The Resurgence of US Interventionism in Latin America

In the early morning hours of Sunday, June 28 2009, approximately 200 Honduras soldiers stormed the house of President Manuel Zelaya. After firing 4 shots inside his home, they detained the President and flew him into exile in Costa Rica. In the following hours, several media outlets were shut down by military force, journalists were arrested, beaten, or deported. Diplomats from Venezuela, Cuba, and Nicaragua were arrested, along with Honduras Foreign Minister Patricia Rodas. Cell phone power was cut throughout most of the country, and a military curfew was imposed. The only television networks allowed to continue their broadcasts, were showing cartoons and soap operas throughout the day. Since that day, media broadcasts (anyone other than ardent coup supporters) have been intermittent with the exceptions of Telesur and Radio Globo, though these two networks have also continuously faced shut down by the military. Tens of thousands of people have protested the coup, marches have been led across the country, and tens of thousands of teachers, hospital workers, airline crews, taxi drivers, and other workers have declared an indefinite strike in protest. Accounts of over 100 deaths during the military curfew hours have been reported since June 28th, some have been violent murders conducted by the Honduran military against demonstration leaders. Hundreds of people have been arrested either for protesting, being out during curfew hours, or on plain grounds of suspicion of being against the coup regime.

What happened in Honduras that led up to a military coup? The interim government, headed by Roberto Micheletti, issued a statement saying that Zelaya's removal was largely due to a referendum on constitutional reforms he was seeking to carry out. They stressed (and continue to do so) that he was unconstitutionally seeking to extend his term limits. The Honduras Supreme Court voted unanimously to impeach, and thus the military coup was carried out. While it is true that Zelaya was intending to carry out a nationwide poll that Sunday afternoon, it must be stated clearly what it the poll was actually for. President Zelaya was seeking to carry out a non-binding opinion poll that asked, "Do you think that the November 2009 general elections should include a fourth ballot box in order to make a decision about the creation of a National Constitutional Assembly that would approve a new Constitution". There was nothing in there about term limits, in fact, the ballot would have appeared during the elections for a new president.

During his presidency, Zelaya strengthened unions and raised the minimum wage of Honduras workers by 60%, to reflect the rise in the cost of food and other basic necessities. Zelaya and Micheletti (then president of Congress) often crossed paths in legislation. While Micheletti supported a bill to privatize the state owned telecommunications firm Hondutel (of which he is the former CEO), Zelaya refused to carry this forth. Zelaya also vetoed a bill (supported by Micheletti) that would have banned the sale of emergency contraception such as the morning after pill. Zelaya accepted low cost petroleum from Venezuela, and finally, sought the opinion of the people on the idea of re-writing the 1982 Honduras Constitution. All of these events culminated with a right wing congress and supreme court overthrowing a democratically elected president whom they feared was turning too far to the left.

The international response to the coup was swift and nearly unanimous. The European Union and the Organization of American States (OAS) immediately denounced the coup and withdrew their ambassadors to Honduras, stating that they would not recognize any government without the return of President Manuel Zelaya. The EU also froze $92 million in aid, while members of the OAS froze aid and enforced trade embargoes against the Honduran government. Yet, even In the midst of immediate international condemnation, the United States government was one of the last to issue a response. Initially, President Obama stated, "we believe the coup was not legal, and that President Zelaya remains the President of Honduras". The official response from the White House later left out any mention of a coup, as in recognizing it as such the US would be required to cease all aid and withdraw its ambassadors.

