Into The Lawless Heart of Mexico

GUADAMOUR

by Guadamour
featured writer
Dandelion Salad
Guadamour’s blog post
Sept. 1, 2008

In God’s MiddleFinger (Free Press 2008) the British writer living in Tucson, Richard Grant, explores the wild and basically ungoverned Sierra Madres, the backbone of Mexican culture.  In doing this Grant not only looks into the Sierra Madres with its lawless drug culture, he manages to capture the psyche of the Mexican people and how they think.

The fast paced, well researched and written book puts the reader on the ground in Mexico and moves him through the terrain as if it were he experiencing the danger, meeting the people, and dodging the bullets.

Grant takes the reader inside a culture where a mafia hit man takes his bullets to be blessed by a saint so they will find their mark.   He is able to show why the Mexican people don’t prepare for and invest in the future and live with a sense of inevitable fatality (everything in their past and present lives indicates that preparing for the future is a waste of time).

Grant writes the book with a tongue-in-cheek humor.

“I join the line of people moving slowly toward the church entrance, where three old men with screwed-up, contorted faces were singing corridos about the revolution and trying to make themselves heard over a younger trio singing corridos about the drug life.   I ducked inside, the music faded, and my eyes slowly grew accustomed to the gloomy light coming through the high windows.  At the nave of the church, surrounded by a warm glow of candles, was a tiny doll-like figure no more than a foot high in a glass box.  Her face was white (the only other white face in Aduana that day was mine) and in her arms she held a baby.

Around her shoulders she wore a red cloak festooned with the tiny gold symbols called milagros, each representing a different type of miracle.  There were milagros in the shape of babies, hearts, legs, arms and VW Beetles.   People filed past, touched the glass with their fingertip, crossed themselves, and dropped coins into an old wooden box.  I did the same and asked for the miracle of understanding Mexico.”

Grant apparently received his miracle, because he manages to capture the Mexican people and what makes them who they are better than any other book period.

God’s Middle Finger should be mandatory reading for all in the DEA and involved in the “War Against Drugs.”   It should also be at the top of the list for students of Mexico and the Mexican culture.   Not to mention all people proposing or opposing the “North American Union.”

Americans Need to Tear Down This Wall by Walter Brasch

by Walter Brasch
featured writer
Dandelion Salad
http://www.walterbrasch.com
Aug. 24, 2008

The “star” of the Olympics may not be multiple medalists but the Great Wall of China. Every TV network covering the Olympics took the world to see the Wall. It seemed as if almost every newspaper and magazine reporter also visited the Great Wall.

But, the Great Wall, which was built and rebuilt many times over its 22 century history, eventually was a failure. Although formidable, and one of the world’s greatest engineering feats, the wall by the 16th century could no longer protect China from neighboring armies. Continue reading

Latin America’s struggle for integration and independence by Federico Fuentes

Dandelion Salad

Posted with permission by Green Left Weekly

by Federico Fuentes, Caracas
Green Left Weekly
26 July 2008

Commenting on how much the two had in common — same age, three children, similar music tastes — Ecuadorian President Rafael Correa said to Mexican President Felipe Calderon on April 11 that “perhaps we represent the new generation of leaders in Latin America”.

Continue reading

Cynthia McKinney speaks on ‘free trade’ in Mexico

Dandelion Salad

by Cynthia McKinney
http://www.workers.org
Jul 20, 2008

The following excerpts are from a recent talk made by Cynthia McKinney, Green Party presidential candidate in the United States. The statement was sent out on June 27th by the International Liaison Committee of Workers & Peoples (ILC) based in San Francisco. Go to www.organicconsumers.org to read the statement in its entirety.

In early April 2008, I participated in the Second Continental Workers’ Conference in Mexico City. I was honored to have been a keynote speaker at the conference’s opening night rally at the hall of the Mexican Electrical Workers Union (SME).

I learned that a powerful united front now exists in Mexico against the NAFTA-inspired privatizations that will result in the theft of Mexico’s patrimony in natural resources.

The Mexican Congress was shut down by the real opposition that they have in Mexico. The PEMEX Privatization bill was supposed to have passed by now. Mexico’s Congress adjourned without passing it. Score one for the people.

One of the leading papers in Mexico City had a photo of the Chamber of Deputies of the Mexican Congress with an unfurled banner covering the Speaker’s Rostrum, proclaiming the Chamber “Closed.” The banner was hung by elected members of the Mexican Congress who constitute the Frente Amplio Progresista that has dared to draw a line in the sand against U.S.-inspired legislation introduced to allow foreign corporate ownership of PEMEX, Mexico’s state-owned oil company.

I wrote my Master’s thesis on the “Idea of Nation.” And to see the women, in their T-shirts and kerchiefs, so committed to their country, their nation, their identity. To them, that’s Mexico’s oil, natural gas, electricity, land and water, and it ought to be used by the Mexican people first and foremost for their own national development. But, sadly, it’s the public policy emanating from Washington, D.C., that threatens that.

According to Greg Palast, the U.S. corporation involved in the Mexican move was none other than that now infamous Georgia-based company: Choicepoint. We know that in Florida, Choicepoint, then doing business as DataBase Technologies, constructed an illegal convicted felons list of 94,000 names, many of whom were neither convicted nor felons. But if your name appeared on that list, you were stopped from voting. Greg Palast tells us that for most of the names on that list, their only crime was “Voting While Black.”

Under a special “counter-terrorism” contract, the U.S. FBI obtained Mexican and Venezuelan voter files through Choicepoint of all the countries that have progressive presidents. Many Mexicans went to the polls to vote for their President, only to find that their names had been scrubbed from the voter list, and they were not allowed to vote. So now, not only in the United States, but in Mexico, too, one can show up to vote and not be sure that that vote was counted, or worse, one can show up duly registered to vote and not even be allowed to vote.

I guess this is the way we allow our country to now export democracy.

Unlike in the United States in 2000, Mexico City was shut down for five months in 2006 when Lopez Obrador, Mexico’s Al Gore, refused to concede and, instead, formed a shadow government.

The issue in the 2006 Mexican election was privatization of Mexico’s oil. Teachers on strike at the same time as the presidential elections in Oaxaca, one of the poorest states in Mexico, began their political movement as a call for increased teacher salaries and against privatization of schools. Tens of thousands of citizens joined them and took over the central city of that state. Today, after Mexico has added teachers and those who support teachers to its growing ranks of “political prisoners,” teachers are still protesting their conditions and the reprisals taken against them for striking, and now the teachers’ union is a committed part of the national mobilization against privatization of PEMEX.

I was invited to participate in the Second Continental Workers Conference. The first meeting was held in La Paz, Bolivia. And so people from all over Mexico and eight different countries told of their struggles, their hopes, their ideals, their values, their patriotism, their desire for peace/no more war.

Representatives from Chiapas, another one of Mexico’s poorest states, told us of the indigenous struggle for land and self-determination, the low-intensity warfare waged against them, and how now they, too, count themselves a part of the national mobilization against PEMEX privatization.

While I was there, mine workers had taken over the mines, and so could only send a handful of inspiring representatives. They are pressing for the right to unionize, denied to them by the government. And the mine workers are part of the solid front forming in Mexico to protect this powerful idea of nation.

Today’s front page of La Jornada says that the women, who marched 10,000 strong on the day that I was there, have renewed their protests and civil disobedience. The threat of violence and bloodshed is very real.

Now, why should this massive social, political and economic upheaval in Mexico, aside from its human rights implications, be important to us up here in the United States?

