People Before Profit blog

Venezuelas Chavez says world faces choice between U.S. hegemony and survival

Tue, 26 Sep 2006 10:49:00 +0000

Speech of Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez to the U.N. General Assembly, New York, Sept. 20, 2006. Transcript provided by Venezuelanalysis.com.

By President Hugo Chavez Frias

Madame President, Excellencies, Heads of State, Heads of Governments, and high ranking government representatives from around the world. A very good day to you all.

First of all, with much respect, I would like to invite all of those, who have not had a chance, to read this book that we have read: Noam Chomsky, one of the most prestigious intellectuals of America and the world. One of Chomsky’s most recent works: “Hegemony or Survival? America’s Quest for Global Dominance.” An excellent piece to help us understand what happened in the world during the 20th century, what is going on now and the greatest threat looming over our planet: the hegemonic pretension of U.S. Imperialism that puts at risk the very survival of the human species. We continue to warn about this danger and call on the people of the U.S. and the world to halt this threat that is like the sword of Damocles.

I intended to read a chapter, but for the sake of time, I will leave it as a recommendation. It’s a fast read. It’s really good Madame President, surely you are familiar with it. It is published in English, German, Russian, and Arabic (applause). Look, I think our brothers and sisters of the United States should be the first citizens to read this book because the threat is in their own house.

The Devil is in their home. The Devil, the Devil himself is in their home.

The Devil came here yesterday (laughter and applause). Yesterday the Devil was here, in this very place. This table from where I speak still smells like sulfur. Yesterday, ladies and gentlemen, in this same hall the President of the United States, who I call “The Devil,” came here talking as if he owned the world. It would take a psychiatrist to analyze the U.S. president’s speech from yesterday.

As the spokesperson for Imperialism he came to give us his recipes for maintaining the current scheme of domination, exploitation and pillage of the world’s people. It would make a good Alfred Hitchcock movie. I could even suggest a title: “The Devil’s Recipe.” That is to say, U.S. Imperialism, and here Chomsky says it with profound and crystalline clarity, is making desperate efforts to consolidate its hegemonic system of domination. We cannot allow this to occur, we cannot permit them to install a world dictatorship, to consolidate a world dictatorship.

The speech of the tyrannical president of the world was full of cynicism, full of hypocrisy. It is this imperial hypocrisy with which he attempts to control everything. They want to impose upon us the democratic model they devised, the false democracy of elites. And moreover, a very original democratic model imposed with explosions, bombings, invasions, and cannon shot. That’s some democracy! One would have to review the thesis of Aristotle and of the first Greeks who spoke of democracy to see what kind of model of democracy is imposed by marines, invasions, aggressions and bombs.

The U.S. president said the following yesterday in this same hall, I quote: “everywhere you turn, you hear extremists who tell you that you can escape your misery and regain your dignity through violence and terror and martyrdom.” Wherever he looks he sees extremists. I am sure he sees you, brother, with your skin color, and thinks you are an extremist. With his color, the dignified President of Bolivia Evo Morales, who was here yesterday, is an extremist. The imperialists see extremists all around. No, it’s not that we are extremists. What is happening is that the world is waking up and people everywhere are rising up. I have the impression Mr. Imperialist dictator that you will live the rest of your days as if in a nightmare, because no matter where you look we will be rising up against U.S. imperialism.

Yes, they call us extremists, we who demand complete freedom in the world, equality among peoples and respect for national sovereignty.

We are rising up against the Empire, against the model of domination.

Later, the president said, “Today I’d like to speak directly to the people across the broader Middle East: My country desires peace.”

That is certain. If we walk the streets of the Bronx, if we walk through the streets of New York, Washington, San Diego, California, any city, San Antonio, San Francisco and we ask the people on the street: the people of the U.S. want peace. The difference is that the government of this country, of the U.S., does not want peace; it wants to impose its model of exploitation and plundering and its hegemony upon us under threat of war. That is the little difference. The people want peace and, what is happening in Iraq? And what happened in Lebanon and Palestine? And what has happened over the last 100 years in Latin America and the world and now the threats against Venezuela, new threats against Iran? He spoke to the people of Lebanon, “Many of you have seen your homes and communities caught in crossfire.” What cynicism! What capacity to blatantly lie before the world! The bombs in Beirut launched with milimetric precision are “crossfire”? I think that the president is thinking of those western movies where they shoot from the hip and someone ends up caught in the middle.

Imperialist fire! Fascist fire! Murderous fire! Genocidal fire against the innocent people of Palestine and Lebanon by the Empire and Israel. That is the truth. Now they say that they are upset to see homes destroyed.

In the end, the U.S. president came to speak to the people, and also to say, “I brought some documents Madame President.” This morning I was watching some of the speeches while updating mine. He spoke to the people of Afghanistan, to the people of Lebanon, to the people of Iran. One has to wonder, when listening to the U.S. president speak to those people: what would those people say to him? If those people could talk to him, what would they say? I think I have an idea because I know the souls of the majority of those people, the people of the South, the downtrodden peoples would say: Yankee imperialist go home! That would be the shout that would echo around the world, if these people of the world could speak with only one voice to the U.S. Empire.

Therefore, Madame President, colleagues, and friends, last year we came to this same hall, as we have for the past eight years, and we said something that today is completely confirmed. I believe that almost no one in this room would stand up to defend the system of the United Nations. Lets admit with honesty, the UN system that emerged after WWII has collapsed, shattered, it doesn’t work. Well, OK. To come here and give speeches, and visit with one another once a year, yes, it works for that. And to make long documents and reflect and listen to good speeches like Evo’s yesterday, and Lula’s, yes, for that it works. And many speeches, like the one we just heard by the president of Sri Lanka and of the president of Chile. But we have converted this Assembly into a mere deliberative organ with no kind of power to impact in the slightest way the terrible reality the world is experiencing.

Therefore we again propose here today, September 20, [2006] to re-found the United Nations. Last year Madame President, we made four modest proposals that we feel are in urgent need of being adopted by the Heads of State, Heads of Government, ambassadors and representatives. And we discussed these proposals.

First: expansion. Yesterday Lula said the same, the Security Council, its permanent as well as its non- permanent seats, must open up to new members from developed, underdeveloped and Third World countries.

That’s the first priority.

Second: the application of effective methods of addressing and resolving world conflicts. Transparent methods of debate and of making decisions.

Third: the immediate suppression of the anti-democratic veto mechanism, the veto power over Security Council decisions, seems fundamental to us and is being called for by all. Here is a recent example, the immoral veto by the U.S. government that freely allowed Israeli forces to destroy Lebanon, in front of us all, by blocking a resolution in the UN Security Council.

