LIBYA 360°



Mass Migration Deaths Caused by Imperialist Foreign Policy

Featured post

Ten Years After Katrina : Natural Disaster or Forced Removals?

Featured post

Native Americans and US Scorched Earth Continuum

Featured post

Systemic Racism : Failing New Orleans

Featured post

Plan Lanmó – The Death Plan : The Clintons, Foreign Aid and NGOs in Haiti

Featured post

Honduras : Impunity and the Legacy of Miguel Facussé

Ferguson : State of Emergency

Torture and Show Trials in Neo-Colonial Libya

Protests in Libya & International Condemnation of Al Qaeda Sentencing of Jamahiriya Officials

US : The State Murder of an Activist

Unmasking Police Violence Against African-Canadians

The Assassination of Sandra Bland and the Struggle against State Repression


‘Operation Ghetto Storm’: The Enduring War on Black People in the US

Millennium Development Goals vs Imperialist Wars, World Capitalism

Emmanuel Dred Wilmè : Haiti Defines Resistance

No ‘Je Suis Charleston’? : The De-Politicization of Black Oppression

Restorative Justice Is Needed For Albert Woodfox, The Black Panther Party & The Nation

Septima Clark and the Role of Civil Rights Education in South Carolina and Beyond

Gender, Resistance and Radical Democracy : Meet the Women of the HDP

Closing the Historical Circle : White Terrorism at the Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church

Charleston Massacre and the Revolutionary Legacy of Denmark Vesey

United States Foreign Policy a Reflection of the Legacy of Racism and National Oppression

Imperialism and the Making of the Migration Crisis

Zero Tolerance for Racism

Sudan : ICC Continues to Target African Leaders, Ignoring the Real War Criminals

Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir arrives in Khartoum, after attending the African Union Summit in Johannesburg, June 15, 2015. © AFP
Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir arrives in Khartoum, after attending the African Union Summit in Johannesburg, June 15, 2015. © AFP

Press TV has interviewed Abayomi Azikiwe, a Detroit-based editor of Pan-African News Wire, to ask for his take on a call by the International Criminal Court (ICC) to arrest Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir on the sidelines of the African Union Summit in Johannesburg. A rough transcription of the interview follows.

Press TV: What do you make of this whole affair where a sitting head of state was first stopped from leaving a foreign country where he was invited first of all and then the court ruled that he should be arrested yet he left?

Azikiwe: There are two major issues involved in this. First of all this harassment and prosecution of the Sudanese president, Omar Hassan al-Bashir, has been going on now for nearly a decade. The International Criminal Court was established by what was known as the Rome Statute and only the groups that are signatories to the Rome Statute are bound to abide by its regulations. The major criticism against the International Criminal Court is that it only targets African heads of state and African rebel leaders. The real culprits in terms of crimes against humanity, wars, regime change and genocidal conflicts are not being targeted by the International Criminal Court; there has been no indictment against George Bush, against Barack Obama, against Tony Blair, David Cameron or the others. So this is clearly a biased effort, plus it also demonstrates the fact that even within the South African judicial system, there are elements who in fact are not working in the interest of Africa. President Bashir was invited there as part of the African Union Summit. That takes priority over any court that is based in the Netherlands, which is in Europe, which is a former colonial and slave-owning nation.

Press TV: Indeed! Also the facts put forward about the whole issue with Bashir is the situation in Darfur. Now wouldn’t that warrant some sort of an action on the part of the International Criminal Court? Is the International Criminal Court justified in pushing this arrest warrant considering the situation in Darfur?

Azikiwe: No, because there is no substantial evidence that crimes against humanity, let alone genocide, has been committed in the western region of Sudan known as Darfur. The problems in Darfur were inherited from the legacy of the British imperialism, plus there is outside interest involved, the United States as well as Israel, that arms, finances, and coordinates many of these rebel groups in western Sudan. So these are the elements that need to be analyzed. Sudan used to be the largest geographic nation-state in Africa until 2011 when the country was partitioned at the behest of the United States, Britain, ans Israel. This is a further effort to Balkanize the country by breaking off the western region of Darfur.


