More Obama Administration Witch-Hunt Prosecutions

More Obama Administration Witch-Hunt Targets - by Stephen Lendman

The FBI's top six news stories for the week ending September 25 were about arrests and/or indictments of suspected Muslim terrorists. Combined, they became the latest national security targets in America's war on Islam.

Waged relentlessly since 9/11, it continues unabated under Obama for the same political advantage George Bush sought by stoking fear to be used as a pretext to wage imperial wars and crack down ruthlessly at home with police state efficiency - today against Muslims, Latino immigrants, environmental and animal rights activists, and street protestors, tomorrow against anyone voicing dissent.

Najibullah Zazi - The FBI's Top Story for the Week Ending September 25, 2009

On September 24, an FBI press release announced the indictment of Najibullah Zazi, an Aurora, CO-based legal US resident from Afghanistan on a conspiracy charge "to use weapons of mass destruction (explosive bombs) against persons or property in the United States" based on allegations that he "received bomb-making instructions in Pakistan, purchased components of improvised explosive devices, and traveled to New York City on September 10 in furtherance of his criminal plans."

He was also charged with knowingly and willfully making false statements to the FBI regarding international and domestic terrorism. In addition, the indictment alleges that he and others traveled in interstate and foreign commerce and used email and the Internet to carry out his "criminal plans." If convicted, Zazi faces a potential life sentence even though he's likely another victim of police state justice in Washington's war on Islam.

New York Times writers David Johnston and Scott Shane called it "One of the Most Serious (Cases) in Years based on documents filed against Zazi that "he bought chemicals needed to build a bomb - hydrogen peroxide, acetone and hydrochloric acid - and in doing so, Mr. Zazi took a critical step made by few other terrorism suspects." He made his purchases at a beauty shop, hardly the sort of venue for terrorist supplies.

Hydrogen peroxide is a common bleaching agent and mild disinfectant. Acetone is an inflammable organic solvent used in nail polish remover, making plastics and for cleaning purposes in laboratories. Hydrochloric acid is used in oil production, ore reduction, food processing, pickling, and metal cleaning. It's also found in the stomach in diluted form.

Zazi's indictment alleges that he learned explosives techniques at a Pakistani Al-Queda training camp, that he stored nine pages of "formulations and instructions" on his laptop regarding the chemicals he bought for "the manufacture and handling of initiating explosives, main explosives charges, (and) explosives detonators and components of a fuzing system," and that he planned to attack New York commuter trains or another major target on the eighth 9/11 anniversary, even though he built no bombs and the chemicals he bought can be freely purchased over-the-counter by anyone.

Nonetheless, Jarret Brachman, author of Global Jihadism and a government terrorist consultant, said despite more details to be learned, the case was "shaping up to be one of the most serious terrorist bomb plots developed in the United States," one resembling the London July 2005 underground attacks.

On July 7, 2005, multiple mock terror drills occurred at the same time as the transit system attack. In addition, other UK and American mock drills took place on the same day and exact time as actual "terror" attacks. On the 9/11 morning, in fact, at the same time the twin towers were struck, the CIA in Virginia was running "a pre-planned simulation to explore the emergency response issues that would be created if a plane were to strike a building." Described by the administration as "a bizarre coincidence," the media never mentioned it. The story was buried and forgotten, and no investigation followed,

Karen Greenberg, executive director of New York University's Center on Law and Security called other post-9/11 prosecutions "fantasy terrorism cases," yet, citing scary ingredients, preemptively sees Zazi as "the case the government kept claiming it had but never did," even though conclusive evidence is absent, Zazi denies involvement in a terror plot, and by law he's innocent until proved guilty.

Even The Times acknowledges that:

-- veteran counterterrorism investigators admit that important facts remain unknown, including whether Zazi selected a specific target, date, and recruited others to help;

-- no operational bomb exists, according to DOJ officials; and

-- it's unclear why a Colorado-based man drove to New York without the chemicals he bought at home, perhaps indicating they were for another purpose, not terrorism.

Yet US prosecutor Tim Neff told a Denver federal judge that Zazi "was intent on being in New York on 9/11 (and that he) was in the throes of making a bomb and attempting to perfect his formulation." He called circumstantial evidence a "chilling, disturbing sequence of events" pointing to a possible terror attack, but where's the bomb and what's the motive?

Others Arrested and Charged with Zazi - The FBI's Second Top Story for the Week Ending September 25, 2009

An earlier September 20 FBI press release announced two others arrested with Zazi "on charges of making false statements to federal agents in an ongoing terror investigation" - his father, Mohammed Wali Zazi and Ahmad Wais Afzali.

"Each of the defendants has been charged by criminal complaint with knowingly and willfully making false statements to the FBI in a matter involving international and domestic terrorism." If convicted, Afzali and Zazi's father face up to eight years in prison. His son may be incarcerated for life, yet the FBI admits that:

"It is important to note that we have no specific information regarding the timing, location or target of any planned attack," nor can they find a bomb.

In other words, none exists nor evidence of a motive or plan to detonate one, yet the FBI arrested and charged three men on dubious suspicions and got highly-charged media reports to suggest "a big one" was imminent.

It's typical of how the Justice Department operates - shoot, ready, aim. In other words, first arrest, charge, and generate fear through the media, then invent a plot, concoct evidence to prove it, indict suspects, bring them to trial, and intimidate juries to convict because no one wants terrorists in their neighborhood even though the likelihood is virtually nil.

The September 20 press release merely added that:

On August 28, 2008, "Najibullah Zazi flew to Peshawar, Pakistan from Newark International Airport via Geneva, Switzerland and Doha, Qatar. CBP (US Customs and Border Protection) records further reflect that (Zazi) traveled from Peshawar to John F. Kennedy International Airport on or about Jan. 15, 2009."

"On September 10, 2009, New York City Police Department (NYPD) detectives met with defendant Afzali (a Flushing, NY resident), whom the NYPD had utilized as a source in the past," suggesting that the DOJ will use him against the younger Zazi and offer leniency if he cooperates - a familiar tactic to frame other innocent victims and show how law enforcement is removing "bad guys," targeted for political advantage.

Zazi's Background

According to The New York Times, he was born on August 10, 1985 in a small Eastern Afghanistan village. In 1991 or 1992, his family moved to the Peshawar area of Pakistan - "ground zero in the US jihadist war and home to many Al-Queda operatives," according to the DOJ.

In the early 1990s, Mohammed Zazi, his father, came to Flushing, New York, drove a cab, worked 12-hour shifts, lived in a two-bedroom apartment, and prayed at the nearby Hazrat Abu Bakr Mosque. The younger Zazi was much like others in his high school, but he did poorly in his studies and dropped out before graduating. According to his step-uncle, Mr. Rasooli, "He was a dumb kid, believe me," but tried to make enough money to help his father.

He worked as a coffee cart vendor on New York streets, and said he drove back to New York to clear up related issues. According to an old customer, Imran Khan, he was back at his regular spot on the morning of September 11, 2009. Khan and others saw him joking and laughing with some old regulars, not heading off to detonate bombs.

In addition, an acquaintance named Rahul recalled Zazi saying about the 9/11 attacks: "I don't know how people could do things like this. I'd never do anything like that." Other friends agreed that he abhorred violence and called terrorism at odds with the teachings of Islam. He was a devout Muslim, grew his beard long, and occasionally wore tunics instead of more Western-style clothes.

On a 2006 trip to Pakistan, he married and hoped later to be able to afford to bring his new wife to America. Each year, he flew back to see her, including on August 28, 2008, the FBI-announced trip in its press release. Two months after he returned the following January, he filed for bankruptcy and moved to Colorado to live more cheaply and be close to an aunt and uncle in Aurora.

He worked as a shuttle van driver at Denver International Airport, applied for a limousine license, underwent an airport background check, then drove a van for the Big Sky Company and later ABC Transportation. In July, 2009, his parents left New York and joined him.

On September 25, New York Times writer Michael Wilson headlined his story, "From Smiling Coffee Vendor to Terror Suspect, and said:

"according to federal investigators, (Zazi worked on bomb materials) in a hotel suite he rented in Aurora," but unexplained was how he could afford it on his small income along with his regular apartment. Yet, investigators "say chemical residue they found in the kitchen there indicates he tried to heat up the beauty supplies (he bought) to help convert them in a bomb." But unexplained was how someone called "dumb" would be smart enough to make bombs for potentially the "biggest terror case since 9/11," according to CBS News. In federal court on September 29, he pleaded not guilty to all charges, but was held without bail pending trial

Hosam Maher Husein Smadi - The FBI's Third Top Story for the Week Ending September 25, 2009

On September 24, an FBI press release "announced today that Hosam Maher Husein Smadi, 19, (was arrested in downtown Dallas) and charged in a federal criminal complaint with attempting to use a weapon of mass destruction....after he placed an 'inert/inactive' car bomb" near a 60-story office tower. "Smadi, a Jordanian citizen in the US illegally....repeatedly espoused his desire to commit violent jihad and has been the focus of an undercover FBI investigation."

He "made clear his intention to serve as a soldier for Usama Bin Laden and al Qaeda, and to conduct violent jihad. Undercover FBI agents, posing as members of an al Queda 'sleeper' cell, were introduced to Smadi, who repeatedly indicated to them that he came to the US for the specific purpose of committing 'Jihad for the sake of God'....against those he deemed to be enemies of Islam."

On September 27, James C. McKinley, Jr. headlined his New York Times story, "Friends' Portrait of Texas Bomb Plot Suspect at Odds With FBI." They called him an extremely outgoing young man, who smoked marijuana and drank beer with his friends in the complex where he lived. He did endless favors for them, held barbecues, and baby-sat for neighborhood children.

He also went to local dance clubs featuring Arabic techno music, and at home, had friends over to watch action movies on his widescreen TV. A Ms. Deloach said He "came here because it was really strict out there in Jordan. He wanted freedom." According to McKinley:

"That no one here suspected (him) of hating Americans suggests he was either an extremely talented undercover terrorist or a troubled young man at war with himself, going out of the way to befriend Americans he lived with while, the authorities say, plotting to kill thousands of people when he surfed radical Islamic chat rooms online." Or perhaps he's neither of the above, just an ordinary person justifiably angry about Washington's war on Islam but not plotting a terror bombing to retaliate.

According to his father in Jordan:

The charges against his son are "completely fabricated and in our family we never condoned terrorism." He added that his other son Hussein, aged 18, was also arrested in California, apparently related to Hosam's case. They both entered the country legally in 2007 on student visas.

The Smadi case is a typical FBI sting, much like others designed to entrap unwitting victims, this time with undercover agents, other times with paid informants usually charged with crimes and offered leniency for their cooperation.

One of many earlier cases involved the "Fort Dix Five" - innocent Muslim men convicted of conspiracy and other charges related to plans to kill as many soldiers as possible on the Army base, a ludicrous charge but it stuck. Described as "radical Islamists," the media played along and the result was predictable even though there was no plot and no crime, just a familiar FBI sting operation to entrap them, then intimidate a jury to convict.

According to Anthony Barkow, former federal prosecutor and current executive director of the Center on the Administration of Criminal Law at New York University's School of Law:

"A person (often) is entrapped when he has no previous intention to violate the law and is persuaded to commit the crime by government agents."

Further, US conspiracy law prosecutions can be based on such thin evidence that former Supreme Court Justice Robert Jackson once said it "constitutes a serious threat to fairness in our administration of justice." According to other legal experts, it let's prosecutors target people they don't like, want to convict to set an example, or simply show government is removing dangerous terror threats. Today, most often they're Muslims or environmental or animal rights activists, and virtually never is a charged suspect guilty. Yet they're usually convicted and sentenced to hard time in federal prisons - the fate now awaiting Smadi and the others when their cases come to trial.

Daniel Patrick Boyd - The FBI's Fourth Top Story for the Week Ending September 25, 2009

On September 24, the FBI announced a "Superseding Indictment in Boyd Matter Charg(ing) Defendants with Conspiring to Murder US Military Personnel (and) Weapons Violations.

Last July 27, dozens of heavily armed Swat and hostage rescue team members arrested Boyd and six other men (the so-called North Carolina 7) on terrorist-related charges, claiming they "conspir(ed) to provide material support to terrorists (and to) murder, kidnap, maim and injure persons abroad" plus other related charges.

The DOJ also alleged that "Boyd is a veteran of terrorist training camps in Pakistan and Afghanistan who, over the past three years, has conspired with others in this country to recruit and help young men travel overseas in order to kill." No evidence was cited, just baseless accusations then trumpeted by the media and others on the far right.

The new indictment includes "all of the charges alleged in the original indictment of July 22, 2009 (plus) new (ones) against three defendants, Daniel Patrick Boyd, aka 'Saifullah,' Hysen Sherifi, and (Boyd's son) Zakariya Boyd, aka 'Zak.' " New accusations claim the three men:

"conspir(ed) to murder US military personnel (and to do it) Boyd undertook reconnaissance of the Marine Corp Base located in Quantico, Va., and obtained maps of the base in order to plan an attack on Quantico. (He) possessed armor piercing ammunition, stating it was 'to attack the Americans.' "

It's the same ludicrous charge made against the Fort Dix Five defendants - the preposterous idea that a few men planned to wage war on the US Army. For Boyd and the others, to do it against the Marines, especially at a time of heightened awareness about possible terrorist attacks with military police alerted to prevent suspicious individuals, notably civilians, from getting through base security. Yet, that's precisely what the new indictment charges, and, if convicted, the men face potential life sentences for offenses they don't plan to commit.

But according to Attorney General Eric Holder:

"These additional charges hammer home the grim reality that today's homegrown terrorists are not limiting their violent plans to locations overseas, but instead are willing to set their sights on American citizens and American targets, right here at home," including the Army and Marines.

Michael C. Finton - The FBI's Fifth Top Story for the Week Ending September 25

On September 24, an FBI press release announced that "Michael C. Finton, aka., 'Talib Islam,' has been arrested on charges of attempted murder of federal employees and attempted use of a weapon of mass destruction (explosives) in connection with a plot to detonate a vehicle bomb at the federal building in Springfield, Ill."

Another FBI sting was involved, again with undercover agents in a scheme now all too familiar, yet the public seems none the wiser.

According to the FBI:

Finton "dealt with undercover FBI agents and confidential sources who continuously monitored his activities up to the time of his arrest. Further, in his alleged efforts, Finton drove a vehicle containing inactive explosives to the Paul Finley Federal Building and Courthouse in Springfield and attempted to detonate them. (He's) charged....with one count of attempted murder of federal officers or employees and attempted use of a weapon of mass destruction (aka, an inert, FBI-supplied explosive device)." If convicted, he faces possible life imprisonment.

On September 27, New York Times writer Dirk Johnson headlined "Suspect in Illinois Bomb Plot 'Didn't Like America Very Much," so he planned to blow up part of it. He worked as a fry cook at Seals Fish & Chicken in Springfield, IL and is described by co-workers, according to Johnson, as "cheerful and polite, but unwavering when it came to religion and politics." So are many people, but that doesn't make them "terrorists."

Neighbors in his apartment building called him "mild-mannered" in expressing shock about the charges. A Brandon Jackson said they played chess, card games and watched soccer on television, after which Finton took him out for pizza. Vivian Laster was "baffled" that this "nice young man" was charged with such a plot. Others said he was excited to be a Muslim and occasionally he wrote articles for the Richland Community College student newspaper about campus-related entertainment activities, not the usual topic for a jihadist.

He took the nickname Talib Islam (student of Islam) after converting to the Islamic faith while in prison from 2001 - 2006 on charges of aggravated robbery and battery. The FBI claimed it found a document he wrote about "awaiting a return letter from John Walker Lindh." Called an "American Taliban," he was captured, held and tortured in Afghanistan in 2001 based on false charges that he was a Taliban terrorist fighting US forces. In fact, he only arrived in the country four weeks before 9/11 to help the Taliban against the Afghan warlords supported by Washington.

FBI agents arranged a sting to entrap Finton and succeeded like against the Fort Dix Five and many others. Yet according to prosecutors, he "hope(d) that (his alleged attack) would cause American troops to be pulled back out of Afghanistan and Iraq," said the bombing would be a "historic occasion (to achieve his) biggest dream (of) bringing down the US government," and that he would be "rewarded for his intentions."

Yet court papers said he was suspicious about being "set up," but apparently not clever enough to avoid being manipulated to carry out the alleged plot he's now charged with. An employee at the federal building in question, a Mr. Meng, was "remind(ed that) there are evil people out there." True enough, but not the ones he imagines.

Betim Kaziu - The FBI's Sixth Top Story for the Week Ending September 25, 2009

On September 24, an FBI press release announced "An indictment....charging Betim Kaziu, a US citizen and resident of Brooklyn, with conspiracy to commit murder in a foreign country and conspiracy to provide material support to terrorists."

Allegedly, "in early January 2009, (he) devised a plan to travel abroad for the purpose of joining a radical foreign fighter group and to take up arms against perceived enemies of Islam. Kaziu allegedly boarded a flight at John F. Kennedy Airport on Feb. 19, 2009, and traveled to Cairo, Egypt, where he took steps to continue on to Pakistan to obtain training and other support for violent activities....(He) also attempted to join Al-Shabbab, a radicalized, militant (pro-Al-Queda) insurgency group (now) designated as a terrorist organization by the United States Department of State."

In addition, "Kaziu made efforts to travel to Afghanistan, Iraq, and the Balkans to fight against US armed forces (and on multiple occasions attempted) to purchase weapons in Egypt. Untimately, Kaziu traveled to Kosovo where he was arrested by Kosovar law enforcement authorities in late August 2009." Afterwards, he told his family that he was visiting a friend when the house was raided, and the weapons seized belonged to his friend's father.

On September 24, Ray Rivera headlined his New York Times article, "Brooklyn Man Is Accused of Trying to Aid Terrorists," according to an indictment unsealed in Federal District Court. Yet family members expressed shock, his sister, Sihana saying "This is totally unlike him. (He) has a big heart" and was never violent.

Kaziu's case is similar to the first indictment against Daniel Patrick Boyd and the other North Carolina 7 defendants. The DOJ indictment claimed that from 1989 - 1992, Boyd got "violent jihad" training abroad and "allegedly fought in Afghanistan" against the Soviets. Then from November 2006 through July 2009, he and the others "conspired to provide material support and resources to terrorists, including currency, training, transportation and personnel" plus other charges.

Federal authorities accused them of "loving jihad, fighting for Allah, and loathing a US military presence at Muslim holy sites." Self-styled terrorism expert and notorious Islamophobe Steven Emerson highlighted the charges and claimed the FBI "found a fatwa, or religious edict, in Boyd's house saying Muslims have 'an individual duty to kill Americans and their allies.' "

Of course, Emerson, others on the far right, and the DOJ are notorious for manipulating, doctoring, or inventing evidence to target innocent Muslims, incite fear, and intimidate juries to convict. The charges against Kaziu are as likely bogus as the ones above and against numerous other victims targeted for their faith, ethnicity, prominence and charity. It's the wrong time to be Muslim in America and vital to know that we're all equally vulnerable.

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 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.

http://republicbroadcasting.org/Global%20Research/index.php?cmd=archives.year&ProgramID=33&year=9
 

Israel's Ofra Settlement on Unauthorized Palestinian Land

Israel's Ofra Settlement on Unauthorized Palestinian Land - by Stephen Lendman

Israel's 130 West Bank settlements are illegal under international law, including Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention that states:

"Individual or mass forcible transfers, as well as deportations of protected persons from occupied territory to the territory of the Occupying Power or to that of any other country, occupied or not, are prohibited, regardless of their motive."

In addition, various UN resolutions (including 446, 452 and 465) condemned Israel's settlement building by declaring they have "no legal validity" to exist. Yet they do and continue expanding in reckless disregard of the law.

Even so, after its forces occupied the West Bank in 1967, Israel in principle agreed to respect binding local Jordanian law and its own subsequent military order. It didn't then and doesn't now.

B'Tselem's report titled "The Ofra Settlement - An Unauthorized Outpost" shows that Israel reneged on its agreement because Ofra is illegal under local and international law.

Called a flagship settlement, it was established in 1975 by the fundamentalist Gush Emunim (Bloc of the Faithful) movement that began seizing West Bank land for itself - modestly at first in abandoned Jordanian Ein Yabrud army camp houses. Then later, more aggressively after the Rabin government recognized it as a community even though 58% of its area lies on land registered to Palestinians in Israel's Land Registry. Settlement construction there is forbidden. Yet in 1977 under Menachem Begin, recognition became official.

Ofra set a precedent. As the first northern West Bank settlement, it broke "the barrier that blocked settlement attempts in the heart of the Palestinian population" and established events on the ground for dozens more to follow - illegal settlements and outposts "in opposition to the stated official position of the government," on paper only to be defiled and ignored.

Some Background on Gush Emunim

Under the slogan, "The Land of Israel, for the people of Israel, according to the Torah of Israel," Gush Emunim (GE) emerged in the aftermath of the 1973 Yom Kippur war, but Israel's 1967 Six-Day war victory inspired its adherents to believe that all biblical Israel for Jews alone was now in reach.

Today, GE is an influential, extremist pressure group - fundamentalist, radical, messianic, militant, terrorist, and undemocratic, yet supported by all Israeli governments. Ofra gave it a footprint, a toehold, an entry for Israel to establish 130 West Bank settlements and other outposts, now home to half a million Jews on confiscated Palestinian land.

From Ofra to Colonizing the Entire West Bank for a Greater Israel

In their book, "Lords of the Land: The War over Israel's Settlements in the Occupied Territories," Israeli authors Idith Zertal and Akiva Eldar described the beginning as follows:

"Ofra...., which was established in trickery and on false pretexts, flourished into the heart of the Israeli consensus because of its respectable appearance, the settler's flagship institutions that were established there, and the mellifluous discourse of some of its better-known inhabitants."

Respectability, however, hid its dark side. Besides lying on registered Palestinian land, the area's borders weren't defined. A community plan was never approved, and required building permits were never issued for construction. As a result, Ofra is now the largest unauthorized West Bank outpost, yet it continues to exist. It has 2700 residents in well-established northern and southern neighborhoods with extensive community services, including three schools, a day-care center, several kindergartens, a Society for the Protection of Nature field school, women's religious schools, various public institutions, businesses, and light industry.

It's registered as a cooperative society, a legal entity offering many advantages. Their private, not public bodies. Their documents and files aren't open to the public, and they can restrict membership solely to others as ideologically committed as themselves.

Ofra's Illegality Under Israeli Law

Besides international law, Ofra violates local law under which a settlement must meet four criteria to be legal:

-- Israeli government authorization for its establishment;

-- the settlement's jurisdictional area approved under the military commander's order;

-- a lawfully approved Civil Administration planning authorities' plan; and

-- settlements must lie on state land and/or land purchased by Israelis and registered under their name in the Land Registry.

At its inception in 1975, no government authorization was given. Yet, on July 26, 1977, Israel's Ministerial Committee for Settlement recognized Ofra as a civilian community. The Civil Administration told B'Tselem that "no area of jurisdiction has been defined for Ofra, which is one of the communities of the Meteh Binyamin Regional Council in accordance with the schedule to the Order Concerning Administration of Regional Councils (Judea and Samaria) (Number 783), 1979."

The still-in-force Jordanian planning law states that building permits are required for construction, including structure additions. Lawfully approved, detailed plan outlines are also required. In 1971, the IDF military commander signed Order No. 418. It left most Jordanian law provisions intact, but "made significant changes to the structure and composition of the planning institutions."

International law is precise. It lets occupying powers change existing laws only for reasons of military necessity or to provide humanitarian aid for the local population. Israel did it anyway. It cancelled local Palestinian planning and building committees, transferring their authority to the Higher Planning Council subcommittees operating within the Civil Administration on the Beit El army base.

Special local settlement planning committees were also appointed with powers given them by the military commander. It let them issue building permits, "pursuant to valid detailed outline plans." It also gave the Higher Planning Council power "to exempt any person from the obligation to obtain a (required) license (building permit)."

B'Tselem requested information on Ofra's planning process. In response, the Civil Administration replied:

"The build-up area of Ofra is not located in the planning area of a local or special committee. There are no approved or deposited planning schemes concerning the built-up area of Ofra. No building permits or exemptions from building permits were given to structures in Ofra."

Proceeding anyway, Ofra leaders broke the law by bypassing planning procedures and preparing their own "building rules." As a result, they're legally invalid, and no building permits should have been issued under them. Further, Ofra isn't situated with the boundaries of a planning area where local or special local committees have authority. Construction was authorized anyway.

In May 2008, aerial photos showed 570 structures built, at least 400 of which are single-family homes. None were authorized. All are illegal.

The Mandatory Outline Plan

Lawful building permits may only be issued under Mandatory Regional Outline Plan RJ/5. Approved in 1942 and still in force, it covers the land on which Ofra lies. It's designated for agricultural use with construction allowed under strict conditions:

-- landowner approval must be gotten;

-- only one residential structure per original plot may be built provided the area is at least 1000 square meters; even if much larger, the "one" rule applies; and

-- distances between structures and plot boundaries must be at least five meters.

Ofra construction failed to comply on all counts. "Residential dwellings and public buildings have been built in total disregard of the provisions of the Mandatory plan."

In October 1979, Israel's High Court ruled that privately-owned Palestinian land seizures by military requisition order were only lawful if they served "a clear security interest." Yet a month later, the government decided to establish settlements only on "state-owned land" without ever defining it properly.

Contrary to valid Jordanian law, Israeli policy states that "land that is not registered in the Land Registry, and has never been cultivated or is not suitable for cultivation, or was only cultivated in the distant past, is state land."

However, land registered to Palestinians is their land and may not be declared government property. Yet Israel twisted the law to declare 16% of the West Bank state land besides another 14% pre-1967 under Jordanian rule giving Israel 30% ownership and growing.

