During this year’s Black History Month, like last, we will be treated to celebrations of Obama’s presidency — the ultimate symbol, we are told, of America’s triumph over its ugly history of discrimination, exclusion, and racial caste. This is a time to rejoice, it is said, though we still have a long way to go.

That is the dominant racial narrative today among those who claim to care about racial justice: Look how far we have come, but yes we still have a long way to go.

Here are a few facts that run counter to that racial narrative:

• There are more African Americans under correctional control today — in prison or jail, on probation or parole — than were enslaved in 1850, a decade before the Civil War began.
• As of 2004, more African American men were disenfranchised (due to felon disenfranchisement laws) than in 1870, the year the Fifteenth Amendment was ratified prohibiting laws that explicitly deny the right to vote on the basis of race.
• If you take into account prisoners, a large majority of African American men in some urban areas, like Chicago, have been labeled felons for life. These men are part of a growing undercaste — not class, caste — a group of people who are permanently relegated, by law, to an inferior second-class status. They can be denied the right to vote, automatically excluded from juries, and legally discriminated against in employment, housing, access to education, and public benefits — much as their grandparents and great-grandparents once were during the Jim Crow era.

There is a colorblind explanation for all this: crime rates. But crime rates do not explain the sudden and dramatic mass incarceration of African Americans during the past 30 years. Crime rates have fluctuated over the past few decades — and currently are at historical lows — but imprisonment rates have soared. Quintupled. And the vast majority of that increase is due to the War on Drugs, a war waged almost exclusively in poor communities of color, even though studies consistently show that people of all colors use and sell illegal drugs at remarkably similar rates. In fact, some studies indicate that white youth are significantly more likely to engage in illegal drug dealing than black youth.

That is not what you would guess, though, when entering our nation’s prisons and jails, which are overflowing with black and brown drug offenders.

The clock has been turned back on racial progress in America, though scarcely anyone seems to notice. All eyes are fixed on people like Barack Obama and Oprah Winfrey who have defied the odds and achieved great power, wealth and fame.

But what if Obama, who has admitted to violating our nation’s drug laws, had been treated like a common criminal — what if he hadn’t been insulated by growing up in Hawaii and attending a predominately white university — where would he be now? Most likely, he would be cycling in and out of prison, trapped in the parallel social universe that exists for those labeled felons. Far from being president of the United States, he might be denied the right to vote. He would be subject to many of the same forms of discrimination, stigma, and social exclusion that we supposedly left behind. How many black men and boys are trapped in this undercaste who might have been president of the United States? We will never know.

This is not Martin Luther King, Jr.’s dream. As described in The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness the cyclical rebirth of caste in America is a recurring racial nightmare.

“Public housing tenants in New York are three times as likely to be stopped in their own complexes than people in surrounding neighborhoods with similar crimes rates.”

When many Americans use the terms “police state” or “creeping fascism,” their point of reference is the Patriot Act or some other mechanism of the national security state. But for Black America, the police state is the daily reality of arbitrary, relentless stops on the streets of their own neighborhoods, or in the hallways of their own public housing projects.

When the numbers are tallied, they are expected to show that more than 600,000 people were stopped by police on the streets of New York City, last year, 89 percent of them Black and brown. That’s almost six times the number of “stop-and-frisks” in 2002. Philadelphia stopped 200,000 people on its streets in 2008, twice the number as in the previous year. Los Angeles stop-and-frisks hit a quarter million in 2008, double the rate in 2002. And that doesn’t count the people stopped in their cars in L.A.

Stop-and-frisk is the race-based law of the land, the American police state in its most elemental, predatory form, a system of methodical mass racial profiling that debases and criminalizes all African Americans, and which now serves as the primary intake mechanism for the national policy of mass Black incarceration.

The legal justification for the mass stopping and frisking of Blacks roughly dates to the beginnings of modern mass imprisonment of Blacks. In 1968, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that police can stop and detain citizens based on “reasonable suspicion” of involvement in crime, rather than the higher standard of “probably cause.” Of course, in a racist society, singling out Blacks for more intensive surveillance and questioning seems eminently reasonable. And when mass Black profiling ultimately results in far more Blacks being sucked into the criminal justice system, then the racist society concludes it was right all along – that African Americans are more prone to commit crimes. Mass Black profiling is guaranteed to find what it’s looking for: more Black crime. Mass Black profiling and mass Black incarceration are organic elements of the same, diabolical system that preys on African Americans as a group and makes the words “crime” and “Black” synonymous in the public mind.

