Monthly Archives: December 2004

Onward Christian Soldier! Nothing Sells Like Crusade

The following speech act represents very well what counts for cool in the USA today:

“To The People Of Islam:
Just think: If we’d invaded your countries, killed your leaders and converted you to Christianity
YOU’D ALL BE OPENING CHRISTMAS PRESENTS RIGHT ABOUT NOW!
Merry Christmas”
Pasted from the Ann Coulter Homepage
anncoulter.com
Dec. 30, 2004

NOTE: Will the State Dept. consider this “inciting.” Designate anncoulter.com a terrorist org. Will Fox, etal. refuse to broadcast her opinions via satellite. Or will the double standard apply: Crusade sells, jihad incites. (No question marks needed for rhetorical questions.) –gm

More Research on Al-Manar

From a European reader who wishes to remain anonymous:

Just spent a few boring hours going through the forum of the newspaper “Le Monde” to figure out what was the fuss about Al-Manar TV, not pretty reading, it seems like the anti-anti-Israel is really gaining ground, but anti-Israel (or anti-Zionism or plain anti-colonialism) are also closing the gap on the cultural (or for the believer racial) issue, finally claiming their Semitic identity.

Seems that the protocol of Zion are the problem indeed (since it is forbidden to publish them /sell them and read them it is difficult to figure out if they are only ridiculous or actually a problem) but one book should definitely be taken out and burnt: “The old testament” inciting hatred against most of the non-Jewish middle east, including, in the children book version against Egyptian, etc…… and promoting genocide (of the Amalek), philistines (a minister of the church reminded us that they still exist today and are called Palestinians!).

Other interesting facts collected reading “Le Monde”: 3 separate incident of anti-Jewish acts actually proven not to have been such, first one arson of a Jewish centre for which some Arab kids were actually sent to prison was in fact a accidental fire (caused with cigarettes by the security guard), the infamous non Jewish girl, not attacked by anti-Semite and lastly another arson of a Jewish building committed by a (Jewish) employee, but initially blamed by the entire political class and Israeli establishment, proof that Jews are not safe in France (who is safe or not safe anywhere?).

Occasionally “Le Monde” will remind us that most anti-Muslim act (including police brutality versus teen-ager and act committed by Jewish “terrorist” organization BETAR) are not worth publishing because they are too common, maybe one remembers in “tolerant” Holland the murder of a Muslim family (children rescued by a neighbour) by another nice European. Guess Michael Neumann published a few articles in Counterpunch along that line.

Normally I suspect that censorship is stupid and counterproductive but coupled with the right type of propaganda it is really frightening. I remember last year, the censorship of Al- Jazeera (still not allowed in Irak) and taking down Yellowtimes.org for showing pictures of dead Irakis and a link to Al- Jazeera to get more information. And more recently taking down Indymedia (not very clear where it came from and why exactly).

Sad thing is most are not even aware of the existence of Al-Manar TV and they just have in the periphery of their mind the idea that it is a terrorist organization successfully brought down by joint US_FRANCE operation, for others at least we can ask question about what is going on and may be why some people in Lebanon do not have our vision of Israel/garden of Eden, we can even wonder why exactly we have this ridiculous crusade against Islam (in the name of feminism???) we might even try to discover what Islam is about and why not that there are plenty of other religions practiced on this planet (the one with the Christmas tree, by the way, is definitely not christian) including centuries old Chinese atheism!

Happy New Year

PS: Sorry I could not resist writing all this after reading your second piece on the subject!

Ramsey Muniz Speaks: X-Mas vs. the Power Fools

By Greg Moses

Texas Civil Rights Review

Winter takes the color away, but people put up lights. In my own cul de sac of the global village, the light show this year is fantastic. We have colors like I’ve never seen, electric deer that raise their lit-up heads, candy canes, icicles, y mas santas. At night the frozen ground glows in magical grace. With hope, we have electrified a dying world.

Where does this spirit come from? If you think it comes from Jesus, I get it. If you prefer a pagan yule tide, I get that, too. My own favorite story for this season of lights belongs to Africa, where the Nile River once rose and fell. By x-mas time each year, the water had fallen low, but the low ebb of the river was matched by the high hope of Horus, the baby born of Holy Mother Isis and Green God Osiris, each and every December 25.

Whether the water is low or the snow is high, x-mas in El Norte finds us asking metaphysical questions. Will we believe in the returns of Spring? Stake our cheer on nothing but the future? Or feed our fear on everything we see around us?

For Ramsey Muniz on x-mas, it is neither low water nor high snow. For Ramsey, and so many with him, it is thick walls that must be hoped through. If he had to do it all over again, says Ramsey in an interview with Rolando Garza, he’d rather not run for Governor of Texas. He’d rather serve as minister of cultura for his beloved party, La Raza Unida.

Cultura. Familia. And most important, says Ramsey, is Love.

“Let us celebrate the birth of this historic spiritual man whose destiny was to change the entire world,” writes Ramsey from Leavenworth prison. The email comes from his esposa, Irma. “It is not about a white Christmas. It is about accepting the truth of faith, charity, love, forgiveness, and spirituality. We are in the midst of a world spiritual evolution and those who open their hearts with patience and understanding will witness the resurrection of spiritual power which is greater than any other power in the world.”

Although he says nothing directly about her in this message, Ramsey’s voice reminds me who else is looking out. The Lady of Guadalupe, her resplendent image watching from the East. She is mother to all the children of Aztlan, and it would take a soul made from dry husk not to thank her that you live at this glowing cul de sac while Ramsey Muniz is locked up in Leavenworth.

If the best things come from prison, as Ramsey says, then in what way do the best things exist and why do the power-fools of this earth lock the best things away? In solitary confinement, Ramsey encountered a vision of Ricardo Flores Magón, and, having nothing more urgent at hand, they talked. Was it the same cell where Magon had been beaten to death in 1922, four years into his fourth imprisonment? Magon had coined the slogan, “Land and Liberty.” In his journal, Regeneration, he reminded Mechika readers that “emancipation of the workers must be the work of the workers themselves.”

At the Irish anarchist website, struggle, they say “No Gods, No Masters.” If you think the spirit belongs to this slogan, I get that, too. On x-mas day, the point is never to be caught without the spirit that takes you through the low water times.

Rule by Double Standard?: Readers Reply

Ordonnance du juge des référés et communiqué de presse du 13 décembre 2004. Président du Conseil supérieur de l’audiovisuel. La société Eutelsat sommée de faire cesser la diffusion de la chaîne de télévision Al Manar sous 48 heures.

-My reading of this is that Al Manar was indeed peddling hate and is therefore guilty as charged. There are plenty of noble causes to be defended without anybody wasting much time on these people!

