Violence & Street Fighting: Who Says It Alienates the People?

“Revolutionary politics and militant tactics are inherently shocking to powerful sections of society. It is certainly unacceptable to that liberal establishment (that some want to ally with). It is offensive and infuriating to the more backward. And any serious revolutionary movement needs to travel (with enthusiasm) straight into those hostile winds — with a deep strategic sense that there are other forces who in class society who are not nearly so conservative.” More here.

Toronto: Resistance to the G20.

"The G20 are not respecting indigenous rights across the world. They’re bending over backward, so that way corporate colonialism can control indigenous indigenous lands and its indigenous people, who are directly affected by the decisions made at the G20. So, being in solidarity with Palestinians and liberation armies from southern America, we’ve felt the need to come out here today and represent the warrior’s voice, when the liberal organizations are coming out to try and pacify the movement." More here.

"World leaders have started arriving for the G8 and G20 meetings amidst a massive security crackdown that will mark the most expensive three days in Canadian history. Large swaths of Toronto’s downtown core have the appearance of a police state, with an estimated deployment of over 19,000 security personnel—nearly five times the number at the G20 in Pittsburgh last year. The security price tag is around $1 billion, and some predict the total summit cost will surpass $2 billion." Read more about "Fortress Toronto" here.

Call to Action Against Racism and Fascism.

“During the early morning hours of March 27th, a Portland, Oregon anti-racist activist was shot in what appears to be a well orchestrated attack. It is suspected that the attackers were members of the neo- Nazi movement…

The March 27th shooting occurred within a backdrop of growing Right wing, racist, and emerging fascist organizing and activity. There has been a dramatic escalation of rhetoric and action from the broad Right. While all sectors of the working classes and poor face economic and social uncertainty, the racists, the Right wing, and the smaller but significant sections of the neo-Nazi and fascist movements are looking to divide our class and peoples…

We propose Saturday July 31, 2010 as a Call to Action Against Racism and Fascism. We want to use the CA to both engage the broad, independent, and radical anti-racist/anti-fascist movements… we argue for a maximum of creative and independent initiative… to use the CA as a means to increase collaboration between our forces and work in a popular manner to highlight the need for a mass, radical response to racist and fascist organizing.”

More here in English and Spanish.

The Revolution Will Not Be Funded By a Grant From....

Do Capitalists Fund Revolutions? By Michael Barker.

To date capitalists have financially supported two types of revolution: they have funded the neoliberal revolution to “take the risk out of democracy”,[1] and they have supported/hijacked popular revolutions (or in some cases manufactured ‘revolutions’) in countries of geostrategic importance (i.e. in counties where regime change is beneficial to transnational capitalism).[2] The former neoliberal revolution has, of course, been funded by a hoard of right wing philanthropists intent on neutralising progressive forces within society, while the latter ‘democratic revolutions’ are funded by an assortment of ‘bipartisan’ quasi-nongovernmental organizations, like the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), and private institutions like George Soros’ Open Society Institute].

The underlying mechanisms by which capitalists hijack popular revolutions has been outlined in William I. Robinson’s seminal book, Promoting Polyarchy: Globalization, US Intervention, and Hegemony (1996), which examines elite interventions in four countries – Chile, Nicaragua, the Philippines, and Haiti.[3] Robinson hypothesized that as a result of the public backlash (in the 1970s) against the US government’s repressive and covert foreign policies, foreign policy making elites elected to put a greater emphasis on overt means of overthrowing ‘problematic’ governments through the strategic manipulation of civil society. In 1984, this ‘democratic’ thinking was institutionalised with the creation of the National Endowment for Democracy, an organisation that acts as the coordinating body for better funded ‘democracy promoting’ organisations like US Agency for International Development and the Central Intelligence Agency.

More here.

South Of The Border movie trailer.

Plan De San Diego.

In early 1915, a Spanish document appeared in the south Texas town of San Diego calling for Chicanos in the U.S. Southwest to start a race war at 2 a.m. on February 20.

The document called for the recapture of all lands stolen from Mexico by the United States in 1848, as well as for the execution of all adult white males. African Americans, American Indians, and Asian immigrants were invited to join the uprising, which would result in a new Mexican republic and the acquisition of six states in North America to be used by blacks to establish their own separate nation.

More here. And another take on it here.

O-Bomb-Yuh's Top General Vs. O-Bomb-Yuh and His Administration: The Rolling Stone Interview.

"Before President Obama put him in charge of the war in Afghanistan, he spent five years running the Pentagon's most secretive black ops...


