America continues to screw Black workers

Kinda makes you wonder what opportunities for Blacks exist partnering with others in new powerhouse economies like Venezuela, Nigeria, and others in the so-called third world who are increasingly distancing themselves from capitalist imperialism.

Twilight of a Hip Hop Hero

This article misses several points about the Minister but makes some valid ones as well. NOt the soundest piece but another interesting take from across the east pond.

California classroom divided by race

Bush Co.s Iraq oil grab a done deal

For Bush and the criminal capitalists he represents, election results are marginal. The real measure of the extent to which this administration has pulled the wool over our collective eyes is told in the looted U.S. treasury, the forsaken inner-cities, and the sickening profits reaped by war profiteers and military contractors alike. These people will be laughing all the way to the World Bank for generations to come.

It was time to impeach was years ago.

AmeriKKKa the violent

A theme repeated by writers every so often, but especially potent in 'dese times.

It is increasingly unlikely that the good Americans can overcome those who've embraced the legacies of slavery and genocide as the national birthright.

Black men and prostate cancer

Black womens' health sparks new breast cancer research

Breast cancer kill twice as many Black women as white, though they are only less than half of all patients.

UNDERSTATEMENT OF THE DAY: INTEL CHIEF WARNS SITUATION IN IRAQ DIRE

Nooooo shit? Really? The situation in Iraq is going bad? I better cancel my Iraq vacation till they're fully pacified and happily sippin' cokes from SpongeBob crazy straws while cheering on Britney's rehab.

Katrina: Eighteen months later

How is is possible that this administration has avoided impeachment when the last yokel in office was censured for nothing close to Bush/Cheney's crimes?

A good book, if you haven't already picked it up:

The Genius of Impeachment --and why it must be appied to George Bush by John Nichols

rz

America's severe poverty highest in three decades

Social kill-off is the REALITY of this age, folks.

Discuss?

rz

Hutchinson sorts Farrakhan's legacy

EOH doesn't mention the truly more controversial elements of the enigmatic Minister Farrakhan, such as the split from Elijah's son Wallace, and of course his role in fueling anti-Malcolm sentiment among those who would kill him. A good commentary nonetheless.

rz

In defense of Jill Clark: Human Rights Defender pt. 2

For the purposes of this series the Federal Mediation Memorandum of Agreement will be referred to as “the agreement” and the Minneapolis Police Department will be referred to as the “MPD.”--BlackLogic

“...We condemn cultures of brutality and violence everywhere they exist. Where we find them in society we will combat them. Where we find them in the police department, we will combat them. We also condemn institutional racism everywhere it exists. Where it is found in society, we will combat it. Where it is found in the police department, we will combat it...”

