Showing posts with label Injustice. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Injustice. Show all posts

Background RUC Pat Finucane Rosemary Nelson Colm McCartney Sean Farmer

The current story.

Apology for 1989 Finucane murder

The British Government is "deeply sorry" following the murder of Belfast solicitor Patrick Finucane, Northern Ireland Secretary Owen Paterson has said.

Making a statement in the Commons, he told MPs that Mr Finucane's killing in front of his family on February 12 1989 was "a terrible crime", adding that there have been long-standing allegations of security force collusion in his murder. more

Update:

AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL

PUBLIC STATEMENT
AI Index: EUR 45/017/2011
13 October 2011

United Kingdom/Northern Ireland: Deplorable government decision to renege on promise of public inquiry into Finucane killing


Amnesty International deplored yesterday’s announcement by the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, Owen Paterson, that there would be no public inquiry into the 1989 killing of Belfast solicitor Patrick Finucane as a failure to ensure full accountability. The Northern Ireland Secretary instead appeared before Parliament and stated that he had instructed a senior lawyer, Sir Desmond de Silva QC, to conduct a review of all the available documentation in relation to the case of Patrick Finucane in order “to produce a full public account of any involvement by the Army, the Royal Ulster Constabulary, the Security Service or other UK Government body in the murder of Patrick Finucane”.


Amnesty International said the decision reneged on past promises that the government would establish a public inquiry to investigate the killing of Patrick Finucane. The organization urged the government to honour its commitment to hold a public inquiry and set about its establishment without delay.


The proposed review falls far short of the requirements of international human rights law to ensure that there is an effective, independent, impartial and thorough investigation into the killing of Patrick Finucane. A review of documentation by Sir Desmond de Silva QC, regardless of how thorough it is, would remain an inadequate substitute for an inquiry held in public, with powers to compel witnesses and testimony, and conducted with the full participation of the family members. more



Background

An Phoblacht
February 2001
RUC handlers face prosecution

by Laura Friel

Two RUC Special Branch officers may face prosecution for their role in the killing of Belfast defence lawyer Pat Finucane. Papers have been sent by the Stevens team to the Director of Public Prosecutions, who will decide whether the RUC handlers of William Stobie will be prosecuted.

As an agent working for the RUC, William Stobie is currently awaiting trial for his role in the Finucane killing. As a UDA quartermaster, Stobie has already admitted supplying and disposing of the weapons used in the shooting. Crucially, Stobie has said that he warned his handlers on at least two occasions ``that a murder was about to be committed''.

At first, the RUC claimed that they could not act on the information they received because they did not know who was the intended target. Stobie has claimed that he too was unaware of the intended target but according to another witness, the former journalist Neil Mulholland, Stobie did know the target was Finucane and may have told his handlers.

other British agent, Brian Nelson, in his role within the UDA, supplied a photograph of Pat Finucane and his personal details to the loyalist gang that carried out the killing. Nelson says he alerted his British Army handlers that Finucane was being targeted.

Now, according to a senior source within the Stevens team, the two RUC handlers are claiming that no such conversation with Stobie took place. The handlers, known only as `Ian' and `Raymond', have been questioned by detectives working within the Stevens investigation.

News that the two RUC handlers may face prosecution came as legal insiders are predicting that the case against their agent is about to collapse. Judge Liam McCollum is expected to rule within days on whether Stobie's defence team is entitled to medical reports on the chief prosecution witness.

Last year, former journalist and present NIO press officer Neil Mulholland, at the centre of the case against Stobie, dramatically signed himself into a psychiatric unit. At the time, An Phoblacht warned that the case might collapse.


January 2007


An Phoblacht
April 2001
RUC to face charges over Finucane killing

BY LAURA FRIEL

Two RUC officers who knew a loyalist gang was about to kill but did nothing to thwart the death squad who shot dead Belfast defence lawyer Pat Finucane in 1989 are to be charged with withholding information. The two facing charges are believed to be the Special Branch handlers of William Stobie, the UDA quartermaster who supplied and disposed of the weapons used in the assassination.

The RUC were alerted to a pending loyalist attack by Stobie 1 hour and 40 minutes before the killing, but failed to intervene to prevent the fatal attack. It is understood that the Stevens team will recommend charges be brought against the RUC officers in a report prepared for RUC Chief Ronnie Flanagan.

News of the pending charges were leaked to the press as the case against the only other person charged in connection with the Finucane killing appeared about to collapse. William Stobie, a UDA quartermaster attached to a notorious loyalist gang based in North Belfast, was an agent working for RUC Special Branch at the time of the killing.

Stobie alerted his handlers when he was asked to supply weapons for a pending loyalist plot to target ``a top Provo''. A few days later, on Sunday 9 February, the day of the killing, Stobie made two calls to the RUC. The second call was made at 5.30pm. Stobie told his handler ``the team is out''.

The RUC knew the loyalist gang involved, they knew the area in which they operated and in the words of one commentator, ``as little as four vehicle check points could have thwarted this attack''. The RUC did nothing.

After the killing, Stobie alerted his RUC handlers when the principle weapon used in the shooting, a Browning automatic, was being moved. The RUC were given an opportunity to arrest the leading UDA gunman involved in the killing in possession of the murder weapon. The RUC did nothing.

Stobie claims that after the killing he was targeted for harassment by RUC Special Branch who planted weapons in his home. Stobie was arrested and charged with possession but the case against him was dropped after he threatened to reveal all he knew about the RUC Special Branch's culpability in the Finucane killing.

Stobie has also claimed that the RUC Special Branch were behind a plot to kill him in 1994 because they feared he would reveal their role. He claims that the UDA took him to a house and shot him six times. ``I was set up by RUC Special Branch because I was the only person who knew that they had done nothing to stop the murder,'' said Stobie.

The case against Stobie is on the verge of collapse after the chief prosecution witness withdrew his evidence. Former journalist Neil Mulholland, who is now employed as a NIO press officer, contacted the Director of Public Prosecutions last week to formally withdraw three statements implicating Stobie. Earlier in the year Mulholland had signed himself into a psychiatric hospital, effectively undermining his credibility as a witness.

During a court hearing last week, an attempt by Stobie's legal team to force disclosure of Mulholland's medical records was stalled when the proceedings were adjourned for another month at the request of the prosecution.

The news that two RUC officers are now facing charges does nothing to undermine the Finucane family's demand for an international independent public inquiry. As predicted, the Stevens inquiry has collapsed into what republicans and nationalists always suspected it was, a mechanism of damage limitation.

A campaign of vilification against Pat Finucane prior to his death began with RUC Special Branch. During an interrogation of a loyalist, RUC Special Branch officers suggested Finucane should be targeted. It was they who issued death threats against the solicitor through his clients. It was they who compiled a dossier and briefed British Minister Douglas Hogg, which promoted his House of Commons outburst about certain lawyers being too sympathetic to the IRA.

One of their agents, William Stobie, played a key role in the actual plot, a plot which the RUC Special Branch refused to thwart. In the aftermath, the RUC Special Branch ignored information which could have resulted in the arrest and prosecution of the gunmen.

They intervened to suppress evidence when a loyalist confessed his role in the killing to an RUC detective. And if Stobie can be believed, they tried to stitch up a loyalist who knew too much. Withholding information? Conspiracy to murder would be nearer the mark.





An Phoblacht
September 2003
RUC questioned over Rosemary Nelson killing

Two former RUC police members have been questioned over allegations that they threatened the life of the Lurgan defence lawyer Rosemary Nelson and may have colluded in her death.

Nelson died in a loyalist car bombing in March 1999. The circumstances of her death mirrored those accompanying that of Belfast solicitor Patrick Finucane ten years earlier. In both cases, death threats by members of the RUC Special Branch preceded the killings.

Information that two former RUC members had been questioned in connection with the killing surfaced as relatives of Rosemary Nelson were told that the inquiry was finished, despite the failure to secure any convictions.

It is understood that the two RUC suspects were questioned following claims by a convicted loyalist killer that two named RUC officers had asked him to have Rosemary Nelson shot dead.

Loyalist Trevor McKeown first made the claim to a newspaper earlier this year. McKeown said that, in 1997, during an interrogation regarding an unrelated sectarian killing, the RUC members questioning him offered to pass on the Lurgan solicitor's personal details to have her killed.

McKeown's allegations were initially believed to have been linked to a bid to overturn his current conviction, but Rosemary Nelson's family have recently discovered that the officers named by McKeown were two of a number of RUC personnel questioned six years ago, after the solicitor filed a complaint against RUC threats to her life.

An internal RUC investigation followed the complaint but was subsequently discredited. Later a team headed by London Metropolitan Commander Niall Mulvihill was sent to investigate the complaint.

Mulvihill's team questioned a number of RUC members, but his report was never made public. No action was taken, on the grounds of insufficient evidence.

Following McKeown's allegations, the two former RUC members agreed to be interviewed by the Port team, but denied the loyalist's claims.

Rosemary's sister Bernie said the family had first wondered if McKeown was "trying to tell a story for his own ends", but later, "when we heard that he named names which were in the Mulvihill report, we were concerned".

The family was recently informed that the Port investigation had ended. Commenting, a spokesperson for the family said that they were disappointed, but not surprised that it appeared that no one would be prosecuted for Nelson's murder.

"It had been the family's view for some time that the Port investigation was not going to expose collusion in the case, nor was it going to bring people to justice."

The family went on to say that, in their opinion, there is extensive evidence suggesting collusion in the murder and that they are placing their trust in the inquiry being undertaken by Judge Cory. The retired Canadian Supreme Court Judge is currently examining six controversial cases, to determine if there is evidence of collusion sufficient enough to lead a public inquiry.




An Phoblacht
September 2003
Court hears how PSNI interferes with forensic evidence

Sinn Féin's Pat Doherty MP said it is ``remarkable'' that the British Secretary of State Paul Murphy has not made any comment following revelations made last week in a Belfast Court the senior members of the PSNI police have attempted to interfere with the work of the Forensic Science Agency in order to wrongly convict people.

The claims came from one of the North's most senior forensic scientists, Ann Irwin, during a court case in Belfast last week.

On Tyesday, the case in which the revelations were originally made was dismissed because there was no evidence linking the man charged to the action. Despite this senior PSNI members attempted to secure his conviction based on false and flawed forensic evidence.

