ANTIFA Info-Bulletin #315 Via NY Transfer News * All the News That Doesn't Fit ANTIFA INFO-BULLETIN News * Analysis * Research * Action - AFIB No. 315, September 30, 2001 - FREE MUMIA ABU-JAMAL! FREE LEONARD PELTIER! FREE ALL POLITICAL PRISONERS & PRISONERS OF WAR! Brzezinski, like President Carter's CIA director Admiral Stansfield Turner and lower-ranking but key players like Charles Cogan, freely acknowledges that the possible adverse consequences of the anti-Communist alliance with the Afghan Islamists (and shortly afterward, with their radical Muslim allies around the world) -- the growth of a new international terrorist movement and the global outreach of South Asian drug trafficking -- did not weigh heavily, if at all, in their calculations at the time. Brzezinski's proclaimed goals were, and remain, far more grandiose and truly strategic. Asked whether he regretted favoring extremist Islamism or arming and training future terrorists, his reply was, "Which was more important in world history? The Taliban or the fall of the Soviet empire? A few over-excited Islamists or the liberation of Central Europe and the end of the Cold War?" -- John K. Cooley, Unholy Wars: Afghanistan, America and International Terrorism [London, Pluto Press, 1999] pp. 19-20. Contents: Number 315 01. OPEN LETTER [San Francisco]: A Message to Troops, Would-be Troops, and Other Youth from Marine Gulf War Resister. 02. COMMON DREAMS NEWS CENTER [US]: Martin A. Lee: 13 Questions for President George W. Bush. 03. WORLD SOCIALIST WEB SITE [London]: White House Lied about Threat to Air Force One. [...] 05. FRIENDS OF MARILYN BUCK [San Francisco]: Political Prisoners' Rights Attacked, Including Right to Counsel. 06. THE A-INFOS NEWS SERVICE [Canada]: Urgent Appeal: First Nation People in Struggle. 07. SOLIDARITY WITH HUNGER STRIKERS IN TURKEY [Dublin]: Two More Deaths. [...] 09. THE OBSERVER [London]: Spy Blunder: Resentful West Spurned Sudan's Key Terror Files. 10. MUMIA ABU-JAMAL: "The Forgotten Terrorists." * * * __________________________________________________________________________ A MESSAGE TO TROOPS, WOULD-BE TROOPS, AND OTHER YOUTH __________________________________________________________________________ By Jeff Paterson - Sunday, September 23, 2001 - Do you know anyone in the military, or thinking about signing up soon? Pass this along to them. They may appreciate it, or not... but they deserve a heads up. In August 1990 I was an active duty US Marine Corps Corporal. I was ordered to the Middle East, the Gulf War was about to come. Four years prior--thinking I had nothing better to do with my life--I had walked into the Salinas, California recruiting station and told them to "put me where I was most needed". "What am I going to do with my life?" has always been a huge question for youth, and today in the wake of the horror and tragedy of New York September 11th this question has increased importance for millions of young people. No one who has seen the images will ever forget. In a scene as seemingly unreal as the Matrix, a conflict reached into American reality in an unthinkable way. Copy clerks to admin assistants, restaurant workers to firefighters--thousands of lives ripped away from friends and family. Now the television shouts, "revenge", "infinite justice", and "something must be done!" Wave a red, white and blue flag to ease the sorrow, to declare "We're not going to take it." And if I hadn't spent those four years in the Marine Corps, I might be inclined to fall into line now. Most of the time my unit trained to fight a war against peasants who dared to struggle against "American interests" in their homelands--specifically Nicaragua, El Salvador, and Guatemala. I saw dire poverty in the Philippines, US government-sanctioned prostitution rings to service servicemen in South Korea, and unbridled racism towards the peoples of Okinawa and Japan--the standard response to a child waving a "peace sign" at us with his fingers was "yeaa, ha ha, two bombs little gook." I began to understand why billions of people around the world really do hate the United States--specifically its war machine, covert contra wars, and an increasing system of economic globalization that replaces hope with 12-hour days locked in sweatshops producing "Designed in the USA" exports. Faced with this reality, I began the process of becoming un-American--meaning that the interests of the people of the world began to weigh heavier than my self-interest. I realized that the world did not need or want another U.S. troop. Although they did not look much like me, I found I had more in common with the common peoples of the Middle East than I did with those who were ordering me to kill them. My Battalion Commander's reassurance that "if anything goes wrong we'll nuke the rag heads until they all glow" was not reassuring. Up against that, I publicly stated I would not be a pawn in America's power plays for profits, oil, and domination of the Middle East. I pledged to resist. I said that if dragged out into the Saudi desert, I would refuse to fight. A few weeks later, I sat on the airstrip as hundreds of Marines--many of whom I had lived with for years--filed past me and boarded the plane. I fought the Gulf War from a military brig, and after worldwide anti-war protesters helped spring me, we fought the war in the streets. But back then we failed to stop the war. Since 1990 over 1.5 million Iraqi people have died--not mainly from the massive US bombing from the sky, but from a decade of economic sanctions. All the while the US government has coldly declared that these Iraqi deaths are "worth it" in order to achieve strategic regional objectives. So today, as the US Government demands the world mourn with us for our loss, we in turn are expected to ignore the suffering that this nation produces. Every time the war machine is kicked into high gear, acknowledgements are made about past "mistakes": Gulf War Sickness, Agent Orange and napalm in Viet Nam, massacres of refugees in Korea, U.S. troops used as nuclear exposure guinea pigs after World War II. And always: "Trust us, this time it will be different". But it never is. One need not be a pacifist, a Communist, a Quaker, or a humanist to oppose this war. However, it certainly helps to be an Internationalist--realizing that our collective future is bound with the majority of humanity, and not with those who are taking this horrific opportunity to threaten world war. For those women and men now in uniform, you have a choice to make. Silence is what your "superiors" expect of you, but the interests of humanity require more. Think. Speak out. And if