Attacks on Sudan Overshadow African Union Summit Held in South Africa

EU’s Military Strategy to Deepen Mediterranean Tragedies

Empire of Bases : The Truth About Diego Garcia

Assata Shakur Mural Removed Following Unrelenting Right-Wing Campaign

By Workers Worldtumblr_mke1nvaB9n1rtvsvno1_1280

A mural depicting Assata Shakur was removed in May by Marquette University officials after an unrelenting right-wing campaign.

Shakur, a people’s hero and icon of the Black Lives Matter movement, is a former Black Panther falsely accused and convicted of killing a cop in New Jersey in 1973. She escaped prison and has been in exile in Cuba for more than 30 years. The U.S. government has a $2 million bounty out on her.

The mural had been on display in the Alumni Memorial Union near the Marquette Gender and Sexuality Resource Center since March. Shortly after the center posted photos of the mural on its Facebook page, a longtime conservative professor, John McAdams, joined a campaign to have the mural removed. McAdams critiqued the center on his blog for “glorifying a black militant cop killer.”

Under mass student, faculty and community protest, McAdams, an associate professor of political science, was suspended in 2014 for criticizing a graduate student teaching assistant on his blog for how she handled a discussion of gay marriage in her class. He faces possible termination.

Charlie Sykes of the WTMJ radio ­station in Milwaukee, one of the most rabid right-wing media personalities in the United States, helped the campaign to have the mural painted over. Sykes has a daily radio show and a TV program, and edits “Wisconsin Interest,” a magazine from the right-wing Wisconsin Policy Research Institute. This think tank for decades has participated in the destruction of social safety nets such as Aid to Families with Dependent Children, the public school system, and unions and called for the privatization of public ­services.

Despite a mission statement proclaiming that the university encourages a diverse community with “vigorous yet respectful debate,” university spokesperson Brian Dorrington spoke for the Wall Street interests that really run Marquette University, the administrators and their servants, and the cops, on May 20, when he said: “The facts in this instance are clear: A mural of a convicted murderer has no place here.”

Dorrington, of course, said nothing about the innumerable photos, statues and memorabilia littering the Marquette campus and Milwaukee generally that glorify real criminals and murderers such as slave owners, those who’ve committed genocide on Native peoples and plundered whole continents, and the bankers and industrialists responsible for the vicious exploitation, oppression, and murder of workers and oppressed peoples.

Shortly after the mural was removed, the director of the center, Dr. Susannah Bartlow, either resigned under pressure or was fired. There is now a campaign to have her restored to her position. Supporters can email Dr. Michael Lovell, president of Marquette University, at or call 414-288-7714. A petition can be found at

We will not be silenced!

The Coalition of and for Students of Color at Marquette University issued a statement May 18 after the mural was removed:

“Marquette University does not waste a moment. They painted over a mural with inspirational quotes from activist Assata Shakur without asking anyone (the students) if it was ok the same day of graduation. This is an attempt to erase our voice and silence the people, but we refuse to be silenced MU! Remember you are only functioning because we pay tuition and the Coalition doesn’t believe the mural should have been painted over. This is disrespectful and unacceptable!”

The Gender and Sexuality Resource Center was built after the university administration rescinded a job offer to Jodi O’Brien, a lesbian professor and noted author of gender and sexuality books. The center offers lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer students and allies space where they can seek counseling and resources. It is also designed to address issues of sexual violence on campus. The center, under Dr. Bartlow’s leadership since 2012, has also become an oasis for students of color on the majority white and affluent campus.

At a time when every progressive law, every policy, every organization and every resource is under attack by the right wing in Wisconsin, the destruction of the mural must be seen as part of the overall effort by Wall Street and their servants to attempt to smash what’s left of the labor-community movement and to make the state a Jim Crow, low-wage, nonunion, deregulated playground.

