12/17 C.I.A.:What's New? Renditions Began Under Clinton; Hillary on Law; Border Resistance to Terror; Miami 7 Win for Now

It is extremely dangerous to exercise the constitutional right of free speech in a country fighting to make democracy safe in the world...
These are the gentry who are today wrapped up in the American flag, who shout their claim from the housetops that they are the only patriots, and who have their magnifying glasses in hand, scanning the country for evidence of disloyalty, eager to apply the brand of treason to the men who dare to even whisper their opposition to Junker rule in the United Sates. No wonder Sam Johnson declared that "patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel." He must have had this Wall Street gentry in mind, or at least their prototypes, for in every age it has been the tyrant, the oppressor and the exploiter who has wrapped himself in the cloak of patriotism, or religion, or both to deceive and overawe the people...
Every solitary one of these aristocratic conspirators and would-be murderers claims to be an arch-patriot; every one of them insists that the war is being waged to make the world safe for democracy. What humbug! What rot! What false pretense! These autocrats, these tyrants, these red-handed robbers and murderers, the patriots, while the men who have the courage to stand face to face with them, speak the truth, and fight for their exploited victims -- they are the disloyalists and traitors. If this be true, I want to take my place side by side with the traitors in this fight:
Eugene V. Debs [The Canton, Ohio, Anti-War Speech. June 16, 1918]

For the USA to stop going to war, it needs... a system that puts people before profits.
Jacques Pauwels, author of The Myth of the Good War: America in the Second World War


But u.s.-israeli state terrorism is no myth
The Myth of International Terrorism
... British author and producer Adam Curtis (“Power of Nightmares re-awakened” BBC), made attempts to re-awaken the human conscience that the myth of international terrorism is a misleading political phenomenon to embark on American ambitions of global hegemony. Michael Meacher, MP and former UK Minister of Environment of Blair’s Cabinet points out to the same agenda (“This War on Terrorism is Bogus:”): “... the so called “war on terrorism” is being used largely as bogus cover for achieving wider US strategic geopolitical objectives.”

When the CIA destroyed those prisoner interrogation videotapes, was it also destroying the truth about 9/11?
...according to the 9/11 Commission Report, the basic narrative of what happened that day and the definition of the enemy in this GWOT/ global war on terror launched in response... comes from the CIA’s account of what those prisoners told their torturers.... for six years those prisoners were refused any public legal exposure...the commission was never allowed to interview the prisoners, or speak with those who did ... was instead forced to rely on what the CIA was willing to relay... and the CIA lied, not only to the 9/11 Commission but to Congress... why believe what we’ve been told ... http://www.uruknet.de/?p=39132

further destruction of its democratic facade: capitalist- fascist state requires suppression of govt. branches and agencies
Justice Dept. Seeks Delay on C.I.A. Inquiry
The Justice Department said a House investigation into the destruction of interrogation videotapes presented "significant risks" to its own inquiry.http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/15/washington/15intel.html?th&emc=th

[Congress] Hill Briefed on Waterboarding in 2002 In Meetings, Spy Panels' Chiefs Did Not Protest, Officials Say
In September 2002, four members of Congress met in secret for a first look at a unique [SIC] CIA program designed to wring vital information from reticent terrorism suspects in U.S. custody. For more than an hour, the bipartisan group, which included current House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), was given a virtual tour of the CIA's overseas detention sites and the harsh techniques interrogators had devised to try to make their prisoners talk. Among the techniques described, said two officials present, was waterboarding, a practice that years later would be condemned as torture by Democrats and some Republicans on Capitol Hill. But on that day, no objections were raised. Instead, at least two lawmakers in the room asked the CIA to push harder, two U.S. officials said. [...]

Four former CIA officials who provided intelligence information to past presidents described as preposterous President Bush's claim that he was unaware until very recently that Iran had stopped its nuclear weapons program in 2003.

