Global IMC FeaturesMon Feb 13, 2012 11:42 Recent stories compiled by IMC editors worldwide
Indymedia Global Website Featuresen | Mon Feb 13, 2012 11:42 Features selected and composed by the www-features and www-editoriales groups
USA IMC FederationMon Feb 13, 2012 11:57 indymedia.us main features
User Preferences
|
alterthess.gr - Sun Feb 12, 2012 17:31 Demonstrations in Greece continue today after three days of strikes and manifestations. Hundred thousand citizens are protesting in Athens, Thessaloniki and all big cities of Greece against the new load agreement that is going to be voted at the Parliament this evening Athens 19.08 : Protesters are not leaving Syntagma square. 18.56 : Conflicts in Panepistimiou, Stadiou, Ermou, Filellinon, Amalia and Solonos. The police attacked and expelled the protesters towards the National Garden with extensive use of gas bombs. 18.51 : Police tries to push the protesters towards the National Garden. There have been arrests. 18.45 : Greek parliament is blocked. All surrounding streets full of protesters. Conflicts at Syntagma square. 18.33 : Conflicts at Panapistimiou street. The manifestation of PAME just began moving towards Syntagma from Stadiou street. 18.20 : Broad intervention of riot police in order to remove the protesters. Many wounded. 18.00 : Molotof and chemical ..Conflicts at Amalia avenue with Vasileos Georgiou. 17.54 : One injured demonstrator. Extensive use of gas bombs in Vas Amalia avenue. 17.49 : One policeman injured. Conflicts at Vas. Sofias avenue and Panepistimiou street. 17.41 : Broad intervention of riot police at Syntagma square with gas bombs. 17.26 : Hundreds of thousands of protesters this time in the streets around Syntagma square. 17.20 : Thousands of people in protest at Syntagma square. In progress the demonstration of PAME at Omonoia square. 17.05 : Blocks of organized protesters arrive continuously at the demonstrations gathering places. 16.35 : People are already gathering at Syntagma square. Amalia avenue and Stadiou street are closed. Fences have been installed by powerful police forces. 16.25 : Half an hour before the official appointment of trade unions, organizations, parties and citizens in the Syntagma square hundreds of protesters have allready gathered. Thessaloniki 19.05 : At the white tower the head of the demonstration at Thessaloniki. At Aristostelous square its tail. 18.53 : The demonstration is now starting at Nikis (seaside) avenue. 18.34 : Huge number of demonstrators in Aristotelous square. More than 15,000. 17.48 More than 10.000 protesters now in Thessaloniki. 17.26 : According to first estimates the demonstration in Thessaloniki has 7000 protesters and the number continues to grow. Protesters are at Aristotle's Square. 17.08 : A large number of people gathered in front of the Olympion theater at Thessaloniki.
Eve - Sun Feb 12, 2012 11:11 Inaugural meeting of reading group on the origins of capitalism in early modern Europe (i.e. c. 1500 ? c. 1800). On Saturday March 3rd we are discussing Ellen Meiksins Wood?s ?The Origin of Capitalism: A longer view?, the core chapters of which are probably The Agrarian Origin of Capitalism and Agrarian Capitalism and Beyond. Further to that texts by Brenner and Polanyi have been proposed. Meeting at 1 pm in a central Dublin location, contact evejennifercampbell (at) yahoo.com for further details.
SCOOP - Sat Feb 11, 2012 17:42 The SCOOP are currently recruiting enthusiastic, bright, creative interns and volunteers for 2012. This is the perfect opportunity to immerse yourself into the SCOOP team, become part of something worthwhile and to learn how this unique and innovative organisation operates. The SCOOP Foundation is a young organisation that works to build schools and support children's education in the world's poorest regions, by raising funds through unique events and fresh thinking ideas. Intern positions are three months with possibility of extension. Volunteers will be required to help out at SCOOP's major events over the course of the year. We're looking for energetic, fun loving, friendly bodies to have on hand for a number of tasks. If you're passionate about event management, an aspiring photographer, arts lover, activist, or even if you're bored silly and looking for something to get involved in, then this is for you. Volunteering is the ideal way to enhance your CV and to meet like-minded people. Interning with The SCOOP will give you an invaluable opportunity to get hands on experience working along side the Scoop's main operators. Contact volunteerscoop@gmail.com with your CV and a brief cover letter on how you'd like to get involved and what you can bring to SCOOP to make 2012 SCOOP's best year yet. For more info on The SCOOP visit www.thescoopfoundation.com or check out our facebook page for daily updates.
