Monday, December 28, 2009

New Blog Address

After two year's hiatus I have decided to relaunch my Blog on Wordpress.

The new Blog is entitled "Shourouq" ("شروق") which means "sunrise" in Arabic.

Please visit soon.

Peace and love

El Gringo Rumbero

Friday, January 4, 2008

On Immigration Policy

Before our white bothers came to civilize us we had no jails. Therefore we had no criminals. You can't have criminals without a jail. We had no locks or keys,and so we had no thieves. If a man was so poor that he had no horse, tipi or blanket, someone gave him these things. We were too uncivilized to set much value on personal belongings. We wanted to have things only in order to give them away. We had no money, and therefor a man's worth couldn't be measured by it. We had no written law, no attorneys or politicians, therefore we couldn't cheat. We really were in a bad way before the white man came, and I don't know how we managed to get along without the basic things which, we are told, are absolutely necessary to make a civilized society.

It's election time in the U.S. and the Republican candidates are in heated debates about who's going to be better at keeping Latin Americans, mostly Mexicans (just because these hypocrites mince words doesn't mean I have to), from entering the country illegally. They all seem to have conveniently forgotten that the U.S. was founded by illegal immigrants. The Europeans who came to the Americas, murdered its inhabitants and robbed them of their ancestral lands never asked for anyone's permission. Columbus did not ask the Taino chiefs in the Caribbean islands if he could enter their lands. Cortez never requested a visa from the Mexica (Aztec) authorities or the authorities of any of the neighboring peoples. The Englishmen who founded the Jamestown colony never applied for residency permits from the chief of the Powahatans. Moreover the illegal immigrants who founded the U.S., unlike most of the undocumented immigrants in the U.S. today, really were criminals! And we are talking here about the worst kind of murders, racketeers and thieves. They committed genocide and enslaved people. Now the descendants of these same scoundrels want to keep Latin Americans, most of whom (ironically) have indigenous ancestors, from moving north in search of better economic opportunities -- opportunities which might exist in their homelands if not for the exploitative neo-liberal economic policies which the U.S. establishment exports all over the world via the World Bank, World Trade Organization and International Monetary Fund.

Friday, December 21, 2007

Towards the Unconditional Return of All Tribal Lands

After over 500 years of European rule in the Americas and about 100 years after the last of the "wild" Indians were massacred at Wounded Knee, 150 in all including women and children, the tide may finally be turning for the Indigenous people of these lands.

Evo Morales, an Aymara Indian, was recently elected to the presidency of Bolivia and has proposed a new constitution which would recognize the rights of the country's indigenous population to their tribal lands including natural resources (this is what really frightens the avaricious oligarchs in the wealthier provinces of the country -- not the lifting of term limits so often publicized by the U.S. news media which is actually not uncommon in many of Europe's democracies).

At the same time, further north, representatives of the Lakota Sioux Indians (including three veteran A.I.M. activists who were at Wounded Knee during the 1973 takeover) have declared independence from the U.S. citing years of treaty violations and other grievances. The delegation has already met with representatives of the Bolivian government which has expressed interest in the Lakota Sioux cause.

Hopefully this is just the beginning.

Tuesday, December 4, 2007

Stop the Genocide in Iraq!

According to a study published in September 2007 by the U.K.-based Opinion Research Business (ORB), the number of civilian deaths in Iraq since the U.S. invaded in March 2003 has now exceeded one million. This number is nearly double the figure that came out of the Johns Hopkins study published in The Lancet in 2006. The authors of the Johns Hopkins study were not surprised, however, at the new estimate considering that it covers a broader time period. Moreover, having read the new report, the authors of the study published in The Lancet supported the new figure since the methodologies of both studies were essentially identical. Killing over a million civilians in a country of roughly 30 million is nothing less than genocide.

Wednesday, November 28, 2007

Petition of Protest Against the Annapolis Summit

To: President Georg W.Bush, White House, Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice, United Nations, UK Government, Security Council

We the undersigned declare our rejection to Annapolis Summit for the following reasons:

First: we repudiate the exploitation of the Palestinian cause to conceal the United States' failure in its illegitimate imperialist invasion to Iraq.

Second: Arab governments attended this summit under the pressure of the United States. The governmental capitulation to the United States does not mean by any means that it articulates the will of Arab people. The United States is aware of the contradiction between Arab people will and its governments' gluttonies.

Third: The announcement and invitation to this conference, completely ignore the Palestinian right in the land of Palestine, the right of return of refugees, the establishment of a free, independent and sovereign Palestinian state with Jerusalem as its capital.

Forth: Arab people resent racism, we do not recognize racist entities and we do not accept its existence in our region. As we reject racism which is spreading world wide along with the hegemony of Globalization culture, we refuse the United States endeavors to impose racist categorizations in our region. We insist on our negation to Israel, we do not recognize it as a state and we assert that we do not abide to treaties signed by illegitimate Arab governments supported by the United States.