you resist, there are hundreds of thousands who will support you--many of whom have already taken to the streets to oppose this war. Like his father before him, Bush Jr. has drawn a line in the sand: "Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists." Simply put, the rulers of the U.S. see much unfinished business for their "New World Order". While we grieve, they grin that "the normal rules no longer apply" (translation: now is the time to settle our scores), and we have "a blank check to act, the nation is united" (translation: dissent will be ignored, or suppressed as required). Bush Jr. has established a "Czar of Homeland Security" to coordinate domestic government spies, phone taps, and Internet surveillance. During a staged televised CNN "Town Hall" meeting, a businessman rises: "I'll gladly give up my right to protest in order to be safe!" Applause. Now more than ever, the people of the world are not safe from the U.S., and the people in the U.S. are not safe from the U.S. I will not wave the red, white and blue flag--instead I'll wear a green ribbon in solidarity with immigrants and Arab Americans facing increasing racist attacks. Stop the War. Support the troops--who refuse to fight. Let's dedicate our lives to changing this whole situation. Background: On August 30, 1990, 22-year-old Marine Corporal Jeff Paterson refused to board a military plane in Hawaii heading to Saudi Arabia. He was the first active-duty military resister in the U.S.-led attack on Iraq. The photo of Jeff Paterson sitting on the airstrip, defying orders to go fight in the Gulf War, appeared on TV and in newspapers around the world. Later Jeff edited the Anti-WARrior newsletter of military resistance to the Gulf War. Jeff currently resides in the San Francisco Bay Area and is a member of Vietnam Veterans Against the War Anti-Imperialist (http://www.oz.net/~vvawai). He can be reached through VVAW-AI, or directly at EMAILJP@post.com. ____________________________________________________________________ 13 QUESTIONS FOR PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH ____________________________________________________________________ COMMON DREAMS NEWS CENTER Breaking News & Views for the Progressive Community Featured View Friday, September 28, 2001 http://www.commondreams.org/views01/0928-11.htm by Martin A. Lee Mainstream journalists in the United States often function more like a fourth branch of government than a feisty fourth estate. If anything, the patterns of media bias that characterize sycophantic reporting in "peacetime" are amplified during a war or a national security crisis. Since the tragic events of September 11, the separation between press and state has dwindled nearly to the vanishing point. If we had an aggressive, independent press corps, our national conversation about the terrorist attacks that demolished the World Trade Center towers in New York and damaged the Pentagon would be far more probing and informative. Here are some examples of questions that reporters ought to be asking President Bush: 1. Before the attacks in New York and Washington, your administration quietly tolerated Saudi Arabian and Pakistani military and financial aid for the Taliban regime, even though it harbored terrorist mastermind Osama bin Laden. But now you say fighting terrorism will be the main focus of your administration. By making counter-terrorism the top priority in bilateral relations, aren't you signaling to abusive governments in Sudan, Indonesia, Turkey, and elsewhere that they need not worry much about their human rights performance as long as they join America's anti-terrorist crusade? Will you barter human rights violations like corporations trade pollution credits? Will you condone, for example, the brutalization of Chechnya in exchange for Russian participation in the "war against terrorism"? Or will you send a message loud and clear to America's allies that they must not use the fight against terrorism as a cover for waging repressive campaigns that smother democratic aspirations in their own countries? 2. Terrorists finance their operations by laundering money through offshore banks and other hot money outlets. Yet your administration has undermined international efforts to crack down on tax havens. Last May, you withdrew support for a comprehensive initiative launched by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), which sought greater transparency in tax and banking practices. In the wake of the September 11 massacre, will you reassess this decision and support the OECD proposal, even if it means displeasing wealthy Americans and campaign contributors who avoid paying taxes by hiding money in offshore accounts? 3. Four months ago, U.S. officials announced that Washington was giving $43 million to the Taliban for its role in reducing the cultivation of opium poppies, despite the Taliban's heinous human rights record and its sheltering of Islamic terrorists of many nationalities. Doesn't this make the U.S. government guilty of supporting a country that harbors terrorists? Do you think your obsession with the "war on drugs" has distorted U.S. foreign policy in Southwest Asia and other regions? 4. According to U.S., German, and Russian intelligence sources, Osama bin Laden's operatives have been trying to acquire enriched uranium and other weapons-grade radioactive materials for a nuclear bomb. There are reports that in 1993 bin Laden's well-financed organization tried to buy enriched uranium from poorly maintained Russian facilities that lacked sufficient controls. Why has your administration proposed cutting funds for a program to help safeguard nuclear materials in the former Soviet Union? 5. On September 23rd , you announced plans to make public a detailed analysis of the evidence gathered by U.S intelligence and police agencies, which proves that Osama bin Laden and his cohorts are guilty of the terrorist attacks in New York and the Pentagon. But the next day your administration backpedaled. "As we look through [the evidence]," explained Secretary of State Colin Powell, "we can find areas that are unclassified and it will allow us to share this information with the public. ... But most of it is classified." Please explain this sudden flip-flop. How can we believe what you say about fighting terrorism if your administration can't make its case publicly with sufficient evidence? How do you expect to win the support of governments and people who otherwise might suspect Washington's motives, particularly some Muslim and Arab nations? 