SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: longnshort who wrote (282503)3/30/2006 11:06:19 AM
From: paret  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1575583
 
Opinions split over red, white and green (Houston Principal flies Mexican Flag at School)
Chron.com ^ | March 30, 2006 | Jennifer Radcliffe

Reagan High School Principal Robert Pambello was ordered to remove a Mexican flag Wednesday morning that he had hoisted below the U.S. and Texas flags that typically fly in front of his school — a symbol he agreed to fly to show support for his predominantly Hispanic student body.

At nearby Hamilton Middle School, a child was asked to wipe off Mexican and U.S. flags painted on his face. Hundreds of other students carried Mexican flags during walkouts Wednesday — acts of protest that they vow to continue until Congress rejects legislation that would further restrict immigration.

"There's no other way to be heard ... It's not the best way or the right way, but it's our way," Reagan freshman Jose Lopez, 14, said of the effort.

The Mexican flag has become a lightning rod in the immigration debate that's consumed the city and the nation this week. Students say the flag represents their pride in the contributions Mexicans make to this country. Critics, though, said watching young Hispanics in the streets with the red, green and white flags is more than they can stand. These youngsters are in the United States and should — at the least — carry the U.S. flag, they argue.

"The whole thing just makes my blood boil," said Bruce R. Wing, a 52-year-old Missouri City resident. "I want them all out of here."

Wing said the Houston Independent School District should fire Pambello.

HISD leaders said no decision has been made about possible discipline against the principal, who declined interview requests Wednesday.

"It is appropriate to fly the flags of the United States and Texas over schools in the Houston Independent School District, since we are a public entity of the state," HISD spokesman Terry Abbott said. "It would not be appropriate for the school district to advocate allegiance to a country other than the United States. Therefore, it is not appropriate to permit use of school district flagpoles for the purpose of flying flags representing other countries."

Raul Ramos, a professor of Texas history at the University of Houston, said most Mexican-Americans see no contradiction in flying the Mexican flag alongside those of Texas and the United States.

"Most students at Reagan High School have relatives or ancestors from Mexico," said Ramos. "The flag represents Mexican heritage as much if not more than citizenship."

Historical research Ramos noted that there is a long Texas history of both flags flying. He has found Mexican and Texas flags interwined during Mexican Independence Day parades in such cities as Laredo, El Paso and San Antonio dating to 1910.

Calling HISD's decision a reaction to cultural anxiety, he said, "it's important for the school to make efforts to identify with the student body," not vice versa. "The school, after all, reflects the ethnic identity of the students sitting in its classrooms."

Nearly 60 percent of HISD's 200,000-plus students are Hispanic.

Plan to raise flag today Some Reagan students said they will try to raise a Mexican flag again today. They said they want it to fly at least above the Texas flag on the pole.

"Just because you're in the country doesn't mean you can't show your culture," said Lewis Ramirez, 16, a sophomore at Reagan High.

Carina Muriel, a junior at Channelview High School, said she doesn't think it's appropriate for her rallying classmates to carry Mexican flags.

"If they really want to show devotion, they should be carrying U.S. flags," she said.

Muriel said students at her school are walking out, wearing white shirts and carrying Mexican flags.

"More than half don't even know why they are doing it," she said. "It seems to me that they just want to be part of something big, but they don't know what it is. They've never before cared about politics, or what was going on with our government. The reason they care now is because it gives them a chance to cut class."

Jose Cantu, 18, a junior at Reagan, said he read the 54-page bill Wednesday so he could understand why he's protesting. "It got confusing," he said. "So I wanted to see the whole thing."

Districts ponder problem School districts, meanwhile, are trying to figure out how to allow children to learn about the issues and express their feelings while also disciplining those who continue to walk out of class in protest.

"I so appreciate the fact that young people are getting excited about what's going on in their country. What could be more inspiring than seeing children wanting to have their voices heard in their political process?" said HISD trustee Natasha M. Kamrani, who represents the neighborhoods that feed into Reagan. "But there's a way to protest and then there's a way to organize to make change."

To accomplish that, students need to be in class learning and preparing for college, she said.

About 300 students from North Shore and Galena Park high schools staged protests outside their schools Wednesday — the first organized protests to be held in that district.

"It picked up today for us," said Staci Stanfield, spokeswoman for the Galena Park District. "I think they're watching it. We've seen kind of copycat protests that have cropped up throughout the entire country and area."

