MIM(Prisons) is a cell of revolutionaries serving the oppressed masses inside U.$. prisons, guided by the communist ideology of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism.
Under Lock & Key is a news service written by and for prisoners with a focus on what is going on behind bars throughout the United States. Under Lock & Key is available to U.S. prisoners for free through MIM(Prisons)'s Free Political Literature to Prisoners Program, by writing:
MIM(Prisons) PO Box 40799 San Francisco, CA 94140.
Over the past few weeks many of us locked up within Amerikkka’s prisons
have watched, read and heard about the genocidal war crimes currently
being committed against the oppressed nation of Palestine by the white
settler state of I$rael. What these events show us is not only the
carnage and slaughter of a one-sided war, but that the oppressed will
never be free to forge their own destinies so long as the monster of
imperialism remains intact.
With forked tongues like the pit of vipers that they are, the United
Nations (UN) sits idly by and does virtually nothing to help the people
of Palestine as the Zionist regime attempts to bomb them out of
existence. The so-called “international community” does nothing for
Palestine other than speak hypocritically about the need for a cease
fire on both ends and the continued need for a two-state solution, as if
the mounting deaths (1,432 deaths as of today)(1) and the balance of war
was even! Even as the world watches complacent and content through their
pacifist, non-interventionist actions, and some begin to complain about
the rising number of Palestinian civilian deaths, the United $tates
continues to arm I$rael. The worthless UN has thus shown its true color:
yellow! The international community is guilty of complicity thru
complacency, thus Palestinian blood is also on the hands of the United
Nations.
As prisoners of good conscience we reject the genocide and slaughter
which has hystorically been imposed on the people of Palestine and which
is currently being played out by the Jewish state ever since the
creation of I$rael in 1948. And while the Amerikan imperialists and
their general citizenry and population have found us guilty of crimes
against civil society, we prisoners likewise find them guilty of crimes
against humynity for their collusion with the state of Israel to
exterminate the Palestinian nation.
Within these walls we are as yet powerless to tap into the potential of
the imprisoned lumpen, but we are not yet powerless to sign a piece of
paper to denounce the state of Israel and their support in the United
$tates. Therefore with this declaration we angrily express our
indignation with the state of Israel for committing genocide, and the
Israeli people for allowing it to happen in the 21st century after
vowing “never again.”
Furthermore, with this declaration we express our concern, condolences,
solidarity and humynity with the people of Palestine. We grieve your
loss. I$rael must pay! Just as Palestinian prisoners of war showed their
support and solidarity with the California hunger strikers by issuing a
statement of solidarity to end solitary confinement in the United
$tates, we must now do the same. We must recognize and acknowledge that
their struggle is our struggle and we must say no to I$rael and no to
the genocide of Palestine.
Long live the people of Palestine! Down with I$rael! Charge and
convict the war criminals! Free Palestine!
With the ongoing fighting in the occupied territory of Palestine (Gaza)
the death toll rises on both sides. However, there’s a savage
lopsidedness to it as the Palestinians take the toll of death. Even more
savagely is its children and civilians taking the carnage of
indiscriminate bombs being dropped by Israel.
In the face of this fighting, U.$. Secretary of State John Kerry gave a
press conference in which he more or less stated that, “there can be no
meaningful peace without the disarmament of Hamas.” Not only is this
hypocritical but who in their right mind will lay down what arms they
have when faced with an enemy that not only has a standing army but an
air force, navy, special forces and drones which lend an uneven hand to
the fighting. The IDF (Israel Defense Forces) have stated that they will
not stop until all of Hamas’s underground tunnels are destroyed.
More to this unevenness and inequality is the rhetoric spewing from
I$raeli and Amerikan media that Hamas is terrorist and is causing the
suffering of the Palestinian people. As if Hamas was the one dropping
hundreds of bombs from helicopters and jets. Israel is a settler nation
and therefore will stop at nothing to see the destruction of Palestine
and the ceasing of resistance from the people.
The resistance of the Palestinian people is not without precedent.
History has shown what nations that occupy a territory will do:
slaughter and genocide of the occupied nation. All media pundits say
that I$rael has the right to defend itself, however what about
Palestine?
MIM(Prisons) adds: We agree with this comrade that oppressed
nations have the right to defend themselves against imperialist
agressors. Though we would go even further and say that those oppressed
nations don’t stand a chance at independence until we can take on the
imperialists themselves. The imperialists will not allow individual
nations self-determination and independence, even if those nations try
to exist without threatening imperialism. Cuba provides a good example
of this. But imperialism is building its own demise by putting the
majority of the world’s people in the camp of oppressed and exploited,
with a material interest in overthrowing imperialism. One at a time
nations will gain independence, and united these nations will take on
imperialism globally.
