Meldungen (Feeds)

Friedens-Demonstration am 8. Oktober 2016 in Berlin

No to NATO - sam, 09/07/2016 - 21:59

„Die Waffen nieder – Kooperation statt NATO-Konfrontation – Abrüstung statt Sozialabbau“

Friedens-Demonstration am 8. Oktober 2016 in Berlin

Mit einem gemeinsamen Aufruf fordern die Friedensbündnisse der „Kooperation für den Frieden“, des „Bundesausschusses Friedensratschlag“ und der „Berliner Friedenskoordination“ die Öffentlichkeit auf, am 8. Oktober 2016 in Berlin gegen die aktuelle Politik der Bundesregierung auf die Straße zu gehen.

Die Demonstration am 8. Oktober ist als als Auftakt für weitere Aktionen der Friedensbewegung im kommenden Bundestagswahlkampf gedacht. Die Friedensbewegung wirbt für ihre Aktion um breite Unterstützung von Organisationen, Gewerkschaften und Initiativen, damit die Friedensfrage wieder zu einem zentralen Punkt der politischen Auseinandersetzung in unserem Land wird.

Es folgt der gemeinsame Aufruf:

Plattform für die bundesweite Demonstration am 08.10.2016 – Beschluss der Aktionskonferenz vom 02.07.2016

Die Waffen nieder Kooperation statt NATO-Konfrontation Abrüstung statt Sozialabbau

Die aktuellen Kriege und die militärische Konfrontation gegen Russland treiben uns auf die Straße.

Deutschland befindet sich im Krieg fast überall auf der Welt. Die Bundesregierung betreibt eine Politik der drastischen Aufrüstung. Deutsche Konzerne exportieren Waffen in alle Welt. Das Geschäft mit dem Tod blüht.

Dieser Politik leisten wir Widerstand. Die Menschen in unserem Land wollen keine Kriege und Aufrüstung – sie wollen Frieden. Die Politik muss dem Rechnung tragen.

Wir akzeptieren nicht, dass Krieg immer alltäglicher wird und Deutschland einen wachsenden Beitrag dazu leistet: in Afghanistan, Irak, Libyen, Syrien, Jemen, Mali. Der Krieg in der Ukraine ist nicht gestoppt. Immer geht es letztlich um Macht, Märkte und Rohstoffe. Stets sind die USA, NATO-Mitgliedstaaten und deren Verbündete beteiligt, fast immer auch direkt oder indirekt die Bundesrepublik.

Krieg ist Terror. Er bringt millionenfachen Tod, Verwüstung und Chaos. Millionen von Menschen müssen fliehen. Geflüchtete brauchen unsere Unterstützung und Schutz vor rassistischen und nationalistischen Übergriffen. Wir verteidigen das Menschenrecht auf Asyl. Damit Menschen nicht fliehen müssen, fordern wir von der Bundesregierung, jegliche militärische Einmischung in Krisengebiete einzustellen. Die Bundesregierung muss an politischen Lösungen mitwirken, zivile Konfliktbearbeitung fördern und wirtschaftliche Hilfe für den Wiederaufbau der zerstörten Länder leisten.

Die Menschen brauchen weltweit Gerechtigkeit. Deshalb lehnen wir neoliberale Freihandelszonen wie TTIP, CETA, ökologischen Raubbau und die Vernichtung von Lebensgrundlagen ab.

Deutsche Waffenlieferungen heizen die Konflikte an. Weltweit werden täglich 4,66 Milliarden Dollar für Rüstung verpulvert. Die Bundesregierung strebt an, in den kommenden acht Jahren ihre jährlichen Rüstungsausgaben von 35 auf 60 Milliarden Euro zu erhöhen. Statt die Bundeswehr für weltweite Einsätze aufzurüsten, fordern wir, unsere Steuergelder für soziale Aufgaben einzusetzen.

Das Verhältnis von Deutschland und Russland war seit 1990 noch nie so schlecht wie heute. Die NATO hat ihr altes Feindbild wiederbelebt, schiebt ihren politischen Einfluss und ihren Militärapparat durch Stationierung schneller Eingreiftruppen, Militärmanöver, dem sogenannten Raketenabwehrschirm – begleitet von verbaler Aufrüstung – an die Grenzen Russlands vor. Das ist ein Bruch der Zusagen zur deutschen Einigung. Russland antwortet mit politischen und militärischen Maßnahmen. Dieser Teufelskreis muss durchbrochen werden. Nicht zuletzt steigert die Modernisierung genannte Aufrüstung der US-Atomwaffen die Gefahr einer militärischen Konfrontation bis hin zu einem Atomkrieg. Sicherheit in Europa gibt es nur MIT und nicht GEGEN Russland.

Wir verlangen von der Bundesregierung den Abzug der Bundeswehr aus allen Auslandseinsätzen, die drastische Reduzierung des Rüstungsetats, den Stopp der Rüstungsexporte und die Ächtung von Kampfdrohnen, keine Beteiligung an NATO-Manövern und Truppenstationierungen entlang der Westgrenze Russlands. Wir sagen Nein zu Atomwaffen, Krieg und Militärinterventionen. Wir fordern ein Ende der Militarisierung der EU. Wir wollen Dialog, weltweite Abrüstung, friedliche zivile Konfliktlösungen und ein auf Ausgleich basierendes System gemeinsamer Sicherheit.