Sean Clinton - Fri Feb 10, 2012 19:39 No Valentine for blood diamond regulations as US chair of the Kimberley Process limits scope of reforms. In her first conference call with journalists since becoming chair of the Kimberley Process (KP), US Ambassador, Gillian A. Milovanovic has moved to limit the scope of any reform of the KP definition of a ?conflict diamond?. Ambassador Milovanovic said: ?I do not foresee within the Kimberley Process, per se, going beyond the question of rough diamonds.?[1] The KP was supposed to end the trade in blood diamonds - diamonds that fund human rights violations - but the narrow definition of a "conflict diamond" adopted by the KP allows diamonds that fund human rights violations by government forces to evade the regulations. As a result, last November, diamonds from the Marange area of Zimbabwe where government forces stand accused of gross human rights violations, including killing 200 people, were certified as KP compliant and allowed to contaminate the global market. Human rights organisations walked out of a KP meting in Kinshasa last June and boycotted the annual plenary meeting in November over the failure of the KP to agree a reform of the definition of a "conflict diamond" that would include diamonds that fund human rights violations by government forces. In the wake of the KP decision last November to allow the export of blood-tainted diamonds from Zimbabwe, Global Witness, a London-based human rights organisation that was to the fore in bringing blood diamonds to public attention in the 90s withdrew from the KP that it helped to establish in 2003. While other human rights organisations remain inside the KP for the time being, Partnership Africa Canada has indicated that it does so in the expectation that tangible reforms of the KP definition of a "conflict diamond" will be agreed in 2012, and that the polishing industry, which currently evades the regulations, will be brought into the scheme.[2] Therein stands the elephant in the KP room. Israel, a dominant player in the global diamond industry, is one of the world?s leading centres for cutting and polishing diamonds. The Israeli military stands accused by the UN Human Rights Council of war crimes and possible crimes against humanity during the three week assault on Gaza which killed more than 1400 people, including over 300 children in the winter of 2008/2009. In evidence to the Russell Tribunal on Palestine, Israeli political economist, Shir Hever, testified that the diamond industry in Israel generates about $1 billion in funding for the Israeli military/security industry each year and when someone buys a diamond exported from Israel some of the money ends up funding the Israeli military[3]. US Ambassador Milovanovic will no doubt try to prevent any reform of the KP definition of a ?conflict diamond? that would ensnare Israel?s diamond industry. However, human rights activists are upping the ante and last weekend were on the street in Hatton Garden, London ? one of the world?s foremost diamond-trading hubs ? to raise awareness with shoppers and jewellers about the trade in diamonds that fund human rights violations by government forces in Israel and Zimbabwe.[4] Further actions to alert shoppers prior to Valentine?s Day are scheduled to take place in Dublin, Ireland on Saturday. The ethical provenance of all diamonds remains suspect as long as jewellers continue to facilitate the trade in diamonds that fund gross human rights violations by government forces. END. Contact: Sean Clinton, Global Palestine Solidarity (GPS) chips@iol.ie GPS is an internet-based global network of human rights activists who campaign to highlight the trade in Israeli diamonds ? a major source of funding for the nuclear-armed Israeli military regime. Reference: 1. - http://iipdigital.usembassy.gov/st/english/texttrans/20...jixCN 2. - http://www.pacweb.org/Documents/Press_releases/2011/KP_...l.pdf 3. - http://electronicintifada.net/content/israels-blood-dia.../8754 4. - http://londonbds.org/2012/02/05/no-valentine-for-israel...onds/ 5. - http://electronicintifada.net/content/diamond-industrys...10102
Moshé Machover - Fri Feb 10, 2012 13:41 Israeli Marxist Moshé Machover writers on how the Israelis continue to plot action against Iran. They will likely use a military provocation to get Tehran to react and use the ensuing disturbances to drive more Palestinians out of the Occupied Territories and Israel itself. One thing is beyond any doubt: a major aim of Israel?s foreign policy is the overthrow of the Iranian regime. What is not generally understood are the motives behind this aim, and the present Israeli government?s preferred means of achieving it. In this article I would like to say something about the motives, and then explain why prime minister Binyamin Netanyahu?s preferred means is war - one likely to ignite a major conflagration. Motives In my 2008 article ?Zionism: propaganda and reality?,[1] I quoted a recent Jerusalem Post report on a conference at Israel?s Institute for National Security Studies. That report deserves to be read very carefully, so here it is again: ?Iran?s success in obtaining a nuclear capability will deter Jews from immigrating to Israel, cause many Israelis to leave and will be the end of the ?Zionist dream?, former deputy defence minister Ephraim Sneh said Tuesday. ??A nuclear weapon in Iranian hands will be an intolerable reality for Israel,? Sneh said during a conference on Iran?s nuclear programme at the Institute for National Security Studies (INSS) in Tel Aviv. ?The decision-making process in Israel will be under constant [Iranian] influence - this will be the end of the Zionist dream.? ?Former Mossad chief Ephraim Halevy slammed Israeli political leaders for calling Iran?s nuclear threat ?an existential threat?. ?There is something wrong with informing our enemy that they can bring about our demise,? Halevy said. ?It is also wrong that we inform the world that the moment the Iranians have a nuclear capability there is a countdown to the destruction of the state of Israel. We are the superpower in the Middle East and it is time that we began behaving like [a] superpower,? he said. ?Iran?s real goal, Halevy said, was to turn itself into a regional superpower and reach a ?state of equality? with the United States in their diplomatic dealings. ?Sneh said that, while the military option was not preferred, Israel needed to keep it on the table, since such a possibility was the motivation for the international community?s efforts to use diplomacy to stop Iran. Sneh added that he was confident that the [Israeli Defence Force] was capable of successfully carrying out a military strike against Iran. ?We grew up in a place that when the political echelon wanted something, the professional echelon knew how to do it,? he said. ?I believe this has not changed in 2008.??