6. Exactly who is a terrorist, and who is not? When the CIA was busy doling out an estimated $2 billion to support the Afghan mujahadeen in the 1980s, Osama bin Laden and his colleagues were hailed as anti-communist freedom fighters. During the cold war, U.S. national security strategists, many of whom are riding top saddle once again in your administration, didn't view bin Laden's fanatical religious beliefs as diametrically opposed to western civilization. But now bin Laden and his ilk are unabashed terrorists. Definitions of what constitutes terror and terrorism seem to change with the times. Before he became vice president, Dick Cheney and the U.S. State Department denounced Nelson Mandela, leader of the African National Congress, as a terrorist. Today Mandela, South Africa's president emeritus, is considered a great and dignified statesman. And what about Israeli prime minister Ariel Sharon, who bears significant responsibility for the 1982 massacre of 1,800 innocents at the Sabra and Shatila refugee camps in Lebanon. What role will Sharon play in your crusade against international terrorism? 7. There's been a lot of talk lately about unshackling the CIA and lifting the alleged ban on CIA assassinations. Many U.S. officials attribute the CIA's inability to thwart the terrorist attacks in New York and Washington to rules that supposedly have prohibited the CIA from utilizing gangsters, death squad leaders, and other "unsavory" characters as sources and assets. Why don't you set the record straight, Mr. President, and acknowledge there were always gaping loopholes in these rules, which allowed such activity to continue unabated? It's precisely this sort of dubious activity -- enlisting unsavory characters to advance U.S. foreign policy objectives -- that set the stage for tragic events on September 11th. It's hardly a secret that the CIA trained and financed Islamic extremists to topple the Soviet-backed regime in Afghanistan. Some of the same extremists supported by the CIA, most notably bin Laden, have since turned their psychotic wrath against the United States. Instead of rewarding the CIA with billions of additional dollars to fight terrorism, shouldn't you hold accountable those shortsighted and perilously naove U.S. intelligence officials who ran the covert operation in Afghanistan that got us into this mess? 8. John Negroponte, the new U.S. ambassador the United Nations, says he intends to build an international anti-terrorist coalition. During the mid-1980s, Negroponte was involved in covering up right-wing death squad activity and other human rights abuses in Honduras when he served as ambassador to that country. Doesn't Negroponte's role in aiding and abetting state terrorism in Central America undermine the moral authority of the United States as it embarks upon a crusade against international terrorism? 9. The attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon brought home the frightening extent to which U.S. citizens and installations are vulnerable to terrorist attacks. If terrorists hit a nuclear power plant, it could result in an enormous public health disaster. In the interest of protecting national security, why haven't you ordered the immediate phase-out of the 103 nuclear power plants that are currently operating in the United States? Why doesn't your administration emphasize safe, renewable energy alternatives, such as solar and wind power, which would not invite terrorism? 10. After years of successful lobbying against rigorous safety procedures, the heads of the airline industry will receive a multibillion-dollar taxpayer bailout for their ailing companies. Given your support for the airline rescue package, do you now agree that letting the free market run its course won't resolve all our economic and social problems? (That's what anti-globalization activists have been saying all along.) And if airlines deserve a bail-out, how about a multibillion-dollar rescue package for human needs like health and education? Why aren't we bailing out our under-funded public schools, our insolvent hospitals, our national railroads, and other elements of our dilapidated social infrastructure? 11. September 11th will be remembered as a day of infamy in the United States because of the terrorist attacks in New York and Washington. In Chile, September 11th is also remembered as the day when a U.S.-back coup toppled the democratically elected government of Salvador Allende in 1973, initiating a reign of terror by General Augusto Pinochet. Given your administration's avowed stance against terrorism, will you cooperate with the various international legal cases that are honing in on ex-Secretary of State Henry Kissinger for colluding with Pinochet's murderous regime? 12. You say you're a loving man, Mr. President, but you must feel unrequited, for no empire has ever been loved by its subjugants, and that's what the USA is -- an empire. You talk as though the United States has in no way contributed to the spread of fanaticism around the globe. As hideous as it might sound, there are many people on the planet who consider the September 11th attacks a response -- however twisted or demented -- to U.S. actions. If the killing of innocent people in New York and Washington is indefensible, and surely it is, then why do U.S. officials defend American air strikes that kill innocent civilians in Iraq, Sudan, Serbia, and Afghanistan? More than 500,000 Iraqi children under age 5 have died as a result of the 1990 Gulf War, subsequent economic sanctions, and ongoing U.S. bombing raids against Iraq. Will your planned actions lead to a similar fate for the children of Afghanistan? 13. What will you accomplish if you bomb Afghanistan? Wouldn't this galvanize Islamic fundamentalist movements that are already powerful in Algeria, Egypt, Pakistan, Sudan, the oil-rich Arab monarchies, and the Balkans? Wouldn't a U.S.