Für diese Friedenspolitik setzen wir uns ein. Wir rufen auf zur bundesweiten Demonstration am 8.10.2016 in Berlin. Dortmund, den 02.07.2016

 The Most Important US Air Force Base You’ve Never Heard Of

No to NATO - sam, 09/07/2016 - 21:50
Ramstein, Germany, is the hub for America’s global drone war, from North Africa to South Asia. By Norman Solomon July 7, 2016

https://www.thenation.com/article/the-most-important-us-air-force-base-youve-never-heard-of/

Initial Report from NATO Counter-Summit – Warsaw

No to NATO - sam, 09/07/2016 - 21:32

Friends,
As a number of you know, I am in Warsaw for a Counter-NATO Summit conference held yesterday and tomorrow, and for a demonstration later today. Yesterday’s conference, initiated by the No to NATO/No to War Network, on whose Steering Committee I serve, was attended by 150 people from 14 countries. The majority were obviously Poles, but there were a good number of Germans, as well as people from the U.S., Britain, Russia, France, Spain, the Czech Republic, Austria and Belgium.

I thought that some of you might appreciate some of the highlights, so they follow as “bullet” points, and I’ve attached several photos.

• Growing concern about NATO, led by the U.S., dangerously ratcheting up military tensions in Europe and not respecting the very real limits of Russian/Putin ambitions. (See my Common Dreams article’s section on Ukraine http://www.commondreams.org/views/2016/07/05/imperial-nato-and-after-brexit.)

* NATO must be retired as soon as possible.

• Beginning with the Lisbon Treaty of 2009, the E.U. has been developing its own military. It is deeply integrated with NATO and provides the E.U. with the options of fighting as part of and in coordination with NATO or operating independently.  Assuming that Britain follows through with its exit from the E.U., Germany will be left as not only the dominant economic power in Europe, but also as the dominant military power. In NATO Germany is “just a junior partner,” while in the E.U. it is dominant. There is often a division of labor with NATO doing its coercive thing, while the E.U. takes care of the civilian dimensions of an intervention or nation building.

• While U.S. and E.U. interests and policies are closely aligned, at points they diverge. For example, Germany has deep economic interests with Russia, while the U.S. has few, leading to less aggressive Germany policies toward Russia. Also, the U.S. and Russia are reportedly supporting the Kurds in Syria (they declared the regional autonomy of their part of Syria yesterday), while Germany is backing Turkey as it tolerates Turkey’s assault on Kurds in Turkey and Syria (largely owing to the deal to keep Syrian refugees from coming to Europe.)   While the U.S. and E.U. collaborated in the Ukrainian Maidan coup, they backed different oligarchs, with the U.S. winning out and restructuring Ukrainian intelligence and its military along U.S. lines and to serve U.S. interests.

• I was especially moved by the talk by Ilya Budraiskis of the Russian Socialist Movement. He is a sharp and courageous critic of Putin’s government, but he is also clear that NATO and Russian militarism are dangerous and need to be opposed. The sanctions (both the U.S./E.U. sanction and Putin’s sanctions on food imports from Europe) have hurt the Russian people, with the former leading more people to support Putin. Sanctions should only be targeted against the persons of Putin & his cronies.

• Germany has “bought up” Central and Eastern Europe, though the U.S. is heavily present, both militarily and via financial institutions (many U.S. banks operating here.) A thoughtful Swede recalled that Sweden once conquered Poland and Ukraine and argued that Swedish banking interests in Ukraine played a major role in the 2014 Maidan coup.  =

• Our U.S. movement would benefit from touring some of the best thinker/activists from Europe, so that we can more deeply appreciate the dangers and alternatives to rising U.S.-led militarism here.

• There is a Polish anti-militarist movement here, but with 200 years of nasty history with Russia it may reflect the thinking of perhaps 10% of the people here.  The slogan on the banner that will lead our protest today says something like “We’ve suffered Russia and We Don’t Want Washington. No to NATO.” During the Cold War, Germany was the front line, now it is Poland, and one Polish speaker spoke of the importance of building a movement here equal to their Stop the War movement on the eve of the invasion of Iraq (in which Polish troops fought.) A poll released yesterday indicated that 20% of Poles oppose NATO, a number larger than expected. It’s likely due to opposition by younger people with no memory of the Soviet occupation and who have been disappointed by the low salaries that came with failed economic hopes raised by the E.U. (Poland is, indeed, a 2nd world nation!)

• Militarism in Europe is choking democratic culture and institutions, with Poland being a prime but not unique example. NATO and the E.U. military make decisions in secret and are not accountable to any democratic processes.

• U.S. demands that all members of NATO devote at least 2% of their GDP to their militaries is oppressive, especially in the context of the austerity budgets which have slashed essential social services and people’s incomes. SIPRI reports that U.S. military spending is 34% of the world’s total. Adding NATO gets to more than half. Russia’s spending is 4% of the world’s total, which says something about relative (not nuclear) power.

• The military-industrial complex and elites require enemies to prosper. Putin, while hardly loved by people here, is being demonized for this purpose.

• Some Eastern European and Baltic states joined NATO only because they thought it necessary to do so in order to gain E.U. membership.

• The refugee crisis, in both the Aegean and Mediterranean Seas is a profound concern. (One old acquaintance is just back from Lesbos, and he sang a song honoring the refugees and those helping them.)  There is deep concern about the militarization of the NATO and EU responses.  In a number of European countries, including Austria and Poland, border controls are becoming increasingly militarized, enforce by the military rather than civilian forces. There is also thinking that the U.S/NATO response also serves as a means to preposition aircraft carriers and other war-making resources, close to Syria and Russia. NATO is now also “assisting” Turkey in securing its border with Syria (which may actually be a way of disciplining Turkey which had served as the primary route for ISIS to welcome foreign fighters to Syria and much of ISIS’ weaponry.)

