Monday, November 02, 2009

Eyes of the Rainbow- Assata Shakur Documentary

Eyes of the Rainbow- Assata Shakur Documentary-Part 1 of 6 Documentaries RBG Tube | PanAfrican.TV v2.0 - Free Revolutionary Audio Video Speech Library of Leaders, Activist, and Educators

Eyes of the Rainbow- Assata Shakur Documentary-Part 2 of 6 Documentaries RBG Tube | PanAfrican.TV v2.0 - Free Revolutionary Audio Video Speech Library of Leaders, Activist, and Educators

Eyes of the Rainbow- Assata Shakur Documentary-Part 3 of 6 Documentaries RBG Tube | PanAfrican.TV v2.0 - Free Revolutionary Audio Video Speech Library of Leaders, Activist, and Educators

Eyes of the Rainbow- Assata Shakur Documentary-Part 4 of 6 Documentaries RBG Tube | PanAfrican.TV v2.0 - Free Revolutionary Audio Video Speech Library of Leaders, Activist, and Educators

Eyes of the Rainbow- Assata Shakur Documentary-Part 5 of 6 Documentaries RBG Tube | PanAfrican.TV v2.0 - Free Revolutionary Audio Video Speech Library of Leaders, Activist, and Educators

Eyes of the Rainbow- Assata Shakur Documentary-Part 6 of 6 Documentaries RBG Tube | PanAfrican.TV v2.0 - Free Revolutionary Audio Video Speech Library of Leaders, Activist, and Educators

Celebrate Thirty Years of Freedom for Assata Shakur!

Sketchy Thoughts Blog
Listen to this article. Powered by Odiogo.com



In 1979, fearing that I would be murdered in prison and knowing that I would never receive any justice, I was liberated from prison, aided by committed comrades who understood the depths of the injustices in my case and who were also extremely fearful for my life.
-Assata Shakur

Thirty years ago today three individuals signed in as visitors to see Assata Shakur, who was at that time a prisoner of war, framed by the United States government as part of its vendetta against the Black Liberation Movement.

Only thing was, these “visitors” had other plans… they managed to smuggle in guns, took some guards hostage and managed to break Assata out of jail. Comrades were waiting in a car not far away, and they all made it away.

One of the finest operations ever carried out by "our side" in North America, if you ask me…

None of the guards were harmed, and despite a massive FBI manhunt Shakur managed to disappear without a trace. It was five years later – in 1984 – that Assata made a public statement, letting us know that she was living in Cuba, working on a masters degree in political science, writing her autobiography, and raising her daughter.

As it states in Assata's short biography in Let Freedom Ring:

In May 1973, while Assata and two companions were traveling on the New Jersey Turnpike, state police spotted and identified them as people they believed to be members of the Black Panther Party and the Black Liberation Army, and proceeded to ambush them. When the smoke cleared, one police officer and one of Assata’s companions, Zayd Shakur, lay dead. Assata, shot with her hands in the air and dragged from the car, lay wounded. Only belatedly taken to the hospital, Assata was then chained to her bed, tortured, and questioned while injured. In fact, she never received adequate medical attention even though she had a broken clavicle and a paralyzed arm. Nonetheless, she was quickly jailed, prosecuted, and incarcerated over the next few years for the series of trumped up cases. In five separate trials, and with majority-white juries, where charges were not dismissed due to lack of evidence, she was repeatedly found not guilty of charges ranging from bank robbery to murder. As the manager of one bank said at trial, “She is just not the one who robbed my bank.” In the final trial in 1977, where she was charged with the Turnpike killings, she was found guilty by an all-white jury. This, even though forensic evidence taken that day showed that she had not fired a weapon. She was sentenced to life plus 33 years in prison. (Sundiata Acoli was tried separately, convicted of killing the policeman, and sentenced to life plus 30 years.)

Sadly, several comrades - Marilyn Buck, Mutulu Shakur and Sekou Odinga and Silvia Baraldini – were arrested in the years following Assata's liberation, and charged with having participated in the action (amongst other things). All but Baraldini remain behind bars today. Black Liberation Army martyr Kuwasi Balagoon – who died of AIDS while in prison in 1986 – was also said to have been a member of the Black Liberation Army unit that participated in the action.

For years the US government has had a bounty on Assata's head - $150,000 for the forcible return of this remarkable woman, this "twentieth century escaped slave". In May of 2005 the federal government upped the bounty, now offering one million dollars for anyone who might kidnap and her and return her to her to the US plantation. All of which, it must be said, is as much about the broader trend towards repression within the United States and that country's war of attrition against Cuba as it is about Assata herself.

As Assata herself has explained:

I am a 20th-century escaped slave. Because of government persecution, I was left with no other choice than to flee from the political repression, racism, and violence that dominate the U.S. government’s policy toward people of color. I am an ex-political prisoner, and I have been living in exile in Cuba since 1984.

I have been a political activist most of my life, and although the U.S. government has done everything in its power to criminalize me, I am not a criminal, nor have I ever been one. In the 1960s, I participated in various struggles: the Black liberation movement, the student rights movement, and the movement to end the war in Vietnam. I joined the Black Panther Party. By 1969 the Black Panther Party had become the number one organization targeted by the fbi’s cointelpro program. Because the Black Panther Party demanded the total liberation of Black people, J. Edgar Hoover called it the ‘greatest threat to the internal security of the country’ and vowed to destroy it and its leaders and activists.


For more information about Assata Shakur – including information about ordering her autobiography Assata – please visit the Assata Shakur Page on the Kersplebedeb Site.

For more information about Kuwasi Balagoon, including information about the incredible book A Soldier’s Story, check out the Kuwasi Balagoon Memorial Page.

For more information about political prisoners and prisoners of war in the United States, check out the Kersplebedeb PP/POW Page.

Assata, Kuwasi Balagoon: A Soldier's Story, and Let Freedom Ring are all available from leftwingbooks.net:

FBI Kills Islamic Cleric, Arrests Followers, for Being Muslims at the Wrong Time in America

November 2, 2009
Stephen Lendman

On October 28, New York Times writer Nick Bunkley wrote the following:

"Federal agents (today) fatally shot a man they described as the leader of a violent
Sunni Muslim separatist group in Detroit." Targeted was Luqman Ameen Abdullah "whom
agents were trying to arrest in Dearborn on charges that included illegal possession
and sale of firearms and conspiracy to sell stolen goods."

The Times echoed FBI allegations that Abdullah "began firing at them from a
warehouse (and) was shot in the return fire...." Ones also that he said:

-- "America must fall;"

-- if police tried to arrest him he'd "strap a bomb on and blow up everybody;" and

-- that he urged his followers to get bulletproof vests by "shoot(ing) a cop in the
head and tak(ing) their vest."

In fact, neither happened, and no surprise. No bombs were found or went off, and
bulletproof vests are easily bought online from web sites like bulletproofme.com, so
why shoot anyone to get them.

Post-9/11, America declared war on Islam with the FBI in the lead at home. It
notoriously targets the vulnerable, entraps them with paid informants, inflates
bogus charges, spreads them maliciously through the media, then intimidates juries
to convict and sentence innocent men and some women to long prison terms. Justice is
nearly always denied. At times willful killings are committed. The Detroit Muslims
are their latest victims.

The Muslim Community Reacts

The Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC) "is a public service agency working for the
civil rights of American Muslims, for the integration of Islam into American
pluralism, and for a positive, constructive relationship between American Muslims
and their representatives." Since its 1988 founding, it's become known for promoting
"Mercy, Justice, Peace, Human Dignity, Freedom, and Equality for all."

On October 29, MPAC's Executive Director, Salam Al-Marayati said:

"There is a clear and present danger in the escalating mob mentality against
vulnerable Muslim Americans."

The organization called for an investigation into the shooting death, saying it is
"deeply disturbed" by the incident.

So is the Muslim Alliance in North America (MANA), a national network of masjids
(mosques), Muslim organizations and individuals committed to addressing the needs of
the Muslim community. It released a statement saying:

"It is with deep sadness and concern that we announce the shooting death of Imam
Luqman A. Abdullah, of Masjid Al-Haqq (Detroit, MI). Imam Luqman was a
representative of the Detroit Muslim community to the 'National Ummah' and the
general assembly (Shura) of the Muslim Alliance in North America (MANA)...."

Ummah founder Jamil Al-Amin (aka H. Rap Brown) wanted it to be an association of
mosques in US cities to coordinate religious and social services primarily in the
black community. Calling it a "nationwide radical fundamentalist Sunni group
consisting primarily of African-Americans" is an "offensive mischaracterization."