The epigraph above is taken from the preamble of the Memorandum of Agreement between police, the City of Minneapolis, and an unfortunately incomplete, inclusively speaking, of community members from the Twin Cities. Is that pledge being fulfilled, or does the MPD continue to foster a culture, subversive or overt, of corruption and brutality? Would it have needed federal mediation if they had lived up to this pledge?
Attorney Jill Clark was one of the most important advocates in bringing federal mediation to Minneapolis. When a lawyer has success defending underrepresented persons who have experienced brutality and/or abuse at the hands of the police department, that lawyer becomes a valuable part of that community, and a pariah to some powerful public servants who work in our local criminal justice system.
According to her supporters (myself included), Jill Clark has earned the right to be called a defender of human rights. Here is a glance at a few of the Minneapolis/St. Paul cases in which Clark successfully held police and the courts accountable for some of their collective disregard for human rights:
* Dontay St. James, an African American man, was shot 4 times by a Minneapolis police officer through his apartment door. Then he was charged with assault on a police officer. The only witness was the shooter. Jill Clark represented St. James for free, and tried the case to a jury. A jury quickly found St. James not guilty.
* Philander Jenkins, an African American man, complained that 2 jailers had tried to sexually assault him in the Hennepin County Jail. Who got criminally charged? Jenkins. Jill Clark and Jill Waite took the case pro bono and tried it to a jury. The jury acquitted Jenkins of charges that he had made a false complaint.
* Darryl Robinson, an African American man, was pushed down by a Minneapolis police officer, kicked in the head until his eardrum broke, and the cop poured a bottle of sparkling water into Robinson’s bleeding ear. Robinson got himself to a hospital and demanded that police take his criminal complaint against the officer, but MPD did nothing. Eventually, Jill Clark helped Robinson bring his claim against police to federal court. A jury gave Robinson the maximum possible award for his injuries.
* Rickey Jones, an African American man, is a photographer who caught Minneapolis police on film while they were beating an older woman. He was arrested for taking pictures and initially convicted because he complained about his rights being violated. Jill Clark took the case for free to uphold Rickey’s First Amendment rights. A motion for new trial was granted and eventually the case was dismissed.
* Patrick Fearing was beaten by St. Paul police in full view of his young daughters. An audiotape recorded a chilling record of Fearing’s screams while he was being beaten. Jill Clark and Jill Waite tried the case to a jury in federal court, which agreed that two officers had used excessive force on Fearing.
* Kenneth Bady is an African American man who friends feared was having a heart attack. They called 911 for emergency medical care. The result? Witnesses say Minneapolis Police showed up and tasered Bady, the man suspected of having a heart attack. Bady began to pursue a civil action, when suddenly he was criminally charged for the same incident—police claiming he did something wrong. Jill Clark took the criminal case free of charge and convinced the prosecutor to dismiss it.
* Lloyd Mayberry lives in St. Paul. A neighbor called St. Paul Police, who showed up, and his wife said nothing was wrong. Witnesses say that Mayberry was assaulted by police, but police criminally charged him. Jill Clark took the case for free and convinced the St. Paul prosecutor to dismiss the criminal charges.

* Alfred Flowers is an African American man who was walking near the Urban League talking on his cell phone when a Minneapolis Park Police officer approached him and took him to the ground. Witnesses say that police who showed up choked Flowers until he was unable to breathe. Police charged Flowers, but following a month-long trial in which Jill Clark defended Flowers, a jury found him not guilty.

In addition to aiding in the defense of these clients, Jill Clark continues to defend the human rights of people who have experienced police brutality, misconduct and abuse of authority while being a positive force for change in community efforts to change the underlying policies and practices that allow bad policing to exist, while stifling efforts to sustain real community policing.

Thus, it is both disheartening and curious that Clark's complaints against Hennepin County District Court Chief Justice Lucy Wieland went ignored for months by both the *Minnesota Board on Judical Standards and the Lawyer's Professional Responsibility Board, particularly since the Clark indicated she had evidence of judicial misconduct on the part of said justice (read “In Defense of Jill Clark: Human Rights Defender” -- archives).


So, why did the police department of our (un)fair yet major city require a federal mediator to intervene in their relationship with the community they are sworn to serve and protect? Because in the summer of 2002, according to an analysis of the MOA by CUAPB, “a series of high profile police incidents was capped by the wounding of 11-year old Julius Powell by a stray police bullet during a botched drug raid. Although the youth was not seriously injured, the incident brought North Minneapolis residents to the boiling point and touched off an uprising in the Jordan neighborhood in which some journalists were beaten and media vehicles were torched.

“Prior to the Powell shooting, members of the Minneapolis Police Federation attacked city council member Natalie Johnson-Lee (out of office since '05) for remarks she made in connection with a shooting incident that resulted in the deaths of community members Martha McDonald and police officer Melissa Schmidt. Johnson Lee was the only African American on the city council at that time and these attacks on her were seen very negatively by large numbers of her constituents and the Black community as a whole. A rally was held to denounce the attacks, followed by a large community meeting in North Minneapolis to discuss police/community issues. At the rally and later at the meeting, it was announced that an ad hoc coalition had come together, met with U.S. Attorney Tom Heffelfinger and contacted U.S. Department of Justice, Community Relations Section mediator Patricia Campbell Glenn to ask for federal mediation [since the city had failed to ease police/community relations-brackets mine]. Two days later, the Powell shooting occurred and the coalition requested that Ms. Glenn come to Minneapolis to assess the situation first-hand.