Fourthly: as we always say, it is necessary to strengthen the role, the powers of the general secretary of the United Nations. Yesterday we heard the speech of the general secretary, who is nearing the end of his term. He recalled that in these ten years the world has become more complicated and that the serious problems of the world, the hunger, poverty, violence, and violation of human rights have been aggravated, this is a terrible consequence of the collapse of the UN system and of U.S. imperialist pretensions.

Madame President, recognizing our status as members, Venezuela decided several years ago to wage this battle within the UN with our voice, our modest reflections. We are an independent voice, representing dignity and the search for peace, the formulation of an international system to denounce persecution and hegemonic aggression against people worldwide. In this way Venezuela has presented its name. The homeland of Bolivar has presented its name as a candidate for a non-permanent seat on the Security Council. Of course you all know that the U.S. government has begun an open attack, an immoral global attack in an attempt to block Venezuela from being freely elected to occupy the open seat on the Security Council. They are afraid of the truth. The empire is afraid of the truth and of independent voices. They accuse us of being extremists. They are the extremists.

I want to thank all countries that have announced your support for Venezuela, even when the vote is secret and it is not necessary for anyone to reveal their vote. But I think that the open aggression of the U.S. Empire has reinforced the support of many countries, which in turn morally strengthened Venezuela, our people, our government. Our brothers and sisters of MERCOSUR, for example, as a block, have announced their support for Venezuela. We are now a full member of MERCOSUR along with Brazil, Argentina, Uruguay, Paraguay. Many other countries of Latin America, such as Bolivia and all the CARICOM nations have pledged their support to Venezuela. The entire Arab League has announced its support for Venezuela. I thank the Arab world, our brothers of the Arab world and of the Caribbean. The African Union, nearly all of the African Union countries have pledged their support for Venezuela and other countries like Russia, China and many others across the globe. I thank you all deeply in the name of Venezuela, in the name of our people and in the name of truth, because Venezuela, upon occupying a seat on the Security Council will not only bring to it the voice of Venezuela, but also the voice of the Third World, the voice of the peoples of the planet. There we will defend dignity and truth.

Despite all this Madame President, I think there are reasons to be optimistic.

Hopelessly optimistic, as a poet would say, because beyond the threats, bombs, wars, aggressions, preventative wars, and the destruction of entire peoples, one can see that a new era is dawning.

Like Silvio Rodríguez sings, “the era is giving birth to a heart.”

Alternative tendencies, alternative thoughts, and youth with distinct ideas are emerging. In barely a decade it has been demonstrated that the End of History theory was totally false. The establishment of the American Empire, the American peace, the establishment of the capitalist, neoliberal model that generates misery and poverty — all totally false. The thesis is totally false and has been dumped. Now the future of the world must be defined. There is a new dawning on this planet that can be seen everywhere: in Latin America, Asia, Africa, Europe, Oceania. I want to highlight that vision of optimism to fortify our conscience and our will to fight to save the world and construct a new world, a better world.

Venezuela has joined this struggle and for this we are threatened.

The U.S. has already planned, financed and launched a coup in Venezuela. And the U.S. continues to support coup plotters in Venezuela. And they continue supporting terrorism against Venezuela.

President Michel Bachelet recalled a few days ago … pardon, I mean a few minutes ago … the terrible murder of the former Chilean Foreign Minster Orlando Letelier. I would only add the following: the guilty parties are free. Those responsible for that deed, in which a U.S. citizen was also killed, are North Americans of the CIA. Terrorists of the CIA.

In addition, we here in this room must remember that in a few days it will be the 30th anniversary of that murder and of the horrible terrorist attack that blew up a Cubana de Aviación airplane in mid-flight, killing 73 innocent people. And where is the worst terrorist of this continent, who admitted to being the intellectual author of the airplane sabotage? He was in prison in Venezuela for some years, but he escaped with the complicity of CIA officials and the Venezuelan government of that time. Now he is here living in the U.S., protected by the government even though he was convicted and he confessed. The U.S. government has a double standard and protects terrorism.

These reflections are to demonstrate that Venezuela is committed to the fight against terrorism, against violence and works together with all people who struggle for peace and for a just world.

I spoke of the Cuban airplane. Luis Posada Carriles is the name of that terrorist. He is protected here just like the corrupt fugitives who escaped Venezuela. A group of terrorists who planted bombs in embassies of various countries, murdered innocent people during the coup and kidnapped this humble servant. They were going to execute me, but God reached out his hand, along with a group of good soldiers, and the who people took to the streets. It’s a miracle that I’m here. The leaders of that coup and those terrorist acts are here, protected by the U.S. government. I accuse the U.S. government of protecting terrorism and of giving a completely cynical speech.

Speaking of Cuba, we went happily to Havana. We were there several days. During the G-15 Summit and the NAM Summit the dawning of a new era was evident with an historic resolution and final document. Don’t worry. I am not going to read it all. But here is a collection of resolutions made in open discussion with transparency. With more than 50 Heads of State, Havana was the capital of the South for a week. We have re-launched the Non-Aligned Movement. And if there is anything I could ask of you all, my brothers and sisters, it is to please lend your support to the strengthening of the NAM, which is so important to the emergence of a new era, to preventing hegemony and imperialism. Also, you all know that we have designated Fidel Castro as President of the NAM for the next three years and we are sure that compañero President Fidel Castro will fulfill the post with much efficiency. Those who wanted Fidel to die, well, they remain frustrated because Fidel is already back in his olive green uniform and is now not only the President of Cuba but also the President of NAM.

Madam President, dear colleagues, presidents, a very strong movement of the South emerged there in Havana. We are men and women of the South. We are bearers of these documents, these ideas, opinions, and reflections. I have already closed by folder and the book that I brought with me. Don’t forget it. I really recommend it. With much humility we try to contribute ideas for the salvation of the planet, to save it from the threat of imperialism, and god willing soon.

Early in this century, god willing, so that we ourselves can see and experience with our children and grandchildren a peaceful world, under the fundamental principles of the UN, renewed and relocated. I believe that the UN must be located in another country, in a city of the South. We have proposed this from Venezuela. You all know that my medical personnel had to stay locked up in the airplane. The Chief of my security is locked on the plane. They would not let them come to the UN. Another abuse and outrage Madame President that we request to be registered personally to the sulfurous Devil. But God is with us.

A warm embrace and may God bless us all. Good day.

FROM THE PWW ARCHIVES, Sept. 5, 1998, European resistance to gene modification grows

Sun, 24 Sep 2006 05:50:00 +0000

The broadest political movement to be seen in Europe in recent decades has been taking shape in opposition to the development and production of genetically-modified food crops.