The general prides himself on being sharper and ballsier than anyone else, but his brashness comes with a price: Although McChrystal has been in charge of the war for only a year, in that short time he has managed to piss off almost everyone with a stake in the conflict. Last fall, during the question-and-answer session following a speech he gave in London, McChrystal dismissed the counterterrorism strategy being advocated by Vice President Joe Biden as "shortsighted," saying it would lead to a state of "Chaos-istan." The remarks earned him a smackdown from the president himself, who summoned the general to a terse private meeting aboard Air Force One. The message to McChrystal seemed clear: Shut the fuck up, and keep a lower profile..."

and...

"Last fall, with his top general calling for more troops, Obama launched a three-month review to re-evaluate the strategy in Afghanistan. "I found that time painful," McChrystal tells me in one of several lengthy interviews. "I was selling an unsellable position." For the general, it was a crash course in Beltway politics – a battle that pitted him against experienced Washington insiders like Vice President Biden, who argued that a prolonged counterinsurgency campaign in Afghanistan would plunge America into a military quagmire without weakening international terrorist networks. "The entire COIN strategy is a fraud perpetuated on the American people," says Douglas Macgregor, a retired colonel and leading critic of counterinsurgency who attended West Point with McChrystal. "The idea that we are going to spend a trillion dollars to reshape the culture of the Islamic world is utter nonsense.

In the end, however, McChrystal got almost exactly what he wanted. On December 1st, in a speech at West Point, the president laid out all the reasons why fighting the war in Afghanistan is a bad idea: It's expensive; we're in an economic crisis; a decade-long commitment would sap American power; Al Qaeda has shifted its base of operations to Pakistan. Then, without ever using the words "victory" or "win," Obama announced that he would send an additional 30,000 troops to Afghanistan, almost as many as McChrystal had requested. The president had thrown his weight, however hesitantly, behind the counterinsurgency crowd.


Today, as McChrystal gears up for an offensive in southern Afghanistan, the prospects for any kind of success look bleak. In June, the death toll for U.S. troops passed 1,000, and the number of IEDs has doubled. Spending hundreds of billions of dollars on the fifth-poorest country on earth has failed to win over the civilian population, whose attitude toward U.S. troops ranges from intensely wary to openly hostile. The biggest military operation of the year – a ferocious offensive that began in February to retake the southern town of Marja – continues to drag on, prompting McChrystal himself to refer to it as a "bleeding ulcer." In June, Afghanistan officially outpaced Vietnam as the longest war in American history – and Obama has quietly begun to back away from the deadline he set for withdrawing U.S. troops in July of next year. The president finds himself stuck in something even more insane than a quagmire: a quagmire he knowingly walked into, even though it's precisely the kind of gigantic, mind-numbing, multigenerational nation-building project he explicitly said he didn't want."

More here.

New Dead Prez! Go Get It At deadprez.com

Don't Snitch On Yourself: Plea to Obama Led to an Immigrant’s Arrest.

The letter appealing to President Obama was written in frustration in January, by a woman who saw her family reflected in his. She was a white United States citizen married to an African man, and the couple — college-educated professionals in Manhattan — were stymied in their long legal battle to keep him in the country.

A letter from Caroline Jamieson, left, to the president seeking help to keep her immigrant husband, Hervé Takoulo, in the country led to his arrest. Federal officials are investigating. Read more here.

The Devil Is Made and Molded in the Pacific Northwest.

Four more Lewis-McChord Stryker soldiers charged in Afghan deaths

The five soldiers accused of killing three Afghan civilians over a period of months earlier this year allegedly threw grenades at them and shot them with rifles, according to charging papers released Wednesday by Joint Base Lewis-McChord. Go here for more.

Support REAL 'freedom of information'! Support Wikileaks!

Pentagon investigators are reportedly still searching for Wikileaks co-founder Julian Assange, who helped release a classified US military video showing a US helicopter gunship indiscriminately firing on Iraqi civilians.

The US military recently arrested Army Specialist Bradley Manning, who may have passed on the video to Wikileaks. Manning’s arrest and the hunt for Assange have put the spotlight on the Obama administration’s campaign against whistleblowers and leakers of classified information. Read more about this case here.

A Good Day To Die.

Is The Opportunity To Handout 5 Jaywalking Tickets Worth Punching A Child, Potentially Starting A Riot, or Losing Ones Life?