“Mass Black profiling is guaranteed to find what it’s looking for: more Black crime.”
Nowhere is police predation more merciless than in public housing. New York City public housing is home to 400,000 people, 95 percent of them Black and Latino. The NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund has filed suit, charging that police so-called “vertical sweeps” from floor to floor of public housing buildings serve no legal purpose, and routinely subject residents and visitors to illegal stops and false arrests. Studies have shown that public housing tenants in New York are three times as likely to be stopped in their own complexes than people in surrounding neighborhoods with similar crimes rates. Police stops have doubled in public housing since 2004. Visitors are so harassed and intimidated by police behavior, many no longer visit their friends and relatives in public housing. The citywide public housing tenant organization says the perception among residents is that they are living in “penal colonies.” For millions of Black Americans, the Bill of Rights no longer exists on the streets and in the hallways of their city.

For Black Agenda Radio, I’m Glen Ford. On the web, go to www.BlackAgendaReport.com.
BAR executive editor Glen Ford can be contacted at Glen.Ford@BlackAgendaReport.com.

In Lebanon, some 40 years later, he is to pay a visit.

In America, a Black minister agitates in a New Orleans City Council meeting and demands entrance for residents who have come to protest the demolition of their homes to make way for luxury apartments. The protesters are met with Tazer guns and mace.

In Beirut, this response might include snipers and bullets. A non-violent tent occupation of Martyr’s Square is criticized for the economic damage inflicted on the downtown business district, itself occupied by foreign Capital.

In Detroit, residents destroy their valueless homes with gasoline and fire in order to recoup insurance money that will allow them to move out to the suburbs.

In Beirut, real estate barons offer a pittance to anyone willing to raze the city’s heritage to make way for hermetically sealed buildings closed off from the doomed street life below.

In Louisiana, six Black teenagers face emprisonment for assault in reaction to the hanging of nooses from a tree deemed “reserved” for white students.

In Beirut’s airport there is a waiting room clearly marked for arriving laborers. In Lebanon, the marginalized are stabbed in their sleep; thrown from their balconies; killed on construction sites. No one is prosecuted for these crimes.

In America, logos and signs maintain the country’s racist roots: Uncle Ben, Aunt Jemima, the Native American as symbol for sports teams. Consumers eating their rice or pancakes, patrons of baseball games wearing face paint and waving tomahawks, do not challenge this.

In Beirut, diners are entertained in sushi restaurants by Filipina women dolled up as Japanese geishas; in Indian restaurants by Syrian men sporting salwar kameez. No one protests.

In Philadelphia, white parents pull their children out of a private swimming pool when Black children from a summer camp show up for some relief from the summer heat. There are few if any public spaces for swimming.

In Beirut, scandals erupt due to the presence of foreign servants in private beach resorts. Similarly, the “public beach” is but a tiny strip of trash-littered sand along water polluted by untreated sewage. No one cares.

In Los Angeles, the architect who planned out a bunker-like U.S. chancellery in Damascus builds a library, the symbol of democratic access to information. Its design reflects the security needs of a prison complex. Its location is a low-income immigrant community seen as undesirable.

In Beirut, an Art Center rises in an industrial neighborhood, and touts its communal use. It welcomes a small subset of the population, none of whom is from the neighborhood.

On American theater screens, the movie “Driving Miss Daisy” portrays a fictitious scene in which a Black man chauffeurs a Southern doyenne to a speech by Dr. Martin Luther King. The chauffeur waits outside, far removed from the man who speaks of his liberation.

In Lebanon, nannies and domestic servants take care of households while their owners listen to Black artists who speak of their exclusion from American society.

In America, in one of his more famous works, Emory Douglas collages the controlling hand of Capital decorated with logos of corporations and other Voice destroyers.

In Beirut, the sponsors list of any given cultural event proudly lists the banks, foreign NGOs, and other corporations that make such importation and implantation of outside culture possible. No one seems to mind.

In Denver, at the mayoral state-of-the-city address, a Black woman is excoriated for singing “Lift Every Voice and Sing”–referred to as the Black National Anthem–instead of “The Star-Spangled Banner”. She replies to the harsh criticism: “Art is supposed to make you think.”