Besides the usual seething racism by right-wing forces against people’s warriors such as Shakur and against all people of color, the mural attack is also an attack on Cuba and the burgeoning youth- and student-led Black Lives Matter movement in Wisconsin. These inspiring forces have been connecting race, class, gender, sexuality and other issues such as the environment and supporting unions. The right wing is also attempting to divide white workers from their direly needed allies.

As the students, faculty and their supporters fight back, the two quotes from Shakur on the original mural are giving them inspiration to continue the struggle:

“No one is going to give you the education you need to overthrow them. Nobody is going to teach you your true history, teach you your true heroes if they know that that knowledge will help set you free.”

“Before going back to college, I knew I didn’t want to be an intellectual, spending my life in books and libraries without knowing what the hell is going on in the streets. Theory without practice is just as incomplete as practice without theory. The two have to go together.”

For more information:, and #ASSATAMU #HANDSOFASSATA

From Africa, Middle East, Latin America to Ukraine – Snowden & Human Rights : Theatre vs Reality

By Tortilla Con Sal

Recent legislative theatricals in the US Congress once again brought the issue of mass surveillance into the corporate media headlines and with it the continuing hype around Edward Snowden. Ever since Snowden made his revelations, his supporters have claimed his actions constitute a heroic defence of fundamental civil rights in the United States and countries of the European Union.

The latest corporate media reports argue that Snowden has been largely responsible for a major change in Western country legislation defending fundamental civil rights. But the reality behind this extraordinary campaign of exaggeration and illusion looks very different in the light of actual events and a critical look at their media diffusion.

Whatever Edward Snowden’s own intentions may have been, his revelations have been exploited by the psychological warfare apparatus of the United States government and its allies. The media and political management of his revelations have helped the US government consolidate and legitimize existing covert mass surveillance practices in the United States and overseas.

USA Today reported on June 2nd, “The Senate overwhelmingly voted Tuesday to end the controversial bulk collection of the phone data of millions of Americans who have no ties to terrorism.” The USA Today report included a tweet from President Obama “Glad the Senate finally passed the USA Freedom Act. It protects civil liberties and our national security. I’ll sign it as soon as I get it.”

However, Barack Obama has prosecuted more whistleblowers than any President before him. So it seems rational to infer that he will sign off on what is nothing more than a procedural administrative tweak. Let’s face it: substantially, it changes nothing. Even the New York Times reported the day before the vote “Even if Congress ultimately restricts domestic surveillance, it will leave intact the vast majority of the post-Sept. 11 programs authorized by two presidents.

Numerous writers have correctly noted that the new law merely places the formality of a routine administrative procedure – the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) tribunal – between the US government’s spies and the mass data they previously collected unhindered. The corporate media and non-governmental Edward Snowden industry spin this as a vindication of Snowden’s revelations.

But Edward Snowden’s support network is almost completely compromised, one way or another, by most of its members’ relations with the the political and corporate establishment of the US and its NATO allies. For example, film-maker Laura Poitras in 2012 received a US$500,000 fellowship from the MacArthur Foundation, whose then President Robert Gallucci was previously a very high level strategic adviser to the US government.

Glenn Greenwald has been the main proselytizer managing what in many ways is a Snowden cult. Greenwald moved swiftly from his work managing Edward Snowden’s material for the Guardian to working for billionaire Pierre Omidyaar, whose own business empire has corporate links to the US government intelligence network, in particular Booz Allen Hamilton, for whom Snowden used to work.

Edward Snowden himself is an espionage professional, so what he says or does should certainly not be taken at face value. That said, it does seem clear that far from having radical progressive politics he is very much a US patriot with staunch libertarian views, not at all opposed to US foreign policy as such.