Because the sad truth of the matter is that, in many respects, it is our military and economic policies that are causing it. Of course, I recognize that all the way back to the practice of Manifest Destiny and the declaration of the Monroe Doctrine, U.S. policy decisions have at times sent shock waves to places outside our borders. You could say that the modern version of that is NAFTA.

In 1993, the Democratic majority in the United States Congress supported then-President Bill Clinton’s push for passage of the North American Free Trade Agreement. The stated purpose of the legislation was to remove barriers to trade and investment that existed in North America. The objective was to lift all boats in Canada, the United States, and Mexico through trade and investment. But the result has been the stripping away and transfer of Mexico’s patrimony in terms of its natural and human resources. And the Mexican people are taking a stand against it. They are taking the same stand that the little people in Haiti, Venezuela, Brazil, Chile, Bolivia, Nicaragua, Ecuador and Argentina have taken.

I happened to vote against NAFTA, and I’m glad for that. Imagine if we in the United States were as certain of the possibility of peaceful change through the vote as were the people of Haiti, Mexico—despite having their election stolen from them—Venezuela and the rest. Then we would vote members of Congress out of office who support Plan Colombia. We would vote members of Congress out of office who support Plan Mexico—which, like its Colombian counterpart, is the military answer to the cry of the people for dignity, self-determination and that idea of patria.

Cynthia McKinney is a former six-term member of the U.S. Congress from the state of Georgia.


Articles copyright 1995-2008 Workers World. Verbatim copying and distribution of this entire article is permitted in any medium without royalty provided this notice is preserved.

Workers World, 55 W. 17 St., NY, NY 10011
Email: ww@workers.org
Subscribe wwnews-subscribe@workersworld.net
Support independent news http://www.workers.org/orders/donate.php

see

The Great Mexican Oil Takeover

Plan Mexico: Plan Colombia Heads for Mexico by Stephen Lendman

Riz Khan: Torture training in Mexico

Dandelion Salad

Will post Part 2 when it becomes available.

Warning

.

This video may contain images depicting the reality and horror of war/violence and should only be viewed by a mature audience.

AlJazeeraEnglish

Following the emergence of videos showing Mexican police being taught torture methods by a US security firm, Riz Khan speaks to Laura Carlsen of the Center for International Policy and Tamara Taraciuk, a lawyer for Human Rights Watch.

Border Déjà Vu

GUADAMOUR

by Guadamour
featured writer
Dandelion Salad
Guadamour’s blog post
July 13, 2008

A friend of mine was in dire straights recently.  In need of cash.   He offered me a ’96 four-wheel drive Suburban for five hundred.   I had no use for the vehicle, don’t have that much money myself, but wanted to help a friend out.  I thought maybe I could sell it for what I paid for it across the line in Mexico.  I bought the vehicle.

It cost me a hundred and sixty dollars to fill it up.  I couldn’t believe it.  I’ve paid less for running cars at auctions.

What the hell, I have a full tank of gas and four wheel drive, two feet of clearance, I might as well go exploring.

It’s getting to be late afternoon and I head towards Bisbee.  I turn right on Double Adobe Road and then hang a hard  left onto High Lonesome Road.

In nineteen-ninety-nine I had purchased another Suburban for other reasons.  It didn’t have four-wheel drive.

I hadn’t gone down High Lonesome more than a couple of miles when I came to a steep ravine.  I didn’t think anything of it.  There was lots of clearance and it looked to be good traction.

I entered the ravine and as I started up the other side by rear bumper caught up on the rocks.  This left the vehicle suspended without the rear wheels touching.  The vehicle was huge and I couldn’t move it myself.  I tried piling rocks up to the rear wheels to give them something to grab on, but to no avail.  I was screwed.   It was dark and I was stuck there with the two toy poodles, Ona La Llorona and Hercules.  I would sleep in the monster and go get my Toyota four-wheel drive pickup and pull it out in the morning.

I laid down and tried to get comfortable when the dogs started barking.

A group of about eighty undocumented border crossers were coming down the road.  I talked to them and explained the situation and they pushed me out.  I thanked them and wished them a safe journey.

At that time there were less than half the complement of Border Patrol agents as there are today, and it was relatively common to see large groups making their way through the desert.

A friend of mine lives and has a hundred acres in a canyon off of High Lonesome.   At that time Peter said he never had to buy clothes.  He would just pick up and wash what he found discarded along the way.

I shouldn’t have any trouble with this Suburban.  It is four-wheel drive and I have a lot more clearance.

I come to the same ravine.   I am positive I can make it.  I ease into the draw, and the rear bumper gets hung up again.   No problem.  I get out, lock the hubs, get back in, put it in four-wheel drive and ease the clutch out.   The front wheels spin on rock and won’t grab.   I’m screwed until I can get my trusty Toyota pickup and pull the beast out in the morning.   Maybe, I’ll get lucky and a Border Patrol will come along and pull me out.

I try to get comfortable in the monster.  It’s looking to be a long night, and I don’t have any dogs along with me this time.

I’m kicking myself in the head, not believing what an idiot I am, when a troop of ninety-two undocumented immigrants comes along.  I talk to them and they push me out and I make it back home.

To see a group of ninety-two border crossers these days is unheard of.   There are just too many Border Patrol Agents.   People still cross, but they cross in groups of two or three or maybe as many as eight people.   Ninety-two is a huge number.

In 1999 it cost five hundred dollars to be taken from the border to Phoenix. Today it cost from twenty-five hundred to three thousand.

I think about all those people.  92 times 2,500 is $230,000.

A number of lower echelon Border Patrol Agents are cooling their heels in prison after being busted for corruption and other charges.  This is understandable because the Border Patrol has become the largest police force in the country, and they have to constantly lower their requirements to meet the manpower needs.  It seems incredible to me that a Border Patrol Agent with overtime can be making upwards of $80,000 a year, and all that is required is a high school diploma and a clean record.

That still does not account for a group of ninety-two.   That could only happen if someone higher up was being paid off, and was directing people to another area purposely, because there are always at least one or two Agents on High Lonesome.

Maybe I’m being too harsh.  They could be having a major bust somewhere else along the border that has drawn all the agents.   But that would still not account for accumulating 92 people into one group, and the people sending the group would have to know that the agents had been deployed to another area.

This drives me buggy all the way back home.

I check with a friend of mine who has far too much free time on his hands, has a police scanner, and has always been a want-to-be cop.

I ask him if there is anything major happening.  “Nah.” he says, “Totally dead tonight.”

Wall of Stupidity

by Guadamour
featured writer
Dandelion Salad
Guadamour’s blog post
June 28, 2008

Living only nine blocks from Mexico, one tends to pay close attention to anything that effects the border or that is written about it.

As part of the $1.2 billion that was allocated to build a wall to separate The United States of America and Los Estados Unidos de Mexico, they are excavating a runoff ditch that follows the border on the US side and concreting it.  The National Guard Engineering Corps are doing the work.

The most recent issue of Time Magazine featured the Great Wall of America on the cover.

It explained how the wall is being built by the same firms that are the defense contracts in Iraq.

It also explained how as one area was finished, the smugglers of drugs and people moved operations to another area where the fence was not completed.

The article further explained how in parts of the border that it is almost physically impossible to build a literal wall, but how a virtual wall is planned.

What it does not explain is that (if and when they can actually get a virtual wall working–$120 million has already been spent, though it doesn’t work) a virtual wall is useless, because by the time border officials can respond to the presence of people, they will be long gone.