“The coalition met with Ms. Glenn and this meeting led to a four-month long effort to bring federal mediation to Minneapolis. There was a great deal of resistance on the part of city leadership. Mayor Rybak repeatedly called for private mediation. The task of bringing federal mediation to the city involved extensive neighborhood canvassing and numerous community meetings to 1) educate the community on mediation and why it was needed. 2) to motivate the community to call their council members and the mayor to ask for mediation, and 3) gather input on the community's desired demands for mediation. The final result of these efforts was a ten-page document outlining community demands for improved police policies, practices and accountability.

“The community's demands for mediation never saw the light of day. Police Chief Robert Olson stonewalled mediation, refusing to attend sessions with the team elected by the community. He was backed by city council members who strove to control the outcome of mediation by controlling community representation. Sadly, city leadership finally got their way, and in May 2003, a hand picked “community” team sat down with representatives from the city, the MPD, and the federation to broker a federal mediation agreement. Ms. Campbell served as the mediator.” (The rest of this analysis is linked further below.)


On December 4, 2003, the Minneapolis Police Department, at the behest of a federal mediator, entered into a memorandum of agreement (MOA) with citizens of Minneapolis designated the Unity Community Mediation Team (UCMT), a partial representation of the city.

The agreement, according to the MOA preamble, was/is “dedicated to protecting safety and the human rights, civil rights, and legal rights of all Minneapolis residents, regardless of race, ethnicity, national origin, religion, language, immigration status, gender sexual orientation, mental health, economic status or disability status

“We condemn cultures of brutality and violence everywhere they exist. Where we find them in society we will combat them. Where we find them in the police department, we will combat them. We also condemn institutional racism everywhere it exists. Where it is found in society, we will combat it. Where it is found in the police department, we will combat it.”

Also pledged by the MPD and UCMT in the preamble of the Agreement: “We agree to work together too protect the life, dignity, health, and safety of all Minneapolis residents; to continue this dialog to improve police practices; to ensure that violations of Minneapolis' residents' rights by police officers are resolved justly; to improve the level of professionalism, training, and racial and gender diversity at all levels of the Minneapolis Police Department; and to improve relations between our communities and their police department and the City of Minneapolis.

“Police officers are sworn to uphold the law and take action without regard to race. If race is a motivating factor in police actions, it is a vital concern to the community and the department. The data contained in the September 24, 2003 'Minnesota Racial Profiling Study,' published by the Council and Crime and Justice, heightens this concern and demands further analysis. Police officers are entrusted with enormous authority and are accountable for a strong commitment to public service. MPD officers must project professionalism and are held accountable for excellence in serving all members of the public. The many officers who live up to this standard of excellence deserve respect from the community they serve.”

In theory the memorandum is unique in the nation; it had led to the creation of the Police-Community Relations Council (PCRC) and represents a clearly goal of humanizing the often tumultuous relationship between MPD officers and those persons or communities who have most often not received equal protection under the law.

In practice the MOA has little to no teeth and the MPD are not bound to enforcing it's mandates, according to the analysis of the Agreement by Communities United Against Police Brutality (CUAPB) among others.

Below is a link to the City of Minneapolis' copy the Minneapolis Federal Mediation Agreement between the MPD and various community representatives. Please note that many groups traditionally underrepresented in society were also absent from the mediation process, including members of the Hmong and Latino communities:

www.ci.minneapolis.mn.us/police/about/mcu/federal-mediation-agreement.pdf

For an analysis of the Agreement by Communities United Against Police Brutality (CUAPB), follow this link: http://www.charityadvantage.com/CUAPB/AnalysisofFedMedAgree.asp

For more information about the Jill Clark Defense Coalition, call 612-874-7867.

The Lawyer's Professional Responsibility Board can be reached at 1500 Landmark Towers, 345 St. Peter Street, Suite 1500, in St. Paul. Apparently, the LPRB saw fit to investigate Clark for complaining about Judge Wieland, while disregarding her more serious, and earlier complaint against Judge Wieland altogether as of this deadline.
The Minnesota Board of Judicial Standards may be contacted at 2025 Center Point Blvd.,Suite 180, Mendota Heights, or online at judicial.standards@state.mn.us. They received Clark's complaint against Judge Wieland, but their review is still pending as of this writing.