[2] Two points in this report are particularly noteworthy. First, one of the experts, a former chief of the Mossad (Israel?s counterpart of MI6 and the CIA) is talking here about the prospect of Iranian nuclear capability rather than actual production and possession of a nuclear weapon. As all experts are well aware, there is no evidence that Iran has a programme for producing such a weapon. This is as true today as it was in 2008. Indeed, the US defence secretary, Leon Panetta, confirmed this quite recently.[3] (Nuclear capability is the ability to produce a usable nuclear weapon at fairly short notice. It is a policy pursued by several other governments, and is not prohibited by the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, of which Iran - but not Israel! - is a signatory.) Second, contrary to Israeli and western hype, neither expert claims that Iran is actually planning to attack Israel, let alone subject it to a nuclear holocaust. The former Mossad chief is dismissive of the scaremongering propaganda alleging that Iran poses a credible military threat to Israel. Ephraim Sneh, a former brigadier general and senior Labour Party politician, does mention the (purely hypothetical) prospect of Iran producing a nuclear weapon, but even he believes that the threat it would pose to Israel is political rather than a direct military one. Indeed, Israel?s worry regarding Iran is the real political threat it poses to Israel?s regional hegemony, not the imaginary threat of being attacked by the Islamic Republic. Possession of nuclear capability is certainly a component of this political threat, inasmuch as it would contribute to Iran?s diplomatic muscle in its dealings with other Middle Eastern states and with the US. But it is only a component. Even without the nuclear issue, the Zionist state has a clear interest in replacing the present Iranian regime by one compliant with global US hegemony. Divergence As far as this aim is concerned, the interests of US and Israel are in complete agreement. But, as regards the means, there appears to be a divergence between the Obama administration and the Netanyahu government. The US, smarting from the wounds of its adventurous wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, would like to avoid an outright open military conflict with Iran, a state that can inflict serious damage to its attackers. Moreover, in the present economic climate a sharp rise in the price of oil - an inevitable concomitant of war in the Middle East - may have catastrophic consequences for the global capitalist economy. True, the scary game of ?chicken? the Obama administration is playing against Iran can inadvertently get out of hand and lead to disastrous unintended consequences. (Recall the classic James Dean film, Rebel without a cause ?). But the administration is hoping to keep this danger under control and avoid outright war - at least for the time being. Not so the Israeli government: there are increasing signs that Netanyahu and his defence minister, Ehud Barak, are considering - against the advice of some of their military and intelligence experts - a provocation that would lead to a major war. This causes the Obama administration serious worry: they do not wish to be dragged into such a war by their Israeli junior partner. On January 20, while on an unadvertised and little noticed visit to Israel (no press conference, no public statement), general Martin Dempsey, chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, ?told Israeli leaders ? that the United States would not participate in a war against Iran begun by Israel without prior agreement from Washington ? Dempsey?s warning, conveyed to both prime minister Binyamin Netanyahu and Israeli defence minister Ehud Barak, represents the strongest move yet by president Barack Obama to deter an Israeli attack and ensure that the United States is not caught up in a regional conflagration with Iran.?[4] His warning seems to have fallen on deaf ears. On February 2, Associated Press reported: ?US defence secretary Leon Panetta won?t dispute a report that he believes Israel may attack Iran this spring in an attempt to set back the Islamic republic?s nuclear programme. ?Panetta was asked by reporters to comment on a Washington Post opinion column by David Ignatius that said Panetta believes there is a ?strong likelihood? that Israel will attack in April, May or June. Ignatius did not say who told him this. ?Asked whether he disputes the report, Panetta said, ?No, I?m just not commenting? ? ?He noted that Israel has stated publicly that it is considering military action against Iran. He said the US has ?indicated our concerns?.?[5] In my opinion this is not just sabre-rattling on Israel?s part. There is reason to believe that Netanyahu is seriously considering a provocation designed to trigger off a major Middle East conflagration, despite the enormous risks, that include Iranian retaliation causing loss of many Israeli lives. To explain Netanyahu?s reckless calculation we need to turn our attention to Zionism?s nightmare: the Palestinian ?demographic peril?. One state, Zionist style By now most people are aware that the present Israeli government has done all in its power to torpedo a so-called ?two-state solution?. What is less well known is that opposition to a sovereign Palestinian state in any part of Eretz Yisrael is not a mere quirk of a rightwing Israeli government, but a deep-seated and fundamental principle shared by all mainstream Zionist parties. In 1975, General Moshe Dayan put it like this: ?Fundamentally, a Palestinian state is an antithesis of the state of Israel ? The basic and naked truth is that there is no fundamental difference between the relation of the Arabs of Nablus to Nablus [in the West Bank] and that of the Arabs of Jaffa to Jaffa [in Israel] ? And if today we set out on this road and say that the Palestinians are entitled to their own state because they are natives of the same country and have the same rights, then it will not end with the West Bank. The West Bank together with the Gaza Strip do not amount to a state ? The establishment of such a Palestinian state would lay a cornerstone to something else ? Either the state of Israel - or a Palestinian state.?