-I recall the time when Salman Rushdie published his hate-filled inflammatory book about Islam, how the entire West was sermonising the Muslims on the great virtues of free speech and tolerance. I don’t know why those damn Iranian Mullas had to issue a fatwa; the CIA doesn’t issue fatwas before they act.

We were told that you can’t have laws which protect you from being offended. The only problem we are clearly facing now is, that you can call the Muslims: terrorists, murderers, fascists, thugs, etc., but you just can’t use any of those words to describe the Jews, because we are told that would be anti-semitic.

Silencing a newsnetwork is like murder, because you silence the voices. Al Manar was in fact murdered in “remove your headscarf, girl” France and “freedom-loving” U.S. My Canadian friend while decrying the fact that an Arab would avenge the assassination of Sheikh Yasin in faraway Montreal, conveniently forgets that the Israeli Government and Sharon have openly declared that they have a right to strike anywhere in the world to protect Jews.

-There is absolutely no link between the murder of Theo Van Gogh and the French court decision, or indeed, for that matter, between Van Gogh and ANYTHING else! All this talk about the Van Gogh murder having had an effect in Europe is crap which I have found to my amazement in some US websites and I can only assume that it is neocon war propaganda designed to hoodwink Americans into believing that there is a wave of anti-Muslim feeling sweeping Europe and to conceal the fact (which some mainstream US media outlets are starting to notice) that hostility to Bush’s war is massive over here (opposition running at 75 – 85%!). Clearly, making Europeans hate Muslims would be very convenient, but it isn’t happening!

….Having been a spindoctor myself, my best guess is that some neocon source fed disinformation to a few pliable outlets, who put it out, and now the whole pack is just repeating each other….

Last point: One of the little oddities of this is that the right foot doesn’t seem to know what the even more right foot is doing! One part of the neocon propaganda machine is proclaiming that Islam is incompatible with Western (sic!) civilization and that Europe’s Muslims are at war with their fellow citizens, while another is trying to force the (largely hostile!) EU to admit Turkey and, indeed force the (moderately Islamist) Turkish government to pursue an application it said it was against during the election campaign! They can’t have it both ways! If the Van Gogh spin is true, then Turkey should not be admitted to the EU and if Turkey should be admitted to the EU, then the Van Gogh story is a lie!

-Did I gather correctly from the article that public speech which might incite terrorism is illegal according to the Patriot Act?

It occurred to me that if speech _and_ actions which incite terrorism are illegal under that act then the Federal Government’s terrorism inciting wars in the Near East must also be illegal. Seems like an open and shut case…

-I too live in Canada and I regard the laws against disseminating “hateful” opinions as dangerous infringements of the right of free _expression. The thick end of this sort of wedge can be seen in the attack on Fallujah’s hospital as a source of “incitement.” The ridiculous conditions of the CRTC designed to keep Al Jazeera off Canada’s satellite and cable TV choices and so on…Only a few days ago a trade unionist was imprisoned in Jordan for explaining to a public meeting the role of the United States in his country. His crime: “incitement.” In truth these laws are designed to appease unthinking ‘liberals’ while immensely gratifying those who believe that all dissenting opinion is dangerous. There is not the slightest attempt to pretend that balance is aimed at: is it not incitement to post large signs outside Community Centres proclaiming that Palestine belongs to the club members forever? It makes my blood boil but I grit my teeth and walk by. The wonder is not that there are attacks on targets openly identifying with Israel but that there are so very few of them. One thing is certain if the _expression of opinion becomes dangerous those who hew to “unlawful” opinions will engage in propaganda involving deeds.

It is no accident that the dangers of abridging freedom of speech are well understood in the South where, it might be argued, Israel went to find much of its current policy towards Arabs and some of its ideology too. But not even Mississippi ever thought of Jim Crow roads bypassing Arab villages and reserved for the herrenvolk.

When No Law Means No Law: Al-Manar Revisited

CounterPunch

The following Q&A with CounterPunch readers (who are opinionated and engaging readers) leads to two conclusions: (1) the State Department’s letter of justification for adding Al-Manar to the Terrorist Exclusion List (TEL) should be immediately de-classified and published in the Federal Register; (2) the Patriot Act should be amended to require the de-classification and publication of all reasons for TEL designations that are based on public acts of speech.

Question: Is there some reason why your article entitled “The New Zeus on the Block” on counterpunch.org contained every relevant fact about the issue surrounding Al-Manar, with the exception of the actual content that is responsible for banning the network? Clearly the freedom of speech does not protect one’s right to disseminate lies and propaganda?

Answer: The answer is classified. According to the Patriot Act, the State Dept. is required to distribute a “classified” letter of justification one week prior to designating a group as a “terrorist organization.” Then, on the day that the designation takes effect, a notice appears in the Federal Register. The Dec. 17 notice in the Federal Register about Al-Manar doesn’t (and doesn’t have to) set forth any of the “classified” reasons. We’ll get back to the USA directly, but first a word about France.

The French ruling on Al-Manar is interesting, because it comes through an administrative court known as Council of State. Reports about the Council’s ruling on Al-Manar focus on the following incident in which a commentator reportedly purveyed Zionist conspiracy theories: “The commentator, who was defined as an expert on the ‘Zionist entity’, described at length how Israel has been trying to spread dangerous diseases, including AIDS, in the Arab world.”

So far, I have not seen very much information about the French court’s proceedings or about the legal traditions that inform French law. For instance, what if I further explore on this page the pros and cons of the Al-Manar commentary about the spread of AIDS? Could this page be banned in France? Or, what is being talked about when the commentator speaks about a Zionist entity? Is this how Al-Manar refers to the state of Israel? Under French law can states claim protection against defamation? There is a lot I don’t know about French law.

Returning to principles of the First Amendment in the USA, I happen to believe that a world without Zionist conspiracy theories would be a better world. But a world where Zionist conspiracy theorists are suppressed by state agents for “inciting terror” is a chilling one. As reported in the media so far, Constitutional justifications for restricting Al-Manar’s freedom of speech have yet to be publicly set forth. If the State Dept. is acting in a Constitutional manner, I would expect stringent standards regarding speech that “incites”.

The Al-Manar ruling appears to designate a “terrorist organization” based solely on public acts of speech. As far as I know, this is new.

In neither the State Dept. briefing of Dec. 17, nor in news reports about the terrorist designation in the USA, were examples of content given that would qualify for “inciting terrorism.” As for what the First Amendment protects, indeed lies and propaganda are broadly tolerated, unless they libel or incite. As far as I know, “libel” does not pertain to states. As for “incite,” the ghost of Abbie Hoffman is here to warn you, that’s a very serious word.