The National Guard has been supplementing the Border Patrol and other law enforcement along the international line.  The article explains how they are being pulled away from the border because they are needed for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The article mention the problem of hiring more Border Patrol to replace the missing Nation Guard because there has been a problem with corruption among the Border Patrol because of the lowering of standards to meet quotas.  What it does not go into is the oftentimes lack of professionalism in work performed by the Border Patrol.

As an example of this, a friend of mine, and one of the few college educated Border Patrol Agents went public when he discovered that an arrest was made under false pretenses.   The stop and the arrest were basically illegal sloppy police work; however, drugs were seized and there was a prosecution involved.

My friend was working in a supervisory capacity.  He was demoted and given light office duty with no chance of overtime, thereby, severely limiting his income.  The ACLU has agreed to represent him in his case against the Border Patrol.

Time Magazine does a good job of showing how the border issue will be a continued and ongoing problem even upon completion of the wall.  It explains how the fence is cut each and every night with blow torches [in] many places along the border, and how the smugglers are very resourceful and will fly over, tunnel under or go around via the thousands of miles of US coast line.

What Time Magazine fails to do is question why there is currently such a huge immigration and drug smuggling problem when fifteen years ago it wasn’t really a very serious issue.

Furthermore, Time Magazine fails to offer any solutions to the problems.   This is understandable because they assign a staff writer to research the issue and write about it and aren’t all that familiar with the issue.  It’s a lot different when you were born before fire was invented and you’ve spent most of your life within a hundred miles of the border.

The North America Free Trade Agreement went into effect in 1994.

As Naomi Klein so aptly shows in her book, Shock Doctrine.  Chile as the first country to suffer under the Chicago School of Economics concept of “Free Trade.”   The results were disastrous in Chile and every old place in the world that was subjected to it.

Professor Chong in his book Bad Samaritan, gives many historical examples from all the countries that have succeeded in the world and shows how they used protective tariffs to foster indigenous industry and agriculture, the opposite of “Free Trade.”

Raj Patel in his book Stuffed and Starved explains how even before  NAFTA was signed into law it was know that it would destroy the Mexican small agriculturalist, because the treaty allowed the import of highly subsidized crops into Mexico.

It is only reasonable that after destroying the Mexican small self-sufficient landholder that they would have to seek sustenance elsewhere.  Mexico was in no position to put all these people to work.   Of necessity, most of them illegally immigrated to the US.  That didn’t prevented authorities from lying to the public and claiming that Mexican farmers would benefit from NAFTA and that it would raise their living standard.

The only logical solution to the immigration problem based on the logic presented above is to do away with NAFTA, and re-institute programs that help small agriculturalists.

It is going to be almost impossible to effectively do this, because the wealthy–-individuals and corporations– have purchased many of the lands that the small farmers used to till.

These people do no want to come to the US, they are forced to out of necessity.

The only way they can be re-employed in Mexico and elsewhere is if a massive micro-loan program is developed.   Micro Loans have been proven to work over and over again.

The $1.2 billion being used to build the Great Wall of America and further enrich swollen war profit laden corporations like Halliburton, could be better and more effective spent on a micro-loan program.

For people who want to get involved in a Micro Loan Program with a small donation Kiva.org has a great program that helps thousands.

see

The Great Mexican Oil Takeover

The Unholy Trinity Of International Terrorists Organizations

A Man-Made Famine + Stuffed & Starved: Interview with Raj Patel

Global Food Crisis: Hunger Plagues Haiti & the World by Stephen Lendman

Bad Samaritans – The Myth of Free Trade & the Secret History of Capitalism

Naomi Klein “The Shock Doctrine” & “No Logo” interview (must-see video)

Harvest of Injustice: The Oppression of Migrant Workers on Canadian Farms

Dandelion Salad

By Adriana Paz
http://www.socialistvoice.ca
June 22, 2008

Adriana Paz is a co-founder and organizer of Justicia/Justice for Migrant Workers-BC (J4MW), a volunteer collective based in Toronto and Vancouver that strives to promote the rights of Mexican, Caribbean, and Guatemalan workers who annually participate in the Seasonal Agricultural Workers Program (SAWP).

Socialist Voice has also published an important document on a related issue: Bolivian President Evo Morales Condemns Europe’s Anti-Migrant Law

Some say that nothing happens by chance. At the very least, it was a fortunate accident that my first job, when I arrived in Canada from Bolivia three years ago, was in a tomato greenhouse in South Delta, British Columbia — one of the first in the province to request migrant farm workers from Mexico under the federal Seasonal Agricultural Workers Program (SAWP). My job was to run from the office managers’ office to the greenhouse and back relaying information on workers’ productivity levels.

My first observation was that brown bodies are the pickers and white bodies are the managers. I naively asked my boss why there are no Canadians picking tomatoes. He answered me simply, “Because this is not a job for them.”

That was my first lesson in Canadian social history. In B.C., most farm workers are and have long been immigrants of colour, including recently a growing number of seasonal migrants under SAWP and a related federal scheme, the Temporary Foreign Workers Program. Battered by the whims of global capital and local government policy, farm workers are the most vulnerable part of the work force, facing extreme job and economic insecurity.

According to the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives BC, most farm workers in the province are immigrants from India, chiefly women in their 50s and 60s who came to Canada under the family reunification program. Lack of language skills and the obligation to their families to repay money advanced for their immigration and settlement pressure them to accept working conditions that Canadian workers find unacceptable.

Their plight is worsened by the Farm Labour Contractor (FLC) system, unique to the agricultural sector. The FLCs act as coyotes or intermediaries between farm workers and greenhouses/farms, determining how workers will get to the job, how long they will work, what they will earn, and so on. Obviously the FLCs do nothing to ensure respect for employment standards and safety regulations, leading to all sort of violations while the provincial authorities close their eyes.

For generations, South Asians have toiled in the fields of British Columbia under unsafe and exploitative conditions, enduring low wages and long hours of hard work while creating massive profits for agrobusiness.

Although fully informed about the corrupt FLCs and their blatant violations of employment and safety regulations, the provincial government decided in 2001/2002 to reduce enforcement. Then in 2003/2004 they excluded farm workers from various provisions of the Employment Standards Act, leaving this group of racialized labour even more vulnerable to hyperexploitation.

How to create a labour shortage

Since 2000, farm operators in B.C. have been complaining of a shortage of labour to harvest their crops. Little science is needed find the cause. When wages are low, often less than the legal minimum, and working conditions are substandard, workers are unwilling to work in agriculture if they have a choice.

The farm operators are of course passing on downwards the immense pressures they face from the forces of globalization and the power of agribusiness monopolies. Far from providing protection against these profiteers, the government, urged on by the farm/greenhouse operators, has adopted policies that have worsened the “labour shortage.”

Nothing was done to raise farm labour wages or to increase the supply of immigrant labour. On the contrary, their measures serve to make agricultural labour not only unattractive but unlivable. To make matters worse, Citizenship and Immigration Canada in 2003 restricted the family reunification program, reducing the traditional South Asian labour source of those utilizing this program to immigrate to Canada.

Meanwhile the federal government is closing the door to permanent immigration of farm workers while steadily moving towards a U.S-style policy based on temporary migration.

All this is of course the total opposite of the “free market” policies that the government claims to support. In a free market, when demand for something goes up, so should its price. If there’s a labour shortage in Canadian agriculture, wages should tend upwards until the supply of labour increases. By aggressively expanding Temporary Worker Programs, the government is manipulating market conditions to keep wages and working conditions low in order to increase corporate profits.