Rashard Zanders is the host of blacklogic.blogspot.com and an unabashed advocate for human rights and human rights defenders.

The preceding article IS the opinion of management.

Reagan and his infanticides

Consortium News - Jan 30, 2007



Reagan & the Salvadoran Baby Skulls

By Robert Parry--[Robert Parry broke many of the Iran-Contra stories in the 1980s for the Associated Press and Newsweek. His latest book, Secrecy & Privilege: Rise
of the Bush Dynasty from Watergate to Iraq, can be ordered at
secrecyandprivilege.com. It's also available at Amazon.com, as is his 1999
book, Lost History: Contras, Cocaine, the Press & 'Project Truth.']


Ronald Reagan's many admirers may find this idea offensive, but - given a
new report by the Washington Post - it might be fitting to have a display
at Reagan National Airport to show how Salvadoran baby skulls were used as
candle holders and good luck charms. Perhaps the presentation could contain
skeletal remains of Guatemalans and Nicaraguans, too.

It might be modeled after skeletons on display in Cambodia from the
slaughters by the Khmer Rouge. After all, it was President Reagan - more
than any other person - who justified and facilitated the barbarity that
raged through Central America in the 1980s, claiming the lives of tens of
thousands of peasants, clergy and students, men, women and children.

Reagan portrayed the bloody conflicts as a necessary front in the Cold War,
but the Central American violence was always more about entrenched ruling
elites determined to retain their privileges against impoverished peasants,
including descendants of the region's Maya Indians, seeking social,
political and economic reforms.

One of the most notorious acts of brutality occurred in December 1981 in
and around the Salvadoran town of El Mozote. The government's Atlacatl
Battalion - freshly trained and newly armed thanks to Reagan's hard-line
policies - systematically slaughtered hundreds of men, women and children.

When the atrocity was revealed by reporters at the New York Times and the
Washington Post, the Reagan administration showed off its new strategy of
"perception management," denying the facts and challenging the integrity of
the journalists.

Because of that P.R. offensive, the reality about the El Mozote massacre
remained in doubt for almost a decade until the war ended and a United
Nations forensic team dug up hundreds of skeletons, including many little
ones of children.

Now the Washington Post has added a new grisly detail. Several months after
the massacre, the Salvadoran army returned to the scene and collected the
skulls of some El Mozote children as novelty items, the Post reported.

"They worked well as candle holders," recalled one of the soldiers, Jose
Wilfredo Salgado, "and better as good luck charms."

Now, a quarter century later, describing his role piling the tiny skulls
into sacks as souvenirs, Salgado acknowledged that he had "lost his love of
humanity."

The Post reported that "witnessing the aftermath of what his colleagues did
in El Mozote and reflecting on those skulls changed his mind about how the
war was being fought." Salgada said his mentor, Col. Domingo Monterrosa,
who later died in a helicopter crash, had ordered an act of "genocide" in
El Mozote.

"If Monterossa had lived," the Post reported, "Salgada said, he should have
been prosecuted for `war crimes like a Hitler.'" [Washington Post, Jan. 29,
2007]


...But the story of the Reagan-supported genocide of the Mayan Indians was
quickly forgotten, as Republicans and the Washington press corps wrapped
Reagan's legacy in a fuzzy blanket of heroic mythology.

The atrocities inflicted on the Mayas - and the peasants of El Salvador and
Nicaragua - were rarely associated with the popular Reagan. Neither, of
course, will anyone in polite Washington society link Reagan to the
revelation that the skulls of children butchered at El Mozote became candle
holders and good luck charms.

Continued -- In Defense of Jill Clark: The Minneapolis Federal Mediation Agreement

For those of you following, or who have expressed interest in the Minneapolis Federal Mediation Agreement/process, here's the link to the Agreement in its entirety. Problems of racism, police brutality and judicial misconduct have all coalesced in recent years to provide us Minneapolis taxpayers with one corrupt criminal justice system.

Join the club, right?