In Lebanon, a craftsman sings silently to himself and creates his artworks which, when copied by thieving “local artists”, will sell for more than he can ever imagine.

In American museums and gallery spaces, almost fifty years after his group arose from an oppressed community, the work of Emory Douglas is literally given currency by the very media that helped destroy the Panthers in the first place.

In Lebanon, former signs and symbols of resistance find themselves equally evaluated by a similar over-mediation. They are thus rendered void of actionable meaning.

In America, millions of voters walked into polling stations and cast a ballot for a Black man thinking they would bring change to the country. In fact, they didn’t.

In Beirut, a dozen or so art mavens walk into a lecture and listen to a Black man speaking of his activism yesteryear, thinking they are part of some minor revolution. In fact, they aren’t.

In America, any local cultural manifestation, any expression of history and context, any resistant voice that dares speak out is suppressed; co-opted; destroyed.

In Beirut, a Voiceless man far from his hometown works in a corner shop of a neighborhood he can’t afford and writes his poetry in a beautiful calligraphic hand. Then, he throws the pages away. He explains: “No one will ever read them; I write for no one.”

From an America that doesn’t deserve him, Emory Douglas is coming to Beirut. For fifty dollars, one can enter an Art Center’s hallowed halls and benefit from a workshop with the artist.

Meanwhile, in a Lebanon that deserves him less, the Voices most in need of him remain outside, ever marginalized; waiting to be lifted, their song never heard.

Now, it is kicking into full gear in Haiti. As we know, the member companies of the Orwellian-named mercenary trade association, the International Peace Operations Association, are offering their services in Haiti. But look for more stories like this one:

On January 15, a Florida based company called All Pro Legal Investigations registered the URL Haiti-Security.com. It is basically a copy of the company’s existing US website but is now targeted for business in Haiti, claiming the “purpose of this site is to act as a clearinghouse for information seekers on the state of security in Haiti.”

“All Protection and Security has made a commitment to the Haitian community and will provide professional security against any threat to prosperity in Haiti,” the site proclaims. “Job sites and supply convoys will be protected against looters and vandals. Workers will be protected against gang violence and intimidation. The people of Haiti will recover, with the help of the good people from the world over.”

The company boasts that it has run “Thousands of successful missions in Iraq & Afghanistan.” As for its personnel, “Each and every member of our team is a former Law Enforcement Officer or former Military service member,” the site claims. “If Operator experience, training and qualifications matter, choose All Protection & Security for your high-threat Haiti security needs.”

Among the services offered are: “High Threat terminations,” dealing with “worker unrest,” armed guards and “Armed Cargo Escorts.” Oh, and apparently they are currently hiring.

The concrete action undertaken by Rescue South Africa and Gift of the Givers is a clear expression ofubuntu. Ubuntu ngumuntu ngabantu. As we all know, many people remain buried under tons of ruble and debris waiting to be rescued. When we think of their suffering, we feel deeply and profoundly that we should be there, in Haiti, with them, trying our best to prevent death.

To symbolize this readiness we have decided to meet not just anywhere, but here, in the shadow of the Oliver Tambo International Airport. As far as we are concerned, we are ready to leave today, tomorrow, at any time to join the people of Haiti, to share in their suffering, help rebuild the country, moving from misery to poverty with dignity. Friends from around the world have confirmed their willingness to organize an airplane carrying medical supplies, emergency needs and ourselves.

While we cannot wait to be with our sisters and brothers in Haiti, we share the anguish of all Haitians in the Diaspora who are desperate to reach family and loved ones.

Soufrans youn nan nou se soufrans nou tout.

L’Union fait la force. Kouraj! Kenbe! Kenbe!

Youn soutni lòt nan lespri Mèm Amou an.

Our love to the nation now labeled the poorest of the western hemisphere. However, the spirit of ubuntu that once led Haiti to emerge as the first independent Black nation in 1804; helped Venezuela, Colombia and Ecuador attain liberty; and inspired our forefathers to shed their blood for the United States’ independence, cannot die. Today this spirit of solidarity must and will empower all of us to rebuild Haiti.

Ukwanda kwaliwa umthakathi.

Thank you.

