-------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 17:55:28 -0500 From: Paul Wolf <•••@••.•••> Subject: Putting Fallujah to the Torch 1. Putting Fallujah to the Torch 2. Counterinsurgency run amok 3. Don't Support the Troops! Not When They Commit War Crimes 4. US accused of 'torture flights' Putting Fallujah to the Torch By Assaf Kfoury, www.occupationwatch.org, November 14, 2004 The conduct of US troops in Iraq has been a combination of extreme brutality and wholesale destruction. Brutality towards Iraqis has routinely come with systematic pillaging, if not wrecking, of the country's civil institutions and productive capacity. As if, when the time will finally come for US troops to go, they are determined to leave behind a landscape of ruins and carnage. Events in Falluja this past week epitomized this conduct once again. American troops started their offensive against Falluja on November 8 by occupying the main city hospital. According to the embedded New York Times reporter, soldiers "eagerly" kicked in the doors of Falluja General Hospital, and patients and hospital employees were forced to lie on the floor while troops tied their hands behind their backs. Although the NY Times reporter did not call it by its name, this was a war crime, turning a medical facility into a theatre of combat: Early Target of Offensive is a Hospital by Richard A. Oppel Jr. http://www.occupationwatch.org/article.php?id=7642 Two days earlier, another hospital in the city center had been razed to the ground by massive US air raids: US strikes raze Falluja hospital BBC News http://www.occupationwatch.org/article.php?id=7798 What followed was an orgy of killing and destruction, pitting warplanes, tanks and armored vehicles against insurgents armed with Kalashnikov rifles. Even when embedded reporters revel in the killing efficiency of US marines, they still describe the scene for what it is, a "sliver of apocalypse" -- not the scene of a movie set but of a real massacre, however casually described: Will Meets Resistance in Deadly Logic of War by Dexter Filkins & Robert F. Worth http://www.occupationwatch.org/article.php?id=7782 Terrified civilians trying to flee the city were pushed back, to face almost-certain death: Rights Lawyers See Possibility of a War Crime by Michael Janofsky http://www.occupationwatch.org/article.php?id=7769 By the end of the week, the US war machine had swept through most of the city, leaving behind shelled buildings, bullet-riddled cars and rotting corpses: Breaking a City in Order to Fix It by Edward Wong http://www.occupationwatch.org/article.php?id=7784 Ten days ago, commenting on the re-election of US President Bush on November 2nd, former British foreign secretary Robin Cook wrote: Bush will now celebrate by putting Falluja to the torch by Robin Cook http://www.occupationwatch.org/article.php?id=7800 Put Falluja to the torch, he did indeed. The logic is to put Iraqi insurgents on notice that they can expect horror in exchange for daring to resist a foreign occupier. Events of this past week bear witness to this criminal policy. The US government and its puppet regime in Baghdad will undoubtedly claim victory after laying waste to Falluja. This may turn out a Pyrrhic victory. As Patrick Cockburn notes, "it is likely to be as disappointing in terms of ending the resistance as the capture of Saddam": The Crushing of Fallujah Will Not End the War in Iraq by Patrick Cockburn http://www.occupationwatch.org/article.php?id=7687 Former UN arms-inspector Scott Ritter observes that, "far from facing off in a decisive battle against the resistance fighters, it seems the more Americans squeeze Falluja, the more the violence explodes elsewhere. It is exercises in futility, akin to squeezing jello." Squeezing Jello in Iraq by Scott Ritter http://www.occupationwatch.org/article.php?id=7697 Violence erupts across Iraq and aid agencies warn of disaster as US declares battle of Fallujah is over by Kim Sengupta http://www.occupationwatch.org/article.php?id=7774 New insurgency confronts US forces by Rory McCarthy and Michael Howard http://www.occupationwatch.org/article.php?id=7737 The overwhelming majority of the world remains opposed to this ruthless occupation. While Iraqis continue to pay its terrible price, they may take some comfort from world-wide sympathy for their agony. Several opinions from around the world were collected by the Toronto Star: 'What did Falluja do to deserve this?' Toronto Star http://www.occupationwatch.org/article.php?id=7799 http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/FK18Ak03.html Counterinsurgency run amok By Pepe Escobar, Asia Times Online, Nov. 18, 2004 "The people who are doing the beheadings are extremists ... the people slaughtering Iraqis - torturing in prisons and shooting wounded prisoners - are 'American heroes'. Congratulations, you must be so proud of yourselves today." - Iraqi girl blogger Riverbend Whom are you going to trust: Fallujah civilians who risked their lives to escape, witnesses such as Associated Press photographer Bilal Hussein, hospital doctors, Amnesty International, top United Nations human-rights official Louise Arbour, the International Committee of the Red Cross; or the Pentagon and US-installed Iraqi Prime Minister Iyad