Since the crisis broke out in late June, the US has tread very lightly with its official response, and a cursory glance at the available information reveals why. The United States has been the top benefactor of Honduras for decades. Honduras exports amount to 70% to the United States, while imports from the US were at 52% in 2006. Investors from the US account for two thirds of foreign investment, with amounts of capitol surpassing $568 million in 2006. In its military role, the coup was led by General Romeo Vasquez, who was fired by Zelaya for refusing orders to distribute the ballot boxes, then reinstated by the Honduran Supreme Court. Vasquez, and the head of the Honduran Air Force, were both graduates of the notorious US Army School of the Americas, known for its graduates going on to lead coups, death squads, and become high level officials targeting the more democratic sectors of society (unions, church groups, humanitarian organizations, etc). All graduates continue to keep close ties to the US military as they have maintained relationships through training and advice. Ties to the US military do not end there. According to the US State Department, the United States maintains a presence of 550 military personnel and 600 US civilians at the Soto Cano Air base in Honduras. Joint Task Force Bravo conducts joint exercises in counter-narcotics, counter-terrorism, peace keeping, and civic actions, to name a few. The Honduras military and the police department have received extensive training, funding, and equipment from the US Army.

Considering such investments into Honduras, it comes as no surprise that there is significant support from US congressional leadership for the coup regime. The International Republican Institute (IRI), chaired by US Senator John McCain, has shown considerable interest in Honduras. Three months before the coup, there were talks on Honduras regarding the removal of President Zelaya, who, by turning to more "leftist" policies, had begun to "destabilize" a country which had been a bench mark of US policy toward Latin America since the 1980's. These statements are important when you consider the role that IRI had in the coups of both Venezuela and Haiti. Through the funding of USAID and NED (National Endowment for Democracy), IRI funded and trained political parties that were implicated in the violent overthrows (in Venezuela's case, attempted) of governments in those countries. During the Hondutel scandal in 2008, in which charges of corruption were led by Former State Department Official (under Bush) Otto Reich and Robert Carmona-Borja (key player in the Venezuela coup), US telecommunications companies donated $200,000 to IRI. The IRI has been a fierce advocate of telecom privatization in Latin America, and these companies would have stood to gain if the privatization of Hondutel took place. Just a few days after the coup in Honduras, John McCain and IRI leadership invited the coup leaders to Washington DC to offer the services of a lobby group, the Cormac Group, to lobby Washington on their behalf.

One cannot speak of the International Republican Institute without mention of their parent organizations, NED and USAID. They both share a notorious record of interference in Latin American politics and governments. While humanitarian, education, and voting observation programs do indeed take place under their guidance, the majority of their funding goes to organizations of a more political nature. According to documents retrieved via freedom of information act, they work primarily in the strengthening of alternative political parties, leadership counseling, campaigning, information dissemination via media channels (communications counseling), and neo-liberal (privatization, foreign ownership, low wages, union busting, tax shelters, etc) economic studies. These policies have usually been highly resisted unless brought to fruition by a violent regime change or fraudulent elections (Chile, Argentina, Venezuela in the 1980's, Honduras, Colombia, Guatemala, etc). Funding for USAID/NED in Honduras jumped from $37 million in 2007 to more than $50 million in 2009, a majority of this funding going to the Archbishop of Teguciagalpa, the Honduras Private Enterprise Council (COHEP), the Council of University Deans, the Chamber of Commerce, the Association of Private Media, and the group Paz y Democracia (Peace and Democracy), just to name a few. All of these groups have expressed support for the coup regime, while others have coordinated anti-zelaya media campaigns and marches throughout the country before the crisis, as well as on the very day of the coup.

Another aid group funding the coup in Honduras is the Millennium Challenge Corporation. The MCC is a US government run corporation set up in 2004 to provide developmental assistance to low income developing countries. The MCC is tasked with managing the Millennium Change Account, which disperses these funds to various countries according to need and their meeting of criteria in order to receive aid. The chairman of the board to the MCC is Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, while Secretary of Treasury Tim Geithner and US Trade Representative Ron Kirk also sit on the board of directors. The MCC has dealt with three coups in the last year, and while Mauritania and Madagascar were prescribed an immediate suspension or termination of funds and contracts, the MCC has yet (2 months later) to follow protocol with Honduras. While the official US State Department's response to the turmoil in Honduras was a cessation of non-humanitarian funding, this funding was redirected to MCC to the tune of roughly 18 million dollars since June 28th.

