KIM GAMEL, AP, April 29, 2008
BAGHDAD - Dozens of fighters ambushed a U.S. patrol in Baghdad's main Shiite militia stronghold Tuesday, firing rocket-propelled grenades and machine gun bursts as the American push into Sadr City increasingly faces pockets of close urban combat.
U.S. forces struck back with 200-pound guided rockets that devastated at least three buildings in the densely packed district that serves as the Baghdad base for the powerful Mahdi Army militia.
The U.S. military said 28 militiamen were killed as the U.S. patrol pulled back. Local hospital officials said dozens of civilians were killed or wounded.
Such street battles — in tight confines and amid frightened civilians — are increasingly becoming a hallmark of the drive into Sadr City and recall the type of head-on clashes last seen in large numbers during last year's U.S. troop buildup in Baghdad and surrounding areas.
U.S. troops often have fought intense gunbattles as they cleared neighborhoods in Baghdad and former Sunni insurgent havens such as Anbar and Diyala provinces. But roadside bombings and rocket or mortar volleys against bases have been the more frequent mode of attack in recent years.
Meanwhile, two U.S. soldiers were killed in northwestern Baghdad on Tuesday, the military said. One soldier died when his vehicle was struck by an improvised explosive device. The other died of wounds sustained when he was attacked by small-arms fire, the military said in a statement. No other details were immediately available.
Clashes have intensified in Sadr City since the Mahdi Army leader — the anti-American cleric Muqtada al-Sadr — reiterated his threat of an all-out war against U.S.-led forces last week. U.S. troops, meanwhile, find themselves increasingly drawn into the fight opened by the Iraqi government to cripple the power of Shiite militias.
"We are seeing larger groups of militants actually aggressively attacking Iraqi and U.S. security forces," said Lt. Col. Steve Stover, a military spokesman for American troops in Baghdad. "We've seen more of the brazen attacks in the daytime recently."
The ambush Tuesday came as a U.S. patrol of heavily armored Stryker vehicles and tanks moved along a road where the U.S. military is putting up a concrete barrier — which seeks to cut off the militants' movements and hamper their ability to fire rockets and mortars at the U.S.-protected Green Zone.
The militia fighters struck with rocket-propelled grenades and machine guns barrages fired from alleys and rooftops, the military said.
As the troops pulled back, one vehicle was hit with two roadside bombs, Stover said. Six American soldiers were wounded.
Stover said 28 militiamen were killed when U.S. forces hit back with rockets
Officials at two local hospitals said about 25 people had died and several dozen were wounded — most civilians. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because they weren't authorized to release the information.
Associated Press photos showed men pulling the dust-covered body of a 2-year-old boy, Ali Hussein, from the rubble of one building.
U.S. officials said all precautions are taken to prevent civilian casualties, but blamed the militiamen for taking cover among their neighbors and families.
"The enemy continues to show little regard for innocent civilians, as they fire their weapons from within houses, alleyways and rooftops upon our soldiers," said Col. Allen Batschelet, chief of staff for the 4th Infantry Division in Baghdad.
AP Television News footage showed children running for cover behind blast walls amid gunshots. Men helped carry several blood-soaked injured people onto stretchers to a local emergency hospital. Outside the hospital, the dead were placed inside plain wooden coffins.
Also in Baghdad, a senior government official was killed in a roadside bombing in the north of the city.
Dhia Jodi Jaber, director general at the Ministry of Labor and Social Affairs, was hit by a roadside bomb as he left his home, the ministry's spokesman Abdullah al-Lami said.
Insurgents frequently target governmental officials and institutions in a bid to disrupt the government's work.
Separately, an Iraqi court adjourned until May 20 the trial of Tariq Aziz, one of Saddam Hussein's best-known lieutenants, and seven other defendants over charges of allegedly ordering the execution of dozens of merchants for profiteering half an hour after it started.
The judge postponed the trial, saying co-defendant Ali Hassan al-Majid, Saddam Hussein's cousin who is known as "Chemical Ali," was too ill to attend.
___
Associated Press writers Hamid Ahmed and Sinan Salaheddin contributed to this report.
Anti-war Cindy Sheehan files to take on Pelosi
John Wildermuth, San Francisco Chronicle, April 26, 2008
Peace activist Cindy Sheehan wants to snatch House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's congressional seat from her in November, but first she's going to need the help - and signatures - of 10,198 friends and supporters.
Sheehan was at San Francisco City Hall on Friday to take out papers for her independent run for Congress, but without those signatures from voters in the district, her name won't show up on the ballot.
"It's an uphill battle," said Sheehan, who vowed to run against Pelosi in July after the speaker refused to start impeachment proceedings against President George Bush. "But I'm excited about the signature-gathering process. It's going to be an opportunity to talk to people about our campaign."
The 50-year-old Sheehan, whose son, Casey, was killed while serving in Iraq in 2004, became the public face of the anti-war movement when she mounted a demonstration outside Bush's Texas ranch that lasted from 2005 to 2007.
Even after pleading exhaustion and closing down "Camp Casey" in May, Sheehan was a regular speaker at anti-war gatherings across the nation. Since moving from Dixon to San Francisco's Mission District, she's been campaigning virtually full time.
To get the signatures, equal to 3 percent of the district voters registered for the 2006 general election, the campaign will have people setting up ironing boards and card tables on street corners throughout the city, seeking voters who want an alternative to Pelosi. Sheehan has until Aug. 8 to collect the needed signatures.
Getting on the ballot will be the easy part for Sheehan. If she becomes a recognized candidate, she'll be challenging one of the best-known and most powerful Democrats in the country in Pelosi, a 10-term incumbent who routinely collects around 80 percent of the vote in the San Francisco-only district.
Election challenges are nothing new to Pelosi, who has faced token Republican opposition in most of her November races, along with occasional primary challenges. But since she beat former San Francisco Supervisor Harry Britt in the 1987 special election to replace the late Rep. Sala Burton, Pelosi's political resume has been short of opponents anyone other than local political junkies has ever heard of.
Sheehan has name recognition, particularly for her Camp Casey crusade.
"I said last year that I was going to take a break (from the anti-war movement) and then come back," Sheehan said in an interview at her Mission Street campaign headquarters.
But when the president commuted White House aide Scooter Libby's prison sentence last summer, she said, she decided "that seeing George Bush impeached would be a victory for humanity."
Calls for impeachment from Sheehan and other progressives didn't move Pelosi, who already had declared that impeachment was "off the table" when it came to the Democratic congressional agenda.
"In this political environment, the speaker has to work for those things that are possible," said Brendan Daly, a spokesman for Pelosi.
An impeachment effort, he said, "would be divisive, we couldn't get the votes, and we would have to spend all our time on it."
There are plenty of congressional Democrats, especially in the Bay Area, who don't agree, including Reps. Lynn Woolsey, Barbara Lee and Pete Stark, along with other progressives, both in and out of office.
Impeachment isn't Sheehan's only concern. Pelosi's refusal to vote for an immediate end to the Iraq war and to support single-payer health care shows she's out of touch with San Francisco's progressive roots, Sheehan said.
"I'll represent everyone in San Francisco, not just the corporate elite," she said. "I'm working class, my family was working class, and we have struggled the same way our neighbors here in San Francisco have struggled."
There's nothing unusual about Pelosi taking fire from the left, said Daly, her spokesman, especially when the speaker has to be concerned not only about her district, but also about the party across the country.
Pelosi "has always been forceful about speaking her mind on issues like human rights in China and the war in Iraq," he said. "In San Francisco, there's always tension between the district and the leadership responsibility."
The speaker will get an early look at the unhappiness of the city's progressives, because she's being challenged by local activist Shirley Golub in the June 3 Democratic primary.
"I've just had the sense from people I've talked to that (Pelosi) hasn't done what people in the community want her to do," Golub said. "People now have a choice, and they haven't had a Democratic choice for a long, long time."
Despite the upbeat talk, Sheehan and Golub, along with Republican Dana Walsh and Libertarian Philip Berg in November, are the longest of longshots to give Pelosi even a moment's worry on election day. In a district where Democrats outnumber Republicans 56 percent to 10 percent and a state where incumbents almost never lose, a party leader like Pelosi has every right to be making plans for her next term in office.
The odds don't bother Sheehan, who has raised more than $100,000 for her race, most of it from outside the district.
"Even people who I won't represent are willing to back me, because they know what I'll do in office," she said. "Many people in San Francisco know me, and they know my persistence.
"If I get to Washington, I'll only be in office a couple weeks before Bush leaves, but I guarantee he'll know I'm there."
E-mail John Wildermuth at jwildermuth@sfchronicle.com.
Peace activist Cindy Sheehan wants to snatch House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's congressional seat from her in November, but first she's going to need the help - and signatures - of 10,198 friends and supporters.
Sheehan was at San Francisco City Hall on Friday to take out papers for her independent run for Congress, but without those signatures from voters in the district, her name won't show up on the ballot.
"It's an uphill battle," said Sheehan, who vowed to run against Pelosi in July after the speaker refused to start impeachment proceedings against President George Bush. "But I'm excited about the signature-gathering process. It's going to be an opportunity to talk to people about our campaign."
The 50-year-old Sheehan, whose son, Casey, was killed while serving in Iraq in 2004, became the public face of the anti-war movement when she mounted a demonstration outside Bush's Texas ranch that lasted from 2005 to 2007.
Even after pleading exhaustion and closing down "Camp Casey" in May, Sheehan was a regular speaker at anti-war gatherings across the nation. Since moving from Dixon to San Francisco's Mission District, she's been campaigning virtually full time.
To get the signatures, equal to 3 percent of the district voters registered for the 2006 general election, the campaign will have people setting up ironing boards and card tables on street corners throughout the city, seeking voters who want an alternative to Pelosi. Sheehan has until Aug. 8 to collect the needed signatures.
Getting on the ballot will be the easy part for Sheehan. If she becomes a recognized candidate, she'll be challenging one of the best-known and most powerful Democrats in the country in Pelosi, a 10-term incumbent who routinely collects around 80 percent of the vote in the San Francisco-only district.
Election challenges are nothing new to Pelosi, who has faced token Republican opposition in most of her November races, along with occasional primary challenges. But since she beat former San Francisco Supervisor Harry Britt in the 1987 special election to replace the late Rep. Sala Burton, Pelosi's political resume has been short of opponents anyone other than local political junkies has ever heard of.
Sheehan has name recognition, particularly for her Camp Casey crusade.
"I said last year that I was going to take a break (from the anti-war movement) and then come back," Sheehan said in an interview at her Mission Street campaign headquarters.
But when the president commuted White House aide Scooter Libby's prison sentence last summer, she said, she decided "that seeing George Bush impeached would be a victory for humanity."
Calls for impeachment from Sheehan and other progressives didn't move Pelosi, who already had declared that impeachment was "off the table" when it came to the Democratic congressional agenda.
"In this political environment, the speaker has to work for those things that are possible," said Brendan Daly, a spokesman for Pelosi.
An impeachment effort, he said, "would be divisive, we couldn't get the votes, and we would have to spend all our time on it."
There are plenty of congressional Democrats, especially in the Bay Area, who don't agree, including Reps. Lynn Woolsey, Barbara Lee and Pete Stark, along with other progressives, both in and out of office.
Impeachment isn't Sheehan's only concern. Pelosi's refusal to vote for an immediate end to the Iraq war and to support single-payer health care shows she's out of touch with San Francisco's progressive roots, Sheehan said.
"I'll represent everyone in San Francisco, not just the corporate elite," she said. "I'm working class, my family was working class, and we have struggled the same way our neighbors here in San Francisco have struggled."
There's nothing unusual about Pelosi taking fire from the left, said Daly, her spokesman, especially when the speaker has to be concerned not only about her district, but also about the party across the country.
Pelosi "has always been forceful about speaking her mind on issues like human rights in China and the war in Iraq," he said. "In San Francisco, there's always tension between the district and the leadership responsibility."
The speaker will get an early look at the unhappiness of the city's progressives, because she's being challenged by local activist Shirley Golub in the June 3 Democratic primary.
"I've just had the sense from people I've talked to that (Pelosi) hasn't done what people in the community want her to do," Golub said. "People now have a choice, and they haven't had a Democratic choice for a long, long time."
Despite the upbeat talk, Sheehan and Golub, along with Republican Dana Walsh and Libertarian Philip Berg in November, are the longest of longshots to give Pelosi even a moment's worry on election day. In a district where Democrats outnumber Republicans 56 percent to 10 percent and a state where incumbents almost never lose, a party leader like Pelosi has every right to be making plans for her next term in office.
The odds don't bother Sheehan, who has raised more than $100,000 for her race, most of it from outside the district.
"Even people who I won't represent are willing to back me, because they know what I'll do in office," she said. "Many people in San Francisco know me, and they know my persistence.
"If I get to Washington, I'll only be in office a couple weeks before Bush leaves, but I guarantee he'll know I'm there."
E-mail John Wildermuth at jwildermuth@sfchronicle.com.
Protests follow "not guilty" verdict in NYPD murder of Bell, call issued to "Shut Down the City"
Photo: New York City, April 25, 2008Fiancee says justice system let her down after NYPD shooting
VERENA DOBNIK, AP, April 26, 2008
NEW YORK - The fiancee of an unarmed man shot to death by police on his wedding day said Saturday that "the justice system let me down" when the three detectives were acquitted of all charges in his killing. "April 25, 2008: They killed Sean all over again," Nicole Paultre Bell softly told hundreds of people gathered at the headquarters of the Rev. Al Sharpton's National Action Network. "That's what it felt like to us."
Paultre Bell, in her first public remarks since storming out of a courtroom Friday after the NYPD detectives were cleared in 23-year-old Sean Bell's killing, said she would seek another decision in the case.
"I'm still praying for justice because it's not over," she said.
Joseph Guzman, who was wounded in the barrage of 50 police gunshots outside a Queens strip club on Bell's wedding day in 2006, also spoke for the first time since Friday's verdict to supporters at Sharpton's Harlem offices.
"We've got a long fight," he said. "We're still in it. ... We're going to struggle. We're going to get through."
Sharpton lambasted the judge who acquitted the detectives in the killing of Bell and wounding of his two friends, saying a jury should been seated to decide guilt or innocence.
"If people are on the public payroll, doing their public duty, they should be required to face a public jury," Sharpton said. The officers had opted to have the judge instead of a jury decide the case
Sharpton later promised to "shut the city down" with organized civil disobedience. "Shut it down! Shut it down!" supporters chanted.
In his ruling Friday, Justice Arthur Cooperman said inconsistent testimony, courtroom demeanor and rap sheets of the prosecution witnesses — mainly Bell's friends — "had the effect of eviscerating" their credibility.
"At times, the testimony just didn't make sense," the judge said.
The verdict elicited gasps as well as tears of joy and sorrow. Detective Michael Oliver, who fired 31 of the shots, wept at the defense table, while Bell's mother cried in the packed courtroom. Shouts of "Murderers! Murderers!" and "KKK!" rang out outside the courthouse.
Protests followed later in the day, and police said two demonstrators were arrested near the site of the shooting Friday night. One was arrested on a disorderly conduct charge, the other on a charge of obstructing governmental administration, police said.
Oliver and Gescard Isnora were acquitted of charges that included manslaughter, assault and reckless endangerment. The third officer, Marc Cooper, faced lesser charges.
After the verdict, the officers gave brief statements without taking questions. "I'd like to say sorry to the Bell family for the tragedy," an emotional Cooper said.
Bell was killed outside the strip club as he was leaving his bachelor party. The officers — undercover detectives who were investigating reports of prostitution at the club — said they thought one of the men had a gun.
The slaying heightened tensions in the city and stoked long-standing allegations of racism and excessive use of force by police, even though two of the officers charged are black.
The officers complained that pretrial publicity had unfairly painted them as cold-blooded killers.
After the verdict, the U.S. attorney's office said it would look into the case and "take appropriate action if the evidence indicates a prosecutable violation of federal criminal civil rights statutes."
In addition, relatives of the victims have sued the city. The officers, who had been on paid leave, also face possible departmental charges that could result in their firing.
The case brought back painful memories of other New York police shootings, such as the 1999 killing of Amadou Diallo, an African immigrant who was gunned down in a barrage of 41 bullets by officers who mistook his wallet for a gun. The acquittal of the officers in that case led to days of protests, with hundreds arrested.
The defense in the two-month trial painted the victims as drunken thugs who the officers believed were armed and dangerous. Prosecutors sought to convince the judge that the victims had been minding their own business, and that the officers were inept, trigger-happy cowboys.
Bell's wounded companions — Guzman and Trent Benefield — both testified.
Guzman, a burly ex-convict who still has four police bullets lodged in his body, grew combative during cross-examination and said of Isnora: "This dude is shooting like he's crazy, like he's out of his mind."
None of the officers took the stand. Instead, the judge heard transcripts of the officers telling a grand jury that they believed they had good reason to use deadly force.
The officers said that when the club closed around 4 a.m., they heard Guzman say "Yo, go get my gun" — something Bell's friends denied.
Isnora claimed that after he warned the men to halt, Bell pulled away in his car, bumped him and rammed an unmarked police van. The detective also said Guzman made a sudden move as if he were reaching for a gun.
Benefield and Guzman testified that there were no orders from the police.
No weapon was found in Bell's blood-splattered, bullet-riddled car.
___
Associated Press writer Tom Hays contributed to this report.
Protest Sen. John McCain in Charlotte
Monday, May 5, 2008
5:00 pm
Westin Hotel
601 S. College St
Charlotte, NC 28202
No More War Funding! Bring The Troops Home Now!
Bail Out People Before Banks – Stop Foreclosures & Evictions!
Money for jobs, education, housing, healthcare & the environment!
Join people from around the region to protest pro-war presidential candidate & U.S. Senator John McCain in Charlotte. McCain will be in uptown Charlotte for a $1000 - $2300 a plate fundraiser. We say no to McCain's plans to continue Bush's program of endless war on the people abroad & right here at home.
Organize or join carpools, van or buses from your area: email BringThemOnHome@yahoo.com with "May 5 rides" as the subject or call (704) 492-5226. Let us know if you can offer a ride & how many people you can take, or if you need a ride.
Spread the word: Email info about the protest to others. Flyers will be posted at www.CharlotteAction.org soon.
DONATE to help us organize this protest & other events. Click here to donate online or send to:
Action Center For Justice
7100 Mapleridge Dr
Charlotte, NC 28210
****************************
For more info:
Action Center For Justice
www.CharlotteAction.org
704.492.5226
5:00 pm
Westin Hotel
601 S. College St
Charlotte, NC 28202
No More War Funding! Bring The Troops Home Now!
