From Statewatch

Anarchists to be targeted as "terrorists" alongside Al Qaeda (pdf file)

-------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------

Europol has produced a Situation and Trends report on terrorist activity in the European Union. As might be expected the report covers ETA in Spain, the Real IRA in Northern Ireland, the National Front for the Liberation of Corsica and "Islamic extremist terrorism" (including Al Qaeda). The report stresses that although the number of incidents was "showing a small decrease" the "importance of the attacks increased dramatically" - this was because after 11 September the "European Union is not only a target for terrorist attacks but also an important area for preparatory and logistic purposes in the widest sense". It further notes that progress is taking place in Northern Ireland, and that ceasefires, both in Northern Ireland and Corsica have "been maintained by the main players".

One new category added in 2001 was "eco-terrorism" on which the report gives no examples. The report simply says in total that: "Radical environmentalists and animal rights movements have maintained a limited campaign. Nevertheless, the material damage they caused was extensive". No definition of "eco-terrorism" is given nor is one planned in the proposed extension of Europol's role (see Statewatch's The activities and development of Europol pamphlet). It is thus hard to see the distinction between activity which might be termed a criminal offence as distinct from a "terrorist" offence.

Another new category which is even more problematic is that of "anarchist terrorism". In February 2001 a Europol seminar on counter-terrorism held in Madrid agreed on a proposal by Spain, Portugal, Greece and Italy to set up a joint investigation team on "anarchist terrorism". It appears that after Genoa in July 2001 Europol may have set up an "analysis file" on "anarchist terrorism" which in turn fed through into this Situation report. Interviewed by a German newspaper in August Jurgen Storbeck, Europol's Director, said the so-called "Black
Block" of anarchists could be seen as "terrorist or pre-terrorist".

The following analysis looks at the many questions that arise from the inclusion of "anarchist terrorism" which relies almost totally on examples from Italy and at the attempt to extend terrorism in Spain to legitimate political groups.

A Marxist Critique of Anti-Globalization Activism

After at least twenty years of steady decline of the "radical movement", of "leftist activism", during which those people in society who were attempting to "change the world" -- in a "progressive" or "leftist" sense -- were reduced to a miniscule "fringe group", a complete marginalization within society, within even the "left", broadly speaking; Seattle N30 came along to change all that, to reverse the trend, to turn it all around. Now, in the wake of N30.99, people who are out there trying to "change the world" are no longer nearly so marginalized, their existence as a distinct force or tendency within society is known by (more or less) everyone. Their existence and activity is now appreciated and welcomed by a significant and growing part of this society -- those who have come to question the direction the dominant social forces in our society are pushing to take it, and us, in.

So if it is now "respectable" or even "fashionable" to work (voluntarily, without remuneration, on oneÕs own free time) to "change the world" -- if such people are no longer universally considered to be "kooks", "utopian dreamers", or "relics of the past" -- then why is it that so few of this new wave of radical social activists have made their way to a position of revolutionary anti-capitalist critique? Of course, at this still early stage in the development of this new movement of resistance to capitalist globalization, the movement itself is in no way "revolutionary". Revolutionary potential may exist within the movement, in the most radical current within it, but it is presently entirely a matter of potential; it is a tendency that might arise within the movement in the upcoming period.

Noam Chomsky Calls for Marijuana Decriminalization,

Discusses Drug/Terror Links

Philip Smith, DRCNet, February 14, 2002

MIT professor Noam Chomsky has long been one of the nation's most implacable
critics of US foreign policy and domestic inequity, as well as its
highly-concentrated mass media. Lauded by the New York Review of Books as
"America's leading radical intellectual," Chomsky has authored dozens of
books on US policy in the Middle East, Latin America, the former Yugoslavia
and East Timor, among others, as well as "Manufacturing Consent," a scathing
critique of propagandistic corporate media.

A proud anarchist -- he defines anarchism as "a tendency in the history of
human thought and action which seeks to identify coercive, authoritarian,
and hierarchic structures of all kinds and to challenge their legitimacy,
and if they cannot justify their legitimacy, which is quite commonly the
case, to work to undermine them and expand the scope of freedom" -- Chomsky
is a legendary American political dissident whose campus appearances
regularly bring out thousands of students. We spoke with the distinguished
linguist and essayist from his office at MIT.

Open Letter to Those Involved in the Black Bloc

From Willful Disobedience, #12

The anti-globalization movement has brought with it an increase in
public confrontations with those in power. Of course, anarchists have
been there. One of the tactics anarchists have used in these situations
is that of the black bloc. I am not interested in going into a thorough
discussion of the effectiveness of this tactic or discuss its merits as an
anarchist practice. Rather I want to deal with a somewhat troubling
recent development that has made its appearance in discussions about
the black bloc. In the Summer/September 2001 issue of Barricada and
in the October 2001 issue of Tute Nere there are articles discussing the
tactics of the black bloc. This is certainly not surprising, nor is it
uncalled -- for after two years of regular summit demonstrations as well
as other demonstrations in which black bloc participates were involved.
What bothers me is the direction in which the examination of the black
bloc has gone.

It has been said over and over again that the black bloc is not an
organization, but a tactic. The organizational framework in which it has
operated has been the affinity group (or at least, the small group of
friends -- each such group can decide for itself to what extent to which it
has made a determined effort to achieve true and deep affinity). The
purpose for wearing black has been anonymity and a visual statement
of solidarity, not the formation of an anarchist army. I am convinced that
this informality has been the real strength of this tactic, providing
flexibility and leaving real choice of action in the hands of individuals in
relation with others of their choosing. The tactical organization here
reflects the aim of a world without delegation or hierarchy, a world
where the separation between decision and action has disappeared, at
least to some extent.

