Case grows against sex assailant

Case grows against sex assailant

DNA links Mark Heath to an unsolved crime that occurred in 2007

By Gene Park

POSTED: 01:30 a.m. HST, Dec 18, 2008

A man who has already pleaded guilty to burglary and sexual assault at the University of Hawaii at Manoa pleaded no contest yesterday to another sexual assault case.

After Mark Heath, 21, pleaded guilty on April 30 to breaking into University of Hawaii dormitories and taking underwear and other objects, his DNA sample was taken.

That DNA was linked to an unsolved 2007 sexual assault case. Heath has been in custody on a $1 million bail.

Deputy Prosecutor Thalia Murphy said she hopes to get a maximum of 60 years total for Heath’s crimes, including the university incidents.

“He’s a predator and he’s indiscriminate,” Murphy said. “This defendant knows no bounds. And yet if you were to look at him, he looks like someone you’d want your daughter to marry.”

In April 2007, Heath followed a woman unknown to him to her Ala Wai Boulevard apartment. The woman shut the door on him and went to sleep.

She awoke to find Heath raping her, chased him out but could not catch up to him.

Heath’s DNA was linked to that case. Yesterday he pleaded no contest to first-degree burglary and second-degree sexual assault.

On Aug. 19, 2007, Heath tried to cut off the panties of a female student at the Hale Mokihana dormitory on the Manoa campus. He also was accused of stealing women’s underwear and an iPod in November 2007.

Heath’s sentencing is scheduled for March 4.

A man who has already pleaded guilty to burglary and sexual assault at the University of Hawaii at Manoa pleaded no contest yesterday to another sexual assault case.
Click Here For More Info!

After Mark Heath, 21, pleaded guilty on April 30 to breaking into University of Hawaii dormitories and taking underwear and other objects, his DNA sample was taken.

That DNA was linked to an unsolved 2007 sexual assault case. Heath has been in custody on a $1 million bail.

Deputy Prosecutor Thalia Murphy said she hopes to get a maximum of 60 years total for Heath’s crimes, including the university incidents.

“He’s a predator and he’s indiscriminate,” Murphy said. “This defendant knows no bounds. And yet if you were to look at him, he looks like someone you’d want your daughter to marry.”

In April 2007, Heath followed a woman unknown to him to her Ala Wai Boulevard apartment. The woman shut the door on him and went to sleep.

She awoke to find Heath raping her, chased him out but could not catch up to him.

Heath’s DNA was linked to that case. Yesterday he pleaded no contest to first-degree burglary and second-degree sexual assault.

On Aug. 19, 2007, Heath tried to cut off the panties of a female student at the Hale Mokihana dormitory on the Manoa campus. He also was accused of stealing women’s underwear and an iPod in November 2007.

Heath’s sentencing is scheduled for March 4.

Source: http://www.starbulletin.com/news/hawaiinews/20081218_case_grows_against_sex_assailant.html

The Storm of US Militarization Hits Guam

The Storm of US Militarization hits Guam

Seventh Session of the United Nations Permanent Forum on
Indigenous Issues – April 2008 – New York, NY

Item # 6
Topic: Pacific
Presenter: Julian Aguon

Collective Intervention of the Chamoru Nation and Affiliated Indigenous Chamoru Organizations; Society for Threatened Peoples International (ECOSOC); CORE (ECOSOC); Western Shoshone Defense Project; Flying Eagle Woman Fund (ECOSOC); Mohawk Nation at Kahmawake; Cultural Development and Research Institute; Famoksaiyan; Organization of People for Indigenous Rights; Colonized Chamoru Coalition; Chamoru Landowners Association; Chamoru Language Teachers Association; Guahan Indigenous Collective; Hurao, Inc.; Landowners United; Chamoru Veterans Association; Fuetsan Famaloan

Ati addeng-miyo your Excellencies. My name is Julian Aguon and I appear before you with the full support and blessings of my elders. I address you on behalf of the indigenous Chamoru people of Guam, an endangered people now being rushed toward full-blown extinction.

In 2008, the indigenous Chamoru people of Guam brace ourselves for a storm of U.S. militarization so enormous in scope, so volatile in nature, so irreversible in consequence. U.S. military realignment in the Asia-Pacific region seeks to homeport sixty percent of its Pacific Fleet in and around our ancient archipelago. With no input from the indigenous Chamoru people and over our deepening dissent, the US plans to flood Guam, its Colony in Perpetuity, with upwards of 50,000 people, which includes the 8,000 U.S. Marines and their 9,000 dependents being ousted by Okinawa and an outside labor force estimated upwards of 20,000 workers on construction contracts. In addition, six nuclear submarines will be added to the three already stationed in Guam as well as a monstrous Global Strike Force, a strike and intelligence surveillance reconnaissance hub at Andersen Air Force Base.

This buildup only complements the impressive Air Force and Navy show of force occupying 1/3 of our 212 square mile island already. This massive military expansionism exacts devastating consequences on my people, who make up only 37% of the 170,000 people living in Guam and who already suffer the signature maladies of a colonial condition.

The military buildup of Guam endangers our fundamental and inalienable human right to self-determination, the exercise of which our Administering Power, the United States, has strategically denied us-in glaring betrayal of its international obligations under the United Nations Charter, the Universal Declaration on Human Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, UN General Assembly Resolution 1514, to name but some.

The unilateral decision to hyper-militarize our homeland is the latest in a long line of covenant breaches on the part of our Administering Power to guide Guam toward self-governance. It was made totally without consulting the indigenous Chamoru people. No public education campaign regarding the social, cultural, and political consequences of this hyper-militarization has been seriously undertaken or even contemplated.

Of the 10.3 billion dollars settled upon by the U.S. and Japan for the transfer of U.S. Marines from Okinawa to Guam, nothing has been said as to whether or not this money will be used to improve our flailing infrastructure. Recently, the largest joint military exercise in recent history conducted what were casually called war games off Guam waters. 22,000 US military personnel, 30 ships, and 280 aircraft partook in “Valiant Shield.” That weekend, water was cut off to a number of local villages on the Navy water line. The local people of those villages went some thirty days without running water. Across the military-constructed fence, the tap flowed freely for the U.S. military population. The suggestion of late is that Guam is expected to foot the bill of this re-occupation. Meetings with defense officials have proved empty. Military officers we have met with inform us only of their inability to commit to anything. In effect, they repeat that they have no working plans to spend money on civilian projects. Dollars tied to this transfer have been allocated to development only within the bases. Money for education in the territory will again be allocated to schools for children of U.S. military personnel and not ours. Meanwhile, virtually every public sector in Guam is being threatened with privatization.

There is talk of plans to condemn more of our land to accommodate its accelerated military needs. In contrast, there is no talk of plans to clean up radioactive contaminations (strontium, in particular) of Guam from toxins leftover from the U.S.’ World War II activities and its intense nuclear bombing campaign of the Marshall Islands only 1200 miles from Guam. Indeed, the indigenous Chamoru people of Guam suffer extraordinarily high rates of cancer and dementia-related illness due to the U.S.’ widespread toxic contamination of Guam. For example, Chamorus suffer from nasopharynx cancer at a rate 1,999% higher than the U.S. average (per 100,000). To boot, Guam has 19 Superfund sites, most of which are associated with U.S. military base activities as in the case of Andersen Air Force Base and the former Naval Air Station. Nineteen sites is a significant number in consideration of the island’s small size of 212 square meters.
There is also no word on whether or not the U.S. plans to pay war reparations due to us since it forgave Japan its World War II war crimes committed against the Chamorus.
Like an awful re-run of World War II, when the U.S. unilaterally forgave Japan its horrific war crimes on our people, the US is back at the table negotiating away our human rights including our right to self-determination. Beyond the B-2 bombers in our skies, the ships playing war games in our waters, the added weapons of mass destruction, and the contamination that has robbed us of so many loved ones by way of our extraordinarily high rates of cancers and dementia-related illnesses, there is a growing desperation back home. A desperate lethargy in the wind. A realization that if the UN remains unable to slow the manic speed of US militarization, Chamorus as a people will pass.