While the North American and European progressives who promote Edward Snowden congratulate themselves on their commitment to human rights, almost everywhere else in the world their human rights agenda has been made to look hollow, self-serving and hypocritical. The psy-warfare exploitation of Edward Snowden’s revelations categorically confirms the truism that human rights concerns derive from political, not humanitarian concerns, as events in Palestine, Libya, Syria, Ukraine demonstrate

In Libya, among many other even more extreme examples, hundreds of former officials of the Libyan Jamahiriya have been tortured and abused prior to the sinister farce of judicial process under the control of ISIL terrorists who make a mockery of Islam. Those Libyans, including Saif Gaddhafi, face the death sentence. But Western human rights advocates have nothing to say about these phony trials or their governments’ destruction of Libya because they were cheerleaders for it.

In Palestine, the UN General Secretary has just decided not to include the Israeli government on the list of governments harming children through armed conflict, despite overwhelming evidence including the repeated genocidal massacres in Gaza. Western human rights advocates tend to play down this kind of shameful, indefensible decision and other examples like it, because they fear zionist accusations of “anti-semitism”.

In Ukraine, the fascist regime there has overseen the murder of dozens of journalists, like Oles Buzyna, and anti-regime activists like Oleg Kalashnikov under cover of almost complete silence from the US government and its European Union allies. Western human rights organizations too have next-to-nothing to say beyond ritual denunciations because they are reluctant to seem “pro-Russian”.

In Syria, as in Libya, Western human rights organizations and liberal and progressive NATO country media outlets have vociferously promoted one falsehood after another, that government military arbitrarily murdered large numbers of “peaceful demonstrators”, that “Assad” used chemical weapons in Ghouta or that “Assad” deliberately targets civilians.

It is hard to believe mere coincidence leads the same corporate media and human rights networks to promote Edward Snowden’s revelations ostensibly against government policy, alongside the propaganda line of those same governments targeting Syria, Iran, Cuba, Venezuela, Russia and China and so on. That only adds up if one goes to sleep each night listening to the fairy tale of “objective reporting” as read by the BBC or CBS, or Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch – an organization funded (and founded) by George Soros, the same man who destabilized the Ukraine and is a close associate to President Petró Poroshenko.

Edward Snowden’s revelations can be looked at in any number of ways, some more plausible than others. A credible view on the available evidence to date is that the material he has made available has been managed to legitimize long standing covert practice by Western intelligence gathering agencies while also providing a handy human rights and democracy alibi to Western media.

Western government support for their corporate oligarchies following the crash of 2008 compounded Western media embarrassment at their governments’ well-documented human rights abuses, from Iraq and Afghanistan, to Guantanamo and the US corporate industrial penal system. The Snowden revelations have been exploited by Western corporate media so as to offer a theatrical human rights and democracy distraction from past and current crimes by the US government and its NATO allies.

Those governments are guilty of murdering many hundreds of thousands of civilians in Afghanistan, Iraq, Ivory Coast and Libya, as well as more current support for genocidal Nazi militias in Ukraine and for takfiri terrorists across the Arab world and Central Asia. Not surprisingly, they are also determined enemies of the emancipatory processes of change in Latin America and the Caribbean, targeting especially the Bolivarian Revolution in Venezuela.

Now the same corporate media and human rights networks that attack Venezuela and its allies are falsely reporting, with all the unison of an accomplished choir, an important civil rights victory thanks to Edward Snowden. That should give decisive pause for thought, because by now few will disagree that the underlying reality of the management of Edward Snowden’s revelations is very different from their superficial appearance.

Psy-warfare and NATO Country Terrorism – Ukraine, Venezuela, Snowden
Snowden: Overlooking the Obvious
Snowden Revisited
Inculcating Stupidity: Syria and Edward Snowden
Reflections on the category “journalism” and the revelations by Edward Snowden
Snowden: Behind NATO’s propaganda outlet for progressives – the Guardian’s board members
Mr. Snowden, It’s Time to Come Out and Take a Stand Publicly as to Your Intentions
The Risks of Trusting the Snowden Story

Albert Woodfox, Ex-Black Panther, Released after 43 Years in Solitary Confinement

Western Power and Press vs Burundi’s President Nkurunziza

By Ann Garrison

Burundian President Pierre Nkurunziza

Should incumbent Burundian President Pierre Nkurunziza be allowed to run for election again? Most Western powers and Western press say no.


KPFA Weekend News Anchor David Rosenberg: The US, the EU, and Western media continue to castigate Burundian President Pierre Nkurunziza for seeking a third term in office despite violent street protest and police response, and a failed coup détat. Nkurunziza, who was elected by Burundi’s Parliament in 2005, claims that the Burundian Constitution gives him the right to run for election twice by universal suffrage, and the country’s constitutional court confirmed that right. Two neighboring presidents, Rwanda’s Kagame and DR Congo’s Kabila, successfully claimed the right to be elected a second time by universal suffrage, Kagame in 2010 and Kabila in 2011. KPFA’s Ann Garrison has more.

KPFA/Ann Garrison: Russia and China blocked a UN Security Council resolution censuring Nkurunziza for seeking another term, and said that Burundi is a sovereign nation that must be left alone to solve its own problems.

Ironically, one of the only voices in the Western press who has also pointed to Burundi’s sovereignty, is Shaka Ssali, the very popular African born host of Straight Talk Africa, an international public affairs show produced by the Voice of America.

Shaka Ssali: George W. Bush was not elected President of the United States in his first term. He was appointed by the Supreme Court of the United States of America, 5 to 4 verdict. And the 5 members who voted for him . . . they had been appointed by Republican presidents. People grumbled here and what have you, but life went on. So let’s be honest. You may not be in agreement with the decision of the Burundian constitutional court, but since the court has spoken, you have to accept it, no?

KPFA/Ann Garrison: Shaka Ssali was speaking to a Burundian in Washington, who responded that the people of Burundi oppose Nkurunziza’s decision to run for election again. Agence France Presse, however, in one newswire that departed significantly from the rest of the Western press, reported that the protests have all occurred in Burundi’s capital, Bujumbura, and that Nkurunziza is immensely popular with Burundi’s rural peasant majority. Thousands of supporters, they said, met him dancing and singing, in farmland just 30 kilometers outside the capital, after he defeated the coup.

Gearóid Ó Colmáin, an Irish writer based in Paris, explained Nkurunziza’s popularity in an interview with Phil Taylor on CIUT-Toronto’s The Taylor Report.

Gearóid Ó Colmáin: He’s managed to reconstruct the country. He’s actually built more schools, by 2007, than were built before in the entire 50 years of independence. He’s instituted policies that have been very good for working people, with emphasis on infrastructure.

He made a law actually, which requires people to provide free labor, community labor, on Saturdays to build schools and other public infrastructure that people need. So he has created a kind of a national voluntarism which has given people a sense of hope and a sense that they have power to build their country. He’s actually done very well and he spends a lot of his time with poor people on weekends, so he’s extremely popular.

The government has made the claim that this problem, this violence, is really only in Bujumbura, the capital, and that is actually true. In most of the country there are hardly any protests. The foreign funded media tends to be concentrated in Bujumbura. But even in Bujumbura, you only have about four quarters of the capital where there’s violence. So this has really been blown all out of all proportion by the international press.

(Gearóid Ó Colmáin:Are the US and the EU Sponsoring Terrorism in Burundi? )

KPFA: Earlier this week, regional leaders met in Dar Es Salaam, Tanzania, where they asked Nkurunziza to postpone the election until order could be restored in Burundi. They did not ask Nkurunziza to withdraw from the election, but the US and the EU still do.

For Pacifica, KPFA, and AfrobeatRadio, I’m Ann Garrison.

Coup Attempt Defeated in Burundi, US Continues to Recognize Nkurunziza
Are the US and the EU Sponsoring Terrorism in Burundi?
Peter Erlinder: Second Genocide in Rwanda
Towards a Regional War in Central Africa : Rwandan and Ugandan Troops in the Congo (DRC)

Nuclear Horror Still Haunts Trinity, New Mexico, 70 Years On Finian Cunningham

America’s New Mexico state saw the birth of nuclear weapons 70 years ago at the Trinity test site, where the world’s first ever atomic explosion occurred. That was on July 16, 1945. Less than one month later, the bomb was dropped on Japanese cities Hiroshima and Nagasaki wiping out some 200,000 lives in an instant.

Now the American state is grappling with the sinister problem of trying to bury seven decades of nuclear waste from America’s military-industrial complex. In many ways, the horror of nuclear weaponry still haunts the very place where it was first unleashed.

US federal and state politicians are planning to make New Mexico the permanent burial site for highly radioactive waste materials that up to now have been kept in temporary storage at other locations across the country, such as at Hanford in northwest Washington state where the nation’s main facility for producing plutonium and uranium for nuclear weapons is located.

There is, to be sure, strong opposition among various community groups and activists, who deplore the plans to scale up New Mexico’s nuclear-waste dumping. They point to an already heavy burden of environmental and public health toxicity in NM that includes not only fallout from the original Trinity test site, but also from Los Alamos Laboratories where the atomic bomb was conceived under the Manhattan Project during the 1940s, as well as from scores of uranium-ore mines, and an existing low-level nuclear waste site.

But the anti-dumping campaigners are up against the formidable US military-industrial complex and what they call a «genocidal ideology» in the east coast Washington political establishment. If plans go ahead, as seems likely, New Mexico will become the sole depository for the most dangerous of all radioactive waste in the US.

Randy Martin is one of the community campaigners trying to prevent the scaling up of nuclear-waste dumping in NM. He has been an activist on the issue for over 30 years. Some of his family relatives who had farms near the Gnome site – another disastrous nuclear-explosion test area hatched on the backs of natives and locals – succumbed to cancers and other diseases, which he believes were caused by the subsequent radioactive fallout. He reckons that thousands of people in New Mexico have been affected by inter-generational nuclear contamination.

«The trouble is that New Mexico has been enslaved to the military-industrial complex», says Martin. «Our relationship to the industry is from the cradle to the grave. This is where nuclear weapons technology was created and tested, and now we are being left with the task of burying its toxic waste».

One of the biggest advocates for the expanded waste facility in New Mexico is Republican state governor Susana Martinez. Martinez is touted to have ambitions of becoming a future vice-president in the White House. The plan is to take in high-level spent radioactive materials from all over the country, including fuel rods and bomb cores, in an expansion of an already existing low-level waste site located at Carlsbad – about 200 km from the Trinity site.

Advocates for the expansion of nuclear-waste dumping in New Mexico appear to have a strong suite of arguments in their favour. The state is one of the poorest in the whole of the US; therefore the development beckons jobs and a boost to local government coffers. There is also a onerous psychological pressure on communities to be «patriotic» in helping to serve the nation’s military. Moreover, since the Second World War, New Mexico has become so entwined with the US military that it seems extremely difficult to live without it.

The state hosts the biggest weapons testing and training sites in the whole country at the White Sands Missile Range covering 8,300 sq. km of desert at the foot of the San Andreas Mountains. The vast area encompasses the Trinity test site. There are also numerous other military bases dotted all over the state. Consequently, much of the civilian sector, even if it is not formally connected to the military, has a preponderant economic dependence on it. The argument that whatever is good for the military is good for New Mexico is a hard one to rebut. That makes it difficult for communities to oppose the plan to accept military nuclear waste even if there is an apprehension about contamination risk. Many livelihoods are at stake by not accommodating the Pentagon.

Indeed campaigners say there is a sinister, but subtle, social atmosphere that pervades the state, whereby open criticism of the environmental and public health impacts from the Pentagon’s activities is frowned upon. That creates a climate of conformity and self-censorship. Jobs and contracts can be lost on a sly say-so.

Furthermore, there is a dearth of official data on the fallout from nuclear activity in New Mexico. Incredible as it might seem, it was only last year that the federal government finally launched a comprehensive epidemiological study into the possible health impact of the Trinity atomic test – some 70 years after it took place. So up to now, no-one was too sure how deleterious that explosion was to local populations, although there is ample anecdotal evidence of high rates of cancer and other environmental impacts.

That lack of impact-data makes it difficult to mount an effective campaign against the latest plans to scale up nuclear dumping.

However, there are warning signs. Last year, there was a serious radioactive leak at the existing waste site at Carlsbad, which resulted in contamination of some dozen workers at the plant. Yet the same facility is now being lined up to take in much greater quantities of higher-level spent radioactive material. The new waste is to be stored in vast underground caverns mined from the salt-rock terrain.

Advocates for the site claim that the geology provides a safe natural deposit. But given that the waste material represents a toxic lifespan of thousands of years it is a worrying assumption that leaks will not occur from future geological events. The New Mexico waste site lies perilously above the Delaware Basin that serves as the only fresh-water source for communities in the region and is a tributary to the Rio Grande River, which outflows to the Gulf of Mexico, potentially affecting millions of lives all along the US-Mexican border.

Campaigners against nuclear-waste dumping point out that the Soviet authorities acted with much greater alacrity to the fallout of the 1986 Chernobyl disaster compared with their American counterparts over New Mexico’s decades-old concerns. Following Chernobyl, medical surveys were carried out to assess human health impacts, and the then Soviet government enacted compensation payments to victims and families. In contrast, the US federal government has tended to suppress investigations into the legacy of nuclear activity in New Mexico, and has been reluctant to provide financial compensation for those allegedly affected by it. The pervasive dominant role of the US military in the state tends to further suppress any public criticism and calls for accountability.

The historical background of colonial conquest is another telling factor. New Mexico was long considered by the Washington establishment as backward «Indian territories». The modern state of New Mexico was only formed in 1912. Prior to that it was known simply as «The Territories» – a vast borderless hinterland populated by native American tribes. The Apache Wars were being waged by the newly formed United States up to the late 1800s – only 70 years before the Trinity test explosion occurred in 1945. During those wars, the Apache tribes were among the last native Americans to be conquered in brutal campaigns of extermination.

It is no coincidence then that the «worthless deserts and conquered people» of New Mexico would be later selected by the Washington establishment as the test site for the first atomic weapon. It must be recalled that even the scientists of the Manhattan Project were not sure whether the nuclear explosion would result in a catastrophic atmospheric reaction within New Mexico and surrounding US states.

Randy Martin, the campaigner, says that horrific atomic experiment at the Trinity site in 1945 was born out of the «genocidal mentality» that the Washington government retained from the earlier conquest of native American tribes.

«That genocidal mentality persists to this day», says Martin. «The United States government and its military-industrial complex unleashed the horror of nuclear weapons in this part of the country because they saw it as a conquered territory containing conquered people. Today, the Washington establishment and its ilk still view New Mexico as a place where they think nuclear problems can be buried and forgotten».

Under the Obama administration, the Pentagon has received a budget of over $350 billion to upgrade the US arsenal of nuclear weapons over the next decade. Some observers have discerned that this nuclear resurgence under Obama is emblematic of a new Cold War with Russia and other perceived global rivals. Notwithstanding the facts that Obama was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 2009 in part supposedly for nuclear disarmament, and that the US is obligated to totally disarm under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty that was signed 40 years ago.

Under Washington’s renewed nuclear arms quest, Los Alamos Laboratories in New Mexico has been assigned to replace plutonium cores in nuclear weapons with new fission devices. That inevitably means much greater volumes of nuclear waste will be dumped in the deserts of New Mexico.

Seventy years after Trinity, New Mexico is still being used in a pernicious nuclear experiment by the Pentagon. The toxic waste might be buried underground, but the horror lives on.

Blog at | The Baskerville Theme.

Up ↑


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,275 other followers