Tuesday, July 15, 2014

Crossing the Border: How Security Steps on the Constitution (and Plain Decency)


Border Wars in the Homeland: "Stop Stepping on the Pictures"

by Todd Miller  - TomDispatch

Shena Gutierrez was already cuffed and in an inspection room in Nogales, Arizona, when the Customs and Border Protection (CBP) agent grabbed her purse, opened it, and dumped its contents onto the floor right in front of her. There couldn’t be a sharper image of the Bill of Rights rollback we are experiencing in the U.S. borderlands in the post-9/11 era.

Tumbling out of that purse came Gutierrez’s life: photos of her kids, business cards, credit cards, and other papers, all now open to the official scrutiny of the Department of Homeland Security. There were also photographs of her husband, Jose Gutierrez Guzman, whom CBP agents beat so badly in 2011 that he suffered permanent brain damage. The supervisory agent, whose name badge on his blue uniform read “Gomez,” now began to trample on her life, quite literally, with his black boots.

“Please stop stepping on the pictures,” Shena asked him.

A U.S. citizen, unlike her husband, she had been returning from a 48-hour vigil against Border Patrol violence in Mexico and was wearing a shirt that said “Stop Border Patrol Brutality” when she was aggressively questioned and cuffed at the CBP’s “port of entry” in Nogales on that hot day in May. She had no doubt that Gomez was stepping all over the contents of her purse in response to her shirt, the evidence of her activism. 

Tomgram: Todd Miller, Bill of Rights Rollback in the U.S. Borderlands
[Note for TomDispatch Readers: TD regular Todd Miller is back with another hair-raising tale from America’s borderlands and since it focuses on our increasingly un-Constitutional governance, I decided to ask State Department whistleblower Peter Van Buren, now embarked on a series of TD pieces about the tearing up of the Bill of Rights, to do the introduction. Please note that a signed, personalized copy of Miller’s superb new book, Border Patrol Nation, is still available at the TomDispatch donation page for a $100 contribution, as are Anand Gopal’s widely praised book on the Afghan war and books by Nick Turse and myself. Don’t forget that your donations really do keep this website above the waves in rugged times! Tom]

You're not in the United States. Oh sure, look around at the fog lifting over the New England countryside or the diamond deserts of Arizona, but this land isn't your land, not anymore. It’s a place controlled by U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and your constitutional rights do not apply on their territory. CBP can, and does, detain Americans, search them without warrant, and physically mistreat them in what has become, for our 9/11 sins, a Post-Constitutional legal purgatory. You are neither outside their grasp in a foreign land, nor protected from them by being inside America.

The concept that the Constitution does not apply at America's borders is not new, particularly in relation to Fourth Amendment protections against search and seizure. (In this context, “seizure” often takes the form of detention, as well as the more traditional concept of taking physical possessions away.) Once upon a time, the idea was that the United States should be able to protect itself by examining people entering the country. Thus, routine border seizures and searches without warrants are constitutionally “reasonable.” Fair enough. The basic rules, in fact, go back to 1789.

But the fairness of the old rules no longer applies, particularly in the face of a constantly metastasizing CBP, anxious to expand its place in the already expansive Homeland Security ecosystem. On its website, CBP boasts of making 1,100 arrests a day as, in its own words, the “guardians” of America. Do the math: that's 401,500 a year, and those arrests are not limited to dangerous foreigners. Americans who hold certain beliefs and affiliations are swept up as well, whether they are prominent journalists, activists, or simply (as in today's piece) angry spouses of men beaten nearly to death by CBP agents. The agency now insists that its jurisdiction does not end at the physical border, the line on the map that separates say the United States from Mexico, but extends 100 miles inland.

Building on his successful new book, Border Patrol Nation: Dispatches from the Front Lines of Homeland Security, TomDispatch regular Todd Miller brings us more examples of CBP lawlessness and brutality, while asking crucial questions about its larger meaning to our nation. Get ready to be scared. If you live near the border, cross the border after a trip abroad, or attract the attention of roving CBP patrols in New England or Arizona within 100 miles of the line, this land belongs not to you and me, but in Post-Constitutional America, increasingly to our so-called guardians. Peter Van Buren 

 

Border Wars in the Homeland: "Stop Stepping on the Pictures"

by Todd Miller

Perhaps what bothered Gomez was the photo silkscreened onto that shirt -- of her husband during his hospitalization. It showed the aftermath of a beating he received from CBP agents. His head had a partially caved-in look because doctors had removed part of his skull. Over his chest and arms were bruises from Tasering. One tooth was out of place, and he had two black eyes. Although you couldn’t see them in the photo, two heavily armed Homeland Security agents were then guarding his hospital door to prevent the father of two, formerly a sound technician and the lead singer of a popular band in Los Angeles, from escaping -- even in his comatose state.

Jose Gutierrez Guzman's has become an ever more common story in an American age of mass expulsions. Although he had grown up in the United States (without papers), he was born in Mexico. After receiving a letter requesting his appearance, he went to the Immigration and Customs Enforcement building in Los Angeles and was promptly arrested and deported. Customs and Border Protection agents later caught him crossing the border in San Luis, Arizona, near Yuma, in an attempt to reunite with his wife and children.

“Stop... stepping... on... the... pictures,” Shena insisted.

As she tells the story, Agent Gomez looked at her shirt for a second, then looked up at her and said, “You have that mentality about us. You think we go around abusing.” His tone remained faux-friendly, but his boots didn’t -- and neither did those cuffs another CBP agent had put on her. Forcing her hands behind her back, they cut uncomfortably into her wrists. They would leave deep red circular marks.

On display was a post-9/11 world in which the usual rights meant to protect Americans from unreasonable search and seizure and unwanted, as well as unwarranted, interrogation were up for grabs.

While such constitutionally questionable intrusions into people’s privacy have been increasing at border crossings in the post-9/11 years, this type of hardline border policing has also moved inland. In other words, the sort of intrusions that once would have qualified as unconstitutional have moved in startling numbers into the interior of the country.

Imagine the once thin borderline of the American past as an ever-thickening band, now extending 100 miles inland around the United States -- along the 2,000-mile southern border, the 4,000-mile northern border, and both coasts -- and you will be able to visualize how vast the CBP’s jurisdiction has become. This “border” region now covers places where two-thirds of the U.S. population (197.4 million people) live. The ACLU has come to call it a “constitution-free zone.” The “border” has by now devoured the full states of Maine and Florida and much of Michigan.

In these vast domains, Homeland Security authorities can institute roving patrols with broad, extra-constitutional powers backed by national security, immigration enforcement, and drug interdiction mandates. There, the Border Patrol can set up traffic checkpoints and fly surveillance drones overhead with high-powered cameras and radar that can track your movements. Within 25 miles of the international boundary, CBP agents can enter a person’s private property without a warrant. In these areas, the Homeland Security state is anything but abstract. On any given day, it can stand between you and the grocery store.

“Border Patrol checkpoints and roving patrols are the physical world equivalent of the National Security Agency,” says attorney James Lyall of ACLU Arizona puts it. “They involve a massive dragnet and stopping and monitoring of innocent Americans without any suspicion of wrongdoing by increasingly abusive and unaccountable federal government agents.”

Before she was so unceremoniously stopped and held, Shena Gutierrez shared the story of her husband at that 48-hour vigil. It was another story of the kind of pervasive abuse reported by people in the 100-mile zone. There were no cameras that night to record how 11 agents “subdued” Jose Gutierrez Guzman, as the CBP put it in its official report on the incident. Its claim: that Jose “struck his head on the ground,” a way perhaps of accounting for the hospital’s eventual diagnosis of “blunt force trauma.”

Considering the extent of Jose’s injuries, that CBP report is questionable indeed. Many Border Patrol agents now use the term “tonk” -- the sound a flashlight supposedly makes when it bangs against someone’s head -- as their way of describing border-crossers. Jose was also repeatedly “shot” with an “electronic control device,” aka a Taser. He was so badly beaten that, more than three years later, he still suffers seizures.

“Stop stepping on my pictures!” Gutierrez insisted again. But much like the CBP’s official complaint process, the words were ignored. The only thing Gomez eventually spat out was, “Are you going to get difficult?”

When Shena Gutierrez offered me a play-by-play account of her long day, including her five-hour detainment at the border, her voice ran a gamut of emotions from desperation to defiance. Perhaps these are the signature emotions of what State Department whistleblower Peter Van Buren has dubbed the “Post-Constitutional Era.” We now live in a time when, as he writes, “the government might as well have taken scissors to the original copy of the Constitution stored in the National Archives, then crumpled up the Fourth Amendment and tossed it in the garbage can.” The prototype for this new era, with all the potential for abuse it gives the authorities, can be found in that 100-mile zone.

A Standing Army


The zone first came into existence thanks to a series of laws passed by Congress in the 1940s and 1950s at a time when the Border Patrol was just an afterthought with a miniscule budget and only 1,100 agents. Today, Customs and Border Protection has more than 60,000 employees and is by far the largest federal law enforcement agency in the country. According to author and constitutional attorney John Whitehead, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), created in 2002, is efficiently and ruthlessly building “a standing army on American soil.”

