home / subscribe / donate / about us / books / archives / search / links / feedback / events

A Special Report on the Presidential Elections Exclusively in the Print Edition CounterPunch How Progressive Challenges Have Been Killed Off Since LBJ; Gagging Fanny Lou Hamer; Eugene McCarthy on "a Peasants Rebellion;" Sabotaging McGovern; The Wreck of Jesse Jackson's Rainbow Coalition; Smearing Nader, Not Once But Three Times: by Alexander Cockburn; The Thieves of the Green Zone by Patrick Cockburn; Murder in Mississippi: Could John Doar Have Saved Cheney, Schwerner & Goodman by David Kotz. In May, CounterPunch Online was read by over 20 million viewers! But remember, we are funded solely by the subscribers to the print edition of CounterPunch. Please support this website by buying a subscription to our newsletter, which contains fresh material you won't find anywhere else, or by making a donation for the online edition. Remember contributions are tax-deductible. Click here to make a (tax deductible) donation. If you find our site useful please: Subscribe Now! Call Toll Free 1-800-840 3683 or write CounterPunch, PO BOX 228, Petrolia, CA 95558

Sex, Drugs & the Blues! Serpents in the Garden CounterPunch's Sizzling New Book on Culture and Sex is Now Available Click here to purchase Today's Stories July 20, 2004 John Ross Burying Iraq, Burying Bush July 19, 2004 Uri Avnery Marie and the Ghosts: the Hoax of Paris Col. Dan Smith What Has Been Accomplished? Mike Whitney Allawi: Our Puppet with a Pistol Karyn Strickler Just Marriage, Not Gay Marriage Robert Fisk The Crisis of Information in Baghdad David Swanson Media Blackout of US Labor Opposition to Iraq War Jennifer van Bergen The Death of the Great Writ of Liberty   July 17 / 18, 2004 Gary Leupp Apocalypse Now: Why the Book of Revelations is Must Reading Ghada Karmi Vanishing the Palestinians Lenni Brenner When Cattle Unite, Lions Go Hungry: Notes for Ralph Nader Ben Tripp Man on a Bridge: a Ghost Story Brandy Baker What Would Elizabeth Cady Stanton Make of John Kerry? M. Shahid Alam Israel Builds Another Wall Sasan Fayazmanesh Nuclear Hypocrisy: Israel, Iran and the IAEA Patrick Bond The George Bush of Africa Fred Gardner Politics of Marijuana: Cannabiniod Therapuetics William Blum Bush and Thucydides Ben Terrall Carter and the Indonesia Elections: "I Don't See Anything Wrong with a General Running the Country" Tom Barry John Lehman on the War Path David Vest Dylan Without the Music Phyllis Pollack Return to Sin City: Keith Richards Does Gram Parsons Ron Jacobs Smearing Muhammad Ali: Bob Feller Strikes Out Joshua Frank Kerry to Edwards: "Let's Lose!" David Nally A Call for Sudan: Our Georgraphical Blindspot Toni Solo Bolivia's Gas Referendum Landau, Hassan, Prashad & Lindorff Three Reviews of Moore's F911 Poets's Basement Ford, Smith and Albert July 16, 2004 Dave Zirin Adonal Foyle: Master of the Lefty Lay-Up Shervan Sardar Dershowitz, the ICJ and Jim Crow Laws Ron Jacobs The Lil' Engine That Couldn't: Kucinich Surrenders on Anti-War Plank Robert Fisk Iraq, According to Edgar Allen Poe: Coffin Bombs in Baghdad Greg Moses The Forts of Iraq Mickey Z. Ad Infinitum?: Presidential Campaigns in the Age of TV Dan Bacher A Landmark Win for Salmon and the Tribes Dave Lindorff The Mumia Case: Support from NAACP, But a Movement in Shambles Paul McGeough Did Allawi Shoot Inmates in Cold Blood? Website of the Day 10 Reasons to Fire Bush (and 9 Reasons Kerry Won't Be Any Better)     July 15, 2004 Heather Williams McMissing the Point: Supersize Me Crashes on Its Message Werther Iraq: Follow the Money Tom Crumpacker The Birds of Guantanamo Brian Cloughley What Does the Bush Regime Object To? Bill Christison Reorganize the CIA? Of Course, But... July 14, 2004 Jeffrey St. Clair Chronicle of a Nomination Foretold: the Green Deceivers Neve Gordon Of Socrates and the Apartheid Wall Diane Christian The Priesthood of Death Stefan Wray Who Benefits from Missing Data at Los Alamos Nuclear Lab? Josh Frank The Nader / Dean Debate Conn Hallinan Divide and Conquer as Imperial Rules Elizabeth Weill-Greenberg Bring My Brother Home!: Class, War and Education Website of the Day Hijacking Catastrophe: 9/11, Fear and the Selling of US Empire   July 13, 2004 Ray McGovern The CIA and Iraq: an Intelligence Debacle...and Worse Mark Donham The Sierra Club's Inexplicable Treatment of Cynthia McKinney Ben Tripp Politus Interruptis: With Friends Like These, Who Needs Electorates? Mark Gaffney