CIA renditions began under Clinton
12/29/05 "ABC" -- -- The US Central Intelligence Agency's (CIA) controversial "rendition" program was launched under US president Bill Clinton, a former US counter-terrorism agent has told a German newspaper. Michael Scheuer, a 22-year veteran of the CIA who resigned from the agency in 2004, has told Die Zeit that the US administration had been looking in the mid-1990s for a way to combat the terrorist threat and circumvent the cumbersome US legal system. "President Clinton, his national security adviser Sandy Berger and his terrorism adviser Richard Clark ordered the CIA in the autumn of 1995 to destroy Al Qaeda," Mr Scheuer said. "We asked the president what we should do with the people we capture. Clinton said 'That's up to you'." Mr Scheuer, who headed the CIA unit that tracked Al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden from 1996 to 1999, says he developed and led the "renditions" program.
He says at the time the CIA did not arrest or imprison anyone itself. "That was done by the local police or secret services," he said, adding the prisoners were never taken to US soil. "President Clinton did not want that," he said. [...] http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article11404.htm

Democratic complicity in Bush's torture regimen
Glenn Greenwald, Salon
The Washington Post reports today that the Bush administration, beginning in 2002, repeatedly briefed leading Congressional Democrats on the Senate and House Intelligence Committees -- including, at various times, Jay Rockefeller, Nancy Pelosi, and Jane Harman -- regarding the CIA's "enhanced interrogation methods," including details about waterboarding and other torture measures. With one exception (Harman, who claims to have sent a letter to the CIA), these lawmakers not only failed to object to these policies, but affirmatively supported them... Jay Rockefeller was one of the key Democrats briefed on the torture methods who never objected. But it's far worse than that. In September, 2006, Rockefeller was one of 12 Senate Democrats to vote in favor of the Military Commissions Act, one of the principal purposes of which was to explicitly authorize the CIA's "enhanced interrogation program" to proceed (even though it continues to be illegal under the Geneva Conventions). Thus, not only did Rockefeller remain silent when continuously briefed on illegal torture methods by the CIA, he then voted to legalize those methods by voting in favor of one of the most Draconian laws in modern American history. That law also retroactively immunized government officials from any liability for past lawbreaking. Rockefeller is not just any Democrat. He is the individual whom the Democratic Senate caucus thereafter elected -- and still chooses -- to lead them on all matters relating to intelligence.... consider how compromised he is and they are when it comes to investigating abuses by the intelligence community over the last six years. Rockefeller was complicit in all of those abuses, and the Democrats voted for him -- and still support him -- as their Chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee... the Democratic leadership has continuously enabled and, more often, supported the defining Bush policies. http://www.uruknet.de/?p=39077

a neoliberal analysis...
Hillary Clinton on International Law
Stephen Zunes
Foreign Policy In Focus
Perhaps the most terrible legacy of the administration of President George W. Bush has been its utter disregard for such basic international legal norms as the ban against aggressive war, respect for the UN Charter, and acceptance of international judicial review. Furthermore, under Bush’s leadership, the United States has cultivated a disrespect for basic human rights, a disdain for reputable international human rights monitoring groups, and a lack of concern for international humanitarian law.

Ironically, the current front-runner for the Democratic nomination for president shares much of President Bush’s dangerous attitudes toward international law and human rights.

For example, Senator Hillary Clinton has opposed restrictions on U.S. arms transfers and police training to governments that engage in gross and systematic human rights abuses. Indeed, she has supported unconditional U.S. arms transfers and police training to such repressive and autocratic governments as Egypt, Morocco, Saudi Arabia, Oman, Pakistan, Equatorial Guinea, Azerbaijan, Cameroon, Kazakhstan, and Chad, just to name a few. She has also refused to join many of her Democratic colleagues in signing a letter endorsing a treaty that would limit arms transfers to countries that engage in a consistent pattern of gross and systematic human rights violations.
Civilian Casualties

Not only is she willing to support military assistance to repressive regimes, she has little concern about controlling weapons that primarily target innocent civilians. Senator Clinton has refused to support the international treaty to ban land mines, which are responsible for killing and maiming thousands of civilians worldwide, a disproportionate percentage of whom have been children.