• The German Left Party (De Linke) forced a debate in the German Parliament on Thursday over whether NATO should be dissolved. It was apparently quite a passionate debate on all sides. The European Left is developing a resolution calling for the dissolution of NATO to be introduced into the parliaments of many European nations for debate in November.  They don’t expect to win these debates but to open up the public discourse.

• The British Chilcot report, which is holding Tony Blair’s government accountable for lying and committing to the war in Iraq before all peaceful alternatives were exhausted is inspiring to people from across Europe. Jeremy Corbyn has been shown to have been correct in his opposition to the war and his criticism of Blair and his cronies.  100,000 people have joined the Labor Party since the Brexit vote in an effort to support Jeremy as he is being attacked by Blarites and other conservatives within the Labor Party’s parliamentary delegation.

• German Foreign Minister Steinmeyer was playing politics when he referred to the massive Anaconda military exercise in Central Europe and the Baltics as “warmongering.” (Reference was made to anaconda snakes strangling their prey – i.e. Russia.)  Thinking was that he was playing to public concerns about the dangers of rising militarism, while supporting it, and that he may hope to succeed Angela Merkel.

• Ann Wright told us that her first assignment in the military was to NATO, and that she’s glad to be on this side of that line! The video of Rep. Barbara Lee addressing the conference, which I arranged, was deeply appreciated and inspired people at the conference. It was introduced with profound respect for her being the one member of Congress with the wisdom and courage to vote against the authorization of the disatrous Afghanistan War.  Her remarks focused on the urgent need to prevent nuclear war and to move for the complete elimination of nuclear weapons.
AFSC Peace & Economic Security Program
Phone: 617-661-6130
Email: *protected email*

http://afsc.org

Zahlen ohne Aussagekraft: Der offizielle Bericht zu zivilen Opfern des US-Drohnenkriegs

IMI Tübingen - sam, 09/07/2016 - 15:29
Zwischen 64 und 116 Zivilisten sollen laut eines neuen Berichtes außerhalb von bewaffneten Konflikten durch US-Drohnen in der Amtszeit von Präsident Barack Obamas bis Ende 2015 getötet worden sein. Zudem wurde ein Dekret erlassen, das die Transparenz und die Rechenschaftspflicht (…)

Read the rest of this entry »

The Fact of Sisyphus

The Intercept - Engl. - sam, 09/07/2016 - 13:45

Partly as a consequence of my natural rambunctiousness, I’ve spent a total of five months over the past few years of incarceration being held in 23- to 24-hour-a-day Special Housing Unit confinement cells, collectively and informally known as “the hole,” at three different prisons and in stints ranging from six to 60 days; indeed, my first three Intercept columns were composed from the SHU over at Federal Correctional Institution Fort Worth. But as these were given over largely to rambling self-promotion and some rather intemperate attacks on several contemporary novelists, I’ve never gotten around to providing a real sense of what it’s actually like to live in one of these federal dungeons.

The chief thing to keep in mind is that dungeons vary. The most fundamental division lies between those in which inmates are kept singly in cells along a corridor set off from the rest of the prison and purposefully denied human contact to one extent or another, and those in which two prisoners are kept together in such cells, usually with a window or metalwork grill on the door through which inmates can communicate with others in their corridor via the age-old medium of shouting. The first — known as solitary confinement to everyone but prison officials, who’ve gradually replaced the term with an assortment of euphemisms — is often conflated in the public mind with the second, lesser-known setup, but at any rate the nature of one’s detention is such that human contact is either intentionally and elaborately absent or haphazardly and excruciatingly omnipresent.

Even within these two categories, one finds a great deal of variation from institution to institution, but day-to-day SHU life at FCI Fort Worth should make for a useful baseline. There, a weekday begins at 6 a.m. when the lights in one’s cell come on. A few minutes later the rectangular slot in one’s door is unlocked and a guard pushes in a plastic tray containing breakfast along with a couple of little plastic bags of milk. It’s rather dehumanizing, this matter of having to drink milk out of bags like a common Canadian, but getting breakfast in bed every day makes up for it. Fifteen minutes later the guard comes back and takes up the trays, and then one of his colleagues will walk down the hall jotting down the names of those who want to go outside for one’s permitted daily hour of weekday recreation. Having compiled the list, the guard goes back to his station and tries to arrange things such that incompatible inmates aren’t placed together in the same recreation cage. This sort of reminds me of the old riddle about the farmer who has a fox and a rooster and a bag of corn but can only take one at a time across the river in his boat and the fox will eat the rooster and the rooster will eat the corn if either pair is left together unattended (the solution, incidentally, is to shoot the fox, because it’s a fox).

If you are indeed going to rec that morning, the guard opens the hatch and you back up to it and put your hands through to be handcuffed, and then your cellmate does likewise regardless of whether or not he’s going out as well, as the door isn’t ever supposed to be opened until both occupants are cuffed. When the door does open, you walk out backward before being patted down and scanned with a hand-held metal detector, led out to the courtyard, placed in one of several large cages with your scientifically designated playmate, and then uncuffed through the slot in the gate. After an hour of kicking around a deflated basketball while yelling old Symbionese Liberation Army slogans at the other prisoners, you’re cuffed back up through the gate slot and returned to your cell. A bit later we get lunch, and then dinner a few hours afterward, followed by mail. Three days a week we’re cuffed up and taken to the other end of the hall for showers. On weekends we generally don’t leave our cells at all.

