Tuesday, July 24, 2007

Detainees' hunger strike protest

Oakington Reception Centre July 24, 2007 BBC

About 60 Sri Lankans awaiting deportation have gone on hunger strike at detention centres across the UK.

The detainees have been protesting against their enforced removal to Sri Lanka since Monday.

There are 28 detainees on hunger strike at Harmondsworth in London; 23 are refusing to eat at Oakington, Cambs; and 10 are protesting at Haslar, Hants.

A government spokeswoman said staff cannot force detainees to eat as it would be seen as an assault.

The spokeswoman said: "The situation remains calm at all three centres and the Border and Immigration Agency is actively engaging with detainees to discuss their concerns.

"Detention is an essential element in the effective enforcement of immigration control.

"We are unable to force detainees to eat or drink as this would be against their wishes and would be classed as an assault.

"We do ensure, however, that they receive medical treatment as and when necessary."

Monday, July 23, 2007

Children Behind Bars: Issue 31

2007/07/18

Children Behind Bars: Issue 31



The Presumption of Innocence & The Burden of Proof
A summary of the role of the detention and interrogation phase in the prosecution of Palestinian juveniles in the Israeli Military Courts

During 2006 and the first half of 2007, almost all Palestinian children who were arrested by the Israeli occupying forces in the West Bank and then charged and prosecuted before the Israeli military courts, were sentenced to a term of imprisonment.

Only 3 to 5% of these children were granted bail pending trial or sentence proceedings.

In the same period, almost all Palestinian children pleaded guilty. A very small minority of approximately less than 1%, who pleaded not guilty, were all ultimately found guilty, convicted and sentenced.


Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defence. Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 11(1)

Everyone charged with a criminal offence shall have the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty according to law. Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Article 14(2)

Unconvicted prisoners are presumed to be innocent and shall be treated as such. UN Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners, Rule 84(2)

Almost all children who were prosecuted and sentenced in the Israeli Military Courts in 2006, confessed to the allegations against them during a lengthy period of interrogation, before their first Court appearance.


I was arrested on the street near Rachel’s Tomb by the Israeli Army. They claimed that I had been throwing stones and Molotov Cocktails. When they arrested me they severely beat me. They tried to pull down my pants. They sexually abused me. After that, they transferred me to Checkpoint 300 at the entrance to Bethlehem town. Then they transferred me in a private vehicle to the Russian Compound. They took photos of me and medically examined me because I suffered from an injury to the shoulder as a result of the beating. I was interrogated for stone throwing and Molotov cocktail. During the interrogation, they beat me and they hit my head against the wall. I asked the interrogator to call my family but he refused. The interrogation lasted continuously from my arrival at the Russian compound to midnight. Two interrogators interrogated me and they were speaking Arabic After the interrogation finished they asked me to sign papers. I did not understand what I was signing Name Withheld, Al Dheisha Refugee Camp, Bethlehem, Al Moscibiyya Interrogation Centre 14 March 2007.

Israeli Military Courts, Laws and Procedure

In the Israeli Military Courts, the main procedural rules and laws that apply to the prosecution of Palestinian children charged with alleged crimes against the security of the State of Israel, are contained in (1) Military Order 378, (2) Military Order 132 (3) the Israeli Criminal Procedure Law and (4) the Israeli Evidence Law (these latter two Laws also apply in the domestic Israeli criminal jurisdiction).

Military Order 378 , the Order Concerning Security Directives and Military Order 132, the Order Pertaining to Juvenile Offenders are two of more than 2500 Military Orders issued since Israel’s occupation of the Palestinian Territories in 1967, by the Israeli Army, to administer the occupation of the Palestinian territories. Together, these Military Orders form Israel’s military system of governance over the Palestinian people in the occupied territories.

Military Order 378 establishes the Israeli Military Court, defines the Court’s jurisdiction and the offences that are to be prosecuted within it and outlines the procedure to be conducted when an accused is brought before the Court.

Prosecutions in the Israeli Military Court, as in the regular Israeli criminal courts, are conducted within an adversarial system of justice. As such, the presumption of innocence of an accused and the prosecution’s burden of proof should theoretically underlie the legal procedure.


I was arrested at Huwwara checkpoint by the Israeli army. I was transferred to Ariel settlement where they beat me while I was blindfolded on my face. Afterwards I was transferred to Salem interrogation compound. I was beaten and position abused for 10 hours in the cold weather. During the interrogation, the interrogator asked me to sign papers in the Hebrew language. When I refused, he hit my head against the desk.Rashed Radwa , aged 16 years, Azoun Village near Qalqilya, Hasharon Prison April 2007

Under Military Order 378, when a Palestinian child or adult accused of an offence pleads not guilty in the military court, the following procedure is followed by the court in proceeding to and conducting a trial:

Section 29: If the defendant pleads not guilty to the indictment, or the Court refuses to accept his confession to a charge, the Court will hear the military prosecutor and his witnesses, in addition to any other testimony it deems appropriate.

Section 30: If the Court sees, at the conclusion of the prosecution’s case, that the evidentiary material does not warrant the defendant responding to a certain charge, the court will acquit the defendant of the said charge.