The bombing taking place in Palestine is beyond words and has changed my
view of Israel forever, from a settler state to a terroristic state. As
of today over 1,000 Palestinians have been murdered by Israel. The
majority of those being blown to pieces have been civilians and children
as well as the elderly. This atrocity has gone on without a peep from
the U.S. imperialist state media mouthpieces, and criticism about these
acts have been slim in the corporate media, but this is no surprise.
I have been following, as best as I could, the Israeli war on Palestine
from this death kamp called Pelican Bay SHU, and what I have found is
that Israel has been targeting children and hospitals. People are
literally buried in their homes and then the Israelis watch and wait
until other people come out to help dig these children out of the rubble
and they are shot by snipers. The Israeli military is turning
Palestinian homes into sniper nests as the Palestinians are driven out.
They are sniping wimmin and children in order to inflict terror into the
lives of the Palestinians who refuse to give up their struggle for
liberation.
I have drawn much strength from the Palestinians and I learn from their
concrete examples of what struggling against an occupier, a terroristic
settler state, really looks like. I think that the whole world is
learning what resistance really looks like, the Palestinians today are
the example we can learn from. They are cut off economically and yet
they find ways to fight against tanks and missiles, while starving and
barefoot with nothing more than an AK and a clenched fist.
The terroristic state of Israel is a bold example of settlerism which
needs to be excised from humynity. People in Palestine are being held
hostage and bombed at will. But the majority who are being slaughtered
are civilians and yet the Amerikkkan parasites remain silent. They are
mostly silent because in many ways the terroristic state of Israel is a
mirror reflection of the terroristic state of Amerikkka. We are not yet
attacked on this scale in the U.S., but the internal semi-colonies are
having their lands occupied and we are being assassinated selectively.
Amerikkka uses soft terror by SHU torture, death row and the pigs, while
in Palestine it is the missile, tanks and drones slaughtering the
people.
These terrorist acts unleashed by Israeli dogs are what inspires me to
help spread the word that Palestine must be free. This onslaught has
educated me in ways that my years of study has been unable to
accomplish. After seeing the Israeli’s barbaric treatment of Palestine
all I have to say is never again will Palestine stand alone in fighting
settlerism.
After a year under the elected rule of President Mohamed Morsi, in June
and July the Egyptian people once again took to the streets to protest a
government that was not serving their interests. Back in 2011 the
Egyptian people successfully took down Hosni Mubarak and forced the
country’s first elections for President. As we wrote at that time in
ULK
19: “The Egyptian people forced President Mubarak out of the
country, but accepted his replacement with the Supreme Council of the
Military – essentially one military dictatorship was replaced by
another. One of the key members of this Council is [Omar] Sueliman, the
CIA point man in the country and head of the Egyptian general
intelligence service. He ran secret prisons for the United $tates and
persynally participated in the torturing of those prisoners.” But the
Egyptian people were not fooled, and they rightfully took to the streets
to force further change this summer. Still, we do not see clear
proletarian leadership of the protests, and instead the U.$.-funded
military is again stepping in to claim the mantle and pretend to
represent the people.
Morsi is widely considered “Egypt’s first democratically elected
president.” Prior to the elections in 2012 the country was led by an
elected parliament and an unelected President, Hosni Mubarak, a former
general who took power after the assassination of his predecessor in
1981. But it’s important to consider what “democratically elected”
really means. Democratic elections presume that the people in a country
have the ability to participate freely, without coercion, and that all
candidates have equal access to the voting population. Most elections in
the world today do not actually represent democracy. In many countries
dominated by Amerikan imperialism, there are elections, but we do not
call these democratic, because it is not possible for candidates without
lots of money and the backing of one imperialist interest or another to
win. When democracy gets out of imperialist control and an
anti-imperialist candidate does participate and win, they better have
military power to back them up or they will be quickly murdered or
removed by military force (see
“Allende
in Chile” or
“Lumumba
in the Congo”). We should not just assume that people participating
in a balloting exercise represents democracy for the people.
There are some key political reasons why Morsi won the presidential
election in 2012. Representing the Muslim Brotherhood, Morsi was well
educated and spent several years getting a doctorate in the United
$tates and teaching at University in the 1980s. He is certainly not one
of the 40% of the Egyptian population living on less than $2 a day.(1)
The Muslim Brotherhood has long been a well organized activist group,
which despite being banned by the government from participating in
Parliamentary elections was allowed to organize on the streets as a
counterforce to progressive anti-imperialist parties that faced complete
repression.(2) Demonstrating the advantage it had over other banned
organizations, the Muslim Brotherhood put together the most effective
electoral campaign after Mubarak fell. It is telling that the runoff in
the presidential election was between Morsi and Ahmed Shafiz, the prime
minister under Hosni Mubarak, and the vote was close. Essentially the
election was between a representative of the status quo that had just
been overthrown, and a candidate who promised to be different but
represented a conservative religious organization.
