(eng) ANTIFA INFO-BULLETIN, Supplement 44

Tom Burghardt (tburghardt@igc.apc.org)
Thu, 23 May 1996 12:13:33 +0200

||| |||
||| A N T I F A |||
||| |||
||| I N F O - B U L L E T I N |||
||| _____ |||
||| |||
||| * News * Analysis * Research * Action * |||
||| |||


|| * -- SUPPLEMENT - * -- May 22, 1996 -- * - SUPPLEMENT -- * ||


CONTENTS: Supplement 44

1. (FM) FREE MUMIA! {excerpt} Mumia Abu-Jamal: Malcolm
X And The Race Police

2. (TC) THE CONSORTIUM -- Lost History: Death, Lies
And Bodywashing

ISRAEL: Gary Lauck -- A Letter From Hans

4. (NCDM) Chiapas: Red Alert Signals Possible Return Of
State Of Combat; Is The U.S. Going To Support
Civil War In Chiapas?

WWW Site {Update}

6. (NYT) Supremacist Told To Pay Black Family

7. (AP) Abortion Clinic Executive Obtains Court Order
Against Activist

8. (SFC) Misconduct Alleged In Church Arson Probe

9. (AFIB) AFIB Now Available On PeaceNet!


** Written 1:05 PM May 18, 1996 by nattyreb@ix.netcom.com in
cdp:misc.activism. **


Column Written 5/13/96
Copyright (C) 1996 Mumia Abu-Jamal

How many of you who are reading this know who "Malachi
Shabazz" is?
How about "Jack Carlton"?
If you've done your homework, some of you know these were
names once used by the late Malcolm X, names listed among several
others in Malcolm's extraordinary FBI files.
Malcolm's FBI files?
Yes, don't be surprised.
Not only did Malcolm have an extensive FBI surveillance,
snitch, and political file, but I'd bet many of you have one as
Again, don't be surprised.
Harper's Index reports over 87 million people, none of
these with criminal convictions, have fingerprints and other
records in FBI files.
What are the chances you are in that number - 87,000,000!?
Would you be surprised to know that in this 'land of the
free,' Malcolm's FBI file dates from when he was in prison
several years before he joined the Nation of Islam, and details
his political views, not his criminal background?
His June 1950 file details a letter written by Malcolm
Little in which the sentence, "I have always been a communist,"
is excerpted.
What this demonstrates is that the Commonwealth of
Massachusetts, through its prison officials, was copying Malcom's
mail, and forwarding it to the FBI two years before he even
joined the Nation of Islam!
Why, one wonders, would the U.S. government be interested
in the mail of a small-time petty thief?
Malcolm told us that, of all our studies, history best
rewards our research.
Examine this man's noble life, and you'll learn much, not
only about Malcolm, but about the U.S. government, your
government, this system.
Malcolm's FBI files placed him in good company, for the
feds dogged others whose names you might recognize, like James
Baldwin, W.E.B. DuBois, Marcus Garvey, Fanny Lou Hamer, Paul
Robeson, and both Martin Luther Kings (Jr. and Sr.)!
What you'll find in common among them is the determination
of all to speak out against this nation's wretched practice of
white supremacy and oppression of Black Americans.
I remind you of these points in history, not to discourage
you, but to encourage you to study our people's history, and to
speak out against this monster.
For it doesn't matter if you just write a letter, a single
letter! If it's against the system, you'll soon learn there are
no rights, no constitutional protections, no freedoms.
There is only a government governed by fear, one which
acts in stealth against those it claims are its 'citizens.'

Sources: Black Americans: the FBI Files, by Kenneth O'Reilly
The Judas Factor: the Plot to Kill Malcolm X, by Karl Evanzz


Submitted by: Sis. Marpessa

** End of text from cdp:misc.activism. **


{Editor's Note: The piece below from The Media Consortium is
posted with the author's permission. Subscription information
follows Robert Parry's article.}


Date: Tue, 14 May 1996 06:11:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-within-URL: http://www.delve.com/consort1.html


"The Internet's First Investigative 'Zine"

Vol. 1, No. 13 -- Washington, D.C. -- May 27, 1996



By Robert Parry

WASHINGTON -- On Sunday, May 5, a solemn ceremony took place
in an open grassy space at Arlington National Cemetery. A small
memorial stone was unveiled to honor 21 American soldiers who
died in secret combat against leftist guerrillas in El Salvador.
As family members wiped tears from their eyes, Salvadoran
children placed tiny American flags next to the soldiers' names,
unknown casualties from the 1980s.