Resistance is directed chiefly at the operations of the huge U.S. chemical company, Monsanto, which is its chief promoter.

Monsanto began its program in the U.S. with genetically- modified (GM) seeds of soya beans. In Europe, one of the main export markets for U.S. soya beans, doubts about the scientific testing of the altered bean have led to efforts to restrict its importation.

For Monsanto, its move into biotechnology means new vistas of profits.

A widespread invasion of the European market has been going on, with governments persuaded to undertake experimental plantings. In Britain alone there have been 1,200 such trials, involving 160 genetically-engineered seeds, and similar trials have been occurring in other countries of western Europe.

According to its supporters, GM can make food taste better, be more nutritious, improve yields and require fewer pesticides and herbicides.

Pointing to the emergence of BSE, or “mad cow disease,” that has been traced to untested cattle feeding techniques, its opponents contend that the potential risks cannot be predicted. They also point out that crop monoculture is susceptible to diseases, that there will be a loss of biodiversity, that power will be concentrated in the hands of agrochemical giants, that consumers are being given no choice, that the technology poses fundamental ethical questions about life forms and that already new toxins and allergies have developed.

The activities of Monsanto have disturbed many people who recall that it was Monsanto that created and produced Agent Orange, the lethal chemical used by the U.S. in Vietnam that caused death or malformation for countless Vietnamese as well as many U.S. soldiers.

Furthermore, past chemical tampering with agriculture saw the indiscriminate spraying of crops with DDT in the 1960s. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has since banned DDT because of its proven health dangers. And there was the “green revolution” of 30 years ago, featuring the use of costly chemical fertilizers that produced Third World farmers who are burdened by debt rather than basking in the sunshine of prosperity.

In France, the leaders of the biggest farmers’ union became folk heroes for destroying a GM-trial grain field and the government has been compelled to order a two-year moratorium on introducing GM crops. Greenpeace in Germany has mobilized a movement of 250,000 consumers against the sale of GM-linked foods.

The most extensive anti-GM movement has developed in Britain, where Monsanto is making its most vigorous drive. Over 40 groups have been set up with the aim of destroying the GM test sites by pulling up the plants. Currently, Monsanto is bringing a court case against five women who ripped up one of its sites.

Spontaneous organizations calling themselves “Earth First,” “Captain Chromosome,” “Genetic Superman,” search out test sites for razing. Although these are only the activist tip, the demand for a moratorium on tests for up to five years has been made by such conservative organizations as the Women’s Institute, the Country Landowners, and the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds.

The National Trust, Britain’s biggest landowner, and the conservative National Farmers’ Union want greater study of the issue. On the other hand, the environmental organizations, Greenpeace, Friends of the Earth, the Green Party and the Soil Association call for a halt to the GM introduction entirely.

International aid groups like Oxfam and Christian Aid express doubts about the claim that the technology would relieve third world hunger.

Resistance has been greatly increased by the recent discovery that the claim that GM crops can withstand weed- killing herbicides is false. Instead, all that will happen is the development of a “super weed.” On top of this, research made public in August by the Rowett Research Institute in Aberdeen, Scotland showed that rats eating GM potatoes over a three-month period suffered stunted growth and damage to their immune system.

In early August the prestigious British Vegetarian Society has refused to endorse foods with GM ingredients.

A major blow to the GM program has been a growing number of declarations and articles by environmentalists warning of the coming “silent spring.” So effective have this and other arguments been that many of those resisting the GM program see it as a reckless drive by Monsanto and other companies to disregard safeguards and thoroughly objective investigation in the pursuit of short-term profits. There is no objection to well-researched, proven technology that benefits humanity without harming sections of it, but, like the technology of nuclear weapons, if the effects are disastrous it has to be ended.

FROM THE PWW ARCHIVES, Sept. 5, 1998

Oil pressure

Fri, 22 Sep 2006 10:12:00 +0000

“The oil belongs to the Iraqi people. It’s their asset,” declared President George W. Bush in a press conference on the White House lawn in June. He had just returned from a surprise visit to Baghdad, in which oil had been one of the main subjects of discussion.

“We talked about how to advise the government to best use that money for the benefit of the people,” he clarified.

Since the new Iraqi government was formed in May 2006, the U.S. government has dramatically scaled up its efforts to provide “advice.” In July, the administration and major oil companies reviewed and commented on a new law governing Iraq’s crucial oil sector, before it has even been seen by the Iraqi Parliament.

Violating the very notions of freedom and democracy Bush invokes in nearly every speech on Iraq, the U.S. government has actively intervened in the restructuring of Iraq’s oil industry since at least 2002.

In October 2002, the State Department established a working group on oil and energy, as part of its “Future of Iraq” project. The project brought together influential exiled Iraqis with U.S. government officials and international consultants. Later, some members of the group became part of the Iraqi government. The result of the project’s work was a draft framework for Iraq’s oil policy. Despite Iraq being rich in oil and technical expertise, the group recommended a major role for foreign companies, through long-term contracts — an approach which would set Iraq at odds with the rest of the Middle East, where major oil producers keep their oil in the public sector.

In early 2003, the wheels started to turn as the Coalition Provisional Authority appointed the former head of Shell USA as senior oil adviser, in daily contact with the Iraqi Ministry of Oil. He was joined by an executive from Exxon Mobil, and after six months, the post was rotated to former managers of ConocoPhillips and BP.

In December 2003, the framework was set out in more detail when USAID commissioned a report by the privatization specialists BearingPoint entitled, “Options for developing a sustainable, long-term Iraqi oil industry.” The report reinforced the “Future of Iraq” report, recommending long-term contracts with foreign companies. Pointing to the “success” of this model, BearingPoint used Azerbaijan’s privatization model as an example. The report commented approvingly that Azerbaijan’s high corruption and lack of democracy had not impeded investment — the government had simply given away a higher share of revenues, in order to attract companies. The implication was that Iraq, which has a nascent democracy and chronic corruption, might follow the same approach.

After the handover to the interim government in June 2004, senior oil advisers — now based within the Iraq Reconstruction Management Office (IRMO) in the U.S. Embassy — continued working closely with the Oil Ministry in shaping policy. Post holders included executives from ChevronTexaco and Unocal.

In 2006, these efforts intensified. In February, the IRMO advisers accompanied eight senior officials from the Oil Ministry on a trip to the U.S., sponsored by the U.S. Trade and Development Agency. On the trip, they met oil company representatives to discuss the future structure of the Iraqi oil industry.