B'Tselem petitioned the Civil Administration for clarification, clearly marked on a map to show:

-- all defined state land;

-- land confiscated for public purposes;

-- land seized "pursuant to military requisition orders;"

-- land classified as "absentee property," belonging to Palestinians who fled in 1967 and didn't return; and

-- closed military zone areas.

The information gotten showed that "the portion of the built-up area of Ofra, or the area adjacent to it, that lies on requisitioned or confiscated land is very small, except for the land that the Civil Administration contends was confiscated by the Jordanians for the army camp."

By May 2008, Ofra's built-up area covered over 670 dunams (about 170 acres). About 27% of it was seized under Expropriation Order No 77/E (November 1977). Civil Administration information claimed it was "expropriated by the Jordanian government for a public purpose" and not initiated by Israel. Official documents, however, show that "the expropriation process was not completed." Also, Order 77/E wasn't recorded in the Land Registry, but the Civil Administration insisted that it's state land nonetheless even though registration was incomplete and thus invalid.

B'Tselem calls the land "not state land. (Therefore), Order 77/E, issued by the Israeli military commander in 1977, is a new expropriation order, issued more than two years after the settlers of Ofra took over the abandoned houses of the Jordanian army camp and some three months after the government of Israel decided to recognize Ofra as a permanent community."

The entire scheme was illegal. Israel's official position puts privately-owned Palestinian land off-limits for settlement construction because it's not for a "public purpose" under (still in force) Jordanian law. According to Plia Albeck, former State Attorney Office's Civil Division head:

Israel "may expropriate land for public purposes in the region, but regarding establishment of a new community, whose residents are Israeli citizens and at the time of establishment of the community do not live in the region, it is very doubtful that it is an expropriation for a public purpose in the region."

Former attorney general Yitzhak Zamir agreed in saying that "it is impossible to act under Jordanian law to expropriate private land for public purpose" to build settlements. Order 77/E was thus illegal and so is Ofra.

Israel also expropriated dozens of additional acres for an expanded area "not recognized as legitimate under international" or local (Jordanian) law. Further, most of Ofra's built-up land is not included under Order 77/E. In responding to recently filed petitions in Israel's High Court, "the state admitted that (Ofra's built-up area) contains additional lots that are recorded on the name of Palestinians...." It amounts to at least 58% of Ofra's built-up area.

The Ofra Cooperative Association, however, claims that it's held the land for many years without registered owners disputing it through legal action, so the land was lawfully theirs. The State Attorney's Office disagreed in stating "no proof had been made that the land was purchased by your client (and saying it is constitutes a) mere claim." The Civil Administration also provided no proof of purchase.

By law, all claimed West Bank land must be recorded in the Land Register under the name of the purchasers. Failure to do so is a crime. Ofra settlers said they failed to comply to "protect the lives of the Palestinian sellers" even though there were none. Also, according to Israeli attorney Plia Albeck, 90% of supposed West Bank purchased land involved forged "fictitious" documents.

As a result, Palestinian rights were grossly breached because Ofra construction "prevent(ed) them from possessing and exercising their ownership rights in the land and from gaining a living from it and from its agricultural produce."

Under Israel's Basic Law: Human Dignity and Liberty, 5752 - 1992, section three states: "there shall be no violation of the property of a person." Illegal settlement construction on Palestinian-owned land constitutes a grave breach. International law affirms it. Besides Fourth Geneva and numerous UN resolutions, Article 46 of the 1907 Hague Regulations states:

"Family honor and rights, the lives of persons, and private property, as well as religious convictions and practice must be respected. Private property cannot be confiscated."

Ofra construction violates this law, "extending beyond the prohibition on establishment of the settlements." It denies Palestinians:

-- the right to live on their own land, develop it, raise crops on it, and gain other benefits;

-- thousands of additional dunams that Ofra seized for future development;

-- more still for infrastructure, including for-Jews only roads; and it

-- "has ramifications for other Palestinian communities" by preventing free movement between them and letting all settlements expropriate more West Bank and East Jerusalem land.

Conclusions

Under international and local laws, Ofra's settlement is illegal. No jurisdictional area was set for it. It doesn't have a valid outline plan, and at least 58% of its land is lawfully registered under Palestinian names in the Land Registry.

Israel's High Court held that settlements may not be built on such land. Yet it was and still is. Also, the military order pertaining to Ofra states that "the jurisdictional area of an Israeli regional council shall not include (privately-owned) Palestinian lands."

Israel's Civil Administration is prohibited from approving plans for Israeli communities on land registered to Palestinians. The state didn't authorize Ofra, but did nothing to stop settlement construction and continues letting them expand.

"Officially, Ofra is a recognized settlement and not an unauthorized outpost." But that doesn't make it lawful. International and local law obligate Israel to disband it, return the land to its rightful owners, and provide compensatory damages. And that's besides the greater issue of other unauthorized outposts, all 130 illegal settlements, a sovereign Palestinian state, the lawful right of return, and decades of unaddressed abuses depriving Palestinians from having the freedom, equity and justice they deserve.

Stephen Lendman is a Research Association 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.

http://republicbroadcasting.org/Global%20Research/index.php?cmd=archives.year&ProgramID=33&year=9
 

Police State Raids Against Immigrants

Police State Raids Against Immigrants - by Stephen Lendman

In 2003, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) established its largest investigative and enforcement branch - the US Immigration and Customs Enforcement arm (ICE) "as a law enforcement agency for the post-9/11 era, to integrate enforcement authorities against criminal and terrorist activities, including the fights against human trafficking and smuggling violent transnational gangs and sexual predators on children (who are) criminal (and) terrorist" threats to the nation.

Along with Muslims, Latinos are its prime targets, often using militarized unconstitutional tactics against vulnerable, defenseless people. Post-9/11, the Bush administration initiated them, and they continue under Obama.

On May 23, 2007, as a senator, Obama said:

"The time to fix our broken immigration system is now. We need stronger enforcement on the border and at the workplace."

Then on July 8, 2009, Wall Street Journal online writer Cam Simpson said on politicalforum.com that:

"The Obama administration (today) said it would move forward with a Bush-era program aimed at cracking down on illegal-immigrant workers and their employers, just as Republicans in the Senate are pushing legislation that would mandate a similar move."

With about 10% of DHS' $55 billion FY 2010 budget, ICE will continue targeting Latinos at the border, at work sites, and at their homes with some recent examples below:

-- in a September 18 press release, ICE's Miami field office announced it "removed" 423 "criminal aliens from 36 countries" in August, charging them with drugs traffickin, robbery, and various fraudulent activities;

-- on September 11, 23 alleged gang members faced deportation after being being arrested in a four-day operation; unmentioned was whether any of them are undocumented;

-- on August 25, 15 Latinos were arrested in San Antonio, TX on alleged drugs trafficking charges;

-- on August 11, 50 arrests were made on charges of "enter(ing) into sham marriages to gain citizenship," including those undocumented and their US citizen wives;

-- on July 31, 53 alleged South Florida gang members and associates were arrested in a two-day operation; some "were found to be in violation of the immigration law (and) were processed for removal from the United States;"

-- on July 31, eight San Francisco area alleged gang members and associates were seized "during a six hour surge;" some were "foreign nationals who are being processed for deportation;"

-- on June 30, 116 alleged gang members, their associates and "immigration status violators" were targeted in a five day operation in Houston, Beaumont, and Corpus Christi, TX;

-- on June 30 in the Dallas-Fort Worth Metroplex, 81 others were arrested; foreign-born ones seized were from Mexico, El Salvador, Honduras and Laos;

-- on February 25, 28 "illegal workers" were arrested at Yamato Engine Specialists in Bellingham, WA during an earlier Obama administration raid; and

On February 18, the Washington Post reported that "immigration officers had been raiding targets across Prince George's and Montgomery counties all night long in search of fugitive and criminal immigrants but only netted a handful."

Earlier, a Baltimore ICE supervisor warned about being well behind "a Washington-mandated annual quota of 1000 arrests per team" and ordered his agents to seize more saying: "I don't care where you get more arrests, we need more numbers," and apparently he meant from any street corner, work place, or personal residence. An hour later, 24 Latino men were seized at a nearby 7-Eleven store.

Since established in 2003, Congress appropriated hundreds of millions of dollars to let ICE "bring in tens of thousands of immigrants who have not evaded a deportation order or committed a crime...." Since then, it continued the operation, and, during 2007 and 2008, expanded tactical home entries using militarized agents for illegal warrantless raids without the consent of their owners.

On July 26, The New York Times reported that:

"Federal immigration squads with shotguns and automatic weapons (are) forcing their way into citizens' homes without warrants or lawful consent, shoving open doors and climbing through windows in predawn darkness, pulling innocent people from their beds, holding groggy occupants at gunpoint, (and) taking people away without explanation - after invading the wrong house."

"This is a true account of the depths to which the Bush administration sank in its twilight, when immigration enforcement was ramped up to a feverish extreme." Shamefully, these practices continue under Obama.

A recent New York City Cardozo School of Law Immigration Justice Clinic (IJC) study titled "Constitution on Ice: A Report on Immigration Home Raid Operations" examined the problem in New York, New Jersey, and Long Island from 2006 - 2008 and included other examples in California, Texas, Massachusetts, Georgia and elsewhere. Researchers documented a nationwide assault on poor immigrant workers, the great majority being Latinos. Many times ICE broke into homes, seizing all occupants "without legal basis."

IJC discovered a systematic pattern of misconduct "suggest(ing it) may be a widespread national phenomenon reaching beyond" the areas studied. It involves:

-- illegal ICE agent entries with no legal authority;

-- illegally arresting people randomly, including innocent ones in their bedrooms;

-- conducting lawless searches and seizures in violation of the Fourth Amendment; and

-- making arrests based on ethnicity, race, appearance, and English proficiency.

These police state tactics have no place in a democracy, yet ICE (on its web site) lists dozens of monthly swat-type raids, often against innocent people and their families in their homes. IJC described them this way:

A typical home raid has "a team of heavily armed ICE agents approaching a private residence in the pre-dawn hours, purportedly seeking an individual believed to have committed some civil immigration violation. Agents, armed only with administrative warrants, which do not grant them legal authority to enter private dwellings, then push their way in when residents answer the door, enter through unlocked doors or windows or, in some cases, physically break into homes."

All occupants are then seized and interrogated with no legal authority, and often "no target is apprehended." These aren't random, standard operating procedures in violation of the Fourth Amendment that protects citizens and non-citizens alike. The Office of Detention and Removal (DRO) conducts them cooperatively with the Office of Investigations (OI), charged with investigating national security threats, immigration violations, and various other suspected crimes.

Home raid operations include:

-- the National Fugitive Operations Program (NFOP) using over 100 seven-person Fugitive Operations Teams (FOTs) to target individuals for deportation;

-- Operation Cross Check focusing on specific immigrant populations or ones working in certain industries like dangerous, low-paying meat packing operations, unattractive to workers able to find safer, better-paying jobs;

-- Operation Community Shield (OCS) against suspected immigrant gang members; and

-- Operation Predator against suspected immigrant sex offenders.

Most often, high priority targets aren't seized. Instead, "collateral arrests of mere (suspected) immigration status violators" are made, and since 2006 the numbers expanded eight-fold because of primarily relying on home raids despite their illegality.

On April 15, 1980 in Payton v. New York, the Supreme Court ruled that "The Fourth Amendment....prohibits the police from making a warrantless and nonconsenual entry into a suspect's home in order to make a routine (criminal or civil) felony arrest." Such "entry....is the chief evil against which the wording of the Fourth Amendment is directed."

Searches are also prohibited. Only an adult resident's consent permits either or both. Administrative warrants have no authority, and police may only interrogate suspects based on "reasonable suspicion" of unlawful activity. "In addition, agents can never rely solely on the racial or ethnic appearance or the limited English proficiency of an individual to justify a seizure."

DHS' own regulations cover these restrictions, and ICE's Detention and Deportation Officer's Field Manual states:

"Warrants of Deportation and Removal are administrative rather than criminal, and do not grant the authority to breach doors. Thus informed consent must be obtained from the occupant of the residence prior to entering."

Nonetheless, "empirical data drawn from ICE's own arrest records (obtained by Freedom of Information Act lawsuits) strongly suggest a significant and disturbing pattern of (agency) misconduct during home raids" during which over 1000 people were seized. The evidence is alarming and shows "an unacceptable level of illegal entries" in clear violation of the law. In addition, most arrest records indicate "no basis for the initial seizure" and a disturbing racial profiling pattern against Latinos.

In recent years, defense lawyers increasingly have used suppression motions to prevent illegally obtained evidence being used. Earlier, they were rare in immigration courts, given the Supreme Court's decision in INS v. Lopez-Mendoza (July 5, 1984) that deportation proceedings are:

"civil action(s) to determine a person's eligibility to remain in this country....not to punish past transgressions. (As such) various protections (including suppression motions don't generally) apply....in a deportation hearing."

In immigration courts, they're not standard procedures. Since 2006, however, they're more often used because the High Court also "reasoned that the exclusionary rule may (apply) in immigration proceedings for egregious and widespread Fourth Amendment violations" even though prevailing in immigration cases remains challenging, expensive, and time-consuming.

Political and Local Law Enforcement Concerns

ICE often requests operational help from local police who complain that Fourth Amendment violations undermine their central crime suppression mission. Political leaders voice similar concerns. New York state Senator Kirstin Gillibrand said she was "appalled by some of the practices I have heard about," and New Haven Mayor John DeStefano said "We won't stand for the violation of constitutional rights and racial profiling" in reacting to city raids.

In September 2007, the Nassau County Police Department pulled out of an operation it agreed to because of "serious allegations of misconduct and malfeasance." In this case, no warrants were used, not even administrative ones. ICE fraudulently claimed they weren't needed because consent to enter all homes was received. In response, Nassau County Police Commissioner, Lawrence Mulvey, said:

"In my 29 years of police work, I have executed countless warrants and have sought to enter countless homes. ICE's claim that they received 100% complaince with their requests to enter is not credible even under the best of circumstances."

Evidence Suggests a National Pattern of Constitutional Violations

Since 2006, lawsuits have been filed against ICE "in every region of the country - including two large class actions" and several with multiple defendants - all alleging a similar pattern of misconduct.

They pertain to illegally entering private homes as well as other misconduct charges. In March 2009, Jimmy Slaughter, an Arizona DHS officer, filed suit as well, stating:

"I was at home with my wife when the door bell rang. I opened the door and noticed approximately 7 uniformed ICE agents with vests and guns....I opened the door to look at the paperwork and five agents entered my house....The agents then told my wife to stand in the center of 'OUR' living room. Not once did anyone say they had a warrant."

Numerous other instances confirm a national pattern of constitutional violations, including:

-- unannounced pre-dawn raids;

-- illegal entries into private homes, at times forcibly with drawn guns;

-- some with administrative warrants; others with none; often with no probable cause or consent;

-- unconstitutional searches and seizures;

-- all occupants arrested and interrogated;

-- commonplace use of excessive force; and

-- at times, individuals prevented from calling attorneys.

New York Immigration Judge Noel Brennan ruled on one case saying:

"It is hard for me to fathom a country or a place in which we live in which the Government can barge into one's house without authority from the Third Branch after a probable cause finding. So for all these reasons I find that what is essentially a warrantless search in the meaning of the Fourth Amendment....was an egregious violation, and therefore I suppress all the evidence and order these proceedings terminated."

ICE's 2006 Policy Changes

Three new memoranda issued dramatic enforcement changes that led to and facilitated nationwide home raids. Fugitive Operation Team (FOT) annual quotas were raised eight-fold (from 125 to 1000 arrests) and didn't have to include "criminal aliens."

Another change permitted "collateral" arrests of suspected civil immigration status violators. These actions "incentivized the pattern of unlawful behavior" and put tremendous pressure on ICE agents to deliver. As a result, home raids increased sharply and illegally. Wrongful arrests became common. Easy targets were chosen, including women and children, often at the expense of real criminals remaining at large.

Immigrants are some of "the most vulnerable of populations in this nation's legal system." Most are poor, are unfamiliar with the law, and many speak imperfect or limited English. Often those seized have no lawyers, are kept in detention, and are then deported summarily with no ability to pursue justice. In addition, "traditional civil remedies are (often) ineffective deterrents to unlawful ICE home raids."

IJC Policy Recommendations

Major constitutional issues are at stake making everyone potentially as vulnerable as immigrants. If authorities can get away with constitutional violations against some, they can do it against anyone. That said, IJC recommends the following:

-- home raids should only be for criminal arrests or civil ones in cases posing real risks to national security or for persons with violent criminal records;

-- judicial warrants should be required, not administrative ones;

-- in all cases, "high-level centralized pre-approval in advance of any home raid operation" should be required;

-- if judicial warrants aren't obtained, residents' consent should be required after informing them "explicitly and clearly" of their right to refuse before entry is made;

-- in all pre-dawn and nighttime raids, judicial warrants should be required;

-- in all cases, a high-level supervisor should be involved on site;

-- home raids should be videotaped;

-- ICE agents should be trained on home raid procedures stressing compliance with the law at all times;

-- local law enforcement agencies should be apprised of raids and their results;

-- they should not be asked to participate in or facilitate lawless activities;

-- emphasis should be on arresting dangerous criminals, not collateral ones to meet quotas;

-- arrests should be race, ethnicity, and English proficiency neutral;

-- agent misconduct should be assessed and properly addressed;

-- a clear public complaint procedure should be established; and

-- illegally obtained evidence should be disallowed.

Obama Administration's Immigrant Detention Policies

On August 7, Washington Post writer Spencer Hsu headlined, "Agency Plans to Improve Oversight of Immigrant Detention" in saying the Obama administration intends to "restructure the nation's much-criticized immigration detention system by strengthening federal oversight and seeking to standardize conditions in a 32,000-bed system now scattered throughout 350 local jails, state prisons and contract facilities."

Since 1979, the National Immigration Law Center (NILC) has represented, protected, and promoted "the rights of low income immigrants and their family members (and) earned a national reputation as a leading expert on immigration, public benefits, and employment laws affecting immigrants and refugees."

It calls US immigrant detention centers "A Broken System" in a recent report that presents "the first-ever system-wide look at the federal government's compliance with its own standards regulating immigrant detention facilities....based on previously unreleased first-hand reports of monitoring inspections."

Annually, over 320,000 immigrants are incarcerated. They face enormous obstacles challenging their detention, and they're held under conditions "as bad as or worse than those faced by imprisoned criminals." They're kept in three types of facilities:

-- ICE owned and operated Service Processing Centers (SPCs);

-- privately run Contract Detention Facilities (CDFs); and

-- Intergovernmental Service Agreement Facilities (IGSAs) holding two-thirds of detainees - mostly state or county jails plus a small number in US Bureau of Prisons or other facilities.

Since 1992, immigrant detentions have increased from 6,259 to 20,000 in early 2006 to the current 31,000 total - a number that continues to grow due to policies discussed above.

NILC learned that detention standards are poorly regulated and that government efforts to monitor compliance have been "woefully deficient and in need of a major overall." Testimony obtained from ICE employees revealed that monitoring is understaffed. Before inspections, facilities get at least 30 days notice to fix or cover up problems and abuses in advance. Multiple review levels are used, yet headquarters rarely requires violations to be corrected and often gives facilities "higher overall assessments than the review team's original ones."

Systemic problems were also uncovered pertaining to annual review procedures and their inadequately identifying and correcting noncompliance with acceptable standards. ICE plans to let private contractors monitor compliance, yet current failures suggest that new management will let a broken system fester and worsen as the detention population grows and overcrowded facilities get further stretched.

Despite repeated calls for reform, greater transparency, accountability, and better controls, "the government has not taken effective measures to ensure that even its nonbinding standards are met." It shows an appalling indifference to some of the nation's most vulnerable people, no match against a system in place to repress them.

Currently, numerous violations are systemic, serious, and numerous. They include:

(1) Visitations by family, lawyers and others

Detainee visitations are severely restricted in violation of clear constitutional and statutory rights, especially to free access to counsel and close family members.

(2) Recreation

Standards require safe recreational time for physical, mental and emotional well-being, including for those with special needs or in segregation. Yet they're routinely denied or offered at the discretion of facility staff. In addition, programs are way inadequate, and many detainees get limited or no access to outdoor recreation and a chance to interact with others in a natural environment.

(3) Telephone access

Many facilities didn't comply with standards. Monitoring of confidential legal calls was conducted, and restrictive time limits were imposed. Numerous facilities also prevented detainees from contacting courts, consulates, and getting access to free legal service providers.

(4) Access to Legal Material

Immigration law is so complex that good counsel is essential. Yet it's expensive and few detainees can afford it. Instead they must rely on pro bono help if available or their own resourcefulness. Standards require facilities to have a law library and an adequate environment to research and prepare legal documents. Yet numerous facilities have none, and the limited information on hand is inadequate and outdated. Still other facilities require specific document requests, even though detainees have no way to know what applies to their case.

(5) Group Presentations on Legal Rights

Facilities are required to let authorized attorneys or representatives, on written request, conduct immigration law and detainee rights presentations. Few do it, and individual counseling is also limited.

(6) Correspondence and Other Mail

Most facilities restrict access, monitor incoming and outgoing mail, and confiscate items at times. As a result, confidential correspondence is compromised. At times, identity documents are destroyed. Detainees miss court deadlines, and they're intimidated from freely sending and receiving mail.

(7) Administrative and Disciplinary Segregation

It's supposed to be non-punitive isolation to ensure detainee safety or facility security. Instead it's done punitively for extended periods for even slight rule infractions. Reports also uncovered severe privilege restrictions, unsanitary conditions, and poor health care protection for segregated detainees and the entire facility population.

(8) Disciplinary Policy

They're supposed to protect detainees from arbitrary disciplinary actions with rules conspicuously posted so they're known and can be obeyed. Yet most facilities don't do it.

(9) Detainee Handbook

Facilities are required to develop and make available a "facility-specific handbook" covering policies, rules, and procedures. However, those having them "presented an inaccurate or incomplete picture of facility policy" because important information was missing, erroneous, incomplete, or inappropriate.

(10) Hold Rooms in Detention Facilities

Physical space requirements and design specifications are supposed to be followed and monitored. Yet poor compliance was found, including inadequate toilet facilities and detainees held there too long in violation of rules requiring a maximum of 12 hours.

(11) Detainee Grievance Procedures

They're to assure detainees can file grievances with uninvolved officers without fear of retaliation. Widespread noncompliance was found, and most often facilities don't inform detainees of their rights.

(12) Detainee Transfers

Procedures are to protect their security in transit and make a traumatic experience easier, especially when to locations remote from their families. Transfers also interfere with attorney-client relations and harm constitutionally protected due process rights.

(13) Funds and Personal Property

Rules are supposed to safeguard detainees' money and personal property with written procedures for receiving, processing, storing, and returning them. Evidence showed instances of theft, forfeiture of funds and property, and failure to conduct audits to assure none of this would happen.

(14) Admission and Release

Official procedures protect the health, safety, and welfare of detainees. Most facilities don't do it, including providing proper medical care and personal hygiene considerations from admission to the time of release.

NILC concluded that "the nation's immigrant detention system is broken to its core (and) reveals pervasive and extreme violations of the government's own detention standards as well as fundamental violations of basic human rights and notions of dignity."

On August 6, the Obama administration announced remedial plans amounting only to a cosmetic fix for a dysfunction system. A day ahead, The New York Times headlined "US to Reform Policy on Detention for Immigrants" and called the effort "an ambitious plan....to overhaul the much-criticized way the nation detains immigration violators, trying to transform it (into) a 'truly civil detention system.' "

According to ICE Assistant Secretary, John Morton, ICE will create an Office of Detention Policy and Planning (ODPP) effective immediately. DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano said:

"This change marks an important step in our ongoing efforts to enforce immigration laws smartly and effectively. We are improving detention center management to prioritize health, safety and uniformity among our facilities while ensuring security, efficiency and fiscal responsibility."

What's planned, in fact, is more centralized control and better ways to track, process, incarcerate, and/or deport growing numbers of undocumented immigrants - not treat them humanely as international law and DHS/ICE regulations stipulate.

The Obama administration has expanded and intensified the same harsh Bush administration policies, and ICE's August 6 announcement signifies nothing more than a cosmetic repackaging of a broken system.

In May, the Obama administration asked Congress for a 30% funding increase to expand the controversial Bush administration Secure Communities program (begun in December 2007) to identify, arrest, incarcerate, and deport undocumented immigrants, mostly Latinos from Mexico and Central America.

In declaring "zero tolerance" for undocumented immigrants, he'll also keep building the $8 billion virtual border fence, planned for hundreds of miles, and will continue the same harsh Bush administration policies.

On August 4, the Immigrant Solidarity Nework said that despite early pledges that he'd moderate them, Obama "is pursuing an aggressive strategy for an illegal-immigration crackdown that relies significantly on programs started by his predecessor."

They call for "no-nonsense immigration enforcement" followed later in the year or early next year by immigration legislation to create a new bracero program, among other harsh measures, that immigrant rights group oppose. They also include extensive employee paperwork audits, an expanded (and much criticized) program to verify worker immigration status, and greater cooperation between federal and local authorities while rejecting proposals for legally binding rules regarding detention center conditions. Non-binding Bush administration ones still followed hold no one accountable and let detainees be treated harshly under a system described above.

In response to Obama's decision, the National Lawyers Guild's Paromita Shah, associate director of its National Immigration Project, said the government is "disregard(ing) the plight of the hundreds of thousands of immigration detainees" by continuing a dysfunctional system. DHS "has demonstrated a disturbing commitment to policies that have cost dozens of lives" and shows an appalling indifference to the fate of defenseless people.

Highlighting the plight of immigrants, the National Immigrant Justice Center's Mary McCarthy described the current detention system as a "human rights nightmare. The past administration created this, and now we need to dismantle it." Instead, Obama officials plan to make a "broken system" worse, then harden it with discriminatory immigration reform legislation later in the year. According to University of Houston immigration law Professor Michael Olivas, "We literally have the worst of all worlds," and nothing is being planned to improve it.