Those who've worked with Imam Abdullah know him for having "advocated for the
downtrodden and always sp(eaking) about the importance of connecting to the needs of
the poor." Alleging that he and his followers engaged in illegal activity, resisted
arrest, and waged an "offensive jihad against the American government" are "shocking
and inconsistent."

On October 30, the American Muslim Taskforce on Civil Rights and Elections (AMT), a
coalition of major national Islamic organizations, issued this statement:

"It is imperative that an independent investigation of Imam Luqman Ameen Abdullah's
death make public the exact circumstances in which he died. And unless the FBI has
evidence linking the criminal allegations to the religious affiliation of the
suspects, we ask that federal authorities stop injecting religion into this case.
The unjustified linkage of this case to the faith Islam will only serve to promote
an increase in existing anti-Muslim stereotyping and bias in our society."

AMT also urged the Congressional Tri-Causus (African-American, Latino and Asian) to
call for a judicial inquiry.

A statement from The International Council for Urban (Formations) Peace, Justice and
Empowerment read:

We members "are appalled by the raids on Masjid Al-Haqq and a halal meat packing
plant that left (Abdullah) dead. We are demanding an independent investigation into
this action that is clearly the result of a climate of Islamophobia fed by law
enforcement and a media bent on sensationalism. (The FBI's) complaint and the
resulting raid are nothing more than government sponsored terrorism against a group
that was working to help the community...."

"The inconsistencies in this investigation are glaring. The case is based on sworn
statements of informants. These informants were convicted criminals who were paid by
the federal government for their 'work.' These criminals were used to engage and
entrap law abiding citizens...."

We "never heard Imam Abdullah make any statements (or suggest any actions)
consistent with the statements in the complaint...."

"The FBI has stated that this was not a terrorism case. However, the investigation
was conducted by a counter terrorism unit."

"....Masjid Al-Haqq, under the direction of Imam Abdullah, fed the hungry, housed
the homeless, worked with gangs and the formerly incarcerated to turn a crime ridden
and drug infested neighborhood around to becoming a productive community....The most
disturbing fact is that a religious leader who reached out to his people and his
community is dead, the victim of a society that sees anyone who is different as
dangerous."

Omar Regan, Abdullah's son, led the Friday, October 30 prayers at the Al-Haqq
mosque, and said the following:

"My father was a sharp-tongued individual. He would talk about his dislike of the
government, about how law enforcement wasn't protecting and serving the people. But
speaking his emotions and acting on (them) are two different things."

Other community members echoed that sentiment in accusing the FBI of heavy-handed
tactics that killed Abdullah maliciously from multiple gunshot wounds.

Abdullah El-Amin, an imam at Detroit's Muslim Center (the city's largest black
mosque), said he knew Luqman for years and never heard him talk about wanting a
separate Muslim state, just something "like the Pennsylvania Dutch have (with) their
own communities and stuff."

He and about 20 other Detroit imams attended an October 29 meeting with US Attorney
Terrence Berg and FBI Special Agent Andrew Arena at which they charged the Agency
with entrapping Abdullah, then killing him in cold blood. One informant, they said,
was a former Abdullah follower with a criminal past, and he and the others "came to
a place where people are not getting social security, unemployment. They had
nothing," so could easily be manipulated to sell stolen items they provided.

Dawud Walid, Executive Director of the Michigan chapter of the Council on
American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) said:

"The very incendiary rhetoric that the FBI alleges, I never heard that from
(Abdullah). There was nothing extraordinary about him....I knew him as a respected
imam in the Muslim community....I knew him to be charitable. He would open up the
mosque to homeless people. He used to run a soup kitchen and feed indigent
people....I knew nothing of him that was related to any nefarious or criminal
behavior."

Walid added:

"Is this the kind of excessive force that we black Americans are all too familiar
with?" He also questioned using informants he called "agent provocateurs" who entice
law-abiding people to self-incriminate.

Other community members believe Abdullah was maliciously targeted, that the FBI
likely initiated gunfire, and if he shot back it was in self-defense.

Even the FBI's complaint admitted that whatever alleged crimes were planned or
committed, they were minor and inconsequential. Hardly offenses warranting a
high-profile raid, shoot-out, and political assassination.

Department of Justices Allegations

On October 28, a Department of Justice (DOJ) press release headlined: "Eleven
Members/Associates of Ummah Charged with Federal Violations - One Subject Fatally
Shot During Arrest." The FBI and US Attorney for the Eastern District of Michigan,
Terrence Berg, charged:

"Luqman Ameen Abdullah, aka Christopher Thomas, and 10 others with conspiracy to
commit several federal crimes, including theft from interstate shipments, mail fraud
to obtain the proceeds of arson, illegal possession and sale of firearms, and
tampering with motor vehicle identification numbers. The eleven defendants are
members of a group that is alleged to have engaged in violent activity over a period
of many years, and known to be armed."

Those charged were "believed to be armed and dangerous (so) special safeguards were
employed by law enforcement to secure the arrests without confrontation. During the
arrests today, the suspects were ordered to surrender. At one location, four (did)
and were arrested without incident. Luqman Ameen Abdullah did not surrender and
fired his weapon. An exchange of gun fire followed and Abdullah was killed."

"Abdullah was the leader of part of a group which calls themselves Ummah ('the
brotherhood'), a group of mostly African-American converts to Islam, which seeks to
establish a separate Sharia-law governed state within the United States. The Ummah
is ruled by Jamil Abdullah Al-Amin, formerly known as H. Rap Brown, who is serving a
(life) sentence (without parole) in USP Florence, CO, ADMAX (supermax), for the
murder of two police officers in Georgia."

In the US District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, a criminal complaint
named:

-- Luqman Ameen Abdullah (aka Christopher Thomas);

-- Mohammad Abdul Bassir (aka Franklin D. Roosevelt Williams);

-- Muhammad Abdul Salaam (aka Muhammad Addul Salam; aka Gregory Stone; aka Gun Man;
aka Norman Shields);

-- Abdul Saboor (aka Swayne Edward Davis);

-- Muhahid Carswell (aka Muhahid Abdullah, Luqman's son);

-- Abdullah Beard (aka Detric Lamont Driver);

-- Mohammad Philistine (aka Mohammad Palestine; aka Mohammad Al-Sahli);

-- Yassir Ali Khan;

-- Adam Hussain Ibraheem;

-- Garry Laverne Porter (aka Mujahid); and

-- Ali Abdul Raqib.

At the time of the raid, three of the men were still at large - Mujahid Carswell
(Abdullah's son), Mohammad Philistine and Yassir Ali Khan. However, Windsor, Ontario
police announced the arrest of Carswell the next day, and on October 31, they
arrested Philistine and Ali Khan.

The unsealed complaint charged Abdullah with "espous(ing) the use of violence
against law enforcement, (and) train(ing) members of his group in the use of
firearms and martial arts in anticipation of some type of action against the
government." It said "Abdullah and other members of this group were known to carry
firearms and other weapons."

According to FBI Counter-Terrorism Squad Special Agent Gary Leone, a "confidential
source" (aka paid informant) called S-2 provided "reliable and credible"
information, "independently corroborated by other sources, and by consensual
recordings he has made with the members of The Ummah at the direction of the FBI."

In a "surreptitiously" recorded December 12, 2007 conversation, "S-2 told Abdullah
he had asked to donate $5,000 to pay to have someone 'do something' during the 2006
Super Bowl in Detroit. Abdullah said he would not be involved in injuring innocent
people for no reason: 'If there's something to be done....it (has) to be
legitimate.' "

He then allegedly said...."things are coming....I got some violence (in me) because
of what they did to Imam Jamil (H. Rap Brown)....I got some stuff, man, I got some
soldiers with me....Brothers that I know would, you know, if I say 'Let's go, we
going to go and do something,' they would do it."

Leone said this and other recordings "confirm(ed) by (another paid informant) S-1
(showed) that Abdullah and his followers view themselves as soldiers at war against
the United States government, and against non-Muslims," yet nothing in his above
statement says that, so charges amount to putting FBI allegations in the mind of a
dead man, unable to refute them.

The DOJ presented no evidence of a plot, a crime, or intent to commit one.

The FBI used three paid informants for over two years. On October 10, 2008, the
third, S-3, allegedly recorded Abdullah saying:

"We have to cut the ties to (Christians, Jews, and the Kuffar (infidels). You cannot
please them until you follow their religion....Obama is a Kafir (infidel,
non-Muslim, an insulting term for any African American)....the premise of Allah and
Islam (is) 'the worst Muslim is better than the best Kafir....we should be trying to
figure out how to fight the Kuffar....Washington is trying to stop everything we
do....they are my enemy, and I should be trying to plot as to how to make moves to
get some things accomplished....(we) need to plan to do something."