Finally, while the Honduras coup regime did not take the IRI up on the Cormac offer, they did utilize other ties to the US capitol. Lawyer to former President Bill Clinton, and presidential campaign adviser to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Lanny Davis is now lobbying on behalf of the coup leaders and Honduran business elite in Washington. Lanny Davis works on behalf of industries who back the current coup government in Honduras. Among those industries are some American companies, Russell, Fruit of the Loom and Hanes, who have been ardent backers of the coup regime due to the decreased wages, decreased union participation, and privatization of industries in Honduras.

Considering these extensive ties to top level US officials and to the coup regime in Honduras, it becomes quite clear that not only did the United States government know about the coup in advance, but financially aided the coup leaders in the overthrow of their democratically elected President, Manuel Zelaya. Therefor, the United States government bears some responsibility of the actions taken by the coup leaders and complicity in the human rights abuses. This is not the first time that the United States has been directly involved in the politics of countries in Central and South America. In 1973, Henry Kissinger committed a coup in Chile, resulting in decades of torture chambers, disappearances, and some of the most damaging economic policies that have begun to take shape in Latin America. We have committed (covertly) or funded and aided coup actors in Guatemala (United Fruit), Ecuador, the Dominican Republic, Brazil, El Salvador, Nicaragua, and most recently, Venezuela in 2002, Haiti in 2004, and the crisis in Bolivia in 2008, just to name a few. While the US citizenry thought that with the election of a new president, and a new administration, our relationship with the world would be one of more transparency, dignity, and one of less military aggression, it seems that this is just not the case. In fact, President Obama recently increased the funding to USAID and NED in Latin America, and since the coup in Honduras has increased US military presence from two bases in Colombia, to seven.

The US involvement in the coup in Honduras speaks to the larger picture of our placement in all of Latin America. The policy that the US has had with Latin America has been pushed aside in recent years (with the exception of Venezuela, and increased NED funding to "alternative political parties" in Bolivia), but now it is apparent that while we are distracted with wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, that officials in the Obama administration seek to continue our long standing policy of directing politics on another continent, at the expense of human rights, justice, and sovereignty. We the people, should not stand for this, nor allow ourselves to think that there is nothing that we can do to help this country in Central America. If we allow these acts to continue unchecked, we will end up watching the demise of a truly democratic revolution in our hemisphere, while our government, again, holds the direct responsibility of bloodshed in its hands.

You Can Help:
Call the State Department at 202-647-5171 or 1-800-877-8339 and ask for Secretary Clinton. Call the White House at 202-456-111. Deliver the following message: "Legally define the de facto regime in Honduras as a military coup and cut off all aid to Honduras until President Zelaya is unconditionally reinstated."

Helpful Links on Honduras:
http://hondurasresists.blogspot.com/
http://narcosphere.narconews.com/thefield
http://www.chavezcode.com/
http://aliveinhonduras.org/ (spanish)

Say No to Unchecked Bailouts on Wall Street! Protest Actions Around the Country

New York
Protest At Wall Street! September 25 2008

When: 4pm – ? Thursday, September 25.
Where: Southern end of Bowling Green Park, in the plaza area
What to bring: Banners, noisemakers, signs, leaflets, etc.
Why: To say we won’t pay for the Wall Street bailout
Who: Everyone!

"They said providing healthcare for 9 million children, perhaps costing $6 billion a year, was too expensive, but there’s evidently no sum of money large enough that will sate the Wall Street pigs. If this passes, forget about any money for environmental protection, to counter global warming, for education, for national healthcare, to rebuild our decaying infrastructure, for alternative energy.

This whole mess gives lie to the free market. The Feds are propping up stock prices, directing buyouts, subsidizing crooks and swindlers who already made a killing off the mortgage bubble.

Worst of all, even before any details have been hashed out, The New York Times admits that “Wall Street began looking for ways to profit from it,” and its chief financial correspondent writes that the Bush administration wants “Congress to give them a blank check to do whatever they want, whatever the cost, with no one able to watch them closely.”