No statement has been made on the issue by PSNI chief Hugh Orde, his boss Paul Murphy or any member of the Policing Board.

Mr. Doherty said:

``In any other judicial system a revelation that senior members of the police force have over a period of years interfered in the work of a Forensic Science Agency in order to wrongfully convict people would spark outrage.

``It says much about public confidence in the system of justice in the six counties that most people are not surprised by the revelation.''

He demanded to know the identity of the senior officers involved.

``We can only assume they are Special Branch members and because of their seniority, close colleagues of the Chief Constable Hugh Orde.,,. From this silence are we to assume that the above individuals condone this practice or do not feel it important?''

``It is time for those who defend this force to tell us straight what they think of this scandal. It is time for the Secretary of State to speak on this matter and it is time for the many hundreds if not thousands of people convicted in the Diplock Courts on the basis of Forensic Evidence to seek a review of their convictions.''




An Phoblacht
November 2003
Stevens seeks prosecutions

London police chief John Stevens, who is heading an investigation into British Crown force collusion with loyalist killers, revealed today his inquiries have led to new breakthroughs.

He has already established ``shocking'' levels of colluson in the murders of Belfast defence lawyer Pat Finucane and another loyalist victim, Adam Lambert.

But in Belfast today he confirmed he has sent files on another eight to ten murders to the Director of Public Prosecutions in the North of Ireland, and more were on the way.

Brian Nelson, a British military agent who acted as the intelligence officer for a UDA death-squad, is at the centre of the allegations.

Nelson, operating for the British Army's murderous `Force Research Unit', directed the UDA to kill Mr Finucane in front of his family at their North Belfast home in February 1989.

Stevens also confirmed his 12-year-long investigation into claims that the RUC police Special Branch and British army units were involved in assassination plots is now centred on an alleged top informer inside the IRA, referred to as `Stakeknife'.

Stakeknife himself carried out killings on behalf of the British Army, it has been claimed.

It is also alleged that loyalist gunmen who planned to murder Stakeknife were re-directed by Nelson to kill a West Belfast pensioner, Francisco Notorantonio, in order to save the life of the British Army agent.

Mr Nelson died earlier this year in mysterious circumstances, but Stevens claimed his investigation ``know exactly what happened and why it happened.''

He said he intends to continue his investigations for another six months.

Meanwhile, the British Secretary of State, Paul Murphy, said yesterday that he hoped a decision on Canadian judge Peter Cory's report into alleged collusion would be made by the end of the year.

The Cory investigation, which was set up to recommend whether public inquiries are necessary into certain collusion cases, has been criticised as a delaying tactic by the families of Pat Finucane, Rosemary Nelson and Robert Hamill, who all died in controversial circumstances.

In an interview in New York, Mr Murphy said that Judge Cory would come to London and Dublin next week to discuss his reports with the governments, and ``as soon as possible after that we'd want to make them public.''




An Phoblacht
December 2003
FORMER RUC MAN BACKS COLLUSION CLAIM

A former RUC detective has claimed that police informers who carried out murders were later shielded from prosecution.

Speaking on a UTV documentary, Johnston Brown offers his support to Raymond McCord, who believes two men involved in the killing of his son worked for the RUC Special Branch.

Raymond Junior, a 22-year-old former RAF man, was battered to death in Newtownabbey six years ago.

His father believes he was killed by the unionist paramilitary UVF to cover up a drug deal.

``I know exactly what happened to him. he went to visit a friend in jail and after the jail visit he came home and was lured to his death by so-called friends,'' said the victim's father.

But Mr McCord's most serious allegation is that two men involved in the killing were working for the RUC Special Branch.

The allegation is now being investigated by the Police Ombudsman Nuala O`Loan.

``As a protestant from a unionist background, I always thought when I heard about this collusion it was republican propaganda. It`s not republican propaganda, its the truth.''

On tonights Insight show, he is backed by former detective Johnston Brown, who says members of the UVF in Mount Vernon appeared to be `above the law'.

Brown said: ``Could we have put the majority of them in jail in 1997, 1998, 1999? Absolutely. Lives would have been saved time and time again. There appeared to be no will to prosecute certain individuals.''

Meanwhile, Mr McCord is facing a campaign of intimidation by the paramilitaries.

`SPY' CIRCUS FOR HIGH COURT

Meanwhile, Freddie Scappaticci, who denies being the British Army agent and IRA informer `Stakeknife', has been summonsed by a senior British intelligence operative.

Sam Rosenfeld, who once worked undercover gathering intelligence on the IRA in both the Six and 26 Counties, has also summonsed London police chief John Stevens to appear at the High Court in London.

Outside the Royal Courts of Justice, Rosenfeld said: ``I want the truth. It's time the truth about all this collusion was known.''

The `Stakeknife' figure is accused of carrying out a series of killings of Republicans while working undercover in the IRA on behalf of the British Army's terrorist unit, the Force Research Unit (FRU).

Sinn Féin has backed Scappaticci in regard to the allegations made against him. Mr Scappaticci's Belfast lawyer said his client did not know Mr Rosenfeld.

The case is due to be heard on December 17.

Stevens, who is continuing his inquiry into allegations of collusion between the British forces and paramilitary asssasins, has confirmed he is to question an agent known as Stakeknife. They have yet to meet.

Rosenfeld, a building contractor, worked for the FRU between 1990 and 1993. British Defence chiefs are attempting to gag him to prevent damaging details being revealed about its `dirty war' in Ireland.

A former intelligence agent known as Kevin Fulton and Martin Ingram, once a FRU handler turned whistle-blower have been summonsed as well. Fulton has confirmed he will be attending.

Mr Rosenfeld claimed his partner lost their baby daughter a month before she was due to be born after a police raid on their home in Irvinestown, County Fermanagh in June 1992. He was not there at the time and is understood to blame bungling by the security forces for the loss of his unborn child.

He and Mr Fulton have also claimed their military bosses reneged on an agreement to re-settle them with a pension after their links with the intelligence agencies ended.

The the 1989 murder of Belfast lawyer Pat Finucane is one of a number of killings involving alleged collusion which is under investigation by Sir John`s team.

Mr Rosenfeld claimed this week that the British Ministry of Defence would attempt a cover up of details of their operations in Northern Ireland in the years before the IRA`s first ceasefire in August 1994.

He also said he had suffered British harassment for a decade.

He added: ``Everyone has suffered, particularly families who have had relatives murdered in disputed circumstances. They need closure in the same way I do.

``Sir John Stevens who has been investigating collusion for the last 14 years is in a position to answer important questions.''




Daily Ireland
May 24 2006

PAID FOR SILENCE - Finucane killer serves three years of 22-year term

Barrett’s generous relocation package for silence on state collusion

The killer of Belfast lawyer Pat Finucane has been given a generous relocation package by the British Ministry of Defence (MoD) in return for his silence on the extent of state collusion, one of his would-be victims claimed last night.

UDA gunman and British agent Ken Barrett was freed by the Sentence Review Commission yesterday after applying for early release under the terms of the Good Friday Agreement.

It is understood he has been relocated to begin a new life in Britain.

Barrett had served nearly three years in Maghaberry prison after pleading guilty to murdering Mr Finucane, who was shot 14 times in his family home in north Belfast by a gang of UDA gunmen.

An investigation by metropolitan police commissioner, John Stevens, confirmed that several gang members were paid agents of British intelligence agencies, including the notorious Force Research Unit.

Barrett dramatically changed his plea to guilty during the last week of his trial at Belfast Crown Court in September 2004. He was jailed for a minimum of 22 years for a series of offences, including murder and attempted murder.
Belfast Sinn Féin councillor Alex Maskey was targeted by the UDA triggerman in June 1988 while he was having a meal at an Antrim Road hotel – one year before Mr Finucane’s murder.

Another British agent – Shankill Road intelligence officer Brian Nelson – contacted Barrett and told him of the Sinn Féin man’s location. By the time Barrett arrived at the hotel, Mr Maskey had already left.

In 1992 Nelson pleaded guilty to five counts of conspiracy to murder and was sentenced to ten years, after being exposed as a British agent by the Steven’s inquiry team in 1990.

Mr Maskey said Nelson – who was also involved in Mr Finucane’s murder – had been released under similar circumstances to Barrett. He told Daily Ireland that Barrett’s release had been a “further act of collusion” and that the British agent had been given a generous relocation package in exchange for his silence on the extent of the state’s nefarious activities.

Mr Maskey said: “Nelson had also changed his plea to guilty in the last stages of his trial and was released during the late 1990s. He was relocated and was given a substantial financial package.

“There is no reason to believe that Barrett hasn’t been given the same treatment.”




An Phoblacht
November 1999
Families seek truth after 25 years

RUC implicated in double killing

by Laura Friel

WHY DID RUC officers who recognised the UDR checkpoint as a ``fake'' when they were illegally stopped by loyalists 45 minutes before a double sectarian murder do nothing to challenge the masquerading gang?

That's the question which Sean McCartney, the brother of one of two GAA fans who were killed at a bogus UDR roadblock almost 25 years ago, wants answering now.

Colm McCartney and Sean Farmer were travelling from Dublin back to Derry after attending a GAA football semi final in August 1975. Their bodies were found, riddled with bullets, just before midnight, a few hundred yards north of the border in Tullyvallen, near Newtownhamilton.

``We always suspected collusion by the RUC or UDR,'' says Sean. The family's suspicions were raised after the bodies of the two men were found outside their car. They were later told by the RUC that there had been a ``fake'' UDR patrol in the vicinity just prior to the killings.

``Over the years, a number of people who also drove through that bogus checkpoint have spoken to us,'' says Sean. Why Sean and Colm were specifically selected for murder might never be known. ``Obviously they were easily identified as Catholics,'' says Sean. ``Perhaps they also drove into the checkpoint alone.''

Confirmation of an RUC patrol also being stopped at the bogus checkpoint recently came to light via a copy of inquest affadavits in which three RUC officers - Sergeant F. Bartholomew and Constables Robert Harvey Gibson and Mervyn Coleman - described the incident.

According to the documents, an armed RUC patrol ``in uniform, with a civilian jacket over tunics'' and travelling in a ``hired'' car, was heading towards the border on the main Newtownhamilton to Castleblayney Road when they were stopped by a man dressed in ``full military combat uniform'' and waving a red torch. The RUC patrol also saw a second man, dressed in a similar uniform and carrying an SLR rifle, lying in a ditch.

