Karachi CID building hit by huge explosion

The blast took place in the busy evening rush-hour

An attack on anti-terrorist police headquarters in Pakistan’s largest city, Karachi, has left 15 dead and 30 injured.

The suspected car bomb exploded outside the police Criminal Investigation Department (CID) building, reducing parts of it to a pile of rubble.

TV footage showed bloodied victims being taken away on stretchers.

An eyewitness quoted by AP news agency said the blast had left a crater 3m (10ft) wide.

Shattered

One witness told the BBC that he had heard gunfire before the explosion.

“I was playing tennis across the road at the Karachi Club when I heard gunshots and then a huge blast,” said Ali Zaidi.

“Everyone started panicking and running toward the changing rooms. Some of my friends have been injured and have been taken to hospital.”

The site of the blast is not far from the Sindh province chief minister’s residence, opposite the Sheraton hotel in the south of the city.

Other buildings close by were badly damaged in the blast, which shattered windows within a two-mile radius.

The blast took place in the evening rush hour as the city was busy with people leaving work.

No group has immediately claimed responsibility for the attack but the Taliban have been behind a number of similar attacks on police and army compounds in recent years.

Pakistan’s commercial capital has a history of violence with sectarian disputes between majority Sunni and minority Shia Muslims regularly flaring.

Karachi has also seen a spate of shootings in recent years, some of them sectarian, which have left many dead. Ethnic divisions are also re-emerging.

‘Every Second Russian Is A Skinhead At Heart,’ Moscow Editor Says

WRITTEN BY PAUL GOBLE

Russia has relatively few active skinheads (150) and neo-Nazi groups (150) for a country of its size, a Russian Internet editor says, but Moscow’s failure to address ethnic issues has created a situation in which polls suggest “every second Russian is a skinhead at heart,” thus providing implicit support for the nationalists of the radical right.

 

In a comment posted on the Osobaya bukhva site, Viktor Tsvetkov notes that the Russian Federation is not the only country having problems with tolerance and multi-culturalism or the integration of ethnically and religious distinct immigrant groups into the broader society (www.specletter.com/politika/2010-11-09/kazhdyi-vtoroi-rossijanin-v-dushe-skinhed.html).

But German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s recent suggestion that multi-culturalism “isn’t working,” that Germans are attached to Christian values,” and that “those who do not accept them have no place here” had particular resonance in Russia because of the large number of Muslims both indigenous and immigrant there.

In Europe, “after World War II, nationalism was banned from big politics for a long time, but now,” Tsvetkov points out, “formerly taboo slogans are being taken up” again and without the shame or restraint of every times. Europeans still say they “love” or “tolerate” all people just as they did, but increasingly they are demanding that immigrants do all the adapting.

It would be strange if Russia did not face a similar challenge. “The roots of the conflict are very similar: the clash of various cultures and mutual lack of understanding on the background of economic problems.” And it would be equally strange if Russians did not react in many of the same ways Europeans are, the Osobaya bukhva editor says.

But there is an important difference. Russia has never been a mono-ethnic country, and many of the minorities that so many ethnic Russians are now angry about are indigenous nations rather than immigrants. Moreover, Russian attitudes appear to be leading the country into an absolute “dead end” given the failure of the powers that be to address it adequately.

Tsvetskov points to the ethnic clashes in the military unit near Perm and the shooting of a North Caucasian dancing in the middle of the night in Stavropol to show that officials clearly don’t know what to do. In the first case, they tried to suppress information about it, and in the second, they ignored the multiple factors at work.

This “short-sightedness and indifference” is obvious to everyone, the editor continued. “Doesn’t the Defense Ministry know that where people from the Caucasus republics assemble in a group, they will begin to live as their parents taught them and not as their father-commanders ordered?” And doesn’t the Stavropol militia recognize the way in which dancing in the middle of the night could affect people?

As Tsvetkov notes, Galina Kozhevnikova, the deputy head of the SOVA information-analytic center which tracks ethnic and religious affairs, points out that while the number of skinheads and radical groups is small, “more than half of Russians support neo-Nazi ideas” when it comes to dealing with minorities.

Thus, she continued, “this is a question not of the number of little groups but of the number of people who share neo-nazi views and support xenophobia as a whole because the neo-Nazis in the absence of such attitudes could not exist; they need to operate on the silent support of society” at large.”

Given that environment, Tsvetkov says, “can anyone be surprised by the appearance of demands of our citizens to create ‘an ethnic Russian republic’?” Or at the collection of signature in support of separating out Stavropol kray from the North Caucasus Federal District? “all this is based not on a heightened sense of national self-consciousness but on simple fear.”

Economists and demographers say that Russia needs more immigrants, but Tsvetkov says, there are no visible efforts by the government now to socialize the arrivals and help them fit in, a task especially difficult when Russians don’t want to consider them as people even though they want to hear them cite Pushkin from memory.

“The arguments of those who continue to support the idea of ‘Russia as a family of peoples’ are becoming ever fewer. Anger and lack of understanding, in contrast, are becoming ever greater and greater.” As a result, people are asking “what unites all of us besides state borders?”

And ever more often, Tsvetkov says, “one can hear the response: ‘Nothing.’”

Some Russians are trying to do something about this, but it is unclear whether they can succeed and reverse the current trend. Last week in Sochi, the Multi-National Russia Youth Forum came up with the idea that it is necessary to adopt and apply an “ethical code for multi-national Russia.”

Such a document, the editor continued, would declare Russian society to be “a single social community consisting of representatives of various ethnoses and start out from a recognition of the unqualified right of the individual to freedom of choice of his own ethnic and religious identities.”

Putting that in simpler terms, Tsvetkov says, “it is being suggested that we identify ourselves first of all as citizens of the Russian Federation and then as Russians (Tatars, Buryats and so on), Orthodox (Muslims, Buddhists, and so on)” – a proposal that he suggested represented “a noble undertaking.”

But there are good reasons to think such calls face an uphill battle. “Artificial constructs of citizenship by their significance do not compare with natural forms of identity including nationality and religion” – something that the collapse of the USSR highlighted for all in the post-Soviet region.

“Of course,” Tsvetkov continues, “it is possible to recall the Western model of the supremacy of law over all cultural distinctions and contradictions.

However after the acknowledgement of Merkel and the French cleansings of the Roma, this experience too does not look so convincing.”

Keeping things together by force is always a possibility but that approach entails serious costs. Thus, “the method of convincing people remains.”

But that is a hard task, especially if the powers that be prefer to ignore what is going on and “every other Russian” sympathizes with those who would oppress religious and ethnic minorities.

Tsetkov’s article is only one of the cries from the heart following the November 4 National Unity Day demonstrations conducted across the Russian Federation by ultra-nationalists, skinheads, and neo-Nazis, some of whom carried Nazi slogans like “Arbeit Macht Frei” (blog.humanrightsfirst.org/2010/11/charged-week-in-russia-skinheads.html).

And while these protests too were relatively small given the size of the country, they are disturbing because they underscore the point Tsvetkov makes: The active extremists are not all that numerous, but the share of the population that sympathizes with at least some of their messages is much larger and seems certain to play a role in Russia’s future.