The military has once again stepped in to the vacuum created by the mass
protests demanding the removal of President Morsi, pretending to be
defending the interests of the people. This position by the military is
no surprise after Morsi, in August, stripped the military of any say in
legislation and dismissed his defense minister. The military selected
the leader of the Supreme Constitutional Court to serve as interim
president after Morsi stepped down. Morsi still enjoys significant
support among the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt who continue to take to
the streets to demand that he be freed from military prison and returned
to power.
The Egyptian military actually has a long history of institutional
power. In 1981, after Mubarak took power, the military expanded with the
help of Amerikan aid. This aid came as a sort of bribe, as up until the
1977 peace accord Egypt had been attempting to lead an Arab resistance
to Israel’s occupation of Palestine, a cause the people of Egypt
continue to support to this day. Since then the military has remained
one of the top receivers of U.$. military aid, second only to Israel
itself, until 2001 when Afghanistan became the largest. The armed forces
in Egypt used this economic power to take up significant economic
endeavors entering into private business with factories, hotels and
valuable real estate.(3) It is clever leadership that allows the
military to divorce itself from failed leadership of Egypt time and
again while acting behind the scenes to ensure that only those
individuals they support, who will carry out their will, gain the
presidency. This is not a democracy. And the leadership of the armed
forces will continue to serve their Amerikan masters, not the will of
the people, as General el-Sisi is once again claiming.
MIM(Prisons) supports the interests of the masses of Egyptian people as
they ally with the interests of the world’s majority who are exploited
by imperialism. We praise their ongoing activism in taking to the
streets when the government is not meeting their needs. But we can learn
from history that deposing one figurehead does not make for
revolutionary change. Fundamental change will require an overthrow of
the entire political institution in Egypt that is dependent on U.$.
imperialism. And while President Nasser offered an independent road for
Egypt during the anti-colonial era following WWII, true independence
requires the full mobilization and participation of the masses in
creating a new system based on need and not profit.
It is a truth in humyn history that those with the guns and power will
not voluntarily step aside, but they will make cosmetic changes to try
to fool the masses into complacency. We call on the Egyptian people, who
have repeatedly demonstrated their willingness to sacrifice for the
movement, not to be fooled and not to allow electoral politics to drain
their momentum. The military is not on your side, and neither are any of
the branches of the existing government. Seize the power you have
demonstrated in the streets and build for fundamental, revolutionary
change to a government that actually serves the people and not the
elite.
According to Article IV of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty
(N.P.T.), all signatory member nations possess the “inalienable right”
to “develop research, production and use of nuclear energy for peaceful
purposes without discrimination.”(1) As a signatory nation, the Islamic
Republic of Iran is entitled to this most basic right, just like any
other nation. However, the United $tates and its allies are seeking to
infringe upon and limit Iran’s right to produce nuclear energy for
civilian purposes, asserting that the Iranian government is using its
civilian nuclear program as a smokescreen for an alleged covert nuclear
weapons program.(2) These assertions are backed by no credible evidence,
just the assurances of the U.$. and Israeli governments respectively. It
is further insinuated that once Iran develops nuclear weapons, it will
certainly use them to “wipe Israel off the map of nations,”(3)
presenting an existential threat to the Jewish people.
Despite the belligerent public tone of the U.$. government, however, its
intelligence community has consistently reported to Congress that Iran’s
military strategy is strictly geared towards “deterrence,
asymmetric retaliation, and attrition warfare” (emphasis
mine).(4) Even the U.$. National Intelligence Director, James Clapper,
recently admitted to Congress that “we do not know if Iran will
eventually decide to build nuclear weapons” and implicitly confirmed
that Iran is not presently seeking to do so because if it were, such
activities would certainly be discovered by the “international
community.”(5) In spite of all this, President Obama maintains that “all
options are on the table” to thwart Iran’s nuclear program, with a
military attack on Iran taking place as early as June 2013.(6) As we
shall see, the United $tates is merely using Iran’s nuclear program as a
pretext to justify further military intervention in the region in a
larger effort to redesign the landscape of the Middle East in order to
secure the continued global hegemony of the U.$. empire. After the
collapse of the Soviet Union, the United $tates remained standing as the
world’s lone superpower. In 1991, President Bush declared the
establishment of a “New World Order,” that is, a unipolar global system
completely subjected to the imperial dictates of the United $tates and
its junior partners.(7) Foreign policy experts and government policy
think tanks immediately began mapping out blueprints for a new century
of what can be called trilateral imperialism (the United $tates, Western
Europe and Japan).(8)
To this end, the Bush I administration called for “the integration of
the leading democracies into a U.$.-led system of collective security,
and the prospects of expanding that system, [to] significantly enhance
our international position and provide a crucial legacy for future
peace.”(9) Within this collective framework, the United $tates would act
to “preclude any hostile power from dominating a region critical to our
interests, and also thereby to strengthen the barriers against the
reemergence of a global threat to the interests of the United States and
our allies.”(10) In other words, the First World should unite under the
leadership of the United $tates to dominate and exploit the resources of
the Third World (cheap labor, oil, cobalt, etc.), while preventing any
other power from emerging which could disrupt this neocolonial
relationship.