Washington DC
March to the White House!
Thursday September 25 2008 4pm
Meet at Pershing Park, located diagonally across from the Treasury Department (15th St, NW btw E st. and Pennsylvania Ave) If you don't have them, signs and flyers will be provided.


Austin Texas
Say No To Wall Street Bailout!

Tonight! September 24 2008
In front of the capitol building
W 11th Street & Congress Avenue
Austin TX 78701

Let your voices be heard and help stop the Bailouts! Informal protest of Secretary Henry Paulson's Financial Bailout plan. Join us at 9 am on Wednesday, September 24th in front of the Capital Building.

St Paul Minnesota
Protest at the Black Dog Cafe!


September 25 2008
5:00 PM - 6:30 PM
308 Prince Street
St Paul , MN 55101

Directions
Black Dog Cafe is on the corner of 4th and Broadway in Lowertown St Paul, just across from the Farmers Market. We will have a table set up inside and stand on the corners outside with signs

Stand with your neighbors and say NO Bush Bailout! The Black Dog Cafe sits on a corner where hundreds of people walk by to their parked cars. Let's stand on the corner at this high traffic area and let people know we are against the bail out.

Philadelphia Pennsylvania
Protest the tax money giveaway to Wall Street


September 27 2008
12:00 PM - 2:00 PM
6th & Market Sts.
Philadelphia, PA 19106
(Near the Federal Building)

Portland, OR
Thursday September 25 2008
5.30 pm.
We will peacefully gather at the east end of the Hawthorne bridge, likely flanking both sides (north and south) of the bridge. Tons of signs and energy are encouraged. This is what Portland is all about - why we live here - it is time to speak up! (again

Phoenix, Arizona
Thursday September 25 2008
5:00 pm
7th street and Camelback organized by PDA - Bring Signs - No Wall Street - Bush Bailout !

Chandler, Arizona
Protest the tax money giveaway to Wall Street
September 25 2008
5:00 PM - 6:30 PM

235 E Ray Rd
Chandler, AZ 85225
Directions - just east of Arizona Ave on the south side of Ray Rd, Palm Trails Condominiums - pool area


You can also go to America Says No Bush Bailout! enter in your zipcode, and see if there is anything scheduled near you.

In Need of Crisis in Democracy

Government leaders refer, then as now, to the Civil Rights Movement as a crisis in democracy. This is true, by the standards accorded to the democracy run by the leaders of our society. It was a crisis, because the people who were affected by policy and divisive media manipulation, stood up, marched, protested, and risked their freedom (as many were jailed and beaten for their actions), to demand that their rights be recognized, and policies changed. No longer passive, distracted, or otherwise apathetic about politics, people took noticed, paid attention, and took action.

At this time, we face a situation where the lives of hundreds of thousands have been ended in the guise of the war on terror, and millions more are
displaced without a stable place to live, work, and grow as communities do. Now, this certainly isn't a new development limited to the Bush Administration. It is only after 9/11, the blatant disregard for the International Community, and exposed lies about weapons
of mass destruction, that our media system has finally allowed the lines of dissent to bleed through into their papers, news networks, and other information outlets. As in Vietnam, it has become safe to dissent against the government line, so long as it is limited to the Bush Administration. Once a new president takes over, we will move on to other countries, such as Afghanistan, and Iraq will be a footnote in history books as a foreign policy of a lame duck president.

With elections in November, and the election of a new president that will be taking his oath in January of 2009, our media system is portraying our nation as one that has simply forgotten, or is no longer as concerned about the situation in Iraq, or the blunders that have been highlighted by this administration. The reasons why 9/11 occurred in the first place, the secret prisons and round ups of thousands of people suspected of terrorism, the thus far indefinite detainment of hundreds of people in these secret prisons, the techniques of torture that have been brazenly undertaken, the suspension of international rights such as Habeas Corpus, the Geneva
Conventions, and most importantly, the violation of the Nuremberg Principles that our very government assisted in setting up with the international community, have all been put on the back burner, in light of new elections and new conflicts with Iran and Afghanistan.