She was also among a minority of Democratic Senators to side with the Republican majority last year in voting down a Democratic-sponsored resolution restricting U.S. exports of cluster bombs to countries that use them against civilian-populated areas. Each of these cluster bomb contains hundreds of bomblets that are scattered over an area the size of up to four football fields and, with a failure rate of up to 30%, become de facto land mines. As many as 98% of the casualties caused by these weapons are civilians.

Senator Clinton also has a record of dismissing reports by human rights monitors that highlight large-scale attacks against civilians by allied governments. For example, in the face of widespread criticism by reputable human rights organizations over Israel’s systematic assaults against civilian targets in its April 2002 offensive in the West Bank, Senator Clinton co-sponsored a resolution defending the Israeli actions that claimed that they were “necessary steps to provide security to its people by dismantling the terrorist infrastructure in the Palestinian areas.” She opposed UN efforts to investigate alleged war crimes by Israeli occupation forces and criticized President Bush for calling on Israel to pull back from its violent re-conquest of Palestinian cities in violation of UN Security Council resolutions.

Similarly, when Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch and other reputable human rights groups issued detailed reports regarding Israeli war crimes during that country’s assault on Lebanon in the summer of 2006, Senator Clinton insisted they were wrong and that Israel’s attacks were legal. Furthermore, though these groups had also criticized the radical Lebanese group Hezbollah for committing war crimes by firing rockets into civilian-populated areas in Israel, exhaustive investigations have revealed absolutely no evidence that they had used the civilian population as “human shields” to protect themselves from Israeli assaults. Despite this, Senator Clinton, without providing any credible evidence to the contrary, still insists that they in fact had used human shields and were therefore responsible for the death of more than 800 Lebanese civilians.
Senator Clinton has voted to send tens of billions of dollars unconditionally to Baghdad to prop up that regime, apparently unconcerned about the well-documented reports of death squads being run from the Interior Ministry that have killed many thousands of unarmed Sunni men.
In Senator Clinton’s world view, if a country is considered an important strategic ally of the United States, any charges of human rights abuses – no matter how strong the evidence – must be summarily dismissed. Indeed, despite the Israeli government’s widespread and well-documented violations of international humanitarian law, Senator Clinton has praised Israel for its “values that respect the dignity and rights of human beings.”...
The International Court of Justice (also known as the World Court, which essentially serves as the judicial arm of the United Nations) has also been a target of Senator Clinton’s hostility toward international law. For example, in 2004, the ICJ ruled by a 14-1 vote (with only the U.S. judge dissenting, largely on a technicality) that Israel, like every country, is obliged to abide by provisions of the Fourth Geneva Convention on the Laws of War, and that the international community – as in any other case in which ongoing violations are taking place – is obliged to ensure that international humanitarian law is enforced. Affronted that an important U.S. ally would be required to abide by its international legal obligations and that the United States should help ensure such compliance, Senator Clinton strongly condemned the decision.

At issue was the Israeli government’s ongoing construction of a separation barrier deep inside the occupied Palestinian West Bank, which the World Court recognized – as does the broad consensus of international legal scholarship – as a violation of international humanitarian law. The ICJ ruled that Israel, like any country, had the right to build the barrier along its internationally recognized border for self-defense, but did not have the right to build it inside another country as a means of effectively annexing Palestinian land. In an unprecedented congressional action, Senator Clinton immediately introduced a resolution to put the U.S. Senate on record “supporting the construction by Israel of a security fence” and “condemning the decision of the International Court of Justice on the legality of the security fence.” In an effort to render the UN impotent in its enforcement of international law, her resolution (which even the then-Republican-controlled Senate failed to pass) attempted to put the Senate on record “urging no further action by the United Nations to delay or prevent the construction of the security fence.”
Hillary Clinton vs. the World Court

Clinton’s resolution claimed that Israel had built a similar barrier “in Gaza [that] has proved effective at reducing the number of terrorist attacks.” Also, according to the resolution, “The United States, Korea, and India have constructed security fences to separate such countries from territories or other countries for the security of their citizens.” Such comparisons, however, fail to note – as did the World Court – that these other barriers were placed along internationally recognized borders and were therefore not the subject of legal challenge. Clinton’s resolution also claimed that “the International Court of Justice is politicized and critical of Israel,” ignoring that the World Court has actually been quite consistent in its rulings. In the only other two advisory opinions issued by the ICJ involving occupied territories – South African-occupied Namibia in 1971 and Moroccan-occupied Western Sahara in 1975 – the court also decided against the occupying powers... Clinton’s resolution contended that the request by the UN General Assembly for a legal opinion by the ICJ referred to “the security fence being constructed by Israel to prevent Palestinian terrorists from entering Israel.” In reality, the UN request said nothing regarding security measures preventing terrorists from entering Israel. Instead, the document refers only to the legal consequences arising from “the wall being built by Israel, the occupying Power, in the Occupied Palestinian Territory…”...
Senator Clinton’s resolution also represented a departure from any previous congressional resolution in that it referred to the West Bank not as an occupied territory but as a “disputed” territory. This distinction is important for two reasons. The word “disputed” implies that the claims of the West Bank’s Israeli conquerors are as legitimate as the claims of Palestinians who have lived on that land for centuries. And disputed territories -- unlike occupied territories -- are not covered by the Fourth Geneva Convention and many other international legal statutes. As a lawyer, Senator Clinton must have recognized that such wording had the affect of legitimizing the expansion of a country’s territory by force, a clear violation of the UN Charter.
Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, the International Red Cross, and a number of Israeli human rights groups had documented the devastating impact of the separation barrier on the economic and social lives of the Palestinians, including access to schools, health care, and employment, findings confirmed by the World Court ruling. However... Clinton’s resolution contested their assertions that the route chosen for the wall has had a negative impact on the civilian population under Israeli occupation, declaring that “the Government of Israel takes into account the need to minimize the confiscation of Palestinian land and the imposition of hardship on the Palestinian people.” A longtime supporter of Israel’s colonization and annexation efforts in the West Bank, Senator Clinton took part in a photo opportunity at the illegal Israeli settlement of Gilo last year, in which she claimed – while gazing over the massive wall bisecting what used to be a Palestinian vineyard – “This is not against the Palestinian people. This is against the terrorists.”... Clinton’s resolution also claims that Israel’s barrier is a “proportional response to the campaign of terrorism by Palestinian militants.”...Senator Clinton’s response to the human rights abuses and violations of international law by this key strategic ally of the United States is emblematic of her disregard for international law and human rights overall... a Hillary Clinton presidency would simply be a continuation of the efforts by the Bush administration to undermine the UN Charter and the basic international legal framework in place for much of the past century. Historically, it has been the right wing of the Republican Party that has opposed international legal restrictions on the activities of the United States and its allies to advance America’s hegemonic agenda. Now, however, the front runner for the Democratic Party’s presidential nomination also shares this view[...]
Stephen Zunes is the Foreign Policy In Focus Middle East editor (www.fpif.org). He is a professor of politics at the University of San Francisco and the author of Tinderbox: U.S. Middle East Policy and the Roots of Terrorism (Common Courage Press, 2003).

What The CIA Torture Tapes Would Have Shown:
...They strapped Abu Zubaydah to a water-board, which reproduces the agony of drowning. They threatened him with certain death. They withheld medication. They bombarded him with deafening noise and harsh lights, depriving him of sleep. Under that duress, he began to speak of plots of every variety — against shopping malls, banks, supermarkets, water systems, nuclear plants, apartment buildings, the Brooklyn Bridge, the Statue of Liberty. With each new tale, "thousands of uniformed men and women raced in a panic to each...target." And so, Suskind writes, "the United States would torture a mentally disturbed man and then leap, screaming, at every word he uttered."...
Ron Suskind, The One Percent Doctrine http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2007_12/012662.php

Sen. Kit Bond of Missouri : Some forms of waterboarding 'like swimming:
"What the CIA is doing is not torture. It conforms to the Detainee Treatment Act, the Geneva Convention, the Convention against Torture. None of these things that are being used, by any stretch of the imagination, could be described as torture," Bond told interviewer Gwen Ifill.