Section 31 (a) If the Court perceives at the conclusion of the prosecution case that the evidence presented against the defendant is prima facie sufficient to obligate him to respond to the charge, the Court will explain that he may testify as a witness for the defence…..and will ask him if he wishes to present testimony or call a witness in order to defend himself. The Court will hear the testimony of the defendant…and the testimonies of all the witnesses he will call.

The Criminal Standard of Proof in the Israeli Military Courts

According to section 30 and 31(a), the burden of proof in the Israeli Military Courts according to Military Order 378, is to establish a prima facie case. A prima facie case is a standard that falls short of the ordinary standard of proof of beyond a reasonable doubt, the standard of proof that applies to the prosecution of an accused in the regular Israeli criminal jurisdiction, as well as in other adversarial criminal justice systems around the word, including the United Kingdom, the United States, Canada and Australia.

The criminal standard of proof of beyond a reasonable doubt is a much higher standard and a more difficult standard to establish. The reason that the standard of proof of beyond a reasonable doubt is applied in most adversarial criminal justice systems is because an accused faces harsh penalties and usually imprisonment.

In these aforementioned criminal jurisdictions, the prima facie standard is usually only applied in bail determination hearings and preliminary procedural hearings prior to an accused being brought to trial. Where the prosecution must only present a prima facie case, the evidence presented to the Court need only be sufficient to prove the alleged facts against an accused. If the evidence is sufficient, then a jury or a judge would be entitled or justified to find either in favour or against the accused in a criminal trial. Before the verdict, the burden shifts to the accused who must, through evidence, rebut the prosecution’s case. If the prosecution’s case is not rebutted, a judge or a jury are entitled to find the accused guilty of the offence.

Where a prosecutor must meet the standard of proof of beyond a reasonable doubt, the prosecutor must convince a judge or a jury of every element of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt, and the accused is not required to establish his or her innocence.

In the Israeli Military Courts, lowering of the standard of evidentiary proof to prima facie case at the stage of the actual trial, undermines an accused’s presumption of innocence and places a heavier burden on the accused and defence counsel. As part of a larger political policy on the part of the State of Israel, this is also enhanced by a lengthy and violent arrest and interrogation phase that a Palestinian child or adult accused has undergone prior to appearing in court.


I was arrested on 24 May 2007 near Al Aroub College by Israeli soldiers. During the arrest, the soldiers beat me by boxing me with their hands. They beat me around my waist and shoulders and afterwards they put me in their jeep. During the transfer, they blindfolded and handcuffed me. They slapped me. The transfer lasted for half an hour until we reached Khirbit Sor and there I was beaten by their hands. One of the soldiers beat me in the middle of my back and he continuously asked me questions and when I didn’t respond, he would beat me with his hands on my face. He continued to ask me questions for half an hour. I was then transferred to Atzion Detention Centre where I was interrogated for one hour and the interrogator showed me photographs of someone throwing stones and paint.

At about sunset, they transferred me to a military place, I don’t know where or the name of this place. I spent the whole night outside. Every soldier that passed by beat me and I did not sleep at all.

I was interrogated in the Hebrew language and there was a soldier who translated for me. I signed papers but I don’t know the content of the papers. They informed me that it contained my confession of stone throwing and the next day, they transferred me to Ofer Prison.

We were 24 prisoners, children and adult in the tent. Muss’ab Abed Al Basset Abdullah Abu Rayah, 15 years of age, Al Aroub Camp, Ofer Prison 12 June 2007


Israeli Laws and Policy in the Interrogation Process

Israeli Police, Israeli Army and Israeli Secret Service personnel conduct the arrest and interrogation of Palestinian children on a daily basis. The arrests and subsequent interrogations in detention centres operate in isolation of any transparent rules, procedure or laws giving Israeli military personnel wide powers during this phase.

Certain provisions contained in Military Order 378 complement and legitimize these wide powers rather than provide checks and balances to the arrest and interrogation process.

According to Section 78 of Military Order 378, a Palestinian child can be detained by an ordinary, low ranking Israeli soldier or police officer for 96 hours. Afterwards, a child can be held for interrogation for 8 days prior to be taken to Court through a formal detention order made by a higher ranking military official. A judge of the military court has the power to extend this period of detention for interrogation for a period of up to 90 days. A judge of the military court of appeals has the power to extend this 90 day period to a further period of up to 3 months.

Military Order 378 also provides for the means to isolate an accused from the outside world, including from a lawyer, during the interrogation phase, by giving Israeli police officers, senior Israeli Army and Secret Service staff and Military Court Judges, broad and arbitrary discretion to limit an accused’s right to communicate with a lawyer during the interrogation process:-

Section 78 (a) A soldier may stop, with no detention order, any person violating the directives of the Order, or if there is room to suspect that he violated this order. Section78 (e1)(4) The detainee shall not meet with his attorney during the two days from the day of his detention.

Section 78b (d) If a detainee is in interrogation proceedings or other actions related to the investigation, and a police inspector reasons that a break in the interrogation proceedings or actions is liable to thwart the investigation or disrupt the detention of additional suspects in the same manner,, it may order…that a meeting of the detainee with an attorney be delayed for a number of hours..”

Section 78c ( c ) (1)The supervisor of interrogation may, in a written decision, order not to permit a meeting of the detainee with a lawyer for a period or periods which together will be no longer than 15 days from the date of detention, if he reasons this is necessary for reasons of security of the region or that the interrogation process necessitates it.”