Allawi? On the humanitarian front, Fallujah is a tragedy. The city has virtually been reduced to rubble. Remaining residents, the Red Cross confirms, are eating roots and burying the dead in their gardens. There's no medicine in the hospitals to help anybody. The wounded are left to die in the streets - their remains to be consumed by packs of stray dogs. As Iraqresistance.net, a Europe-wide collective, puts it, "World governments, international organizations, nobody raises a finger to stop the killing." The global reaction is apathy. Civilians? What civilians? Asia Times Online sources in Baghdad confirm the anger across the Sunni heartland - even among moderates - against the occupation and Allawi has reached incendiary proportions. His credibility - already low before the Fallujah massacre - is now completely gone. Allawi insists on the record that not a single civilian has died in Fallujah. Obviously nobody in his cabinet told him what Baghdad is talking about - the hundreds of rotting corpses in the streets, the thousands of civilians still trapped inside their homes, starving, many of them wounded, with no water and no medical aid. And nobody has told him of dozens of children now in Baghdad's Naaman hospital who lost their limbs, victims of US air strikes and artillery shells. A top Red Cross official in Baghdad now estimates that at least 800 civilians have been killed so far - and this is a "low" figure, based on accounts by Red Crescent aid workers barred by the Americans from entering the city, residents still inside Fallujah, and refugees now huddling in camps in the desert near Fallujah. The refugees tell horror stories - including confirmation, already reported by Asia Times Online, of the Americans using cluster bombs and spraying white phosphorus, a banned chemical weapon. The talk in the streets of Baghdad, always referring to accounts by families and friends in and around Fallujah, confirms that there have been hundreds of civilian deaths. Moreover, according to the Red Cross official, since September Allawi's Ministry of Health has not provided any medical supplies to hospitals and clinics in Fallujah: "The hospitals do not even have aspirin," he said, confirming many accounts in these past few days from despairing Fallujah doctors. The official spoke on condition of anonymity for fear of US military reprisal. Even submitted to media blackout - an al-Arabiya reporter, for instance, was arrested by the Americans because he was trying to enter Fallujah - the Arab press is slowly waking up to the full extent of the tragedy, not only on networks such as al-Jazeera and al-Arabiya, but also in newspapers like the pro-American Saudi daily Asharq a-Awsat. Our sources say that most of Baghdad and the whole Sunni triangle is already convinced that the Americans "captured" Fallujah general hospital, bombed at least two clinics and are preventing the Red Crescent from delivering urgent help because as many bodies as possible must be removed before any independent observers have a chance to evaluate the real extent of the carnage. Al-Jazeera continues to apologize for not offering more in-depth coverage, always reminding its viewers that its Baghdad bureau was shut down indefinitely by Allawi in August. But many in the Arab world saw its interview with Dr Asma Khamis al- Muhannadi of Fallujah's general hospital, invaded and "captured" by the marines. She confirmed that "we were tied up and beaten despite being unarmed and having only our medical instruments"; and that the hospital was targeted by bombs and rockets during the initial siege of Fallujah. When the marines came she "was with a woman in labor. The umbilical cord had not yet been cut. At that time, a US soldier shouted at one of the [Iraqi] National Guards to arrest me and tie my hands while I was helping the mother to deliver. I will never forget this incident in my life." Crucially, Dr al-Muhannadi also confirmed that American snipers killed more than 17 Iraqi doctors who had mobilized to answer an appeal from Fallujah's doctors broadcast on al-Jazeera: information on the massacre has been circulating in Baghdad for days. Amnesty International, based on the account of a doctor at the scene, says that 20 Fallujah medical staff and dozens of civilians were killed when an American missile destroyed a clinic on November 9. The failure of 'Iraqification' On the military front, roughly 3,000 urban guerrillas with mortars, Kalashnikovs and rocket-propelled grenades have resisted more than 12,000 marines supported by F-16s, AC-130 gunships, Cobra and Apache helicopters, an array of missiles, 500-pound and 2,000-pound bombs, tanks and Bradleys. Sources in Baghdad close to the resistance tell Asia Times Online that at least 200 marines are dead, and more than 800 wounded. The Pentagon - exercising total media blackout - will only admit to about 50 dead and 350 wounded. Allawi and his cabinet are spinning more than 1,600 "insurgents" dead; the resistance so far only admits to a little more than 100. The resistance says that dozens of marine snipers have taken six or seven positions along Tharthar Street, the main street leading to Ramadi, and a few buildings overlooking the Euphrates in western Fallujah. But residents seem to be free to move