Long ago, President James Madison warned that “a standing military force, with an overgrown Executive, will not long be safe companions to liberty.” With its 240,000 employees and $61 billion budget, the DHS, Whitehead points out, is militarizing police units, stockpiling ammunition, spying on activists, and building detention centers, among many other things. CBP is the uniformed and most visible component of this “standing army.” It practically has its own air force and navy, an Office of Air and Marine equipped with 280 sea vessels, 250 aircraft, and 1,200 agents.

On the border, never before have there been so many miles of walls and barriers, or such an array of sophisticated cameras capable of operating at night as well as in the daylight. Motion sensors, radar systems, and cameras mounted on towers, as well as those drones, all feed their information into operational control rooms throughout the borderlands. There, agents can surveil activity over large stretches of territory on sophisticated (and expensive) video walls. This expanding border enforcement regime is now moving into the 100-mile zone.

Such technological capability also involves the warehousing of staggering amounts of personal information in the digital databases that have ushered in the Post-Constitutional Era. “What does all this mean in terms of the Fourth Amendment?” Van Buren asks. “It’s simple: the technological and human factors that constrained the gathering and processing of data in the past are fast disappearing.”

The border, in the post 9/11 years, has also become a place where military manufacturers, eyeing a market in an “unprecedented boom period,” are repurposing their wartime technologies for the Homeland Security mission. This “bring the battlefield to the border” posture has created an unprecedented enforcement, incarceration, and expulsion machine aimed at the foreign-born (or often simply foreign-looking). The sweep is reminiscent of the operation that forced Japanese (a majority of them citizens) into internment camps during World War II, but on a scale never before seen in this country. With it, unsurprisingly, has come a wave of complaints about physical and verbal abuse by Homeland Security agents, as well as tales of inadequate food and medical attention to undocumented immigrants in short-term detention.

The result is a permanent, low-intensity state of exception that makes the expanding borderlands a ripe place to experiment with tearing apart the Constitution, a place where not just undocumented border-crossers, but millions of borderland residents have become the targets of continual surveillance. If you don’t see the Border Patrol’s ever-expanding forces in places like New York City (although CBP agents are certainly present at its airports and seaports), you can see them pulling people over these days in plenty of other spots in that Constitution-free zone where they hadn’t previously had a presence.

They are, for instance, in cities like Rochester, New York, and Erie, Pennsylvania, as well as in Washington State, Vermont, Florida, and at all international airports. Homeland Security officials are scrutinizing people’s belongings, including their electronic devices, from sea to shining sea. Just ask Pascal Abidor, an Islamic studies doctoral student whose computer was turned on by CBP agents in Champlain, New York.

When an agent saw that he had a picture of a Hezbollah rally, she asked Abidor, a U.S. citizen, “What is this stuff?” His answer -- that he was studying the modern history of the Shiites -- meant nothing to her and his computer was seized for 10 days. Between 2008 and 2010, the CBP searched the electronic devices of more than 6,500 people. Like many of us, Abidor keeps everything, even his most private and intimate conversations with his girlfriend, on his computer. Now, it’s private no longer.

Despite all this, the message politicians and the media generally offer is that the country needs more agents, new techno-gadgets, and even more walls for our “safety.” In that context, President Obama on July 7th asked Congress for an additional $3.7 billion for “border security.”

Since last October, in what officials have called a “humanitarian crisis,” 52,000 unaccompanied children, mostly from Central America, have been apprehended by Border Patrol agents. News about and photos of some of those children, including toddlers, parentless and incarcerated in warehouses in the Southwest, have led to a flood of articles, many claiming that border security is “strained.” A Border Patrol Union representative typically claimed that the border is “more porous than it’s ever been.” While such claims are ludicrous, all signs point to more money being packed aboard what Whitehead has called a “runaway train.”

Make no bones about it, every dollar spent this way works not just to keep others out of this country, but to lock American citizens into a border zone that may soon encompass the whole country. It also fortifies our new domestic “standing military force” and its rollback of the Bill of Rights.

Resistance Inside the 100-Mile Zone


The first thing Cynthia (a pseudonym) asks the supervisory agent with the green Border Patrol hat and wrap-around sunglasses who stops her car is: “Can I have your name and agent number please?” She’s been halted at a checkpoint approximately 25 miles north of the U.S.-Mexican border on a road running east-west-running near the small town of Arivaca, Arizona, where she lives.

The agent pauses. He looks like he’s swallowed a hornet before he barks, “We ask the questions here first, okay? Do you have some ID on you?”

This starts a tense exchange between the two of them that she videotaped in its entirety. She is only one of many challenging the omnipresence and activities of the Border Patrol in the heart of the 100-mile zone. Like many locals in Arivaca, she is sick of the checkpoint, which has been there for seven years. She and her neighbors were fed up with the obligatory stop between their small town and the dentist or the nearest bookstore. They were tired of Homeland Security agents scrutinizing their children on their way to school. So they began to organize.

In late 2013, they demanded that the federal government remove the checkpoint. It was, they wrote in a petition, an ugly artifact of border militarization; it had, they added, a negative economic impact on residents and infringed on people’s constitutional rights. At the beginning of 2014, small groups from People Helping People in the Border Zone -- the name of their organization -- started monitoring the checkpoint several days a week.

This Arivaca Border Patrol road barricade, one of at least 71 in the southwest, functions as a de facto enforcement zone away from the border. In Border Patrolese, it’s “an additional layer in our Defense in Depth strategy.” This particular checkpoint isn’t exactly impressive -- just a portable trailer with an attached tarp for shade, but it still qualifies, according to one of the Patrol’s informational brochures, as “a critical enforcement tool for securing the nation’s borders against all threats to our homeland.”

The agents manning it stop every car on the road, do a quick visual check of its interior, and ask the driver and passengers their citizenship. There are also dogs available to sniff each car for traces of drugs or explosives. “Our enforcement presence along these strategic routes reduces the ability of criminals and potential terrorists to easily travel away from the border,” the brochure explains.

The Homeland Security surveillance gaze in the Southwest is, in fact, so pervasive that it has even nabbed singer Willy Nelson in Texas for marijuana possession. It detained 96-year-old former Arizona governor Raul Castro and made him stand in 100-degree heat for more than 30 minutes because a dog detected the radiation from his pacemaker. In the past three years in the Tucson sector, the Patrol has made more than 6,000 arrests and confiscated 135,000 pounds of narcotics at checkpoints.

But this is no longer just a matter of inland areas near the Mexican Border. A Border Patrol agent forced Vermont’s senior senator Patrick Leahy from his car at a checkpoint 125 miles south of the New York State border. The ACLU of Vermont unearthed a prototype plan for CBP to operate checkpoints to stop southbound traffic on all five highways through that New England border state.

On Sunday afternoons in Sodus, New York, about 30 miles east of Rochester, green-striped Border Patrol vehicles can sometimes be found parked in front of a laundromat which farmworkers (many undocumented) use. In Erie, Pennsylvania, agents wait at the Greyhound bus terminal or the Amtrak station to question people arriving in town. These are all places where the Border Patrol was all but unknown before 2005. In Detroit, simply being at a bus stop at four in the morning en route to work or fishing in the Detroit River is now “probable cause” for an agent to question you.

Or perhaps it is simply the color of your skin. Arrest records from both bus terminals and railway stations in Rochester, New York, show that of the 2,776 arrests agents made between 2005 and 2009, 71.2% were of “medium” complexion (likely of Latino or Arab background) and 12.9% “black.” Only 0.9% of those arrested were of “fair” complexion.

Back in Arivaca, the agent with the wraparound sunglasses tells Cynthia that she needs to get out of her car. Much like Senator Leahy, she responds that she doesn’t “understand why.”

“You don’t have to understand,” he says. “It’s for my safety. And yours. Do you understand that?”

Then his tone gains an angry edge. He clearly doesn’t like having his authority challenged. “We don’t have time for this. We have criminals here, okay? If you have a political or an emotional situation here” -- he makes an emphatic chopping motion with his hand -- “I don’t want to hear about it. I want to see your ID.” He pauses. “Now!”

The adrenaline is obviously pumping and he is about to edge up on the limits of what an agent can do, even with extra-constitutional powers. He thrusts his hand through the open window and into the car and unlocks it. With a yank, he pulls the door open from the inside. When Cynthia is out of the car, he asks, his voice rising, “What do you think we’re looking for here?”

“I don’t know,” Cynthia responds.

“That’s where I’m gonna educate you a little bit. Okay?”

“Okay,” she says.

“What happens through this checkpoint is that we catch smugglers of aliens, smugglers of drugs, child molesters, murderers, and everything else. Okay? Does that make sense?”

This rural area of Arizona, he insists as they stand under a vast cloudless blue sky, is infested with bandits, criminals, and drug dealers. “We have methamphetamine being made and manufactured,” the agent explains. “Do you think methamphetamine is a good thing?”

“Personally, no,” she says.

