Gaza

I was wrong — this needs to be blogged, despite the fact that it is all over mainstream outlets. It looks like another line has been crossed, with Israel launching a missile attack into a crowd of people in Gaza, essentially a flat out massacre of civilians, without even any kind of pretext (most Israeli massacres of civilians come with a pretext). The absence of a pretext in this attack is a sign of impunity, I suppose related to the fact that the only forces that can restrain the Israeli military are the US (firmly dedicated to committing massacres with impunity and unlikely to play any restraining role) and the Israeli public (which is, actually, hopefully, less interested in these kinds of massacres).

It’s worth mentioning that apologists for Israeli atrocities always make a point of trying to differentiate Israel’s massacres of civilians from the Palestinian suicide bombers. They are not making the quantitative argument that Israel kills more civilians, which is the case, or that Israel starves Palestinians and the reverse is not true, also the case, and so on. Instead, they are saying that the Palestinian bombs are meant to kill civilians, deliberately, by design, whereas Israel kills Palestinians by accident. It was outrageous when they were using it before, but I suppose they’ll probably stop using it now.

Not that you need arguments when you have helicopter gunships and missiles.

Much more gravely, this is a glimpse of what Sharon’s ethnic cleansing plan for the Palestinians is: it has always been to use artillery against densely populated civilian areas and commit atrocities that dwarf the Jenin massacre of 2002. It is a ‘feeler’: if there isn’t a major reaction from the Israeli public or the US, there will be more such massacres, and soon.

Below is the note from the ISM.

INTERNATIONAL SOLIDARITY MOVEMENT
Wednesday, May 19, 2004
For Immediate Release

ARMY FIRED MISSILES AT A CIVILIAN DEMONSTRATION IN RAFAH
13 people, mostly youths are reported killed, more than 60 injured

[Rafah, Gaza Strip] Israeli army helicopter gunships and tanks opened fire on a nonviolent civilian demonstration in Rafah early this afternoon. 13 Palestinian are repored killed, including 2 children, and 60 injured.

Approximately 3.000 Palestinian civilians from Rafah, mostly youths, were peacefully demonstrating to protest the recent military operation in the southern part of the Gaza Strip. Eyewitnesses reported that 4 missiles were fired from helicopter gunships and tanks fired shells at the crowd of unarmed civilians.

Hospitals are overflowed and cannot handle the situation, chief hospital spokesperson said.

This recent attack raised the previous death toll to 37 people in one of the bloodiest military operation since the beginning of the second Intifada.

For more information, please contact:

Mohammed Ali (English and Arabic): 972-59 841672
Adwan (English and Arabic): 972-59 304628
Dr. Ali Musa (Director of Rafah’s Hospital): +972-8-2132-616
Sa’id Zoroub (Mayor of Rafah): +972-59-408-391 or +972-8-21-37-951 (Office)
Ali Barhoum (Rafah Municipality): +972-59-815-100 or +972-8-21-37- 951
(Office)
Dr. Youssef Musa (Director UNRWA Clinic in Gaza): +972-59-410-490

ISM Media Office: +972-2.277.4602

Kanehsatake

http://www.zcommunications.org/kanehsatake-by-justin-podur

On May 20, 2004, people from all over the Ontario and Quebec will go to the Mohawk community of Kanehsatake to show their support for a peaceful resolution to a confrontation between heavily armed agents of the state and a community that rejects them. The conflict has gone on for months, with a Grand Chief ousted by the community trying repeatedly to return to power, against community opposition, at the head of a group of heavily armed police.

Continue reading “Kanehsatake”

… and back to Gaza

After our brief excursion into optimism, let us return to the Occupied Palestinian Territories, where Israel is launching missiles, artillery, and aggression into neighbourhoods. Using the IMEMC.org newswire, a valuable resource.

There was all the home destruction in Rafah.

The shelling of residental areas.

The shelling of a mosque.