Section 78c ( c ) (2) A permitting authority ( a chief superindent or higher of the Israeli police service, the Head of Interrogations Division of the General Security Services, or lieutenant colonel or higher in the IDF) may, in a written decision, order not to allow a meeting of the detainee with a lawyer for an additional period or additional periods together will be no longer than 15 days, if it is convinced that this is necessary for reasons of the security of the region or for the interrogation process.”

Section 78d(2) A jurist judge may authorise…..that a detainee will not meet with an attorney, if he is convinced that for reasons of security of the region or interrogation needs necessitates it…Section 78d(3)……….the authorization will be will for a period or periods which together will be no longer than 30 days……Section 78d(4) The president of the court or the duty president may extend the period for an additional period or periods which together will be no longer than 30 days, if the IDF commander of the region confirmed in writing that special reasons of the security of the region necessitate this. .


A detained person shall be entitled to have the assistance of a legal counsel. He shall be informed of his right by the competent authority promptly after arrest and shall be provided with reasonable facilities for exercising it. UN Principles on Detention, Article 17

Governments shall further ensure that all persons arrested or detained, with or without criminal charge, shall have prompt access to a lawyer, and in any case not later than 48 hours from the time of arrest or detention. UN Principles on Lawyers, Article 7

A central aspect of the interrogation phase, is the use of particular forms of torture and ill treatment. Statements made by Palestinian children held in Israeli prisons, to Defence for Children International within this article, illustrate the varying types of methods used.


No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 5.

No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Article 7.

Because the arrest and interrogation phase is conducted by Israeli military personnel, the actual methods of arrest and the interrogation process itself, cannot be challenged in the Military Court. Limitations on arrest and detention powers contained in the Israeli Arrest and Detention Law do not apply to the Israeli Military Courts, as it does for domestic Israeli Police and security officials in the regular Israeli criminal courts.


Each State Party shall take effective legislative, administrative, judicial or other measures to prevent acts of torture in any territory under its jurisdiction.

  1. No exceptional circumstances whatsoever, whether a state of war or a threat of war, internal political instability or any other public emergency, may be invoked as a justification of torture.
  2. An order from a superior officer or a public authority may not be invoked as a justification of torture. United Nations Convention Against Torture, Article 2

In this context, it is important to note that provisions in Military Order 378 that should mirror the Israeli Arrest and Detention Law do not exist. This serious and deliberate omission means that Judges in the Military Court do not ever have to consider whether or not the accused’s rights at the time of arrest and interrogation were given effect and preserved.


All persons deprived of their liberty shall be treated with humanity and with respect for the inherent dignity of the human person. Article 1, United Nations Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.


I was arrested at home on 9/2/06 The Israeli army searched my home and beat me and humiliated me. They transferred me to Salem. During the trip I was handcuffed and my legs were tied. I was blindfolded as well. In the IC, I was beaten and position abused outdoors under the rain. I spent 40 days in the interrogation centre. Assem Lutfi Abdel Lattif Khalil, aged 16 years, Attil Village near Tulkarm, Hasharon Prison 7 March 2007

I was arrested by the Israeli Army and transferred to Huwwara where I stayed for two days and then to Petah Tikva Interrogation Centre. During interrogation they beat me, and the beating concentrated on my sexual parts. Sameh Said Moussa Safwan, Aged 15 years, Askar Camp in Nablus, Hasharon Prison 7 March 2007

The overall effect of this is the erosion and virtual depletion of a Palestinian accused’s rights during the arrest and interrogation phase. A Palestinian child under arrest and during interrogation does not have the right to silence; the right to immediate and liberal access to a lawyer; the right to be advised of his or her rights while under arrest and interrogation; the right not to be assaulted, abused or tortured; the right to have contact with a family member or support person and; the right to be presumed innocent.

Confessions

Ultimately, this makes it easier for an interrogator to illicit a confession from a child and also creates a judicial system that does not need to question the reliability and credibility of a confession and how it was obtained.

While the right to object to a confession does exist in an Israeli Military Court under the Israeli Criminal Procedure and Evidence Laws, the burden of raising the objection and establishing grounds that a confession should not be read as evidence, rests with an accused and his counsel. The basis that must be established by the accused is that the confession is unreliable because the accused lost a level of consciousness or reached a certain irrational state of mind due to torture and ill treatment when the confession was made.

For Palestinian children who naturally confess due to being threatened, beaten, and abused over a number of hours and days, this is impossible to establish. Furthermore, by virtue of the heavy reliance on confessional evidence, and the political context of the court, judges have a preference for the evidence of interrogators when challenges to a confession are made.


I was arrested on 15 October 2006 by the Israeli ArmyThey searched me and threatened to beat me.After that I was transferred with security service car to Atzion Detention Centre and the trip took around half an hour. When I reached the Detention Centre, a doctor examined me and the interrogation started with me and lasted for 12 continuous hours.During the interrogation they threatened to beat me if I did not confess. They cursed me and my family members.

They sexually abused me by touching certain parts of my body. The lawyer was prevented from visiting me during the interrogation period and I still suffered from psychological impact as a result of the interrogation and I was not transferred to the hospital to be treated. I was sentenced for 10 months.Name Withheld, aged 16 years, Surif Village near Hebron, Hasharon Prison 12 April 2007.