-led military onslaught against Afghanistan be the fastest way to create a new generation of terrorists? Adept at manipulating real grievances, terrorist networks breed on poverty, despair, and social injustice. Do you think you can wipe out or even reduce this scourge, Mr. President, without seriously and systematically addressing the root causes of terrorism? Martin A. Lee (martinalee17@yahoo.com) is the author of Acid Dreams and The Beast Reawakens. Copyright 1997-2001 Common Dreams ____________________________________________________________________ WHITE HOUSE LIED ABOUT THREAT TO AIR FORCE ONE ____________________________________________________________________ News & Analysis: North America http://www.wsws.org/articles/2001/sep2001/bush-s28.shtml By Jerry White The White House has been caught in a lie about the alleged terrorist threat against Air Force One which it had cited as the reason for President Bush's absence from Washington for most of September 11. According to reports by CBS News and the Washington Post, White House officials have acknowledged that the Secret Service never received a phone call warning of a direct threat to the president's airplane. The government's reversal has gone largely unreported in the media. In the immediate aftermath of the terror attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, Bush's movements became a matter of controversy within political and media circles. As the destruction in New York and Washington unfolded and unconfirmed reports emerged of a car bomb at the State Department and the danger of further hijackings, Bush, who began the day in Florida, was whisked from one military installation to another by the Secret Service. Looking pale and shaken, he taped a brief initial message from an underground bunker at an air force base in Louisiana. Several hours later--when all non-US military aircraft in American air space had been grounded--Bush was flown to another fortified location at the Strategic Air Command headquarters in Nebraska. The president did not return to Washington until 7 p.m., nearly 10 hours after the initial attack. Bush's failure to quickly return to Washington sparked pointed criticism, including from within the Republican Party. Under conditions of a massive attack on US civilians, involving the destruction of a symbol of American financial power and the partial destruction of the nerve center of the American military, any appearance of indecisiveness or panic on the part of the US president was of great concern to the American political and financial elite. New York Times columnist William Safire, a one-time Nixon aide and fixture within the Republican Party, suggested that Bush had panicked and all but abandoned his post in the first hours of the crisis. Writing in a September 12 op-ed piece, Safire said, "Even in the first horrified moments, this was never seen as a nuclear attack by a foreign power. Bush should have insisted on coming right back to the Washington area, broadcasting--live and calm--from a secure facility not far from the White House." Stung by such criticisms, Bush's chief political strategist Karl Rove and other top administration officials worked feverishly to reassure the political, corporate and military establishment, and bolster Bush's authority among the population at large. By the afternoon of September 12, the Associated Press and Reuters were carrying stories, widely circulated throughout the media, that were intended to diffuse criticism of Bush's actions the previous day. They quoted a White House spokesperson saying, "There was real and credible information that the White House and Air Force One were targets of terrorist attacks and that the plane that hit the Pentagon was headed for the White House." White House Press Secretary Ari Fleischer repeated this claim at an afternoon news briefing that same day, saying the Secret Service had "specific and credible information" that the White House and Air Force One were potential targets. In a further column in the New York Times on September 13, entitled "Inside the Bunker," Safire described a conversation with an unnamed "high White House official," who told him, "A threatening message received by the Secret Service was relayed to the agents with the president that 'Air Force One is next.'" Safire continued: "According to the high official, American code words were used showing a knowledge of procedures that made the threat credible." Safire reported that this information was confirmed by Rove, who told him Bush had wanted to return to Washington but the Secret Service "informed him that the threat contained language that was evidence that the terrorists had knowledge of his procedures and whereabouts." Two weeks after these astonishing claims, the administration has all but admitted it concocted the entire story. CBS Evening News reported September 25 that the call "simply never happened." The fact that top officials, at a time of extraordinary crisis and public anxiety, lied to protect the president's image has immense implications. If, within 24 hours of the terror attacks, the White House was giving out disinformation to deceive the American public and world opinion, then none of the claims made by the government from September 11 to the present can be taken for good coin. If Bush lied about his activities on the day of the attacks, why should anyone assume he has not lied about the government's investigation, the identity of the perpetrators, the motives and aims of US war preparations, and the intent and scope of expanded police powers demanded by his administration to wiretap, search and seize, and detain suspects? This entire episode provides ample grounds for the American people to treat all claims by the government with the utmost suspicion and not accept any of its assertions without independent and verifiable information. The duplicity of the government is all the more significant since the Bush administration has taken the position that people not only in the US, but throughout the world, must accept on faith its assertions that Osama bin Laden and his Al Qaeda network are responsible for the attacks, and that the Islamic fundamentalist Taliban government in Afghanistan bears direct responsibility because it harbors bin Laden. It is quite possible that bin Laden played a role in the September 11 atrocities. To date, however, Bush has offered no evidence, and, apparently, has no intention of doing so. Instead the administration insists that the American people place blind trust in the White House and give it a blank check for waging war and trampling on civil liberties. The phony Air Force One story not only exposes the duplicitous methods of the Bush administration, it also underscores the shamelessness and complicity of the media. When the White House came out with the story of a terrorist phone threat against the president's plane, the media uncritically repeated it, with banner headlines and chilling segments on the evening news. As it has throughout the present crisis, the media functioned unabashedly as a propaganda arm of the government. But when the White House, two weeks later, retracted the story, most networks failed to even report the fact, as did leading newspapers such as the New York Times. The Washington Post, for its part, buried the government's about-face on its inside pages. No media outlet made an issue of this incriminating admission, or discussed its broader implications. Well