The same month, at the request of the State Department, USAID provided an adviser to the Oil Ministry, again from BearingPoint, to work directly on a new oil law, providing “legal and regulatory advice in drafting the framework of petroleum and other energy-related legislation, including foreign investment.”

The U.S. campaign on the fledgling Iraqi government has been successful. Following his appointment in May, new Oil Minister Husain al-Shahristani announced that one of his top priorities would be the writing of an oil law to allow Iraq to sign contracts with “the largest companies.”

This would be the first time in more than 30 years that foreign companies would receive a major stake in Iraq’s oil. Oil was brought into public ownership and control back in 1975.

But with the ink not yet on the paper, the U.S. has maintained its pressure. On his visit to Baghdad in July 2006, U.S. Energy Secretary Bodman insisted that the Iraqi government must “pass a hydrocarbon law under which foreign companies can invest.” But the work to make this case had already been done: “We got every indication that they were willing and also felt a necessity to open the sector,” he commented, after meeting with the oil minister and Iraqi officials.

Mr. Bodman did not stop at reviewing the draft law himself in Baghdad: he also arranged for Dr. Al-Shahristani to meet with nine major oil companies — including Shell, BP, Exxon Mobil, ChevronTexaco and ConocoPhillips — for them to comment on the draft as well, during the minister’s trip to Washington, D.C., the following week.

Given the pressures involved, perhaps the minister felt he did not have much choice. His promise to pass the law through Parliament by the end of 2006 was set in Iraq’s agreement with the International Monetary Fund last December. According to that agreement, IMF officials would also review and comment on a draft in September.

And still, the draft law has not been seen by the Iraqi Parliament. Meanwhile, an official from the Oil Ministry has stated that Iraqi civil society and the general public will not be consulted at all.

The issues could hardly be more important for Iraq. Oil accounts for more than 90 percent of government revenue, and is the main driver of Iraq’s economy. And decisions made in the coming months will not be reversible — once contracts are signed, they will have a major bearing on Iraq’s economy and politics for decades to come.

No wonder a recent poll showed that when asked what Iraqis thought were the three main reasons why the United States invaded Iraq, 76 percent gave “to control Iraqi oil” as their first choice.

Attempting to reverse this perception and change U.S. policy, lawmakers in the House and Senate have passed legislation stating that the United States should not exert “control over any oil resource of Iraq.” But usurping democracy here at home, Republicans stripped this language out of the bill’s final version: Hoping for better luck the second time around, Sen. Joe Biden successfully led the charge to add this language to another bill currently awaiting final passage.

In an ideal world, this legislation wouldn’t be needed after Bush promised that “the oil belongs to the Iraqi people.” But actions speak louder than words. If democracy is to be upheld in Iraq and the constitution is to be protected, it should be the Iraqi people who decide how oil is managed, not the U.S. administration and Big Oil.

Greg Muttitt is a co-director at the UK-based organization Platform, and an analyst for Foreign Policy In Focus, www.fpif.org, where this article originally appeared. He is the recent author of “Crude Designs: The Rip-Off of Iraq’s Oil Wealth.”

Solar power in space, why not on Earth?

Fri, 22 Sep 2006 10:02:00 +0000

For years NASA insisted it couldn’t be done. Beyond the orbit of Mars, NASA said, solar energy could not be used to generate electricity for onboard power on space devices.

So the agency used the extremely dangerous nuclear substance plutonium — and people on Earth were put at great risk in the event of an accident.

For instance, in 1997 NASA launched its Cassini plutonium-fueled space probe, and in 1999 it had Cassini hurtle back at Earth in a “slingshot maneuver” to increase its velocity so it could get to Saturn. If there was an “inadvertent reentry” of Cassini into the Earth’s atmosphere during this maneuver, it would disintegrate and “5 billion … of the world population … could receive 99 percent or more of the radiation exposure,” NASA admitted in its Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Cassini Mission.

The potential death toll from a Cassini accident was put by Ernest Sternglass, professor emeritus of radiological physics at the University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, at 20-40 million.

This is not a sky-is-falling story. Of 28 U.S. space missions using plutonium, there have been three accidents, the worst in 1964 in which a plutonium-powered satellite fell back to Earth, breaking up and spreading the toxic radioactive substance widely.

That caused NASA to develop solar power for satellites — and today all satellites (and the International Space Station) are energized by solar panels. But, insisted NASA, in deep space sunlight is too weak, and solar energy could not work, only plutonium would.

Now the leading space industry trade magazine, Aviation Week & Space Technology, reveals that solar energy is to be used by NASA to substitute for nuclear power in deep space: “Budget and technical realities have led NASA to put its once-ambitious space nuclear power plans on a slow track, but development in solar power generation should allow new scientific probes beyond Mars to operate without nuclear energy. The U.S. space agency is already planning a solar-powered mission to study the atmosphere of Jupiter, and has looked at sending probes as deep into space as Neptune using only the Sun’s energy for spacecraft and instrument power … It is all but certain the next U.S. deep-space missions will be solar-powered.”

The piece described the new giant solar energy systems that will be used to harvest solar energy at record efficiencies vast distances from the Sun.

Bruce Gagnon, coordinator of the Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space, comments, “For years NASA said that we didn’t know what we were talking about. Now NASA is planning to do what we’ve been saying all along they could do. It just goes to show that if you are willing to stay on top of an issue for a long time, something good can come from your hard work.”

Jeremy Maxand, executive director of the Snake River Alliance, an Idaho group that’s been challenging the use of Idaho National Laboratory to produce plutonium for space power systems, says, “We’ve said since day one that plutonium is unnecessary and dangerous, and that we can do the same job a better way, and now we’re seeing what that better way is — solar.”

What’s to happen in space is what should also happen on Earth. The Bush administration and nuclear industry are pushing for a “revival” of nuclear power.

We don’t need to take the enormous risk of building new nuclear plants — or having nuclear poisons over our heads. Safe energy technologies are here.

Karl Grossman, professor of journalism at the State University of New York/College at Old Westbury, is the author of “The Wrong Stuff” and narrator of the documentary “Nukes In Space” (www.envirovideo.com).

EDITORIAL: Independence for Puerto Rico

Fri, 22 Sep 2006 09:38:00 +0000

Today, Puerto Rico is a U.S. colony. In the final document of its just-completed summit conference in Havana, the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries reiterated its support for the right of the Puerto Rico nation to independence and self-determination. The affirmation by most of the world’s countries of Puerto Rico’s right to be free and sovereign came just before the 138th anniversary of El Grito de Lares, the historic Sept. 23, 1868, revolt against Spanish colonialism.