At the time, Russia was deemed to be the only military power capable of
potentially deterring U.$. imperialism. Thus, during the late 1990s
Council on Foreign Relations member and Clinton foreign policy advisor
Zbigniew Brzezinski advised that Russia “ought to be isolated and picked
apart” in order to extend “America’s influence in the Caucasus region
and Central Asia,” both formerly under Russian control.(11) In doing so,
the United $tates could secure its domination over Eurasia, long deemed
to be the strategic “heartland” of global power.(12) The NATO-led
“humanitarian intervention” in the former Yugoslavia during the late
1990s must be understood in this light.
The Middle East has long been assigned a very narrow role within the
imperialist world system, being seen as “a stupendous source of
strategic power, and one of the greatest material prizes in world
history.”(13) This is of course only because of the region’s massive
natural gas and oil reserves, which the United $tates considers to be
vital to its national interests. U.$. foreign policy in the Middle East
in the post-war period has been geared towards three main objectives: 1)
securing and maintaining “an open door” for Western companies to the
region’s vast oil and gas reserves; 2) maintaining a “closed door” for
potential rival powers (i.e., Russia and China) to Middle Eastern oil;
and 3) preventing Middle Eastern “radical and nationalist regimes” from
coming to power that might use their oil and gas resources for the
“immediate improvement in the low living standards of the masses” and
development for domestic needs.(14)
In the bipolar world of the Cold War, the Soviet Union was able to
counter U.$. ambitions in the Middle East, supporting various secular
nationalist regimes relatively hostile towards U.$. imperialism. After
the collapse of the USSR and the subsequent isolation of Russia,
however, the United $tates was in a position to fundamentally alter the
political map of the Middle East so as to “ensure that the enormous
profits of the energy system flow primarily to the United States, its
British client, and their energy corporations, not to the people of the
region” or potential rival powers.(15) It is in this light that we must
view the recent wave of “humanitarian interventions” conducted by the
United States and NATO in the Middle East and North Africa, as well as
the current confrontation with Iran.
In 2000, the Project for a New American Century published a report
entitled “Rebuilding America’s Defenses: Strategy, Forces and Resources
For a New Century,” which was extended and adopted as official national
security policy in 2005. Drawing on the themes of the first Bush
administration and Brzezinski, the report recommends that U.$. military
forces become “strong enough to dissuade potential adversaries from
pursuing a military build-up in hopes of surpassing, or equaling, the
power of the United States.”(16) As noted above, there was nothing new
in this goal of American hegemony per se, but what was new was the
emphasis placed on “transforming” the political landscape of the Middle
East. Due to the rise of Islamic terrorism and the stubborn existence of
“rogue states,” the “stability” of the Middle East, North Africa, and
their oil reserves were deemed to be essential objectives of U.$.
national security and foreign policy.
Using the 9/11 terrorist attacks as a pretext for this grand imperial
project, the Bush administration outlined a list of seven “rogue states”
targeted for regime change in order to secure de facto U.S. control over
global oil supplies. Those seven countries were Iraq, Syria, Lebanon,
Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Iran.(17) Of course, Iraq was invaded,
occupied and “democratized” by the United $tates in 2003. The threat of
Hezbollah in Lebanon has been satisfactorily neutralized as a result of
Israel’s 2006 invasion, the Jamahariya government of Libya was utterly
destroyed by NATO and Al Qaeda in 2011, the Assad regime of Syria is on
the verge of collapse today as it is under attack from NATO and its
Islamic mercenary forces, while there are ongoing covert military
operations being conducted against Somalia and the Sudan. Only Iran
remains intact as a nation-state out of the seven countries targeted by
the U.$. imperialists for regime change.
The current U.$. propaganda campaign would have us believe that the
United $tates is targeting Iran because it is seeking to develop nuclear
weapons with which it will destroy Israel. As we have seen however, U.$.
intelligence – that is, the agencies responsible for obtaining such
information – does not have strong evidence to prove that Iran is
pursuing nuclear weapons. Further, in its assessment, Iran’s military
strategy is not geared towards aggression or the offensive, but strictly
deterrence and defense. Therefore, there must be some other reasons why
the United $tates is gearing up for war against Iran.