Assassinations of Islamic Jihad and people anywhere near people suspected of belonging to said group.

Standard patterns of wreckage, destruction, and murder that are the daily diet of Palestinians, especially in Gaza, and especially in Rafah, courtesy of the Israeli military and the US government. These are being reported in the mainstream media as ‘retaliations’.

India’s Elections again

Thinking a little more about it, and reading Arundhati Roy and P Sainath’s pieces on the subject, I have decided that I am going to take a minute and celebrate the results of India’s elections. The result is only hitting me now. Readers have probably deduced that I am somewhat pessimistic. But this is actually a major event: the population of India has rejected fascism and neoliberalism and done so in a way that pulls the country back from the brink. I stand by what I said yesterday — the government can’t be relied upon to pull India back very far from the brink. But it’s not the distance from the brink that matters, it’s the depth of the hole. That 1/5 of the world is now a little further back from it is very good news indeed.

A little blog accountability

In the interests of blog accountability, I will remind readers that I made an incorrect prediction days ago, when I followed the trends and said that India’s right wing Hindu fundamentalist party, the BJP, would win the elections with a minority. Well, it looks like the BJP won’t be at the head of the government after all. Instead, it will be the Congress party.

The Congress party isn’t the fascists, but it certainly is neoliberal, corrupt, and so on. It’s BJP-Lite. Sound familiar? It seems to me that it is part of a global phenomenon. Right here in Ontario, Canada, for example, the hard-right vicious regime of Conservatives were thrown out, and the Liberals, (Conservative-lite) were put in. The Spanish got rid of Aznar in Spain, and to the new regime’s credit, they have actually withdrawn their troops from Iraq. In Colombia, regional elections brought the left to power all over the place. And of course in the previous wave in Latin America there was Kirchner, Lula, Chavez, etc.

But there’s a problem. First, it’s not all peacemakers and ‘lite’ regimes coming to power. In Sri Lanka, for example, the more conciliatory party lost elections. In El Salvador, the nasty right wing party won.

But more importantly, these ‘lite’ regimes, having come to power on the heels (optimistically interpreting) of popular repudiation of the viciousness of the ones they were replacing, have little idea what to do when they are in power or (like in Colombia) don’t really have the power to do much in this global context. There’s actually an argument to be made that such do-nothing ‘lite’ regimes, especially if they are accompanied by corruption, pave the way for hard right regimes to come to power. That’s because they don’t do anything for their own constituency (the poor and oppressed constituencies), so they don’t get access to that energy and power, but at the same time they can’t possibly serve elites as much retrogression as fast as the more brutal governments of the right. That leaves people at an impasse, and even leads to some people on the left believing that ‘the worse, the better’, that a Bush is better than a Kerry, since Bush provokes more opposition than Kerry would.

I don’t agree with this assessment. I think that more progress would be possible, more reform could be wrested, out of a more wishy-washy ‘lite’ regime than out of a ruthless right wing regime. But the basic problem remains — the electoral system is a sealed little circle that deprives people of meaningful choices. How can people force their way into the equation, in a context like this one?

Brazil and the NYT

When the US decided it was going to add a little extra humiliation for foreigners to the process of traveling through that country (which multinational transportation networks, especially in the Americas, have made difficult to avoid) by fingerprinting and scanning them, Brazil decided to do the same to US visitors of Brazil. This was greeted with gasps all over the world. The temerity! Galeano wrote about it, eloquently as usual:

“Many condemned this normal act as an expression of perilous insanity. Perhaps, if the world were not so misconditioned, things would be seen in another light. At bottom, what was abnormal was not what the Brazilian president Lula did but the fact that he was the only one to do so. What was abnormal was that everyone else simply accepted the conditions that Bush imposed on the rest of the world with the exception of a privileged few that were held beyond suspicion of terrorism and evil-doing.”

Well, President Lula has done it again. This time, Larry Rohter, the NYT bureau chief, accused Lula of being a drunk. His visa was cancelled.