Confessions comprise the bulk of evidence presented in cases in the Israeli military courts and are relied upon heavily by prosecutors and judges throughout the entire course of the prosecution of an accused, from the bail hearing, to the formal indictment to the trial and the sentence.

In essence, by the time a Palestinian child is brought before the Israeli military court, the presumption of innocence, which did not apply during the interrogation phase, takes on a superficial meaning within the day to day sittings of the court. The confession, rather than any particular type of criminal justice, becomes the focus of the court proceedings and directs the outcome. Additionally, the confession, together with a lower criminal standard of proof, empowers the prosecution in the Israeli military court shifting the burden to the accused to choose between accepting the confession, or to contest it.

For Palestinian children, the reality of choosing to contest a confession is to accept many more months in imprison awaiting for a trial that will in all probability result in a finding of guilt. Eventually, a Palestinian child who faces the Israeli military court surrenders to the prospect of a lengthy term of imprisonment, and agrees to accept the contents of the confession, innocent or not.


I was arrested by Israeli soldiers at Kapsa Gate. They arrested two others with me. They handcuffed us and they asked us to sit on the floor.

After a short period, the soldiers transferred us to the military checkpoint in Attour and during transferring us one of the soldiers hit me with his wireless CB radio on my head.

I was interrogated and the interrogator hit my head against the desk. The interrogation lasted for two hours. After that I and the others were transferred to Maale Adumim Detention Centre and we stayed there until 5am. After that, we were transferred to Ofer Prison and now we are 21 prisoners, adults and children, in the tent. Ibrahim Mashhour Abdallah Far’oun, 16 years old., El Eziriyah Village near Jerusalem, Ofer Prison 12 June 2007.

PLN editor Receives Washington Coalition for Open Government Award for Public Records Lawsuit

More news articles about the case are on the Prison Legal News website at: www.prisonlegalnews.org.

WA COG press release:

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
July 23, 2007
WASHINGTON COALITION FOR OPEN GOVERNMENT TO PRESENT JAMES MADISON AWARD TO PAUL WRIGHT OF PRISON LEGAL NEWS

Washington Coalition for Open Government
6351 Seaview Avenue NW
Seattle, Washington 98107-2664
www.washingtoncog.org
Phone: (206) 782-0393
Fax: (206) 623-4474


Self-taught editor Paul Wright, who founded Prison Legal News from inside his cell at the Washington State Reformatory in Monroe and continues to use public records to document conditions inside jails and prisons nationwide since his release from custody in 2003, will receive the James Madison Award from the Washington Coalition for Open Government.

The award, the group's highest honor, will be presented at a breakfast reception September 21 at the Washington Athletic Club in Seattle.

Wright, 42, recently settled a seven-year-long legal battle with the Washington Department of Corrections over records dealing with medical care of prisoners. The department agreed to pay $541,000 in fees and penalties -- the largest public records award in Washington state history.

Wright was sentenced to a 25-year prison term for the 1987 murder of a Federal Way drug dealer during a botched robbery attempt. It was the 21-year-old U.S. Army MP's only brush with the law. Following his incarceration, he took the advice of a fellow prisoner and got a job in the prison law library. With a budget of $50, he launched PLN in 1990. The first few issues were crude, hand-illustrated and only 10 pages, but had an immediate and controversial impact. The inaugural issue included stories about the suspected murder of a prisoner by an Oregon correctional officer, perceived abuses by the Washington and details of a court ruling that awarded $241,000 in damages to three prisoners whom guards had handcuffed and beaten during a prison riot. The first three issues were banned within all Washington prisons until the order was overturned.

Wright, who relocated to Vermont after his release from prison in December 2003, continues to edit PLN, which now boasts 6,300 subscribers in all 50 states and reaches every maximum- and medium-security prison in the United States. Wright also continues to use public records laws to uncover and document abuse of prisoners and their legal rights.

"Paul Wright had no resources, no power, and no clout," said Seattle attorney Michele Earl-Hubbard, a past president of WCOG who represented PLN in public record cases and nominated Wright for the James Madison Award. "While confined by the state he waged and successfully won open government battle after battle, and he made law that will benefit the public in the future."


The James Madison Award, named for the nation's fourth president, known as the Father of the Constitution, is awarded annually by WCOG to an individual who has demonstrated exceptional dedication to the cause of open government. Past honorees were Rowland Thompson, Executive Director of Allied Daily Newspapers of Washington in 2006, and retired Washington State Chief Justice James Andersen in 2005.

The Washington Coalition for Open Government (WCOG) is a non-profit organization founded in 2003 by a group of individuals representing a broad spectrum of opinions and backgrounds, all dedicated to the principles of strengthening the state's open government laws and protecting the public's access to government at all levels.

For more information, contact Washington Coalition for Open Government, 6351 Seaview Avenue NW, Seattle, WA 98107-2664 or on the web at www.washingtoncog.org or call (206) 782-0393.

Mumia Abu-Jamal: The Crimes of the CIA

The Crimes of the CIA
[col. writ. 6/28/07] (c) '07 Mumia Abu-Jamal

News Item: Spokesman for the CIA announced today that the American spy agency engaged in a series of improper, and illegal acts during the 1970's. According to documents released from the era, the nations' spy agency snooped on American dissenters, spied on U.S. journalists, and once tried to hire someone to kill Cuban leader, Fidel Castro. The spokesman assured reporters that was the 'old days', when things were done without proper oversight. "Things are different now," the unidentified CIA spokesman noted.