Until a fuller account is given for the Al-Manar designation, we have good reasons to be seriously concerned, because the treatment of Al-Manar is a very practical test of the rights to free speech that will be respected under the jurisdiction of the USA. The First Amendment bans administrative censorship of speech carried out under laws made by Congress: “Congress shall make no law.” If the Al-Manar ruling is to be defended as a justifiable exception to First Amendment protections, the burden of proof must be quite tall. And given the legal precedents that may be set by the Al-Manar example, I believe citizens of the USA are entitled to the gravest procedural courtesies. Instead, I perceive more power, more arrogance, and more state control operating under cover of “anti-terrorism” legislation.

While I may ring with the popular chime that state intelligence about certain acts of terrorism has some basis to be counted as “classified” (for purpose of protecting sources, etc) what can be the basis for classifying “acts of speech” that have been previously broadcast? What possible sources could the State Department be protecting? The Al-Manar file should be immediately de-classified and published in the Federal Register.

In addition, the case of Al-Manar indicates that the Patriot Act should be amended. Whenever a terrorist designation is made on the basis of public acts of speech, the State Department should be compelled to divulge its evidence.

CounterPunch reader writes back: I live in Canada where thankfully they are not carrying this satellite station, and we have quite stringent hate-crime laws which I feel comfortable would keep this garbage off our televisions. I do not disagree with you when you state that using terrorism legislation to punish this broadcaster is not the most logical way to do it, because technically this is not terrorism in and of itself, although I can see how it could very easily incite terrorist actions. If you would like an example I will point out to you the recent arson attack in Montreal Quebec; an 18 year old Montreal man of Arab origin set fire to a Jewish Day School and Library. He left a note at the scene claiming that the attack on the school was punishment for Israel’s assasination of Sheik Yassin. Clearly this is terrorism, and it is almost certainly incited by one-sided news reports from channels such as Al-Manar. Channels that deliberately refuse to show that there are two sides to a conflict and depict only one villain.

What I’m curious to know however, is how you can criticize a government for doing everything it can to get this poison off the airwaves. Freedom to express one’s opinion is one thing, but the lies this station spreads to further it’s political objectives are dangerous. They are not lies which espouse political action, but rather racial hatred. In your article you discussed the removal of the television station and the reasons why it was wrong, but you never discussed the reasons why the station was pulled and whether they had merit. I didn’t find it a very balanced report.

And I Reply That: Regarding structures of law that discourage hate speech or war propaganda, I am ready to listen. But this is not the same thing as asking a state (or an empire for that matter) to do everything in its power. As Mary Ratcliff has pointed out in a Dec. 15 post at The American Street, the Bush administration is using the charge of “propaganda” to prosecute some parties, while it openly organizes “propaganda” campaigns at home and abroad. Based on what I know so far, it appears to me, and to the next CounterPunch reader, that the Al-Manar ruling exhibits a blatant double standard for what counts in the Bush adminsitration as “inciting” and what does not:

Another Reader Writes: Started reading your great piece on Al-Manar and it reminds me of the same BS that the Govt used for deporting formerly Cat Stevens and the so called charity group! Notice, if it’s white, right wing who baits people to do their dirty work as Mr. Byrd, Matthew Shepard, Dr. Slepian et al who cares?! Actually am sure the Triumpherate in the White House and their foot soldiers are celebrating as in a touchdown!?

YOUR articles are for contemplating and learning too!!

Reply: Dear Reader, I love the way you spell Triumpherate. Indeed who or what can this White House not conquer once it sets out? As you suggest, it might even have effects against racism, homophobia, or misogyny in America if it took such things to be any of its business. Now, returning to the example of terrorist crime and the things that incite it:

PS: In a freebie web offering at Stratfor.Com, George Friedman says in a Nov. 17 webinar that Europe has been traumatized by the Amsterdam street killing of filmmaker Theo Van Gogh (great grand nephew to the painter). The killing has been attributed to a man dressed in a traditional Moroccan jalaba, who was allegedly motivated to retaliate against the filmmaker’s work on violence against women in Islamic societies. The example sounds like the one given by my Canadian correspondent above, with important differences. In the Canadian example, we have terrorism that kills anonymous members of a perceived enemy population in retaliation for state actions. In the Amsterdam example, the retaliation is directed against a specific person for acts of expression.

The killing of Van Gogh, says Friedman, has provoked in European civil society a more sympathetic (or less hostile) attitude toward Bush’s war on terrorism. This climate may have something to do with the timing of the French ruling against Al-Manar. If events are linked in this way, then a killing that retaliates against expression is answered by collective, state censorship. The chill we feel in the aftermath of Van Gogh’s murder is answered by the power to chill.

In the Canadian example, my correspondent says that representations of the Israeli assassination of Sheikh Yassin incited the terror, not the assassination itself. It was probably one-sided news reports about the killing, not the killing itself, that incited the terrorist response, says the reader. Therefore, we should shut down the alleged sources of one-sided news reports. This is another discussion altogether. What seems clear however is that nobody has asserted a carefully traced link between Al-Manar’s reporting and some specific act of terror.

My Canadian correspondent has led me to sources that say Al-Manar has broadcast programming based upon the infamous Protocols of Zion. On this point, I take at face value claims that assert the Protocols to be anti-semitic. What’s decisive, however, is that the number one Google source for the Protocols is listed at an Australian domain known as biblebelievers. Again, if anyone has ideas about how to lawfully reduce anti-semitic expression, I’m listening. But if anti-semitic expression is enough to make one guilty of inciting terrorism, then we have quite a legal reformation ahead of us. If there is to be such a legal reformation in the West, then I say let the biblebelievers go first.

Meanwhile, says Friedman, French President Jacques Chirac, for one, wants to restore a working relationship with Bush during the second term, because there are things Bush can give him, such as trade concessions and support in West Africa.

I take note of Friedman’s claims as I think about the synchronized timing of French and American responses to Al-Manar. But I also consider that something profound is taking shape in the nexis of profit and power that involves communication companies such as France Telecom, Eutelsat, and Intelsat, who have been sublimely compliant. Thinking about transatlantic satellites is like thinking about opium in Afghanistan, or oil in Iraq. State power never overlooks such things. As Alex Jones has helpfully noted in his daily news clips this week, there was a French spy satellite launched over the weekend. “Helios 2A is said to be able to spot objects as small as a textbook anywhere on Earth. Its infrared sensors will allow France’s military to gather information at night from space for the first time.” Did the Bush team need some snapshots? Inquiring minds have a right to ask.

Finally, it must be said. The hammer came down on Al-Manar on the Friday before Christmas week. This ensures that nobody but receptionists will be working full time for many weeks to come.

And this just in: CounterPunch reader asks, “Time to dust off the shortwave radios?”