The RUC officers describe how one of the uniformed men approached their vehicle and asked for the driver's licence before realising that the three men in the car were members of the RUC. ``Realising something was wrong,'' says RUC Sergeant Bartholomew, ``I told Constable Gibson to drive on.''

After the incident, the RUC patrol drove back to their barracks. On the way, they radioed ahead to check that there were no authorised UDR patrols in the area. It was confirmed. The RUC patrol was stopped at 10.45pm. The inquest puts the time of the two deaths at 11.30pm. ``The RUC had 45 minutes to do something and they did nothing,'' says Sean.

But the questions don't stop there.

Presumably, after the killings, the RUC patrol would have been able to provide vital identification evidence for the ongoing murder investigation. Yet, to date, no one has been questioned about the killings by the RUC.

In a recent affidavit by former RUC Sergeant John Weir, Weir names those involved in the Farmer/McCartney murders. He names UDR Sergeant Robert McConnell, Portadown UVF killer Robin Jackson, and an RUC Reservist. ``The RUC Reservist named by Weir is still alive,'' says Sean, ``but as far as we know, he has never been questioned about the killings. For all we know he may still be a serving member of the RUC.''




An Phoblacht
January 1999
'We are Special Branch'

A republican ex-prisoner is in fear of his life after four men dressed in civilian clothing, claiming to be RUC officers, tried to abduct him.

The incident happened on Monday evening at about 5.15pm as the man, a first year student at Queen's Univerity, was leaving an exam centre in the univerity's leisure complex. He told An Phoblacht that he noticed two men acting suspiciously, and apparently watching him, at the front of the building.

``One was talking on a mobile phone, the other was standing near the door. I went back and made a phone call then left by a side door, but I had to go past the front entrance and the pair spotted me and came after me. At the end of the street, at the Stranmillis Road junction, another two were standing about. I went to a bus stop but they came toward me and I moved away. Further up the street I made my way to a public phone box and two of the men approached me, one got in front of me and the other grabbed me''.

It was then that one of the men addressed the man by name and said, `come with us, we are Special Branch, and we want to talk to you for ten minutes'.

The man broke away and ran into a nearby bakery.

``At this point I was really freaking out, I didn't know who these guys were and thought I was going to be abducted and shot. I kept telling a bakery assistant that I thought I was going to be shot but she didn't take me seriously. Eventually I got her to ask the men for ID, which they produced''.

The ex-POW then left the shop and pushed his way through the second pair of men who were at the door and went to the phone box and called his family to arrange a lift home.

``As I was making the call the four tried to pull me out of the box and when I asked them if they were going to arrest me they threatened to `kick the fuck out of me'. They warned me that they would `be on my back any time I was out of West Belfast'''.

The man said that because of the row he had in the shop, which made their approach so public, the men left him alone to wait for his family to pick him up.

``I am fearful of my life,'' said the man, ``this incident was very frightening and then to be threatened in the way I was makes me believe these men were up to something sinister''.

Phoblacht phoned the bakery into which the man fled and a manager confirmed that the incidnet had occurred. He also confirmed that he phoned the RUC about a second incident which occurred later that night and they admitted that it was RUC members who followed the West Belfastman.


Related:
Jim Gamble: Looking Back (Operation Ballast - RUC collusion)

Trust us, we're the BBC. Shurely Shome Mishtake (Ronnie Flanagan/Rosemary Nelson murder/Shameful BBC bias)

Share:

Who Does This Remind You Of?

Firstly let me make something thing quite clear. I neither wanted to, or ever intended to, ever again blog about the two people responsible for Madeleine McCann's disappearance, her parents, Kate and Gerry McCann. But...

But it's that damn twitter thing, it's almost as if someone is poking me every couple of minutes with a sharp stick and saying, what about this then, you remember this bit dontcha? And that's the trouble, I do, and unfortunately, all too well.

Perhaps before going further, and moving to the crux of the post, it might be politic to explain my reasons, however reluctant those reasons might have been initially, for my getting involved in this sordid circus.

More than happy blogging against injustice in my own little way here at Only in America, I can't in all honesty say what and when was the tipping point. I can only hazard a guess that it must have been a reaction to the surfeit of sycophantic mush and drivel that we were being constantly bombarded with from every shameful and irresponsible media outlet in the country. And that is bar none by the way, from the Guardian to the Star, the dereliction of duty by the media, being equalled only by that of Law enforcement in this country. Guilty all!

But get involved I did, in a light hearted manner, and soon thereafter The McCann Gallery came into being. And here I must stress, it was light hearted, because to us all, all of us with two neurons bolted together that is, that it was patently obvious who was responsible for the disappearance of Madeleine, and that justice would be done, and Mummy and Daddy would get theirs. Justice all round, justice for Madeleine, and justice for those responsible for her demise and subsequent disappearance without trace, the same Mummy and Daddy, the Doctors McCann.

And just in case anyone should be in doubt as to where I stand on the issue, let me borrow this from a previous post; and I will even post a graphic to reinforce that stance.

....And what is it all for? Two chavy Doctors who are as clearly guilty of all they are suspected of, as equally clear they are both categorically insane. And insane they are, who else in their right mind would have the affront to talk about reputation given the circumstances that surround them?

People on occasion ask me how I can be so sure they are guilty, invariably my reply; I can use a spoon. And that really is it in nutshell, once you have reached that level of sophistication, this farce, this charade lays open to you, all Danae to the stars if you will.


And that's it! that's all the level of sophistication you need to attain, to draw the right conclusion in this case. I can use a spoon, therefore I can conclude. But what does that then say of the Home Office, Leicester plod, and England's finest, the Met?

eta: And all you plods involved in this ''review'' if you can't see the obvious (or choose not to) and if at the end of it all, these two aren't sat in a cell, then it's time to hand the badge back in. Or give it to the ape with the spoon, I'm sure he would make better use of it than you ineffectual fucks.

But then something happened to change all that light heartedness, it soon became obvious, thanks to both Portuguese and British Government machinations, that there was never going to be any justice. Justice, unlike Madeleine McCann had gone straight out the window. Aided and abetted in this country, by every Government organisation, and every NGO alike.

Aided and abetted by all, other than one small section of society who were having none of it, bloggers. Where would this case be now if bloggers hadn't dug their heels in? The same place Madeleine McCann finds herself, in a hole somewhere, I can't tell you where exactly, but I know two people who can.

I'm proud to call myself a blogger, whether I do any good I don't really know, but I know it's better than sitting on my arse and not railing about injustices in this world. Not when the tools to do so are so readily available to all, and at no cost to any of us. Long live a free and unrestricted internet.

Equally as people asked me, how could I be so sure that the McCann's were guilty, they then started to ask, particularly as my graphics became increasingly more cutting: How can you be so cruel? ....... It was at this point that I was going to write a few words by way of a reply, but a check of the archives show that they are already writ, here they be.

Cards On The Table

It would appear some of my recent posts are not to everybody's liking, not PC enough, nasty language and all that.

To my detractors I say this:

No matter what I produce, no matter what I say, no matter how I say it; it is nothing but nothing compared to what these two creatures have pulled, it is nothing compared to the people they have used and it is nothing compared to the people they are trying to destroy.

When I think what Goncalo Amaral has gone through, and continues to go through, it is not but scandalous, it is heinous.

He has effectively lost his job, his career is over after I don't know how many years. He finds himself in court on trumped up charges, and astonishingly convicted of them, but that part is a Portuguese matter.

But what is not a Portuguese matter is the way this country has behaved towards the man, a man who's only crime was to be a copper, do his job and try to find out what happened to Madeleine McCann.

And a crime it must be, for I can see no other reason why this Government should collude with the Portuguese in seeking his removal from the investigation.

A crime it must be, for I can see no other reasons that the man and his good name have been sullied and dragged through the mud and portrayed as everything from incompetent to lazy to smelly, sweaty, sardine muncher.

And who is it that presumes to sit in judgement on the man and write such xenophobic vitriolic trash? none other than those champions of morals, seekers of truth, the UK press.

A press more interested in reporting, and falsely, Goncalo Amaral's luncheon habits than it is of finding out just what happened to "Our Maddie."

A press, that had it given over just a fraction of its attention and one tenth of its column inches to inquire into all the glaring contradictions in this case, had it done that, then things might, as we stand today, look a whole lot different.

A press so obviously biased, so derelict in its duties and so utterly vile in its manner of reporting that it is the shame of this Nation.

And it is as a Nation that we should get down on our knees in shame and beg the forgiveness of Goncalo Amaral.

But our treatment of Amaral is but a nothing compared to that of Madeleine McCann by her own parents.

Just when I think this sordid pair cannot go any lower, they never fail to surprise me by plumbing new depths, in their equally sordid and undignified use of their own daughter.

A daughter I might add, for who's death the are responsible, as equally as they are responsible for hiding her body, but they are unequalled, they are unparalleled as parents in their grotesque and obscene manner in which they have used of their daughter's name, image and memory, as they hatch and move from one vile plot to the next in an effort to cover their crimes.

This is where I stand, this is how I will be counted, I will write what I want in any manner I want, and I say to my detractors, go and fuck yourselves, don't visit here, go to fucking devil, and take your PC with you.


OK, let's have a look at a couple of clips and words oh so familiar.

It's the first bloke, Scott Peterson, that is the star of the show, unless of course you want to compare Susan Smith with Kate McCann. (video provided)

Scott Peterson: At this point unfortunately, it has reached a point where suspicion of me, is keeping people from searching for Laci.

Its lost that um there focussing on me, we need to ask people when was the last time they really though about Laci missing? as opposed to when the suspicions that swirl around me. Currently um its important that we get people out there looking for Laci again. Transcript for all here.




Yes that's the one, don't look at me look at the bogey man, or straw man as the case may be. Change of plan, no link, here is the graphic in person.



A collection of McCann's odious utterances and malignant mantras can be found, along with the thoughts of a couple of others, here. A Blight On Humanity: Gerry McCann

And here below, a rendition of Susan Smith, performed by Kate McCann.



Vile creatures.

A couple of posts previous, that may be of interest.