Slipping Towards Armageddon: Israel in Iraq Dave Lindorff Osama Wins! Election Postponed! Chris White Double Think: the Bedrock of Marine Indoctrination     July 10 / 12, 2004 Kathleen Christison The Problem with Neutrality Between Palestinians and Israel Janine Pommy Vega Trail of the Comet: a Gathering of the World's Poets Against War Sherry Wolf From Maverick to Party Attack Dog: Howard Dean Gay-Bashes Nader Saul Landau and Farrah Hassen A Transfer of Power, Sort Of Michael Donnelly How to Steal an Election: the Green Version, 2004 Stanton / Madsen Iraq Survey Group: Rumsfeld's al-Qaeda? Richard Lichtman The End of Innocence: Reflections on American Pathology Gila Svirsky Thank You, Your Honors: a Legal Blow to the Wall Kurt Nimmo Clinton's Life Toni Solo Empire-Speak: What Roger Noriega Really Means Ron Jacobs The Black Panthers and the Rest Camelo Ruiz Marrero Gene Warfare in Oaxaca: Genetic Mutation of Mexican Maize Omar Barghouti Wither the Empire: Rise of a Global Resistance Poets' Basement Curtis and Albert   July 9, 2004 Dave Zirin Carlos Delgado on Deck: Blue Jays Slugger Stands Up Against War Justin Delacour Wishing Kerry Would Shut Up About Latin America Robert Fisk Iraq in Reverse: Martial Laws Fuel Insurgency Boris Kagarlitsky Two Congresses and a Funeral William S. Lind The October Surprises Sibel Edmonds Our Broken System: John Ashcroft's War on Truth Ron Jacobs Reading Tea Leaves: What Vietnam Tells Us About Iraq's Future Gary Leupp The Lie That Will Not Die: Cheney and the Iraq/al-Qaeda Link   July 8, 2004 Niranjan Ramakrishnan The Inexplicable John McCain Toufic Haddad Protesting Israel's Apartheid Wall: a Letter from the Hunger Strikers' Tent Dave Lindorff Liberation as Martial Law Joshua Frank The Fall: How Beltway Dems Sank Howard Dean Christopher Brauchli Bush & Cheney Play the Hitler Card James Petras The Truth About Jimmy Carter   July 7, 2004 John Chuckman Kerry's BBQ: a Deafening Silence of Meaning Virginia Tilley A Line in the Sand: Azmi Bishara's Hunger Strike Susan Martinez A Letter to Bill Cosby Mickey Z Elie Wiesel's Strange Parade Michael Donnelly Our Own Private Wilderness: Trusting the Land in the Inland Empire Sean Donahue Boston Social Forum: the Dems aren't the Only Show in Beantown Diane Christian Sovereignty and Freedom in Iraq   July 6, 2004 Lisa Viscidi Fleeing Guatemala: Central Americans Risk Lives to Reach El Norte Marc Norton The Felonious Five Ride Again: the Supreme Court and Enemy Combatants James Brooks Chemical Warfare on the West Bank? Ray McGovern Porter Goss as CIA Director? William Cook Legacy of Deceit: If Dante Knew of Bush and the Neo-Cons...   July 5, 2004 Forrest Hylton US Imperialism in Latin America: Sept. 11, July 4 and Systematic Torture Chris White A Former Marine Sgt. on the Meaning of Independence Day Joe Bageant Cranky Reflections on the 4th of July Robert Jensen Stupid White Movie: What Michael Moore Misses About the Empire Kathy Kelly "Two Days an' a Wake-Up"   July 3 / 4, 2004 Elaine Cassel Bush's Police State and Independence Day Stan Goff ABC of Opportunism: "Progressive" Latin American Leaders Support the Coup in Haiti Snehal Shingavi "We Want Real Justice for Bhopal": Two Survivors Speak Out Bruce Anderson The Cheney-Leahy Metaphor and the Greens Sharon Smith Twilight of the Greens: the Chokehold of "Anybody But Bush" Josh Frank Ralph Nader's Revolt: an Interview with Greg Bates Robert Fisk Pentagon Tried to Censor Saddam's Hearing Joe Bageant Sons of a Laboring God: Leftnecks Unite! Brian Cloughley Fortress Bush and the One Law Doctrine Justin Delacour The Anti-Chavez Echo Chamber: Venezuela's Media Tycoons William S. Lind Saudi Spillover Linda S. Heard A Joke Called "Justice" Greg Moses "It's Illegal, But It's Our Right": Korean Labor Won't Back Down Ron Jacobs "Ain't You Proud to be White on Independence Day?" Toni Solo Weary of Indigenous Resistances? Just Pretend They're Not There Dan Nagengast Chicken Manure as Cattle Food: Safe, But Do We Want to Eat It? Stew Albert Brando, a Personal Recollection Dave Zirin From the Black Panthers to Sacheen Littlefeather: a Eulogy for Our Brando Patrick W. Gavin The Progressive Case for Dodgeball Steven Rosenthal / Junaid Ahmad The Problem is Bigger Than the Bushes: a Review of F911 Poets' Basement Kearney, Ford and Davies Website of the Day Global Peace Solution   July 2, 2004 Jeffrey St. Clair Suicide Right on the Stage: the Demise of the Green Party Douglas Valentine