In light of U.$. policy objectives to dominate global oil supplies and
to subvert or overthrow “nationalist regimes” that seek to use their
natural resources to benefit their domestic populations or to promote
independent development, it should be fairly obvious that Iran is a
target because its oil is nationalized and it pursues a program of
independent development. Indeed, when Iran first nationalized its oil in
1953 under Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddegh, the CIA and British MI6
quickly organized a coup d’etat to overthrow Mosaddegh and reprivatize
Iranian oil.(18) The oil industry wasn’t nationalized again until the
1979 Islamic revolution, led by Ayatollah Khomeini, which quickly set
Iran on a path of independent nationalist development.
Also of grave concern to the United $tates is Iran’s growing commercial
and economic relations with Russia and China. Iran exports 22% of its
oil exports to China,(19) while it has cultivated a strong economic
relationship with Russia on various fronts, especially in military
equipment and nuclear infrastructure.(20) The Iranian regime’s
independence from Washington has afforded Russia and China a foot in the
door of the Middle East, which hinders the ability of the United $tates
to completely dominate the region and prevent the rise of potential
rival hegemons in the world system, perhaps the greatest threat posed by
Iran.
Iran itself is deemed as a threat to U.$. interests in the Middle East,
as it is devoted to “countering U.S. influence” and becoming a regional
dominator.(21) To this end, Iran has been fostering political, economic
and security ties with other actors in the region, appealing to Islamic
solidarity and resistance to imperialism. Iran has become influential in
both Iraq and Afghanistan, undermining U.$. objectives in those
countries, and has maintained its support for the Assad regime in Syria,
thwarting NATO’s efforts there.(22) All of these factors make Iran a
formidable obstacle to U.$. objectives in the Middle East, halting
Washington’s ability to totally redesign the political landscape of the
region.
Iran also gives financial and military support to various
politico-military organizations in the region. As the United $tates
considers many of these organizations “terrorists,” Iran is then a
“state sponsor of terrorism.” Most of its support is channeled to
Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in the Gaza Strip. Both of these groups
are opposed to the Zionist colonization of Palestine and to U.$.
imperialism in the region more generally. Through Hezbollah and Hamas,
Iran is able to exert its influence in the Middle East, creating
political “destabilization” in Lebanon and Palestine.(23) The continued
existence of such armed groups is considered a threat to U.$. objectives
in the region and is another main reason why the United $tates is
seeking to attack Iran.
When we place the current threats towards Iran in their proper
geopolitical and historical context, it becomes clear that Iran’s
nuclear program is not the real reason why the imperialists are gearing
up to attack it. In fact, there is sufficient evidence to suggest that
the alleged threat posed by Iran’s nuclear program is merely a
propaganda fabrication designed to garner popular support for the
immanent invasion of Iran, similar to the lie that Saddam Hussein
possessed “weapons of mass destruction” in Iraq. In truth, Iran was
targeted for regime change at least ten years ago, but because of its
resistance to the “Washington Consensus,” its economic nationalism, its
growing commercial and economic ties to Russia and China, its potential
to become a regional authority, and its support of politico-military
organizations opposed to the United $tates and Israel, not because of
its nuclear program.
The drums of war are now beating in the United $tates as Washington
prepares to launch the final phase of its grand strategy to remake the
Middle East. This plan is merely one component of a much larger plan to
maintain the world system of trilateral imperialism. In order to
maintain the global supremacy of the West, the United $tates and its
junior partners are determined to prevent the rise of Russia and China
to hegemonic status. Thus, an attack on Iran will surely be viewed as an
indirect attack on both Russia and China. A war on Iran may very well
quickly escalate into a global military conflagration, consuming other
states in the region, as well as Russia and China. To prevent such a
scenario from unfolding, academics and intellectuals must dispel the
propaganda about Iran’s nuclear program and expose the imperialist
ambitions behind the U.$. government’s agenda to the Amerikan people.
This movie claims to chronicle the decade-long hunt for Osama bin Laden
after the September 2001 attack, culminating in his death in May 2011.
This is a hollywood film, so we can’t expect an accurate documentary.
But that doesn’t really matter since the movie will represent what
Amerikans think of when they picture the CIA’s work in the Middle East.
And what they get is a propaganda film glorifying Amerikan torture of
prisoners, and depicting Pakistani people as violent and generally
pretty stupid. From start to finish there is nothing of value in this
movie, and a lot of harmful and misleading propaganda. The main message
that revolutionaries should take from it revolves around government
information gathering. From tracking phones to networks of people
watching and following individuals, the government has extensive and
sophisticated techniques at their disposal, and even the most cautious
will have a very hard time avoiding even a small amount of government
surveillance.