Government-imposed servitude

Ottawa’s seasonal agricultural workers program (SAWP) is an old federal initiative that started in 1966 with Caribbean countries. Mexico and Guatemala were incorporated in the seventies. SAWP operates in Alberta, Quebec, Manitoba, Ontario, Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, and Prince Edward Island, supplying 20% of seasonal farm jobs on vegetable, fruit, and tobacco farms and greenhouses. B.C. was incorporated in 2004.

Under the SAWP a farm worker comes under a temporary work permit visa tied to one single employer for periods of up to eight months. Before leaving the home country, the worker must sign a contract with the employer specifying wages and terms of employment — in other words, sign away the right while in Canada to seek better conditions. Those seeking permits are not allowed to bargain collectively with their prospective employer. Impoverished and dispossessed workers abroad stand alone against the power of employer and government. The employer is able to dictate contract terms.

Justicia/Justice for Migrant Workers-BC calls on Ottawa to offer the migrant workers permanent status — for them and their families — at the end of their first season. In fact, as things stand, workers have no option to apply for permanent status. They are sent home as soon as their contracts expire — or sooner, if they complain or raise concerns about poor working or living conditions..

They take with them an evaluation form from their employer, which must be given to the home government. At the end of the season, employers fill an evaluation report indicating if they would recall the workers for next season. A negative report can result in suspension from the program. Workers also report on their treatment by Canadian employers, but most of them avoid complaints for fear that this would be held against them in reapplying for work in Canada.

In the Mexican case, the government requires that applicants have less than grade three education, a farm-worker background, and strong family ties — factors believed likely to prevent them from establishing themselves in Canada as undocumented workers.

Workers get little information on what to expect in Canada. Once here, they start at or near minimum wage, exposed to long shifts of hard labour (up to 12-16 hour days in peak season). They receive no overtime pay, no paid holidays, sometimes no weekends, and no vacation pay. They are also subjected to unfair paycheck deductions for social benefits such as Unemployment Insurance and Canadian Pension Plan that they can never receive because of their “temporary” status.

The SAWP program does not provide a path to regularization of status. Migrant labourers work here for years as migrants, coming and going yearly, sometimes for their entire work life. They develop ties here and establish themselves up to a certain point, but are never able to settle with their families. This creates a pattern of extended and painful family separation. Children grow up without fathers, while men here establish separate lives, and the fabrics of relationships and communities are strained.

Immigrant-based community grassroots organizations, progressive faith groups, and the labour movement point out that such temporary worker programs depress standards for all workers in Canada. The migrant-worker programs are yet another tactic of the “divide and conquer” strategy that aims to divide and fracture the working class. It encourages a perception that migrant workers threaten the jobs and employment standards of the local population, when in fact it is the migrant-labour programs — not the workers — that threaten us all.

How to create a labour surplus

The rural economy of Mexico has been devastated in recent years by the provisions of the North American Free Trade Agreement. This is entirely intentional, reflecting NAFTA’s goal of reshaping Mexico’s economy in line with the needs of mainly U.S. corporate interests, while enriching the notoriously corrupt Mexican ruling class.

NAFTA and related policies deepen economic distress in Mexico where, according to the World Bank, 50% live in poverty and 15% in extreme poverty — about 15 million Mexicans struggling to fend off starvation. Meanwhile, Mexico, one of the world’s most unequal and unjust countries, boasts more new billionaires than Canada, including the richest man on earth, Carlos Slim.

The economic collapse of the Mexican countryside has created waves of migrants seeking a future in Mexico’s large cities and in the U.S. It is estimated there could be as many as 12 million undocumented Mexicans in the U.S. Half a million brave the dangerous journey north every year. About 3,000 die each year in the attempt, mostly from exposure while crossing the unforgiving deserts of the U.S. Southwest. The migrants’ remittances back home are now Mexico’s largest source of foreign revenue, about $25 billion annually.

SAWP and other temporary worker programs take advantage of the huge surplus of cheap labour in Mexico that NAFTA helped to create. Through temporary worker programs, governments of both Mexico and Canada aim to manage the flow of migrants to the North for the benefit of local business elites, while stripping workers of rights and liberties.

The result is to create in this country an underclass of workers, an underclass of human beings stamped with the labels of “foreign,” “undocumented,” “unskilled,” and “temporary.” Meanwhile it relieves the Mexican government of responsibility to ensure healthy rural and urban development throughout the country.

The need to organize

The creation of this oppressed migrant workforce must be answered by a migrant labour movement with its feet and heart in the countries of both origin and destination, one that seeks real and lasting solutions to the migrant workers’ problems. This movement must be based on grassroots organizing initiatives that empower workers to lead their own struggle. Real changes happen only when those most affected, those who suffer the most, are at the forefront of the struggle. If this is not the case, changes if any will be superficial and short-lived.

The Justicia/Justice for Migrant Workers collective sees its mandate as assisting those most affected — the migrant workers — in stepping to the fore and consolidating their position and participation in the movement. We help workers organize in an effective manner, avoiding possible risk of repatriation and seeking to meet their immediate and long-term needs.

We expose migrant workers’ conditions and apply pressure through the media, while accompanying the workers’ process of raising consciousness, and developing skills and tools drawn from their own analysis of their condition and situation. We seek to help create different types of support systems — legal, political, and moral — within the community to overcome the numerous barriers that silence migrant workers.

In B.C., unlike other provinces in the east, migrant farm workers are allowed to unionize. In some cases, unions have sought to respond to their plight, as with regard to the temporary workers employed in B.C. on the Richmond-Vancouver rapid transit line and the Golden Ears Bridge over the Fraser River. The United Food and Commercial Workers operate Migrant Support Centers in Ontario, Manitoba, Quebec, and recently B.C. Currently it is fighting for the right to represent these workers in Manitoba and Quebec.

On the whole, however, efforts by the trade union movement to defend these workers have been sporadic, and their character raises legitimate concerns.

In addition, it must be asked whether Canada’s unions, with their present hierarchical and primarily white leadership structures, can effectively represent migrant workers and serve their interests. Are unions long-term allies of migrant workers, supporting their struggle not only here but in their country of origin, where the root causes are found that forced them to migrate? Should an independent migrant workers union be formed to better represent their interests by exercising their skills and building on their organizing culture and historical backgrounds?

What is certain is that regardless of the structure or model, the most affected ones — migrant workers and migrants of colour — should represent themselves. Only this will counteract their historical background of marginalization. Otherwise systemic patterns of charity and paternalism will be perpetuated, making token gestures to those most affected — the migrant workers — without changing the structures that determine their fate.

Alliances of migrant workers with other sectors, inside and outside the labour movement, should address systemic issues, such as the root causes of migration, structural and systemic racism in immigration policies and hiring systems, and so on. There are ways unions can support migrant workers other than merely “representing” or “leading” their struggle.

Support and solidarity can be expressed through respecting, facilitating, and encouraging migrant workers’ self-organization instead of speaking for them and having others doing the work for them. Respect and support is also needed for grassroots organizing efforts to develop leadership and capacity within community-based organizations. This can help grassroots organizers and migrant workers develop the tools needed for their struggle for justice and dignity.

After my first “Canadian social history lesson” in the tomato greenhouse three years ago, many more followed. Undoubtedly, the most powerful and hopeful lessons came from the migrant farm workers themselves, who through the years have been resisting with admirable courage and dignity their “patrones” (bosses), both in their farms and the consular offices, where officials are often from the employer’s side. They do this sometimes silently and sometimes loudly, accompanied by external supporters or just by themselves. They demand the right to be human beings, not just the “economic units” that global capital needs them to be.