Paul Goble

Paul Goble is a longtime specialist on ethnic and religious questions in Eurasia. Most recently, he was director of research and publications at the Azerbaijan Diplomatic Academy. Earlier, he served as vice dean for the social sciences and humanities at Audentes University in Tallinn and a senior research associate at the EuroCollege of the University of Tartu in Estonia. He has served in various capacities in the U.S. State Department, the Central Intelligence Agency and the International Broadcasting Bureau as well as at the Voice of America and Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty and at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. Mr. Goble maintains the Window on Eurasia blog and can be contacted directly at paul.goble@gmail.com .

If you don’t want war, prepare for peace

International politics is viewed by ‘realists’ as a struggle for power, with military force as the principal instrument — we need a different approach

BY RAMESH THAKUR, CITIZEN SPECIAL NOVEMBER 11, 2010 6:33 BE THE FIRST TO POST A COMMENT

Some years ago, a group of people in UNESCO were trying to have peace inscribed as a human right. The American representative at the discussion objected on the grounds that, if peace was declared to be a human right, it would be much more difficult to start new wars. Just so.

Once upon a time, I used to be director of the Peace Research Centre in Canberra. The Australian National University also had a Strategic and Defence Studies Centre. When people asked me for the difference between the two, I used to reply jokingly that we were on the side of the angels. The serious point of the question is still pertinent, and worth pondering on as we mark Remembrance Day.

The central problem for peace research is violence: the nature, causes, consequences, management and resolution of conflict. It seeks not just to understand violence, but to eliminate or tame it. Its task is to challenge the basic tenets of the conventional analyses of violence and offer critical alternatives. The most important point is that the primary motivation is to improve the human condition, to aim for a better life in a safer world for all.

At any given time, most of the countries in the world are ready to go to war if necessary. Yet most of them are also at peace and long to keep it so. Therein lies the key to the difference between peace research and strategic studies.

As a general rule, strategic studies is infused with realist assumptions. International politics is seen as a struggle for power. The primary actors in world affairs are autonomous states engaged in power-maximizing behaviour. National security is the ultimate and overriding goal, and force is the principal instrument. In such a realist paradigm, violence is seen as endemic, inevitable and an instrument of dispute resolution. The task of strategic analysts is to predict courses of action that will enable states to maximize their own power while neutralizing or minimizing the national power of opponents so that the conflict is resolved on one’s own terms and not that of the enemy.

Peace research changes focus from the welfare of the state to that of individuals and the world community. Strategic studies focuses on the successful use of violence; peace research seeks to reduce the frequency of latent and manifest use of force by organized groups of human beings. Strategic studies accepts and refines the instrumentality of violence; peace research questions and rejects it.

From the perspective of strategic studies, the most critical lesson of the interwar period (1919-’39) is that pacifism and appeasement do not work against the Adolf Hitlers of the world. Few peace researchers would dispute this. But most would point to the injustice and inequity of the Treaty of Versailles, and the subsequent treatment of Germany from within the realist paradigm, as having spawned Hitler in the first place.

For an Indian strategic studies analyst, the key question on Kashmir is how best to secure the province against the threat from Pakistan. And vice versa for a Pakistani strategic studies expert. But for a peace researcher, it is equally legitimate to ask how best to protect the people of Kashmir against killings by terrorists and extrajudicial killings by national security forces. The threats posed by the agents of the state — whether India, Pakistan, Afghanistan or any other country — to individual and group rights are conceptually alien to strategic studies. They are central to peace research.

During the Cold War, the logic of realist analyses produced policy prescriptions of containment of the “evil empire” through a sustained posture of armed strength. The peace research community grew in strength, conviction and numbers in opposition to the logic of confrontation. Its adherents argued that the adversarial approach to Cold War international relations intensified mutual antagonism, fed the conventional and nuclear arms race and increased the probability of war by design or accident. The contrasting perspectives are still relevant to understanding the dynamics of India and Pakistan, for example, the structural basis of their conflict resembling that of the Cold War.

The distinct identity of the peace research community rests in the broader conceptions of “peace” and “violence.” The importance of peace research increased with the end of the Cold War as the definition of security broadened substantially to embrace non-traditional notions and threats such as global warming, HIV/AIDS and human rights violations. These are issues that are better addressed within peace research than strategic studies paradigms.

Possibilities for the breakdown of peace exist everywhere and at all times. The task for strategic studies is to identify them through the exploration of worst-case scenarios. Possibilities for building peace exist in every human crisis. The challenge for peace research is to identify them through the exploration of best-case scenarios.

Under the strategic-studies paradigm, states hope for the best but prepare for the worst. “Trust, but verify,” said president Ronald Reagan in the context of his historic arms-control agreements with the former Soviet Union. For peace researchers, nations should be prepared for the worst but work for the best: Verify, but do trust. And, where possible, love thy neighbour.

A nation-defining mythology has grown up in Australia and New Zealand around the battle of Gallipoli in 1915. Troops from the two colonies were slaughtered as they waded ashore in the face of well-fortified Turkish defenders. Almost 9,000 Australians and 3,000 Kiwis lost their lives in the eight months of the deadly campaign. April 25 — ANZAC Day — is the most solemn day of the year in the calendar of the Australian and New Zealand defence force. In Canberra, there is a memorial, at one end of ANZAC Parade, to the friendship between Australia and Turkey. It is a fine example of reconciliation between erstwhile enemies.

Carved in stone on the memorial in ANZAC Parade are lines of poetry penned by Kemal Ataturk, one of Turkey’s finest patriots whose career received a major boost from the battle for Gallipoli. The poem is addressed to the foreign invaders of his country:

You, the mothers

Who sent your sons from faraway countries

Wipe away your tears.

Your sons are now lying in our bosom

And in peace.

Having lost their lives on this land, they have

Become our sons as well. The need to temper justice and vengeance with reconciliation and reintegration of traumatized, bitterly divided communities is an increasing imperative in many parts of the world. Ataturk’s words are an inspiration to peace researchers everywhere. If we fail to learn wisdom from the dead, we shall surely join them in the peace of the dead.

Ramesh Thakur, a professor of political science at the University of Waterloo, returns to the Australian National University next year.

© Copyright (c) The Ottawa Citizen

US Wanting Between Costa Rica and Nicaragua

U.S. Willing To Help In Costa Rica - Nicaragua Dispute If Asked

The U.S. Ambassador in Nicaragua, Robert Callahan, said Washington is willing to “help” Costa Rica andNicaragua resolve their border conflict.

“We (the U.S.) are willing to help if the two countries ask us,” said the American diplomat, when asked by reporters after attending an official function in Managua, Nicaragua’s capital city.

Asked how the U.S. could help, he said “it all depends on the two countries”.

“We will respond if the two countries, Nicaragua and Costa Rica, ask for our involvement”, said Callahan.

He said both countries can also go to other countries, international and regional organizations to resolve their differences. “It is a bilateral dispute and the two countries ahve to decide the most effective and fair way to resolve their differences”, said ambassador Callahan, who added that his country hopes for a “peaceful and quick” solution to the conflict.