The plot focuses almost exclusively on a CIA agent, “Maya,” who devoted
her career to finding clues to Osama bin Laden’s whereabouts. Early in
the film there are a lot of graphic scenes of prisoners being tortured
to get information, including waterboarding, beatings, cages, and food
and sleep deprivation. Maya is bothered by the torture initially, but
quickly adapts and joins in the interrogations. The movie is very
pro-torture, showing critical information coming from every single
tortured prisoner, ignoring the fact that so many prisoners held in
Amerikan detention facilities after 9/11 were never charged, committed
no crimes, and had no information. Throughout the film there are
constant digs against Obama’s ban on torture as a method of extracting
information in 2009. Ironically, in the movie the CIA still found Osama
bin Laden, using no torture after the ban. But we’re left understanding
that it would have been much easier if the CIA still had free reign with
prisoners.
Although Zero Dark Thirty portrays Obama as soft on terror and
a hindrance to the CIA’s work, we should not be fooled into thinking
that the U.$. government has really ended the use of torture. While we
have no clear information about what goes on in interrogation cells in
other countries, we know that right here in U.$. prisons, torture is
used daily. And this domestic torture is usually not even focused on
getting information, it’s either sadistic entertainment for prison staff
or punishment for political organizing. In one example of this, a USW
comrade who wrote about
Amerikan
prison control units died shortly after his article was printed,
under suspicious circumstances in Attica Correctional Facility.
Banning certain interrogation techniques, even if that ban is actually
enforced in the Third World, is just an attempt to put makeup on the
hideous face of imperialism. Even if no Amerikan citizen ever practices
torture on Third World peoples (something we know isn’t true), the fact
is that the United $tates prefers to pay proxies to carry out its dirty
work anyway. Torture, military actions, rape, theft, etc., can all be
done at a safe distance by paying neo-colonial armies and groups to work
on behalf of the Amerikan government.
Whether actions are carried out by Navy SEALs, CIA agents, or proxy
armies and individuals, Amerikan imperialism is working hard to keep the
majority of the world’s people under control and available for
exploitation. The death of bin Laden is portrayed as a big victory in
Zero Dark Thirty, but for the majority of the world’s people
this was just one more example of Amerikan militarism, a system that
works against the material interests of most people in the world.
15 September 2012 – Tens of thousands of people in dozens of cities and
slums across Africa, South Asia, the Middle East and parts of Europe and
Australia have demonstrated in recent days in response to a film made in
the United $tates attacking the Prophet Muhammad. Protests primarily
targeted U.$. embassies and other symbols of imperialism including an
Amerikan school, a KFC restaurant, and a UN camp.(1) The latter was one
of many locations where authorities shot at protestors with live
ammunition. Many have died so far. Some common unifying symbolism of
these actions has been burning of Amerikan flags and chants of “Death to
Amerika!”
The first protest that got the world’s attention was in Libya, where
U.$.-backed forces recently overthrew the decades-old government there.
Timed to occur on the anniversary of the 11 September 2001 attacks on
the United $tates by Al Qaeda, rebels grabbed headlines by laying siege
to the embassy, killing as many as a dozen people, including the new
U.$. ambassador. Since then protestors have attacked imperialist
embassies in Tunisia, Yemen and Sudan without firearms.
While incumbent U.$. President Barack Obama has been making plenty of
mention of his role in the assassination of Al-Qaeda’s former leader
Osama bin Laden in campaign speeches, hundreds of protestors in Kuwait
chanted outside the U.$. embassy, “Obama, we are all Osama.” Osama’s
vision of a Pan-Islamic resistance to U.$. occupations and economic
interference in the Muslim world has reached new heights this week.
The Amerikan media has tried to play it off as a small group of trouble
makers protesting, while Amerikans are shocked that they can be blamed
for a fringe movie they have never seen and think is a piece of crap. At
the same time, Amerikans seem very willing to condemn the protestors as
ignorant, violent, low-lifes – just as the movie in question portrayed
Muslims. But the trigger of these protests is far less important than
the history of U.$. relations to the people involved. The most violent
reactions occurred in countries that have all been under recent bombing
attacks by the U.$. military, two of them for many years now, and the
other had their whole government overthrown. Cocky Amerikans won’t
recognize that the ambassador was targeted as the highest level
representative of the U.$. puppet master in Libya.
MIM has held for some time that Muslim organizations have done more to
fight imperialism in recent years in most of the world than communists
have.(2) And while there are plenty of ways communists could
theoretically be doing a better job, they are not. As materialists we
must accept and work with the people and conditions we are given. And we
do not hesitate to recognize that Islam has brought us the biggest
internationalist demonstration of anti-imperialism we’ve seen in some
time.
When the 2011 food strike was peaking in California, MIM(Prisons) had
mentioned similar tactics being used by Palestinians in Israeli prisons.