The country has faced more than its fair share of catastrophes. Hundreds died in Port-au-Prince in an earthquake back in June 1770, and the huge earthquake of 7 May 1842 may have killed 10,000 in the northern city of Cap Haitien alone. Hurricanes batter the island on a regular basis, mostly recently in 2004 and again in 2008; the storms of September 2008 flooded the town of Gonaïves and swept away much of its flimsy infrastructure, killing more than a thousand people and destroying many thousands of homes. The full scale of the destruction resulting from this earthquake may not become clear for several weeks. Even minimal repairs will take years to complete, and the long-term impact is incalculable.

What is already all too clear, however, is the fact that this impact will be the result of an even longer-term history of deliberate impoverishment and disempowerment. Haiti is routinely described as the “poorest country in the western hemisphere“. This poverty is the direct legacy of perhaps the most brutal system of colonial exploitation in world history, compounded by decades of systematic postcolonial oppression.

The noble “international community” which is currently scrambling to send its “humanitarian aid” to Haiti is largely responsible for the extent of the suffering it now aims to reduce. Ever since the US invaded and occupied the country in 1915, every serious political attempt to allow Haiti’s people to move (in former president Jean-Bertrand Aristide’s phrase) “from absolute misery to a dignified poverty” has been violently and deliberately blocked by the US government and some of its allies.

Aristide’s own government (elected by some 75% of the electorate) was the latest victim of such interference, when it was overthrown by an internationally sponsored coup in 2004 that killed several thousand people and left much of the population smouldering in resentment. The UN has subsequently maintained a large and enormously expensive stabilisation and pacification force in the country.

Haiti is now a country where, according to the best available study, around 75% of the population “lives on less than $2 per day, and 56% – four and a half million people – live on less than $1 per day”. Decades of neoliberal “adjustment” and neo-imperial intervention have robbed its government of any significant capacity to invest in its people or to regulate its economy. Punitive international trade and financial arrangements ensure that such destitution and impotence will remain a structural fact of Haitian life for the foreseeable future.

It is this poverty and powerlessness that account for the full scale of the horror in Port-au-Prince today. Since the late 1970s, relentless neoliberal assault on Haiti’s agrarian economy has forced tens of thousands of small farmers into overcrowded urban slums. Although there are no reliable statistics, hundreds of thousands of Port-au-Prince residents now live in desperately sub-standard informal housing, often perched precariously on the side of deforested ravines. The selection of the people living in such places and conditions is itself no more “natural” or accidental than the extent of the injuries they have suffered.

As Brian Concannon, the director of the Institute for Justice and Democracy in Haiti, points out: “Those people got there because they or their parents were intentionally pushed out of the countryside by aid and trade policies specifically designed to create a large captive and therefore exploitable labour force in the cities; by definition they are people who would not be able to afford to build earthquake resistant houses.” Meanwhile the city’s basic infrastructure – running water, electricity, roads, etc – remains woefully inadequate, often non-existent. The government’s ability to mobilise any sort of disaster relief is next to nil.

The international community has been effectively ruling Haiti since the 2004 coup. The same countries scrambling to send emergency help to Haiti now, however, have during the last five years consistently voted against any extension of the UN mission’s mandate beyond its immediate military purpose. Proposals to divert some of this “investment” towards poverty reduction or agrarian development have been blocked, in keeping with the long-term patterns that continue to shape the distribution of international “aid”.

The same storms that killed so many in 2008 hit Cuba just as hard but killed only four people. Cuba has escaped the worst effects of neoliberal “reform”, and its government retains a capacity to defend its people from disaster. If we are serious about helping Haiti through this latest crisis then we should take this comparative point on board. Along with sending emergency relief, we should ask what we can do to facilitate the self-empowerment of Haiti’s people and public institutions. If we are serious about helping we need to stop trying to control Haiti’s government, to pacify its citizens, and to exploit its economy. And then we need to start paying for at least some of the damage we’ve already done.

It has represented the type of political model which has been promoted to the Arabs, by their rulers and by the West.

When George W Bush, the former US president, visited the United Arab Emirates during his last year in office, he praised Dubai and its models of economic and political prosperity; he promoted the UAE’s mantra and ethos as glimmers of hope to the new generation of Arabs.

It took the former president little more than a few hours during his stop-over to assess the conditions in the region, and to reach his conclusions: resistance to Israel clashes with the type of prosperity that was prevalent in Dubai.