Also, Callahan agreed with the proposal of the Government of Nicaragua to begin a process of demarcation of the border with Costa Rica.

“Really this is an idea that does have validity, but the Nicaraguan government has to discuss, talk, talk, negotiate with the Government of Costa Rica to find the most satisfactory for both countries,” he said.

In his view, at this time it is “important to avoid more problems and find a solution satisfactory to both sides.”

The border dispute began last Oct. 21 when Costa Rica reported that Nicaragua poured sediment dredged from the San Juan river in its territory, an issue that Managua refutes.

The Costa Rican authorities have charged, in addition, the Nicaraguan troops invaded a sector in the Caribbean coast that Costa Rica considers as its own, while Managua argues that its military presence is on their territory.

The Slow Russian Thaw Continues

The Russian Thaw Continues

by Gordon M. Hahn

In a move reminiscent of the early years of Mikhail Gorbachev’s reign as Soviet leader and the beginning of his reform policy known as perestroika, the Kremlin and the ruling tandem of President Dmitrii Medvedev and Prime Minister and former President Vladimir Putin, in one or both of its parts, appear to be behind the new Moscow city government’s decision to begin to allow political demonstrations in the heart of Russia’s capitol more easily.

In this way, the predicted thaw continues (See Gordon M. Hahn, “Is A Russian ‘Thaw’ Coming?” Russia: Other Points of View, 18 April 2008,  and Gordon M. Hahn, “More Signs of a Possible Thaw Under Medvedev,” Russia: Other Points of View, 2 June 2008).  As importantly, it has been expanded now into a new arena – freedom of assembly.  Although this right began to be honored in the late perestroika era of the USSR and was fully realized in post-Soviet Russia during the 1990s, it was curtailed under President Putin in the mid-2000s, especially in Moscow.However, the Kremlin tandem appears to have used the scandal leading to the replacement of Moscow’s long-time mayor Yurii Luzhkov with one of their own – former Tyumen governor, presidential administration chief and government apparatus chief Sergei Sobyanin – in order to begin opening up the public sphere and reduce tensions with the democratic opposition. 

On October 25th negotiations between representatives of the opposition, including Moscow Helsinki Group Chairwoman Lyudmila Alekseeva, and the Moscow city government yielded an agreement that will allow 800-1,000 demonstrators (depending on reports) representing the democratic opposition to hold their monthly ‘Article 31’ protest on October 31st on Triumfalnaya Ploshchad’ in central Moscow.  The opposition had requested a limit of 1,500 protesters, and Moscow’s interim government had granted space for 200.  These protests have been held on the 31st of every month with 31 days in order to call on the authorities to honor the right to freedom of assembly ensconced in Article 31 of the 1993 Russian Consitution.  However, in recent years these and other demonstrations were denied official permission by the authorities, held in technical violation of the law, ended in the detention of tens of demonstrators, and saw police beatings of demonstrators.

On October 23rd, less than a week after Sobyanin was installed as mayor, an anti-Putin protest, led by opposition leader and chess champion Garry Kasparov, was held on central Moscow’s Pushkin Square unobstructed.  Hundreds, perhaps over a thousand participated, and the demonstrators were neither detained nor beaten (Tom Balmforth, “A Change of Strategy,” Russia Profile, 26 October 2010).  Again, the interim government gave official permission for the rally to be held.  The rally was organized by the Committee of Five Demands recently formed by the largely pro-democratic groups Solidarity, United Civil Front, and others.  Their five demands are: resignation of prime minister, dissolution of the State Duma and Federation Council, immediate free and fair elections, major staff overhauls in the police and secret services, and budget transparency (Nadezhda Krasilova, “Nezhdannaya ottepel’,” Novyie izvestia, 18 October 2010).

Leading democrats hailed the agreements.  Alekseeva called it a “step forward” (Alexander Bratersky, “Sobyanin Allows Larger 31st Rally,” Moscow Times, 26 October 2010).  Vladimir Ryzhkov called it “a victory for civil society” (Tom Balmforth, “A Change of Strategy,” Russia Profile, 26 October 2010).  The authorities had rejected the previous 11 requests going back to 2009 (Alexander Bratersky, “Sobyanin Allows Larger 31st Rally,” Moscow Times, 26 October 2010).

Evidence suggests that it was the federal authorities, not an independent decision taken by the new mayor, that have generated this new liberalization in policy.  President Medvedev’s newly appointed head of the Russian Presidential Human Rights Council, long-time liberal Mikhail Fedotov called for allowing such rallies and promised he would attend the Strategy 31 movement’s October 31 rally in order to monitor its progress along with Presidential Human Rights Ombudsman and former Russian Amabassador to the US Vladimir Lukin and Moscow’s own ombudsman Aleksandr Muzykantskii (“Russia’s New Rights Chief Says ‘Strategy 31′ Rallies Should Be Allowed,”RFERL Russia Report, 26 October 2010).  This past summer Lukin condemned the Moscow police crackdown on a Strategy 31 protest and sent a strong letter to Medvedev urging the president to put an end to such spectacles.

In addition, it is unlikely that the Medvedev and/or Putin would have allowed the newly appointed mayor to make such decisions autonomously.  Even those who reject the idea of any Medvedevian thaw or even the possibility of one while Putin remains near the center of power or otherwise would be forced to acknowledge that the so-called ‘power vertical’ of centralized political management would not tolerate such local autonomy.  This faces them with the choice of either acknowledging that Medvedev and/or Putin are carrying out a slow albeit gradual liberalization policy or a decentralization policy at least with regards to the Moscow city government’s decisionmaking autonomy.  Either way, this adds another element to the ongoing thaw, about which we, at least, will keep readers informed.

Dr. Gordon Hahn is a Senior Researcher in the Monterey Terrorism Research and Education Program and an Adjunct Professor at the Graduate School of International Policy Studies, Monterey Institute of International Studies and a Senior Researcher at the Center for Terrorism and Intelligence Studies (CETIS), Akribis Group. He is author of two books: Russia’s Islamic Threat (New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2007) and Russia’s Revolution From Above: Reform, Transition, and Revolution in the Fall of the Soviet Communist Regime, 1985-2000 (New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers, 2002) . He is one of the administrators of the Russia Other Points of View blog where this piece originally appeared. http://www.russiaotherpointsofview.com

Killing the Country to Save Banks and Corporations

Deficit Plan Pits $3.8 Trillion Math Against Politics

Nov. 11 (Bloomberg) — A plan offered by the leaders of President Barack Obama’s commission to reduce the federal deficit might work. It just won’t happen.The co-chairmen proposed a $3.8 trillion deficit-cutting plan yesterday that would trim Social Security and Medicare, reduce income-tax rates and eliminate tax breaks including the mortgage-interest deduction. It would reduce the annual deficit from $1.3 trillion this year to about $400 billion by 2015 and start reducing the $13.7 trillion national debt.

“Mathematically it apparently works,” said Stan Collender, a former Democratic House and Senate budget analyst and managing director of Qorvis Communications in Washington. “Politically, it is going to have a lot of trouble getting support from more than just the two co-chairs.”