That was the impression from several recent articles on the U.S. government spy agency.

The articles almost went out of its way to leave the reader with the impression that this was a distant, almost historical revelation. Surely this didn't happen in our day, because of something called 'oversight.'

To anyone who has dared to look beneath the headlines, and who has dared to ask questions, the revelations are nothing short of astounding.

There are several published sources that show us that the CIA has violated both U.S. and international laws for generations, and is still doing it today!

The most remarkable source is the CIA itself, in it's reports to the U.S. Congress.

According to a report by the house Intelligence Committee, the Agency commits hundreds of crimes - hundreds - every single day!

And this is a conservative estimate.

Investigative journalist John Kelly, in an essay entitled "Crimes and Silence: The CIA's Criminal Acts and the Media's Silence", published in the anthology Into the Buzz saw: Leading journalists Expose the Myth of a Free Press. ED, by Kristina Borjesson (Amherst, N. Y.: Prometheus Books, 2002, tells us:

The report was the first official admission and definition of CIA covert operations as crimes which the committee, without explanation, equated with essential national security operations.

In other words, the national security of the United States requires that more than one hundred thousand extremely serious crimes be committed every year.

The committee expressed no legal or ethical concerns about these crimes. On the contrary, CIA offenders were portrayed as potential hapless victims of sinister foreign authorities opposed to their lawbreaking.

"A typical 26 year old, GS-11 case officer, "reads the study, "has numerous opportunities every week, by poor trade craft or inattention, to embarrass his country and President and get agents imprisoned or executed."

But, you would argue, doesn't this very congressional report prove that there is oversight? Hardly. For Kelly goes on to write that in 2000, President Clinton signed into law the Intelligence Authorization Act, which immunizes the CIA from violating International Laws and Treaties. In fact, It's a law to violate the law!

Some oversight.

This is something straight from the Nazi playbook. If the State declares it lawful, then nothing is a crime.

We need look no further than the work of the late Gary Webb, who brilliantly documented the CIA's role in domestic drug trafficking.

His reward for such groundbreaking reporting?

A professional death sentence ( and perhaps, suicide.)

The media defenders of the Agency attacked him with a vengeance, and his paper let him go.

We've just been speaking in generalities. The CIA has committed murders, drug trafficking, assassinations of heads of state, removal of governments, takeovers of labor unions, destruction of democracies --you name it.

It didn't stop in 1975, any more than the attempted assassination of Castro stopped at one try.

It continues to this very day.
-(c) '07 maj

[Sources: 1) K. Borjesson, ed;, Into the Buzz saw....: 2) Donner, Frank. The Age of Surveillance: The Aims and Methods of America's Political Intelligence System (N. Y.:Vintage/Random Hse., 1981) 3) Nieto, Clara. Masters of War: Latin America and U.S. Aggression )From the Cuban Revolution Through the Clinton Years.) (N. Y.: 7 Stories Press, 2003): and 4) Zepezauer, Mark. The CIA's Greatest Hits (Tucson, AZ: Odinian Press.
Mumia Abu-Jamal is a political prisoner in the United States, with what could be the final decision on his legal appeals possibly coming down this summer. That decision could give Mumia his freedom, life in prison, or execution. It is time to turn up the heat against this injustice. Free Mumia Abu-Jamal!
For more on the case of Mumia Abu-Jamal read:
Top Ten “Fry Mumia” Myths Debunked
(Myth #1) “Five eyewitnesses saw Mumia shoot officer Faulkner.”