A McQuestion Or Two

Barking, Or Something Else Entirely? eta: This really is a must read, but do strap in first.
Share:

FBI: Here's a Rock, Go throw It Through That Window - FBI: Youre nicked Old Son For Having a Rock In Your Hand

And that kiddywinks is just about the top and bottom of ninety five percent of the FBI's anti-terrorist successes.

A more detailed update of what has passed before. (as law enforcement)

It's not all bad though, it did inspire a little creativity.




How the FBI's Network of Informants Actually Created Most of the Terrorist Plots "Foiled" in the US Since 9/11
The FBI has built a massive network of spies to prevent another domestic attack. But are they busting terrorist plots—or leading them?
October 9, 2011

UPDATE: On September 28, Rezwan Ferdaus, a 26-year-old graduate of Northeastern University, was arrested and charged with providing resources to a foreign terrorist organization and attempting to destroy national defense premises. Ferdaus, according to the FBI, planned to blow up both the Pentagon and Capitol Building with a "large remote controlled aircraft filled with C-4 plastic explosives."



The case was part of a nearly ten-month investigation led by the FBI. Not surprisingly, Ferdaus' case fits a pattern detailed by Trevor Aaronson in his article below: the FBI provided Ferdaus with the explosives and materials needed to pull off the plot. In this case, two undercover FBI employees, who Ferdaus believed were al Qaeda members, gave Ferdaus $7,500 to purchase an F-86 Sabre model airplane that Ferdaus hoped to fill with explosives. Right before his arrest, the FBI employees gave Ferdaus, who lived at home with his parents, the explosives he requested to pull off his attack. And just how did the FBI come to meet Ferdaus? An informant with a criminal record introduced Ferdaus to the supposed al Qaeda members.

To learn more about how the FBI uses informants to bust, and sometimes lead, terrorist plots, read Aaronson's article below.



James Cromitie was a man of bluster and bigotry. He made up wild stories about his supposed exploits, like the one about firing gas bombs into police precincts using a flare gun, and he ranted about Jews. "The worst brother in the whole Islamic world is better than 10 billion Yahudi," he once said.

A 45-year-old Walmart stocker who'd adopted the name Abdul Rahman after converting to Islam during a prison stint for selling cocaine, Cromitie had lots of worries—convincing his wife he wasn't sleeping around, keeping up with the rent, finding a decent job despite his felony record. But he dreamed of making his mark. He confided as much in a middle-aged Pakistani he knew as Maqsood. more


Share:

Martin Luther King: A Time to Break Silence

A fine speech in seven parts one part.

A Time to Break Silence
By Rev. Martin Luther King

By 1967, King had become the country's most prominent opponent of the Vietnam War, and a staunch critic of overall U.S. foreign policy, which he deemed militaristic. In his "Beyond Vietnam" speech delivered at New York's Riverside Church on April 4, 1967 -- a year to the day before he was murdered -- King called the United States "the greatest purveyor of violence in the world today."

Time magazine called the speech "demagogic slander that sounded like a script for Radio Hanoi," and the Washington Post declared that King had "diminished his usefulness to his cause, his country, his people."

Once to every man and nation
Comes the moment to decide,
In the strife of truth and falsehood,
For the good or evil side;
Some great cause, God's new Messiah,
Off'ring each the bloom or blight,
And the choice goes by forever
Twixt that darkness and that light.

Though the cause of evil prosper,
Yet 'tis truth alone is strong;
Though her portion be the scaffold,
And upon the throne be wrong:
Yet that scaffold sways the future,
And behind the dim unknown,
Standeth God within the shadow
Keeping watch above his own.

James Russell Lowell

Beyond Vietnam: A Time To Break Silence



h/t ICH and transcript h/t zzahier for the uploads.

It's not hard to appreciate, particularly with the benefit of hindsight, that this, along with others I imagine, was an extremely dangerous speech, contributing no doubt to King's subsequent assassination one year later. I thought to look into King's assassination and see if there was any light shed on who ordered his execution. Although too late for me to take in the details tonight, I shall leave this link to more or less the first sight I dropped on that might elucidate things a little.

Unread then. http://www.geocities.com/~virtualtruth/king.htm

Update: Democracy Now Special: Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. in His Own Words Includes a good proportion of this and other speeches.
Share:

Julian Assange: America The New Reich - Department of Justice The New Gestapo - Britains Awake!

A follow up to my recent post: John Pilger on The 'Getting' of Assange The Guardian and The US Justice System. A post where I stressed, ''That the United States of America should never be allowed to get into its rancid clutches, the person of Julian Assange.''

You can read this story however you wish, the nuts and bolts of what came to pass, or as Amy Goodman intended, as an expose of what passes for justice in the Land of the Free.

A similar, if not worse fate, awaits Julian Assange should we in Britain, or those in Europe, cave in to the demands of the Great Satan. (Paul Craig Roberts) And Garry whatshisname for that matter?


The Great Satan, Iranian depiction. Which, however true, is a bit rich coming from that quarter.


Two Standards of Detention
By Amy Goodman
December 3, 2009

Scott Roeder, the anti-abortion zealot charged with killing Dr. George Tiller, has been busy. He called the Associated Press from the Sedgwick County Jail in Kansas, saying, “I know there are many other similar events planned around the country as long as abortion remains legal.” Charged with first-degree murder and aggravated assault, he is expected to be arraigned July 28. AP recently reported that Roeder has been proclaiming from his jail cell that the killing of abortion providers is justified. According to the report, the Rev. Donald Spitz of the Virginia-based Army of God sent Roeder seven pamphlets defending “defensive action,” or killing of abortion clinic workers.

Spitz’s militant Army of God Web site calls Roeder an “American hero,” proclaiming, “George Tiller would normally murder between 10 and 30 children … each day … when he was stopped by Scott Roeder.”

The site, with biblical quotes suggesting killing is justified, hosts writings by Paul Hill, who killed Dr. John Britton and his security escort in Pensacola, Fla., and by Eric Rudolph, who bombed a Birmingham, Ala., women’s health clinic, killing its part-time security guard.

On Spitz’s Web site, Rudolph continues to write about abortion: “I believe that deadly force is indeed justified in an attempt to stop it.”



Juxtapose Roeder’s advocacy from jail with the conditions of Fahad Hashmi.

Hashmi is a U.S. citizen who grew up in Queens, N.Y., and went to Brooklyn College. He went to graduate school in Britain and was arrested there in 2006 for allegedly allowing an acquaintance to stay with him for two weeks. That acquaintance, Junaid Babar, allegedly kept at Hashmi’s apartment a bag containing ponchos and socks, which Babar later delivered to an al-Qaida operative. Babar was arrested and agreed to cooperate with the authorities in exchange for leniency.

While the evidence against Hashmi is secret, it probably stems from the claims of the informant Babar.

Fahad Hashmi was extradited to New York, where he has been held in pretrial detention for more than two years. His brother Faisal described the conditions: “He is kept in solitary confinement for two straight years, 23- to 24-hours lockdown. … Within his own cell, he’s restricted in the movements he’s allowed to do. He’s not allowed to talk out loud within his own cell. … He is being videotaped and monitored at all times. He can be punished … denied family visits, if they say his certain movements are martial arts … that they deem as incorrect. He has Special Administrative Measures (SAMs) … against him.”



Hashmi cannot contact the media, and even his lawyers have to be extremely cautious when discussing his case, for fear of imprisonment themselves. His attorney Sean Maher told me: “This issue of the SAMs … of keeping people in solitary confinement when they’re presumed innocent, is before the European Court of Human Rights. They are deciding whether they will prevent any European country from extraditing anyone to the United States if there is a possibility that they will be placed under SAMs … because they see it as a violation … to hold someone in solitary confinement with sensory deprivation, months before trial.”

Similarly, animal rights and environmental activists, prosecuted as “eco-terrorists,” have been shipped to the Federal Bureau of Prisons’ new “communication management units” (CMUs). Andrew Stepanian was recently released and described for me the CMU as “a prison within the actual prison. … The unit doesn’t have normal telephone communication to your family … normal visits are denied … you have to make an appointment to make one phone call a week, and that needs to be done with the oversight of … a live monitor.”



Stepanian observed that up to 70 percent of CMU prisoners are Muslim—hence CMU’s nickname, “Little Guantanamo.” As with Hashmi, it seems that the U.S. government seeks to strip terrorism suspects of legal due process and access to the media—whether in Guantanamo or in the secretive new CMUs. The American Civil Liberties Union is suing U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder and the Bureau of Prisons over the CMUs.

Nonviolent activists like Stepanian, and Muslims like Hashmi, secretly and dubiously charged, are held in draconian conditions, while Roeder trumpets from jail the extreme anti-abortion movement’s decades-long campaign of intimidation, vandalism, arson and murder.

Denis Moynihan contributed research to this column.

Amy Goodman is the host of “Democracy Now!,” a daily international TV/radio news hour airing on more than 750 stations in North America. She is the co-author of “Standing Up to the Madness: Ordinary Heroes in Extraordinary Times,” recently released in paperback. The Muslim Observer

h/t Maren
Share:

Ivan Hightower: America is still dead

Well he's not really called Ivan Hightower, but this article falls into my Ivan/China taking the high moral ground category, articles of which I have to say, are becoming ever more common. (Search this blog: high moral ground)

No, as you can see by the header, the author is one, David R. Hoffman. I shall look to him at the bottom of the page, but for the present, if you find yourself on the same hymn-sheet as both Hoffman and myself, you might like to sing along. My emphasis.

America is still dead
David R. Hoffman
03.10.2011

"Greetings:

If you are reading this, the President of the United States has declared you to be a terrorist or enemy combatant. As a result, you will be detained without charge or trial, tortured, and/or extrajudicially executed. You are not entitled to any legal due process, you have no civil rights, and there is absolutely no need for the United States government to prove any of the allegations it has made against you, even if you are a citizen of the United States.

Sincerely, Barack Obama"

Throughout much of its history, America had a Bill of Rights that protected the fundamental freedoms of its citizens, as well as a "check-and-balance" system that ensured no government institution, branch or individual would ever obtain unbridled power.