“Personally, I don’t think so either. I think they’re poisoning our world, okay? So when we ask you just to do something simple, like uncover something, do it! It’s a relief for us that it’s not something dangerous or something else.” By now, the agent is making the full-blown case for Homeland Security’s rollback of the Bill of Rights: the world’s a dangerous place, too dangerous for us not to have a free hand searching wherever we want whenever we want -- and it’s your job to understand that new twenty-first-century American reality. He ends with a final dig at her for her initial resistance: “You’re destroying your rights, because what happens is, is that the criminals take your rights away, okay? Not us. We’re here to protect you.”

According to the ACLU’s Lyall, the fact is that the abuses of Customs and Border Protection in that Constitution-free zone are “massively underreported” and “far more prevalent than anyone has been able to document.” Many people, according to him, are simply afraid to come forward; others don’t know their rights.

In Shena Gutierrez’s case, she returned to the same Nogales “port of entry” with two other activists to lodge a complaint about the purse incident. When she refused to leave federal property (for which she now faces charges), the CBP arrested and detained her for hours. This time they did what she described as “an invasive body search.”

“I told them that I had not given my consent to be touched.” They nonetheless made her take off her wedding ring “for safety.” When she resisted, they said that they “would force it off her.” Again, the handcuffs cut into her wrists. This time, an agent kicked her in the ankle from behind. A female agent searched her thoroughly, from head to toe and in her private parts, because she “might have drugs or contraband or documents.”

As the agent groped her, she told me, she began to think yet again about what her husband had gone through. If this can happen to a U.S. citizen, she told me, “Imagine what happens to a person without documents.”

Imagine what can happen to anyone in a realm where, increasingly, anything goes, including the Constitution.

Todd Miller, a TomDispatch regular, has researched and written about U.S.-Mexican border issues for more than 10 years. He now writes on border and immigration issues for NACLA Report on the Americas and its blog “Border Wars,” among other places. His first book is Border Patrol Nation: Dispatches From the Front Lines of Homeland Security. You can follow him on twitter @memomiller and view more of his work at toddwmiller.wordpress.com.

Follow TomDispatch on Twitter and join us on Facebook and Tumblr. Check out the newest Dispatch Book, Rebecca Solnit's Men Explain Things to Me.

Copyright 2014 Todd Miller

Democrat Support for Israel: Can American Morality Trump Party Loyalties?

Obama, Israel and Liberal Capitulation

by Joshua Frank - CounterPunch

We’ve been waiting now for nearly seven years to uncover that progressive streak hidden deep in the heart of President Barack Obama. But one drone strike after another, one dead child piled upon another and any glimmer of hope that Obama would put the breaks on US extremism has finally come to an end.

Not only has Obama refused to alter the bloody foreign policy of his predecessors, he has vowed to continue its most extreme elements. In no other instance has this been more true than with the case of Israel and Palestine.

This reality has likely come as a surprise to many who placed their aspirations in our first black president, a man who at one point early in his career believed Palestinians had a right to not only exist, but to reside in their own country.

Yet, time and again President Obama has put his foot down when the global community was ready to honor a Palestinian state, as he did at the UN Security Council in 2011 and again when the US vetoed a UN resolution that would have condemned Israel’s illegal settlement building. Now, as bombs fall on innocent Palestinians, Obama reasserts the US role in defending Israel.

Last week in an op-ed for Haaretz, Israel’s oldest newspaper, Obama wrote that while “restraint” was needed on both sides, the US would continue to provide assistance to Israeli defense, unconditionally. Just as Obama’s piece appeared, the US and Israel were working hard behind the scenes to prevent the UN Security Council from condemning Israel’s air-strikes.

“As I’ve said time and again, neither I nor the United States will ever waver in our commitment to the security of Israel and the Israeli people, and our support for peace will always remain a bedrock foundation of that commitment,” wrote Obama in Haaretz. “Budgets in Washington are tight, but our commitment to Israel’s security remains ironclad. The United States is committed to providing more than $3 billion each year to help finance Israel’s security through 2018.”

Not one dollar for Detroit, but billions for Israel. And what about Palestine’s right to security and peace, which is certainly in far more peril than Israel’s? One need not be an expert on the Middle East to understand Palestinians live in a land prison, surrounded and occupied by Israel. Electricity, water and healthcare essentials are controlled by their oppressor. Indeed, Palestinians are a people without a country, simply fighting to survive.

Living under brutal occupation, decade after decade, has produced elements of extremism, as was the case of the kidnapped and murdered Israeli teens. But what of Israel, a so-called beacon of democracy (even as Israel kills and forces Palestinians off their ancestral homeland), where a Palestinian boy was burned alive in spiteful revenge? Such acts only empower and serve as recruitment tools for Hamas.

The same can be said for the indiscriminate missiles Israel launches into Gaza: the bombing of a Mosque, countless homes destroyed, hundreds injured, nearly two hundred more killed – many of whom have been children. And what for? How many deaths will it take for Israel to stop its bombardment? How many lost lives before Obama tells Israel to stop its assault? Perhaps more importantly, when will the American people say ‘enough is enough’? Sure, Obama has offered up the United States to broker a cease-fire, but how can a true cease-fire be brokered when the mediator supports the military of one side over the civilians of another?

It’s all a farce of course. Obama doesn’t really care to see the violence end – if he did he would pay more than lip-service to Palestinian statehood and support the matter when it counts – on the global stage in front of the UN.

We live in a sad and desperate time in the United States, yet fair-minded folks, many who oppose Israeli and US aggression, refuse to break from the strangle of the Democratic Party because Republicans are more blatant in their repulsiveness. It is this cowardly embrace that lets Democrats off the hook (next up Hillary Clinton) and allows Israel to operate and murder with impunity.

Joshua Frank is managing editor of CounterPunch. He is author of Left Out! How Liberals Helped Reelect George W. Bush (Common Courage Press, 2005), and along with Jeffrey St. Clair, the editor of Red State Rebels: Tales of Grassroots Resistance in the Heartland and Hopeless: Barack Obama and the Politics of Illusion, both published by AK Press. He can be reached at brickburner@gmail.com.

"Good God"? Not Quite: America's Quest for the Panopticon

Does Uncle Sam Have a God Complex?

by Norman Solomon

As a matter of faith, some people believe that God can see and hear everything. But as a matter of fact, the U.S. government now has the kind of surveillance powers formerly attributed only to a supreme being.

Top "national security" officials in Washington now have the determination and tech prowess to keep tabs on billions of people. No one elected Uncle Sam to play God. But a dire shortage of democratic constraints has enabled the U.S. surveillance state to keep expanding with steely resolve.

By the time Edward Snowden used NSA documents to expose -- beyond any doubt -- a global surveillance dragnet, the situation had deteriorated so badly because the Bush and Obama administrations were able to dismiss earlier warnings to the public as little more than heresy.

Eight years ago, in the book "State of War," New York Times reporter James Risen devoted a chapter to the huge expansion of surveillance. A secret decision by President Bush "has opened up America's domestic telecommunications network to the NSA in unprecedented and deeply troubling new ways, and represents a radical shift in the accepted policies and practices of the modern U.S. intelligence community," Risen wrote.

Risen added: "The NSA is now tapping into the heart of the nation's telephone network through direct access to key telecommunications switches that carry many of America's daily phone calls and e-mail messages."

More details on the surveillance state came in 2008 with James Bamford's book "The Shadow Factory," which illuminated the National Security Agency's program for "eavesdropping on America." And in August of 2012 -- nearly 10 months before Snowden's revelations began -- filmmaker Laura Poitras released a mini-documentary on the New York Times website about the NSA's mass surveillance program.

All three journalists relied on whistleblowers who balked at the NSA's virtual mission to see and hear everything. Both books (especially "State of War") depended on information from unnamed sources. The short documentary focused on a public whistleblower -- former NSA executive William Binney, who continues to speak out.

Testifying to a committee of the German parliament in Berlin two weeks ago, Binney -- whose 30 years at the NSA included work as a high-level intelligence official -- said that the NSA has a "totalitarian mentality."

Days later, speaking at a conference in London, Binney explained: "At least 80 percent of fiber-optic cables globally go via the U.S. This is no accident and allows the U.S. to view all communication coming in. At least 80 percent of all audio calls, not just metadata, are recorded and stored in the U.S. The NSA lies about what it stores."

Since last summer, a backup source of strength for the voices of Binney, Thomas Drake, Kirk Wiebe and other NSA whistleblowers -- the fact that Snowden has provided the public with NSA documents -- is exactly what has enraged U.S. officials who want to maintain and escalate their surveillance power. Because of those unveiled documents, clarity about what the NSA is really doing has fueled opposition.

NSA surveillance proliferates in a context that goes well beyond spying. The same mentality that claims the right to cross all borders for surveillance -- using the latest technologies to snoop on the most intimate communications and private actions of people across the globe -- is also insisting on the prerogative to cross borders with the latest technologies to kill.

When a drone or cruise missile implements an assumed right to snuff out a life, without a semblance of due process, the presidential emulation of divine intervention is implicit.

But, in military terms, dominating the world is a prohibitively expensive goal. In the digital age, surveillance has emerged as a cost-effective way to extend the U.S. government's global reach and put its intelligence capacities on steroids -- while tens of billions of taxpayer dollars in annual revenues go to corporate contractors servicing the NSA, CIA and other agencies of the military-industrial-surveillance complex.