With so many lives lost, with our economy so close to complete depression, with constitutional rights suspended or altered to include wide ranging surveillance and suspension of judicial ethics that had been in place for so long, where is our crisis of democracy? Where is our demand for better ways of life? Where is our demand for life? The preservation of our planet, the only place in which we all have to live, is on the back burner for petty politics such as which new person is going to step into the oval office and play RISK with our planet?

With so much going on, we should, as a people, not be simply pacified with the hope that a new administration will turn things around. Yet both candidates clearly state that any policy decision involving Iraq, will also involve other countries in the region. Those serving third and fourth tours in Iraq, will get their withdrawal...as a redeployment to Afghanistan.

There have been so many reversals on the rights we have as people, and our government looking to those of other nations to restrict even further, that we have cause for great concern about the state of our nation, the state of our people, the state that our children will face in the future, and the state of the people of the rest of the world. This is not a time to sit idly by and wait, we must take back our country, with the same ferocity that we have displayed in years past when faced with oppression and the risk of our own lives for the sake of "economic interests", that which we do not have the same interest for us here at home. We need a new "crisis in democracy", we need a new cry, we need to gather, march, protest, and dissent.

We do not need to pacify ourselves with new toys, iPhone, cars, and whatever the latest pretty gadget marketed to the people is. We need to get ourselves caught up in what is important, what affects us, not participate in that which limits, distracts, and divides us.

Five Years Is Far Too Long

The 5th Anniversary of the Iraq war is upon us, and in reflection of these last five years, I find that we have begun to face a stark reality of what this war has brought to the people of this country, and more importantly, to the people of Iraq, Afghanistan, and other countries in the middle east, who have been affected by our foreign policies, as well as those by our allies, during the war on terror.

Within last five years, we have found that our government has waged a war of aggression, with little to no legitimacy, and had used a horrific and painful event to their own ends to do so. It has also become known, that the protections that have been granted to people worldwide, as a people, as the human race, have been deemed "quaint", "obsolete", "inconvenient", and "antiquated", and have been disregarded in favor of more subversive measures of capturing, detaining, extracting information from, and with holding information from arguably innocent people. We have discarded habeas corpus, the Geneva Conventions, and our own U.S. Constitution in order to do so, even in the face of international scrutiny and condemnation.

We have allowed ourselves somehow, to believe that this is acceptable, because were it not for these practices being used, we may have already had another terrorist attack on our soil. That using torturous interrogation methods, might be a benefit to the world, because it could prevent atrocities from being committed by the people we have detained, and the networks of people they are connected with. Yet, the fact of the matter is, that when you extract information from a suspect, using means that cause them to believe they are facing instant and painful death, the information garnered can hardly be useful, and in most cases, is given simply to end the pain that is being inflicted in the first place.

Turning a blind eye to those around us, only does a further disservice, in harming us as a whole. Torture, death, "casualties" or "collateral damage" these terms and their implications, are easy to ignore when the effects are felt only by those who are unseen and unheard. Officials attempt to strip them, and us, of our humanity, by referring to people as something other than people. Enemy combatants, terrorists, captives, suspects, detainees, numbers, statistics...all of these attempt to strip these people of their humanity, and attempt to increase the likelihood that we, in turn, will do the same, that we will look to them as something other than us.

I find this absolutely unacceptable. No longer, can I tolerate watching the numbers of the dead Iraqi citizens climb towards the million and above mark. No longer can I watch the numbers of the fallen soldiers climb and surpass the number of those who perished on that fateful day that proved to be the opportunity so many were looking for to secure a stronghold in the middle east. No longer, can I, as a US citizen, in the comforts, and rights, and freedoms that I have been lucky enough to be born into, sit back, as people are tortured in my name, as families are torn apart in my name, and as countries are demolished, in the name of me, of mine, and of my country.