Unlike the fingerprinting at airports, there are legitimate reasons why Lula ought not to have done this. But the private media, especially the US media, in Latin America, especially in Venezuela but also in Brazil, are instruments of destabilization. Perhaps the media and governments should consider a negotiated solution: the media will stop lying and participating in foreign attempts to overthrow democratic regimes; those regimes will stop doing things like these.

The truth is, this is the only incident of its kind I’ve heard about — for the most part, governments are fulfilling their end of the bargain. Reuters story below.

By Axel Bugge
BRASILIA, Brazil (Reuters) – Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva has run into fierce criticism at home and abroad over his decision to expel a New York Times correspondent who wrote about his heavy drinking, with one critic calling him a “dictator of a third-rate republic.”

It will be the first time a foreign journalist has been thrown out of Brazil since the end of a 1964-1985 military dictatorship. The nation’s military rulers even jailed Lula, a former militant unionist who made his name standing up for the oppressed.

The government defended its move to cancel the visa of Larry Rohter, New York Times bureau chief in Rio de Janeiro. It said the article, which ran on Sunday, offended his honour.

The government said there was no chance it would reverse the expulsion.

“The Brazilian government is not going to retreat on this issue,” Lula’s spokesman told reporters on Wednesday. “It’s our responsibility to defend Brazil.”

Many Brazilians thought the story itself unfair. But the government’s reaction was slammed by Brazil’s opposition, human rights groups and media watchdogs, who called it an attack on press freedom.

“This was absurd, an immature decision by a dictator of a third-rate republic who does not understand the role of government,” said Sen. Tasso Jereissati of the centre-right Brazilian Social Democratic Party opposition.

The furore follows other spats between Brazil and the United States over trade policy and fingerprinting at airports.

It is also another distraction for the Lula government, which has just emerged from a corruption scandal and is struggling to get Brazil’s economy back on track and make good on its electoral promises of broad social reforms.

Two former presidents backed the expulsion. But Lula’s predecessor Fernando Henrique Cardoso did not, saying there were misinformed articles all the time but “I never thought of taking reprisals against a journalist.”

“APPROPRIATE ACTION TO DEFEND HIS RIGHTS”

Foreign Minister Celso Amorim said the issue was not about press freedom. The article “was intended to diminish the figure and dimension of the president.”

The U.S.-based Human Rights Watch said that the expulsion could “do irreparable damage to freedom of expression in the country.” And U.S. State Department spokesman Richard Boucher said the decision was “not in keeping with Brazil’s strong commitment to freedom of the press.”

New York Times spokeswoman Catherine Mathis said there was no basis for Rohter’s expulsion and the paper “would take appropriate action to defend his rights.”

The government’s move gives Rohter, a veteran Latin American correspondent, eight days to leave Brazil once police inform him he has lost his visa. He is now travelling outside Brazil.

The reaction prompted some to question if Lula overreacted.

“What was wrong with the story was that it said Lula’s drinking was a national worry, which is wrong, but the government’s response has become a national question,” said analyst Carlos Lopes.

Lula, who took office in January 2003, is known to enjoy a drink or two and Brazil has a generally relaxed attitude toward alcohol.

Lula’s personal doctor of ten years told Reuters the president did not have a drinking problem.

“I never noticed alcohol abuse,” cardiologist Roberto Kalil said in a phone interview. “He’s a normal, healthy person.”

Beheading and the race war

The media will be full of stories of the beheading of Nick Berg. The implication is clear: we do horrific things to them, and they do horrific things to us, so it’s all fine and even-handed and okay.

Joe Lieberman apparently said in the media, responding to the lack of an apology: “I have to point out that no one apologized to us for 9/11. No one apologized to us for the killing of US servicemen and women in Iraq.” I was sent this by email along with a translation: “I would just like to point out that some unrelated brown people did some bad things.”