in the narrow alleyways: the Americans only control the main roads. According to resistance reports, the mujahideen are constantly changing their positions, moving apparently undetected inside the areas they still control and reinforcing different neighborhoods with more cells of five to 20 fighters each. "Iraqification" - the Mesopotamian counterpart of Vietnamization - is floundering. After 19 months of occupation, the Pentagon still has not been able to put an Iraqi army in place. Baghdad sources confirm the backup plan has been to give US troops a counterinsurgency field manual. (The exhaustive 182-page document will be discussed in a separate article.) During the Vietnam War, counterinsurgency was conducted by Special Forces. In Vietnam, the US simply did not understand that the force of the resistance was its complex clandestine infrastructure. By killing indiscriminately in covert operations like Operation Phoenix, the Americans totally alienated the average Vietnamese. In Multitude: War and Democracy in the Age of Empire (Penguin Press, New York, 2004), Tony Negri and Michael Hardt, discussing counterinsurgencies, point out how "guerrilla forces cannot survive without the support of the population and a superior knowledge of the social and physical terrain". They could be describing the guerrillas in the Sunni triangle. "Guerrillas force the dominant military power to live in a state of perpetual paranoia." In asymmetrical wars like Vietnam and Iraq, US counterinsurgency tactics must not only lead to a military victory but to control of the enemy with "social, political, ideological and psychological weapons". There's ample evidence these tactics are failing in Iraq. Like a fish out of water Negri and Hardt argue that in counterinsurgency "success does not require attacking the enemy directly but destroying the environment, physical and social, that supports it. Take away the water and the fish will die. This strategy of destroying the support environment led, for example, to indiscriminate bombings in Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia, to widespread killing, torture and harassment of peasants in Central and South America." This - "take away the water and the fish will die" - is exactly what's happening in Fallujah. And it won't work, because "the many noncombatants who suffer cannot be called collateral damage because they are in fact the direct targets, even if their destruction is really a means to attack the primary enemy". Fallujah's population has been the direct target this time - the "water" that was essential to the resistance "fish". But the "fish" are always able to turn the tables "as the rebellious groups develop more complex, distributed network structures. As the enemy becomes increasingly dispersed, unlocalizable, and unknowable, the support environment becomes increasingly large and indiscriminate." This is exactly the post-Fallujah scenario - see The real fury of Fallujah, November 10. The political infrastructure in Iraq controlled by the Ba'ath Party for many decades has integrated most of the Islamic resistance groups under its command with great efficiency. It has also managed to infiltrate and smash the Iraqi counterinsurgency force that the Americans were trying to assemble. The new counterinsurgency field manual means that unlike Vietnam, counterinsurgency is now being conducted by marines and GIs. Intuitively, the totally alienated population of the Sunni triangle (the "water") has already identified the threat. Iraqification mimics Vietnamization in at least one aspect: the logic of collective punishment (once again "take away the water and the fish will die"). The Fallujah assault proved that for the Pentagon every Sunni Iraqi is the enemy. The Pentagon maintains there are no civilians in Fallujah. The horror faced by these "invisible" civilians has not even begun to emerge, even though precision-strike democracy is being denounced by those who risked their lives to escape. The "water" is represented by the "invisible" civilian population in Fallujah. In yet another echo of Vietnam, for the Pentagon any dead Iraqi in Fallujah is a dead guerrilla fighter - and just like in Vietnam this figure includes "noncombatants", women and children. In Fallujah, the Pentagon declared, after fully encircling the city, that women, children and the elderly might leave, but not men and boys from ages 15 to 55. This implies that most of the 50,000 to 100,000 civilians trapped in the city may be these men and boys - many with no taste for war - along with the unlucky elderly, women and children who were too poor to leave. But under Pentagon logic the problem is solved: everyone inside the city is a fighter. Thus no need for relief from the Iraqi Red Crescent or anyone else. Counterinsurgency meets 'invisible' civilians In a press conference in Baghdad, Allawi's Interior Minister Faleh Hassan al-Naqib finally was forced to admit what Asia Times Online and an array of independent media have been reporting since the spring of 2003: that the resistance spans the whole Sunni heartland, not only Fallujah and the Sunni triangle (a lot of "water" for a few thousand "fish"); that the resistance is unified under some form of central command and control, and is not a