A Seattle police officer punched a teenage girl in the face Monday afternoon. It was captured by a witness on video. The video above, a longer version of the incident, gives more clues on how this whole thing started.

From what I saw on the video, the whole thing was a comedy of errors that could have been FATAL for all involved (in no particular order):

• He did not tell her initially she was under arrest or being detained, he simply grabbed her. If he did, her friend did interfere with a lawful arrest in progress. If he did not, that is an issue. The longer youtube video also shows both the girl he later struggles with and the girl he punched being initially complaint. Verbal complaints from a suspect do NOT constitute resisting.
• He didn't wait for back-up when he saw he was outnumbered.
• Her friend has the heart and courage to physically resist authority (specifically ARMED, local-level, imperialist authority), which is hard to find amongst black people in Seattle (or in amerikkka, generally), however she is fortunate (as are the bystanders) that he didn't draw his weapon and fire on her or the rest of the crowd.
• Due to the adrenal dump the officer was experiencing, and all the emotions bound up with the body's physical response to perceived danger, chances are he probably would have been unable to draw his sidearm, let alone his pepper spray (as if that is a better alternative), let alone use either weapon effectively.

Police officers are taught what is called the Use Of Force Ladder. Aside from their personal politics and beliefs, or that of the department they serve, or even the state itself, this is a guide they use for determining how to respond to the actions of a "suspect".

The first level is officer presence. It is a societal expectation that once a uniformed officer arrives on the scene (or a plainclothes identifies himself as such) that whoever they want to speak to will comply with whatever they ask of them, based upon the position of authority that comes with being part of law enforcement.

The second level is verbal commands. This is the part where we see if the officer is "fair, friendly, and firm" or "foul-mouthed, fascistic, and looking for a fight", regardless of what the suspect is saying or doing. Depending on how the officer manages the encounter on this level, will greatly determine how the next levels play out; or whether or not those next level events even occur at all!

From what I read about it, it was a stop for jaywalking. The incident occurred near an area where two major arterials intersect, and there is a bridge that spans over both. The officer saw an 18-year-old man jaywalk across the busy street about 15 feet from the overpass.

After the officer stopped the man, he saw four women jaywalk at the same location and ordered them to come over to his car. At that point, the women became "verbally antagonistic, and one turned and began walking away", police said.

When the officer approached her and began escorting her back to his car, the Times report says, she tensed and pulled away, ignoring his order to put her hands on the patrol car. By then, a crowd had gathered. Police said the officer then began trying to handcuff her.

On one level, this whole thing could have been avoided. To the SPD officer in the video: Is it really necessary to attempt to coral 5 people at the same time by yourself, for jaywalking? Is the opportunity to handout 5 jaywalking tickets worth punching a child, potentially a starting a riot, or losing ones life?

Beyond the obvious, there are also the larger issues of capitalism, white supremacy, and police terrorism in communities of color. Really, it is these larger issues that this incident, stood next to the video taped stomping of a Mexican suspect two months ago (but only revealed to the public a month ago), that far too many sleep on.

They, along with other apologists for the way the world is, instead try to find ways to justify such acts (along with attempting to justify larger legal and legislative "brutalities" that further erode civil 'rights' [click here for an example of this], further erode our collective ability to peacefully redress our grievances; and give law enforcement greater latitude to terrorize us), and in doing so their lack of moral fortitude and outright cowardice is put on display.

It is because of these issues that this incident, and thousands of others like this one, and some that are even worse, in reality could not be avoided for very long.

One does not have to agree with what Christopher Morfort or Maurice Clemmons did, but anyone who has ever been threatened, brutalized, and/or terrorized by police has to agree that fear can quickly evolve into rage of that type, and we all know what that feels like.

What is key is how you use it. Do you strategize your anger or do you throw a temper tantrum and take a butt-whuppin' from friend and foe alike? All efforts to confront state power (in this case, as represented by SPD) will be for nothing if we do not attack the problem scientifically and systemically; with a clear understanding of who we are, what we are dealing with, why we are dealing, with who we are dealing with, and what our ultimate end goal is.

We must ask ourselves: is our goal reform...or revolution?

And let's be clear on the difference between the two. Put simply, reform seeks to fix a society that was built with the specific function to oppress and exploit. Revolution seeks to smash that society, and replace it with a society that does not!

Posing the above question in the context of this single issue (one of many symptoms of a dying imperialism), reform seeks to punish the officer, pay the victims (and their lawyers), and give the community more empty promises from city leadership and the police department. Revolution seeks to punish the officer, punish the city leadership, pay the victims, and give the community a strong social/political/economic/cultural/spiritual/ vehicle designed specifically to ensure that things like this never happen again!