For more information on this subject, see Cultivating Farmworker Rights: Ending the Exploitation of Immigrant and Migrant Farmworkers in BC (PDF 1058 Kb) published on June 18, 2008 by the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives

Socialist Voice is a forum for discussion of today’s struggles of the workers and oppressed from the standpoint of revolutionary Marxism. Readers are encouraged to distribute Socialist Voice as widely as possible.

SuperCorridor Defeat? Don’t Bet On It

Dandelion Salad

by Stephen Lendman
Global Research
June 20, 2008

The title refers to the I-69/Trans-Texas Corridor (TTC) portion of the North American SuperCorridor Coalition (NASCO) project. The Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) announced that, for now at least, it nixed this part of the $184 billion scheme calling for:

— a 4000 mile toll road network of transportation corridors;

— 10 lanes or 1200 feet wide;

— two or more trans-Texas corridors being considered; one paralleling I-35 from Laredo through San Antonio, Austin, Dallas/Fort Worth to Gainesville; the other an extension following US 59 from Texarkana through Houston to Laredo or the Rio Grande Valley;

— others would parallel I-45 from Dallas/FortWorth to Houston and I-10 from El Paso to Orange;

— they’ll accommodate car and truck traffic;

— rail lines;

— pipelines and utilities; and

— communication systems.

It’s planned across Texas from Mexico to Oklahoma, would have annexed huge private land tracts, and may later on take much of it anyway. Enough to threaten organizations like the Texas and Southwestern Cattle Raisers Association (TSCRA), Texas Farm Bureau and other rural interests. Their member property rights are at stake, so they fought it, and for now, prevailed – at least partly, but the matter is far from settled.

On June 10, Executive Director Amadeo Saenz announced that TxDOT “narrowed the (TTC I-69) study area (to) existing highway (routes) whenever possible,” and “any area (outside) an existing (one) will not be considered” except for necessary portions. NASCO’s Texas highway remains viable. It’s just a little less “Super” and for now will use mostly existing state highways and connect them to northern links.

The larger project is far more ambitious. It’s to develop an international, integrated, secure superhighway running the length and breath of the continent for profit. It’s to militarize and annex it as part of the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) scheme – aka “Deep Integration” North American Union. If completed, it will extend nearly everywhere – North, South, East and West along four main cross-border regions:

— an Atlantic Corridor, including: the Canada-US East Coast; the Champlain-Hudson Corridor; the Appalachian region; and the Gulf of Mexico;

— a Central Eastern Corridor; an urban one through large cities and industrial areas; another through the Great Plains to the Canadian Prairies;

— a Central Western Corridor, including the largest Mexican maquiladora concentration; and

— a Pacific Corridor linking Fairbanks, Alaska to San Diego into Tijuana, Ciudad Obrego and Mazatlan, Mexico.

From north to south, it will extend from Fairbanks to Winnipeg, Manitoba; Edmonton, Alberta; and Windsor, Ontario, Canada through Kansas City, San Antonio and Laredo, Texas into Neuvo Laredo, Monterrey, Guadalajara, and the ports of Manzanillo, Colima and Lazaro Cardenas, Mexico. Other links will connect Montreal, Ottawa, and Toronto, Canada to New York, Chicago, Indianapolis, Denver, Los Angeles, Salt Lake City, Memphis, Dallas, Houston with still more routes to follow – East to West, North to South across Canada, the US and Mexico.

Canada’s plan is called CISCOR – the Canadian Intelligent SuperCorridor running west from Vancouver and Prince Rupert to Montreal and Halifax. Its web site explains it as follows: “The Saskatchen-based CISCOR Smart Inland Port Network will serve as the central logistics and coordination hub, creating a Canadian east-west land bridge (connecting) three major North American north-south corridors; North Americas SuperCorridor (NASCO), Canada America Mexico Corridor (CANAMEX) and River of Trade Corridor Coalition (ROTCC).

ROTCC was created in 2004 to facilitate trade across 3300 miles from Laredo, Texas to Detroit and into Canada. Another route along I-45 extends from Houston and the I-10 corridor and rail route from Los Angeles and Long Beach to Dallas/Fort Worth.

Overall, it will be a comprehensive energy and commerce-related transportation artery for trade and strategic resources with DHS and NORTHCOM in charge. They’ll monitor and militarize it through a network of high-tech sensors and trackers to secure the continent for profit at the expense of the greater public good the way these schemes always work.

Part of the plan involves a proposed arrangement between NASCO and a company called Savi Networks – a joint venture between Lockheed Martin and Hutchison Ports Holdings, a Chinese ports management firm. If instituted, it will generate huge revenues by paying NASCO 25 cents for each of the millions of “revenue-generating intermodal ocean cargo container(s)” using the supercorridor as well as along other north-south routes being planned. The idea is to install an RFID chip network and put them in containers as well for tracking. They’ll monitor them from port of entry to final destination and make shippers pay tolls in addition to transportation costs. They’ll, in turn, pass on costs to buyers.

Lockheed Martin runs a Global Transport Network (GTN) Command and Control Center for the military that provides electronic tracking. On its web site, Savi Networks says it “was formed to improve the efficiency and security of global trade (through its) SaviTrack system.” It “utilizes a reliable network of wireless Automated Identification and Data Collection (AIDC) equipment and (Enterprise Resource Planning – ERP) software to provide shippers, logistics service providers, and terminal operators with precise and actionable information.”

For now, the Texas artery will be less ambitious but still part of the grander scheme. For its part, I-69/TTC remains a government-private partnership whereby new roads will charge tolls for maximum revenue generation and make the public to pay the tab for their use.

Besides the scaled back I-69/TTC, another planned project is just as worrisome. It’s called the TTC-35 600 mile corridor extension along I-35 from Oklahoma through Dallas/Forth Worth to Laredo to Mexico and possibly the Gulf Coast. A two-tiered environmental study for it began in spring 2004 and remains ongoing.

Tier One engendered sweeping opposition but not enough to stop it. Public hearings were held for input on potential corridor locations and promoted what’s called the Preferred Corridor Alternative. Federal Highway Administration approval comes next, after which a Tier Two phase would identify proposed highway alignments and other modes and potential access points. Hearings would follow for further public input and be as likely to generate hostility as did the I-69/TTC project. It slowed SuperCorridor momentum, but in Texas and across the country it’s very much alive and ongoing.

Powerful forces back it in spite of considerable opposition in states across the country. In support are organizations like:

— the Council on Foreign Relation and its influential members; it backed business having “unlimited (cross-border) access in its 2005 report titled “Building a North American Community; its Task Force “applauds the announced ‘Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP)’ of North America” – aka North American Union and its SuperCorridor project; it also sees a step beyond with “a more ambitious vision of a new community by 2010 (giving) specific recommendations on how to achieve it.”