The plan would raise gas taxes, slash defense spending and farm subsidies and bring down health-care costs by clamping down on medical malpractice suits. The Social Security retirement age would rise to 68 in about 2050 and 69 in about 2075.

Its release created instant opposition from Democrats, some Republicans and groups such as the Mortgage Bankers Association and the Aerospace Industries Association.

‘Simply Unacceptable’

Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi called the targeting of Social Security and Medicare “simply unacceptable,” and Republican Representative Jeb Hensarling of Texas expressed opposition to proposals to raise taxes.

Obama, in Seoul as part of a 10-day tour of Asia, said he had yet to read the plan, adding that critics should withhold their judgment until the final report. He appealed for congressional leaders to match rhetoric with action and join him in making difficult decisions about taxes and spending.

“So before anybody starts shooting down proposals, I think we need to listen, we need to gather up all the facts,” Obama said at a press conference with South Korean counterpart Lee Myung-Bak. “If people are, in fact, concerned about spending, debt, deficits and the future of our country, then they’re going to need to be armed with the information about the kinds of choices that are going to be involved.”

Panel co-chairman Erskine Bowles, former chief of staff to President Bill Clinton, joked that he and co-chairman Alan Simpson, a Republican former Wyoming senator, were entering a “witness protection program.”

‘Harpooned Every Whale’

“We have harpooned every whale in the ocean and some of the minnows,” said Simpson, who said the plan is sure to be unpopular. The two said Obama hadn’t seen their plan, which they said should be viewed as a starting point for negotiations. The panel meets again next week to consider proposed changes.

“Is America ready for an adult conversation on the deficit?” said Representative Jim Cooper, a Tennessee Democrat. “It’s ‘put up or shut up’ time.”

None of the proposals would take effect next year to avoid disrupting the economic recovery. The savings would come between 2012 and 2020, cutting the deficit from the current 9 percent of the nation’s gross domestic product to about 2.2 percent in 2015, exceeding Obama’s goal of 3 percent.

The government is projected to run $8 trillion in deficits over the next 10 years, which would push the national debt to more than $20 trillion. If the proposal were adopted without change, the government still would have annual deficits of $350 billion.

‘Big and Real’

“It puts out there how big and real the problems are,” said Oklahoma Republican Senator Tom Coburn, a member of the committee.

Under one option, income-tax rates would be reduced to three levels: 8 percent, 14 percent and 23 percent. Now there are six tax levels ranging from 10 percent to 35 percent. The corporate income-tax rate would be cut to 26 percent from 35 percent.

1 | 2 | Next Page »

Capitalism and the War on Public Education

“In this inhospitable landscape of consumerism and greed, the idea of democracy remains a utopian dream rooted in socialism and class struggle, a philosophy we have been programed to despise, just as we were conditioned to loathe our own emancipation by falsely equating market fundamentalism and capitalism with democracy. These institutions of usury and greed find their grotesque expression through the corporation and the corporate state. Government is an antagonist to freedom when corporations infest the hallowed halls of our so called democratic institutions. They are a cancer that erodes hope and eats away at human dignity.”

by Charles Sullivan / November 8th, 2010

My own experience indicates that the average college student is more concerned with grades than with learning. Therefore grades are more of an impediment to learning than they are an accurate measure of it. Scoring well on tests is not an indication of comprehension of complex ideas or the thought processes behind them.  Nevertheless, test scores are the Holy Grail of the school reform movement that is sweeping the country as part of a political agenda to privatize the public domain and put it under absolute corporate control.

Right-wing politicians of the Republican and Democratic parties are wrecking what remains of the public education system. They have been doing so for decades. Some of them are castigating it as socialist. Under the guise of reform, a movement is afoot to under fund public schools and replace them with ‘for profit’ charter schools. Firing qualified teachers and busting teachers unions is part of the process. College and University education is being priced out of the reach of working class people. We are witnessing the death of the liberal arts. The war on public education is a front in the broader class war that pits workers against owners and the working class against the wealthy.

There is a widespread notion among neoconservatives, neoliberals, and civil libertarians that government is the enemy of the people. Many people believe that government is incapable of serving the public, that it is incapable of doing good. I am not one of those people. After all, government grudgingly provided social security, the minimum wage, Medicare and Medicaid, and it restrained corporate power. This came as a response to social unrest engendered by social agitators, but it was not enough. Government that serves the needs of the people rather than corporate interests is good government.

The problem isn’t big government; it is the merging of corporations and big business with government and the philosophical system that engenders it: the market fundamentalism spawned by rapacious capitalism. When corporations, which are motivated by profit rather than regard for the public welfare, merge with government, people are removed from the equation and they are replaced by capital. Thus money is equated with free speech and corporations are given the rights of human beings without the social and moral responsibility of citizenship. This is what capitalism does. Free markets are not an expression of democracy; they are a manifestation of corporate fascism and belligerence.

Ideally, from a purely capitalist perspective, corporations socialize costs and privatize profits. We saw this policy in action with the public bailout of banks deemed too big to fail. There will be more bailouts, many more, to come. And there will be millions more foreclosures that leave people living in the streets.

Earlier in American history capitalism produced fabulous wealth for a few at the expense of the many through the institution of chattel slavery. Ever since the emancipation of the slaves, multinational corporations and the captains of industry have sought to recapture those glorious days of prosperity when plantations dotted southern landscapes and the crack of bull whips and screams of agony rented the air. To the capitalist ear, that was the sound of fortunes being made via free labor, socialized cost, and privatized profit. The high priests of capital on Wall Street are pining for a return to the plantation.

Like the raw materials of industry, workers are not only dehumanized and alienated from their work and from one another; they are commodified and exploited like chattel. Because workers do not own the means of production, they are essentially the leased property of their employers, who use them up, wear them out, and discard them on the scrap heap to rust and disintegrate.

This explains why much of the US manufacturing base was sent elsewhere, and with it, US jobs. The purpose of off-shoring jobs was not to provide workers anywhere in the world with good working conditions or with living wages and health care; it was to maximize corporate profits any way possible and to allow corporations carte blanche to abuse the work force and to pollute the earth with impunity.

It was Bill Clinton and Newt Gingrich, aided by the toadies in Congress, who brokered the free trade agreements known as NAFTA and GATT. These agreements garnered strong bipartisan support. As a result, US manufacturing jobs left the country, global wages fell, and corporate profits soared. Inner cities became sites of depravity and hopelessness, testifying to the rapacious legacy of capitalism. Those jobs are never coming back.

The effects of market fundamentalism are profound and global in extent. Locally owned small businesses were forced out, behemoths like Wal-Mart and Target, with their slick advertising campaigns and corporate bribes, moved in. Diversity was exchanged for monoculture and monopoly. The Walton’s took in billions of dollars, but workers at every point of the supply chain suffer both in the US and in sweatshops around the globe. A few people are getting fabulously wealthy while the people who produce the products we buy so cheaply are exploited, the majority of them forced to live in squalor and poverty. None of the blue collar employees at Wal-Wart and Target earns a living wage.