Bail Out People Before Banks – Stop Foreclosures & Evictions!
Money for jobs, education, housing, healthcare & the environment!
Join people from around the region to protest pro-war presidential candidate & U.S. Senator John McCain in Charlotte. McCain will be in uptown Charlotte for a $1000 - $2300 a plate fundraiser. We say no to McCain's plans to continue Bush's program of endless war on the people abroad & right here at home.
Organize or join carpools, van or buses from your area: email BringThemOnHome@yahoo.com with "May 5 rides" as the subject or call (704) 492-5226. Let us know if you can offer a ride & how many people you can take, or if you need a ride.
Spread the word: Email info about the protest to others. Flyers will be posted at www.CharlotteAction.org soon.
DONATE to help us organize this protest & other events. Click here to donate online or send to:
Action Center For Justice
7100 Mapleridge Dr
Charlotte, NC 28210
****************************
For more info:
Action Center For Justice
www.CharlotteAction.org
704.492.5226
No justice, no peace! Until Mumia Abu-Jamal is released!
Betsey Piette, Workers World, April 24, 2008
Philadelphia - Over a thousand people voiced their collective outrage here April 19 that political prisoner Mumia Abu-Jamal was once again denied the right to a fair hearing by an injustice system determined to keep this innocent man imprisoned for life if it can’t silence him outright through execution.
Protesters filled all four corners of a major intersection near the Federal Court building for a brief rally before marching around the Liberty Bell and up Market Street to City Hall for a closing rally. Along the way the march stopped for street meetings where speakers explained the case to passers-by.
The demonstrators filled all four lanes of Market Street, bringing traffic on this busy downtown street to a halt for over an hour. Drivers of stalled buses eagerly received materials to read about the case.
Groups of students in Philadelphia for class trips also stopped to listen. One teacher tried to keep students from taking handouts about the case. When a protester pointed out that the teacher was trying to keep them from getting information, one student responded, “Yeah, it happens all the time!”
Another teacher, however, encouraged her students to take literature and asked questions about the case so the youth could get a better understanding.
In addition to a strong turnout from Philadelphia, protesters came from Boston, New York City, California and there was also a delegation from France. Solidarity demonstrations also took place in other countries.
A threatened counterprotest by neo-Nazi skinheads turned out to be a dozen or so white men who looked more like off-duty police. The pro-Mumia protesters did not allow them to disrupt and passed them by without incident.
Denied fair trial
On March 27, a three-judge panel of the Third Circuit Court of Appeals denied Abu-Jamal’s appeal of racism in jury selection, going against its own precedent on this issue. The appellant court panel also rejected appeals concerning prosecutorial misconduct and pro-prosecution judicial bias that could have led to a new trial.
Abu-Jamal, a former Black Panther Party activist, has been on Pennsylvania’s death row for 26 years in connection with the shooting death of a Philadelphia police officer.
The panel also upheld a 2001 ruling by Federal Judge William Yohn that overturned the death sentence in this case. Philadelphia District Attorney Lynne Abraham can still call for a new penalty-phase jury trial to attempt to reinstate a death sentence.
Abu-Jamal’s lawyer is refusing to accept the ruling against a new trial that could determine guilt or innocence. Instead, the attorney, Robert R. Bryan, is now appealing to the entire Third Circuit Court of Appeals, and if necessary, he will appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.
The strong outpouring of support for Mumia comes at a crucial time. It follows earlier protests in cities around the country in the aftermath of this judicial panel’s outrageous decision. Even one of the panel’s members, Judge Thomas Ambro, took strong exception in a 41-page dissent strongly criticizing his colleagues for denying Abu-Jamal the courtesy of their own legal precedents concerning racism in jury selection.
‘Keep on fighting’
Rally speakers included former U.S. Congressmember Cynthia McKinney, who is currently running for president of the United States and who has long been an advocate for Abu-Jamal and other political prisoners.
Attorney Lynne Stewart, currently appealing her own conspiracy conviction, challenged people to “keep on fighting.” Stewart pointed out that while this case goes through the courts there is a tremendous amount of work for people to do in fundraising and getting out publicity on the case.
Larry Holmes, of the International Action Center and the recently formed Ad Hoc Network to Stop Foreclosures and Evictions, stressed the need for solidarity to free brother Mumia, and to stop the onslaught of economic attacks against poor and working people evidenced by widespread foreclosures, evictions and layoffs.
Pam Africa of the MOVE organization and International Concerned Family and Friends of Mumia Abu-Jamal challenged the courts to release Mumia now on the grounds that they have consistently denied his right to a fair trial. “We have absolutely no faith in the judicial system,” she said, “but if Mumia does have a court proceeding, we’ll continue to mobilize and pack the courtroom and the streets. However, if Mumia gets justice, we know it will not come from the courts, only from the pressure generated by the people.”
¡SÃ, se puede! – Free Mumia!
Latin@s for Mumia brought two buses from New York, and Esperanza Martell of ProLibertad Freedom Campaign had the crowd cheering as she exclaimed: “Mumia is Dominican! Mumia is Puerto Rican! Mumia is Mexicano! Mumia is all of us! ¡SÃ, se puede! (Yes we can) Free Mumia!”
Political prisoner and Lakota activist Leonard Peltier, recently moved to a federal prison in Pennsylvania, sent a message of solidarity in which he stated: “We are one, and we are many. We are forever, we are timeless. We are Crazy Horse, we are Geronimo, we are Mumia, we are Leonard Peltier, we are Malcolm X, and we are Martin Luther King. ... We are the American Indian Movement, we are the Black Panthers, we are MOVE, we are the Viet Cong, we are the Irish Republican Army, and the Palestinian Liberation Organization.
“We are every man, woman and child who desires to see a sunrise in a land of freedom and opportunity, a land of plenty and not hunger, a land of choices without fear, a land of progress without brutality.”
Philadelphia - Over a thousand people voiced their collective outrage here April 19 that political prisoner Mumia Abu-Jamal was once again denied the right to a fair hearing by an injustice system determined to keep this innocent man imprisoned for life if it can’t silence him outright through execution.
Protesters filled all four corners of a major intersection near the Federal Court building for a brief rally before marching around the Liberty Bell and up Market Street to City Hall for a closing rally. Along the way the march stopped for street meetings where speakers explained the case to passers-by.
The demonstrators filled all four lanes of Market Street, bringing traffic on this busy downtown street to a halt for over an hour. Drivers of stalled buses eagerly received materials to read about the case.
Groups of students in Philadelphia for class trips also stopped to listen. One teacher tried to keep students from taking handouts about the case. When a protester pointed out that the teacher was trying to keep them from getting information, one student responded, “Yeah, it happens all the time!”
Another teacher, however, encouraged her students to take literature and asked questions about the case so the youth could get a better understanding.
In addition to a strong turnout from Philadelphia, protesters came from Boston, New York City, California and there was also a delegation from France. Solidarity demonstrations also took place in other countries.
A threatened counterprotest by neo-Nazi skinheads turned out to be a dozen or so white men who looked more like off-duty police. The pro-Mumia protesters did not allow them to disrupt and passed them by without incident.
Denied fair trial
On March 27, a three-judge panel of the Third Circuit Court of Appeals denied Abu-Jamal’s appeal of racism in jury selection, going against its own precedent on this issue. The appellant court panel also rejected appeals concerning prosecutorial misconduct and pro-prosecution judicial bias that could have led to a new trial.
Abu-Jamal, a former Black Panther Party activist, has been on Pennsylvania’s death row for 26 years in connection with the shooting death of a Philadelphia police officer.
The panel also upheld a 2001 ruling by Federal Judge William Yohn that overturned the death sentence in this case. Philadelphia District Attorney Lynne Abraham can still call for a new penalty-phase jury trial to attempt to reinstate a death sentence.
Abu-Jamal’s lawyer is refusing to accept the ruling against a new trial that could determine guilt or innocence. Instead, the attorney, Robert R. Bryan, is now appealing to the entire Third Circuit Court of Appeals, and if necessary, he will appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.
The strong outpouring of support for Mumia comes at a crucial time. It follows earlier protests in cities around the country in the aftermath of this judicial panel’s outrageous decision. Even one of the panel’s members, Judge Thomas Ambro, took strong exception in a 41-page dissent strongly criticizing his colleagues for denying Abu-Jamal the courtesy of their own legal precedents concerning racism in jury selection.
‘Keep on fighting’
Rally speakers included former U.S. Congressmember Cynthia McKinney, who is currently running for president of the United States and who has long been an advocate for Abu-Jamal and other political prisoners.
Attorney Lynne Stewart, currently appealing her own conspiracy conviction, challenged people to “keep on fighting.” Stewart pointed out that while this case goes through the courts there is a tremendous amount of work for people to do in fundraising and getting out publicity on the case.
Larry Holmes, of the International Action Center and the recently formed Ad Hoc Network to Stop Foreclosures and Evictions, stressed the need for solidarity to free brother Mumia, and to stop the onslaught of economic attacks against poor and working people evidenced by widespread foreclosures, evictions and layoffs.
Pam Africa of the MOVE organization and International Concerned Family and Friends of Mumia Abu-Jamal challenged the courts to release Mumia now on the grounds that they have consistently denied his right to a fair trial. “We have absolutely no faith in the judicial system,” she said, “but if Mumia does have a court proceeding, we’ll continue to mobilize and pack the courtroom and the streets. However, if Mumia gets justice, we know it will not come from the courts, only from the pressure generated by the people.”
¡SÃ, se puede! – Free Mumia!
Latin@s for Mumia brought two buses from New York, and Esperanza Martell of ProLibertad Freedom Campaign had the crowd cheering as she exclaimed: “Mumia is Dominican! Mumia is Puerto Rican! Mumia is Mexicano! Mumia is all of us! ¡SÃ, se puede! (Yes we can) Free Mumia!”
Political prisoner and Lakota activist Leonard Peltier, recently moved to a federal prison in Pennsylvania, sent a message of solidarity in which he stated: “We are one, and we are many. We are forever, we are timeless. We are Crazy Horse, we are Geronimo, we are Mumia, we are Leonard Peltier, we are Malcolm X, and we are Martin Luther King. ... We are the American Indian Movement, we are the Black Panthers, we are MOVE, we are the Viet Cong, we are the Irish Republican Army, and the Palestinian Liberation Organization.
“We are every man, woman and child who desires to see a sunrise in a land of freedom and opportunity, a land of plenty and not hunger, a land of choices without fear, a land of progress without brutality.”
Congress prepares to give $178 billion more for war instead of social programs
Democratic leaders may add unemployment benefits to war bill
ANDREW TAYLOR, AP, April 24, 2008
WASHINGTON - House Democratic leaders plan to try to add extended unemployment benefits and new education funding for veterans to President Bush's war funding bill while dropping lots of other party priorities.
Facing a veto threat, Democrats such as Speaker Nancy Pelosi don't want to try to add billions of dollars for roads, bridges and other ideas such as heating subsidies for the poor and increases in food stamp benefits.
Democratic aides say Pelosi's plan is tentative and had not been widely shopped to rank and file lawmakers. Pelosi said Thursday that she had yet to brief her colleagues.
The still-emerging plan is a sign that Democrats want to avoid loading up the war funding bill and lose a veto and public relations clash with the president, who insists lawmakers keep his bill free of add-ons.
Bush is certain to oppose the effort, which would add to the war spending legislation a $12.7 billion plan to give 13 additional weeks of unemployment checks to people whose benefits have run out and 13 weeks beyond that in states with especially high unemployment rates. He's also likely to oppose the even more expensive plan for higher GI Bill benefits for veterans.
But the plan would make it more palatable for anti-war Democrats to provide money until the next president takes office.
Bush has promised to veto any bill that exceeds his pending $108 billion request to fund U.S. military and diplomatic efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan. It's a tougher line than he took last spring, when he accepted about $17 billion in domestic funding as part of a $120 billion war funding measure.
Democrats are in fact planning on not only providing the $108 billion to fund the war through the Sept. 30, the end of the 2008 budget year, but they're likely to add another $70 billion for next year so they don't have to vote on war funding again in the fall election season.
But the hard line from the White House has Democrats scaling back plans to use the must-pass bill as an engine to carry everything from a summer jobs programs to a Senate proposal for $10 billion for infrastructure projects such as roads, bridges and new schools.
Republicans are eager for a battle with Democrats over add-ons to the war funding bill. Despite record low approval ratings and his status as a lame duck, Bush has to be rated as a clear favorite in any veto battle.
"If the president stands his ground on this he'll win," House GOP Whip Roy Blunt, R-Mo., said. "And I believe he's prepared to stand his ground and we'll stand with him."
House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., told reporters Wednesday that proposals that don't make it into the war spending bill may instead be carried by a second economic stimulus bill. That's where the unemployment benefit extension ultimately may wind up anyway, assuming Bush carries out his veto threat.
The tentative bill also would carry a plan to block new Bush administration regulations that would cut federal spending on Medicaid health care for the poor by $13 billion over the next five years. That bill passed the House Wednesday by an overwhelming 349-62 vote despite a Bush veto threat.
Money to fight wildfires in the West — backed by many GOP allies of the president — also would make it into the measure, the aides said, as would additional help for victims of Hurricane Katrina. The wildfire funds could total about $400 million, while the state of Louisiana wants to ease current requirements that it put up 35 percent of the funds for a multibillion-dollar project to rebuild levees around New Orleans.
ANDREW TAYLOR, AP, April 24, 2008
WASHINGTON - House Democratic leaders plan to try to add extended unemployment benefits and new education funding for veterans to President Bush's war funding bill while dropping lots of other party priorities.
Facing a veto threat, Democrats such as Speaker Nancy Pelosi don't want to try to add billions of dollars for roads, bridges and other ideas such as heating subsidies for the poor and increases in food stamp benefits.
Democratic aides say Pelosi's plan is tentative and had not been widely shopped to rank and file lawmakers. Pelosi said Thursday that she had yet to brief her colleagues.
The still-emerging plan is a sign that Democrats want to avoid loading up the war funding bill and lose a veto and public relations clash with the president, who insists lawmakers keep his bill free of add-ons.
Bush is certain to oppose the effort, which would add to the war spending legislation a $12.7 billion plan to give 13 additional weeks of unemployment checks to people whose benefits have run out and 13 weeks beyond that in states with especially high unemployment rates. He's also likely to oppose the even more expensive plan for higher GI Bill benefits for veterans.
But the plan would make it more palatable for anti-war Democrats to provide money until the next president takes office.
Bush has promised to veto any bill that exceeds his pending $108 billion request to fund U.S. military and diplomatic efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan. It's a tougher line than he took last spring, when he accepted about $17 billion in domestic funding as part of a $120 billion war funding measure.
Democrats are in fact planning on not only providing the $108 billion to fund the war through the Sept. 30, the end of the 2008 budget year, but they're likely to add another $70 billion for next year so they don't have to vote on war funding again in the fall election season.
But the hard line from the White House has Democrats scaling back plans to use the must-pass bill as an engine to carry everything from a summer jobs programs to a Senate proposal for $10 billion for infrastructure projects such as roads, bridges and new schools.
Republicans are eager for a battle with Democrats over add-ons to the war funding bill. Despite record low approval ratings and his status as a lame duck, Bush has to be rated as a clear favorite in any veto battle.
"If the president stands his ground on this he'll win," House GOP Whip Roy Blunt, R-Mo., said. "And I believe he's prepared to stand his ground and we'll stand with him."
House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., told reporters Wednesday that proposals that don't make it into the war spending bill may instead be carried by a second economic stimulus bill. That's where the unemployment benefit extension ultimately may wind up anyway, assuming Bush carries out his veto threat.
The tentative bill also would carry a plan to block new Bush administration regulations that would cut federal spending on Medicaid health care for the poor by $13 billion over the next five years. That bill passed the House Wednesday by an overwhelming 349-62 vote despite a Bush veto threat.
Money to fight wildfires in the West — backed by many GOP allies of the president — also would make it into the measure, the aides said, as would additional help for victims of Hurricane Katrina. The wildfire funds could total about $400 million, while the state of Louisiana wants to ease current requirements that it put up 35 percent of the funds for a multibillion-dollar project to rebuild levees around New Orleans.
Syria denies U.S. accusation over nuclear reactor
Samia Nakhoul, Reuters, April 24, 2008
LONDON (Reuters) - Syria on Thursday dismissed U.S. accusations that North Korea was helping it build a nuclear reactor that could produce plutonium.
Syria's ambassador to Britain, Sami al-Khiyami, told Reuters that the accusation, which President George W. Bush's administration was expected to lay out to lawmakers on Thursday, was to put pressure on North Korea in talks about Pyongyang's nuclear program.
"This has nothing to do with North Korea and Syria. They just want to exert more pressure on North Korea. This is why they are coming up with this story," Khiyami said.
"The cooperation between North Korea and Syria has nothing to do with (building) a nuclear facility. Cooperation is mainly economic.
"This is political manipulation ahead of the talks with North Korea to exert more pressure on them," he said.
Khiyami was speaking before what a U.S. official said would be evidence regarding Syria-North Korea nuclear cooperation to be put to lawmakers in Washington on Thursday.
The White House has said little about the possibility of such cooperation between the two since Israel conducted a mysterious September 6 air strike on Syria that media reports said targeted a nuclear site being built with Pyongyang's help.
The presentation to U.S. lawmakers was expected to include still photographs taken from videotape recorded inside the Syrian facility, another U.S. official said.
"Unfortunately the scenario of taking and retaking pictures looks like what happened before the Iraq war, when the U.S. administration was trying to convince the world that Iraq had nuclear weapons," Khiyami said.
"Instead of coming up with these ridiculous photos I think the U.S. administration should put all their effort into clearing the Middle East region of all weapons of mass destruction, starting with its closest ally Israel."
Israel is widely believed to have assembled the Middle East's only nuclear arsenal at Dimona, a plant out of bounds to foreign inspection.
(Editing by Charles Dick)
LONDON (Reuters) - Syria on Thursday dismissed U.S. accusations that North Korea was helping it build a nuclear reactor that could produce plutonium.
Syria's ambassador to Britain, Sami al-Khiyami, told Reuters that the accusation, which President George W. Bush's administration was expected to lay out to lawmakers on Thursday, was to put pressure on North Korea in talks about Pyongyang's nuclear program.
"This has nothing to do with North Korea and Syria. They just want to exert more pressure on North Korea. This is why they are coming up with this story," Khiyami said.