Papa Bear's part in NFL discrimination, and the legacy of Fritz Pollard

Pollard's legacy follows coaches to Super Bowl
By Gene Wojciechowski
ESPN.com

You'll hear and read a lot in the next 12 days about the social and historical significance of two black head coaches -- the Chicago Bears' Lovie Smith and the Indianapolis Colts' Tony Dungy -- reaching the Super Bowl.

Maybe you'll read about the charter bus driver hired to take the Colts from Baltimore's M&T Bank Stadium to the airport after the Jan. 13 AFC divisional playoff win against the Ravens. As Dungy boarded the first of the four buses, the driver, an African-American, reportedly told him, "I want you to know, Coach Dungy, we are proud of you."

You'll hear from people such as former NFL player and scout John Wooten, chairman of the influential Fritz Pollard Alliance, who has worked long and hard with the league to help create more opportunities for minority coaches and aspiring front office personnel. The 70-year-old Wooten will tell you that blacks everywhere, even those only casually interested in the NFL, were pulling for Smith and Dungy last Sunday. It was like the old days, he'll say, when Joe Louis used to fight not just for himself, but for all those of color.

"It's a race pride," Wooten says from the Senior Bowl in Mobile, Ala. "People get mixed up. Race pride doesn't mean racism. Race pride means being proud of what you are and what you stand for."

What you won't hear or read -- at least, not from the NFL or the Bears organization -- is the awkward history between the league and team founder George S. Halas and Pollard himself, the first black man to play and coach in the NFL. More than 20 years after each man died, their legacies remain connected.

Remember the cement block-sized piece of hardware Smith hoisted after winning the NFC championship a few days ago at Solider Field? It was the Halas Trophy, and it was held tightly by, technically speaking, the first black head coach to lead a team to the Super Bowl.

"That is ironical," says 85-year-old Eleanor Pollard Towns, one of two Pollard daughters who live in the Chicago area.

Ironical, she says, because Halas was no friend of Fritz Pollard or his causes. Ironical because Halas has always been linked to the 1934 unwritten edict by NFL owners that banned black players from the league until 1946, as newspaper reports at the time detailed. And ironical, say both Pollard Towns and Fritz Pollard III (Fritz Pollard's grandson), because they believe Halas used his considerable influence to derail Pollard's candidacy for the Pro Football Hall of Fame.

"He certainly did a lot to keep my father from going any further than he did," Pollard Towns says. "I have heard my father talk about that down through the years."

"With George Halas, as great as he was," Pollard III says, "he did so much to try to keep African-Americans out of the league. Here, Lovie Smith leads his team to the Super Bowl. But it was a different age."



Follow the link for the rest of the article

Harriet Washington on Medical Apartheid

Interview with Harriet Washington by Amy Goodman. Washington is a medical scholar and has a new book on this subject; it's an insightful interview.

Medical Apartheid: The Dark History of Medical Experimentation on Black Americans from Colonial Times to the Present

"A new report by the American Cancer society shows that African-Americans are still more likely than any other group to develop and die of cancer. The study states that socio-economic factors play the largest role in this disparity - African Americans have less access to health care and information, and are less likely to get screening and medical treatment. Well, a new book offers one answer into why black Americans deeply mistrust American medicine.

“Medical Apartheid: The Dark History of Medical Experimentation on Black Americans from Colonial Times to the Present” is the first and only comprehensive history of medical experimentation, abuse and neglect of African Americans. The book reveals the hidden underbelly of scientific research and the roots of the African American health deficit. It begins with the earliest encounters of blacks and the medical establishment during slavery, looks at how eugenics and social Darwinism was used to justify medical experiments conducted by the government and the military - and offers new details about the infamous Tuskegee Experiments that began in the 1930’s.

“Medical Apartheid” also examines less well-known abuses and looks at unethical practices and mistreatment of blacks that are still taking place in the medical establishment today..."

A reflection on the holiday for MLK

Odd, isn't it, that the most zealous perpetrator of violence in the world, um, US...would take time to honor arguably the most zealous advocate of non-violence in the nation's history.

Once I joined throngs in demanding this national holiday. Years later I feel as if we dishonor the man and his message the more violent we become.