Fahrenheit 911: Mocking the Moral Crisis of Capitalism Gary Leupp "Just Because I Could": On Obscenities and Opportunities Lee Ballinger Illegal People: Kerry Opposes Immigrant Rights Robert Fisk Saddam in the Dock: Confused? Hardly CounterPunch Wire "What Law Formed This Court?": a Transcript of Saddam's Arraignment Christopher Brauchli Bush's Drug Card Lottery: the Price Ain't Right Saul Landau Buzz Words and Venezuela   July 1, 2004 Katherine van Wormer Bush's Damaged Mind: the Madness in His Method Joe Bageant Is Our President a Whackjob? Does It Matter? William James Martin The Dogma of Richard Perle Dave Lindorff Bush's Evacuation Moment Robert Fisk Bread and Circus Trials in Iraq Alan Maass Green Party in Reverse Website of the Day Michael Moore and Israel: Blind or a Coward?     June 30, 2004 Kurt Nimmo Nicholson Baker's Checkpoint: a New Kind of Anger About Bush Tariq Ali Getting Away with Murder in Iraq Jennifer Van Bergen Bush and the Detainees Douglas Valentine Apotheosis of the Psychopaths: Instead of Fahrenheit 9/11, Rescreen The Quiet American David Price Fahrenheit 9/11 Through the McCain-Feingold Looking Glass Roger Normand America's Criminal Occupation of Iraq Stan Cox Sanitized for Your Protection: Ashcroft's War on Art Henry David Thoreau On the Futility of Bush v. Kerry: All Voting is a Kind of Gaming Ben Tripp Who Dast Call Him Liar: a Rebuttal to Nicholas Kristof                       Hot Stories Alexander Cockburn Behold, the Head of a Neo-Con! Subcomandante Marcos The Death Train of the WTO Norman Finkelstein Hitchens as Model Apostate Steve Niva Israel's Assassination Policy: the Trigger for Suicide Bombings? Dardagan, Slobodo and Williams CounterPunch Exclusive: 20,000 Wounded Iraqi Civilians Steve J.B. Prison Bitch Sheldon Rampton and John Stauber True Lies: the Use of Propaganda in the Iraq War Wendell Berry Small Destructions Add Up CounterPunch Wire WMD: Who Said What When Cindy Corrie A Mother's Day Talk: the Daughter I Can't Hear From Gore Vidal The Erosion of the American Dream Francis Boyle Impeach Bush: A Draft Resolution Click Here for More Stories.     Subscribe Online

July 19, 2004 The Ghost of Gonismo "Popular Participation" in Bolivia's Gas Referendum* By FORREST HYLTON When Colombian President Álvaro Uribe Vélez gave the signal for the propaganda onslaught -- accompanied, coincidentally, by paramilitary threats and harassment -- in favor of his referendum in October 2003 (in which 81% of the Colombian population abstained from participating), some Colombian analysts reminded readers that Hitler had used referendums to build fascism. Referendums can be demagogic instead of democratic. Brought to power on the strength of a popular, indigenous-led insurrection in October, Bolivian President Carlos Mesa is a different species of politician than Uribe or Hitler, of course, but his July 18 gas referendum -- one of the three pillars of the program imposed on the government (the other two being a constitutional assembly and an end to government impunity) -- fit squarely in the demagogic camp. The Mesa administration, along with neoliberal political parties (MNR, MIR, NFR), the Catholic Church, Evo Morales/MAS, the Permanent Human Rights Assembly, the Human Rights' Ombudsman's Office, and numerous NGOs, equated participation in the referendum with support for "direct democracy." The referendum was pitched as an unprecedented historical opportunity for the Bolivian people to decide the fate of their natural resources; one that they, as citizens of the world's second-most unequal country measured in terms of the distribution of wealth and income, could not afford to miss. The five questions of the referendum were as follows: 1. Do you agree that the current Hydrocarbons Law should be changed? 2. Do you agree that the Bolivian State should have rights to hydrocarbons once they reach the ground? 3. Do you agree that YFPB [the oil company privatized under Sánchez de Lozada] should be re-established in order to control hydrocarbon production? 4. Do you agree that Bolivian gas should be used to regain useful or sovereign access to the Pacific? 