UC Irvine Bans Muslim Student Union, Defends Israeli Fascism.

Officials at the University of California, Irvine, have banned the Muslim Student Union for one year and placed the organization on disciplinary probation for an additional year. In February, members of the group disrupted a speech by Israeli ambassador Michael Oren.

In a related story, Democracy Now has posted video of images taken from the Israeli raid on the humanitarian flotilla in international waters off the coast of Gaza that the Zionist government doesn't want the world to see.

South Africa: Security guards fired on by police at World Cup.

From Reuters News Service...

South African police fired tear gas and rubber bullets at protesting security workers in the coastal city of Durban early on Monday in the first serious trouble at the World Cup.

The clash between police and stadium stewards protesting over pay came after the first match in the beautiful oceanside stadium when Germany put themselves among the favourites for the tournament with a devastating 4-0 rout of Australia. Defending champions Italy play for the first time on Monday, hounded by a wave of negative reporting that says they are too old and lack pace and imagination.

They meet an in-form Paraguay in Cape Town in the evening and few give the ageing side a chance of retaining their title. In Durban, riot police wearing armour and helmets chased stewards who had earlier been responsible for the security of 62,660 fans at the new futuristic Moses Mabhida stadium.

One woman hit by a rubber bullet lay outside the stadium for nearly an hour before an ambulance took her away.

Police blasted teargas as the disgruntled staff, bricks and rocks in hand, rampaged down a Durban highway. Scores of police coralled the protesters before they reached the city centre. After a tense standoff, the workers dispersed.

Organising committee spokesman Rich Mkhondo said in Johannesburg that authorities were talking with the stewards and their employers to resolve the wage dispute as soon as possible.

Although the violence was an embarrassment for organisers, who have spent billions of dollars and gone to great lengths to avoid trouble at the tournament, it was quickly controlled and seemed unlikely to take the shine off the happy buzz around Africa's first World Cup.

The tournament was preceded by several violent demonstrations, some involving minibus taxi drivers who felt excluded from the transport arrangements, and a series of township protests over lack of service delivery 16 years after the end of apartheid which were sometimes linked to resentment over massive World Cup spending.

I Would Pay To See Obama Beat Down The CEO of BP on Pay-per-View.

Alas, it is but a daydream...



Ironically, Obama may need a healthy dose of butt-whippery himself. Go here to see why.

Click here to learn the real, hidden history of BP.

Click here to see how these oil companies get down in the 3rd world.

Click here to read about how BP's "accident" will effect the Black community.

Click here to read about how BP's "accident" will effect Indigenous populations.

Editor of Salon.com Roasts Zionist Lapdog from MSNBC.

Meanwhile, leaked documents obtained by The Electronic Intifada show that the Palestinian Authority tried and failed to undermine Turkey's push for strong condemnation, and an independent UN Human Rights Council investigation into Israel's deadly attack on the Gaza Freedom Flotilla.

Coming Soon to DVD (I hope)..

Bush Administration Engaged In Human Experiementation.

Experiments in Torture: Medical Group Accuses CIA of Carrying Out Illegal Human Experimentation.

A new report from Physicians for Human Rights accuses the Bush administration of conducting illegal and unethical human experimentation and research on prisoners in CIA custody.

The report details how doctors, psychologists and other professionals monitored the effects of sleep deprivation, waterboarding and other so-called "enhanced interrogation" techniques on more than a dozen prisoners. It charges that CIA doctors and other medical personnel turned the prisoners into research subjects and collected data in order to study and refine those techniques, but did so under the guise of trying to protect the health of the detainees.  More here.

Who Are You Callin' "Illegal", Pilgrim!? (Part 3).

US Border Patrol Agent Shoots Dead Mexican Teen on Mexican Soil. From democracynow.org

A fourteen-year-old Mexican boy is being buried today, less than forty-eight hours after being shot by a US Border Patrol agent on Mexican soil.

Mexican officials say Sergio Adrian Hernandez Huereca was shot in the head. Graphic photos published in the Mexico press show the boy lying next to a pool of blood. Sergio and his friends were reportedly playing in a dry section of the Rio Grande and throwing rocks at border guards. The Mexican government has condemned the shooting, saying the use of firearms to respond to boys throwing rocks was a "disproportionate use of force." An eyewitness said Hernandez was clearly on the Mexican side of the border when he was shot.