before the official retraction, it was widely accepted in the Washington press corps that the administration had made up the Air Force One story. In her column in the September 23 New York Times, Maureen Dowd noted that Karl Rove had "called around town, trying to sell reporters the story" now widely discredited "that Mr. Bush didn't immediately return to Washington on Sept. 11 because the plane that was headed for the Pentagon may have really been targeting the White House, and that Air Force One was in jeopardy, too" (emphasis added). Dowd and her colleagues believed the government was lying, but the public had no way of knowing the story was not credible since the news media refused to openly challenge it. There may be another reason for the silence of the press. The story handed out on September 12 by Rove, Fleischer and other White House officials raised issues even more explosive and potentially damning than Bush's feckless behavior on September 11. Safire pointed to one such question in his September 13 New York Times column. Referring to the White House claim that the terrorists had knowledge of secret information about Air Force One, Safire asked: "How did they get the code-word information and transponder know-how that established their mala fides? That knowledge of code words and presidential whereabouts and possession of secret procedures indicates that the terrorists may have a mole in the White House--that, or informants in the Secret Service, FBI, FAA, or CIA." Safire's entirely valid question as to how a supposed terrorist could have knowledge of such top-secret and sensitive information has never been taken up by the media at large, or addressed by the government. If, indeed, such a phone call took place, it would raise an alternate theory of contact between the terrorists and one or another agency of the government at least as plausible as that suggested by Safire: Namely, that the call was not a threat, but rather a tip-off from an informant for the US who had knowledge of the plans and activities of the terrorists. The World Socialist Web Site does not claim to have an answer to these questions. But it is legitimate and necessary to raise them, especially since they are posed by the government's own statements. One thing is clear: the government lied to the people of America and the world. Either it lied on September 12 when it issued the story of the threat to Air Force One, or it lied two weeks later when it retracted the story. The millions of people who are being told they must accept unbridled militarism and the gutting of their democratic rights in the name of a holy war against terrorism must draw the appropriate conclusions from this indisputable fact. Copyright 1998-2001 World Socialist Web Site. All rights reserved. WORLD SOCIALIST WEB SITE Published by the International Committee of the Fourth International (ICFI) Web: http://www.wsws.org/ E-Mail: editor@wsws.org - Saturday, 29 September 2001 - _____________________________________________________________ FRIENDS OF MARILYN BUCK c/o Legal Services for Prisoners with Children 100 McAllister Street San Francisco, CA 94102 E-mail: fombuck@yahoo.com - Tuesday, 25 September 2001 - POLITICAL PRISONERS' RIGHTS ATTACKED, INCLUDING RIGHT TO COUNSEL ____________________________________________________________________ In the wake of the horrific attacks of September 11, Federal authorities have with no legitimate reason severely restricted the most basic civil rights of a number of political prisoners. WHAT WE KNOW: Political prisoners Sundiata Acoli, Carlos Alberto Torres, Richard Williams, Jose Solis, Antonio Camacho Negron, Juan Segarra Palmer, Philip Berrigan, Tom Manning, Marilyn Buck and others were put in isolation following the September 11 attacks. Philip Berrigan, Tom Manning, and Marilyn Buck have recently been released back into general population. No reasons were given by authorities for this punitive move except in some cases "for their own protection" or "for investigation." At least some have been held completely incommunicado. Marilyn and Sundiata, and maybe others, were denied access even to their lawyers and religious advisors. PLEASE CALL, WRITE OR FAX the Attorney General and the Bureau of Prisons at the addresses below. Bear in mind that while the issues at stake are great, the letters and calls should focus specifically on the prisoners' right to counsel and getting them back into general population. These people have all been in prison for long terms and had absolutely nothing to do with the events of September 11 -- as the prison authorities well know. through all their years in prison they have had few or no write-ups. Keep it simple: Why is this person in segregation? Why can they not have visits, especially from their lawyers? What is this about? What makes you think this person is suddenly a threat? It would also be very helpful to send personal mail to as many political prisoners as you can, to give them moral support and to let the prisons see that they are not forgotten. Even brief greetings count for a lot. Address lists can be found on the Prison Activist Resource Center (PARC) website at http://prisonactivist.org/pps+pows/pplist-alpha.shtml, the Nuclear Resister at http://www.nonviolence.org/nukeresister and The Jericho Amnesty Movement at http://www.thejerichomovement.com It is important to protest these restrictions and reaffirm rights for all, for if the Administration can eliminate Constitutional rights for these vulnerable activists, they will be encouraged to "suspend" these rights for others. Please pardon any double postings. In solidarity, Friends of Marilyn Buck fombuck@yahoo.com ADDRESSES Attorney General John Ashcroft U.S. Department of Justice 950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW E-mail AskDOJ@usdoj.gov. [and indicate for Attorney General in subject] Phone (202) 353-1555 Fax:(202) 514-5331 Kathleen Hawk Sawyer Director, Federal Bureau of Prisons 320 First Street NW Washington, D.C. 20534 Fax: (202) 514-6620 Phone: (202) 307-6300 Addresses of each Federal prison can be found at http://www.bop.gov/facilnot.html#fac Courtesy of Afrikan Frontline Network, nattyreb1@home.com ____________________________________________________________________ FIRST NATION PEOPLE IN STRUGGLE, BURNT CHURCH MESSAGE ____________________________________________________________________ URGENT, URGENT Esgenoopetitj First Nation (Burnt Church First Nation) Source: tintin, tintin@tao.ca Once again, the community of Burnt Church and the Mi'kmaq Nation are fighting the Canadian government for the future of the next 7 generations. The