5. Do you agree that Bolivian gas should be exported, and that multinationals should pay 50% of projected profits for rights to exploit Bolivian gas, and that the government should invest in health, education, and infrastructure? The chief architects of October's uprising -- COR-El Alto, FEJUVE-El Alto, UPEA (El Alto's public university), the COB, the branch of the CSUTCB led by Felipe Quispe, and the Coordinadora of Gas in Cochabamba -- advocated a boycott because Mesa refused to incorporate the demand supported by over 80 per cent of Bolivians: nationalization. According to social movement leaders, dominated by but not limited to indigenous people, Mesa's referendum offered only the appearance of sovereignty, insofar as it neglected to revise the seventy-eight contracts signed with multinationals under the 1997 Hydrocarbons Law -- brainchild of former president Gonzalo Sánchez de Lozada, who authored the decree two days before leaving office for the first time. In short, opposition movement leaders contended that the referendum, since it was not retroactive, would leave Bolivian gas and oil in the same multinational hands that acquired it before neoliberalism fell into the crisis that led to Sánchez de Lozada's downfall on October 17, 2003. With coup rumors launched by Waldo Albarracín, the Human Rights Ombudsman, on July 14, the message was explicit: those who advocated a boycott threatened Bolivia's "democratic" stability and, willingly or not, favored the forces of reaction. On the evening of the 15, speaking on PAT (a television station of which President Mesa is a major shareholder), Mesa equated social protest with violence, intolerance, and disrespect for democracy, and used his formidable skills as a television broadcaster to persuade his audience of the specters he conjured up for them. Immediately following Mesa's address, PAT showed the results of its nationwide opinion poll ­ even in El Alto, only 10 per cent favored burning referendum forms. A tiny, radicalized minority, then, threatening to subvert Bolivia's democratic order, pushing it inexorably towards a reactionary coup. The tune was not new, and its one-note insistence recalled Goni's pathetic song and dance in September-October. So did the searches and seizures conducted in La Paz on July 13, which ostensibly revealed the existence of a "subversive group," harboring "explosives" in order to "sabotage" the coming referendum. Neither the alleged subversives nor the explosives were shown to the ever-compliant press, which asked few questions and told necessary lies. The anniversary of the foundation of La Paz was unusually tense this year, and on July 15 Mesa nipped the traditional celebration in the bud at midnight, under the "Auto de Buen Gobierno," declared in order to prevent widespread drunkenness before the referendum. Drink continued to flow in copious amounts in bars across the city into the early morning hours, but the packed, all-night street festival in the city center was shut down via a show of overwhelming state power. On the 16, security measures were tightened in the Plaza Murillo to protect the president, his cabinet, and the diplomatic corps from "threats" of undisclosed provenance. Meanwhile, with sporadic blockades beginning in El Alto, Roberto de la Cruz, one of the leaders of COR-El Alto, received multiple death threats before turning off his cell phone. The fault lines in the loose coalition that overthrew Sánchez de Lozada were thrown into sharp relief: on the official side, Morales/MAS -- the "respectable," electoral opposition -- and the representatives of Bolivia's only politically legitimate state institutions (the Permanent Human Rights Assembly and the Ombudsman's Office); on the other side stood the insurgent forces without whom the referendum would never have been put on the national political agenda in the first place. As Lucila Choque, a UPEA professor of Aymara descent (and former student of mine), noted on PAT on July 14, the second question was particularly deceptive, since it appeared to give Bolivians sovereignty over gas reserves, without reversing the privatization process first initiated under Jaime Paz Zamora (1989-1993) and accelerated during and after Sánchez de Lozada's first administration (1993-97). Choque explained that what Bolivians like her wanted was for her and her children to eat better, to have decent lunches instead of soup and bread, and she explained that that would never happen unless Bolivian gas was sold at world market prices (as opposed to 20 per cent of said prices). Mesa had betrayed the October agenda, and according to Choque, people like her knew it, which is why they advocated a boycott; no one was against a binding referendum per se, or even the export of gas, she said. The issues