This Sept. 23 is also the first anniversary of the shooting death of Puerto Rican independence leader Filiberto Ojeda Rios at the hands of the FBI.

A recent U.S. Department of Justice report acquitted the federal agents involved. In other words, the department investigated itself and declared itself innocent.

That report was but one more attack on a people who constitute a Latin American nation, a nation that cherishes its language, history and customs. Puerto Rico is viewed as a nation by countries around the world.

Other attacks against the rights of the Puerto Rican people have included the detention of a Puerto Rican solidarity group that traveled to Cuba — imposing the U.S. travel ban on Puerto Ricans — and the detention of a delegation that traveled to Venezuela, where no U.S. blockade or ban exists.

There have also been raids on homes and worksites of independence activists, supposedly for “antiterrorist” reasons, and attacks against Puerto Rican journalists covering the raids.

In fact, these assaults against the integrity, honor and rights of an oppressed nation began with the U.S. invasion of Puerto Rico in 1898. Many Puerto Ricans supported the invasion at the time, thinking Puerto Rico would be freed of Spanish colonialism and would then treated with respect, equality and new prospects for economic development by the “democracy” to the north. On the contrary, what they got was colonial domination and super-exploitation by U.S. corporations.

All democratically minded people should join with the non-aligned nations to declare with one voice: Independence for Puerto Rico!

EDITORIAL: The Pope & Bushs holy war

Fri, 22 Sep 2006 09:36:00 +0000

Pope Benedict XVI stirred worldwide outrage when he quoted a 14th-century Byzantine emperor calling Islam “evil and inhuman,” a faith that has been “spread by the sword.”

In apologizing, he claimed the quote was taken out of context and he was actually preaching against “lack of reason” and “violence.”

But religious leaders from the Catholic peace group Pax Christi, the Muslim American Society and the World Conference of Religions for Peace convened a news conference in Washington Sept. 20 to condemn religious intolerance and to call for “solidarity” with Muslims.

They, too, spoke of the context of the Pope’s speech. David Robinson, Pax Christi executive director, said the Pope’s appeal for “reason” must begin with the clear acknowledgement that the militarized policies being pursued by the Bush administration in Iraq, Afghanistan, Palestine, Lebanon and Iran “are themselves unreasonable.”

“Violence is unreasonable,” Robinson added. “From the unreasonable violence of justified torture to the unreasonable violence of military occupation, we reject the use of violence to achieve political ends.”

Robinson directly linked the Pope’s incendiary words with President Bush’s war policies, promoted in a barrage of recent speeches portraying the occupation of Iraq as a defense of “civilization.” Smearing Islam as “evil and inhuman” gives aid and comfort to Bush’s drive to impose a permanent occupation of the Middle East, and his policies of torture and shredding of civil liberties and international law.

The Muslim American Society issued a statement debunking the deliberate distortion of Islamic beliefs. “Islam does not and never did sanction spreading the faith by the sword,” the group said, noting that the Koran states categorically, “There is no compulsion in religion.”

The statement continued, “It is unfortunate that these statements came at a time when Islam and Muslims are under vicious, undue attack by some public voices in the West that lay aside reason and dialogue for hatred and violence.”

The Bush administration’s rhetoric of endless war against Islamic extremists and terrorists, with an assist from the Pope, is a dangerous smokescreen to advance the imperial policies of this administration. It must be rejected.

Cuban life, beauty and complexity in black and white

Fri, 22 Sep 2006 09:33:00 +0000

Cuba Photographs by Jack Kenny Corazon Press, 2005 Hardcover, 120 pp., $65

The island nation of Cuba is one of the most fabled places on earth. Just the mention of its name evokes a plethora of images, from steamy salsa music and the world’s finest cigars to the vintage American cars on the streets of Havana and the ubiquitous revolutionary image of Ché Guevara. The Cuban Revolution is a source of hope and pride for many in Latin America and a thorn in the side of others who wish for a return to the days when U.S. business interests reigned supreme.

Depending on who you talk to, you will hear of the highest literacy rates in the region or of draconian food-rationing; a highly effective health care system or of rampant political repression.

A visit to Cuba reveals a complex reality deeply affected both by the U.S embargo against the country, which limits access to basic medicines and other supplies, and the rapid influx of tourist dollars from Europe and Canada, which challenge the socialist example.

Cuba is many things to many people, including the Cubanos themselves. For some, it is an outward-looking culture, obsessed by the perceived riches and excesses of capitalist economies, while for others it is possessed of a proud heritage and stands as a model of defiance and sustainability in a world gone awry.

See for yourself

In the early 1980s I was deeply moved by the photographs of Susan Meiselas chronicling the triumph of the Nicaraguan Revolution, which she was clearly enamored with. When I was lucky enough to see her present the work in person, she implored the people in the audience not to take her word on the matter but to “go see for yourself.”

Having had the good fortune to spend time in Cuba in the late 1990s studying their cutting-edge organic agriculture program, I would suggest that anyone with a genuine interest in the country try to do the same, although a recent U.S. crackdown on travel to the Cuba has made it harder than ever for U.S. citizens to go and “see for themselves.”

Short of being able to travel to Cuba, we can “visit” this beautiful and inspiring country through the eyes and hearts of others. A recent book of photographs simply titled “Cuba” by Jack Kenny is useful in this regard. Kenny’s passion for the people of Cuba and for photography as a means of communication are clearly evident in his carefully executed and richly reproduced black and white images that are the result of his more than 30 trips to the country. While “Cuba” is not a detailed survey of the island and its culture by any means, it is a portal into the lives of a people through a distinct and passionate perspective.

‘Around the island’

Kenny begins his book with a journey that takes us “Around the Island” with a selection of photographs from various provinces, touching on numerous themes. Most are portraits, either intimate or environmental, with the occasional landscape to set the scene. Many of his portraits are piercing, eyes locked on the lens, as if the person is looking through to communicate something of their reality with the viewer.

The pictures are striking on many levels and introduce us to the themes that run through this book. We see families, elders, religion, agriculture, architecture, youth and, of course, cigars, vintage cars and revolutionary imagery.

Kenny’s choice of a picture to start the book is indicative of not only what is to come in the pages that follow, but also points to the inherent dichotomy of the project. Three women, a baby and a man stand in a deteriorating but solid doorway. We know that it is a family because the title tells us so, but it is unclear as to the details. The picture is ripe with ambiguity.