"The cooperation between North Korea and Syria has nothing to do with (building) a nuclear facility. Cooperation is mainly economic.
"This is political manipulation ahead of the talks with North Korea to exert more pressure on them," he said.
Khiyami was speaking before what a U.S. official said would be evidence regarding Syria-North Korea nuclear cooperation to be put to lawmakers in Washington on Thursday.
The White House has said little about the possibility of such cooperation between the two since Israel conducted a mysterious September 6 air strike on Syria that media reports said targeted a nuclear site being built with Pyongyang's help.
The presentation to U.S. lawmakers was expected to include still photographs taken from videotape recorded inside the Syrian facility, another U.S. official said.
"Unfortunately the scenario of taking and retaking pictures looks like what happened before the Iraq war, when the U.S. administration was trying to convince the world that Iraq had nuclear weapons," Khiyami said.
"Instead of coming up with these ridiculous photos I think the U.S. administration should put all their effort into clearing the Middle East region of all weapons of mass destruction, starting with its closest ally Israel."
Israel is widely believed to have assembled the Middle East's only nuclear arsenal at Dimona, a plant out of bounds to foreign inspection.
(Editing by Charles Dick)
Five US troops killed in Iraq
AFP, April 22, 2008
BAGHDAD (AFP) - The US military on Tuesday announced the deaths of five troops in a series of bombings as blasts in Baghdad killed 10 people and a female suicide bomber slaughtered six Iraqis north of the capital.
Two US marines were killed and three others wounded when a bomber slammed his explosives-laden car into a checkpoint near the western Iraqi city of Ramadi at around 7:30 am (0430 GMT), the American military said.
Two Iraqi policemen and 24 civilians were also wounded in the attack near Ramadi, the capital of Anbar province, which was once the symbol of Sunni Arab insurgency against US forces.
A third marine was killed and another wounded in a separate roadside bomb attack in Basra on Monday, the military said in a separate statement.
This is the first US military loss in Basra since Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki launched a crackdown against Shiite militiamen there on March 25.
US forces have been sent to Basra to support Iraqi troops after fierce clashes broke out in the port city following the crackdown.
Another roadside bomb attack killed two US soldiers "during operations" and wounded another two, as well as three Iraqis, in north-central Salaheddin province on Monday, the US military said.
The latest deaths bring the US military's overall toll since the March 2003 invasion to 4,044, according to an AFP tally based on independent website www.icasualties.org.
Blasts, meanwhile, killed at least 10 people and wounded 17 around 7:00 pm (1600 GMT) in Baghdad's Shiite bastion Sadr City, where militiamen are fighting street battles with Iraqi and US forces, officials said.
Several mortar rounds struck the embattled district's Al-Nasr neighbourhood, they said.
Other officials and a local resident said the casualties were the result of a US air strike in the neighbourhood but Lieutenant Colonel Steven Stover said no American planes carried out strikes at that time.
The US military had earlier announced it had killed five Shiite militiamen in Sadr City, bringing to around 335 the number of people killed since the fighting began late last month.
The Basra crackdown triggered a wave of firefights across Shiite regions of Iraq, including Sadr City, the bastion of anti-American leader Moqtada al-Sadr.
A female suicide bomber meanwhile blew herself up near a police station in the restive Iraqi province of Diyala on Tuesday and killed five policemen and a security guard, officials told AFP.
The bomber attacked the police station in the town of Jalawla, 100 kilometres (62 miles) east of Baquba, the capital of Diyala, at around 6:45 pm (1545 GMT), a police officer from Baquba said.
Doctor Youssef Atta from Jalawla hospital confirmed the attack.
"We have received the bodies of six people, including five policeman and one security guard. Twelve wounded victims have also been admitted in the hospital."
The wounded include two policemen and 10 civilians.
The attack was the second by a woman in as many days in Diyala, one of the most dangerous regions of Iraq which is known to house Al-Qaeda strongholds.
BAGHDAD (AFP) - The US military on Tuesday announced the deaths of five troops in a series of bombings as blasts in Baghdad killed 10 people and a female suicide bomber slaughtered six Iraqis north of the capital.
Two US marines were killed and three others wounded when a bomber slammed his explosives-laden car into a checkpoint near the western Iraqi city of Ramadi at around 7:30 am (0430 GMT), the American military said.
Two Iraqi policemen and 24 civilians were also wounded in the attack near Ramadi, the capital of Anbar province, which was once the symbol of Sunni Arab insurgency against US forces.
A third marine was killed and another wounded in a separate roadside bomb attack in Basra on Monday, the military said in a separate statement.
This is the first US military loss in Basra since Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki launched a crackdown against Shiite militiamen there on March 25.
US forces have been sent to Basra to support Iraqi troops after fierce clashes broke out in the port city following the crackdown.
Another roadside bomb attack killed two US soldiers "during operations" and wounded another two, as well as three Iraqis, in north-central Salaheddin province on Monday, the US military said.
The latest deaths bring the US military's overall toll since the March 2003 invasion to 4,044, according to an AFP tally based on independent website www.icasualties.org.
Blasts, meanwhile, killed at least 10 people and wounded 17 around 7:00 pm (1600 GMT) in Baghdad's Shiite bastion Sadr City, where militiamen are fighting street battles with Iraqi and US forces, officials said.
Several mortar rounds struck the embattled district's Al-Nasr neighbourhood, they said.
Other officials and a local resident said the casualties were the result of a US air strike in the neighbourhood but Lieutenant Colonel Steven Stover said no American planes carried out strikes at that time.
The US military had earlier announced it had killed five Shiite militiamen in Sadr City, bringing to around 335 the number of people killed since the fighting began late last month.
The Basra crackdown triggered a wave of firefights across Shiite regions of Iraq, including Sadr City, the bastion of anti-American leader Moqtada al-Sadr.
A female suicide bomber meanwhile blew herself up near a police station in the restive Iraqi province of Diyala on Tuesday and killed five policemen and a security guard, officials told AFP.
The bomber attacked the police station in the town of Jalawla, 100 kilometres (62 miles) east of Baquba, the capital of Diyala, at around 6:45 pm (1545 GMT), a police officer from Baquba said.
Doctor Youssef Atta from Jalawla hospital confirmed the attack.
"We have received the bodies of six people, including five policeman and one security guard. Twelve wounded victims have also been admitted in the hospital."
The wounded include two policemen and 10 civilians.
The attack was the second by a woman in as many days in Diyala, one of the most dangerous regions of Iraq which is known to house Al-Qaeda strongholds.
Take Action: House to Vote on Resolution Today on Israel's 60th Anniversary
US Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation, April 22, 2008
Today the House of Representatives is scheduled to vote on H.Con.Res.322, "recognizing the 60th Anniversary of the founding of the modern State of Israel and reaffirming the bonds of close friendship and cooperation between the United States and Israel ."
In addition, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi has reserved time each week through June for Representatives to make statements on the floor of Congress on the occasion of Israel 's 60th anniversary.
The US Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation urges all of its member groups and individual supporters to contact their Representative in Congress and ask him/her not to vote for resolutions or make statements that recognize Israel's 60th anniversary but fail to recognize the historic injustices that Israel has inflicted on the Palestinian people and the injustices that it continues to inflict daily. To send your message today, please click here.
Below is a copy of talking points which the US Campaign faxed to each Representative yesterday.
Talking Points on H. Con. Res. 322 and Israel 's 60th Anniversary
On Tuesday, April 22, the House of Representatives is scheduled to vote under suspension on H. Con. Res. 322, "recognizing the 60th Anniversary of the founding of the modern State of Israel and reaffirming the bonds of close friendship and cooperation between the United States and Israel ." In addition, Speaker Pelosi has reserved floor time each week through June for Representatives to make statements on Israel 's 60th anniversary.
The US Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation, a national coalition of more than 250 organizations working to change U.S. policy toward Israel/Palestine to support human rights, international law and equality for all, has prepared the following talking points for the consideration of Representatives voting on resolutions and making statements on the occasion of Israel's 60th anniversary.
* The establishment of the State of Israel was accompanied by the widespread ethnic cleansing and dispossession of indigenous Palestinians from their homes and lands. Israel destroyed at least 418 Palestinian villages and towns and caused to flee or forcibly exiled at least 711,000 Palestinians. Palestinians recall this record of destruction, dispossession, and ethnic cleansing as the Nakba, or "catastrophe", in Arabic.
* To this day, Israel has prevented these Palestinian refugees and their descendants, who now number nearly 4.5 million people, from exercising their right to return despite the fact that this right is guaranteed generally under international humanitarian law and specifically by UN General Assembly Resolution 194. Meanwhile, Israel adopted a law of return which guarantees Israeli citizenship to Jewish people worldwide. By treating people differently based on ethnicity or religion, Israel 's differential treatment of Palestinian refugees and Jewish immigrants is one manifestation of its apartheid policies.
* Palestinians who were not ethnically cleansed from their homes and lands in 1948 were given Israeli citizenship but remain subject to discriminatory policies. Palestinians with Israeli citizenship were forced to live under military occupation until 1966. The Legal Center for Arab Minority Rights in Israel today counts more than 20 Israeli laws that explicitly discriminate against Palestinian citizens of Israel who comprise approximately 20% of Israel 's population. Palestinian citizens of Israel are also discriminated against in land use policies and Palestinian communities in Israel receive disproportionately less government funding than Jewish communities. The second-class citizenship of Palestinians in Israel and the discrimination they are subjected to are another manifestation of Israel 's apartheid policies.
* Since 1967, Israel has illegally occupied the Palestinian West Bank, East Jerusalem , and Gaza Strip. Israel's brutal record of collective punishment, torture, killing of civilians, building illegal Israeli settlements, walls, barriers, and checkpoints is well-documented by Israeli, Palestinian, and international human rights organizations. The fact that Palestinians are subjected to military laws under perpetual military occupation while Israeli settlers are subjected to civil law and can drive on Israeli-only roads in the Occupied Palestinian Territories is yet another manifestation of Israel 's apartheid policies.
Given Israel 's 60-year record of ethnic cleansing, dispossession, discrimination, military occupation, and apartheid against Palestinians, the US Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation urges Representatives not to vote for resolutions or make statements that fail to recognize the historic injustices that Israel has inflicted on the Palestinian people and the injustices that it continues to inflict daily. Members of Congress have an obligation to pass resolutions and make statements that accurately reflect the historical record and not unambiguously applaud the anniversary of countries such as Israel with such dismal human rights records.
Don't forget to send your message to your Representative by clicking here.
Today the House of Representatives is scheduled to vote on H.Con.Res.322, "recognizing the 60th Anniversary of the founding of the modern State of Israel and reaffirming the bonds of close friendship and cooperation between the United States and Israel ."
In addition, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi has reserved time each week through June for Representatives to make statements on the floor of Congress on the occasion of Israel 's 60th anniversary.
The US Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation urges all of its member groups and individual supporters to contact their Representative in Congress and ask him/her not to vote for resolutions or make statements that recognize Israel's 60th anniversary but fail to recognize the historic injustices that Israel has inflicted on the Palestinian people and the injustices that it continues to inflict daily. To send your message today, please click here.
Below is a copy of talking points which the US Campaign faxed to each Representative yesterday.
Talking Points on H. Con. Res. 322 and Israel 's 60th Anniversary
On Tuesday, April 22, the House of Representatives is scheduled to vote under suspension on H. Con. Res. 322, "recognizing the 60th Anniversary of the founding of the modern State of Israel and reaffirming the bonds of close friendship and cooperation between the United States and Israel ." In addition, Speaker Pelosi has reserved floor time each week through June for Representatives to make statements on Israel 's 60th anniversary.
The US Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation, a national coalition of more than 250 organizations working to change U.S. policy toward Israel/Palestine to support human rights, international law and equality for all, has prepared the following talking points for the consideration of Representatives voting on resolutions and making statements on the occasion of Israel's 60th anniversary.
* The establishment of the State of Israel was accompanied by the widespread ethnic cleansing and dispossession of indigenous Palestinians from their homes and lands. Israel destroyed at least 418 Palestinian villages and towns and caused to flee or forcibly exiled at least 711,000 Palestinians. Palestinians recall this record of destruction, dispossession, and ethnic cleansing as the Nakba, or "catastrophe", in Arabic.
* To this day, Israel has prevented these Palestinian refugees and their descendants, who now number nearly 4.5 million people, from exercising their right to return despite the fact that this right is guaranteed generally under international humanitarian law and specifically by UN General Assembly Resolution 194. Meanwhile, Israel adopted a law of return which guarantees Israeli citizenship to Jewish people worldwide. By treating people differently based on ethnicity or religion, Israel 's differential treatment of Palestinian refugees and Jewish immigrants is one manifestation of its apartheid policies.
* Palestinians who were not ethnically cleansed from their homes and lands in 1948 were given Israeli citizenship but remain subject to discriminatory policies. Palestinians with Israeli citizenship were forced to live under military occupation until 1966. The Legal Center for Arab Minority Rights in Israel today counts more than 20 Israeli laws that explicitly discriminate against Palestinian citizens of Israel who comprise approximately 20% of Israel 's population. Palestinian citizens of Israel are also discriminated against in land use policies and Palestinian communities in Israel receive disproportionately less government funding than Jewish communities. The second-class citizenship of Palestinians in Israel and the discrimination they are subjected to are another manifestation of Israel 's apartheid policies.
* Since 1967, Israel has illegally occupied the Palestinian West Bank, East Jerusalem , and Gaza Strip. Israel's brutal record of collective punishment, torture, killing of civilians, building illegal Israeli settlements, walls, barriers, and checkpoints is well-documented by Israeli, Palestinian, and international human rights organizations. The fact that Palestinians are subjected to military laws under perpetual military occupation while Israeli settlers are subjected to civil law and can drive on Israeli-only roads in the Occupied Palestinian Territories is yet another manifestation of Israel 's apartheid policies.
Given Israel 's 60-year record of ethnic cleansing, dispossession, discrimination, military occupation, and apartheid against Palestinians, the US Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation urges Representatives not to vote for resolutions or make statements that fail to recognize the historic injustices that Israel has inflicted on the Palestinian people and the injustices that it continues to inflict daily. Members of Congress have an obligation to pass resolutions and make statements that accurately reflect the historical record and not unambiguously applaud the anniversary of countries such as Israel with such dismal human rights records.
Don't forget to send your message to your Representative by clicking here.
The 2008 Election Will Be Stolen
David Swanson, AfterDowningStreet.org, April 19, 2008
A new collection of essays edited by Mark Crispin Miller called "Loser Take All: Election Fraud and the Subversion of Democracy, 2000 - 2008," tells the story better than any single source I've seen yet.
The Supreme Court stopped a recount in Florida in 2000 that would have made Al Gore president. This is not speculation. The recount was later done.
Numerous elections were stolen in 2002, in Colorado, New Hampshire, Minnesota, and elsewhere, including Senate, Governor, and House races in Georgia that were practically openly swiped by Diebold's elections unit president flying in at the last minute and altering the election machines. The theft of Don Siegelman's 2002 election as governor of Alabama was almost as transparent. One county reported a set of results from electronic machines that made Siegelman governor, then recalculated and reported a different set of results. The new results were statistically impossible, and the pair of reports strongly suggested exactly how the machines were rigged, first mistakenly and later as intended.
John Kerry and John Edwards won the presidential election in 2004. The evidence of specific fraud in Ohio and elsewhere is overwhelming, but so is the evidence of the exit polls. The unadjusted exit polls show Kerry and Edwards winning. When the results are "adjusted" to conform to the official results, we are asked to believe that Bush and Cheney increased their big city voters from 2.3 million in 2000 to 5.4 million in 2004, a 153 percent increase. While support for Cheney-Bush dropped off in rural areas, small towns, medium sized cities, etc., it skyrocketed in the Democratic strongholds of big cities. Let me be clear: that's the official story of what happened, not the wild conspiracy theory of ordinary people who allow themselves to be influenced by facts, logic, or memory of actual events.
Election fraud was not limited to Ohio or to the presidential race in 2004, but was widespread and systematic. This was also true in 2006. In many cases, Democratic turnout overwhelmed Republican fraud in 2006, and the Democrats picked up 30 new seats. But those victories were by larger margins than people believe. In other races, Republican fraud won out, and was immediately hushed up. Read the evidence in "Loser Take All," and then think about how the current Congress would have been different with 40 or 50 new Democrats rather than 30. The 2006 elections saw the most widespread and sophisticated election fraud our country has yet seen, combined with the greatest public confidence since 2000 that elections were honest and verifiable. That combination does not bode well for 2008.
The views of Senator John McCain are so far from those of most Americans, that Miller rightly refers to the Republicans as a fringe party. But that fringe party is perfecting election theft. The only way to prevent John McCain from being the next president would be to hand him such a whopping defeat that he could not plausibly claim to have honestly won. Sadly, Senator Obama (the Democratic nominee, barring an antidemocratic coup by super delegates) appears intent on avoiding a landslide at all costs and aiming, rather, for a tight victory of 1 or 2 percent. (And Senator Clinton appears intent on losing the election should she be miraculously nominated.)
Obama is sitting on a number of keys to a landslide if he would only pull them out of his pocket and use them. Thus far it appears he will not. The 20 percent of Americans who support the occupation of Iraq are not potential Obama voters. There is nothing to be gained by appealing to them. But when I talk to people in the peace movement, they are increasingly telling me they plan to stay home or vote for a third party candidate such as Ralph Nader or Cynthia McKinney. None of them are potential McCain voters. They are, in fact, what Senator Hillary Clinton disdainfully refers to as "the activist base of the Democratic Party." According to Clinton, these people:
"turn out in great numbers. And they are very driven by their view of [my] positions, and it's primarily national security and foreign policy that drives them. I don't agree with them. They know I don't agree with them."
Well, guess what, we don't agree with Obama either. We appreciate the credit Clinton gives us for her defeat. For his own good, Obama needs to understand that he's next, that those of us who actively represent the 80 percent of the nation opposed to the occupation will direct our activism at him until he agrees to a speedy and complete withdrawal from Iraq. And we will mobilize millions to guarantee a landslide if Obama stands up this week and leads a filibuster of the next $170 billion for the occupation. If he continues to claim that he opposes the occupation while funding it with our grandchildren's borrowed treasure, his criticism of McCain will fall flat. If he continues to speak of reducing the U.S. presence in Iraq to "non-combat troops" while soldiers get their heads blown off deep within the Green Zone, he will lose all credibility. A "non-combat troop" in Iraq is another name for John McCain's fantasy that the Iraqis will someday stop resisting. If Obama votes No on the $170 billion without actively lobbying his colleagues to vote No, he will not be seen as sincere.