— the International Mobility & Trade Corridor Project (IMTC); it bills itself as a US – Canadian government and business coalition “promot(ing) improvements to mobility and security for the four border crossings between Whatcom County, Washington and the Lower Mainland of British Columbia” – combined called the Cascade Gateway;

— the CANAMEX Corridor Coalition for a superhighway linking Mexico City to Edmonton, Alberta; it supports the “seamless and efficient transportation of goods, services, people and information between Canada, Mexico and the US;”

— the Central North American Trade Corridor Association (CHATCA); it’s for a Central North American Trade Corridor fully integrated in the global economy and refers to “5 T’s” as “essential:” tourism, technology, trade, transportation and training;

— the Ports to Plains Trade (PTP) Corridor; it supports a multimodal one from Mexico through the four PTP states of Texas, New Mexico, Colorado and Oklahoma up to Canada and the Pacific Northwest;

— the Champlain-Hudson Trade Corridor and Gateway Coalition representing trade from Quebec City and Montreal to New York; and

— the I-95 Corridor Coalition alliance of transportation agencies, toll authorities, and related organizations (including law enforcement) from Canada to Florida in support of transportation managements and operational common interest issues favoring business.

Nothing so far is finalized, but SuperCorrider momentum remains viable. It’s slowed in Texas, but very much alive and viable.

In contrast, opposition groups are numerous, vocal, but yet to achieve enough critical mass to matter. They include groups like the “People’s Summit” that protested in New Orleans last April against the recent three-presidential secret summit to plot strategy. Also, the conservative Coalition to Block the North American Union condemns a “stealth plan” to erase national borders, merge three nations into one, end the sovereignty of each, build a SuperCorridor, put Washington and the military in charge, allow unlimited immigration, and replace the dollar with the “amero.”

Still another is a group of citizen-activist Oklahomans and the organization they formed: Oklahomans for Sovereignty and Free Enterprise. Like similar Texas and other state groups, it’s against the SuperCorridor and its proposed I-35 route through their state. It’s a conservative group believing that “a capitalist economy can regulate itself in a freely competitive market…with a minimum of governmental intervention and regulation.” It opposes government using the law to facilitate a “corporate takeover” of society and fund it with public tax dollars. On board as well is an Oklahoma state senator who says “the NAFTA Superhighway stops here.”

He’ll need other lawmakers with him and on April 29 failed. Despite vocal opposition, the Oklahoma state legislature authorized the creation of “Smart (inland) Ports” and SuperCorridor system despite earlier having passed a resolution urging Congress “to withdraw from the (SPP – North American Union)” and all activities related to it. Besides Oklahoma, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) lists 21 other states that have passed public-private partnership enabling legislation considered essential for private investment to go forward.

At the federal level, there’s also congressional opposition (but not enough to matter) in spite of Rep. Virgil Goode and six co-sponsors introducing House Concurrent Resolution 40 in January 2007. It expressed “the sense of (some but not enough in) Congress that the United States should not engage in (building a NAFTA) Superhighway System or enter into a North American Union with Mexico and Canada.”

State legislatures as well are against it (in contrast to others in support) – thus far a dozen or more passing resolutions in 2008 and another 20 in 2007. Well and good but remember Adlai Stevenson’s response to an enthusiastic supporter during his first presidential campaign. He thanked the woman and replied: “That’s not enough madam. I need a majority.”

It’s no different for the SuperCorridor and North American Union. They’re progressing secretly in spite of activist opposition and a largely unaware public. A recent poll sheds light. It was conducted by the American Policy Center that calls itself “a privately funded, nonprofit, 501 c (4), tax-exempt grassroots action and education foundation dedicated to the promotion of free enterprise and limited government….”

It revealed no widespread public SPP opposition because most people (58% living along the proposed Texas to Minnesota route) don’t know about it or enough to matter. However, 95% of respondents with awareness opposed it but unfortunately in answer to biased questions. Their wording apparently conveyed the idea of “private corporations (having) power to enforce trade policy that may adversely affect our national sovereignty and independence.”

Market researchers know that questions must be neutral and unbiased to produce reliable results. For example, respondents should have been asked: From what you know about SPP, do you favor or oppose it? A follow-up should then ask “why” to get unguided replies. Other biased questions were also asked and elicited strong opposition to an “amero,” NAFTA courts superseding state and federal ones, the Bush administration being allowed to proceed without congressional approval, the US being “harmonized” or merged with Mexico and Canada, and more.

Most important is that public knowledge is sparse. What is known is incomplete, at times inaccurate, and either way plans (so far) are proceeding with or without congressional or public approval.

It means a corporate coup d’etat is advancing, aided and abetted by three governments. They plan to unite and become one, militarize the continent for enforcement, lay ribbons of concrete and rail lines across it, and hand it over to business for profit. That’s where things now stand. Imagine where they’ll end if a way isn’t found to stop them.

Stephen Lendman is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization. He lives in Chicago and can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net.

Also visit his blog site at www.sjlendman.blogspot.com and listen to the Global Research News Hour on RepublicBroadcasting.org Mondays from 11AM – 1PM US Central time for cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests. All programs are archived for easy listening.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=9383

© Copyright Stephen Lendman, Global Research, 2008

The url address of this article is: www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=9397


Losing Latin America – What Will the Obama Doctrine Be Like?

Dandelion Salad

By Greg Grandin
TomDispatch
June 08, 2008

Google “neglect,” “Washington,” and “Latin America,” and you will be led to thousands of hand-wringing calls from politicians and pundits for Washington to “pay more attention” to the region. True, Richard Nixon once said that “people don’t give one shit” about the place. And his National Security Advisor Henry Kissinger quipped that Latin America is a “dagger pointed at the heart of Antarctica.” But Kissinger also made that same joke about Chile, Argentina, and New Zealand — and, of the three countries, only the latter didn’t suffer widespread political murder as a result of his policies, a high price to pay for such a reportedly inconsequential place.

Latin America, in fact, has been indispensable in the evolution of U.S. diplomacy. The region is often referred to as America’s “backyard,” but a better metaphor might be Washington’s “strategic reserve,” the place where ascendant foreign-policy coalitions regroup and redraw the outlines of U.S. power, following moments of global crisis.

When the Great Depression had the U.S. on the ropes, for example, it was in Latin America that New Deal diplomats worked out the foundations of liberal multilateralism, a diplomatic framework that Washington would put into place with much success elsewhere after World War II.

…continued

FAIR USE NOTICE: This blog may contain copyrighted material. Such material is made available for educational purposes, to advance understanding of human rights, democracy, scientific, moral, ethical, and social justice issues, etc. This constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

see

Plan Mexico: Plan Colombia Heads for Mexico by Stephen Lendman

Mexico’s Ghost Towns-The other side of the immigration debate

Dandelion Salad

By John Gibler
http://www.inthesetimes.com
May 29, 2008

ZACATECAS, Mexico

Cerrito del Agua, population 3,000, has no paved roads — either leading to it or within it. No restaurants, no movie theaters, no shopping malls. In fact, the small town located in the central Mexican state of Zacatecas has no middle schools, high schools or colleges; no cell phone service, no hospital. Its surrounding fields are dry and untended. The streets are empty.

The explosion of emigration to the United States over the past 15 years has emptied much of central Mexico, even reaching into southernmost states like Chiapas and Yucatan. But it has simply devastated Zacatecas, a dry, rolling agricultural region located about 400 miles northwest of Mexico City.

“Theories of migration always show the interests of the North,” says Raul Delgado Wise, director of the Graduate School of Development Studies at the Autonomous University of Zacatecas and an expert on migration. He says migrants born in Mexico contribute 8 percent of the U.S. gross domestic product (GDP) — about $900 billion — which is more than Mexico’s entire GDP.