And that is about all the logic you need. The Red Cross report on the torture at Abu Ghraib apparently says that 90% of the prisoners were innocent. But does ‘guilt’ and ‘innocence’ have any meaning in a culture so deeply racist? If North Americans are incapable of understanding that the invasion of Iraq was international aggression, and the ultimate crime, the one that has made all the torture, massacres, abuses, and war crimes possible, then why would they be capable of understanding that some set of Iraqis was ‘innocent’? Innocent of what, in any case — would resistance activities, legitimate under international law, make them ‘guilty’?

In Stan Goff’s books, he refers to Vietnam as a ‘race war’. Whatever the US went there to do, whether it was establish ‘credibility’, or defeat ‘the threat of a good example’, on the ground it played out as a bloody race war. But that’s what all these wars are. Just bloody race wars, of escalating atrocities, justifications in terms of other atrocities, and dehumanization.

The murder of Berg is going to be used to try to take attention away from the tortures at Abu Ghraib (and all the other torture that’s still going on and hasn’t been discussed, like at Guantanamo and elsewhere). It’s also going to be used to justify future atrocities and a longer presence in Iraq. If this weren’t a race war, if there were some sanity in this situation, Berg’s murder would be further reason why the US should not be in Iraq. But that would be too much to ask.

US troops courageously handcuff 5-year old Haitian girl, and more…

I am including below a report from Marguerite Laurent of the Haitian Lawyers Leadership Network. It is a rush translation and I can’t verify its accuracy. But it falls well within the realm of the entirely plausible, so I include it for readers to decide for themselves.

“So Ann”, a Haitian activist with Lavalas and grandmother, was ‘arrested’ last night. The manner of her arrest seems to follow standard US military doctrine. I will include this excerpt from the report. It includes handcuffing a 5-year old baby girl and blowing the gates off of a house for no good reason. I suppose we should be marveling at the restraint shown by the US soldiers. They could, after all, have simply carpet-bombed the house or handed the child a cluster bomb that looked like a food packet. Anyway here’s the excerpt:

Last night, May 10, 2004, on or about 12:30 am, a strong contingent of U.S. soldiers, from the Multinational Interim Force in Haiti apparently decided to forego Haitian and international law and practice warfare games on this elderly grandmother’s unarmed household.

Instead of knocking at the door, providing proof of charges and making a legal arrest, at a reasonable and Constitutionally approved hour for arrests, the U.S. soldiers, armed with the world’s most sophisticated war instruments, threw a grenade and blew up this elderly Haitian woman gates and forcibly entered her home.

All the people in her house, some 11 people, including her 5-year old grand daughter, Shashou, where forced to the ground and were handcuffed by U.S., soldiers armed in heavy artillery.

The full report:

On or about 12:30 on May 10, 2004, the U.S. military, acting as the Multinational Interim Force in Haiti violently gained entrance to the home of Annette Auguste, aka as “So Anne.”

No Haitian police were present at the time of the forcible entry, at the time of interrogations or during the arrests. The Us. soldiers are said to have blown up the gate where So Anne was living and accused her of making threats against the MIF.

Freedom of speech is no longer a civil rights for Haitians, especially Lavalas progressives.

At a press briefing today, MIF CJTF Pub. Affairs officer Col. David Lapan reportedly said, in sum, when asked why such force was used to make this arrest, that in operations of this type it is necessary to use violence in order to show the individuals who are the objects of the operation that the MIF means business. (See French report below.) Haitian who had any doubt as to the current status of Haitian sovereignty need no longer ask. The U.S. military, through Colonel David Lapan, have clearly implied, that Haiti is under occupation, and war rules known only to U.S. officers. Although the curfew have been lifted, by this action last night, it is reasonable to say, Haiti is under U.S. martial law while Ambassador Foley puts every word that comes out of U.S. puppet head, Mr. Latorture.