In 2005 and 2006, we appeared before the UN Special Political and Decolonization Committee, alerting the UN organ of these two frightening facts: 1) it was recently discovered that the U.S. Department of Interior purposefully killed a presidential directive handed down in 1975, which ordered that Guam be given a commonwealth status no less favorable than the one the U.S. was negotiating with the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands at that time; and 2) a campaign of the Guam Chamber of Commerce (primarily consisting of U.S. Statesiders) to privatize every one of Guam’s public resources (the island’s only water provider, only power provider, only local telephone provider, public schools, and its only port, on an island that imports 85-90% of its food and where private monopolies of public goods would truly make us captive to the forces of the market) is undermining our ancient indigenous civilization with violent speed. Eating us whole.
Not much has changed since we last were here in New York. Our power provider has been privatized, our telecommunications sold. Our only water provider and one port are under relentless attack. The meager, questionable victories we have had to stay this mass privatization are only the result of indigenous Chamoru grassroots activists who, on their own-with no financial, institutional, or strategic support-holding both their hands up, holding the line as best they can. At great personal cost.

Your Excellencies: Know this-the indigenous Chamoru people of Guam are neither informed nor unified around this military buildup despite dominant media representations. For all intents and purposes, there is no free press in Guam. Local media only makes noise of the re-occupation, not sense of it. The Pacific Daily News-the American subsidiary newspaper that dominates the discourse-has cut off the oxygen supply to indigenous resistance movement. Rather than debating this buildup’s enormous sociopolitical, environmental and cultural consequences, it has framed the conversation around how best to ask the U.S. (politely) for de facto consideration of our concerns. Without appearing un-American.

We are not Americans. We are Chamorus. We are heirs to a matrilineal, indigenous civilization born two thousand years before Jesus. And we are being disappeared. Off your radar.
All this, and only two years until the end of the Second International Decade for the Eradication of Colonialism. And no midterm review by the Special Committee on Decolonization. No designation of any expert to track Guam’s progress, or lack thereof, toward progressing off the UN list of Non-Self-Governing Territories. Not one UN visiting mission to Guam.

It is a sad commentary that the Administering Power year after year abstains or votes against UN resolutions addressing the “Question of Guam” and resolutions reflecting the work of the UN on decolonization including the resolution on the Second International Decade for the Eradication of Colonialism and the very recent Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. With this non-support by Guam’s Administering Power, it is no wonder that the list of the Non-Self-Governing Territories under the administration of the United States has turned half a century old with little progress.

We Chamorus come to New York year after year, appealing to the UN decolonization committee to follow through with its mandate. Indeed, the UN has collected almost thirty years of our testimony, with nothing to show for it. I represent today the third generation of Chamoru activists to appear before the UN, desperately trying to safeguard our inalienable, still unrealized, human right to self-determination.

The failure of the U.S. to honor its international obligations to Guam and her native people, the non-responsiveness of the UN Special Committee on Decolonization to our rapid deterioration, and the overall non-performance of relevant U.S. and UN Decolonization organs and officials combine to carry our small chance of survival to its final coffin.

All this combines to elevate the human rights situation in Guam as a matter not only of decolonization, but ethnic cleansing.

Indeed, when future generations look upon these days, they might label Guam not merely a U.S. colony, but rather, a UN colony.

To date the Forum has deferred to the Special Committee. The time has come for the Forum to take the lead. To this end we request the Forum take the following action:

Sponsor an expert seminar in conjunction with the UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination and the Special Committee on Decolonization to examine the impact of the UN decolonization process regarding the indigenous peoples of the NSGTs-now and previously listed on the UN list of NSGTs. This seminar must be under the auspices of the Forum due to existing problems with the Secretariat of the Special Committee. We request that Independent Expert Carlyle G. Corbin be included in the seminar as well as the UN Special Rapporteur on the Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms of Indigenous Peoples.

Utilize the Inter-Agency Support Group to begin to implement the Program of Implementation (POI) with UN Agencies, UNDP, UNEP and other agencies and specialized bodies as directed by the General Assembly; and

Communicate its concern for the human rights of indigenous peoples and all peoples in the NSGTs to the UN Human Rights Council and request that the Council designate a Special Rapporteur on the Situation of the Peoples of the Non-Self-Governing Territories.

In Solidarity and Urgency,
The Chamoru Nation and Indigenous Chamoru Organizations of Guam, with support of the above-listed organizations.

Source: http://www.geocities.com/minagahet/pakyofinamilitat

Government pays family $800,000 over Tripler suicide

November 5, 2008

Government pays family $800,000 over Tripler suicide

Advertiser Staff

The federal government has paid $800,000 to settle a lawsuit brought
by the family of a suicidal Air Force veteran who jumped to his death
from Tripler Army Medical Center after his pleas to be admitted went
unheeded, the family’s attorney said today.

Robert Roth, 50, died in January 2007 after he jumped from a 10th-floor
balcony at Tripler.

The family had sued the U.S. government, alleging that Tripler was
careless and negligent in its dealings with Roth.

If Tripler had admitted Roth on either of two instances when he went
to the hospital seeking help, he would have been hospitalized for a
short period, had his anti-depressant medication adjusted and would
not have jumped to his death, according to Rick Fried, the family’s
attorney.
The $800,000 settlement means a trial scheduled for next month will
not be held, Fried said.
A Tripler representative could not be immediately reached for comment.

Source: Honoluluadvertiser.com

One in seven female soldiers sexually harassed or assaulted

http://www.latimes.com/news/science/la-sci-harass28-2008oct28,0,7238888.story

Sexual abuse rates of deployed female soldiers detailed in study

One in seven asked by the VA said they had been harassed or assaulted during their military service. They are more likely to suffer from PTSD and substance abuse than others.

By Thomas H. Maugh II

October 28, 2008

One in seven female soldiers who were deployed to Iraq or Afghanistan and later sought healthcare for any reason reported being sexually harassed or assaulted during their military service, according to a study by Veterans Affairs researchers.

In contrast, only 0.7% of male soldiers reported similar experiences.

Women who reported harassment or assault were 2.3 times as likely to suffer post-traumatic stress disorder as those who did not, and were also more likely to suffer from depression or engage in substance abuse. Men who reported harassment or assault were 1.5 times more likely to suffer PTSD or other disorders.

Similar data have been found in other studies of the military, “but these are the first data specifically coming from veterans deployed in those operations, which makes them novel,” said clinical psychologist Amy Street of the National Center for PTSD at the Veterans Affairs Boston Healthcare System.

No previous study had correlated sexual misconduct with mental health problems among veterans of the deployments, said Street, a co-author of the research.

The data are being presented today at a San Diego meeting of the American Public Health Assn.

The study started with all patients who used VA healthcare between Oct. 1, 2001, and Oct. 1, 2007. They were matched against an administrative list of soldiers who were deployed in Operation Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan and Operation Iraqi Freedom. Those deployed may not have actually served in those two countries, however.

More than 125,000 patients met both criteria. All patients seeking medical care are routinely asked if they have been subjected to harassment or assault. “They may not tell if they are not asked about
them,” Street said.

Among this group, 15.1% of women and 0.7% of men answered positively. The data do not indicate what proportion were assaulted, and researchers don’t know if the incidents happened while they were
deployed or simply sometime during military service.

The rates are lower than those of a similar study released last year by Street and her colleagues. In that study of all VA healthcare users in 2003, not just those deployed, the researchers found that 21.5% of females and 1% of males had reported suffering sexual assault or harassment.

The researchers are uncertain why the rate was lower among deployed soldiers.

The Department of Defense has developed a sexual assault prevention and response program “and we may be seeing a response to those policies,” Street said.

Maugh is a Times staff writer.

thomas.maugh@latimes.com

McCain Picks Tailhook Sexual Harassment Scandal Vet To Oversee Transition

John Lehman, owner and president of Hawaii Superferry, neocon affiliate of the Project for the New American Century, participated in Tailhook sex assault scandal while Sec. of Navy under Reagan.

>><<

http://www.motherjones.com/mojoblog/archives/2008/10/10403_mccain_lehman_transition_tailhook.html

McCain Picks Tailhook Sexual Harassment Scandal Vet To Oversee Transition

On October 29, 1991, Senator John McCain went to the floor of the US Senate. The former Navy pilot was angry and disgusted. In recent days, the news had broken that the previous month Navy airmen and others had gone wild—engaging in sexual molestation, out-of-control drinking, and other misconduct—at the Tailhook Association convention in Las Vegas, an annual gathering of retired and active-duty naval aviators. “I cannot tell you,” McCain proclaimed, “the distaste and displeasure that I have as a naval aviator…concerning this incident.” He bemoaned the fact that senior ranking naval officers and civilian leaders had been at the meeting. He called for an investigation and urged the Navy to suspend its traditional participation with the Tailhook reunions. “There is no time in the history of this country that something like this is more inappropriate,” McCain said, “and we cannot allow it. It is unconscionable. And we in the military…should be ashamed and embarrassed…that this kind of activity went on. And there is no excuse for it.”