Other pictures are less ambiguous but still open to the viewer’s stance: A man toils at a lathe in a rustic shop; a patched up ’50s vintage Cadillac drives in front of a crumbling, yet beautiful, Greek Revival-style home; boys play a game of chess on a tattered “board” sitting on the stoop of a rundown building; a man tills a field with a team of oxen and a makeshift harrow.

Those of us sympathetic to the Cuban project read these richly detailed images as a record of the fortitude, resilience, ingenuity and pride of a people who have figured out how to do more with less and see the glass as half full. Taken a step further, the Cubans in these pictures could be seen as world leaders in sustainability as they recycle products and practice sustainable agriculture.

‘Playa Baracoa’

The second and shortest section of the book, “Playa Baracoa,” has only 13 photographs, but does much to tell the recent history of this seaside town and Cuba in general. Kenny photographed Playa Baracoa before and after Hurricane Ivan, which dealt the former summer resort of rich Cubans a direct hit. Vestiges of the town’s former opulence are evident in a few of the pictures: an elaborate and detailed stone foundation, a beautifully tiled floor, and a whitewashed summer cottage interior festooned with starfish and hanging nets, all speak to an earlier time when this town was a summer haven for the city’s wealthy.

Beyond this vestige of a storied past, numerous portraits speak to a new reality. A boy on a mountain bike sports a pair of stylish sunglasses and gleaming white pair of basketball sneakers, two young girls clad in bathing suits and flip flops smile by his side, a well groomed street spreads out behind them. Other more intimate portraits might be of families anywhere expressing the joy of a summer vacation, albeit in less prosperous times, posing in front of a weathered facade or swimming off of a crumbling breakwater.

The most striking image of this section has little to do with the seaside culture, but is one of the rare images in this book that speaks to the artistic vitality of Cuba. A young girl in a wheelchair, leg in a cast, sits in front of her brother’s painting. She seems to emerge from the artwork itself, which evokes the highly regarded work of painters like Keith Haring and Jean Michel Basquiat. A close look at the photograph reveals that the artist’s “canvas” is actually the side of a building.

Havana life

The final and by far the most extensive section of “Cuba” documents the street life of Havana, arguably one of the most photogenic cities on earth. Its colonial architecture and bustling streets have engaged countless documentary photographers, and Kenny follows in that tradition with a broad overview of the activities that take place there, interspersed with some penetrating portraits.

While there are a few images in this section that stand out as powerful statements in their own right (his “Diving on the Malecon” is among the best, evoking the work of the great Hungarian photographer Martin Munkacsi), it is the sum of the pictures presented that paint a portrait of the city in all its vibrancy.

In Kenny’s Havana, vintage cars share the road with bicycles, and laundry hangs to dry in brilliant whiteness. Groups of people gather to play games, vendors vend, hair is cut, fingernails painted, elaborate tattoos revealed. Lovers stroll Kenny’s streets. Except for the city’s stunning backdrop, this explosion of life could be anywhere, which may be Kenny’s point.

Power of photography

Contrary to popular belief in the U.S., the people of Cuba are mostly a happy and vital lot, going about the business of life much as everyone else. If there is repression, it’s not visible in these streets. If there is poverty, it’s not of the wrenching kind that we see in the war-torn parts of the world that dominate our news. Kenny’s Cuba is full of hope, inspiration and beauty.

If we wonder for a minute where his sympathies lie, we need only to turn to the last two pages of the book. On the first of these two pages a “revolutionary” proudly displays a tattoo of Ché that covers the better part of his chest. The following and final page of the book is a portrait of Alberto “Korda” Diaz, the photographer who made the iconic photograph of Ché, a potent symbol of revolution, from which the tattoo and millions of other reproductions have been made.

Whether you find yourself with the opportunity to visit Cuba and “see for yourself” or not, Jack Kenny’s “Cuba” has much to reveal about this glorious island and its people. It also speaks of the power of photography to communicate, albeit subjectively, across boundaries of all kinds, whether physical, cultural or political.

Scott Vlaun (scott@moosepondarts.com) is a writer, photographer and co-founder of Moose Pond Arts and Ecology in Otisfield, Maine.

At home and at UN: Bush isolated on war policy

Fri, 22 Sep 2006 07:30:00 +0000

UNITED NATIONS — “Bush is in town,” the woman working behind the coffee bar said unenthusiastically to her co-worker. It captured the mood in New York City as President George Bush arrived for the opening of the United Nations General Assembly, attended by heads of state from around the world.

With Bush’s Republican Party facing serious difficulties in the November elections and his administration isolated in the world community, he delivered a carefully crafted speech to the assembled world leaders, Sept. 19. Refusing to acknowledge the disastrous results of his policies on the ground in Iraq, Afghanistan, Lebanon and Gaza, Bush told the 192-member body that “peace is taking root” in the Middle East.

In contrast, UN Secretary General Kofi Annan warned, “If current patterns of alienation and violence persist much longer, there is a grave danger that the Iraqi state will break down, possibly in the midst of a full-scale civil war.”

Bush’s effort to cover his record of contempt for international diplomacy and paint a rosy picture of his Middle East policies, while continuing the drumbeat for war against Iran, drew tepid applause from the world body.

Outside, on the city streets, reactions to Bush were not constrained by diplomatic politeness. Construction workers, taxi cab drivers and passers-by voiced their support for an estimated 3,500 antiwar protesters, organized by United for Peace and Justice.

“I agree with everything they say,” said Andrew Wright, a member of the Carpenters Union. “We’re against war,” said co-worker Mike Miller.

Among the protesters was Colleen Kelly, a co-founder of Sept. 11 Families for Peaceful Tomorrows. Kelly lost her brother, Bill, in the 9/11 terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center. Early on, she said, she saw that war would not end terrorism and she never believed that Iraq was tied to 9/11.

“Look what we have now,” she said. “According to the State Department’s own statistics, terrorist attacks have greatly increased.” Bush’s threats against Iran are eerily similar to the Iraq war buildup, she noted.

Kelly and others in Peaceful Tomorrows emphasize “people-to-people” diplomacy as one method to help end violence, war and terrorism. “The United Nations is one big important tool in the tool box,” she said.

Neteca Petgrave, an SEIU 1199 organizer, said she and her union brothers and sisters were marching because they “strongly oppose” the war. Petgrave, a former home care worker who came here from Jamaica over 30 years ago, said many of her union’s members have sons and daughters in Iraq. “One of ours lost her son in Iraq last week,” she said. “We need to end the war now.”

Petgrave said defeating the Republicans in the congressional elections this November would make a difference in the antiwar fight. “We can’t give up. We have to continue to fight.”