It’s a schedule that leaves prisoners with a great deal of free time, much of which tends to be spent in sleep or exercise. The chief workout routine in the SHU, as well as in jail units and other locales where even improvised equipment can be hard to drum up, is something called burpies, which entails an alternating series of push-ups, squats, and leg thrusts and which I refer to as Berbers because “burpies” is vulgar. Not that I do them anyway, or any other exercise, and I’ve never approved of excessive sleeping, either, for life is not meant to be spent in rest, but rather in conflict or preparation for future conflict.

There is one common SHU activity in which I do happily participate, though, simply because it’s something that can’t be done elsewhere and naturally I’m trying to experience all the touristy prison things before my release just in case I don’t come back for a while. The SHU is the only place of which I’m aware where it’s socially acceptable to yell random nonsense where other people can hear it. Now, much of the yelling that people do through gaps under the door or the crack between the door and its mounting or the metal grills that serve as windows in some units, as the case may be, is entirely purposeful communication consisting of gossip, plots, threats, lyrics, Symbionese Liberation Army slogans, vows, requests, and commercial offers, and this sort of thing will go on throughout the day, with peak times occurring after meals and other periods when everyone tends to be awake (as to how those commercial offers are accepted, there is a process known as “fishing” or “shooting the line” by which small items may be transferred among inmates, but a full column’s description will be required to do it justice; suffice it to say that string and persistence are involved).

But in addition to all of this more or less mundane intercourse, there’s also a wholly distinct and inimitable element of shouting-for-the-sake-of-shouting. Some of this takes the form of memes; at Seagoville Federal Detention Center, for instance, the guards once brought in a drunk off the compound who, after being placed in his cell, spent the next hour banging on the door and yelling out some sloshy, inconsequential narrative that he would punctuate every few sentences with the refrain, “They hear me but they don’t FEEL me, though!” Thereafter this phrase became a very popular meme that would be shouted out several times a day; it had been incorporated into the vibrant oral culture of our particular SHU corridor.

But SHU shouts can be, and often are, more or less apropos of nothing. I myself was fond of drinking six or seven lukewarm cups of the freeze-dried instant coffee we can buy from the weekly commissary cart, going up to the door grill, and calling out in a raspy, feminine voice, “My brother is coming … with MANY FREMEN WARRIORS” about 20 or 30 times in a row, often capped off with a triumphant, “Meet the Atreides Gom Jabbar, grandfather!” And it wouldn’t occur to anyone to inquire as to why I’d done this; people in the SHU wake up every morning with a sort of preternatural awareness that someone could start yelling out lines from David Lynch’s highly underrated 1984 film version of Dune at any moment and will either assume that the yeller needed to do this to feel self-actualized or, alternatively, that he’s one of the untold thousands of mentally ill prisoners whom U.S. prison authorities have allowed to languish in punishment cells for years on end (though in my case, people tended to recognize me by voice as the guy who was always kicking around the deflated basketball and calling for death to the fascist insect that preys on the life of the people).

Aside from sleeping, screaming, and exercising, there’s also reading. Federal SHUs generally have book carts that are rolled up the hallway once a week; inmates crouch next to their door slots to view the selections and point to what they want. Prison book carts are always exciting, tending to be largely composed of donations from ancient rural branch libraries that have just given up and closed down or whatever, such that one can always expect to find a stray gem or hilarious oddity. On one occasion I grabbed an award-winning 1962 volume on Jefferson by Dumas Malone in which the claim that the third president engaged in a sexual relationship with the slave Sally Hemings is dismissed as “wholly unwarranted.” But my best find to date remains the early ’80s sci-fi novel I came across a couple of years back in which the U.S. has fallen under a dystopian theocracy after having rather unwisely elected a Mormon president.

Fortunately, SHU inmates are allowed to receive books through the mail from commercial retailers just as we can in the prison itself, with the only difference being that we can’t get hardcover books lest we use them to make shanks. When the editors at The Intercept sent me a hardback copy of the new Jonathan Franzen tome Purity last year, I was only given it after a guard tore off the cover. This was a rather upsetting thing to have witnessed, though halfway through the narrative I was kind of wishing he’d finished the job.

I try to keep a copy of something by Hegel with me at all times as well, not so much with the intent of reading it straight through, but rather as a means by which to play a little game I’ve invented called Shut the Fuck Up, Hegel, You Fucking Fraud. What you do is, you flip to a random page in any volume of Hegel’s works and look for the inevitable instance of hyper-oracular nonsense, such as this line I just randomly came across from page 129 of Lectures on the Philosophy of History:

The spread of Indian culture is prehistorical, for history is limited to that which makes for an essential epoch in the development of spirit. On the whole, the diffusion of Indian culture is only a dumb, deedless expansion, that is, without a political act. The people of India have achieved no foreign conquests, but have been on every occasion vanquished themselves.

Then you write in the margin, “Shut the fuck up, Hegel, you fucking fraud.” And from page 51:

What spirit really strives for is the realization of its own concept; but in so doing it hides that goal from its own vision; it is proud and quite enjoys itself in this alienation from itself.

“Whatever, douche.”