Obama was asked last week in Philadelphia about impeachment, indictment, and accountability for Bush and Cheney. He suggested that he MIGHT investigate their crimes AFTER we elect him president, and that he MIGHT prosecute them "if" they were found to have committed crimes. "If"? "If"? That word may become as famous as Dick Cheney's "So?" At every stop Obama makes on this endless campaign, people should hand him copies of John Conyers' "The Constitution in Crisis," a book you can buy in most bookstores which documents a long list of criminal offenses committed by Bush and Cheney. Does Obama disagree with the book's conclusions? Does he have a response to Bush's public confession to violating the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act? Does he question the two Government Accountability Office studies that have found that in a significant percentage of cases, when Bush has announced his right to violate laws through signing statements, he has proceeded to violate those laws? Does Obama now believe the invasion of Iraq and everything that came with it was possibly legal? Was the February 7, 2002, order from Bush allowing the torture of detainees a legal act? "If?" "If?"
(You can find Conyers' whole book for free here: http://afterdowningstreet.org/constitutionincrisis Just click on "Summary," print out that short section, and send it to Obama.)
If Obama were to quietly allow impeachment hearings on Cheney or Bush to proceed on such subjects as torture and signing statements, he could put McCain on the defensive and force him to defend each crime while promising not to commit it. Impeachment hearings could squeeze out all coverage of nonsense spats and scandals. And if the American public understood that voting for Obama would put Bush and Cheney behind bars, we would see a landslide that could not be denied.
Sadly, it looks like we're going to see a tight race. During this tight race, good citizens will avoid all other political activism and devote their energies to the race. And not just their energies. We will transfer enough wealth to build a real populist movement for justice or a legitimate source of news into the hands of corporate television networks in the form of campaign ads. And, as a reward for our efforts, the election will be stolen.
Unless we interrupt this script and make some changes.
A new collection of essays edited by Mark Crispin Miller called "Loser Take All: Election Fraud and the Subversion of Democracy, 2000 - 2008," tells the story better than any single source I've seen yet.
The Supreme Court stopped a recount in Florida in 2000 that would have made Al Gore president. This is not speculation. The recount was later done.
Numerous elections were stolen in 2002, in Colorado, New Hampshire, Minnesota, and elsewhere, including Senate, Governor, and House races in Georgia that were practically openly swiped by Diebold's elections unit president flying in at the last minute and altering the election machines. The theft of Don Siegelman's 2002 election as governor of Alabama was almost as transparent. One county reported a set of results from electronic machines that made Siegelman governor, then recalculated and reported a different set of results. The new results were statistically impossible, and the pair of reports strongly suggested exactly how the machines were rigged, first mistakenly and later as intended.
John Kerry and John Edwards won the presidential election in 2004. The evidence of specific fraud in Ohio and elsewhere is overwhelming, but so is the evidence of the exit polls. The unadjusted exit polls show Kerry and Edwards winning. When the results are "adjusted" to conform to the official results, we are asked to believe that Bush and Cheney increased their big city voters from 2.3 million in 2000 to 5.4 million in 2004, a 153 percent increase. While support for Cheney-Bush dropped off in rural areas, small towns, medium sized cities, etc., it skyrocketed in the Democratic strongholds of big cities. Let me be clear: that's the official story of what happened, not the wild conspiracy theory of ordinary people who allow themselves to be influenced by facts, logic, or memory of actual events.
Election fraud was not limited to Ohio or to the presidential race in 2004, but was widespread and systematic. This was also true in 2006. In many cases, Democratic turnout overwhelmed Republican fraud in 2006, and the Democrats picked up 30 new seats. But those victories were by larger margins than people believe. In other races, Republican fraud won out, and was immediately hushed up. Read the evidence in "Loser Take All," and then think about how the current Congress would have been different with 40 or 50 new Democrats rather than 30. The 2006 elections saw the most widespread and sophisticated election fraud our country has yet seen, combined with the greatest public confidence since 2000 that elections were honest and verifiable. That combination does not bode well for 2008.
The views of Senator John McCain are so far from those of most Americans, that Miller rightly refers to the Republicans as a fringe party. But that fringe party is perfecting election theft. The only way to prevent John McCain from being the next president would be to hand him such a whopping defeat that he could not plausibly claim to have honestly won. Sadly, Senator Obama (the Democratic nominee, barring an antidemocratic coup by super delegates) appears intent on avoiding a landslide at all costs and aiming, rather, for a tight victory of 1 or 2 percent. (And Senator Clinton appears intent on losing the election should she be miraculously nominated.)
Obama is sitting on a number of keys to a landslide if he would only pull them out of his pocket and use them. Thus far it appears he will not. The 20 percent of Americans who support the occupation of Iraq are not potential Obama voters. There is nothing to be gained by appealing to them. But when I talk to people in the peace movement, they are increasingly telling me they plan to stay home or vote for a third party candidate such as Ralph Nader or Cynthia McKinney. None of them are potential McCain voters. They are, in fact, what Senator Hillary Clinton disdainfully refers to as "the activist base of the Democratic Party." According to Clinton, these people:
"turn out in great numbers. And they are very driven by their view of [my] positions, and it's primarily national security and foreign policy that drives them. I don't agree with them. They know I don't agree with them."
Well, guess what, we don't agree with Obama either. We appreciate the credit Clinton gives us for her defeat. For his own good, Obama needs to understand that he's next, that those of us who actively represent the 80 percent of the nation opposed to the occupation will direct our activism at him until he agrees to a speedy and complete withdrawal from Iraq. And we will mobilize millions to guarantee a landslide if Obama stands up this week and leads a filibuster of the next $170 billion for the occupation. If he continues to claim that he opposes the occupation while funding it with our grandchildren's borrowed treasure, his criticism of McCain will fall flat. If he continues to speak of reducing the U.S. presence in Iraq to "non-combat troops" while soldiers get their heads blown off deep within the Green Zone, he will lose all credibility. A "non-combat troop" in Iraq is another name for John McCain's fantasy that the Iraqis will someday stop resisting. If Obama votes No on the $170 billion without actively lobbying his colleagues to vote No, he will not be seen as sincere.
Obama was asked last week in Philadelphia about impeachment, indictment, and accountability for Bush and Cheney. He suggested that he MIGHT investigate their crimes AFTER we elect him president, and that he MIGHT prosecute them "if" they were found to have committed crimes. "If"? "If"? That word may become as famous as Dick Cheney's "So?" At every stop Obama makes on this endless campaign, people should hand him copies of John Conyers' "The Constitution in Crisis," a book you can buy in most bookstores which documents a long list of criminal offenses committed by Bush and Cheney. Does Obama disagree with the book's conclusions? Does he have a response to Bush's public confession to violating the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act? Does he question the two Government Accountability Office studies that have found that in a significant percentage of cases, when Bush has announced his right to violate laws through signing statements, he has proceeded to violate those laws? Does Obama now believe the invasion of Iraq and everything that came with it was possibly legal? Was the February 7, 2002, order from Bush allowing the torture of detainees a legal act? "If?" "If?"
(You can find Conyers' whole book for free here: http://afterdowningstreet.org/constitutionincrisis Just click on "Summary," print out that short section, and send it to Obama.)
If Obama were to quietly allow impeachment hearings on Cheney or Bush to proceed on such subjects as torture and signing statements, he could put McCain on the defensive and force him to defend each crime while promising not to commit it. Impeachment hearings could squeeze out all coverage of nonsense spats and scandals. And if the American public understood that voting for Obama would put Bush and Cheney behind bars, we would see a landslide that could not be denied.
Sadly, it looks like we're going to see a tight race. During this tight race, good citizens will avoid all other political activism and devote their energies to the race. And not just their energies. We will transfer enough wealth to build a real populist movement for justice or a legitimate source of news into the hands of corporate television networks in the form of campaign ads. And, as a reward for our efforts, the election will be stolen.
Unless we interrupt this script and make some changes.
Ex-bishop wins Paraguayan election; 6-decade rulers dumped
BILL CORMIER, AP, April 21, 2008
ASUNCION, Paraguay - The world's longest-ruling political party is about to lose its six-decade grasp on power in Paraguay after a former Roman Catholic bishop won the country's presidential election.
The Colorado Party's reign — which began in 1947 and was marked by the right-wing dictatorship of the late Gen. Alfredo Stroessner until his ouster in 1989 — was halted by Fernando Lugo, a charismatic 56-year-old who advocated for the end of political corruption and economic disarray.
He beat Colorado Party rival Blanca Ovelar, a 50-year-old protege of President Nicanor Duarte who had sought to become Paraguay's first woman president in Sunday's election.
The triumph of Lugo's eclectic opposition coalition — the Patriotic Alliance for Change — is the latest in a series of electoral wins by leftist, or center-left, leaders in South America.
Mark Weisbrot, at the Washington think tank Center for Economic and Policy Research, said Lugo's election is a sign of "deep and irreversible ... changes sweeping Latin America."
But Lugo faces many challenges: 43 percent of the country's 6.5 million people live in poverty, illiteracy is high, 300,000 landless peasant farmers are clamoring for help and Paraguay's corruption is notorious. Lugo himself is a political newcomer, forging his anti-Colorado coalition just eight months ago.
For now, the opposition is basking in its victory, holding gleeful celebrations in the Paraguayan capital and outlying cities.
"You have decided what has to be done in Paraguay. You have decided to be a free Paraguay," Lugo told cheering thousands.
Those who cheered him will be looking to him to keep his promises. Rodney Bernal, a hotel security guard who watched horn-honking opposition celebrations peter out early Monday, said promises by politicians — even Lugo — have made him weary.
"Lugo made a lot of promises and we're tired of promises. We'll have to wait at least a year to see if he does anything, especially if he can give work to young people," he said.
Riordan Roett, head of western hemisphere studies at SAIS-Johns Hopkins University, echoed that sentiment, saying there is scarce wiggle room ahead.
"The economic realities give the new teams very little room to maneuver," he said.
Maria Ines Gonzalez, waving a flag of the opposition Liberals — the biggest force in the left-of-center coalition — said she hopes Lugo succeeds.
"My dad is a construction worker but he's out of work because people don't have money to build anything," she said. "Lugo is a priest who understands the needs of the poor and I believe he is going to solve many social problems."
The Colorado Party emerged from a 1947 civil war to begin its long rule in Paraguay. When Stroessner seized power in 1954, he recruited the party as an acquiescent "twin pillar" alongside his repressive military.
After Stroessner's ouster, free elections led to a succession of Colorado presidents despite sporadic political unrest and party infighting. But countless corruption scandals blamed on party elites beginning in the late 1990s engendered new dissatisfaction with a party that still controlled a vast bureaucracy, jobs and, some say, Paraguay's judiciary
Lugo became a bishop in 1994 but resigned the post in December 2006 to sidestep Paraguay's constitutional ban on clergy seeking office. He says he is neither on the left nor the right and has distanced himself from the region's more radical leaders, such as Venezuela's Hugo Chavez.
Eight months ago, Lugo melded leftist unions, Indians and poor farmers into a coalition with Paraguay's main opposition party, the conservative Authentic Radical Party. He now vows to use his five-year term, which begins Aug. 15, to right economic problems dating back decades.
With about 13,000 of 14,000 balloting stations counted, election officials said Lugo had 41 percent of the vote, Ovelar had 31 percent and former army chief Lino Oviedo had 22 percent.
___
Associated Press reporter Pedro Servin contributed to this report in Asuncion.
ASUNCION, Paraguay - The world's longest-ruling political party is about to lose its six-decade grasp on power in Paraguay after a former Roman Catholic bishop won the country's presidential election.
The Colorado Party's reign — which began in 1947 and was marked by the right-wing dictatorship of the late Gen. Alfredo Stroessner until his ouster in 1989 — was halted by Fernando Lugo, a charismatic 56-year-old who advocated for the end of political corruption and economic disarray.
He beat Colorado Party rival Blanca Ovelar, a 50-year-old protege of President Nicanor Duarte who had sought to become Paraguay's first woman president in Sunday's election.
The triumph of Lugo's eclectic opposition coalition — the Patriotic Alliance for Change — is the latest in a series of electoral wins by leftist, or center-left, leaders in South America.
Mark Weisbrot, at the Washington think tank Center for Economic and Policy Research, said Lugo's election is a sign of "deep and irreversible ... changes sweeping Latin America."
But Lugo faces many challenges: 43 percent of the country's 6.5 million people live in poverty, illiteracy is high, 300,000 landless peasant farmers are clamoring for help and Paraguay's corruption is notorious. Lugo himself is a political newcomer, forging his anti-Colorado coalition just eight months ago.
For now, the opposition is basking in its victory, holding gleeful celebrations in the Paraguayan capital and outlying cities.
"You have decided what has to be done in Paraguay. You have decided to be a free Paraguay," Lugo told cheering thousands.
Those who cheered him will be looking to him to keep his promises. Rodney Bernal, a hotel security guard who watched horn-honking opposition celebrations peter out early Monday, said promises by politicians — even Lugo — have made him weary.
"Lugo made a lot of promises and we're tired of promises. We'll have to wait at least a year to see if he does anything, especially if he can give work to young people," he said.
Riordan Roett, head of western hemisphere studies at SAIS-Johns Hopkins University, echoed that sentiment, saying there is scarce wiggle room ahead.
"The economic realities give the new teams very little room to maneuver," he said.
Maria Ines Gonzalez, waving a flag of the opposition Liberals — the biggest force in the left-of-center coalition — said she hopes Lugo succeeds.
"My dad is a construction worker but he's out of work because people don't have money to build anything," she said. "Lugo is a priest who understands the needs of the poor and I believe he is going to solve many social problems."
The Colorado Party emerged from a 1947 civil war to begin its long rule in Paraguay. When Stroessner seized power in 1954, he recruited the party as an acquiescent "twin pillar" alongside his repressive military.
After Stroessner's ouster, free elections led to a succession of Colorado presidents despite sporadic political unrest and party infighting. But countless corruption scandals blamed on party elites beginning in the late 1990s engendered new dissatisfaction with a party that still controlled a vast bureaucracy, jobs and, some say, Paraguay's judiciary
Lugo became a bishop in 1994 but resigned the post in December 2006 to sidestep Paraguay's constitutional ban on clergy seeking office. He says he is neither on the left nor the right and has distanced himself from the region's more radical leaders, such as Venezuela's Hugo Chavez.
Eight months ago, Lugo melded leftist unions, Indians and poor farmers into a coalition with Paraguay's main opposition party, the conservative Authentic Radical Party. He now vows to use his five-year term, which begins Aug. 15, to right economic problems dating back decades.
With about 13,000 of 14,000 balloting stations counted, election officials said Lugo had 41 percent of the vote, Ovelar had 31 percent and former army chief Lino Oviedo had 22 percent.
___
Associated Press reporter Pedro Servin contributed to this report in Asuncion.
Zimbabwe marks 28 years of Independence
The Herald, April 19, 2008
ZIMBABWEANS yesterday marked 28 years of Independence at various centres throughout the country at festivities punctuated with eulogies, military and police drills, live music performances, mass displays and soccer matches.
The main celebrations were at Gwanzura Stadium in Highfield, Harare where President Mugabe officiated while a delegation comprising largely of youths visited Chimoio in Mozambique to pay tribute to cadres who were massacred by Rhodesian forces during the liberation struggle.
The Gwanzura celebrations began in earnest after Cde Mugabe lit the Independence Flame and the Police Band led the singing of the National Anthem as the Air Force of Zimbabwe jets flew over in the traditional fly-past.
Prior to that, Cde Mugabe inspected the Guard of Honour after which detachments from the country’s security forces forming the guard declared: "Zimbabwe is a sovereign State, we shall defend it with our blood", to the delight of the thousands in attendance.
Some of people in the crowd held up banners with messages such as "Zimbabwe has no place for sell-outs" and "Independence and Sovereignty for all times."
However, the voice of Cde Simbaneuta Mudarikwa — who had performed the duty of master of ceremony at independence celebrations since 1980 — was the only missing part.
Cde Mudarikwa was recently elected Member of the House of Assembly for Uzumba and has since been replaced as master of ceremony.
The crowds were kept entertained by mass displays staged by about 1 000 schoolchildren, the police, the army’s Parachute and Commando regiments and the Airforce of Zimbabwe Traditional Dance Troupe.
Sulumane Chimbetu and the Orchestra Dendera Kings, among others, provided musical entertainment.
In his remarks introducing President Mugabe, the chairman of the independence celebrations organising committee Cde Ignatius Chombo said Zimbabweans should remember that the country’s independence did not come on a silver platter and should be guarded jealously.
Cde Chombo, the Minister of Local Government, Public Works and Urban Development, said it was imperative to keep alive the memory of the bruising struggle that led to democracy.
"The venue where we are gathered is significant for a number of reasons. Gwanzura Stadium is adjacent to Zimbabwe Grounds, which we all know was the place where Cde Mugabe made his historic speech in 1980.
"Furthermore, this place is walking distance from Cde Mugabe’s home in New Canaan and so by all means this is what can be called the cradle of our liberation," said Cde Chombo.
"It is imperative to rekindle the memory of the protracted and bruising struggle that brought independence and ushered in democracy. Independence did not come on a silver platter. Many people were massacred by the cowardly Rhodesian regime and the loss of all this blood should not be in vain. We laud the determination of our heroes and admire their courage and pluck.
"Our leader, His Excellency Cde Mugabe spent 11 years in jail and many more at the forefront of the liberation struggle with other luminaries like Cde Chitepo, Cde Joshua Nkomo and Cde Muzenda among others.
"Cde Mugabe’s tenacious defence of the dignity of the people of this land and 28 years later he is still standing strong in defending our heritage."
Among the dignitaries in attendance were Government ministers, service chiefs, diplomatic, senior civil servants, Zanu-PF Politburo and Central Committee members and judges of the Supreme and High Courts.
In Chomoio, Mozambique Zanu-PF Women’s League Secretary Cde Oppah Muchinguri urged youths to remain patriotic and remember that Zimbabwe’s independence came through bloodshed and should be jealously safeguarded.
She was addressing about 800 delegates mostly youths, who were visiting the former liberation war camp in Chimoio where at least 2 000 men, women and children who perished while on a mission to free Zimbabwe were buried.
The visit was part of the independence commemorations.
"We want to leave the heritage to you the youth our future leaders but you have to be guided. You should not forget where you came from and you should always remember that thousands of gallant sons and daughters perished at Chimoio fighting for the independence of the country," Cde Muchinguri said.