US intelligence agency uses Jordan for torture of prisoners
Joe Kay, WSWS
The revelation that the CIA organized the destruction of videotapes documenting the interrogation of prisoners at secret CIA detention facilities abroad has focused attention on one aspect of the US torture program. Another important component is the policy of "extraordinary rendition"—the transfer of prisoners to the control of other countries that specialize in torture. One of the countries that has been most frequently used by the CIA in this way is Jordan, a key US ally in the Middle East. An article in the Washington Post published on Saturday ("Jordan’s Spy Agency: Holding Cell for the CIA" by Craig Whitlock) documents the close relationship developed over seven years.... http://www.uruknet.de/?p=39018

We Are All Tortures Now
This short video provides evidence of the type of torture engaged in. As citizens of the U.S. each of us is responsible for the actions of our government. We are complicit in the torture, distance from the tools used to inflict pain in no way reduces our part in these disgusting acts of barbarity.
See also : Kidnap and Torture American Style: Video: Kidnap and Torture American Style follows the stories of terror suspects. Click to view
See Also: Outlawed: Torture and Disappearances in the "War on Terror" Testimony from another victim of Extraordinary Rendition.
See also: "I Was Tortured" - By Sister Dianna Ortiz, OSU : Sister Ortiz relates her personal experiences and tell us that U.S. personnel were present in interrogation and torture rooms,” in Guatemala in 1989 when she was kidnapped, taken to a secret prison and repeatedly raped and tortured by troops commanded by General Hector Gramajo (a CIA asset and graduate of the U.S. Army School of the Americas).

FREE PADILLA! he's innocent, framed, then tortured for years!
Padilla's attorneys argue he's been so mistreated by the government he deserves far less than the life prison sentence prosecutors are seeking.

Special Relationship: Global Snatch and Grab is the Law of the Land
Chris Floyd , Empire Burlesque
The government of the United States has officially informed the courts of Her Majesty the Queen that Her Majesty's subjects may be kidnapped (and that was the precise term used by the government of the United States) by agents of the United States at any time – and there is not a bloody thing that Her Majesty can do about it. And you thought "extraordinary rendition" was just for "terrorists"? No, the Bush Regime has decreed that this bounty extends to every human being on the face of the earth. (And yes, Virginia, it also applies to U.S. citizens kidnapped on U.S. soil – just ask Jose Padilla. No wait, you can't ask him; his mind has been destroyed by the years of torture and isolation that was inflicted on him before the Regime finally tried him on minor charges.).... http://www.uruknet.de/?p=38971

show U.S. fascist national oppression...
Justice Dept. Numbers Show Prison Trends
About one in every 31 adults in the United States was in prison, in jail or on supervised release at the end of last year, the Department of Justice reported yesterdayAn estimated 2.38 million people were incarcerated in state and federal facilities, an increase of 2.8 percent over 2005, while a record 5 million people were on parole or probation, an increase of 1.8 percent. Immigration detention facilities had the greatest growth rate last year. The number of people held in Immigration and Customs Enforcement detention facilities grew 43 percent, to 14,482 from 10,104.
The data reflect deep racial disparities in the nation’s correctional institutions, with a record 905,600 African-American inmates in prisons and state and local jails. In several states, incarceration rates for blacks were more than 10 times the rate of whites. In Iowa, for example, blacks were imprisoned at 13.6 times the rate of whites, according to an analysis of the data by the Sentencing Project, a research and advocacy group.