But all that ended with the recent extrajudicial execution of American citizen Anwar al-Awlaki in Yemen. And while most politicians and pundits are opportunistically applauding al-Awlaki's death, a few perceptive Americans are growing increasingly concerned about the unprecedented powers the executive branch of government is assuming.
Share

Under those powers, American citizens can now be illegally detained, even within America's own borders, as was illustrated in the case of Abdullah al-Kidd, who, despite never being charged with a crime, was held for more than two weeks in high security cells and repeatedly strip-searched and shackled. In addition, American citizens like Bradley Manning and Jose Padilla were tortured in American military prisons, and now American citizen Anwar al-Awlaki was deliberately marked for death.

Tragically, but not surprisingly, America's federal judicial system, the branch of government best positioned to halt these abuses, has done everything in its power to ensure that government-sanctioned kidnappers, torturers and murderers evade any semblance of justice.

The United States supreme court, for example, recently proclaimed that al-Kidd could not sue former attorney-general John Ashcroft, the official primarily responsible for al-Kidd's detention and abuse, because Ashcroft was legally "immunized" against such lawsuits; a federal judge in South Carolina dismissed the case filed by torture victim Padilla against former government official Donald Rumsfeld on the grounds that granting Padilla a trial would create "an international spectacle"; and when al-Awlaki's father attempted to have his son's name removed from the American government's "kill list," a federal judge decreed that Anwar al-Awlaki had to argue for this removal himself-a ruling that creates a ludicrous and perverse Catch-22 for persons on this list, because seeking legal redress in America to prevent their extrajudicial executions would also heighten their chances of being extrajudicially executed before they ever reached the courthouse.

The "Nobel Peace Prize Winning" Obama and his cronies have also done everything in their power to promote illegal detentions, torture and the extrajudicial executions of American citizens. Attorney General Eric Holder, a self-professed paradigm of "integrity" who demonstrates far too little of it, refused to prosecute corrupt CIA officials who, in defiance of a court order, destroyed videotapes that depicted the torture of detainees. And, in a revelation exposed by Wikileaks, it was discovered that Obama strong-armed foreign governments to prevent them from filing torture and/or war crimes charges against Bush and/or his minions.
(I think I can stop here, for it's all pretty obvious, especially for those that can carry a tune, it's just a case of finding a suitable hymn for the occasion, but that in itself, might be no easy task.)

But, in at least one respect, Obama may be even worse than Bush, because he is-according to a recent article by Matt Apuzzo of the Associated Press-the first United States president in history to intentionally target an American citizen for extrajudicial execution.

George W. Bush once said that terrorists hate America because of its freedoms. But it was Bush and his minions, not the terrorists, who did the most to undermine human rights, democracy and freedom in America. Yet as Obama continues to morph into George W. Bush (as Steven Thomma of McClatchy Newspapers so accurately observed) there has scarcely been a whimper of protest.

What are the reasons behind this deafening silence as America's most basic rights and freedoms are being eroded by the very people sworn to protect them? Why, in a nation that professes to fear the intrusiveness and overreaching of "big" government, aren't the streets overrun with protesters enraged about the unchecked and unconstitutional powers the president of the United States has usurped? Why isn't there commensurate outrage directed against the corrupt legal system, led by amoral men like Scalia, Thomas, Roberts, Alito and Kennedy, who are not only enabling governmental abuses of power, but incessantly dismantling democracy and fundamental freedoms as well? Why are Americans so comfortable with the fact that torturers, war criminals, and murderers can not only evade justice, but also live freely among them?

One possible reason is that freedom to most Americans simply means the ability to conspicuously consume. Almost all the recent protests over health care reform and government spending are really about one thing: The desire to pay less in taxes, because paying less tax means having more disposable income to purchase that bigger house, fancier car, and whatever new trinkets modern technology offers. And as long as one is watching that big screen television, playing with that IPad, or "tweeting" that celebrity, it's easy to remain oblivious to the fact that your countrymen are being tortured and killed by their own government, your freedoms are being decimated, and your politicians are being bought and paid for by billionaires and corporate dollars.

A second reason for this silence was discussed in a Pravda.Ru article entitled Welcome to the Village (October 25, 2010). This article's title was inspired by the prophetic 1960s television drama The Prisoner, which starred the late Patrick McGoohan.

McGoohan's character (known only as "Number Six") is a disgruntled government employee who angrily resigns from his position, only to be kidnapped and transported to "The Village"-a bucolic yet sinister place where residents are constantly spied upon by a omnipresent overseer, known only as "Number Two."

My article explained how many of the fictional surveillance techniques used in "The Village" have now become reality as computers, satellites, ubiquitous cameras, facial recognition technologies and tracking chips have the capability to subject almost anyone in the world to continuous surveillance.

I was somewhat surprised to discover that, unlike many of my other articles, Welcome to the Village did not provoke much reader feedback or discussion. And while I realize that the article's title might not have accurately conveyed its content, I could not help but wonder if people, particularly in America, have become so paralyzed by the fear of terrorism that they are willing to surrender their privacy and individuality to "big brother" regimentation and conformity.

Which leads to the third reason: Americans incessantly praise "freedom" and "democracy" with their words (and are repeatedly conned into sending their youth off to die in purported defense of these principles), yet they just as incessantly embrace and promote fascism with their deeds.

Fascism, as I discussed in several Pravda.Ru articles written during the nightmarish years of the Bush dictatorship, has always been more seductive than freedom, because it demands less effort. Freedom requires people to think for themselves, and to gather facts and information necessary to formulate reasoned judgments or opinions. Freedom also means making difficult, sometimes life-altering decisions, with no guarantee those decisions will reap any positive results.

Fascism, on the other hand, favors emotion over reason, appeals to the basest instincts in human nature, and creates omnipotent demagogues who tell the masses what to think and how to think. Freed from the burden of making decisions for themselves, people can then pretend they are blameless for, and powerless to prevent, atrocities and injustices committed by those in power.

Make no mistake about it. I have no sympathy for terrorists or terrorism, and I agree that many of the statements al-Awlaki made were reprehensible, even in a world where Nobel Peace Prize winners sow death and destruction. But regardless of how wicked an individual might be, when a government chooses to extrajudicially execute its own citizens it creates a dark and dangerous precedent that can easily be expanded by those who gain power in the future. Given the kidnappings, illegal detentions, tortures and murders that have already been committed in the name of the so-called "war on terror," it is frighteningly clear that the American government may be traversing a path of no return.

Arrogant, militarily powerful, and lacking a viable foe to curb its contempt for international law, the United States government now feels "superior" to every other country in the world, and, as a result, has become a lawless, rogue nation operating under the clandestine philosophy that "might makes right" while openly (and hypocritically) cloaking itself in the garments of "freedom," "justice" and "human rights."

So America is dead, and within its cadaver lurks a country little different than the third-world dictatorships it claims to abhor-a country controlled by a plethora of sadistic, amoral, venal and ruthless reprobates who relentlessly manipulate the fear of terrorism to promote their own agendas and propagate their own brand of terror throughout the world.

Maybe one day Americans will awaken to this reality.

But by then it will probably be too late. Pravda.Ru

David R. Hoffman
Legal Editor of Pravda.Ru

I didn't have to look far from something on Hoffman, this from Winter Patriot, who looks like he might himself warrant a bit of looking at.
Share:

Julian Assange: Facing The Future in a US Supermax Prison?

This is the follow on article to the Julian Assange piece below. Its purpose is twofold, to blow away the myth that the sole purpose of supermax facilities is to hold the baddest of the bad, because they are not. Designed with that purpose in mind, undoubtedly, but now employed just as much to punish any inmate, anywhere within the correctional system, who doesn't toe the line.

The other reason for offering this article up, is to highlight the kind of brutal and inhumane punishment that would, not may, await Julian Assange should he ever be extradited to the US, particularly when Assange is given the status of terrorist. And that's not another maybe, believe me, that's a foregone conclusion.

AS the writer notes:

Like Marion and Alcatraz before it, the Florence ADX is likely to hold those imprisoned for their political actions and beliefs: lifelong activists for Puerto Rican independence, Native American sovereignty, Black liberation, and anti-imperialism. The prison system treats these activists with special severity. Despite claims by the Bureau of Prisons that control units are designed for dangerous inmates incapable of coexisting in the general population, political prisoners often face isolation with no disciplinary charges against them whatsoever

Little wonder that Timothy Mcveigh waived his right to appeal and embraced his execution. They strap you to a gurny, they can only kill you once. Spend your life in a supermax, they kill you anew, every day. If you read the complete article, you may understand what I'm talking about. Though I must stress, this is a far milder article than some I could have made use of. See supermaxed.com below for others.

Drawings by America’s most isolated prisoner, Tommy Silverstein. More of him and other links below.


Shackled justice: Florence federal penitentiary and the new politics of punishment.


"All of us share a common curse," bemoaned President Clinton as he urged the passage of his fledgling crime bill. "In the most wonderful country in the world, we have the highest violent crime rate, the largest percentage of our people behind bars" (Denver Post, April 15, 1994). As with other U.S. leaders, however, the "New Democrat" president could not be expected to address the fundamental social fissures that simultaneously foster a terrifying plague of violence while building an increasingly policed and criminalized society. Instead, Clinton's quizzical solution to crime and excessive incarceration, as he defines them, has been a retrenchment of the preceding regime - marginalizing still broader sectors of U.S. society and expanding the state's powers of coercion to control those subsequently labeled as criminal.

The overarching effects of this law-and-order strategy toward governance have already been catastrophic. The U.S. imprisons some 560 of every 100,000 citizens and the proportion increases each year (New York Times, October 28, 1994). While critiquing the broad impacts of an increasingly punitive state, however, it is also important to analyze its localized manifestations. It is crucial to study not only the social and political forces behind the new politics of punishment, but also their smaller-scale and largely autonomous institutions. The billions Congress and state legislatures allocate to law enforcement and incarceration create and maintain individual penal institutions, from local jails to federal prisons, each caught within the matrix of the dominant social order. Together they profoundly control the lives of more than 1.5 million individuals, yet they are largely hidden from public view and critique (New York Times, October 28, 1994). One such institution is the newly opened control-unit prison in Florence, Colorado.

The new supermaximum-security prison is actually one of four facilities, which together make up the largest federal prison complex in the United States. When completely filled in early 1995, the entire "campus" will incarcerate some 3,000 inmates in four institutions: a minimum-security federal prison camp, a medium-security federal correctional institution (FCI), a maximum-security United States penitentiary, and an administrative-maximum, control-unit prison (ADX).