Annette Auguste (aka, “So Anne) is an elderly Haitian woman, whose life has been dedicated to the Lavalas Movement for democracy and development in Haiti. As a well-respected elder and community leader, her house is a meeting ground, as is the normal Haitian custom, for people to come and eat, gather, share news and solidarity. The Haitian Constitution guarantees Haitian citizens the right, not to be arrested or terrorized without due cause, especially it outlines no arrest warrants may be excised between 6pm and 6 am at night.

Yet, last night, May 10, 2004, on or about 12:30 am, a strong contingent of U.S. soldiers, from the Multinational Interim Force in Haiti apparently decided to forego Haitian and international law and practice warfare games on this elderly grandmother’s unarmed household.

Instead of knocking at the door, providing proof of charges and making a legal arrest, at a reasonable and Constitutionally approved hour for arrests, the U.S. soldiers, armed with the world’s most sophisticated war instruments, threw a grenade and blew up this elderly Haitian woman gates and forcibly entered her home.

All the people in her house, some 11 people, including her 5-year old grand daughter, Shashou, where forced to the ground and were handcuffed by U.S., soldiers armed in heavy artillery.

Let’s reiterate, a 5-year old Haitian baby girl, handcuffed by the world’s most powerful soldiers at midnight in her grandmother’s home!

This is the sort of “law and order” and democracy Haitians are subjected to after their Constitutionally elected President was, himself, forced out of Haiti by U.S. and French soldiers at gunpoint.

This is the sort of “law” “order” and “democracy” the Bush Administration is bringing to the world, while Secretary of State, Colin Powell, ushers the illegitimate U.S. replacement, Mr. Latorture, to shrimp and lobster dinners at the Harvard Club in New York today.

After, the U.S. soldiers, with grenades, blew up the gates at So Anne’s house, they then shot, with powerful automatic weapons, the hapless defenseless yard dogs and children pets who were barking in the yard at the rude entry in the dead of night.

Photos taken of So Anne’s house show that a lot of damage was done. Also from news reports, it the U.S. admitted, through Col. Lapan press conference, that there was no evidence of any weapons at So Anne’s house. Thus, the use of such excessive force and the hour of the operation is rendered even more illegal and clearly a violation of the Haitian Constitutional, Haitian sovereignty and international treaties, not to mention the OAS and UN charter.

Moreover, in the context of the U.S. citizenry current concerns over treatment of individuals in US custody in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Guantanamo Bay, this May 10, 2004, excessive force and handcuffing, terrorizing at past midnight of Haitian civilians, who where then not accused of any crime is especially egregious.

All 11 people at So Anne’s house where transported to the U.S. barracks at the Medical University the U.S. shut down upon arriving in Haiti, a country without doctors, and interrogated. None where charged. No apologies given. They were release, except that Lavalas militant, So Anne, was then delivered, after U.S. interrogation, to the Haitian National Penitentiary. No official charges have been cited. Presumably, the Interim Multinational Force has the authority, by virtual of what law? to use military force against a Haitian citizen, without even the presence of Haitian authorities or any Haitians whatsoever?

Haitian children, even 5-year old baby girls in Haiti, needed to be handcuffed by grown U.S. soldiers in the dead of night.

Thus, it is clear, our malnourished and defenseless Haitian children no longer have to get on overloaded Haitian boats, face shark infested open seas and reach Miami to be terrorized by U.S. guards. Now in Haiti itself they don’t have sanctuary. Even at their very own grandmother’s houses.

This situation is more than illegal, It’s barbaric. Haitians are flesh and blood human beings with heart beats, pains, dreams, desires for beauty and peace.