Eyewitness: "Once the youngsters were on Mexican soil, an official—I don’t know if he was an immigration agent or a police officer—arrived on a bike, wearing a white shirt, a helmet and shorts, and he shot at the youngsters, at the whole group. Some ran in one direction, and others in another. This one teenage victim hid behind the wall. He looked out, and that’s when the teenager was shot." The shooting comes just weeks after President Obama announced a plan to send an extra $500 million and 1,200 National Guard troops to the border.

Two weeks ago, a Border Patrol officer in California shot and killed an undocumented Mexican immigrant with a stun gun. The thirty-two-year-old Anastacio Hernandez had lived in San Diego since he was fourteen and had five American-born children. Border Patrol agents claim he had resisted being deported.

Courts Rule Against Recording Police in U.S.

Due to recent internet videos of police brutality, at least three states have outlawed recording on-duty police officers. It doesn't matter if the encounter with police involves you, is necessary for your defense, or is in a public area, video recording on-duty police officers is now illegal.

The so-called legal basis for this rests on eavesdropping and wiretapping laws. In some states, all parties must consent to being recorded unless a TV news crew is doing the recording. Police never consent, and so the non-press camera operators can be arrested. Illinois, Massachusetts and Maryland are among the 12 states with all-party consent laws.

Massachusetts Chief Justice Margaret Marshall said, "Citizens have a particularly important role to play when the official conduct at issue is that of the police. Their role cannot be performed if citizens must fear criminal reprisals."

"The police are basing this claim on a ridiculous reading of the two-party consent surveillance law - requiring all parties to consent to being taped. I have written in the area of surveillance law and can say that this is utter nonsense," said Jonathan Turley, a professor and Legal scholar.

More here.

Obama's Relationship to the Trilateral Commision.

Barack Obama appointed eleven members of the Trilateral Commission to top-level and key positions in his administration within his first ten days in office. This represents a very narrow source of international leadership inside the Obama administration, with a core agenda that is not necessarily in support of workers anywhere.

Obama was groomed for the presidency by key members of the Trilateral Commission. Most notably, Zbigniew Brzezinski, author of National Security Council Memorandum #46 and co-founder of the Trilateral Commission (with David Rockefeller) in 1973, has been Obama’s principal foreign policy advisor.

According to official Trilateral Commission membership lists, there are only eighty-seven members from the United States (the other 337 members are from other countries). Thus, within two weeks of his inauguration, Obama’s appointments encompassed more than 12 percent of Commission’s entire US membership.

Read more at Project Censored.

The Problem is NOT Islam, the Problem is US!

For the few of us who know and understand who's who and what's what (and act to do something about it), we openly bear witness that:

1. All aspects of daily life in the first world, especially in amerikkka, are brought to us by way of the stolen resources and labor of workers in the 3rd world. The start-up capital for this country in particular has its roots in the exploration and exploitation of the "new world", the colonization of Indigenous lands, the trans-Atlantic slave trade, and use (and abuse) of mostly Mexican and Asian immigrant labor.

2. We, as workers, are entitled to all we produce. In the 1st world, particularly in amerikkka, we produce nothing; we largely provide services in the form of physical or mental labor. The tools we use and materials we use to create the products we sell, buy, or deliver come from the stolen resources and labor of workers in the 3rd world. We do this in order to make others rich and to earn a wage or commissions to sustain our own lives. If anything, we produce garbage that winds up off the coast of places like Somalia.

3. Under global capitalism, the very act(s) of sustaining our own lives actively destroys the lives of others elsewhere. The wealthy, their governments, their financial institutions, their educational/indoctrinational facilities, and their militaries (including volunteer right-wing militia and private mercenary armies) act as conduit for super-exploitation around the world, with oppression of so-called minorities in the heart of the U.$ empire, and repression of the few who dare to say or do anything about it.

As workers in the 1st world, we are the vehicle for corporations and their various government representitives to act upon decisions that increase their 'bottom line' while greatly decreasing the life expectancy of workers in the 3rd world (and ultimately, in the 1st world as well, albeit more slowly).

We are part of the problem. The majority of workers in the U.$. have more in common with their upper classes politically and culturally (and thus ideologically) than they have in common with workers in the rest of the world, particularly in the 3rd world.

Also, in amerikkka we have a mass media that is consolidated into 5 large corporations, which by material necessity must put forward the worldview of those who own and control it; a worldview that reinforces the idea that we, especially balck people and other oppressed nations in its borders, have more in common with their upper classes politically and culturally (and thus ideologically) than we have in common with workers in the rest of the world, particularly in the 3rd world.