Space Capital News

peaceinspace.org

Microcom Systems (where to begin)

Launch Schedule

ArabSat About

Eutelsat About

France Telecom Organization

  • Globecast (France Telecom subsidiary: not a satellite owner, but a service provider)

Inmarsat About

Intelsat About

Helios About

French Spy Satellite Launched

Helios 2A is said to be able to spot objects as small as a textbook anywhere on Earth. Its infrared sensors will allow France’s military to gather information at night from space for the first time.

Sample Satellite Biz Report: (6 December 2004) The DirecTV Group, Inc. and SkyTerra Communications, Inc., an affiliate of Apollo Management, L.P., a New York-based private equity firm, have announced an agreement in which SkyTerra will acquire 50 percent of a new entity that will contain the assets of Hughes Network Systems (HNS) in a transaction that values HNS at approximately US$ 360 million. HNS, which is based in Germantown, Maryland, is a wholly owned subsidiary of The DirecTV Group.

As part of the transaction, the new venture will own the SpaceWay 3 satellite, an advanced Ka band broadband communications satellite that is currently being manufactured by Boeing. Also included in the new HNS are the complete ground infrastructure and user terminals that were developed to implement this advanced communications network. The DirecTV Group will retain the other two SpaceWay satellites, which are scheduled for launch next year, to support DirecTV’s direct-to-home satellite broadcasting business. SpaceWay 3 is currently expected to launch in early 2007. Upon its successful launch into orbit, SpaceWay 3 is expected to enable the new HNS to provide North American customers with a next generation suite of high-speed, two-way data communications utilising the advanced features of the SpaceWay platform and will allow for a more cost-effective service than is currently available.

Admin Details

Designation of Terrorist Org in Federal Register

[Federal Register: December 17, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 242)]
[Notices]
[Page 75587]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr17de04-120]

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice 4935]

Determination Pursuant to Section 212(a)(3)(B)(vi)(II) of the
Immigration and Nationality Act, as Amended, Placing Al Manar on the
Terrorist Exclusion List

Acting under the authority of Section 212(a)(3)(B)(vi)(II) of the
Immigration and Nationality Act, as amended (INA), 8 U.S.C.
1182(a)(3)(B)(vi)(II), and in consultation with the Attorney General
and the Secretary of Homeland Security, the Secretary of State has
concluded that Al Manar is a “terrorist organization” within the
meaning of that section of the INA.
This notice shall be published in the Federal Register, and is
effective upon publication.

Dated: December 15, 2004.
William P. Pope,
Coordinator for Counterterrorism, Acting, Department of State.
[FR Doc. 04-27801 Filed 12-16-04; 5:00 pm]

BILLING CODE 4710-10-P

New Zeus on the Block

[Late Edition]

Unplugging Al-Manar TV

By Greg Moses

CounterPunch Expanded Version (Dec. 21)

Alternet Concise Version (Dec. 20)

They are not even a dozen strong, but the Islamic activists (mostly Shiah women) who posted recent statements at Houston IndyMedia say they are backed by principles found in the First Amendment to the Constitution of the USA, Article 19 of United Nations Declarations of Human Rights, and Islamic principles, “which call for the pursuit of knowledge throughout one’s life and the dissemination of knowledge.”

At the time that Houston activists posted their first statement Friday morning, the State Department had not yet announced its decision to place Hezbollah-backed television station Al-Manar on the terrorist watch list. But within hours, the decision had been announced and the Intelsat satellite company had stopped relaying the station’s signal to USA audiences. The year-old group known as Texas Muslims for Islamic Change (TXM4C) said on Friday that it was “dismayed at this development and considers it to be part of the American government’s assault on Constitutional rights.” On Sunday the group countered claims by the State Department that Al-Manar incited terrorist violence.

“On the other hand, TXM4C sees this as yet another step in America’s progression away from democratic values. To date, it has not seen properly documented evidence brought forward that would support the State Department’s claims that Al Manar ‘preaches violence and hatred’ or ‘serves to incite … terrorist violence’. Rather, this Houston-based group of Muslim thinkers and activists feels that the loss of access to Al-Manar will remove from the American people a valuable source of information about the ongoing conflicts in the Middle East, governmental policies of countries around the world, and especially Islam.”

Meanwhile, a Washington-based civil rights group on Friday pointed to a Cornell University study showing that 44 percent of Americans believe that the government of the USA should curtail the civil liberties of Muslims. The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) called on public officials to address rising levels of Islamophobia.

A State Department spokesperson on Friday claimed that action against Al-Manar was justified because “terrorist activity” by Hezbollah was linked to “incitement” by Al-Manar television.

“The designation is to put Al-Manar Television on the terrorist exclusion list because of its incitement of terrorist activity. Our law says that the organization can be put on the list if it commits or incites to commit any terrorist activity, and that is what we’ve found them,” said Richard Boucher.

The terrorist exclusion list (TEL), authorized by Section 411 of the USA PATRIOT Act of 2001, authorizes the exclusion and deportation of aliens who support terrorist organizations. According to the State Department’s website, TEL also deters donation or contributions to named organizations, heightens public awareness and knowledge of terrorist organizations, alerts other governments to U.S. concerns about organizations engaged in terrorist activities, and stigmatizes and isolates designated terrorist organizations. Journalists at the State Department briefing on Friday were curious about the effects that such principles might have on Americans at home.

“What about any Americans in this country that provide programming or things like that? Are — ,” begins a follow-up question. The spokesperson interrupted, insisting that, for the time being, we should remain focused on foreigners, not legal principles. It would have been interesting to hear the complete question in order to determine if the reporter was asking about Americans who provide pro-Arab programming such as provided by Al-Manar or anti-Arab programming such as provided by Fox, Viacom, or MSNBC.

“I don’t know what the legal implications might be,” said the spokesperson who had earlier begged journalists to bear with him while he looked up the exact State Department language concerning the Al-Manar decision: “Let me look it up because it is a legal matter and I want to get it right.”

“I think this list, in particular, only has to do with the exclusion of aliens from the United States,” said the spokesperon. “So whether there are other designations that might imply something for Americans, I don’t know. I’m not aware of any restrictions at this point on finance or things like that.”

As news reports have pointed out, “the US Treasury could further decide to include Al-Manar on its terrorism blacklist, freezing its assets and making any financial dealings with the channel illegal.”

What about Americans who help to distribute Al-Manar in the USA?

“I’ve given you the criteria,” said the spokesperson. “We will be examining people and activities to see whether they fall within that criteria.”

Does the move by the State Department reflect undue influence by Israeli lobbyists? The spokesperson denied the allegation by spinning Hezbollah’s terror as an interference in Palestinian affairs. Palestinians, said the spokesperson, were trying to win peace by peaceful means.

“It’s not a question of freedom of speech. It’s a question of incitement to violence, and we don’t see why, here or anywhere else, a terrorist organization should be allowed to spread its hatred and incitement through the television airwaves.”