Sentencings symbolize radical environmentalist movement decline

7/22/2007, 9:00 a.m. PT
By WILLIAM McCALL
The Associated Press
EUGENE, Ore. (AP) — More than a decade after they began setting fires across the West, remnants of the radical Earth Liberation Front stood before a federal judge, one by one, to hear her decide: Had they committed acts of domestic terrorism?
First, Stanislas Meyerhoff.
Quiet, shy, his hair turning gray at 30, the slightly built Meyerhoff was dwarfed by the angular expanse of the courtroom.
"I was ignorant of history and economy and acted from a faulty and narrow vision as an ordinary bigot," Meyerhoff said, in May.
"A million times over I apologize ... to all of you hardworking business owners, employees, researchers, firemen, investigators, attorneys and all citizens whose property was destroyed, whose holidays were ruined, whose welfare was thwarted, and whose sleep was troubled."
And so a violent chapter in the environmental movement ended — with a whimper. Once feared by some and admired by others for their willingness to use any means necessary, these militants are in decline.
"Radical environmentalism failed," said James Johnston of Forest Service Employees for Environmental Ethics. "Whether radical environmentalists admit it or not, they failed."
Although crimes by environmental and animal-rights militants still occur, they have been sporadic. And although authorities cannot declare victory over radical militants, the movement has been significantly weakened.
Johnston and other activists, community members, investigators and experts agreed that environmental protest by arson had pretty much run its course long before "Operation Backfire," a joint task force of federal and state agencies, began making arrests in 2005.
They say the environmental movement remains strong — building on the work of grass roots activists, or supporting mainstream advocates such as former Vice President Al Gore, or going deeper underground to avoid the fate of the 10 activists brought to justice in Eugene.
"The environmental problems on the planet aren't getting any better, they're getting worse," said Jim Flynn, former editor of the Earth First! Journal and a veteran of protests in Eugene. "People will do what it takes to either try and stop environmental degradation, or draw attention to it."
But by 2001, the movement was already over for most of the ELF cell known as "The Family."
Bound by youth, idealism and frustration over the ineffectiveness of more traditional environmental protest methods, they had turned to secret meetings, codes and stealth attacks on private and public property, setting fires in the dead of night to draw attention to their cause.
Among other targets, they ignited logging trucks, a slaughterhouse, SUVs at a car dealership, ranger stations and a government lab, causing $40 million in damage from 1996 to 2001.
The largest chunk of that damage was done in October 1998 to a ski resort in Vail, Colo., by William Rodgers, the man at the heart of the cell.
Short, red-haired and intense, Rodgers ran down a mountainside from bucket to hidden bucket of diesel and gasoline, setting them aflame while a young woman he had recruited, Chelsea Dawn Gerlach, waited for him in the truck they had used to transport the fuel.
Rodgers is dead now, committing suicide in an Arizona jail cell just before Christmas in 2005. He had been working at a book store he co-founded when an informant in Eugene set off a series of arrests.
During the heyday of "The Family," Rodgers was an influential and charismatic leader.
"He was a zealot in the classic sense of the word," Johnston said.
For some, it went beyond charisma. He had what was called a "Svengali-like hold" on Gerlach, who was a 16-year-old high school student in Eugene when she first met Rodgers at an Earth First! camp in Idaho. She developed a crush on the 28-year-old man who had adopted the nickname "Avalon," after the mythical island where King Arthur went after his death.
Gerlach immersed herself in Rodgers' writings about sabotage and incendiary devices, progressed to participation in planning and strategy for "The Family," then moved to roles in arson that "ran the gamut and included research, reconnaissance, lookout, device-assembler, driver and communique writer" — all according to court documents filed by federal prosecutors, the source of much of what is known about the ELF cell.
When the group broke up in 2001, Gerlach became romantically involved with another co-defendant, Darren Thurston, who helped her support herself by selling marijuana and ecstasy until her arrest in December 2005.
By the time Gerlach was sentenced this May, her tone was contrite and repentant. Like many of her co-defendants, she claimed she had changed her ways.
"It's very clear to me now that if you want to live in a world of peace and equality, you need to embody those qualities in your own heart and actions," Gerlach, now 30, told the judge. "I am grateful I have been given this opportunity to reconcile my past."
Gerlach was among eight of the 10 members of "The Family" who apologized or repudiated their roles — including Meyerhoff, who had been her boyfriend at South Eugene High School and got involved with ELF because he had fallen in love with her and wanted to prove himself to her as an "eco-warrior."
Meyerhoff also had a desperate need to be accepted, seeking a surrogate family with his activist comrades before he abandoned the cause to find a life for himself, eventually enrolling in college in Virginia to study biomedical engineering.
Kevin Tubbs, a Nebraska native who once worked for PETA organizing demonstrations against killing livestock, also got involved in arson as a way of proving himself, in his case, to win back a girlfriend who began an affair with another activist.
When Tubbs found a new love in 2001, he told his fellow arsonists he was leaving the movement to start over and have a family.
Others also chose different paths after what they considered mere flirtation with the radical tactics of their small, tightly knit cell.
Kendall Tankersley was about to enter medical school when she was arrested in 2005.
Daniel McGowan, a latecomer to "The Family" who also began his activist career in animal rights, went back home to his native Brooklyn to work for social justice causes, such as prisoner rights. He had married and says he had put his brief experience in Oregon behind him.
Thurston, a Canadian animal rights activist turned environmentalist, presented letters from family and friends saying he dreams of returning to Canada and working with computer technology.
The portrait that emerges is a band of young people, compassionate toward animals, seeking direction in life, looking to impress each other and reinforce their own sense of self-worth as much as they were looking for a cause. Mostly, they were desperate for attention for that cause.
"I think that's really what all these actions are about — is really getting public attention to some of these issues," said Flynn, who was once repeatedly splashed with pepper spray as he doggedly resisted arrest during a 1997 protest to prevent the removal of some old trees considered a landmark in Eugene.
"If we were able to affect policy change through more legal means, then certainly that's the way these people would go," Flynn said. "Nobody enjoys being underground, and that lifestyle."
U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales saw "The Family" in a much different light, calling the case "the largest prosecution of environmental extremists in U.S. history" who were responsible for "a broad campaign of domestic terrorism."
U.S. District Judge Ann Aiken agreed — to a point. She ruled some of their crimes fit the federal definition of terrorism but others didn't; she imposed sentences ranging from 37 months for Thurston to 13 years for Meyerhoff.
McGowan, the son of a New York City police officer whose family witnessed the effects of the Sept. 11 terrorist attack, says comparing burned trees and SUVs to terrorism cheapens the meaning of the word.
"It's hard to stomach being from New York and seeing the effects of terrorism ... and then to be called that and to know that's going to chase you the rest of your life," McGowan said.
He points out that nobody was ever hurt in any of the 20 fires set by ELF members, although McGowan agreed with prosecutors there was always a risk.
"But the reason people were not hurt, aside from luck, is because great care and attention was taken," McGowan said. "These are a group of people who are very, very much about preserving life."
One of the lead investigators in the multi-agency "Operation Backfire" task force was Bob Holland, a veteran Eugene police detective who spent years tracking down "The Family."
Holland said there are radical activists who are still underground, although he predicted that any violent protests in the future would more likely be carried out by individuals rather than groups, because groups are only as strong as their weakest member — a lesson learned from the Eugene case that he also hopes serves as a deterrent.
But he agreed that the Eugene group was driven largely by their need for camaraderie and a common cause at a unique moment in the history of the environmental movement.
"These people were so disenfranchised," Holland said. "And they met each other and found out they weren't the only people who felt this way."