[6] Thus, for mainstream Zionism any admission that ?the Palestinians are entitled to their own state because they are natives of the same country and have the same rights? would undermine the legitimacy of the Zionist state, and eventually its very existence. This has remained a cornerstone of Israel?s political strategy. For this reason, no Israeli government has ever signed a legally binding commitment to accepting a Palestinian Arab state. This applies, in particular, to the Oslo accords of 1993, which the second government of Yitzhak Rabin co-signed with the Palestinian leadership under Yasser Arafat. In this treaty there is no mention of a Palestinian state. This was not an accidental omission: when presenting the Oslo accords to the Knesset for ratification - on October 5 1995, a month before he was assassinated - Rabin pointedly stressed that what Israel was going to insist on was a Palestinian ?entity which is less than a state?. Many observers have been puzzled by Israel?s adamant rejection of any Palestinian sovereign state, however small, west of the Jordan River. This seems terribly short-sighted. For, if the whole of pre-1948 Palestine is to remain under Israeli sovereignty, that would mean that Israel would have to rule over a hostile Palestinian Arab people. In effect, the whole of that territory will be one state. Right now there is a rough numerical parity between the two national groups. Since no large-scale Jewish immigration is expected, and since the natural rate of increase of the Palestinian population is higher that that of the Hebrew population, the former will considerably outnumber the latter within a few decades. Surely, the Palestinian majority cannot indefinitely be denied equal rights; but equal rights would lead to the demise of the Jewish state. For Zionism this ?demographic peril? is worse even than a sovereign Palestinian mini-state. So it would seem that by sabotaging the creation of such a state, Israel is heading for what its own ruling ideology regards as the abyss. This apparent contradiction disregards a third option: neither a two-state solution, nor a single state with an Arab majority, but ?population transfer?. Large-scale ethnic cleansing of Palestinian Arabs would result in a single state in the entire territory, with a large Jewish majority, which is the ultimate aim of all mainstream Zionist parties. But implementing ethnic cleansing on a sufficiently large scale - while technically quite easy, as explained by the Israeli military theorist, Martin van Creveld[7] - is politically very tricky. It cannot be done in normal, politically tranquil circumstances. It requires what in Zionist parlance is called she?at kosher: an opportune moment of major political, and preferably military, crisis. Interestingly, quite a long time ago, on November 16 1989, a junior minister in the Shamir government made precisely this point in a speech delivered at Bar-Ilan University, a hotbed of clerical ultra-chauvinist Zionism. The Jerusalem Post of November 19 1989, quoting a tape recording of the speech, reported that the deputy foreign minister (roughly equivalent to parliamentary under-secretary of state in Westminster) ?has called for Israel to exploit political opportunities in order to expel large numbers of Palestinians from the [occupied] territories?. He told students in a speech at Bar-Ilan University that ?the government had failed to exploit politically favourable situations in order to carry out ?large-scale? expulsions at times when ?the damage would have been relatively small. I still believe that there are opportunities to expel many people?.? Oh, the name of that junior minister: Binyamin Netanyahu. A sacrifice worth making A war with Iran would present a golden opportunity for large-scale expulsion of Palestinians, precisely because (unlike the Iraq invasion of 2003) fighting would not be over too soon, and major protests and disturbances are likely to occur among the masses throughout the region, including the Palestinian Arabs under Israeli rule. What better way to pacify such disturbances than to ?expel many people?. Of course, a decision to ignite a war against Iran is not one that any Israeli leader would take lightly. There is a non-negligible risk that Israel would suffer many casualties. This is not a price that even the most adventurous prime minister would consider paying, unless the expected prize is extremely high. But in this case the prize is the highest possible one from a Zionist point of view: eliminating the demographic threat to the future of Israel as a Jewish ethnocracy. So Netanyahu will be sorely tempted to make a sacrifice of his own people for the greater national good. I assume that American policy-makers are aware of Israel?s special interest in a military denouement of the conflict with Iran, an interest not quite shared by the US. This is why they are worried, and issue stern warnings to Netanyahu and Barak - discreetly and behind the scenes, of course, because especially in this election year, when he will face Republican crazies, Obama cannot afford to appear pusillanimous. However, Netanyahu cannot flagrantly go ahead and start a war without US approval. Therefore the most likely scenario is a series of provocations instigated by Israel, mostly by devious and covert means, in order to escalate the conflict and drag the US by degrees into mission creep. I do not wish to sound too alarmist, but the coming few months may well be ?interesting? in the Chinese sense l Notes 1. Weekly Worker September 18 2008. 2. ?Iranian nukes mean end of Zionism? The Jerusalem Post internet edition, September 9 2008. 3. ?Panetta: Iran has not yet decided to make a nuclear bomb? Associated Press, January 8 2012; reported by Fox News: www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/01/08/panetta-iran-has-not-yet-decided-to-make-... 4. IPS report, February 1 2012: http://ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=106621. 5. Washington Post February 2 2012. 6. Ha?aretz December 12 1975. 7. Martin van Creveld, ?Sharon?s plan is to drive Palestinians across the Jordan? The Sunday Telegraph April 28 2002: www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/israel/1392485/Sharons-plan-is-...