Why are they so persecuted by the most powerful of peoples? And dare we quote President Bush in reference to a statement made about the U.S. soldier’s torture of Iraqi prisoners in U.S. custody, and say, the handcuffing and arrest of a 5-year old baby-girl at midnight on May 10, 2004; even the killing of defenseless pets in the yard of a grandmother in Haiti awaken by U.S. grenades, not too mention the arrest of So Ann and her entire household, one of Haiti’s most tireless pro-democracy activists, is simply too naked and revolting a lawlessness; and, for those who still believe in the untainted goodness of the U.S. government: it’s simply “un-American” to borrow that recent phrase used by President George W. Bush.

It is reported this U.S. orchestrated show of force is to further pressure, intimidate and otherwise stop other such Lavalas activists requesting the return of democracy to Haiti from holding a demonstration intended for May 18, 2004, Haiti’s flag day.

*

More than 3,000 Haitians, mostly young Haitian men associated or rumored to be associated with the Lavalas party have been killed in Haiti since the U.S. deposed President Aristide itself on February 29, 2004. In a bare two months, this bloodbath and killing of 3,000 Haitians represents more than half the number of Haitians that were killed during the entire three years of the first Coup D’etat. More than 3,000 defenseless Haitians have been killed since U.S. soldiers landed in Haiti for this 2nd Coup d’etat against Haitian development and democracy. Yet, the reason given by Colin Powell for the MIF and forcing out of President Aristide was “to avoid a bloodbath.”

According to current reports, as of April 26, 2004 – less than two months after U.S. and French soldiers forced Haiti’s Constitutionally elected President unto a U.S. aircraft – this Bush Administration’s illegal interdiction policy towards Haitian asylum seekers has resulted in Washington returning 1,948 Haitians to Haiti in 2004, already an increase, according to the U.S. Coast Guard, over the 1,490 intercepted at sea for the entire 2003 year. And yet, the State Department’s propaganda to destabilize the Constitutional government, had promised the Haitian people a better human rights record than that of the previous two Lavalas voted-in governments?

There is now a strong dossier of the 14-year destabilization campaign against Haitian democracy and development by the powerful Western Nations, led by the U.S. The violent arrest of So Ann, her 5-year old granddaughter and 10 other people at her house at midnight on May 10, 2004 and similar brutal conduct by the U.S. military against Lavalas — the party whom State Department propaganda insisted, before the Coup D’etat, no longer supported President Aristide is too blatant to need deeper investigation.

The U.S. Marines did not leave So Anne’s house until around 2 or 2:30 a.m. on May 10, 2004. The house of this well-known Haitian woman and Lavalas activists was brutally ransacked and all the occupants, including, as we have noted above, small children as young as 5-year old, where taken in custody, in the dead of night and transported to the Medical University at Tabarre. Some of the detainees report they were interrogated about their role under the Constitutional government, including questioned regarding whether they knew “Danny Toussaint was a drug trafficker?” and what where they planning at the house so late at night, et.

It is reported, by these eyewitnesses and detainees, that excessive force was used in putting them into custody. They had no warning and some still are trembling from the encounter and that they were terrorized during the interrogations by U.S. soldiers. No one can say what this how this trauma will damage the children involved, not to mentioned the adults who were already managing the U.S./France metered out Coup D’etat’s post traumatic stress syndrome. Imagine waking up and all that you have worked for your entire life has been trashed and defiled while the duly elected President is kidnapped to parts unknown. The trauma is tremendous for the majority of Haitians who do not support dictatorship and wanted to move from elections to elections, not from Coup d’etat to dictatorship and the rule of the old status quo Duvalieriest and their FRAPH and Haitian army soldiers.

No charges where pressed against any of the twelve Haitian detainees taken from So Anne’s house, including the small children. Except that So Anne was arrested and transferred to the National Penitentiary after having been interrogated all night. Just as with the kidnapping of President Aristide and his wife, this operations was conducted without any Haitian present other than the foreign soldiers.