So the trend line continues to move in the wrong direction. Speaking last month at a news conference that launched ExposeFacts.org (part of the Institute for Public Accuracy, where I work), Binney said that in recent years the NSA's surveillance activity has "only gotten worse." He added: "I mean it's almost in everything that you do. If you do anything electronically, they're in it and they're watching you."

The information being collected is so vast that NSA operatives face a huge challenge of figuring out how to sift through it on such a large scale -- "because they have to manually look at this data," Binney said. "But the point is, they're setting the stage for this to continue to the point where everybody could be monitored almost constantly throughout the day. That is an oppressive, suppressive state."

Since last summer, revelations about NSA programs have been so profuse and complex that it's difficult to gain an overview, to see the surveillance state's toxic forest for the digital trees. But the macro picture has to do with a mind-blowing agenda for monitoring the people of the world.

"For me, the most significant revelation is the ambition of the United States government and its four English-speaking allies to literally eliminate privacy worldwide, which is not hyperbole," journalist Glenn Greenwald said at a news conference three months ago. "The goal of the United States government is to collect and store every single form of electronic communication that human beings have with one another and give themselves the capacity to monitor and analyze those communications."

Such a goal, formerly reserved for the more fundamentalist versions of God, is now firmly entrenched at the top of the U.S. government -- and at the top of corporate America. As Greenwald pointed out, "There almost is no division between the private sector and the NSA, or the private sector and the Pentagon, when it comes to the American 'national security' state. They really are essentially one."

Now that's the kind of monotheism the world can do without.


Follow Norman Solomon on Twitter: www.twitter.com/normansolomon

Monday, July 14, 2014

Labor Reform This! Is It Time for the Socialist Revolution?

“Labor Reform”: Proposals to Maximize Workplace Bullying

by James Petras - ICH

Leading management consultants, top government officials and prominent financial journalists are proposing, what they dub, “labor reforms” as the solution for double-digit unemployment and underemployment, economic stagnation and the decline of capital investments.

“Labor Reform” as the Concentration of Power and Profits

 First of all, the term “labor reform” is just a euphemism for labor regression, the reversal of laws and practices that workers and employees secured through decades of struggle against employers.

The idea that “labor reforms” would create jobs for the unemployed has been tried and disproven over the past decade. Throughout Europe, in particular Spain, Portugal, Greece, Ireland and France, laws facilitating firings, pay differentials between short-term and long-term contract workers and speed-ups have not reduced unemployment, which still remains at depression levels.

What neo-liberal economists and journalists call “labor market flexibility” is really all about increasing the power of the bosses to impose reductions in wages, dominate and dictate work rules, intensify management bullying in the workplace and fire workers without just cause or redress. Likewise “wage flexibility” means giving management the exclusive power to unilaterally lower wages, to alter work contracts, to stratify payments between workers , to downgrade job categories in order to lower wages and to increase output, and to pit unemployed workers against employed workers, temporary workers against long-term workers.

The Consequences of “Labor Reform”: Rising Inequalities

“Labor reforms” are not policies designed to end unemployment, encourage economic recovery and increase capital expenditure. They are not an economic strategy. The principle goal is to concentrate power in the hands of the bosses in order to lower labor costs, increase profits and double-up production from a reduced workforce.

The growing disparity of power between capital and labor resulting from “labor reforms” is the key factor producing inequality. Neo-liberals attribute growing inequality to technological changes, ignoring the fact that it is the growing power of capital that determines how productivity gains, from the introduction of technological innovations, are distributed between capital and labor.

“Labor Reform” and the Astronomical Rise of Workplace Bullying

Most liberals focus on the problems of sexual harassment and intra-working class bullying. These problems certainly require attention and correction. But far more pervasive and with far-reaching consequential is management harassment of all workers of both genders. Because ‘labor reforms’ allow management to fire workers without due process and because union shop stewards do not exist in 88% of the private and public workplaces, management intervenes in everyday workplaces, arbitrarily increasing work assignments and downgrading work performance. And many times it does so with verbal and some times, physical abuse. Management no longer faces workplace solidarity: it can abuse workers, isolate and harangue them, threaten and dictate ultimatums. Any self-defense is immediately interpreted as insubordination and the worker is fired – an example to others to unconditionally submit. Intimidation takes the form of hiring temporary low-wage workers to compete with permanent employees, or threatening to ‘relocate’ the factory. Macro and micro personal bullying is today an integral part of capital- labor relations.

Bullying has an economic function – it is designed to increase output, inculcate obedience and raise profits. But management bullying has profound negative psycho-social effects on workers. Verbal abuse, face to face intimidation, arbitrary downgrading without recourse and other everyday indignities cause depression, a loss of self-worth dignity. This leads to self-abuse, worker and family violence and/or a ‘chain of bullying’ of those below … children, spouses, neighbors and outsiders (immigrants).

The bullying by management does not merely express itself in victimizing workers but also in forcing them to enter in “co-operative relations” where they are supposed to “share” tasks, responsibilities and innovations, without rewards or say in the distribution of material benefits or in the shaping of workplace power relations. It’s bad enough to be bullied and exploited, its worse to be forced to co-operate with management bullies, to smile at indignities and praise the degrading relationships.

The Most Vulnerable: Unemployed, Temporary and Young Workers

The most brutalized sectors of the workforce are the unemployed and temporary young workers, which the neo-liberal ideologues argue will be the beneficiaries of “labor market flexibility”. In fact, lowering the status of employed workers has not created jobs for the unemployed. Temporary workers are hired at the lowest level, paid less than half the wage of permanent workers and can be fired with no notice. Most young ‘temps’ work with the promise of a permanent job and are driven to compete with a multitude of others ... yet only a few are rehired when the contract ends and, even among them, it is usually another temporary contract. Unemployed workers are subject to intense interviews that go far beyond their work capabilities: they are interrogated regarding their readiness to obey, submit and collaborate with management - this is a key factor in getting hired. Temporary workers are encouraged by management to exceed existing work norms, to work overtime without extra payment, thus fostering animosity and hostility among permanent workers. The unemployed are there to pressure the temp; the temp is employed to compete with the permanent; the young are hired to replace older workers near retirement age to lower pension payments. Veteran workers fear that the younger workers they are assigned to train will then take their jobs or force them into early retirement with a loss of their pension and benefits. Management fosters distrust, hostility, competition and bullying among workers which undermines solidarity by dividing workers between temps and ‘permanent’ workers so they can dominate, intimidate and exploit both.

The on-going drive to strip workers of all protective social legislation and eliminate trade union organization in order to increase profits has allowed capitalists to lessen capital investments in job creating activities. Management bullying at the workplace has become endemic because individual workers have no redress, lack solidarity and have the “choice” of submitting to daily abuse until it become unbearable, or quitting. Management can always find cheap replacements that are more submissive, more willing to endure added job tasks for lesser pay. In many cases, especially among public sector employees, management bullying is a tool to remove and replace competent professionals with political or family cronies. Organizational loyalty replaces professional competence, leading to a decline of public service and advocacy for the citizens, especially the most vulnerable.

Labor Market Reform as a Cover for the Failures of Capital

As we have noted, stripping labor of its rights and concentrating power in the hands of management has not created jobs. The reason is that unemployment and underemployment is a result of the behavior of the capitalist class. They are not investing in job creation!

Instead CEO’s are paying higher dividends to big stockholders, investment bankers and hedge funds. Corporate directors are channeling billions into acquisitions, buying out competitors and monopolizing markets or simply “broadening the portfolio”. They reap huge salaries and bonuses.

Corporate strategic planners and accountants relocate corporate offices overseas and stash hundreds of billions of dollars offshore to avoid taxes while reducing the availability of capital for job-creating investments at home.

The corporate elite relocates plants and operations “off-shore” to low-wage countries, in the process firing millions of workers and thus creating a massive pool of unemployed workers. ‘Capital flexibility’, not ‘labor inflexibility’ (job protection), is the decisive factor generating and maintaining high unemployment and underemployment: Capital has the “flexibility” to acquire existing firms instead of creating new plants and jobs; it has the ‘flexibility’ to ‘offshore’ its operations and displace millions and it has the ‘flexibility’ to hoard funds and profits overseas, hidden from domestic taxes.

Conclusion

The entire argument for “labor reform” and labor flexibility to create jobs is entirely without merit. Worse, it is a subterfuge to cover up the fact that it is “capital flexibility”, which is the cause of unemployment.

Moreover, the vast imbalance between financial and productive investments has led to the diminution of stable well-paying jobs in productive sectors. The movement by the corporate and financial elite toward a high unemployment strategy is predicated on its supreme control over the executive branch of government at the top and iron-fisted control over the workplace at the bottom.

Political-corporate integration is at its highest point in history: “flexible capital”, unrestrained movements of capital, is the dominant state ideology. The inability of trade unions and other organized sectors to challenge state policy has led to their total subjection to threats of capital flight and their acceptance of the imposition of “labor reforms” destroying the social basis for organization.

Capital-State integration at the top is accompanied by worker fragmentation and isolation at the workplace. Here “labor reform” plays a major role in sustaining management absolutism: corporate power at the top corrupts and absolute power at the workplace absolutely corrupts – to paraphrase and adapt Lord Acton to the 21st century.