Glen Clifford - Thu Feb 09, 2012 18:18 This post is a quick response to an SWP internal members bulletin, which was presumably leaked by one of their members - available to read here: http://tomasoflatharta.com/2012/02/09/kubla-heard-from-...else/. It gives an insight to the real views of the SWP on a number of issues including the ULA and the CAHWT. I want to take up some of their points relating to the Household tax campaign, which I object to and to offer what I think is the real situation with the campaign. "*Household tax*" SWP IB: "It?s only a matter of time now before the State pulls out the heavy guns and starts to pile the pressure on people through the media and through threats as we approach March. It?s vital that we win local groups to the demand for protests- not only in words but in action in order to resist this pressure. Alan Shatter has already been in the Sunday Papers threatening legislation to take the fines directly from wages." GC: This is true, the state will be launching their offensive quite soon and it will be vicious. However, based on the views expressed In this piece, one can only take it that the SWP do not take that fact seriously. Only by building and strengthening the national non-payment campaign, with thousands of ordinary people becoming actively involved can the government?s assault be fought. Protests will of course play an important part in the overall strategy of the campaign, the SWP are not alone in calling for protests, certainly not amongst the Left which they seem to be implying. What they are alone in, is only calling for protests (which is often the case), or more accurately prioritising the organising of protests over - even at the expense of - building mass non-payment. SWP IB: "Overall the level of payment is still only 5% which means a huge 95% of people are still holding out. But the substitutionism of some on the left is appalling and will suffocate the ability of the campaign to effectively resist." GC: It?s worth pointing out that the SWP?s record in participating in major battles of the working class in Ireland or indeed in Britain is poor ? particularly in those battles that involved the tactic of ?non-payment?. SWP members in Britain paid the Poll Tax, they played little or no role in the successful Dublin Anti-Water charges campaign in the 1990s and played a wholly negative and conservative role in the Anti-Bin Tax campaign of 2003-04. Anyone involved in those campaigns can testify to the veracity of that statement. I?m not sure what the SWP understands ?substitutionism? to be, but if they mean in this case, left-wing activists substituting themselves for activity amongst the mass of working class people, then they could not be further from the truth. Had the SWP paid attention to what was discussed and agreed, by the national Campaign Against Household and Water Taxes (CAHWT), as the best approach to fighting the tax, they would know that the key task that has always been stressed is; to turn as many working class people as possible, into active builders and organisers of the campaign themselves. This is without doubt, a far more difficult task than simply encouraging people to go on protests, but it is necessary to have this aim because it is the only way the campaign can be successful. Surely this is the opposite of a ?substitutionist? approach? SWP IB: "Sometimes left wing activists who have struggled long and hard in isolation underestimate the capacity of people." GC: As is indicated later, this is true of the SWP and nobody else involved in the campaign. It is clear that the SWP have and do underestimate the potential to build a campaign of ordinary people strong enough to defeat this tax. SWP IB: "They suggest a campaign *purely* of non-payment and believe that slow, methodical canvassing of areas will be enough in itself to defeat the government." GC: If done correctly and successfully, this is undoubtedly what will defeat the government, but nevertheless nowhere has anyone suggested that the campaign should consist ?purely? of this. It?s also worth stating that anyone involved thus far should know there is nothing ?slow? about the campaign. SWP IB: "This electoralist perspective which leaves the mass of people as passive and the activists substituting will not find itself capable of resisting the onslaught of the State." GC: The ?electoralist? accusation is aimed at the Socialist Party no doubt, but again if the SWP paid attention they would see that Anarchist activists in the campaign agree with this strategy, not because that they are happy to facilitate the electoral aspirations of the Socialist Party and others, but because it is the most effective strategy and has been proven so in past struggles. In dealing with this nonsense from the SWP it?s important to remember that these are the views of the leadership, aimed at influencing their membership. Assuming the tone and content of this ?weekly bulletin? is not an exception, one gets the impression that there is a conscious attempt to create a siege mentality amongst the membership ? that it?s everybody against the SWP, which anyone not in the SWP would know to be absurd. SWP IB: "Where we have an influence in a campaign we should be calling protests. It?s time to show in practice that it works. We should also get into the routine of having one good nights canvassing with as many locals as possible before our branch meetings. The response from our SWP leaflet has been great with 7 text joiners last Friday and another group of texts following the weekend?s stalls. We have to keep getting those leaflets around as much as possible at household activities. Remember: campaigns don?t last forever and there is a limited window of opportunity to start the process of targeting key individuals who want to take the fight further for recruitment to the SWP. The stronger the SWP the stronger the voice for a bottom up dynamic and radical campaign will be and the more will remain when the campaign comes to a lull." GC: This last statement won't be surprising for anyone who has experience of the SWP and how they operate. It has long been remarked about the SWP that they don't take campaigns seriously, constantly jumping from one to the next, staying the course only as long as the potential to recruit to the SWP remains. And here it is from the horse's mouth. Whlie there is nothing wrong with a party trying to recruit new members, in fact if a party didn't try to recruit new members there wouldn't be much point in that party existing, the problem with the SWP is that once again, this often takes priority over or is done at the expense of building a successful campaign. On the question of a stronger SWP being good for the campaign, not surprisingly I disagree. The CAHWT has a 'bootom up dynamic', ie it is democratic and it is radical - in the sense that it is a campaign that can take on the full might of the state and win - not because of the influence of the SWP, but despite it. There's little doubt that if it was left to the SWP the campaign to fight the Household Tax would most likely join those other 'bottom up' and 'radical' campaigns that went nowhere; namely Right to Work and Enough!. What's posed in relation to the Household / Water / Septic Tank Tax battle is something infinitely more significant. At this stage it is strangely pessimistic and cynical for the SWP to talk about the campaign in terms of a 'limited window of opportunity' or coming to a 'lull', when in actual fact a more likely perspective is that this campaign and battle may last for months and even years before a it comes to a conclusion. Activists in the CAHWT should be aware of the views of the SWP leadership on these matters, while acknowledging and welcoming the excellent and dedicated work that many of the SWP membership can and will contribute to the campaign. As for members of the SWP, they should question the political positions of their leadership, look at the role of the SWP in past struggles and be open to discussions with others in the campaign who argue a different approach to fighting this attack.