It has been an economic boon for economically depressed central Colorado and the prison promises 750 permanent jobs to this small, rural community. Florence has been long strapped by factory layoffs and throughout the 1980s most local families earned less than $15,000 a year (O'Keeffe, 1991a: 1; Bureau of Prisons, 1989: II-40). Already accustomed to a number of state prisons in the area, the town lobbied hard for the complex. A local newspaper poll found 97% support for the project, and despite the area's meager resources, Florence pulled together an attractive incentives package (O'Keeffe, 1991a: 1). Local citizens held bake sales and sold T-shirts, raising $128,000 to purchase land for the economy-boosting site (Denver Post, May 17, 1991). It is not often that a community asks for a prison to be built next door, and as the Bureau of Prisons (BOP) scrambled to contain a soaring prison population, it eventually accepted their offer. Construction of the $222 million compound began in 1990 (Denver Post, October 27, 1994). Today Florence's Fremont county boasts the highest concentration of inmates in the United States.




While prison officials and local residents found a convergence of interests in Florence, prisoners and their advocates are not nearly as enthusiastic. Activists for human rights and social justice are especially concerned about the ADX control unit, slotted to become the highest security and most regimented prison in the United States. The Bureau of Prisons designed Florence as a high-tech replacement for its infamous lock-down prison in Marion, Illinois. After a decade of stinging lawsuits and public protest there, the prisoncrats promised a kinder, gentler supermaximum prison in Florence. As the 554-cell men's control unit began to accept prisoners in early December 1994, however, all indications are that the prison will not reform the punitive Marion model of total isolation and sensory deprivation, but will intensify it. For those concerned with social justice, an understanding of the new prison and the gamut of policies it embodies is crucial. Florence represents the cutting edge of U.S. social control. Not only will dozens of incarcerated political activists likely be moved to the prison, but its construction also underlines the government's reaction to infrastructural decay and a growing domestic underclass.

The Marion Model

The Marion model for control-unit prisons originated within the Bureau of Prisons some 30 years ago. At a 1963 conference in Puerto Rico, prison administrators sought to cope with the closure of Alcatraz by dispersing "problem prisoners" throughout the federal system and experimenting with psychological rehabilitation programs (Ward and Carlson, 1994: 3). With the rise of national liberation movements, however, and especially after the Attica uprising of 1971, U.S. power brokers soon missed the ability of Alcatraz to isolate and rigidly control those who most articulately and effectively opposed their role. In an era of Increasing economic stratification and civil disorder, they moved to create embryonic institutions of social control for whatever perilous conditions the future might hold.

At Marion, the Bureau of Prisons began by reconcentrating high-security inmates in a new long-term control unit and forcibly enrolling them in the systematic Control and Rehabilitation Effort (CARE) (Dowker and Good, 1993: 2). With this behavior modification experiment underway, Marion became the "end of the line" for federal prisoners. By the dawn of the Reagan era, when warden Harold Miller assumed the helm, Bureau of Prisons' plans were already underway to convert Marion into a permanent isolation facility (Dunne, 1992: 40). It was a gradual transformation, and as prisoners resisted the erosion of their already limited civil rights, prison administrators justified each new step. After a long 1980 work strike, for example, the Bureau of Prisons permanently closed Marion's prison factory. The atmosphere became increasingly coercive and as guard violence, religious persecution, and other maladies increased, Warden Miller began the final crackdown.(1)

The immediate pretense was a series of murders inside. On October 22, 1980, prisoners in the control unit separately stabbed two guards to death. Four days later, a prisoner was found murdered in his cell (Dowker and Good, 1993: 3). Although two perpetrators were brought to trial and convicted of murder, Miller placed the entire prison under a state of emergency on October 28. The Bureau of prisons transferred riot squads with names like the "A-Team" and "Blue Thunder" from other prisons and a comprehensive shakedown began on November 2 (Dunne, 1992: 52). With every prisoner locked 24 hours a day in solitary cells, guards began a veritable reign of terror more violent than anything since the Attica rebellion. Guards in full riot gear removed their name tags and moved cell by cell through the prison, extracting and beating inmates and confiscating their property (Amnesty International, 1987: 1).




The case of Garvin Dale White is a poignant example. After refusing a rectal examination during the crackdown, he was beaten, forcibly x-ray searched, and locked naked in a "dry cell," with no heat, water, or toilet for four days. He was manacled the entire time (Dunne, 1992:53). Overall, there were 110 complaints of physical abuse filed, none of which resulted in legal or personnel disciplinary action (Ibid.).

After several weeks of total lockdown, Marion settled into its present conditions. It has served as the cutting-edge model for control-unit prisons ever since, dispensing entirely with the seemingly anachronistic rhetoric of rehabilitation and linking punishment to every aspect of prisoners' lives. Today, Marion prisoners spend 23 hours each day in their cells alone. There are limited educational and religious services, no central library, and no job-training program. In the most controlled cell block, inmates are allowed only one 10-minute phone call each month, three showers per week, and they can never move from their cells without shackles and handcuffs. At any sign of resistance, the prison's Special Operations Response Team (SORT) uses "whatever force is necessary" to restore order, including chaining prisoners to their beds for days at a time (ABC's "20/20," 1988). All this is at the cost of $40,000 per prisoner every year. "Marion is an experiment," Chicago Lawyer Jan Susler comments, "to see how much a prisoner can take before he breaks, to see how far they can dehumanize somebody before they completely lose their sanity" (Washington Post, May 28, 1991).

The effects of Marion and other control units on prisoner psychology are predictably profound. As early as 1890, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that extended solitary confinement was "infamous punishment," leading to severe mental impairment (Haney, 1993: 5). More recently, the American Journal of Psychiatry reported significant psychological problems after less than two months of solitary confinement. Their observations, made at the Walpole Massachusetts Control Unit, included hallucinations, anxiety attacks, memory and concentration lapses, problems with impulse control, self-mutilation, and other diagnosable disorders (Grassian, 1983: 1450-1454). An Iowa prisoner in his fourth year of segregation wrote, "I remember waking up...so full of stress that the veins in my head were vibrantly flexing...like muscles having an involuntary spasm" (Stewart, 1990).

Conditions in the Security Housing Unit (SHU) of California's Pelican Bay prison are so severe that Harvard psychiatrist Stuart Grassian characterizes their effects as a unique illness (Bierma, 1994: 26). In accordance with a federal class-action lawsuit against the prison, Grassian interviewed 50 Pelican Bay inmates last year. He testified that 80% of them suffer from what he calls "SHU syndrome," in which they either become mentally ill once in the unit or their preexisting disorders are severely exacerbated. "Many of the inmates at Pelican Bay were among the most severely ill of people I've encountered in my research and observation," Grassian says. Pelican Bay does not rehabilitate. Instead, Grassian explains, the prison "takes the most out-of-control of the prison population and makes them much more out-of-control by the time they leave" (Ibid.). An isolation prisoner inside the unit writes, "It's like we're dead.... They've taken away everything that might give a little purpose to your life" (Haney, 1993: 5).




The newest facilities are unique in their application of sophisticated technology to control prisoners' routines, movements, and even thoughts more than ever before. At Pelican Bay, for example, electronic surveillance, automatic doors, and intercoms have replaced many guard duties. Silence reigns at the futuristic SHU where prisoners never see natural light and are prohibited from decorating their windowless cells (Weinstein and Cummins, 1993: 39). In a new supermaximum facility run by the State of Colorado, lights stay on around the clock and a single 3.5 inch by 3.5 foot window provides narrow vistas of a brick wall (Daily Camera, 1993).

Of course, it is not only technology that confines control-unit inmates; the threat of physical violence is a constant component in institutions of such rigidity. Inmates can be "extracted" from their cells by SORT teams for any number of reasons, including insolence, excessive noise, refusal to eat, and other infractions. Other times guards may shackle inmates to their beds, and reports of beatings and assaults with rubber-bullet guns are not uncommon (testimony at the National Lawyer's Guild Convention, August 1994). Most attacks result in relatively minor injuries that the prison hierarchy can easily ignore, but occasionally the inherent violence of control units spills beyond the confines of invisibility.

On April 22, 1992, for example, Vaughn Dortch was stripped naked and pulled out of his cell by a Pelican Bay SORT squad. According to court records, prison guards then carried Dortch shackled and gagged to the infirmary where six guards pressed him into a steel tub of scalding hot water for several minutes. Dortch, who is African American, told "60 Minutes" that the guards promised to give him a "Klan bath" and scrubbed him with a bristle brush until his skin started to peel away. "Looks like we're going to have a white boy before this is through," one of the assailants joked. Dortch received second and third-degree burns over 30% of his body (Bienna, 1994: 26).

Even without considering such wanton acts of violence, Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch have condemned such control units based on their design and purpose alone. In the Pelican Bay case (Madrid v. Gomez), U.S. District Judge Thelton Henderson ruled on January 13, 1995, that the California Super-Max violates constitutional guarantees against cruel and unusual punishment. "Dry words on paper cannot adequately capture the senseless suffering and sometimes wretched misery that [state officials'] unconstitutional policies leave in their wake," Henderson wrote in his 345-page decision. "The anguish of descending into serious mental illness, the pain of physical abuse or the torment of having serious mental needs that simply go unmet is profoundly difficult, if not impossible, to fully fathom" (Associated Press, January 14, 1995). Despite his harsh words, Judge Henderson's ruling was unfortunately narrow, limiting legal action to ameliorating inadequate medical care rather than addressing the policies of the control unit as a whole. Meanwhile, the Marion model continues to expand rapidly.(2) By 1991, there were control-unit prisons in 36 states, isolating over 18,000 people, and nearly every state has plans for further construction (Daily Camera, August 29, 1993).




The Crime of Punishment

The steady deterioration in U.S. prison conditions has not occurred in isolation. After a decade of Republican rule and economic stratification, it is only natural that the decay and violence on the outside would be magnified within prison walls. Between 1980 and 1990, the richest one percent in the United States saw their after-tax income grow by nearly 90%, while the majority sank into unemployment and growing poverty (Sklar, 1991: 10-12). Such statistics reflect the economic misery of millions of North Americans, sparking the rage and alienation that institutions like Florence scramble to control. As neither Reagan nor Clintonomics care to address this economic underdevelopment, their policies favor social control over social reform.