Antithesis of Palestine?

Dubai hit a dramatic rise in the 1990s and became a success story that was carefully calibrated, promoted and disseminated in the Arab media and collective psyche.

Daniel Pipes, who has a reputation for hostility towards Arabs and Muslims, was interviewed two years ago in the Jerusalem Post praising Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum, the ruler of Dubai, after the release of his memoirs.

There was not one word about Palestine in that book which nevertheless offered a recipe of unregulated and unrestricted capitalism.

Dubai was supposed to be the antithesis of Palestine. It was designed to create a concrete Utopia that would encourage all young Arabs to forget about their political aspirations and dreams.

In Lebanon, the March 14 opposition movement has been posing this question to the Lebanese people for three years: Hanoi or Dubai? But Hanoi is today a far more promising model than Dubai.

Not only has Hanoi been liberated from foreign occupation and a corrupt puppet regime, but it has also become part of a sovereign country with a record of fast economic growth.

Much has been written about Dubai and even more will be written about the emirate which was positioned as the success story that all Arabs were to emulate.

However, its success is not based on sound economic or classical political theories. It was in fact a projection of what the West wanted to see in the Middle East.

This projection represented the fruits of US co-operation with Middle Eastern governments, especially in the realm of defence and national security. Dubai was more important for the US due to military intelligence co-operation than for its lavish seven-star hotels.

Playground for the rich

Dubai was supposed to be a vision but one not rooted in the productive sectors of the economy.

There were early warnings of the debacle that struck Dubai World – too much glitz and ostentation and little attention to a careful building of culture and economy that reflect the region.

There was a rush to build multi-billion dollar artificial ski slopes and playgrounds for the very rich of the world.

But Dubai did not want to be part of the region, politically speaking. Instead it modelled itself as a copy of Las Vegas in the heart of the Arab Middle East.

Dubai carefully steered away from all the issues that alarmed and agitated Arab public opinion.

Instead, Dubai and the other six emirates which comprise the UAE made sure that they operated within the realm of US foreign policy priorities. Dubai became a regular stop on the travel routes of US diplomats.

But people will wonder whether the recent crisis in Dubai is the apparent economic mismanagement resulting from rapid urbanisation and modernisation that lacked a soul.

Was this an example of a fundamental contradiction between economic growth and lack of democracy?

China and Vietnam have proved that rapid economic growth without democratisation could work, and work splendidly. Yet, Dubai’s model of economic growth seemed less planned and less guided by a realistic vision of the future.

There was little attempt to match future planning with Dubai’s demographic realities or even of the area around it. Instead, the emirate had to rely on the import of large numbers of Asian workers without any effort to integrate them, or even to afford them decent living standards and human conditions.

Lack of co-ordination

Dubai has dominated the imagination of young Arabs for less than two decades. Its rise was rapid and its decline may also be rapid as recent press stories seem to indicate.

Dubai’s shortcomings may indicate the lack of economic integration between Arabs. Worse, the UAE’s constituent emirates made no effort to co-ordinate economic planning among them.

In reality, the seven emirates acted like independent sovereign states, up until the recent crisis when Dubai had to plead with Abu Dhabi, the capital, in the name of Arab brotherhood.

It is not clear whether Abu Dhabi will bail its neighbour out, but the capital seems glad to be playing the role of the partial rescuer.

Lessons have to be taught. The relationships between the different emirates, and even between the different Arab countries, will have to be rethought.

Dubai was supposed to be the model of non-politics, or the model of anti-politics. Dubai TV, for example, reflected that message in Arab political and popular cultures. Paris Hilton replaced all the symbols of the Palestinian revolution in the Dubai TV culture. Fun, not resistance, was the new catchword.

Educated and skilled Arabs were welcomed in the Utopian emirate provided they left their political dreams and passions behind them. There was no room for the slogans of the Arab nationalist era, nor for the demands of the democracy or feminist movements.

Dubai would welcome you provided you did what you were told and provided you paid homage to the ruling family.

Arabs questioning policies

But the collapse of Dubai may redraw the political and economic pictures of the region. Maybe governments will now be pressed to explain the purposes and motives behind their economic policies. And maybe the Arab public will now raise more questions about the various models that are promoted as exemplary by the West.