And just as the struggle in U.$. prisons continues, so has the struggle
of the Palestinians. A mass hunger strike lasted 28 days this spring,
with some leaders having gone as long as 77 days without food, until an
agreement was made on May 15.
“The written agreement contained five main provisions:
The prisoners would end their hunger strike following the signing of the
agreement;
There will be an end to the use of long-term isolation of prisoners for
“security” reasons, and the 19 prisoners will be moved out of isolation
within 72 hours;
Family visits for first-degree relatives to prisoners from the Gaza
Strip and for families from the West Bank who have been denied visit
based on vague “security reasons” will be reinstated within one
month;
The Israeli intelligence agency guarantees that there will be a
committee formed to facilitate meetings between the IPS and prisoners in
order to improve their daily conditions;
There will be no new administrative detention orders or renewals of
administrative detention orders for the 308 Palestinians currently in
administrative detention, unless the secret files, upon which
administrative detention is based, contains “very serious”
information.”(1)
While the concessions were a bit more gratifying than those that
stopped the strike in California, Palestinians still have to ensure that
Israeli actions followed their words, just as
prisoners
have been struggling to do in California. And sure enough the
Israelis have not followed through, as leading hunger strikers have had
their “administrative detentions” (which means indefinite imprisonment
without charge or conviction) renewed. One striker has been on
continuous hunger strike since April 12, and was reported to be in grave
danger on July 5, after 85 days without eating. Others have also
restarted their hunger strikes as the Israelis prove that they need
another push to respect Palestinian humyn rights.
[UPDATE: As of July 10, Mahmoud Sarsak was released
from administrative detention, after a three month fast. Others continue
their fasts, including Akram Rikhawi (90 days), Samer Al Barq (50 days)
and Hassan Safadi (20 days).]
MIM(Prisons) says that U.$. prisons are just as illegitimate in their
imprisonment of New Afrikan, First Nation, Boricua and Chicano peoples
as Israel is in imprisoning the occupied Palestinians. The extreme use
of imprisonment practiced by the settler states is connected to the
importance that the settlers themselves put on the political goals of
that imprisonment. Someone isn’t put in long-term isolation because
they’re a kleptomaniac or a rapist, but they are put in long-term
isolation because they represent and support the struggle of their
people to be free of settler control.
The point of guerrilla war is not to succeed, it’s always been
just to make the enemy bleed. Depriving the soldiers of the peace of
mind that they need. Bullets are hard to telegraph when they bob and
they weave. The only way a guerrilla war can ever be over, is when
the occupation can’t afford more soldiers. Until they have to draft
the last of you into the service, and you refuse because you don’t
see the purpose. - Immortal Technique, the Martyr
In just over a week, six Amerikan soldiers have been killed by Afghan
patriots within the state military that is supposedly working with the
U.$. occupation. Nominally triggered by reports of the U.$. military
burning copies of the Koran, these killings bring the number of NATO
troops killed by their Afghan “allies” to 36 in the last year. This is a
significant increase from previous years and some have suggested no
other “native ally” of U.$. imperialism has compared.(1) While tiny in
comparison to the loss of life by the occupied population, these
incidents support the assessment that the United $tates continues to
lose their war on Afghanistan. The deaths of Amerikans, while providing
fuel for anti-Afghan propaganda, frightens the Amerikan public away from
participating in ground wars. It took a long 9 years to turn Amerikan
public opinion towards pulling troops out of Afghanistan, and Afghans
are still fighting to get them out.(2)
There are two incorrect bourgeois narratives underlying the reporting on
recent events. One attempts to hide the fact that the nation has faced a
brutal occupation for over a decade, as if Afghans are just irrationally
responding to the minor incident of the burning of some books. The
second narrative is that there is an outside radical religious element,
which must be distinguished from the greater Afghan nation that wants to
work with Amerikans. This narrative was used against the Taliban for
years before the invasion by U.$. troops even began. The truth being
(however flimsily) covered by both of these narratives is that the
Afghan nation has supported a decade-long war of resistance to the
imperialist occupation led by Amerika. A parallel might be drawn to the
media’s portrayal of the prison movement where the outside element is
“criminal gangs” and resistance is pinned to issues like wanting TV or
better food.
In a recent report on NPR, an official stated that USAID had to hide the
fact that they were giving aid to the Afghan people, because no one in
the country would be seen with a blanket or food with a U.$. flag on it.
This fact is a clear demonstration that either the resistance is the
Afghan people, or the “outside radical element” is so prolific as to
make distinguishing it from the Afghan people irrelevant. Meanwhile, the
funeral of an Afghan air force colonel that killed nine Amerikans was
attended by 1500 mourners last year.(3) Since this article was first
drafted another bomb struck near Bagram Air Force Base where the Korans
were burned on March 5. On March 8 the Taliban infiltrated Afghan police
in Oruzgan and killed nine of them, while six British occupiers were
killed during an attack on their vehicle in Helmand province. Our
strategic confidence comes from examples like this, where whole
countries have united to reject and fight imperialism. Comparing these
conditions to those in the United $tates demonstrates our line on where
guerrilla war is possible and not.
“Time works for the guerrilla both in the field – where it costs the
enemy a daily fortune to pursue him – and in the politico-economic
arena.”(4) The occupation of Afghanistan is estimated to have cost as
much as $500 billion(5), with sources reporting costs per Amerikan
soldier at $850,000 up to $1.2 million a year.(6) While almost all of
this money goes to U.$. corporations and their employees supplying the
soldiers, even bourgeois economists have recognized that militarism is
not a sustainable way to prop up a capitalist economy. What they fail to
acknowledge is that only a socialist economic system that produces for
need, not profit, can eliminate the inherent contradictions in
production where circulation of capital must always increase in the
interest of profit.
“There is no great novelty in [guerrilla tactics], nor can the
Marxist-Leninist camp claim any special credit for it. What is new – and
Mao is the apostle and the long Chinese revolution the first proving
ground – is the application of guerrilla activity, in a conscious and
deliberate way, to specific political objectives, without immediate
reference to the outcome of battles as such, provided only that the
revolutionaries survive.”(7)
We are coming out of a period where the universality of Maoism has been
dirtied by an association of communism with revisionists and First
Worldists. Islam continues to unite the national liberation movement in
Afghanistan, while “communism” has an association with foreign invasion.
While socialism is necessary to meet the needs of the people of
Afghanistan, the movement’s ideology so far has kept it isolated from
the toxic politics of the First World. This will work in their favor as
the people’s struggle reaches higher stages.
Here in the United $tates we must continue to find creative ways to help
the Afghans’ heroic struggle to whittle away at Amerikan support for
occupation. And we must learn from the events in Central Asia about who
are our friends and enemies, what is possible where, and what it looks
like to take on a long struggle with the confidence that you are on the
right side of history.
While Israel/Netanyahu proclaim that Iran has, or is developing, a
nuclear arsenal and that nuclear research by Iran can be dangerous for
peace in the Middle East, Israel continues to stockpile nuclear weapons
freely, without any restriction or limit from the international
community; the same as the U$A! So why is Israel allowed to develop all
kinds of nuclear arsenal and weapons of mass destruction, as is the
United $tates, but Iran is not allowed to have any kind of nuclear
research, not even for peaceful purposes, such as energy? Is Israel less
aggressive and less war-waging than Iran? Is the U$A less war waging
than Iran? Are the U$A and Israel more democratic and just than Iran or
Syria or Iraq or Afghanistan?
It looks like democracy, to the U$A, is in the eye of the beholder! To
the imperialists, democracy means providing for the elite, the top
aristocracy and their lackeys, but not for the oppressed and exploited
of the world. This is part of the principal contradiction in imperialist
society. It is selfish and cannot see democracy from the vantage of the
oppressed nations and the Third World nations!
So Israel can have nuclear warheads, pointing toward Iran, Syria, or any
Arab-Muslim country that they claim threatens Israel, but none of those
countries can have nuclear research, even if it is for peaceful purposes
like generating electricity. With this kind of provocation, Israel is
ushering the Arab-Muslim countries to war; but that might be unfortunate
for Israel!
MIM(Prisons) responds: This is a good point about imperialist
double standards that we need to hammer home each time we see examples
of it. The imperialists define who they want to label “terrorists” while
they run around the world committing real acts of terror: mass murder,
widespread destruction, and environmental devastation. It is the
imperialists who will be the cause of the end of humyn life on earth if
we do not come together with the oppressed of the world to put an end to
imperialist terror.
Today, the United $tates threatened to trigger conflict with Iran when
one of its unmanned drones allegedly lost control and flew into Iranian
air space.(1) If it was Iran’s drone that had flown over the United
$tates, we would again see the double standard at play. Last month the
Amerikans made unlikely accusations against Iran’s Qods force that it
plotted a terrorist attack in Washington DC with the Mexican drug
cartel, Zeta. Amerikan politicians attack the Third World as
“terrorists” and the internal semi-colonies as “gangs.” While they tell
fantastic
stories(2) to link foreign terrorists with North American gangs, we
work with lumpen in the United $tates to develop in a united front with
the struggle of Third World peoples to end oppression and exploitation.
Many people join the anti-imperialist movement out of persynal reasons
(for instance fighting against the horrible conditions of imprisonment
in Security Housing Units) but we need to broaden our thinking beyond
our persynal struggles and see the connections to the oppressed of the
world if we hope to make real and lasting change.