San Francisco imprisons African Americans for drug offenses at a much higher rate than whites, according to a report to be released today by a nonprofit research institute... Between 1996 and 2002, the number of people in jail for drug offenses increased by about 47 percent. San Francisco has a small population of African Americans - 6.7 percent of the total, according to the Census Bureau's 2006 American Community Survey - but African Americans are going to prison for drug offenses at a rate that is 28 times higher than the rate for whites... whites and African Americans use illicit drugs at similar rates. But black people account for more than 50 percent of sentenced drug offenders, though they make up only 13 percent of the nation's population. San Francisco locks up a higher percentage of members of the African American community in drug cases than any other county in the study. In the county, 123 people out of every 100,000 are sent to state prison each year for drug offenses. Of those, whites are incarcerated at a rate of 35 per 100,000 white people, while blacks are incarcerated at a rate of 1,013 per 100,000 black people. "If you go to any courtroom in the Hall of Justice, you will see that the majority arrested are African American," said San Francisco Public Defender Jeff Adachi. "At every stage of the criminal process - arrest, conviction and those who are sent to prison... http://snipurl.com/1utn5

The CIA Destroys Tapes, What is New!
Prison Radio
Mumia Abu-Jamal's Radio Broadcasts
Higher Quality Audio files available info@prisonradio.org
Copyright 2007 Mumia Abu-Jamal/Prison Radio
{col. writ. 12/9/07} (c) '07 Mumia Abu-Jamal
As news agencies and politicians express shock and awe over the destruction by the CIA of videotapes recording the interrogations of suspected numbers of Al Qaeda, I can't help but be surprised - by the surprise. We like to think (or pretend to think) that the CIA is merely an intelligence (or information gathering ) agency, which dutifully reports back to the government on events transpiring around the globe. Instead, they are more like the Praetorian Guard of Rome, who did anything and everything they were told to do. And I do mean everything.

As noted by investigative journalist John Kelly, in his article, "Crimes and Silence: The CIA's Criminal Acts and the Media's Silence" [published in Kristina Borjesson's (ed.) Into the Buzzsaw: Leading Journalists Expose the Myth of the Free Press. {Amherst, N. Y.: Prometheus Books, 2002} pp.311-322] the agency doesn't engage in occasional lapses of judgment, but commits thousands of crimes a year all over the earth. Kelly cited as his source the CIA itself, as it reported to the House Intelligence Committee. A committee staff study on the CIA report found, " The CS (Clandestine Service of the CIA), is the only part of the IC (Intelligence Community), indeed of the government, where hundreds of employees on a daily basis are directed to break extremely serious laws in countries around the world. "
The staff study went on to estimate that these actions occur "several hundred times every day," or several hundred thousand times a year (p.311)
What was the government's legislative response when such news saw the light in House Intelligence Committee documents?

The Senate Intelligence Committee proposed a mass immunization bill for CIA employees, that would make the commission of crime legal. Kelly wrote, "This is the Nazi rationale, plain and simple." On Dec. 27, 2000, then president Bill Clinton signed the bill into law, as the Intelligence Authorization Act.

Under the law, the CIA could violate international law and treaties, as long as they were following orders.

In the past, according to intrepid journalists, researchers and former CIA officials themselves, the agency has toppled governments, staged assassinations, supported terrorists who unleashed waves of violence against their people (they called them 'contras'), bombed people, undermined national economies and democracies, and a host of other crimes - because they were told to do so.

In this context, compare that they destroyed tapes - even tapes of torture! Why is this objectionable, yet all else that they do isn't even worthy of reporting? That's because the major corporate media doesn't seriously question what the government does. We saw this when the government sold the People a bill of goods to start the Iraq war. At a time when the American people really needed their press, they were compliant, quiescent, and servile. The US media hasn't yet come to terms with what the CIA either does, or actually is. They are Praetorian Guards, obeying the Emperor, whose word is law. Why should we be surprised? Weren't they 'chust followink Orders?'

Mr. Jamal's recent book features a chapter on the remarkable women who helped build and defend the Black Panther Party: *WE WANT FREEDOM:
A Life in the Black Panther Party*, from South End Press (http://www.southendpress.org); Ph.#1-800-533-8478.

The campaign to kill Mumia is in full swing and we need you to **please** contact as many publications and information outlets as you possibly can to run Mumia's commentaries (on-line and **especially off-line**)!! The only requirements are that you run them *unedited*, with every word including copyright information intact, and send a copy of the publication to Mumia and/or ICFFMAJ.