Fifth: The main aim of such a summit is to form a front of Arab governments that disregards Palestinian rights, implements the American imperialist plot which titled as "The New Middle East" and to impose proxy war on our governments with Iran and resistance groups to serve American interests.

As we declare our rejection Annapolis Summit and to all American-Zionist-Imperialist schemes, we announce our demands as:

1- The comprehensive liberation of the complete Palestinian Lands and the establishment of an independent, liberated and sovereign Palestinians state with Jerusalem as its capital.
2- The return of all Palestinian refugees from the diaspora to the land of Palestine.
3- The departure of all occupation forces from all the countries of the region: Palestine, Iraq, Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, UAE and the Golan.
4- Lifting of the siege on the Palestinian people.
5- Removing American domination from the region; We do not want American aid, we do not want American support for dictatorial governments in the region, we do not want American intervention, which give provokes sectarian sense in our region, and we do not want American intervention to protect the Zionist entity in the region, we do not want the American exploitation to our wealth and our resources, we do not want neither good or evil from the United States.
We want to build our countries depending on our human and natural resources without interference from any outside force. We want our right self - determination.
6- We refuse the establishment of a "Jewish" state in our region; we respect all beliefs and religions, and admit citizenship to all citizens, equally, regardless of their doctrines, religions, or races. We resent the Zionist entity and its violation of human rights: slaughtering our women and children, expelling natives from their mother lands and building racist settlements on it.

We demand our rights according to:

Universal Declaration of Human Rights which states:

Article 1.
All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.
Article 2.
Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a person belongs, whether it be independent, trust, non-self-governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty.
Article 3.
Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.
And according to:

Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples, G.A. res. 1514 (XV), 15 U.N. GAOR Supp. (No. 16) at 66, U.N. Doc. A/4684 (1961).

Which Declares that:

1. The subjection of peoples to alien subjugation, domination and exploitation constitutes a denial of fundamental human rights, is contrary to the Charter of the United Nations and is an impediment to the promotion of world peace and co-operation.

2. All peoples have the right to self-determination; by virtue of that right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development.

3. Inadequacy of political, economic, social or educational preparedness should never serve as a pretext for delaying independence.

4. All armed action or repressive measures of all kinds directed against dependent peoples shall cease in order to enable them to exercise peacefully and freely their right to complete independence, and the integrity of their national territory shall be respected.

5. Immediate steps shall be taken, in Trust and Non-Self-Governing Territories or all other territories which have not yet attained independence, to transfer all powers to the peoples of those territories, without any conditions or reservations, in accordance with their freely expressed will and desire, without any distinction as to race, creed or colour, in order to enable them to enjoy complete independence and freedom.

6. Any attempt aimed at the partial or total disruption of the national unity and the territorial integrity of a country is incompatible with the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations.

7. All States shall observe faithfully and strictly the provisions of the Charter of the United Nations, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the present Declaration on the basis of equality, non-interference in the internal affairs of all States, and respect for the sovereign rights of all peoples and their territorial integrity.

Friday, November 9, 2007

Justice for Samina Malik!

Samina Malik is a 22-year-old Muslim Briton who was convicted yesterday under the U.K.'s Terrorism Act of 2000 for "owning terrorist manuals" ("articles likely to be useful to a person committing or preparing an act of terrorism"). Evidence presented at her trial included poems she wrote. Apparently she is a prolific poet. Here's one of the poems the prosecutors presented at the trial:

How to Behead

Hold him
Tie the arms behind his back
And bandage his legs together
Just by the ankles
Blindfold the punk
So that he won't hesitate as much
For on seeing the sharp pointy knife
He'll begin to shake
And continuously scream like an eedyat
And jiggle like a jelly
Trust me – this will sure get you angry
It's better to have at least two or three brothers by your side
Who can hold the fool
Because as soon as the warm sharp knife
Touches his naked flesh
He'll come to know what'll happen

No evidence was presented at the trial to prove that Ms. Malik had actually committed or was even planning any violent actions against anyone. She was convicted for possessing certain types of literature and writing certain types of poetry. In other words she was convicted for merely thinking certain types of thoughts.

But I'd like to suggest that she was also convicted for thinking certain types of thoughts AND being the child of Asian Muslims. I have written much more violent poems than this one -- one of which was actually published in my High School literary magazine. It's hard for me to imagine that there are no other 22-year-olds in the U.K. who have written violent poetry and/or are in possession of books like "The Anarchist Cookbook" or "Guerilla Warfare" (Ernest "Che" Guevara). Ms. Malik was singled out because of her race and religion.

But never mind the issue of Racism for a minute since the dominant discourse disavows the existence of Racism in the world today. What about FREEDOM -- for which these English and U.S. imperialists claim to be committing genocide in the Middle East? And where is Amnesty International or Human Rights Watch? How come I have been able to find only one article defending Ms. Malik's right to freedom of thought? Has our new motto become (thanks Stephen Colbert) "'live free or do whatever it takes so I don't die"?