Zanu-PF Youth League deputy secretary Cde Saviour Kasukuwere said youths should not take independence for granted but jealously guard against re-colonisation.
A sombre atmosphere engulfed the former liberation war camp as some of the delegates broke down after touching narrations by surviving cadres of the Chimoio bombing of November 1977 by Rhodesian forces.
In Bulawayo, scores of residents gathered at White City stadium to commemorate Zimbabwe’s Uhuru.
Bulawayo Metropolitan Province Governor Cde Cain Mathema, first inspected a guard of honour before he read President Mugabe’s speech.
The celebrations started in the morning with a parade of soldiers, policemen and prison officers accompanied by drum majorettes which marched from the intersection of Luveve Road and Nketa Drive turning into Hyde Park Road before moving to the White City Stadium where Cde Mathema inspected a guard of honour.
The entertainment menu included drills by drum majorettes, performances by traditional music and dance groups and the famous Light Machine Gun choir.
The Minister of Information and Publicity, Dr Sikhanyiso Ndlovu, the Bulawayo Zanu-PF Provincial Chairman, Cde Macloud Tshawe, Politburo and Central Committee members, service chiefs from the province and Government departmental heads attended the commemorations.
Also in attendance was former Politburo member Dumiso Dabengwa, who was among the dignitaries on the high table.
Dabengwa left the ruling party after he lent his support to independent presidential candidate Simba Makoni — also a former Politburo member — just before last month’s elections.
In Umguza, hundreds of people thronged Nyamandlovu Primary School to celebrate the country’s independence from colonial bondage.
The Minister of Industry and International Trade, Cde Obert Mpofu, who was also re-elected as the House of Assembly representative for the constituency during the March 29 harmonised polls, was the guest of honour.
Cde Mpofu read President Mugabe’s speech which was well received by the people, most of them newly resettled farmers from the constituency which was predominantly a white commercial farming area before the land reform exercise to correct the racially skewed land ownership imbalances, which were a legacy of the colonial era.
War veterans toyi-toyied and performed various drills.
This year’s celebrations in the Midlands were held at the traditional venue, Mkoba Stadium in Gweru.
Midlands Governor, Cde Cephas Msipa, newly-elected Mberengwa Senator and Zanu-PF Politburo member, Cde Richard Hove, and the provincial service chiefs started arriving at 9:45am.
Cde Msipa inspected the guard of honour before reading President Mugabe’s speech at 11am.
Before reading the President’s speech, Cde Msipa thanked the people for attending the celebrations and urged them to always remember the importance of commemorating the anniversary.
"Many people sacrificed their lives for us to enjoy the independence, we have today. A lot happened, we had orphans, widows and the maimed that came out of the protracted war for the liberation of the country. That is why, I always say we should cherish this day (independence anniversary) in honour of the gallant sons and daughters of the country, who perished during the liberation struggle,’’ he said.
After the formal proceedings, the public was treated to entertainment from the army with its helicopter displays and the police weighed in with its dog displays.
In Lupane, thousands of people braved the scorching heat to attend the Matabeleland North provincial independence celebrations at Somhlolo Stadium.
People began gathering at 10am but the official proceedings only started at midday.
Matabeleland North Governor Cde Sithokozile Mathuthu inspected the guard of honour, which was mounted by four detachments from the ZNA, Police and Prison Services.
She read the President’s speech and thereafter the public was treated to drill displays by the security forces.
In Masvingo, people thronged Mucheke Stadium to commemorate Independence Day.
Proceedings to mark the day began in the morning with detachments from the Zimbabwe National Army, Prison Service and the Zimbabwe Republic Police marching from Chikato Police Station to the stadium.
Drum majorettes marched in unison with the uniformed forces.
At the stadium, Masvingo Governor Cde Willard Chiwewe first inspected a guard of honour mounted by the security forces.
After the inspection Cde Chiwewe read President Mugabe’s speech.
Thereafter the security forces entertained the crowd with their drills.
The celebrations continued until late afternoon.
Celebrations were also held in all Masvingo’s seven administrative districts.
In attendance at Mucheke were top Government and Zanu-PF officials among them party provincial chairman Retired Major Alex Mudavanhu, his deputy Cde Clifford Mumbengegwi, provincial war veterans’ leader Cde Isiah Muzenda, Masvingo South Member of the House of Assembly Cde Walter Mzembi, Zimbabwe Council of Chiefs president Chief Fortune Charumbira and service chiefs.
In Beitbridge, scores of people gathered at Zimbabwe Prisons Grounds to celebrate independence.
The army, the police dog section, drum majorettes, and schoolchildren who recited poems, traditional dance groups, entertained the crowd.
Home Affairs Minister Cde Kembo Mohadi read President Mugabe’s speech.
Addressing the same gathering Senator for Beitridge Cde Tambudzani Mohadi urged people to maintain a unity of purpose and complement the Government in its efforts to revive the country’s economy.
"As Zimbabweans we need to join hands and complement the efforts being made by the Government to address the economic challenges the country is facing", She said.
The main celebrations in Mashonaland Central were held at Chipadze Stadium in Bindura where people were treated to various forms of entertainment.
Mashonaland Central Governor Cde Ephraim Masawi inspected a guard of honour before reading the President’s speech.
Bindura residents interviewed by The Herald said they cherished the freedom fought for by gallant cadres.
Rudhaka Stadium in Marondera was the venue of the main celebrations in Mashonaland East province.
The crowd was treated to spectacular military and police displays and perfomances by poets and choirs.
Mashonaland East Provincial Governor Cde Ray Kaukonde read President Mugabe’s speech after reminding Zimbabweans that the independence they enjoy today was a result of a protracted liberation war.
"Many people are now selling out as they forget the bitter armed struggle that was fought. Ngatisakanganwe chezuro nekuda kwehope. We should defend our land and resources," said Cde Kaukonde.
He said Government prioritises the welfare of civil servants and in Marondera it facilitated the building of 143 houses by the National Social Security Authority in Rusike high density area.
In attendance were Marondera East Member of the House of Assembly Cde Tracy Mutinhiri, Mashonaland East provincial administrator Mr Cuthbert Ndarukwa and service chiefs.
Matabeleland South Provincial Governor, Cde Angeline Masuku paid tribute to people in the province for rallying behind Zanu-PF and President Mugabe in the 29 March harmonised elections.
Addressing people gathered at Pelandaba Stadium in Gwanda to mark the country’s 28th Independence Anniversary, she said support for the ruling party in the province had dampened the country’s detractors.
Cde Masuku said by voting for President Mugabe they had showed that they still had confidence in his leadership.
She said the President had a track record in politics dating back to the days of the liberation struggle, which brought Independence on 18 April 1980, and thus had proven leadership qualities.
"I thank you for voting for ubaba uMugabe, which really shows that we still like his leadership role. That is a positive thing indeed," said Cde Masuku.
ZEC is yet to pronounce the winner of the presidential election since the results are still going through the collation and a verification process as well as the intended recount today.
Cde Masuku said although the Zanu-PF Government had made mistakes, significant strides had been made in developing the country, since the attainment of Independence from the colonial bondage of the British-exactly 28 years ago.
ZIMBABWEANS yesterday marked 28 years of Independence at various centres throughout the country at festivities punctuated with eulogies, military and police drills, live music performances, mass displays and soccer matches.
The main celebrations were at Gwanzura Stadium in Highfield, Harare where President Mugabe officiated while a delegation comprising largely of youths visited Chimoio in Mozambique to pay tribute to cadres who were massacred by Rhodesian forces during the liberation struggle.
The Gwanzura celebrations began in earnest after Cde Mugabe lit the Independence Flame and the Police Band led the singing of the National Anthem as the Air Force of Zimbabwe jets flew over in the traditional fly-past.
Prior to that, Cde Mugabe inspected the Guard of Honour after which detachments from the country’s security forces forming the guard declared: "Zimbabwe is a sovereign State, we shall defend it with our blood", to the delight of the thousands in attendance.
Some of people in the crowd held up banners with messages such as "Zimbabwe has no place for sell-outs" and "Independence and Sovereignty for all times."
However, the voice of Cde Simbaneuta Mudarikwa — who had performed the duty of master of ceremony at independence celebrations since 1980 — was the only missing part.
Cde Mudarikwa was recently elected Member of the House of Assembly for Uzumba and has since been replaced as master of ceremony.
The crowds were kept entertained by mass displays staged by about 1 000 schoolchildren, the police, the army’s Parachute and Commando regiments and the Airforce of Zimbabwe Traditional Dance Troupe.
Sulumane Chimbetu and the Orchestra Dendera Kings, among others, provided musical entertainment.
In his remarks introducing President Mugabe, the chairman of the independence celebrations organising committee Cde Ignatius Chombo said Zimbabweans should remember that the country’s independence did not come on a silver platter and should be guarded jealously.
Cde Chombo, the Minister of Local Government, Public Works and Urban Development, said it was imperative to keep alive the memory of the bruising struggle that led to democracy.
"The venue where we are gathered is significant for a number of reasons. Gwanzura Stadium is adjacent to Zimbabwe Grounds, which we all know was the place where Cde Mugabe made his historic speech in 1980.
"Furthermore, this place is walking distance from Cde Mugabe’s home in New Canaan and so by all means this is what can be called the cradle of our liberation," said Cde Chombo.
"It is imperative to rekindle the memory of the protracted and bruising struggle that brought independence and ushered in democracy. Independence did not come on a silver platter. Many people were massacred by the cowardly Rhodesian regime and the loss of all this blood should not be in vain. We laud the determination of our heroes and admire their courage and pluck.
"Our leader, His Excellency Cde Mugabe spent 11 years in jail and many more at the forefront of the liberation struggle with other luminaries like Cde Chitepo, Cde Joshua Nkomo and Cde Muzenda among others.
"Cde Mugabe’s tenacious defence of the dignity of the people of this land and 28 years later he is still standing strong in defending our heritage."
Among the dignitaries in attendance were Government ministers, service chiefs, diplomatic, senior civil servants, Zanu-PF Politburo and Central Committee members and judges of the Supreme and High Courts.
In Chomoio, Mozambique Zanu-PF Women’s League Secretary Cde Oppah Muchinguri urged youths to remain patriotic and remember that Zimbabwe’s independence came through bloodshed and should be jealously safeguarded.
She was addressing about 800 delegates mostly youths, who were visiting the former liberation war camp in Chimoio where at least 2 000 men, women and children who perished while on a mission to free Zimbabwe were buried.
The visit was part of the independence commemorations.
"We want to leave the heritage to you the youth our future leaders but you have to be guided. You should not forget where you came from and you should always remember that thousands of gallant sons and daughters perished at Chimoio fighting for the independence of the country," Cde Muchinguri said.
Zanu-PF Youth League deputy secretary Cde Saviour Kasukuwere said youths should not take independence for granted but jealously guard against re-colonisation.
A sombre atmosphere engulfed the former liberation war camp as some of the delegates broke down after touching narrations by surviving cadres of the Chimoio bombing of November 1977 by Rhodesian forces.
In Bulawayo, scores of residents gathered at White City stadium to commemorate Zimbabwe’s Uhuru.
Bulawayo Metropolitan Province Governor Cde Cain Mathema, first inspected a guard of honour before he read President Mugabe’s speech.
The celebrations started in the morning with a parade of soldiers, policemen and prison officers accompanied by drum majorettes which marched from the intersection of Luveve Road and Nketa Drive turning into Hyde Park Road before moving to the White City Stadium where Cde Mathema inspected a guard of honour.
The entertainment menu included drills by drum majorettes, performances by traditional music and dance groups and the famous Light Machine Gun choir.
The Minister of Information and Publicity, Dr Sikhanyiso Ndlovu, the Bulawayo Zanu-PF Provincial Chairman, Cde Macloud Tshawe, Politburo and Central Committee members, service chiefs from the province and Government departmental heads attended the commemorations.
Also in attendance was former Politburo member Dumiso Dabengwa, who was among the dignitaries on the high table.
Dabengwa left the ruling party after he lent his support to independent presidential candidate Simba Makoni — also a former Politburo member — just before last month’s elections.
In Umguza, hundreds of people thronged Nyamandlovu Primary School to celebrate the country’s independence from colonial bondage.
The Minister of Industry and International Trade, Cde Obert Mpofu, who was also re-elected as the House of Assembly representative for the constituency during the March 29 harmonised polls, was the guest of honour.
Cde Mpofu read President Mugabe’s speech which was well received by the people, most of them newly resettled farmers from the constituency which was predominantly a white commercial farming area before the land reform exercise to correct the racially skewed land ownership imbalances, which were a legacy of the colonial era.
War veterans toyi-toyied and performed various drills.
This year’s celebrations in the Midlands were held at the traditional venue, Mkoba Stadium in Gweru.
Midlands Governor, Cde Cephas Msipa, newly-elected Mberengwa Senator and Zanu-PF Politburo member, Cde Richard Hove, and the provincial service chiefs started arriving at 9:45am.
Cde Msipa inspected the guard of honour before reading President Mugabe’s speech at 11am.
Before reading the President’s speech, Cde Msipa thanked the people for attending the celebrations and urged them to always remember the importance of commemorating the anniversary.
"Many people sacrificed their lives for us to enjoy the independence, we have today. A lot happened, we had orphans, widows and the maimed that came out of the protracted war for the liberation of the country. That is why, I always say we should cherish this day (independence anniversary) in honour of the gallant sons and daughters of the country, who perished during the liberation struggle,’’ he said.
After the formal proceedings, the public was treated to entertainment from the army with its helicopter displays and the police weighed in with its dog displays.
In Lupane, thousands of people braved the scorching heat to attend the Matabeleland North provincial independence celebrations at Somhlolo Stadium.
People began gathering at 10am but the official proceedings only started at midday.
Matabeleland North Governor Cde Sithokozile Mathuthu inspected the guard of honour, which was mounted by four detachments from the ZNA, Police and Prison Services.
She read the President’s speech and thereafter the public was treated to drill displays by the security forces.
In Masvingo, people thronged Mucheke Stadium to commemorate Independence Day.
Proceedings to mark the day began in the morning with detachments from the Zimbabwe National Army, Prison Service and the Zimbabwe Republic Police marching from Chikato Police Station to the stadium.
Drum majorettes marched in unison with the uniformed forces.
At the stadium, Masvingo Governor Cde Willard Chiwewe first inspected a guard of honour mounted by the security forces.
After the inspection Cde Chiwewe read President Mugabe’s speech.
Thereafter the security forces entertained the crowd with their drills.
The celebrations continued until late afternoon.
Celebrations were also held in all Masvingo’s seven administrative districts.
In attendance at Mucheke were top Government and Zanu-PF officials among them party provincial chairman Retired Major Alex Mudavanhu, his deputy Cde Clifford Mumbengegwi, provincial war veterans’ leader Cde Isiah Muzenda, Masvingo South Member of the House of Assembly Cde Walter Mzembi, Zimbabwe Council of Chiefs president Chief Fortune Charumbira and service chiefs.
In Beitbridge, scores of people gathered at Zimbabwe Prisons Grounds to celebrate independence.
The army, the police dog section, drum majorettes, and schoolchildren who recited poems, traditional dance groups, entertained the crowd.
Home Affairs Minister Cde Kembo Mohadi read President Mugabe’s speech.
Addressing the same gathering Senator for Beitridge Cde Tambudzani Mohadi urged people to maintain a unity of purpose and complement the Government in its efforts to revive the country’s economy.
"As Zimbabweans we need to join hands and complement the efforts being made by the Government to address the economic challenges the country is facing", She said.
The main celebrations in Mashonaland Central were held at Chipadze Stadium in Bindura where people were treated to various forms of entertainment.
Mashonaland Central Governor Cde Ephraim Masawi inspected a guard of honour before reading the President’s speech.
Bindura residents interviewed by The Herald said they cherished the freedom fought for by gallant cadres.
Rudhaka Stadium in Marondera was the venue of the main celebrations in Mashonaland East province.
The crowd was treated to spectacular military and police displays and perfomances by poets and choirs.
Mashonaland East Provincial Governor Cde Ray Kaukonde read President Mugabe’s speech after reminding Zimbabweans that the independence they enjoy today was a result of a protracted liberation war.
"Many people are now selling out as they forget the bitter armed struggle that was fought. Ngatisakanganwe chezuro nekuda kwehope. We should defend our land and resources," said Cde Kaukonde.
He said Government prioritises the welfare of civil servants and in Marondera it facilitated the building of 143 houses by the National Social Security Authority in Rusike high density area.
In attendance were Marondera East Member of the House of Assembly Cde Tracy Mutinhiri, Mashonaland East provincial administrator Mr Cuthbert Ndarukwa and service chiefs.
Matabeleland South Provincial Governor, Cde Angeline Masuku paid tribute to people in the province for rallying behind Zanu-PF and President Mugabe in the 29 March harmonised elections.
Addressing people gathered at Pelandaba Stadium in Gwanda to mark the country’s 28th Independence Anniversary, she said support for the ruling party in the province had dampened the country’s detractors.
Cde Masuku said by voting for President Mugabe they had showed that they still had confidence in his leadership.
She said the President had a track record in politics dating back to the days of the liberation struggle, which brought Independence on 18 April 1980, and thus had proven leadership qualities.
"I thank you for voting for ubaba uMugabe, which really shows that we still like his leadership role. That is a positive thing indeed," said Cde Masuku.
ZEC is yet to pronounce the winner of the presidential election since the results are still going through the collation and a verification process as well as the intended recount today.
Cde Masuku said although the Zanu-PF Government had made mistakes, significant strides had been made in developing the country, since the attainment of Independence from the colonial bondage of the British-exactly 28 years ago.
An interview with author J. Patrick O'Connor: The framing of Mumia Abu-Jamal
Hans Bennett, International Action Center, April 16, 2008
On March 27, the U.S. Third Circuit Court of Appeals ruled against granting a new guilt-phase trial to world-famous journalist and death row prisoner Mumia Abu-Jamal. While ruling against the three issues that could have led to a new guilt-phase trial, the court affirmed U.S. District Court Judge Yohn’s 2001 decision overturning the death sentence. If the district attorney wants to re-instate the death sentence, the D.A. must call for a new penalty-phase jury trial that would be limited to the question of life in prison without a chance of parole or a reinstatement of the death sentence.
Outraged by this decision, Abu-Jamal’s supporters around the world held “day after” protests, and are now organizing a mass demonstration in Philadelphia on April 19, just days before the Pennsylvania presidential primary election. Simultaneously, Abu-Jamal is appealing the court ruling “en banc” to the entire Third Circuit, and if unsuccessful there, he will appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, in an effort to be granted a new guilt-phase trial.