International legal scholar Francis Boyle says Arab advocates should sue Fox News for “inciting terroism.” Via email, Boyle says he just gave an interview to that effect while visiting Dubai.

In Beirut, meanwhile, Al-Jazeera reports that 50 cable operators have cut signals from French TV5 in retaliation for France’s decision last week to suspend Al-Manar’s signal.

“Al-Manar was dropped from French-based Eutelsat’s broadcasts on Tuesday after a Paris court found it guilty of being anti-Jewish,” reports Al-Jazeera. “On Friday, French-owned satellite carrier GlobeCast removed al-Manar from US airwaves after the state department announced it had added the channel to its list of suspected terrorist organisations that face sanctions.”

An analysis of the French initiative by New York Sun staff writer Eli Lake gives credit to former Soviet dissident Natan Sharansky for leading the campaign against Al-Manar. In America, too, says the report, Sharansky showed videotapes of Al-Manar clips to members of Congress.

Meanwhile, one of the satellite companies, Intelsat, that quickly pulled the plug on Al-Manar’s signal, is undergoing a stormy year of privatization. An Initial Public Offering has been delayed several times. In October, the company announced that it would sell itself to a coalition of venture capitalists operating out of Bermuda under the name Zeus.

According to a release posted at Intelsat’s website, Zeus is a mosaic of other captial venture firms such as Apax Partners Worldwide, LLP and Apax Partners, Inc., Apollo Management V, L.P., MDP Global Investors Limited and Permira Advisers LLC.

Directors from Apax and Permira (Richard Wilson and Graham Wrigley) joined the board at satellite company Inmarsat in December 2003. According to FCC documents, one Inmarsat rival accuses the company of engaging in anticompetitive practices. Inmarsat unfairly uses “proprietary protocols and technology” says rival MSV (Mobile Satellite Ventures–owners of MSAT satellites 1 & 2).

At the Apollo group, one of the founding principals, Marc J. Rowan, has been known to exhibit an appetite for XM Satellite Radio stock.

As these satellite giants are targets for capital ventures seeking communication dominance, the unplugging of Al-Manar by Intelsat raises questions about rights to free speech in a privatized communication infrastructure.

An August report by the European Institute for the Media reports on page 211 that, “In order for the media to carry out its function as the fourth estate, and in order for the citizen to be fully informed regarding the democratic process, a ‘freedom of information’ system is also required in a democratic system.”

“The ‘war on terrorism’, the fight against crime and the fight against right wing extremism can pose problems for the practice of investigative journalism,” says the report. Under the cover of anti-terrorism, the state is exercising new forms of surveillance and control over journalists (p. 214).

As a handful of conservative, Texas, Islamic activists suggest, the listing of Al-Manar by the State Department and the rapid disconnection by satellite giant Intelsat indeed poses deep questions about the structure of information freedom at the advent of a second Bush administration.

NOTES:

(1) A concise version of this story is posted at Alternet.

(2) Also see statement by Reporters Without Borders.

Focus on the McCaul e-Slate Relationship

Bob Dacy at InfoWars traces the connection from Clear Channel to e-Slate voting machines through investments managed by Clear Channel vice-chair Tom Hicks, whose capital venture firm Hicks, Muse, Tate, & Furst, is a named player in Stratford Capital Partners. In turn, Stratford’s Co-Managing Partner, John G. Farmer, is listed as a director of Hart InterCivic, the e-Slate maker. So we have a director at Hart InterCivic who is backed by Hicks bucks. And Hicks bucks have been saturated with Clear Channel profits since 2000, when the Mays company buyout of the Hicks company (AMFM) was approved by the FCC (a buyout that relieved the Hicks group of about $6 billion in debt). Read more about Tom Hicks as Bush backer and financial operative at Texans for Public Justice, Common Cause, and BushWatch. On the general tenor of Clear Channel’s political activism, see buzzflash and Vital Source. Attempts to view the Hicks, Muse, Tate, & Furst website at hmtf.com were greeted with prompts for secure login, but we don’t have a password for that. While the Mays family (in-laws to Congressperson Michael McCaul) appears to be closely connected to this chain of influence via corporate relationship to Hicks, it is not clear whether the family is personally invested in either the Hicks fund, the Stratford fund, or Hart InterCivic. With all these clarifications on the record, the original question stands as asked by Alex Jones: Do we want our votes counted by machines this closely linked to influential family and political interests of Congressional candidates? No, we don’t.

Send No Messengers of Defeat: The Texas Capitol Rally Against Election Fraud

By Greg Moses

[Paragraph 10 revised Dec. 19.]

Houston IndyMedia has put together a tight package, “Republican Cites Voter Fraud,” that includes links to this and two other dispatches of interest. Story also linked at IndyMedia North Texas, Austin, ILCA Online, and CounterPunch

“Today across the country a citizen uprising begins,” says Kip Humphrey, giving the first speech of his life, under a pure blue sky in Texas. It is the day before the Electoral College meets, and Humphrey is here to demonstrate his anger and disappointment with the way that election 2004 has gone down.

Just two weeks ago Humphrey and his son set up a website called 51 Capital March dot com and, using internet chain-mails, began asking folks to make signs and show up at their state capitols. When I show up to the rally in Austin around Sunday noon (with a notebook instead of a sign) a young woman hands me a white button with slim black letters that say, “I Showed Up.”

“Thank you for showing up,” she smiles. “You’re welcome,” I smile back. In the background I can hear, “the times they are a’changin’”, playing live from the steps of the Capitol.

Humphrey reports from the podium at the Texas Capitol that 29 rallies were being held this weekend, not bad for a two-week old idea. Looking over the Austin crowd of about 200 people, Humphrey declares that each person here represented thousands of others.

“March like a Ukrainian,” says one sign in the hands of a teenage girl. “Live Free or Die Bold,” says more than one other sign. “The Vote was Rigg’d,” shouts one sign in plain language. “We need paper trails,” insists another. And finally, in a turn of phrase that mocks a local computer company, “Dude, where’s my vote?”

It is not difficult to imagine that the sentiments expressed on these signs are more widely shared than the size of the rally would indicate. Houston Congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee sends a written statement with Humphrey, assuring the rally that her colleague John Conyers would take his time investigating the vote in Ohio, “until we find the truth”–a pledge that draws applause.

Next up to speak is Austin-based infowars guru, access cable host, and emerging radio personality Alex Jones, who turns up the heat with his raspy allegations that e-voting machine systems are “a complete and total fraud.”

“What a beautiful day to be standing up for our Constitutional Republic against enemies foreign and domestic,” exclaims Jones in a pure patriot opening. Jones carries a loaded automatic in his throat, and he sprays his audiences with rapid fire allegations of conspiracy, corruption, and confoundedness in high places. For Jones it’s the ballot box or the cartridge box, and right now the ballot box is looking like a stolen weapon.