…continued

FAIR USE NOTICE: This blog may contain copyrighted material. Such material is made available for educational purposes, to advance understanding of human rights, democracy, scientific, moral, ethical, and social justice issues, etc. This constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

see

Immigration

Plan Mexico: Plan Colombia Heads for Mexico by Stephen Lendman

Dandelion Salad

by Stephen Lendman
Global Research, May 27, 2008

It’s called “Plan Mexico,” or more formally the “Merida Initiative,” and here’s the scheme. It’s to do for Mexicans what Plan Colombia has done to that nation since 1999, and, in fact, much earlier. Since then, billions have gone for the following:

— to establish a US military foothold in the country;

— mostly to fund US weapons, chemical and other corporate profiteers; it’s a long-standing practice; in fact, a 1997 Pentagon document affirms that America’s military will “protect US interests and investments;” in Colombia, it’s to control its valuable resources; most importantly oil and natural gas but also coal, iron ore, nickel, gold, silver, emeralds, copper and more; it’s also to crush worker resistance, eliminate unions, target human rights and peasant opposition groups, and make the country a “free market” paradise inhospitable to people;

— it funds a brutish military as well; already, over 10,000 of its soldiers have been trained at the Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation (WHINSEC) – aka the School of the Americas (SOA) at Fort Benning, Georgia; its graduates are infamous as human rights abusers, drugs traffickers, and death squad practitioners; they were well schooled in their “arts” by the nation most skilled in them;

— it lets Colombia arm and support paramilitary death squads; they’re known as the United Self-Defense Forces of Colombia (AUC); for more than a decade, they’ve terrorized Colombians and are responsible for most killings and massacres in support of powerful western and local business interests;

— it funds drug eradication efforts, but only in FARC-EP and ELN areas; government-controlled ones are exempt; trafficking is big business; laundering drugs money reaps huge profits for major US and regional banks; the CIA has also been linked to the trade for decades, especially since the 1980s; after Afghanistan’s invasion and occupation, opium harvests set records – mostly from areas controlled by US-allied “warlords;” the Taliban’s drug eradication program was one reason it was targeted; Colombia’s drug eradication is horrific; it causes ecological devastation; crop and forest destruction; lives and livelihoods lost; large areas chemically contaminated; bottom line of the program – record amounts of Colombian cocaine reach US and world markets; trafficking is more profitable than ever; so is big business thanks to paramilitary terror;

— it’s to topple the FARC-EP and ELN resistance groups; Latin American expert James Petras calls the former the “longest standing (since 1964), largest peasant-based guerrilla (resistance) movement in the world;” it’s also to weaken Hugo Chavez, other regional populist leaders and groups, and destabilize their countries; and

— it supports the “Uribe doctrine;” it’s in lockstep with Washington; its policies are hard right, corporate-friendly and militarized for enforcement.

Plan Colombia turned the country into a dependable, profitable narco-state. Business is better than ever. Violence is out of control and human rights abuses are appalling.

It gets worse. Two-thirds of Columbians are impoverished. Over 2.5 million peasant and urban slum dwellers have been displaced. Thousands of trade unionists have been murdered (more than anywhere else in the world), and many more thousands of peasants, rural teachers, and peasant and indigenous leaders have as well. Paramilitary land seizures are commonplace. Colombian latifundistas profit hugely. Wealth concentration is extreme and growing. Corruption infests the government. Many thousands in desperation are leaving. Colombia’s “democracy” is a sham. So is Mexico’s. Plan Mexico will make it worse. That’s the whole idea, and it’s part of the secretive Security and Prosperity Partnership – aka the North American Union.

It’s planned behind closed doors – to militarize and annex the continent. Corporate giants are in charge, mostly US ones. The idea is for an unregulated open field for profit. The Bush administration, Canada and Mexico support it. Things are moving toward implementation. Three nations will become one. National sovereignty eliminated. Worker rights as well. Opposition is building, but moves are planned to quash it. That’s the militarization part.

Business intends to win this one. People are to be exploited, not helped. That’s why it’s kept secret. The idea is to agree on plans, inform legislatures minimally about them, get SPP passed, then implement it with as few of its disturbing details known in hopes once they are they’ll be too late to reverse.

SPP is ugly, ominous and hugely people destructive. Hundreds of millions in three countries will be affected. Others in the region as well. Plan Mexico is a contribution to the scheme. Below is what we know about it.

Plan Mexico – Exploitation Writ Large

The plan was first announced in October 2007 as a “regional security cooperation initiative.” It’s to provide $1.4 billion in aid (over three years) for Mexico and Central America on the pretext of fighting drugs trafficking and organized crime linked to it. FY 2008 calls for $550 million for starters with about 10% of it for Central America.

In fact, Plan Mexico is part of SPP’s grand scheme to militarize the continent, let corporate predators exploit it, and keep people from three countries none the wiser. Most aid will go to Mexico’s military and police forces with its major portion earmarked back to US defense contractors for equipment, training and maintenance. It’s how these schemes always work.

This one includes a menu of security allocations, administrative functions, and special needs like software, forensics equipment, database compilations, plus plenty more for friendly pockets to keep our Mexican cohorts on board.

After failing on May 15, House passage will likely follow the Senate’s approval on May 22 – below the radar. It’s one of many appropriations tucked into the latest Iraq/Afghanistan supplemental funding request, and its purpose is just as outlandish. It will militarize Mexico without deploying US troops. It will also open the country for plunder, privatize everything including state-owned oil company PEMEX, give Washington a greater foothold there, and get around the touchy military issue by allowing in Blackwater paramilitaries instead to work with Mexican security forces.

Only privatizing PEMEX is in doubt thanks to immense citizen opposition. Thousands of “brigadistas” were in the streets, protesting outside the Senate and Chamber of Deputies, as lawmakers considered ending PEMEX state-control. They paralyzed debate and brought it to a halt – temporarily putting off a final resolution of this very contentious issue. Big Oil wants it. Most Mexicans don’t. The battle continues. Mexico’s military may get involved.

The US State Department describes them as follows:

— ….”impunity and corruption (in Mexico’s security forces are) problems, particularly at the state and local levels. The following human rights problems were reported: unlawful killings; kidnappings; physical abuse; poor and overcrowded prison conditions; arbitrary arrests and detention; corruption, inefficiency, and lack of transparency in the judicial system; (coerced) confessions….permitted as evidence in trials; criminal intimidation of journalists leading to self-censorship; corruption at all levels of government; domestic violence against women (often with impunity); violence, including killings, against women; trafficking in persons; social and economic discrimination against indigenous people; and child labor.”

Mexico’s military fares little better with promises Plan Mexico will worsen it. President Calderon now deploys troops around the country. People fear them when they come. They’re purportedly against drugs traffickers, but that’s mostly cover. Their real purpose may be sinister – a possible dress rehearsal for martial law when SPP is implemented.

Mexican soldiers are hard line. Their reputation is unsavory. People justifiably fear them. They commit flagrant human rights abuses and get away with them. The major media even report them. The New York Times, CNN, BBC, USA Today and others cite evidence of rape, torture, killings, other human rights abuses, corruption, extortion, and ties to drugs traffickers. Little is done to stop it. Government and military spokespersons often aren’t available for comment. They’re part of the problem, not the solution. Plan Mexico promises more of the same and then some. Billions from Washington back it.

Social protests in the country already are criminalized. Hundreds are filling prisons. Many languish there for years. Labor and social activists are most vulnerable. Injustice and grinding poverty motivate them. Plan Mexico ups the ante. Things are about to get worse.

Militarizing society is toxic. Police state enforcement follows. Accountability disappears. The rule of law no longer applies. Plan Mexico assures it. So does SPP for the continent. In classic doublespeak, the White House claims it will “advance the productivity and competitiveness of our nations and help to protect our health, safety and environment.” Its real purpose is to annex a continent, destroy its democratic remnants, lock in hard line enforcement, and secure it for capital.