Now, McCain has placed one of the men responsible for permitting—and encouraging– loutish activity at the Tailhook meetings in a powerful position: heading up his transition team.

McCain recently named John Lehman to oversee his transition effort and figure out how a McCain administration ought to get started—and whom it ought to hire for the most senior jobs—should McCain win the November 4 election. Lehman, now an investment banker, was secretary of the Navy during the 1980s, and he played a R-rated role in the Tailhook scandal.

Lehman was no longer Navy secretary when the Tailhook scandal exploded. But in 1991 and 1992, as military investigators and journalists probed what had happened at the 1991 convention—which included the so-called Gauntlet, a line of rowdy and drunk junior officers who harassed and assaulted women passing by–they learned that the events at the Tailhook convention of 1991 were predated by similar behavior in early years. And they discovered that Lehman, as Navy secretary, had been an enthusiastic participant.

In his 1995 book, Fall from Glory: The Men Who Sank the U.S. Navy, Greg Vistica, the San Diego Union-Tribune reporter who broke the Tailhook scandal, described a scene from the 1986 Tailhook meeting:

When the door to the suite at the Las Vegas Hilton opened, a prominent member of President Ronald Reagan’s administration and a naked woman were clearly visible. He was lying on his back, stretched out in front of a throng of naval officers. There were probably one hundred men watching him, laughing with him….

Several of the Navy and Marine officers now crammed into the room…knew him personally and worshiped him. Many knew he was married and had three children. Almost everyone knew who he was, which made the show that much more fascinating….

Most of the officers in the room, including the man on his back, were hard-drinking renegades. Some had been partying for days, others for hours. The carpet was spongy and damp from alcohol spilled on it by drunken military men. The room itself reeked with the odor of booze and sweat. But nobody seemed to care much. All eyes were on the man and the naked woman standing over him, wagging her bare rump in a teasing motion. The men in the room went into a throaty uproar at the site, and their cheers and laughs grew louder as the show went on.

The man on the floor was Lehman. And this was the example he was setting at this particular Tailhook convention. Another account of the Tailhook scandal–The Mother of All Hooks: The Story of the U.S. Navy’s Tailhook Scandal by William McMichael–noted that Lehman ate whipped cream out of the stripper’s crotch.

Lehman, who had once been a Navy pilot, left his post as Navy secretary the following year—four years before Tailhook would become a controversy. But the 1993 report on Tailhook ‘91 conducted by the Pentagon’s inspector general concluded that the 1991 convention was “the culmination of a long-term failure of leadership” in the Navy. According to the report, “the nature of the misconduct at the annual convention was well-known to senior aviation leaders….We were repeatedly told that such behavior was widely condone by Navy civilian and military leadership.” A footnote in the report stated:

Throughout our investigation, witnesses told us remarkable incidents at past Tailhook conventions. Incidents related by witnesses included a high-ranking Navy civilian official dancing with strippers in hospitality suites.

The IG’s report noted that Tailhook had spun out of control during Lehman’s tenure as Navy secretary: “By many accounts, the increase in rowdy and improper behavior culminated at Tailhook ’85.” After that convention, one Tailhook Association board member privately complained to the group, “Dancing girls performing lurid sexual acts on Naval aviators in public would make prime conversation for the media.” But no steps were taken—by the association or the Navy–to rein in the Top Gun aviators. And Lehman’s antics at the 1986 gathering sent an obvious signal: party on, men.

1n 1996, Lehman, appearing on ABC News’ This Week with David Brinkley, downplayed the Tailhook affair. Asked if he had participated in public lewdness at one of the conventions, he said that was unimportant and railed against “gutter reporting,” insisting that Tailhook ’91 should have been nothing more than a minor story. Speaking more broadly about the military during the Clinton years, Lehman added, “This is not a touchy-feely bureaucracy here. It has to have a macho, tough, warrior culture, and that’s what’s being eroded.”

Lehman’s involvement in the Tailhook scandal did not harm his career. In the past two decades, he has been a businessman and has sat on the board of several corporations, while working with hawkish think tanks, including the Project for the New American Century. He served as a commissioner for the 9/11 Commission.

Though McCain was quick to denounce the misconduct at Tailhook ’91, it also became a campaign issue for him the following summer, when he was running for reelection to the Senate. In August, 1992, Newsweek published a story reporting that a 1987 Tailhook newsletter had noted that McCain had appeared at that year’s convention and had “participated in the camaraderie of the third [floor]”—where the carousing happened at Tailhook events. His Democratic opponent, Claire Sargent, criticized McCain for attending the 1987 convention and the 1990 gathering. McCain maintained that he had been unaware how rowdy the parties had become. He added, “I heard there was drinking going on, furniture sometimes broken, and occasional vomiting.” But McCain insisted that he had talked to several people who had been at Tailhook ’91 and that they had told him that the abuse of women guests “was unheard of until 1991.” The subsequent IG report on Tailhook would make it clear that was not true. But the Tailhook matter caused McCain no political pain—especially after Naval Lieutenant Paula Coughlin, a female pilot who had publicly charged she was harassed at Tailhook ’91, produced a statement praising McCain. He cruised to an easy reelection.

During that campaign, on September 24, 1992, McCain issued a statement regarding the ongoing Tailhook investigation. “It is my hope,” he said, “that we will take every necessary action to ensure that every man in every service who crossed the line, either in participating in the abuses at Tailhook or in covering them up, receives whatever penalties apply.” McCain praised the current Navy secretary for proceeding with the inquiry. He said nothing about the previous secretaries, including his good friend, John Lehman.

Nuclear survivors of Rongelap

http://counterpunch.org/johnston11212008.html

Weekend Edition
November 21 / 23, 2008

The Voices of Rongelap
Cautionary Tales From a Nuclear War Zone

By BARBARA ROSE JOHNSTON
and HOLLY M. BARKER

John Anjain, Alab of Rongelap, Marshall Islands:

Early in the morning of March 1, 1954, sometime around five or six o’clock, American planes dropped a hydrogen bomb on Bikini Atoll. Shortly before this happened, I had awakened and stepped out of my house. Once outside, I looked around and saw Billiet Edmond making coffee near his house. I walked up and stood next to him. The two of us talked about going fishing later in the morning. After only a few minutes had passed we saw a light to the west of Rongelap Atoll. When this light reached Rongelap we saw many beautiful colors. I expect the reason people didn’t go inside their houses right away was because the yellow, green, pink, red, and blue colors which they saw were such a beautiful sight before their eyes.

The second thing that happened involved the gust of wind that came from the explosion. The wind was so hot and strong that some people who were outside staggered, including Billiet and I. Even some windows fell as a result of the wind.

The third thing that happened concerned the smoke-cloud which we saw from the bomb blast. The smoke rose quickly to the clouds and as it reached them we heard a sound louder than thunder. When people heard this deafening clap some of the women and children fled to the woods. Once the sound of the explosion had died out everyone began cooking, some made donuts and others cooked rice.

Later some men went fishing, including myself. Around nine or ten-o’clock I took my throw net and left to go fishing near Jabwon. As I walked along the beach I looked at the sky and saw it was white like smoke; nevertheless I kept on going. When I reached Jabwon, or even a little before, I began to feel a fine powder falling all over my body and into my eyes. I felt it but I didn’t know what it was.

I went ahead with my fishing and caught enough fish with my throw-net to fill a bag. Then I went to the woods to pick some coconuts. I came back to the beach and sat on a rock to drink the coconuts and eat some raw fish. As I was sitting and eating, the powder began to fall harder. I looked out and saw that the coconuts had changed color. By now all the trees were white as well as my entire body. I gazed up at the sky but couldn’t see the clouds because it was so misty. I didn’t believe this was dangerous. I only knew that powder was falling. I was somewhat afraid nevertheless.

When I returned to Rongelap village I saw people cooking food outside their cook-houses. They didn’t know the powder was very dangerous. The powder fell all day and night long over the entire atoll of Rongelap. During the night people were sick. They were nauseous, they had stomach, head, ear, leg and shoulder aches. People did not sleep that night because they were sick.

The next day, March 2, 1954, people got up in the morning and went down to get water. It had turned a yellowish color. “Oh, Oh” they cried out and said “the powder that fell down yesterday and last night is a harmful thing.” They were sick and so Jabwe, the health-aide, walked around in the morning and warned the people not to drink the water. He told them that if they were thirsty to drink coconuts only.

. . . At three o’clock in the afternoon of March 2, 1954 a seaplane from Enewetak Atoll landed in the lagoon of Rongelap and two men came ashore. Billiet and I asked them why they had come to Rongelap and they responded by saying they had come to inspect the damage caused by the bomb. They said they would spend twenty minutes looking at all the wells, cement water catchments, houses and other things. The two men returned quickly to their plane and left without telling anyone that the food, water, and other things were harmful to human beings.