Baytown march In Baytown, about 50 students — some waving Mexican flags — skipped class to march from one of the town's two high schools, Robert E. Lee, where nearly half of the 2,511 students are Hispanic.

About 200 Alvin High School students participated in an early-morning march. Though most of the students had returned to school by 10 a.m., a group of about 40 students made a 10-mile trek to Pearland High School, Alvin ISD spokeswoman Shirley Brothers said.

Students demanded to meet with Alvin Mayor Andy Reyes, who eventually agreed to meet with a delegation of students today.

Oscar DeLeon, a parent of three children in the protest, left work to watch the march.

"I support them. They've got their rights," he said.

Alvin High School Principal Kevon Wells, who also watched the group, said the students will be treated as truants. Punishment can include after-school detention and being assigned to an alternative school campus, he said.

Text messages spread word Students said the makeshift rally was publicized through text messages.

A text message sent by an HISD student Wednesday encouraged more walkouts.

Part of it read: "Do ANY of you know how much money our schools make for each student that attends everyday ... Imagine how much money they would lose if we didn't go."

HISD Superintendent Abelardo Saavedra has vowed harsher punishments for students who continue to miss classes to protest.

The 50 Marshall Middle School students who made their way to City Hall on Wednesday, for example, could be suspended for up to three days, officials said.

The district had to spend $5,500 Tuesday to transport 30 busloads of students from City Hall back to Austin, Davis and Sam Houston high schools.

"Any student who engages in this kind of activity today can be suspended for up to three days, and may be removed from school outright," Abbott said. "There also are severe academic consequences."

Chronicle reporters Todd Ackerman, Alexis Grant, Cindy Horswell and Richard Stewart contributed to this report.

KHOU Channel 11 also contributed to this report.

jennifer.radcliffe@chron.com



To: longnshort who wrote (282503)4/3/2006 5:38:08 PM
From: tejek  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1575583
 
Is U.S. Planning More Attacks on Shiite Militias?

Analysis by Gareth Porter*

WASHINGTON, Apr 3 (IPS) - Last week's attack by U.S.-led Iraqi paramilitary forces on a building that Shiite leaders claim was a mosque may have marked the beginning of a new stage of U.S. policy in which Iraqi forces are used to carry out military operations against Shiite militia forces -- especially those loyal to Muqtada al-Sadr.

However, such a strategy risks uniting the Shiites against the U.S. military occupation and leading to a showdown that makes that presence politically untenable.

Just before the operation against the mosque complex, which the U.S. military referred to as a "terrorist base", U.S. Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad hinted broadly that the United States would soon target the Shiite militias for the brunt of its operations.

"The militias haven't been focused on decisively yet," he declared, adding that militias were now killing more Iraqis than the insurgents. Khalilzad further pinpointed the Mahdi Army and its ties to Iran as the primary and most immediate U.S. concern.

Most of those killed in the raid by U.S. Special Forces and their Iraqi counterparts apparently worked for Muqtada al-Sadr's political-military organisation, the Mahdi Army. After the raid, moreover, the State Department spokesman said the incident underlined the need to free Iraq's security forces from sectarian control.

Militiamen loyal to al-Sadr have been implicated in many of the reprisal killings against Sunnis since the bombing of the Shiite mosque in Samarra last month. Al-Sadr's forces may also be targeted, however, because he has closer links to Iran than any other Shiite political figure. On a visit to Tehran last January, al-Sadr declared, "The forces of Mahdi Army defend the interests of Iraq and Islamic countries. If neighbouring Islamic countries, including Iran, become the target of attacks, we will support them." In a move evidently aimed at building popular support for a possible confrontation with the United States, ministers representing all three Shiite parties in the government united in denouncing the raid as a massacre. Even more significant, however, the "Shiite Islamist Alliance" has demanded the restoration of control over security matters to the Iraqi government.

That demand throws the spotlight on the continued de facto U.S. control over certain Iraqi military and military forces, in contrast to the formal independence of the Iraqi government and army and police. The Shiite leadership is now afraid that the United States plans to use that control to intervene in the sectarian political crisis of the country to reduce the power of the Shiites in the government.