So when radical, right-wing Islamic groups from the Middle East and Africa recruit youth from all over the world (including the U.$.), most in the U.$. act shocked/dismayed, and then quickly condemn both the recruit and the recruiter(s). In doing this, they fail to understand that among a majority in the Middle East and elsewhere, the U.$. (and its junior partner Israel) is viewed as an evil empire (and rightfully so). Nor do they even bother to ask why that is. The few who do ask such questions are accused of being "anti-semitic".

In the U.$., the broad masses are largely disinformed, national chauvanists, racists, sexists, homophobes, spook-worshippers, and ALL are low-level beneficiaries of the spoils of U.S. corporate-military expansionism in the world.

Most do not see it that way even as they themselves begin to experience the serious economic difficulty and widespread enviromental destruction their/our 3rd world and indigenous neighbors have known about in a very initimate way for many, many years. Most remain blind to this fact even as they organize to obtain health care, higher wages, job security, Immigrant rights, etc. All of these things are the additional spoils of imperialism's undeclared war of conquest on the rest of the world.

These types of demands only become revolutionary demands when those making such demands seek these benefits in the context of the greater goal of  permenently removing the corporations, their governments, their armies, and their supporters and apologists from power, and redistrubuting those benefits as part of territorial, material, and technical reparations to 3rd world workers and workers from oppressed nations within the U.$., Europe, and Australia.

A genuine revolutionary is one who knows they are one of the few who truly thinks globally, while acting locally; carefully separating theory and science from religion and politics in all decisions.

One example of separating theory and science from religion and politics is the statement made by Washington Press Corps Senior Reporter Helen Thomas in regards to the state of I$rael, a U.S.- backed irn-fisted, fascist, settler regime ruled through terror. Thomas, who is 90, was forced into early retirement just hours after making the statement. She has covered every U.S. president since John F. Kennedy.

Israel was created as a result of the theorhetical leadership of Theodore Herzl and the imposition of the Balfour Declaration of 1917 by Britian (after they had made a similar promise of land to the Palestinians) giving the land to the fledgling Zionist movement, based in the middle and upper classes of Jewish people. British officials agreed with the interpretation of the Zionists that a state would be established when a Jewish majority was achieved and suddenly strictly limited immigration briefly, which led to an escalation of fighting between Palestinians and Zionist guerillas. As more Jewish settlers came, especially after WW2, the Zionist forces began recruiting more members. Soon , they began driving Palestinians off their land and out of thier homes at gun point. Once the British left, it became an integral part of state policy.

The reason Israel continues to recieve U.S. support is due to the material class interests of the assorted special interest groups, from Zionist organizations like the American Israeli Political Action Committee (AIPAC), to Haliburton, to heavy equipment manufacturers like Catapilar, that lobby Congress and give generously to the campaigns of both demokkrat and republikkkan politicians. These politicians in turn vote yes on continuing military aid to Isarel in a conflict that is very one-sided in its numbers of casualties and total domination of one group (the Palestinians) by another (Israel). This aid is part of the 64% of U.S. income taxes that go towards U.S. wars and covert operations around the world.

So, now that the theory and science behind the reality has been extracted and laid bare, the question becomes for each individual: are you part of the solution or part of the problem?

[Hopefully] preventing terrorist acts by doing our part to fight imperialism internationally and fascism domestically can be viewed as concretely within our material interests as 1st world workers. This means fighting the increasing militarization and surveillance of both oppressed communities and mall communities in the 1st world, and confronting amerikkkan-style fascists within the Tea Party, the anti-immigrant movement, and local law enforcement (as well as the liberal elements, including many 'dark faces in high places', who enable the fascists to operate locally without serious challenge or penalty).

The fear-based and oppressive measures being taken by the Obama administration to stop terrorism (and mimicked in smaller-scale by local law enforcement against blacks, indigenous people, suspected 'illegal immigrants', etc) do not address the root causes that motivate armed acts: exploitation and U.S. involvement in those regions (along with various compliant puppet regimes) which make the symptoms of this exploitation (poverty, disease, ethnic/tribal rivalry, genocide, gender oppression/rape, etc) even worse. This is what makes people desperate enough to make the ultimate sacrifice (prison or death).

Puerto Rico Democracy Act of 2010: The Devil Is In The Details.

As I have stated before, real self-determination is impossible as long as imperialism continues to exist.