This is in no way meant to insult the millions and millions of my compatriots who sincerely and vigorously attack the foundations of white privilege and white supremacy on a daily basis; the white supremacy that is under the surface of all other euphemisms: war on terror; war on drugs, war on labor...it's all a war on common sense and decency so a small population of the world can continue to make profits anywhere in the world, at the expense of the rest of the world.

So this year, instead of peeking in at the so-called MLK celebrations/honorariums happening around the Twin Cities and cyberspace, I am holding a requiem for the Dream. It appears we've all turned our back on it.

raz

Demystifying Venezuela

From the Citizen Alice Blog - Jan 13, 2007



Confused About Venezuela?

by Eva Golinger

Over the past few days, major newspapers in the United States, such as The
New York Times, The Washington Post, The Los Angeles Times and The Wall
Street Journal, have published editorials aggressively and harshly
criticizing recent declarations and decisions made by re-elected President
Hugo Chavez and his cabinet. A large percentage of the content of these
editorials, which reflect the viewpoints of the newspapers, are based on a
distortion and misconception of new policies being implemented in Venezuela and the overall way government is functioning.

In the Washington Post's "Venezuela's Leap Backward", published on January
10, the editorial board intentionally and mistakenly portrays the recent
presidential elections this past December in Venezuela as illegitimate and
unfair. By falsely claiming that Chavez conducted a "one-sided campaign that
left a majority of Venezuelans believing they might be punished if they did
not cast their ballots for him", the Post wants its readers to think
Venezuelans who voted for Chavez did so under duress and fear. Nothing could
be further from the truth. A majority of Venezuelans publicly express their
sincere admiration and approval of President Chavez in an open and fearless
way on a daily basis in this country.

Most Venezuelans believe Chavez is the best president the nation has ever
had, and statistics prove that his government has built more bridges,
railroads, hospitals, clinics, universities, schools, highways and houses
than any administration in the past. The Post editorial also attempts to
downplay the "only 7 million votes" Chavez received, not mentioning that
those seven million votes represent more than 63% of total votes - a
landslide victory to the opposition candidate's 37% - and that no president
in Venezuelan history has ever, ever received such a large number of votes
in an election.

The New York Times editorial, also published on January 10, attacks a
recent statement made by President Chavez regarding the nationalization of
one telephone company, CANTV, and an electric company. However the Times
doesn't explain that the CANTV is the only non-cellular telephone company
in the country, giving it a complete monopoly on national land-line
telecommunications and control over a majority of Internet service as well.

Furthermore, the CANTV was privatized only in 1991, during the second
non-consecutive term of Carlos Andres Perez a president later impeached for corruption who implemented a series of privatization measures, despite
having run for office on a non-privatization platform just three years
before. In fact, as soon as Carlos Andres Perez won office in 1988 after
convincing the Venezuelan people he would not permit "neo-liberalism" on
Venezuelan shores, he immediately began to announce the privatization of
several national industries, including telecommunications, education and
the medical and petroleum sectors. This deception led to massive
anti-privatization protests during February 1989 during which the
government ordered the armed forces to "open-fire" on the demonstrators and
arrest and torture those not killed. The result was the "Caracazo", a
tragic scar on contemporary Venezuelan history that left more than 3,000
dead in mass gravesites and thousands more injured and detained.

The re-nationalizing of Venezuela's one landline phone company is a
strategic necessity and an anti-monopoly measure necessary to ensure that
Venezuelans have access to telecommunications service. (Take it from someone who lives here. You can't even get a landline if it isn't already installed
in your residence. The waiting list is over 2 years and you have to bribe
someone to actually do the job). And furthermore, the new Minister of
Telecommunications, Jesse Chac�n, announced that any company "nationalized"
will be fully compensated for its shares and property at market value.

The third issue put forth in the editorials is the recent announcement by
President Chavez that the license of private television station RCTV to
operate on the public airwaves is up for review in May 2007 and most likely
will not be renewed. The government has based its denial of the license
renewal on RCTV's lack of cooperation with tax laws, its failure to pay
fines issued by the telecommunications commission, CONATEL, over the past twenty years, and its refusal to abide by constitutional laws prohibiting
incitation to political violence, indecency, obscenity and the distortion of
facts and information.