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.

http://republicbroadcasting.org/Global%20Research/index.php?cmd=archives.year&ProgramID=33&year=9
 

How Israel Targets and Suppresses Opposition to Its Annexation Wall

How Israel Targets and Suppresses Opposition to Its Annexation Wall - by Stephen Lendman

Established in 1992, the Addameer (Arabic for conscience) Prisoners Support and Human Rights Association helps Palestinian prisoners, and works to end torture, arbitrary arrests and detentions, other forms of abuse, and unjust, unequal treatment in Israel's criminal justice system that handles Jews one way and Palestinians another.

In July 2009, in cooperation with the Grassroots Palestinian Anti-Apartheid Wall Campaign (Stop the Wall) and the Palestinian Prisoners Support and Human Rights Association, Addameer published a report titled "Repression allowed, Resistance denied" that documents resistance to Israel's apartheid wall and the "staggering level of repression, arrests and violence" by Israeli authorities.

On July 9, 2004 in a unanimous decision, the International Court of Justice (IJC) ruled that "the construction of the Wall being built by Israel, and its associated regime, are contrary to international law...." It said construction on it must cease. Built sections must be dismantled, Palestinian land returned, and compensation paid for property destroyed. The UN General Assembly endorsed the decision. Israel rejected it out of hand, keeps seizing Palestinian land, continues the wall's construction, and ruthlessly suppresses efforts to halt it.

In defiance of international law, Israel's High Court ruled that erection of a "barrier" may continue for security reasons even though its purpose is solely to steal resources and land that will include over 12% of the West Bank when completed.

The consequences for Palestinians have been devastating. Communities have been divided, isolated and ghettoized. Farmers have been separated from their land and water sources. Militarized control is repressive, and free movement is more restricted than ever.

The ICRC called the Wall contrary to international humanitarian law and repeatedly urged Israel to halt it. Article 2(c) of the Apartheid Convention says the Wall and checkpoints are key to maintaining apartheid in the West Bank. Article 2(d) adds that "the Wall and its infrastructure of gates and permanent checkpoints suggest a (permanent) policy....to divide the West Bank into racial cantons," and the South African Human Sciences Council stated:

"Restrictions on the Palestinian right to freedom of movement are endemic in the West Bank, stemming from Israel's control of checkpoints and crossings, impediments created by the Wall and its crossing points." They constitute an illegal matrix of control affecting all aspects of Palestinians' lives.

Popular non-violent, direct action resistance emerged in self-defense as well as lobbying through the courts and national and international media campaigns. It was entirely blacked out in the major media.

Most visible are weekly demonstrations, protests and marches involving Palestinians, Israelis, other Jews, and international human rights activists - in defiance of Israeli military orders that call these activities and all organized resistance "criminal offenses," punishable by arbitrary arrests, targeted killings, brutal repression, disproportionate violence, and collective punishment in violation of international law, including Fourth Geneva protections.

Addameer "provide(s documented) evidence to show that injuries and deaths inflicted by the Israeli military at protests and activity surrounding them are intentional, not accidental." Indiscriminate arrests are made, family members threatened, including children, and many are tried, convicted, imprisoned, fined, and ruthlessly punished for defending their rights. Israel wages low intensity warfare against a popular resistance in a futile effort to break an indomitable spirit, at a cost that includes:

-- premeditated, systematic punitive attacks and collective punishment;

-- entire communities targeted by state-sponsored terror;

-- mass arrests, killings, beatings, torture and other abuses;

-- children imprisoned or shot for throwing stones or being in the wrong place at the wrong time; and

-- Palestinians victimized by decades of unremitting, systemic violence and repression, and in Gaza under siege and attack, of course, it's much worse.

Addameer's report "is a preliminary summary of (its) findings, based on (extensive interviews, other primary research, and) the experiences of a few protagonist villages in the struggle against the Wall." Follow-up reports are planned to continue documenting the affects on "a wider number of villages affected by the Wall."

When completed, it will span over 760 kilometers, be more than five times longer than the Berlin Wall, and far more imposing with its sensors, trenches, security roads, mine fields, checkpoints, terminals, watchtowers, surveillance cameras, electronic sensory devices, and military patrols using killer dogs.

Around 20% of the Wall follows the "Green Line." The rest expropriates over 12% of the West Bank and East Jerusalem, and with the settlements, military zones, and for-Jews only infrastructure amounts to about 46% of the Territory and growing as Israel keeps seizing more land.

It displaces thousands of Palestinian families, entraps all Palestinians in the West Bank, steals their land and resources, and has nothing to do with security. It's a land grab/collective punishment scheme to enclose an entire people inside disconnected cantons in violation of international law and the ICJ ruling.

Organized Resistance Against the Wall

After Israel began construction in June 2002, spontaneous demonstrations, community actions, and meetings followed. The first public statement read:

The Wall represents "the Occupation in its ugliest face. (It's) stealing....land and water, and....changing....the historical and demographic status of these areas. (It's) uprooting....trees and (destroys) nature. (It's) in opposition to all that is human and civilized."

In October 2002, opposition groups were formed, including the Grassroots Anti-Apartheid Wall Campaign (Stop the Wall) in response to a need for a coordinated popular resistance and to offer advocacy, research, legal challenges, and support for the communities affected. Efforts thereafter grew, and from September 2003 became a national and international priority. Israel responded with permit restrictions to bar free movement and prevent people from accessing their lands. Since then, many anti-Wall farmers lost their livelihoods when they were denied permits to cultivate their own land.

Demonstrations, protests and strikes have continued in targeted West Bank communities and villages. Campaigns not to recognize the permit system were organized. Israeli forces responded harshly. Time passed. Crops rotted in fields and livelihoods were destroyed. Yet villagers resisted despite severe collective punishment imposed. Since then, eight West Bank popular committees have been represented in the Campaign's General Assembly, and five of the 11 members of the Campaign's coordinating committee are representatives from local groups.

In 2004, anti-Wall resistance became widespread. The first martyrs were killed in defending their rights. The ICJ ruled the Wall illegal and ordered its demolition. Increased land theft and human fallout drew international attention and encouraged mass protests and solidarity against state-sponsored terror.

Direct actions blocked bulldozers, breached sections of fences and razor wire separating villagers from their lands, slowing construction and forcing constant rebuilding. Media strategies were also developed through international contacts. In addition, committees held rallies, demonstrations, and sit-ins to pressure the Palestinian National Authority (PA) to support affected communities, raise the Wall issue at an international level, and act to implement the ICJ decision.

Yet when UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan came to Palestine in March 2005, he refused to speak out or visit the Wall. Around 5,000 Palestinians demonstrated in protest.

Since late 2005, popular resistance had to reorganize for numerous reasons. So much of the Wall was completed that actions to stop bulldozers ceased. Since international support failed to materialize, new forms of protest were needed to sustain a long-term struggle. Friday demonstrations replaced daily ones so a semblance of daily life was possible.

Yet in areas like Anata in East Jerusalem, daily protests continued because Wall construction ran straight through school courtyards. Students were involved and sustained many injuries for their efforts.

Frustration with the Palestinian leadership also grew as campaigning for the Palestinian Legislative Council (PLC) began in late 2005. It heightened the split between Fatah and Hamas because effective popular resistance was futile without leadership sustaining and capitalizing on it.

National actions like Land Day, the Week against the Apartheid Wall, and other events gained prominence. In March 2007, Land Day activities took place in over 20 locations with popular committees and students participating. Thereafter, Stop the Wall and popular committees have been key players in other national action days.

Resistance solidified and expanded south with new campaigns against Wall construction. People in the Jordan Valley protested against being isolated from the rest of the West Bank. Media and civil society organizations finally noticed, and political and material support began to arrive.

Since mid-2008, weekly protests gained strength in a number of villages - in Bil'in, Al Ma'sara, Irtas, Ni'lin, Jayyus, Nahalin, and elsewhere with hundreds of people facing down soldiers and risking arrests, injuries or death.

In addition, popular committees are focusing on settlements and renaming themselves "Committees Against the Wall and The Settlements" because both represent occupation leaving Palestinians dispossessed, walled-in, ghettoized, and repressed unless organized movements resist.

The villages of Burqa, Bizzariya, Silat, ad-Dhahr, Sabastiya, and Beit Imrin led protests against the resettlement of Homesh, a settlement evacuated during the "disengagement." After a month, Homesh settlers left with all their belongings.

Other actions included boycotting Israeli products and legally challenging companies that support the Wall and occupation. "The mobilizing capacity of the popular committees and Stop the Wall (have) become (key) actor(s) at national action days, such as Land Day and the 60 years Nakba Commemoration." During Operation Cast Lead, they sacrificed two lives in supporting Gazans under attack.

Movements against the Wall have become a "politically mature network of activism and resistance" despite escalated repression against them.

Violent Repression of Palestinian Anti-War Protests

They're ongoing in dozens of villages, and "immediate action is require to counter it." In Bil'in, Ni'lin, Al Ma'sara and Jayyus over 1,566 people have been wounded and six killed while protesting. IDF actions are vicious and beyond the bounds of "crowd control, security or self-defense." They involve:

-- threats to inflict individual and collective punishment;

-- premeditated shooting with intent to injure, disable, kill and send a message to other protesters;

-- night terror raids, curfews, closures, tear-gassing, and property destruction; and

-- entire villages targeted with collective punishment, including mass arrests and unconscionable viciousness.

A Friends of Freedom and Justice video recounted a recent Bi'lin incident:

"At around 2:30AM, two groups of around 35 soldiers (70 total) descended on the village....They raided several houses, detained their inhabitants, and searched (inside). When members of the ISM and the Popular Committee of Bi'lin confronted the soldiers, they called all of Bi'lin a closed military zone and threatened to arrest anyone out of their house or anyone on top of a house taking pictures."

"They kidnapped a 16 year old boy (Mohsen Kateb)....and took him away into the night. Haitham al-Katib, a respected Palestinian activist....was video taping....when soldiers aggressively pushed him against a wall and threatened him with arrest.....(the son of) Iyad Burant, the head of the popular committee, (was threatened) if he didn't produce a camera....This raid follows on the heels of others that have happened almost every night for two weeks." Arrests are made and people threatened because they campaign against the "loss of 60% of (their) farmland due to the construction of the apartheid wall and the illegal settlements" that continue to expand.

Israeli policy focuses on ruthless deterrence to break popular resistance by inflicting serious harm. Threats are made collectively and against village officials. Violence is systemically employed. Activists are threatened, killed or arrested. Live fire is used against peaceful demonstrators.

One popular committee member said: "once, soldiers broke into my home and told my mother that if her son did not stop, they would break his legs and he would never walk again." Others recounted death threats. Parents are told "we are going to take revenge on you and on your children." Leaflets are distributed promising "punishment (and) final warnings" to communities that keep protesting.

Home demolitions are also threatened. Farmers are told their land and crops will be destroyed. Force follows, including beatings, live fire, tear-gassing, willful killings, including against children. Soldiers justify it as "crowd (or) riot control" and that soldiers fire only in self-defense.

In fact, actions are grossly excessive against activists and peaceful demonstrations, and include ambushes, shootings from rooftops and concealed locations, and extreme aggression against a civilian population. At an early 2004 Biddu protest, soldiers unleashed a massive attack, killed two, injured 70 others, some severely, and caused an elderly man to die of a tear gas-induced heart attack. Numerous other demonstrations, then and now, were disproportionately attacked by "massive retaliatory violence" with dozens killed and thousands more injured throughout the West Bank. Prominent activists are targeted for removal, willful disabling, or death.

Illegal weapons are used, including bullets that break into pieces on contact leaving shrapnel slivers inside bodies that are very hard or impossible to remove. Besides willful killings, legs are targeted to inflict disabling injuries, including against children. Head shots are also used with rubber bullets and tear gas canisters dangerous enough to cause cranial fractures and permanent memory problems. Ambushes and other surprise attacks are employed using indiscriminate fire with lethal weapons unrelated to crowd or riot control.

Indiscriminate attacks also occur that are passed off as unfortunate errors, when, in fact, they're deliberate, for revenge, and "constitute an integral part of" oppressing popular resistance and right of Palestinians to be free. Innocent civilians are wounded, disabled or killed in cold blood because soldiers are ordered to do it.

Collective punishment is systemic and longstanding in the form of:

-- night terror raids to intimidate entire communities and villages; children are especially affected by shooting, explosions, and shouting through loudspeakers;

-- harassing curfews on entire villages prohibiting anyone from leaving homes on threat of being shot or arrested; while in force, soldiers break into homes, search them, and arrest occupants for interrogations that include beatings, humiliation and torture;

-- village closures and sieges are also imposed allowing no one and nothing in or out; throughout, homes are raided, people tear-gassed, arrested and shot, and property is destroyed;

-- besides outdoor tear-gassing, canisters are fired into homes without pretext, damaging property, human health and causing fires; a Jayyus resident said:

"I cannot count how many times they fired tear gas inside my house....As a result of everything, I had a heart attack, and have had two operations. My daughter has also been in the hospital."

-- willful property destruction occurs, including windows, possessions, and village water tanks; items are also stolen, including money, computers and books; and

-- fields are set afire, crops and trees uprooted, and land effectively destroyed.

State-Sponsored Repression

The above incidents show that "death, maiming and injury resulting from military violence....form a consistent pattern of repressive violence....Individual and collective punishment are two, complementary parts of this strategy" that aim to weaken solidarity, create divisions, and crush the will to resist - to kill it "from the roots."

Intimidating munitions are used, including:

-- hollow point bullets that expand in human flesh to maximize tissue and organ damage;

-- exploding or fragmenting bullets to tear apart human flesh and leave hard to remove metal fragments inside;

-- .22 caliber bullets designed to be less lethal but more deadly than rubber-coated ones that at times can maim or kill; and

-- 40 mm high-velocity tear gas rounds that resemble shells and explode internally for added velocity and impact; when fired directly at crowds, they're like missiles able to cause serious injuries and deaths.

Collective Punishment and Community Blackmailing

Collective punishment includes threats that it will continue as long as demonstrations persist. It also aims to divide communities, families in the interest of their children, hurt economically by destroying property, deny permits to hamper movement, and break the will to resist.

Violating Civil and Political Rights

As explained above, Israel employs a range of repressive tactics, including threats, physical pressure, curfews, blockades, isolation, arrests, property destruction, and targeted and indiscriminate killings on pretexts such as:

-- stone-throwing;

-- interfering with soldiers' activities;

-- resisting arrest;

-- being in a closed military zone; and

-- threatening the security of Israel, even though the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) affirms that assembling and peaceful protests are lawfully protected activities.

Since 1967, however, over 750,000 Palestinians (as much as 40% of the male population) have been victimized by systematic arrests, detentions and brutalizing treatment in custody.

"Over the years, thousands of Palestinians have been detained and charged with maintaining ties to an organization, institute, office, movement, branch, centre, committee, faction, group, or whatever the law defines as 'a body of persons' branded 'hostile' or 'terrorist' and included in an ever-expanding list of unlawful associations."

Israel's Military Court System

Unlike Israelis, Palestinians are processed, tried, and sentenced in military courts located inside Israeli military bases. From the outset, they haven't a chance under a system rigged to convict. Less than 1% are acquitted. Individual rights are denied. Institutionalized racism prevails. International human rights laws are defiled, and according to the UN Human Rights Committee:

-- a state of emergency never justifies deviation from fundamental principles of fair trials;

-- military courts should never be used, except in cases where civil ones aren't able to function;

-- when used, military tribunals must afford all protections guaranteed under ICCPR's Article 14 that stipulates: "All persons shall be equal before the courts and tribunals....shall be presumed to be innocent until proved guilty," shall have a fair and impartial trial, and be granted all rights according to established international law.

Israel's military courts defile all of the above and offer no possibility for justice. Judges are hanging ones. Children as young as 16 are tried as adults. Secret evidence is used, and the right to appeal flawed verdicts and sentences is severely compromised.

Israel targets anyone suspected of resisting as well as children for the "crime" of assembly, throwing rocks, or having a family member previously arrested. Popular committee heads are especially sought as a way to remove leaders and weaken movements. A Bil'in village head, Iyad Burnat, was arrested twice - in 2005 when he blocked bulldozers beginning work on a segment of the Wall. He was beaten severely enough to require hospitalization. Then in 2008, he was arrested again during a demonstration, tried and fined. Similar incidents occur regularly in other villages.

Youths are frequently targeted because they're among the staunchest and most proactive demonstrators, yet more vulnerable, less aware of their rights, and as a way to intimidate parents. At times, military raids provoke them to react and crack down hard indiscriminately when they do.

According to Defence for Children International/Palestine Section 2009 Annual Report on Palestinian Child Prisoners, when soldiers clash with youths, they go after "any child in the vicinity, regardless of whether that child was actually involved in the unrest of not." During interrogations, they're then subjected to psychological and physical abuse, just like adults, to extract confessions of whatever authorities want - "which (most) Palestinian children do not understand."

During arrests, violence is standard practice. Samed Mohammad Hassn Salim's experience was typical. On February 18, 2009 in Jayyus, he and 60 others were arrested for participating in a weekly protest against the Wall. His pregnant wife was thrown to the ground and later suffered a miscarriage. A medical report confirmed it resulted from the fall and sound grenades used in the assault.

Those in detention face intimidation, humiliation, threats of recriminations against family members, long interrogations, physical and psychological torture and abuse, demands to sign confessions and provide information on other protesters, denial of medical care, poor sanitary and hygiene conditions, inadequate quantity and poor quality of food and water, and exposure to the elements.

According to one detainee: "They always beat you - that is normal." Another said: "They were beating me. It felt like they were trying to kill me. They handcuffed me and forced me into a chair. My neck still hurts from the beatings I received. They were strangling me. I lost consciousness."

At times, treatment is severe enough to leave permanent psychological and/or physical scars. Detainees are forced to sign confessions in Hebrew they don't understand, confess to crimes, and deny they were tortured. Nonetheless, one military commander said that for every 1000 detainees, only one will provide information, and even that might prove useless.

Palestinian human rights activists are generally treated harshest of all, including severe treatment and longer sentences for resisting repression and standing up for their rights that include peaceful demonstrations and displaying the Palestinian flag.

Israeli, International and Palestinian Protesters: Different Rights, Different Jurisdiction, Drastically Different Repercussions

Israel and international activists face far different treatment under Israel's judicial standards. In detention, they're generally treated humanely, endure no long interrogations as a rule, most often are released in a few hours, may or may not face charges, but if so are tried in civil courts under a completely different system of justice. Acquittals are more common, fines lower, first offenses forgiven, if sentences are imposed they're for much shorter periods, and the right of appeal is assured.

In the first seven months of 2009, 129 Israeli activists were indicted, 15 convicted, and the majority got suspended sentences or convictions reversed on appeal. Deportation was how most internationals were handled. "To date, there have been no reported cases of an Israeli or international activist serving more than a week in prison, or being placed in administrative detention," and most are rarely sentenced. Currently, no international activists are in prison for having participated in an anti-Wall protest.

In contrast, Palestinians charged with throwing stones face up to 20 years in prison although generally they're released within a year.

Under ICCPR's Article 14, fair, impartial trials are guaranteed. Under the UN Congress on the Prevention of Crime and the Treatment of Offenders, Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers, access to competent counsel must be granted within 48 hours. Adequate time and facilities must be available to communicate privately, and if detainees can't afford to pay, proper representation must be provided anyway.

Nonetheless, Palestinians are affected by factors such as counsel's citizenship and residency status, as well as military orders, Israeli laws and prison procedures that violate international standards, so their right to fair, impartial justice is impossible.

Inflated and multiple charges also assure convictions on at least one offense regardless of the validity of evidence. The result is less than 1% acquittals as explained above and 97% resolutions by plea bargain agreements for the most leniency lawyers can get.

Military tribunal justice is near-impossible when charges of throwing stones or owning a gun are inflated to "trying to kill" and prosecutors rely solely on soldiers' testimonies for corroboration. Lymore Goldstein who's represented a number of Palestinian and Israeli activists cites Israel's apartheid justice with Jews treated one way and Palestinians another:

"The evidence used against people is never verified, for instance, all the (Palestinians) who touched the microphone (at a specific protest) were charged with incitement - there was no mention of what they had said" or what, in fact, they incited. "This is a very typical example," but for Jews it's entirely opposite. Even when Palestinians can prove their innocence, acquittals are rarely gotten.

Attorney Sahar Francis expressed frustration saying:

"I'm against the military courts. Let the occupiers do this job for themselves. Why should lawyers go there and try to do things when we know at the beginning" how things will turn out.

From their time of arrest, Palestinians have almost no chance to prevail under a system of kangaroo court justice, so it's why up to 12,000 languish in Israeli prisons at any time and endure torture and other dehumanizing treatment.

Mohammed Brijiah, from Al Ma'sara described his arrest and trial ordeal:

"Three times during the night, they came and attacked my house, took out my brothers and nieces....and my children, including my 1-year-old daughter. They made my family stand outside for 3 - 4 hours. They damaged the furniture, told me to get dressed and that they would take me to prison. I was arrested twice (in November 2007 and December 2008). They brought me to a court and then released me....I stayed one week, but the arrest was because of the demonstration. (Another) accusation was that I beat a soldier, but (video evidence) clearly shows that I did nothing like this."

Prosecutors did all they could to extend his detention and brought up baseless old charges to delay his trial hearing. Brijiah was luckier than most others who disappear for months or years in Israel's criminal justice system that affords none of it to Palestinians. No bail, long sentences, high fines, and brutalizing treatment are common, nearly always in violation of international law. For example, under Military Order 378, stone throwing carries a maximum penalty of 20 years imprisonment, and the threshold of evidence to convict on mere suspicion is low enough to prevail.

Former soldier, now writer and journalist Seth Freedman says it's common for the military to select targets, regardless of whether they're committing the act in question. Then it's their word against defendants, nearly always they prevail, and many innocent youths are imprisoned for offenses they didn't commit but have no way to prove it. They can't prove a negative.

Nor can they defend against threats that serve as "a powerful coercive means of intimidating - and harassing - protestors." In detention, death or physical harm threats are made during interrogations. Also making them against family members is commonplace as a way to induce cooperation.

Further, collective punishment, mass arrests, and various forms of intimidation are repeated throughout the West Bank. They comprise ways "to punish anyone exercising their right to self-determination and resistance. Their impact will be manifold, affecting family's livelihoods, freedom of movement, as well as their rights to express themselves and assemble freely."

Conclusions

Israeli authorities act in violation of the fundamental right to assemble, demonstrate, and protest peacefully. Violent and aggressive measures are used repeatedly in violation of international law. Palestinian activists risk arrest, interrogation, long detentions, kangaroo trials, imprisonment, torture and other forms of abuse. Nonetheless, they persist, and according to one interviewee:

"The army has created a lot of obstacles but it hasn't prevented the protests." Those arrested do it again, at times more cautiously, but others with a determination to prevail.

The entire judicial process is racially biased and blatantly discriminatory. Indiscriminate arrests are made. Demonstrators are intimidated and targeted. Popular committee leaders and youths are most vulnerable. State terror is common practice, and in detention humiliation, torture and other abuses are employed for extended periods - to break their spirit, crush their will to resist, make them docile and submissive, or simply give up and leave. For over four decades under occupation, Palestinians, on their own, have continued their struggle to live freely on their own land, in their own country as international law affirms.

Recommendations

-- on July 20, 2004, the ICJ ruled the Wall illegal and called for its demolition; the UN General Assembly endorsed the decision; it's time for the UN "to follow through on its mandate to develop relevant measures to ensure the implementation of the ICJ decision;"

-- Israel should be pressured by targeted sanctions, including an arms embargo;

-- the UN Human Rights Council and Special Rapporteur for Human Rights should address these issues;

-- the international community should:

(1) "Take real action to ensure that Israel complies with the" ICJ's decision;

(2) protect the lawful right of Palestinians to protest against the Wall and land confiscation to build it;

(3) affirm Palestinians' right to resist against Israeli repression;

(4) hold Israel accountable under international law and pressure it to halt arbitrary arrests, indiscriminate violence, mass arrests, torture, and other human rights violations;

(5) assure international standards and legal guarantees protect Palestinians brought to trial;

(6) until and unless Israel fully complies, "suspend cooperation, free trade, research and development," and other normal relations with a rogue state; and

(6) sanction companies that "aid or assist the construction or maintenance of the Wall, and follow the same course of action with regards to companies that construct, invest or operate in the settlements."

-- Palestinian, international, and other NGOs should continue their active support for "the popular committees on the ground through their services and capacities."

Like people everywhere, Palestinians yearn to live freely on their own land as international law affirms. They deserve universal support for the most fundamental of all rights without which all others are compromised.

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.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=15305

Goldstone Commission Gaza Conflict Findings and Reactions

Goldstone Commission Gaza Conflict Findings and Reactions - by Stephen Lendman

On April 3, 2009, a UN press release stated:

"The Human Rights Council (HRC) today announced the appointment of Richard J. Goldstone....to lead an independent (four-person) fact-finding mission to investigate international human rights and humanitarian law violations related to the recent conflict in the Gaza Strip....The team will be supported by staff of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights....Today's appointment comes following the adoption of a resolution by the Human Rights Council....to address 'the grave violations of human rights in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, particularly due to the recent Israeli military attacks against the occupied Gaza Strip."

Established by the UN General Assembly on March 15, 2006, the HRC's 47 member states are "responsible for strengthening the promotion and protection of human rights around the globe."

As a former South African Constitutional Court justice, Goldstone is a respected jurist. He also served as chief prosecutor for the Yugoslavia and Rwanda tribunals and is a Hebrew University board member. As a Jew, he promised to be fair and even-handed, and "hope(s) that the findings....will make a meaningful contribution to the peace process....and will provide justice for the victims."