These and other recordings show anger, not intent to commit crimes. Yet that's what
the DOJ alleges. Saying "We are going to have to fight against the Kafir" suggests
resistance against a hostile state. Even stronger statements, allegedly recorded,
aren't hard evidence of planned violence against the FBI, other federal agents, or
anyone else.

In its October 28 press release, the DOJ acknowledged that the above criminal
complaint "is only a charge and is not evidence of guilt. A trial cannot be held on
felony charges in a complaint. When the investigation is completed a determination
will be made whether to seek a felony indictment." Yet the FBI killed Abdullah,
allegedly in a shoot-out with only its account for proof, an Agency notorious for
political assassinations and twisting facts to make its case.

Imam Umar Responds

In a widely distributed message, an Imam Umar wrote:

"The FBI ups the ante. They set up Imam Luqman of Detroit and murdered him. We know
him and the community he comes from. This is no terrorist trap. This was part
criminal sting and when the Imam and his brothers peeped the tricks of the FBI, they
lured him to a warehouse and killed him. Now they accuse Imam Jamil (H. Rap Brown)
who has been in prison for the past ten years as leader of this group. He is an easy
target. A lone Imam with the FBI was also an easy target. The FBI is not only tricky
and devious....they are extremely dangerous thugs and murderers."

A follow-up message added:

"The FBI is known for their murderous tactics all over the world. When they are
given an assignment they use every imaginative strategy to accomplish their goal.
When they were under J. Edgar Hoover, he found various ways to discredit Martin
Luther King....They turned the Black Stone Rangers against the Black Panthers in
Chicago that (caused) the death of the (BPP) leaders. They got the Huey P. Newton
and Eldredge Cleaver factions to kill one another. They have gone after the
so-called terrorists with one phony case after another. They first went after
immigrants, decimating their numbers in America. Now they are after African American
Muslims. Next will most likely be the support groups of mostly white people....These
FBI devils are very shrewd and their evil spreads....The murder of a good Muslim
will only make it more dangerous to live in America. They know that black people
sooner or later will fight back."

"The Ummah is not a 'brotherhood,' it is the Arabic word for 'community.' This group
setting up a Muslim state? What a joke. They can hardly set up an annual conference.
This information is to cause fear....to cause backlash against Muslims....Let the
FBI continue with their tricks, lies and murder. Before long, everyone will see
through their veil and they will become the target."

Imam Jamil Al-Amin, Formerly Known as H. Rap Brown

Born Hubert Gerold Brown, he became famously known as H. Rap Brown, a 1960s civil
rights activist, social commentator, and chairman of the Student Nonviolent
Coordinating Committee (succeeding Stokely Carmichael) where he distinguished
himself as a charismatic leader and effective organizer. In 1968, he was named
minister of justice for the Black Panther Party for Self-Defense that strove for
ethnic justice, racial emancipation, and real economic, social, and political equity
across gender and color lines.

As a result, he was targeted by federal and state authorities, charged with inciting
a riot in Maryland, violating the National Firearms Act, and illegally crossing
state lines to skip bail. During his 1970 firearms trial, he disappeared for 17
months and was placed on the FBI's "Ten Most Wanted" list. In late 1971, he
reemerged after being arrested and falsely charged with armed robbery in Manhattan.
Convicted, he served five years in Attica State Prison.

While there, he converted to Islam and changed his name to Jamil Abdullah Al-Amin.
After release, he started an Atlanta mosque and operated a small grocery store and
community center. Then in 2000, he was charged with murdering a black police officer
and injuring his partner in a gun battle outside his store.

In 2002, he was tried, and despite strong evidence of his innocence, was convicted
on 13 counts, including murder, aggravated assault, obstruction, and possession of a
firearm by a convicted felon, and sentenced to life imprisonment with no possibility
of parole.

At trial, his lawyers argued for a case of mistaken identity, claimed prosecutors
were out to get him for decades, and presented a strong defense in his behalf,
including:

-- his fingerprints weren't on the murder weapon;

-- he wasn't wounded in the incident even though the arresting deputy said he shot
the assailant;

-- he also identified his eyes as gray; Al-Amin's are brown;

-- his attire didn't match clothing the shooter wore;

-- blood found at the scene was discounted and unchecked;

-- potentially exculpatory evidence relating to the sheriff's vehicle was either
lost or destroyed;

-- a man named Otis Jackson confessed to the crime; it was ignored, never introduced
at trial, days later Jackson recanted, and the defense team never got a chance to
interview him; and

-- withheld evidence and proceedings were so controversial that observers believed
Brown was convicted pre-trial for his civil rights activism and conversion to Islam;
he was clearly a targeted man;

It became clearer when the Georgia Supreme Court agreed that the prosecution
committed a grave constitutional error when, in closing arguments, the assistant
district attorney directed jurors to consider posed questions relating to Al-Amin's
failure to present testimony or evidence. Nonetheless, the Court upheld the verdict.

Afterward, his legal team filed a habeas corpus writ citing gross irregularities,
including:

-- not investigating Otis Jackson's confession;

-- denying a change of venue due to negative publicity;

-- prohibiting Al-Amin from testifying in his own defense;

-- eliminating Muslims from the jury pool;

-- dismissing three of his four trial lawyers;

-- prohibiting potentially exculpatory evidence from being introduced;

-- denying favorable testimony in his behalf;

-- withholding discovery from the defense team;

-- denying them a chance to cross-examine an FBI agent relating to his prior
misconduct against a Muslim, his misleading and false testimony, and charges that he
tampered with evidence; and

-- inflammatory media reports during trial, portraying Al-Amin as a radical extremist.

A Final Comment

As a nationally known civil rights champion and Islamic leader, Al-Amin was a prime
FBI COINTELPRO target, the agency's infamous counterintelligence program against
political activists, legitimate dissent, independent thought, and non-violent
opposition to the Vietnam war, and racial and social injustice.

It continues today against men like Abdullah, his followers, and dozens more like
them for their faith, ethnicity, race, activism, prominence, and opposition to
government injustice at the wrong time to be Muslim in America.

According to an Islamic Human Rights Commission (IHRC) December 2007 report on
Al-Amin titled, "Prisoners of Faith Campaign Pack," many thousands of "Muslim
prisoners of faith around the world" are being held in Muslim and non-Muslim
countries, including politicians, human rights activists, students, writers, and
others with "one thing in common:" their adherence "to the Islamic belief and way of
life."

They're portrayed as "terrorists, inciters of religious hatred or of even trying to
change the constitution of the country" where they live. They're vilified and denied
their civil rights. In custody, they're neglected, brutalized, tortured, and
forgotten as non-persons. As one of them, Al-Amin once said:

"For more than thirty years, I have been tormented and persecuted by my enemies for
reasons of race and belief....I seek truth over a lie; I seek justice over
injustice; I seek righteousness over the rewards of evil doers; and I love ALLAH
more than I love the state."

For others like him, their struggle for equity, social justice, and mutual
understanding persists against hostile government oppression. In America as much as
anywhere. Its tradition continues.

Stephen Lendman is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization.
He lives in Chicago and can be reached
at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net.

Also visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com and listen to The Global Research
News Hour on RepublicBroadcasting.org Monday - Friday at 10AM US Central time for
cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on world and national issues. All
programs are archived for easy listening.

Get Ready for the Emergency Protests! They Want to Kill Mumia Abu-Jamal – But Joint Action by Us All Can Prevent This!

AHM-ATİK News Center
November 2, 2009

GERMANY | 02 – 11 – 2009 | It is now for almost 27 years that the African American
journalist Mumia Abu-Jamal has been on death row in Pennsylvania, U.S.A., as a
political prisoner. His trial and his conviction for murder were a typical example
for racist bias and class justice.


The presiding judge denied Mumia the funds necessary for a defense and called him a
"n….r", the prosecutor first picked a jury which consisted almost exclusively of
conservative White males, and then proceeded to paint a picture of the defendant as
an ice-cold, ultra-leftist killer. In this trial, tainted as it was by racism and
political repression, the former Black Panther Party spokesman Mumia never had a
chance and was sentenced to death.

All the same, the unbearable conditions of incarceration on death row Mumia has had
to suffer for so long have neither broken him nor snuffed his voice. Even there, he
doesn’t give up and continues to write and broadcast against the injustices of
capitalist society. Why we support Mumia Abu-Jamal:
The death penalty is racist: Close to a half of all inmates of death row in the
Unites States are African Americans. The death penalty is directed against the poor:
More than 90 % of those on death row are poor.