Sunday, July 22, 2007

Italy: Lecce Anarchists Sentenced to Years in Prison

Saturday, July 21 2007 Infoshop News

Italy: Lecce Anarchists Sentenced to Years in Prison

On July 12th, 2007, the sentences were announced in the first degree
of the “Operation Nighttime” trial against the anarchists of Lecce
and the province.

They were acquitted of “subversive association” but four companions
were convicted of “association to commit a crime”.

Salvatore was sentenced to 5 years in prison because he’s considered
the leader of the association. Saverio and Cristian, considered to be
participants in the association, were condemned to 3 years. Marina,
also considered to be a participant, was sentenced to 1 year and 10
months.

The same companions were also convicted for specific offenses:
damaging Esso gas pumps, squatting the “Capolinea”, unauthorized
demonstrations, violence to a public official, instigating detained
immigrants to commit a crime, writing on a wall, defamation,
telephone threats to the former director of the San Foca immigrant
detention center (Cesare Lodeserto), and threats towards two medics
that had edited some documents to cover-up violence by Lodeserto and
carabinieri (paramilitary police) against immigrants who tried to
escape. Lodeserto was awarded thousands of Euros for the threats
while one of the medics received 50,000 Euros for defamation.

Other companions were sentenced for some offenses. Sandro to 1 year,
Massimo to 4 months, and Laura to a 100 Euro fine. Another 8
anarchists were acquitted entirely. Acquittals were made on the
charges of setting fire to the main entrance of the Cathedral of
Lecce and for the damages against some automatic bank machines of
Banca Intesa that held the funds of the "Regina Pacis" immigrant
detention center in San Foca. The defense will make an appeal.


Translated from a text by anarchists in Italy
http://liberisubito.splinder.com/

Italy: Lecce Defendants Update
http://www.infoshop.org/inews/article.php?story=20070708163333779

Repression of Anarchists in Italy
http://www.geocities.com/insurrectionary_anarchists/repression.html

Times of War
http://digilander.libero.it/tempidiguerra/

Guerra Sociale
http://digilander.libero.it/guerrasociale.org/

Saturday, July 21, 2007

Mumia Abu-Jamal: The Fall of Faith-Based Foreign Policy


[col.writ. 7/17/07] (c) '07 Mumia Abu-Jamal
With the news of the resurgence of Al-Qaeda has come the incredible claims by the Bush administration of the exact opposite: that 'Al-Qaeda is weaker.'
The Bush regime is in this profound state of denial because to agree with this assessment implies failure in Iraq, a fact that is patently obvious to all who possess sight.
For the Iraq debacle, begun with the spurious claims of weapons of mass destruction, and to stop Saddam Hussein's support of terrorism, has unleashed the whirlwind in the country.
Before the war, Al-Qaeda was, if anything, persona non grata to the Baath Party secularists who ran the country: today, they are using Iraq as a live-fire training camp; a place to fight the Americans, not in practice, but for real!
If that ain't failure, what is?
The neo con, 'Zion con' forces that pushed at the inner offices of government for the Iraq war, on the promise of 'bringing democracy to the Middle East', have reaped a disaster of truly epic proportions.
Iraq, whether it remains one state, or is shattered into many, will never be the same. Its millions of refugees may wait a lifetime for the stability that allows homes to be established, businesses to function, and peace to reign.
And while the problem may have begun in Congress (in their ill-advised grant of war authority to the so-called 'War President'), it cannot resolve the problem, for it is now beyond their control.
Iraq is a hell on earth. Any dreams of using it as a demonstration project to influence the developments in the rest of the region is now in ashes.
But this is not merely my opinion. British journalist Jonathan Freedland, writing in a recent edition of the New York Review of Books, argued that Bush failed even under his own measures. Writes Freedland:
Judged even by the lights of Bush's own "war on terror" it has been a spectacular failure.
It took a country that had been free of Jihadist militants and turned it into their most fecund breeding ground;it took a country that posed no threat to the United States and made it into a place where thousands of Americans, not to mention tens, if not hundreds, of thousand of Iraqis, have been killed. And it diverted resources from the task that should have been
uppermost after September 11, namely the hunting down of Osama bin Laden and his top lieutenants, allowing them to slip out of reach.
What's more, Bush's "war on terror" did bin Laden's work for him. [Former US national security advisor [Zbigniew} Brzezinski is not alone in suggesting that it was a mistake to treat September !! as an act of war, rather than an outrageous crime: in so doing, the administration endowed a-qaeda with the status it craved. {Fr.: Freedland, J., "Bush's Amazing Achievement."
N. Y. Rev. of Books, June 14, '07, p.16]
Any president who assumes control next year, whether Democratic, Republican, or Green, will inherit the Iraq trap; for he or she may be able to mitigate problems, or even exacerbate them, but they cannot solve them. And they cannot ignore them.
Iraq will be with this country, one way or another, for at least a generation.
Ultimately, history will judge that this ill-advised adventure, will become tantamount to a war on the U.S.
No lame declaration, from Congress, or the White House, will mean its end.
--(c) '07 maj
Mumia Abu-Jamal is a political prisoner in the United States, with what could be the final decision on his legal appeals possibly coming down this summer. That decision could give Mumia his freedom, life in prison, or execution. It is time to turn up the heat against this injustice. Free Mumia Abu-Jamal!
For more on the case of Mumia Abu-Jamal read:
Top Ten “Fry Mumia” Myths Debunked
(Myth #1) “Five eyewitnesses saw Mumia shoot officer Faulkner.”