Everyone was quite surprised at the speed with which the men surveyed everything in the island and then returned to their plane. People said maybe we’ve been really harmed because the men were in such a hurry to leave. Although they said they would look around for about twenty minutes, they probably didn’t stay here for more than ten minutes. So in less than ten minutes after their arrival on Rongelap, the two men had already taken off.

. . . On that day we looked at the water catchments, tubs and other places where there was a great deal of water stored. The water had turned a strong yellow and those who drank it said it tasted bitter.

On March 3, early in the morning, a ship and a seaplane with four propellers appeared on Rongelap. Out of the plane came Mr. Oscar de[Brum] – and Mr. Wiles, the governor of Kwajelein Atoll. As their boat reached the shore, Mr. Oscar cried out to the people to get on board and forget about their personal belongings for whoever thought of staying behind would die. Such were the words by which he spoke to them. Therefore, none of the people went back to their houses, but immediately got on the boats and sailed to board the ship that would take them away. Those who were sick and old were evacuated by plane.

. . . At ten o’clock in the morning we left Rongelap for Ailinginae Atoll and arrived there at three in the afternoon. We picked up nineteen people on this atoll and by five o’clock we were on our way to Kwajalein.

On March 4, we arrived on Kwajalein and met the Admiral who then sent us to where we were to stay. A day later, Dr. Conard and his medical team arrived. The doctors were very thorough in checking and caring for our injuries and showed much concern in examining us. The Admiral was also very concerned about our situation and took us in as if we were his own children. His name was Admiral Clark.

Ever since 1954 Dr. Conard has continued to examine the fallout victims on a yearly basis. These visits are very important for all the people on Rongelap and others in the Marshall Islands. These medical examinations are also of great importance for men throughout the world.

. . . From 1959 to 1963 and 1964, after the Rongelapese had returned to Rongelap from Majuro, many women gave birth prematurely to babies which looked somewhat like animals. Women also had miscarriages. During these years many other strange things happened with regard to food, especially to fish in which the fertilized eggs and liver turned a blackish color. In all my forty years I had never seen this happen in fish either on Rongelap or in any of the other places I’ve been in the Marshall Islands. Also, when people ate fish or [arrowroot] starch produced on Rongelap, they developed a rash in their mouths. This too I had never seen before.

. . . I, John, Anjain, was magistrate of Rongelap when all this occurred and I now write this to explain what happened to the Rongelap people at that time.

[In 1954] the people of Rongelap stayed on Kwajalein for three months and the DOE [Atomic Energy Commission] people removed the Rongelap people to Majuro. The people lived in Majuro for three years and in 1956 the DOE, Trust Territory government and the UN came to Majuro and I went with them to attend a meeting with them at the school in Rita. And they told me that it is time that we go back home. And I asked “are we really going home while Rongelap is contaminated?” And the answer that they give me is that “it is true that Rongelap is contaminated but it is not dangerous. And if you don’t believe us, well then stay here and take care of yourself.”

. . . In 1957 the people returned to Rongelap and the DOE promised that there wouldn’t be any problems to the Rongelap people. However in 1958 and 1959 most of the women gave birth to something that was not resembling human beings. There was a woman giving birth to a grape. Another woman gave birth to something that resembles a monkey. And so on. There was a child born at that time and there was no shell covering the top of that child’s head.

The American doctors came every year to examine us. Every year they came, and they told us that we were not sick, and then they would return the next year. But they did find something wrong. They found one boy did not grow as fast as boys his age. They gave him medicine. Then they began finding the thyroid sickness.

My son Lekoj was thirteen when they found his thyroid was sick. They took him away to a hospital in America. They cut out his thyroid. They gave him some medicine and told him to take it every day for the rest of his life. The same thing happened to other people. The doctors kept returning and examining us. Several years ago, they took me to a hospital in America, and they cut out my thyroid. They gave me medicine and told me to take it every day for the rest of my life.

A few years after the bomb, Senator Amata Kabua tried to get some compensation for the people of Rongelap. He got a lawyer, and the lawyer made a case in court. The court turned our case down. The court said it could not consider our case because we were not part of the United States. Dwight Heine went to the United Nations to tell them about us. People from the United Nations came to see us, and we told them how we felt. Finally, in 1964, the U.S. Congress passed a bill. The bill gave us money as a payment for our experience. Some of the people spent all their money; some of them still have money in the bank. After we got the money, they began finding the thyroid sickness.

In 1972, they took Lekoj away again. They said they wanted to examine him. They took him to America to a big hospital near Washington. Later, they took me to this hospital near Washington because they said he was very sick. My son Lekoj died after [I] arrived. He never saw his island again. He returned home in a box. He is buried on our island. The doctors say he had a sickness called leukemia. They are quite sure it was from the bomb.

But I am positive.

I saw the ash fall on him. I know it was the bomb. I watched him die.

***

Statement of Almira Matayoshi to the Nuclear Claims Tribunal, Marshall Islands (2001):

I was pregnant when they dropped the bomb [Bravo]. I was flown off of Rongelap with the other pregnant women and elderly people. The rest of the people left on the boat. I gave birth to Robert on Ejit, and he was normal. The child I had after Robert, when we had returned to Rongelap, I gave birth to something that was like grapes. I felt like I was going to die from the loss of blood. My vision was gone, and I was fading in and out of consciousness. They emergency evacuated me to Kwajalein, and I was sure I was going to die. After the grapes, I had a third child. It wasn’t like a child at all. It had no bones and was all skin. When I gave birth they said, “Ak ta men en?” [What is that thing?]. Mama said uror [a term denoting exacerbation]. It was the first strange child that people had seen. I was the first. That time was the worst in my life. I feel both angry and embarrassed.

***

What words can possibly communicate what it is like to see and survive such sights? To become increasingly fearful that the intense beauty of your world-the water, the sand, the plants, the soil, the sea, and all the creatures within-has been fundamentally transformed by invisible, untouchable, all-encompassing poison? After years and years of living in a radioactive laboratory as the subject of scrutiny and study, what does it mean to find your fears confirmed-that your favorite foods are taboo, that your loved ones grow old before their time and your children fail to thrive? What does it mean to “survive” downwind from the the United States proving grounds – where nuclear war was practiced and perfected by Cold War warriors?

In 1946, after evacuating the people of Bikini and nearby atoll communities in the Marshall Islands, the United States detonated two atomic weapons: the same type of bomb that was dropped on Nagasaki in 1945. In 1947 the United Nations designated the Marshall Islands a United States Trust Territory. Over the next eleven years, this U.S. territory played host to another sixty-five atmospheric atomic and thermonuclear tests. The largest of these tests, code named Bravo, was detonated on March 1, 1954. This 15-megaton hydrogen bomb was purposefully exploded close to the ground. It melted huge quantities of coral atoll, sucking it up and mixing it with radiation released by the weapon before depositing it on the islands and inhabitants in the form of ash, or radioactive fallout. The wind was blowing that morning in the direction of inhabited atolls, including Rongelap and Utrik, some 100 and 300 miles from the test site at Bikini. The Marshallese communities on Rongelap, Ailinginae, and Utrik atolls, U.S. servicemen on Rongerik Atoll (weathermen who were monitoring winds and fallout), and the twenty-three-man crew of the Japanese fishing vessel Fukuryu Maru (Lucky Dragon) received near-lethal doses of radiation from the Bravo event.

International protests and calls for a ban on nuclear weapons testing prompted the U.S. government to publicly acknowledge the incident and accept liability. The Marshallese filed an April 20, 1954, complaint to the United Nations Trusteeship Council:

We, the Marshallese people feel that we must follow the dictates of our consciences to bring forth this urgent plea to the United Nations, which has pledged itself to safeguard the life, liberty and the general well being of the people of the Trust Territory, of which the Marshallese people are a part.

. . . The Marshallese people are not only fearful of the danger to their persons from these deadly weapons in case of another miscalculation, but they are also very concerned for the increasing number of people who are being removed from their land.

. . . Land means a great deal to the Marshallese. It means more than just a place where you can plant your food crops and build your houses; or a place where you can bury your dead. It is the very life of the people. Take away their land and their spirits go also.