7 out of 10 Iraqi citizens want US forces out of Iraq. The country that we invaded, to dispose of biological and chemical weapons of mass destruction, then for the disposal of a cruel and terrible dictator, and then finally, to bring democracy to, wants us out of there. If we cared as much for the well being of the people of Iraq, as has been so avidly expressed by this administration, then we should follow the will of the people who's lives have been destroyed in the name of their safety and freedom.

Recent polls show that 52% of Americans want to withdrawal the majority of our military presence by 2009. 62% of Americans polled, do not believe that the President has adequately handled the occupation in Iraq. 53% believe that victory (whatever that may be) is no longer possible in Iraq. 59% believe we made a mistake in sending troops to Iraq in the first place, and 60% support sticking to a timed withdrawal as opposed to maintaining a presence there as long as it takes to bring a stable democracy.

With all of these numbers, showing clear support of troop withdrawal in Iraq, it is quite apparent, that this is in fact what we should be doing. We should be supporting the will of the people who's country we invaded, and we should be supporting the will of the people within our own country as well. Yet, it is also clear, that our government is going to continue its presence in Iraq, possibly for much longer than we have anticipated, depending on who is sitting in the white house come January 2009.

I've seen the argument, that we all want out, but that we are powerless against our government, that we are powerless against those we have elected to represent us, that things will never change because the interests are too deep, the businesses are too powerful, the government is too strong, and that we are helpless against them.

There are 300 million people living in the United States of America. If so many people are upset, confused, angry, betrayed, and disenfranchised, then we MUST use our numbers, and use our voices, to shout loud and hard against the atrocities that are being committed in our names and without our consent. We need to join the masses in protest, we need to join the fight against oppression and imperialism. We must rise up, and let ourselves be heard, that these actions are not of our choice, that they are not with our consent, and that we will not idly stand back and watch it all happen from the sidelines.

We need to stand up and demand that our rights as human beings, our right to live in peace, and to fulfill our own desires, for our own country, are not only reinstated for us in our country, but also attributed to those that are easily forgotten, out of sight, and out of mind. We need to do whatever it takes, and spread the word until we are exhausted, and then continue. Today, there are demonstrations, around the country, and around the world, to show our support of withdrawal, and continued lack of support for this war on terror, and this deadly occupation of the countries of Iraq and Afghanistan. We must join in dissent, join in protest, and join in support of having our voices heard, together, to make an impact on those who think that they can callously continue these policies without care for what the people of these countries think and feel about it.

MoveOn.org has an extensive list of demonstrations organized throughout the country. You can also find them through 5 years too many, and through World Can't Wait. Find a demonstration, protest, or vigil near you, do something constructive, and join in the cause against oppression, imperialism, tyranny, and atrocity.

It Is Time For A Change In Our Political Process

On Tuesday, January 15th 2008, the Nevada Supreme Court overturned a ruling that stated NBC must include Representative Dennis Kucinich in the presidential debates in Las Vegas Nevada, or they were to pull the plug on the debate.The Supreme Court reversed the ruling, stating that that the verdict given by a district court judge, violated the media giant's constitutional first amendment rights to free speech. This ruling came days after 81 protesters were arrested on the steps of the United States Supreme Court in Washington, DC for protesting the continued operation of the military prison in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

How is it that a giant corporation can get away with silencing the truth, while protesters who are trying to shed light on human rights infringements are sent to jail on the very steps of the building that is supposed to protect us?

How is it that a majority of the population can excuse this by saying that a media giant has every right to exclude or include candidates as they wish? Do we forget that the mass majority of the United States population gets their information about the candidates from major media networks? Those networks that host, televise, and report on the debates themselves?

While people lose their liberty by detainment and arrest for speaking their mind against a great atrocity committed by this nation, a media giant retains its right to free speech by excluding the one democratic candidate who will challenge those in power, who is challenging those in power, while exercising in full, his right to free speech?

To me, this is unbelievable.