Reagan launched the "drug war" in the early 1980s and mainstream politicians have jumped on the increasingly coercive bandwagon ever since. Capitalizing on real public victimization, especially that in poor, urban communities, Congress and state legislatures have passed dozens of "get-tough" crime bills, imposing limitations on legal appeals, mandatory sentencing guidelines, more money for police with liberalized mandates, and especially for more prisons. While debating the federal crime package, Senator Joseph Biden described the prevailing zeitgeist: "There is a mood here that if someone came to the floor and said we should barbwire the ankles of anyone who jaywalks, I think it would pass" (Denver Post, November 10, 1993).(3)

California alone has enacted more than 1,000 crime laws since the 1970s, and its prison budget now eclipses funding for the University of California system (Denver Post, May 15, 1994). There are now 28 prisons in California, but if the state is to comply with the much touted "three-strikes-and-your-out" legislation, the state will need at least 20 more prisons by the end of the century. If the current incarceration growth rate continues, the state will need an additional 80 prisons over the next 30 years. The cost to California tax payers will be at least $24,000 per prisoner per year after construction costs, some of which will be spent for the entirety of prisoners' lives (Denver Post, May 15, 1994).

The results of this mostly bipartisan crime strategy, pursued through a string of administrations and congressional sessions across the country, are staggering. The United States now incarcerates at a higher rate than any country except Russia, and new crime legislation makes room for thousands more (New York Times, October 28, 1994).(4) Indeed, the medium- and maximum-security facilities at Florence and every new federal prison built are already filled beyond capacity (Bowers, 1993: 7).




This phenomenal growth, almost tripling since 1980, has little to do with crime. In fact, while politicians have polished their cavalier images, crime statistics have generally fallen or remained static. The two-decade National Crime Victimization Survey, for example, indicates a 29% drop in crime across the United States since 1974 (Bureau of Justice Statistics, 1993). For violent crime in specific, the rates have remained relatively flat, certainly representing elevated totals compared to most of the world, but hardly indicative of a new and escalating crisis.

Moreover, contrary to conventional media wisdom, the primary victims of crime have remained constant throughout the shift in U.S. crime policy. The only demographic group to actually suffer an increase in murder and other violent crimes over the last 20 years, for example, are urban teens, especially African American youth (Ibid.). For children, women, and almost everyone else, the most dangerous places in North America are still the home and workplace. There, reported rates of domestic violence, marital and acquaintance rape, and sexual assault and harassment remain epidemic. Domestic violence is the number one cause of injury to women aged 15 to 24, representing an impact greater than that of auto accidents and cancer combined (Denver Post, July 31, 1994). Most socially and environmentally egregious activity, especially that involving legitimized corporate pursuits, is not even defined as criminal.

These domestic and profiteering perpetrators have not been the focus of the anti-crime movement because addressing crime and violence is not its primary objective. Instead, the latest law-and-order regime traces its roots to politics and social control. As Marc Mauer of The Sentencing Project reminds us, "the politics of [crime] shows the data don't have much impact on the debate" (Denver Post, May 15, 1994). Yet the rhetoric of obfuscation has proved an incredibly effective political strategy for Democrats and Republicans alike, falsely diagnosing social maladies from painfully real symptoms and deflecting attention from the country's more deep-rooted and tangible concerns.

For people of color and others living in marginalized communities, the fear of crime victimization is compounded by the fear of police forces that function more as armies of occupation than keepers of the peace. People of color are not only the primary victims of crime, they are also the primary targets of the new law-and-order regime. They face discriminatory treatment at every level of the criminal justice system, from police harassment and brutality to racially charged congressional legislation and hostile Supreme Court rulings.




Throughout the 1980s and early 1990s, racial disparity in the judiciary has only deteriorated. In 1984, the average prison sentence was 28% higher for African Americans than for whites. With the escalation of the "drug war," the disparity grew to 49% by 1990 (Meierhoefer, 1992: 20-21). Mandatory sentencing guidelines, ostensibly designed to alleviate such penal subjectivity, have actually exacerbated the situation (McDonald and Carlson, 1993: 177). In 1990, Latino offenders were 28% more likely than whites to receive mandatory sentences (Vincent and Hofer, 1994: 24). Once they are in prison, people of color are the last to leave. African American women, for example, are eight times more likely to be sentenced to prison than white women and they serve 30% more time once inside (Kurshan, 1992: 346).

Such oppressive conditions, both inside and outside the prison system, have always sparked popular resistance that institutions like Florence are designed to control. Like Marion and Alcatraz before it, the Florence ADX is likely to hold those imprisoned for their political actions and beliefs: lifelong activists for Puerto Rican independence, Native American sovereignty, Black liberation, and anti-imperialism. The prison system treats these activists with special severity. Despite claims by the Bureau of Prisons that control units are designed for dangerous inmates incapable of coexisting in the general population, political prisoners often face isolation with no disciplinary charges against them whatsoever. When Silvia Baraldini, Alejandrina Torres, and Susan Rosenberg were sent to the Lexington High Security Unit (a rigid control unit for women isolated 30 feet below ground), prison staff informed them that their pass into the unit was "one way" unless they changed their political affiliations (Rosenberg, 1992: 128).(5) The new Florence ADX warden, Jim Story, admits that prisoners will be sent to the control unit for being the "leader or significant participant in a work or food strike" (Story, 1994a).

The Florentine Solution

Prison officials and their media supporters have tried to distance Florence from its problematic predecessor and accompanying political baggage. Administrative maximum facilities, they say, are an unfortunate necessity, housing only the most "predatory" criminals (Bureau of Prisons, 1992: 1). They offer mostly anecdotal evidence, emphasizing details of proverbial prisoner brutality rather than case studies or statistical data. The Denver Post, for example, introduced the ADX with mug shots of Manuel Noriega, John Gotti, and assorted neo-Nazis and serial killers (Denver Post, May 17, 1992). Thus, prisoncrats leave the impression that only the "worst-of-the-worst" will ever reach the ADX. By concentrating such super criminals in a single prison, a Bureau of Prisons Congressional Affairs memorandum argues, they decrease violence throughout the prison system (Bureau of Prisons, 1992:11-14).

As proof of their benign intentions, the Bureau of Prisons claims that most inmates have been downgraded from Marion since the 1983 lockdown. The 21 original prisoners who still remain, of course, have been locked down now for more than a decade (Ibid.: 9). Contrary to Bureau of Prisons assertions, shipment to an ADX requires less than grisly stardom. In fact, the designation of a prisoner's security level is an arbitrary process, and anyone who antagonizes prison officials, through prison organizing, legal work, verbal defiance, political affiliation, or, more rarely, through actual violence, can be labeled an acute security risk. Dan Dove, Chief of Bureau of Prisons Public Affairs, concedes that there is no judicial oversight in determining who will be sent to the Florence ADX. "Inmates may be represented by a staff member at these hearings," he writes, "but there is no provision for attorney representation" (Dove, 1993: 3). A 1985 congressional report on this wholly internal process determined that 80% of Marion inmates merited a less severe security rating (O'Keeffe, 1991b: 13).




Prison officials assert, however, that Marion is perfectly fair and operates within constitutional guidelines. (They make no mention of international guidelines.) Florence, they say, will be even better. Unlike Marion, the new ADX is designed as a supermaximum prison. Bureau of Prisons literature cites new technology as the key, allowing Florence to function securely without bed restraining loops and standard shackling for any movement. Like Marion, Florence will operate on various security levels, ostensibly allowing inmates to work their way toward release through long-term cooperative behavior (Dove, 1992: 2).(6) During construction, Florence project manager Russ Martin summarized the Florence Renaissance approach: "The entire design of the facility is to create a more humane environment, to take away the dungeon effect" (O'Keeffe, 1991b: 13). Reading Bureau of Prisons media releases, one almost envisions Florence, where cells are "rooms" and inmates work toward completion of their "institutional careers," as a beacon of New Age corrections. October 1993 was even "Hispanic Heritage Month" at the prison (FCI/FPC Florence, 1993: 1).

A glance inside is more reminiscent of the rack. The Florence ADX penitentiary sits in the southeast corner of the four-prison complex. It is an imposing triangle of X-shaped cell blocks, surrounded by double 20-foot fences interwoven with 10 rows of razor wire.(7) Two perimeter roads, 8,000-watt lights, microwave sensors, anti-escape trip wires, and six sniper towers separate the ADX from the other facilities. Prisoners are unlikely ever to reach this dead space since the prison walls themselves serve as the primary perimeter, containing the limited recreation areas and everything else. Guards and visitors enter the prison through a tunnel.

Countering charges of sensory deprivation, Bureau of Prisons officials always note that Marion's cells close with open bars, allowing communication and free air flow (Bureau of Prisons, 1992:4). They have eliminated even this vestige of humanity at Florence. Cells in the six isolation units measure less than 90 square feet each and lock with a solid steel door (Bureau of Prisons, 1994: 2). Each cell contains a three-foot-wide cement bed slab, a concrete stool and desk, a steel sink and toilet, and a three-by-three shower stall. A fluorescent light panel glares from the wall, illuminating other amenities like an electric cigarette lighter, an inmate duress switch (since the cells are essentially soundproof), an air grate, and, in some cells, a small television. Double doors shrink the cells by another three feet, trapping unreachable space between bars and the outer door. Only two window slits allow external light into the cage, one on the steel door staring into the empty hallway and another body-length sliver facing an empty courtyard. The shower, along with food slots in the door, allow for total isolation. Even psychological counseling can be a solitary experience in the ADX. Warden Bill Story promises that health care will be "consistent with community standards" and that those inmates deemed too dangerous to leave their cells can receive religious or psychological guidance from "professional staff" over closed-circuit television (Story, 1994b).

When and if prisoners are allowed out of their cells, they will have little to celebrate. Visits in the control blocks will be tightly regimented and only allowed through Plexiglas dividers. There will be no joint religious services of any faith and educational programs will be restricted beyond GED work (Dove, 1992: 3). Not even demeaning work assignments will break the monotony of isolation for most of the prisoners (Ibid.). In the worst units, inmates will exercise alone in a pod barely twice the size of their cages, some for only five hours per week (Bureau of Prisons, 1994: 3).