Mi'kmaq people of Burnt Church are determined to protect their people's ancient Inherent right to fish, which has been exercised since time immemorial. This Inherent right was recognized in the 1760-61 Treaties with the British and upheld in the 1999 Supreme Canadian Court Marshal ruling. The Canadian government through the Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) has chosen to ignore their laws and turn a blind eye to their Marshall decision by denying us our Inherent right to our own resources and the ability to sell our catch in order to sustain ourselves. The Mi'kmaq people of Burnt Church have utterly rejected any and all of the Canadian governments attempts to "legally" extinguish our rights and freedoms through "agreements". We will not perpetuate the process of self-infringement, self-denial and self-extinguishment of rights and freedoms that belong to the future generations. We are bound and determined to not repeat the mistakes of the past by co-operating with an adversarial Canadian government. The 2001 Mi'kmaq Treaty Conflict resulted in a large deployment of government forces (DFO, RCMP, Coast Guard and the paramilitary Emergency Response Teams) to wipe out the Mi'kmaq fishery by use of overwhelming force. The Mi'kmaq stood up, resisted and defended their rights and freedoms. We clearly understand the magnitude of the this fight. It has National consequences and impacts ALL Native Nations. When we win, this will set a precedent for Native Nations reasserting control over stolen Natural resources and demonstrate a right to manage these resources, for the betterment of our futures, without the influence or control of the Canadian government. This year we are up against an even larger mobilization government forces. They have deployed up to 40% more DFO officers and vessels, A larger RCMP presence, a purposely built RCMP Operational Center just off our reserve and twice as many paramilitary Emergency Response Teams. The government has taken over the nearby wharf and surrounded our reserve with RCMP vehicles. Burnt Church has fewer boats, no available funds, and are closed off by large daily government patrols. The leadership has been targeted by the RCMP. Most of them have warrants for their arrest pertaining to last years conflict and one by one the RCMP is trying to grab them. As I write this letter, I am constantly evading capture by the RCMP. I have evaded 4 attempts so far. I am now a fugitive in my own land. We are going to fight for our children, and WE WILL WIN, but in order to be successful we need the help from our bother and sister Nations and any social conscience individuals. This conflict is a dark time for my people and we need your help. We are in need of: 1. Financial donations - Banking information provided below 2. Boats - any size or type, if you wish to lend or donate one please contact me first at my number provided below for arrangements 3. Food - we have warriors from throughout Canada here to assist but we have very little food to sustain them. 4. Communications gear - preferably marine VHF radios 5. Scanners - to monitor radio traffic 6. Night vision - to conduct conservation and security patrols 7. Global positioning systems- to assist in conservation and security patrols 8. Spotting scopes and binoculars to assist conservation and security - patrols 9. Camping supplies tents, sleeping bags, tarps, propane stoves, - propane tanks, lanterns, lamps, blankets, utensils 10. Marine items - 2 cycle oil, gas and rope 11. Medical Equipment - any 12. Warm Gear - jackets, sweaters, gloves, hats, wool socks 13. Wet weather gear - ponchos or rain gear 14. Cigarettes and/or tobacco As you can see we need a lot for this fight. Any help will be greatly appreciated by myself, the people of Esgenoopetitj and the Mi'kmaq Nation. Thank you. Please make any financial contributions payable to; Burnt Church Treaty Defense Fund Bank of Nova Scotia 139 Henry St. Miramichi, NB E1V-2N5 Sincerely, James Ward Commander, East Coast Warrior Society, phone - (506) 776-5629 E-Mail: crimson_nemisis@hotmail.com ____________________________________________________________________ SOLIDARITY WITH HUNGER STRIKERS IN TURKEY (Dublin) E-mail: turkeysolidarity@ireland.com Web:http://www.geocities.com/turkishhungerstrike Friday, 28 September 2001 Turkish Hunger Strike Update TWO MORE DEATHS ____________________________________________________________________ Latest deaths... The death toll in the Turkish Hunger Strikes has now reached 38. Two hunger strikers, Ali Riza Demir and Zeynep Arikan, both died on Thursday 27th September in the shanty town of Kucuk Armutlu in Istanbul. Seven hunger strikers have died in the past 3 weeks. A vigil to mark the deaths of Ali and Zeynep will be held at the Turkish Embassy in Dublin on Monday 1st October from 6pm. All are welcome and encouraged to attend. Upcoming events Sunday 30th September - Celtic -v- Rangers televised game and gig in The Sidewalk bar will be leafleted. Monday 1st October - Protest vigil for Ali Riza Demir and Zeynep Arikan. Turkish Embassy in Dublin at 6pm. How to get there: The Turkish Embassy is located at Number 11, Clyde Road, Ballsbridge, Dublin 4. Nearest Buses: 7 or 7A from O Connell Street to Jury's Hotel, Ballsbridge. Clyde Road is behind the American Embassy. Nearest DART station is Lansdowne Road. Saturday 6th October - March and Rally in Dublin for 20th Anniversary of Irish Hunger Strike, organised by the 1981 Committee. 'Solidarity with Hunger Strikers in Turkey' has been asked to send a delegation, banner, etc. Meet at Garden of Remembrance at 2pm. Saturday 20th October - March and Rally for Turkish Hunger Strikers in BELFAST. Activists are asked to make their best effort to attend this event - we will be in touch again with details of travel arrangements, etc. Other upcoming events - details and times to be arranged: Report from James on his visit to Turkey as part of the Irish delegation last week. A meeting will be arranged where he can update activists on the situation and his experiences. Fund Raising The campaign has no money at all. To raise some funds two events are being planned. Raffle - Tickets will cost #2. Activists are asked to take tickets to sell. Tickets will be available soon. Pub Quiz - It is hoped this will take place in the second or third week of October in central Dublin. Lobbying Postcards are being designed/printed which will be sent to the Dept. of Foreign Affairs calling for the expulsion or the Turkish Ambassador from Ireland due to the unwillingness of the Turkish state to make any move to resolve the hunger strike. We will notify people when these are available. (NOTE: This aspect of the campaign is not confined to Dublin, if anyone needs postcards please let us know. They should be ready in the next week). Other events Members of the group leafleted the opening night of H3, the film about the H-Block hunger strikes. The film is at present showing in the Screen on College St., UGC cinema on Parnell St and Ster cinema in Liffey Valley shopping centre. If any activists are going to the film they are asked to get in touch. We can provide some leaflets which you can give out in the queue. Next Meeting The next meeting of Solidarity with Hunger Strikers in Turkey will take place on Thursday 4th October. ____________________________________________________________________ Spy blunder RESENTFUL WEST SPURNED SUDAN'S KEY TERROR FILES ____________________________________________________________________ THE OBSERVER International News Sunday, 30 September 2001 http://www.observer.co.uk/international/story/0,6903,560624,00.html David Rose Security chiefs on both sides of the Atlantic repeatedly turned down the chance to acquire a vast intelligence database on Osama bin Laden and more than 200 leading members of his al-Qaeda terrorist network in the years leading up to the 11 September attacks, an Observer investigation has revealed. They were offered thick files, with photographs and detailed biographies of many of his principal cadres, and vital information about al-Qaeda's financial interests in many parts of the globe. On two separate occasions, they were given an opportunity to extradite or interview key bin Laden operatives who had been arrested in Africa because they appeared to be planning terrorist atrocities. None of the offers, made regularly from the start of 1995, was taken up. One senior CIA source admitted last night: 'This represents the worst single intelligence failure in this whole terrible business. It is the key to the whole thing right now. It is reasonable to say that had we had this data we may have had a better chance of preventing the attacks.' He said the blame for the failure lay in the 'irrational hatred' the Clinton administration felt for the source of the proffered intelligence - Sudan, where bin Laden and his leading followers were based from 1992-96. He added that after a slow thaw in relations which began last year, it was only now that the Sudanese information was being properly examined for the first time. Last weekend, a key meeting took place in London between Walter Kansteiner, the US Assistant Secretary of State for Africa, FBI and CIA representatives, and Yahia Hussien Baviker, the Sudanese intelligence deputy chief. However, although the intelligence channel between Sudan and the United States is now open, and the last UN sanctions against the African state have been removed, The Observer has evidence that a separate offer made by Sudanese agents in Britain to share intelligence with MI6 has been rejected. This follows four years of similar rebuffs. 'If someone from MI6 comes to us and declares himself, the next day he can be in Khartoum,' said a Sudanese government source. 'We have been saying this for years.' Bin Laden and his cadres came to Sudan in 1992 because at that time it was one of the few Islamic countries where they did not need visas. He used his time there to build a lucrative web of legitimate businesses, and to seed a far-flung financial network - much of which was monitored by the Sudanese. They also kept his followers under close surveillance. One US source who has seen the files on bin Laden's men in Khartoum said some were 'an inch and a half thick'. They included photographs, and information on their families, backgrounds and contacts. Most were 'Afghan Arabs', Saudis, Yemenis and Egyptians who had fought with bin Laden against the Soviets in Afghanistan. 'We know them in detail,' said one Sudanese source. 'We know their leaders, how they implement their policies, how they plan for the future. We have tried to feed this information to American and British intelligence so they can learn how this thing can be tackled.' In 1996, following intense pressure from Saudi Arabia and the US, Sudan agreed to expel bin Laden and up to 300 of his associates. Sudanese intelligence believed this to be a great mistake. 'There we could keep track of him, read his mail,' the source went on. 'Once we kicked him out and he went to ground in Afghanistan, he couldn't be tracked anywhere.' The Observer has obtained a copy of a personal memo sent from Sudan to Louis Freeh, former director of the FBI, after the murderous 1998 attacks on American embassies in Kenya and Tanzania. It announces the arrest of two named bin Laden operatives held the day after the bombings after they crossed the Sudanese border from Kenya. They had cited the manager of a Khartoum leather factory owned by bin Laden as a reference for their visas, and were held after they tried to rent a flat overlooking in the US embassy in Khartoum, where they were thought to be planning an attack. US sources have confirmed that the FBI wished to arrange their immediate extradition. However, Clinton's Secretary of State, Madeleine Albright, forbade it. She had classed Sudan as a 'terrorist state,' and three days later US missiles blasted the al-Shifa medicine factory in Khartoum. The US wrongly claimed it was owned by bin Laden and making chemical weapons. In fact, it supplied 60 per cent of Sudan's medicines, and had contracts to make vaccines with the UN. Even then, Sudan held the suspects for a further three weeks, hoping the US would both perform their extradition and take up the offer to examine their bin Laden database. Finally, the two men were deported to Pakistan. Their present whereabouts are unknown. Last year the CIA and FBI, following four years of Sudanese entreaties, sent a joint investigative team to establish whether Sudan was in fact a sponsor of terrorism. Last May, it gave Sudan a clean bill of health. However, even then, it made no effort to examine the voluminous files on bin Laden. Copyright Guardian Newspapers Limited 2001 ____________________________________________________________________ "THE FORGOTTEN TERRORISTS" By Mumia Abu-Jamal ____________________________________________________________________ Source: Afrikan Frontline Network, nattyreb1@home.com - Friday, 28 September 2001 For far too many Americans, the word 'terrorism' has acquired a whole new meaning in the dusty aftermath of 11 September 2001. The word now instantly refers to the mental imagery of the shattered twin towers of the World Trade Center in downtown Manhattan, or the broken edifice