Meanwhile at the UN, world leaders addressed key crises, most of them caused or aggravated by the U.S.: Iran and nuclear power, Iraq, the Israeli invasions of Lebanon and Palestinian territories, Sudan and Darfur, and increasing violence in Afghanistan.

In a stinging rebuke of U.S. “pre-emptive and unilateral” war policies, Italian Prime Minister Romano Prodi said, “No country, however strong and powerful it may be, can take on such complex challenges single-handedly. We need to reinvigorate multilateralism, by which I mean restoring the central, fundamental role of the United Nations.”

Many challenged Bush’s seemingly delusional portrait of an increasingly peaceful Middle East and called for steps to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. French President Jacques Chirac urged leaders to be bold enough to seek peace like “Rabin and Arafat.”

Brazil’s President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva said poverty, particularly in the global South, is a main factor of instability and inequality confronting the world.

This year’s General Assembly agenda includes urgent issues of peace and security, economic development, human rights, nuclear disarmament and UN reform. It will name a new secretary-general and elect four new members to the Security Council to join the five permanent members — China,

Abu Bakker Qassim, wrote an op-ed in The New York Times that he was freed from Guantanamo only because the Supreme Court upheld his habeas corpus rights. Another innocent is Canadian citizen, Maher Arar, kidnapped by the CIA while changing planes in New York and flown to Syria to be tortured in the CIA’s “extreme rendition” program. He is still awaiting justice, or even an apology from Bush.

Three ranking Republican senators — John Warner of Virginia, Lindsay Graham of South Carolina and McCain of Arizona — opposed Bush’s legislation. Former Secretary of State Colin Powell wrote a letter opposing the bill. Support has also eroded in the House, and GOP leaders postponed a vote until next week. Bush is maneuvering to cut a deal, dropping efforts to gut Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions that guarantees humane treatment of captured combatants. Instead, Bush seeks to amend the McCain ban on torture to immunize U.S. officials, retroactively from prosecution as war criminals.

Retired Col. Ann Wright of the U.S. Army, who served 13 years on active duty and 16 in the Army Reserve, was in the audience as Clousing spoke. A winner of the State Department’s “Heroism Award” during her 16 years in the diplomatic corps, Wright reopened the U.S. Embassy in Kabul, Afghanistan, in 2001. She told the World, “All the protections in the Geneva Conventions are being gutted by this administration. I think this administration is just digging its own grave deeper and deeper in refusing to acknowledge the time-honored principles of the Geneva Conventions.”

She added, “What is most shocking is that they want to make retroactive a law that exonerates officials who have committed war crimes or violated the Geneva Conventions. That could include the president of the United States.”

Polls show that 70 percent of the people believe the Iraq war should end and 55 percent say “there are reasonable grounds for impeachment” of Bush and Cheney, she said. “It’s time for the people to take their country back. The Democrats have a golden opportunity on the war, on these illegal activities like [NSA] eavesdropping, [CIA] rendition, illegal detention and torture.”

They can win Nov. 7, she continued, “but the probability that the elections will be stolen is very high. People have to volunteer to be poll watchers and observers and be ready to take to the streets if there is any appearance that the elections have been stolen.”

Arms control takes center stage at UN meet

Wed, 20 Sep 2006 05:25:00 +0000

UNITED NATIONS — Convening under the theme of “Unfinished business: effective partnerships for human security and sustainable development,” the 59th annual UN Conference of Non-Governmental Organizations met here Sept. 6-8. The conference drew representatives from more than 2,000 NGOs from over 90 countries.

Last year’s meeting focused on worldwide Millennium Development Goals, goals aimed at eradicating extreme poverty, achieving universal primary education, and improving public health and environmental sustainability by 2015. While these goals remain a UN priority, this year’s conference took up several issues related to war and peace.

The meeting took place in the shadow of the Israeli bombardment and invasion of Lebanon. Kofi Annan, the UN secretary-general, was unable to deliver his opening address because he was touring the Middle East in the wake of the war.

Sweden’s Jan Eliasson, president of the UN General Assembly, spoke about the need to promote human security, placing special emphasis on arms control and disarmament. He pointed to some of the UN’s achievements during his tenure, including the founding of a new human rights commission and a peace-building commission.

Significantly, Eliasson cited the late British philosopher and mathematician Bertrand Russell as a model for today. Russell was an outspoken champion of human learning and compassion. He was also a fierce opponent of the Vietnam War and of nuclear weapons.

The conference keynote was to have been delivered by Bolivian President Evo Morales, leader of the Movement Toward Socialism, but at the last minute he was pulled away for talks in Havana. Bolivian Vice President Alvaro Garcia Linera filled in for him.

Garcia told the NGO leaders that, with the election of Morales, Bolivia was following its own road of development. For three centuries, he said, his country was subjected to an ill-suited model of development imposed upon it from the outside.

“Bolivia will no longer be controlled by credit and trade controls imposed by the powerful countries,” he said. “These have failed.”

Hans Blix, the former director of the International Atomic Energy Agency, said efforts toward arms control and disarmament had stagnated and need to be revived. He said that at the end of the Cold War, many people expected to see a more peaceful era. The opposite has happened, he said.

Blix, who headed weapons inspection efforts in Iraq prior to the U.S. invasion in 2003, said the decision to invade was based on “faith-based intelligence.” He reminded the audience that “there were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, they were all eliminated in the previous 10 years.”

Citing the importance of nuclear test ban treaties and the “no first nuclear strike” pledge, Blix noted that some countries still resist taking this road. Everyone in the audience knew he was alluding to the United States. His remarks drew enthusiastic applause.

Conference workshops included one titled “Former fighters working for peace.” The panel was sponsored by the U.S.-based Veterans for Peace, the Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom and Iraq Veterans against the War.

The first speaker was Suliman al-Chatib, a Palestinian from the Israeli-occupied West Bank. Al-Chatib is a founding member of the new group Combatants for Peace, which includes both Israelis and Palestinians. He said his counterpart from Israel was unable to attend.

The mission of his group, he said, is to promote peaceful conflict resolution, to end the occupation, and to press for the establishment of a Palestinian state alongside Israel. His remarks we very well received.

Other speakers focused on the Iraq war. Anita Cole, a former U.S. military interrogator, and Garett Reppenhagen, a sharpshooter, talked about their experiences in Iraq.

After joining the service, Cole quickly turned against the war and sought conscientious objector status. Noting that it is much more difficult for soldiers to get CO status if they don’t have a college education, she urged soldiers get legal help when they apply.

Reppenhagen gave a moving talk about his conversion from a military “killer,” as he described himself, to a person who totally opposes the war. He currently gives anti-military-recruitment talks in schools around the District of Columbia.