The MIF apparently transferred So Anne to the custody of the PNH without charging her with any crime. But, it has been reported, after the arrest, and before any formal charges have been brought that NCHR – a human rights organization with strong ties to USAID, the U.S. Embassy, the right wing Haiti Democracy Project and the opposition to President Aristide and the Lavalas party- has accused So Anne of “some connection” to the December 5th violent incidents at the University. However, these innuendoes are not supported by NCHR by any facts as of yet.

Moreover, other Haitian popular organizational leaders, currently in hiding for fear of similar U.S. reprisals, have opined that they suspect this arrest is a pretext to prevent So Anne from taking part in a demonstration demanding the return of the rule of law and President Aristide planned for May 18, 2004 – Haiti’s Flag Day.

Also, grassroots organizers and pro-democracy leaders in the U.S. who are against this U.S. sponsored dictatorship with Latorture and who also support the call for return of law and democracy to Haiti say this latest U.S. military operation against Haitian democracy is an effort to forestall a pro-Aristide demonstration intended for Flag Day, May 18, 2004.

So Ann is an elderly woman on medication and has yet to be charged or to see a judge in accordance with the 48 hour rule under the 1987 Haitian Constitution.

The dead on night timing, the brutal targeted reprisal against this well known Haitian woman, and pro-democracy activist – So Ann – by U.S. forces, the arbitrary nature, all, call for immediate investigation by international human rights organizations, the international media, U.S. congresspersons, Secretary Powell and the State Department.

Haitian children, even 5-year old baby girls in Haiti, need to be handcuffed by grown U.S. soldiers in the dead of night.

Our Haitian children no longer have to get on overloaded Haitian boats, face shark infested open seas and reach Miami to be terrorized by U.S. guards.

Now, in Haiti itself, they don’t have sanctuary.

Even more poignant, our Haitian children, don’t, in this 200 year of our ancestor’s greatest feat against enslavement and colonialism, have asylum, justice, sanctuary at their own grandmother’s houses on Haitian soil.

This situation is more than illegal, it’s barbaric, untenable. And dare we quote President Bush in reference to the U.S. soldier’s torture of Iraqi prisoners, and say, the handcuffing and arrest of a 5-year old baby-girl at midnight on May 10, 2004; even the killing of defenseless dogs in the yard of a grandmother in Haiti awaken by U.S. grenades, not too mention the arrest of So Ann and her entire household, one of Haiti’s most tireless pro-democracy activists, is simply too naked and revolting a lawlessness. It’s “un-American” to borrow that recent phrase used by President George W. Bush.

It is reported this U.S. orchestrated show of force is to pressure, intimidate and otherwise stop other such Lavalas activists requesting the return of democracy to Haiti from holding a demonstration intended for May 18, 2004, Haiti’s flag day.

This is an urgent call to action. Please contact the State Department, Defense Secretary Colin Powell, your local congressperson, the Congressional Black Caucus and media, to denounce the arrest of So Anne; the systematic terror campaign against Lavalas demonstrators, and the treatment of Haitians, like So Anne, and especially her 5-year old granddaughter, Shashou, by U.S. command with the Multinational Interim Force in Haiti.

Marguerite Laurent, JD, Haitian Lawyers Leadership Network (dedicated to protecting the civil, human and cultural rights of Haitians at home and abroad) May 10, 2004

Destroying Gaza

I’m sure readers will forgive the repetition. Or rather, if the repetition is upsetting to you, you ought to direct your anger at those who keep committing the same atrocities over and over.

So, in Gaza, the United Nations reports that in the past ten days Israel has flattened 100 homes in Gaza, rendering 1100 more people homeless, bringing the total of Palestinians made homeless in Gaza over 17,000 since 2000.

In the process of destroying houses, Israel felt the need to murder Nahed Abu Haddaf, 22 years old, who died of multiple gunshot wounds in Gaza. The Israeli Army also shot 19 year old Fadi Bahar in the head in Jerusalem.

In other news, the abuse of Palestinian children in Israeli prisons, well-documented in the book Stolen Youth by Defense of Children International, has made Ha’aretz.