Below is a prime example of phony self-determination/independence. Puerto Rico has a long history of struggling for national liberation and self determination, so what is being proposed below may seem to the uniniated as a good deal. Well, it is...if you're the United $tates (and are "negotiating" from a position of armed might). As it stands, it's going nowhere, and if there was real movement on it in Congress, Puerto Rico would be a U.S. puppet state at best, the 51st state at worst.

The 2009 bill (H.R. 2499), was introduced in the United States House of Representatives on May 19, 2009 by Pedro Pierluisi (D-Puerto Rico).

The bill would provide for a referendum giving Puerto Ricans the choice between the options of retaining their present political status, or choosing a new status.If the former option were to win, the referendum would have been held again every 8 years. If the latter option were to win, a separate referendum would be held where Puerto Ricans would have been given the option of being admitted as a US State "on equal footing with the other states," or becoming a "sovereign nation, either fully independent from or in free association with the United States." The bill enjoys bi-partisan support in the House of Representatives, with 182 co-sponsors.

Key issues before Congress.
The key issues of this bill that are considered "debatable" are:

Plebiscite vs. Constitutional convention.
Participation of Puerto Rican population not living in the Island.
Exact meaning of "Sovereignty in association with the United States".

Plebiscite vs. Constitutional convention.

H.R. 2499 proposes to take the question directly to voters in at least one plebiscite.

For those who believe that direct democracy is the best method for readdressing the status issue, the plebiscite approach could be preferred. Plebiscites, however, necessarily include pre-determined questions and answers (i.e., the options listed on the ballot).

Other proposals (e.g., H.R. 110-1230) suggest a more grassroots-oriented approach involving constitutional conventions without preconditions on the issues to be considered or options to be proposed. The plebiscite approach is perhaps a more efficient way to ascertain the electorate’s views on specific questions, but plebiscites do not allow for modification of the questions presented. By contrast, although conventions have the potential advantage of allowing for wide-ranging debate, they rely on delegates to represent popular will and might or might not be able to reach a politically viable status choice.

Participation of Puerto Ricans not living in Puerto Rico.
Under H.R. 2499, Puerto Ricans living on the Island and U.S. citizens born in Puerto Rico — but not necessarily living there today — would be eligible to participate in the plebiscites. This approach is substantially similar to the one proposed in H.R. 900 in the 110th Congress. Allowing non-residents to vote outside their current jurisdiction of residence is not typical in elections, but this aspect of the proposal would provide an opportunity for the substantial Puerto Rican population living elsewhere (assuming they were born in Puerto Rico and remain U.S. citizens) to participate in what many view as an essential Puerto Rican political debate. Proposals to allow those living outside Puerto Rico to vote in plebiscites do not appear to have generated substantial controversy, according to a Congressional Research Service analysis.

Meaning of "Sovereignty in association with the United States".
The first and third status options in the second plebiscite — independence and statehood, respectively — are straightforward. The second option, however, uses terminology that is not widely recognized in discussions of political status. It proposes: "Sovereignty in Association with the United States: Puerto Rico and the United States should form a political association between sovereign nations that will not be subject to the Territorial Clause of the United States Constitution."

“Sovereignty in association with the United States” is not a term of art typically used in status discussions. The proposed ballot language suggests that Puerto Rico would become an independent nation but maintain a close relationship with the U.S., perhaps akin to a concept known as “free association.” Free association generally implies negotiated legal, economic, or defense ties between two independent nations. Three former territories — the Republic of the Marshall Islands, the Federated States of Micronesia, and the Republic of Palau — are currently engaged in free association with the United States. (Following World War II, the U.S. administered all three of those territories on behalf of the United Nations, although they were never U.S. territories per se but United Nations Trust Territories.) Based on current compact agreements with the Republic of the Marshall Islands, the Federated States of Micronesia, and the Republic of Palau, the U.S. provides those countries with defense protection and various forms of economic aid. If the “sovereign association” language proposed in H.R. 2499 is viewed as something akin to free association, the future relationship between the U.S. and an independent Puerto Rico could resemble the current relationships between the United States and the Marshall Islands, Micronesia, and Palau.

“Sovereignty in association with the United States” might also be interpreted to mean so-called “enhanced commonwealth,” an option that is not a particular territorial status or official term, but which has been a component of previous popular status debates. Generally, “enhanced commonwealth” suggests a relationship that is, essentially, something between territorial status and statehood. Recent presidential task force reports have concluded that such an option would be unconstitutional because land under United States sovereignty must either be a State or a territory, but some in Puerto Rico maintain that such a political status could be negotiated between Puerto Rico and the U.S. These are two possible interpretations of option #2 in the second plebiscite and, in the absence of additional information, the precise meaning of the option is unclear.