In response to this petition the United States assured the General Assembly of the United Nations:

The fact that anyone was injured by recent nuclear tests in the Pacific has caused the American people genuine and deep regret. . . . The United States Government considers the resulting petition of the Marshall Islanders to be both reasonable and helpful. . . . The Trusteeship Agreement of 1947 which covers the Marshall Islands was predicated upon the fact that the United Nations clearly approved these islands as a strategic area in which atomic tests had already been held. Hence, from the onset, it was clear that the right to close areas for security reasons anticipated closing them for atomic tests, and the United Nations was so notified; such tests were conducted in 1948, 1951, 1952 as well as in 1954. . . . The question is whether the United States authorities in charge have exercised due precaution in looking after the safety and welfare of the Islanders involved. That is the essence of their petition and it is entirely justified. In reply, it can be categorically stated that no stone will be left unturned to safeguard the present and future well-being of the Islanders.

The United States promised the Marshallese and the United Nations General Assembly that “Guarantees are given the Marshallese for fair and just compensation for losses of all sorts.”

These guarantees worked: the United States was able to continue its atmospheric weapons testing program in the Marshall Islands through 1958 and at its Nevada test site through 1963, when the United States, Great Britain, and the Soviet Union finally signed on to a limited test ban treaty.

The United States has not, however, fully lived up to its promises to the United Nations or the Marshallese people to safeguard their well-being. Atmospheric weapons testing in the Pacific resulted in considerable human and environmental harm.

Atmospheric nuclear weapons tests released numerous radioisotopes and dangerous heavy metals. An estimated 2 percent of the radioactive fallout was iodine-131, a highly radioactive isotope with an 8-day half-life. The nuclear war games conducted by the United States in the Marshall Islands released some 8 billion curies of iodine-131. To place this figure in broader context, over the entire history of nuclear weapons testing at the Nevada Proving Grounds, some 150 million curies of iodine-131 were released, and varying analyses of the Chernobyl nuclear power plant disaster estimate an iodine-131 release of 40 to 54 million curies. Much of the iodine-131 released in the Marshall Islands was the by-product of the March 1, 1954, Bravo test detonation of the hydrogen bomb. Designed to produce and contain as much radioactive fallout in the immediate area as possible, in order to create laboratory-like conditions, Bravo unleashed as much explosive yield as one thousand Hiroshima-sized bombs. Communities living downwind from the blast, especially the Rongelap community, were acutely exposed to its fallout.

Evacuated three days after the blast, the people of Rongelap spent three months under intense medical scrutiny as human subjects in Project 4.1. They spent three years as refugees and were returned to their still-contaminated atoll in 1957 with assurances that their islands were now safe. They lived on Rongelap for another twenty-eight years and as the closest populated atoll to the Pacific Proving Grounds, they were exposed to additional fallout from another series of nuclear tests in 1958. While living on Rongelap, the community was visited annually, and later biannually, by U.S. government scientists and medical doctors conducting follow-up studies begun under Project 4.1. Researchers collected fish, plants, soil, and human body samples to document the presence of radioisotopes deposited from sixty-seven tests, the movement of these isotopes through the food chain and the human body, and the adverse health impact of this radiation on the human body.

The community left Rongelap in 1985 after receiving information from some U.S. scientists that confirmed their long-held fears that their ancestral homeland was contaminated with radiation at levels that posed a serious risk to their health. Today, the Rongelap community lives in exile, largely on borrowed or rented lands in Kwajalein and Majuro atolls. Recent efforts to remediate fallout hazards on areas of some islands and to rebuild homes and community structure on the island of Rongelap suggest that the community may, someday soon, have the choice of returning home. Whether or not remediation is successful and people decide to return remains to be seen.

The people of Rongelap are not the only nuclear nomads created by the actions of military and nuclear powers over the past six decades. They are, however, one of the most studied communities.

Following their acute exposure in 1954 the people of Rongelap enrolled in a medical research program sponsored by the Atomic Energy Commission. The program was designed to document the movement of radiation through the atmosphere, food chain, and human body, with the goal of understanding the long-term effects of human exposure to ionizing radiation.

Over the years, U.S. scientists added to the research program “control” subjects, including people on Rongelap who were not present during the Bravo test, people on the nearby atoll of Utrik, people on Likiep (another populated atoll in the northern Marshall Islands), and people on Majuro. Control subjects were typically selected to match the acutely exposed by age and sex, and scientists studied these people in many instances for four decades. Comparative studies documented increases in thyroid disorders, stunted growth in children, and increases in many forms of cancer and leukemia, cataracts, and other radiation-related illnesses.

For four decades, U.S. government scientists returned to the Marshall Islands to conduct exams and collect blood, tissue, bone marrow, teeth, and other samples. These studies generated a broad array of scientific findings, including the recognition that not only can acute exposures to radiation stimulate short-term effects but that late effects can emerge years and decades following the initial exposure. For example, by studying the Marshallese population, scientists found that radio-iodine-131 adheres to and accumulates in the thyroid, stimulating the production of benign and cancerous nodules and interfering with the production of hormones, leaving pregnant women and children especially vulnerable. They also discovered that people who were not exposed to an acute level of ionizing radiation but were exposed to low-levels on a daily basis because they lived in an area contaminated by fallout also developed thyroid and other radiogenic problems. The lessons learned by scientists included an awareness of the many complicated ways that radiation adversely affects the human body.

The Rongelap study was structured in ways that required the involvement of children from other atolls, especially children in the southern part of the nation. Such involvement extended over decades. Control subjects were selected at the direction of authorities. Being singled out resulted in social stigmatization (people were shunned because of the social perception that all people studied by the medical survey team were damaged by radiation). Control subject experiences included thorough examinations with photographs and x-rays; measurement of internal radiation with whole-body counters; the sampling of blood, bone marrow, skin, and other tissue; and, on a number of occasions, the injection of radioisotopes, vaccines, and other nonexplained substances. The experience of serving as a research control was intrusive, painful, and potentially harmful to the health of the participant.

The research agenda was shaped to meet U.S. military and scientific research objectives rather than the personal health needs of the affected population. The pressing question for the U.S. government was how to document and interpret the Marshallese experience in ways that might predict the consequences for U.S. troops or U.S. citizens exposed to radiation in the event of nuclear war. Marshallese health concerns, especially worries that radiation from fallout remained in their environment, poisoning their food and their bodies, were often ignored.

The classified nature of this research had profound effects within the Marshall Islands and within the broader scientific research community. Research protocols, data, and findings were restricted to those with security clearance. Patients, and later the Marshall Islands government, were denied access to medical records generated by this research.

This biomedical research was conducted by Brookhaven National Laboratory with monies appropriated by the U.S. Congress for the health of the Rongelap people. However, rather than investments in local health infrastructure, funds were used to periodically transport medical staff and supplies from the United States to the Marshall Islands for brief examinations of the “exposed” and “control” populations; to analyze the samples that were collected; to occasionally treat conditions that were defined as radiogenic in nature; and, in later years, to acquire and supply a ship with the necessary technology to conduct whole-body counting, x-ray, and other laboratory procedures. Some of the residents who developed thyroid tumors and other radiogenic conditions were brought to the United States for study and surgical removal of the thyroid gland.

When the U.S. government states that it has provided millions of dollars to the Marshall Islands for issues related to the weapons testing, it does not mention that enormous portions of this money went into advancing U.S. scientific interests, not into services for the people.

The culture of secrecy that characterized biomedical research in the Marshall Islands facilitated efforts to shape public opinion on the safety of the nuclear weapons testing program. Scientific findings were cherry-picked: those studies released to the public were carefully selected; conclusions were carefully worded to support the contention that exposed communities suffered no lasting effects from their exposure and that their exposure presented no threat to the health of subsequent generations. Manipulated “findings” were used to counter calls within the United Nations to establish a ban on nuclear weapons testing; to calm local and regional complaints that exposure to radiation was producing a wide array of untreated health effects, especially reproductive effects; and to reduce the economic liability of the U.S. government in meeting its obligations to its former territory.

As the decades passed, people experienced a growing incidence of adverse health effects, most notably the late onset of thyroid cancer and stunted growth and retardation in children in “exposed” as well as “control” populations. These health problems fed concerns that Rongelap Atoll was still dangerously contaminated and posed a significant hazard to occupants, a fact that became evident in the restudy of radiological conditions in the northern Marshall Islands in 1978. The results of this survey and the input of a few independent foreign experts led the Rongelapese to evacuate their homes in 1985, with the assistance of the Greenpeace ship Rainbow Warrior on what proved to be its final voyage in the Pacific. The evacuation of Rongelap occurred without the assistance or approval of the U.S. government. The restudy confirmed that much of the northern Marshall Islands was indeed still contaminated and that some areas would not be habitable without extensive remediation for at least twenty-five thousand years.