Niall Harnett - Thu Feb 09, 2012 17:11 ?Your letters have sparked riots in the maximum security wing of my heart? - Sideshow Bob, the Simpsons! An insight into prison life in Ireland, namely Castlerea Prison, Co Roscommon. On 21st April 2010 I was convicted of assaulting a number of Gardaí in relation to Shell to Sea protests and sentenced to 6 months imprisonment. Remission for good behaviour means that prisoners will have their sentences reduced by a quarter, once you keep your nose clean. I was given credit for 2 weeks time served previously in 2009, before I was bailed out pending my appeal. So I spent 4 months in jail from April to August in the summer of 2010. An insight into prison life in Ireland, namely Castlerea Prison, Co Roscommon. On 21st April 2010 I was convicted of assaulting a number of Gardaí in relation to Shell to Sea protests and sentenced to 6 months imprisonment. Remission for good behaviour means that prisoners will have their sentences reduced by a quarter, once you keep your nose clean. I was given credit for 2 weeks time served previously in 2009, before I was bailed out pending my appeal. So I spent 4 months in jail from April to August in the summer of 2010. NOTE: shell to sea day of solidarity on Feb 17th. details HERE Related Links: Shell to Sea: Day of Solidarity | Shell, IRMS & Gardaí move into Glengad | Shell's tunnelling compound shut down for the day | Shell to Sea: Day of Solidarity | A busy time up in co. Mayo | Open letter to Minister Pat Rabbitte concerning hydraulic gas fracturing ("fracking") in Ireland | Day of Solidarity in Mayo | Shell's tree cutting disrupted for second day running | Scaling tree cutters and trees to halt Corrib pipeline works | First Shell blocking of the New Year | Friday the 13th day of solidarity- Mayo | Court Report On ?rape-tape? Sergeant Being Awarded ?33,0000 | Shell and the other oil companies: serial killers | The Release & Homecoming of Pat 'The Chief' O'Donnell - Photo Essay | Maura Harrington, opponent of Shell, jailed | The Jailing of Niall Harnett | Prosecutions of Shell to Sea campaigners collapse | Human Rights questions being asked in Mayo courts | "Do you have a house, do you have a car? You should think about your wife and family.....? | Jeff Leurs | Bradley manning
The Prison.
O. O'Connell - Thu Feb 09, 2012 15:33 Goalposts have been shifted - but we don't even know what the new rules are ?Our core concerns remain: what are the actual tank standards? What assistance will be available if we now need to upgrade our systems, despite having complied by the rules that the institutions of state set previously? Instead of answering these questions, Minister Phil Hogan has introduced draconian legislation which dictates that householders will be dragged through the courts and may be fined up to ?5,000 if they cannot comply with his secret standards. The heavy-handedness, and lack of clarity surrounding this scheme stinks.? The organiser of a public meeting against the government?s proposed septic tank scheme, has said that its core issues and roll-out ?stinks?. Oisín O?Connell from Foulkesmill said that he decided to organise the meeting in the Horse-and-Hound, Ballinaboola on the fifteenth of February, to highlight misconceptions surrounding the controversial scheme, and to present sensible alternatives. ?Our core concerns remain: what are the actual tank standards? What assistance will be available if we now need to upgrade our systems, despite having complied by the rules that the institutions of state set previously? Instead of answering these questions, Minister Phil Hogan has introduced draconian legislation which dictates that householders will be dragged through the courts and may be fined up to ?5,000 if they cannot comply with his secret standards. The heavy-handedness, and lack of clarity surrounding this scheme stinks.? ?The entire septic tank scheme is of huge concern to rural Ireland,? Mr O?Connell said. ?The government wants the power to criminalise people first, but without telling us what the actual rules are. They are trying to distract us from core issues like this, including the great personal and family costs of upgrades. They are trying to muddy the waters by focusing on the additional costs of the appeals process and registration - as though these were the only issues.? ?Our problem is not concerning the genuine environmental and social need to protect our water-tables and water sources. The issue is about using this as a money-grabbing tactic at a time of economic collapse. The issue is about successive governments who failed to comply with EEC/EU directives regarding the disposing of domestic wastewater - dating back to 1975. Now they want us to pay, to fix it for them overnight. Rural householders who have paid for their own infrastructure - dug their own wells and installed their own sewerage system - now have to bailout government abdication of duty.? ?We need a grant scheme for upgrades. It should be a given that any upgrading will be exempt from planning permission. Criminalising, and threatening homeowners with massive fines, must end. These people are ordinary rural dwellers who have provided their own infrastructure at great cost to themselves. Now the goalposts have been shifted half-way through - but we don't even know what the new rules are, that we are being threatened with not complying. There are existing, practical, and working alternatives to this kafkaesque shambles.? A public meeting against the government's Septic Tank Scheme will be held in the Horse and Hound, Ballinaboola on Wednesday the 15th at 8pm. Oisín O?Connell and Senator David Cullinane will be the main speakers and all are welcome to attend and contribute.
Stephen Boyd - Thu Feb 09, 2012 13:11 Campaign Against Household and Water Tax Household Tax - name a date for protests By Councillor Mick Barry Campaign Against Household and Water Tax public meetings held this week in Waterford (700), Carlow (400) and elsewhere clearly show a growing mood of angry opposition to the Government's household tax. The tax is clearly seen as both an "austerity" tax which will not improve local services one iota but will serve to pay the bill for the bank bondholder bailout and as a "gateway tax" which will lead on to property taxes on the family home (2013) and water tax (2014). The Campaign is being seen by growing numbers of ordinary people as offering a chance to draw a line in the sand and demonstrate opposition to further austerity measures. Clearly, the potential to build nationwide, mass, organised non-payment of the tax is opening up. This is the key to defeating the tax. Mass, organised non-payment was the key to defeating Thatcher's poll tax in Britain in the late 80s/early 90s and to achieving the abolition of water charges in this state in the mid-1990s. The mass meetings now taking place around the country must prioritise building powerful networks of local activists to leaflet their areas and knock on doors and spread the message of non-payment. The Socialist Party believes that the growing mood of anger and the Government's imminent plans to leaflet every house in the state on the issue provide another opportunity to the Campaign now. The Government's leaflet drop is likely to be accompanied by a propaganda offensive in the media which uses the threat of fines and the fear factor as a key weapon. While fears and concern will no doubt increase in the wake of such an offensive so too can peoples' anger and the mood for protest can develop. The Campaign should tap into this mood and facilitate protest. This can feed into and boost the campaign for organised, mass non-payment. This has been shown in Cork where 250 supporters of the Campaign turned out on Feb 3 to picket Enda Kenny's dinner at City Hall with the Chamber of Commerce. The Campaign's National Steering Committee meets this weekend. The Socialist Party believes that the committee should name the date for a Day of Protest throughout the country, possibly (depending on the timescale of the Govternment leaflet drop) on Saturday Feb 25. This could take the form of mass binning of the Government literature and, in the cities and where big numbers assemble to do so, potentially the organising of protest marches. Given the fact that occupations and sit-ins have been put on the agenda by the global Occupy movement, the Vita Cortex workers and the La Senza workers, occupation of TDs' clinics, council meetings etc should also be considered. Protest should never be used as a substitute for building mass non-payment but, handled correctly, mass non-payment and protest are complementary tactics and the Campaign should embrace both as the fight against the tax is stepped up in the weeks ahead.