The public airwaves, as in the case of the United States, are regulated by
government. Television and radio stations apply for licenses from the
telecommunications commission and are granted those licenses based on
conditional compliance with articulated regulations. When a station does not
abide by the requirements, it generally is fined and warned, repeatedly,
until compliance is assured. In the specific case of RCTV, the station and
its owner, multi-millionaire Marcel Granier, have refused to comply with the
law and have continued to abuse and violate the clear and concise
regulations that are supposed to guarantee Venezuelan citizens their
constitutional right to "true and accurate information" (Article 58 of the
Constitution).

RCTV's owner, Marcel Granier, played a key role in the April 2002 coup
d'etat against President Chavez and has used his station to engage in an
ongoing campaign of anti-Chavez propaganda and efforts to destabilize the
nation through distorting and manipulating information to create panic,
apathy, fear and violence in Venezuelan society. The station's clear
violations of the telecommunications regulations and the Constitutional
guarantees that protect freedom of speech and access to true and accurate
information provide sufficient reason to deny the renewal of its license to
use the public airwaves.

Unlike the editorial board of the Los Angeles Times (Fidel Chavez?, January
11, 2007) mistakenly claims, Chavez and his government are not "shutting
down" the private media station. RCTV can continue to operate on the private
airwaves, i.e. cable and satellite television. As would be the case in any
country where law and order are respected, RCTV will not receive a renewal
on its license to remain on the public airwaves because it repeatedly
violated the law during more than a decade.

Unfortunately, international groups that allegedly protect freedom of the
press and of speech around the world, have fallen under the influence and
manipulation of RCTV president Marcel Granier, who through his close
relationship with Washington, is conducting a campaign to defend his station
by user the banner of freedom and liberty. But consistent lawbreakers and
coup leaders should not receive the support of international press watchdog
groups and human rights defenders. Rather, those groups should praise the
decision of the Venezuelan government to maintain the public airwaves in the hands of the public. The license so abused by RCTV will most likely be
granted to various community and alternative media groups and stations in
Venezuela that have emerged over the past few years as a result of the
direct encouragement and support of the Chavez administration.

Finally, the editorials in the Post, the New York Times, the Los Angeles
Times and the Wall Street Journal, all criticize President Chavez's
announcement to create a new political party in Venezuela: the United
Socialist Party of Venezuela. The editorials inaccurately claim that Chavez
will dissolve all political parties in the country and allow only one party
to operate. This is a dangerous and false inference.

What Chavez really declared was the formation of a new revolutionary party that would be open to all parties that support the revolution. There will be no closing down or abolishing of other political parties in the nation; they
can all remain as they wish and those that choose to merger or support the
new party can also freely do so.

Furthermore, Chavez indicated that the reason for the designing of a new
political party is to break free from the old corrupt hierarchical party
structures of the past that concentrate power in the hands of few and
exclude and ignore the vast majority of supporters. Chavez remarked that the
new party he seeks to promote will be formed by grassroots community
movements, and that there will be no power structures that isolate and
marginalize constituents.

If you only read the US press, you must be very confused about Venezuela.
The extreme levels of distortion, lack of fact checking and source
verification and outright manipulation of information in the US media on
Venezuela is quite troubling and dangerous in a nation that has waged wars
based on false data and misleading policies.

How US forged an alliance with Ethiopia over invasion

Follow this link for an insightful article from the Guardian UK on : How US forged an alliance with Ethiopia over invasion

Xan Rice in Nairobi and Suzanne Goldenberg in Washington
Saturday January 13, 2007

Guardian
On December 4, General John Abizaid, the commander of US forces from the Middle East through Afghanistan, arrived in Addis Ababa to meet the Ethiopian prime minister, Meles Zenawi. Officially, the trip was a courtesy call to an ally. Three weeks later, however, Ethiopian forces crossed into Somalia in a war on its Islamist rulers, and this week the US launched air strikes against suspected al-Qaida operatives believed to be hiding among the fleeing Islamist fighters.

"The meeting was just the final handshake," said a former intelligence officer familiar with the region.

Hmmmm.