In 1986, after years of negotiations and the threat of some $7.1 billion in damage claims making their way through the U.S. court system, the United States and the Republic of the Marshall Islands signed a Compact of Free Association, releasing the U.S. government from pending legal claims through the establishment of a compensation trust fund. The Compact of Free Association requires the United States to continue efforts to adequately address the full range of damages and injuries resulting from the testing program. Section 177 of the compact outlines responsibilities for monitoring the environment and human health effects of radiation from the nuclear weapons tests in the northern Marshall Islands (Bikini and Enewetak, the two ground-zero locations and Rongelap and Utrik atolls, the two communities enrolled in the Project 4.1 biomedical study). An additional provision of section 177 enables the Republic of the Marshall Islands to petition the U.S. Congress for additional compensatory funds should conditions change or new information come to light. Congress set aside $150 million to fund the provisions of the initial compact, which established a compensation trust fund with funds administered through a Nuclear Claims Tribunal that receives claims and issues awards for personal injury and property damage.

When the Compact of Free Association was negotiated and the Nuclear Claims Tribunal established much of the scientific record was classified: The Marshallese were never fully briefed on the nature of the nuclear weapons testing program and the full extent of its damages. This inequitable access to fundamental information has severely hampered Marshallese efforts to achieve a meaningful and comprehensive remedy. For example, to this day, the United States acknowledges in its compensatory programs the obligation to address nuclear-weapons-related damage to property and people in only four atolls: Bikini, Enewetak, Rongelap and Utrik. The U.S. documentary record tells another story: a 1955 survey, declassified in 1994 and released to the RMI in 1995, reports fallout from the 1954 Bravo test occurring at hazardous levels on twenty-eight atolls throughout the Marshall Islands. The entire nation, not simply the four atolls, is downwind, and the whole country has been adversely affected by nuclear weapons.

Today, the Rongelap community lives in exile, largely on borrowed or rented lands in Kwajalein and Majuro atolls. Recent efforts to remediate fallout hazards on areas of some islands and to rebuild homes and community structure on the island of Rongelap suggest that the community may, someday soon, have the choice of returning home. Whether or not remediation is successful and people decide to return remains to be seen.

The Marshallese have suffered more illness, death, and grief than any population should endure, and historical wrongs resulting from the nuclear weapons testing program have been compounded by inadequate and underfunded medical assistance. Despite the seriously elevated cancer rates in the Marshall Islands, as of this writing there is no oncologist in the country. There is no ability to provide chemotherapy or radiation treatment. Perhaps worst of all, there is no ability to undertake a nationwide screening for cancer to catch the illness in its early stages and provide patients with the greatest chance for survival and an improved quality of life.

A minimalist approach to health care has been provided through the Compact of Free Association (177 Agreement): Some seventeen thousand people receive health care through the 177 Health Care Program established to address the radiogenic health issues of the people of Enewetak, Bikini, Rongelap, and Utrik islands. This system is woefully underfunded and lacks comprehensive cancer treatment capability. Many people have filed personal-injury claims with the Nuclear Claims Tribunal and, with their compensation, moved to Hawaii and the continental United States seeking, among other things, better health care. The NCT has ordered millions of dollars in compensation for personal-injury claims, but many more people have been found eligible than originally anticipated. Thus the majority of awards have yet to be paid in full to victims or their surviving families. And while a compensatory payment provides assistance at one level or another, in no way does it provide the means to restore overall health.

What is clearly lacking in the Marshall Islands, and sorely needed, is a high-quality medical care program that would address direct and indirect health problems caused by U.S. activities during the nuclear test period, and build the capacity of the Marshall Islands to address these needs.

The story of Rongelap is one of systemic injury, and inadequate and at times abusive response on the part of the U.S. government. U.S. government activities in the Marshall Islands resulted in profound consequences for the entire nation, unmet U.S. obligations, and an intergenerational responsibility. Under the Bush Administration, the U.S. government views its responsibility to its former territorial possession, and those people adversely affected by the nuclear weapons testing program, as a set of limited obligations that have in large part been addressed.

Political administrations come and go, but radiogenic contamination and disease present protracted, ulcerating, intergenerational problems. The toxic and radioactive contamination of soil, water, terrestrial and marine biota, and human life that is the legacy of nuclear war games in the Marshall Islands is difficult and expensive to monitor, let alone remediate. The health complications of radiation exposure for individuals and their offspring are similarly expensive to monitor and treat. Nevertheless, just as the U.S. government continues to appropriate billions of dollars for the cleanup of the plutonium processing plant in Hanford, Washington, and as it continues to make appropriations to provide full compensation to people living downwind from the Nevada Test Site, so too must it honor commitments to the inhabitants of the former trust territory, who deserve the same level of health care and cleanup as U.S. citizens.

In today’s world-where uranium mining occurs at historic levels, where depleted uranium is widely used in military training and war, and where nuclear power and weapons production are again on the agendas of the world’s nations-these lessons have currency. The experiences of the people of Rongelap, whose lives were transformed not only by acute exposure but also by chronic exposure to low-level radiation, should be read as a timely, cautionary tale.

This essay is excerpted from The Consequential Dangers of Nuclear War: the Rongelap Report

Barbara Rose Johnston is an anthropologist and senior research fellow at the Center for Political Ecology, and a member of the expert advisory group for UNESCO’s Water and Cultural Diversity Project. She is the co-author of The Consequential Dangers of Nuclear War: the Rongelap Report. Her documentation of dam legacy issues in Guatemala is available in Spanish and English at http://www.centerforpoliticalecology.org/chixoy.html. She can be reached at: bjohnston@igc.org

Holly M. Barker served as the advisor to the Republic of the Marshall Islands Embassy for 18 years and now teaches anthropology as a full-time lecturer a the University of Washington. Her latest book is Consequential Damages of Nuclear War – The Rongelap Report, by Barbara Rose Johnston and Holly M. Barker (Left Coast Press 2008). She can be contacted at hmbarker@u.washington.edu.

Army settles Hawaii culture lawsuit

The Associated Press
Posted : Tuesday Nov 18, 2008 6:09:54 EST

HONOLULU — The Office of Hawaiian Affairs and the Army announced Monday that they have settled an OHA lawsuit filed in 2006 over the establishment of a Stryker brigade and its impact on Native Hawaiian cultural resources.

OHA representatives and a neutral archaeologist accompanied by Army representatives will survey certain Army training areas, the announcement said. Continue reading “Army settles Hawaii culture lawsuit”

Settlement lets OHA access some Stryker training areas

November 18, 2008

Settlement lets OHA access some Stryker training areas

Deal with Army aims to ensure protection of cultural resources

By William Cole
Advertiser Military Writer

The Office of Hawaiian Affairs and the Army have settled OHA’s 2006 federal lawsuit claiming the Army failed to protect Native Hawaiian cultural resources when it brought the Stryker brigade to the state.

OHA representatives, along with an archaeologist, will be able to survey certain Stryker training areas at Schofield Barracks, Kahuku and Pohakuloa as a result of the agreement, the state agency announced yesterday.

Through the surveys, OHA said it and Army representatives “aim to ensure the appropriate identification and treatment of cultural and historic resources located in Lihu’e, the traditional name for the Schofield Barracks region,” as well as other parts of Hawai’i.

The settlement means the Army can put behind it another legal case involving the $1.5 billion Stryker brigade of 4,000 soldiers and about 328 of the armored eight-wheeled vehicles.

The unit is deployed to Iraq. The soldiers and vehicles are expected back in Hawai’i in February or March.

“This agreement will afford OHA the opportunity to have a firsthand look at important cultural resources that would not otherwise be accessible to the general public, and to determine whether they were fully addressed in the Army’s prior surveys of areas affected by Stryker activities,” OHA chairwoman Haunani Apoliona said in a statement yesterday.

Col. Matthew T. Margotta, commander of U.S. Army Garrison, Hawai’i, said the Army values the “spirit of cooperation and communication with OHA.”

Margotta added that the agreement will “build upon our existing robust programs to identify and care for these cultural and historical resources, while balancing the need for soldier training.”

When it filed the lawsuit, OHA said cultural monitors had been partly responsible for the discovery of historically significant sites and burial grounds that were overlooked by the military’s archaeologists.

On July 22, 2006, an unexploded-ordnance removal crew bulldozed across a buffer protecting Hale’au’au heiau at Schofield, according to cultural monitors hired by the Army.

OHA also said there were other incidents involving displacement and damage of petroglyphs, the filling of a streambed known to contain Native Hawaiian sites and the construction of a road over burial grounds.