"For too long, we have failed to recognize the contributions,
the sacrifices, of those who served with distinction under the
most dangerous conditions," said former U.S. Ambassador to El
Salvador, William G. Walker. The next day, The Washington Post
focused on the human interest side of the story in a front-page
piece entitled "Public Honors for Secret Combat."

But what received short-shrift amid the honors and the tears
was the remarkable confirmation that for much of a decade, the
Reagan-Bush administrations had conducted a secret war in which
American soldiers engaged in not-infrequent combat. The 21 dead
surpassed the number who died in the 1989 invasion of Panama.

Yet, the war in El Salvador was waged with hardly anyone in
Congress or the national news media catching on to the U.S.
combat role. Indeed, throughout the 1980s, the White House and
Pentagon routinely denied that U.S. soldiers were in combat in El
Salvador -- and few reporters challenged the official story.

Shortly after taking office in 1981, President Reagan
dispatched 55 Green Beret trainers to El Salvador to teach the
Salvadoran army better techniques for defeating a resilient band
of Marxist-led guerrillas. For years, the Salvadoran military had
been more adept at running death squads against civilian targets
than at cornering an armed enemy in the country's mountainous

To allay public fears about another Vietnam War, however,
Reagan limited the number of Green Berets to 55 and ordered them
to avoid combat zones. They were to train only, not advise the
Salvadorans in combat situations as Green Berets had done in
Vietnam. They also were forbidden to carry M-16s. They were to
have only side arms, for self-defense.


All of these U.S. government pronouncements, the Arlington
ceremony made clear, had been lies. But the Post story made only
a passing attempt to explain why so little was known about these
years of classified combat and why the government cover-ups had
been so successful.

"Reports of firefights involving U.S. troops were closely
held, and field commanders were told in no uncertain terms not to
nominate soldiers for combat awards," the Post reported. It then
quoted Joseph Stringham, a retired one-star Army general who
commanded U.S. military forces in El Salvador in 1983-84.

"It had been determined this was not a combat zone, and they
were going to hold the line on that," Stringham said. "I've
puzzled over why. It may be something as fundamental as the
bureaucracy not wanting to reverse itself."

The Reagan administration also might have been surprised how
easy it was to gull the Washington press corps and the Congress.
No matter how obvious the lies or how illogical the
administration's arguments, the media and the Democrats couldn't
sustain any serious pursuit of the truth.

But the lies did not go completely unchallenged. As early as
1981-82, a few American reporters in Central America were
stumbling over the reality of secret U.S. combat operations.

One top U.S. military adviser told me about an incident in
which he was on patrol with a Salvadoran army unit and was
spotted by New York Times correspondent Raymond Bonner. Bonner,
renowned for his tough reporting on the early years of the war,
was not easily intimidated into doubting his own perceptions.

To head off a possible embarrassing disclosure, the Green
Beret told me that U.S. officials quickly lined up the Salvadoran
soldiers and gave them false affidavits to sign, declaring that
there was no American with them. The adviser said the strategy
for discrediting honest journalists, such as Bonner, was always
an important part of the embassy's strategy for keeping secret
the reality on the battlefield.

In early 1982, Bonner also exposed the Salvadoran government's
massacre of nearly 1,000 men, women and children at the town of
El Mozote in December 1981. After that disclosure, Bonner was
targeted by right-wing press "watchdog" groups, such as Reed
Irvine's Accuracy in Media, and the Wall Street Journal's
editorial page.

In congressional testimony, assistant secretaries of state
Thomas Enders and Elliott Abrams disputed Bonner's stories. They
insisted that an investigation of the incident had concluded that
the El Mozote massacre had never happened.

As pressure built on The New York Times, then-executive editor
Abe Rosenthal flew to El Salvador to assess the complaints about
Bonner first-hand. Sympathetic to Ronald Reagan's anti-communist
foreign policy, Rosenthal began limiting Bonner's role in the
Times' bureau in Central America.