Terrorism in the belly of the beast

Sat, 09 Sep 2006 05:52:00 +0000

Father Geoff Bottoms, president of the London-based UK Free the Five Committee, visited two of the Cuban Five political prisoners in the U.S. recently. We publish his report as part of an “International Month of Action” in solidarity with the Cuban Five, Sept. 12-Oct. 6.

In their cells at U.S. penitentiaries Victorville, Calif., and Beaumont, Texas, Gerardo Hernandez and Ramon Labanino receive a mountain of mail each day from all over the world.

Together with Antonio Guerrero, Fernando Gonzalez and Rene Gonzalez, these Cuban political prisoners known as the Cuban Five are serving sentences ranging from 15 years to two life terms in prisons throughout the U.S. for defending their country against terrorism.

They were convicted on charges ranging from being undisclosed agents of a foreign power to conspiracy to commit espionage and murder, following a flawed trial in Miami where the anti-Castro Cuban American community’s enormous political influence prevented a fair hearing.

Though the intelligence they gathered on right-wing terrorist groups in Miami — groups responsible for 40 years of attacks against the Cuban people — was shared with the FBI under a secret agreement with the Clinton administration, the administration arrested the Five on Sept. 12, 1998, instead of rounding up the real criminals.

Pressed by the same right-wing elements, the so-called Miami mafia, FBI chief Hector Pesquera pulled the plug on the agreement. This happened while 14 of the 19 terrorists allegedly responsible for the 9/11 attacks were plotting in Miami and could have been exposed.

While the charges against the Five varied, prominent U.S. military officials testified at the trial that the Five had not accessed any classified information or threatened the U.S. national interest.

Hernandez was found guilty of conspiracy to murder in the downing of light aircraft that provocatively invaded Cuban airspace in 1996, although no evidence to support his involvement exists.

Transferred late last year to Victorville, Hernandez, like Labanino, spends most of each day answering letters. The rest of the time he works for $10-18 a month emptying rubbish bins and polishing railings, which he finds preferable to the job they offered him: repairing transmissions on military humvees returning from Iraq.

Similarly, Labanino cleans the laundry rather than make uniforms for the U.S. military.

Obviously, the prison pay the two men receive is insufficient to cover their immediate needs and expensive phone calls home. They occasionally receive a small remittance from the Cuban government.

Twice a week, Hernandez calls his wife Adriana, who gives him both inspiration and strength, especially as they have not seen one another since his arrest. She and Olga Salanueva, wife of Rene Gonzalez, are barred from the U.S. on grounds they threaten the national interest.

Ironically, last April 12, the CIA-sponsored and wanted terrorist Luis Posada Carriles appealed for political asylum in the United States through his attorneys in Miami. After he lived openly there for over a month, the Bush government, bowing to growing public and international pressure, detained and charged Posada with illegally entering the U.S., although his hearing was deferred in an attempt to play for time.

Venezuela has formally requested Posada’s extradition to face trial for the 1976 bombing of Cubana Airlines flight 455 in which 73 people were killed. The Bush administration so far refuses to honor the U.S.-Venezuela extradition treaty.

Throughout all this, Hernandez and Labanino remain focused as they savor the day when the freedom of the Five will be celebrated in Cuba together with all those who have campaigned for their release. Despite an adverse appeals court ruling on Aug. 9, the two men remain both optimistic and realistic about the ultimate victory, believing that reason, truth and justice are on their side and that of their compatriots.

Meanwhile terrorism continues to lurk in the belly of the beast.

Chicago mother fights deportation

Fri, 01 Sep 2006 05:28:00 +0000

CHICAGO — Elvira Arellano, 31, an immigrant rights activist and mother of a 7-year-old child, has taken sanctuary in a church here, defying efforts by the U.S. government to deport her to Mexico. She told reporters, “I don’t only speak for me, but for millions of families like mine.”

On Aug. 15, Arellano, president of the immigrant rights group La Familia Latina Unida, said she would not report to the Department of Homeland Security for deportation, in an effort to remain with her son Saul, or “Saulito,” who is a U.S. citizen.

Arellano was arrested in 2002 in an immigration raid at O’Hare Airport where she worked. The government ordered her deportation. Arellano, who is undocumented, has gained wide support in her struggle to remain in the U.S. Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) introduced a private relief bill in 2003, based on Saulito’s health problems. Arellano was granted three stays, the last of which has expired.

Arellano has taken refuge at the Adalberto United Methodist Church in the heart of the city’s Puerto Rican community. She says she hopes her actions will promote legislation that protects families from being torn apart by deportation.

In May, she carried out a 23-day hunger strike demanding a moratorium on deportations and immigration raids until Congress passes a more just immigration policy.

Arellano talked with the World in Spanish at the church about her decision to take refuge there. She said she plans to stay as long as it takes to win an agreement from immigration officials not to deport her.

“I understand my legal situation, but I’m here because I’m defending the constitutional rights of my son,” she said. “I’m not going to abandon my child. We’re going to stay together, and I have an obligation and a responsibility to ensure that my son grows up healthy with a future filled with opportunities here in the U.S.”

She added, “The love of a mother for her child is unconditional and necessary. When a woman gets pregnant she also has rights, especially to struggle and fight for her children’s rights.”

Arrelano’s attorney Joseph Mathews is seeking a temporary injunction to block her deportation. Deporting her would effectively lead to the deportation of Saulito, and thus violate his rights as an American citizen, Mathews told reporters. “And if you violate Saul’s rights, you violate the rights of all people born on U.S. soil,” he said.

Arellano said she feels in high spirits, bolstered by the daily arrival of supporters from community and immigrant advocacy groups, labor unions and churches as well as elected officials.

Saul Melendez, 28, a local high school counselor, is part of a team of young volunteers who have been taking one-hour shifts during the day and two-hour shifts at night, standing guard outside the church with the Puerto Rican flag.

Melendez said they are showing the unity between the Puerto Rican and Mexican communities. Arellano is “ a symbol of resistance,” he told the World. “It’s important that she is taking a stand, saying ‘You can’t take me, I’m not going.’”

Beti Guevara, associate pastor at Adalberto Church and longtime friend of Arellano, calls her “a hero to me” and “to all single mothers, especially for our kids who depend on us and don’t have father figures. She is fighting for the rights of all Latino women who are saying ‘don’t mess with my kids.’”

Arellano urged her supporters to register and vote in the November elections and to continue to flood Congress with phone calls demanding comprehensive and just immigration reform.

“The voters,” she said, “are the most important players who can support undocumented workers and immigrant families. They can stop families from being deported in order to remain united and not divided.”