Anonymous Comrade writes "The turn out for the February 1 anti-World Economic Forum march (15,000 –20,000) surprised everyone: the cops, the media, and perhaps most of all those who had organized the demonstration. Much of the energy on the street was a direct response to the campaign of intimidation carried out by the media on behalf of the WEF and the police. The demonstration tapped into a growing disaffection with capitalism and a general discontent with globalization and corporate governance in the US. For many of those who came out, the press campaign against the demonstrators was a direct assault on civil liberties and real proof that groups like the WEF are incapable of defending their policies when confronted with the meat and bones of democratic discourse.

hydrarchist writes "

Amidst all the hype and shadow-boxing around the WEF meeting in New York next weekend, simple questions relating to the purpose and effectiveness of collective action are being ignored. Much recent activity takes place in a deracinated context which while tragetting the lofty and distant centers of power, remains disconnected from local space and the everyday life. For this reason, I though that the following history of the OCAP might serve as interesting document to read as a positive counter-example to such trajectories.

A Short History of OCAP

OCAP has its roots in a struggle around welfare reform in the late 1980s. At
that time, the Liberal Government of David Peterson was under considerable
pressure to introduce some improvements to the Province's welfare system. As a
stalling tactic, it set up a review committee that held extensive public
hearings and, finally, recommended a number of measures that included an
increase in welfare rates (depending on the category of recipient) of between
10% and 20%. During this period the London and Toronto unions of unemployed
workers had been campaigning for a 25% increase in the rates. After the release
of the review committee's report, a broader formation came together and decided
to press for the Government to implement the proposals of its own committee. A
three pronged march from Windsor, Sudbury and Ottawa was organized on the
Ontario Legislature to fight for this.

Bono Bloody Bono

Dave Bleakney

Every generation has an Elvis. Being an Elvis is not only about shaking
your hips or making teenagers scream. When things are going bad in the
public relations department, a famous entertainer can add pop, sizzle
and glamour to the message. Performers sell soap, cars and coca cola.
And lately, rich corporations have been in need of a little sizzle to
sell corporate globalization.

Nixon needed Elvis. He saw a good 'ol southern boy that loved his Mama
cruise into the White house to join hands with the Administration in one
of the many wars on drugs. Elvis, heavily medicated, was more than ready
to expose his peers to extra scrutiny.

Mussolini had Ezra Pound. The Macarthyites had Ronald Reagan, who, at
the time a Democrat, spent his career at the Screen Actors Guild ratting
out so-called subversives in his Union.

Bono, the 80's inspired politico warbler is the latest in a long line of
performers who are trotted out on behalf of the power holders. Poor
Bono, he doesn't get it. At first I thought he looked silly. But now I
see him as dangerous. Okay, well, silly and dangerous. At least that's
how he looked at the World Economic Forum held recently in New York.
"Bono steals spotlight at forum," said the Globe and Mail byline of
February 5. While distribution of the Earth Times may have been banned
at the exclusive Waldorf-Astoria for the WEF, the corporate and political
elite made a home for Bono.

A number of texts by Rene Riesel
concerning the first direct action campaign in France against
organically modified seeds, as first published in English translation in
the anthology RESTRUCTURING AND RESISTANCE (London: resresrev, 2001),
are now available at the following web address:

http://directaction.piranho.com/riesel.html

Biotechnology Public and Private (Riesel)

Some months ago a team of French psychiatrists was asked to evaluate the motivation of the opponents of genetic engineering. Curiously, this reassuring news was not widely reported. Nor does anyone seem to have noticed the remarkable self-imposed discretion of the devotees of transgenetics with respect to the doings of their enemies. Only on the rarest of occasions do they let slip some faint condemnation of the over-sensitivity, the old-fogeyism or the obscurantism of the anti-GMO crew, or mutter under their breath that the dissenters' virulent hatred of progress is really a matter for the psychiatrists. True enough, the most exemplary aspect of the first campaign waged in France against genetic engineering - a campaign that began with the Nérac sabotage of January 1998 and ended with the Montpellier action of June 1999, and included ten or so destructions of experimental crops and brief occupations of premises of Novartis, of CIRAD (Centre for International Co-operation in Agronomic Research for Development) and of INRA (National Institute of Agronomic Research) - lay in its renewal of the Luddite tradition. Considering that some participants are eager to downplay this aspect, no doubt because they need to forget the implications of what they have got caught up in, it is probably worth recalling the bases of this modern-day Luddite madness.

dementia writes "Cool Hunting: How Big Companies Exploit the Anti-Globalization Movement

Did you know what the cool hunters are? Did you accidentally notice lately any advertisements with radical themes or the latest fashion that demonstrates symbols of revolution impressed you? When anti-globalization becomes a mass movement it is easily noticed by the brand companies that they don't want to loose a share from any part of the consumer pie .

Jak King writes: We recall that Bush used up most of his State of the Union speech to make specific threats about dealing with "terrorism", telling countries around the world that they'd better clean up their act or the States will do it for them. We also recall that Bush's new budget adds billions upon billions of dollars onto taxpayers burdens specifically to fight "terrorism". Finally, we also recall Mr Bush, from the earliest days after September 11th, explaining in his best school principal's manner that "terrorism" is "terrorism" is "terrorism" and must be stamped out wherever it is found.

But, of course, in reality "terrorism" is not always "terrorism". In terms of Bush's plans, "terrorism" only means anti-American "terrorism". If you are a "terrorist" opposed to a regime that the US is not keen on, then you are welcome in the States. There are, for example, Cambodian. Cuban and Vietnamese "terrorists" happily living in the USA or protected by the CIA or both.