The state of our country is unbelievable. While we are continuously protecting large corporations, we are simultaneously eroding the rights of the citizens of this country, while ingeniously making them not only okay with it, but for it, and against those who dispute it. We are constantly pitting ourselves against each other in a fight of left versus right, liberal versus conservative, neo-cons versus neo-liberals, and we're not even realizing that by doing this, we are distracting ourselves from the very issues and people we were angry at the in the first place!

By picking apart each other over petty squabbles, we allow those in charge to not only get away with limiting our first amendment rights, limiting habeas corpus, ignoring those "quaint" Geneva Conventions, and that inconvenient piece of paper that is our Constitution, but we are allowing them to continue dismantling the very rights, and this very country, that we are so proud of.

We take the word of the New York times, Fox News, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, NPR, and whatever media outlet we happen to listen to as objective. Because they tell us that they are. They always invite one side of an argument, and pit it against another side of the argument. But those arguments that they use are merely the same, only with small variations. We listen to what they have to say, and because they said it intelligently and articulately, and because their sources are from Washington, we assume that what they are portraying is factual, right, and just.

Yet, we don't question the fact that those sources, coming from Washington...are from Washington. Of course they are going to tell us that there is less violence in Iraq. Of course they are going to tell us that Iran is pushing for war by continuing on with a nuclear program. Of course they are going to tell us that the Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act is going to protect us from terrorism. We should expect nothing less from these Washington sources, then for them to pat us on the head, tell us there's nothing to worry about, and to go about our business without a care in the world.

They tell us to go ahead and let the companies that manage our country, to continue to manage our lives. These companies will get us out of the economic crisis, these companies will help fix our environment. These companies will help deter terrorism, because they have the means, and they have the knowledge. We should simply trust in them, and in the free market, and not let the nanny state come in and regulate them. They use these words knowing that they are going to have effective connotations.

Do we really not have enough sense to trust ourselves? Are we really going to buy into the fact that these companies know best, and they can present us with the best information, and that this is our only option? Do we really have such low self esteem as a country, to think that we could not possibly be involved in the passing of our laws, the enforcement of accountability of our government and large companies that have a huge stake in the interest of our remaining docile? Because I don't buy this for one minute. In fact, I completely resent the notion that I am not smart enough to participate in the decision making process of this country that effects my life, and the lives of others throughout the world.

We need a change. Everyone recognizes this. However, we are not going to get this change through the same institutions and the same practices that have led us through this administration, or the ones before it. Maintaining the same direction is not going to bring us anywhere else but right back to where we started from, pissed off and frustrated.

We have to take these matters into our own hands. We cannot allow free speech to be limited to those who have influence. We cannot allow accountability to be limited to those who are small enough that they cannot fight back. We cannot allow the way things are to be the way things will continue to be, we just can't. I love this country too damn much to let this happen without a fight.

The candidates that are the front runners, the candidates that have been portrayed and televised, these are the candidates that will forever remain the same. If we need a change, we're going to have to look into these issues ourselves, and discuss them with each other. We're going to have to look at the people that the media decries as crazy, small, and insignificant, because if they have gone through the trouble to make them insignificant, then there has got to be something that they are afraid of right? Could it be that they themselves hold the key to that change, that fear of the unknown, that something different, that we so desperately desire?

It is time for us to take matters into our own hands. It is time for us to contact our legislators, whenever there is an issue that comes up that we do not agree with. It is time for us to talk with each other, to communicate, to learn from one another, as people in this country, who care about this country. This apathy, these distractions, this defeatism is getting us nowhere, and we certainly cannot rely on someone else, who has the power to make laws and to dictate our leadership, to change things for us. There is no one person who is going to save us. We have to do it ourselves, and the time to do so is right now.

Why Don't We Start Following Our Hearts and Minds?

On March 17, 2003 President Bush declared that Saddam Hussein had 48 hours to leave Iraq, as we were entering into combat operations. Since that day, when we declared War, we have been occupying a country, with the stated mission of "winning the hearts and minds of the Iraqi people", to "liberate them" and "bring democracy".