At the time, Israel refused to cooperate, Foreign Ministry spokesman, Yigal Palmor, saying: "This committee is instructed not to seek out the truth but to single out Israel for alleged crimes." He then accused the Council of having "practically (no) credibility at all."

On September 15, the HRC released the Commission's 575 page report, titled Human Rights in Palestine and Other Occupied Arab Territories: Report of the United Nations Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict.

It covered Operation Cast Lead, the Gaza siege, the impact of Israel's West Bank military occupation, and much more including:

-- events between the "ceasefire" period from June 18, 2008 to Israel's initiated hostilities on December 27, 2008;

-- applicable international law

-- Occupied Gaza under siege;

-- an overview of Operation Cast Lead;

-- the obligations of both sides to protect civilians;

-- indiscriminate Israeli attacks on civilians resulting in many hundreds of deaths and thousands of injuries;

-- "the use of certain weapons;"

-- attacking "the foundations of civilian life in Gaza: destruction of industrial infrastructure, food production, water installations, sewage treatment plants and housing;"

-- using Palestinians as human shields;

-- detention and incarceration of Gazans during the conflict;

-- the IDF's objectives and strategy;

-- impact of the siege and military operations on Gazans and their human rights;

-- the detention of the Israeli soldier, Gilad Shalit;

-- internal Gaza violence - Hamas v. Fatah;

-- the Occupied West Bank and East Jerusalem;

-- Israel's treatment of Palestinians in the West Bank, including excessive or lethal force during demonstrations;

-- Palestinians in Israeli prisons;

-- Israeli violations of free movement and access rights;

-- Fatah targeting Hamas supporters in the West Bank, and restricting free assembly and expression;

-- rocket and mortar attacks against Israeli civilians;

-- repression of dissent, access to information, and treatment of human rights defenders in Israel;

-- Israeli responses to war crimes charges;

-- proceedings by Palestinian authorities;

-- universal jurisdiction;

-- reparations; and

-- conclusions and recommendations.

The introduction stated that:

"The Mission interpreted (its) mandate (to) requir(e) it to place the civilian population of the region at the centre of its concerns regarding the violations of international law."

It repeatedly tried to get Israel's cooperation, but failed. However, it "enjoyed the support and cooperation of the Palestinian Authority (PA) and of the Permanent Observer Mission of Palestine to the United Nations." Israel denied the Commission access to the West Bank and had to meet with PA officials in Amman, Jordan. "During its visits to the Gaza Strip, the Mission (also) held meetings with senior (Hamas) members, and they extended their full cooperation and support...."

The Commission's "normative framework" was international law, international humanitarian law, the UN Charter, and international human rights and criminal law.
Information gotten included:

-- reports from different sources;

-- interviews with victims, witnesses, and others with relevant information;

-- visitations to specific Gaza sites where incidents occurred;

-- an analysis of video and photographic images, including satellite imagery;

-- medical reports about injuries to victims;

-- forensic analysis of weapons and munitions remnants collected from incident sites;

-- meetings with interlocutors;

-- information received in response to requests to provide it; and

-- public hearings in Gaza and Geneva.

The Commission conducted 188 interviews, received over 300 reports, submissions, and other documents comprising more than 10,000 pages, 30 videos, and 1,200 photographs. As much as possible, it relied on material gathered first-hand. Secondary sources were then used for corroboration. Overall, enough information was obtained "of a credible and reliable nature for the Mission to make a finding in fact." It established clear evidence of crimes, and in almost all cases was able to determine if the acts in question were deliberate or reckless.

"By refusing to cooperate with the Mission, the Government of Israel prevented it from meeting Israeli government officials, but also from traveling to Israel to meet with Israeli victims and to the West Bank to meet with Palestinian Authority representatives and Palestinian victims."

Commission's Findings

A UN September 15 press release stated that the Mission concluded that "there is evidence indicating serious violations of international human rights and humanitarian law were committed by Israel during the Gaza conflict, and that Israel committed actions amounting to war crimes, and possibly crimes against humanity." Examples included numerous incidents of civilians shot waving white flags while trying to leave their homes for safer locations. Other instances of Palestinians used as human shields, arbitrary arrests, and extra-judicial assassinations in Gaza and the West Bank.

In particular, the Commission noted that:

"While the Israeli Government has sought to portray its operations as essentially a response to rocket attacks in the exercise of its right of self defence, the Mission considers the plan to have been directed, at least in part, at a different target: the people of Gaza as a whole." Rocket attacks were a pretext for naked aggression.

Calling them war crimes, the Mission found evidence that "Palestinian armed groups" launched rockets and mortars into Southern Israel, but they were minor incidents compared to the Israeli onslaught.

The Commission called the Gaza siege collective punishment through a "policy of progressive isolation and deprivation," and that Operation Cast Lead destroyed vast amounts of Gaza infrastructure, homes, public buildings, factories, schools, hospitals, police stations, and other structures and facilities.

It cited the death toll at over 1,400, families still living in rubble, the blockade preventing reconstruction, and significant immediate and long-term trauma, especially on children.

It blamed Israel for depriving Palestinians of a means of subsistence, employment, housing, water, free movement, the right to leave and return to their own country, and access to judicial redress constituting a "crime of persecution (and) against humanity...."

Israel also violated the principles of "distinction" between combatants and military targets v. civilians and non-military ones, and "proportionality" that prohibits disproportionate indiscriminate force likely to cause extensive damage and great loss of life.

The Commission found numerous incidents of Israeli forces launching "direct (disproportionate) attacks against civilians with lethal outcomes." These are war crimes because "no justifiable military objective" was pursued.

It cited "a justice crisis in the Occupied Palestinian Territory that warrants action." It said Israel conducted no "credible investigation into alleged violations," and recommended that the Security Council (SC) require it to do so and report back within six months. It further asked the SC to establish an expert independent body to oversee the investigations and prosecutions progress and refer the matter to the International Criminal Court (ICC) Prosecutor if Israel doesn't comply.

"The report concludes that the Israeli military operation was directed at the people of Gaza as a whole, in furtherance of an overall and continuing policy aimed at punishing the Gaza population, and in a deliberate policy of disproportionate force aimed at the civilian population. The destruction of food supply installations, water sanitation systems, concrete factories and residential houses was the result of a deliberate and systematic policy which has made the daily process of living, and dignified living, more difficult for the civilian population."

Richard Goldstone's September 17, 2009 New York Times Op-Ed

Goldstone said that, "above all," he accepted the UN mandate because of his deep belief "in the rule of law and the laws of war, and the principle that in armed conflict civilians should to the greatest extent possible be protected from harm."

Yet Israel willfully killed hundreds of civilians as a result of "disproportionate attacks," including on hospitals and civilian structures. "Repeatedly, the Israel Defense Forces failed to adequately distinguish between combatants and civilians, as the laws of war strictly require....Pursuing justice in this case is essential because no state or armed group should be above the law." Failure to do so "will have a deeply corrosive effect on international justice, and reveal an unacceptable hypocrisy. As a service to hundreds of civilians who needlessly died and for the equal application of international justice, the perpetrators of serious violations must be held to account."

Amnesty International's (AI) Response to the Goldstone Report

Donatella Rovera, head AI's Operation Cast Lead investigation, called on the UN Human Rights Council to "endorse the report and its recommendations and request the UN Secretary-General to refer it to the UN Security Council. (It) and other UN bodies must now take the necessary steps to ensure that the victims receive justice and reparation that is their due and that perpetrators don't get away with murder." The Security Council "must refer the Goldstone findings to the International Criminal Court (ICC) Prosecutor if Israel and Hamas do not carry out credible investigations within a set, limited period." AI added that the report's findings are consistent with its own.

The New York Times Response to the Goldstone Report

A September 15 Neil MacFarquhar article quoted the report citing Israel's "deliberately disproportionate attack designed to punish, humiliate and terrorize a civilian population," but suggested that Hamas was equally culpable.

Then on September 17, it published two highly critical letters of Goldstone. One was from Richard Sideman, president of the American Jewish Committee saying:

"Richard Goldstone displays the same disregard for Israel and naivete regarding Hamas that permeates the report he wrote for the United Nations Human Rights Council."

He then vilified the HRC as "consistently demoniz(ing) Israel while giving a free pass to some of the world's worst tyrants, from Sudan to Iran, (and) Mr. Goldstone largely neglects what prompted Israel to act militarily against Hamas....In sum, Mr. Goldstone's conclusions are a disservice to the credibility of the United Nations itself."

In the second letter, Matan Shamir, a Legacy Heritage Fellow, said Richard Goldstone is "absolutely right" about "the 'corrosive effect on international justice' and the 'unacceptable hypocrisy' of not holding Israel accountable....but through the select application of international law against one democratic nation, Israel." By that standard, "United States troops would similarly be unable to defend themselves in Iraq and Afghanistan without being smeared as war criminals."

On September 18, The Times ran two more anti-Goldstone letters condemning Hamas "terrorism," defending Israel's right to self-defense, and saying that since its founding, "Israel was plagued by attacks by rejectionist groups that continue to this day."

It also ran a September 18 story headlined "UN Study Is Called Unfair to Israel" and quoted State Department spokesman Ian Kelly saying:

"Although the report addresses all sides of the conflict, its overwhelming focus is on the actions of Israel. Its conclusions regarding Hamas' deplorable conduct and its failure to comply with international humanitarian law during the conflict are more general and tentative."

Absent entirely from The Times, now and always, is an emphasis on the egregiousness of Israeli crimes, its ability to commit them with impunity, the unconscionable Gaza siege, and 42 years of oppressive military occupation and state terror against millions of Palestinian civilians. In covering a persecuted people, The Times looks the other way.

The Palestinian Centre for Human Rights (PCHR) Response

PCHR welcomed the Goldstone report and called for "effective judicial redress and the protection of victims' rights." It urged that the Mission's recommendations be adopted to assure accountability, either through the Security Council; under the UN Charter's Chapter VII that deals with breaches of or threats to peace and acts of aggression; or by referring the matter to the ICC for criminal prosecutions and to compensate Palestinians in accordance with international law.

PCHR stressed that normal relations can't be conducted with states that commit crimes of war and against humanity. International pressure must be exerted to insure Israel's compliance. The siege must be ended and reconstruction allowed to begin. So far, the international community is silent and has granted Israel impunity to act above the law.

"The results of this impunity are evident. The situation cannot be allowed to persist. If the rule of law is to be relevant, it must be upheld." According to the UN Charter, individual states and the UN must fulfill their legal obligation "to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war....reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights....establish conditions under which justice (and) international law can be maintained, (and resolve) to maintain international peace and security...."

Other Responses from Human Rights Organizations

Rabbis for Human Rights called on Israel to take the report seriously, study its findings, and investigate charges of "violat(ions of) the laws of war as well as human rights." Rabbi Ellen Lippmann, co-chair, Rabbis for Human Rights-North American (PHR-NA) said:

"Our colleagues in Israel have been urging Israel to launch an independent and impartial investigation of its own. As we rabbis and our communities prepare to celebrate Rosh HaShanah, our hearts and minds are turned toward Israel, hoping than an investigation will begin shortly....to work toward justice and right in Israel and at home."

The Arab Association for Human Rights (ARABHRA) endorsed the Goldstone report's findings of "strong evidence of war crimes and crimes against humanity committed during the Gaza conflict." It called for an end to Israeli impunity and action to hold it accountable.

"Taking into account the ability to plan, the means to execute plans with the most developed technology available, and statements by the Israeli military that almost no errors occurred, (it's clear) that the incidents and patterns of events considered in the report are the result of deliberate planning and policy decision."

B'Tselem said "Israel must investigate Operation Cast Lead" crimes, and called on its government "to take the report seriously and to refrain from automatically rejecting its findings or denying its legitimacy. Already it is clear that the findings of the report will join a long series of reports indicating that Israel's actions (in Gaza) violated the laws of combat and human rights law."

Other human rights organizations endorsed this statement including: Association for Civil Rights in Israel (ACRI), Adalah, Bimkom, Gisha, HaMoked, Physicians for Human Rights (Israel), The Public Committee Against Torture (PACTI), and Yesh Din.

Israel's Response

Not surprisingly, Israeli officials condemned the report and dismissed it out of hand. President Shimon Peres called it "a mockery of history" and charged that it "fails to distinguish between the aggressor and a state exercising its right of self defense....The report legitimizes terrorist activity, the pursuit of murder and death. The report disregards the duty and right of self-defense...."

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said:

"The Goldstone report is a kangaroo court against Israel, whose consequences harm the struggle of democratic countries against terror."

Deputy Foreign Minister, Danny Ayalon, called the report "a dangerous attempt to harm the principle of self-defense by democratic states and provides legitimacy to terrorism. (It's) a cynical attempt at role reversal in blaming Israel for war crimes instead of terrorist organizations." He added that Israel would enlist the support of Western democracies in a campaign "to prevent turning international law into a circus."

Defense Secretary, Ehud Barak, said the report constituted "a prize for terrorism. The comparison between those who foment terrorism and its victims is unconscionable."

UN ambassador, Gabriela Shalev, said: "The mandate of the Goldstone Commission was one-sided from the beginning and the initiative to establish the commission came from the UN Human Rights Council, which is known for regularly and routinely condemning Israel."

The extremist Jerusalem Post called the report "nauseating (by equating) a democratic state with a terror organization."

Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman said:

"The whole purpose of the report, from the moment the decision was made to write it, was to destroy Israel's image, in service to countries where the terms 'human rights' and 'combat ethics' do not even appear in their dictionaries. I can say wholeheartedly....that the IDF is the most moral army in the world, and it is forced to deal with the most vile terrorists, who set for themselves the goal of killing women and children, and hide behind women and children."

"(The report) wishes to take the UN back to the dark ages....(It) has no legal, factual or ethical value, (and) it is a testament to the writers of the report and those that sent them."

Lieberman heads the ultranationalist/revisionist Zionist Yisrael Beiteinu (Israel is Our Home) party, and has openly called for the assassination of Hamas leaders, saying:

"They have to disappear, go to Paradise, all of them and there can't be any compromise."

He also wants the peace process abandoned, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas ignored, and once urged that Israeli Arabs be deported and Arab Knesset members who met with Hamas or Hezbollah executed. Haaretz called him:

an "unrestrained and irresponsible man....a threat (to Israel for) his lack of restraint and his unbridled tongue (that may) bring disaster (to) the whole region."

Like other Israeli leaders, confrontation with Iran is one of his top priorities as well as continued West Bank land seizures (including all of East Jerusalem) for settlement expansions, denying Palestinians their rights and freedom, and restricting them to isolated cantons.

New UN Report Says Israel Is Blocking Gaza's Reconstruction

On September 18, the London Guardian reported on a leaked September UN report accusing Israel of causing "de-development" by keeping Gaza under siege, denying essential aid, and blocking its reconstruction.

From Jerusalem, Rory McCarthy wrote:

"....much reconstruction work is still to be done because materials are either delayed or banned from entering the strip. The UN (Office of the Humanitarian Co-ordinator) Report, obtained by the Guardian, reveals the delays facing the delivery of even the most basis aid. On average, it takes 85 days to get shelter kits into Gaza, 68 days to deliver health and paediatric hygiene kits, and 39 days for household items such as bedding and kitchen utensils."

All sorts of essentials are either delayed or banned. The report accused Israel of "contraven(ing)" the Security Council's January 2009 resolution 1860 calling for "unimpeded provision and distribution" of humanitarian aid.

Titled "Access for the Provision of Humanitarian Assistance to Gaza: An Overview to Delivering Principled Humanitarian Assistance," it said:

"....there has been no significant improvement in the quantity and scope of goods allowed into Gaza....The lack of construction materials, as well as equipment and material necessary for maintenance and repair of public infrastructure, has lead to a process of de-development in the Gaza Strip, which potentially could lead to the complete breakdown of public infrastructure and further deterioration in the economy."

In 2005, Israel signed an Agreement on Movement and Access (AMA) with the PA. At the time, 9,470 monthly truckloads into Gaza were considered inadequate. During June and July 2009, only 2,406 entered monthly, a 75% reduction and 80% below the June 2007 12,352 level for the Strip's 1.5 million people.

"The result is a gradual process of de-development across all sectors, devastating livelihoods, increasing unemployment, and resulting in increased aid dependency amongst the population."

Everything is urgently needed, but blocked from entering, including vital construction materials for redevelopment. Getting in are inadequate amounts of food, hygiene, and some other items plus what enters through Gaza's tunnel economy.

Final Comments

For over six decades, Israeli state terror continued its tradition of blaming the victim and choosing militarism, violence, intimidation, and naked aggression over peaceful coexistence, respect for human rights, and observance of international laws and norms. Israelization and De-Arabization are fixed policies. So is the Dahiya Doctrine, named after the Beirut suburb that the IDF destroyed in the 2006 Lebanon war. It calls civilians a strategic target "at the heart of the enemy's weak spot," and for using disproportionate force against them, their property, and infrastructure.

Arabs are thus disenfranchised, denied rights, and deemed inferior as subhumans. Israeli policy is confrontation, conflict, oppression, impoverishment, displacement, slow-motion genocide, and state terror to depopulate historic Palestine for Jews only.

Operation Cast Lead was the latest episode, but Gaza remains isolated under siege. The West Bank is under military occupation. Land seizures, arrests, random killings, torture, checkpoint restrictions, home demolitions, crop destruction, permits, economic strangulation, and incarcerations occur daily, yet the world community is silent. The Goldstone Commission offers the latest evidence of what's persisted for decades. Holding Israel accountable is essential. It's high time world bodies and jurists demanded it.

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.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=15190

Doctors Aiding Torture

Doctors Aiding Torture - by Stephen Lendman

In April 2009, a confidential February 2007 ICRC torture report was publicly released. Titled, "ICRC Report on the Treatment of Fourteen 'High Value Detainees' in CIA Custody," it detailed harsh and abusive treatment from their time of arrest, detention, transfer, and incarceration at Guantanamo where ICRC professionals interviewed them.

Besides detailed information on torture and abusive treatment, they obtained damning, consistent detainee accounts of medical personnel involvement, including:

-- their monitoring of and direct participation in torture procedures;

-- instructing interrogators to continue, adjust, or stop certain ones;

-- informing detainees that medical treatment depended on their cooperation;

-- performing medical checks before and after each transfer; and

-- treating the effects of torture as well as ailments and injuries during incarceration.

Condoning or participating in torture grievously breaches medical ethics and the 1975 World Medical Association (WMA) Declaration of Tokyo "Guidelines for Physicians Concerning Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment in Relation to Detention and Imprisonment." It states:

-- in all cases at all times, "physician(s) shall not countenance, condone or participate in" torture or any other form of abuse;

-- they "shall not use nor allow to be used (their) medical knowledge or skills, or health information" to aid interrogation in any way;

-- they "shall not be present during any procedure during which torture or any other forms of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment is used or threatened;"

-- they "must have complete clinical independence" in treating persons for whom they're medically responsible; and

-- WMA encourages the international community and fellow physicians to support medical professionals who face "threats or reprisals resulting from a refusal to condone" all forms of torture and abuse.

Protocol I of the 1949 Geneva Conventions states:

"Persons engaged in medical activities shall neither be compelled to perform acts or to carry out work contrary to, nor be compelled to refrain from acts required by, the rules of medical ethics or other rules designed for the benefit of the wounded and sick, or this Protocol."

On July 7, 2005 in the New England Journal of Medicine, Dr. Gregg Bloche and Jonathan Marks published an article titled, "Doctors and Interrogators at Guantanamo Bay" in which they cited evidence that "Health information (was) routinely available to behavioral science consultants and others" engaged in interrogations, in violation of strict medical ethics.

In early 2003, detainee medical records were readily available, and since late 2002, psychiatrists and psychologists were involved in crafting extreme stress techniques "combined with behavior-shaping rewards to extract actionable intelligence from resistant captives."

"Wholesale disregard for clinical confidentiality" seriously breaches medical ethics "since it makes every caregiver into an accessory to intelligence gathering." It also "puts prisoners at greater risk for serious abuse."

In July 2006, the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR) published a report titled, "Report on Torture and Cruel, Inhuman, and Degrading Treatment of Prisoners at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba" that included evidence of medical personnel involvement in torture.

Detainee Othman Abdulraheem Mohammad was told that medical treatment would depend on his cooperation. Lakhdar Boumediene said every time he requested care he was told to ask permission from his interrogators. They "controlled his access, (and it) was granted or denied based on the interrogator's assessment of his level of cooperation."

Bosnian prisoner medical records confirmed that medical staff were present during their interrogations "and authorized (them) to proceed."

Medical personnel monitored Mohammed al Qahtani's interrogation during nearly two months of "severe sleep deprivation and physical stress." At one point, they rushed him to the base hospital when his heart rate dropped dangerously low. After stabilization, they returned him the next day for more interrogation.

Other prisoners described doctors performing unnecessary and abusive procedures, including forced amputations, after which they were denied proper treatment.

Psychiatrists and psychologists designed "extreme interrogation techniques as part of the Behavioral Science Consultation Team (BSCT)." In late 2002, it was tasked "to torment detainees in interrogations...."

International and US Laws Prohibiting Torture

Numerous international and US laws unequivocally ban torture under all conditions at all times with no allowed exceptions ever, for any reasons, including in times of war.

The Third Geneva Convention covers war prisoners and detainees. It prohibits torture and protects their right to be treated humanely against "violence to life and person (and) humiliating and degrading treatment" as well as to judicial fairness and proper medical treatment. The Fourth Geneva Convention affords the same rights to civilians in times of war.

The federal anti-torture statute (18 USC, 2340A) prohibits its use outside the US and defines it as "an act committed by a person acting under the color of law specifically intended to inflict severe physical or mental pain or suffering....upon another person within his custody or physical control."

The 1991 Torture Victims Protection Act authorizes civil suits in America against individuals, acting in an official capacity for a foreign state, who committed torture and/or extrajudicial killing.

The 1984 UN Convention Against Torture bans all forms of torture, cruel and degrading treatment in all circumstances at all times with no exceptions ever allowed.

The US Constitution's Fifth, Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments prohibit cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment.

The US Army's Field Manual 27-10 states that military or civilian persons may be punished for committing war crimes (that include abusive interrogations) under international law. Army Field Manual 34-52 outlines interrogation procedures and specifically prohibits force, mental torture, threats, and inhumane treatment.

The Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) bans cruelty, oppression, actions intended to degrade or humiliate, and physical, menacing, and threatening assaults. Army Regulation (AR) 190-8 protects detainees from violence, assaults, and insults, and directs that they be treated humanely with respect.

The 1996 US War Crimes Act prohibits grave Geneva Convention breaches, including (as stipulated under Common Article III) "violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture (as well as) outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment."

Other binding international laws also prohibit torture, including the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the 1992 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights with no exceptions or justifications allowed, such as orders by field commanders, Pentagon officials, or the President of the United States.

Physicians for Human Rights (PHR)

Founded in 1986, PHR "mobilizes health professionals to advance health, dignity, and justice and promotes the right to health for all." It also "investigates human rights abuses and works to stop them" in conflict zones, US prisons, and offshore detention facilities where torture is routinely practiced.

In 2005, it published a report titled, "Break Them Down: Systematic Use of Psychological Torture by US Forces," which it called the first comprehensive examination of "the use of psychological torture by US personnel in the so-called 'war on terror,' " including sensory deprivation, prolonged isolation, sleep deprivation, forced nudity, using fierce dogs to instill fear, cultural and sexual humiliation, mock executions, and threatened violence against loved ones.

It called the effects devastating and longer-lasting than physical torture, and said psychological abuse is morally reprehensible and illegal under international and US law.

In August 2009, PHR published a new report titled, "Aiding Torture: Health Professionals' Ethics and Human Rights Violations Revealed in the May 2004 CIA Inspector General's Report," including ethical misconduct not previously known. It revealed the role of health professionals involved "at every stage in the development, implementation and legitimization of this torture program."

It explained that doctors and psychologists actively participated in abusive interrogations and contributed to the physical and mental suffering of detainees. It called their actions "an unconscionable affront to the profession of medicine," made worse by experimenting on inmates, then "aggregat(ing) data on (their) reaction to interrogation methods."

PHR's Steven Reisner said "They were experimenting and keeping records of the results," a war crime under Geneva and the Nuremberg Code that requires "voluntary consent" of human subjects and prohibits experiments:

-- that inflict "unnecessary physical and mental suffering and injury;"

-- if there's "an a priori reason to believe death or disabling injury will occur;" and

-- from being implemented if there's reason to believe they'll cause "injury, disability, or death to the experimental subject."

PHR's report detailed the psychological and medical effects:

-- forced shaving inflicts psychological harm "by means of humiliation, both personal and religious;"

-- hooding disorients and causes acute anxiety depression, depersonalization, and abnormal behavior;

-- dietary manipulation inflicts discomfort and psychological stress;

-- prolonged diapering causes physical and psychological stress and harm;

-- walling inflicts physical injuries as well as psychological stress, rage, and helplessness;

-- confinement in a box in extreme stress positions causes extreme physical and psychological pain and trauma; and

-- other abuses, including waterboarding that simulates drowning and the feeling of helplessness to prevent it.

Involvement of Medical Professionals

They help develop, implement, provide cover for, and justify torture and abusive practices. They're actively involved in designing harmful interrogation techniques in clear violation of the law and medical ethics. They're "complicit in selecting and then rationalizing (methods) whose safety and efficacy in eliciting accurate information have no valid basis in science." Their actions constitute "a practice that approaches unlawful experimentation."

CIA guidelines require health professionals, including a doctor and psychologist, to be present during enhanced interrogations, "thereby placing (them) in the untenable position of calibrating harm rather than serving as protectors and healers as" their ethical code demands.

They also participate in initial physical and psychological assessments, then monitor all subsequent interrogations. They know their actions are harmful, unethical, and illegal, yet they serve willingly.