of the Pentagon building in Washington, or even the smouldering mound of earth in southwestern Pennsylvania. They refer to the thousands of people, from dozens of countries, who lost their lives when the buildings were shattered, broken and leveled into dust. But, if truth be told, they refer mostly to Americans. When an airliner in the far-off South China Sea area develops engine trouble, and plummets into the ocean depths, reporters always rush to inform us, "Flight 502 of a PanAm to Hong Kong went down over the South China Sea today: 15 Americans were onboard." In such a common report, it is implicitly assumed that those of other nationalities are of lesser importance. They don't *really* matter. It is indeed possible to look at the events of 11 September in a somewhat similar light. For, if it is indeed found that the acts of that day may be traced to terrorists, working out of Middle Eastern organizations, what most will ignore is another kind of terrorism. It is waged against the poor and powerless of many nations. It kills, maims, tortures, and destroys many thousands of people every year. It is the spectre of State Terrorism. Don't expect to find eye-catching exposes in the Daily Blah, or to hear about it on your favorite network news program in the evening on the tube. You have to look hard for this stuff. Consider the views of John Stockwell, a former CIA station chief (Angola), who considers the work that he was doing overseas, on behalf of the US government, to be supporting terrorism. He looks at the time when a man named Bush headed the CIA: "CIA Director George Bush allegedly worked to convince the former OPMONGOOSE operators to reorganize outside the United States. In June 1976, they went to the Dominican Republic and founded CORU, a counter-revolutionary group. On October 26, 1976, they blew up an airplane that was taking off from Barbados, killing 73 passengers on board in a raw act of terrorism. Luis Posada Carrilles and Orlando Bosch were jailed in Venezuela for that bombing. There is evidence that members of this same CIA/Cuban exile community participated in the killing of President John F. Kennedy in 1963. We also know that the CIA's 1980 contra program later managed to get Luis Posada Carilles out of prison in Venezuela. They put him to work for Felix Rodriguez, who was reporting directly to then Vice-President Bush's Office. As Felix Rodriguez told the press, 'We needed him.'" He was referring to Carilles, the terrorist airplane bomber (See The Praetorian Guard: The U.S. Role in the New World Order (Boston: South End Press, 1991). These are the words of a man who spent over a decade in the CIA, and even served briefly on a subcommittee of the National Security Council, during the Kissinger era. Even though his work had to be cleared by CIA censors to be published, his view of how the United States government has functioned, through its CIA, is telling: "To summarize, the CIA has overthrown functioning constitutional democracies in over 20 countries. It has manipulated elections in dozens of countries. It has created standing armies and directed them to fight. It has organized ethnic minorities and encouraged them to revolt in numerous volatile areas." (p. 73) Looking at CIA activities abroad, in Asia, Africa, and Latin America, this former station chief offers a conservative estimate of how many people, all over the world, "...would not have died if U.S. tax dollars had not been spent by the CIA to inflame tensions, finance covert political and military activity, and destabilize societies," and comes up with a figure of: 6,000,000. Six million people, he says, "and this is a minimum figure" (p.81). Are Afghan-trained rebels, from various Middle Eastern states, responsible for the carnage of 11 September, 2001? Who armed them? Who trained them? Who loosed them upon the world? Their very deadly expertise are your tax dollars at work. Americans mean one thing, when they think of terrorism. Americans from the South, in Peru, Colombia, Nicaragua, Uruguay, Brazil, Cuba, El Salvador, Chile, etc., think of something else. People from Indonesia, South Africa, Angola, Egypt, the Occupied Territories of Palestine, Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, and the like, think of something else. Copyright 2001 Mumia Abu-Jamal. All rights reserved. * THEY ARE PLANNING TO MURDER MUMIA!! "We are fighting the last battle to Free Mumia, and need support now more than ever. We need donations of money, calling cards, copy cards, etc. and we really need manpower. We need people to be in the streets every day putting out information, demonstrating, raising money, and doing whatever you can to help." "Tell judge Pamela Dembe to hold an evidentiary hearing and a new post-conviction relief appeal, to hear the confession of Arnold Beverly and to let Mumia be at the hearings in his "trial". Tell mayor John Street to keep his promise and do what he can to help Mumia receive a fair trial and to hold an independent investigation into the case. (you can get a sample of both of these letters at http://www.freemumia.com) Pamela Dembe: 1417 Criminal Justice Center 1301 Filbert St. Philadelphia PA 19107 Phone 215 683-7148 Fax 215 683-7150 John Street: room 215 City Hall Philadelphia PA 19107 Phone 215 686-3000; Fax 215 686-2170 -- ICFFMAJ Urgent Update! PLEASE CONTACT: International Concerned Family & Friends of MAJ; P.O. Box 19709, Philadelphia, PA 19143; Tel: 215-476-8812; Fax: 215-476-6180; E-mail: icffmaj@aol.com; Web: http://www.mumia.org AND OFFER YOUR SERVICES! Send our brotha some LOVE and LIGHT at: Mumia Abu-Jamal AM 8335 SCI-Greene 175 Progress Drive Waynesburg, PA 15370 !! PEOPLE GET READY !! ANTIFA INFO-BULLETIN (AFIB) 750 La Playa # 730 San Francisco, California 94121 To subscribe: afib-subscribe@igc.topica.com To unsubscribe: afib-unsubscribe@igc.topica.com Inquiries write: tburghardt@igc.org Via the Web --> http://www.antifa.net/af/afib.html Archive --> http://www.antifa.net/af/afib/index.html ANTI-FASCIST FORUM (AFF) Antifa Info-Bulletin is a member of the Anti-Fascist Forum network. AFF is an info-group which collects and disseminates information, research and analysis on fascist activity and anti-fascist resistance. More info: E-mail: afmail@antifa.net; Web: http://www.antifa.net/af ================================================================= NY Transfer News Collective * A Service of Blythe Systems Since 1985 - Information for the Rest of Us 339 Lafayette St., New York, NY 10012 http://www.blythe.org e-mail: nyt@blythe.org ================================================================= nytrc-10.01.01-21:23:04-18394