Indeed, to live in the hole is to be thrust into a world in which everything must be repurposed and all possibilities pursued. One day I decided to compose a list of unnecessary people throughout history and had jotted down Ezra Pound, the Emperor Aurangzeb, Carlos Mencia, Charles IV, and Gary Bauer when it became clear that I’d cast my net too wide, at which point I abandoned the project. Instead I tried to decide which city I’d destroy if I had the chance, other than Houston. I eventually decided on Singapore, which I feel has been setting a bad example for the other cities.

SHU time is a time for remembrance. I thought of all the strange and interesting people I’d met throughout my incarceration, such as the fellow who would conclude all of his assertions with the phrase, “Even a small child knows that.” Among the things a small child knows, it seems, is that sentences handed down for conspiracy to distribute methamphetamines tend to be much harsher in Texas than in California and that a particular guard who works the morning shift is kind of a dick sometimes but not always. There was also the guy who feted me with coffee and candy bars during a weeklong transit stop at a local jail, at one point showing me the program from his father’s funeral a few years prior; the cover bore a photo of a man dressed all in yellow, right down to his cape and top hat, and who apparently went only by the name Yellow Shoes. As noted in the program text, Yellow Shoes was survived by well over 30 children. His father had been a famous East Dallas pimp, my friend explained, somewhat unnecessarily. Now he himself had been indicted as a drug dealer when in fact he was a pimp like his father before him, something he planned to explain to the judge at the first opportunity. Frankly, I’d say he had a strong case.

Finally, SHU inmates also spend some variable portion of each day reflecting on the astonishing degree of injustice they’ve had the chance to observe, as well as cultivating a healthy contempt for the system that perpetrates that injustice and the society that continues to permit it. Some months ago I asked The Intercept to file a Freedom of Information Act request with the Bureau of Prisons in pursuit of all records pertaining to yours truly in hopes of documenting further instances of government misconduct to add to my collection. Recently the BOP provided us with 175 pages, all of which we’ve posted online — including the fully one-third that the BOP has completely redacted. Tellingly, some clear and potentially criminal wrongdoing actually crops up even among those pages that the agency has not gone so far as to completely blank out, as we’ll see in a moment. First, let’s get the vital statistics from Ben Brieschke of the BOP’s notoriously shady South Central Regional Office, who prepared the cover letter:

After a careful review, we determined 89 pages are appropriate for release in full; 28 pages are appropriate for release in part; and, [sic] 58 pages must be withheld in their entirety.

Most of these redactions are being justified under two FOIA exemptions, one of which is intended for those files or portions thereof “which would disclose techniques and procedures for law enforcement investigations or prosecutions,” with the other pertaining to those bits of information “which could reasonably be expected to endanger the life or personal safety of an individual.” This latter consideration certainly sounds serious, and one can get a sense of the peril to which BOP staff are forever subject by the fact that first names are blocked out with the “(b)(7)(F)” box throughout these documents, lest they be tracked down by violent ex-prisoners or what have you. One can likewise get a sense that even the BOP doesn’t buy its own bullshit in this regard by the fact that it has failed to block out the first name of a member of the BOP’s Special Investigative Services (SIS) security division, and in another document has left in the typed-out first, last, and middle names of some dozen other officers and staff, an act of negligence that — what was that phrase again? — “could reasonably be expected to endanger the life or personal safety” of the individuals it itself has just fully identified, if we take the BOP’s own word for it (though in my infinite benevolence, I’ve asked The Intercept to block out the names in question, for all men know of my great regard for the comfort and well-being of American law enforcement officials).

Of course, the reality is that despite these names having sat on the internet for weeks before I came across the regional office’s slip in my paper copies and had them redacted, no one has been endangered by the BOP’s incompetence here, as the (b)(7)(F) exemption is less a necessary security measure than it is a convenient smokescreen by which to cover up its own misconduct. And at many institutions, employees tend to be less wary of inmates than they are of the administration itself; when medical staff at several BOP prisons spoke to USA Today earlier this year about the bureau’s despicable tendency to regularly use them as prison guards rather than, say, having them work full-time providing the medical care that’s already in short supply, all of those coming forward chose to remain anonymous for fear of retaliation.

Speaking of retaliation, have a look at this inmate progress report prepared by two Fort Worth staff at the end of August 2015 in which I am commended for my “good sanitation” and continued FRP payments (the monthly restitution I’ve been ordered to pay to my corporate “victims”). Elsewhere it’s noted that I’m “currently participating in the GED program” (until recently the BOP refused to acknowledge that, in addition to my good sanitation, I’m also a high school graduate; as a result I had to sign up for high school equivalency classes). And here are the signatures of the staff members in question, S. Vanderlinden and M. Gutierrez, along with my own, perhaps not terribly impressive signature. Now take a look at this other document composed 12 days later, after I’d been thrown in the hole again, and signed by the very same two staff members, which I was never supposed to see. Now it seems that I’ve shown “poor institutional adjustment,” “poor program participation,” and even “poor living skills” — true enough if we’re talking about signature design — and thus must be moved to a medium security prison immediately.