The Army in 2001 decided to base a Stryker unit in Hawai’i, and started about $700 million in construction projects.

Based on a separate federal lawsuit, a federal appeals court ruled in 2006 that the Army had not adequately examined alternative locations outside Hawai’i for the fast-strike unit, and ordered the Army to do so.

The decision temporarily halted one of the biggest Army projects in the Islands since World War II.

The end of that lawsuit brought the resumption of about six construction projects related to the Stryker brigade. Work is projected to continue through 2017.

Source: http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/20081118/NEWS01/811180360/1001

Anti-Bases Coalition Pushes U.S. Military Base out of Ecuador

Anti-Bases Coalition Pushes U.S. Military Base out of Ecuador

By Helga Serrano

November 5, 2008

Translated from: Coalición No Bases logra la salida de Base Militar de EEUU de Ecuador
Translated by: Annette Ramos

Note:

The following is Helga Serrano’s report about the case of Ecuador presented at the Second Encounter for the Demilitarization of the Americas on Oct. 4, 2008 in La Esperanza, Honduras. It is of interest because it describes the grassroots organizational process that led to President Rafael Correa’s decision to announce that the U.S. military must leave the base at Manta as of 2009. The president’s decision was important, but it was the constant pressure from grassroots networks that led to this triumph for all who seek a demilitarized continent, with peace and full respect for sovereignty.

The achievements of the peace and anti-bases movements in the country also are revealed in Article 5 of the new Constitution of Ecuador which prohibits locating foreign military bases on Ecuadorean soil, to wit: “Ecuador is a peaceful territory. The establishment of foreign military bases and foreign facilities with military purposes is not allowed.” Following is the system by which this experience came about, providing an example for the whole continent.

Friends, partners,

Warm greetings in solidarity from Ecuador, on behalf of the Christian Youth Association-YMCA of Ecuador, the Anti-Bases Coalition of Ecuador, and the Global Anti-Bases Network.

I am happy to be here in La Esperanza to share with you two victories that bring hope. The first is the success of the referendum and the new constitution, and the other is that U.S. forces have been officially notified that they must leave the Manta Military Base in 2009.

We would like to share the following points with you:

The strategy of imperialist domination based on militarism and neoliberal economic globalization.

The Base at Manta

The Constitution

The Multinational Network

Challenges facing the Latin American and Caribbean Anti-Bases Network

Imperialist Domination: Militarization and Neoliberal Globalization

To begin with, it is important to underscore that to protect its interests and military and commercial investments globally, the United States seeks global political control grounded in two strategies: global militarization and neoliberal capitalist globalization. In this manner, the military forces of the empire act as a “global police,” with the goal of maintaining security for the global market. So, it is clear that on the one hand it aims to keep military control and supremacy, and on the other control over markets and resources.

The United States military presence is made more evident when it invades a country, such as in the instance of Iraq in 2003. But it is also present on a daily basis in foreign military bases, military exercises, training schools, and even in so-called “peace operations.”
During the last decade, the United States consolidated its military bases system into a new global imperial system. According to Pentagon data, there are more than 735 U.S. military bases in 130 countries. This constitutes a global strategy of expansion and control of nations, natural resources, and human beings. If we include the so-called cooperation agreements signed with countries such as Ecuador as to the Manta Base, the military empire has more than 1,000 U.S. bases in other countries.1

Foreign bases have five missions:

1. maintain absolute military supremacy in the world
2. interfere with communications
3. attempt to control the largest number possible of petroleum sources
4. provide work and income for the military industrial complex, and
5. make sure that the military and their families live comfortably.

As well as military bases and other forms of military presence, the U.S. has the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, NATO, which includes European countries. The United States needs to have access to and control of the world’s natural resources: oil, natural gas, mining, water, forest resources. And of course, it needs to protect its transnational corporations. For all this it also controls international organizations: the G8, the World Bank, the World Trade Organization, the International Monetary Fund, and the United Nations Security Council.

In the end, all these organizations are at the service of the large transnational corporations that operate as a planetary government. In these organizations, northern countries define what needs to be done to protect the economic interests of their transnationals. The powerful have divided the globe into an economic map, driving an accumulation model that takes over markets by mergers, acquisitions, patents-at the cost of smaller national capitals. In many cases, the actions of large transnationals increase their value without producing real wealth, based only on financial speculation. Neoliberal globalization is maintained due to the misery of many, and for that reason, this model is not sustainable. Not all of us can get by with the wasted resources of life in some of the northern countries.

What is Happening in Latin America and the Caribbean?

Now let’s turn to what is going on in Latin America and the Caribbean. If we recall the United States intervention in the region we cannot ignore the 75,000 dead in the war in El Salvador, nor the 200,000 dead in Guatemala, whose governments received support from the United States.

Similarly the United States invaded Panama, used Vieques in Puerto Rico to run impoverished uranium tests, and Panama for experiments with chemical weapons. Now we see how they are using the base at Guantanamo, Cuba as a jail where there is no law or justice.

To maintain regional hegemony, the strategy of the U.S. government establishes an economic, political, and military nexus as a means of control. At the economic level, the United States is looking for new markets for its transnational companies through the signing of Free Trade Agreements (FTAs). This makes any development in our countries truly impossible. At the political level, the United States requires agreements with local elites, and this has been complicated by the new governments in Latin America, such as Evo Morales in Bolivia, Rafael Correa in Ecuador, and Hugo Chavez in Venezuela.

The free trade area projects complement the Hemispheric Cooperative Security plan, which wants the armed forces of Latin America to adopt as priorities the war on drugs and terrorism. In that manner, the items on the U.S. agenda become priorities for the region, when the truth is that our problems are foreign debt, unequal distribution of wealth, and inequalities.

In Latin America and the Caribbean, the United States maintains a complex network of military facilities and operations, which include:

17 sites with radar facilities, mainly in Colombia and Peru

2 military bases, one in Guantanamo, Cuba and the other in Soto Cano/Palmerola in Honduras; and

4 Cooperative Security Locations in Comalapa, El Salvador; Reina Beatriz in Aruba; Hato Rey in Curazao; and Manta in Ecuador. Tres Esquinas in Colombia plays a crucial role in the implementation of Plan Colombia.

U.S. military strategy is controlled from Southern Command based in Key West, Florida. According to Uruguayan researcher Raúl Zibechi, “Some analysts believe that the Southern Command has turned into the main source of dialogue with the governments of Latin America as well as the organism that expresses U.S. foreign and defense policy in the region. The Southern Command has more employees working on Latin America than the Departments of State, Agriculture, Commerce, Treasury, and Defense combined.”

This direct military presence in the region increased once Panama’s Base Howard was closed in 1999. Following this, the United States established four Cooperative Advance Centers, today known as Cooperative Security Locations, which are really military bases, with the pretext of the war on drugs. They also have the additional goals of dealing with migration and terrorism.

Through military bases, the United States also controls guerrilla activities. In Colombia it has a force of 1,600 between troops and private contractors that engage in activities within the parameters of Plan Colombia. This Plan was launched principally in the Amazon departments of Caquetá and Putumayo and Nariño in the South, on the border with Ecuador. Since 1999, U.S. agencies share intelligence in “real time” with the Armed Forces of Colombia. Another fundamental component of Plan Colombia has to do with the glyphosate sprayings that have been undertaken in Colombia and in the border areas with Ecuador. These sprayings affect everything: family gardens, food crops, water, the environment, and, above all, the health and life of the population, including innocent children. Since February of this year sprayings ceased following demands from the Ecuadorean government, which will lodge a lawsuit at the International Tribunal at The Hague so that the affected population can be compensated.

Manta Military Base

In 1999, the United States signed an agreement with Ecuador for the use of the Manta Base until 2009. This turned into an illegal and illegitimate U.S. military enclave enjoying immunity, whose actions infringe on the country’s national sovereignty. The Ex-Commander himself of the U.S. Advanced Security Operations Site at the Manta Base, Javier Delucca, stated, “The Manta Base is very important within Plan Colombia. We are very well situated to operate in this area.”

After seven years at the Manta Base, it has been determined that the main activities of the U.S. military are geared to migration control and providing logistical support for the war in Colombia. Since the Manta Base opened, several conflicts have unfolded: an increase in sex workers, the eviction of peasant families, the sinking of fishing boats, the interdiction of vessels transporting migrants, limits on fishing work for “security” reasons, and the risk to population settlements near firing ranges.

This is only a reflection of what has happened in other countries where U.S. military bases have been established. In those places there are problems related to sovereignty, democracy, the displacement of indigenous populations, environmental dangers, effects on health, crime and impunity, sexual crimes, and prostitution.