According to the dictums of capitalism, profits matter but people do not. To understand what is being done to working people, one has to examine the entire production and distribution chain, not just the terminus at Wal-Mart and Target. Low prices at big box retail exact a high social and environmental cost. These are concealed from public view.

The war on public education is part of a broader capitalist agenda to produce a global plantation of private owners and worker drones. Their purpose is not to produce an educated citizenry, but to deliver an obedient and cheap work force to the corporate plantation. Community colleges are enthusiastically fulfilling this role.

Virtually every aspect of our culture, including its financial institutions, its media and its education system, as well as organized religion, has fallen under corporate control. None of these institutions functions in the public interest anymore. Market fundamentalism, the idea that deregulated markets are the arbiter of all values, not Christianity, or Islam or the philosophy of Thoreau and Emerson, is America’s real religion. The shopping mall is the holy shrine of the gluttonous consumption demanded by capitalism. This provides an example of people serving the economy rather than the economy serving the people.

In this inhospitable landscape of consumerism and greed, the idea of democracy remains a utopian dream rooted in socialism and class struggle, a philosophy we have been programed to despise, just as we were conditioned to loathe our own emancipation by falsely equating market fundamentalism and capitalism with democracy. These institutions of usury and greed find their grotesque expression through the corporation and the corporate state. Government is an antagonist to freedom when corporations infest the hallowed halls of our so called democratic institutions. They are a cancer that erodes hope and eats away at human dignity.

Market fundamentalists and their servants in government are in control of virtually all of the institutions of society. They hate liberals and progressives because liberals, real liberals, not the kind associated with the Democratic Party, but the kind related to socialism and communism, those who brought us the eight-hour work day and the weekend, protect ordinary working class citizens from the naked greed of the corporation. It protects them from the wealthy sociopaths who operate in secrecy behind corporate masks. The extremists cringe behind the camouflage of the corporation like the public servants that once donned white hoods and burned crosses in the night in order to terrorize black folk and to keep them in their place.

These were the people: racists, sexists, homophobes, and white supremacists one and all, who were employed as newspaper editors, court clerks, school teachers, corporate executives, and sheriffs by day. Many of them were church deacons and some were ministers. But no façade of respectability can conceal their black hearts or the venomous hatred they harbor for coal miners, cleaning ladies, environmental sanitarians, taxi drivers, liberal arts professors, and the department store employees they so coldly regard as chattel.

If the truth be told, the plutocrats who are running the country so loathe and detest working people, and they feel so superior to them, that they do not want us to have anything, least of all, autonomy. Their goal, both stated and unstated, is to eradicate the last vestige of liberalism from the earth.  They may succeed in driving us underground for a while, but they will never succeed in eliminating traditional liberalism. Extremism always breeds resistance.

Empowerment should never be conferred by others; it is the right of every individual to grant oneself power. Nor is it attained through the vote. Replacing one capitalist with another does not offer progressive change; it perpetuates the established orthodoxy. We must change the dominant paradigm that drives social, economic, and political philosophy. Empowerment comes from organized resistance to tyranny. It can only be attained through class struggle. If the vote is ever to become meaningful, democracy must first be won in the streets. We, the people, must be willing to fight and die for it.

Charles Sullivan is a naturalist and free-lance writer residing in the hinterlands of geopolitical West Virginia. Read other articles by Charles.

Russian Journalists Have Sold Their Freedom of Speech

Sergei Sokolov: “Journalists themselves have sold the freedom of speech”

What Happened last week, the Brutal Beating of a journalist Oleg Kashin Kommersant Still Remains One of the Most debated Topics, Not Only in the Russian media, But Also in the International Community. The journalist is Still in hospital, condition HIS Doctors Estimate AS ” stable heavy. “

Who and What is to Maim and Kill Russian Journalists? Is there Protection from people with Valves That Lie in wait at the door? Why in such Circumstances, the constant Threat of life, many Continue to do Journalism? These and Other questions Are Answered by the deputy editor of Novaya Gazeta, Sergei Sokolov, in an interview with the Russian Service Bi-Bi-Si Anastasia Assumption.

BBC: Kashin’s Not the First journalist to Whom attacked. Why HIS Case Has Received such a response?

Sergei Sokolov: I ASSUME That the limit of patience of the journalistic Community crossed. All Those Endless beatings Became Fashionable Not Only to Journalists, But Also Against Public Figures, just Opinion Leaders, “living” in the network. Journalists and Activists beaten in Moscow , St. Petersburg, Voronezh, Samara, Saratov, Anywhere. Baseball Bats, accessories Have Become the main argument Against Those Who Have the Right to Express Their point of View and Express IT very actively, Including the Internet and media.

You See, in Oleg Kashin Agreed a few Things. Firstly, He, AS an active user of the Internet and an active blogger, [is] a Leader of Public Opinion, IT’s by far. Secondly, the Newspaper That He is Also a Leader of Public Opinion. And What Happened to HIM, is, in My Opinion, this Mafia Black label all the people Who Have the Right and Opportunity to Speak and in the network, and in Public.

He broke HIS Jaw, Not to Say That you do Not Want a Broken Leg Not to go WHERE no FOLLOWS One, and Broken Fingers, Not to write.This is a candid and frank Attempt to Challenge deterrence, Not Only Journalists, But anyone Who has their own opinion.

BBC: When you Say “Mafia” Black Mark, That you Have in Mind?

SS: The thing is That the symbolism of What Happened – and this, of course, there is symbolism, and colleague Oleg Kashin and simply Observers Agree with this – very Similar to What They do representatives of Mafia Structures in all known romanah.Ne know where it went, whether it’s intuitive desire or outright mockery of the society.

We need to Understand First of all, Who ordered all this ugliness.Undoubtedly, this Attack does Not exist symbolic AS Extremely Specific culprits and Extremely Specific Motives. But IT WAS all decorated EXACTLY like this.

It is such a popular Pastime Russian Leaders, Law enforcement Officials and Presidents. Starting with Boris Yeltsin That just do Not Take personal control. And None of Those That Were Taken cases under HIS personal control, in Principal, IT WAS Never completed.

Sergei Sokolov, Novaya Gazeta

BBC: Some Public Figures Have a rather opaquely alluded to Potential customers Beating Kashin. Tell Me, When in such high-profile cases Come up Fairly well known names, AS a Consequence Should REACT to IT, and IT Whether reacts in Russia?

SS: You know, a Sad experience, “Novaya Gazeta”, I CAN Say That at Best CAN reach the perpetrators, if people do Not Represent Any Social value. After all, no One Customer or assaults, no beatings or killings of Journalists WAS not found.

There are two resonant case, where we found the perpetrators: the murder of Larisa Yudina in Kalmykia and the killing of our [the journalist of "Novaya Gazeta"] Igor Domnikov, which, incidentally, also scored with a hammer in his apartment building in 2000. There Are Performers SAT on for years Imprisonment, But customers, DESPITE the Fact That They Were known, Not even prosecuted.