The spokesman for the Dawa Party, Kuthair al-Khuzzaie, referred directly to that possibility, warning the U.S. in a Mar. 26 press conference that "a battle with the calm giant Shiite means they are falling into a dangerous swamp".

The Shiites have shown no willingness to give up their control over sectarian Shiite militias, which they regard as their only guarantee against future moves to unseat a Shiite-dominated government.

According to Joost Hilterman of the Brussels-based International Crisis Group, Shiite leaders are now talking about the "second betrayal" of the Shiite cause by the United States. The first betrayal was the U.S. failure to intervene to support a Shiite uprising against the Saddam Hussein regime at the end of the first Gulf War in 1991, which resulted in the killing of thousands of Shiite civilians.

In a showdown between military forces of the two sides, the militant Shiites would have a considerable advantage in numbers, but the U.S. would be able to deploy better trained and equipped Iraqi forces. U.S. combat forces would be ready to intervene on their side.

The main forces available to the Shiites will be the militiamen loyal to al-Sadr, whose population base in the sprawling Baghdad slum called Sadr City includes at least a million Shiites. In 2004, U.S. intelligence estimated the Mahdi Army at 10,000 fighters, but the actual number is almost certainly several times larger than that, given al-Sadr's ability to recruit followers during 2005.

The Shiites can also count on some 10,000 militiamen in the Badr Organisation, formerly known as the Badr Brigade, established and trained by Islamic Revolutionary Guards in Iran and still said to be financed by Iran. Many of Badr militiamen were brought into police units run by the Interior Ministry last year, and the Interior Minister Bayan Jabr continues to support them.

In addition the all-Shiite 1st Brigade, with 4,000 men, which was given control over all of Baghdad west of the Tigris River last year, is likely to side with the Shiites against its U.S.-backed rivals in any showdown. Despite its 250 U.S. advisers, the 1st Brigade was reported by Knight Ridder's Tom Lasseter last October to be taking its overall direction from local Shiite clerics -- not from the Ministry of Defence.

On their side, the United States can use a number of units responsive to U.S. direction in a crackdown against Shiite militia. The spearpoint of the new U.S. campaign against Shiite militias will be the Iraqi Special Operations Forces (ISOF), a brigade of 1,300 troops under the command of Kurdish officers. It is believed to consist of mostly Kurdish troops.

Nominally under the Ministry of Defence, the ISOF works closely with U.S. Special Forces and has no loyalty to any Iraqi central government. It includes two battalion-sized operational units, the Iraqi Counter-Terrorism Task Force and the Iraqi Commandoes.. It was the Counter-Terrorism unit that carried out the raid with U.S. Special Forces last week.

The U.S. Embassy began preparing paramilitary forces it could count on to support U.S. geopolitical interests in the broader conflict with Iran during the Ayad Allawi regime, in which the Interior Ministry was filled with old Central Intelligence Agency collaborators.

CIA advisers to the Interior Ministry created a force of "special police commandoes" consisting of 5,000 elite troops commanded by a former Baathist general, Adnan Thabit. Many of the commandoes recruited for the unit were former Hussein security personnel themselves, partly because of their experience in counterinsurgency, and partly because they would be strongly anti-Iran. While still under the Interior Ministry in theory, these commandoes will follow the lead of the U.S.-supported Gen. Thabit.

The move against Shiite militia units appears to be the result of a new fear in the White House of impending disaster in Iraq. Despite soothing talk by U.S. commanders earlier in March that the threat of civil war had passed, Brig. Gen. Douglas Raaberg, deputy chief of operations for the U.S. Central Command, revealed the command's pessimistic view out civil war when he told Associated Press, "Whenever it happens, it's Iraq's problem and Iraqis have to take care of it."

The White House may also have begun to doubt that the political negotiations on a new government will do much to reverse that trend. The idea of a more aggressive policy toward the Shiite militias appeals to the desire to do something dramatic to regain control of the situation.

A strategy of trying to wrap up the Mahdi Army, however, would represent another major U.S. miscalculation. The militant Shiites hold the high cards in any showdown: the ability to mobilise hundreds of thousands of followers in the streets of Baghdad. The most likely result of such a campaign would be a decisive -- and final -- political defeat for the occupation.

*Gareth Porter is an historian and national security policy analyst. His latest book, "Perils of Dominance: Imbalance of Power and the Road to War in Vietnam", was published in June 2005. (END/2006)

ipsnews.net