Almost 5 years later, we reflect on a brutalized country, and a brutalized coalition force. There is now a war being fought directly against the civilian population, after we destroyed their cities, interrogated the people, arrested and detained the people of Iraq for questioning and interrogations. We sent hundreds of people to Guantanamo Bay, many (and in some cases all) of which were unrecorded, unrepresented, held without charge, and withheld the right to contact their families. It is estimated, that between 600,000 and 1,000,000 people have died resulting from the initial war, occupation, and subsequent humanitarian crisis that has occurred since that day in 2003. After bombing or shooting into the civilian places of gathering such as mosques, hospitals, schools, and homes, it is obvious for anyone to see...that we are not succeeding in winning the hearts and minds, liberating, and installing our democracy, in Iraq.

There are many reasons that we went to war in Iraq. We have begun, and since increased our country's presence in the Middle East. We have relations with Israel, with Saudi Arabia, with Pakistan, with Iraq, Iran, Kuwait, and Syria. We have friendly relations with some of these countries, and aggressive relations with others. Regardless, we certainly maintain a concrete presence in this region. It is largely known that for decades, we have reinforced our presence for purposes of bartering power, of advancement in maintaining a role of holding and maintaining strategic resources, and for the protection of our affiliated countries (allies, if you will), and our interests.

The problem with this, is that our country, because it is the largest superpower in the world, and because for decades, it has held the largest amount of influence throughout the world, is playing a game of Risk with the rest of the world. These are not countries that need to fall under one. What we need to remember, is that instead of it being about strategy, and accomplishment, and power, and acquirements; this is about people.

This is about human beings; you, me, our families, our friends, this is about everyone.

When our diplomats talk sternly to one another at UN meetings, when we make threats of violence against a country for not bending to what we think is best for them, and when we attack another country because they adamantly refuse to cooperate, we are dealing with people. We are killing them. We are destroying their comfortable ways of life, their routines, their communities.

Indeed, Emma Goldman once said (I believe she quoted Carlyle): "War is a quarrel between two thieves too cowardly to fight their own battle; therefore they take boys from one village and another village; stick them into uniforms, equip them with guns, and let them loose like wild beasts against each other."

My question is, instead of trying to win their hearts and minds, why don't we follow our hearts and minds?

Let's follow the hearts and minds of our people who are stuck over there. These are our friends, our brothers, sisters, and partners. These are not pawns in an elaborate game of world domination. Let's follow the hearts and minds of the people who live in the countries we have dominated. They are not to be forgotten, in the game of conquest. When we invade a country, we must take care of the innocent population who gets caught in the crossfire.


We are the wealthiest country in the world right now. We spend 452 Billion dollars per year on this war. Why don't we cut the payroll, bring most of the soldiers and most of the equipment home, and spend a significant amount on paying reparations to the Iraqi people. We wouldn't even have to spend all of the difference. We could use even 100, or 200 billion a year for this, and spend the rest on domestic issues like health care, education, transportation, and other social, civilian plans. The people who remain there, can be available to work with the Iraqi government (all of the Iraqi government, the parliament, the council, the prime minister), as well as within the International Community (as to build support, as to participate on a positive note, in world affairs, and to work together), to rebuild the infrastructure of Iraq.

Above all, we must give up on "Winning the Hearts and Minds". Why should we have to win them over to somewhere they clearly do not wish to be? It obviously isn't working, and quite frankly, it's turned into a complete disaster.

I believe that it is time for a change. We as a nation are very frustrated about where we've been led in this war, the neglect on our domestic front, our lack of preparedness for disaster, and our lack of adequate representation by the people we voted into office. Maybe it's time we start following the hearts and minds of the people, here, and abroad, and start working to affect a positive change in this world, and in how we look at it. We should think long and hard about this, and make sure that the people we vote for in office this time around are held accountable for the decisions they make, and ensure that we, as a people, can go along with these decisions, that we know the facts, and we actually start helping people instead of hurting them.

Originally published by Amy Oyler at Z Communications