We have 10 years of Trying to force the Investigation committee and the police to criminal Institute Proceedings Against the Murder of Igor Domnikov customers. They Are known, They Are in the record. But nobody Called to Account.

BBC: In the Case of Oleg Kashin Investigative committee at Russia AS a prosecutor again urged the Public to help in the Investigation.The Case Has Taken personal control of the Prosecutor General Viktor Chaika. Does this mean That now the Investigating Authorities Are going to Get to the truth?

SS: That Will depend on Who is Still behind the Whole Story.

AS for personal control, then this is such a popular Pastime Russian Leaders, Law enforcement Officers and Presidents. Starting with Boris Yeltsin That just do Not Take personal control. And None of Those That Were Taken cases under HIS personal control, in Principal, IT WAS Never completed. So all this is, for the Most Part, sotryasanie air. I do Not Believe in Any personal control. Enough to See How Things Are the Most Resonant Case [in Russia] on bribery or Murder, and IT Becomes Clear That “personal control” is, sorry, it’s ridiculous.

BBC: Had IT Kashin at the Beginning of Term AS president, Dmitry Medvedev, in your Opinion, He Also fervently urged to find and punish the guilty?

SS: The Beginning of Term AS president Medvedev Has coincided with the Murder of lawyer Markelov and Anastasia Baburova Our Reporter.Do you Remember What WAS a tough Reaction from the president on this? There WAS a Meeting with Our editor in Chief, with shareholders, Were made and very Harsh statements. And by the way, I guess IT’s the Rare Case When a crime Will be Fully investigated. Very soon the Dock We Will See the Killer and accomplices.

Imagine the journalists who work in a small district center in a small newspaper, where everyone knows them and where their lives, their health, the health of their families every day in danger if they are real journalists

I Think IT does Not Affect the Political Situation. On the Political Situation Affects of duty Performers. How They Are going to Investigate a Particular crime depends entirely on What Interests Are involved, and Not from the statements made, Putin and Medvedev.

You See, IT’s all Oprichny Structure – the Interior Ministry, the UPC, the prosecutor’s Office – IT is Because no One obeys. If They Will need, They naplyuyut to anything: and the president and prime Minister Hon, and on Public Opinion and the media .

BBC: Some older Journalists Say That Have Forgotten many, and others and DID WAS Not know What the Deal with this in Journalism before. And Consider That in Today’s Russia is Not SO scary.

SS: I Worked in Soviet times and I CAN compare How IT WAS and AS IT is. I Will Say this: Of course, slingshots Those Censorship, the Limitations That Were at One time, IT is terrible and disgusting Certainly. But Nothing is worth a Human life. When the life of a journalist, health HIS, HIS family is Generally Not appreciated in a Society WHERE people Who Have Been threaten Journalists Killed or beaten with impunity, I guess Things That Are Incomparable.

Those days in IT WAS a question of How to Deal with HIS conscience and Trying to do What is Possible in the Circumstances That exist.Now this question, Too, is if We Take the State television channels, or Government and large oligarchic Edition. But nowadays there is a question and physical survival.

Not just now I’m Talking about Moscow, the Most terrible thing After all is Not there. Imagine the Journalists Who work in a Small district center in a Small Newspaper, WHERE everyone Knows Them and WHERE Their lives, Their health, the health of Their Families Every day in Danger if They Are Real Journalists. I do Not See What used to be Easier. Earlier there WAS a question of survival.

BBC: It is known That the “New Newspaper” Engaged in an Independent Investigation Into the Murder Works with you Anna Politkovskaya. What Problems, Obstacles you faced?

State violence is not state policy, but simply those people who wear shoulder-straps and weapons, given the opportunity to showboat on own people

SS: What is Investigative Journalism? We do Not Have Any Procedural rights and, of course, CAN Neither questioned NOR arrested or searched, IT is Not Within Our Competence. We CAN Only gather information from sources Those That Are AVAILABLE to us, talk to Those people Who Want to talk to us and try to Get answers from Government Agencies to the questions We ask. But the Government DID Not hasten to answer Our questions, and IT is connected Not Only with this Particular Investigation, and with anyone.

We Have Worked closely enough with the Investigation, and I CAN imagine What Obstacles Stood in Front of Them. First of all, IT’s a Huge corruption of Our Law enforcement Agencies, and police and prosecutors, and Investigative committee.

This is a terrible tangle of Relationships Corrupt Law Enforcers – the main Obstacle to the disclosure of criminal Any Case. Because if We Take Any loud Murder, Any high-profile Crimes, there always Will Sit One, two, and even More Security Officers or Law enforcement. It’s Their Own Private Business. And These people Are related to a Huge number of threads with Other people Who depend on Them. They each depend on each Other, SO Their They Will Not drown. That is the main problem in Investigating Any criminal case in Russia.

BBC: IT Is Possible Today to protect Journalists in Russia, and, if SO, How?

SS: I do Not See These Opportunities. And even if the journalistic Community, finally, Remember That IT – the journalistic Community, I Still do Not See How you CAN Resist That system of State Violence That prevailed in Our Country. Moreover, this State violence is not state policy, but simply those people who wear shoulder-straps and weapons, given the opportunity to showboat on his own people.

Became Their Own people Goods and a source of profit. And the Journalists in this Situation in Their way to do IT, SO the Journalists for Them Will always be enemies. How to protect? I do Not know, Because I do Not Have to defend the public from criminals, but from the state.

BBC: Why, then, in such Circumstances, the constant Threat of life people go Into Journalism, do Not protect Yourself? This is the Most ardent Love of Truth?

Journalists themselves have sold their own profession and their freedom of speech

SS: So Journalism something Different. There Are people Who write about butterflies, there Are people Who shoot glamorous Stories. It’s Their Choice, and, in My View, Given the Situation That prevailed in Russia, no One the Right to throw Their Accusations. this is a personal Choice – What to write, and WHERE to write How to write. And here the question is Not about Any kind of Public outbursts, Not about a Social movement, is a matter of Individual conscience of each person.

BBC: In One of the many rankings, Reflecting the Situation with Freedom of speech in Different COUNTRIES, Russia is on Adjacent indicators of Zimbabwe. The Russian Authorities Never Tire of repeating That course of Russia – is to upgrade. Why such a discrepancy and Desired actual?

SS: You know, people Who Represent the State and the people Who Live in this State, They Are in Parallel Realities. Do Not touch Nothing, and nowhere is That Officials Are Doing SO AS a Real Live people. These Are Different worlds, Different ideas about life, Different Income levels, all Different. Therefore, We CAN talk about Modernization, But IT is Completely Pointless idea to try to convey to the person Who is looking for extra hundred rubles to Raise a child in School.

Now I realize that not only the trip to some small town near Moscow poses a great danger, but also daily work in Moscow, too, represents a danger

With Regard to Freedom of speech, a Lie Would be blamed for the Fact That IT does Not exist, or That She is Kutsa, disability, Only the State.Journalists Themselves largely to blame for What Happened in Russia. When during the 1990′s they sold for huge money and oligarchs have started to lie, and lie made a business of their own and as a means of earning money, so from that moment it all started.