Workplace bullying by management, is the starting point in an extended chain or domination and exploitation that stretches from the highest levels of corporate headquarters to the lowest office and workplace. Frustrated atomized workers suffering indignities do not strike and do not vote. They are the silent majority who tell the pollsters they oppose Wall Street, they want a national health system for their family, affordable higher education for their children and stable, secure employment for themselves - but feel powerless and voiceless!

This majority needs a movement to impose ‘capital reforms’: an end to capital flight, mergers, acquisitions and hoarding instead of capital investments. Perhaps the starting point is workplace reform: organizing and fighting management bullying in every day work.

Another response to the escalation of managements workplace bullying is the growth of self-employment, as skilled workers turn to small-scale enterprises and self-managed co-operatives to free themselves from managers constantly looking over their shoulders, barking for greater output and demanding “extra hours and overtime” without compensation.

Decades earlier, a whole generation was raised with the understanding that employment in a larger firm was a collegial experience of sharing knowledge and advancing through meritorious achievements. Today, few skilled workers hold that view: corporate employment involves a merciless “grind”, abrupt changes in ownership, radical restructuring, high stress workloads and perpetual job insecurity.

The risk of exiting to small-scale individual enterprises may be preferable to the strains and indignities of everyday corporate bullying, even in the public sector. But the bankruptcy rates for small independents remain high.

Socialism anybody?

James Petras, a former Professor of Sociology at Binghamton University, New York, owns a 50-year membership in the class struggle, is an adviser to the landless and jobless in Brazil and Argentina, and is co-author of Globalization Unmasked (Zed Books).

From Israel's Border with Gaza

Report From Israel's Border with Gaza

by TRNN

As Israel mobilizes tanks and reservists to Gaza border and bombardments intensify, The Real News' Israel/Palestine Correspondent reports from the border - July 14, 2014
 
 
While the Israeli cabinet deliberates whether to expand its current assault on the Gaza Strip, The Real News' Lia Tarachansky traveled to the Israeli border with the Gaza Strip. She reports on the barrage of rockets various militant groups inside the strip have been firing on Israeli population centers, and on the intensified bombardment campaign from the air and sea of the Strip.

Ukraine: The Other War of Savage Aggression Against Civilians

It’s war in eastern Ukraine as Kyiv gov’t bombards cities and towns

by Roger Annis - A Socialist in Canada

MOSCOW, Russia, July 14, 2014 – Ukraine President Petro Poroshenko is trying to make good on his announcement on July 11 that his army or the fascist militias fighting alongside it will kill “dozens and hundreds” of people in the east of the country for every Ukraine soldier dying in the war his regime is waging there.


Aftermath of Ukraine gov’t attack on 
Kramatorsk - photo Ukraine gov’t 

Since his pronouncement, his armed forces have been bombarding cities and towns in southeast Ukraine. Fighter aircraft, tanks and other armoured vehicles are engaged.

The heaviest shelling in recent days has been directed at the city of Luhansk and surrounding villages. A leader of the self-defense forces there, Igor Strelkov, told RIA Novosti (quoted in Russia Today) there is fierce fighting in the suburbs of Luhansk, which is located not far from the Russian border. “The enemy has thrown in about 70 tanks consisting of two compact armored groups. There is unconfirmed information that a helicopter with a SWAT team landed in the city,” he said.

Strelkov says some 30 civilians have been killed by shelling and fighting in the last several days.

The Guardian reports in a video story that overnight on July 11, shelling hit houses and apartment buildings, factories and town squares in Luhansk (population 400,000) and in the town of Marinka near Donetsk city. Strelkov tells the camera that a milk factory and a cattle feed factory were destroyed and that 30 citizens were killed in the various attacks.

In the Guardian video, a resident stands in front of an apartment building damaged by shells and says, “I have no words to express my outrage, fear, confusion. Look at this [pointing to the building]. Look at this—this is the true face of Petro Poroshenko.

“He is not our president. This is his true face.”



Ukraine army rocket launchers in Donetsk region
July 12, photo BBC

BBC has a report and photos of the multiple-rocket attack on Marinka’s houses. The Guardian reports on July 13, “Marinka, a nearby farming town, was hit with a barrage of artillery for the third day running. The assaults have caused large-scale destruction of apartment blocks, businesses and restaurants.”

Russia Today reports that nine people were killed and six others injured in shelling by the Ukrainian army near Trudovskaya coal mine in Donetsk region on July 12. There have been reports of other shelling in Donetsk but the city’s utilities and public transport are reported to be functioning normally.

RT also reports that according to the Twitter feed of the People’s Republic of Donetsk, the army fired on the town of Krasnogorovka in the Donetsk region on July 12. A school and multiple apartment blocks were damaged and “there were many casualties”.

In a story broadcast on the English service of Russia Today, a woman whose neighbourhood has been shelled is in tears and tells the RT camera, “I curse you Petro Poroshenko and Arseniy Yatseniuk” [Ukraine prime minister].

Provocations against Russia


Poroshenko’s crazed threat and the attacks that followed are retaliation for a rocket attack by self-defense fighters overnight on July 10/11 that destroyed a Ukraine army armoured column, killed 23 soldiers and border police (some reports say 30 died), and wounded dozens more.

Russia has condemned the Ukraine government’s military offensive and it issued a particularly strong statement after a shell struck a home in the village of Donetsk, in Russia’s Rostov region, killing one citizen and injuring another. A government statement said there would be “irreversible consequences”.

A government official is cited in the Russian daily Kommersant as saying that Moscow was weighing up “targeted retaliatory strikes”, but was not planning any large-scale action.

“Our patience is not limitless,” he said, adding that Russia “knows exactly where they [Ukrainians] are firing from”.

There are persistent reports that some of the Ukrainian fighter aircraft are being flown by pilots from east European NATO countries. Prior to the change of regime in Kiev in February, Ukraine’s armed forces were ill-equipped and trained, adding to the belief that its pilots were in no position to spring into combat action.

Problems of equipment, training and motivation bedevil Ukraine’s ground forces, hence the heavy use of artillery and dependence on rightist and fascist militias as shock troops.

Russian President Vladimir Putin and German Chancellor Angela Merkel met in Brazil on July 13 and issued a call for a ceasefire. This is not the first ceasefire call and it’s not clear whether Merkel is merely playing to German public opinion. Her government is among those which have imposed economic and political sanction on Russia following the plebiscite vote in Crimea on March 16 to secede from Ukraine and join the Russian Federation. Polls show that a strong majority of Germans oppose assisting the Ukraine government’s military offensives.

Putin was in Brazil as part of a five-day, official tour that saw him also visit Cuba, Nicaragua and Argentina. In Cuba, the president made official Russia’s decision to cancel most of the disputed debt of $32.5 billion that Cuba was said to owe to Russia dating from the era of the Soviet Union.

Last March 27, a resolution at the United Nations General Assembly was approved to condemn Russia for accepting the will of the Crimean people expressed in their plebiscite. One hundred countries voted in favour of the resolution, 11 voted against and 58 abstained. Of the countries visited by Putin, Argentina and Brazil abstained and Cuba and Nicaragua voted against. The other Latin American countries to vote against were Venezuela and Bolivia. (Vote result here.)

The measured Russian response to events belies claims during the past several months by the Ukraine government and voiced by left and liberal opinion internationally that Russia has territorial ambitions over Ukraine. What is called the “annexation” of Crimea by Russia is cited as proof of those ambitions. But the population of that region voted to secede from Ukraine because it feared that the right wing regime that came to power in Kyiv in February would bring civil war to their region, as it has done in southeast Ukraine.

War refugees


Russia is providing assistance to the tens of thousands of refugees displaced by Kyiv’s war, in the form of temporary shelter, cash assistance and job offers in Russian industry (many of those displaced are workers and technicians; southeast Ukraine is heavily industrialized). According to Russian Emergency Situations Ministry spokesperson Alexander Drobyshenko, there are 22,037 refugees from Ukraine currently housed in 326 shelters. Tens of thousands more refugees are finding their own means of shelter. (See a new article on this subject in The Nation.)

The number of internal refugees in Ukraine is unreported. The Kyiv government has no formal program of assistance to them. It has cut off social service payments to areas in southeast Ukraine considered hostile to its rule and under attack.

At the root of the Crimea vote and the popular resistance in southeast Ukraine is the desire of local populations for local and regional democracy, their rejection of the extremist, austerity economic program that Kiev is embarked upon in alliance with the U.S. and the European Union and their hostility to the billionaire capitalists that control the economy. Ukraine signed an “association agreement” with the EU on June 30 that will see many protections to industry and agriculture cancelled and will shut off access to existing markets in Russia and other countries in the region.

Well before the EU agreement, the regime that seized power in Kyiv in late February of this year began slashing spending on social services and civil infrastructure. Protests have taken place against these cuts and these will only grow as the full impact of the turn to Europe bites deeper and deeper.

Coal miners union appeals for international solidarity


The following appeal has been received by the UK campaign Solidarity with the Antifascist Resistance in Ukraine. It is signed by Mikhail Alexeevich Krylov, Representative of the Independent Donetsk Miners’ Trade Union. Krylov was co-chairman of the City Strike Committee in Donetsk during the big coal miners’ strikes in 1991 and later that decade. He is the head of the Independent Miners Union of Donetsk, which organises over 1,000 miners.