Hearing
On June 24, 2009, the U.S. House Committee on Natural Resources held a hearing on the bill with the participation of the Governor of Puerto Rico, and others like Jennifer Gonzalez, speaker of the Puerto Rico House of Representatives, Thomas Rivera Schatz, president of the Senate of Puerto Rico.

Committee assignments.

Referred to the United States House Committee on Natural Resources.
Committee vote.
The House Natural Resources Committee, led by Chairman Nick J. Rahall (D-WV), approved the bill and referred it to the United States House of Representatives floor with a 30 in favor 8 against vote.

House Vote
On April 22, 2010, Resident Commissioner Pedro Pierluisi announced that H.R. 2499 would be voted on in the week of April 26th, 2010.  On April 29th, 2010, H.R. 2499 passed the House with a 223-169 vote.

Two amendments were added to H.R. 2499. The first, proposed by Virginia Foxx, stated that it "would allow supporters of the commonwealth status quo the option of voting their preference during the second stage of the plebiscite." The second, proposed by Dan Burton, stated that it "would retain the requirement that all ballots used for authorized plebiscites include the full content of the ballot printed in English" —a consideration already contemplated in Puerto Rican electoral law. It would also require the Puerto Rico State Elections Commission to inform voters in all authorized plebiscites that if Puerto Rico retains its current status or is admitted as a State: (1) any official language requirements of the Federal Government shall apply to Puerto Rico to the same extent as throughout the United States (regardless of the fact that English is already an official language in Puerto Rico); and (2) it is the Sense of Congress that the teaching of English be promoted in Puerto Rico in order for English-language proficiency to be achieved"; regardless of the fact that English is already taught in all grades from primary school, middle school, and high school, as well as in higher education.

Senate Hearing
Immediately following House passage, H.R. 2499 was sent to the U.S. Senate, where it was given two formal readings and referred to the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. A hearing was held on H.R. 2499 on May 19, 2010, for the purpose of gathering testimony on the bill. Among those offering testimony was Resident Commissioner of Puerto Rico, Pedro Pierluisi; Governor of Puerto Rico, Luis Fortuño; President of the Popular Democratic Party of Puerto Rico, Héctor Ferrer; and President of the Puerto Rican Independence Party, Rubén Berríos.

Further proceedings have not yet been scheduled on the bill.

Full article here.

Background info on the Puerto Rican Independence Movement in the past, and its status in the present.

Also, check out what's coming soon to theatres...

Are Kids Racist? A Study Says "Yes".

If you think that children are too young to have racial biases — that racism is a problem that affects just adults — think again. Psychologists say that children as young as three have attitudes (both positive and negative) about different racial groups. That was a finding reinforced by the recent study commissioned by news giant CNN, a study that shocked many and moved parents to tears.


The pilot study, which involved 133 children and was designed by child development researcher and University of Chicago professor Margaret Beale Spencer, found that "white children have an overwhelming bias toward white, and that black children also have a bias toward white but not nearly as strong as the bias shown by the white children."

More here.

The True Cost of Drilling For Oil: Destruction of the Planet for All for the Profit of a Relative Few.

This raw truth I'm about to share with you is the reason that Josh Coates of the Wilderness Society and Aboriginal activist Neil McKenzie were arrested at the recent Chevron shareholders meeting in Houston, TX.

Mariana Jimenez is a 70-year-old grandmother of 27, mother of 7, and a campesina who settled in Ecuador's rainforest in 1971 when Texaco first started drilling in the Amazon region. She said that she represented 30,000 people displaced by oil operations in her country. She told about ponds turning black with oil, black smoke in her village and illness. I understood her even in Spanish because her anguish and determination were equally strong when delivering her message to Chevron to clean up. She lost her sister to cancer, two infant nephews to poisoned water and even her pigs have died.


Debra Barros Fince also shook the room with her description of the hardships and oppression she and other women face in Colombia due to an oil pipeline. In April 2004, her community was attacked by paramilitary forces and permanently removed. She is the Director of Wayuumunsurat and a lawyer representing the Wayuu people.

More here. Even more here. Also, read about BPs poisoning, censorship of workers displaced by the oil spill, and the arrest of Gulf Coast residents by the U.S. Coast Guard under orders from BP.