Word soon spread that Bonner would be removed. When I was in
El Salvador on a reporting assignment in fall 1982, two senior
U.S. officials boasted to me about the embassy's success in
discrediting Bonner and orchestrating his departure. In early
1983, Rosenthal did recall Bonner from El Salvador and put him on
the business desk in New York. Not long after that, Bonner
resigned from the Times.

Another case of gutsy reporting was a long investigative
article by Frank Greve and Ellen Warren of the Knight-Ridder
newspaper chain on Dec. 16, 1984. The piece brought to light the
term "bodywashing," the disturbing practice of reporting false
details about the circumstances surrounding the deaths of U.S.
soldiers involved in secret operations.


The Knight-Ridder story focused on an elite Army helicopter
unit, the 160th Task Force of the 101st Airborne Division
stationed at Fort Campbell, Ky. The article quoted family members
who suspected that their loved ones had died in combat in Central
America and that cover stories had then been concocted about the
pilots' fate.

"If downed or captured, the soldiers, who wore civilian
clothes and flew at night, were told to expect no U.S. government
acknowledgement or intervention, the relatives said," according
to the Knight-Ridder article.

In 1984, the Reagan administration insisted that it had no
knowledge about any casualties from secret fighting in Central
America. But the Knight-Ridder story ended with a chilling quote
from a former covert military specialist who explained the
practice of "bodywashing."

"If a guy is killed on a mission," the former officer said,
"and if it was sensitive politically, we'd ship the body back
home and have a jeep roll over on him at Fort Huachuca," a remote
Army intelligence base in Arizona. "Or we'd arrange a chopper
crash, or wait until one happened and insert a body of two into
the wreckage later. It's not that difficult."

Also in December 1984, I wrote an article for The Associated
Press describing how American helicopter crews assigned to the
CIA had fired on Nicaraguan troops earlier that year. The first
incident occurred on Jan. 6, 1984, during a raid on the
Nicaraguan port of Potosi. The second clash occurred on March 7,
1984, at the southern port of San Juan del Sur in support of CIA
operations which mined Nicaraguan harbors.

The administration did not even bother to deny the AP story.
White House spokesman Larry Speakes simply declared that "I think
the CIA is probably checking to see what the facts are."

Though the two stories pulled back the veil on the secret
Central American conflicts, neither the AP nor the Knight-Ridder
article generated much follow-up by other Washington journalists.
The administration continued to insist publicly that U.S.
soldiers in the region were avoiding combat situations -- and the
national media accepted the White House word.

By 1984, lying about Central America had become a
well-established administration practice.


Bonner's courageous reporting on the El Mozote massacre would
not be corroborated until 1991. Then, a United Nations forensics
team excavated the village and found hundreds of skeletons,
including those of little children who had been butchered by the
Salvadoran army along with their mothers and fathers.

But this El Mozote war crime, like so many others in El
Salvador, went unpunished, not only there but in Washington. No
American official was held accountable for giving misleading
testimony to Congress or covering up the atrocity.

Nor did any of those who took part in undercutting Bonner pay
any price. Rosenthal remains a regular columnist for the Times.
Reed Irvine continues to receive national attention in his
well-financed role as a press "watch dog." Wall Street Journal
editor Robert Bartley still heads the paper's right-wing
editorial page, which continues to attack journalists who don't
toe the conservative line.

Only after the United Nations released its findings about El
Mozote was Bonner rehired by the Times. He now reports for the
paper from Eastern Europe.


What drove these recurring deceptions of the 1980s was the
Reagan administration's zealous opposition to leftist movements
anywhere in the Third World. Though many experts on Central
America saw the peasant uprisings as rebellions against corrupt
oligarchies, President Reagan and CIA director William J. Casey
detected instead an insidious Soviet plot to surround and conquer
the United States.

In one memorable formulation of this theme, Reagan conjured up
the image of Harlingen, Texas, under threat from Central American
peasant armies. At another point, a top Pentagon official warned
that there was nothing to stop Nicaragua's Sandinista army from
marching south, conquering Costa Rica, invading Panama and
seizing the Panama Canal. (I asked at that Pentagon briefing if
the 82nd Airborne might not show up.)