Keep updated by reading ACTION ALERTS!! at http://www.mumia.org, http://www.onamove.com/ and their links.
To download Mp3's of Mumia's commentaries visit http://www.prisonradio.org or http://www.fsrn.org

The Power of Truth is Final -- Free Mumia!
International Concerned Family & Friends of MAJ
P.O. Box 19709
Philadelphia, PA 19143
Phone - 215-476-8812/ Fax - 215-476-6180
E-mail - icffmaj@aol.com

Send our brotha some LOVE and LIGHT at:
Mumia Abu-Jamal
AM 8335
175 Progress Drive
Waynesburg, PA 15370

Submitted by: Sis. Marpessa
Subscribe: mumiacolumns-subscribe@topica.com
Read: http://topica.com/lists/mumiacolumns/read
Subscribe ICFFMAJ email updates list by e-mailing

"When a cause comes along and you know in your bones that it is just, yet refuse to defend it--at that moment you begin to die. And I have never seen so many corpses walking around talking about justice." - Mumia Abu-Jamal

Check out Mumia's NEW book:
"Faith of Our Fathers: An Examination of the Spiritual Life of African and African-American People" at www.africanworld.com

despite another failed racist frame-up govt. to fix it with double-jeopardy retrial...
U.S. Falters in Terror Case Against 7 in Miami
One of seven indigent men charged with plotting to blow up the Sears Tower in Chicago as part of an Islamic jihad was acquitted on Thursday, and a mistrial was declared in the prosecution of the six others... The defendants — five Americans and two Haitians — worked in a small construction business owned by Mr. Batiste and were members of the Moorish Science Temple, a sect that blends Islam, Christianity and Judaism and does not recognize the authority of the United States government. They were charged with planning to join forces with Al Qaeda to blow up the Chicago skyscraper and several federal buildings in an effort at a government overthrow. The seven came under government surveillance in the fall of 2005 when a Yemeni man contacted the Federal Bureau of Investigation to report what he described as suspicious activity by them and their request that he help them contact Al Qaeda. ... The outcome was a significant defeat for the Bush administration, which had described the case as a major crackdown on homegrown terrorists....Officials had acknowledged that the defendants, known as the Liberty City Seven for the depressed section of Miami where they frequently gathered in a rundown warehouse, had never acquired weapons or equipment and had posed no immediate threat. But, the officials said, the case underscored a need for pre-emptive terrorism prosecutions. As for the six defendants on whom the jury deadlocked, the United States attorney’s office here said Thursday that it would retry them. The judge, Joan A. Lenard, ordered jury selection for the retrial to begin Jan. 7 and barred prosecution and defense lawyers from discussing Thursday’s outcome with reporters.

NYT helps sets stage for state terrorism...
In New Orleans, Plan to Raze Low-Income Housing Draws Protest
NEW ORLEANS — At a moment when the shortage of low-income housing in the city is causing significant hardship, the federal government is beginning this week to tear down thousands of apartments in the city’s four biggest public housing projects. The plan is producing sharp opposition, which has escalated to include raucous demonstrations and, perhaps, threats of arson and other violence. On Thursday, outside City Hall and opposite a park where homeless people are living in dozens of small tents, about 100 demonstrators chanted “Stop the demolitions now!” A few were displaced public-housing residents; most were activists and public housing advocates from here and cities from New York to California. Though local and federal housing officials say the storm-damaged projects were inhuman places to live and should not be rebuilt, some protesters accused the government of a darker motive behind the demolition plan. They contended that the government’s real aim was to keep the poor, mostly female, almost entirely black residents of public housing from returning to their city, to their homes. “They don’t want this city to be for the poor, working-class people,” said Sharon Sears Jasper, a former public housing resident who says she is now living in a “slum house.” Government policies favor the wealthy and tourists, she continued after the demonstration. “Everyone else, kick them to the curb.”
Hurricane Katrina destroyed more than 50,000 rental units here, and damaged thousands more apartments, affecting two-thirds of the city’s rental stock. Rents have soared for the apartments that remain habitable.
Adding to the pressure on the rental market, almost 3,000 families living in [digest: NYT forgot to mention they are contaminated, toxic health hazards] government trailer parks in Louisiana must find a new place to live in the next few months, as the Federal Emergency Management Agency closes the sites it manages. By the end of the year, it will stop paying for 3,700 trailers in private trailer camps.... James Bernazzani, special agent in charge of the Federal Bureau of Investigation office here, confirmed that its domestic terrorism unit was investigating the source of small posters reading “For Every Public Housing Unit Destroyed a Condo Unit Will Be Destroyed.”