With regard to this, Mumia Abu-Jamal is just one case of many: He was Black, he was
poor, and he couldn’t afford to pay for a real defense. His case thus stands for
thousands of others. In addition, he is a political activist who is a thorn in the
side of the authorities and the powerful.

In all these past years in prison, Mumia hasn’t just fought for his own freedom, but
has also tirelessly struggled for all those sentenced to death everywhere in the
world. As a "voice of the voiceless," as he had come to be called even before his
imprisonment on account of his work as a radio journalist, he gives a voice and a
face to millions of prisoners and all those in society who get no representation in
the "respectable" media.

In April 2009, the Supreme Court of the United States once more demonstrated what
many people in the U.S. already know as the "Mumia exception": Any existing law or
procedure is reinterpreted or simply ignored whenever they represent an obstacle to
the design of the judiciary and their political masters to punish Mumia for refusing
to give in.

After the April 2009 U.S. Supreme Court decision made definitely clear that Mumia
will not be given a new trial, there is now only one additional Supreme Court
decision pending, which is scheduled for autumn 2009: namely, whether the death 1982
sentence is simply reconfirmed, or whether it is not confirmed, in which case the
prosecution will be entitled to get a new jury which will then decide on whether
Mumia is re-sentenced to death or "only" gets life in prison without the possibility
of parole.

In this fateful decision, the Supreme Court of the U.S. found no more than two words
to comment on this judicial scandal concerning the political prisoner Mumia
Abu-Jamal, which has now been publicly known for almost three decades: "Petition
denied." They want to execute Mumia, or to bury him in prison for the rest of his
life.

The prosecution in Philadelphia (aka the District Attorney’s Office) is striving for
Mumia’s execution at any price and exerts great pressure to achieve that goal.
According to his lawyer, Robert R. Bryan, since his arrest in December 1981 Mumia’s
life has never been in greater danger than right now.

So far, worldwide protests were able twice – in 1995 and 1999 – to prevent an
execution that had already been ordered. It’s no different today: Only a broad
international protestand solidarity can bring about a situation that makes it
impossible for the authorities to carry out the planned murder of Mumia at the hands
of the state.

Of course, Mumia’s defense team will continue to exhaust all possible legal steps to
save him from execution. But regardless of what happens on the legal front, Mumia
himself, his defense, and his supporters all around the world have always stressed
the fact that political trials can’t be won merely in the courtroom, but are
actually primarily won in the streets.
One of the present strategies of the solidarity movement in the U.S. is to exert
political pressure on the Obama administration. Of course, everybody knows that to
expect a fair treatment of political prisoners from the U.S. government is just as
unrealistic as to expect such from the racist U.S. criminal justice system. All the
same, the solidarity movement in the United States strives to hold the
administration responsible in the broad
daylight of the public sphere and to force it to take a stance, motivated not least
by its (so far hollow) electoral promises of a "change" of the government’s position
with regard to racism in the courts.

One of several expressions of this drive is the demand by the nation’s largest civil
rights organization, the NAACP, for a "Civil Rights Investigation" by the government
concerning the documented racism in the course of the various courts’ handling of
the case of Mumia Abu-Jamal.

Solidarity is a Weapon!
Organize the Emergency Protests! Build Up the Movement!
What can the worldwide solidarity movement for Mumia contribute to vigorously
support the demands of the U.S. activists? How can we, from our geographical
location, increase the political pressure on the Obama administration?

Write Mumia to His Prison Address!
It is important that Mumia gets as much mail from different countries as possible.
Since the authorities check every single piece of mail addressed to him, every mail
bag filled with letters to Mumia represents a kind of silent protest demonstration
that the judiciary and the government will undoubtedly notice. By doing this, we can
clearly show them that Mumia Abu-Jamal isn’t forgotten even after 27 years of
solitary confinement on death row – and that we are very well informed about the
plans of the courts and will continue to watch them with diligence.

There are numerous additional good suggestions how to help Mumia on an individual
basis. But we must also be clearly aware that we will need powerful collective
protests should the racist U.S. criminal justice dare to reinstate the death penalty
against Mumia.

Together with the numerous Mumia support groups and coalitions, the Rote Hilfe (Red
Aid) is calling for a nationwide demonstration in Berlin for the life and freedom of
Mumia Abu-Jamal, as well as for the abolition of the death penalty. This
demonstration will take place on the last Saturday before a possible future
execution date for Mumia; the exact day will be announced immediately after the
latter becomes known.

Compared to the situation in 1995 and 1999 when the first two execution dates
against Mumia had to be canceled due to a successful interplay of legal appeals on
the part of the defense and massive protests by the worldwide solidarity movement,
right now mass protests in front of U.S. embassies and other U.S. institutions all
around the world will be even more decisive, since differently from the 1990s this
time around we won’t be able to stop the execution by legal means, as Mumia has
already exhausted his ordinary legal
appeals.

"Mumia 3 + 12"
In case that the U.S. judiciary and the political forces behind it should really try
to put their death threats against Mumia into practice, the FREE MUMIA movement
additionally calls for a decentralized day of action: At 12 AM (or, if necessary, at
a later hour) on the 3rd day after the reinstatement of Mumia’s death sentence,
institutions of the U.S. government as well as dependencies of U.S. corporations
should then be targets of protests and acts of civil disobedience.

Nobody knows the exact date of the decision of the U.S. Supreme Court that will
either give the green light for Mumia’s execution, or force the prosecution to apply
for another sentencing trial if they want to see Mumia dead. But that decision could
come any time after October 5. Should it confirm Mumia’s death sentence, there will
possibly be only very little time left until the governor of Pennsylvania signs an
execution order and
schedules a new execution date. If we start to think about forms of resistance
against this state-sponsored judicial murder only then, it will already be too late.

But if the preparations for this worst case scenario begin right away, the necessary
political pressure will also develop from right now on! – So what are we waiting
for?

Without You, It Can’t Be Done:
Organize the emergency protests – Get loud, become active!
As soon as an execution date is set, everything must be done very quickly; mass
protests must be organized and realized, and everything has to be already in place
for them. And most of all, everyone should be aware that the necessary mobilization
can be effected only with the support and participation of thousands upon thousand
of people.

Solidarity Is a Weapon!
For the Life and Freedom of Mumia Abu-Jamal!
No State has the Right to Murder Prisoners – Abolition of the Death Penalty
Everywhere!
Free Leonard Peltier! Free All Other Political Prisoners!
"Mumia 3 + 12" Decentralized Day of Action on the 3rd Day after the
Confirmation of Mumia’s Death Sentence – 12 AM (or, if necessary,
later that day)
National Demonstration to the U.S. Embassy on the last Saturday
before the Planned Execution! 2 PM / Oranienplatz, Berlin

YES WE CAN – Free Mumia!

ABOLISH THE DEATH PENALTY!

For the Life and Freedom of Mumia Abu-Jamal!
AHM-ATİK News Center

National Lawyers Guild (NLG) calls for an immediate investigation into fbi's fatal shooting of Imam Luqman Ameen Abdullah

The National Lawyers Guild (NLG) calls for an immediate and
independent investigation into fbi's fatal shooting on 10/28/09 islamic
leader imam luqman ameen abdullah in dearborn,miFor Immediate Release--November 2, 2009

*Contact: *Paige Cram, Communications Coordinator, 212-679-5100, ext. 15,
communications@nlg.org

*New York*—The National Lawyers Guild (NLG) calls for an immediate and
independent investigation into the FBI’s fatal shooting on October 28 of
Islamic leader Imam Luqman Ameen Abdullah in Dearborn, Michigan. The FBI
killed him during a series of raids of the Masjid Al-Haqq Mosque by federal
and local law enforcement officials in which 11 others were arrested. While
mainstream media outlets are calling the killing and arrests a
counter-terrorism operation, the raids arose out of criminal complaints
containing no specific allegations of violations of federal law or acts of
terrorism.

All reports from local residents and community leaders indicate that Imam
Abdullah and Mosque members were dedicated to improving the community,
feeding hungry neighborhood residents and helping young people in need, even
letting many sleep in the mosque during inclement weather.

By publicizing the killing and arrests as related to terrorism, absent any
such allegations in the complaint, the FBI seems to be engaging in the same
tactics used in its Counter Intelligence Program (COINTELPRO), in which it
spied on, infiltrated and disrupted political movements. Imam Abdullah had a
close relationship with Imam Jamil Abdullah al-Amin, formerly known as H.
Rap Brown, was a field organizer for the Student Nonviolent Coordinating
Committee (SNCC) and later served as national chairman of the Black Panther
Party (BPP).

The FBI and mainstream media blamed the organizing work of SNCC for the
urban rebellions in over 200 cities in the late 1960s. The Black Panther
Party was COINTELPRO’s primary target, but it targeted a vast array of
others, including Martin Luther King. In light of these events, we cannot
trust the claim that COINTELPRO has been abandoned. Many have been
imprisoned on spurious charges. Al-Amin, for example, maintains his innocence

in the deaths of Atlanta law-enforcement officers and has sought an appeal
of his case. Reports indicated that he has been harassed and placed in
isolation in the Georgia prison system. Over two dozen BPP members were
killed by law enforcement between 1968 and 1971.

The National Lawyers Guild advocated on behalf of, and represented, members
of the BPP and other political organizations. The FBI tried to have the
Guild labeled as a subversive organization, and for many years spied on and
infiltrated the association and its individual members.

Guild president David Gespass said, “It took more than twenty years to prove
in court that Fred Hampton and Mark Clark were targeted and murdered by the
FBI and Chicago police. We cannot wait that long for the truth of what
happened to Imam Abdullah.”

The National Lawyers Guild was founded in 1937 and is the oldest and largest
public interest/human rights bar organization in the United States. Its
headquarters are in New York and it has chapters in every state.

###
--
Paige Cram
NLG Communications Coordinator
communications@nlg..org
(212) 679-5100, ext. 15

Sunday, November 01, 2009

Mr Chidambaram’s War

Forsaken god: Will someone tell Copenhagen, leave the bauxite in the mountain
essay

A math question: How many soldiers will it take to contain the mounting rage of hundreds of millions of people?

The low, flat-topped hills of south Orissa have been home to the Dongria Kondh long before there was a country called India or a state called Orissa. The hills watched over the Kondh. The Kondh watched over the hills and worshipped them as living deities. Now these hills have been sold for the bauxite they contain. For the Kondh it’s as though god has been sold. They ask how much god would go for if the god were Ram or Allah or Jesus Christ?

Red terror?: A tribal woman with her children in Dantewada

Perhaps the Kondh are supposed to be grateful that their Niyamgiri hill, home to their Niyam Raja, God of Universal Law, has been sold to a company with a name like Vedanta (the branch of Hindu philosophy that teaches the Ultimate Nature of Knowledge). It’s one of the biggest mining corporations in the world and is owned by Anil Aggarwal, the Indian billionaire who lives in London in a mansion that once belonged to the Shah of Iran. Vedanta is only one of the many multinational corporations closing in on Orissa.

If the flat-topped hills are destroyed, the forests that clothe them will be destroyed too. So will the rivers and streams that flow out of them and irrigate the plains below. So will the Dongria Kondh. So will the hundreds of thousands of tribal people who live in the forested heart of India, and whose homeland is similarly under attack.

In our smoky, crowded cities, some people say, “So what? Someone has to pay the price of progress.” Some even say, “Let’s face it, these are people whose time has come. Look at any developed country, Europe, the US, Australia—they all have a ‘past’.” Indeed they do. So why shouldn’t “we”?



The Niyamgiri hills have been sold for their bauxite. For the Kondhs, their god’s been sold. How much, they ask, would god go for if he was Ram, Allah or Christ?

In keeping with this line of thought, the government has announced Operation Green Hunt, a war purportedly against the “Maoist” rebels headquartered in the jungles of central India. Of course, the Maoists are by no means the only ones rebelling. There is a whole spectrum of struggles all over the country that people are engaged in—the landless, the Dalits, the homeless, workers, peasants, weavers. They’re pitted against a juggernaut of injustices, including policies that allow a wholesale corporate takeover of people’s land and resources. However, it is the Maoists who the government has singled out as being the biggest threat. Two years ago, when things were nowhere near as bad as they are now, the prime minister described the Maoists as the “single-largest internal security threat” to the country. This will probably go down as the most popular and often-repeated thing he ever said. For some reason, the comment he made on January 6, 2009, at a meeting of state chief ministers, when he described the Maoists as having only “modest capabilities” doesn’t seem to have had the same raw appeal. He revealed his government’s real concern on June 18, 2009, when he told Parliament: “If left-wing extremism continues to flourish in parts which have natural resources of minerals, the climate for investment would certainly be affected.”

Who are the Maoists? They are members of the banned Communist Party of India (Maoist)—CPI (Maoist)—one of the several descendants of the Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist), which led the 1969 Naxalite uprising and was subsequently liquidated by the Indian government. The Maoists believe that the innate, structural inequality of Indian society can only be redressed by the violent overthrow of the Indian State. In its earlier avatars as the Maoist Communist Centre (MCC) in Jharkhand and Bihar, and the People’s War Group (PWG) in Andhra Pradesh, the Maoists had tremendous popular support. (When the ban on them was briefly lifted in 2004, one-and-a-half million people attended their rally in Warangal.) But eventually their intercession in Andhra Pradesh ended badly. They left a violent legacy that turned some of their staunchest supporters into harsh critics. After a paroxysm of killing and counter-killing by the Andhra police as well as the Maoists, the PWG was decimated. Those who managed to survive fled Andhra Pradesh into neighbouring Chhattisgarh. There, deep in the heart of the forest, they joined colleagues who had already been working there for decades.



A concerted campaign has been orchestrated to shoehorn myriad resistances into a simple George Bush binary: if you’re not with us, you’re with the Maoists.

Not many ‘outsiders’ have any first-hand experience of the real nature of the Maoist movement in the forest. A recent interview with one of its top leaders, Comrade Ganapathy, in Open magazine didn’t do much to change the minds of those who view the Maoists as a party with an unforgiving, totalitarian vision, which countenances no dissent whatsoever. Comrade Ganapathy said nothing that would persuade people that, were the Maoists ever to come to power, they would be equipped to properly address the almost insane diversity of India’s caste-ridden society. His casual approval of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) of Sri Lanka was enough to send a shiver down even the most sympathetic of spines, not just because of the brutal ways in which the LTTE chose to wage its war, but also because of the cataclysmic tragedy that has befallen the Tamil people of Sri Lanka, who it claimed to represent, and for whom it surely must take some responsibility.

Right now in central India, the Maoists’ guerrilla army is made up almost entirely of desperately poor tribal people living in conditions of such chronic hunger that it verges on famine of the kind we only associate with sub-Saharan Africa. They are people who, even after 60 years of India’s so-called Independence, have not had access to education, healthcare or legal redress. They are people who have been mercilessly exploited for decades, consistently cheated by small businessmen and moneylenders, the women raped as a matter of right by police and forest department personnel. Their journey back to a semblance of dignity is due in large part to the Maoist cadre who have lived and worked and fought by their side for decades.


Elections ’09: Ask not where the two billion dollars came from

If the tribals have taken up arms, they have done so because a government which has given them nothing but violence and neglect now wants to snatch away the last thing they have—their land. Clearly, they do not believe the government when it says it only wants to “develop” their region. Clearly, they do not believe that the roads as wide and flat as aircraft runways that are being built through their forests in Dantewada by the National Mineral Development Corporation are being built for them to walk their children to school on. They believe that if they do not fight for their land, they will be annihilated. That is why they have taken up arms.

Even if the ideologues of the Maoist movement are fighting to eventually overthrow the Indian State, right now even they know that their ragged, malnutritioned army, the bulk of whose soldiers have never seen a train or a bus or even a small town, are fighting only for survival.



Schedule V of the Constitution, which provides adivasis protection & disallows alienation of their land, now seems just window-dressing, a bit of make-up.

In 2008, an expert group appointed by the Planning Commission submitted a report called ‘Development Challenges in Extremist-Affected Areas’. It said, “the Naxalite (Maoist) movement has to be recognised as a political movement with a strong base among the landless and poor peasantry and adivasis. Its emergence and growth need to be contextualised in the social conditions and experience of people who form a part of it. The huge gap between state policy and performance is a feature of these conditions. Though its professed long-term ideology is capturing state power by force, in its day-to-day manifestation, it is to be looked upon as basically a fight for social justice, equality, protection, security and local development.” A very far cry from the “single-largest internal security threat”. Since the Maoist rebellion is the flavour of the week, everybody, from the sleekest fat cat to the most cynical editor of the most sold-out newspaper in this country, seems to be suddenly ready to concede that it is decades of accumulated injustice that lies at the root of the problem. But instead of addressing that problem, which would mean putting the brakes on this 21st century gold rush, they are trying to head the debate off in a completely different direction, with a noisy outburst of pious outrage about Maoist “terrorism”. But they’re only speaking to themselves.

The people who have taken to arms are not spending all their time watching (or performing for) TV, or reading the papers, or conducting SMS polls for the Moral Science question of the day: Is Violence Good or Bad? SMS your reply to.... They’re out there. They’re fighting. They believe they have the right to defend their homes and their land. They believe that they deserve justice.


VT, 26/11: Odd that the Centre was ready to talk to Pakistan even after this, but is playing hard when it comes to the poor

In order to keep its better-off citizens absolutely safe from these dangerous people, the government has declared war on them. A war, which it tells us, may take between three and five years to win. Odd, isn’t it, that even after the Mumbai attacks of 26/11, the government was prepared to talk with Pakistan? It’s prepared to talk to China. But when it comes to waging war against the poor, it’s playing hard. It’s not enough that Special Police—with totemic names like Greyhounds, Cobras and Scorpions—are scouring the forests with a licence to kill. It’s not enough that the Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF), the Border Security Force (BSF) and the notorious Naga Battalion have already wreaked havoc and committed unconscionable atrocities in remote forest villages. It’s not enough that the government supports and arms the Salwa Judum, the “people’s militia” that has killed and raped and burned its way through the forests of Dantewada leaving three hundred thousand people homeless, or on the run. Now the government is going to deploy the Indo-Tibetan Border Police and tens of thousands of paramilitary troops. It plans to set up a brigade headquarters in Bilaspur (which will displace nine villages) and an air base in Rajnandgaon (which will displace seven). Obviously, these decisions were taken a while ago. Surveys have been done, sites chosen. Interesting. War has been in the offing for a while. And now the helicopters of the Indian air force have been given the right to fire in “self-defence”, the very right that the government denies its poorest citizens.

Fire at whom? How in god’s name will the security forces be able to distinguish a Maoist from an ordinary person who is running terrified through the jungle? Will adivasis carrying the bows and arrows they have carried for centuries now count as Maoists too? Are non-combatant Maoist sympathisers valid targets? When I was in Dantewada, the Superintendent of Police showed me pictures of 19 “Maoists” who “his boys” had killed. I asked him how I was supposed to tell they were Maoists. He said, “See Ma’am, they have malaria medicines, Dettol bottles, all these things from outside.”


Licence to kill: Greyhounds, Scorpions, Cobras.... Now the IAF can fire in self-defence, a right the poor are denied.

What kind of war is Operation Green Hunt going to be? Will we ever know? Not much news comes out of the forests. Lalgarh in West Bengal has been cordoned off. Those who try to go in are being beaten and arrested. And called Maoists of course. In Dantewada, the Vanvasi Chetana Ashram, a Gandhian ashram run by Himanshu Kumar, was bulldozed in a few hours. It was the last neutral outpost before the war zone begins, a place where journalists, activists, researchers and fact-finding teams could stay while they worked in the area.

Meanwhile, the Indian establishment has unleashed its most potent weapon. Almost overnight, our embedded media has substituted its steady supply of planted, unsubstantiated, hysterical stories about ‘Islamist Terrorism’ with planted, unsubstantiated, hysterical stories about ‘Red Terrorism’. In the midst of this racket, at Ground Zero, the cordon of silence is being inexorably tightened. The ‘Sri Lanka Solution’ could very well be on the cards. It’s not for nothing that the Indian government blocked a European move in the UN asking for an international probe into war crimes committed by the government of Sri Lanka in its recent offensive against the Tamil Tigers.



The next time you see a news anchor haranguing a guest, ‘Why don’t Maoists stand for elections?’, do SMS this reply, ‘Because they can’t afford your rates.’

The first move in that direction is the concerted campaign that has been orchestrated to shoehorn the myriad forms of resistance taking place in this country into a simple George Bush binary: If you are not with us, you are with the Maoists. The deliberate exaggeration of the Maoist ‘threat’ helps the State to justify militarisation. (And surely does no harm to the Maoists. Which political party would be unhappy to be singled out for such attention?) While all the oxygen is being used up by this new doppelganger of the War on Terror, the State will use the opportunity to mop up the hundreds of other resistance movements in the sweep of its military operation, calling them all Maoist sympathisers. I use the future tense, but this process is well under way. The West Bengal government tried to do this in Nandigram and Singur but failed. Right now in Lalgarh, the Pulishi Santrash Birodhi Janasadharaner Committee or the People’s Committee Against Police Atrocities—which is a people’s movement that is separate from, though sympathetic to, the Maoists—is routinely referred to as an overground wing of the CPI (Maoist). Its leader, Chhatradhar Mahato, now arrested and being held without bail, is always called a “Maoist leader”. We all know the story of Dr Binayak Sen, a medical doctor and a civil liberties activist, who spent two years in jail on the absolutely facile charge of being a courier for the Maoists. While the light shines brightly on Operation Green Hunt, in other parts of India, away from the theatre of war, the assault on the rights of the poor, of workers, of the landless, of those whose lands the government wishes to acquire for “public purpose”, will pick up pace. Their suffering will deepen and it will be that much harder for them to get a hearing. Once the war begins, like all wars, it will develop a momentum, a logic and an economics of its own. It will become a way of life, almost impossible to reverse. The police will be expected to behave like an army, a ruthless killing machine. The paramilitary will be expected to become like the police, a corrupt, bloated administrative force. We’ve seen it happen in Nagaland, Manipur and Kashmir. The only difference in the ‘heartland’ will be that it’ll become obvious very quickly to the security forces that they’re only a little less wretched than the people they’re fighting. In time, the divide between the people and the law enforcers will become porous. Guns and ammunition will be bought and sold. In fact, it’s already happening. Whether it’s the security forces or the Maoists or non-combatant civilians, the poorest people will die in this Rich People’s War. However, if anybody believes that this war will leave them unaffected, they should think again. The resources it’ll consume will cripple the economy of this country.

Last week, civil liberties groups from all over the country organised a series of meetings in Delhi to discuss what could be done to turn the tide and stop the war. The absence of Dr Balagopal, one of the best-known civil rights activists of Andhra Pradesh, who died two weeks ago, closed around us like a physical pain. He was one of the bravest, wisest political thinkers of our time and left us just when we needed him most. Still, I’m sure he would have been reassured to hear speaker after speaker displaying the vision, the depth, the experience, the wisdom, the political acuity and, above all, the real humanity of the community of activists, academics, lawyers, judges and a range of other people who make up the civil liberties community in India. Their presence in the capital signalled that outside the arclights of our TV studios and beyond the drumbeat of media hysteria, even among India’s middle classes, a humane heart still beats. Small wonder then that these are the people who the Union home minister recently accused of creating an “intellectual climate” that was conducive to “terrorism”. If that charge was meant to frighten people, to cow them down, it had the opposite effect.



There’s an MoU on every mountain, river, forest glade. What the media calls the Maoist Corridor—the Dandakaranya—could well be called the MoUist Corridor.

The speakers represented a range of opinion from the liberal to the radical Left. Though none of those who spoke would describe themselves as Maoist, few were opposed in principle to the idea that people have a right to defend themselves against State violence. Many were uncomfortable about Maoist violence, about the ‘people’s courts’ that delivered summary justice, about the authoritarianism that was bound to permeate an armed struggle and marginalise those who did not have arms. But even as they expressed their discomfort, they knew that people’s courts only existed because India’s courts are out of the reach of ordinary people and that the armed struggle that has broken out in the heartland is not the first, but the very last option of a desperate people pushed to the very brink of existence. The speakers were aware of the dangers of trying to extract a simple morality out of individual incidents of heinous violence, in a situation that had already begun to look very much like war. Everybody had graduated long ago from equating the structural violence of the State with the violence of the armed resistance. In fact, retired Justice P.B. Sawant went so far as to thank the Maoists for forcing the establishment of this country to pay attention to the egregious injustice of the system. Hargopal from Andhra Pradesh spoke of his experience as a civil rights activist through the years of the Maoist interlude in his state. He mentioned in passing the fact that in a few days in Gujarat in 2002, Hindu mobs led by the Bajrang Dal and the VHP had killed more people than the Maoists ever had even in their bloodiest days in Andhra Pradesh.

People who had come from the war zones, from Lalgarh, Jharkhand, Chhattisgarh and Orissa, described the police repression, the arrests, the torture, the killing, the corruption, and the fact that in places like Orissa, they seemed to take orders directly from the officials who worked for the mining companies. People described the dubious, malign role being played by certain NGOs funded by aid agencies wholly devoted to furthering corporate prospects. Again and again they spoke of how in Jharkhand and Chhattisgarh activists as well as ordinary people—anyone who was seen to be a dissenter—were being branded Maoists and imprisoned. They said that this, more than anything else, was pushing people to take up arms and join the Maoists. They asked how a government that professed its inability to resettle even a fraction of the fifty million people who had been displaced by “development” projects was suddenly able to identify 1,40,000 hectares of prime land to give to industrialists for more than 300 Special Economic Zones, India’s onshore tax havens for the rich. They asked what brand of justice the Supreme Court was practising when it refused to review the meaning of ‘public purpose’ in the Land Acquisition Act even when it knew that the government was forcibly acquiring land in the name of ‘public purpose’ to give to private corporations. They asked why when the government says that “the Writ of the State must run”, it seems to only mean that police stations must be put in place. Not schools or clinics or housing, or clean water, or a fair price for forest produce, or even being left alone and free from the fear of the police—anything that would make people’s lives a little easier. They asked why the ‘Writ of the State’ could never be taken to mean justice.

There was a time, perhaps 10 years ago, when in meetings like these, people were still debating the model of “development” that was being thrust on them by the New Economic Policy. Now the rejection of that model is complete. It is absolute. Everyone from the Gandhians to the Maoists agree on that. The only question now is, what is the most effective way to dismantle it?

An old college friend of a friend, a big noise in the corporate world, had come along for one of the meetings out of morbid curiosity about a world he knew very little about. Even though he had disguised himself in a Fabindia kurta, he couldn’t help looking (and smelling) expensive. At one point, he leaned across to me and said, “Someone should tell them not to bother. They won’t win this one. They have no idea what they’re up against. With the kind of money that’s involved here, these companies can buy ministers and media barons and policy wonks, they can run their own NGOs, their own militias, they can buy whole governments. They’ll even buy the Maoists. These good people here should save their breath and find something better to do.”

When people are being brutalised, what ‘better’ thing is there for them to do than to fight back? It’s not as though anyone’s offering them a choice, unless it’s to commit suicide, like the 1,80,000 farmers caught in a spiral of debt have done. (Am I the only one who gets the distinct feeling that the Indian establishment and its representatives in the media are far more comfortable with the idea of poor people killing themselves in despair than with the idea of them fighting back?)

For several years, people in Chhattisgarh, Orissa, Jharkhand and West Bengal—some of them Maoists, many not—have managed to hold off the big corporations. The question now is—how will Operation Green Hunt change the nature of their struggle? What exactly are the fighting people up against?

SEZ who: Is it development?

It’s true that, historically, mining companies have almost always won their battles against local people. Of all corporations, leaving aside the ones that make weapons, they
probably have the most merciless past. They are cynical, battle-hardened campaigners and when people say ‘Jaan denge par jameen nahin denge (We’ll give away our lives, but never our land)’, it probably bounces off them like a light drizzle on a bomb shelter. They’ve heard it before, in a thousand different languages, in a hundred different countries.

Right now in India, many of them are still in the First Class Arrivals lounge, ordering cocktails, blinking slowly like lazy predators, waiting for the Memorandums of Understanding (MoUs) they have signed—some as far back as 2005—to materialise into real money. But four years in a First Class lounge is enough to test the patience of even the truly tolerant. There’s only that much space they’re willing to make for the elaborate, if increasingly empty, rituals of democratic practice: the (rigged) public hearings, the (fake) Environmental Impact Assessments, the (purchased) clearances from various ministries, the long-drawn-out court cases. Even phony democracy is time-consuming. And time, for industrialists, is money.

So what kind of money are we talking about? In their seminal, soon-to-be-published work, Out of This Earth: East India Adivasis and the Aluminum Cartel, Samarendra Das and Felix Padel say that the financial value of the bauxite deposits of Orissa alone is 2.27 trillion dollars. (More than twice India’s Gross Domestic Product). That was at 2004 prices. At today’s prices it would be about 4 trillion dollars. A trillion has 12 zeroes.

Of this, officially the government gets a royalty of less than 7 per cent. Quite often, if the mining company is a known and recognised one, the chances are that, even though the ore is still in the mountain, it will have already been traded on the futures market. So, while for the adivasis the mountain is still a living deity, the fountainhead of life and faith, the keystone of the ecological health of the region, for the corporation, it’s just a cheap storage facility. Goods in storage have to be accessible. From the corporation’s point of view, the bauxite will have to come out of the mountain. If it can’t be done peacefully, then it will have to be done violently. Such are the pressures and the exigencies of the free market.



For the adivasis, the mountain is still a living deity, but for the corporation, it’s just a cheap storage facility. The bauxite will have to come out of the mountain.

That’s just the story of the bauxite in Orissa. Expand the four trillion dollars to include the value of the millions of tonnes of high-quality iron ore in Chhattisgarh and Jharkhand and the 28 other precious mineral resources, including uranium, limestone, dolomite, coal, tin, granite, marble, copper, diamond, gold, quartzite, corundum, beryl, alexandrite, silica, fluorite and garnet. Add to that the power plants, the dams, the highways, the steel and cement factories, the aluminium smelters, and all the other infrastructure projects that are part of the hundreds of MoUs (more than 90 in Jharkhand alone) that have been signed. That gives us a rough outline of the scale of the operation and the desperation of the stakeholders. The forest once known as the Dandakaranya, which stretches from West Bengal through Jharkhand, Orissa, Chhattisgarh, parts of Andhra Pradesh and Maharashtra, is home to millions of India’s tribal people. The media has taken to calling it the Red corridor or the Maoist corridor. It could just as accurately be called the MoUist corridor. It doesn’t seem to matter at all that the Fifth Schedule of the Constitution provides protection to adivasi people and disallows the alienation of their land. It looks as though the clause is there only to make the Constitution look good—a bit of window-dressing, a slash of make-up. Scores of corporations, from relatively unknown ones to the biggest mining companies and steel manufacturers in the world, are in the fray to appropriate adivasi homelands—the Mittals, Jindals, Tata, Essar, Posco, Rio Tinto, BHP Billiton and, of course, Vedanta.

There’s an MoU on every mountain, river and forest glade. We’re talking about social and environmental engineering on an unimaginable scale. And most of this is secret. It’s not in the public domain. Somehow I don’t think that the plans that are afoot to destroy one of the world’s most pristine forests and ecosystems, as well as the people who live in it, will be discussed at the Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen. Our 24-hour news channels that are so busy hunting for macabre stories of Maoist violence—and making them up when they run out of the real thing—seem to have no interest at all in this side of the story. I wonder why?

Perhaps it’s because the development lobby to which they are so much in thrall says the mining industry will ratchet up the rate of GDP growth dramatically and provide employment to the people it displaces. This does not take into account the catastrophic costs of environmental damage. But even on its own narrow terms, it is simply untrue. Most of the money goes into the bank accounts of the mining corporations. Less than 10 per cent comes to the public exchequer. A very tiny percentage of the displaced people get jobs, and those who do, earn slave-wages to do humiliating, backbreaking work. By caving in to this paroxysm of greed, we are bolstering other countries’ economies with our ecology.



To get the bauxite out of the mountain, the iron ore from the forest, India needs to militarise. To militarise, it needs an enemy. The Maoists are that enemy.

When the scale of money involved is what it is, the stakeholders are not always easy to identify. Between the CEOs in their private jets and the wretched tribal Special Police Officers in the “people’s” militias—who for a couple of thousand rupees a month fight their own people, rape, kill and burn down whole villages in an effort to clear the ground for mining to begin—there is an entire universe of primary, secondary and tertiary stakeholders. These people don’t have to declare their interests, but they’re allowed to use their positions and good offices to further them. How will we ever know which political party, which ministers, which MPs, which politicians, which judges, which NGOs, which expert consultants, which police officers, have a direct or indirect stake in the booty? How will we know which newspapers reporting the latest Maoist “atrocity”, which TV channels “reporting directly from Ground Zero”—or, more accurately, making it a point not to report from Ground Zero, or even more accurately, lying blatantly from Ground Zero—are stakeholders?

What is the provenance of the billions of dollars (several times more than India’s GDP) secretly stashed away by Indian citizens in Swiss bank accounts? Where did the two billion dollars spent on the last general elections come from? Where do the hundreds of millions of rupees that political parties and politicians pay the media for the ‘high-end’, ‘low-end’ and ‘live’ pre-election ‘coverage packages’ that P. Sainath recently wrote about come from? (The next time you see a TV anchor haranguing a numb studio guest, shouting, “Why don’t the Maoists stand for elections? Why don’t they come in to the mainstream?”, do SMS the channel saying, “Because they can’t afford your rates.”)