bunch of uncoordinated groups; that the majority, at least 95%, are Iraqis, and not "foreign fighters" (thus ridiculing the Pentagon's designation of the resistance as "anti-Iraqi forces"); that former Ba'ath Party officials and former Iraqi army officers are essential protagonists; and that they have prepared for urban guerrilla warfare long before the US invasion. With Fallujah, the guerrilla strategy has changed. No more occupying a territory that could be organized as a safe haven (the city of Fallujah, for instance). The guerrillas are now network-centered. Negri and Hardt: "The network tends to transform every boundary into a threshold. Networks are in this sense essentially elusive, ephemeral, perpetually in flight ... And, even more frighteningly, the network can appear anywhere at any time." Think of the new Iraqi resistance as small, mobile armies striking in Baqubah, Samarra and Mosul, running away and melting into the local population, which fully supports them. This is pure Vietminh tactics - Saddam Hussein's officers were all keen students of the Vietnam War. The Americans in Iraq are now confronting a network enemy. Negri and Hardt say that "confronting a network enemy can certainly throw an old form of power into a state of universal paranoia". Thus the fiction of "invisible" civilians in Fallujah. Thus the "capture" of Fallujah general hospital. Thus destroying Fallujah in order to "save it". Thus the marine executing a wounded man, on camera, inside a mosque. Thus the Vietnam nightmare all over again. http://thiscantbehappening.net/2004.11.01_arch.html#1100626673535 Don't Support the Troops! Not When They Commit War Crimes By Dave Lindorff, Nov. 16, 2004 It is depressingly predictable how "worked up" the Pentagon brass gets about an atrocity committed in gross violation of the Geneva Conventions when the crime is captured on film, as happened during this recent Fallujah action in the case of an NBC pool cameraman showing the execution by a US Marine of a wounded Iraqi captive, and the apparent execution of several other wounded captives later on. But does anyone seriously believe that this particularly grisly atrocity is the only one that occurred during the week-long and ongoing assault? The casual way it was done, in front of the embedded cameraman, makes it clear that quite to the contrary, this must be standard operating procedure for the American soldiers, who weren't even worried about about the possible consequences of their being photographed. (Remember, the executioner was not alone, and none of his colleagues tried to stop him.) How surprised should we be at this bloodthirsty and criminal behavior? The goal of the assault on Fallujah was not the capture of a city -- the normal situation in a war. It was the killing of all the insurgents who were in the city. Consider this. The approach taken to this assault was first to ring the city with a cordon of over 10,000 heavily armed troops, supported by virtually the entire fleet of U.S. warplanes in the Iraq theater--F-15s, F-18s, A-10 Warthogs and helicopter and fixed- wing gunships. Women and children were allowed to leave the doomed city, but all males "of fighting age" were turned back if they tried to leave. You have to ask: turned back for what purpose? If the goal was to capture potential guerrillas, here were the men and boys trying to leave, offering themselves up to be arrested, investigated, interrogated and even held in detention. But instead of this, they were turned back to face the coming attack (this action in itself was a major violation of the Geneva Conventions, which require armies to allow non-combatants to leave the scene of combat). If they were really fighters, did it make sense to send them back into Fallujah where they could pick up weapons and possibly kill U.S. soldiers? If the goal was to capture insurgents, then these unfortunates would simply have to be captured later, accomplishing the same thing, but under much more dangerous circumstances for both them and for their U.S. attackers. Clearly the real goal all along was something else: to kill them all - insurgents, potential insurgents, and any other "fighting age" males (that included little boys as young as 15!) unlucky enough to be residents of Fallujah. That such horrors are going on in our name should be no surprise. This war was never about "liberation." It is about conquest. That so little is being said about it here in the U.S. is a crime. "Support the troops" we are told. But we cannot do that, if the troops are engaged in criminal behavior. Surely no American would wish harm to the many thousands of good men and women, boys and girls who have been snatched away from their families and their lives to fight Bush's war in Iraq. We want them all home safe, immediately. But no one should be blindly adopting a slogan that implies supporting what the troops are doing in Iraq, which we know includes atrocities worthy of the German SS. It should be clear to any thinking person that the U.S. cannot win in Iraq. Unable to defeat the insurgency in there, the U.S. has turned to terror and to military tactics -- the executing of wounded and captured fighters, the turning back of refugees, the denial of water and food to people in Fallujah, the barring