Galway Alliance Against War - Wed Feb 08, 2012 22:33 The regular bulletin from the Galway Alliance Against War GALWAY ALLIANCE AGAINST WAR BULLETIN FEBRUARY 2012 Follow us on Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/#!/groups/312442090965/ GAAW SUPPORTED PEACE EVENT SUNDAY 12th FEBRUARY BETWEEN 2-3PM PEACE VIGIL ORGANISED BY SHANNONWATCH AT SHANNON AIRPORT (PLEASE ASSEMBLE AT ROUNDABOUT BEFORE AIRPORT) CONTENTS 1. SYRIA 2. COULD EU FUNDS BE USED TO BOOST DEFENCE SPENDING IN 2012 3. WHAT DID YOU LEARN IN SCHOOL TODAY ABOUT OBAMA?S DRONES 1 SYRIA ??The opposition outside the country [the Syrian National Council] should support the opposition inside the country [Building the Syrian State] not the other way around.? Exiles have ?seized control? and the opposition inside the country are ?still trying to get it back??. ?Negotiations are the only way? to resolve the situation. The SNC should not reject talks with the government. ?All key players must be involved?..Any solution must provide for equal treatment for minorities and recognition of national sovereignty and security. The Russian and Chinese vetoes in the UN Security Council?.could have a positive effect by forcing ?Syrians to solve their problems by themselves?.We are trying to unite the international opposition behind a common programme which promotes negotiations, prepares for the transition and rejects external intervention?.The games people are playing in Syria are growing increasingly dirty.?There is a lot of exaggeration? of casualties?particularly on the part of the exile groups?this was especially true?with reports of government attacks on Homs only hours ahead of the [UN Security] council vote.? Dr Mona Ghannem of the Syrian-based opposition Building the Syrian State (http://binaa-syria.com/B/en ) in an interview with Michael Jansen in the Irish Times 7th February 2012. The drums of war are beating once more. NATO and its friendly dictators in Saudi Arabia and Qatar are hoping to intervene in Syria as they did in Libya. All feign concern for civilian life as a cover for an invasion. The feudal regimes in the Gulf have no interest in ordinary people, neither does NATO ? over 30,000 Libyan civilians lost their lives during the British and French intervention. There has been no mention about these deaths from the Western propagandists working in the media. The West has held a hypocritical attitude to the Assad regime. While disapproving of the anti-Zionist and pro-Hezbollah stand of Damascus, Washington had no qualms outsourcing torture victims to Syria such as the Canadian citizen Maher Arar who was kidnapped by the CIA in New York?s Kennedy airport in September 2002 (see http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/0208-13.htm ). And neither has Berlin. According to the German Foreign Policy website Syria?s apparatus used torture to prepare prisoners for interrogations by German officials: http://www.german-foreign-policy.com/en/fulltext/57993 Of course the name of imperialism?s game is clear: first they hope to take Damascus then they foolishly believe they can take Tehran. The ground is already being well prepared for the war on Iran. The propaganda machine of the western media constantly churns out the Iranian ?nuclear threat? lie, which is all so reminiscent of the claims made by Bush and Blair about Saddam Hussein?s WMD threat. The truth is somewhat different. The US Defense Secretary, Leon Panetta, was asked about Iran?s nuclear programme on Face the Nation on CBS on 8 January 2012, he replied: ?Are they [the Iranians] trying to develop a nuclear weapon? No.? (Read David Morrison?s full article on this: http://www.david-morrison.org.uk/iran/iran-no-nuclear-p...e.htm ) But when did the US, their pals in NATO and Israel allow the truth to get in the way of a good war? There is growing speculation that Israel may launch an attack on Iran as early as April. (A MUST READ is an absorbing article by Craig Murray - former British Ambassador to Uzbekistan who was sacked because of his whistleblowing ? concerning the ?British Ambassador to Israel and the plot to attack Iran?: http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2011/11/matthew-...iran/ A military conflict with Iran will have untold consequences for the world. And as long as Shannon remains a US military base we will be accomplices to the crimes committed by the West. That is why it is vital we continue to support the peace activities of Shannonwatch and try and make Shannon warport a national issue once more. ********* Once more the Guardian?s Seumas Milne goes to the heart of the matter with a commentary on Syria: Intervention in Syria will escalate not stop the killing Russia and China blocked a bid to force regime change. But a negotiated settlement is the only way out of civil war http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/feb/07/syr...lling 2 COULD EU FUNDS BE USED TO BOOST DEFENCE SPENDING IN 2012 This was the headline in a recent article in the newsletter of Defence IQ.com. If you are in the business of armaments ? very, very big or really, really small armaments ? then this website?s mailing list is the one you got to be on. The article appears because the European Parliament?s specialist committee on ?security and defence issues? proposed a ?ground-breaking resolution? that could see European Union funds being used to plug capability gaps for the continent?s militaries. The ?Lisek Resolution? ? named after its key author Polish MEP Krzysztof Lisek - came in response to a detailed report put in circulation in mid-2011 concerning ?the impact of the financial crisis on European militaries.? The