This would be my new favorite illustration of the casual criminality that has long marked the BOP’s operational culture had I not also acquired this other, even more extraordinary specimen — the latest response from the BOP regarding the Administrative Remedy complaint I filed over a year ago regarding the retaliatory seizure of my email access, the first of a string of bizarre incidents at Fort Worth that would culminate in the confiscation of my notebook outside the law library. As I’ve noted before, the Prison Litigation Reform Act of 1986 — passed during a period in which U.S. domestic policy was being determined largely on the basis of questionable anecdotes — requires that inmates who wish to sue the BOP and its employees first complete an arcane and multilayered regimen of paperwork to the satisfaction of the BOP and its employees. Inmates who find that the process itself is being violated by the BOP and its employees are free to file another complaint for review by the BOP and its employees. Astonishingly, this process is not always free from abuse by the BOP and its employees.

When we last checked in on my own complaint about my email access having been seized by BOP Washington liaison Terrance Moore an hour after I’d used it to alert a journalist to BOP misconduct, the regional office had rather despicably claimed that my appeal had been late, even though it clearly hadn’t, as the failure by the warden’s executive assistant Jerry McKinney to respond to my BP-9 form within 20 days of the day he logged it in, as well as his failure to request the 20-day extension to his own deadline until well after his first deadline had passed, as well as his failure to meet even that extended deadline, allowed me to consider this a rejection at the institutional level and freed me to proceed to the regional level, as is noted in the BOP’s own policy guidelines — except that I couldn’t, because, as I’ve also documented via forms signed and dated by McKinney himself, McKinney failed to return the original documents to me for another month despite messages I sent over the internal staff notification system requesting that he do so.

Finally he brought me back a triply late and thus invalid rejection — even handing it to me nine days after the date it was signed, as is again documented by his own dating and signature. The regional counsels know this fully well, and also know that just a few days later I was placed in the SHU and thereafter shipped to Oklahoma for processing and then to my current prison, where I filed my regional appeal as soon as I received the box containing my legal papers. They know this because, as I learned recently when I complained that the BOP was now apparently violating the law by holding some of my mail for nearly two weeks, I’m on some ultra-rare and secretive classification known as “Inmates of Greatest Concern,” which requires that everything I do be monitored and scrutinized for the benefit of some unspecified outside agency.

Nonetheless, the region rejected my appeal due to it being “untimely,” made an inappropriate request that I obtain “staff verification” that this wasn’t my fault from staff at a prison I am accusing of systematic retaliation and whom I have no means of contacting since I’m no longer housed there, and demanded that my appeal be reduced to a single typewritten page and resubmitted, all within 15 days of the date of this rejection, which just happened to be 15 days prior to my receipt of it. Thus I’d been given zero days to comply, including mail time.

I documented the entirety of this in a column months ago and wrote back to the region’s legal counsel, explaining in detail why his requests were impossible. Several weeks later I received another rejection notice in which the counsel ignores my explanations and maintains that I missed the deadline, although he himself seems confused as to when that deadline actually was since he lists it as having fallen on two different dates.

And just so I understand that the zero days thing wasn’t a mistake, the rejection notice is dated December 4 — and they’d delayed mailing it to me such that it didn’t even arrive at the warden’s office until December 29. This time, then, I’d been given negative 10 days to comply.

My email access was finally reinstated several months ago by the security staff at my current prison, who immediately determined that there was no legitimate reason why I shouldn’t have it; my continued pursuit of this process is intended to force an admission of wrongdoing from the BOP as well as to illustrate how it actually operates. This, after all, is the only procedure by which my 200,000 fellow federal inmates are able to protect the last human rights remaining to them, whether they’ve been subject to ongoing retaliation, or they’ve been kept in the hole for years on end contrary to law and all decency, or they’ve been beaten while in handcuffs, or they’ve been denied basic medical care — all issues that have been encountered by people I’ve known and interviewed over the past few years. Here’s a list of grievances logged in at Fort Worth in 2014 and 2015, which we’ve obtained via another FOIA request; keep in mind that for every complaint filed, there are dozens of incidents that go undocumented because veteran inmates are aware of the near impossibility of getting heard by the court under a system that can be violated without consequences.

Imagine spending a year in the hole due to a mistake, trying all the while to get a court to order your release, and getting back a demand that you include two extra copies of a document and that you do this six days ago. This sort of thing happens regularly, throughout the system, although the problem appears to be particularly systematic in this regional district.

The truly disturbing part is not that this happens in the first place, but rather that it will likely continue happening despite now having been fully documented. For it is not just the prisons that are broken, but the media as well.

To help illustrate the manner in which the press has become largely incapable of performing its necessary watchdog role even when large parts of its job are done for it, and how certain parties have managed to benefit from this state of affairs, next time we’ll discuss why it is that I happen to be in prison. We’ll also talk about a man named Peter Thiel. As it happens, these subjects are very much intertwined.

Quote of the Day:

“At the very outset we have the antithesis between the goal of the state as the abstract generality on the one hand, and the abstract person on the other; but when subsequently, in the course of history, personality gains the ascendant, its breakup into atoms can only be held together externally; then the subjective power of rule comes forward as if summoned to fulfill this task. For abstract legality is this; not to be concrete from within, not to have organization from within; and this, having come to power, has only an arbitrary power as contingent subjectivity as what moves it, as what rules it; and the individual seeks in the developed private law solace for his lost freedom. This the purely secular reconciliation of the antithesis.”

— Fucking Hegel

Drawing by Paul Davis. Fee donated to Barrett Brown’s legal defense fund.

Sign up for The Intercept Newsletter here.

The post The Fact of Sisyphus appeared first on The Intercept.

IMI-Texte: in München bei der BIFA

BIFA München - sam, 09/07/2016 - 13:17

Die IMI1 liefert alle ihre Texte gratis als PDF im Web aus - Bravo!