Brother miners,

We need to explain to you the true state of affairs in Donbas [the region of southeast Ukraine that is resisting Kyiv’s rule]. The real picture of what is happening has been misinterpreted or hushed by European media. We understand that you may not find it easy to come to the correct conclusions; and therefore, we declare that we – the miners – are forced to fight with weapons in our hands for the sake of our lives – in the name of survival!

Our interest in this confrontation is one: end the bloodshed! The end of the war will be the trial of the war criminals that began it. We cannot give up because it would mean our full moral and physical destruction! From the outset, “Euromaidan” has been under the control of the big bourgeoisie: Ukrainian oligarchs and their foreign masters. In February of this year, there was a coup in Ukraine with the active participation of neo-Nazi organizations. In response to this, there was a protest movement in the South-East of the country, which at first was pushing innocuous slogans such as federalization and Russian as a second state language. This was greeted with terror.

In Donbas, there is a real war in which civilians are killed: including the elderly, women and children. You are blatantly being lied to that what war is between Ukraine and Russia. But it is not so! The war is between the people and a handful of oligarchs with the support of the EU and U.S. authorities. The tragedy in Ukraine is that, those in power, managed to infect the people with certain fascist ideas. We, the residents of Donbas, fight against all manifestations of Nazism and Fascism. We fight with weapons in hand, for our lives and the lives of our loved ones. We have nowhere to retreat – this is our land! We appeal to you, the workers of the European countries, asking for your help and solidarity: help us break the stronghold of fascism in Ukraine. This will be our common victory!

Signed,
Mikhail Alexeevich Krylov
Representative from Independent Donetsk Miners’ Trade Union

Note: Donetsk miners marched on June 18 against Kiev’s “anti-terrorist operation” and gave a 48-hour ultimatum that they would take up arms unless the war stopped.

Enbridge "Integrity Digs" Challenged on Line 9 Toronto

Enbridge has no integrity. No Digs. No Pipeline.

by Rising Tide Toronto

Etobicoke, ON (Rexdale Blvd. and Kipling Ave.) - G.T.A. residents are blocking access to work being done on a section of Enbridge’s Line 9 pipeline in Etobicoke, Ontario (123 Rexdale Blvd - behind the  Shopper’s Drugmart and Bowlerama). Blockaders turned away workers from the site where Enbridge is doing construction necessary before the reversed Line 9 can go into operation.

“The work being done on the pipeline is not a solution, it’s barely a band-aid,” says Lana Goldberg, one of the blockaders.
“Line 9 has nearly 13,000 instances of corrosion, cracks, and dents but they’re addressing only a few hundred. Further, they refuse to do the hydrostatic test requested by the province.”

“We have stopped work at this site today because every inch of every pipeline is a risk to our most basic need as living beings, water, and threatens our homes and communities.”

The work site being blockaded today is is adjacent to a densely populated part of the city and if Line 9 gets turned on local residents will be at risk. International pipeline expert, Richard Kuprewicz, has given a 90%
likelihood of rupture within 5 years.
http://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/748594/9b-safety-report-2013-08.pdf

The blockaders point to the disastrous rupture of an ExxonMobil pipeline that sent a river of oil through a suburban neighborhood in Mayflower, Arkansas. The spill forced residents to either move away or face chronic health problems as it has proved impossible to fully clean up. Enbridge’s record is even worse. When Enbridge’s line 6b ruptured and spilled into the Kalamazoo River in Michigan in 2010, millions of litres of oil spilled and have so far proven impossible to clean up.

“This construction site is part of an integrity digs,” added Meghan Mills. 
“But to anyone watching the Line 9 issue, its clear Enbridge has no integrity. This work on the line is just a band-aid, a flimsy patch over the most outrageous flaws in the Line 9 plan.”

The Chippewas of the Thames are challenging the NEB approval of Line 9 in court yet Enbridge is continuing to do work on the pipeline.

“While they claim otherwise, Enbridge has consistently failed to meaningfully consult with the first nations communities their projects run through and threaten the lives and culture of,” Meghan Mills explains.
“Line 9 is in direct conflict with first nations treaties and we are here in opposition to Enbridge’s reckless and illegal activity.”


*Media Release *

*July 14 2014*
*Updates / Pics: @risingtidetor *


Media Contacts:
Lana Goldberg

Sunday, July 13, 2014

Stephen Harper's 'New Government of Canada' Support for Gaza Slaughter

Canada Rejects UN High Commissioner for Human Rights’ Criticism of Israel’s Response to Rocket Attacks from Gaza

by "Government Of Canada"

Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird today issued the following statement:

“Canada rejects UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay’s uncalled-for criticism of Israel’s response to rocket attacks from Gaza. Focusing her comments on Israel is neither helpful nor reflective of the reality of this crisis.

“There must be no moral equivalence between Hamas, a listed terrorist organization, and its blatant disregard for human life, and the liberal democratic State of Israel’s duty and obligation to defend its people from cowardly and indiscriminate attacks.

“Canada mourns the death and suffering of innocent civilians in Gaza. Responsibility rests solely with Hamas and its allies, who launched and continue to feed this crisis.

“The Israel Defense Forces have taken extraordinary steps to reduce civilian casualties in very difficult and trying conditions. Israel should be commended—not criticized—for these efforts in the face of an enemy clearly determined to put civilians, from both sides, in mortal danger to suit its own purposes.

“Canada calls on Hamas and other militant groups to end the rocket attacks on Israel and bring an end to the ongoing violence that threatens the lives of innocent Israelis and Palestinians. The path chosen by Hamas and its allies does not lead to peace.” 


Media Relations Office
Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development Canada
Tel 343-203-7700

media@international.gc.ca
Follow us on Twitter: @DFATDCanada

http://www.international.gc.ca/media/aff/news-communiques/2014/07/12a.aspx?lang=eng

Slaughter in the Ghetto: West Cheers Israel's Gaza Atrocity

Massacre of the Innocents: Slaughter in the Gaza Ghetto

by Chris Floyd - Empire Burlesque

The horror of Israel’s latest slaughter in Gaza speaks for itself — despite the mountainous flow of media sludge designed to obscure the reality of the aggression. Even the New York Times has been forced to print a few stories about the high number of civilian deaths being caused by the Israeli assault on the “Warsaw Ghetto” they have made of Gaza, noting the hospitals and mosques and private homes where dozens of innocent people have been blown to pieces by Israel’s weaponry (much of it American-made).

Israel has imprisoned the people of Gaza in a stateless limbo while carefully controlling almost every aspect of their lives, including what medicines they can have, what manufacturing and building materials they are allowed and even, at times, how much food they are allowed to eat to keep the population weakened but just above malnutrition levels. This brutal regimen in daily life is of course punctuated with regular night raids, bombings, kidnappings, “disappearings” and almost weekly civilians deaths at the hands of Israeli overseers. This has gone on year after year. Yet Western media — and Western politicians — are presenting a picture of a nuclear-armed, American-backed ultra-militarist Israel “under siege” from a handful of ineffective rockets fired by factions in Gaza which are answering violence with violence.

But as we all know, the West demands that Palestinians show superhuman, Gandhi-like forbearance in the face of murderous oppression and relentless, widespread violence killing their children and families. They are never to respond in kind — unlike the Americans, who have killed hundreds of thousands of people in response to a single attack on their soil. This after killing, by Washington’s own admission, more than half a million children in Iraq with peacetime sanctions — against a nation which had never attacked the United States and posed no threat to it. The merest hint of a possible threat remotely occurring sometime in a barely imaginable future is justification enough for the Americans to lay waste to whole nations and kill thousands of people. (Of course, in many states in America this principle is now enshrined in law on an individual basis: you can shoot dead anyone you feel might be a “threat” to you — whether they are or not. The ‘stand your ground’ laws are a perfect example of a nation rotting from the head, as the murderous militarism and adherence to violence embodied by the bipartisan elite seep down through every strata of society.) This is the true — the only — meaning of “American exceptionalism”: the right to ruin, rape and murder in perfect moral purity.

To be sure, this golden aura can be loaned out at times to others. Israel above all seems to have acquired a permanent lease on American’s license to kill. But it can also be spread around to other nations and factions, even terrorist groups, if it serves the purposes of the Potomac Imperium. Such as the “moderate al Qaeda” now being supported in Syria (or the al Qaeda forbears supported so fully in Soviet-era Afghanistan). Saddam Hussein was allowed to slaughter tens of thousands, and even use chemical weapons, with America’s blessing and military aid and money. Later of course, he morphed into a new Hitler, and, as noted, America had to kill half a million children in his land, before invading the country and causing the deaths of a million more people. Why, even Vlad the Impaler Putin — the current new Hitler in America’s eyes — was gifted with America’s moral exemption when he was killing thousands of people in Chechnya.

But yes, Israel is the chief beneficiary of Washington’s moral blank check. And so the false narrative — the mendacious “frame” — of a “besieged” Israel defending its poor, innocent self from unprovoked attack is promulgated at every turn by the Western political establishment and most of the media. Barack Obama and a bipartisan gaggle of Capitol Hill geese have lent their support to this narrative — and to the massacre of the innocents that lurks behind it.