SPP Backdrop of Plan Mexico

A detailed SPP explanation can be found on the 2007 article link. It’s titled The Militarization and Annexation of North America – http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=6359

Plan Mexico is part of SPP. It will militarize and annex the continent. It was formerly launched at a March 23, 2005 meeting in Waco, Texas attended by George Bush, Mexico’s President Vincente Fox, and Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin. They forged a tripartite partnership for greater US, Canadian and Mexican economic, political, social and security integration. Secretive working groups were formed to accomplish it – to devise non-negotiable agreements to be binding on all three nations.

Details are hidden. No public input is permitted. Pro forma legislative voting is approaching. It will try to avoid a NAFTA-type battle. Legislatures aren’t being fully informed. The worst of SPP is secret. It’s not a treaty, and the idea is to pass it below the radar and avoid a protracted public debate.

What’s known so far is disturbing, and considerable opposition has arisen but thus far too inadequate to matter. SPP, Plan Mexico, and a final continent-wide plan amount to a corporate coup d’etat against three sovereign states and hundreds of millions of people. It’s to erase national borders, merge three nations into one under US control, and remove all barriers to trade and capital flows. It’s also to militarize the continent, create a fortress-North America security zone, and have in place police state laws for enforcement. Billions will fund it. All for corporate gain. Nothing for public welfare.

SPP takes NAFTA and the “war on terrorism” to the next level en route to extending it further for more corporate plunder. It’s based on outlandish notions – that doing business, protecting national security, and securing “public welfare” require tough new measures in a very threatening world.

SPP bolsters US control. It enhances corporate power, quashes civil liberties, erases public welfare, and creates an open field for plunder free from regulatory restraints. It’s being plotted behind closed doors. A series of summits and secret meetings continue with the latest one in New Orleans from April 22 to 24.

Three presidents attended and were met by vocal street protests. They convened a “People’s Summit” and also held workshops to:

— inform people how destructive SPP is;

— strengthen networking and organizational ties against it;

— maintain online information about their activities;

— promote their efforts and build added support; and

— affirm their determination to continue resisting a hugely repressive corporate-sponsored agenda. Opponents call it Nafta on steroids.

Business-friendly opposition also exists. Prominent is a “Coalition to Block the North American Union.” The Conservative Caucus backs it. It has a “NAU War Room.” It’s the “headquarters of THE national campaign to expose and halt America’s absorption into a ‘North American Union (NAU)’ with Canada and Mexico.” It opposes building “a massive, continental ‘NAFTA Superhighway.’ “

It has congressional allies, and on January 2007 Rep. Virgil Goode and six co-sponsors introduced House Concurrent Resolution 40. It expresses “the sense of Congress that the United States should not engage in (building a NAFTA) Superhighway System or enter into a North American Union with Mexico and Canada.”

The April summit reaffirmed SPP’s intentions – to create a borderless North America, dissolve national sovereignty, put corporate giants in control, and assure big US ones get most of it. Militarism is part of it. It’s the reason for fortress-North America under US command. The US Northern Command (NORTHCOM) was established in October 2002 to do it. It has air, land and sea responsibility for the continent regardless of Posse Comitatus limitations that no longer apply or sovereign borders easily erased.

Homeland Security (DHS) and its Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) also have a large role. So does the FBI, CIA, all US spy agencies, militarized state and local police, National Guard forces, and paramilitary mercenaries like Blackwater USA. They’re headed anywhere on the continent with license to operate as freely here as in Iraq and New Orleans post-Katrina. They’ll be able to turn hemispheric streets into versions of Baghdad and make them unfit to live on if things come to that.

SPP maintains a web site. It’s “key accomplishments” since August 2007 are updated on it as of April 22, 2008. Its details can be accessed from the following link:

Click to access key_accomplishments_since_august_2007.pdf

It lists principles agreed to; bilateral deals struck; negotiations concluded; study assessments released; agreements on the “Free Flow of Information;” law enforcement activities; efforts related to intellectual property, border and long-haul trucking enforcement; import licensing procedures; food and product safety issues; energy (with special focus on oil); water as well; infrastructure development; emergency management; and much more. It’s all laid out in deceptively understated tones to hide its continental aim – enhanced corporate exploitation with as little public knowledge as possible.

Militarization will assure it, and consider one development up North. On February 14, 2008, the US and Canada agreed to allow American troops inside Canada. Canadians were told nothing or that the agreement was reached in 2002. Neither was it discussed in Congress or the Canadian House of Commons. It’s for “bilateral integration” of military command structures in areas of immigration, law enforcement, intelligence, or whatever else the Pentagon or Washington wishes. Overall, it’s part of the “war on terror” and militarizing the continent to make it “safer” for business and be prepared for any civilian opposition.

Congress may soon pass SPP, but with no knowledge of its worst provisions kept secret. It’s to assure enough congressional support makes it law. Nonetheless, federal, state and local opposition is building. It ranges from private activism to vocal lawmakers. In 2008, a dozen or more states passed resolutions against SPP. Around 20 others did it in 2007. Congress began debating it last year with opposition raised on various grounds – open borders, unchecked immigration, a NAFTA Superhighway System, and the idea of giving unregulated Mexican trucks free access to US roads and cities.

There’s also talk of replacing three national currencies with an “Amero.” Unfortunately, little is heard about trashing the Constitution or giving corporate bosses free reign. There’s even less talk about a militarized continent against dissent. SPP is a “new world order.” Companies are plotting to get it. People better hope they don’t. Disruptive opposition might derail them. It’s building but needs more resonance to matter. Time is short and slipping away. These schemers mean business. They want our future. We can’t afford to lose it.


Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net.

Also visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com and listen to The Global Research News Hour on RepublicBroadcasting.org Mondays from 11AM to 1PM US Central time for cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests. All programs are archived for easy listening any time.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=9059

The CRG grants permission to cross-post original Global Research articles on community internet sites as long as the text & title are not modified. The source and the author’s copyright must be displayed. For publication of Global Research articles in print or other forms including commercial internet sites, contact: crgeditor@yahoo.com

www.globalresearch.ca contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.

For media inquiries: crgeditor@yahoo.com
© Copyright Stephen Lendman, Global Research, 2008
The url address of this article is: www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=9084

US to import Great Wall of China to use on Mexican border (satire)

Robert

by R J Shulman
Dandelion Salad
featured writer

Robert’s blog post
May 24, 2008

WASHINGTON – As further evidence that American manufacturing and construction jobs are headed overseas, the Bush administration announced today that the wall between the United States and Mexico will be imported from China. “Having Mexicans build a wall to keep themselves out made no sense,” said Will Graybar, an Administration spokesman, “so we jumped at the offer of the Chinese who’ve integrated all peoples into their society and have no need for a wall to separate folks like we do here in the US.”

The placement of the 1,969 mile section of the Great Wall between Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, California and Mexico should be completed by August 2010. “The Chinese are sensitive to our budgetary problems,” said Gord Wilkins of the General Accounting Office, “so they are supplying cheap Chinese prison labor and will freshen up the wall with a new coat of lead paint.”

“Even the enviro-fascist tree hugging killers should love this wall,” said President Bush, “as we are using recycled materials.” “It’s too bad we didn’t act in time to grab the iron curtain before that fell,” said Vice President Dick Cheney, “as we could really use it now to separate dastardly domestic terrorists and homegrown enemy combatants from the rest of us hard working white Americans.”