Trotzdem, praktisch schätzen viele von uns Gedrucktes zum "Offline"-Studium, und das gibt es bei wichtigeren Texten auch. Wir bestellen von der BIFA häufig ein gewisses Kontingent zum Weiterverkauf in München, aktuell sind besonders diese beiden wichtig:

Die 360°-NATO: Mobilmachung
an allen Fronten

Broschüre (4.- €)

Der umfangreiche Reader a href="http://www.no-to-nato.org/2016/06/appell-an-die-internationale-friedensb...">kam jetzt zum "NATO-Gipfel" in Polen heraus und ist sicher länger aktuell. Die Kapitel gibt es auch einzeln zum Herunterladen.

Nato-Exzellenzzentren

Planen für den nächsten Krieg (1.- €)

Das ist eine der jüngsten "IMI-Studien", und auch im nebenstehenden Reader enthalten. Die DFG-VK Friedensfahrradtour, die 2016 von Ingolstadt das "Airbus-Drohnen-Zentrum" in Manching ansteuert, kommt auch in Ingolstadt an der Pionierkaserne vorbei, wo kurz deren heutige Rolle als "NATO-Exzellenzzentrum" gewürdigt wird ...

Bei Infoständen, Veranstaltungen und nach Vereinbarung zu erhalten.
  • 1. Informationsstelle Militarisierung e.V. Tübingen

NATO Counter Summit demands the dissolution of the military alliance and the creation of a cooperative security system

No to NATO - sam, 09/07/2016 - 10:48

Warsaw, July 9th 2016

Six Polish organizations of the peace and social movements as well as the international network No to War – No to NATO conducted a NATO Alternative Summit “No to War – No to Militarism – Yes to Refugees” in Warsaw on Friday July 8th. The aim of the conference was to continue the delegitimization of the largest military alliance of the world which permanently and globally is involved in wars.

About 150 persons from 18 countries discussed at the unexpectedly large counter summit. Among others participants came from Russia, USA, Czech Republic, Ukraine, Poland, France, Germany, GB, Belgium and Spain. They discussed the actual wars and conflicts, the creation of peace, social justice and common security in Europa. Worrisome are the actual dangers of increasing militarism in Eastern Europe, particularly because of the troop movements, aggressive maneuvers and the missile defense shield of NATO. Scenarios right up to a “great war in Europe” cannot be precluded anymore.

Therefore the participants agreed that the international peace movement faces the largest challenge of recent years. The NATO induced confrontation with Russia, the global projects of armament like missile defense and the modernization of nuclear weapons need to be stopped in order to give a process of cooperation in Europe a chance. The deployments of NATO’s military structures to the Western boarder of Russia as well as the Russian reactions bear the danger of an intended or accidental war. A common and cooperative system of security which orientates along the needs of people is the alternative.

“Intensified international networking of the peace and social movements is necessary”, states Kristine Karch, Co-Chair of the international network No to War – No to NATO. She continues: “the impressive meeting in Warsaw was an important step in the necessary connection to the Eastern European and Russian movements”.

“Even in such a NATO-loving country as Poland we could successfully delegitimize NATO. We presented many facts from many different countries and clearly stated that the dinosaur NATO does not have a future”, stated Lucas Wirl, Co-Chair of the international network No to War – No to NATO.

The actions will continue on Saturday with a demonstration and on Sunday with a strategy meeting of the international peace movement.

 

Further information: Reiner Braun +49 172 231 7475

www.no-to-nato.org

NEW!!! – Updated Programm Alternative Summit Sunday July 10th

No to NATO - sam, 09/07/2016 - 10:43
Sunday July 10th

10:15 – 10:45 Special Panel on Ukraine

11:00 – 13:30 Roundtable with open microphone:

Future of Peace and Anti-War Movement in Poland and the world

Introduction: Ewa Groszewska, Poland Lucas Wirl, No to War – No to NATO

13:30 END

Location Conference Center „Copernicus” / Centrum Konferencyjne Kopernika

The debates, plenary debate and workshops will all take place at the Conference Center „Kopernik” (address:  Kopernika 30, 00-336 Warszawa).

OpenStreetMap® is open data, licensed under the Open Data Commons Open Database License (ODbL) by the OpenStreetMap Foundation (OSMF).

NATO Gegengipfel fordert die Auflösung des Militärbündnisses und die Schaffung eines zivilen Sicherheitssystems

No to NATO - sam, 09/07/2016 - 10:35

Sechs Polnische Organisationen aus der Friedens- und sozialen Bewegung sowie das internationale Netzwerk No to War – No to NATO veranstalteten am Freitag den 8.7. in Warschau den NATO Gegengipfel „No to War – No to Militarism – Yes to Refugees“. Ziel der Veranstaltung war die weitere Delegitimierung des größten Militärbündnisses der Welt, das weltweit permanent in Kriege verwickelt ist.
Es diskutierten auf dem unerwartet großen Gegengipfel mehr als 150 Personen aus 18 Ländern, unter anderem aus Russland, den USA, Tschechien, Ukraine, Polen, Frankreich, Deutschland, Großbritannien, Belgien und Spanien über die aktuellen Kriege und Konflikte, über die Gestaltung des Friedens, soziale Gerechtigkeit und gemeinsame Sicherheit in Europa. Besorgnis rufen die aktuellen Gefahren des verstärkten Militarismus im Osten Europas, besonders durch die Truppenpräsenz, die aggressiven Manöver und den Raketenabwehrschirm der NATO, hervor. Szenarien bis hin zu einem „großen Krieg in Europa“ sind nicht mehr auszuschließen.
Die TeilnehmerInnen waren sich deshalb einig, die internationale Friedensbewegung steht vor der größten Herausforderung der letzten Jahre. Die von der NATO herbeigeführte Konfrontation mit Russland, die globalen Rüstungsvorhaben wie der Raketenabwehrschirm und die Modernisierung der Atomwaffen müssen beendet werden, damit ein Prozess der Kooperation in Europa wieder eine Chance bekommt. Die Dislozierung von NATO-Militärstrukturen an die Westgrenze Russlands sowie die russischen Gegenreaktion birgt die Gefahr eines bewusst oder versehentlich angezettelten Krieges. Ein gemeinsames, kooperatives Sicherheitssystem welches sich an den Bedürfnissen der Menschen richtet ist die Alternative.
„Eine intensivere internationale Vernetzung der Friedens- und sozialen Bewegungen ist erforderlich“, so Kristine Karch Co- Vorsitzende internationalen Netzwerk No to War – No to NATO, „die beeindruckende Tagung in Warschau hat uns Schritte in der so notwendigen Vernetzung mit Osteuropa und Russlands erbracht“.
„Selbst in einem so zentralen NATO-Land wie Polen, konnten wir erfolgreich mit vielen Fakten und Argumenten aus vielen Ländern die Delegitimierung der NATO fortsetzen. Das Dinosaurier des kalten Krieges hat keine Zukunft“, so Lucas Wirl Co- Vorsitzender des internationalen Netzwerkes.
Die Aktionen werden am Samstag mit einer Friedensdemonstration, sowie am Sonntag mit einer Strategiedebatte der internationalen Friedensbewegung fortgesetzt.

Weite Informationen bei: Reiner Braun +49 (0)172 231 7475

Download Pressenitteilung Gegengipfel Warschau 2016-07-09.pdf

How the Dallas Police Used an Improvised Killer Robot to Take Down the Gunman

The Intercept - Engl. - ven, 08/07/2016 - 23:03

Following the tragic deaths of five police officers in Dallas, Texas, during a rally for Alton Sterling and Philando Castile on Thursday night, the Dallas Police Department deployed a small robot designed to investigate and safely discharge explosives.

Officers attached a bomb to the robot ad hoc style — detonating it and killing the sniper while keeping the investigators out of harm’s way.

According to companies who manufacture bomb disposal robots interviewed by The Intercept — none were aware of their bots ever being turned into lethal weapons, though one company acknowledged the robots can be adapted to hold weapons.

A spokesperson from Pedsco, a company in Canada that supplies robots to other jurisdictions in Texas, confirmed that he did not “know of any instances of an explosive used to disable a suspect” attached to a robot owned by law enforcement.

Pedsco denied any comment on its own robots, citing possible confidentiality conflicts with customers, but pointed to instances where EOD robots had been used offensively, such as a 1993 case where Prince George’s County Police Department deployed a water cannon attached to a robot to disarm a suspect hiding in a closet.

“The robots often have mounts that allow various tools to be used remotely, including water cannons (disruptors) and shotguns,” he continued. “The robots are designed to remotely deal with suspected packages, so remotely dealing with armed subjects would not be that much different (except that IEDs don’t move).”

Eric Ivers, the President of RoboteX, which sells robots to police departments in Texas (though not in Dallas), said that the use of a police robot to kill someone was unprecedented. “We are not aware of any robot, from any company, having been used for this purpose before,” he wrote in an email to The Intercept.

According to a 2009 Seattle Police Department presentation, the SPD’s bomb squad uses a robot made by Northrop Grumman, the REMOTEC Andros — which the Dallas PD also owns. It costs almost $200,000, weighs 425 pounds, and is useful for “bomb call out,” “SWAT Operations,” “Surveillance,” and more.

The accessories and weapons listed include a 12 gauge semi-automatic shotgun, a water cannon, hooks, blades, talons, and an x-ray system.

Other robots can deploy chemical agents or shoot TASERs.

Even in the military, surveillance and safety robots are almost never used for lethal attacks. There are only a few instances reported, also improvised, according to Peter Singer, a strategist and senior fellow at the Washington-based think-tank New America Foundation. “I’ve never heard of another similar police use [of bomb robots] … and it’s not established doctrine in the military at all,” he told The Intercept.

Security researchers have expressed concern that any technology haphazardly turned into a weapon escalates the concern of it being hacked.

However, companies have been selling drones and robots as multi-faceted, sometime violent tools for law enforcement for years. The Guardian reported in 2013 that one product, the “Switchblade,” had been advertised as “the ultimate assassin bug,” allowing law enforcement to pilot a small drone and then lunge it forward and kill a target.

The Dallas Police Department has refused to confirm which robot was used against the suspect on Friday morning, but several reports have noted that the city’s public records have identified prior purchases from Remotec, a Northrop Grumman subsidiary. Both Dallas police and Northrop declined to comment to The Intercept — or elucidate on which types of explosives were deployed or how they were attached.

Sign up for The Intercept Newsletter here.

The post How the Dallas Police Used an Improvised Killer Robot to Take Down the Gunman appeared first on The Intercept.

Pages

Subscribe to sicherheitskonferenz.de  |  security-conference.de agrégateur