One U.S. government pamphlet from the mid-1980s even suggested
that Nicaragua, with its navy of a few river patrol boats, might
somehow bottle up the U.S. fleet in New Orleans as it tried to
resupply American troops in Europe during a hypothetical World
War III with the Soviet Union.

As farfetched as these scenarios were, these apocalyptic
visions justified to the Reagan team almost any action, even
countenancing atrocities against civilian populations in Central
America and deceiving the American people at home.

The Washington press corps, cowed by Reagan's effective
attacks on reporters, either kept silent about the absurdities of
the policy or joined in advancing the bizarre arguments.
Journalists who sided with Reagan's foreign policy -- the likes
of Fred Barnes and Charles Krauthammer -- saw their careers soar.
Suddenly, they were pundits on weekend TV shows and were in
demand on the lucrative lecture circuit.

So, even after the 12-year Reagan-Bush reign ended, there was
little interest in Washington to correct the bogus historical
record. Too many powerful individuals, both in and out of
government, had profited off the lies.

Ironically, conservatives were the ones who led the belated
fight to gain recognition for the U.S. soldiers who fought and
died in El Salvador. F. Andy Messing Jr., a former Special Forces
major who worked closely with Lt. Col. Oliver North on Central
America in the 1980s, was one of those who insisted on the
historical correction.

After a CBS "60 Minutes" broadcast on the issue a year ago,
Rep. Robert K. Dornan, R-Calif., pushed through legislation
mandating that the Pentagon give Armed Forces Expeditionary
Medals to soldiers who served in El Salvador from January 1981
until February 1992.


"The U.S. government was going to allow a clever blurring of
the history of the civil war to go unchallenged," commented
former Special Forces Sgt. Greg Walker. "We wanted to correct the
history. ...We wanted to honor our dead and bring closure to
their families."

The little monument to the secret warriors now sits next to a
newly planted tree in an otherwise vacant sector of Arlington
National Cemetery. Like the war it commemorates, it is barely
noticeable to passers-by visiting the rows of white headstones
that cover the cemetery's rolling hills.

Normally helpful cemetery employees were nonplussed when asked
about the location of the marker several days after the ceremony.
One cemetery employee had no idea where it was and another
directed a questioner to Section 59, the wrong place.

The small shiny stone actually lies across Eisenhower Avenue
from Section 59, in Section 12. There were no flowers or flags.
The names of the 21 dead soldiers were not engraved on the stone,
just the words: "El Salvador 1981-1992. Blessed are the
peacemakers. In sacred memory of those who died to bring hope and

(c) Copyright 1996 -- Please Do Not Re-Post


What is The Consortium?

Besides being the Internet's first investigative 'Zine,
The Consortium is one of the most important publications found
anywhere today. The Consortium covers crucial, well-documented
stories that the mainstream media has ignored. These stories are
accounts of our provocative political era, and, we believe, must
be told if America is to regain control of its democracy.

Published by award winning journalist Robert Parry (who
broke many of the Iran-contra stories), The Consortium focuses on
national politics and international affairs. Our goal is to be an
important instrument in helping Americans understand the
political era we are all living through. The Consortium's only
special interest is telling the truth, a commitment we pledge to
all our readers.


Subscribe to the paper version of The Consortium. We offer both
annual subscriptions ($49 for 26 issues) and six months
subscriptions ($29 for 13 issues). The Consortium is published
biweekly and is available by calling 1-800-738-1812 or (703)
920-1802 (if outside the U.S.) Or you can mail a check or money
order to The Media Consortium, Suite 102-231, 2200 Wilson Blvd.,
Arlington, VA 22201. (For more details, go to The Consortium
Merchandise-and-Book-Store Page.)

The Consortium


Date: 16 May 96 12:21:26 EDT
From: LEBRECHT HANS <100264.770@CompuServe.COM>
Subject: Lauck trial

Information by Hans Lebrecht, Tel-Aviv - May 16, 1996

The "Association of Antifascists and Victims of Nazism in Israel"
sent today by FAX a letter to the state attorney, Mr. Mauruschat
in Hamburg, Germany, who leads the prosecution in the process
against the American Nazi Gary Lauck at the district court of
that town (see AFIB supplement # 40 of May 10, 1996), telling of
a hateful letter, received by that association in January 1978
with antisemitic instigation material and a threatening letter,