Yet as David Cronin notes:

There is no acknowledgement that Israel has been subjecting Palestinian civilians to collective punishment — in clear violation of international law. There is no mention of the seven-year siege that Israel has imposed on Gaza. There is no recognition that Benjamin Netanyahu’s government has used the murder of three Israeli teenagers as a pretext to kill much higher numbers of Palestinian children in recent days ….

“Pretext” is certainly the operative word. As Max Blumenthal reports, Netanyahu’s government knew almost immediately that the three teenagers were dead, and who had killed them. But they suppressed these facts in order to rouse atavistic hatred among Israelis and to rally world opinion and sympathy — preparatory to an assault on Gaza that was obviously long-planned, and which had nothing at all to do with the murder of the teenagers at the hands of a “rogue” clan at odds with the Hamas leadership. Blumenthal:

From the moment three Israeli teens were reported missing last month, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and the country’s military-intelligence apparatus suppressed the flow of information to the general public. Through a toxic blend of propaganda, subterfuge and incitement, they inflamed a precarious situation, manipulating Israelis into supporting their agenda until they made an utterly avoidable nightmare inevitable.

Israeli police, intelligence officials and Netanyahu knew within hours of the kidnapping and murder of the three teens that they had been killed. And they knew who the prime suspects were less than a day after the kidnapping was reported.

Rather than reveal these details to the public, Israel’s Shin Bet intelligence agency imposed a gag order on the national media, barring news outlets from reporting that the teens had almost certainly been killed, and forbidding them from revealing the identities of their suspected killers. The Shin Bet even lied to the parents of the kidnapped teens, deceiving them into believing their sons were alive.

Instead of mounting a limited action to capture the suspected perpetrators and retrieve the teens’ bodies, Netanyahu staged an aggressive international public relations campaign, demanding sympathy and outrage from world leaders, who were also given the impression that the missing teens were still alive.

Meanwhile, Israel’s armed forces rampaged throughout the occupied West Bank and bombarded the Gaza Strip in a campaign of collective punishment deceptively marketed to Israelis and the world as a rescue mission.

Critical details that were known all along by Netanyahu and the military-intelligence apparatus were relayed to the Israeli public only after the abduction of more than 560 Palestinians, including at least 200 still held without charges; after the raiding of Palestinian universities and ransacking of countless homes; after six Palestinian civilians were killed by Israeli forces; after American-trained Palestinian Authority police assisted Israeli soldiers attacking Palestinian youths in the center of Ramallah; after the alleged theft by Israeli troops of $3 million in US dollars; and after Israel’s international public relations extravaganza had run its course.

Israeli forces began rounding up and interrogating family members of the main suspects, Marwan Qawasmeh and Amer abu Eishe, the day after the kidnapping of the Israeli teenagers. Yet this fact too was kept from the public, and from the world. As Blumenthal noted:

While Netanyahu and his top deputies blamed the entire membership of Hamas for the kidnapping, the Shin Bet gag order suppressed all information relating to the identities of the suspects until 26 June. As far as the Israeli public knew, the kidnappers could have been anywhere in the West Bank, in any schoolhouse or coffee house or hen house where anyone remotely affiliated with Hamas congregated.
Having manipulated an exceptionally suggestible population through the careful management of information, the military had all the political latitude it needed to rampage through cities far from the scene of the crime.


 Blumenthal further notes:

According to Israeli journalist Shlomi Eldar, members of the Qawasmeh clan of Hebron have earned a reputation for attacking Israeli civilian targets during ceasefires between Hamas and Israel.

While an extended family of over 10,000 can hardly be blamed for the actions of some of its members, it is notable that attacks carried out by fighters from the family were privately criticized by top Hamas leaders, as Eldar explains. Hamas leadership regarded the operations as self-destructive acts of freebooting and often paid for them in the form of Israeli assassinations. In each case, the violence shattered ceasefires and inspired renewed bouts of bloodshed.

“The same is true now,” Eldar writes. “Marwan Qawasmeh and Amer Abu Eishe have taken Hamas to a place where its leadership never intended to go.”

Hamas leadership has yet to take responsibility for the kidnapping and likely had no knowledge of its planning. As Haaretz military correspondent Amos Harel notes, “So far, there is no evidence that Hamas’ leadership either in Gaza or abroad was involved in the kidnapping.” Harel adds that the fallout of the kidnapping “effectively froze the Fatah-Hamas reconciliation.”

The latter is certainly one of the reasons behind the current onslaught. A reconciled Palestinian leadership could offer more formidable resistance to Israeli domination (although the years-long fecklessness of Fatah, its enormous corruption and frequent, brutal cooperation with Israel does not augur well for any principled resistance). But before any reconciliation or spine-stiffening could take hold among Palestinian politicians, Israel went on the attack.

Blumenthal tells a harrowing tale of the propaganda campaign waged by the Israeli government to whip the population into a frenzy of revenging bloodlust over the “missing boys” — even as Netanyahu and his minions knew full well the boy were dead. These efforts were redoubled after the bodies were found, and of course led to the notorious murder of a Palestinian teenager by Israeli youths inflamed by the government’s cold-blooded manipulations. I won’t excerpt the passage here, but you should read the Blumenthal article in full.

But political power-playing to separate Fatah and Hamas were by no means the only impetus behind the operation. In a world whose lifeblood is fossil fuel, it’s no surprise to find that the present attack on Gaza — like the ISIS assault in Iraq — is, in significant measure, one of the “resource wars” which many analysts believe will be one of the defining characteristics of the 21st century. As Nafeez Ahmed notes in the Guardian:

…in 2007, a year before Operation Cast Lead, [Israel’s] concerns focused on the 1.4 trillion cubic feet of natural gas discovered in 2000 off the Gazacoast, valued at $4 billion. Defense Minister Ya'alon dismissed the notion that "Gaza gas can be a key driver of an economically more viable Palestinian state" as "misguided." The problem, he said, is that:

"Proceeds of a Palestinian gas sale to Israel would likely not trickle down to help an impoverished Palestinian public. Rather, based on Israel's past experience, the proceeds will likely serve to fund further terror attacks against Israel…

A gas transaction with the Palestinian Authority [PA] will, by definition, involve Hamas. Hamas will either benefit from the royalties or it will sabotage the project and launch attacks against Fatah, the gas installations, Israel – or all three… It is clear that without an overall military operation to uproot Hamas control of Gaza, no drilling work can take place without the consent of the radical Islamic movement."

Operation Cast Lead did not succeed in uprooting Hamas, but the conflict did take the lives of 1,387 Palestinians (773 of whom were civilians) and 9 Israelis (3 of whom were civilians).

Since the discovery of oil and gas in the Occupied Territories, resource competition has increasingly been at the heart of the conflict, motivated largely by Israel's increasing domestic energy woes.

Mark Turner, founder of the Research Journalism Initiative, reported that the siege of Gaza and ensuing military pressure was designed to "eliminate" Hamas as "a viable political entity in Gaza" to generate a "political climate" conducive to a gas deal. This involved rehabilitating the defeated Fatah as the dominant political player in the West Bank, and "leveraging political tensions between the two parties, arming forces loyal to Abbas and the selective resumption of financial aid."

…As Dr Gary Luft - an advisor to the US Energy Security Council - wrote in the Journal of Energy Security, "with the depletion of Israel's domestic gas supplies accelerating, and without an imminent rise in Egyptian gas imports, Israel could face a power crisis in the next few years… If Israel is to continue to pursue its natural gas plans it must diversify its supply sources." …

Earlier this year, Hamas condemned a PA deal to purchase $1.2 billion worth of gas from Israel Leviathan field over a 20 year period once the field starts producing. Simultaneously, the PA has held several meetings with the British Gas Group to develop the Gaza gas field, albeit with a view to exclude Hamas – and thus Gazans – from access to the proceeds. That plan had been the brainchild of Quartet Middle East envoy Tony Blair.

But the PA was also courting Russia's Gazprom to develop the Gaza marine gas field, and talks have been going on between Russia, Israel and Cyprus, though so far it is unclear what the outcome of these have been. Also missing was any clarification on how the PA would exert control over Gaza, which is governed by Hamas.

According to Anais Antreasyan in the University of California's Journal of Palestine Studies, the most respected English language journal devoted to the Arab-Israeli conflict, Israel's stranglehold over Gaza has been designed to make "Palestinian access to the Marine-1 and Marine-2 gas wells impossible." Israel's long-term goal "besides preventing the Palestinians from exploiting their own resources, is to integrate the gas fields off Gaza into the adjacent Israeli offshore installations." This is part of a wider strategy of:

"…. separating the Palestinians from their land and natural resources in order to exploit them, and, as a consequence, blocking Palestinian economic development. Despite all formal agreements to the contrary, Israel continues to manage all the natural resources nominally under the jurisdiction of the PA, from land and water to maritime and hydrocarbon resources."