At this critical juncture in Abu-Jamal’s case, an explosive new book is set for release in May, titled “The Framing of Mumia Abu-Jamal,” by J. Patrick O’Connor, and published by Lawrence Hill Books. O’Connor explains that he was “an associate editor for TV Guide at its headquarters in nearby Radnor, Pa., during the time Officer Faulkner was killed and Abu-Jamal was put on trial and convicted of murdering him. ... Sometime in the mid-1990s I began hearing and seeing the ‘Free Mumia’ slogan.
“In 1996, when HBO premiered the one-hour documentary ‘Mumia Abu-Jamal: A Case for Reasonable Doubt?,’ I developed some questions about the verdict and certainly the fairness of his trial.”
Soon, O’Connor had “read all the trial transcripts as well as all of the transcripts from Abu-Jamal’s Post-Conviction Relief Act hearings that were held in 1995, and continued in 1996 and 1997. I also read all the contemporaneous newspaper articles from the Philadelphia Inquirer and Philadelphia Daily News, as well as all the books published about the case.”
In his new book, O’Connor argues that Abu-Jamal was clearly framed by police, and that the actual shooter was a man named Kenneth Freeman. O’Connor criticizes the local media, who, he says, “bought into the prosecution’s story line early on and has never been able to see this case for what it is: a framing of an innocent and peace-loving man.”
In his review of the recent book “Murdered by Mumia,” O’Connor writes that “there’s a great deal to admire about Maureen Faulkner, the widow of Philadelphia Police Officer Daniel Faulkner,” but concludes that her “obsessive hate for Abu-Jamal has blinded her to the prosecutorial misconduct and judicial bias that plagued his trial and justifiably fueled his rise to a world stage. The real villains in her life were the police and prosecutors who framed Abu-Jamal for Officer Faulkner’s killing. They are the ones, not the long drawn-out appellate process that has kept Abu-Jamal alive, who have denied her the closure she was due more than 25 years ago.”
For more background on “The Framing of Mumia Abu-Jamal” and J. Patrick O’Connor, Abu-Jamal-News.com is featuring an excerpt from the new book, a previous interview with the author, and O’Connor’s review of “Murdered By Mumia.” This new interview was conducted on April 11, 2008, and will be featured in the “Journalists for Mumia” newspaper, to be released days before the April 19 demonstration in Philadelphia.
Hans Bennett: Advocates of Abu-Jamal’s conviction and execution always say that a police frame-up of Abu-Jamal is a lunatic, far-fetched “conspiracy theory” that should be dismissed by any sane observer. What do you mean when you say he was “framed”? How was this done?
J. Patrick O’Connor: Mumia’s early association with the Philadelphia branch of the Black Panther Party marked him as a subversive to George Fencl, the chief inspector of the Philadelphia Police Department’s Civil Defense Bureau. His subsequent sympathetic coverage of MOVE while reporting for the local public radio station made him an avowed enemy of Mayor Frank Rizzo. Minutes after Officer Faulkner was shot at 3:55 a.m., Inspector Alfonzo Giordano–who reported directly to Fencl–took command of the crime scene and personally set in motion the framing of Abu-Jamal. It would be Giordano who claimed that Mumia told him in the paddy wagon that he dropped his gun after he shot Faulkner; it would be Giordano who arranged for prostitute Cynthia White and felon Robert Chobert to identify Abu-Jamal as the shooter. Giordano and White would be the D.A. office’s only witnesses at the preliminary hearing to hold Abu-Jamal over for trial where Giordano repeated this “confession.”
Giordano is as corrupt a police officer as one can imagine. For years he had been extorting kickbacks–personally averaging $3,000 per month–from Center City prostitutes, pimps and bar owners, which explains his early arrival at the crime scene. He knew Cynthia White and her pimp. He coerced her at the scene to identify Abu-Jamal as the shooter. She would be the only witness the D.A. had to claim to see Abu-Jamal holding a gun over Faulkner.
In her original statement to the police–given within an hour of the shooting–she had Abu-Jamal running from the parking lot and from as far away as ten yards firing off “four or five shots” at Faulkner before the officer fell. In her third interview with police detectives, given on Dec.17, she fine-tuned her statement to comport with the actual evidence in the case that Faulkner was shot at close range.
[In one of the most sinister aspects of Abu-Jamal’s case, the police department waited until the Monday after Abu-Jamal’s conviction to “relieve” Giordano of his duties on what would prove to be well-founded “suspicions of corruption.” Four years after Abu-Jamal’s trial, Giordano pled guilty to tax evasion in connection with those payouts and was sent to prison.—HB]
Incredibly, the police arriving at the crime scene would later claim not to have conducted any tests to determine if Abu-Jamal had recently fired a gun by checking for powder residue on his hands or clothing, nor did they claim to even feel or smell his gun to determine if it had been recently fired. Tests such as these are so routine at murder scenes that it is almost inconceivable the police did not run them. It is more likely that they did not like the results of the tests.
From the outset, the investigation into the shooting death of Officer Faulkner was conducted with one goal in mind: to hang the crime on Mumia Abu-Jamal. There was no search for the truth, no attempt at providing the slain officer with the justice he deserved. Giordano handed Abu-Jamal to the D.A.’s office with his own lie about Abu-Jamal confessing to him and packing off Cynthia White in a squad car to tell her concocted account of the shooting.
When the D.A.’s office was forced to back away from the corrupt Giordano, Assistant D.A. Joseph McGill elicited a new “confession” to replace Giordano’s in February when security guard Priscilla Durham and Officer Garry Bell, Faulkner’s best friend on the police force, responded to his promptings by saying they heard Abu-Jamal blurt out at the hospital, “I shot the mother-fucker and I hope the mother-fucker dies.” Not one of the dozens of other officers present at the hospital would make such a claim. In fact, the two officers who accompanied Abu-Jamal from the time he was placed in the paddy wagon until he went into surgery reported that he made no comments in signed statements given to detectives assigned to the case that morning.
The prosecution knew that its new “confession” could be skewered if Abu-Jamal’s defense attorney, Anthony Jackson, called the two officers who accompanied Abu-Jamal to the stand, so all the prosecution really had was Cynthia White. With White saying she saw it all from beginning to end, and willing to testify that she saw Abu-Jamal blow the helpless Faulkner’s brains out in ruthless cold blood, McGill had his case made, providing White’s credibility could survive Jackson’s cross-examination. McGill bet the entire case that it could, and despite the utter web of lies she told the jury, was right.
HB: Why do you think that Kenneth Freeman was the actual shooter of Police Officer Daniel Faulkner?
JPOC: Kenneth Freeman was Billy Cook’s street vendor partner and was riding with him in the VW when Faulkner pulled the VW over. Freeman got out of the VW and subsequently handed Faulkner a phony driver’s license application bearing the name of Arnold Howard, which Howard had recently loaned to him. Howard’s papers were found in Faulkner’s shirt pocket. Police rounded up both Howard and Freeman in the early morning hours of Dec. 9 and brought them in for questioning. At the Post-Conviction Relief Act hearing in 1995, Howard testified that on several occasions, Cynthia White picked Freeman out of a lineup.
At Billy Cook’s March 29 trial for assaulting Officer Faulkner, with McGill as the prosecutor, White told McGill in direct testimony that the passenger in the VW “had got out.” McGill said, “He got out of the car”? White responded, “Yes.” [At Abu-Jamal’s trial, McGill got White to testify that only Abu-Jamal, Cook and Faulkner were at the scene.]
Various witnesses said they saw a black man running from the scene right after the shooting. Some of the eyewitnesses said this man had an Afro and wore a green army jacket. Freeman did have an Afro and he perpetually wore a green army jacket. Freeman was tall and burly, weighing about 225 pounds at the time.
Cab driver Robert Harkins was driving right by the parked police car and the VW when he saw a police officer grab a man. The man “then spun around and the officer went to the ground,” falling facedown backwards, landing on his hands and knees. The assailant shot the officer in the back, causing him to roll over on his back, and then executed him with a shot to his forehead.
Harkins described the shooter as a little taller and heavier than the 6-foot, 200-pound Faulkner. Robert Chobert told police in his first statement that the shooter had an Afro and weighed about 225 pounds. [Abu-Jamal, also about 6-foot, wore his hair in dreadlocks and weighed 170 pounds at the time.]
In Billy Cook’s April 29, 2001, affidavit he declared that Freeman was with him the night of the shooting, was armed, and fled the scene after Faulkner was shot. Cook said he did not see who shot Faulkner.
Freeman would meet an ignominious death hours after Philadelphia police firebombed the MOVE house on Osage Avenue in 1985, killing 11 MOVE members, including John Africa, whose corpse had been beheaded. Freeman’s dead body was found bound, gagged and naked in a vacant lot. There would be no police investigation into this obvious murder. The coroner listed his cause of death as a heart attack. The timing and modus operandi of the abduction and killing alone suggest an extreme act of police vengeance.
HB: In your book, you were very optimistic about the Third Circuit granting Abu-Jamal a new guilt-phase trial. Were you surprised by the March 27 ruling? If so, how do you account for such a surprising ruling?
JPOC: I was incredulous. I thought the oral arguments on May 17 had gone extremely well for Abu-Jamal and that he would get a new trial. The 2-1 majority ruling demonstrated anew just how politicized this case always has been from the beginning and continues to be still. The two Republican-appointed judges on the panel formed the majority and the lone Democrat-appointed judge dissented. I hate to make it sound that simple, but the U.S. Supreme Court itself is not above making decisions based on party or ideological lines, and all too frequently does.
In its ruling, the majority stated it believed Abu-Jamal had “forfeited his Batson claim by failing to make a timely objection. But even assuming Abu-Jamal’s failure to object is not fatal to his claim, Abu-Jamal has failed to meet his burden in providing a prima facie case.” The majority stated that he failed because his attorneys at his PCRA evidentiary hearing neglected to elicit the prosecutor’s reasons for removing 10 otherwise qualified blacks by means of peremptory strikes during jury selection.
“Abu-Jamal had the opportunity to develop this evidence at the PCRA evidentiary hearing, but failed to do so. There may be instances where a prima facie case can be made without evidence of the strike rate and exclusion rate. But in this case, we cannot find the Pennsylvania Supreme Court’s ruling [denying Abu-Jamal’s Batson claim] unreasonable based on this incomplete record,” the majority wrote. In a nutshell, the majority denied Abu-Jamal’s Batson claim on a technicality of its own invention, not on its merits.
Judge Ambro’s dissent was sharp: “...I do not agree with them [the majority] that Mumia Abu-Jamal fails to meet the low bar for making a prima facie case under Batson. In holding otherwise, they raise the standard necessary to make out a prima facie case beyond what Batson calls for.”
In other words, the majority, in this case alone, has upped the ante required for making a Batson claim beyond what the United States Supreme Court stipulated. When ruling in Batson in 1986, the U.S. Supreme Court imposed no timeliness restrictions as to when a Batson claim may be raised, nor has the court done so in the intervening 22 years. Neither did it require that the racial composition of the entire jury pool be known before a Batson claim could be raised. [In fact, the Supreme Court recently added heft to its Batson ruling, ruling in Synder that the purging of only one black juror on the basis of racial discrimination was grounds for a new trial.]
In addition, the Supreme Court ruled in 1986 that to establish a prima facie case for a Batson claim, the defendant must show only “an inference” of prosecutorial discrimination in purging even one black from a jury. Even the Third Circuit has never previously allowed the timing of a Batson claim to be material, nor had it ever ruled previously that not knowing the racial composition of the entire jury pool was a fatal flaw in lodging a Batson claim.
The fact that the prosecutor in Abu-Jamal’s case used 10 of the15 peremptory challenges to exclude blacks from the jury–a strike rate of 66 percent against potential black jurors–is in itself an inference of discrimination. The result was that only three of the 12 jurors impaneled were black.
The Third Circuit should have remanded the case back to Federal District Court Judge Yohn–the judge who ruled on Abu-Jamal’s habeas corpus petition in 2001–to hold an evidentiary hearing to determine the prosecutors’ reasons for excluding the 10 potential black jurors he struck. If that hearing revealed racial discrimination on the part of the prosecutor during jury selection, Judge Yohn would be compelled to order a new trial for Abu-Jamal.
Abu-Jamal is left with only two remedies to correct the flawed Third Circuit ruling. His first option is to request the Third Circuit to review its decision en banc where the entire panel of judges sitting on the Third Circuit would conduct oral arguments anew. There is some likelihood that the Third Circuit might agree to meet en banc because the panel’s decision to deny Abu-Jamal’s Batson claim went against that court’s own well-established precedents in granting similar Batson claims in the past.
However, the barrier to en banc deliberations is a high one: a majority of the sitting judges must vote to reexamine the case. On the Third Circuit Court, there are 12 judges eligible to vote but four have already recused themselves from this particular case, meaning five of the remaining eight judges would be needed to go forward en banc. Abu-Jamal has most probably had his one day before the Third Circuit.
Barring a reversal by the Third Circuit, Abu-Jamal’s final option is to appeal the Third Circuit’s ruling to the U.S. Supreme Court, which has on three previous occasions denied to take up his case. This time, though, there is a remote possibility that the high court may take the case up because the Third Circuit’s ruling created new law by placing new restrictions on a defendant’s ability to file a Batson claim.
HB: With the media spotlight on the Pennsylvania primary elections, and the major demonstrations supporting Abu-Jamal on April 19, what would you like the world to know about this famous death-row case? How far has the city of Philadelphia come since the days of Police Commissioner and Mayor Frank Rizzo, a notorious racist and public advocate of police brutality?
JPOC: In a real sense, D.A. Lynn Abraham, just as Frank Rizzo before her, embodies the worst of Philadelphia. Known as “the Queen of Death” for her zeal in seeking the death penalty, she was depicted as the nation’s “deadliest D.A.” in a New York Times Magazine article in 1995. Her personal vendetta against Abu-Jamal equals that of Officer Faulkner’s widow. The day Federal District Court Judge Yohn overturned Abu-Jamal’s death sentence in 2001, Abraham put her antipathy for Abu-Jamal this way: “Today, Mumia Abu-Jamal is what he has always been: a convicted, remorseless, cold-blooded killer.”
The case of Mumia Abu-Jamal represents an enormous miscarriage of justice, representing an extreme example of prosecutorial abuse and judicial bias. What makes getting to the truth about this case so difficult for people, particularly people in Philadelphia, is that the prosecution built its case on perjured testimony with a calculated disregard for what the actual evidence established. The local media bought into the prosecution’s story line early on and has never been able to see this case for what it is: a framing of an innocent and peace-loving man.
Two things account for the unprecedented national and international interest in this case. First and foremost is the man himself. Despite more than 25 years of the bleakest existence possible in isolation on death row, Mumia Abu-Jamal remains what he has always been: an articulate, compassionate righter of wrongs. The second thing that makes this case so compelling to such a wide audience is that his trial represents such a monumental abuse of government power to railroad one man that it really says no citizen is truly free until this wrong has been undone.
Hans Bennett is a Philadelphia journalist and co-founder of Journalists for Mumia, whose website is Abu-Jamal-News.com.
On March 27, the U.S. Third Circuit Court of Appeals ruled against granting a new guilt-phase trial to world-famous journalist and death row prisoner Mumia Abu-Jamal. While ruling against the three issues that could have led to a new guilt-phase trial, the court affirmed U.S. District Court Judge Yohn’s 2001 decision overturning the death sentence. If the district attorney wants to re-instate the death sentence, the D.A. must call for a new penalty-phase jury trial that would be limited to the question of life in prison without a chance of parole or a reinstatement of the death sentence.
Outraged by this decision, Abu-Jamal’s supporters around the world held “day after” protests, and are now organizing a mass demonstration in Philadelphia on April 19, just days before the Pennsylvania presidential primary election. Simultaneously, Abu-Jamal is appealing the court ruling “en banc” to the entire Third Circuit, and if unsuccessful there, he will appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, in an effort to be granted a new guilt-phase trial.
At this critical juncture in Abu-Jamal’s case, an explosive new book is set for release in May, titled “The Framing of Mumia Abu-Jamal,” by J. Patrick O’Connor, and published by Lawrence Hill Books. O’Connor explains that he was “an associate editor for TV Guide at its headquarters in nearby Radnor, Pa., during the time Officer Faulkner was killed and Abu-Jamal was put on trial and convicted of murdering him. ... Sometime in the mid-1990s I began hearing and seeing the ‘Free Mumia’ slogan.
“In 1996, when HBO premiered the one-hour documentary ‘Mumia Abu-Jamal: A Case for Reasonable Doubt?,’ I developed some questions about the verdict and certainly the fairness of his trial.”
Soon, O’Connor had “read all the trial transcripts as well as all of the transcripts from Abu-Jamal’s Post-Conviction Relief Act hearings that were held in 1995, and continued in 1996 and 1997. I also read all the contemporaneous newspaper articles from the Philadelphia Inquirer and Philadelphia Daily News, as well as all the books published about the case.”
In his new book, O’Connor argues that Abu-Jamal was clearly framed by police, and that the actual shooter was a man named Kenneth Freeman. O’Connor criticizes the local media, who, he says, “bought into the prosecution’s story line early on and has never been able to see this case for what it is: a framing of an innocent and peace-loving man.”
In his review of the recent book “Murdered by Mumia,” O’Connor writes that “there’s a great deal to admire about Maureen Faulkner, the widow of Philadelphia Police Officer Daniel Faulkner,” but concludes that her “obsessive hate for Abu-Jamal has blinded her to the prosecutorial misconduct and judicial bias that plagued his trial and justifiably fueled his rise to a world stage. The real villains in her life were the police and prosecutors who framed Abu-Jamal for Officer Faulkner’s killing. They are the ones, not the long drawn-out appellate process that has kept Abu-Jamal alive, who have denied her the closure she was due more than 25 years ago.”
For more background on “The Framing of Mumia Abu-Jamal” and J. Patrick O’Connor, Abu-Jamal-News.com is featuring an excerpt from the new book, a previous interview with the author, and O’Connor’s review of “Murdered By Mumia.” This new interview was conducted on April 11, 2008, and will be featured in the “Journalists for Mumia” newspaper, to be released days before the April 19 demonstration in Philadelphia.
Hans Bennett: Advocates of Abu-Jamal’s conviction and execution always say that a police frame-up of Abu-Jamal is a lunatic, far-fetched “conspiracy theory” that should be dismissed by any sane observer. What do you mean when you say he was “framed”? How was this done?