Journalists Themselves Have Sold Their Own and Their profession Freedom of speech. Now That Has changed State, Not the oligarchs, and Their [Journalists] Are now using Security Forces, IT is Too late to Jump Back. But They Started, IT and Should be remembered.

BBC: What Implications does guide publication, the employee is beaten or Killed? Does this mean That the publication is something very Doing Right, or, alternatively, Completely Wrong?

SS: You’ve got to watch, of course, on Why IT Happened, and positions Itself AS a publication. When They Killed Anna Politkovskaya, the Leadership of the Newspaper gathered, and decided That We Should We close the Newspaper. Before That We HAD Already Killed two Journalists – Igor Domnikov, and Yuri Shchekochikhin – and We Thought That Human life is Not worth of newsprint. When We expressed this idea in a Circle of Journalists, Young Journalists Who Came to this Newspaper, We Were Nearly Killed and forced to deal with the case.

After that, a lot of things happened, too fearful and heavy, and I think it is a choice, again, every edition and every journalist: to work in this edition, or not work, go away – not to go, to raise these matters or Not to Raise. The Only thing That the Leadership of the Newspaper Feels Absolutely Helpless. If Earlier, in 1990, I was afraid to send people to war, the North Caucasus, but now I realize that not only the trip to some small town near Moscow poses a great danger, but also daily work in Moscow too dangerous.

Given the humiliating situation of people who zamordovali police officers, government officials, low salaries, the owners of their businesses, what kind of self-esteem in this situation can be said?

I do Not know What and How a journalist CAN protect at five past four p.m. in Downtown Moscow. People Killed is Already in sight of the Kremlin, and How to build a Security system, I honestly do Not Understand, and None of the Leaders of publications does not understand.

BBC: Why, then, a Society Which CAN Not fail to See What Happens, does Not REACT Violently to such a Reality? Maybe people Are Happy with What We Have?

SS: The Russian Society is Not Happy, Russian Society is Sick. And then, Russian Society does Not exist. This kind of atomized Substance, the Individual Elements of Which Are Their Own living lives. Someone living on the ruble, They do Not Have diamonds, someone lives in business and making money, someone has left a spiritual opposition, understands everything, sees everything but prefers to not talk about it and be silent, and someone, and their majority, deals with survival.

After Moscow and all Russia – is Also two Different worlds. Those Problems and troubles That fall to a MAN in a Small town with One plant and One School, They Are Not comparable with What is happening in Moscow. These people Are Engaged in Their Daily Own survival and the survival of Their Families. And if in Front of Me, for Example, Will Face the problem How to build your child to School and How to Feed HIM, I Would Not care for Democracy and for everything else. Given the humiliating Situation of people Who zamordovali police Officers, Government Officials, low salaries, the owners of Their Businesses, What kind of self-esteem in this Situation CAN be Said? It is Not.

Anti-Trafficking Training Center Just Another American Foot Through the Door

U.S. Government provides technical assistance to the national anti-trafficking training center in Tajikistan

Author: Nargis Hamroboyeva

DUSHANBE, November 11, 2010, Asia-Plus — The U.S. Government provided over $650,000 for counter-trafficking projects, which led to the establishment of the National Anti-Trafficking Training Center under the Criminal Justice Department of the Faculty of Law at the Tajik State University, according to the U.S. Embassy in Dushanbe.

On November 10, U.S. Ambassador to Tajikistan Ken Gross was at the opening ceremony of the expanded center, together with the First Deputy General Prosecutor of the Government of Tajikistan, Abduqodir Muhammadiyev, and Chief of Mission of the International Organization for Migration (IOM) Zeynal Hajiyev, the U.S. Government’s implementing partner.

Working with Tajiksitan’s Inter-Ministerial Commission on Combating Trafficking in Persons, the Project addresses human trafficking through training for law enforcement officers and university students on how to investigate, prosecute, convict and punish traffickers.

At the ceremony, Ambassador Gross voiced the U.S. Government’s strong commitment to fight against forced labor, sexual exploitation and modern-day slavery worldwide.  He stated that “solving this crime is not easy.  It requires close cooperation of law enforcement and government officials.  This Center is designed to improve these efforts.”  In 2009, the U.S. Government supported 168 international anti-trafficking programs, totaling about $84 million and in more than 80 countries.  He commended the Government of Tajikistan for its achievements in fighting this crime.

“As we look ahead, this Training Center will be a place for active inquiry, for discussion and research, for lectures and seminars, and for collaborative programs with educational institutions and state structures”, said Mr. Zeynal Hajiyev of IOM Tajikistan.  “IOM Tajikistan, with INL’s support, has been providing assistance to the Government of Tajikistan on combating Trafficking in Persons for the last five years.”

Since 2005, the U.S. Embassy in Dushanbe, through INL and the U.S. Agency for International Development, has provided approximately $3 million in program assistance to support Tajikistan’s efforts to combat human trafficking.

Kazakhs ambassador to Tajikistan dies

Nargis Hamroboyeva

DUSHANBE, November 11, 2010, Asia-Plus  — The Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of Kazakhstan to Tajikistan, Abutalip Akhmetov died suddenly in Dushanbe Wednesday evening.

According to the Kazakh Embassy in Dushanbe, Ambassador Akhmetov died of a heart attack.  “Ambassador Akhmetov’s body will be conveyed to Kazakhstan on Saturday, November 13,” the source said.

Book of Condolences will be open at the Kazakh Embassy in Dushanbe today between 2:00 pm and 5:00 pm and tomorrow between 10:00 am and 12:00 noon and 2:00 pm and 5:00 pm for the members of the diplomatic corps, government officials and well wishers to record their condolences.

Born in 1949, Abutalip Akhmetov graduated from Moscow State Institute of International Relations in 1977 and took training course at the Diplomatic Academy of the MFA of the Soviet Union in 1990.

Mr. Abutalip Akhmetov had been the Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of Kazakhstan to Tajikistan since May 2008.

German people in unprecedented rebellion against government

1000 injured in nuclear protests: police at breaking point

By Jane Burgermeister

Like the Roman legions vanquished in the Teutoburger Wald in Lower Saxony in 9 AD, the 17,000 police officers that marched into the woods around the nuclear storage facility in Gorleben in northern Germany on Sunday morning looked invincible. Police personnel from France, Croatia and Poland had joined in the biggest security operation ever mounted against protestors against the a train carrying nuclear waste to a depot in an isolated part of  Lower Saxony’s countryside. Helicopters, water canons and police vehicles, including an armoured surveillance truck, accompanied an endless column of anti-riot police mounted on horses and also marching down the railway tracks into the dense woods. Tens of thousands of anti riot police clattered along the tracks, their helmets and visors gleaming in the morning sun, and wearing body armour, leg guards and carrying batons.

But by Sunday night, those same police officers were begging the protestors for a respite.