concerned the terms and conditions of sale, and the nature of the questions on the referendum. To their credit, then, representatives from the movements advocating a boycott explained their reasoning on television, radio, and in meetings with the rank-and-file in their respective organizations. They argued that the people had already spoken out in favor of nationalization. As soon as they were divulged in May, the questions were scrutinized around the country, especially in El Alto, and given media efforts to stereotype the opposition as a small group of maximalist "dead-enders," the opposition demonstrated an impressive capacity for sustained, respectful debate. In the media, much was made of the people's incapacity to understand the technical complexities of gas exploitation, and Mesa inundated the airwaves with simplistic explanations of various aspects of the process. Yet as in September and October, the opposition articulated a clear vision of what it wanted: national sovereignty over natural resources, especially the 53 trillion cubic meters of gas reserves ­ the second-largest in Latin America. For the opposition, nationalization is considered the only hope for a future that would break with past cycles of non-renewable natural resource extraction (silver, tin, rubber), which enriched a small number of creoles and foreigners at the expense of urban artisans and Andean peasant communities. The debate over the referendum reflected clashing historical interpretations and contrasting -- and perhaps incompatible -- visions of the country's future. President Mesa tried to represent the referendum as a chance to break with the past, threatened only by a violent minority that refused to recognize the democratic rights of the majority. Yet the in the region whose almost exclusively non-violent resistance and rebellion made Carlos Mesa president in October, the majority saw the referendum as continuity, thinly disguised as change; a way of masking the minority interests of privileged groups as the general interests of the nation. In the face of widespread deployment of police and military forces throughout the country, with characteristic pragmatism, on July 18, some rank-and-file militants opted for a "third way" between the maximalism of their leadership and the opportunism of Evo Morales and MAS. Although the latter had considerable influence in the towns (pueblos), their reach was limited in the countryside. Even Roberto de la Cruz voted, following the rank-and-file consensus, but not in response to the questions as formulated on the ballot. Like many, he voted for nationalization. In District 8, Senkata -- gateway to Oruro and a key site of conflict in October -- was heavily militarized, with continuous blockades on the Avenida 6 de Marzo in which two people were injured. Yet the voting tables were open all day, and members of the FEJUVE and the COR voted, many casting blank ballots or writing in the word "nationalization." At another flashpoint in October, Santiago II, a zone composed largely of ex-mining families, many voters opted for nationalization as well. In other words, the boycott in El Alto fell flat (excepting Senkata), but insofar as significant portion of the rank-and-file expressed a preference for nationalization, which Mesa had excluded from consideration, they sent a clear political signal that attempts to void the content of October's agenda via the manipulation of democratic forms will not go unchallenged. In Achacachi and Warisata (Omasuyos), insurgent Aymara districts that led struggles in defense of natural resources in 2000 (land, water) and 2003 (gas), most voters were senior citizens who feared they would lose their right to a government bond if they failed to vote. The majority abstained from voting. Many of those who did vote wrote in "nationalization" or handed in blank ballots. Eugenio Rojas, a community member from Achacachi and veteran of the gas war in 2003, explained, "We are organizing ourselves because the Aymara and the Quechua don't sleep. This is a long fight. we have to return to [the issue of] political redistribution. We have to reconstruct the ayllu, but not just the Aymara, but our brothers, the Chimanes, Gauraníes, Quechuas, because we can't usurp their lands, or their forms of government, we have to unite with them." Rojas warned that the process could not be allowed to fall into the hands of any of the political parties, whether MAS or NFR. For