For the Israeli government, Hamas continues to be the main obstacle to the finalisation of the gas deal. In the incumbent defence minister's words: "Israel's experience during the Oslo years indicates Palestinian gas profits would likely end up funding terrorism against Israel. The threat is not limited to Hamas… It is impossible to prevent at least some of the gas proceeds from reaching Palestinian terror groups."

The only option, therefore, is yet another "military operation to uproot Hamas." Unfortunately, for the IDF uprooting Hamas means destroying the group's perceived civilian support base – which is why Palestinian civilian casualties massively outweigh that of Israelis. Both are obviously reprehensible, but Israel's capacity to inflict destruction is simply far greater.

So here is another reason why the Hamas-Fatah reconciliation cannot be borne by Israel; it not only blocks a billion-dollar deal for existing Israeli gas, it also cuts Israel off from exploiting the 1.2 trillion cubic feet of natural gas off the Gaza shore. As Ahmed notes, this isn’t the only cause behind the current operation — but it is a central one.

But beyond all the politics and petrodollars driving the madness of the latest assault lie the ordinary people whose bodies and lives are being ripped to shreds. As’ad AbuKhalil, the ‘Angry Arab,’ is, as usual, an important source for some hard fragments of reality amidst the toxic sludge of spin and propaganda. AbuKhalil points us to a number of stories on the human toll of the attacks. Such as this one:

Sahir Salman Abu Namous was just four years old, soon to turn five. … Sahir was killed on Friday afternoon when an Israeli warplane bombed his family home in the Tal al-Zaatar neighborhood in northern Gaza. “He was playing and smiling next to his mother when missile shrapnel divided his head,” Mahmoud writes. “His father took him to the hospital screaming ‘Wake up my son! I bought toys for you, please wake up!’”

…Sahir Salman Abu Namous was one of 21 children who had been killed in the onslaught by Friday.

A piece of shrapnel divided his head. “Wake up my son!” Wake up, indeed: the soul of the world is sleeping, and the murderous rampage goes on.

Nakba Origins

Nakba Origins

by If Americans Knew



Gorilla Radio with Chris Cook, Robert Wintner, Scott Harris, Janine Bandcroft July 14, 2014

This Week on GR

by C. L. Cook - Gorilla-Radio.com

"The creatures of Our oceans are under attack like never before by the rapaciousness and stupidity of the planet's largest predator, We humans.

And, it's not just the large fish floating on the brink of extinction. While it's true, the Blue Fin Tuna, Sharks, Sword and Sailfishes, and all of the Cetaceans, waver on the edge of viable survival, the small reef inhabitants of the World's seas, fish you may find familiar sights at your doctor's or dentist's office, too face an uncertain future.

The negative effects driving the extinctions are many, but central to them all is the human penchant to love the wild things of this earth to death.

Listen. Hear.

I wrote that introduction four years ago, and the situation in the World's oceans, and especially on its diminishing reefs, is worse now than then."

Robert Wintner is an environmental defender, author, and the wildly successful entrepreneur behind Hawaii's Snorkel Bob's reef outfitter company. He is also the engine behind the Snorkel Bob foundation, whose myriad charitable projects help to bring the appreciation of the oceans and all its inhabitants to humans who would otherwise remain ignorant of the workings of the Planet's single-most essential biosphere.

Some of Robert Wintner's book titles include: 'In a Sweet Magnolia Time', 'Toucan Whisper, Toucan Sing', 'The Modern Outlaws', and his latest, 'Dark Hobby: Some Fishes I Have Known.' Snorkel Bob is also the author of the popular 'Snorkel Bob's Underwater and Get Down Guide to Oahu', and it's companion 'Get Down Guide to Maui', and he's compiled several books of short stories. He is also vice-president of the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society, and skipper for its recently launched 'Operation Reef Defense.'

Robert Wintner in the first half.

And; nothing accommodates the despoliation of the land, air, and waters of our fragile blue home in space more than the ascendancy of corporate power. In every sphere of our lives we are connected in a web of interests we know little about, the strands of that web all inexorably connected to one corporation, or more probably a matrix of interlocked trans-national corporations. Nowhere is the power of this system more evident than in the so-called alphabet soup of "free trade" agreements. Most Canadians remember well the "national debate" over the FTA that culminated in the election of Brian Mulroney, but knowing the profound effect that agreement and subsequent agreements has had on the nature and character of our nation is a more nebulous proposition. Those citizens entirely in the dark about these dealings can be forgiven somewhat given the super secrecy with which meetings between the corporadoes and "our" representatives are conducted.

Scott Harris is Trade Campaigner with the Council of Canadians, the organization formed specifically to battle that original Free Trade Agreement, and kept busy on myriad campaigns to preserve Canadian democracy from the encroachment of corporate power ever since.

Scott Harris and facing the next of the corporate Hydra's heads, the Trans Pacific Partnership in the second half.

And; Victoria Street Newz publisher emeritus and CFUV Radio broadcaster, Janine Bandcroft will join us at the bottom of the hour to bring us up to speed with what's good going on, and otherwise, on Victoria's streets and beyond in the coming week. But first, Robert Wintner and the dark business behind the "dark hobby" of live fish collecting.

Chris Cook hosts Gorilla Radio, airing live every Monday, 5-6pm Pacific Time. In Victoria at 101.9FM, and on the internet at: http://cfuv.uvic.ca.  He also serves as a contributing editor to the web news site, http://www.pacificfreepress.com. Check out the GR blog at: http://gorillaradioblog.blogspot.ca/
G-Radio is dedicated to social justice, the environment, community, and providing a forum for people and issues not covered in the corporate media.

Root and Branch in Gaza: This is What Genocide Looks Like

18 from one family killed in Gaza… 

by Eva Bartlett - In Gaza

Israeli air strikes on the Gaza Strip killed 52 people Saturday, including two severely handicapped women in a care facility, medics said.

The toll made Saturday the bloodiest day yet in the five-day conflict, and hiked the overall toll to 157.


The deadliest strike came in the Tuffah district in eastern Gaza City, where 18 people were killed in strikes that hit a home and a mosque, emergency services spokesman Ashraf al-Qudra said.
photo from Quds News Network

Fifty-two killed as Israel bombs charity, mosques, homes in Gaza's bloodiest day:

Among at least 50 people injured in the strike was Hamas police chief Tayseer al-Batsh, who was reportedly in critical condition.

Elsewhere, three people were killed in Rafah in southern Gaza, and one person in Jabalia, in the north of the coastal enclave.

The evening strikes came after defiant fighters in Gaza responded to the relentless Israeli assault by firing rockets towards Israeli occupied territories, including long range armaments that hit Tel Aviv.

Earlier, eight people were killed in raids on Gaza City, central al-Bureij and northern Jabalia.

They included a woman aged 25, and a 16-year-old, Qudra said.

And six men, including two nephews of former Hamas premier Ismail Haniya, were killed in an afternoon strike on the Sheikh Radwan district of western Gaza City.

Aged from 21 to 58, they were sitting outside their homes in the area when the strike hit, eyewitnesses said.

Their deaths followed an early morning strike that killed two women at a charitable association housing the disabled in Beit Lahiya in northern Gaza.

The women, Suha Abu Saada and Ola Washahi, both had severe mental and physical handicaps, association director Jamila Alaywa said.

Four others were wounded in the attack -- three residents and a helper, she said.

Another three people were killed in eastern Gaza City and three in an attack on the western side of town in early Saturday attacks.

Earlier, Qudra announced the deaths of eight other Palestinians in raids that hit targets including a bank, two mosques and the houses of Hamas officials.

On Friday, the United Nations said 77 percent of those killed in the Israeli raids were civilians.

No Israelis have been killed.

***

Dr. Mona El-Farra: "The medical resources are exhausted": LISTEN HERE

***

photos from Quds News Network:

Israeli occupation forces target a residential house in the eastern ‪#‎Gaza‬ Strip belongs to Taysir al-Batsh, killing 18 of his family members.

6 children and 4 women among them

List of martyrs:

1. Anas Alla'a al-Batsh, 10
2. Qusai Isam al-Batsh, 12
3. Manar Majed al-Batsh, 13
4. Muhammad Isam al-Batsh, 17
5. Ibrahim Majed al-Batsh18
6. Yahyia Ala'a al-Batsh, 18
7. Khaled Majed al-Batsh, 20
8. Zakaria Ala'a al-Batsh, 20
9. Mahmoud Majed al-Batsh, 22
10. Marwa Majed al-Batsh, 25
11. Jalal Majed al-Batsh, 26
12. Ahmed Neman al-Batsh, 27
13. Baha'a Majed al-Batsh, 28
14. Nahed Naim al-Batsh, 41
15. Amal Hassan al-Batsh, 49
16. Aziza Yousef al-Batsh, 59
17. Majed Subhi al-Batsh
18. Qusai Ala'a al-Batsh











***

Israel tell northern Gaza residents to evacuate:

**Benevolent, and all, but where shall they go??

The Israeli military says it is ordering Palestinians living in the northern Gaza Strip to evacuate the area “for their own safety.”

In a statement Saturday, the military said it would send messages to residents overnight to leave the area.
Brig. Gen. Motti Almoz, the chief military spokesman, said Israel planned to hit the area with heavy force in the next 24 hours as it steps up an offensive against Gaza militants.