Then he starts talking about my own congressman elect, Michael McCaul, telling me that I am now represented by the son-in-law of Lowry Mays (oh great, just what I needed to hear). Lowry Mays, in case you don’t know, is the affirmative-action-killing chairman of the board at my alma mater, Texas A&M University, and founder of Clear Channel Communication, the powerful right-wing radio company.

As if all this isn’t enough to make my pen a little nervous, Jones tells me that McCaul’s in-laws also have close business associations with Tom Hicks, a high-profile Bush supporter and major investor in the company that makes the very e-voting machines used at the polling place where I voted against McCaul. [This is a corrected paragraph, see Dec. 19 Focus.]

(Not that McCaul was in any danger at the ballot box this year. His district was tailor made for him by Majority Leader Tom DeLay. And he was a big spender, even by Republican standards, defeating a fellow millionaire who actually outspent him in the primary. In the general election, the only thing to do was write in the name of an opponent, since there was not a Democrat in sight. And yes, I “wrote in” my choice, a process that required a lot of dialing and button pressing.)

On top of it all, what Jones doesn’t mention today is that McCaul is a former counterterrorism specialist from the Justice Department. Now personally, I am feeling just a little less free when I drive home today, pulling out of parking place number 38 at the Employees Retirement System of Texas, right across the street from the Eastern Orthodox Chruch. But enough about my problems. I still have the Holidays in front of me, and about two more weeks to live under the jurisdiction of Congressman Lloyd Doggett.

Alex Jones asks: Did we want Congress to pass a bill mandating national ID cards? No we did not. Did Congress do it anyway, just three days ago? Yes, they did. A chilling report at Infowars.Com spells out the scenario. When our children are born, they will be assigned federal ID numbers attached to genetic, biometric markers. Pretty soon, everything we do will be ID’d and cross-referenced, beginning sooner rather than later with an airline passport that we’ll all need to fly.

Jones is a horror show. I keep waiting for the sky to turn black. But this is how crazy the truth sounds when someone dares to speak it plain. Opium in Afghanistan, oil in Iraq, with guns and Halliburton contracts for everyone. Jones has it all at the tip of his tongue. And at his website, he reminds us, there are always tons of clips.

“If we don’t have our vote,” concludes Jones, “then America is dead.” Did you catch that note of hope there? What if we do get our votes back?

In my notes, the next key word at the rally is “Stalinism” spoken by David Van Os, who ran as a Democrat for the Texas Supreme Court. He is referring to the airline passport that we’ll soon be carrying, and he compares it to the “internal passports” of Stalinist Russia or Nazi Germany. Disenfranchisement and vote rigging, these are the tools of totalitarianism rising, even if they are not the watchwords that win you elections in Red States this year.

“We’re at war, folks,” says Van Os. There is nothing normal about our times. What we’re losing are the very rights that “farmers with squirrel rifles charged into British cannon fire to win.” Yet we let the Bush machine steal two elections in a row? As for the media, they are nothing but house organs for the ruling Republican Party.

Pacifica broadcaster Pokey Anderson of Houston’s KPFT is next up in this fight club. She quotes Texas journalist Bill Moyers to the effect that the delusional is no longer marginal. We live in a world centered upon delusion. For her, WMD’s are Weapons of Mass Disenfranchisement.

“But we are awake,” declares Anderson under the glorious sky, “and the trumpet is sounding!” By this time, the crowd has mostly parted into the shaded, grassy areas on either side of the broad walkway that leads uphill to the Capitol steps. The Texas sun, even in December, can get pretty close to your head.

“Real patriotism is not running half way around the world to shoot children,” says Anderson. “Real patriotism is what you are doing here.” Anderson takes us back to Volusia County, Florida, 2000, where a strange computer error has given Al Gore about 16,000 negative votes. Soon after the election, the story is normalized by the Washington Post, reported as a quickly fixed glitch. But a follow up investigation by Black Box Voting’s Bev Harris says the problem remains real and strange.

The normalizing report from the Washington Post had failed to ask why two different chips with two wildly different vote numbers could each be placed into the machine without one of them setting of a security warning. How could a chip containing something so sinister as a 16,000 negative vote count been accepted by the machine as “clean”, containing not only a bad vote count but a clean security checkdigit, too?

Delusionland, that’s where we all live now, says Anderson. Which if you believe this world is back to normal, then you’re the one living at the fringe of truth and reality.

“Ohio state authorities were not allowing international observers free access to polling stations?” asks CodePink organizer Debbie Russell incredulously. She’s the next one up to speak. “It’s time to get rid of these battleground states,” says Russell, get rid of the electoral system that creates them, and start electing national offices on the basis of direct, national elections. And all voting places should have voter verified ballots with paper trails. Also, argues Russell, we need to take the administration of elections out of the hands of partisan elected officials.

“But let’s not ask anymore for these things,” says Russell. “Let’s demand them!”

Fellow CodePinker Deborah Vanko steps up next to support Russell’s call for verifiable ballots. Paper receipts that can be counted by hand, that’s what we need in order to know for sure who’s won.

The rally is winding down now, only two more speakers to go before the crowd heads South for a march to the local newspaper, where they will protest the media blackout that attends all these issues. I have decided not to follow the march today, although I think the target selection is genius. How will the media behave when we stop allowing them to bounce us back and forth all the time?

Co-chair of the local county Green Party, Bill Holloway, speaks next to last. For him both parties of the government are unreliable because they both follow orders given by their corporate handlers. Same with the media, says Holloway. From NPR to Rush Limbaugh, all were singing the choir song of “free and fair elections” in the good ole’ USA, when we had more business behaving like Ukrainians.

“If insanity is doing the same thing over and over again while expecting different results, then stopping this madness is up to us,” says Holloway.

And last, but not least, is Vicky Karp, National Chairperson of the Coalition for Visible Ballots.

“I want a recount, how about you!” she cheers. “I’m here to talk about the F-Word–Fraud!” We never asked for electronic voting, we don’t trust electronic voting, and we need verifiable ballots that we can count. There is not much new left to say. But some things are worth repeating:

“Media consolidation is bringing an end to the day when we could count on an informed public.” With that, the band strikes up a Woody Guthrie tune, and the folks raise their signs to march South, across the Colorado River, down from the no-good Capitol across to that no-good newspaper, saying someday this little gang’s going to be remembered for something!

As I watch their backs, I realize I’m standing under a monument that reads in all caps: “Thermopylae had her messengers of defeat. The Alamo had none.”

From Steve Gulick

Thanks, Greg, for connecting me to the article [see below: Ask Not Who Bankrolled Falluja].

I like the connections you draw: that our tax dollars get drafted, that we are morally — although not legally [as IRS officers are quick to point out] — responsible for how that money is spent, that we have choices even in our routinized, consumerized, and alienated culture. For future reference, there is a culture of hope within the shell of the old: various forms of living and buying coops and alternative markets that try to avoid slave and slave-wage products, companies that fuel militarism and environmental degredation, etc., not to mention alternative media [which you probably know more about than I do], and alternative cultural venues.

I also like the paraphrase from John Dunne, historically, one of my favorite poets.

It is important, too, that your readers know that war tax resistance is civil disobedience and can be a pretty lonely road, especially for those not connected with a group of some sort (another of the parts of the culture of hope). I was [am not currently] a war tax resister for 25 years AND you are right about having a spouse who doesn’t agree with the act — even if she/he agrees with the concern. I was married — and still am to the same person! — for 19 of those 25 years. And the resistance was particularly hard on her. She had no support group, unlike me, to which she had a “natural” affinity.

In peace,
Steve Gulick
Philadelphia War Resisters League
gunorlickton@mac.com

It’s the Quality of the Audience

Oh Gosh, was it Billy Brammer or Willie Morris who said of Ronnie Dugger’s Texas Observer that it wasn’t the quantity, but the quality of the readers that mattered most? (Happy 50th, Dugger & crew!)

Likewise with distribution of the Bankrolled article below, I was very pleased that Sam Hamod posted the thing in a heartbeat at his website, todaysalternativenews. I have a lot of respect for Sam’s aiming eye when it comes to targets in mid-East affairs, so his support means a lot when I write about Falluja. He sez via email: “shirley has a lot of courage; your article says so much. the psyops people are going to be the death of america. no one in this world ever gives up to such cruelty, instead, it endgenders more hatred of america that will never be forgotten (see also anwaar hussain’s article on my site of today, from fallujah, it’s in the international column; i put yours in the national column).” Thank you, Sam.

Then Simon Harak at the War Resisters League national office circulated the article to his personal list with a blurb: “very powerful, practical and persuasive piece on war tax resistance.” That was cool enough, but then I traced the link where he got the article, and that was cooler still. A website registered in Rome (yes, the city in Italy) called UrukNet had picked up the article from Sam’s site.

Charlie Jackson of Texans for Peace asked to post it at his website. And Danny Yeager at the Touchstone zine in College Station (my homeplace of dissent) also asked to run it there. Thanks guys.

Finally, I heard back from the ACOMT folks that they were pretty pleased with the work. So it’s on to the next article in the series. Please stay tuned.

Dec. 9 update. We got CounterPunched! Cheers to Cockburn and St. Clair.

Ask Not Who Bankrolled Falluja:

War Tax Resisters Opt Out
(Notes on the Texification of Resistance)

By Greg Moses

UrukNet / Sam Hamod’s Today’s Alternative News /
IndyMedia Austin, Houston, North Texas, NYC / ILCA Online /
Texans for Peace / CounterPunch / DissidentVoice / Z-Net / AmericanFreePress

For three weeks beginning October 14, say sources at Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting, the assault on Falluja was pure PSYOPS, a mere announcement of assault, designed to provoke “the opposition” into premature response. The lie worked pretty well. “The opposition” abandoned their so-called safe havens and “melted into the night.” For this reason, many residents of the city expected the PSYOPS theater to let out early, too.

One hapless doctor, Hakim Mirzoev, says he expected the Americans to surround the city, fire a few shots, and declare victory. He didn’t realize that a greater PSYOPS scheme was in the making, a plan to flatten Falluja under boot and mortar so that the City of Mosques could be rebuilt by Christian Soldiers into a Model City–a Pasadena by the Euphrates. With this world-historical Crusade in mind, Falluja was crushed, thousands were killed and wounded, hundreds of thousands displaced, so that America could perceive itself great in the gaze of the world.

So who made Falluja possible? Who enabled budgets to be filled with imperial plans? American taxpayers did. The moral tracer on this funding leads to me and you, the co-investors who backed this pre-holiday discount on the lives of Fallujans, thousands of lives, forever lost and unlived. To pay for this moral bankruptcy, we got up in the morning, worked all day, and sent money to the war machine. Ask not who bankrolled Falluja.

****

Texas school teacher Shirley Smith made the connection between her tax dollars and the war in Iraq during the first week of the invasion. It was March 27, 2003, and she was listening to Bitta Mostofi speak at the University of Texas campus at Austin. Mostofi had been to Iraq with Voices in the Wilderness, serving witness to sufferings caused by USA-supported sanctions.

It was right after the invasion and only a few weeks before the tax deadline, recalls Smith. Mostofi said it would be an effective protest against the war if everyone refused to pay taxes. And that’s when the light went on. Right away, Smith submitted a new W-4 form, so that no taxes would be withheld. No more money would go from her to the war. On April 15, 2003, Smith joined an annual protest at the downtown Austin post office. Camera crews captured her image as she helped to pass out leaflets. The next day a couple of colleagues spoke to her about seeing pictures on the local news. One colleague got excited.

“She told me she would like to stop paying her taxes, too,” recalls Smith. “So I explained to her that we re-direct our tax money into groups that work for peace. And then she wasn’t quite as interested. I think it’s important to stress that we’re not in this for personal gain.” Like many war tax resisters, Smith sends her tax money to an escrow fund, where interest gets applied to peace work.

When tax day rolled around this year, Smith enclosed a letter with her tax form, explaining why she would not send money. In August she received her first reply from the Internal Revenue Service. On November 16, she received her third. It arrived by certified mail, warning Smith that the IRS would begin looking for property or other assets to attach.

IRS Public Affairs officer Ken Vargas of the Austin office explains that the collections office sends out “soft notices” first, followed by “harder notices” later. Vargas says the IRS doesn’t keep a handy record of war tax resisters, and he insists that “normal collection procedures” apply to all subjects, regardless of whether they write letters stating their war tax resistance.

In fact, the tax reform act of 1998 makes it illegal for the IRS to designate tax protesters as a special class. A June 2004 audit by the Treasury Inspector General reported “233 isolated instances” where subjects had been identified as tax protesters nevertheless. The only time the IRS can justify this practice, warned the IG, is when case notes reflect what subjects say about themselves. The IRS office most likely to abuse its classification of tax resisters was the office of Chief Counsel.

Andy McKenna, who began his war tax resistance after the First Gulf War, says that the three letters sent to Smith this year may serve as one example of more aggressive collections. In a press release, prepared for distribution this week, McKenna joined with other war tax resisters to warn of increased enforcement in the Austin area. At a mid-November meeting of the Austin Conscientious Objectors to Military Taxation (ACOMT), members shared their impressions that a long season of relative neglect by the IRS is now being followed by a spate of collection activities. In mid-October, McKenna himself was hit up for his first wage garnishment, which left him only $330.00 per paycheck, twice a month.