Thus, the Florence ADX's very layout determines that it can be nothing but a chamber of sensory deprivation, designed to press inmates to the brink of insanity by its very architecture. Modern electronics allow constant surveillance and supervision while prisoners themselves remain physically invisible, locked away from any direct human view or contact in compartments of solid steel.

Prisoners arriving en masse from Marion are finding many of their worst fears confirmed. While Marion was a uniquely despised locale, some newly arrived prisoners find themselves expressing an ironic and disturbing nostalgia. One prisoner wrote in early January:

It could be said that I've gone from the cauldrons of Hell in Marion right into Hell's fire in Florence. In Marion prisoners had access and gave support to each other. Even though it was limited to the unit, there was solidarity among prisoners. And at least once a week prisoners had access to the yard, where there was grass and from where we could see the forest, birds, and once in a while, a deer. But the Florence ADX is a cement and steel box designed for sensory deprivation.(8)

Though there were just over 50 inmates (out of an anticipated population of at least 484) in the ADX at the end of 1994 and prisoners remain optimistic that Florence guards may prove themselves to be more professional than their Marion counterparts, reports of staff abuses have already surfaced. Prisoners complain of repeated strip searches before and after visits (despite the absence of physical contact with anyone except prison staff), excessive shackling for any movement, and intentional sleep deprivation, with guards waking some prisoners every hour throughout the night. "The reality of sleep and sensory deprivation supersedes anything I've ever seen," writes a new arrival from Marion, "and that includes Pelican Bay."




Trapped in Toxicity

Florence shares not only cruelty with Marion, but also its environmental woes. At Marion, contamination surfaced as early as 1984, when the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) placed Crab Orchid Lake, a nearby water source, on its National Priorities List for Superfund cleanup (Rocawich, 1989: 24). Elevated PCBs and other toxins convinced the town to switch to an alternate water supply and guards began carrying bottled water to work (Ibid.). As the prison constituted a "community" of less than 10,000 people, however, it fell outside national safety guidelines. In addition to the PCB's, banned in 1976 because of their excessive toxicity, EPA tests found other carcinogens in Marion's water, including chloroform and trihalomethanes (Berkman and Clapp, 1989: 1). In 1986, chloroform levels were more than a thousand times higher than established safety limits (Ibid.: 2). However, Marion administrators took no action on behalf of the prisoners until 1992, consistently denying any contamination or safety risks (Bureau of Prisons, 1992: 18). Meanwhile, for over a decade Marion prisoners consumed contaminated water every day. Several prisoners and their supporters filed lawsuits against the prison, including Robert Wyler, who has since died of kidney cancer (Ibid.: 2-3).

Marion's history of environmental neglect may foreshadow similar events at Florence. Five miles due west of the new prison complex lies the Cotter Uranium Processing Facility, another EPA Superfund site. Cotter began operating the mill in 1958, processing uranium ore into purified uranium oxide "yellowcake" (Ibid.). Cotter stored the cakes - including original Manhattan Project ore with some of the highest concentrations of Thorium-230 and Protactinium-231 known - in giant, unlined tailings ponds (Dodge v. Cotter, 1991: 3). Later, after the ponds were lined, there were over 70 leaks reported at Cotter between 1980 and 1986 (Colorado Attorney General's Office, 1986: 3-28). Until its suspension of operations in 1987, Cotter accumulated approximately 3.5 million tons of radio-active tailings, storing them over 135 acres near Canon City and Florence (Dodge v. Cotter, 1991: 4).

The surrounding communities suffer contamination both through their water and air. Toxic compounds leak into the underground water supply through the unlined ponds and also into the Arkansas River. According to a state-commissioned investigation, the nearby housing development of Lincoln Park has radioactive levels 2,000 times higher than normal background amounts (Colorado Attorney General's Office, 1986: 4). During the irrigation season, the Cotter drainage spills into the Fremont ditch, floating radioactivity directly toward the Florence water supply (Ibid.: 6-11; 6-18). Studies along the Fremont ditch found elevated levels of molybdenum, arsenic, lead, and other contaminants. Molybdenum levels were even higher than those much closer to the mill site (Ibid.: 6-19). Additional allegations that Cotter may have dumped tailings and other waste down abandoned mine shafts to circumvent federal safety standards raise the specter of even worse contamination, perhaps of the entire aquifer (Cotter v. Dodge, 1991: 6).(9) The Bureau of prisons, final Environmental Impact Statement worries that the prison's water supply may have to be rerouted in the future due to "pollution" problems (Bureau of Prisons, 1989: II-45).




The mill also endangers the surrounding communities and the prison population with airborne particulates. Cotter itself estimates that over 19.9 tons of radioactive dust escaped the plant during each year of its operation. In the arid plains, these particles are especially mobile and the prison lies directly in Cotter's secondary wind pattern, subject to gusts of radium, uranium, thorium, and other grains (Colorado Attorney General's Office, 1988). Cotter's continual negligence, even to the point of spilling tailings from railroad cars in downtown Canon City, has prompted several lawsuits on behalf of the EPA and state and local residents ("EPA Eyes Cleanup of Radioactive Soil," 1991). In 1988, Cotter settled a $550 million government suit out of court and has agreed to finance its own cleanup under state supervision. In February 1994, a federal jury awarded $80,000 to eight Lincoln Part plaintiffs for claims associated with the site (Daily Camera, February 17, 1994). There have been no suits filed on behalf of Florence prisoners and since carcinogens may take years to complete their work, any court action may be long delayed.

That the government has expressed little concern for prisoners' environmental safety (or even that of the guards) should come as no surprise. Dozens of prisons have even worse environmental records. The Michigan State Prison in Jackson, for example, was fined $160,000 for illegally storing DDT and Agent Orange (Elvin, 1991: 13). At the state prison in Florence, Arizona, a visiting room sign warns: "If you are pregnant or of childbearing age, do not drink the water" (Ibid.).(10) In these actions, federal and state prisons only mimic corporate behavior across the country, dumping their waste based on a given community's resources and ability to respond. Consequently, prisoners, people of color, and poor communities like Florence bear the brunt of environmental degradation.

Cracks in the Bastille

Prisoners and prison activists have not accepted human rights violations, racism, and toxic exposure quietly. Only a few months after the minimum security camp opened in Florence, inmates organized a food strike to protest inadequate services at the new prison. The largest disturbance at Florence to date came in late February 1994, when medium-security prisoners rioted for several hours, smashing windows and computer equipment, and setting small fires throughout the building (Daily Camera, March 1, 1994). Prisoners at Florence and other federal institutions warn that overcrowding, continual harassment, and ever-harsher sentencing have pushed prison populations to the brink of explosion.

The tensions of overcrowding and mismanagement have affected prison staff as well. Nineteen Florence employees asked for a federal investigation into racial harassment at the prison in October 1993. Four of the whistle-blowers, all African Americans, have since been disciplined by FCI warden Tom Wooten. Charging the four with dubious rules violations, Wooten placed them on indefinite paid suspension and has refused further comment on the case and other management complaints (Rocky Mountain News, February 27, 1994).



I don't know what to make of this; bizarre, imagination, or a sense of humour? Or none of these.

Controversy has erupted on the outside as well, and organized resistance to prison racism and control units has escalated steadily over the last two years. The Committee to End the Marion Lockdown (CEML), founded in 1985 to oppose Marion abuses, has shifted much of its focus to Florence and produces information packets and visits Colorado several times. Committee activists visited Pueblo, Colorado, and surrounding communities as early as 1988 to oppose the ADX construction and to network with local human rights activists.

In Colorado, various organizations formed a statewide coalition to oppose control-unit prisons and political imprisonment in 1992. Labeled Abolish Control Unit Torture (ACUT), the coalition publishes a bimonthly newsletter, serves as an information clearing house, and organizes demonstrations, speaking tours, and other community events.

In October 1993, ACUT and the Movimiento de Liberacion Nacional Mexicano (MLNM) invited former political prisoner Rafael Cancel Miranda to Colorado to lead a demonstration at Florence. Cancel Miranda, along with three other Puerto Rican nationalists, spent 25 years in the worst U.S. prisons, from Alcatraz to Marion, for a 1954 attack on the U.S. House of Representatives.

Over 300 people converged at Florence on October 23, 1993, for a mass rally and march to the prison gates. In addition to the activists from across Colorado, several vans arrived from Chicago as well, carrying representatives of the CEML, the National Committee to Free Puerto Rican Political Prisoners and POWs, and relatives of several Marion prisoners. As the demonstration concluded, Cancel Miranda pointed to police and prison guards, urging them to realize their positions as pawns in oppression. "Florence was built for all of us," he said, and "while it stands, none of us are free."

At the National Lawyers Guild 1994 convention in Albuquerque, prison activists from around the country gathered to share information and strategy. Planned for the future is an on-line control-unit information network, long-term research and legal assistance projects, and a national day of action in Washington, D.C., scheduled for July 17, 1995. Working to coordinate the Washington demonstration and to form a comprehensive control-unit monitoring project, organizers held a national conference in Philadelphia in early December 1994. In Colorado, activists kept up the pressure as the ADX opened surreptitiously in early December, holding a large regional rally at the prison gates on December 10.

Resistance to the Florence supermaximum prison will continue as the U.S. prison population swells. It is projected to surpass two million human beings as anti-crime hysteria swings the political mainstream to the racist right. The Florence ADX is the quintessential embodiment of this oppression, destroying individual spirits through isolation terror and locking broad issues of social justice together within its gates. It represents the denial of justice to everyone in the United States - especially people of color and the poor - through environmental destruction and negligence, obfuscation of the real socioeconomic roots of crime, and political violence against those who dare to resist. The fight against Florence, therefore, is more than a struggle for individual human rights and dignity; it is a struggle for our collective survival. As Malcolm X summarized prison politics in the United States, "Don't be surprised when I say I was in prison. We've all been in prison. That's what America means - prison." The Free Library + notes and refs


Solitary: The Works of Tommy Silverstein


http://tommysilverstein.blogspot.com/

http://artofsilverstein.blogspot.com/

America’s “Most Isolated Man” Sues the Bureau of Prisons

Judge tosses suit of inmate long held in solitary

http://www.supermaxed.com/Federal-SM-Page.htm Everything you wanted to know about man's inhumanity to man. (both ways I guess)

Confronting Torture in U.S. Prisons: A Q&A With Solitary Watch
Share: