, death, imprisonment, family separation, loss of homeland, loss of identity, and loss of control over their destinies. Many had undiagnosed post-traumatic stress disorder. But these weren't things Laotian refugees had the luxury to contemplate, for basic economic survival trumped all other needs.

Drawing on the Past

Between December 1970 and May 1971, Fred Branfman, an American, and Boungeun, a Lao man, collected illustrations and narratives in the Vientiane refugee camps, where bombing victims fled. The drawings and narratives represent the voiceless, faceless, and nameless who endured an air war campaign committed in secrecy. Drawn in pencil, pens, crayons, and markers, they are raw and stark, reflecting the crude events that shaped their reality. The simplicity of the narration and drawings emphasize the illustrators' identities as ordinary villagers who bore witness to a devastating event.

For instance, an 18-year-old woman remembers, "In the year 1967, my village built small shelters in the forest and we had holes in the bamboo thicket on top of the hill. It was a place to which we could flee. But there were two brothers who went out to cut wood in the forest. The airplanes shot them and both brothers died. Their mother and father had just these two sons and were both in the same hole with me. I think with much pity about this old father and mother who were like crazy people because their children had died."



Each of the illustrations demonstrates the violence of warfare. However, the images of blood and death are contradicted by the memories of the scenic and peaceful village life these survivors once lived. Scenes show farmers tending to their rice fields, monks praying at the temple, women going to the market, and children playing in the schoolyard. The drawings capture the very moments when their lives and society were forever altered. The illustrations and narratives are at the heart of the Legacies of War National Traveling Exhibition, which is accompanied by historical photos, maps and other relevant documents to give context to the decade-long bombings.

Only a small circle of individuals knew of the existence of these illustrations. The pictures hadn’t been seen in decades, not since the end of the war. A fortuitous meeting between me and Institute for Policy Studies director John Cavanagh led to the return of the illustrations to the Lao American community. In the last several years, thousands of visitors have seen the illustrations through the Legacies of War traveling exhibit and other community forums. Although most Laotian Americans didn't experience the same horrors depicted in the drawings, the illustrations invoke memory of their own stories of refuge, survival, and resilience.

The reaction to the drawings was instructive to Legacies’ work. Initially considered an artifact, the illustrations have become a living document. One at a time, each drawing tells the story of a survivor. Although the illustrations were from four decades ago, they inspire others to share their stories, contributing to a collective narrative that began long ago in Laos, but continues today through the voices of Laotian Americans.

Following a viewing of the illustrations at an exhibit in Lowell, Massachusetts, a Lao woman in the audience stood up to speak at a community forum, "The illustrations made me remember. I have not shared, not even with my family because I didn't think it was important. When I was a young woman in Laos, I worked as a nurse to help people hurt by the bombing. Every day, the airplanes would come: Boom! Boom! Boom! And then one day, it came so close to us, we had to hide in the cave and we hear right outside the cave, the sound so loud. It scared me so much. I feel so lucky I did not die. The pictures made me remember. I am so sad that today, people in Lao are still being hurt and dying from these bombs." The woman, whose husband had spoken on several occasions about his experience, had never shared hers. The illustrations and community forum gave her a chance to tell her story for the first time in 30 years. Today, she remains engaged in educating people in the Boston-area about the bombing and its aftermath.

These new voices and stories are captured in various ways through Legacies of War: interactive exhibition pieces, community programs, oral history interviews, theater performance pieces, and new commissioned works of art. Based on oral histories collected from Laotian refugees and their descendents, the Refugee Nation theater piece reveals connections between U.S. and Southeast Asian history, and the unique challenges faced by political refugees and their American children. Touching on themes of identity, globalization, and activism, it brings a Laotian voice to a growing part of the Asian-American Diaspora that is yet to be included in the American experience.



The integration of storytelling, art, and performance are critical in breaking the silence. By creating multiple access points of engagement, Legacies of War facilitates the connection of personal stories to a collective experience in recognition that we are not alone in our experiences, that we are connected to a larger narrative and a larger context. The acknowledgement of a shared journey and struggle could lead to collective strength and power.

Since the end to the U.S. wars in Southeast Asia, many other wars have been waged, in other parts of the world, in new terrain, villages, and communities. Yet, the wars in Southeast Asia lingers. And for the people living in Laos as well as those who became refugees, the lingering impact of war remains ever present in their daily lives. Although war and conflict created the refugee community, they don't have to define it. Through the transformative power of stories, art, and performance, Laotian Americans are evolving from victim to agency of change. "Now that I know about the secret war," said a Lao American student in Seattle, "I have to do something about the horrible things that are still happening to people. As Americans, we must do something."

Another victim, a 37-year old woman, reflects, "Our lives became like those of animals desperately trying to escape their hunters . . . Human beings, whose parents brought them into the world and carefully raised them with overflowing love despite so many difficulties, these human beings would die from a single blast as explosions burst, lying still without moving again at all. And who then thinks of the blood, flesh, sweat and strength of their parents, and who will have charity and pity for them?...In reality, whatever happens, it is only the innocent who suffer. And as for other men, do they know all the unimaginable things happening in this war?"

[Channapha Khamvongsa, the executive director of Legacies of War, is a Foreign Policy In Focus contributor. Editor: John Feffer.]

Source / Foreign Policy in Focus

The Rag Blog

[+/-] Read More...

Only a few posts now show on a page, due to Blogger pagination changes beyond our control.

Please click on 'Older Posts' to continue reading The Rag Blog.