PHR believes they should be investigated on charges of "alleged criminal conduct." Those proved guilty should be prosecuted, lose their license, professional society memberships, and any standing in the medical community henceforth.

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.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=15190

Glenn Beck's Demagoguery, Right Wing Extremism, and Racism

Glenn Beck's Demagoguery, Right Wing Extremism, and Racism - by Stephen Lendman

At a time of 24-hour news and a proliferation of television and radio talk shows featuring hatemongers and demagogues like Rush Limbaugh, Bill O'Reilly, Sean Hannity and Lou Dobbs, Glenn Beck may stand out as the most unhinged and extremist of all as evidenced by his jihad against anyone to the left of his views, disadvantaged minorities, Muslims, Latino immigrants, and progressive change in some of his most outlandish comments, including:

-- calling Barack Obama a "racist (who) has a deep-seated hatred for white people or the white culture; I don't know what it is....This guy is, I believe, a racist;"

-- calling Van Jones "an avowed, radical, revolutionary communist," then saying "Jones is the tip of the iceberg" as part of his over-the-top campaign against anyone less extremist than himself;

-- stating "The most used phrase in my administration if I were to be President would be 'What the hell do you mean we're out of missiles;' "

-- saying "We need to be the first ones in the recruitment office lining up to shoot the bad Muslims in the head....In 10 years, Muslims and Arabs will be looking through a razor wire fence at the West;"

-- telling Muslim Congressman Keith Ellison to "prove to me that you are not working with our enemies;"

-- advocating disposing of Guantanamo detainees by shooting them in the head;

-- accusing Al Gore of creating a new "Hitler youth" by promoting environmental awareness, and called for kicking California out of the union;

-- in 2003, telling listeners he was praying for a gruesome death for Democrat presidential candidate Dennis Kucinich, and in 2005 saying he fantasized about strangling filmmaker Michael Moore;

-- characterizing Obama's new regulatory czar, Cass Sunstein, as a crazed animal rights activist who believes that rats matter more than people; and

-- in September 2005, expressing open "hate" toward Katrina victims, calling them "scumbags" for not waiting patiently for emergency aid at a time their lives were devastated, and the Bush administration was forcibly removing them to distant locations, then preventing them from returning so predatory developers could exploit their neighborhoods for profit.

In May 2008, a Media Matters Action Network report titled, "Fear & Loathing in Prime Time: Immigration Myths and Cable News" highlighted undocumented Latino immigrant hatemongering by Lou Dobbs, Bill O'Reilly, and Glenn Beck, each making outlandish claims, including:

-- an alleged connection between undocumented Latinos and crime;

-- how they exploit social services and don't pay taxes;

-- the "reconquista" myth about a supposed Mexican plot to take over the US Southwest; and

-- an epidemic of Latino voter fraud.

According to Beck, "It's time to wake up in this country. We are dealing with an illegal alien (read Latino) crime wave, and drug smuggling is just the beginning." He opened a special 2008 "Border Crisis" program saying: "America's border crisis. Rape, drugs, kidnapping, even murder. It is beginning to look a lot more like a border war....Every single illegal immigrant is guilty of a crime, every single one....Every undocumented worker (read Latino) is an illegal immigrant, a criminal and a drain on our dwindling resources."

He added:

-- "I've got a quick message for illegal aliens if you happen to be watching; you better start packing your bags; and to the politicians in Washington who are soft on illegal immigration, start packing up your office, because when the terrorists strike, which they will, and when we find out that they're here illegally from some other country, we will be telling all of you to get the hell out;"

-- earlier he said "I told you about the five-part plan that I believe may lead to the end of the West as we know it; I called it my 'Perfect Storm;' one of the elements....is illegal immigration; it is still a great way for terrorists to come here and mess with us; but even if that doesn't happen....at the very least (they're) attacking our culture, and our way of life; they are not melting into our melting pot; they're here for the cash;" and

-- "I also know our country is on fire, and the fuel is illegal immigration; they (threaten) our national security;" they come for "three reasons: one, they're terrorists; two, they're escaping the law; or three, they're hungry (because) they can't make a living in their own dirtbag country."

This is what passes for American mainstream "journalism" that's in no worse form than from Glenn Beck - on Fox News, the radio outlets that give him a platform, and the sponsors that make his kind of programming possible. More on them below.

Joe McCarthy's Earlier Jihad Against the Left

In the 1950s, Joe McCarthy's witch-hunts against alleged communists, those on the left, and Democrat administration and other "subversives" included Secretary of State Dean Acheson whom he called "a pompous diplomat in striped pants," General George Marshall when he was Secretary of State for being "soft on communism" and being "a man steeped in falsehood," and many others on his so-called "blacklist."

In 1950, with no proof, he said he had a list of 205 known communists in the State Department, later reduced the number to 57, but said they were passing secret information to the Soviets. He claimed:

"The reason why we find ourselves in a position of impotency is not because the enemy has sent men to invade our shores, but rather because of the traitorous actions of those who had all the benefits that the wealthiest nation on earth has had to offer - the finest homes, the finest college educations, and the finest jobs in Government (and the private sector) we can give."

He characterized enemies as "card-carrying communists." Others as "loyalty risks" or being "soft on communism." For political gain, he vilified patriotic Americans, created years of hysteria, targeted anti-American books in libraries and got them removed, then overstepped enough to be hung on his own petard with publications like the Louisville Courier-Journal reporting that:

"In this long, degrading travesty of the democratic process, McCarthy has shown himself to be evil and unmatched in malice." On December 2, 1954 the Senate censured him and took away his power base. Later ill with cirrhosis of the liver from years of abusive alcoholism, he died a broken man on May 2, 1957.

Today, the term "McCarthyism" is synonymous with baseless malicious slander, unscrupulous fearmongering, vilifying the innocent, accusing them of disloyalty, and calling them terrorists, Islamofascists, illegal immigrants, and unpatriotic for supporting progressive change and ideas to the left of right wing views.

McCarthysim Redux Through the Right Wing Media

Nightly on Fox News, Glenn Beck delivers some of the worst of it to his estimated 2.3 million faithful and millions more on The Glenn Beck Program, a nationally syndicated talk-radio show aired by Premiere Radio Networks (a Clear Channel Communications subsidiary) throughout the country on over 300 stations, according to a Premiere Speakers Bureau promo about him stating that his program "is presently the third highest-rated national radio talk show among adults ages 25 - 54."

It said that he debuted on CNN's Headline News in May 2006 "with his self-styled topical talk show and quickly soared in popularity." CNN at the time called it "an unconventional look at the news of the day featuring (Beck's) often amusing perspective on the top stories from world events and politics to pop culture and everyday hassles."

In early January 2007, he also joined ABC News' Good Morning America as a regular contributor with its senior executive producer, Jim Murphy, saying:

"Glenn is a leading commentator with a distinct voice. At times, he is the perfect guest for many of the talk topics we cover on morning news programs."

In 2008, Beck won the Marconi Radio Award for Network Syndicated Personality of the Year from the National Association of Broadcasters. Previous winners included Rush Limbaugh and Fox News' Sean Hannity. After his award, Premiere Radio Networks president, Charlie Rahilly, said:

"Glenn's conversation with millions of Americans weekly on The Glenn Beck Program....makes him a familiar voice in our culture. We salute his work, creativity, and humor, and congratulate him on his genuine recognition by our industry."

He regularly features guests like Karl Rove, John McCain, Sarah Palin, Rudy Giuliani, Rick Santorum, Rush Limbaugh, and an array of the most extremist Republican members of Congress, others from right wing think tanks, and former Bush administration officials.

His syndicator, Premiere Radio, is a subsidiary of Clear Channel Communications, the world's largest radio broadcaster, concert promoter, and billboard advertising firm. It's also a major player in US television and Spanish language broadcasting, and very much to the right of center in ideology. As one of America's most powerful media companies, it's played a leading role in destroying media diversity by airing the same content on many dozens of its stations simultaneously, suppressing everything not supportive of its views.

In 2002, Clear Channel attracted the attention of Senator Russ Feingold and several other members of Congress over its anti-competitive behavior and alleged shady business practices. In 2009, the company remains a powerful force, ranking ninth among the top 20 US media companies ahead of The New York Times Co., the Washington Post Co., Hearst Corp., and McGraw-Hill.

More on Beck's Background

He's written three New York Times-listed bestsellers, publishes the entertainment Fusion Magazine, and tours the country twice yearly in his own one-man show to promote himself as a national institution.

Instead of condemning his extremism, on December 4, 2006, The New York Times described him as a "tearful rising star" in calling him "brash (and) opinionated (with an) unfiltered approach (in) saying what others are feeling but are afraid to say." Writers Brian Stelter and Bill Carter said he "has a gift for touching the passion nerve (by) tapping into fear about the future."

They quoted Old Dominion University's Jeffrey Jones saying Beck engages in "inciting rhetoric. People hear their values are under attack and they get worried. It becomes an opportunity for them to stand up and do something" without realizing how destructive Beck's extremism is to their own well-being. Even Beck once said about himself: "I say on the air all the time, if you take what I say as gospel, you're an idiot."

His Premiere's Speakers Bureau bio says he debuted in radio at age 13 in Seattle, and grew up in nearby Mount Vernon. After high school, he got jobs "as a Top 40 DJ" in Baltimore, Houston, and New Haven, CT.

It also explained that at age 30, he became consumed by alcoholism and drug addiction, then regained sobriety and "found a new direction." He remarried, became a baptized Mormon, and decided to pursue talk radio after being offered his own show on Tampa, Florida station WFLA-AM. In his first year, it became number-one rated, and within 18 months, Premiere Radio Networks offered him national syndication.

In January 2002, The Glenn Beck Program debuted on 47 stations. Today, he's on over 300 as well as XM satellite radio.

LDS Living Magazine (for Latter Day Saint Mormon families) provides more details about Beck's background. It said he was fired from his first three radio jobs in Washington State. Six months later, he returned on WPGC in Washington, DC. Was again fired. Then he became program director and "morning guy" on a small Corpus Christi, TX station. After two years of "moving around from city to city, he ended up in Baltimore." He also worked at WRKA in Louisville, KY and WKCI-FM in Hamden, CT.

Three days after converting to Mormonism, he was offered his first radio talk show in Tampa. It propelled him to national prominence and his current positions at Fox News, his syndicated radio program (first from Philadelphia in January 2002, now in New York), and as a hot topic on other programs, including MSNBC's Keith Olbermann's war of words with Beck.

He posted a September 6 request on The Daily Kos to "Send Me Everything You Can Find About Glenn Beck." He added that he'll "expand this to the television audience and have a dedicated email address to accept leads, tips, contacts, on Beck, his radio producer Burguiere, and the chief of his tv enables, Ailes (head of Fox News)...."

It may simply be a PR stunt to boost ratings and get added revenue for General Electric, MSNBC's owner, that certainly can stop this if it wishes.

Sponsors Bailing Out on Beck

To date, over five dozen decided they'll no longer be associated with his kind of antics, fearing, of course, it may harm their image and hurt sales and profits.

In 2005, Van Jones (now inactive) and James Rucker co-founded ColorOfChange.org "to strengthen Black America's political voice" toward the goal of making "government more responsive to the concerns of Black Americans and to bring about positive political and social change for everyone."

In the wake of Beck calling Obama a "racist" and attacking Van Jones, it sent a letter to his sponsors urging them to boycott "the kinds of views and tactics" he espouses and cease all advertising on his program.

FoxNewsBoycott.com joined in as part of its campaign "to help people realize that Fox News Channel and its personalities are a detriment to journalism and journalistic integrity." It urges supporters "to boycott, not only Fox News Channel, but Fox News sponsors and companies that air Fox News in their places of business."

To date, over 60 companies no longer advertise on Glenn Beck, including:

-- AT & T

-- Bank of America

-- Bell & Howell

-- Best Buy

-- Campbell Soup

-- Capital One

-- Clorox

-- Berkshire Hathaway's GEICO Insurance

-- General Mills

-- HSBC

-- Johnson & Johnson

-- Kraft Foods

-- Mercedes-Benz

-- Procter & Gamble

-- Sanofi-Aventis

-- Sprint

-- Travelers Insurance

-- UPS

-- Verizon Wireless, and

-- Wal-Mart

Many others still advertise, but more keep pulling out, showing the effectiveness of the national campaign, backed by many tens of thousands of signatures from ColorOfChange.org and FoxNewsBoycott.com supporters.

The Internet's power is real and proves when enough committed people back progressive issues, constructive change follows. If if works against Glenn Beck and Fox News, why not in a campaign to reclaim the kind of America people deserve and can have if they work hard enough for it.

If not now, when? If not us, who? If not soon, maybe never? If that's not incentive enough, what is?

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.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=15190

US Census Bureau Confirms Rising Poverty, Falling Incomes, and Growing Numbers of Uninsured

US Census Bureau Confirms Rising Poverty, Falling Incomes, and Growing Numbers of Uninsured - by Stephen Lendman

In early September, The US Census Bureau released its new report titled, "Income, Poverty, and Health Insurance Coverage in the United States: 2008" showing disturbing data that portends much worse ahead under a president and Congress doing nothing to address it.

In 2008, poverty reached 13.2% of the population, its highest level in 11 years, the result of millions losing jobs during the first year of the gravest economic crisis since the 1930s. For blacks, the figure was nearly double at 24.7%, and 31% of all Americans were impoverished for at least two months between 2004 and 2007, years of economic expansion.

At yearend 2008, even by the Bureau's conservative measures, 39.8 million people were impoverished, the highest level since 1960, and 17.1 million lived in extreme poverty at below one-half the official threshold. In addition, for the first time since the 1930s, median household income failed to increase over a 10-year period from 1999 - 2008.

The Census Bureau states that it "presents annual estimates of median household income and poverty by state and other smaller geographic units based on data collected in the American Community Survey (ACS)" covering population areas of 20,000 or more. The Bureau's Small Area Income and Poverty Estimates (SAIPE) program also produces yearly figures "for states and all counties, as well as population and poverty estimates for school districts." It uses data from a variety of sources, including surveys, administrative records, inter-censal population estimates, and personal income data published by the Bureau of Economic Analysis.

Critics maintain that official government figures way understate the gravity of today's crisis, and the Bureau says:

"The official poverty thresholds were developed more than 40 years ago and have been criticized for not taking into account rising (or since the 1970s inflation-adjusted falling) standards of living, expenses such as child care that are necessary to hold a job, variations in medical costs across population groups (that have skyrocketed nationally and are now unaffordable for millions), and geographic differences in the cost of living."

In addition, income and poverty estimates are pre-tax and exclude non-cash benefits, usually employer-provided. Disposable personal income, after income, payroll, sales, property and other taxes, reveals a far higher poverty level than the Census Bureau reports and a much graver crisis for growing millions as the economic decline deepens.

The Bureau reported that 2008 median (inflation adjusted) household income fell 3.6%, the largest single-year decline on record to the lowest level since 1997 and falling as conditions continue to worsen.

The plight of the poor and impoverished shows up in numerous other reports that paint a darker picture than the Census Bureau and suggest much worse ahead:

-- an unprecedented, growing disparity between the very rich and other income groups;

-- economists Thomas Piketty and Emmanuel Saez's research showing the top 1% of households got two-thirds of the national income growth during the last recovery, a larger share than at any time since the 1920s;

-- wages losing ground to inflation;

-- millions of children dependent on school lunches for a hot meal;

-- an Economic Policy Institute estimate of one-quarter of all children living in poverty by yearend 2009;

-- the continued erosion of employer and government-provided benefits, including at the state and local levels; the growing uninsured crisis is discussed below;

-- greater numbers of households unable to meet expenses, even with two working members;

-- added duress from state budget cutbacks;

-- record numbers of food stamp recipients;

-- persistent and growing hunger and homelessness; and

-- job losses and higher unemployment continuing for many more months with some analysts projecting record high numbers before peaking.

A September 11 Kissinger Associates Joshua Ramo story in Time magazine highlighted the problem. Titled, "Jobless in America: Is Double-Digit Unemployment Here to Stay," it quoted Larry Summers' remarks last July before the Peterson Institute for International Economics about the disturbing rate of job losses. He suggested something strange was happening, unpredicted by experts:

"I don't think that anyone fully understands this phenomenon," he said. Will job losses mount longer than expected? At the "recession's" end, will low numbers of new ones follow, and will double-digit unemployment persist and remain common?

Without saying it, Summers wondered if America's economic model was broken, and if so how to fix it. Or can it be fixed? According to the Peterson Institute's Jacob Kirkegaard, "It is entirely possible that what started as a cyclical rise in unemployment could end up as an entrenched problem."

Summers earned his reputation as an employment theorist. He now believes that earlier unemployment views are "importantly wrong. I thought if you could have areas where there was long-term substantial unemployment, then that raised some questions about the functioning of markets."

In 1986, he wrote an article titled, "Hysteresis and the European Unemployment Problem." Hysteresis is the Greek word for late, referring to what happens when something snaps and can't be fixed. It's an idea economists deplore applying to economies, preferring instead to cite normal business cycle ups and downs. Yet in 1986, Summers argued that Europe's unemployment might be chronic and persist in times of growth.

Today's are another matter at a time of a changing economic landscape perhaps suggesting that hysteresis is confronting America, and many lost jobs aren't coming back, especially better paying ones. That's Kirkegaard's view in saying growth won't put Americans back to work, and new jobs created will be poorer quality than old ones.

So what can be done going forward? Unlike in the 1930s, machines now do much of the work that people did then on infrastructure projects. And it's a lot harder converting white collar workers to blue collar ones. Moreover, Summers' own research concludes that the traditional Western economic model won't alleviate the jobs crisis, so what will?

Summers won't say it, but short of a total remake of "free market" economics, likely nothing and perhaps that's America's future with growing millions consigned to a permanent underclass, while an elite few at the top grow richer, until one day "hysteresis" snaps the system in a disruptive convulsion, the old model passes from the scene, and nothing is the same again.

More Evidence of Economic Duress in the Latest Federal Research Report on Consumer Credit

On September 8, the Federal Reserve reported that total consumer credit fell by a record $21.6 billion in July (the sixth consecutive monthly decline) and year-over-year by $2.47 trillion or 10.4%. According to Bernard Baumohl, The Economic Outlook Group's chief global economist:

"It is one more important sign that consumers are not going to be contributing very much to the economy for the balance of this year and probably for (at least) a good part of next year." Shrinking credit's impact on consumption indicates an economy in decline. It shows up in growing poverty, falling incomes, and greater duress for growing millions, sure to be reflected in the Bureau's 2009 report.

Continued Erosion of Health Care Coverage

In 2008, the Bureau also collected data on health insurance coverage, putting the number of uninsured at 46.3 million last year (15.4 of the population), or an increase of 682,000 over 2007. It was the eighth consecutive year that fewer workers got employer-provided coverage, and those with it had to pay more of the cost.

Other estimates are far grimmer. Some, including the Congressional Budget Office, place the current uninsured total at about 50 million, and a May 2009 Todd Gilmer - Richard Kronick study estimated that 191,670 more lose coverage monthly, 2.3 million annually at the present rate, and an expected 6.9 million more Americans (over 2007) will lack it by yearend 2010 if the present trend continues.

Add to these the underinsured. According to the American Public Health Association, at least another 25 million at great risk if they face a serious health problem not covered by their present plan. In addition, Families USA estimates about 90 million Americans had no health insurance during some portion of 2007 or 2008. The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation reported that over 80% of the uninsured come from working families, and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality estimated that 27% of under aged-65 year old Americans lack coverage.

Still other estimates project up to 60 million uninsured if the commonly reported U-3 unemployment rate hits 10%, and the Urban Institute sees around 66 million without coverage by 2019, given the present trend of rising costs forcing employers increasingly to cut back.

Bureau data show that coverage weakened across most sectors of the population, including full-time workers and the middle class, the result of economic decline and years of employers putting a greater burden on their workforce.

Since at least 2001, the percent of workers with employer-provided insurance has steadily eroded, and it's the main reason behind growing numbers of uninsured and underinsured. In 2008, 61.9% of the below-aged 65 population had job-provided coverage, down from 67% in 2001 and falling due to cost cutting, continued job losses, and the trend to lower-paying ones.

In addition, holding a job no longer guarantees coverage. Plans offered have been greatly eroded, and medical expenses today are the leading cause of personal bankruptcies. America is the world's only industrialized country denying its citizens universal coverage, yet spends on average more than double the other 30 OECD countries and delivers less for it because of unaffordable private insurance and overpriced drugs.

Nothing being debated in Washington addresses this, so whatever legislation emerges will make a dysfunctional system worse with the American public betrayed by "a slick-talking street hustler"- what analyst Bob Chapman calls Obama, or according to James Petras, "the greatest con man in recent history." Make that plural with Congress under Democrat or Republican leadership because both parties are beholden to the corporate interests that own them and are indifferent to growing public needs.

Since taking office in January, Obama kept reform off the table, made progressive change a nonstarter, and achieved the impossible by governing worse than George Bush on virtually all of his domestic and foreign policies. Along with looting the federal Treasury, wrecking the economy, selling out to Wall Street, and continuing imperial wars, Obamacare is the centerpiece of his failed agenda and a betrayal of the public's trust.

On September 9, he presented his vision to a joint congressional session, reassuring providers that their interests are secure. Rejecting universal single-payer coverage, he said it "makes more sense to build on what works and fix what doesn't, rather than try to build an entirely new system from scratch." And while favoring a "public option," he assured private insurers that it's not a deal-breaker, guaranteeing that no final plan will include one because enough votes can't be gotten in the Senate.

Key also is lowering costs by:

-- cutting hundreds of billions in Medicare and Medicaid benefits as a prelude to eliminating or greatly gutting these programs with perhaps Social Security and other social gains to follow;

-- placing caps on what tests and treatments doctors can provide;

-- putting "medical expert" gatekeepers in charge of deciding the most cost-effective care, thus preventing doctors from prescribing what's best for their patients and denying people the right to make their own health care choices if their cost exceeds what Washington will allow;

-- taxing so-called "Cadillac" plans (mostly covering state employees, municipal union members, and other working Americans, not just the super-rich) to encourage employers to provide fewer benefits, thus placing a greater burden on workers; forcing everyone to have insurance; and placing a surtax on non-compliars with incomes of between 100 - 300% of the poverty level under the Baucus Senate plan;

-- creating a "deficit trigger" to reduce the growth of Medicare and Medicaid spending if anticipated savings aren't met; and

-- making everyone more responsible for their own care by forcing them to cover more of the cost in return for less coverage when they need it most.

Numerous details remain hidden from the public, but the goal of Obamacare is clear. It's a scheme to ration care; charge people more for it; enrich private insurers, PhRMA, and large hospital chains; mandate insurance for everyone; and penalize non-compliars. It's up to public outrage to stop it.

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.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=15053

Problems Defending Palestinians in Israeli Courts

Problems Defending Palestinians in Israeli Courts - by Stephen Lendman

Established in 1992, the Addameer (Arabic for conscience) Prisoners Support and Human Rights Association provides support for Palestinian prisoners and works to end torture, arbitrary arrests and detentions, other forms of abuse, and unjust and unequal treatment in Israel's criminal justice system that handles Jews one way and Palestinians another.

In January 2007, it published a report titled "Defending Palestinian Prisoners: A Report on the Status of Defense Lawyers in Israeli Courts" in which it explained obstacles lawyers face in representing Palestinians in military and civil courts. They're hampered by military orders, Israeli laws, and prison procedures that prevent them from adequately helping clients - from their time of arrest through detention, trial, imprisonment, appeal, and other constraints against justice.

Yet international law is clear and unequivocal. Article 2, section 3(b)(c) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) states:

....persons "shall have (the) right (to effective remedy through a) competent judicial, administrative or legislative (authority), or by any other competent authority provided for the legal system of the State (to) ensure that the competent authorities shall enforce (judicial) remed(ies)."

Article 14, section 1 states:

"All persons shall be equal before the courts and tribunals (and) shall be entitled to a fair and public hearing by a competent, independent and impartial tribunal established by law." They shall "be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law."

They're also entitled to competent counsel, may meet with them in confidence, and censorship of their written and oral communications is prohibited.

Addameer's report is based on interviews, from May - July 2006, with 14 defense attorneys representing Palestinian clients. Their accounts show what Arabs are up against in Israel's criminal justice system, one imprisoning over 650,000 Palestinians since 1967, detaining between 9,000 - 12,000 or more at any time, many hundreds administratively without charges or trial, hundreds aged 18 or younger, and dozens of women.

Palestine is under an oppressive military occupation. At times of political tension, the IDF detains large numbers of Palestinians "because the regulations that govern Israeli military tribunals provide little procedural protection to detainees." From March - October 2000, over 15,000 West Bank Palestinians were arrested. Over 1,000 were held in administrative detention without charge.

Procedural flexibility lets military prosecutors process large number of cases swiftly to the disadvantage of defendants. Most are settled by one-sided plea bargains. In 2005, nearly 10,000 cases were handled. Only 167 went to trial, and of those, 15 acquittals were won. In the same year, military courts conducted nearly 12,000 hearings to extend prisoner detentions and levied around $3 million in fines, nearly always against people acting freely or in self-defense as international law allows, suspected of doing it, or their family members as well as themselves.

Three types of courts have jurisdiction over Palestinians:

-- Palestinian civil ones not covered in this report;

-- Israeli military courts, Ofer and Salem, located on Israeli military bases; they prosecute Palestinians accused of self-defense, attending a demonstration, putting up political posters proclaiming Palestinian rights, displaying the Palestinian flag or other symbols, or doing anything authorities say threaten Israeli security; and

-- Israeli civil courts handling Israeli Arabs and West Bank and Gaza Palestinians accused of whatever officials call a crime; "due process protection under Israeli civil law (is compromised for) defendants accused of being security threats," with or without evidence to prove it.