of ambulances and medics from the scene of battle, the deliberate destruction of medical facilities and the capture and closure of hospitals -- that are on their face war crimes. Yet in adopting such tactics, the U.S. is ensuring that it cannot win either. The criminal behavior of American troops in Fallujah, so reminiscent of the behavior of Serbian troops in Bosnia, now broadcast over all of the Middle East, merely encourages more Arab and Iraqi fighters to enlist in the growing anti-American jihad. And let's face it, the confining of fleeing, unarmed males to Fallujah on the eve of the assault of that city, and the return of fleeing unarmed men and boys during the heat of battle (reporrted widely in the U.S. media), is no different than the herding up and execution of adult males in Sbrynica by Serb militia. The Serb war criminals, who had no air force, had to kill their victims by small arms fire. All the U.S. war criminals (and here I'm referring to the colonels and generals and Defense Department officials who set the policy on refugees) have had to do is force them to stay trapped in the killing zone. If you want to support the troops, bring them home. Nothing else is going to save them, either from the enemy, or from the criminal policies of their own leadership. http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2089-1357699,00.html US accused of 'torture flights' By Stephen Grey, The Times of London, Nov. 14, 2004 An executive jet is being used by the American intelligence agencies to fly terrorist suspects to countries that routinely use torture in their prisons. The movements of the Gulfstream 5 leased by agents from the United States defence department and the CIA are detailed in confidential logs obtained by The Sunday Times which cover more than 300 flights. Countries with poor human rights records to which the Americans have delivered prisoners include Egypt, Syria and Uzbekistan, according to the files. The logs have prompted allegations from critics that the agency is using such regimes to carry out "torture by proxy" - a charge denied by the American government. Some of the information from the suspects is said to have been used by MI5 and MI6, the British intelligence services. The admissibility in court of evidence gained under torture is being considered in the House of Lords in an appeal by foreign-born prisoners at Belmarsh jail, south London, against their detention without trial on suspicion of terrorism. Over the past two years the unmarked Gulfstream has visited British airports on many occasions, although it is not believed to have been carrying suspects at the time. The Gulfstream and a similarly anonymous-looking Boeing 737 are hired by American agents from Premier Executive Transport Services, a private company in Massachusetts. The white 737, registration number N313P, has 32 seats. It is a frequent visitor to American military bases, although its exact role has not been revealed. More is known about the Gulfstream, which has the registration number N379P and can carry 14 passengers. Movements detailed in the logs can be matched with several sightings of the Gulfstream at airports when terrorist suspects have been bundled away by US counterterrorist agents. Analysis of the plane's flight plans, covering more than two years, shows that it always departs from Washington DC. It has flown to 49 destinations outside America, including the Guantanamo Bay prison camp in Cuba and other US military bases, as well as Egypt, Jordan, Iraq, Morocco, Afghanistan, Libya and Uzbekistan. Witnesses have claimed that the suspects are frequently bound, gagged and sedated before being put on board the planes, which do not have special facilities for prisoners but are kitted out with tables for meetings and screens for presentations and in-flight films. The US plane is not used just for carrying prisoners but also appears to be at the disposal of defence and intelligence officials on assignments from Washington. Its prisoner transfer missions were first reported in May by the Swedish television programme Cold Facts. It described how American agents had arrived in Stockholm in the Gulfstream in December 2001 to take two suspected terrorists from Sweden to Egypt. At the time of what was presented as an "extradition" to Egypt, Swedish ministers made no public mention of American involvement in the detention of Ahmed Agiza, 42, and Muhammed Zery, 35, who was later cleared. Witnesses described seeing the prisoners handed to US agents whose faces were masked by hoods. The clothes of the handcuffed prisoners were cut off and they were dressed in nappies covered by orange overalls before being forcibly given sedatives by suppository. The Gulfstream flew them to Egypt, where both prisoners claimed they were beaten and tortured with electric shocks to their genitals. Despite liberal Swedish laws on freedom of information, diplomatic telegrams on the case released to the media were edited to conceal the complaints of torture. Hamida Shalaby, Agiza's mother, said: "The mattress had electricity . . . When they connected to the electricity, his body would rise up and then fall down and this up and down would go on until they unplugged electricity." A month before the Swedish extradition, the