J. Patrick O’Connor: Mumia’s early association with the Philadelphia branch of the Black Panther Party marked him as a subversive to George Fencl, the chief inspector of the Philadelphia Police Department’s Civil Defense Bureau. His subsequent sympathetic coverage of MOVE while reporting for the local public radio station made him an avowed enemy of Mayor Frank Rizzo. Minutes after Officer Faulkner was shot at 3:55 a.m., Inspector Alfonzo Giordano–who reported directly to Fencl–took command of the crime scene and personally set in motion the framing of Abu-Jamal. It would be Giordano who claimed that Mumia told him in the paddy wagon that he dropped his gun after he shot Faulkner; it would be Giordano who arranged for prostitute Cynthia White and felon Robert Chobert to identify Abu-Jamal as the shooter. Giordano and White would be the D.A. office’s only witnesses at the preliminary hearing to hold Abu-Jamal over for trial where Giordano repeated this “confession.”
Giordano is as corrupt a police officer as one can imagine. For years he had been extorting kickbacks–personally averaging $3,000 per month–from Center City prostitutes, pimps and bar owners, which explains his early arrival at the crime scene. He knew Cynthia White and her pimp. He coerced her at the scene to identify Abu-Jamal as the shooter. She would be the only witness the D.A. had to claim to see Abu-Jamal holding a gun over Faulkner.
In her original statement to the police–given within an hour of the shooting–she had Abu-Jamal running from the parking lot and from as far away as ten yards firing off “four or five shots” at Faulkner before the officer fell. In her third interview with police detectives, given on Dec.17, she fine-tuned her statement to comport with the actual evidence in the case that Faulkner was shot at close range.
[In one of the most sinister aspects of Abu-Jamal’s case, the police department waited until the Monday after Abu-Jamal’s conviction to “relieve” Giordano of his duties on what would prove to be well-founded “suspicions of corruption.” Four years after Abu-Jamal’s trial, Giordano pled guilty to tax evasion in connection with those payouts and was sent to prison.—HB]
Incredibly, the police arriving at the crime scene would later claim not to have conducted any tests to determine if Abu-Jamal had recently fired a gun by checking for powder residue on his hands or clothing, nor did they claim to even feel or smell his gun to determine if it had been recently fired. Tests such as these are so routine at murder scenes that it is almost inconceivable the police did not run them. It is more likely that they did not like the results of the tests.
From the outset, the investigation into the shooting death of Officer Faulkner was conducted with one goal in mind: to hang the crime on Mumia Abu-Jamal. There was no search for the truth, no attempt at providing the slain officer with the justice he deserved. Giordano handed Abu-Jamal to the D.A.’s office with his own lie about Abu-Jamal confessing to him and packing off Cynthia White in a squad car to tell her concocted account of the shooting.
When the D.A.’s office was forced to back away from the corrupt Giordano, Assistant D.A. Joseph McGill elicited a new “confession” to replace Giordano’s in February when security guard Priscilla Durham and Officer Garry Bell, Faulkner’s best friend on the police force, responded to his promptings by saying they heard Abu-Jamal blurt out at the hospital, “I shot the mother-fucker and I hope the mother-fucker dies.” Not one of the dozens of other officers present at the hospital would make such a claim. In fact, the two officers who accompanied Abu-Jamal from the time he was placed in the paddy wagon until he went into surgery reported that he made no comments in signed statements given to detectives assigned to the case that morning.
The prosecution knew that its new “confession” could be skewered if Abu-Jamal’s defense attorney, Anthony Jackson, called the two officers who accompanied Abu-Jamal to the stand, so all the prosecution really had was Cynthia White. With White saying she saw it all from beginning to end, and willing to testify that she saw Abu-Jamal blow the helpless Faulkner’s brains out in ruthless cold blood, McGill had his case made, providing White’s credibility could survive Jackson’s cross-examination. McGill bet the entire case that it could, and despite the utter web of lies she told the jury, was right.
HB: Why do you think that Kenneth Freeman was the actual shooter of Police Officer Daniel Faulkner?
JPOC: Kenneth Freeman was Billy Cook’s street vendor partner and was riding with him in the VW when Faulkner pulled the VW over. Freeman got out of the VW and subsequently handed Faulkner a phony driver’s license application bearing the name of Arnold Howard, which Howard had recently loaned to him. Howard’s papers were found in Faulkner’s shirt pocket. Police rounded up both Howard and Freeman in the early morning hours of Dec. 9 and brought them in for questioning. At the Post-Conviction Relief Act hearing in 1995, Howard testified that on several occasions, Cynthia White picked Freeman out of a lineup.
At Billy Cook’s March 29 trial for assaulting Officer Faulkner, with McGill as the prosecutor, White told McGill in direct testimony that the passenger in the VW “had got out.” McGill said, “He got out of the car”? White responded, “Yes.” [At Abu-Jamal’s trial, McGill got White to testify that only Abu-Jamal, Cook and Faulkner were at the scene.]
Various witnesses said they saw a black man running from the scene right after the shooting. Some of the eyewitnesses said this man had an Afro and wore a green army jacket. Freeman did have an Afro and he perpetually wore a green army jacket. Freeman was tall and burly, weighing about 225 pounds at the time.
Cab driver Robert Harkins was driving right by the parked police car and the VW when he saw a police officer grab a man. The man “then spun around and the officer went to the ground,” falling facedown backwards, landing on his hands and knees. The assailant shot the officer in the back, causing him to roll over on his back, and then executed him with a shot to his forehead.
Harkins described the shooter as a little taller and heavier than the 6-foot, 200-pound Faulkner. Robert Chobert told police in his first statement that the shooter had an Afro and weighed about 225 pounds. [Abu-Jamal, also about 6-foot, wore his hair in dreadlocks and weighed 170 pounds at the time.]
In Billy Cook’s April 29, 2001, affidavit he declared that Freeman was with him the night of the shooting, was armed, and fled the scene after Faulkner was shot. Cook said he did not see who shot Faulkner.
Freeman would meet an ignominious death hours after Philadelphia police firebombed the MOVE house on Osage Avenue in 1985, killing 11 MOVE members, including John Africa, whose corpse had been beheaded. Freeman’s dead body was found bound, gagged and naked in a vacant lot. There would be no police investigation into this obvious murder. The coroner listed his cause of death as a heart attack. The timing and modus operandi of the abduction and killing alone suggest an extreme act of police vengeance.
HB: In your book, you were very optimistic about the Third Circuit granting Abu-Jamal a new guilt-phase trial. Were you surprised by the March 27 ruling? If so, how do you account for such a surprising ruling?
JPOC: I was incredulous. I thought the oral arguments on May 17 had gone extremely well for Abu-Jamal and that he would get a new trial. The 2-1 majority ruling demonstrated anew just how politicized this case always has been from the beginning and continues to be still. The two Republican-appointed judges on the panel formed the majority and the lone Democrat-appointed judge dissented. I hate to make it sound that simple, but the U.S. Supreme Court itself is not above making decisions based on party or ideological lines, and all too frequently does.
In its ruling, the majority stated it believed Abu-Jamal had “forfeited his Batson claim by failing to make a timely objection. But even assuming Abu-Jamal’s failure to object is not fatal to his claim, Abu-Jamal has failed to meet his burden in providing a prima facie case.” The majority stated that he failed because his attorneys at his PCRA evidentiary hearing neglected to elicit the prosecutor’s reasons for removing 10 otherwise qualified blacks by means of peremptory strikes during jury selection.
“Abu-Jamal had the opportunity to develop this evidence at the PCRA evidentiary hearing, but failed to do so. There may be instances where a prima facie case can be made without evidence of the strike rate and exclusion rate. But in this case, we cannot find the Pennsylvania Supreme Court’s ruling [denying Abu-Jamal’s Batson claim] unreasonable based on this incomplete record,” the majority wrote. In a nutshell, the majority denied Abu-Jamal’s Batson claim on a technicality of its own invention, not on its merits.
Judge Ambro’s dissent was sharp: “...I do not agree with them [the majority] that Mumia Abu-Jamal fails to meet the low bar for making a prima facie case under Batson. In holding otherwise, they raise the standard necessary to make out a prima facie case beyond what Batson calls for.”
In other words, the majority, in this case alone, has upped the ante required for making a Batson claim beyond what the United States Supreme Court stipulated. When ruling in Batson in 1986, the U.S. Supreme Court imposed no timeliness restrictions as to when a Batson claim may be raised, nor has the court done so in the intervening 22 years. Neither did it require that the racial composition of the entire jury pool be known before a Batson claim could be raised. [In fact, the Supreme Court recently added heft to its Batson ruling, ruling in Synder that the purging of only one black juror on the basis of racial discrimination was grounds for a new trial.]
In addition, the Supreme Court ruled in 1986 that to establish a prima facie case for a Batson claim, the defendant must show only “an inference” of prosecutorial discrimination in purging even one black from a jury. Even the Third Circuit has never previously allowed the timing of a Batson claim to be material, nor had it ever ruled previously that not knowing the racial composition of the entire jury pool was a fatal flaw in lodging a Batson claim.
The fact that the prosecutor in Abu-Jamal’s case used 10 of the15 peremptory challenges to exclude blacks from the jury–a strike rate of 66 percent against potential black jurors–is in itself an inference of discrimination. The result was that only three of the 12 jurors impaneled were black.
The Third Circuit should have remanded the case back to Federal District Court Judge Yohn–the judge who ruled on Abu-Jamal’s habeas corpus petition in 2001–to hold an evidentiary hearing to determine the prosecutors’ reasons for excluding the 10 potential black jurors he struck. If that hearing revealed racial discrimination on the part of the prosecutor during jury selection, Judge Yohn would be compelled to order a new trial for Abu-Jamal.
Abu-Jamal is left with only two remedies to correct the flawed Third Circuit ruling. His first option is to request the Third Circuit to review its decision en banc where the entire panel of judges sitting on the Third Circuit would conduct oral arguments anew. There is some likelihood that the Third Circuit might agree to meet en banc because the panel’s decision to deny Abu-Jamal’s Batson claim went against that court’s own well-established precedents in granting similar Batson claims in the past.
However, the barrier to en banc deliberations is a high one: a majority of the sitting judges must vote to reexamine the case. On the Third Circuit Court, there are 12 judges eligible to vote but four have already recused themselves from this particular case, meaning five of the remaining eight judges would be needed to go forward en banc. Abu-Jamal has most probably had his one day before the Third Circuit.
Barring a reversal by the Third Circuit, Abu-Jamal’s final option is to appeal the Third Circuit’s ruling to the U.S. Supreme Court, which has on three previous occasions denied to take up his case. This time, though, there is a remote possibility that the high court may take the case up because the Third Circuit’s ruling created new law by placing new restrictions on a defendant’s ability to file a Batson claim.
HB: With the media spotlight on the Pennsylvania primary elections, and the major demonstrations supporting Abu-Jamal on April 19, what would you like the world to know about this famous death-row case? How far has the city of Philadelphia come since the days of Police Commissioner and Mayor Frank Rizzo, a notorious racist and public advocate of police brutality?
JPOC: In a real sense, D.A. Lynn Abraham, just as Frank Rizzo before her, embodies the worst of Philadelphia. Known as “the Queen of Death” for her zeal in seeking the death penalty, she was depicted as the nation’s “deadliest D.A.” in a New York Times Magazine article in 1995. Her personal vendetta against Abu-Jamal equals that of Officer Faulkner’s widow. The day Federal District Court Judge Yohn overturned Abu-Jamal’s death sentence in 2001, Abraham put her antipathy for Abu-Jamal this way: “Today, Mumia Abu-Jamal is what he has always been: a convicted, remorseless, cold-blooded killer.”
The case of Mumia Abu-Jamal represents an enormous miscarriage of justice, representing an extreme example of prosecutorial abuse and judicial bias. What makes getting to the truth about this case so difficult for people, particularly people in Philadelphia, is that the prosecution built its case on perjured testimony with a calculated disregard for what the actual evidence established. The local media bought into the prosecution’s story line early on and has never been able to see this case for what it is: a framing of an innocent and peace-loving man.
Two things account for the unprecedented national and international interest in this case. First and foremost is the man himself. Despite more than 25 years of the bleakest existence possible in isolation on death row, Mumia Abu-Jamal remains what he has always been: an articulate, compassionate righter of wrongs. The second thing that makes this case so compelling to such a wide audience is that his trial represents such a monumental abuse of government power to railroad one man that it really says no citizen is truly free until this wrong has been undone.
Hans Bennett is a Philadelphia journalist and co-founder of Journalists for Mumia, whose website is Abu-Jamal-News.com.
ON LATEST COURT OF APPEALS DECISION: MUMIA ABU-JAMAL LEGAL UPDATE FROM LEAD COUNSEL ROBERT R. BRYAN
April 11, 2008
Dear Friends:
This Legal Update is made on behalf of my client, Mumia Abu-Jamal, who remains on Pennsylvania’s death row. Many people have inquired as to our reaction and position concerning recent legal developments, and what will happen now. This should answer many of those questions and alleviate some of the confusion.
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, Philadelphia - As widely reported in the media, the U.S. Court of Appeals issued its long-awaited decision on March 27, 2008. (/Abu-Jamal v. Horn/, Nos. 01-9014, 02-9001, 2008 WL 793877 (3^rd Cir. 2008).) Mumia and I had legal conferences that day, and we have been in frequent contact since including a death-row meeting earlier this week and a discussion this evening. We view the opinion of the three-judge panel as a mixed bag with some good, some very wrong, and a remarkable dissenting opinion by a judge on racism that gives us great hope for eventual victory.
A new jury trial has been ordered by the federal court on the question of whether Mumia should be sentenced to life or death, due to the trial judge’s unconstitutional and misleading instructions to the jury. It is a positive step in any capital case when a court finds that the death penalty was wrongfully imposed. Mumia is pleased with this part of the ruling because it could help others on death rows across the U.S. The prosecution now has various options including seeking reconsideration by the federal court and petitioning the U.S. Supreme Court to have the death sentence remain intact.
It was a great disappointment that the federal court rejected our quest for a reversal of the conviction and a new trial on the question of guilt and innocence. To say that Mumia and I are unhappy with this would be an understatement, for the decision flies in the face of the United States Constitution and case precedent. The facts are that the prosecutor did engage in racism during jury selection, and made a false and misleading argument to the jury which turned the concept of reasonable doubt and presumption of innocence on its head. The trial judge was biased and bigoted, even stating in reference to my client that he was “going to help'em fry the nigger.” Unfortunately the court used against Mumia the failings of the lawyers who represented him in state post-conviction and federal habeas corpus proceedings. Their mistakes should not serve as an excuse to rationalize away the fundamental constitutional violations that occurred in this case.
The silver lining of this ruling is that Judge Thomas L. Ambro wrote a 41-page dissent on the racism-in-jury-selection issue. This brilliant opinion began:
Excluding even a single person from a jury because of race violates the Equal Protection Clause of our Constitution. /See //Batson v. //Kentucky//,/ 476 U.S. 79, 84-86, 99 n. 22, 106 S.Ct. 1712, 90 L.Ed.2d 69 (1986). This simple justice principle was reaffirmed by our Supreme Court this past week. /Snyder v. //Louisiana//,/ No. 06-10119, 2008 WL 723750, at *4 (Mar. 19, 2008).
Justice Ambro concluded that everyone is entitled to a fair and impartial trial by a jury of his or her peers. As /Batson/ reminds us, “[t]he core guarantee of equal protection, ensuring citizens that their State will not discriminate on account of race, would be meaningless were we to approve the exclusion of jurors on the basis of . . . race.” /Id./ at 97-98. I fear today that we weaken the effect of /Batson/ by imposing a contemporaneous objection requirement where none was previously present in our Court's jurisprudence and by raising the low bar for a /prima facie/ case of discrimination in jury selection to a height unattainable if enough time has passed such that original jury records are not available. In so holding, we do a disservice to /Batson./ I respectfully dissent.
Shortly before the decision, we brought the /Snyder /decision to the attention of the federal court in a Notice of Supplemental Authority. I wrote on March 23, 2008:
In */Snyder v. Louisiana/**, ___ U.S. ___**, **2008 WL 723750 (Mar. 19, 2008)**, *the judgment of the Louisiana Supreme Court was reversed with the United States Supreme Court holding that the trial court should have disallowed a peremptory challenge based upon race because it violated /Batson v. Kentucky/, 476 U.S. 79 (1986). Justice Alito, in writing for the majority, reaffirmed that evidence of discriminatory intent should be taken from a broad array of factors. Citing /Miller-El v. Dretke/, 545 U.S. 231, 239 (2005), he pointed out that “in considering a /Batson/ objection, or in reviewing a ruling claimed to be /Batson/ error, all of the circumstances that bear upon the issue of racial animosity must be consulted . . .” /Snyder /underscores the point made by Appellee and Cross-Appellant, Mr. Abu-Jamal, urged in oral argument on May 17, 2007, and in briefing, that the existence of a prima facie /Batson/ claim depends upon, /inter alia, /the connection between race and the pattern of strikes, the nature of the case, comments made during jury selection, and the time and place of the trial. Brief of Appellee and Cross-Appellant, Mumia Abu-Jamal, July 26, 2006, at 17-46; Fourth-Step Reply Brief of Appellee and Cross-Appellant, Mumia Abu-Jamal, Oct. 23, 2006, at 11-58.
The high court also reiterated that “the Constitution forbids striking even a single prospective juror for a discriminatory purpose.” */Snyder v. Louisiana/**, 2008 WL 723750** at *4 (quoting */United States v. Vasquez-Lopez,/ 22 F.3d 900, 902 (C.A.9 1994)*). This too was pointed out in oral argument and briefing. *Brief of Appellee and Cross-Appellant, Mumia Abu-Jamal, /supra/, at 41-42. Finally, the case recognized that an "inference of discriminatory intent" is supported when the prosecution's proffered reasons for striking African Americans do not apply even-handedly to non-African Americans. */Snyder v. /**/Louisiana/**, 2008 WL 723750** at *8. Again, this point was presented in oral argument and our briefing. */See, e.g./, Brief of Appellee and Cross-Appellant, Mumia Abu-Jamal, /supra/, at 32-36.
The "Mumia Exception" - The latest denial of a new trial to Mumia has been referred to as part of the “Mumia Exception.” David Lindorff, a noted investigative journalist and author of /Killing Time: An Investigation into the Death Row Case of Mumia Abu-Jamal/, wrote in the Philadelphia Inquirer on April 2, 2008, that the “courts have altered the rules just to keep Abu-Jamal on course for death.” What Professor Linn Washington earlier dubbed the “Mumia Exception”, could not have been more on target.