Administrative detention is oppressive and frequently used. It lets military authorities hold prisoners indefinitely without charge, on secret evidence withheld at the discretion of prosecutors from detainees and their counsel. Under military orders and Israeli law, commanders may order prisoners held for six months and can renew detentions indefinitely.

Lawyers' citizenship or residency status dictate their ability to represent clients. Those in the Occupied Territories (OPT) may only work in military courts and are constrained by checkpoints and other travel restrictions from visiting clients. Meeting them inside Israel is nearly impossible as travel permits are rarely given for "security reasons."

As a rule, West Bank attorneys see clients for the first time on hearing days and only a few minutes in advance. Gaza ones can't represent West Bank clients because travel permission is nearly impossible to get. It means judicial fairness and international law are severely compromised from the start.

Lawyers with Jerusalem IDs face other obstacles. They may take the Israeli Bar Association test to be licensed in Israeli courts. However, those passing the Palestinian Bar must apply annually to the Israeli Department of Justice for permission to represent clients in military courts and to visit them at interrogation centers and prisons.

Lawyers who are Israeli citizens, Arabs and Jews, may represent clients in military and civil courts, including the High Court, and may apply for permission to visit clients in detention. However, they may not enter Gaza or Area A (under Palestinian control) in the West Bank.

Obstacles to A Legal Defense

Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention prohibits:

"Individual or mass forcible transfers, as well as deportations of protected persons from occupied territory to the territory of the Occupying Power or to that of any other country, occupied or not....regardless of their motive."

Nonetheless, the IDF regularly moves Palestinian prisoners from the West Bank to Israeli-based detention and interrogation centers (including the secret "Facility 1391") and prisons.

After arrest and initial detention, Palestinians go first to interrogation centers. They may be held without judicial order for eight days and thereafter indefinitely. Lawyers have no access for up to 90 days, and prisoners have virtually no other outside contact during detention.

Following interrogation, they may either be released, formally charged, or placed under indefinite administrative detention. Those charged are transferred to Israeli prisons to await trial. Bail is almost never allowed. Administrative detainees are taken to Israeli prisons for six months after which they're subject to indefinite extensions.

Lawyers find it difficult to impossible to visit clients because restrictions "are so onerous" that most don't even try, except for the brief moments they're allowed before hearings begin.

In addition, learning where clients are held is so daunting that one attorney said:

"I feel like they're using these procedures to pressure lawyers like me to quit."

However, under military orders, authorities are obligated to inform families where prisoners are held and when they're moved. A central database is also maintained. Attorneys are supposed to have access, but getting it is hard, and the information in it often is inaccurate and not up to date.

Even worse, under Israeli law and military orders, Palestinian prisoners accused of being "security threats" may be prohibited from consulting an attorney - in military courts for up to 90 days and in civil ones up to three weeks. Appeals to the High Court may be made, but only by lawyers with Israeli citizenship or Israeli NGOs.

Permission is required to see clients in prison, but only on certain days, under imposed restrictions, and all prisons have their own procedures. Jewish lawyers are less impeded than Arab ones, but obstacles impeding judicial fairness hamper prisoners and counsel throughout the judicial process.

For example:

-- besides needing permission to visit clients, lawyers must have proof of power of attorney from prisoners' families even though requiring this has no legal basis and getting it is burdensome given West Bank travel restrictions;

-- interviewing prisoners requires knowing where they're held; learning when they're moved and where; dealing with orders barring meetings with clients; putting up with difficult travel through checkpoints; long waits inside prisons; limited amounts of time with clients; speaking with them on phones behind a thick plastic window easily monitored by authorities; and restricted access to documents; it makes some attorneys call these obstacles "a way of making the lawyer think a thousand times before deciding to visit the prison" under a judicial process rigged to get convictions.

Scheduling is another problem in military courts. Lawyers must report there by 9:30 AM, then endure unreliable timetables for hearings. An entire day may be consumed for a 15-minute one, and some attorneys report that they waited until 7PM for it to begin. They also say they're treated like prisoners themselves because their clients have faint hope for justice, yet they do their best under a very unfair system practically assuring convictions.

Entering facilities is nerve-wracking and intimidating as well. West Bank lawyers aren't allowed to drive to military courts on the grounds that they pose security threats. Once at a facility, they endure waits to be admitted. They need soldiers to unlock gates. Some are cooperative, others not, and then they must clear security. Those in traditional Islamic dress are especially pressed to prove they're lawyers, not terrorists seeking entry.

One attorney described his Gaza experience saying:

"As a lawyer, you are a cow. They treat us like they are trying to milk us. They squeeze everything from us: our dignity, our time - everything."

Logistical obstacles are also daunting in the West Bank. For Gaza-based lawyers, they're even more restrictive, especially since Israel's "disengagement" in August-September 2005 and now that Gaza remains under siege.

Prior to summer 2005, Gazans were tried in the Erez military court on the Gaza/Israeli border through which lawyers needed permission to cross. From 2003 - 2005, only two got it, and they endured "obtrusive security procedures," including public and at times embarrassing searches, long delays, and no set hearing schedules.

In addition, whenever border crossings were closed, lawyers were denied access to Erez, so weren't able to assist clients and couldn't see them "during their detention at facilities inside Israel."

Post-disengagement, Erez was closed and lawyers are now denied access to Israeli military courts and prisons inside Israel. Gazans arrested are usually held in Askalan/Shikma prison, then tried or given detention hearings at the B'ir Sab'a/Beersheba courthouse inside Israel. Only lawyers with Israeli citizenship may represent them. Gazan attorneys "are reduced to playing the tole of messengers between the families of prisoners and lawyers inside Israel."

Language is another obstacle as military and civil court proceedings are in Hebrew. Lawyers must be proficient enough to understand them. Palestinians may not be and require Arabic translations, a process their attorneys call "uneven" at best. Also, translators speak so quietly that detainees may not understand the most perfect translation, so can't follow the proceedings properly. Nor can their families consigned to the back of courtrooms.

Another problem is a lack of official court proceedings in Arabic, so prisoner responses become "the answers of the guy who is translating." In addition, "all confessions, statements, police reports, military codes and judicial rulings are provided in Hebrew without translation, even though Arabic is an official language in Israel." But not in military or civil courts.

Under West Bank military orders, unauthorized political activities are crimes, including putting up posters, writing slogans on walls, being members of certain political parties or organizations, displaying Palestinian flags or symbols, attending demonstrations, and socializing with persons classified as security threats - legal activities in democracies but not in Israel or the OPT.

Palestinians engaging in them are prosecuted under the umbrella charge of "threatening the security of the state." They bear the burden of proof, so guilty unless proved innocent is the legal standard in violation of international law. In addition, lawyers face months of delay to learn the charges against clients that are often vague and lack details, including about claimed offenses, dates, time and place where occurred plus evidence that would hold up in legitimate proceedings.

"Lawyers representing administrative detainees must contend with impossibly vague charges" such as "being a threat to the security of the area with no other details provided." Even when more information is gotten, it's only after clients have been held for months.

An egregious example was a man held administratively for five years during which time the court refused to say why. Finally, counsel learned that he allegedly said that he wanted to participate in a suicide attack, but no evidence was offered to prove it.

Secret evidence is also an issue, described by one lawyer as "like entering a dark room and not knowing where to go or what to do." Courts may order evidence kept confidential and unavailable to counsel. It makes a proper defense near impossible, so counsel is hamstrung and clients are effectively guilty as charged.

Some evidence may be declassified, and all or most of it is in regular military tribunals. Still attorneys can't easily access it because specific documents must be described and requested. Without precise knowledge, they must make educated guesses based on previous cases and hope they apply to their clients.

Delays and other obstructions are always problems. In addition, judges have "complete discretion over whether to declassify evidence and tend to arrive at inconsistent decisions" from one case to another.

Even in regular military tribunals, prosecutors may use secret evidence although they can do it more easily for administrative detainees. However, under Israel's judicial system, the deck is heavily stacked against Palestinians very much subject to the whims of the court.

Interrogation reports are another issue. Everything learned must be recorded and made part of the evidence. Yet it's not automatically disclosed to attorneys. They must request it, but weeks may elapse before it's gotten, and usually the material doesn't help because inappropriate details are provided in lieu of relevant facts pertaining to the case.

Torture is another issue with reports saying it's routinely used against the great majority of detainees, and under Israeli law is allowed in "ticking bomb" cases that easily can apply to anyone. Disproving them is daunting as defendants' testimonies are ineffective against prosecution charges and disclaimers on detention treatment.

Further, prisoners must prove that their free will was compromised, and that confessions were obtained under torture. "This is difficult for several reasons:"

-- courts don't consider isolation torture;

-- the Israeli High Court ruled "that the attorney general may determine whether to charge interrogators (accused of torture) who have invoked the defense of 'necessity;' "

-- most often, lawyers can't obtain medical records for evidence of abusive treatment; and

-- even if prisoners prove torture, courts aren't obligated to dismiss evidence if they believe confessions were made despite torture or abuse.

The defense is further hampered by being rarely able to call witnesses in detention hearings. When allowed, they may only testify on matters of family life, moral character, and other factors unrelated to charges. Most often, military prosecutors are attorney's only information source, but not as witnesses. "Instead, the prosecutor answers all of the defense lawyer's questions without being sworn in and has the right" to answer none. To have witnesses in regular military tribunals, attorneys must apply for hard to get travel permits so they may appear in court.

Accessing the law is also hampered as military judges are governed by military orders and military appeals court decisions. Orders must be published but are only available in West Bank civil administration offices, accessible only by special permission. "In practice, many military orders remain unpublished and can be obtained only by contacting the Defense Ministry's legal department directly."

As for judicial decisions, military courts aren't required to publish them, and until recently only four defense attorneys got access to them. The military now publishes some decisions, but they're not widely distributed, comprehensive, or regularly updated enough to be helpful. As a result, lawyers rely mostly on word of mouth for information on new military orders and favorable decisions that may help their clients.

Further, military judges don't have to explain their rulings on matters relating to administrative detentions and extensions. It means defendants are at the mercy of courts and on whether counsel is on good terms with officials.

On matters of objectivity and judicial fairness, one lawyer said:

"There should be three sides in a trial - defense, prosecution and judge - and each should be independent from (the other). Here, both the prosecution and judge have the same role," so the scales of justice weigh heavily against defendants.

In military courts, seven-member committees appoint judges, then approved by the West Bank's military commander. The physical setting is also troublesome as it's located on one of two West Bank military bases. Prosecutors and judges wear uniforms. Proceedings stop at 1PM so they, translators and soldiers may eat together in the mess hall. Defense lawyers are excluded, are on their own to provide meals, and have no access to prosecutor - judge consultations outside of court.

Also troublesome is the training of court officials. Most prosecutors provide service as part of their military obligation and have no training or experience in civil proceedings. Those remaining in the IDF go on to become judges, "putting them in the position of evaluating cases brought by their former colleagues. This means that many people brought up in the system and have never appeared in a civil court, but now they're judging their friends and past friends," so most defendants don't have a chance before them.

Differences between military and civil courts are especially stark. "Lawyers who defend Palestinians must contend with inequalities arising from two systems of law in Israel and the OPT." Civil law provides greater protections, but Occupied Palestinians generally don't fall under its jurisdiction.

For example an Israeli and Palestinian may be charged with the same offense, such as participating in an unauthorized demonstration. In civil courts, an Israeli, at most, faces a fine and suspended sentence for a first offense. In contrast, Palestinian face up to ten years in prison for exercising what Americans call free expression and the right to assemble.

"Some of the most glaring differences between (civil and military proceedings) are in the treatment of juveniles." Israeli civil courts protect them with special procedures not available to Palestinian youths in military courts making them as vulnerable to injustice as adults. In addition, juveniles as young as 17 serve sentences in adult prisons. Only those 16 and younger go to special facilities for youths.

Israeli Arabs are as vulnerable as Palestinians in the Territories for judicial fairness. They may be tried in military courts, and according to the "test of most connection" in Israeli law, Jerusalem Arabs come under the jurisdiction of military courts if accused of committing acts constituting security threats in the eyes of authorities.

Around 98% of the time, plea bargains, not trials, settle things because lawyers prefer them for the following reasons:

-- they often best serve clients under a grossly unfair system; so if a defendant confessed under torture and it's admitted as evidence, a plea bargain is the best option;

-- civil cases must be completed in nine months, but military ones may take two years without bail for charges bringing shorter sentences;

-- the ordeal of trial and detention, family separation, and other systemic inequities means clients are better served by ending proceedings faster;

-- going to trial and losing may bring harsher sentences because the courts are so overloaded, the authorities want fast resolutions and aren't pleased when they're extended; and

-- it's hoped that bending to the prosecution will bring greater leniency; contesting is generally futile and harmful to client interests under an unfair system.

Appeals

Military Courts of Appeals accept them, and orders barring access to lawyers and extending administrative detentions may be appealed to Israel's High Court. In cases involving security threats, appellate reviews don't help. Succeeding presents an onerous burden requiring lawyers to prove legal errors or effectively demonstrate that sentences were unfair.

Military Court of Appeals decisions are final, although in rare cases may be appealed to the High Court in demonstrable cases of "egregious and extreme" legal errors or a lack of jurisdiction by the military court. However, in administrative detention cases, the High Court ruled that it has discretion when extensions are ordered and defendants were denied access to lawyers.

Yet attorneys say authorities treat "almost every Palestinian as a ticking bomb case," so presenting an effective defense is near impossible. Also, the High Court ruled that prisoners may be denied counsel if doing so is "absolutely necessary" for the good of the investigation or to protect national security.

It's why lawyers complain about the fairness of military court trials. Even if they occasionally win reduced sentences and on rare occasions acquittals, most are justifiably angry about a fundamentally unjust system treating Palestinians one way and Jews another. The comments below express their frustration:

-- "....the whole process is oppressive;"

-- "I learned how to help people, but it's just not possible in the military courts; (They) exist to administer the occupation, not the law; I feel helpless;"

-- "The most frustrating thing is that you have to work within the occupation; you oppose the system, but you have to work within it;"

-- "I am surprised that anyone can work as a lawyer for administrative detainees without dying of a stroke;"

-- having to deal with secret evidence, vague charges, and indefinite detentions, one lawyer said: "You try to make claims about the procedures that were undertaken and it's patently obvious that the judge views the whole thing as completely beside the point; he's just waiting....to look at the secret evidence and then approve the administrative detention order;" and

-- "There is the prosecution, a judge, a lawyer, a prisoner. It looks legitimate but it is not; these tribunals should be boycotted."

Lawyers also face the problem of being retaliated against by Israeli security forces for representing Palestinians. Travel restrictions may be imposed, but there's danger of harsher treatment. Both attorneys and clients aren't safe under occupation laws and judicial unfairness.

Conclusion

Addameer reported that lawyers believe "that a general boycott of the military courts would be better in the long term for Palestinian prisoners," but say to be effective should be organized by them. However, no movement exists, and the task of building one is daunting to impossible given detainees' isolation, harsh treatment, and need for help that an activist effort would compromise. For their part, lawyers feel obligated to help despite their impotence under a fundamentally unfair system.

How can they feel otherwise in a Jewish state favoring Jews alone, no others - one that vilifies Palestinians as security threats, terrorists, and ticking bombs, claims all actions against them are justified, and defies international law and fundamental Judaic dogma and morality. That's what Palestinians and Israeli Arabs face and why they're denied judicial fairness, something only afforded Jews.

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.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=15053

Reviewing David Swanson's Daybreak

Reviewing David Swanson's "Daybreak" - by Stephen Lendman

David Swanson is co-founder of AfterDowningStreet.org and Washington Director of Democrats.com. He's also a board member of Progressive Democrats of America, the Backbone Campaign, and Voters for Peace as well as a member of the legislative working group of United for Peace and Justice.

Subtitled "Undoing the Imperial Presidency and Forming A More Perfect Union, Daybreak" is Swanson's first book, a timely and impressive account of presidential extremism, congressional complicity, the urgency for progressive change, and how to do it.

Swanson exposes what was wrong under George Bush and provides a compelling prescription for real change.

In his book "Cracks in the Constitution," Ferdinand Lundberg explained that the supreme law of the land, the Constitution, never deterred presidents or sitting governments from doing what they wished, then inventing justifications for their actions. During eight years in office, George Bush personified it and said so in his own words. In 2005, he told congressional Republican leaders:

"I'm the president and the commander-in chief. Do (things) my way. Stop throwing the Constitution in my face. It's just a goddamned piece of paper." Both parties acceded. The administration got away with murder. Separation of powers were abandoned. Checks and balances barely exist. Lawlessness became the new standard, and the republic took a giant step backward toward despotism and dystopia under a culture of violence, police state laws, and a Wall Street-run asset-stripping system - parasitically destroying America, wrecking the economy for profit, and forcing the public into permanent debt peonage.

Swanson's book is a call to arms for change, an alert about what's wrong with the nation, the urgency to restore the rule of law, save the republic, and necessity to get engaged enough to matter. After eight years under Bush - Cheney and Obama's early months, the government is more than ever corrupted, imperial, and extremist. Undoing the damage will take years of committed effort, and Swanson explains how:

-- understand the imminent danger;

-- replace today's media system with a more democratic one;

-- develop new thoughts and actions;

-- engage to work for change;

-- cooperate with other nations, don't exploit them;

-- consider eight years of damage and serious problems built up over decades;

-- demand accountability for wrongdoing; and

-- "encourage the American people to take actions that are absolutely necessary. Now."

Presidential Power Grab and How to Repair It

George Bush's "attorneys openly argued before a congressional committee that the president (may) violate any law until the Supreme Court specifically rules in favor of it." He used signing statements to rewrite them, issued one-man rule Executive Orders, and unconstitutionally usurped "unitary executive" powers that Chalmers Johnson called a "bald-faced assertion of presidential supremacy....dressed up in legalistic mumbo jumbo."

Congress let him bypass the Constitution and do as he pleased. Police state laws were enacted. Permanent wars are waged for world dominance. Torture became official US policy. Government is more secretive and intrusive than ever. Illegal spying is pervasive. Dissent is targeted. Social decay is deepening. Democracy is eroding and dying. Incestuous ties between favored business interests and government created a cesspool of corruption, and America is plagued more than ever by the dynamic that doomed earlier empires - what Chalmers Johnson calls "isolation, overstretch, the uniting of local and global forces opposed to imperialism, and in the end bankruptcy." Under Obama, little so far has changed as the nation strays further toward tyranny and ruin.

The Power of War

Article 51 of the UN Charter authorizes the "right of individual or collective self-defense if an armed attack occurs against a Member....until the Security Council has taken measures to maintain international peace and security." Preemptive attacks are banned at all times with no exceptions.

The Nuremberg Charter's Article VI explicitly prohibits the following:

-- crimes against peace;

-- planning and waging wars of aggression;

-- war crimes; and

-- crimes against humanity.

The Nuremberg Tribunal also stated that, "To initiate a war of aggression....is not only an international crime; it is the supreme international crime (against peace) differing only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole."

The Constitution's Article I, Section 8 empowers Congress alone to declare war, even though since 1941 it deferred unconstitutionally to the president.

If America is under attack or faces an imminent threat, the November 1973 War Powers Resolution lets the president deploy US forces for up to 60 days plus an additional 30 days for withdrawal, subject to congressional authorization and without a declaration of war.

Post-9/11, no threat existed, yet the Bush administration used deception to wage illegal aggressive wars in defiance of the above constitutional and international law standards. Republican and Democrat Congresses acceded, and so has Barack Obama by continuing an open-ended Iraq occupation and stepped up belligerency against Afghanistan and Pakistan, with perhaps other nations and regions to follow.

If it chooses, Congress can end wars by no longer funding them. Article I, Section 7, Clause I says:

"All bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with amendments as on other Bills."

Either House may originate an appropriations bill although the House claims sole authority to do it. Either may amend bills of any kind, including revenue and appropriation ones. Congress has the power of the purse, so it alone, if it wishes, can fund or end wars. Under George Bush and Barack Obama, Democrats and Republicans are united to continue them.

September 11 was the pretext for launching a long-planned premeditated attack against Afghanistan - a non-belligerent country posing no threat to America and one that sought peaceful engagement. Non-existent weapons of mass destruction then became justification for waging preemptive war against Iraq. Both conflicts are blatantly illegal, yet continue without end.

On January 17, 2003 (ahead of the Iraq war), Law Professor and international human rights law expert Francis Boyle introduced six articles of impeachment against George W. Bush on charges of "high crimes and misdemeanors," including:

-- trying to suspend Habeas Corpus;

-- backing the unconstitutional USA Patriot Act;

-- the mass-rounding up and incarcerating of foreigners;

-- conducting kangaroo tribunal proceedings;

-- violating and subverting the Posse Comitatus Act;

-- conducting lawless searches and seizures; and

-- violating the First Amendment, the Third and Fourth Geneva Conventions, US War Crimes Act, UN Convention Against Torture, and Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

As a result, "George Walker Bush has acted in a manner contrary to his trust as President and subversive of constitutional government, to the great prejudice of the cause of law and justice and to the manifest injury of the people of the United States." So far, Barack Obama shares equal guilt under US and international law.

On June 10, 2008, Congressman Dennis Kucinich introduced 35 Articles of Impeachment against George W. Bush, citing among other charges:

-- "Creating a Secret Propaganda Campaign to Manufacture a False Case for War Against Iraq;"

-- lying to Congress and the public about weapons of mass destruction and calling Iraq a security threat;

-- violating the Constitution and UN Charter;

-- "Initiating a War Against Iraq for Control of That Nation's Natural Resources;"

-- "illegally misspen(ding) funds to begin a war in secret prior to any congressional authorization;"

-- authorizing torture and extraordinary renditions to secret "black sites;"

-- threatening to attack Iran;

-- illegally spying on Americans; and

-- obstructing investigations about the 9/11 attacks.

No action was taken, so George Bush, Dick Cheney and other high officials in their administration faced no charges in office and still don't today.

The Power of Money

As explained above, only Congress has "the power of the purse" to spend or not spend as it chooses and also how much. Under constitutional and statutory law, "it is illegal to use government funds for anything other than what Congress appropriates them for." Yet lawless spending occurs regularly, including through unaccountable black budgets, and Congress does nothing to stop it.

Through a signing statement, George Bush empowered himself to transfer funds from authorized programs to secret ones. It was one of Kucinich's impeachment charges against him.

Then in 2008, the Bush administration began looting the federal Treasury to reward criminal bankers for their crimes and accelerated the process of transferring public wealth to Wall Street. Obama greatly stepped up the practice, and on July 20, 2009, AP reported that:

"The federal government has devoted $4.7 trillion to help the financial sector through its crisis, a watchdog report said Monday," referring to Neil Barofsky, the Special Treasury Department's Inspector General in charge of overseeing the Troubled Assets Relief Program (TARP).

"Under the worst of circumstances, the report said, the government's maximum exposure could total nearly $24 trillion, or (an) $80,000 (liability) for every American."

On March 31, Bloomberg reported that the Treasury and Fed "spent, lent or committed $12.8 trillion," an amount approaching America's 2008 $14 trillion GDP. Currently, the number at least matches and may exceed it.

At the same time, the economic crisis is worsening. Credit remains frozen. The worst housing and commercial real estate slump since the Great Depression continues. Foreclosures threaten millions. Job losses keep mounting. True unemployment, according to economist John Williams (with all uncounted categories included), approaches 21% and is rising. Savings have greatly eroded. Government debt levels are unparalleled during peacetime. Major banks are effectively insolvent. Households are too over-extended to spend or borrow more, and the administration offered little relief to them or states unable to meet their budget commitments, so they adjust by slashing essential social services, including health care, education, and everything for the most needy.

Power of the Judiciary

For years and especially under George Bush, the federal judiciary has been stacked with judges from or affiliated with the extremist Federalist Society. It advocates rolling back civil liberties; ending New Deal social policies; opposing reproductive choice, government regulations (except industry approved ones), labor rights and environmental protections; and subverting justice in defense of privilege.

Bush's Justice Department was just as corrupted by putting politics ahead of the rule of law, hiring and firing prosecutors and other employees based on their loyalty to the Republican party, targeting the innocent opportunistically, waging war on Islam and Latino immigrants, creating justifications for administration crimes, then turning a blind eye to them.

For eight years, waging illegal wars, committing crimes of war and against humanity, violating constitutional and international laws, legalizing torture as official US policy, sanctioning police state laws, spying illegally on Americans, permitting government and corporate fraud, criminalizing dissent, and creating "a justice system stripped of all justice," became federal policy under George Bush and remains so under Obama.

Treaty and Appointment Powers

US presidents may make treaties with the advice and consent of two-thirds of the Senate. However, Status of Forces Agreements (or SOFAs) require only the approval of host countries or enough pressure applied to get it. To legitimize America's occupation, the Iraq SOFA illustrates the process.

Chalmers Johnson calls all of them "foreign military enclaves....completely beyond the jurisdiction of the occupied nation," a modern day version of 19th century China's "extraterritoriality" granting foreigners charged with crimes the "right" to be tried by his or her own government under his or her own laws.

Iraq's SOFA legitimizes permanent occupation and continued war beyond control of Congress or Iraqi officials. Nominally a 2011 withdrawal date was set, but given the impotency of the Iraqi government and the way past agreements were manipulated, US forces will remain indefinitely on dozens of bases, at least five super ones, and perhaps others yet to be built. No change is envisioned under Obama despite rhetoric claiming otherwise.

Federal appointees as ambassadors, ministers, consuls, judges, and others must be approved by the Senate, yet presidents may fill vacancies when the body is in recess. Bush took full advantage in appointing John Bolton UN ambassador over Senate objections. Yet most often, the Senate acquiesced to some of his most egregious nominees, including to the federal bench.

Executive Power

US presidents are the most powerful officials anywhere under our system of government. Regardless of the occupant, the office is inherently imperial as one man can exploit it to his advantage, effectively becoming a dictator if he wishes. The Constitution's Article II, Section 1 grants him near-limitless power in a single innocuous sentence stating: "The executive power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America."