It was only a few years ago that Western governments and media believed the emirate of Dubai could do no wrong. Western publications that had once praised the Dubai experiment and the wisdom and vision of “Sheikh Mo” are now discovering the shortsightedness of the policies that guided the emirate’s growth. Western media are suddenly discovering the plight of Asian workers in the region.

The Arab public has experienced disappointments and disillusionments before but this one will have consequences for US foreign policy.

The Arab people have been urged to abandon struggle and the search for justice and to seek the model of Dubai. Now, the young generation of Arabs will not seek pilgrimage in Dubai.

Another destination will be sought and this could signal a return to Palestine.

For among these many are they who never regarded the US as an empire, and thus were woefully unprepared for the hunger of any president for more executive power and the necessities of any empire to expand, rather than cede, power.

Many of the most vociferous critics of the expansive powers of the Bush Administration, of his wire traps, his secret prisons, of his penchant for total surveillance over Americans at home or abroad are strikingly silent now when under Obama these same powers reside in the executive. Secret prisons? Yes, still there. Illegal renditions? Still there. Wire taps of Americans without court order? Yup.

Indeed, little has changed but the public tone of debate. There’s little bombast. A good deal less bluster. A whole lot less “fear” talk. But the same programs are on tap. And there’s still wars begun in deception and greed, and continued because of simple political necessity.

Yet there’s more. In the next five years or so, many of the men who fought in these wars will be back in the US working as prison guards, cops, security specialists, and the like. Many will be as bitter as vinegar, as angry as a hornet’s nest because they’ll know, as previous generations of veterans learned, that they fought not for the people, not even for the constitution, but for the wealthy rulers who can care less about their lives or their loss. What will this mean to US society? How will it impact the future?

Almost 90 years ago, at the end of World War I, soldiers, bitter at the loss of the war and humiliated by the terms of the Treaty of Versailles, became a right-wing political force that would later emerge as the Nazis which tore through Europe with a vengeance. That is to say, wars don’t end when politicians or diplomats sign treaties or pacts. They fester and feed off unresolved issues and reemerge sometimes worse than before, and they sometimes return to the land that birthed them.

From death row, this is Mumia Abu Jamal

December 6, 2009

LISTEN TO “WARS TO COME”

]]> http://www.elkilombo.org/wars-to-come/feed/ 0 http://www.elkilombo.org/cant-pay-wont-pay/ http://www.elkilombo.org/cant-pay-wont-pay/#comments Tue, 08 Dec 2009 22:37:12 +0000 El Kilombo http://www.elkilombo.org/?p=909 In post-apartheid South Africa, social movements are using direct action to fight privatization, displacement and police brutality. In an interview with KPFA’s “Against the Grain”, the Western Cape Anti-Eviction Campaign’s Ashraf Cassiem talks about their work opposing neoliberalism on the ground, helping poor people to self-organize to fight eviction, turn back on water and electricity for which they cannot afford to pay, and resist the commodification of basic resources. Listen to the interview

[Related: "Fighting Foreclosure in South Africa"]

But there is another reason. Wars fought overseas are real-life metaphors for political wars fought here at home. War abroad are ultimately about domestic politics; about the struggle for political supremacy in America. War, the old adage goes, is the sport of kings. In the US, war is the sport of political parties. She or he who sounds most hawkish, who shows political toughness with other peoples’ children will tend to prevail in the elections.

Afghanistan is thus a prop in a great play of little importance in and of itself but of great symbolic value in the long wars between right and left in the American body politic. It matters not one wit what Americans want, nor what party they belong to. US political parties are bought and paid for tools of great corporate and private wealth.  Thus we see the spectacle of people voting for ostensibly anti-war candidates who once in office vow to more wars, more weapons, and more troops. Why? Because war is big business. It has been since the US Civil War when fortunes were made arming, feeding, and equipping troops.

War is never about what politicians say war is about. Afghanistan is no more about terrorism than Iraq was about weapons of mass destruction. Today, Britain is about to launch a rare parliamentary inquiry into how it got into the Iraq war. Isn’t it remarkable that they can ask questions after the war, but not before? Of course, they did so in fealty to their big brother, the US, for the basest of reasons, for politics and for profits.

From death row, this is Mumia Abu Jamal

November 29, 2009

LISTEN TO “GHOSTS OF VIETNAM”