same Gulfstream was identified by Masood Anwar, a Pakistani newspaper reporter in Karachi. Airport staff told Anwar they had seen Jamil Gasim, a Yemeni student who was suspected of links to Al-Qaeda, being bundled aboard the jet by a group of white men wearing masks. The jet took Gasim to Jordan, since when he has disappeared. "The entire operation was so mysterious that all persons involved in the operation, including US troops, were wearing masks," a source at the airport told Anwar. On another mission, in January 2002, a Gulfstream was seen at Jakarta airport to deport Muhammad Saad Iqbal, 24, an Al-Qaeda suspect who was said by US officials to be an acquaintance of Richard Reid, the British "shoe-bomber" jailed in America for trying to blow up a flight from Paris to Miami. An Indonesian official told an American newspaper that Iqbal was "hustled aboard an unmarked, US-registered Gulfstream . . . and flown to Egypt", where almost nothing has been heard of him since. The CIA Gulfstream's flight logs show it flew from Washington to Cairo, where it picked up Egyptian security agents, before apparently going on to Jakarta to take Iqbal to Egypt. Another transfer involved a British citizen. On November 8, 2002, the Gulfstream took off for Banjul in Gambia. On the same day Wahab Al-Rawi, a 38-year-old Briton, was among four people arrested at the airport by local secret police and handed over to interrogators who said they were "from the US embassy". Wahab said he had previously been questioned by MI5 because his brother Basher, an Iraqi national, was an acquaintance of Abu Qatada, the radical London-based cleric. When Wahab asked the CIA agents for access to the British consul, as required under the Vienna Convention signed by America, the agents are said to have laughed. "Why do you think you're here?" one agent said to Wahab. "It's your government that tipped us off in the first place." Wahab was later released but Basher was sent to Guantanamo and remains there and has yet to be accused of any specific crime. Some former CIA operatives and human rights campaigners claim the agency and the Pentagon use a process called "rendition" to send suspects to countries such as Egypt and Jordan. They are then tortured largely to gain information for the Americans who, it is alleged, encourage these countries to use aggressive interrogation methods banned under US law. Bob Baer, a former CIA operative in the Middle East, said: "If you want a serious interrogation you send a prisoner to Jordan. If you want them to be tortured you send them to Syria. If you want someone to disappear . . . you send them to Egypt." Among the countries where prisoners have been sent by America is Uzbekistan, a close ally and a dictatorship whose secret police are notorious for their interrogation methods, including the alleged boiling of prisoners. The Gulfstream made at least seven trips to the Uzbek capital. The details bolster claims by Craig Murray, the former British ambassador, that America has sent terrorist suspects from Afghanistan to Uzbekistan to be interrogated by torture. In a memo, whose disclosure last month contributed to Murray's removal, he told Jack Straw, the foreign secretary, that the CIA station chief in Tashkent had "readily acknowledged torture was deployed in obtaining intelligence". The CIA and Premier declined to discuss the allegations over the planes. The American government, however, denies it is in any way complicit in torture and says it is actively working to stamp out the practice. http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewForeignBureaus.asp?Page=% 5CForeignBureaus%5Carchive%5C200411%5CFOR20041116f.html -- ============================================================ If you find this material useful, you might want to check out our website (http://cyberjournal.org) or try out our low-traffic, moderated email list by sending a message to: •••@••.••• You are encouraged to forward any material from the lists or the website, provided it is for non-commercial use and you include the source and this disclaimer. Richard Moore (rkm) Wexford, Ireland "Escaping The Matrix - Global Transformation: WHY WE NEED IT, AND HOW WE CAN ACHIEVE IT ", current draft: http://www.ratical.org/co-globalize/rkmGlblTrans.html _____________________________ "...the Patriot Act followed 9-11 as smoothly as the suspension of the Weimar constitution followed the Reichstag fire." - Srdja Trifkovic There is not a problem with the system. The system is the problem. Faith in ourselves - not gods, ideologies, leaders, or programs. _____________________________ "Zen of Global Transformation" home page: http://www.QuayLargo.com/Transformation/ QuayLargo discussion forum: http://www.QuayLargo.com/Transformation/ShowChat/?ScreenName=ShowThreads cj list archives: http://cyberjournal.org/cj/show_archives/?lists=cj newslog list archives: http://cyberjournal.org/cj/show_archives/?lists=newslog _____________________________ Informative links: http://www.indymedia.org/ http://www.globalresearch.ca/ http://www.MiddleEast.org http://www.rachel.org http://www.truthout.org http://www.williambowles.info/monthly_index/ http://www.zmag.org http://www.co-intelligence.org ============================================================