Thursday, July 19, 2007

Romaine Chip Fitzgerald Transferred

July 19, 2007 LA-ABCF

Former Black Panther and current political Prisoner, Romaine Chip Fitzgerald, has been transferred to CSP- Centinla (CEN). Only now have we received the news that Chip was transferred in early June from CSP- Lancaster. Chip’s correct mailing address is currently unknown because we do not know what yard he is in.

Chip was placed on a transfer list before, but was taken off due to a successful campaign by his supporters. Unfortunately, no campaign was mobilized because Chip and his supporters did not receive the news in time.

As soon as we hear of Chip correct mailing address we will post it online.

Thanks
LA-ABCF

Mumia Abu-Jamal: Of Cronies and Kings


[col. writ. 7/5/07] (c) '07 by Mumia Abu-Jamal
The recent presidential commutation of Vice-Presidential aide, Lewis "Scooter" Libby, has demonstrated how deeply politics and cronyism invades the realm of law.
In commuting Libby's 30-month prison sentence, the president has made it clear that, while he made his political career on being 'tough on crime' (especially when it comes to the death penalty), in the cases of his homies, the regular rules don't matter.
This is a politician who, when governor of the Republic of Texas, only granted one commutation to a man on Death Row (to Henry Lee Lucas), while denying every other request, even one advocated by the Pope, for Christian convert Karla Faye Tucker.
As a rule, this is not the guy who even grudgingly gives up either pardons or commutations until, that is, it came to his homie, 'Scooter.'
The power to pardon actually has it roots in the "royal prerogative of the kings and queens of England.
Yet, this act owes more to simple cronyism than to the English precedents.
"Scooter" held the keys to the kingdom. Faced with prison, his lips might have loosened as to the real roots of the Valerie Plame affair. He had it potentially within his power to threaten not just the Vice President, but the White House entire.
Thus, this commutation (pending a full pardon) is as much an act of self-defense, as it is of grace.
The power, under U.S. law and precedents, is virtually total.
The president can pardon or commute any sentence of any person serving (or having already served) a federal criminal sentence or sanction.
Yet, when have we heard of a commutation without someone actually filing for it?
This is an act of power, or politics, and cronyism.
For Bush, this was a freebie.
He never has to face another vote in his life.
With a 27% approval rating in the polls, he as much as told the American people to kiss his ass.
He could care less what you think.
'Scooter' was his homie.
Nor does this 'tough on crime' politician give a fig about what happens to hundreds and thousands of other Americans, every day.
For the statute governing perjury to a federal grand jury, and the range of sentences available under the law, doesn't change a bit.
The White House hasn't, and won't, send a recommendation to the U.S. Sentencing Commission to change the range of sanctions.
'Scooter' got a break because of who he knew in the White House.
The rest of us are on our own.
Cronyism. Homieism.
There is one law for the privileged and the powerful: another law for the rest of us.
'Equal Justice under the law?'
Yeah, right.
--(c) '07 maj
Mumia Abu-Jamal is a political prisoner in the United States, with what could be the final decision on his legal appeals possibly coming down this summer. That decision could give Mumia his freedom, life in prison, or execution. It is time to turn up the heat against this injustice. Free Mumia Abu-Jamal!

City releases protest videos, pictures


(Spokane Police Department)

See the videos: Video 1 | Video 2 | Video 3 | Video 4 | Video 5 | Video 6
Photos:View slideshow

Video shot by Spokane police of the July 4 protests and arrests in Riverfront Park was released Tuesday afternoon by the city.

The video was studied by City Attorney Jim Craven for his report on the incident requested by Mayor Dennis Hession. In the report released Monday, Craven said the video shows no "obviously criminal behavior" before the arrests, at which time there was some resisting of arrest.

The city released the video in response to requests by The Spokesman-Review and other news media in Spokane. It consists of six clips totaling about seven minutes showing scenes before, during and after the arrests. But as Craven noted in his report, the event that precipitated the first arrest of Zach St. John is not visible.

Officer Jay Kernkamp and St. John gave very different accounts. Kernkamp said he was approached aggressively, had profanities yelled at him and was choked twice, the second time until "I feared I would lose consciousness." St. John said he was knocked from his seat, got up and asked the officer why he did that and "bam, I was on the ground."

At that point in the video, the officer holding the camera is being blocked by protesters holding signs, and the interaction between St. John and Kernkamp occurs behind the signs.

St. John's arrest can be seen about 45 seconds into video clip 2.