Not Quite PC: CEO, Op Green Hunt

What are we to make of the fact that the Union home minister, P. Chidambaram, the CEO of Operation Green Hunt, has, in his career as a corporate lawyer, represented several mining corporations? What are we to make of the fact that he was a non-executive director of Vedanta—a position from which he resigned the day he became finance minister in 2004? What are we to make of the fact that, when he became finance minister, one of the first clearances he gave for FDI was to Twinstar Holdings, a Mauritius-based company, to buy shares in Sterlite, a part of the Vedanta group?

What are we to make of the fact that, when activists from Orissa filed a case against Vedanta in the Supreme Court, citing its violations of government guidelines and pointing out that the Norwegian Pension Fund had withdrawn its investment from the company alleging gross environmental damage and human rights violations committed by the company, Justice Kapadia suggested that Vedanta be substituted with Sterlite, a sister company of the same group? He then blithely announced in an open court that he too had shares in Sterlite. He gave forest clearance to Sterlite to go ahead with the mining despite the fact that the Supreme Court’s own expert committee had explicitly said that permission should be denied and that mining would ruin the forests, water sources, environment and the lives and livelihoods of the thousands of tribals living there. Justice Kapadia gave this clearance without rebutting the report of the Supreme Court’s own committee.


Salwa Judum: Inaugurated just days after an MoU with Tatas

What are we to make of the fact that the Salwa Judum, the brutal ground-clearing operation disguised as a “spontaneous” people’s militia in Dantewada, was formally inaugurated in 2005, just days after the MoU with the Tatas was signed? And that the Jungle Warfare Training School in Bastar was set up just around then?

What are we to make of the fact that two weeks ago, on October 12, the mandatory public hearing for Tata Steel’s Rs 10,000-crore steel project in Lohandiguda, Dantewada, was held in a small hall inside the collectorate, cordoned off with massive security, with a hired audience of 50 tribal people brought in from two Bastar villages in a convoy of government jeeps? (The public hearing was declared a success and the district collector congratulated the people of Bastar for their cooperation.)

What are we to make of the fact that just around the time the prime minister began to call the Maoists the “single-largest internal security threat” (which was a signal that the government was getting ready to go after them), the share prices of many of the mining companies in the region skyrocketed?

The mining companies desperately need this “war”. It’s an old technique. They hope the impact of the violence will drive out the people who have so far managed to resist the attempts that have been made to evict them. Whether this will indeed be the outcome, or whether it’ll simply swell the ranks of the Maoists remains to be seen.

Reversing this argument, Dr Ashok Mitra, former finance minister of West Bengal, in an article called ‘The Phantom Enemy’, argues that the “grisly serial murders” that the Maoists are committing are a classic tactic, learned from guerrilla warfare textbooks. He suggests that they have built and trained a guerrilla army that is now ready to take on the Indian State, and that the Maoist ‘rampage’ is a deliberate attempt on their part to invite the wrath of a blundering, angry Indian State which the Maoists hope will commit acts of cruelty that will enrage the adivasis. That rage, Dr Mitra says, is what the Maoists hope can be harvested and transformed into an insurrection. This, of course, is the charge of ‘adventurism’ that several currents of the Left have always levelled at the Maoists. It suggests that Maoist ideologues are not above inviting destruction on the very people they claim to represent in order to bring about a revolution that will bring them to power. Ashok Mitra is an old Communist who had a ringside seat during the Naxalite uprising of the ’60s and ’70s in West Bengal. His views cannot be summarily dismissed. But it’s worth keeping in mind that the adivasi people have a long and courageous history of resistance that predates the birth of Maoism. To look upon them as brainless puppets being manipulated by a few middle-class Maoist ideologues is to do them something of a disservice.

Presumably Dr Mitra is talking about the situation in Lalgarh where, up to now, there has been no talk of mineral wealth. (Lest we forget—the current uprising in Lalgarh was sparked off over the chief minister’s visit to inaugurate a Jindal Steel factory. And where there’s a steel factory, can the iron ore be very far away?) The people’s anger has to do with their desperate poverty, and the decades of suffering at the hands of the police and the ‘Harmads’, the armed militia of the Communist Party of India (Marxist) that has ruled West Bengal for more than 30 years.

Even if, for argument’s sake, we don’t ask what tens of thousands of police and paramilitary troops are doing in Lalgarh, and we accept the theory of Maoist ‘adventurism’, it would still be only a very small part of the picture.

The real problem is that the flagship of India’s miraculous ‘growth’ story has run aground. It came at a huge social and environmental cost. And now, as the rivers dry up and forests disappear, as the water table recedes and as people realise what is being done to them, the chickens are coming home to roost. All over the country, there’s unrest, there are protests by people refusing to give up their land and their access to resources, refusing to believe false promises any more. Suddenly, it’s beginning to look as though the 10 per cent growth rate and democracy are mutually incompatible. To get the bauxite out of the flat-topped hills, to get iron ore out from under the forest floor, to get 85 per cent of India’s people off their land and into the cities (which is what Mr Chidambaram says he’d like to see), India has to become a police state. The government has to militarise. To justify that militarisation, it needs an enemy. The Maoists are that enemy. They are to corporate fundamentalists what the Muslims are to Hindu fundamentalists. (Is there a fraternity of fundamentalists? Is that why the RSS has expressed open admiration for Mr Chidambaram?)

It would be a grave mistake to imagine that the paramilitary troops, the Rajnandgaon air base, the Bilaspur brigade headquarters, the Unlawful Activities Act, the Chhattisgarh Special Public Security Act and Operation Green Hunt are all being put in place just to flush out a few thousand Maoists from the forests. In all the talk of Operation Green Hunt, whether or not Mr Chidambaram goes ahead and “presses the button”, I detect the kernel of a coming state of Emergency. (Here’s a math question: If it takes 6,00,000 soldiers to hold down the tiny valley of Kashmir, how many will it take to contain the mounting rage of hundreds of millions of people?)

Instead of narco-analysing Kobad Ghandy, the recently arrested Maoist leader, it might be a better idea to talk to him.

In the meanwhile, will someone who’s going to the Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen later this year please ask the only question worth asking: Can we please leave the bauxite in the mountain?

'Two killed, 100 hurt' in Bangladeshi workers riot

By Shafiq Alam (AFP) – Oct. 31, 2009

DHAKA — At least two people died and 100 people were injured Saturday when
Bangladesh police fired rubber bullets at thousands of garment factory
workers rioting over unpaid wages, police said.

The two people were killed after around 15,000 workers began hurling
stones and rocks, prompting officers to retaliate, police said, in the
worst industrial violence to shake Bangladesh as it struggles to cope with
the fallout from the global recession.

Police said the protesters, who worked for Bangladeshi-owned Nippon
Garments, were demanding three months' back pay from owners who had shut
down the factory, blaming a lack of orders.

"The law-enforcers had to fire rubber bullets from shotguns to disperse
the workers who hurled stones and bricks at our officers," Inspector
Shafiqul Alam said, adding two people had died.

At least 100 workers and a number of police officers were hurt in the
clashes in the Tongi Industrial Area, 40 kilometres (25 miles) north of
Dhaka, police sub-inspector Maleka Begum said.

Nine of the injured were admitted to Dhaka Medical College Hospital,
clinic official Abdul Baten told AFP.

"All of the injured have wounds caused by live ammunition and some are in
serious condition," he said.

Police insisted, however, they used only rubber bullets to quell the unrest.

"The angry workers became unruly and violent this morning. They threw up
barricades on the roads and suddenly attacked police," Begum said.

The workers also damaged vehicles, torching some, and blockaded road links
between Bangladesh's northern districts and Dhaka, she added.

Saturday's clashes were the most severe since the global downturn began to
affect Bangladeshi apparel factories, which accounted for 80 percent of
the country's 15.56 billion dollars worth of exports in the last financial
year.

In June, some 50,000 workers protesting wage cuts and unpaid salaries
clashed with police, leaving scores injured.

Fazlul Haque, head of the 1,300-member Bangladesh Knitwear Manufacturers
and Exporters Association, said the global slowdown had forced many
factories in the country to lay off workers or shut down.

"Western retailers who are our top buyers have cut orders and squeezed
prices. The big factories have somehow coped, but most of the small- and
medium-sized factories are facing very tough times," he said.

In the first two months of the financial year to August 2010, overseas
shipments fell by three percent.

Unions said factories have cut wages to compete for orders with other
apparel-producers, such as Vietnam, China and India.

Montu Ghosh, head of the Garment Workers Trade Union Center, said the
owners of Nippon Garments were due to pay the wages Saturday morning and
had asked employees to collect their money.

"But they shut down the factory in the night and sent police to guard the
factory. The workers became angry when they saw the owners had left
without paying the salaries," he said.

Forty percent of Bangladesh's industrial workforce is employed in the
garment sector.