Trapped in black, icy  woods without supplies or reinforcements able to reach them because of blockades by a mobile fleet of farmer’s tractors, the exhausted and hungry police officers requested negotiations with the protestors. A water cannon truck was blocked by tractors, and yet the police still had to clear 5000 people lying on the railway track at Harlingen in pitch darkness. The largest ever police operation had descended into chaos and confusion in the autumn woods of Lower Saxony, defeated by the courage and determination of peaceful protestors who marched for miles through woods to find places to lie down on the tracks and to scoop out gravel to delay the progress of the “the train from hell.”

The police union head Reiner Wendt gave vent to the general frustration when he issued a press statement via the DPA news agency last night saying the police had reached exhaustion point and needed a break. Behind the scenes, a battle seemed to be raging between the police chiefs, tucked up in their warm headquarters urging more action, and the exhausted officers on the ground.

The police on the ground won out. The Castor train – called a “Chernobyl on wheels” because it has been carrying 133 tonnes of highly radioactive waste to an unsafe depot – was stopped in the middle of the countryside and Nato barbed wire was placed around it. Lit by floodlights and guarded by a handful of police, the most dangerous train on the planet was forced to a halt after a 63 hour journey across France and Germany.

The defeat of the legions at Teutoburg marked the end of the attempt by the Roman empire to conquer Germania magna. And the failure of the biggest ever police operation two thousand years later in the woods of Lower Saxony to tame women, elderly people and school children protesting the government’s nuclear policy, could well also go down as a turning point.

The Berlin government can no longer rely on the discredited mainstream media to control the way people see issues. Too many people recognise it to be a tool of propaganda. The government now needs to resort to brute force to bludgeon through decisions that enrich corporations and banks and impoverish everyone else. But the police forces  at its disposal are simply not sufficient given the scale of the protests now gripping Germany. Only 1,500 police reinforcements could be mustered on Morning from the entire territory to deal with road blockades by thousands of protestors aiming to delay the transport of the nuclear waste on the final leg of its journey.

The police officers were exhausted after shifts of 24 hours or more, often without any food or just a cappucino and snack bar, and they had nothing to look forward to but more of the same drudgery after a night spent four to a room in a Youth Hostel.

Report on the Castor pushes the police to the limit

A leading figure in a German police police union Bernard Witthaut today even lashed out at the government for trying to drive through unpopular policies using the police.

“Whether in Stuttgart or in Wendland today my colleagues are simply not getting out of their anti riot gear because of the wrong decisions by the government,” he said.

Many police officers also expressed sympathy with the protestors’ aims.

The question now is: how long can the use of police to bludgeon protestors continue when the protests are reaching this scale? How long can Germany be governed by a semi authoritarian regime using brute force when the force at its disposal is so small? The German army cannot be deployed on this kind of mission without sparking even more outrage. A false flag terrorist operation will hardly wash when the people are so fed up with the government lies and the media lies. EU soldiers will find it hard to deal with the Germans. The German and EU secret police cannot infiltrate all of the protestor’s organizations when there are simply so many.

The German people as a whole are on the march.

“Citizens in rebellion,” shouted a TAZ headline.

“Civil war in Wendtand,” fumed Bild.

NGO chief Kersin Rudek spoke for many when she said:

“We have lost faith in the government until they prove that their politics is for the people and not for the corporations.”
She talked about the “anger” among people at the “arrogance of the political class.”

As in the Stuttgart 21 railway protests, it was people from all walks of life,  a genuine grass roots movement, that arrived in Wendland to protest the decision by the CDU/CSU/FDP government to ignore a legally binding deadline to phase out nuclear power. Against the wishes of the majority, Bilderberg Chancellor Angela Merkel announced this autumn that 17 reactors would continue for another 12 years at gigantic cost to the tax payer in subsidies.

The tax payers of Lower Saxony even have to foot the bill of  50 million euro for the police operation to protect the nuclear waste – and not the electricity companies making a fortune from the extravagant energy source [which is associated with France's WMD program] while the government keeps investments in ground-breaking new renewable energy technologies such as the third generation solar cells at a negligible amount.

As in Stutggart, the police used savage force against peaceful demonstrators reinforcing the impression of a government out of control and refusing to respect the basic democratic right of people to hold protests without being beaten to a pulp. Videos of the Castor transport on Sunday show police beating people with their truncheons, punching them and throwing them to the ground. Police also used tear gas, pepper spray and water canon.

Standstill for hours, then begin the evacuation
One clip shows a police officer using his fist to punch a man lying on the railway track in the head.

About a 1000 people were injured, it is reported. 950 people are reported to have suffered eye injuries due to pepper spray and tear gas, according to a spokesperson of “Castor schottern”. Another sixteen protestors suffered broken bones. There were 29 severe head wounds. Two people had to be taken to hospital.

Demonstrators are adapting to long night
One person had to be taken by helicopter after suffering multiple bone fractures after being trampled by a police horse.
But as in Stuttgart, the people did not give up in spite of the risk of savage beatings at the hands of the police. They insisted on their civic right enshrined in the constitution to hold peaceful political protests.

More than 50,000 people from all parts of the country and all walks of life attended a rally on a field close to Dannenberg. Thousands then marched through the autumn woods, splitting into small groups to descend into the valley, break through police lines to chain themselves to the rails or remove gravel from the  tracks to delay the train.

According to Spiegel, 7000 people alone took part in the road and railway blockades.

An armoured police car was set on fire by masked men but it is not clear if this was an agent pravocateur acting to discredit the protestors. A video shows a man able to walk up to the armoured car and set it alight unhindered.

The overwhelming number of protestors were peaceful.

In spite of the sub zero temperatures and ground frost, up to 5000 protestors  lay down on the railway tracks at Harlingen late in the evening and refused to move. Supplies of hot tea, food and blankets were brought to them by mobile kitchens. Fires were lit to help stay warm.

The police worked from midnight until 7 am to clear protestors blocking the track, dragging many to an open air “prison concentration camp” where people were forced to sleep in fields surrounded by police trucks.

This morning, the protestors have regrouped today and thousands are reported to be preparing to block the transport by road of the nculear waste from Dannenberg to Gorleben.

now threatened road terror

German Protestors Stop Nuke Train, posted with vodpod

The organisers of the protest kept journalists and the public informed using live tickers, press releases and at Infopoints so that the whole country could follow the events outside the mainstream media. Radio Wendland is also broadcasting updates on the incredibly heroic resistance of so many people. At great personal risk, tens of thousands of people gave an example of courageous and peaceful non-violent resistance that will surely go down in history.

If this is the resistance for Castor and Stuttgart 21, just imagine what will happen when Germans finally grasp the scale of the banking scam being carried out by their “elite.”

The CDU/CSU/FDP government has already hit record lows in the polls and after Sunday’s savage police operation against peaceful protestors, support for them is sure to plummet further.

The feudal lords without a feudal army to push through their agenda of robbery are facing the end of the road now that their media propaganda apparatus based on the Springer and Bertelsmann empire is falling apart and their strategy of divide and rule through a false left/right political paradigm is no longer working.

A new freedom and power was born in the woods of Wendland. And it belonged to the people who have had enough of the arrogant authoritarian political class.

Violence at Tory HQ overshadows student fees protest

Violence at Tory HQ overshadows student fees pr…, posted with vodpod