Article II, Section 3 adds: "The President shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed" without saying that Presidents may make as well as execute laws, even though nothing in the Constitution permits it, and Article I, Section 1 reads: "All legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States."

However, executive power is key in the hands of presidents to exploit as it's concentrated in one (party bosses selected) man, chosen by an Electoral College that can subvert the popular vote if it wishes.

In times of war, presidents as military commander-in-chief are effective tyrants, and even though Article I, Section 8 grants only Congress the right to declare it, since 1941, all presidents did solely on their own authority.

They can also grant commutations or pardons freely except in cases of impeachment, make treaties with the advice and consent (not ratification) of the Senate, terminate them as well, and can rule by decree through executive agreements with foreign governments.

With rare opposition, they can appoint or discharge officials, veto congressional legislation, and nearly always be sustained. While only Congress has appropriating authority, they can release or not release funds for executive branch spending.

A huge bureaucracy is at their disposal, including powerful officials like the Secretaries of Defense, State, Treasury, and Homeland Security, and the Attorney General in charge of the Justice Department.

They can make one-man laws through Executive Orders and signing statements, powers easily abused as George Bush proved. He usurped "unitary executive" power to declare the law is what he said it was and got no congressional or judicial opposition to stop him.

Bush and earlier presidents, including Franklin Roosevelt during WW II, showed that presidents are unencumbered by constitutional restraints and can effectively rule as a sovereign, easily circumventing Congress and the courts to render the separation of powers neutralized.

Presidents also have their own private army through the Department of Homeland Security, the vast US intelligence apparatus, and much more. The CIA comprises one part. It functions as a praetorian guard operating freely outside the law and backed by a $50 billion + black budget with greater amounts available if requested.

In theory, presidents must obey the law, but can creatively interpret it to get away with murder unless Congress and the courts stop them. Rarely does it happen and never for George Bush. As for impeaching and convicting presidents for malfeasance, John Adams said it would take a national convulsion to do it, and Article II, Section 4 states it can only be for "treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors." Based on the historical record, it's near-impossible to do as no president was ever removed this way and only two were ever impeached, both unjustly. Nixon resigned on his own volition, but might, in fact, have been removed if he hadn't.

Above all others, Bush and Cheney deserved impeachment, but efforts to do it failed because few in Congress had the courage of Dennis Kucinich. As a result, they were unrestrained, even though this isn't what the framers had in mind. Short of a constitutional re-make, other executives will be similarly empowered and as able to take full advantage. George Bush wasn't the first. He won't be the last, and others ahead may be worse as America hurtles recklessly toward tyranny because no constraints are in place to stop it.

Pardoning Power

As explained above, presidents can grant clemency and pardons, except in cases of impeachment. Often the power is abused, and most presidents are guilty, though some far more than others. Cases in point: Ford pardoning Nixon and GHW Bush pardoning six Iran-Contra criminals, including former Secretary of Defense Casper Weinberger, former National Security Advisor Robert McFarlane, and former Assistant Secretary of State for Inter-American Affairs Elliott Abrams. GW Bush commuted I. Lewis (Scooter) Libby's sentence for having obstructed justice by blocking the investigation of a crime.

It remains to be seen if a president can pardon his officials for crimes he authorized and perhaps even himself. Nothing in the Constitution prevents it, so creative lawyers may find a way, and what's in place to stop them.

The Cheney Branch

No vice president matched Cheney's power, his abuse of office, the secret government he ran, the damage he caused, and the weakening of democratic rule of law on his watch. Vice presidents also preside over the Senate, have the final say in case of tie votes, and are first in the presidential line of succession should the executive die, resign, or be removed.

As the nation's strongest ever vice president and most ruthless, Cheney directed US national security policies, sidestepped George Bush on major issues, put his top loyalists in key posts, including Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz, stacked the bureaucracy with neocon extremists like himself, and held out for eight years despite repeated calls for his removal.

He justified seizing unconstitutional powers "because the world is dangerous (and) because I say we have that obligation." He was the power behind National and Homeland Security Presidential Directives like NSPD-51/HSPD-20 to establish "Continuity of Government (COG)" procedures under a "Catastrophic Emergency" defined as:

-- "any incident (such as a terrorist attack), regardless of location, that results in extraordinary levels of mass casualties, damage, or disruption severely affecting the US population, infrastructure, environment, economy, or government functions."

COG is "a coordinated effort within the Federal Government's executive branch to ensure that National Essential Functions continue to be performed during a Catastrophic Emergency."

These directives give presidents and powerful vice presidents unprecedented authority free from constitutional constraints. Martial law without congressional approval can be declared in case of a "national emergency," so both can rule with dictatorial powers under police state laws. Bush and Cheney took full advantage. So can future executives.

Congressional Collapse

The Democrat-controlled 111th Congress is just the latest in more recent failed ones and that of government overall. The electoral process bears much of the blame. It's scripted and corrupted. Secrecy and back room deals substitute for a free, fair, and open process. Candidates are pre-selected. Big money owns them. Both parties share equal guilt. The major media play a dominant role. Favored candidates have a distinct advantage. Alternative ones are marginalized. Horse race journalism substitutes for real debate, while the public interest is nowhere in sight.

Democrats and Republicans comprise two wings of one party representing privilege, not the greater good, and therein lies the problem. On Capitol Hill, democracy is rhetoric, not real. Profiles in courage are as rare as mild Chicago winters, and as Harry Truman famously said, "If you want a friend in Washington, get a dog."

Influence peddling is a way of life. What "payola" is to the music industry, "pay-to-play" is to Washington, and the more anted up, the more favors curried, but the "price of admission" keeps rising. Changing things requires major reform starting with a total electoral process makeover.

Get big money out of it and replace it with publicly funded elections. End corporate run electronic voting. Mandate verifiable hand-counting by nonpartisan civil servants. Adopt proportional representation over winner-take-all. Institute instant runoff voting (IRV). Automatically enfranchise all US citizens at birth under one uniform national law. Prohibit paid political advertising and require broadcasters to provide free air time to all candidates equally over over a shorter electoral cycle. Make democracy in America real, not the best kind money can buy.

Make the impeachment and conviction process work by using them against presidents and others having no place in honest government. End the idea that "We Won't Impeach (or Convict) You No Matter What." Get oversight back into the system. Make abuse of office a crime and hold offenders accountable. Hold public hearings. Demand vital documents. Issue binding subpoenas. Make not showing up criminal. Jail those refusing to cooperate. Make it apply to top officials, including the president and vice president. Use independent special prosecutors freely, fully empowered by their mandate. Put teeth back into the rule of law.

Undoing the Imperial Presidency and the Wars They Wage

America's imperial presence is everywhere through a global network of bases able to strike any nation perceived as a threat and intimidate others into submission. Host country populations perceive us as intrusive, hostile, and detrimental to their own interests with good reason.

They reflect empire and an aim to dominate everywhere, not security, at the expense of appropriated public land, environmental pollution and destruction, unacceptable noise, and human rights abuses by abusive troops committing crimes that include murder and rape.

They control trade, resources, local cheap labor, and political, economic, and social life in host countries. They force compliance with America's will through the Pentagon's might and freewheeling use of it. They've made America a global pariah, and they're illegal and oppressive as unwelcome occupiers.

Respecting International Treaties

Under the Constitution's Article VI, "....all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby..."

As explained above, presidents can make treaties with the advice and consent of two-thirds of the Senate, and can terminate them by executive edict as George Bush did in renouncing the ABM Treaty with Russia. They can also violate them freely with impunity, including the UN Charter, Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, and Chemical and Biological Weapons Conventions, among others. They can block ratifying ones like Kyoto, the Comprehensive Test Ban and Landmine Treaties, PAROS to prevent an arms race in space, and the ICC. They can approve harmful ones like the WTO and NAFTA. They can hurt or harm with a stroke of a pen or do nothing by abstaining.

They and Congress can enact real change by allocating public dollars equitably for essential social needs, including universal health care and education. They can end imperial wars and occupations, downsize the military, close global bases, produce fewer weapons, become a good neighbor, not a menacing one. They can end corporate welfare and other giveaways, rebuild essential infrastructure, put people back to work, reindustrialize the country, end Wall Street's dominance, nationalize or abolish the Federal Reserve, and let government be of, for, and by the people the way Lincoln envisioned. They can do all that and more but won't.

Forming a More Perfect Union

We can restore the Bill of Rights and add new ones, revoke illegal laws like the USA Patriot Act, and enforce all constitutional, statutory, and international ones. We can reinvent democracy and make it real. We can make social equity and equal justice the law of the land. We can be good neighbors, not intimidating ones.

We can protect against "arbitrary arrest, detention, exile, or enforced disappearance, and from all forms of slavery and forced labor, with criminal penalties for violators and compensation for victims." We can ban torture, illegal surveillance, political witch-hunts, and corporate personhood. We can protect, not wreck the environment, prohibit unsafe foods and drugs, enforce collective bargaining and human and civil rights. We can guarantee safety net protections for the needy, end homelessness and hunger, elevate living standards, and make corporations and the rich pay their fair share.

We can take the power of money out of politics, convene a second constitutional convention, redo the document Michael Parenti said protected "a rising bourgeoisie('s freedom to) invest, speculate, trade, and accumulate" to assure that people who own the country run it. We get it right this time, but grassroots pressure is needed to do it. We can discover that organized people can beat organized money with enough will.

We no longer need tolerate extreme inequalities of wealth, lost civil liberties, human rights abuses, destructive foreign wars, the American dream turned nightmare, and politics more corrupted than ever regardless of the party in power. Ideas for change abound. Free and open debate are needed to pick the best, then organize for change and work to enact them for the fundamental goal of equity and justice for all in a nation again to be proud of.

Citizen Power

People are crying for change, but only grassroots activism can bring it. In his call to arms, Swanson says:

"We have reached a critical moment, at great expense, but with great possibility. Things have gotten bad enough in the minds of enough Americans that there is an opening for creating a mass movement for real change, and that movement is already growing all around us." After eight years under Bush - Cheney and a complicit Congress, "What is needed in US civil society is a revolution," a non-violent one.

But "Throughout history, the most powerful movements have (been met by) the most powerful suppressive reactions....Our own power and potential for greater power lies in the coalition we can build of activist groups focused on domestic and international issues, in organizing and training, in funding, in media of our own creation, in leaders, in sympathetic and organized government employees, in protection we can offer to whistleblowers and resisters, in our international allies, in local and state governments, and possibly even in the Congress or the Supreme Court resisting the abuses of the White House in the interests of a balance of powers."

Short of effective real change, odds are "our future will take us from bad to worse," and produce a government even more harmful to the public interest. "The choice belongs (collectively) to all of us together" to prevent it and work for the America we want. But wishing won't make it so.

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.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=14962

Martial Law Alert Over Swine Flu

Martial Law Alert Over Swine Flu - by Stephen Lendman

Fact check:

-- no Swine Flu threat exists;

-- reported H1N1 infections and deaths are uncorroborated;

-- WHO predicting a global pandemic affecting "as many as two billion people....over the next two years" is falsified hype unless a diabolical depopulation scheme (by vaccines or other means) plans to create one;

-- vaccines don't protect against diseases they're designed to prevent and often cause them;

-- all vaccines contain harmful toxins, including mercury, aluminum, formaldehyde, phenoxyethanol (antifreeze), and squalene adjuvants that weaken and can destroy the human immune system, making it vulnerable to many annoying to life-threatening illnesses; and

-- evidence suggests that the H1N1 strain was bioengineered in a US laboratory, and the vaccines being produced for it are extremely hazardous and potentially lethal.

Under no circumstances should anyone submit to them even if threatened with fines, quarantine, or incarceration.

Government and PhRMA Are Enemies, Not Protectors

On April 26, the US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) issued a "Determination that a Public Health Emergency Exists....as a consequence of confirmed cases of H1N1 Influenza in four US states." At an April 27 press briefing, Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Janet Napolitano said:

Yesterday "I issued a public health emergency declaration" as part of "standard operating procedure" to make more government resources available to combat the spread of Swine Flu. She then ordered the FDA "to proceed to permit things like Tamiflu to be used for populations that they otherwise wouldn't be used for - in this case, for example, very, very young children."

On November 13, 2005, Japan's Health Ministry said it was "looking into reports of a number of sudden deaths of young people who had taken prescribed dosages of Tamiflu." The Ministry also "found 64 cases of psychological disorders linked to the drug in the past four years."

The Japan Institute of Pharmaco-Vigilance head, Dr. Rokura Hama, said "Tamiflu appears to be similar to other powerful drugs that can cause behavioral changes" by affecting the central nervous system. It's the leading medication prescribed for the treatment and prevention of flu. In April, DHS ordered 12 million doses made available in locations around the country for quick access if needed.

Then on June 11, the World Health Organization (WHO) "raise(d) the level of (Swine Flu) influenza pandemic alert from phase 5 to phase 6," its highest level in declaring "The world is now at the start of the 2009 influenza pandemic," while admitting its severity would likely be "moderate (and) most people will recover from swine flu within a week, just as they would from seasonal forms of influenza." The WHO no longer reports "confirmed" Swine Flu cases globally, yet continues to hype the scare without corroborating proof.

There was no emergency earlier or now, but you'd never know it from hyped media reports to convince people voluntarily to submit to experimental, untested, toxic and extremely dangerous vaccines that damage the human immune system and cause health problems ranging from annoying to life-threatening.

George Bush's Executive Orders (EOs) 13295 and 13375, Homeland Security Presidential Directive-21, and Military Pandemic Planning

In addition to the federal laws below, the Bush EOs, HSPD-21, and Pentagon plan suggest a hidden agenda behind today's Swine Flu crisis as a way to institute martial law on the pretext of a public health emergency, using hyped fear to win popular acquiescence.

On April 4, 2003, EO 13295 issued a "Revised List of Quarantinable Communicable Diseases" that included cholera, diphtheria, infectious TB, plague, smallpox, yellow fever, severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), and viral hemorrhagic fevers like ebola and lassa.

On April 1, 2005, EO 13375 amended EO 13295 by adding "the following new subsection:"

"(c) Influenza caused by novel or reemergent influenza viruses that are causing, or have the potential to cause, a pandemic."

The October 2007 HSPD-21 "establishe(d) a National Strategy for Public Health and Medical Preparedness which builds upon principles set forth in (the 2004) Biodefense for the 21st Century and will transform our national approach to protecting the health of the American people against all disasters."

It called for:

-- "nationwide, robust, and integrated biosurveillance...to provide early warning and ongoing characterization of disease outbreaks in near real-time;

-- countermeasure stockpiling and distribution....of medical countermeasures (vaccines, drugs, and therapeutics) to a large population....;

-- mass casualty care....created by a catastrophic health event;" and

-- "community resilience" whereby "civic leaders, citizens, and families are educated regarding threats and are empowered to mitigate their own risk;" in addition, the federal government must be involved in "medical preparedness to assist (nationwide) in the face of potential catastrophic health events."

In May 2007, the Department of Defense's (DOD) "Implementation Plan for Pandemic Influenza" prepared for a possible H5N1 (Avian Flu) pandemic that could affect up to one-third of the population and kill as many as three million in just weeks, it was claimed. It involved using US troops to put down riots, guard pharmaceutical plants and shipments, and restrict the movement of people inside the country and across borders.

This plan remains active and US laws authorize it, including Sections 1076 and 333 of the John Warner National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007 that amended the 1807 Insurrection Act and 1878 Posse Comitatus Act. They prohibit using federal and National Guard troops for law enforcement except as constitutionally allowed or expressly authorized by Congress in times of a national emergency like an insurrection.

The president may now announce a public emergency, declare martial law, suspend the Constitution, and deploy US troops on city streets to suppress what he calls disorder.

The Legal Basis for Quarantines

Vaccine law expert Alan G. Phillips says:

"....underlying laws....allow states to mandate vaccines in an emergency....throw out exemptions....impose quarantines and isolation outside of our homes," and the only way around this is to "chang(e) state policy and law."

US laws are similar. They can mandate vaccinations and let states isolate and quarantine Swine Flu victims if authorities call the disease infectious and life-threatening.

Under the proposed Model State Emergency Health Powers Act (MSEHPA), civil liberties may be suspended in case of a public health emergency, with or without verifiable evidence.

The September 2003 Turning Point Model State Public Health Act (MSPHA) lets state, local, and tribal governments revise or update public health statutes and administrative regulations. According to James Hodges, executive director of Johns Hopkins and Georgetown University's Centers for Law and the Public Health, over half the states have these laws that can order flu testing, ban public gatherings, mandate quarantines, and issue other emergency public health directives.

Federal laws already do it, including the 2006 Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness (PREP) Act that lets the HHS Secretary declare any disease an epidemic or national emergency requiring mandatory vaccinations. It also protects drug companies from tort liability, except in cases of "willful misconduct."

US State Responses to Swine Flu

Growing numbers of states are exploiting the hyped scare by declaring a public health emergency. Others are passing laws that order forced quarantines, impose fines or imprisonment for offenders, and prepare to govern under martial law with local police, National Guard, or federal troops for enforcement.

Florida ordered voluntary or mandatory detentions at home or in state-designated facilities as well as closures of suspected buildings and areas. Quarantine Detention Orders state:

-- "non-compliant" persons are ordered to "remain in detention quarantine until released by the State Epidemiologist or Health Officer;"

-- at home, they must wear surgical masks at all times in the presence of anyone, even family members, and follow other required instructions while in isolation;

-- in state-run facilities, they must "comply with all orders....regarding (their) medical care," and must "cooperate with the detention facility's access to (themselves) and (their) medical records for purposes of delivering and monitoring (their) medical care;" and

-- these "action(s are) taken under the police power authority of the health department and your cooperation is required by law;" failure to comply is a "crime."

Forms circulating on the Internet show that Iowa ordered home or facility quarantines for anyone suspected of possible H1N1 infection. However, Mason City, Iowa's KIMT TV 3 reported that "Health leaders in (the state) are reassuring people that there are no H1N1 related quarantines being ordered," yet preparations have been made to do it.

North Carolina's Draft Isolation Order calls for imprisonment for up to two years and pretrial detention for residents failing to comply with isolation orders.

Washington empowers local health authorities to issue emergency detention orders for up to 10 days.

On April 28, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger issued a "Proclamation to Confront Swine Flu Outbreak" and ordered "all state agencies and departments to utilize and employ state personnel, equipment and facilities to assist the Department of Public Health (DPH) and the State Emergency Plan as coordinated by the California Emergency Management Agency."

He further proclaimed a "state of emergency" because of "conditions of extreme peril" in the State.

On April 26, New York Gov. David Paterson activated the state's health emergency preparedness plan, thereby putting the state on "high alert to quickly identify and respond to any cases of swine flu." No further action was taken.

On April 28, Texas became the second state to declare a Swine Flu emergency as officials closed schools and cancelled sporting events after an alleged fatality was reported. At a press conference, Gov. Rick Perry said:

"I'm issuing a disaster declaration which covers the entire state. This will move Texas to a higher state of alert and release resources to address the spread of the virus." No further action was taken.

On May 1, Maryland's Gov. Martin O'Malley's executive order declared a public health emergency "based on an abundance of caution and concern for our students...If there is a probable case of H1N1 virus at any school, we will close that school and cease all extra-curricular activities for up to 14 days."

He also ordered "appropriate emergency protective measures (be taken to) assist public and private sector employers (take) proactive steps to prevent the spread to influenza workers and their families." He stopped short of more draconian measures, including statewide forced vaccinations and quarantines for resisters.

On August 6, the Minneapolis-St.Paul Star Tribune headlined: "As fall approaches, officials are taking a hard look at emergency plans in the event the virus strikes more aggressively." On August 10, the paper reported, without elaboration, that state officials "have a plan ready if Minnesota's health care system is swamped by 1.5 million cases."

Other states took similar actions, including Nebraska, Ohio, Virginia and Wisconsin, and still others are considering them as the fall flu season approaches and children return to school.

After earlier issuing a "Proclamation of Civil Emergency due to a Highly Infectious Disease," Maine Gov. John Balducci signed a Swine Flu civil emergency decree on September 1 that gives the WHO and UN martial law authority over the state and authorized the Maine Center for Disease Control to vaccinate the state's residents. Making this mandatory wasn't mentioned, but state civil emergency powers may allow it if ordered.

On April 28, the Massachusetts Senate unanimously passed the most draconian law to date, S. 2028, that imposes virtual martial law authority. If it's passed in the House and becomes law, it gives the governor sweeping powers, lets public health officials mandate vaccinations, and, with law enforcement and medical personnel, enter private residences and businesses without warrants, quarantine non-compliers, and impose $1,000-a-day fines and/or imprisonment for up to 30 days.

It also authorizes:

-- closures and evacuations to decontaminate residences, buildings or facilities;

-- the destruction of suspect materials;

-- restricting or prohibiting public gatherings;

-- public health authorities to use or supervise private health care facilities and requires private health personnel to provide appropriate services, including vaccinating state residents;

-- "the arrest without warrant (of anyone believed to have) violated an order for isolation or quarantine...;"

-- control over "ingress (and) egress" from public areas and human traffic within them;

-- enforcement measures for the safe disposal of "infectious waste and human remains;"

-- control over all medical supplies as well as other measures needed to respond to the emergency;

-- the use of state police for enforcement;

-- control over "routes of transportation and over materials and facilities including but not limited to communication devices, carriers, public utilities, fuels, food, clothing, and shelter;" and

-- public health officials to "institute appropriate civil proceedings against (properties) to be destroyed in accordance with the existing laws and rules of the courts of this Commonwealth or any such rules that may be developed by the courts for use during the emergency;" acquired properties may "be disposed of by destruction as the court may direct."

Massachusetts may be a trial balloon for what federal authorities plan everywhere as the fall flu season approaches, to be followed by hyped reports of nationwide Swine Flu outbreaks, perhaps caused by the vaccines intended to prevent them.

In early July, HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius announced that children, pregnant women, health care workers, and adults with chronic illnesses will be first to be vaccinated. Reports indicate that inoculations will begin in early October, preceded by media-hyped fear urging everyone to get one.

Stephen Lendman is a Research Associate of the Centre of 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.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=14962

Predicting Worse Ahead from America's Economic Crisis

Predicting Worse Ahead from America's Economic Crisis - by Stephen Lendman

Austrian economist Ludwig von Mises (1881 - 1973) said:

"There is no means of avoiding a final collapse of a boom brought about by credit expansion. The alternative is only whether the crisis should come sooner as a result of a voluntary abandonment of further credit expansion, or later as a final and total catastrophe of the currency system involved."

Under Alan Greenspan, Ben Bernanke and successive US Treasury Secretaries, America chose the latter path and now faces the consequences of their reckless, criminal behavior.

In early 2009, economist Michael Hudson said:

The (US) economy has reached its debt limit and is entering its insolvency phase. We are not in a cycle but (at) the end of an era. The old world of debt pyramiding to a fraudulent degree cannot be restored," only delayed to postpone a painful day of reckoning.

Economist Hyman Minsky (1919 - 1996) described a "Ponzi finance" system during prolonged expansions and economic booms. Speculative excesses create bubbles, triggering structural instability, then asset valuation collapse that turns euphoria to revulsion and market crashes.

On December 29, 2008, the Wall Street Journal online headlined: "As if Things Weren't Bad Enough, Russian Professor Predicts End of US," then continued:

"For a decade, Russian academic (and former KGB analyst) Igor Panarin has been predicting the US will fall apart in 2010" to include an "economic and moral collapse, a civil war, and the eventual breakup of the country." For years, no one took him seriously, but no longer. He's invited to Kremlin receptions, gets interviewed twice a day, publishes books, is a frequent lecturer, and appears regularly in the media as an expert on US - Russia relations as well as the great interest in his predictions and new book titled, "The Crash of America."

On March 25, 2009, RussiaToday.com headlined: "Is there anything Obama can do about the US Collapse?" No, according to Panarin, for these reasons:

-- "the moral and psychological factor and the stress of the American population;"

-- America's deepening financial and economic crisis; and

-- "the increase of anti-Americanism in the world," the result of continued US belligerency.

Panarin sees America collapsing into six areas of foreign influence and perhaps disintegrating as a nation:

-- depressed northern states close to Canada "in their mentality and economic development;"

-- the Southwest "fuel and energy complex, the oil sector" close to Mexico;

-- California and the Pacific Northwest falling under Chinese influence;

-- the Northeast and Middle Atlantic regions under the EU;

-- Alaska may be returned to Russia; and

-- Hawaii may become a Japanese or Chinese protectorate.

Panarin sees 2010 as America's tipping point and says no miracle rescues can save it. In addition, he cites French political scientist Emmanuel Todd's 1976 prediction of the Soviet Union's dissolution that got him laughed at and scorned at the time but proved right.

Todd now predicts a similar fate for the US in his 2002 book, "After the Empire: The Breakdown of the American Order." He cites:

-- unilateral militarism shows weakness, not strength;

-- America is parasitic, relying on voluntary or extracted "tributes" from vassal states;

-- global terrorism is a myth;

-- many nations, including EU states, China and Russia, are beginning to resist US adventurism;

-- terminal corruption and decay;

-- economic weakness and decline;

-- producing little, America's "specialty is consumption (so) relies on foreign imports" to satisfy it;

-- a declining middle class and growing poverty will curtail spending sharply;

-- if capital inflows cease, the dollar will crash:

-- a coming collapse of the stock market, financial institutions and the dollar;

-- a ballooning trade deficit and shrinking manufacturing base;

-- a predatory ruling class plundering the world with impunity, yet out of touch with its own people growing poorer, more desperate and angrier;

-- America's abandonment of universalism and egalitarianism;

-- excess consumption trapping people in an ocean of debt and lowering their living standards;

-- "the rest of the world....is on the verge of discovering that it can get along without America; America is realizing that it cannot get along without the rest of the world;"

-- an emerging Eurasia will end US supremacy, then isolate and curtail its dominance; and

-- "If America continues to endeavor to show its power, it will simply reveal (to) the world its impotence."

