Redaktionelles:
In diese Ausgabe nicht aufgenommen: Ein Beitrag, der nur als Attachment vorlag, div. Spam

==================================================
A) TEXTE
==================================================

><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><
AKTIONEN UND ANKüNDIGUNGEN
><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><

==================================================
01 Seminarankündigung
From: asylkoordination Kremla <kremla@asyl.at>
==================================================
EinsteigerInnen - Seminare für die Beratung von Flüchtlingen und
MigrantInnen

Die Vereine Asylkoordination österreich und Deserteurs- und
Flüchtlingsberatung bieten wieder günstige Seminare für
FlüchtlingsberaterInnen an und für alle, die mehr über die rechtlichen
Grenzen und Chancen von Integration und Asylgewährung wissen wollen.

Für NeueinsteigerInnen gibt es einen Einführungsblock aus vier
Seminaren, die je nach Vorkenntnissen und Interessen auch einzeln
besucht werden können:

Zeit: jeweils Fr., 14.30-18.30 und Sa. 9.30-17
Ort: asylkoordination, 1080 Wien, Laudongasse 52
04/05. Oktober (Verwaltungsrecht), 15./16. (Fremdengesetz) und 29.30.
November (AuslbG), 13./14. Dezember (Praxis der Beratung und Vertretung)

Preis: pro Block 105 Euro, Ermässigungen möglich
Zusätzlich gibt es einige Spezialseminare:

Neuerungen im Fremdenrecht, Freitag, 20. September, 14.30 bis 18.30h
(35 Euro)

Frauen als Flüchtlinge und Migrantinnen: Freitag, 18.Oktober, 9.30 bis
17h (58 Euro)

Mehr darüber: Kooperation asylkoordination österreich und Deserteurs-
und Flüchtlingsberatung, www.asylkoordination.at,

www.deserteursberatung.at, Tel.: 01/532 12 91 - 14, email:
kremla@asyl.at

--

asylkoordination österreich
Marion Kremla
Laudongasse 52/9
1080 Wien
Tel: (0043)01/532 12 91 - 14
Fax: 0043/01/532 12 91 - 20
email. kremla@asyl.at
http://www.asyl.at

==================================================
02 SSF fordert Schadenersatz /INFO Demo
From: salzburg social forum <salzburgsocialforum@gmx.net>
==================================================
PRESSEINFORMATION DES SALZBURG SOCIAL FORUM

SSF fordert Schadenersatz

Salzburg, am 26. September 2002

Schadenersatz für alle Gewerbetreibenden, Einzelhändler, Ärzte in der
roten und gelben Zone forderte heute Andreas Rennert, Sprecher des
Salzburg Social Forum (SSF), für ihren Einnahmenentfall während der
Tagung des World Economic Forum Mitte September in Salzburg. Für die
Geltungsdauer der Roten Zone zum Schutz der Wirtschaftsextremisten
müssten diese auch heuer wieder mit empfindlichen Einbußen rechnen.

"Meiner Hausärztin wurde letztes Jahr seitens der Polizei empfohlen,
die Praxis für drei Tage zu schließen. Der Kongreß tanzt, läßt sich
von der Politik hofieren, und die Trafikantin, die tagelang fast keine
Kunden sieht, ist die Angschmierte. Das WEF bringt Salzburg keine
Umwegrentabilität, sondern kostet nur" meint Rennert.

INFO: Gegen die Untersagung der ersten Demoroute (Bahnof,
Rainerstraße, Markus-Sittikus-Straße, Schwarzstraße, Müllnersteg,
Rudolfskai, Volksgarten) wurde, seitens des SSF bei der
Bundespolizeidirektion in Salzburg Einspruch erhoben.

Das SSF wird bis zum Obersten Gerichtshof gehen und somit das Recht
auf Versammlungsfreiheit verteidigen.

Nach Angaben von stv. Polizeidirektor Feichtinger wird die aktuell
angemeldete Demoroute (Bahnof, Rainerstraße, Ignaz-Harrer-Straße,
linke Salzachseite bis Nonntalerbrücke, Volksgarten) nicht untersagt.

Da der Kongress erst am Montag, 16. September beginnt, gibt es für das
SSF keinen zwingenden Grund direkt am Kongress vorbei zu gehen. Am
Hanuschplatz wird es eine Kundgebung geben, mit welcher die
Tagungsgäste, die sich vor allem im Hotel Sacher aufhalten werden, mit
dem Protest konfrontiert werden sollen. Das SSF rechnet mit
mindestens 4000 DemonstrationsteilnehmerInnen.

Kontakt:
Mag. Claudia Trost
Tel: 0699/ 11 64 80 17

==================================================
03 volksstimmefest!
From: "Ksv Wien" <Ksv.Wien@reflex.at>
==================================================
KSV-KJÖ-Cafe DOGMA
am VOLKSSTIMMEFEST 2002

Samstag 31.8. & Sonntag 1.9.
13.00 Uhr bis open end

Mojitos, Cuba Libre, Sturm, Longdrinks, Wodka, Bier, Wein, T-Shirts
aller Art ("DOGMA goes Salzburg", "eine andere Welt" und der
Klassiker: "vota comunista"), Infomaterial für Salzburg und ESF 2002
in Florenz, Kaffee, Knabberzeug, Zigaretten, u.a.

==================================================
04 Chico/Rückkehr
From: "Asor Uru" <tosal42@hotmail.com>
==================================================
Liebe solidarische Freunde!
Wegen unserer Rückkehr nach Lateinamerika senden wir hier unser Projekt.

Trotz Wirtschaftsprobleme und Schwierigkeiten in Lateinamerika haben
wir uns endschieden unser Leben dort weiter zu führen. Es ist für uns
ein wichtiger Schritt aber ohne Solidarität und ohne Unterstützung ist
es unmöglich in Lateinamerika ein normales Leben zu führen.

Im Namen von meiner Familie und ich, appellieren wir an euch um dieses
kleine - aber- wichtige Projekt für uns zu Unterstützung, nur mit
eurer Solidarität und mit euer Humanismus, Können wir ein würdiges
Leben zu leben. Wie sie bereits wissen führen Emigranten hier ein sehr
bescheidenes Leben.

Dieses Projekt oder diese symbolische Patenschaft ist für unsere
Kinder, für ihre Integration, ein von bedeutendes Projekt. Noch einmal
mein Appell an euch. Ich bitte um eure Unterstützung und wir warten
auf eine positive Antwort,

Wir, Rosa Castro, Jose Reyes und unsere beiden Töchter Romina und
Tania planen Ende September nach Uruguay zurückzugehen. Trotz aller
finanziellen Schwierigkeiten möchten wir dort unser Leben
weiterführen.

Nach so vielen Jahren zurückzukehren, verursacht - auch wegen der
ökonomischen instabilen Situation in Uruguay - Gefühle der
Unsicherheit. Deswegen suchen wir im speziellen Sicherheit für unsere
beiden Töchter.

Wir sind:
Rosa Castro, geb. am 11.03.1958 in Uruguay, seit 1984 in Österreich und
österreichische Staatsbürgerschaft seit 1995, verheiratet seit 1989
Ich war von 1985 bis 1994 Mitfrau, Vorstand von Lefö (lateinamerikanische
emigrierte Frauen in Österreich) und parallel dazu von 1988 bis 2001 in der
Lateinamerikasolidarität aktiv.

Von März 1994 bis 2002 war und bin ich Mitfrau und Angestellte im
Verwaltungsbereich von Lefö.

Jose Reyes, geb. am 15.03.1954 in Chile, in Österreich als anerkannter
Flüchtling seit 1978, österreichische Staatsbürgerschaft seit 1995,
verheiratet seit 1989.

Ich organisierte von 1978 bis 2002 soziale und sportliche Aktivitäten für
Kinder und Jugendliche, soziale und politische Aktivitäten für und mit
MigrantInnen, und war in der Lateinamerikasolidarität tätig.
Von 1978 bis1980 arbeitete ich bei Grundig und von 1986 bis 1998 im Verband
der Wienervolksbildung als Facharbeiter.

Romina Reyes Castro, geb. 16.03.1989 in Österreich, österreichische
Staatsbürgerschaft seit 1995.

Romina schloss das Realgymnasium in der Rosasgasse mit der 3. Klasse ab.

Tania Reyes Castro, geb. 16.08.1991 in Österreich, österreichische
Staatsbürgerschaft seit 1995.

Tania schloss das Realgymnasium in der Rosasgasse mit der 1. Klasse ab.

Wir suchen Ihre Unterstützung für die Integration unserer Töchter in
Uruguay, in einem Umfeld, das für sie mehr oder weniger unbekannt
ist. Wir möchten die Entwicklung von Romina und Tania in dieser
Ungewissheit wenigstens ökonomisch garantieren können.

Wie Sie wahrscheinlich wissen, sind in Uruguay sowohl Schulgebühr,
Bücher, Uniform als auch die Kosten der öffentlichen Transportmittel
zu zahlen. Dies macht pro Kind ca 150 Euro pro Monat aus.

Außerdem fallen am Anfang all die Übersetzung- und
Nostrifizierungskosten der Zeugnisse an, die sich einmalig auf ca 300
Euro pro Kind belaufen werden.

Mit einer einjährigen monatlichen Unterstützung von 150 Euro pro Kind
könnten wir den Anfang der Ausbildung in Uruguay garantieren.

Wir hoffen auf eine positive Antwort

Mit freundlichen Grüssen

Rosa Castro Jose Reyes

Falls sie Kontakt aufnehmen wollen:
Name: Jose (Chico) Reyes
Adresse: Wien 1120,Spittelbreitengasse 23/2/1.
Telefon.: 812 86 77
E- mail.: jose.reyes@chello.at

><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><
MELDUNGEN UND KOMMENTARE
><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><

==================================================
05 ÖGS begrüßt fachlich fundierte Aufkläteriums
From: "RA Univ.-Lekt. Dr. Helmut Graupner" <hg@graupner.at>
==================================================
PRESSEAUSSENDUNG der
ÖSTERREICHISCHEN GESELLSCHAFT FÜR SEXUALFORSCHUNG

"Love, Sex und so ."
- ausgezeichnete Aufklärungsbroschüre für Jugendliche

Österreichische Gesellschaft für Sexualforschung (ÖGS) begrüßt
fachlich fundierte Aufklärungsbroschüre des Jugendministeriums

Die Österreichische Gesellschaft für Sexualforschung (ÖGS) "begrüßt"
die "fachlich fundierte und äußerst jugendgerechte
Aufklärungs-Broschüre" des BMSG "Love, Sex und so ...", wie der dritte
Vorsitzende, der bekannte katholische Theologe und Psychotherapeut
Mag. Johannes Wahala betont: "Die massive Kritik und Hetze gegen die
Broschüre seitens der Bischöfe Küng und Laun sowie dem ,Institut für
Ehe und Familie' der Österreichischen Bischofskonferenz ist von einer
fundamentalis-tischen katholischen Sexualmoral her verständlich, nicht
aber von Seiten einer seriösen Sexualforschung."

Dazu erklärt die Vorsitzende der ÖGS, Prof. Dr. Rotraud Perner, dass
"Sexual-aufklärung nicht darin bestehen kann, nur eine einzige
Position, nämlich die streng katholische, aufzuzeigen, sondern in der
fundierten Information über möglichst alle Sichtweisen und Phänomene
der Sexualität", also auch über sexuelle Variationen und
Orientierungen, selbstverständlich auch die unerwünschten oder
strafrechtlich verbotenen, "damit junge Menschen später nicht
unvorbereitet vor Problemen stehen, die ihre physische und psychische
Gesundheit schädigen." Perner warnt aus ganzheitsmedizinischer und
psychotherapeutischer Sicht, dass Angstmache nur die Gesundheit
schädige, nicht aber lehre, wie man sich vor unerwünschten Formen der
Sexualität schütze. Perner weiter: "Über Sexualität gehört frei und
offen geredet." Dazu brauche es leider immer noch besonders
ausgebildete Fachleute, da der Allgemeinheit - auch Eltern und
professionellen Erziehern - Wissen vorenthalten werde.

Wahala, der die stark frequentierte Sexualberatungsstelle COURAGE der
ÖGS leitet, unterstützt Bundesminister Haupt: "Ich bin als
Sexualtherapeut klar davon überzeugt, dass ,Love, Sex und so ...' der
heutigen Lebenswelt von Jugendlichen sowie den heutigen
humanwissenschaftlichen und erziehungswissenschaftlichen Kenntnissen
entspricht. Ich gratuliere Haupt für diese hervorragende
Aufklärungsbroschüre."

Wahala, der als katholischer Theologe auch jahrelange
Unterrichtserfahrung besitzt, meint zum Vorwurf des Instituts für Ehe
und Familie, dass mit der Broschüre das Elternrecht auf
Sexualerziehung missachtet werde, dass viele Eltern mit der
Sexualaufklärung ihrer Kinder "massiv überfordert" sind. "Das zeigen
fundierte Studien, in denen z.B. 30 % der Jugendlichen angeben, dass
sexuelle Themen zuhause tabu sind."

Der international renommierte Sexualjurist und Wiener Rechtsanwalt
Univ.-Lekt. Dr. Helmut Graupner, zweiter Vorsitzender der ÖGS,
verweist darauf, dass das Argument "Sexualerziehung sei Elternrecht"
schon deshalb "ein Unsinn ist, weil der Europäische
Menschrechtsgerichtshof bereits 2000 entschieden hat, dass Eltern kein
Recht zukommt, Sexualkundeunterricht an staatlichen Schulen zu
beeinspruchen." Der Menschenrechtsgerichtshof unterstrich, dass
Sexualerziehung der sachlichen Information über menschliche Sexualität
diene und daher gerechtfertigt sei. "Im Fall Jimenez Alonso & Jimenez
Merino versus Spain vom Mai 2000 hat der Gerichtshof ausgeführt, dass,
wenn Eltern das nicht wollen, sie ihr Kind ja in eine katholische
Privatschule schicken können", erklärt Graupner.

"Subsidiarität ist ein Prinzip der katholischen Soziallehre", so
Wahala. Es besagt, dass der Staat helfend einzugreifen hat, "wo
kleinere Systeme nicht zurecht kommen". Viele Eltern sind heute noch
mit der Sexualerziehung ihrer Kinder überfordert. "Daher hat der Staat
helfend einzugreifen!", so Wahala. "Das ist nicht nur legitim, sondern
auch seine Pflicht."

Dem Argument von Weihbischof Laun, dass die Broschüre der "Diktatur
der eigenen Lust" fröne bzw. BM Haupt in Richtung "totalitärer Staat"
strebe, steht Wahala fassungslos gegenüber. Er könne es nur
psychologisch deuten, nämlich dass oftmals das eigene Empfinden und
Bestreben auf andere projiziert und an diesen bekämpft wird.

"Eine sachlich korrekte und fundierte Sexualaufklärung", so Wahala und
Perner unisono, "ist eine wichtige Prävention gegen sexuellen
Missbrauch". "Neben der Familie ist die katholische Kirche ein Hort
sexuellen Missbrauchs.", so Wahala. Will die katholische Kirche durch
ihre Kritik und Hetze gegen "Love, Sex und so ..." - wieder einmal -
ihre eigenen Probleme verdrängen? "Würden sich mehr Priester ihrer
homosexuellen Orientierung und ihrer psychosexuellen Entwicklung
stellen, gebe es meines Erachtens weniger Missbrauchsfälle in dieser
Institution.", meint Wahala, der selbst katholischer Priester ist. Die
neue Broschüre des BMSG ist wichtig, "damit unsere Kinder vor
sexuellem Missbrauch geschützt werden". Kinder und Jugendliche sollen
wissen, wozu sie klar Ja oder Nein sagen. Die Broschüre stärkt ihre
Entscheidungsfähigkeit. Haupt vorzuwerfen, er gehe mit ,Love, Sex und
so ...' einen "Schritt in die Richtung des totalitären Staates", wie
es Laun tut, ist nicht nur perfide, sondern auch demagogisch.

"Im übrigen", so Wahala, "solle die katholische Kirche aufhören, den
Menschen die "Lebensfreude zu vergiften." Sexualität hat mit
Verantwortung UND Lust zu tun. Heute von einer "Diktatur der eigenen
Lust um jeden Preis zu sprechen", wie dies Laun tut, entspricht für
die ÖGS nicht den heutigen Menschen und ihren Bedürfnissen. Dass die
Broschüre Homosexualität als eine Ausdrucksform der menschlichen
Sexualität sieht, entspricht den heutigen Humanwissenschaften und den
Erkenntnissen der Weltgesundheitsorganisation (WHO).

Rückfragehinweis:

Mag. Johannes Wahala
Psychotherapeut und Theologe
3. Vorsitzender der ÖGS
Leiter der Familien-, Partnerinnen- und Sexualberatungsstelle COURAGE
Leiter der ExpertInnengruppe "Psychotherapie und Homosexualität" im
Österreichischen und Europäischen Berufsverband für Psychotherapie

Tel: 01 / 585 69 60
Handy: 0676 / 706 21 11

Den Keynotspeaker-Vortrag von Mag. Johannes Wahala am 3. Weltkongress
für Psychotherapie, 14. - 18. 07. 2002, zum Thema "HOMOEROTIK -
HOMOSEXUALITÄT - HOMOPHOBIE. Eine kritische Konfrontation mit
"krankmachenden" Doktrinen, herrschenden Gesellschaftsstrukturen und
Vorurteilen" finden sie unter:
www.courage-beratung.at/seminare/index.htm

==================================================
06 Österreichische Regierung subventioniert Nazipropaganda
From: Karl Pfeifer
==================================================
Die Wiener Wochenzeitung "Zur Zeit" veröffentlichte am 23.8.02 einen
nicht gezeichneten Artikel einer obskuren und anonymen
"Österreichischen Historiker Arbeitsgemeinschaft", mit dem Stimmung
gemacht wird gegen den "Gesinnungsterror" des NS-Verbotsgesetzes, das
Naziaktivitäten und Holocaustleugnung unter Strafe stellt:

"Allenthalben spürbar ist ja schon der Gesinnungsterror der
selbsternannten intellektuellen "Gutmenschen", die mit diesen Methoden
Verfassungen und Menschenwürde unterlaufen würden." Sie sehen den
"Grundsatz der Freiheit der Wissenschaft" und die "Meinungsfreiheit"
eingeschränkt, weil diese "in manchen seit damals (1991) geführten
Prozessen nach dem Verbotsgesetz durch richterlichen Irrtum in
Mißachtung geraten ist".

Bekanntlich wurde ein Autor von "Zur Zeit", der das Buch des
"Revisionisten" Rudolf Czernin lobte, wegen Holocaustleugnung
rechtskräftig verurteilt. "Zur Zeit" empfiehlt dieses Buch demjenigen,
der "in Fragen NS-Verbrechen und Kriegsschuld und überhaupt zur
Geschichte des 20. Jahrhunderts mitreden will".

Außerdem wird im Artikel auch der amerikanische Holocaustleugner und
Amateurhistoriker David L. Hoggan gelobt. Hoggan publizierte Anfang
der sechziger Jahre sein Pamphlet "Der erzwungene Krieg", in dem er
die Attidüde der Gelehrsamkeit zeigte.

Er imponierte dem schlichten Leser mit einer Fülle von Quellenzitaten
und Querverweisen, Fußnoten und Literaturangaben. Damit sollte der
Anschein von Seriosität erweckt werden, und das Geschichtsbild, das
Hitler als überlegenen, friedfertigen Staatsmann und seine Gegner als
kriegslüsterne Monster zeichnete, sollte als wissenschaftlich erwiesen
und unumstößlich zementiert werden.

Bei professioneller Betrachtung erwiesen sich die Quellenzitate als
falsch oder verfälscht, die Literaturangaben als weithin unkorrekt und
die Argumentation als hirnrissig. Als "revisionistische"
Propagandawaffe war das Buch aber sehr tauglich, denn es genügte ja,
den Titel als Programm zu nehmen und auf die vermeintlich schlüssige
Dokumentation zu verweisen.

Die Technik des Verwirrens durch Zitate und unsinnige Quellenangaben
machte Schule und ist in rechtsextremen Kreisen bis heute
wirkungsvoll; zu den eifrigsten Epigonen gehört der deutsche
Holocaustleugner Udo Walendy, dem Virtuosität im manipulativen Umgehen
mit Quellen bestätigt wird und dessen Buch "Wahrheit für Deutschland,
die Schuldfrage des Zweiten Weltkrieges" auch von "Zur Zeit" in
höchsten Tönen gepriesen wird.

"Zur Zeit" wiederholt auch die übliche Nazilitanei gegen Theodor
N. Kaufmann, Henry Morgenthau und Ilja Ehrenburg. Nichts Neues unter
der Sonne: Einer schreibt vom anderen ab.

Die österreichische Bundesregierung hat die Presseförderung für "Zur
Zeit" um 21% erhöht und zahlt dieser den österreichischen
Regierungsparteien nahe stehenden Wiener Wochenzeitung für 2002 eine
Subvention von EURO 75.550.20.

==================================================
07 Kulturzentrum von Abriss bedroht
From: IG Kultur Österreich
==================================================
|||
|||
||| PRESSEMITTEILUNG
|||
||| IG Kultur Österreich
|||
- ---------------
|||
||| Kulturzentrum von Abriss bedroht -
|||
||| Jetzt muss kulturpolitische Vernunft über die Bulldozer siegen!
|||

Die IG Kultur Österreich vertritt bundesweit mehr als 350
Kulturinitiativen, zu denen auch die renommierte Kulturstätte
Rossmarkt in Grieskirchen/OÖ. zählt.

Seit mehr als zwanzig Jahren ist der Rossmarkt ein Zentrum für
Jugend-, Bildungs- und Kulturarbeit in der Region. Das breit
gefächerte Programmangebot hat seit jeher ganz wesentlich dazu
beigetragen, dass die Menschen außerhalb der Ballungszentren mit Kunst
und Kultur erreicht werden konnten. Namhaften Künstlern wie H.C
Artmann, Joe Zawinul, Milo Dor, Josef Hader u.v.m. ist die Region um
Grieskirchen nur durch den Kulturverein Rossmarkt ein Begriff
geworden.

Das mehr als 300 Jahre alte Haus im Grieskirchner Stadtzentrum, in dem
der Kulturverein beheimatet ist, ist vom Abriss bedroht. Es soll den
Geschäftsinteressen eines Autohändlers weichen.

"Es ist unglaublich", erklärt IG Kultur Österreich Geschäftsführerin
Gabriele Gerbasits in einer ersten Stellungnahme, "dass die Arbeit
eines derart wichtigen Kulturzentrums, das für Grieskirchen bisher so
wertvolle und nachhaltige Beiträge geleistet hat, von den finanziellen
Interessen eines Einzelnen zunichte gemacht werden kann".

Die IG Kultur Österreich fordert die politischen Entscheidungsträger
der Gemeinde, des Landes Oberösterreich, aber auch auf Bundesebene
dazu auf, unverzüglich alles Ihnen Mögliche zu tun, damit die Räume
dem Kulturbetrieb erhalten bleiben und die längst überfälligen
Sanierungsmaßnahmen am Haus getätigt werden.

"Wir glauben an den Sieg der Vernunft. Die Kulturstätte Rossmarkt gilt
aufgrund seiner Geschichte in ganz Österreich als kulturelles
Flaggschiff. Es wäre ein barbarischer Akt, wenn sie den Bulldozern zum
Opfer fallen würde", so Gabriele Gerbasits abschließend.

http://igkultur.at/igkultur/aktuell/1030192353

|||
||| Rückfragen:
|||
- ---------------
|||
||| IG Kultur Österreich
||| Viktorgasse 22/8
||| A-1040 Wien
|||
||| Tel: +43 (01) 503 71 20
||| Fax: +43 (01) 503 71 20 - 15
||| Mobil. +43 (676) 309 49 86
|||
||| http://www.igkultur.at/
|||

==================================================
08 Kurden demonstrieren gegen Auslieferung in Den Haag
From: Ges.f.bedrohte Voelker <gfbv.austria@chello.at>
==================================================
GESELLSCHAFT FÜR BEDROHTE VÖLKER INTERNATIONAL PRESSEMITTEILUNG...
Den Haag/Göttingen, den 23.08.2002

Kurden aus den Niederlanden und Deutschland demonstrieren in Den Haag:
Nuriye Kesbir nicht an die Türkei ausliefern!

Bis zu 2.000 Kurden aus den Niederlanden und Deutschland werden am
Sonnabend (24.08.) um 13 Uhr auf dem Malieveld in Den Haag gegen die
Auslieferung der Yezidin und Kurdin Nuriye Kesbir an die Türkei
demonstrieren.

Frau Kesbir war im September 2001 in die Niederlande eingereist und
hatte politisches Asyl beantragt. Sie wurde festgenommen, nachdem die
Türkei einen Auslieferungsantrag gestellt hat. Darüber entscheidet ein
niederländisches Gericht am 30. August. Der Yezidin wird in der
Türkei vorgeworfen, Mitglied der Kurdischen Arbeiterpartei PKK gewesen
zu sein.

Nach Beobachtungen der Gesellschaft für bedrohte Völker International
(GfbV) hat die türkische Regierung den Druck auf die Niederlande vor
dem Prozesstermin erhöht. Die GfbV ist nach amnesty international die
zweitgrößte Menschenrechtsorganisation in Europa.

Sie hat beratenden Status beim Wirtschafts- und Sozialrat der
Vereinten Nationen und setzt sich für verfolgte ethnische und
religiöse Minderheiten, Nationalitäten und Ureinwohnergemeinschaften
ein. Seit Anfang der 70-er Jahre engagiert sich die GfbV für die
Menschenrechte der Kurden in allen Staaten des Nahen Ostens.

Appell der Gesellschaft für bedrohte Völker an die Regierung der
Niederlande:In türkischen Gefängnissen wird gefoltert! Gewähren Sie
Nuriye Kesbir politisches Asyl !

Die türkischen Generäle und Politiker, die für den Großteil der 40.000
Toten im türkisch- kurdischen Krieg verantwortlich sind, wurden noch
vor kein Gericht gestellt. In türkischen Gefängnissen sind Tausende
von Menschen inhaftiert, die in einer Demokratie wie den Niederlanden
nie verurteilt worden wären.

Es ist absurd, dass ein Unrechtsregime wie die Türkei unter Berufung
auf die Genfer Flüchtlingskonvention fordert, Frau Kesbir stehe kein
Asyl zu, weil sie sich in einer terroristischen Vereinigung betätigt
habe. In der Türkei gibt es nicht einmal faire Gerichtsverfahren.

So wurde die kurdische Parlamentarierin Leyla Zana 1994 zu 15 Jahren
Haft verurteilt, nur weil sie ihre demokratischen Rechte wahrgenommen
hat und offen über die Leiden der Kurden gesprochen hat. Trotz
Verabschiedung eines Reformpaketes durch das türkische Parlament wurde
sie genauso wenig freigelassen wie Tausende gewaltlose politische
Gefangene.

Die GfbV fürchtet, dass Frau Kesbir in der Türkei sofort inhaftiert
wird. Nach Angaben von Amnesty International gab es auch 2001
systematische Folter und Vergewaltigung in türkischen Gefängnissen:
"Während ihrer Haft ohne Kontakt zur Außenwelt, im Gewahrsam der
Polizei oder der Gendarmerie wurden Berichten zufolge Männer und
Frauen routinemäßig nackt ausgezogen.

Zu den angewandten Methoden sexuellen Missbrauchs gehörten neben der
Vergewaltigung unter anderem Elektroschocks und Schläge auf die
Genitalien sowie bei Frauen auf die Brüste. Bis Ende 2001 hatten 147
Frauen, darunter 112 Kurdinnen, rechtlichen Beistand über ein
Prozesshilfeprojekt in Istanbul beantragt."

Nuriye Kesbir darf nicht an die Türkei ausgeliefert werden, dort droht
ihr Gefahr für Leib und Leben. Als Kurdin und als Yezidin war die
engagierte Frauenpolitikerin zeitlebens einer doppelten Verfolgung
ausgesetzt. 98 % der in der Türkei religiös verfolgten Minderheit der
Yezidi wurden durch die türkischen Behörden nach Westeuropa
vertrieben.

Selbst vor Mord schreckten sie nicht zurück: Zuletzt wurde am
12. April 2002 das yezidische Ehepaar Seredin und Newroz Sancar in
Xaniki Nusaybin ermordet.

Über den Fall Kesbir kann nur ein internationales Gericht
entscheiden. Vor dieses Gericht müssten auch türkische Generäle und
Politiker wegen Kriegsverbrechen und Kurdenverfolgung gestellt werden.

Tilman Zülch, Präsident der Gesellschaft für bedrohte Völker
International (erreichbar unter Tel. 0172 5620 523)

-------------------------------------------------
Gesellschaft fuer bedrohte Voelker e.V. (GfbV)
Inse Geismar, Pressereferentin
Postfach 2024, D-37010 Goettingen
Tel. +49/551/49906-25, Fax:+49/551/58028
E-Mail: presse@gfbv.de,
Hompage:http://www.gfbv.de
-------------------------------------------------

==================================================
09 Gegen Fundamentalismus
From: www.hagalil.com
==================================================
http://juden.judentum.org/christlicher-fundamentalismus/pbc.htm
Falsche Freunde sind wahre Feinde www.hagalil.com

Am 24. August 2002 organisierte die Initiative "Deutschland an der
Seite Israels" eine Kundgebung vor dem Reichstag in Berlin. Nach
eigenen Aussagen will die Initiative mit dieser Kundgebung ihre "Liebe
und christliche Verantwortung und Solidarität dem Staat Israel und dem
jüdischen Volk gegenüber" ausdrücken sowie "eine Stimme sein gegen den
sich wieder bemerkbar machenden Antisemitismus in Deutschland".

Der Bundesverband Jüdischer Studenten in Deutschland e.V. (Bjsd)
distanziert sich dennoch mit aller Deutlichkeit von den Initiatoren
dieser Demonstration. Das Ziel der meisten Gruppierungen, welche diese
Demonstration unterstützen, ist es, jeden Juden zum Glauben an Jesus
zu missionieren.

Zu diesem Zweck werden Seminare organisiert, Feste veranstaltet und
christliche Propaganda in Synagogen verteilt. Das Existenzrecht von
Juden wird nicht anerkannt, insofern sie nicht an Jesus glauben,
d.h. den christlichen Glauben annehmen. Diese Bestrebungen verurteilen
wir aufs Schärfste.

Gleichzeitig distanzieren wir uns von der politischen Ausrichtung der
Veranstaltung.

Der Hauptredner der Kundgebung, Ludwig Schneider, sprach in seinem im
vergangenen Winter gehaltenen Vortrag "Israel zwischen Krieg und
Frieden" von einem "Heiligen Groß-Krieg", den es zu führen gelte. Nach
Ludwig Schneider sind jegliche Friedensverhandlungen oder Abkommen mit
den Palästinensern "von Gott verboten" und würden Israel unbedingt ins
Verderben führen.

Stattdessen müsse Israel die "Pflugscharen in Schwerter" umschmieden
und einen erfolgreichen "Heiligen Krieg" gegen die, "die dich, oh
Gott, hassen" (= Muslime) führen. In eben diesem Verständnis wurde von
vielen dieser fundamentalistischen Gruppen der Mord an
Ministerpräsident Rabin als "Strafe Gottes" verstanden und positiv
gefeiert.

Der BJSD distanziert sich auch von den Zielsetzungen der "Partei
Bibeltreuer Christen" (PBC), die mit den Auffassungen einer
demokratischen, pluralistischen Gesellschaft unvereinbar
sind. "Während die Länderregierungen christlichen Religionsunterricht
(...) Stück für Stück entfernen, wird der Islam, die gewaltbereiteste
Religion der Welt (...) heute schon in drei Bundesländern unschuldigen
Kindern in Schulen gelehrt."

So erregt sich PCB-Bundesgeschäftsführer Jürgen Künzel und ergänzt:
"Auch in Deutschland hat die Unterwanderung der Parteien durch Muslime
begonnen."

Diese Hetze gegen Muslime lehnen wir strikt ab.

In Abgrenzung zu den scheinbaren Solidaritätsbekundungen dieser
fundamentalistischen Christen betont der BJSD seine Verbundenheit mit
dem Staat Israel. Gleichzeitig hoffen wir auf ein friedliches und
tolerantes Miteinander aller Religionen und Kulturen in Deutschland,
Israel und weltweit.

V.i.S.d.P. Bundesverband Jüdischer Studenten in Deutschland e.V. (BJSD)
http://juden.judentum.org/christlicher-fundamentalismus/pbc.htm

==================================================
10 Ride for Life' in Salzburg mit Eskalationen
From: anonym@myno.na
==================================================
Österreich 25. August 2002, 20:25
,Ride for Life' in Salzburg mit Eskalationen

Salzburger Weihbischof Laun hielt hl. Messe mit "Jugend für das Leben"
Extreme Linke bewarfen Lebensrechtler mit ,Wasserbomben' Versöhnliche
Gesten von Jugend für das Leben beim Friedensgruß.

Salzburg (www.kath.net)

Der "Ride for Life", die Radtour für das Leben, die von der
katholischen Jugendorganisation "Jugend für das Leben" in diesem
Sommer organisiert wird, erreichte am Samstag die Stadt Salzburg. Bei
einer Kundgebung am Samstag Nachmittag am Alten Markt wiesen etwa 80
junge Aktivisten von "Jugend für das Leben" auf das Anliegen der
ungeborenen Kinder hin.

Dabei kam es auch zu Störversuchen von etwa 30 extremen Linken, die
zum Teil extra aus anderen Bundesländern angereist waren, um die
Aktion zu stören und zu provozieren: "Wasserbomben" - mit Wasser
gefüllte Plastikbeutel - wurden geworfen, außerdem versuchten manche
der linken Gegendemonstranten, gewaltsam Flugblätter aus den Händen
der "Jugend- für-das-Leben"-Aktivisten zu reißen; manche grölten
kommunistische Kampfparolen.

Auch bei der hl. Messe, die vom Salzburger Weihbischof Andreas Laun
gehalten wurde, kam es vereinzelt zu Beschimpfungen. Beim Eingangstor
der Franziskanerkirche wurden Kirchgänger angepöbelt, Weihbischof Laun
wurde mit Buhrufen "begrüßt". Die Kirchenbesucher wurden mit
Trillerpfeifen empfangen. Der Slogan der Linken dürfte vermutlich
"Lärm statt Argumente" gewesen sein:

Zu den skandierten Sprüchen der Gegendemonstranten gehörten unter
anderem: "Feminismus statt Pro-Life-Fanatismus". Im Gegensatz zu den
Agressionen der Linken setzten "Jugend-für-das-Leben"-Aktivisten
während der hl. Messe ein Zeichen der Versöhnung. Beim Friedensgruß
gingen Jugendliche vor die Kirche, um den überraschten Demonstranten
ebenfalls das Zeichen des Friedens zu geben.

Selbst beim anschließenden Vortrag vom Weihbischof Laun wurden die
Störversuche zum Teil fortgesetzt und Lebensschützer nach dem Abzug
der Polizei neuerlich mit "Wasserbomben" beworfen.

Im Vortrag selbst ging der Salzburger Weihbischof auf
Hintergrundfragen zum Lebensschutz ein: Wie könnte man den Schutz des
Lebens begründen, wenn der Mensch nichts als Materie ist? Eine
wirkliche Sicherheit gebe nur die jüdisch-christliche Tradition, die
sagt: Der Mensch ist mehr, er hat eine unsterbliche Seele, er ist ein
Ebenbild Gottes.

Laun nannte den US-Philosophen Fukuyama, der sich wieder an diese
Sichtweise herantaste, wenn er vom "Faktor X" spreche, der den
Menschen zum Menschen macht, und eine neue Begründung des Naturrechts
fordere.

Am Sonntag Vormittag wurden in zahlreichen Pfarreien der Stadt
Flugblätter und Infomaterialien verteilt, am Nachmittag fand um 16.00
Uhr eine Pro-Life-Kundgebung auf einer Brücke statt.

RIDE FOR LIFE im KATH.NET-Forum

Foto: Gegendemonstranten in Salzburg; (c) KATH.NET

==================================================
11 Böhler/Putztrupps/Ausgliederung/KPÖ
From: KPÖ Steiermark <kpoe_stmk@hotmail.com>
==================================================
KPÖ Steiermark
Lagergasse 98a
8020 Graz
Montag, 26. August 2002
Presseinformation der KPÖ Steiermark

Böhler: Private Putzrupps!

Die Kapfenberger KPÖ wendet sich entschieden dagegen, die hauseigenen
Putztrupps bei Böhler-Uddeholm aufzulösen und die Arbeit
Gebäudereinigungsfirmen zu übergeben, die ihre Bediensteten weit
schlechter bezahlen.

KPÖ-Sprecher Clemens Perteneder verwies darauf, dass die Firma große
Gewinne macht und hohe Managergehälter zahlt: "Das alles geht auf
Kosten der Menschen, die am wenigsten verdienen und die schlechtesten
Arbeitsbedingungen haben".

Die KPÖ wendet sich gegen diese Ausgliederungen , die bei den
Putzfrauen anfangen und bis zur hauseigenen Gärtnerei reichen
können. Dem Betriebsrat warf Perteneder vor, den Ernst der Lage nicht
zu erkennen, wenn er feststellt, dass jene Böhler-Putzfrauen, deren
Arbeitszeit jetzt gekürzt wurde, ohnehin noch nach dem
Metaller-Kollektivvertrag bezahlt werden.

Perteneder: "Unter dem Diktat des Profits sind ähnliche Tricks wie bei
den Putzfrauen auch bei der Stammbelegschaft nicht ausgeschlossen".

KPÖ-Steiermark
Lagergasse 98 a
8020 Graz
Tel.: 0316 71 24 36
Fax 0316 71 62 91
email: kp.stmk@kpoe-graz.at; kpoe_stmk@hotmail.com

><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><
DISKUSSION
><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><

==================================================
12 Re: 10 Judenmarkierung
From: Martin Mair <mm@mediaweb.at>
==================================================
Re: 10 Judenmarkierung in der Tageszeitung der Republik Österreich
von: Karl Pfeifer

Da ich auch an dieser Veranstaltung teilgenommen habe, muss ich leider
feststellen, dass Karl Pfeifer ausgesprochen einseitig und
unvollstaendig von den Vorfaellen bei der Verasntaltung der Gruenen
berichtet hat:

Mein erstes aha-Erlebnis war, dass der Saal gesteckt voll war und die
Stimmung schon etwas aufgeheizt war, da Felicita Langer viel zu lange
und zu viel auf einmal geredet hatte.

Als ein Mann mit dunkler Hautfarbe den Saal verlaesst - offenbar ein
Palaestinenser - sagt eine aeltere Wiener Dame zu ihm: "Sie haben hier
nichts zu suchen, Sie sind nicht in Oesterreich geboren". Nach der
Pause kann ich mir einen Platz weiter vorne an der Mauer ergattern und
da faellt mir das angesprochene "zionistische Lager" bestehend aus
einigen Wiener Juden, die recht weit vorne als geschlossene Gruppe
immer wieder durch stoerende Zwischenrufe auffiel und spaeter dann mit
Tumulten die Veranstaltung gesprengt hatten. In diesem Block fand ich
auch die aletere Dame vor, die dem Palestinenser gegenueber sich so
rassistisch geaeussert hatte.

Den Zwischenruf des aelteren - also so richitg alt = Kriegsgenerration
schien er mir nicht zu sein, vielleicht anfang 50 - habe ich, obwohl
maximal 3 Meter entfernt - zwar nicht so deutlich gehoert, aber Karl
Pfeifer erwaehnt nicht, dass das darauf folgende Verhalten des
"Zionistenblocks" meines Erachtens stark ueberzogen war:

Er skandierte mit voller Inbrunst und Gehaessigkeit "Nazis raus"
obwohl 1. der Mann alleine war und 2. seine Aussage moeglicherweise
antisemitisch gemeint war (er kann auch gemeint haben, dass nach dem,
was Israel jahrelang den Palestinensern angetan habe, Israel nun die
Gewalt zurueckschlaegt oder einfach nur, dass der Zionistenblock, der
vor allem sich ueber die Wortmeldungen der Palaestinenser aufgeregt
hatte, auch bald dran komme und sich zu Wort melden kann) aber daraus
noch lange nicht gefolgert werden kann, der Mann sei ein Nazi.

Da nationalisozialistische Wiederbetaetigung in Oesterreich strafbar
ist, ist der Vorwurf, jemand sei ein Nazi, nicht so leicht zu nehmen
und erfuellt, wenn dieser Vorwurf nicht zutrifft, den Tatbestand der
Verleumdung. In diesem Fall scheint es mir eine vorschnelle
Verleumdung zu sein. Anzeichen, dass die Gruenen ihn kennnen und -
was Karl Pfeifer wohl unterstellen will - ein Naheverhaeltnis zu ihm
haetten, ist mir nicht aufgefallen.

Kann schon sein, dass er schon mal bei einer anderen Veranstaltung der
Gruenen aufgefallen ist, das tun einige andere "Querulanten" uebrigens
auch. Da der Mann keine weitere Erlaeuterung oder sonstigen
sachdienlichen Bemerkungen von sich gegeben hatte, koennen wir nur
spekulieren, was er nun genau gemeint hatte. Wenn Karl Pfeifer gegen
Judenmarkierung ist, dann moege er bitte

Weiters erwahnt Karl Pfeifer nicht, dass jemand aus dem
"Zionistenblock", laut schreiend zum Podium ging und behauptet, das
Podium sei einseitig besetzt weil der Karl Pfeifer sei von der
Veranstaltung ausgeladen worden, was Ulrike Lunacek verneinte.

Weiters versuchte dieser Mann, als die zweite Fragerunde abgeschlossen
wurde, sich mit Gewalt des Mikrofons bemaechtigen, weil niemand aus
seinem Block drangekommen war. Weiters schien - ich glaube es war vor
der Sache mit dem Kikra - ein Palaestinenser die Nerven zu verlieren
und wollte auch schreiend nach vorne stuermen und wurde von einem
anderen Palestinenser zurueckgehalten. Der Vorfall mit dem Kampf ums
Mikro war dann der Grund fuer die Gruenen, die Veranstaltung
abzubrechen.

Die Auswahl der Fragesteller war zweifelslos ungluecklich gewahelt, da
zwar 2 - 3 Palaestinenser und ein 1 -2 weitere propalestinensische
ragesteller aber nur 2 proisraelische und niemand aus dem
"Zionistenblock" zu Wort gekommen ist. Weiters wurde vom
"Zionistenblock" zurecht bemaengelt, dass keine kritische Stimme von
der palestinensischen Seite am Podium war, eine Dame aus dem Blcok
hoehnte gar, "weil es keine kritischen Palaestinenser gibt", worauf
jemand von "der anderen Seite" erwiderte, dass die kritischen
Palaestinenser eben nicht so leicht ausreisen koennen (weil ja Israel
bestimmt, welcher Palestinenser raus darf und welcher nicht).

Der erstere proisraelische Fragesteller wollte gar die Gruenen als
solches als antisemitisch diskretiditieren, weil die Abgeordnete Sonja
Moser auf einer Demo mitgemacht hatte, die von einer
palaestinensischen Gruppe mitorganisiert worden war, die in einer
Broschuere eine antisemitische Aesserung so in der Preisklasse von
"die Juden ins mehr werfen" (was natuerlcih abzulehnen ist),
veroeffentlicht hatte.

Es sei noch angemekrt, dass sowohl die propalestinensischen als auch
die proisraelischen Fragesteller allesamt recht einseitig und nicht an
einer ehrlichen und offenen Diskussion interessiert waren, sondern
lediglich an der Bestaetigung des eigenen Standpunkts bzw. versuchten
der Gegenseite etwas vorzuwerfen. "Was sagen sie zu ..." oder "Stimmt
es, dass ..." waren da die ueblichen Einleitungen der Fragen, die wie
Granaten niederprasselten.

Nach Abbruch der Veranstaltung versuchte ich ein wenig mit den Damen
und Herren vom Block zu diskutieren und musste feststellen, dass diese
offenbar rechte Zionisten waren, da sie am eigenen Lager rein gar
nichts kritikwuerdig befanden und all die Geschichten ueber Ariel
Sharon Luegengeschichten seien und er kein Kriegsverbrecher sei.

Auf meine Frage, warum den ein Zusammenleben in einem gemeinsamen
Staat nicht moeglich sei, erwiderte die alte Dame ganz empoert, dann
wuerden die 400.000 vertriebenen Palaestinenser wieder zurueck wollen
und die Isreaelis wuerden einmal zu Minderheit werden und die Juden
wollten eben in einem juedischen Israel leben und nicht gemeinsam mit
den Palaestinensern.

Diese und andere Auesserungen des sich zum Teil sehr aggressiv
verhaltenden Blocks lassen wohl zu, diesen als Zionisten zu bezeichnen
(ich wuerde da zumindest partiell auch von Rassisten, wenn nicht gar
Rechtsextremisten sprechen).

In Sachen Moellemann hat Felicita Langer uebrigens nicht eine
bestimmte Aeusserung diese Politikers verteidigt sondern sich "nur"
gegen eine vorschnelle Bezeichnung Moellemanns als Antisemiten
verwahrt, dies aber nicht wirklich nachvollziehbar begruendet sondern
etwas unverstaendlich herumgeredet (was sie genau sagen wollte, war
auch mir nicht klar).

Beschimpft wurde freilich nicht nur ein Jude sondern beschimpft wurde
eine ehemalige Widerstandskaempferin offenbar von Juden, weil sie sich
gegen die Unterdrueckung der Plaestinenser ausgesprochen hatte. Diese
Frau legte dann dar, dass sie aus Solidaritaet mit den Juden auch
selbst den Strassenboden mitgewaschen hatte, von den Nazis selbst
drangsaliert worden ist und auch selbst Juden versteckt hatte, und
daher eben veraegert ist, dass nun Israel selbst zum Unterdruecker
geworden sei.

Noch eine Bloede Meldung kam von juedischer Seite: Dass Oesterreicher
nicht ueber den Konflikt Israel-Palaestina mitreden duerften, wegen
der Judenverfolgung, als waeren 1. damals alle Oesterreich Nazis
gewesen und 2. wuerde sich die Schuld an die Nachfahren vererben. Ich
sage, es ist das Gegenteil der Fall: Ohne Verfolgung der Juden durch
deutsche und oesterreichische Nazis haetten nicht so viele Juden in
Palaestina Zuflucht gesucht und Israel - ohne Mitbestimmung der
einheimischen palaestinenser - gegruendet. Warum sollen die
Palaestinenser leiden, weil Deutsch und Oesterreicher Juden verfolgt
hatten und sie eben nicht (an)erkennen konnten, warum ein eigener
Staat fuer Juden so wichtig ist. Wenn niemand den Palaestinenser
Zukunfts- perspektiven anzubieten vermag, dann werden diesewohl nie
aus dem Kreislauf der Gewalt ausbrechen koennen.

Die Veranstaltung als Ganzes ist wohl als missglueckt zu bezeichnen,
da voellig sinnlos die Stimmung durch den ueberlangen und ueberladenen
Vortrag von Felicita Langer und natuerlich fehlte eine kritische
Durchleuchtung der palaestinensischen Seite des Konflikts. Weiters
wurde unten im Eingang ein palestinensischer Buechertisch, bei dem gar
eine Palaestinenserfahne hing, plaziert, was auch zum boesen Blut
unter den juedischen Teilnehmern gefuehrt hatte. Besser waere wohl,
eine Friedensintiative haette da einen Infotisch gemacht.

Auch bei den Antworten wurde Felicita Langer zu viel Zeit eingeraumt,
und da die Veranstalter die Diskussion nach insgesammt nur 2 Stunden
beenden wollten, eben nur wenige Leute eine Frage stellen konnten und
so auch dem "Zionistenblock" letztlich das Wort verwehrt worden ist.
Und bei einem heiss umstrittenen und komplexen Thema zu glauben, nach
2 Stunden koenne man einfach Schluss machen, war auch ausge- sprochen
naiv.

Etwas mehr Vorbereitung und besseres sowie strengeres briefen der
Vortragenden waere das mindeste gewesen, damit genug Zeit zum
Diskutieren gewesen waere.

So konnten die beiden Bloecke sich in ihren vorgefertigten Vorurteilen
bestaetigt sehen - dass die Gegenseite nicht Dialog und Frieden will -
und die ueberwiegende Mehrheit wird wohl nur verwirrt und kaum
gescheiter als vorher die Veranstaltung verlassen haben.

Ein in der israelitischen Kultusgemeinde aktiver ehemaliger juedischer
Journalist konnte ueber das Verhalten des "Blocks" nur den Kopf
schuetteln und meinte gar, er muesse das agressive Verhalten dieser
Leute, die ja auch in der Kultusgemeinde seien, dort einmal zur
Sprache bringen. Bei einer Diskussion im kleinen Rahmen - ein gruene

Also so eindeutig ist die Sache auch nicht, wie sie es Karl Pfeifer
darstellt. Zumindest in diesem Fall kann ich aufgrund meiner eigenen
Erfahrung sagen, dass dessen Polemiken ziemlich einseitig sind.

Der Verdacht, dass es Karl Pfeifer auch um billige Polemik gegen die
"boesen" Anderen (Palestinenser) geht und die Rechtfertigung
zionistischer Gruppen und Personen geht, scheint sich da zu
bestaetigen, denn er selbst ist nicht frei von rassistischen
bzw. faschistoiden Argumentationen: In einem im MUND veroeffentlichten
offenen Leserbrief an die Presse leitete er aus der Einladepolitik der
Presse-Redaktion an Gastkommentatoren ab, was die Leser denken
wuerden, als wuerden die Leser der Presse die Zeitung nur wegen den
einen Gastkommentar die Presse kaufen, obwohl viele Presseleser gerade
betonen, die Zeitung trotzt der Kommentare zu kaufen, weil ja der
ueberwiegende Teil der Zeitung aus recht informativen Artikeln
besteht. Da kommt das alte Obrigkeitsdenken zutage: Die Meinung des
Herrscher (Chefredakteurs) hat die Meinung des untertaenigen Volkes
(der Leser) zu sein.

Karl Pfeifer moege daher seine anscheinend ideologischen Interessen
zuruecknehmen und nicht gleich immer auf die "boesen Anderen"
lospfeffern, denn sonst wird er auch einiges an berechtigter Kritik
einstecken muessen.

Fuer mich hat seine Glaubwuerdigkeit aufgrund seiner ausgesprochen
grossen EInseitigkeit und dem offenbar absoluten Interesse, bei "den
Anderen" Faschisten zu entlarven, stark gelitten.

Als (selbst)kritische Lektuere empfehle ich ihm den israelischen
Psychologen Dan Bar-On mit "Die Anderen in uns" wo er genau jenes
israelische "monolithische Selbst" das der altenbekannten
Ideoologisierung von wegen wir die Guten und die anderen die "absolut
Boesen" dient. Diese haessliche Seite israelischen Nationalismus ist
bei dieser Veranstaltung leider nur zu deutlich zutage getreten. Fuer
mich besonders erschuetternd ist, dass oesterreichische Juden, die ja
keine israelischen Staatsbuerger sind, derartige nationalistische
Aufwallungen bekommen.

Statt Oel ins Feuer zu giessen, sollte Karl Pfeifer sich lieber
ueberlegen wie man "den Abgrund ueberbrucken" (ein weiteres Buch von
Dan Bar-On) kann. Karl Pfeifers ausgesprochen selektive Darstellung
der Vorfaelle der missgluckten Veranstaltung sind jedenfalls dazu
angetan, den Graben noch unnoetig zu vergroessern.

Da ein juedischer Zuhoehrer, der selbst das agressive Verhalten des
juedischen Blocks ablehnte, sich slebst als linken Zionisten
bezeichnete, war die Bezeichnung der Wiener Zeitung wenngleich
irrefuehrend - weil es auch linke und gewaltlose Zioinisten gibt - so
doch nicht voellig daneben. Wenn der Autor des Artikels nur aufgrund
der APA-Meldung die Begriff "Zionisten" verwendet hatte, dann hat er
wohl unzulaessigerweise sein Vorurteil hinzugefuegt, war er selbst bei
der Veranstaltung oder kennt ausfuehrliche Berichte davon, dann war es
ein Werturteil, ueber das sich streiten laesst. Aber da ich nicht
weiss, aufgrund welcher Informationsgrundlage der Artikel geschirebewn
worden ist, kann ich auch da nur spekulieren, und Spekulationen
sollten auch als solche ehrlicherweise bezeichnet werden.

Und Hand aufs Herz: Wie oft neigen denn Linke dazu, andere Menschen
als "Rechtsextremisten", "Faschisten" usw. aufgrund vergleichbar
duenner Suppe zu "markieren"?

----------------------------------------
Martin Mair - Publizist virtuell & traditionell
Krottenbachstrasse 40/9/6, A-1190 Wien
Tel. + Fax: +43 1 3677487,
Mobil: + 43 676 3548310
Email: mm@mediaweb.at

Media Austria Webhosting & Webdesign
http://www.mediaaustria.at

Media Austria Bannertausch
http://www.bannertausch.info

MediaWeb - Plattform fuer Medienvielfalt
http://www.mediaweb.at

==================================================
13 Karl Pfeifers Antwort an Martin Mair
From: Karl Pfeifer
==================================================
Herr Mair ist ein wortgewaltiger "Publizist", d.h. er antwortet auf
meinen 222 Wörter Kommentar mit 1.844 Wörtern. Herr Mair wirft mir
mehrfach vor, ich hätte die Veranstaltung der Grünen (Lunacek &
Langer) im Mund einseitig und unvollständig geschildert. Die Wahrheit
ist, dass ich diese im Mund gar nicht geschildert habe.

Ich habe lediglich die "Wiener Zeitung" wegen "Judenmarkierung"
kritisiert.

Was mir in seinem Text auffällt: auch er benützt das NS-Verbotsgesetz
als Keule gegen Kritiker von antisemitischen Äußerungen, die ja in
Österreich nicht unter Strafe gestellt sind. Gleichzeitig aber wirft
er mir, wegen eines Artikels, den er aber nicht zitiert, "rassistische
bzw. faschistoide Argumentation" vor. Es ist erstaunlich, dass diese
so sensiblen angeblichen Freunde der Palästinenser, gar nicht sensibel
sind, wenn sie andere Menschen, zum Beispiel mich, verleumden.

Karl Pfeifer

==================================================
14 Nachlese Sommergespräch
From: Friederike Ruth Winkler
==================================================
Liebe Freundinnen und Freunde,

da einige von Euch mich fragen werden, was denn das schon wieder für
eine Veranstaltung bei den Grünen war, sende ich Euch eine Schilderung
des Abends aus meiner Perspektive. (Eine ausführlichere Fassung
(inklusive heftiger Kritik) habe ich an meine lieben Parteifreundinnen
und -freunde bei den Grünen gerichtet.

Diverse interne Anmerkungen habe ich nun rausgestrichen bzw. gekürzt,
damit es nicht zu langatmig wird.) Wenn Ihr wollt, könnt Ihr es gerne
weiterleiten oder veröffentlichen. Die Zeiten in denen ich mich in
Parteisolidarität geübt und (nach außen hin) den Mund gehalten habe,
sind hiermit vorbei.

Gesendet: Freitag, 23. August 2002 12:33
Betreff: Nachlese Sommergespräch
B''H

Mehr als eine verpatzte Veranstaltung

Versuch einer Bestandsaufnahme des "Sommergesprächs" der Wiener Grünen
zum Thema "Krieg im Heiligen Land" (21.8.02)

Die Einladung

Die außenpolitische Sprecherin der Grünen hat eingeladen. Zwei
RepräsentantInnen einer Gruppe, die als israelische
"Friedensinitiative" auf dem europäischen Veranstaltungsmarkt ganz
gute Konjunktur hat. Auf einer Webseite über israelische
Friedensinitiativen wird sie als "kleine aber sehr aktive" Gruppe
beschrieben. Dass sie "sehr aktiv" sind, kann ich bezeugen. Den
größten Anteil an der ständigen Überflutung meiner mailbox hat diese
Initiative.

Dass sie trotz des vielen Lärms den sie schlägt recht klein ist, merkt
man bei näherer Betrachtung auch. Jedoch scheinen sie ganz gut in der
europäischen kommunistischen Szene, vor allem in Italien und
Frankreich, verankert zu sein. Damit kann man zwar einen Teil der
fehlenden Größe wettmachen, aber das führt dann auch manchmal zu
eigenartigen Hinweisen bei Aufrufen zu Aktivitäten. Etwa: Es gebe
schon etliche internationale Teilnehmer, aber zu wenig israelische...

Oder: Es wäre wichtig, dass auch Protestbriefe in hebräischer Sprache
geschrieben werden... Gleich zwei DiskussionsteilnehmerInnen sollten
also von dieser bizarren Gruppe, die bei weitem nicht das vielfältige
Spektrum israelischer Friedensinitiativen repräsentiert, kommen. Dass
das Ganze nicht gerade einer vernünftigen politischen Analyse dienen
soll, war offensichtlich, und die Aufregung schon im Vorfeld
dementsprechend groß.

Meine anfängliche Hoffnung, dass so ein kleines "Sommergespräch" nicht
allzu viel Öffentlichkeitswirkung haben mag, erwies sich schon in den
Tagen davor als Irrtum. Und so war denn auch der Veranstaltungssaal
mitsamt Vorzimmer überquellend voll. Ein paar jüdische
Gemeindemitglieder, die ich sonst nicht auf Grünen Veranstaltungen
sehe, die Palästina-AktivistInnen vom Stephansplatz in sehr großer
Zahl, und etliche offensichtlich sehr aufgeregte Gemüter aus
verschiedenen Ecken der linken Szene. Eine spannungsreiche Mischung in
einer Raumsituation, die die ohnehin schon in der Luft liegende
Agressivität noch anheizte.

Die Veranstaltung

Letztlich kam nur eine der beiden Eingeladenen. Das änderte wohl kaum
etwas am Inhalt der Veranstaltung, aber der, der nicht kam, wäre
wenigstens ein guter Redner gewesen.

Ich kam etwas verspätet und habe die ersten Worte von Ulrike Lunacek
versäumt. Vielleicht hat sie da Wichtiges und Substanzielles
gesagt. Es scheint schon ein paar Zwischenrufe gegeben zu haben, denn
die Unruhe im Saal ist groß. Bis ich mich so weit durch die Menge
durchgeschoben habe, dass ich auch hören konnte, waren die
Ausführungen unserer außenpolitischen Sprecherin jedenfalls nicht mehr
sehr inhaltsreich.

Dass der österreichischen Außenpolitik jemand vom Format Bruno
Kreiskys fehle, dass wir mehr Mut in der Außenpolitik brauchen würden,
dass sie für Sanktionen gegen Siedlungen, nicht jedoch gegen Israel
sei, und dass sie gegen die [israelische] Regierung, nicht jedoch
gegen die Bevölkerung sei. Ja, und dass die EU schon versäumt hat, auf
eine Demokratisierung in Palästina zu drängen.

Nähere Analysen - wieso und wie und was das heißt - blieben
selbstverständlich aus.

Also kam die Gastreferentin zu Wort. Eine einstmals hohe Funktionärin
der israelischen KP, die den Ruf hat, vom Realen Sozialismus bis
zuletzt überzeugt gewesen zu sein. Seit es mit den Auftritten bei den
brüderlichen Freunden nichts mehr ist, sind ihre Aktivitäten in
Deutschland angewachsen.

Früher hat sie als Rechtsanwältin palästinensische Angeklagte vor
israelischen Gerichten verteidigt, und dabei sicher Bedeutendes
geleistet. Dafür hat sie auch mal eine Auszeichnung bekommen. Aber das
ändert nichts an der erschreckenden Engstirnigkeit ihrer politischen
Analyse. Immer noch tief in ihrer alten Ideologie verhaftet, sind
letztlich die U.S.A. die Quelle allen Übels.

Sie distanziert sich von den Terroranschlägen, und das ist ihr
offensichtlich auch eine ganz wichtige Klarstellung. Doch dann geht es
weiter damit, dass Israel doch den Weg zu den Attentaten ebne, und das
alles sei überhaupt erst möglich, weil "der Boss sitzt in Washington".
Langatmig breitet sie sich aus über angebliche und wirkliche
Schreckenstaten, zitiert längst widerlegte Pressemeldungen über das Ausmaß
der Zerstörungen in Dschenin - natürlich kein Wort von den dortigen
Waffenarsenalen und Bombenbauwerkstätten und kein Wort vom UNO-Bericht der
ihrer Version widerspricht.

Zahlen rundet sie jedesmal sehr großzügig auf. Wenn sie allzuviel
übertreibt kommt es zu heftigen Zwischenrufen, die Stimmung im Saal
heizt sich zusehends auf.

Ich kenne fast alles, was sie zitiert und weiß daher auch immer was
sie weglässt bzw. wie sie Details verzerrend aus dem Zusammenhang
reißt. Ein paar handfeste Unwahrheiten sind auch dabei, aber
überwiegend ist ihre Darstellung nicht so sehr davon gekennzeichnet,
was sie Falsches sagt, sondern was sie weglässt.

Vielleicht projiziert sie in ihr Bild vom unschuldig-leidenden
Palästina alles das hinein, was früher für sie Moskau war? Jedenfalls
ist alles ganz einfach: Zwei Staaten für zwei Völker; die Israelis
müssten nur endlich Ruhe geben.

Immerhin ist sie konsequent und lässt an niemanden in der israelischen
Politik ein gutes Haar, der nicht ihrer eigenen Gruppierung angehört -
auch nicht an Jitzchak Rabin. Als sie beim Stichwort
"Staatsterrorismus" angelangt ist, sagt sie in aller Offenheit "das
hat leider keiner in der [israelischen] Regierung gesagt, sondern der
Jürgen Möllemann."

Womit bei einem Teil des Publikums das Fass zum Überlaufen kommt, und
der Tumult zunimmt. Sie legt noch ein Schäuferl nach: "Der Möllemann
hat die Wahrheit gesagt, und wenn jemand die Wahrheit sagt..." und
"Ich komme nach Wien um die Wahrheit zu sagen".

Diskussion und Tumult

Dem Moderator ist die Kontrolle über die Veranstaltung längst
entglitten. Er versucht eine Runde Publikumsfragen, die auch ohne
größere Zwischenfälle gestellt werden. Mehr und weniger konstruktive
Fragen - unter anderem nach der Rolle der EU, aber auch nach der
Motivation der Veranstalter, das Podium so einseitig zu besetzen.

Und natürlich, ob Österreich nicht wegen seiner historischen
Verantwortung mit Kritik an Israel vorsichtig sein müsse...
Insbesondere zur letzten Frage übt sich Ulrike Lunacek in Ausflüchten:
Ja, man müsse vorsichtig sein, aber im Sinne einer Friedenspolitk
mache es sehr wohl Sinn ...

Und wieder gelangt sie zu der bedauernden Schlussfolgerung, dass
Österreich nicht mehr die Rolle hat, die es zu Kreiskys Zeiten hatte.
Vieles beantwortet sie damit, dass sie nicht zuständig sei. "Die
österreichischen Grünen sind weder in der Regierung noch beeinflussen
wir die EU-Position".

Und zur mangelnden Ausgewogenheit der Podiumsbesetzung fällt ihr nur
ein, dass doch sowohl sie als auch ihr Gast "auch Kritik an
Palästinensern geübt" haben, und doch ohnehin die Anschläge verurteilt
haben. Und: "Wir haben niemanden von der Diskussion hier
ausgeschlossen".

Die Tumulte im Publikum eskalieren. Ein Grüppchen in den vorderen
Reihen setzt zu "Nazis raus"-Rufen an, der Moderator bemüht sich das
Wort zu ergreifen und noch eine Fragerunde durchzuführen.

Da klar ist, dass da jetzt nicht mehr viel Konstruktives kommt, gehe
ich hinunter und widme mich dem Büchertisch, der schon bei meinem
Kommen mein stilles Entsetzen hervorgerufen hat.

Der Büchertisch

Nein, natürlich sind auf einem Büchertisch, der am Rande einer
politischen Veranstaltung gemacht wird, nicht unbedingt Bücher drauf,
die die Position der einladenden Partei darstellen, sondern Sachbücher
zum Thema. In der Regel werden wir aber annehmen, dass ein Büchertisch
im Haus der Grünen von einer Gruppe gemacht wird, mit der die Grünen
befreundet sind, und deren Arbeit sie unterstützen - oder nicht?

Da lag nun neben einigen Büchern über den Islam, die recht interessant
ausgeschaut haben, eine Materialsammlung über Palästina, herausgegeben
von der Österreichisch-Arabischen Gesellschaft, mit einem Vorwort
ihres Präsidenten Fritz Edlinger.

Ich hab mir das Vorwort durchgelesen, ich hab's mir nicht genau genug
gemerkt, um es auswendig zu zitieren, aber es entsprach dem, wofür
Fritz Edlinger bekannt ist. Auch sein Palästina-Buch war da, in dem er
darstellt wie schlimm der "Judenstaat" immer schon gegen das
palästinensische Volk vorgegangen sei ... Und allerlei Zeitschriften
und weitere Bücher dieser Art.

Noch eine Frage

Aus dem Haus heraussen höre ich, wie oben im Saal gerade eine
interessante Publikumsfrage gestellt wird:

Jemand zitiert aus einer Broschüre eines "Palästina-Komitees" [die,
die öfters am Stephansplatz ihre Demos abhalten] einen
hoch-antisemitischen Text und erhebt den Vorwurf, dass dieses Komitee
von Grünen unterstützt werde. In diesem Zusammenhang kommt auch die
Frage, nach einem "offenen Brief" dieser "Palästina-Plattform" an die
Israelitische Kultusgemeinde auf, der auch den Namen einer Grünen
Gemeinderätin unter den UnterzeichnerInnen trug.

(Ich kann mich an die Geschichte mit dem "offenen Brief" sehr gut
erinnern. Da ist kurz gesagt drinnengestanden, dass die Israelitische
Kultusgemeinde wohl selbst schuld sei am steigenden Antisemitismus,
weil sie so israel-freundlich sei.)

Dann will noch jemand wissen, ob die Positionen der Gastreferentin von
den Grünen geteilt werden. Doch zu Antworten auf all diese Fragen
kommt es nicht mehr, denn der Lärm im Publikum ist so groß geworden,
dass der Moderator die Veranstaltung vorzeitig abbricht.

Die politische Wirksamkeit des Abends hält sich in Grenzen - nämlich
in innenpolitischen, ja in regionalen. Niemandem, der oder die in
Palästina oder in Israel Not leidet, oder in Gefahr ist, ist mit so
einer Veranstaltung geholfen.

Nur die ohnehin schon aufgehetzte Stimmung hier in Wien hat noch ein
bisschen mehr Nahrung bekommen. Das ist schlimm genug, und kann dann
sehr gefährlich werden, wenn wir das öfter erleben. Aber einstweilen
will ich es auch nicht überschätzen.

Schlecht geschlafen hab ich schon. Ein Büchertisch mit Fritz Edlingers
Ergüssen auf einer Grünen Veranstaltung ...

Wie viel außenpolitische Inkompetenz...?

Am nächsten Tag habe ich mich also hingesetzt und einen ausführlichen
Brief an die lieben Freundinnen und Freunde in meiner Partei
geschrieben und ein paar Fragen aufgeworfen:

Wie viel außenpolitische Inkompetenz wollen sich die Grünen eigentlich
noch leisten?

Was machen solche Grüne, wenn sie - was ja passieren könnte - sich
nach den nächsten Wahlen in der Regierung wiederfinden?

Beklagen, dass die SPÖ keinen Bruno Kreisky mehr liefert? Sagen,
dass sie in der EU leider nichts ausrichten können? Bei den
Deutschen Grünen wird Nahostpolitik mit viel mehr Hand und Fuß
gemacht. Ist da eine Mauer oder ein eiserner Vorhang dazwischen, der
die österreichische Schwesterpartei davon abhält, wenigstens ein
bisschen was davon mitzubekommen?

Welche Vorurteile halten eine österreichische Nationalratsabgeordnete
von der Wahrnehmung der vielen israelischen Friedensinitiativen ab,
die nicht in ihr vorgefertigtes Bild passen?

Welche Ängste halten Grüne davon ab, die (zum Teil EU-finanzierte)
Propagandamaschine der Palästinensischen Autonomiebehörde zu benennen
- und damit die erste Voraussetzung zu ihrer Bekämpfung zu schaffen?
So schwierig dürfte es für eine Oppositionspartei doch auch wieder
nicht sein, zuzugeben, dass gut gemeinte Hilfsprojekte der EU ganz
mächtig schief gegangen sind.

Schließlich waren seinerzeit die Grünen die ersten, die davor gewarnt
haben, dass von den EU-Förderungen zu viel bei Prestigeprojekten und
zu wenig bei der Bevölkerung landet. Nichts mehr davon in Erinnerung?

Es stimmt schon, dass ernst gemeinte Friedenspolitik Mut
voraussetzt. Aber nicht Mut zu allerlei Dummheiten, sondern Mut zum
Denken.

Aus Gründen, die mir nicht ganz klar sind, ist den Grünen dieser Mut
abhanden gekommen, als vor knapp zwei Jahren anlässlich der "Al
Aksa-Intifada" verschiedene AktivistInnen verschiedener
"Palästina-Komitees", sich um Unterstützung bei den Grünen
umschauten. Ich mache diesen Gruppen keinen Vorwurf, dass sie gerne
Geld und Infrastruktur der Grünen benützen wollen.

Der Wunsch ist verständlich. Aber ich mache den Grünen den Vorwurf,
diesem Wunsch allzu naiv nachgekommen zu sein. Lange habe ich
versucht, die diversen Irritationen bei meist ohnehin recht kleinen
Aktivitäten Grüner Teilorganisationen herunterzuspielen. Und habe mich
bemüht, auf die positiven Erlebnisse, die es ja auch gab, hinzuweisen.

(Voggenhubers Arbeit im Europa-Parlament, Van der Bellens Rede bei der
"Light4Israel"-Kundgebung am Judenplatz, etc.) Zur Ehrenrettung der
Grünen sollte ich dazusagen, dass ich erst vor kurzem ein sehr
konstruktives Gespräch mit Johannes Voggenhuber hatte. Doch langsam
stellt sich die Frage, welche der beiden Grünen Vorstellungen von
Außenpolitik denn nun die ist, die sich durchsetzen wird.

Bin schon neugierig darauf, welche Antworten ich bekommen werde.

Friederike Ruth Winkler

><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><
SOLIDARITäT WELTWEIT
><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><

==================================================
15 RAWNEWS - 23/8/02
From: "RAWNEWS" <rawnews@btopenworld.com>
==================================================
RAWNEWS
- 23/8/02

1) 75th anniversary of the murders of Sacco
and Vanzetti
2) A Growing Authoritarianism -Inside the United States: the empire's
home front - FRONTLINE (India)
3) Johnny's Real Crime - Mumia Abu Jamal
4) Officers Say U.S. Aided Iraq in War Despite Use of Gas - New York
Times
5) POLICE RAID PRESS IN ISTANBUL
6) MILOSEVIC CALLS FOR PATRIOTIC FRONT - TARGETS (NETHERLANDS)
7) War of Words Between Washington and Zimbabwe - IPS

August 23rd marks the 75th anniversary of the murders of Nicola Sacco
and Bartolomeo Vanzetti. Gone but never forgotten.

"I would not wish to a dog or to a snake, to the most low and
misfortunate creature of the earth - I would not wish to any of them
what I have had to suffer for things that I am not guilty of. But my
conviction is that I have suffered for things I am guilty of.

I am suffering because I am a radical and indeed I am a radical; I
have suffered because I was an Italian, and indeed I am an Italian; I
have suffered more for my family and for my beloved than for myself;
but I am so convinced to be right that if you could execute me two
times, and if I could be reborn two other times, I would live again to
do what I have done already."

Bartolomeo Vanzetti

"If it had not been for this thing I might have lived out my life
among scorning men. I might have died unmarked, unknown, a
failure. This is our career and our triumph. Never in our full life
could we hope to do such work for tolerance, for justice, for man's
understanding of man, as now we do by accident. Our words - our lives
- our pains - nothing ! The taking of our lives - the lives of a good
shoemakerand a poor fish peddler - all ."

Nicola Sacco

----------------------------------------------------------------------
A Growing Authoritarianism -Inside the United States: the empire's
home front.

FRONTLINE (India) - BY AIJAZ AHMAD
Vol. 19, Issue 17 (August 17-30)

GEORGE BUSH first called it a "crusade", then a "War for
Civilisation", then "A Task that Never Ends", then a
"War against Global Terror", then a "Titanic War on
Terror". The rhetorical inflation and the fudging of facts is
infinite. It is supposed to be all about September 11 and the Al Qaeda,
but senior officials of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) have
been quoted as saying that "Al Qaeda itself, we know, is less than
200." (Palm Beach Post, July 27, 2002) Two hundred, including those
held by the Americans at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba, they said! Undeterred by
factsasserted by his own officials, Bush claimed at just about the same
time: "We know that thousands of trained killers are plotting to
attack us." Dick Cheney, the Vice-President, continues to speak of a
war against "40 to 50 countries", down from 60 or so that Bush
had estimated in September last year. Donald Rumsfeld intones that he has
instructed the Pentagon to "think the unthinkable", that is,
the actual use of nuclear weapons.

With dozens of new military bases and facilities established from
Turkmenistan to the Philippines, the occupation of Afghanistan
accomplished, the destruction of Palestinians going on and on, and a
full-scale war against Iraq being predicted by the U.S. administration
virtually every day, attention has been focussed quite rightly on the
global nature of this perpetual war. (See author's essays on this theme
in Frontline: "Responding with terror", October 12, 2001,and
"Re- mapping the globe," November 9, 2001, and others on U.S.
policies in regard to Palestine and the Philippines.) The focus here,
however, is not on that but on the methodical shift of political power
toward the Far Right inside the United States, also being accomplished
under the guise of that same "Titanic War," which is beginning
to resemble the 'Red Scare' of the 1950s which was used domestically to
justify great growth of the war industries, suspension of democratic
rights and silencing of dissenters by branding them closet
Reds.

for the rest of this article, go to
http://www.flonnet.com/fl1917/19171190.htm

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Johnny's Real Crime
Mumia Abu Jamal

If one listens closely, a vast collective sigh of relief can be heard
at the news that John Walker Lindh has pleaded guilty to several
charges stemming from his service in the military of the fallen
theocracy of Afghanistan, the Taliban.

According to published reports, the plea agreement exposes the 21-year
old Californian to a 20-year bit in the federal pen. The government is
happy, and the defense lawyers seem pleased with the deal. Perhaps the
only disappointment can be found in the financial offices of the news
networks, where it was hoped the Lindh trial could provide a ratings
boost that broadcasters hadn't seen since the heady days of the
O.J. trial.

According to published accounts, Lindh pled guilty to providing
support to the Taliban, and possession of explosives. His plea, if
formally accepted by the court, would prove an evasion from charges
that could've landed him in the brig for life.

This writer thinks the plea is incorrect for another reason:
essentially, Lindh is guilty of serving in an army of a nation the
U.S. government didn't like. Period.

There are hundreds, if not thousands of Americans, walking the streets
today, who served as mercenaries (or soldiers for hire) in the former
Rhodesia, shooting, bombing and killing Africans who were fighting
against the racist white-minority government of Ian Smith.

How many Israeli-Americans now serve in the Army of Occupation in
Palestinian lands, shooting, bombing and killing in the name of a
theocracy?

Apparently, there is no crime in serving in the military of a nation
that the U.S. government likes.

It seems to not offend U.S. sensibilities to serve in the imperialist,
expansionist, white-supremacist wars out on the periphery of Europe.

Then comes Lindh. A young, white, idealistic youth converts to a faith
that has most of its adherents in the darker, poorer, Third World. He
learns a language, changes his name, grows a full beard, and takes up
arms to defend the legitimate government of the land where he lives.

What's the crime? Should he have thrown down his rifle, and cast away
his faith when George W. Bush declared war? (If he had done so, would
he be alive today?) Remember, Taliban didn't attack the towers nor
the Pentagon. According to U.S. accounts, a multinational group (Al
Quaeda) did.

"Johnny Taliban" *is* guilty -- of rejecting his white-skin privilege,
of betraying his class, and of converting from Christianity to the
Islamic faith. He *is* guilty of fleeing the richest empire on earth,
to seek spiritual solace in the dusty, wretched backwaters of
empire. He *is* guilty of looking into the eyes of wrinkled shiekhs in
Karachi, and seeing human beings instead of caricatures. He *is*
guilty, of being a thinking, feeling human.

Copyright 2002 Mumia Abu-Jamal

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Officers Say U.S. Aided Iraq in War Despite Use of Gas

New York Times - By PATRICK E. TYLER - August 18, 2002
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/08/18/international/middleeast/18CHEM.html

WASHINGTON, Aug. 17 - A covert American program during the Reagan
administration provided Iraq with critical battle planning assistance
at a time when American intelligence agencies knew that Iraqi
commanders would employ chemical weapons in waging the decisive
battles of the Iran-Iraq war, according to senior military officers
with direct knowledge of the program.

Those officers, most of whom agreed to speak on the condition that
they not be identified, spoke in response to a reporter's questions
about the nature of gas warfare on both sides of the conflict between
Iran and Iraq from 1981 to 1988. Iraq's use of gas in that conflict is
repeatedly cited by President Bush and, this week, by his national
security adviser, Condoleezza Rice, as justification for "regime
change" in Iraq.

The covert program was carried out at a time when President Reagan's
top aides, including Secretary of State George P. Shultz, Defense
Secretary Frank C. Carlucci and Gen. Colin L. Powell, then the
national security adviser, were publicly condemning Iraq for its use
of poison gas, especially after Iraq attacked Kurds in Halabja in
March 1988.

During the Iran-Iraq war, the United States decided it was imperative
that Iran be thwarted, so it could not overrun the important oil-
producing states in the Persian Gulf. It has long been known that the
United States provided intelligence assistance to Iraq in the form of
satellite photography to help the Iraqis understand how Iranian forces
were deployed against them. But the full nature of the program, as
described by former Defense Intelligence Agency officers, was not
previously disclosed.

Secretary of State Powell, through a spokesman, said the officers'
description of the program was "dead wrong," but declined to discuss
it. His deputy, Richard L. Armitage, a senior defense official at the
time, used an expletive relayed through a spokesman to indicate his
denial that the United States acquiesced in the use of chemical
weapons.

The Defense Intelligence Agency declined to comment, as did Lt. Gen.
Leonard Perroots, retired, who supervised the program as the head of
the agency. Mr. Carlucci said, "My understanding is that what was
provided" to Iraq "was general order of battle information, not
operational intelligence."

"I certainly have no knowledge of U.S. participation in preparing
battle and strike packages," he said, "and doubt strongly that that
occurred."

Later, he added, "I did agree that Iraq should not lose the war, but I
certainly had no foreknowledge of their use of chemical weapons."

Though senior officials of the Reagan administration publicly
condemned Iraq's employment of mustard gas, sarin, VX and other
poisonous agents, the American military officers said President
Reagan, Vice President George Bush and senior national security aides
never withdrew their support for the highly classified program in
which more than 60 officers of the Defense Intelligence Agency were
secretly providing detailed information on Iranian deployments,
tactical planning for battles, plans for airstrikes and bomb-damage
assessments for Iraq.

Iraq shared its battle plans with the Americans, without admitting the
use of chemical weapons, the military officers said. But Iraq's use of
chemical weapons, already established at that point, became
more evident in the war's final phase.

Saudi Arabia played a crucial role in pressing the Reagan
administration to offer aid to Iraq out of concern that Iranian
commanders were sending waves of young volunteers to overrun Iraqi
forces. Prince Bandar bin Sultan, the Saudi ambassador to the United
States, then and now, met with President Saddam Hussein of Iraq and
then told officials of the Central Intelligence Agency and the Defense
Intelligence Agency that Iraq's military command was ready to accept
American aid.

In early 1988, after the Iraqi Army, with American planning
assistance, retook the Fao Peninsula in anattack that reopened Iraq's
access to the Persian Gulf, a defense intelligence officer,
Lt. Col. Rick Francona, now retired, was sent to tour the battlefield
with Iraqi officers, the American military officers said.

He reported that Iraq had used chemical weapons to cinch its victory,
one former D.I.A. official said. Colonel Francona saw zones marked off
for chemical contamination, and containers for the drug atropine
scattered around, indicating that Iraqi soldiers had taken injections
to protect themselves from the effects of gas that might blow back
over their positions. (Colonel Francona could not be reached for
comment.) C.I.A. officials supported the program to assist Iraq,
though they were not involved. Separately, the C.I.A. provided Iraq
with satellite photography of the war front.

Col. Walter P. Lang, retired, the senior defense intelligence officer
at the time, said he would not discuss classified information, but
added that both D.I.A. and C.I.A. officials "were desperate to make
sure that Iraq did not lose" to Iran.

"The use of gas on the battlefield by the Iraqis was not a matter of
deep strategic concern," he said. What Mr. Reagan's aides were
concerned about, he said, was that Iran not break through to the Fao
Peninsula and spread the Islamic revolution to Kuwait and Saudi
Arabia.

Colonel Lang asserted that the Defense Intelligence Agency "would have
never accepted the use of chemical weapons against civilians, but the
use against military objectives was seen as inevitable in the Iraqi
struggle for survival." Senior Reagan administration officials did
nothing to interfere with the continuation of the program, a former
participant in the program said.

Iraq did turn its chemical weapons against the Kurdish population of
northern Iraq, but the intelligence officers say they were not
involved in planning any of the military operations in which those
assaults occurred. They said the reason was that there were no major
Iranian troop concentrations in the north and the major battles where
Iraq's military command wanted assistance were on the southern war
front.

The Pentagon's battle damage assessments confirmed that Iraqi military
commanders had integrated chemical weapons throughout their arsenal
and were adding them to strike plans that American advisers either
prepared or suggested. Iran claimed that it suffered thousands of
deaths from chemical weapons.

The American intelligence officers never encouraged or condoned Iraq's
use of chemical weapons, but neither did they oppose it because they
considered Iraq to be struggling for its survival, people involved at
the time said in interviews.

Another former senior D.I.A. official who was an expert on the Iraqi
military said the Reagan administration's treatment of the issue -
publicly condemning Iraq's use of gas while privately acquiescing in
its employment on the battlefield - was an example of the
"Realpolitik" of American interests in the war.

The effort on behalf of Iraq "was heavily compartmented," a former
D.I.A. official said, using the military jargon for restricting
secrets to those who need to know them.

"Having gone through the 440 days of the hostage crisis in Iran," he
said, "the period when we were the Great Satan, if Iraq had gone down
it would have had a catastrophic effect on Kuwait and Saudi Arabia,
and the whole region might have gone down. That was the backdrop of
the policy."

One officer said, "They had gotten better and better" and after a
while chemical weapons "were integrated into their fire plan for any
large operation, and it became more and more obvious." A number of
D.I.A. officers who took part in aiding Iraq more than a decade ago
when its military was actively using chemical weapons, now say they
believe that the United States should overthrow Mr. Hussein at some
point. But at the time, they say, they all believed that their covert
assistance to Mr. Hussein's military in the mid-1980's was a crucial
factor in Iraq's victory in the war and the containment of a far more
dangerous threat from Iran.

The Pentagon "wasn't so horrified by Iraq's use of gas," said one
veteran of the program. "It was just another way of killing people -
whether with a bullet or phosgene, it didn't make any difference," he
said.

Former Secretary of State Shultz and Vice President Bush tried to
stanch the flow of chemical precursors to Iraq and spoke out against
Iraq's use of chemical arms, but Mr. Shultz, in his memoir, also
alluded to the struggle in the administration.

"I was stunned to read an intelligence analysis being circulated
within the administration that 'we have demolished a budding
relationship (with Iraq) by taking a tough position in opposition to
chemical weapons,' " he wrote.

Mr. Shultz also wrote that he quarreled with William J. Casey, then
the director of central intelligence, over whether the United States
should press for a new chemical weapons ban at the Geneva Disarmament
Conference. Mr. Shultz declined further comment.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Statement: No. 3
IN ISTANBUL, THE POLICE HAVE RAIDED THE CENTRAL OFFICE OF EKMEK VE ADALET
MAGAZINE, THE MAGAZINE ULKEMIZDE GENCLIK AND TAYAD

At about 11:30 today (Tuesday August 20) the police raided the central
office of the magazine Ekmek ve Adalet (Bread and Justice) in
Aksaray's Yusufpasa district, as well as the magazine Ulkemizde
Genclik (The Youth In Our Country) and TAYAD (the prisoners' support
organisation).

As a result of the raid, a large number of workers for the magazines
and guests have been detained.

At the Ekmek ve Adalet office, Huseyin Fevzi Tekin, Caferi Sadik
Eroglu, Sadi Naci Ozpolat, Metin Yavuz, Ercan Gokoglu, Gulizar Kesici,
Mehmet Dogan, Yilmaz Kaya and Hidir Gul were detained.

At the magazine Ulkemizde Genclik, eight people were detained but
their names have not been established. Among those detained were Ayhan
Mimtas, Tagba Iyigun, Yeliz Turkmen, Sema Koc, Sevilay Balikci, Songul
Ergul, Ozgur (last name unknown) and Ercan (last name unknown).

At the same time TAYAD (Association of Aid and Solidarity for
Prisoners' Families) was entered by the police, who carried out a
search and then departed, saying they had found nothing criminal.

We protest against these arbitrary raids and draw them to your
attention.

HALKIN HUKUK BUROSU (PEOPLE'S LAW BUREAU)

Illegal raids were carried out against the publications Ekmek ve
Adalet and Ulkemizde Genclik as well as the central office of TAYAD.

In the raid on Ekmek ve Adalet, the police used large hammers and
special oxygen equipment to knock down the walls and doors and
detained eight people, carrying them off by their arms and
legs. Another 20 people were detained in the raid on the magazine
Ulkemizde Genclik.

After the raids, the police pillaged the offices of the magazines on
the pretext of carrying out a search.

At the Ekmek ve Adalet office, Metin Yavuz, Ercan Gokoglu, Sadi
Ozpolat, Huseyin Fevzi Tekin, Gulizar Kesici, Inan Gok, Mehmet Dogan
and Sadik Eroglu were detained. At the moment no information is
available about those who were detained at Ulkemizde Genclik.

On this subject, the lawyers of Halkin Hukuk Burosu have issued a
statement as follows:

"THE MAGAZINE EKMEK VE ADALET IS BEING RAIDED BY THE POLICE

At the moment the magazine Ekmek ve Adalet based in the Yusufpasa
district of Aksaray (Istanbul) is being raided. The police came about
half an hour ago and beat in the doors without giving any reason.

They detained detained the magazine's staff and guests, a total of
eight persons. According to our information the following were
detained: Huseyin Fevzi Tekin, Sadi Ozpolat, Sadik Eroglu, Metin
Yavuz, Ercan Gokoglu, Gulizar Kesici, Inan Gok and Mehmet Dogan.

Public opinion has witnessed that like raids previously, these raids
are only an excuse for torture and pillage. The raid on Ekmek ve
Adalet is not legal and there is no legal basis for it.

The raid on Ulkemizde Genclik in another place is also
illegal. Fifteen people there were detained. All these raids, carried
out one after the other, are the conscious result of a planned
policy. These raids must be stopped immediately."

----------------------------------------------------------------------
MILOSEVIC CALLS FOR PATRIOTIC FRONT

TARGETS - Independent Monthly paper on International Affairs -
Amsterdam - The Netherlands

See more news: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/targets-news/

After the brutal refusal by the Belgrade regime to allow the mass
political action in support of the presidential candidacy of Yugoslav
and Serbian national leader Slobodan Milosevic, illegally kept in the
NATO dungeon at The Hague, all Yugoslav media reported the message
President Milosevic sent to all patriotic forces in Serbia. Here is
the full text of the message:

Message regarding the Elections

Regarding the forthcoming elections in Serbia, I believe that the
whole opposition bloc should appear united in the elections - with a
common candidate.

The core of that bloc should be the three parties that constituted the
Government of People's Unity until the year 2000. During the war,
those three parties defended the country, through the government and
by all other means. During the bombing, the leaders of those parties
remained in Serbia and put themselves at the disposal of the people
and citizens.

Those parties and their representatives should bring together all
other opposition parties, in fact all parties and individuals who are
patriotically oriented and who have the same attitude towards the
policies of the regime in Serbia.

In that sense, in these elections I consider the candidate Vojislav
Seselj to be a common candidate of the patriotically oriented
opposition parties and individuals. His candidacy should be supported.

To come out with more than one candidate at this moment, especially on
behalf of the strongest opposition parties, would lead to the dilution
of votes, which would only allow the puppet regime to manipulate the
election results.

Today, the main interest of the people and state is to dismantle the
puppet regime. That interest has to be more important than the
particular interest of any party. And particularly it must be more
important than anyone's vanity (collective or individual - no matter).
Until victory.

The Hague, August 10th, 2002 - Slobodan Milosevic

***

Two-and-half years ago, in February 2000, President Milosevic warned
at the Fourth Congress of the SPS:

"At the moment when the country defends itself from the evil looming
over it, the left and right should stand together, the religious ones
and atheists, those educated and those who are not, the old and the
young, those who have not gotten along well or loved each other, those
who have stopped talking to each other, those who think that they have
forever and definitely parted ways. Those who have one thing in common
- the love of their country. And that they feel obliged to defend it
from the colonial status where foreign armies will march in, whose
economy will be a function of the development of other countries,
whose culture will be ruined, whose past will be wiped out and who
will be ruled by those bribed or blackmailed hoodlums whom every
nation has even at the best times, but at bad times in particular."

President Milosevic has several times sent similar messages from the
Hague dungeon to his party comrades in our already-occupied
country. Here are quotes from the one he sent in May 2002 to organs
and members of the SPS:

"The SPS has to be a political tool in the hands of the people - in
the struggle for national interests, and in the first place for
freedom, independence and national dignity. The Party is obliged to be
firmly led by the principle of unity of left and patriotic forces in
the common struggle against the treason and enslavement of Serbia -
for overthrowing the puppet regime of foreign mercenaries organized as
DOS.

Unity of left and patriotic forces is the clear and, historically, the
only possible and justified response to the policy of dismantling the
country and taking over its material resources by foreign capital, the
pauperization of the citizens and the turning of educated and
qualified workers and peasants into slaves of this 'new world
order'. That is why after October 5 our enemies have as their main
goal dismantling the people's unity, breaking the unity of the left
and breaking the SPS itself. (...)

The Party at present has one and only one duty - to protect the
country and people from slavery. Only after the freedom and
independence of the country has been reestablished can one speak of
other goals. Now Freedom is the only goal."

The Government of People's Unity, during its existence from 1994 to
2000, successfully dealt with numerous difficulties produced by
foreign pressures, including the embargo and the NATO aggression in
1999. It protected political and economic independence, social justice
and equality and secured the miraculous reconstruction of the bombed
country and one of the largest rates of economic growth in Europe.

Three parties took part in the government in its last and most
successful years: the Socialist Party of Serbia, the Serbian Radical
Party and Yugoslav Left. The Prime minister was Mirko Marjanovic (now
acting president of SPS). Dr Vojislav Seselj, leader of the Serbian
Radical Party was one of the deputy Prime ministers.

Dr. Seselj's Serbian Radical Party had previously expressed rightist
and sometimes nationalist rhetoric. Nevertheless, in the Government of
People's Unity and after the coup of October 5, 2000, in word and deed
it strongly advocated common socially oriented policies. It recognized
that these were a necessity for our country, under colonial siege. It
is now acting as the most radical critic of the criminal background
and practices of the present puppet regime. Its leader, Dr Vojislav
Seselj (47) is considered one of the most talented Serbian politicians
and undefeatable in direct political duels.

To join or help this struggle, visit:
http://www.sps.org.yu/ (official SPS website)
http://www.belgrade-forum.org/ (forum for the world of equals)

http://www.icdsm.org/ (the international committee to defend Slobodan
Milosevic)

http://www.jutarnje.co.yu/ ('morning news' the only Serbian newspaper
advocating liberation)

----------------------------------------------------------------------
War of Words Between Washington and Zimbabwe

IPS - By Lewis Machipisa

HARARE, Aug 23 (IPS) This week's refusal by Washington to recognise
the government of Zimbabwe, citing electoral fraud in its March
presidential elections, has not gone down well with president Robert
Mugabe.

Walter Kansteiner, the U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for Africa,
said Tuesday Washington did not see President Mugabe as the
democratically legitimate leader of Zimbabwe.

''We do not see President Mugabe as the democratically legitimate
leader of the country. The election was fraudulent,'' he said.

But Mugabe and his senior officials are not amused.

''We are not made as a government in Washington. Let Mr Bush know
that. We are made as a government by our people here. Let foolish
(British Prime Minister Tony) Blair know that ... and let the people
of Australia and New Zealand know that,'' Mugabe said on state
television Thursday night.

The United States, Britain, Australia and New Zealand have
imposedlimited sanctions on Mugabe and his top officials.

Although the United States appears to have backed away from
thestatements that it is working with Southern African countries to
isolate Zimbabwe, officials in Harare have been talking tough.

''The widely-publicised and shockingly scandalous claims by Kansteiner
... have let the cat out of the bag,'' Jonathan Moyo,

Zimbabwe's information minister told the state-run daily, The Herald,
on Friday.

''Now we know. As ZANU/PF, we all call on the government to demand a
full explanation and get to the bottom of the matter given the
seriousness of the claims and their grave implications,'' added Moyo.

ZANU/PF is the ruling Zimbabwe African National Union-Patriotic Front,
led by Mugabe.

South Africa, Botswana and Mozambique have denied involvement in the
U.S. plan to remove Mugabe from office.

Kansteiner said his government was ''working with other countries in
the region as well as throughout the world, on how we can encourage
the body politic of Zimbabwe to go forward and correct that situation
and start providing an environment that would lead to a free and fair
election.''

Mugabe, who is seizing white-owned farms to resettle black
Zimbabweans, said: ''They (western countries) don't want us to be
economically independent. They want us to be beggars ... coming to
them everyday with a bowl asking for help. No ... we have our
resources here. They belong to us and we are taking and giving them to
our people.''

Zimbabwe has fallen out with the international community over
itscontroversial land-reform programme, and over the manner in which
President Mugabe's government conducted the March presidential polls.

Mugabe, 78, has ruled Zimbabwe for 22 years.

Zimbabwe's state media has linked the campaigns against its government
to attempts by Washington to topple the leadership in Palestine and
Iraq.

Zimbabwe's main opposition party, MDC, which has refused to accept the
result of the March elections, has lent its full support to the
announcement by the U.S. administration.

''We will side with any country or government that takes our position
not to recognise the government of President Mugabe. We welcome the
U.S. position as it shows that we are on the same side with other
democratic countries in the world,'' said Welshman Ncube, secretary
general of the Movement for Democratic Change (MDC).

''We definitely welcome all those moves, which render the Mugabe
regime illegitimate,'' he added.

George Charamba, permanent secretary in the Ministry of Information,
said the American move shows that the West is behind the Movement for
Democratic Change.

''The puppeteer is now getting impatient with the puppet and is now
coming to the fore,'' Charamba noted.

But Tendai Biti, MDC shadow minister for Foreign Affairs, said the
ruling party has itself to blame. He said the government of Mugabe was
''working vigorously and tirelessly to isolate itself through bad
governance.''

MDC has refused to recognise the government of Mugabe and has called
on the international community to pressure Harare for freshelections.

==================================================
16 RAWNEWS - Russia
From: "RAWNEWS" <rawnews@btopenworld.com>
==================================================
RAWNEWS on Russia

1) Arming China Makes U.S. Nervous - The Moscow Times
2) GOODBYE DOLLAR! GOODBYE EURO! - PRAVDA.Ru
3) Rumsfeld warns Russia on trade ties - New York Times
4) Russian Communists plan referendum to overturn land sales reform -
AFP

Arming China Makes U.S. Nervous
The Moscow Times, Thursday, Aug. 22,
2002. By Lyuba Pronina - Staff Writer

Officially, Prime Minister Mikhail Kasyanov's three-day visit to
China, which began Wednesday, is about trade -- namely, energy,
aviation, transportation, electronics, banking and telecommunications.

But the item not on the public agenda is the one worrying Washington
and Taipei the most: arms.

Since U.S. President George W. Bush came to power last year, the U.S.
defense establishment has taken an increasingly alarmist approach to
China's burgeoning defense procurement program, in which Russia, as
its main supplier, is playing the leading role. Washington's growing
concern over Beijing's buildup -- and Russia's role in it -- is
clearly spelled out in two recent reports, one from the Pentagon and
the other sponsored by Congress.

"Despite overwhelming U.S. military and technological superiority,
China can still defeat the United States by transforming its weakness
into strength and exploiting U.S. vulnerabilities through asymmetric
warfare ... deception, surprise and preemptive strikes," concluded the
U.S.-China Security Review Commission, which is funded by Congress.

In the addendum to the report, one of the authors, Arthur Waldron,
went even further, saying China's buildup is aimed at excluding the
United States from Asia and establishing the ability to threaten and
coerce neighboring states, ranging from Mongolia to Japan to India.

"With respect to China's proliferation behavior, we have all the
evidence we need: China is a major source of advanced weapons to
terrorist-sponsoring and other dangerous states. ... Far more work is
required, both from the commission and the government on China's role
(or lack of it) in international terrorism," Waldron wrote.

"Beijing's close connections to terrorist-sponsoring states provide
ample reason for concern. ... Foreign companies helping China's
military and security apparatus should be denied any participation in
U.S. government procurement or development programs."

The main foreign company helping China's military and security
apparatus is Rosoboronexport, which dismisses Washington's concerns.
"I think that Russia is not doing anything illegal by [selling arms to
China]," Rosoboronexport chief Andrei Belyaninov said Wednesday. "We
are acting within the framework of international law."

Part of the problem, U.S. officials admit, is that they do not have a
precise picture of China's military program. Defense Minister Sergei
Ivanov reportedly signed a protocol with China during his visit there
earlier this summer under which all arms deals between the two nations
are classified as secret.

Earlier this year, Beijing announced that it would boost its defense
spending in 2002 to $20 billion. However, the Pentagon believes that
China's actual spending could be as high as $80 billion, which would
give it the second largest military budget in the world after the
United States.

"Chinese secrecy is extensive. China reveals little in its Defense
White Paper about the quantity or quality of its military forces," the
Pentagon said in its report, which was commissioned to address the
gaps in knowledge about China's military power, its relations with the
former Soviet Union, and security in the Taiwan Strait.

The most immediate issue is Taiwan, which China has vowed to bring
back under its control since 1949, when 2 million nationalists fled to
the island after the communists conquered the mainland.

However, the biggest obstacle to retaking Taiwan by force is the
United States military, which China is actively seeking to redress.
The Pentagon report said China's modernization program is primarily in
preparation for a potential conflict in the Taiwan Strait and is
heavily reliant upon Russia.

This year alone, China has ordered two new Project 956EM Sovremenny
destroyers for $1.4 billion, eight Kilo submarines for $1.5 billion
and S-300F naval air defense systems for $200 million, according to
media reports. Also on the table are some 30 Su-30MK2 fighters
equipped with X-31A anti-ship missiles.

And just this week, Russia delivered the first 10 of 40 Sukhoi
Su-30MKK fighters that China ordered last summer and offered China a
license to assemble military helicopters, news agencies said.

The report commissioned by Congress said the acquisition of Su-27s in
the 1990s and the purchase of the more modern Su-30MKKs represent a
quantum leap for China's air force: "The extended range of the
Su-30MKKs would allow [China's] air force to circumnavigate Taiwan and
strike lesser-defended facilities on the eastern side of the
island. The Su-30MKKs can carry the X-31 supersonic anti-ship missile
and pose a greater threat to U.S. vessels."

"What the Chinese military is driving toward is to have a credible
deterrent ... to make the U.S. think twice about intervening on
Taiwan's behalf," Ilan Berman, vice president for policy at the
American Foreign Policy Council think tank in Washington, said by
telephone.

"If there is a conflict over Taiwan, both Taiwanese and U.S. forces
will be fighting against Russian weapons," said Richard Fisher, a
China military expert with the Jamestown Foundation, a conservative
think tank with close ties to the Bush administration. "Russia's arms
sales to China amount to gasoline on smoking embers. This is simply
unacceptable," he said.

"While the Clinton administration chose not to make a public issue of
Russian military sales to China, there are some in the Bush
administration, especially in the Pentagon, who now want to engage
Moscow on the larger costs to Russian security and Asian stability of
its military sales to China. This marks the beginning of a real change
in U.S. policy," Fisher said.

Like Rosoboronexport, Konstantin Makiyenko, deputy head of the Center
for Analysis of Strategies and Technologies in Moscow, dismisses the
idea that Russian weapon sales to China are a serious threat to the
United States.

"The Chinese cannot threaten Taiwan, yet. ... The only thing [China]
can do is pepper Taiwan's economic facilities with missiles," said
Makiyenko, who has just completed a report for the U.S. Center for
Defense Information on Chinese-Russian military-technical cooperation
over the last decade.

"The United States has a problem: It is so far away from everyone else
that if it doesn't create a virtual threat the army will be
demoralized," Makiyenko said.

Virtual or not, the Chinese threat is perceived as very real in the
Pentagon and Congressional reports.

"It's very significant that both reports focus on the Russian aspect,
because it indicates growing attention on the part of the Bush
administration as to where exactly the Chinese are getting the fuel to
feed their military fire," said Berman of the American Foreign Policy
Council.

The Pentagon said in its report that despite closer ties between the
United States and Russia since the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, Moscow
cannot be persuaded to scale down its arms transfers to Beijing.

"It will take something as catastrophic as a Chinese attack on Russian
territory before Russia's leaders wake up to the dangers they are
creating," Jamestown's Fisher said.

Makiyenko said the government is fully aware of the dangers. "The
Defense Ministry is watching closely what the Chinese want to buy and
so far have blocked the sale of, for example, MiG-31 long-range
interceptors, which China can use to attack us up to the Urals."

But for the United States to convince Russia to curb arms sales to
China, "it would have to offer a colossal package of economic
incentives, and that is unlikely," Makiyenko said.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
GOODBYE DOLLAR! GOODBYE EURO!
Russian state banks rushed to China for yuans
Dmitry Slobodyanyuk PRAVDA.Ru

Beijing today is the place from where most important information about
Russia's banking sector comes. It is one of the key tasks of the
government to retrieve its monopolistic positions in almost all
spheres, the banking sphere included. That is why special attention is
paid to so-called state banks.

Vnesheconombank president informed from China today that the bank is
going to be an agent of the government only. The Vneshtorgbank
president, also on a working visit to China as well, confirmed the
information that the government will buy Vneshtorgbank shares back
from the Central Bank.

And, as long as Russia's Prime Minister Mikhail Kasyanov plans to
cover the majority of China's demand for oil, gas, and the
construction of infrastructure objects, Vnesheconombank and
Vneshtorgbank are evidently to serve these intergovernmental
transactions.

The signing of an agreement between Russia's Central Bank and the
People's Bank of China has become the key breakthrough in the banking
sphere during Kasyanov's visit to China. The chief bankers have agreed
to settle all inter-bank accounts in rubles and yuans starting next
year.

Negotiating officials say that such a way of settling accounts will be
introduced as an experiment to create the necessary mechanisms to
settle accounts. What is really very important about this agreement is
that Russia and China demonstrated the so-called Eurasian solidarity
and decided to give up the dollar and euro in the settlement of their
accounts.

Another breakthrough is also very important. PRAVDA.Ru has already
reported on the reforms of the Russian state banks Vnesheconombank and
Vneshtorgbank. Some time ago, Andrey Kostin left Vneshtorgbank for
Vnesheconombank. This year, he became president of Vneshtorgbank. With
a team of his own, he managed to work with the commercial assets of
Vnesheconombank.

Moreover, the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development is
ready to be a potential Vneshtorgbank shareholder. Currently, Andrey
Kostin is on a working visit to China together with Prime Minister
Kasyanov. And the visit is turning out to be rather successful for him
and Vneshtorgbank: China's Industrial Commercial Bank and
Vneshtorgbank signed important agreements. The Chinese bank will give
a $200 million loan to Vneshtorgbank to finance supplies of hi-tech
equipment from China to Russia, a method so typical of America.

Despite low financing for development, Russia still produces hi-tech
equipment of a good quality. However, such equipment is poorly
promoted on the overseas markets, despite decreasing the prices. The
production of practically all of the world's electronic firms is
concentrated in China. The production exceeds the demand, and the
sale of Chinese electronics is also unsuccessful because of severe
competition on the work markets.

The Asian economic crisis only aggravated the situation. That is why
Russia and China decided to satisfy each other's needs. Russia will
supply oil, gas, electric power, timber, and armament. In return,
Russia will receive electronics and raw materials necessary for the
Russian metallurgical industry from china.

However, China is not going to repeal the restrictions on Russian
steel imports introduced this year. And to make sure that Russia will
not reject supplies of Chinese electronics, Russia's largest bank will
be given a loan. Doesn't this look like a bribe on a governmental
level? In the context of today's world economy, it means the promotion
of national goods on overseas markets. Russia will purchase Chinese
equipment with money provided by China itself.

Vnesheconombank president Vladimir Chernukhin is also member of the
delegation visiting China. Today, he refuted information about the
division of the bank into commercial and governmental sections. He
said that the bank will simply concentrate more on the most urgent
needs of the state. One of these needs is servicing of Russian-Chinese
intergovernmental accounts.

In Chernukhin's words, Vnesheconombank now serves Russian-Chinese
contracts to the sum of about $10 billion. Vnesheconombank president
is currently negotiating new contracts with China to the sum of $2-3
billion. The contracts involve mostly military and technical
co-operation.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Rumsfeld warns Russia on trade ties
New York Times, August 23 2002

The United States Defence Secretary, Donald Rumsfeld, has warned
Moscow that expanding trade with Iraq will brand Russia a friend of
terrorist states and frighten foreign investors away from its
capital-staved economy.

"To the extent that Russia decides that it wants to parade its
relationships with countries like Iraq and Libya and Syria and Cuba
and North Korea, it sends a signal out that that is what Russia thinks
is a good thing to do, to deal with the terrorist states," Mr Rumsfeld
said on Wednesday.

Decisions by Russian leaders to tighten economic ties with Iraq hurt
Russia because business people could make a decision, he said. "Where
do they want to put a plant? Where do they want to invest? Where do
they want to have a relationship?"

Mr Rumsfeld's strong comments to troops at Fort Hood, Texas, followed
a meeting with the President, George Bush, at Crawford,
Texas. However, Mr Rumsfeld admitted he had no details about the new
trade deals linking Moscow and Baghdad.

Iraq had abused trade relationships by the United Nations oil-for-food
program to strengthen its military, he said.

Citing Iraq's purchase of civilian vehicles, for example, he said,
"Artillery and rocket pieces are put on the back of these so-called
dump trucks, and they are able to continuously improve and strengthen
their military capability in ways that are unhelpful to their
neighbours and unhelpful to other countries."

He said Russia's assessment of long-term economic benefits from ties
with the West meant that relations would not be damaged if Mr Bush
decided to order military action to topple Iraqi President Saddam
Hussein.

"I don't think our relationship would be affected with Russia if that
were to happen," Mr Rumsfeld said. "My impression is that the Russian
administration is fairly pragmatic at this stage and their interest in
the United States is greater than their interest in Iraq."

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Russian Communists plan referendum to overturn land sales reform.
AFP. 22 August 2002.

MOSCOW -- Russian Communist leader Gennady Zyuganov announced Thursday
that his party would organise a nationwide referendum on land sales
and other issues to restore "historic justice" and take on the
country's wealthy "oligarchs."

The planned referendum, backed by "other patriotic forces," will also
seek approval of proposals to set a ceiling on local utilities costs
at 10 percent of a household's income, establish a minimum wage and
pension above the poverty level, and impose state control on the oil,
gas, power and rail industries, he told a press conference.

"The referendum must restore historic justice in a country where the
criminal power of the oligarchs has stolen the citizens' right to
express themselves," he said, referring to the small group of wealthy
businessmen who used personal connections to obtain substantial
holdings in state monopolies in the mid-1990s.

The Communist party is in particular opposed to a historic land reform
bill signed into law by President Vladimir Putin on July 25 which
authorises the sale and private ownership of agricultural land for the
first time since the 1917 Bolshevik revolution.

A working group preparing the referendum will meet early next month in
the southern region of Krasnodar, where the idea originated, Zyuganov
said. Demonstrations of support will be organised in October
throughout the country, he said.

"We will obtain at least five million signatures in favour of the
referendum," he added, predicting that the poll would take place in

March or April of next year.

Under Russian law, two million signatures are needed to launch the
process of holding a referendum, which must be approved by the
president and the Constitutional Court.

==================================================
17 RAWNEWS - Latin America
From: "RAWNEWS" <rawnews@btopenworld.com>
==================================================
RAWNEWS
on Latin-America -
23/8/02

1) Latin America under FTAA - San Francisco Examiner
2) Hemispheric Meeting Against the FTAA - Havana, Cuba, Nov 25-28 -
US-Cuba Labor Exchange
3) Truth and Justice in Venezuela August 15, 2002 - ZNet Commentary
4) Venezuela Opposition Party Wants End Cuba Oil Deal - WALL STREET
JOURNAL
5) Argentine Junta Felt Safe From the U.S. - NYT
6) U.S. Funded Venezuelan Coup - BOSTON GLOBE
7) For Venezuela, a Move Revives to Oust Chávez - New York Times
8) US in Colombia: In bed with the cocaine cartels - Hour.ca
9) The Days of
Gerardo Hernandez: Cuban Patriot in a US Prison - Alicia Jrapco

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Latin America under FTAA
San Francisco Examiner - August 16, 2002
Cold Math
By Conn Hallinan

Want to know what all those mind-numbing figures on Brazilian bond
ratings, Argentinean currency fluctuations, and Bolivian privatization
mean in the real world?

- Some 23 million Brazilians are malnourished, and 40,000 a year die
of hunger. Four million people are landless, while 3 percent of
Brazil's people own two-thirds of its land. Out of a population of 175
million, Brazil has 53 million poor, 23 million homeless, and eight
million unemployed.

- Argentina's unemployment rate is 21.5 percent and half of its 36
million people live in poverty. For the first time in 200 years,
malnutrition is a serious problem.

- In Bolivia, 6 out of 10 people are poor, a figure that rises to nine
out of 10 in some rural areas. One could go on, adding Columbia,
Venezuela, Paraguay, Ecuador and Peru to the litany of misery that
transforms the cold math of international finance into human poverty
and wretchedness.

According to the White House, the International Monetary Fund (IMF),
and the World Bank, the solution to the financial crisis is to stay
the course, continuing the strategy of free trade, privatization and
austerity. According to an increasing number of South Americans, the
solution is to cast aside two decades of failed policies and challenge
the rule of global capital.

The problem is that the latter approach is on a collision course with
the former and, given the people who run Latin American policy for the
Bush Administration, that could be a very risky undertaking.

Brazilians have already discovered this. When leftist Workers Party's
candidate Luiz Inacio Lula de Silva, a critic of IMF policies, took
the lead in the race for President, Morgan Stanley Dean Witter and
Merrill Lynch arbitrarily downgraded Brazilian bonds, weakening its
currency and increasing its debt burden.

Even the normally staid Financial Times took sharp issue with the
move, accusing bond market investors of "overreacting to Brazil's two
biggest problems: political uncertainty and debt," adding that the
rating "is out of line with Brazil's relatively solid public finances
and low inflation."

Misplaced panic or deliberate sabotage? That is the question an
increasing number of Latin Americans are asking these days. Lots of
people on the continent recall when the U.S. deliberately undermined
the Chilean economy to set up the 1972 coup. Brazilians also remember
1964, when their own President, Joao Goulart, was overthrown by a
U.S.-backed military coup for even considering land reform, rent
control, restricting foreign profits and nationalizing oil.

The 21-year dictatorship that followed not only widened the gap
between rich and poor, it is the major source of the country's present
$250 billion foreign debt. On the surface, the recent offer by the
IMF to loan Brazil $30 billion would seem a godsend. The loan,
however, is not aimed at alleviating the appalling poverty and
disparity of wealth, but at insuring Brazil will continue to privatize
key sections of the economy, open its markets, and pay back $20
billion to Citibank and FleetBoston through "austerity measures."

However, even the current conservative and pro-IMF President, Fernando
Henrique Cardoso, says "Brazil has tightened its accounts so far that
it doesn't know where to tighten any more."

What if Brazilians (and Argentines, Paraguayans, Bolivians, etc.) say
"enough" to policies that that have depressed standards of living from
Mexico to Argentina? What happens if Silva wins and, instead of
cutting social services to pay back banks, follows through on his plan
to spend $16 billion a year for a decade aimed at alleviating poverty
and illiteracy?

Suppose Brazil develops an independent foreign policy on issues like
the Colombian civil war, Cuba, and the Middle East? With U.S. Latin
American policy being decided by rightwing extremists likes Otto Reich
and John Bolton at the State Department, Rogelio Pardo-Mauer at the
Defense Department, Elliot Abrams at the National Security Council,
and John Negroponte at the UN, Latin Americans are understandably
nervous.

After Reich, Rogelio Pardo-Mauer, and National Security Director
Condoleezza Rice openly supported the failed coup against Hugo Chavez
in Venezuela, former Brazilian foreign minister Luis Felipe Lampreia
warned there was "anxiety in Brazil and the rest of Latin America
because the U.S. no longer seems so committed to democratic
principles."

The failed policies the White House is pushing have sparked riots and
demonstrations across Latin America where the U.S. is quite rightly
blamed for the disaster. By controlling 18 percent of the IMF's voting
shares, the U.S. essentially wields a veto over the organization's
actions and our fingerprints are all over the current crisis. "It was
very clearly the Department of the Treasury that pushed Argentina over
the edge and allowed it to collapse," Walter Molano of BCP Securities
argues.

The bottom line is that Brazil and other countries in Latin America
are going to have to make a choice between Citibank and their own
people. As Jean Ziegler of the UN Human Rights Commission argues,
"Hunger is not a destiny, but the product of a totally unjust
society. Those who die of hunger in Brazil are assassinated."

The question is: will Latin Americans be allowed to find their own road
to modernity, or are we looking at returning to the dark years when the
U.S. destabilized countries it disagreed with and military dictatorships
held a continent in thrall?

----------------------------------------------------------------------
CONVOCATION TO THE 11 HEMISPHERIC MEETING OF STRUGGLE AGAINST THE FREE
TRADE AGREEMENT FOR THE AMERICAS FTAA

INTERNATIONAL CONVENTION CENTER, HAVANA,
CUBA
NOVEMBER 25 THROUGH 28, 2002.

We are summoning trade unionist, peasants, students, womens,
academicians, artists and intellectuals from the hemisphere, the
youth, the indigenous, ecologists, religious, national entrepreneurs
and all political and cultural personalities who shares the same
concerns about the destiny of our peoples, in the efforts of
organizing more and more and as soon as possible, the diverse and
broad popular masses within the framework of the widest plurality,
ready to oppose the FTAA and to preserve thereby, the independence,
identity and the rigth to integral and democratic develoment of our
peoples.

Cuba Labor Seminar in Havana, Cuba

Join us to participate in 11 INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE AGAINST FTAA

Matanzas, Varadero & Playa Giron, Cuba
10 day Cuba Labor Seminar
Saturday, November 23 to Monday, December 2, 2002

For more information LaborExchange@aol.com
Fax 313 561 8330 cell 313 516 7898
PO Box 39188 Redford, MI 48239

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Truth and Justice in Venezuela August 15, 2002
ZNet Commentary - By Gregory Wilpert

Following three hearings in the past two weeks, the Venezuelan Supreme
Court has ruled that it would deny the attorney general's motion for a
trial against the four high-ranking military officers accused of
military rebellion in the April 11 coup attempt against the government
of President Hugo Chavez.

In effect, a slight majority of 11 to 9 supreme court justices
dismissed the charges against the four officers, with the argument
that they do not see sufficient proof for a viable trial. The ruling
has caused an avalanche of accusations, recriminations, and street
battles between opposition, police, national guard, and government
supporters.

Supporters of President Chavez, as well as most international
observers I have spoken to, find the prospect that the court does not
see sufficient evidence for military rebellion quite baffling. That
is, on the night of April 11 these officers were seen on Television
reading declarations of how they would no longer recognize the
authority of the president. How much more evidence for military
rebellion does one need?

Not only that, numerous ministers and others present in the
presidential palace during the coup report that officers threatened to
bomb the presidential palace if the president and his ministers did
not leave the palace within ten minutes. Finally, the coup regime had
even dissolved the Supreme Court. It is quite difficult to fathom that
either no one was responsible for these acts or that they all had a
legal justification, as the defense claims.

The officers and the opposition, however, argue that since no weapons
were actually used during the "supposed" coup (except by the police)
and since they were resisting Chavez' decision to mobilize the
military so as to prevent further bloodshed, their act does not
constitute military rebellion, but rather an exercise of their
legitimate right to resist a regime that was violating Venezuela's
constitution.

Early in the day of April 11th Chavez did order the mobilization of
troops, in order to, according to him, stop the opposition
demonstration from clashing with the pro-government demonstrators. The
police, as active participants in the opposition demonstration,
clearly could and would not stop the demonstration.

Also, Chavez has said that he knew early in the day that a coup was in
progress and apparently he had hoped that removing the troops from the
direct command of the generals, by placing them in the streets under
his direct command, he would prevent the generals from using the
troops against him. Chavez has always been quite confident that the
lower-ranking officers are on his side.

As hard as it is to believe, the Venezuelan opposition still
steadfastly claims that April 11 was no coup, but rather, that the
president resigned voluntarily and that this resulted in a "vacuum of
power", which the military asked the "civil society" to fill by
appointing Pedro Carmona as president.

By what authority the military or "civil society" (that is, the
opposition) named Carmona president is left to the imagination (he
ended up swearing himself into power). Also, this cover story
conveniently ignores the fact that the Venezuelan constitution
provides for a succession of power through the vice president and the
president of the legislature.

It should be obvious that the consequences of accepting the
opposition's claims and of not trying the military coup plotters in a
court of law would significantly weaken Venezuelan democracy because
it gives the military a free pass to oppose the government as it
pleases.

So why would a supreme court that was appointed by Chavez' party and
his supporters rule against the government and in favor of the coup
plotters? The reason is complex and almost certainly has to do with
the fact that the members of the Supreme Court were by and large
nominated by Luis Miquilena, the former minister of the interior and
of justice. Miquilena, who is considered a "moderate" with
presidential aspirations of his own, left the government last Fall and
recently formed his own political party, "Solidarity", along with
several other of his followers, who broke from Chavez' coalition in
the National Assembly. Many suspect that Miquilena was involved in the
coup attempt and rumors were circulating before the coup that in the
event of a coup he would be named as president.

As is so common in Venezuelan culture, personal loyalty counts for a
lot and this gives Miquilena significant influence over the Supreme
Court. William Lara, the president of the National Assembly and
member of Chavez' party, claimed, prior to the court's final decision
to dismiss the charges, that "Luis Miquilena, together with leaders of
Acción Democrática [the former governing party] is putting pressure on
the Supreme Court, so that they make a decision contrary to the rule
of law and in favor of the accused officials."

It does not help, though, that Chavez, in his weekly radio and
television address, went even further than Lara and said that he has
"possible evidence that there are judges who are being manipulated
from outside the country by people who have a lot of money."

He then went on to make a comparison to a baseball game, his favorite
imagery, where an umpire who consistently makes bad rulings ought to
be removed from the game. The next day all of the main newspapers ran
headlines that Chavez was threatening the independence of the Supreme
Court. Even if Chavez' claims turn out to be true, making such a
public announcement was strategically a foolish move, given how
fragile his hold is on the presidency.

Some of the evidence Chavez mentioned has since surfaced, which
appears to show an effort of manipulation on the part of the
opposition, in the form of a tape recorded phone conversation between
a leader of Acción Democratica and an associate of Luis Miquilena's,
where they discuss the need to put pressure on one of the Supreme
Court justices.

Further deteriorating the sense of institutionality and public order
in Venezuela are a series of confrontations between police and
demonstrators in front of the Supreme Court, who are protesting
against the court's unwillingness to take the military coup plotters
to trial. The municipal police, who are controlled by a mayor who
belongs to the opposition, has been cracking down hard on these
demonstrators, regularly dispersing them with tear-gas and shooting
with live ammunition, so far seriously wounding at least eight
demonstrators. Some demonstrators, however, have also been shooting
and several police officers were wounded in the process.

Also, a new urban paramilitary group has announced its presence, in
defense of the Chavez government and has claimed responsibility for
ambushing a police van with high-caliber gunfire, as the police was
pursuing demonstrators into a strongly pro-Chavez neighborhood. Chavez
has rejected the support of this new group, but the opposition is
using this incident as yet more evidence for the destructiveness of
Chavez' "bolivarian revolution."

This new leftist paramilitary group, which calls itself the
"Carapaica," after an indigenous leader of the 16th century, has also
given the opposition another reason to call on the military to "do its
duty and disarm groups such as the Carapaica" (Caracas mayor Alfredo
Peña).

This is nothing other than a thinly-veiled call for a coup, since the
only one who could mobilize the military for such a task is the
president, but the call was pointedly not directed at the
president. In addition, Francisco Arias, a former ally of Chavez,
until he ran a failed campaign for president against Chavez, has
openly called on the military to intervene should Chavez try to
challenge the ruling of the Supreme Court.

Perhaps the only thing that could truly have helped move Venezuela
from the abyss of permanent confrontation was a truly objective and
highly respected investigation into what really happened on April 11
to 14. Shortly after the failed coup, there were some serious efforts
to create a truth commission, which would independently investigate
what happened.

However, both sides were hopelessly suspicious of the other and no
agreement could be reached in the national assembly as to who would
constitute the truth commission. Instead, the national assembly has
produced two reports on the coup, one written by government supporters
and one written by the opposition, with two vastly different
interpretations of the events of April 11 to 14.

Chavez now faces an extremely delicate balancing act, where wrong
moves, such as his public accusations against the Supreme Court, could
easily lead to another coup, his indictment by a pro-coup Supreme
Court, or renewed efforts by the opposition to mobilize all
oppositional sectors of society against him.

Chavez' supporters, such as the political director of Chavez' party,
Guillermo García Ponce, are deciding to go all-out and have warned
that if Chavez should be indicted, the party would launch a new
constitutional assembly to revamp all of the political powers in
Venezuela. While extremists on both sides of Venezuela's political
conflict appear ready to lynch each other, one can only hope that
Chavez and those around him take this blow to democracy more
calmly. Worse than allowing a coup against a democratically elected
regime go unpunished right now would be to challenge the fragile
institutional order Venezuela has by insisting on removing judges that
appear to be in the hands of the opposition.

This might seem like an intolerable trade-off to the Chavistas, but it
is more likely that democratic culture in Venezuela is strengthened in
the long run through strict adherence to judicial procedure than
through mob justice, as some here are calling for.

Unfortunately, this incessant conflict over coup, counter-coup,
judicial decisions, and hyperbolic accusations causes the media and
other observers to willfully or carelessly ignore the real
achievements of the Chavez regime.

The media and other observers never mention the fact that over half of
Venezuela's population is the potential beneficiary of real urban and
rural land reform, which is currently in the process of being
implemented. Also, no one ever mentions the tremendous increases in
health services and education for the poor. These achievements would
be reversed if the opposition came to power, as they were during the
brief coup regime of Carmona.

Instead, besides the daily unverified opposition charges that the news
media trumpet with all their might, they focus their attention
primarily on the fact that most of Venezuelan society is suffering
from the devaluation of the currency and the consequently high rate of
inflation, both of which are mostly due to politically motivated
capital flight. This is politically motivated capital flight because
Chavez' economic policies, in essence, do not stray all that much from
those of his predecessors-except, significantly, his oil policies.
While the economic situation is serious and has contributed to
recession and increased unemployment, it points to the no-win nature
of politics in the age of globalization.

That is, this is a global politico-economic context in which policies
that intentionally favor the least well off of society lead to
economic decline due to national and international capital flight and
thus to more poverty, while policies that benefit the business sector,
such as neo-liberalism, also lead to more poverty. This problem is
what really ought to be on the agenda in Venezuela, instead of
impatient-since his mandate can be democratically revoked next
year-and undemocratic efforts to get rid of Chavez.

Gregory Wilpert, a former U.S. Fulbright scholar in Venezuela,
currently lives in Caracas and is a sociologist and freelance reporter
who is also doing independent research on the sociology of
development. He can be reached at: Wilpert@cantv.net

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Venezuela Opposition Party Wants End Cuba Oil Deal
WALL STREET JOURNAL - THURSDAY - AUGUST 22, 2002

CARACAS -- An opposition political party in Venezuela has filed an
injunction against the nation's decision to resume crude oil shipments
to Cuba , local daily El Universal reported Thursday.

Under the agreement, PdVSA sells 53,000 b/d to Cuba under preferential
financial terms.

The social-Christian party Copei claims the deal between Cuba and
Venezuela, which is carried out by state-owned oil monopoly Petroleos
de Venezuela (E.PVZ), is illegal since the National Assembly wasn't
consulted. The deal was sealed between President Hugo Chavez and Cuban
leader Fidel Castro.

Castro has been among Chavez's strongest allies.

Copei lawmaker Cesar Perez Vivas was quoted as saying that a deal in
the Assembly in September 2000, under which the government was excused
from approval by the Assembly, was illegal and should be annulled.

The nation's Supreme Court opened a case in March questioning the
legality of an oil assistance pact with Cuba . The Supreme Court last
week gave National Assembly president Willian Lara 15 days to show
that Chavez's government "fulfilled legal requirements" before signing
the pact in October 2000, according to the court statement.

PDVSA executives suspended shipments during an April coup that briefly
ousted Chavez because Cuba owed $142 million. After Chavez regained
power, PDVSA President Ali Rodriguez renewed the shipments and said
the loan had been refinanced. Shipments are expected to resume in
September.

Meanwhile, some PdVSA top officials, all declining to be named, claim
the company is giving its oil away while the country is mired in
recession. Several white-collar workers at various company
departments are collecting signatures opposing the move.

PDVSA provides one-third of Cuba's oil imports.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Argentine Junta Felt Safe From the U.S.
NYT. 22 August 2002.

WASHINGTON -- Leaders of the military dictatorship that took control
of Argentina in 1976 believed the Ford administration supported their
crackdown on leftist insurgents and would not penalize them for rights
abuses, newly declassified State Department documents show.

The documents indicate that American Embassy officials in Buenos Aires
frequently felt frustrated in their efforts to encourage the Argentine
government to rein in military and paramilitary units that were
systematically killing, torturing and kidnapping suspected leftists --
including several American citizens -- during the summer and fall of
1976.

Repeatedly, senior Argentine officials brushed aside concerns raised
by embassy officials, saying that Secretary of State Henry Kissinger
and other top Ford administration officials supported their war
against Communists and were not deeply worried about rights abuses,
several documents show.

In one cable to Mr. Kissinger, dated Oct. 14, 1976, Ambassador Robert
Hill complained that the Argentine foreign minister, Cesar Augusto
Guzzetti, returned from a visit to Washington feeling "ecstatic" about
relations with the United States. "He said he was 'satisfied that the
State Department clearly understood the problem and that there would
be no confrontation between the two governments over human rights,' "
Mr. Hill wrote.

"Guzzetti went to the U.S. fully expecting to hear some strong, firm,
direct warning of his government's human rights practices," Mr. Hill
continued. "Rather than that, he has returned in a state of
jubilation, convinced that there is no real problem with the USG over
this issue."

In another cable to Washington, dated Sept. 20, 1976, Mr. Hill wrote
that Mr. Guzzetti said that Mr. Kissinger had expressed no concerns
about rights abuses in a meeting in Santiago, Chile.

Indeed, Mr. Guzzetti suggested that Mr. Kissinger supported what the
Argentine government called its war on terrorism [!] and was
encouraging President Jorge Rafael Videla of Argentina to move swiftly
in crushing the insurgency.

"When he had seen Secy of State Kissinger in Santiago, the latter had
said he hoped the Argentine govt. could get the terrorist problem
under control as quickly as possible," Mr. Hill wrote. "Guzzetti said
that he had reported this to President Videla and to the cabinet, and
that their impression had been that USG's overriding concern was not
human rights but rather that GOA 'get it over quickly.' "

In another dispatch, Mr. Hill urged the State Department to write the
Videla government to correct the Argentine president's "overly
optimistic view" concerning Washington's opinion of the rights
abuses. It is not clear whether such a letter was ever sent.

The cables were among 4,677 documents dating from 1975 to 1984 that
were declassified and released by the State Department on Tuesday at
the behest of rights groups, families of victims of the military
crackdown and several governments that are considering prosecuting
Argentine officials for abuses.

Attempts to reach Mr. Kissinger for comment were unsuccessful.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
U.S. Funded Venezuelan Coup
BOSTON GLOBE - MIKE CEASER

Over the two years preceding the thwarted coup in April against
President Hugo Chavez, a US-funded pro-democracy group financed a
range of antigovernment programs, including some that have come under
scrutiny for the way they spent their money. An examination of grants
of more than $1 million, given to organizations in Venezuela by the
National Endowment for Democracy, has found that US tax money financed
several Chavez opponents, including two organizations prominent in the
protests that led up to the coup.

The documents and interviews also report that money sent to one
US-funded organization never reached its intended target and that
another organization apparently falsified its Venezuelan
accomplishments. An endowment-funded trip to Washington by Chavez
opponents may have accelerated the events leading to the April 11
uprising.

The revolt against Chavez fell apart after two days, allowing him to
return to power. The United States soon came under a barrage of
criticism for appearing to support the coup against a democratically
elected president, apparently in contradiction to US policy to
strengthen democracy in Latin America.

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines02/0818-04.htm

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For Venezuela, a Move Revives to Oust Chávez
New York Times - By JUAN FORERO - August 17, 2002

CARACAS, Venezuela, Aug. 16 - The wide streets and white-washed houses
in this city's affluent east end are deceptively calm, with tropical
birds and lush mango trees providing a country feel just minutes from
the chaotic downtown.

But here in the Sorocaima neighborhood, residents are preparing for
the worst: a possibly violent confrontation between the multitudes of
poor who support the country's mercurial president, Hugo Chávez, and
his increasingly restive opponents. Taking precautions, the
neighborhood's people have put up razor wire and electrified fences,
set up citizen patrols, erected street barricades and purchased arms.

"We are worried that in a state of desperation, the government will
call for a riot," explained Bruno Scheuren, 58, a publicist who, like
virtually everyone in this part of the city, opposes Mr. Chávez.
"Many people are afraid."

Four months after Mr. Chávez was briefly ousted in a violent uprising,
trouble is stirring again as Venezuelan society has grown more
polarized, and both the president's supporters and his adversaries
talk of looming conflict. Although the president and his foes had
vowed to reconcile after he returned to power, two days after his
ouster, efforts at dialogue have faltered.

Now, a once-fragmented opposition is starting to meld into a coherent
front and is embarking on new efforts to remove Mr. Chávez from
office. They include pushing for a national referendum on his
presidency in August 2003, and demanding criminal charges against him
in the deaths of civilian protesters in the April 11 street
disturbances that led to his temporary downfall.

But some of Mr. Chávez's opponents now speak privately of another
uprising to topple a leader they accuse of dividing Venezuela with his
left-leaning policies and confrontational manner. His supporters,
mostly impoverished Venezuelans who say he has given them a voice they
never had, vow to use force in his defense.

The situation is increasingly worrisome to the United States, which
depends on Venezuela for 1.5 million barrels of oil a day. Bush
administration officials said that unless the two sides renewed talks
soon, Venezuela could spiral into violence.

"Unless there is a meaningful national dialogue, and unless that
dialogue starts really soon, then there is a very good chance
Venezuela will blow again," said an administration official who
follows events in Venezuela.

The upheaval in April was followed by days of soul
searching. Mr. Chávez apologized for his often incendiary language and
promised to open talks with opponents. His foes, ranging from
Venezuela's largest labor union to its biggest business association,
promised to listen. Mr. Chávez soon took some steps that were
welcomed by the business class. He appointed a new economic team,
replaced the president of the state-owned oil company who was seen as
his crony, and pledged that the National Assembly would reconsider
several economic laws opposed by entrepreneurs.

But opponents now charge that the government's actions have been
half-hearted. A presidential committee set up to advance the talks has
largely dissolved, with key opposition figures dropping out, saying
their complaints were not heard. The opposition also charged that
Mr. Chávez had continued to adopt policies that hamper business and
the state oil company.

"The game is over because the president says one thing and does
another," Carlos Fernández, president of the country's largest
business association, Fedecámaras, said, referring to the talks. "The
president in the last few weeks is back to his old self."

To many opposition lawmakers and business leaders, the only option now
is to remove Mr. Chávez, a process they acknowledge could lead to
violence.

"I have no doubt we could enter into a civil war, a fight between
brothers," said Gerardo Blyde, a member of the National Assembly and a
Chávez foe. "We have all the ingredients for that war: intolerance,
sectarianism, exclusion and the incompetence to resolve the problems."

To strengthen its efforts, the disjointed opposition formed, in June,
a group called the Democratic Coordinator. Though its members include
the once powerful Democratic Action Party, Fedecámaras, and
representatives of labor and the Communist Red Flag Party, it is
united behind the goal of ousting Mr. Chávez.

With the advice of lawyers and public relations experts, the group has
embarked on a legal effort to cut short Mr. Chávez's presidency. The
main strategy is to prod the Supreme Court into investigating him for
the deaths of the 18 people in the April protests and for what they
call mismanagement of public funds.

The president's foes were emboldened when the Supreme Court on
Wednesday dismissed charges against four military officers the
government had accused of rebelling against Mr. Chávez in April.

The two sides have not ruled out negotiations. In recent days, both
the government and the opposition extended invitations for the Carter
Center, former president Jimmy Carter's Georgia-based group, the
Organization of American States and the United Nations to choose a
representative to help open talks.

But an effort by Mr. Carter to broker talks between Mr. Chávez and his
opposition during a visit last month ended when the opposition refused
to meet him. Foreign observers who closely follow events here say the
acrimony on both sides has weakened the possibility for fruitful
talks.

Indeed, Mr. Chávez and his supporters see many of his opponents as
mere coup plotters, while opponents often speak of Mr. Chávez as a
fascist or lunatic.

"It's polarized to the extent of mutual contempt bordering on hatred,
so you have people who refuse to even talk to other people," said a
Western diplomat in Caracas.

Some members of the Democratic Coordinator continue to hold out in
private the possibility of a coup by officers of a still-restless
military.

"There is an inclination toward a way out of any kind," said one
official in the group.

Other opposition leaders say a better option is a campaign of street
protests to so debilitate Mr. Chávez that he would resign.

"The strategy is to encircle Chávez to the point where he leaves, or
he is tried on charges or he goes under some other scenario," said
Carlos Hermoso, a leader in the Red Flag.

To the president's ardent supporters, such plans are nothing short of
treason and must be met with force.

"They insist on conspiring, in taking out President Chávez and
establishing their own government," said Désirée Santos, a close
ally in the National Assembly. "We would not permit a government
without Chávez."

----------------------------------------------------------------------
In bed with the cartels:
A former U.S. Green Beret charges American troops are training
cocaine-financed Columbian military death squads
by Alex Roslin - Hour.ca August 15, 2002

http://www.hour.ca/magazine/index.asp?id=1718&parution=1032

When Stan Goff was sent to Colombia and Peru as a member of the U.S.
Army's famed Green Berets, he was amazed by the corruption and
violence of the local troops he was training.

Now, as the U.S. government seeks to boost military aid to Colombia's
hard-line new president .varo Uribe V.ez, Goff is telling his story in
hopes of provoking debate about what the U.S. is up to in Latin
America.

Goff, a Vietnam vet and one-time sniper in the top-secret Delta Force,
says that in Colombia the U.S. has gotten into bed with one of the
most corrupt and violent regimes on the planet, whose military is
joined at the hip with right-wing death squads which, in turn, are
financed by cocaine cartels.

In an interview from his home in Raleigh, North Carolina, Goff said
that no one on the ground in Colombia actually believes Washington's
official claim that it is in Colombia to fight a war on drugs.

"Nobody we talked to down there ever talked about drugs. That seemed
to be the furthest thing from their minds. All they talked about was
the guerrillas," he said.

Goff said the Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias de Colombia, or FARC -
the country's largest leftist guerrilla group - has nowhere near the
same involvement in drugs as Colombia's notoriously corrupt military
or the country's network of right-wing paramilitary death squads,
known as the Autodefensas Unidas de Colombia, or AUC.

He said FARC's involvement in drugs comes mainly from taxing peasant
coca farmers, but the real money is in processing coca leaves into
cocaine and smuggling it into the U.S.

This remains the exclusive preserve of the big cocaine cartels, which
fund the AUC death squads, he said. "These are guys with suits who run
banks," Goff said of Colombia's cocaine barons. "They have no interest
in some socialist insurgency gaining power."

But despite the American anti-drug rhetoric, Goff said the U.S. has
shown relatively scant interest in taking on the big Colombian cocaine
cartels or the AUC, which co-ordinates its bloody missions closely
with the U.S.-backed military.

"The doctrine [the Green Berets were] teaching is counter-insurgency
doctrine, not counter-narcotics doctrine. We would have at least been
showing them how a drug lab is laid out. But we ourselves didn't
know. I couldn't have told you how to make cocaine," he said.

Goff's 24-year military career has taken him from Vietnam to stints as
a special-forces advisor in Colombia, Peru, Honduras and Venezuela, a
Delta Force member in El Salvador and Guatemala, a Ranger in Somalia
and a special-forces peacekeeper in Haiti.

Since retiring in 1996 as a master sergeant, Goff has become a
progressive organizer and spoken at anti-war conferences about his
story. Goff had an eye-opening experience when he was sent to Peru in
1991 to train an elite Peruvian special-forces battalion.

Goff said the Peruvians had a gruesome record of killing indigenous
people in the country's mountainous interior, a fact well known to the
U.S. special-forces trainers who received a full briefing on all the
Peruvians they taught.

"I'm not sure they could have been more violent. President [Alberto]
Fujimori was giving the army a blank cheque to go into the countryside
and lay waste to it," said Goff.

The battalion was racially segregated, with the officers almost
exclusively European while the troops were black and indigenous. As
conscripts with poor tactical training, the Peruvians didn't like
engaging any guerrillas head-on, said Goff.

Instead, their specialty was "death-squad-style tactics" against
civilians, which he described as "severely repressive measures, up to
and including massacres of the indigenous population. It turned into a
race war.

"We walked past a graveyard one day and one of the officers said,
'That's where all the friendly Indians are.'"

The Peruvian officers were also heavily corrupt - "essentially the
mafia with a uniform" - and did nothing to conceal their violence or
corruption from the Americans. "They would hold huge parties with
unlimited booze every night, drunkenly boasting about how many people
they killed," he said.

If that wasn't enough, the U.S. training showed the Peruvians how to
be even "more repressive toward the population," said Goff. After his
two-month stint in Peru, Goff was sent for two months to Colombia to
train two special-forces battalions in air-mobile assault and night
fighting. Stationed at the Tolemaida base, 60 kilometres southwest of
Bogot? Goff said the Colombian units were just as racially segregated,
corrupt and violent as in Peru.

Goff said Colombian military commanders closely co-ordinate their
operations with the paramilitary death squads, with whom they "fight
side-by-side. The army establishes the cordon sanitaire and the AUC
goes in, does what they do and goes on their merry way. They are
allowing the paramilitaries to do their wet work so they have
plausible denial."

----------------------------------------------------------------------
The Days of Gerardo Hernandez in the United States Federal Prison at
Lompoc

(This human-interest account of one of the Cuban 5 political prisoners
was originally written in Spanish for the Cuban media as a way for the
Cuban people to get a glimpse of what they were facing and to show
their gratitude for all the support they were receiving in their
homeland. Here is a modified translation in English)

By Alicia Jrapko (member of the National Committee to Free the Five
from San Francisco, California)

For millions of Cubans, the living conditions of the Five Cuban
Political Prisoners being held in U.S. prisons is one of their
greatest preoccupations.

These five Cubans, who among other things were accused of espionage,
face sentences from 15 years to double life. Since the time they were
sentenced in December 2001, the Five have been scattered between
different federal prisons around the country.

It was obvious that the U.S. government attempted to separate them
with the intention of breaking the strength and morale that the five
had shown all throughout their trial and sentencing. The conditions in
the federal prison system varies from one to the other and the
severity of the conditions depend on several factors including the
political climate of the state as well as the level of security of the
unit a prisoner is in.

Gerardo Hernández Nordelo, who faces the most severe sentence of two
lives in prison plus 80 months, is in Lompoc federal prison in
California. Lompoc is called The New Rock because it is the prison
that replaced the infamous Alcatraz prison in San Francisco
Bay.

Prisoners who have had some type of disciplinary problem in other
prisons are often sent to Lompoc and if after 18 months their behavior
improves, they are assigned to federal prisons that are supposedly
less severe.

Like all the other prisoners at Lompoc Gerardo s day starts at
5:50AM. At that time, the guards automatically open the bars of all
the cells and the prisoners can go to the common areas of their
unit. Between 6:15 and 6:30 in the morning, they are called for
breakfast. After breakfast the prisoners return to their cells or to
the common areas and around 7:45 they are called to go to work.

The U. S. prison industrial complex, which continues to grow, is now
the second largest employer in the country and is responsible for the
elimination of thousands of jobs on the outside, many of which had
been jobs covered by union contracts. The corporation of federal
prisons generates exorbitant profits off of cheap prison labor. Each
prisoner makes between 23 cents to $1.15 per hour, in Gerardo s case
he makes approximately 50 cents per hour.

In all federal prisons all prisoners have to work. The corporation
that operates all prison productions is called Unicor . In Lompoc
there are three factories, one cable joiner factory, a print factory
and a sign factory. The three factories are located inside the prison
walls and are a more desirable place to work because the work tends to
be less menial. Although the wages are very low, for many prisoners it
is there only source of income. If they cannot get work in the
factories, they are assigned to other jobs such as general cleaning,
cooking, services, etc.

Gerardo first started to work in the cable factory, but after a month,
he was transferred to a job in the sign factory, which he feels is a
little bit more interesting. In the sign factory prisoners make
everything from small stickers to big signs for the freeway. The
clients of the factory are all government agencies and
institutions. For example, the Forest Service orders posters with
messages such as forest fire prevention. Any sign in the National
Parks was most likely produced in Lompoc.

Like in any other work place, in prison, the bosses quickly identify
the workers who are more skilled to be assigned to specific
jobs. Gerardo was assigned to a job of high responsibility not because
his bosses were concerned with Gerardo s well being or because they
were interested in his progress but because they found out that he
brought with him a high level of education and knowledge that could be
utilized to further maximize profits. It is not surprising, because
Gerardo, like the 4 other Cuban political prisoners, were educated in
Cuba, where every one has access to free education from kindergarten
to graduate school; an educational system that the U.N. has
characterized as the best in Latin America.

Gerardo works for the most part on a computer where the entire sign
database for the factory is stored. His responsibilities include input
of all orders, keeping records, redirecting orders, passing them to
production, closing orders that are sent to clients, making sales
reports and order status, and also he responds to any requests of
data.

At 4PM Gerardo is back from work when the prison guards close all the
cells and count the prisoners. Between 4:30PM and 4:45PM they open the
cells and at 5:00PM there is a movement for activities meaning that
they can go into the yard, to the library or to church after passing
through a series of metal detectors. Around 5:30PM they are called to
the dining area and after supper the prisoners can either go back to
their cells or they can go directly to the yard. All movement of
prisoners is under close surveillance and takes place at designated
times after being announced on loud speakers. At 10 PM all the cells
are closed until the next morning. The weekends provide some break
from the routine and it is here when Gerardo tries to get some time in
the yard for exercise and some sun. Sunday means the possibility of a
phone call to Cuba.

In the last two months, Gerardo has been by himself in his cell
because his celly (cell mate) was sent to another prison. Lompoc is a
very old prison and the cells are small so this is a great advantage
for him. It not only provides him a little more comfort but he can
also decorate the cell to his own taste. He has two bulletin boards in
his cell that he was able to acquire with a lot of perseverance on his
part. The boards he explains have become a collage of photos of Fidel,
Che, Mandela, images of the Cuban people in the open tribunals,
marches calling for their freedom, and pictures that were sent to him
by Cuban students as well as photos of demonstrations of solidarity
groups from around the world.

In Cuba Gerardo is a well known cartoonist, whose work will soon
appear in a new book, so besides his task of keeping up his
correspondence he spends as much time as he can creating new
caricatures that reflect his political point of view but also exposes
his undaunted sense of humor. Gerardo s cell lacks a chair or a little
table to write on, and although he is used to writing and drawing
standing up against the closet, his greatest complaint is not this
obstacle but the lack of time he has to write and draw.

Due to the fact that the case of the Five Cubans is gaining
international recognition Gerardo is receiving between 5 to 10 letters
per day from all over the world. He wishes to express his gratitude to
all the support and good wishes he receives daily, and at the same
time he wants to apologize for not having enough time to respond in a
timely way to all the letters. For him, the solidarity letters are a
great source of encouragement. All of this mail has given him a sense
of pride to know that so many peace and justice loving people support
the case of the Cuban 5 and their defense of Cuba against the
terrorism that emanates out of Miami.

In Lompoc prison there are 20 Cubans and in Gerardo s unit there are 6
including himself. All of the others are Marielitos, who left Cuba
illegally in the 1980 s, and although many of them have completed
their sentences they are being retained by Immigration indefinitely,
victimized by the U.S. blockade of Cuba. This particularly cruel
aspect of the 43-year-old blockade of Cuba is the absence of any
extradition treaty between the two countries keeping these Cubans in
prison in legal limbo. This situation plays itself out in many state
and federal prisons throughout the U.S. where thousands of Cubans are
imprisoned for undefined time. Many of them have been in prison for
ten, fifteen and even twenty years without charges.

Many of the Cubans who are in prison with Gerardo have no contact with
their families and in a show of solidarity Gerardo has helped some of
them to find their families in Cuba. Due to this effort Gerardo has
become known in the prison and even some American prisoners have asked
him to help them find their lost relatives. Many Cubans, who are in
prison with Gerardo, have told him that leaving Cuba was the biggest
mistake they ever made. Many of them consider themselves
revolutionaries and have asked Gerardo to have a photo taken with them
to send to their families in Cuba. Others share with him letters they
have received from their Cuban families where they have asked them to
look out for Gerardo and to show solidarity to him.

But Gerardo s case like the case of the other Cuban patriots is well
known by other prisoners. Some of them have read their Court closing
statements and had asked Gerardo for a book with his
signature. Several African American prisoners ask Gerardo regularly
for materials that he receives in English to read them. Many of them
have followed closely the case of Mumia Abu-Jamal and others have
expressed to Gerardo their admiration for Cuban leader Fidel Castro.

It is clear that Gerardo has been able to remain strong behind the
walls of Lompoc. Sometimes late at night, on a small radio he has been
able to tune in Radio Havana Cuba in English and one night he was even
able to pick up the Cuban National Anthem.

Contrary to other prisoners in the United States, Gerardo, Ramón,
René, Fernando, and Antonio, are the only political prisoners here who
have the unconditional support of their entire country. The Five
inside U.S. prisons and the great majority of the Cuban people in Cuba
fight the same battle; the battle for their self- determination and
the right to defend the sovereignty of Cuba against all types of
aggressions.

Sooner or later they will return to their homeland.

For more information about the Five Cuban
Political Prisoners Held in U.S. prisons and their prison addresses,
visit:

www.freethefive.org

><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><
LINKS / VERWEISE / HINWEISE
><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><

==================================================
18 prairie [Frische Service]: 26.08.2002
From: uschi reiter <uschi@prairie.at>
==================================================
prairie [Frische Service]: 26.08.2002
----
p o l i t i k + v e r b r e c h e n

o Gerald Oberansmayr : Fighter für die Euro-Armee

Lächerlich wirken die Argumente der österreichischen Bundesregieung,
mit denen sie den Ankauf der Kampfflugzeuge Eurofighter rechtfertigen
will. Vor allem weil Regierungsvertreter schon mehrmals öffentlich
klarstellten, wozu Österreich diese Bomber braucht: Um beim
Kriegführen dabei sein zu können.

http://www.prairie.at/frame?artikel/20020823174214

s t a d t + l a n d

Waltraud Geier : Linzer AktivistInnen "rüsten" sich für Salzburg

Nicht nur Exekutivbeamte sondern auch potenzielle Demonstranten und
Protestiererinnen bereiten sich schon fieberhaft auf das WEF
Osteuropatreffen in Salzburg vor. Da Protest aber nicht immer etwas
tierisch ernstes sein muss, setzen sich linzer AktivistInnen am
Freitag, den 30. August, erst...

http://www.prairie.at/frame?artikel/20020823173647

d o s s i e r s
_ _ _ _ _ _
_____ _| |__ (_) |__ (_) |_(_) ___ _ __
/ _ \ \/ / '_ \| | '_ \| | __| |/ _ \| '_ \
| __/> <| | | | | |_) | | |_| | (_) | | | |
\___/_/\_\_| |_|_|_.__/|_|\__|_|\___/|_| |_|

linz/london/innsbruck --- 03 info

ausstellung | exhibiton: 06.09 - 12.10.02
l o c a t i o n: fotoforum west | adolf pichler platz 8 | 6020 innsbruck

dossier im ueberblick / dossier overview
http://www.prairie.at/dossiers/20020708113808/artikel/20020731100406/index_html

updates -> texts -> images

Verina Gfader : TECHNIKEN DES VORUEBERZIEHENS ****techniques of passing

++abstract >>> an interrogation into modes and situations of
'passengers' and acting in (urban) surroundings, the effects of 'the
street'; + the exploration of how the notion of 'becoming' (which
involves a politics of relations) can be understood through a language
of practice, reflecting our acknowledgment of new technologies as
integrated in everyday life while trans/forming it.
http://www.prairie.at/frame?artikel/20020826133819

Participants:

o Juan Cruz : Disappearing Streets 2002
Disappearing Streets -1 2002 Colour Photograph 30x30cm
http://www.prairie.at/frame?artikel/20020731100642

o Martyn Evans: >> on going
When walking through the city, I stop every now and then,...
http://www.prairie.at/frame?artikel/20020731100541

o Maria Moreira : The welcome enigma
PRESS, compress, repress, pressure, assure, a sore, a soul, your sole
soul is enough audience for me. RELEASE your attention please, and just
please yourself…
http://www.prairie.at/frame?artikel/20020731100406

o Cian Quayle : postcards from innsbruck
Whilst waiting for the arrival of a new passport for my visit to
Austria, I started to wonder what I would see...
http://www.prairie.at/frame?artikel/20020731100014

// unter den einzelnen Artikeln befindet sich Bildmaterial der
teilnehmenden
KuenstlerInnen ++ find images below the articles

_________________________________________________________________
demo - salzburg

Von 12. bis 19. September finden die Action Days gegen die diesjährige
WEF-Konferenz in Salzburg statt. Erwartet werden AktivistInnen aus der
ganzen Welt, um gegen Kapitalismus und für mehr soziale Gerechtigkeit zu
demonstrieren. Neben Demonstartionen sind auch verschiedenen dezentrale
Aktionen und Workshops geplant. --> Termine
http://www.antiwef.org/article.php?sid=60
http://austria.indymedia.org/

+ +

Am 30.8. Stadtwerkstadt / Beginn pünktlich um 20:00

V e r s t e i g e r u n g :

Feilgeboten werden ausgewählte Devotionalien authentisch linksradikaler
Provenienz übriggeblieben/lukriert nach/bei Demonstrationen.

(1) Kostüme-getragen von AkteurInnen der Theatergruppe Schwabingrad
anlässlich des Grenzcamps in Strasbourg
(2) eine Tränengaskartusche (leer) von den Protesten in Genua gegen den G8
Gipfel
(3) eine in Strasbourg von einem öffentlichen Platz eroberte Europafahne
(4) zwei Exemplare aus der Edition Kupf
(5) ein gebrauchtes und Duftversiegeltes T-shirt des publix theatre caravan
Fahrers
(6) des weiteren kleinere Nippes für die unteren Einkommensschichten
(7) ein kunstpolitisch einmaliges bono-vox-taschentuch

Anmeldungen für ein Essen (Gedeckpreis Euro 10) bitte bis spätestens bis
29.8. take this wob_marley@ganja.com.

Die Teilnahme an der Versteigerung ist selbstverständlich auch ohne
Essenskonsum möglich.

Verwendet werden die gesammelten Sesterzen aus dinner and auction
für die kommenden Proteste gegen das WEF Osteuropatreffen in Salzburg
vom 13-17.9 sowie die Anwaltskosten des in Strasbourg aus
fadenscheinigen Grunden verhafteten Ahmed

Musik: DJ Wellman

Im Vorprogramm: Fernsehen mit "Yes Men"

Beginn pünktlich um 20:00

+ + +

_________________________________________________________________

|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| fin |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||

\ | | | | | | | | | | /

[w][w][w].[p][r][a][i][r][i][e].[a][t]

/ | | | | | | | | | | \

k o m m i n s o f f e n e f r e u n d i n

| wahl@prairie.at | guenther@prairie.at | uschi@prairie.at |

temp: Altstadt 22A, A-4020 Linz

tel: 43.732.73 1209

fax. 43.732.7 11 846

***************** h o s t e d b y s e r v u s . a t *****************

Wenn Sie in Zunkunft kein *prairie Frische-Service mehr erhalten wollen,

schicken Sie bitte eine EMail an UNSUBSCRIBE:
prairie@servus.at mit dem Text "unsubscribe prairie".

|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| fin |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||

komm ins offene freundIn! - DIE PRAIRIE
komm ins offene freundIn! - DIE PRAIRIE

-top-

Redaktionsschluss: 22:00 Uhr
Diese Ausgabe hat Albert Brandl
zusammengestellt


Fehler moege frau/man mir nachsehen!