imperialist empire's global eminent domain: forced occupation of ancestral lands and continuing genocide against north american indigenous peoples...
Chertoff: Allow fencing or lose land
The Bush administration has warned landowners along the southern border that it will seize their property if they refuse to cooperate... Chertoff said access to 225 miles of noncontiguous land, most of it in Texas and Arizona, was essential to meeting the administration's goal of building 370 miles of border fencing by the end of 2008. Reaction was swift.[...] http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/politics/2004061349_fence09.html

Barbed Wire: Another layer of border genocide
By Brenda Norrell

THE GATE, TOHONO O'ODHAM NATION (Arizona) -- Another layer of genocide, a barbed wire fence just added at the border wall under construction by Boeing and the National Guard, on the Tohono O'odham Nation. The barbed wire will be detrimental to endangered species, including the Sonoran pronghorn and jaguar. Homeland Security has voided all federal laws, including federal laws that protect endangered species, and dug up the graves of the O'odham ancestors, to build the border wall on Tohono O'odham land. While traditional ceremonial O'odham oppose the wall, the Tohono O'odham Nation elected government is working with Homeland Security and supports the border wall. The border wall will be a physical barrier for the O'odham's annual ceremonial route.
Although the Tohono O'odham Nation refers to this as a "vehicle barrier" instead of a "border wall," traditional O'odham say it has the same effect, since it is a barrier to the annual ceremonial route and has already resulted in the digging up of O'odham ancestors' remains. Photo Brenda Norrell

Showdown in Arizona, Where Mariachis and Minutemen Collide
A weekly confrontation at a parking lot in Phoenix perfectly mimics the national debate over immigration......a trio singing Mexican ballads strolled through... A Minuteman with a bullhorn followed them. “Monkeys coming through!” he shouted. His side rushed up to drown the music out: “Born in the U.S.A.! Born in the U.S.A.! K.K.K.! Viva la Migra! January First!” http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/10/opinion/10mon4.html?th&emc=th

Terrorism reigns in America
By Brenda Norrell
THE GATE, TOHONO O'ODHAM NATION (Arizona) -- While the Lipan Apache women and elders were told of the forced occupation and takeover of their lands on the Texas border by Homeland Security yesterday, I was at the border once again being bullied by the Border Patrol.

All along the border, Homeland Security's Border Patrol is intimidating and harassing the people who have lived there all their lives. The Tohono O'odham have lived here since time immemorial. Now their land has been seized and taken over by the Border Patrol, the contractor Boeing and the invading National Guardsmen, for construction of the border wall. The graves of O'odham ancestors have been dug up.
All along the border, young people are intimidated and harassed constantly. Tailgating police, excessive force and Nazi-style prosecutors push them into rage and jails. At the same time in Tucson, a judge has declared peace activities opposing US torture in Afghanistan, Iraq and Guantanamo, as a "danger to the community." The United States government has become the terrorist it claims to oppose. http://www.bsnorrell.blogspot.com/

sick joke for dummies:

as if popular votes count
Ohio Elections Official Calls Machines Flawed
The voting systems used in Ohio have critical flaws that could undermine the integrity of the 2008 general election,a report commissioned by the state's top elections official has found. http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/15/us/15ohio.html?th&emc=th

system's media-mouthpiece cloaks its role with righteous hypocrisy
The Court That May Not Be Heard
The idea of courts developing law in secret and handing down legal principles that the public cannot know about should not be part of the American legal system. http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/15/opinion/15sat2.html?th&emc=th