Felipe Quispe, leader of the CSTUCB, the referendum represented a "sad defeat," since "the people have lost and the transnationals have won." In Cochabamba, site of the water war in 2000 and one of the fronts in the gas war in 2003, Oscar Olivera and the Coordinadora for Gas held parallel tables and launched a campaign for the recollection of a 1,000,000 signatures in favor of nationalization. Olivera emphasized that the referendum would bring no changes in the daily lives of working people. "The people are building their own horizon. The referendum ends today but the struggle continues; it's irreversible. This referendum won't change people's lives and people will understand that in time." As one neighborhood leader from Senkata put it, nationalization of gas under the type of state run by Mesa would be an advance, but a limited one. The strategic goal, he said, was to change the state, in which case nationalization would lead to radical change. His position echoes those put forth over thirty-five years ago by two of Bolivia's leading national-popular intellectuals, René Zavaleta Mercado and Sergio Almaráz. In 1967, in a deep and wide-ranging debate at the University of San Simón in Cochabamba, both Zavaleta and Almaráz insisted that even if petroleum were to be nationalized, unless the state was nationalized along with it, gains would be limited and subject to reversal. Just as the eventual nationalization of Gulf Oil (1969) was linked to the formation of the Asamblea Popular (1971), so the nationalization of gas is tied to the constitutional assembly slated for 2006. Though Mesa and the adoring media have proclaimed victory, since the majority response to all five questions was "yes," they are surely premature in doing so, as is Morales -- although of rank-and-file activists who voted, perhaps a majority voted "yes" on the first three questions and "no" on the last two, just as MAS had advocated. Why, then, is celebration premature? Because the overall abstention rate was around 40% (10% higher than normal for Bolivian elections), and of those who voted, an average of 12% handed in blank votes, while 11% turned in nullified votes. This gives an average total of 63% who passively or actively dissented from what is already being passed off as a consensus on the future exploitation of Bolivia's gas and petroleum reserves. The referendum has opened the floodgates for debate and struggle over nationalization -- not just of natural resources, but also of government and the state itself. What nationalization of state, government, and natural resources would look like in a country with a heterogeneous indigenous majority has yet to be defined, but in spite of the ambiguous language of the referendum's questions, and the illusion of legitimacy the response to them has created, Mesa has won nothing more than a battle, and then only partially. The war for national sovereignty and the self-determination of the indigenous majority will go on. *"Popular Participation" is placed in quotation marks because it refers to the centerpiece of Gonzalo Sánchez de Lozada's neoliberal reform program (1993-97). Les doy gracias a los compañeros de IndyMedia Bolivia y Radio Wayna Tambo, ya que su trabajo en el día 18 hizo posible este artículo. Forrest Hylton is conducting doctoral research in history in Bolivia. He can be reached at forresthylton@hotmail.com. Weekend Edition Features for July 10 / 12, 2004 Kathleen Christison The Problem with Neutrality Between Palestinians and Israel Janine Pommy Vega Trail of the Comet: a Gathering of the World's Poets Against War Sherry Wolf From Maverick to Party Attack Dog: Howard Dean Gay-Bashes Nader Saul Landau and Farrah Hassen A Transfer of Power, Sort Of Michael Donnelly How to Steal an Election: the Green Version, 2004 Stanton / Madsen Iraq Survey Group: Rumsfeld's al-Qaeda? Richard Lichtman The End of Innocence: Reflections on American Pathology Gila Svirsky Thank You, Your Honors: a Legal Blow to the Wall Kurt Nimmo Clinton's Life Toni Solo Empire-Speak: What Roger Noriega Really Means Ron Jacobs The Black Panthers and the Rest Camelo Ruiz Marrero Gene Warfare in Oaxaca: Genetic Mutation of Mexican Maize Omar Barghouti Wither the Empire: Rise of a Global Resistance Poets' Basement Curtis and Albert WWW http://www.counterpunch.org   Keep CounterPunch Alive: Make a Tax-Deductible Donation Today Online! home / subscribe / about us / books / archives / search / links /