newsletter goes on to report ? without any sense of satire ? that the as yet non-binding resolution is ?a sign of the increased interest in the plight (sic!!) of defence spending by European Parliamentarians.? The People?s Movement in a detailed analysis of these developments in its latest issue of People?s News argues that ?The Lisbon Treaty creeps incrementally towards implementation: http://www.people.ie/news/PN-63.pdf . Both the ?Lisek Resolution? and the Lisbon Treaty?s European Defence Agency raise the question, who has the EU to defend itself against that it needs to waste funds on armaments? The answer, of course, is nobody! ?Defence? is just a euphemism for war. The ?Lisek Resolution? also exposes the nonsense that increased powers for the European Parliament would mean greater democracy in the EU. It would only mean further erosion of whatever power we the Irish people have to determine our own future! 3 WHAT DID YOU LEARN IN SCHOOL TODAY ABOUT OBAMA?S DRONES ? Back in the 1960s the US folksinger Tom Paxton wrote the song ?What did you learn in school today?? Here is a taste of the lyrics: What did you learn in school today, Dear little boy of mine? What did you learn in school today, Dear little boy of mine? I learned that Washington never told a lie. I learned that soldiers seldom die. I learned that everybody's free. And that's what the teacher said to me. That's what I learned in school today. That's what I learned in school. ( For complete lyrics: http://www.mydfz.com/Paxton/lyrics/wdylis.htm ) Flicking through a copy of Wordplay 2 ? the English textbook for kids preparing for the Junior Cert in 2nd & 3rd year in Irish secondary schools? one GAAW member came across part of Obama?s inauguration speech and began to realise that Tom Paxton?s song is as relevant today in Ireland as it was back in the USA of 1963 . The excerpt from the speech consists of the 3 paragraphs under the heading ?Era of Peace?. This speech is the only one in the whole 396 pages of the English book, which underlines its apparent importance to the Dept. of Education. The second para printed in this text book deserves special attention. It reads: To the Muslim world, we seek a new way forward, based on mutual interest and mutual respect. To those leaders around the globe who seek to sow conflict, or blame their society's ills on the West - know that your people will judge you on what you can build, not what you destroy. To those who cling to power through corruption and deceit and the silencing of dissent, know that you are on the wrong side of history; but that we will extend a hand if you are willing to unclench your fist. The Muslim world ? despite all the pleasant sentiments in the first sentence ? is in the same breath linked with those ?who seek to sow conflict?. This is no accident. This sentence is particularly outrageous: ?To those leaders around the globe who seek to sow conflict?. know that your people will judge you on what you can build, not what you destroy.? As if US governments were paragons of peace. At first glance one might think the aim of the extract was to teach the children the meaning of ?irony?. Not so. Sure ?irony died? when Henry Kissinger ? the warmonger and former US Secretary of State ? in 1973 was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. Clearly those in charge of the Peace Prize were not convinced ?irony? was truly dead, as they dug it up and bludgeoned it again by bestowing the peace award on President Obama. And just to prove how worthless this award is, what did Obama do in his first week in office after his momentous speech? Well, don?t expect the authors of Wordplay 2 to tell you. He sanctioned the firing of two rockets into Pakistan, which killed 22 people, 18 of them women and children. Since then he has killed many, many more people. Indeed, he appears to have suspended Bush?s policy of ?extraordinary rendition? and instead stepped up targeted killings. (see: Targeted Killings ? Silent Complicity: http://www.german-foreign-policy.com/en/fulltext/57991 ) Those killings are carried out by US Special Forces? who regularly travel through Shannon airport - and drones, which are probably also part of the military hardware that passes through our country without inspection. (see Shannonwatch?s report: http://www.shannonwatch.org/story/alarming-number-munit...-2011 ) OBAMA?S DRONES Obama has claimed ?Our drones target active terrorists.? If so, then why since Obama took office three years ago, between 282 and 535 civilians have been credibly reported as killed including more than 60 children. Rescuers and funeral attendees of the victims are now regularly targeted. (Glen Greenwald tells the real story about those deadly drones: http://stopwar.org.uk/index.php/usa-war-on-terror/1103-...-this ) So what we have in Wordplay 2 is the views taken by the powers-that-be in Ireland that believe the ruling ideas of the USA - and the EU for that matter ? should also be ours. We shouldn?t be surprised. Didn?t an old bearded German gentleman back in the 19th century note that: ?The ideas of the ruling class are in every epoch the ruling ideas, i.e. the class which is the ruling material force of society, is at the same time its ruling intellectual force.? (Source: German Ideology by K. Marx) Pete Seeger singing What did you learn in school today? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fWE6seINeoE A newer version from Danish singer Eddie Skoller http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5EWVxT4yPp0 . |
Featured Stories from Federated Groups of Indymedia Centres
Featured Stories Selected by local IMCs around the world
|