Reaction of the District Attorney of Philadelphia - The District Attorney appeared livid that the federal court had ordered a new penalty-phase jury trial. At a press conference on March 27, 2008, the day of the decision, she vowed that her office will continue pursuing the execution of my client. Sadly, the prosecution could not resist distorting the truth as it has from the outset over a quarter of a century ago. The DA falsely said that the court “finally decided in its wisdom . . . that Mr. Jamal was guilty.” That is not what the U.S. Court of Appeals found and is nonsense; there was no retrial or verdict. That is not what appellate courts do. Rather, the federal decision dealt with issues of law and procedure. The prosecution’s suggestion that my client was found “guilty” of anything on appeal is absurd and patently false.
Where we go from here - The dissent of Justice Ambro is a light in the darkness, a roadmap as to where we go from here. On April 9, 2008, the U.S. Court of Appeals granted my 45-day Motion for Extension of Time To File Petition for Rehearing and Rehearing /En Banc/. The rehearing petition, now due on May 27, 2008, will be seeking review of the case by all the judges in the Third Circuit. The basis will be that “the panel decision conflicts with a decision of the United States Supreme Court or of the court to which the petition is addressed and consideration of the full court is therefore necessary to secure uniformity of the court’s decisions,” and, “the proceeding involves one or more questions of exceptional importance”. (Fed. R. App. P. 35(b)(1).) If unsuccessful, we will proceed to the Supreme Court.
Conclusion - The issues in this case concern the right to a fair trial, the ongoing struggle against the death penalty, and the political repression of a courageous author and journalist. Based upon three decades of successfully litigating murder cases involving the death penalty, I am convinced that we can win an acquittal upon a new jury trial. My goal is his acquittal upon retrial. I intend to see Mumia go home to his family. I will not rest until that occurs.
Mumia is still on death row and in great danger. His life is hanging in the balance. We must remember that racism, fraud, politics, and unfairness are threads that have run through this case since the beginning. As reflected by the comments at its recent press conference, the prosecution has learned little from its shameful behavior in this case. The misconduct continues, and the prosecutorial wrongs of the past are thus visited on the present.
Finally, we are grateful for all those who do so much to bring the injustice in this case to public attention, whether it be through demonstrations, writing to newspapers, meetings, or circulating information on the Internet. This is all important. We are of one voice in this campaign for justice: Free Mumia!
Yours very truly,
Robert R. Bryan
Law Offices of Robert R. Bryan
2088 Union Street, Suite 4
San Francisco, California 94123-4117
Lead counsel for Mumia Abu-Jamal
Dear Friends:
This Legal Update is made on behalf of my client, Mumia Abu-Jamal, who remains on Pennsylvania’s death row. Many people have inquired as to our reaction and position concerning recent legal developments, and what will happen now. This should answer many of those questions and alleviate some of the confusion.
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, Philadelphia - As widely reported in the media, the U.S. Court of Appeals issued its long-awaited decision on March 27, 2008. (/Abu-Jamal v. Horn/, Nos. 01-9014, 02-9001, 2008 WL 793877 (3^rd Cir. 2008).) Mumia and I had legal conferences that day, and we have been in frequent contact since including a death-row meeting earlier this week and a discussion this evening. We view the opinion of the three-judge panel as a mixed bag with some good, some very wrong, and a remarkable dissenting opinion by a judge on racism that gives us great hope for eventual victory.
A new jury trial has been ordered by the federal court on the question of whether Mumia should be sentenced to life or death, due to the trial judge’s unconstitutional and misleading instructions to the jury. It is a positive step in any capital case when a court finds that the death penalty was wrongfully imposed. Mumia is pleased with this part of the ruling because it could help others on death rows across the U.S. The prosecution now has various options including seeking reconsideration by the federal court and petitioning the U.S. Supreme Court to have the death sentence remain intact.
It was a great disappointment that the federal court rejected our quest for a reversal of the conviction and a new trial on the question of guilt and innocence. To say that Mumia and I are unhappy with this would be an understatement, for the decision flies in the face of the United States Constitution and case precedent. The facts are that the prosecutor did engage in racism during jury selection, and made a false and misleading argument to the jury which turned the concept of reasonable doubt and presumption of innocence on its head. The trial judge was biased and bigoted, even stating in reference to my client that he was “going to help'em fry the nigger.” Unfortunately the court used against Mumia the failings of the lawyers who represented him in state post-conviction and federal habeas corpus proceedings. Their mistakes should not serve as an excuse to rationalize away the fundamental constitutional violations that occurred in this case.
The silver lining of this ruling is that Judge Thomas L. Ambro wrote a 41-page dissent on the racism-in-jury-selection issue. This brilliant opinion began:
Excluding even a single person from a jury because of race violates the Equal Protection Clause of our Constitution. /See //Batson v. //Kentucky//,/ 476 U.S. 79, 84-86, 99 n. 22, 106 S.Ct. 1712, 90 L.Ed.2d 69 (1986). This simple justice principle was reaffirmed by our Supreme Court this past week. /Snyder v. //Louisiana//,/ No. 06-10119, 2008 WL 723750, at *4 (Mar. 19, 2008).
Justice Ambro concluded that everyone is entitled to a fair and impartial trial by a jury of his or her peers. As /Batson/ reminds us, “[t]he core guarantee of equal protection, ensuring citizens that their State will not discriminate on account of race, would be meaningless were we to approve the exclusion of jurors on the basis of . . . race.” /Id./ at 97-98. I fear today that we weaken the effect of /Batson/ by imposing a contemporaneous objection requirement where none was previously present in our Court's jurisprudence and by raising the low bar for a /prima facie/ case of discrimination in jury selection to a height unattainable if enough time has passed such that original jury records are not available. In so holding, we do a disservice to /Batson./ I respectfully dissent.
Shortly before the decision, we brought the /Snyder /decision to the attention of the federal court in a Notice of Supplemental Authority. I wrote on March 23, 2008:
In */Snyder v. Louisiana/**, ___ U.S. ___**, **2008 WL 723750 (Mar. 19, 2008)**, *the judgment of the Louisiana Supreme Court was reversed with the United States Supreme Court holding that the trial court should have disallowed a peremptory challenge based upon race because it violated /Batson v. Kentucky/, 476 U.S. 79 (1986). Justice Alito, in writing for the majority, reaffirmed that evidence of discriminatory intent should be taken from a broad array of factors. Citing /Miller-El v. Dretke/, 545 U.S. 231, 239 (2005), he pointed out that “in considering a /Batson/ objection, or in reviewing a ruling claimed to be /Batson/ error, all of the circumstances that bear upon the issue of racial animosity must be consulted . . .” /Snyder /underscores the point made by Appellee and Cross-Appellant, Mr. Abu-Jamal, urged in oral argument on May 17, 2007, and in briefing, that the existence of a prima facie /Batson/ claim depends upon, /inter alia, /the connection between race and the pattern of strikes, the nature of the case, comments made during jury selection, and the time and place of the trial. Brief of Appellee and Cross-Appellant, Mumia Abu-Jamal, July 26, 2006, at 17-46; Fourth-Step Reply Brief of Appellee and Cross-Appellant, Mumia Abu-Jamal, Oct. 23, 2006, at 11-58.
The high court also reiterated that “the Constitution forbids striking even a single prospective juror for a discriminatory purpose.” */Snyder v. Louisiana/**, 2008 WL 723750** at *4 (quoting */United States v. Vasquez-Lopez,/ 22 F.3d 900, 902 (C.A.9 1994)*). This too was pointed out in oral argument and briefing. *Brief of Appellee and Cross-Appellant, Mumia Abu-Jamal, /supra/, at 41-42. Finally, the case recognized that an "inference of discriminatory intent" is supported when the prosecution's proffered reasons for striking African Americans do not apply even-handedly to non-African Americans. */Snyder v. /**/Louisiana/**, 2008 WL 723750** at *8. Again, this point was presented in oral argument and our briefing. */See, e.g./, Brief of Appellee and Cross-Appellant, Mumia Abu-Jamal, /supra/, at 32-36.
The "Mumia Exception" - The latest denial of a new trial to Mumia has been referred to as part of the “Mumia Exception.” David Lindorff, a noted investigative journalist and author of /Killing Time: An Investigation into the Death Row Case of Mumia Abu-Jamal/, wrote in the Philadelphia Inquirer on April 2, 2008, that the “courts have altered the rules just to keep Abu-Jamal on course for death.” What Professor Linn Washington earlier dubbed the “Mumia Exception”, could not have been more on target.
Reaction of the District Attorney of Philadelphia - The District Attorney appeared livid that the federal court had ordered a new penalty-phase jury trial. At a press conference on March 27, 2008, the day of the decision, she vowed that her office will continue pursuing the execution of my client. Sadly, the prosecution could not resist distorting the truth as it has from the outset over a quarter of a century ago. The DA falsely said that the court “finally decided in its wisdom . . . that Mr. Jamal was guilty.” That is not what the U.S. Court of Appeals found and is nonsense; there was no retrial or verdict. That is not what appellate courts do. Rather, the federal decision dealt with issues of law and procedure. The prosecution’s suggestion that my client was found “guilty” of anything on appeal is absurd and patently false.
Where we go from here - The dissent of Justice Ambro is a light in the darkness, a roadmap as to where we go from here. On April 9, 2008, the U.S. Court of Appeals granted my 45-day Motion for Extension of Time To File Petition for Rehearing and Rehearing /En Banc/. The rehearing petition, now due on May 27, 2008, will be seeking review of the case by all the judges in the Third Circuit. The basis will be that “the panel decision conflicts with a decision of the United States Supreme Court or of the court to which the petition is addressed and consideration of the full court is therefore necessary to secure uniformity of the court’s decisions,” and, “the proceeding involves one or more questions of exceptional importance”. (Fed. R. App. P. 35(b)(1).) If unsuccessful, we will proceed to the Supreme Court.
Conclusion - The issues in this case concern the right to a fair trial, the ongoing struggle against the death penalty, and the political repression of a courageous author and journalist. Based upon three decades of successfully litigating murder cases involving the death penalty, I am convinced that we can win an acquittal upon a new jury trial. My goal is his acquittal upon retrial. I intend to see Mumia go home to his family. I will not rest until that occurs.
Mumia is still on death row and in great danger. His life is hanging in the balance. We must remember that racism, fraud, politics, and unfairness are threads that have run through this case since the beginning. As reflected by the comments at its recent press conference, the prosecution has learned little from its shameful behavior in this case. The misconduct continues, and the prosecutorial wrongs of the past are thus visited on the present.
Finally, we are grateful for all those who do so much to bring the injustice in this case to public attention, whether it be through demonstrations, writing to newspapers, meetings, or circulating information on the Internet. This is all important. We are of one voice in this campaign for justice: Free Mumia!
Yours very truly,
Robert R. Bryan
Law Offices of Robert R. Bryan
2088 Union Street, Suite 4
San Francisco, California 94123-4117
Lead counsel for Mumia Abu-Jamal
"Mortgage bankers lie and cheat!"
Monica Moorehead, International Action Center, April 16, 2008
Sandra Hines of Detroit (center), thrown out of her childhood home a week before Christmas due to foreclosure, speaks outside Policy Conference of Mortgage Bankers Association in Washington, D.C., on April 16. Several hundred people got up to the door of the hotel where the bankers were meeting, then picketed for two hours, chanting “Mortgage bankers lie and cheat, people get thrown out on the street!”
The Ad Hoc National Network to Stop Foreclosures & Evictions brought people, many facing foreclosure, from as far away as Boston, Raleigh and Miami. Sharon Black, a Baltimore organizer who chaired the rally, pointed out that the billionaire bankers were in D.C. to lobby for more tax breaks and concessions from Congress. The network has also organized more than 100,000 messages to representatives demanding a moratorium on foreclosures.
Sign Online Petition to House and Senate Banking and Finance Committees demanding a MORATORIUM ON FORECLOSURES AND EVICTIONS NOW!
Sandra Hines of Detroit (center), thrown out of her childhood home a week before Christmas due to foreclosure, speaks outside Policy Conference of Mortgage Bankers Association in Washington, D.C., on April 16. Several hundred people got up to the door of the hotel where the bankers were meeting, then picketed for two hours, chanting “Mortgage bankers lie and cheat, people get thrown out on the street!”
The Ad Hoc National Network to Stop Foreclosures & Evictions brought people, many facing foreclosure, from as far away as Boston, Raleigh and Miami. Sharon Black, a Baltimore organizer who chaired the rally, pointed out that the billionaire bankers were in D.C. to lobby for more tax breaks and concessions from Congress. The network has also organized more than 100,000 messages to representatives demanding a moratorium on foreclosures.
Sign Online Petition to House and Senate Banking and Finance Committees demanding a MORATORIUM ON FORECLOSURES AND EVICTIONS NOW!
The Real Stakeholder's Meeting - Debt, Dinner & a Movie
April 22 The Real Stakeholder's Meeting 12:30 P.M. - 2:00 P.M. at Levine Museum of the New South, 200 E. 7th St, Charlotte, NC. (Free Parking at the 7th St Tower). Listen to testimonies from families hit hardest by the big banks' worst practices and take steps to make sure the big banks treat our communities fairly.
April 22 Debt, Dinner & a Movie 8:00 P.M. Levine Museum of the New South, 200 E. 7th St, Charlotte, NC. (Free Parking at the 7th St Tower). Come to the "Red Carpet Premiere" of the top videos submitted in a national video contest by students from around the country in an effort to warn youth about the dangers of debt.
Charlotte is a center for American banking. But North Carolina families are suffering from banks' bad practices.
Our community is getting together to talk about how the nation's biggest banks like Bank of America and Countrywide are impacting our families and our communities. Join consumers and national advocacy organizations on April 22nd and April 23rd to act together and hold the banks accountable.
Download Flyers to pass out, click here.
For more info on these events contact Estefania San Juan, SEIU (Service Employees International Union) at 704.877.9466, bigbadbanks@gmail.com or see www.bigbadbanks.org.
April 22 Debt, Dinner & a Movie 8:00 P.M. Levine Museum of the New South, 200 E. 7th St, Charlotte, NC. (Free Parking at the 7th St Tower). Come to the "Red Carpet Premiere" of the top videos submitted in a national video contest by students from around the country in an effort to warn youth about the dangers of debt.
Charlotte is a center for American banking. But North Carolina families are suffering from banks' bad practices.
Our community is getting together to talk about how the nation's biggest banks like Bank of America and Countrywide are impacting our families and our communities. Join consumers and national advocacy organizations on April 22nd and April 23rd to act together and hold the banks accountable.
Download Flyers to pass out, click here.
For more info on these events contact Estefania San Juan, SEIU (Service Employees International Union) at 704.877.9466, bigbadbanks@gmail.com or see www.bigbadbanks.org.
May 1 Forum: Save Your Home From Foreclosure
May 1, 2008 at 6:30pm
Little Rock AME Zion Church
7th St & N. McDowell St, Charlotte, NC
Do You Know Someone Who Is facing foreclosure?
Want to Know What Our Political Leaders Can do about this crisis?
Join the Fight to help save Our Communities
Save Your Home From Foreclosure
Come to the Foreclosure Forum. Hosted by Rev. Dr. Dwayne A. Walker
Participants Include:
Working Families Win, ACORN, North Carolina Justice Center , Legal Services of Southern Piedmont, Crisis Assistance Ministries, Little Rock AME Zion Church and Candidates for North Carolina General Assembly.
This Forum is brought to you by WFW.
For Directions or More Information Call Ruth or Beverly at (704) 900-2539 or ruth@wfwin.org.
Little Rock AME Zion Church
7th St & N. McDowell St, Charlotte, NC
Do You Know Someone Who Is facing foreclosure?
Want to Know What Our Political Leaders Can do about this crisis?
Join the Fight to help save Our Communities
Save Your Home From Foreclosure
Come to the Foreclosure Forum. Hosted by Rev. Dr. Dwayne A. Walker
Participants Include:
Working Families Win, ACORN, North Carolina Justice Center , Legal Services of Southern Piedmont, Crisis Assistance Ministries, Little Rock AME Zion Church and Candidates for North Carolina General Assembly.
This Forum is brought to you by WFW.
For Directions or More Information Call Ruth or Beverly at (704) 900-2539 or ruth@wfwin.org.
Protest Bank Of America's Environmental Policies
April 23 at 9:30 am
Blumenthal Performing Arts Center
130 N. Tryon Street, Charlotte, NC
Are you concerned about climate change? Clean air? A clean energy future?,
Bank of America is having its annual shareholders meeting in Charlotte , NC , on Wednesday, April 23. Join us to demand that the company stop financing mountaintop removal mining, new coal-fired power plants, and climate change!
Come to Charlotte, bring your friends, and be ready to make a ruckus! We'd especially love to have musicians, street theater, self-organized actions, colorful banners and signs. The meeting and protest will be in central downtown Charlotte at a theater adjoining Bank of America's headquarters. Some housing will be available for out-of-town folks in Charlotte on the 22nd and 23rd. Contact me (Matt) at matt@ran.org or Abigail at abigail@risingtidenorthamerica.org for housing or to get involved!
While the world is calling for immediate action to confront climate change, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and end our reliance on dirty coal energy, Bank of America is continuing to use your money to invest in the most destructive and polluting industries.
Join us in Charlotte, and we can help stop Bank of America and push for a clean energy future that prioritizes energy efficiency and clean renewable sources like solar and wind power!
Blumenthal Performing Arts Center
130 N. Tryon Street, Charlotte, NC
Are you concerned about climate change? Clean air? A clean energy future?,
Bank of America is having its annual shareholders meeting in Charlotte , NC , on Wednesday, April 23. Join us to demand that the company stop financing mountaintop removal mining, new coal-fired power plants, and climate change!
Come to Charlotte, bring your friends, and be ready to make a ruckus! We'd especially love to have musicians, street theater, self-organized actions, colorful banners and signs. The meeting and protest will be in central downtown Charlotte at a theater adjoining Bank of America's headquarters. Some housing will be available for out-of-town folks in Charlotte on the 22nd and 23rd. Contact me (Matt) at matt@ran.org or Abigail at abigail@risingtidenorthamerica.org for housing or to get involved!
While the world is calling for immediate action to confront climate change, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and end our reliance on dirty coal energy, Bank of America is continuing to use your money to invest in the most destructive and polluting industries.
Join us in Charlotte, and we can help stop Bank of America and push for a clean energy future that prioritizes energy efficiency and clean renewable sources like solar and wind power!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)