Anecdotal evidence from Texas does not yet support a finding that there is a nationwide crackdown on war tax resisters. From a few dozen emails sent to war tax resisters elsewhere, only Mary Loehr, former national coordinator for the National War Tax Resistance Coordinating Committee (NWTRCC), responded with news of fresh garnishment attempts in Ithaca, Albuquerque, and Chicago. Co-director of Peace and Justice Studies at Wellesley College, Larry Rosenwald, says that computer technology has helped to speed up the IRS over the past five years, “increasing ability to locate wtrs [war tax resisters] and their bank accounts by way of computerized records.” Ruth Benn, current coordinator for NWTRCC, reports in the group’s latest newsletter that, “It is still not clear if there is more actual collection nationally.”

Back in Austin, Susan Van Haitsma, a war tax resister since 1985, feels that her fellow ACOMT members have good reasons to report their experiences, even if no broader trend emerges. “The fact that several in our local group are experiencing collection efforts at the same time is probably just a coincidence,” writes Van Haitsma via email, “and the reason we are seeking to publicize it is just that, in the midst of war, it’s a concrete example of resistance that is of more interest to the general public (it seems) when we are actually engaged in the legal push and pull of collections.”

****

Which brings us back to Falluja and the claim made by Bitta Mostofi that massive tax resistance would work. Anyone interested in cutting ties to this war can stop paying taxes. Yet, as Kathy Kelly noted in a recent essay, a great deterrent to war tax resistance, besides irrational fear of the IRS, is fear of family reactions, especially from spouses. Significantly, neither McKenna, Smith, nor Van Haitsma is married.

Smith says that her daughter was immediately afraid that mom was going to prison. But prison is not a likely outcome, says Smith, as long as war tax resisters remain honest about where their money is. Smith’s father is retired from military service. When she told him about her conversion to war tax resistance, he joked that she didn’t want to pay for his retirement. And that was the worst thing he’s ever said about her decision. Supportive is the word Smith uses to describe her parents.

War tax resistance affects people in different ways. Van Haitsma lives a lifestyle at poverty level, taking care to earn too little to tax. McKenna is starting a new job, different from the one where he was garnished. Smith, the school teacher, on the other hand, is adamant about her work commitment.

“I feel like teaching is a calling,” says Smith. Conscience demands that she keep teaching, even if the IRS garnishes her wages. Smith teaches English as a Second Language and she works with middle school students who are making good grades but who have no family history of college. The program is called AVID or Achievement Via Individual Determination. Smith spends her days helping students to fight voices that would discourage rising classes. She is always volunteering for after-hours events. And the district wants to pay her more money. She pleads, no, don’t pay me any more money!

Speaking via cell phone, school teacher Smith lists all the charities where she sends money, to keep her taxable income down. Then she asks a final question before saying goodbye: “Have you heard the quote by Alexander Haig? ‘Let them march all they want, as long as they continue to pay their taxes’?”

****

Keep buying, and keep buying in. Soon after Sept. 11, Forbes magazine urged Bush to get the American people back into the shopping malls. Soon enough, “shopping” was included in the president’s short list of things that count for daily life in America. Now that Falluja has been rubbleized and stained in blood, freedom loving people everywhere will be sick with curiosity: are the plans long ready, Mr. Bush, to build a Falluja-Euphrates Mall?

The Falluja assault is an egregious blunder, even by the awful standards set by President Bush. Until Falluja, there was a tattered moral argument that Bush’s illegal invasion had at least toppled a bad guy from power. But Falluja is a campaign of, by, and for the sheer effect of terror. As a demoralized peace movement looks to Falluja with dread, Kathy Kelly reminds us, there is one thing that any taxpayer of conscience can do.

NOTES & LINKS:

[This is first in a series of articles about war tax resistance, based on meetings and interviews with Austin Conscientious Objectors to Military Taxation.]

PSYOPS

http://www.fair.org/press-releases/cnn-psyops-fallujah.html

Third Battle of Falluja:

http://olm.blythe-systems.com/pipermail/nytr/Week-of-Mon-20041115/009071.html

Hakim Mirzoev:

http://bellaciao.org/en/article.php3?id_article=4591

Model City:

http://www.twincities.com/mld/twincities/news/nation/10307471.htm?1c

IRS Audit:

http://www.treas.gov/tigta/auditreports/2004reports/200440109fr.html?FILTERNAME=%40URL&FILTERVALUE=%2Ftigta%2F#toc

Kathy Kelly

http://www.counterpunch.com/kelly11272004.html

Forbes:

http://www.forbes.com/2001/10/04/1004topnews.html

Shopping:

http://www.september11news.com/PresidentBushAtlanta.htm

ACOMT:

http://www.acomt.org/

NWTRCC

http://www.nwtrcc.org/

Voices in the Wilderness

http://www.vitw.org/

Back to the white Stupid

Here’s a really good email from Richard Stump at http://andune.blogspot.com/:

Sir,
I am aware of how welcome unsolicited emails usually are, so I will keep this brief. In your article “Its the White Vote, Stupid” you discuss how the White vote, a majority, went one way and the minority vote (usually) went another. I have three main questions.

First, you use the word ‘stupid’ in close conjunction with ‘White’ on several occasions; the
implication seems clear. Yet you freely admit that White voters were pretty evenly split for Kerry and Bush. Do you want to imply *all* White voters are stupid?

Second, you speak of the South being solidly Republican and having a “big, fat, white vote”. Yet
many Southern states have a higher percentage of minorities living in them than Northern states
(Georgia compared to Minnesota, for example). How do you account for the ‘bigger, fatter, whiter” voters of Minnesota voting for Kerry?

Third, you capitalize Black, Latino, and Asian when referring to race, yet you do not capitalize White when referring to race. Why is that?

Actually I enjoy getting emails this good, no apologies needed. And I will be brief in reply. To the extent that I mean to infer anything by the closely connected usage of “stupid” and “white” together, it would pertain to a collective phenomenon. Therefore, it would be a fallacy of division to derive from my claims any conclusions about *all* white people.

Indeed 50 percent of white voters in Minnesota voted for Kerry (according to exit polls, etc.) , proving that there is nothing immutable in the white collective preference for Bush. What’s different about white voters in Minnesota? That’s a good question, and I haven’t tried to answer it yet. Any suggestions? What works with white voters in Minnesota that has not yet been tried on white voters elsewhere?

As for capitalization, I am just doing a little typographical counter-supremacy. It’s a small thing, yet noticable to discerning readers.

Please if you have any more emails like this, send them along.

–Greg Moses