For his part, Panarin compares America to the Titanic after hitting an iceberg when it was unclear whether the crew would try to save the ship or more importantly its passengers. Unfortunately, under Bush and Obama, they're trying to save themselves at the expense of the ship and passengers.

After disintegration, Panarin sees three dominant influence areas emerging - the EU, Russia and China. After 11 years of monitoring US policies, he believes his prediction is largely confirmed and states the following:

America's FY 2009 "budget deficit is 4.5 times the 2008 deficit, while firearms sales are up 40%. On October 1, the coupons that were given state workers are to be cashed out. When (they) realize that they are getting nothing for (them), they will take out their firearms and chaos will unfold."

Further, on September 30, 2009, results will be published that are "destined to shock investors worldwide. After that, and (Japan and China's) snubbing of the dollar....which will transfer 50% of (their) international operations to Yuan starting in 2010, the currency will then flow like a landslide out of style." Already nations like China, Russia, Brazil, Argentina and others are trading in their own currencies or will do so shortly.

In Panarin's view, "the probability of the US ceasing to exist (in its present form) by June 2010 exceeds 50%. At this point, the mission of all major international powers is to prevent chaos" because what hurts America also harms them.

A Multiple-Dip Depression

Economist John Williams publishes the shadowstats.com electronic newsletter with updated sample data on his site. He calls government figures corrupted and unreliable because manipulative changes rigged them for political and market purposes. To correct them, he reverse-engineers GDP, employment, inflation, and other key data for greater reliability to subscribers.

On August 1, Williams called the "Current Economic Downturn (the) Worst Since (the) Great Depression." It began a year earlier than reported, triggered a systemic solvency crisis, and the effects of "a multiple-dip depression (are) far from over."

The July 31, 2009 national income accounts "confirmed that the US economy is in its worst economic contraction since the first downleg of the Great Depression, which was a double-dip" one like today's.

Intermittent upturns are common, like from spiked auto sales from the cash-for-clunkers program that borrowed future purchases for today's. "Yet, this downturn will continue to deteriorate, proving to be extremely protracted, extremely deep and particularly nonresponsive to traditional stimuli."

The economy suffers from deep structural problems related to household income. Consumers are over-indebted, can't borrow, and Washington's policies aren't helping them. Continued economic decline will follow. "The current depression is the second dip in a multiple-dip downturn that started in 1999 (and triggered) the systemic solvency crisis" that was visible by August 2007 but started in late 2006.

The worst lies ahead, the result of the "government's long-range insolvency and (dollar debasing that risks) hyperinflation during the next five years," and perhaps sooner in 2010. It will cause "a great depression of a magnitude never before seen in" America, disrupting all business and commerce and reverberating globally.

Williams defines deflation as a decrease in goods and services prices, generally from a money supply contraction. Inflation is the reverse. Hyperinflation debases the currency to near worthlessness. Officially, two or more consecutive declining quarters means recession, but better measures are protracted weakened production, employment, retail sales, construction, capital investment, and demand for durable goods among other factors.

A depression occurs when inflation-adjusted peak-to-trough contraction exceeds 10%, and a great depression when it's 25% or worse.

Today's economic downturn preceded the systemic solvency crisis after key data "hit cycle highs and began to weaken in late-2005 for housing and durable goods orders....early-2006 for nonfarm payrolls, (and) late-2006 for retail sales and industrial production, patterns more consistent with a late-2006" real recession onset. Gross Domestic Income (GDI) data confirms this analysis.

Its real growth peaked in Q 1 2006, and revised GDI data contracted in seven of the last nine quarters. "Revised GDP shows the sharpest annual decline in the history of the quarterly GDP series," suggesting a much deeper and protracted downturn than previously reported.

July 2009 marked the 19th consecutive month of contraction, "the longest downturn since the first downleg of the Great Depression." More recent GDP declines of 3.3% and 3.9% in Q 1 and Q 2 2009, "are the worst showings in the history of the quarterly GDP series" dating back to 1947-48. In 1946, a greater contraction occurred because of post-war production cutbacks, but it was short-term.

Today's most reliable economic indicators show the downturn is deepening, not abating as deceptive media accounts report. "The SGS (Shadow Government Statistics) alternative measure of GDP suggests (a) 5.9% contraction....versus the official year-to-year" 3.9% figure.

The official estimated annualized Q 2 2009 decline was 1% compared to SGS's figure "in excess of five-percent." Its alternative data show "deeper and more protracted recessions" than officially reported, suggesting a deepening crisis ahead.

The CBO's Grim Forecast

Even the conservative Congressional Budget Office sees a weaker economy ahead, contrary to most consensus views of a sustainable upturn. Its latest projections are as follows:

-- 2010 U-3 unemployment at 10.2%, edging down to 8% by 2011 and 4.8% by 2014;

-- in 2010, 12 million will be underemployed;

-- for the next five years, economic weakness and lower demand will pressure workers with unemployment or underemployment;

-- part-time work only will be available for millions wanting full-time jobs;

-- low consumption will persist through 2014;

-- unemployment benefits will be exhausted;

-- households will be pressured to make mortgage payments, pay for health care, meet other obligations, and provide for their families at a time state and city budget crises force deep cuts in vital social services, not made up for by the federal government;

-- tax revenues are down 17%, the sharpest decline since 1932;

-- $600 billion in investment losses will result plus another $5.9 trillion in lost output through 2014; and

-- the federal deficit will nearly double over the next 10 years to about $20 trillion.

In sum, CBO projects a more severe protracted downturn than it earlier forecast in January.

Troubled Times Ahead

On July 14, Egon von Greyerz, Founder and Managing Partner of Zurich-based Matterhorn Asset Management AG, specializing in precious metals and other investments, said "The Dark Years Are Here" and explained why.

Because of "the devastating effects of credit bubbles, government money printing (and) disastrous actions that governments are taking, (upcoming) tumultuous events will be life changing for most people in the world." They'll begin by year end, last for two to three years, then be followed by extended economic, political, and social upheaval, perhaps continuing for two decades.

Greyerz cites three main concerns:

-- exploding unemployment and government deficits;

-- trillions of unreported bank losses and worthless derivatives; and

-- rising inflation, high interest rates, collapsed Treasury bond (and UK gilt) valuations resulting in more money creation, worthless paper, and a "perfect vicious circle (leading to) a hyperinflationary depression followed by the collapse of the dollar and British pound.

America is hemorrhaging financially and economically. Other countries now realize they hold "worthless" US dollars. Reckless money creation achieved short-term hope, benefitted Wall Street alone short-term, elevated world stock markets, and led some to believe the crisis was over when, in fact, it's worsening.

Aside from expected short-lived upturns, "every single sector of the real economy is deteriorating whether it is production, unemployment, corporate profits, real estate, credit defaults, construction, federal deficits, local government and state deficits etc."

In response, the Fed keeps printing money and destroying its value. "This is total lunacy! How can any intelligent person believe that printed pieces of paper can solve an economic catastrophe?"

We're in "the first phase of this tragic saga." Likely by year end, a second more serious one will start. Real unemployment now tops 20%. It hit 25% in the Great Depression with 35% of the nonfarm population out of work and desperate.

"It is our firm opinion that (US) non-farm unemployment levels will reach 35% at least....in the next few years" with all uncounted categories included.

Growing millions with no jobs, incomes, savings, or safety net protections will create "a disaster of unimaginable consequences that will affect the whole fabric of American society" to a degree far greater than in the Great Depression.

Growing unemployment now plagues Western and Eastern Europe as well, and by 2010 will more greatly affect most parts of the world, "including China, Asia and Africa. Never before has there been a global unemployment crisis affecting the world simultaneously." Ahead expect sharp drops in consumption and global trade leading to depression, poverty, "famine and social unrest."

Already, conditions are worse than in the 1930s, but the worst is yet to come. Expect:

-- an extremely severe global depression in most countries with grave economic, political, and social consequences;

-- social safety net protections will end;

-- private and state pensions will likely collapse; and

-- unemployment, poverty, homelessness, hunger, and famine will cause a protracted period of economic, political, social, and institutional upheaval.

If von Greyerz, Panarin, Todd, and others with similar views are right, a deepening, protracted, unprecedented global catastrophe approaches that "will be life changing for most people in the world."

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.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=14962

A UN Special Focus on Gaza Under Siege

A UN Special Focus on Gaza Under Siege - by Stephen Lendman

In August 2009, the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) published a special report titled: "Locked In: The Humanitarian Impact of Two Years of Blockade on the Gaza Strip." It focuses on import and export restrictions, the travel ban on "livelihoods, food security, education, health, shelter, energy and water, and sanitation." It explains how violence and human rights abuses increase the suffering of 1.5 million people.

Following Hamas' January 2006 electoral victory, all outside aid was cut off. Sanctions and an economic embargo were imposed, and the democratically elected government was falsely accused of being a terrorist organization and isolated. Stepped up repression followed as well as IDF attacks, killings, targeted assassinations, property destruction, and more. Gazans have been imprisoned ever since. In silence, the world community sanctions Israeli crimes and shares guilt for their commission.

In June 2007, Israel placed the Territory under siege and imposed an unprecedented blockade on nearly all movement and supplies in and out of the Strip, "triggering a protracted human dignity crisis with negative humanitarian consequences." At its heart is the "degradation (of) living conditions," the erosion of livelihoods, the lack of vital services in the areas of health, water, sanitation and education, and the collapse of essential infrastructure in the wake of Operation Cast Lead.

Over the past several months, Israel allowed in only small amounts of vital goods and services, far below quantities essential enough to relieve a grave humanitarian crisis. Despite the urgings of the UN, ICRC, a few nations, and numerous human rights organizations, Israel continues its blockade that includes:

-- the closure of border crossings, including Karni, the largest and best equipped commercial one, except for a conveyor belt for the transfer of inadequate amounts of grains;

-- tight restrictions on the import of industrial, agricultural, construction, and essential to life products, services, and materials;

-- a suspension of nearly all exports;

-- restricted amounts of industrial fuel (for Gaza's sole power plant), benzene, diesel, and cooking gas;

-- except for a limited number of humanitarian cases, a ban on Palestinian traffic through Erez, the only passenger crossing to the West Bank;

-- other than intermittent openings, the closure of Rafah, the Egyptian-controlled crossing; and

-- restricted (to close to shore) fishing and accessibility to farmland.

After over two years of siege:

-- Gaza's economy was wrecked;

-- the UN report way underestimates the number of job losses at 120,000 and unemployment at 40%;

-- on May 1, the Palestinian Chamber of Commerce reported that unemployment reached 65%, poverty hit 80%, and the longer the siege continues, the higher these figures will go; in addition, 96% of Gaza's industrial capacity is shuttered, and well over 80% of the population is aid-dependent; yet most get below minimal amounts of everything;

-- Gazans have had to shift from a high-nutritional diet to a low-cost cereals, sugar and oil one, "which can lead to micro-nutritional deficiencies, particularly among children and pregnant women;"

-- OCHA identified 1,383 (mostly civilian) deaths, including 333 children during Operation Cast Lead;

-- Israel's ban on construction materials prevents the rebuilding of homes and other structures;

-- many thousands of Gazans now live with relatives, in tents, or if lucky in rented apartments, much fewer in number post-conflict;

-- inadequate fuel supplies cause up to eight-hour-a-day blackouts for 90% of the population; the other 10% have no power;

-- many thousands have no running water and none of it meets WHO sanitary standards because of high pollution levels; more on that below;

-- 80 million liters of raw and partially-treated sewage are discharged daily, thus causing serious sea and underground aquifer pollution, detrimental to human health;

-- medical facilities are severely strapped by shortages of everything plus a lack of essential equipment, drugs, and capacity to handle a growing population; few patients needing specialized treatment are permitted to leave Gaza to get it;

-- education is undermined by over-crowding, a lack of materials for rebuilding and repairs, and shortages of virtually all teaching materials; and

-- post Operation Cast Lead and after over two years under siege, a state of humanitarian crisis exists for most Gazans with continued deterioration daily.

The Systematic Destruction of Livelihoods

The combination of unemployment, poverty, and vast areas of Gaza destroyed, damaged, or in disrepair has left most people struggling to survive.

"The private sector has been devastated by the blockade" and conflict. Replacing it are improvised coping mechanisms by Hamas authorities and the growth of the "tunnel economy" discussed below. A May 2008 ICRC survey found 70% of Gazans live on less than $1 dollar a day per person, and around 40% of families at half that amount, excluding whatever humanitarian aid is accessible.

For over two years under siege, average truckloads of goods entering Gaza delivered less than one-fifth the tonnage than in the first five months of 2007. About 70% of it consists of food products because most industrial, construction and other materials are banned or greatly restricted. Currently, 1,700 containers of goods are in Israel or the West Bank, prohibited from entering the Strip. Exports have been totally prohibited except for small amounts of cut flowers and strawberries.

Industry is 96% shut down, and agriculture also has been heavily impacted. What provides the livelihood for 40,000 farmers, herders, fishermen, and farm laborers is severely hurt by a lack of seedlings, livestock, fuel, spare parts, and pesticides for those who use them.

Operation Cast Lead exacerbated already intolerable conditions, according to a Gaza Private Sector Council survey. It reported:

-- 268 establishments totally destroyed and another 432 damaged, resulting in millions of dollars in losses;

-- 40% of those affected are small and medium-sized industrial companies involved mainly in producing food, textiles, garments, and furniture while the other 60% were commerce, contracting and fuel establishments;

-- 20 out of 29 ready-mix concrete factories and 39 other construction-related businesses were destroyed or damaged; and

-- extensive losses of productive agricultural assets were sustained.

Farmers and herders now working close to the Israeli border face extreme restrictions and dangers. After Israel's summer 2005 "disengagement," a 150 meter-wide buffer zone was created where Palestinian access is prohibited. Warning shots are fired at farmers working anywhere near it. Then on May 23, 2009, the zone was expanded to 300 meters and at times to 1000 meters on an ad hoc basis.

Since the siege began in June 2007, 33 Palestinian civilians were killed, including 11 children, in border-related incidents. Another 61 were injured, including 13 children. That's besides many others by incursions and targeted assassinations.

Fishermen have also been greatly impacted by being prohibited from fishing beyond three nautical miles from shore - severely undermining their catch because deep waters are most productive, so exclusion caused some to abandon fishing altogether. As a result, monthly tonnage now is around one-fourth as much as pre-siege, and prices are much higher making fish less available and unaffordable for most.

Restrictions on cash entering Gaza were also imposed. The Palestinian Monetary Authority (PMA) estimates that 43 bank branches need about 200 million New Israeli Shekels (NIS) monthly for regular needs, while international agencies require additional amounts for theirs. Severe cash shortages put added pressure on Gaza's economy. Salaries can't be paid regularly, and daily affairs can't be conducted normally.

At times of duress, innovative solutions are employed. Gaza's tunnel economy is one - over 1,000 into Egypt for vital goods, including food, fuel, medicines, livestock, construction materials, generators, other basic necessities, and even cash. This constitutes around 90% of economic activity and employs thousands of Gazans digging, smuggling, and transporting essential items. Tunnels are about three-tenths of a mile long, as deep as 50 feet, require several months of hard labor, and cost from $50,000 - $90,000 to build. As long as the siege persists, they provide a lifeline for essential goods that are still way short of what's needed. When Israel bombs and destroys some, Gazans rebuild - to survive and keep resisting an intolerable situation.

Food Insecurity

OCHA reports that over 80% of Gazans are food-insecure (other estimates say 96%), up from about 50% in 2006 after Hamas was democratically elected. "Food insecurity exists when people lack sustainable physical or economic access to safe, nutritious and socially acceptable food to maintain a healthy and productive life." It's the daily ordeal for Gazans because of the siege and destruction of agricultural land, crops and assets during Operation Cast Lead. Higher food prices have also hurt badly as well as restrictions on what Israel lets in and their amounts.

On March 22, 2009, Israel nominally lifted food entry restrictions, but its decision remains unimplemented. Many items are still prohibited and most in short supply even though more staple items are permitted. Still, over 80% of Gazans remain aid-dependent, mainly from the World Food Program and UNWRA, and most have sub-nutritional diets.

Pervasive Insecurity and Lack of Civilian Protection

Under occupation, Gazans have experienced it for over 40 years, but especially under siege with its regular cycles of violence and constant threats to their well-being. Post-imposition in June 2007, over 2,000 Palestinians were killed and another 6,700 wounded. Three weeks of Operation Cast Lead took the greatest toll in lives lost, numbers wounded, and property of all kinds destroyed or damaged.

Israeli attacks continue intermittently, and Gazans remain at risk from numerous conflict-related factors, including unexploded ordnance (UXO) and other hazardous residues from legal and illegal munitions. In addition, large rubble amounts contain asbestos and dangerous substances that pose a serious threat to human health.

Reconstruction of Homes Prevented - Thousands of Families Still Displaced

Israel prohibits construction material imports, including cement, gravel, wood, pipes, glass, steel bars, and more compared to an average of 7,400 monthly truckloads pre-siege. Israel calls them "dual use" items that Hamas can use for military purposes. Their ban, in fact, is to harass, hold 1.5 million Gazans hostage, break their will to resist, hope many will give up and leave, and for those who stay destroy them by slow-motion genocide.

Besides essential food and medical care, Gazans' most urgent need is for construction materials to repair and rebuild homes and other structures now in ruin. A joint UNWRA - UNDP survey showed that 3,540 homes were totally destroyed, 6,400 heavily damaged, and another 52,900 less so. As of July 2009, many thousands are still displaced, their lives severely disrupted, especially for those living in tents.

"Anecdotal evidence suggests that children are among the worst affected by displacement, including many who were relocated to alternative schools closer to their place of alternative accommodation."

Besides homes, many thousands of other structures need to be rebuilt or repaired, including many with major damage. But without construction materials, it's impossible except for rudimentary, make-do ingenuity such as efforts getting the most out of whatever materials are available.

In other ways, humanitarian agencies help out by supplying blankets, tents, mattresses, clothing kits, kitchen sets, and other items Israel lets in. Some families also get small cash assistance through UNWRA for refugees and UNDP for others, but serving the needs of 1.5 million people means precious little gets done overall.

Despite the obstacles and Israel's hostility, a number of organizations, including UN agencies, are actively seeking ways to help, including initiating vitally needed reconstruction. The UN Special Coordinator for the Occupied Palestinian Territory asked Israel's Defense Minister to open border crossings and let in construction materials to begin work on housing, health and education facilities, suspended for over two years. Thus far, no response was received, but not enough pressure is put on for it, nor does any come from nations mattering most like America.

A Protracted Energy Crisis

After Gaza was declared a "hostile entity" in September 2007, Israel cut the amount and types of fuel let in, including benzene, diesel, cooking gas, and industrial fuel. A protracted crisis followed affecting key services gravely and Gazans' ability to run their households.

Electricity is the main problem because Gaza's sole power plant can't supply enough of it. Production levels were previously cut after Israel destroyed six electric transformers in June 2006 during Operation Summer Rain in Gaza and Operation Change of Direction against Hezbollah in Lebanon during which vast amounts of carnage were inflicted and many hundreds of lives lost in both conflicts combined.

At full capacity, Gaza's power plant supplies less than one-third of the Strip's needs. Lacking enough fuel, it's operating at three-fourths capacity at best. When available, the rest is bought mainly from Israel plus smaller amounts from Egypt. As a result, public institutions rely heavily on backup generators and other devices that are extremely dependent on a spotty availability of spare parts, so are very vulnerable to breakdowns.

A Challenged Health System

Gaza's ability to deliver proper health care is severely compromised by a lack of virtually everything, including building materials to expand for a growing population. Power shortages force suspension or postponement of vital surgeries because of the risk to patients. Proper medical equipment is in short supply, and what's available is hampered by a lack of spare parts and the ability to get them. Inadequate amounts of pharmaceuticals and other supplies are a constant problem. As of July 2009, 77 essential drugs and 140 disposable items were out of stock with no easy way to replace them due to blockage restrictions.

In addition, few patients can leave Gaza for vital treatment elsewhere. Getting approval is time consuming, arduous and uncertain, thus compounding a dire situation, even for the severely ill who without access to a full-functioning facility have little chance to survive. Some give up after trying. Others die awaiting approval that doesn't come. The Gaza Ministry of Interior estimates that hundreds of patients can't travel due to the lack of a passport alone and no simple way to get one.

During and in the aftermath of Operation Cast Lead, Gazan medical teams were severely challenged to work around the clock under dangerous conditions to provide care for the hundreds of patients in need, many with very severe injuries. They performed courageously and tirelessly treating an estimated 5,300 injured, many with multiple and complex wounds. They also treated hundreds with chronic illnesses, but not optimally given the lack of vital resources.

Psychological trauma also proved challenging, especially for children given the lack of safe havens and almost constant bombardments and ground attacks. As a result, people lost "the most basic sense of security, which is one of the foundations of overall psychological well-being." WHO estimates that from 20,000 - 50,000 will suffer long-term consequences, and for some it will be permanent.

Problems, especially for children, are sleeping disorders, loss of appetite, difficulty concentrating, inability to conduct normal activities like dressing, washing, household chores, and for about one-fourth of them repeated bed-wetting.

Operation Cast Lead's Effect on Women

Very negatively given the vast amount of destruction, loss of life, and disabling injuries to loved ones. "The inability of women to carry out their normal (caretaker) roles significantly contributed to their psychological suffering." A UN survey showed they feared disability and dependency more than death, and pregnant women were especially affected. Miscarriages, neonatal deaths, and premature births rose sharply, and obstetric complications necessitated a greater number of Caesareans. Also, women giving birth during the conflict were discharged within 30 minutes to free beds for the critically injured. The increased trauma to mothers and newborns caused further complications.

Water and Sanitation Infrastructure: A Health and Environmental Hazard

Inadequate resources prevent water and sanitation maintenance, creating a significant public health and environmental problem. As mentioned above, around 80 million liters of untreated and partially-treated sewage pollutes sea water and underground aquifers. In addition, the Gaza wastewater treatment plant with a daily 32 million liter capacity now handles about 50 million liters. As a result, discharged effluent contains twice the amount of biological pollution and suspended solids, and a project to upgrade the plant's capacity to 70 million daily liters remains in its early planning stage because of siege-related restrictions.

Contaminated seawater along coastal areas poses a severe health hazard for all Gazans through potentially contaminated sea food as well to people using beaches for recreation. Aquifer contamination is just as worrisome as it's Gaza's sole fresh water resource. Over time, it's become increasingly salinized and polluted, now exacerbated by higher levels. "Currently, only 5 - 10 percent of the extracted water is considered drinkable," according to WHO standards, and the Khan Younis governate is one of the worst affected areas.

Detected water well nitrate levels were over three times the safe WHO level making the water unfit to drink. Consumption with concentrations this high compromises the transmission of oxygen in the blood, potentially causing lethal "blue-baby syndrome" in infants. Poor sanitation is also responsible for greater levels of watery diarrheal disease (WDD) among children aged 9 - 12 months. In Khan Younis, 88% of them are affected and in north Gaza 77%.

Education Undermined

The siege and Operation Cast Lead have severely affected education in Gaza. At least 280 schools were damaged, including 18 totally destroyed. Construction materials aren't available for rebuilding or repairs. At the end of the last academic year, 88% of UNRWA schools and 82% of government ones operated on shifts to accommodate growing numbers of children. Students in north Gaza may have no school to attend because of conflict-caused destruction.

Power outages and lack of essential educational items are hugely disruptive, even though some amounts of previously banned items now get in.

The pre-conflict effects on students were evident in their academic performance as only 20% of 16,000 sixth graders passed standardized math, English, science, and Arabic tests.

Higher education is also impacted. Gaza has five universities offering a limited undergraduate curriculum and even fewer post-graduate choices. Yet Israel prohibits students from exiting Gaza to pursue their studies. Even seven Fulbright recipients were denied until a public outcry loosened restrictions to let a limited number of students go abroad on condition they have a scholarship from a recognized university and a diplomat from the host country accompanies them through the Erez Crossing, across Israel and the West Bank until entering Jordan.

From July - September 2008, Israel let 70 students leave Gaza through Israel. Hundreds of others not awarded scholarships or unable to get diplomatic escorts were denied, even though a few exited through Rafah to Egypt from where they continued to planned destinations.

In Summary

For over two years under siege, including months post-conflict, Gaza has endured "a protracted (humanitarian) crisis that is reflected in almost every aspect of daily life:" their livelihoods, income, enough food, too little of the nutritious kinds, medical care for the seriously ill, enough electricity and fuel, no homes for many thousands, the ability to rebuild, and other collective punishments.

Pre-siege, over 4,000 products, commodities, medicines, materials, and other items entered freely. Now it's around three to four dozen in limited quantities, gradually being increased to include small amounts of others. Yet most basics are denied - most food items, medicines called "dual use," light bulbs, fabrics, needles, candles, matches, mattresses, blankets and sheets, cutlery, books, coffee and tea, cigarettes, clothing and shoes, and much more, things posing no threat to Israel or planned for "dual use."

As a result, most Gazans "report a growing sense of being trapped: physically, intellectually and emotionally." Their ability to cope and survive is severely challenged. Efforts by humanitarian organizations are no match for Israel's malicious intransigency. The UN's most senior humanitarian official, John Holmes, expressed frustration saying:

"Protection, food, water, healthcare, and shelter are basic human needs, not bargaining chips. This fact must be recognized by all parties responsible for the immense suffering in Gaza."

Many others express similar sentiments to marshal support for global action, hold Israel accountable under international law, free Gazans now entrapped, and end an illegal occupation so Palestinians can live freely on their own land without fear.

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.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=14962