In Ecuador, the struggle against the base began upon its establishment, with complaints being lodged as to its unconstitutionality. Later, forums, meetings, and demonstrations took place. The Anti-Bases Coalition of Ecuador was formed demanding that the agreement with the United States for the use of the Manta Base not be renewed, which we have now achieved. Undoubtedly, it was very important to hold the World Conference for the Abolition of Foreign Military Bases in 1997 in Ecuador. The Ecuadorian Ministry of State has already officially notified the U.S. government that its military must leave. CELEBRATIONS WILL BE HELD IN 2009 IN ECUADOR!!

The Constitution and the Bases

For now there is much significance in the articles approved for the constitution and ratified in the referendum with 64% of the votes, relative to sovereignty and the ban on foreign military bases, as stated in Article 5: “Ecuador is a peaceful territory. The establishment of foreign military bases and foreign facilities with military purposes is not allowed. Conveying national military bases to foreign armed or security forces is prohibited.” Ecuador, moreover, defines itself as a country that promotes peace, universal disarmament; it condemns development and the use of weapons of mass destruction, and the imposition of bases or facilities with military purposes of certain states in the territory of others (Article 416, 4). This constitutes a victory not only for Ecuadorian organizations, but for networks at the continental and global level that fight for the abolition of foreign military bases.

The constitution also happens to include a series of progressive elements that will allow for overcoming inequality, discrimination, and injustice in Ecuador, such as the following: the regime of living well (sumak kawsay), which implies living in harmony with oneself, society, and nature; the rights of nature to assure “the maintenance and regeneration of its life cycles, structure, functions, and evolutionary processes”; multi-nationality and collective rights; the human right to water, as well as prohibition on privatizing it; food sovereignty and the right to secure and permanent access to food; communication rights and access to frequencies for public, private, and community media.

The International Network for the Abolition of Foreign Military Bases

We have a very large ally in our struggle in the International Anti-Bases Network that was formed in March of 2007 at the Conference in Ecuador, with the aim of developing a global and local str

ategy for the closing of all foreign military bases. It was concluded that if the empire is global, resistance must also be global. And this network is precisely part of the movement for global justice, which unites us all here. We are currently in the process of consolidating as a network, but also of joining other networks and movements worldwide. Closing a base is a blow to imperial strategy, and that is why we call for the abolition of military bases in the world.

The ideological and political base of the Anti-Bases Network, affirmed in the Final Declaration, constitutes a central and unifying element that will allow the network to advance strongly in its development. The Anti-Bases Network is clearly positioned in the framework of movements that fight for justice, peace, self-determination of peoples, and ecological sustainability. It also recognizes that foreign military bases constitute instruments of war that strengthen militarization, colonialism, imperial strategy, patriarchy, and racism.

The Network affirms that foreign military bases and the infrastructure used for wars of aggression, violate human rights, oppress peoples, particularly the indigenous, those of African descent, women, girls, and boys, and destroy communities and the environment. For these reasons, the Network demands the abolition of all foreign military bases. And this implies questioning militarism and the structural axis of this system of bases-that is, the U.S. empire. The Network denounces the principal responsibility of the United States in the proliferation of foreign military bases, and also recognizes the role of NATO, the European Union, and other countries.

The work of the International Network is growing stronger in different regions-in Europe and Southeast Asia, and the Pacific. At the European Social Forum in Malmo, a well-attended event was organized and now it’s our turn here in Latin America.

Lessons and Challenges for Latin America and the Caribbean

Some lessons learned in the struggle against the U.S. military at the Manta Base are:

Have a clear objective.

Organize and build coalitions. In Ecuador’s case we joined the Anti-Bases Coalition made up of 20 social change organizations.

Multiple strategies, including mobilization, communication, legal action, events, and forums.

Maintain relationships with other social change organizations and movements, so as to have the base issue incorporated into their agendas, as well as relating it to the struggle against the Free Trade Agreement (FTA).

Internationalization of the struggle, from the local to the global and from the global to the local, and toward that end the support of the International Anti-Bases Network was important.

Turn the struggle into a constitutional article, which implies electing good representatives, a participatory process, and including the prohibition on building foreign military bases, which was picked up from the proposal put forth by the Anti-Bases Coalition.

We are also part of networks in Latin America that work in the same struggles:

CADA: focused on the exit of foreign troops from Haiti.

Triple Border Social Forum: struggle against the presence of military forces in the border area between Paraguay, Brazil, and Argentina, where there are large deposits and currents of water.

SOA Watch: so that governments don’t send their soldiers for “training” at Fort Benning, Georgia, in what used to be known as the School of the Americas, where they were taught to torture and violate human rights.

Guantanamo: there has been a worldwide condemnation of the torture and violation of human rights at that base turned jail. Many voices say: “Shut down Guantanamo!”

HSA: The Hemispheric Social Alliance developed the “No FTAA” and important mobilizations in the continent.

World Social Forum and Americas Social Forum: they were important spaces to bring together various networks to plan joint actions against FTAs.

But there are fundamental challenges that we need to confront, starting from the recognition that there are no individual exits from neoliberalism, militarization, and imperialism. Exits are collective and organized.

We don’t want the U.S. forces to leave Manta only to land in Peru or Colombia. Nor do we want the IV Fleet patrolling the Pacific. Therefore, it is fundamental that we develop a regional joint strategy to prevent this from happening.

Building on the articles of Ecuador’s Constitution, other national instruments, and allies in Latin American governments, we can begin a campaign directed at the United Nations to achieve a treaty for the abolition of foreign military bases.

We need to strengthen the exchange of experiences and systematize the experiences of struggle and share achievements … as well as failures.

Strengthen our Latin American and Caribbean Anti-Bases Network. We hope to meet soon with several organizations toward this end. This will also allow strengthening the International Anti-Bases Network.

Establish strong relations with the U.S. Anti-Bases Network, because that is where pressure needs to be put on the government and Senators to change their militaristic and warmongering policies. Solidarity visits and informational forums would be interesting.

We need to strengthen alliances with the social movements of the region, so that the demilitarization agenda is included in their struggles.

As Francisco Morazán said, there are two homelands. In Ecuador we are defeating the homeland of the oligarchy, of the minorities, of inequality, of party rule, and the homeland of the majority, of sovereignty, dignity, and peace, is winning.

End Notes

Chalmers Johnson, Nemesis: The Last Days of the American Republic (Metropolitan Books, 2007).

Translated for the Americas Policy Program by Annette Ramos.

Helga Serrano is a member of the International Anti-Bases Network, Anti-Bases Coalition Ecuador, and ACJ/YMCA Ecuador, and a collaborator with the Americas Policy Program at www.americaspolicy.org.

For More Information

Change Triumphs in Ecuador’s Constitutional Referendum
http://www.americas.irc-online.org/am/5571

United States Announces IV Fleet Resumes Operations Amid South American Suspicions
http://www.americas.irc-online.org/am/5362

Hundreds Gather to Confront Militarization of the Americas
http://www.americasmexico.blogspot.com/2008/10/hundreds-gather-to-confront.html

Coalición Anti-bases
Encuentro Desmilitarización 2008

This article was re posted on www.opednews.com with permission from CIP Americas Policy Program or the Center for International Policy. Original Content at http://www.opednews.com/articles/Anti-Bases-Coalition-Pushe-by-By-Helga-Serrano-081114-721.html

Full Moon Over Okinawa

http://www.counterpunch.org/lummis11042008.html November 4, 2008

Nuchi du Takara

Full Moon Over Okinawa

By DOUG LUMMIS

The Tenth Annual Okinawa Full Moon Festival will be held at Sedake Beach, northern Okinawa, November 8 and 9.  This is a festival of traditional, folk, and rock music in protest of – or better, in celebration of the opposition to – the construction of a new US Marine Corps helipad nearby.

The helipad, designed to be home to the Marines’ accident-prone Osprey, is to be built by filling in a part of the pristine Oura Bay which is, among other things, the northernmost habitat for the endangered mammal, the Dugong.

The local fisherfolks, with some outside help, have carried on a continuous protest sit-in officially since 2004, and in fact from some time before that.  They have also been going out day after day in sea-kayaks and small boats, getting in the way of survey boats and divers, and doing whatever they (legally) can to interfere with and slow down the process.  The strategy has been exhausting and dangerous, but effective: construction is way behind schedule.

The annual festival is held on full moon night partly to overcome the isolation of this Okinawan movement.  The full moon, the sponsors say, happens everywhere.  So people in any country, in any hemisphere, can participate in the festival.

They would like to ask you to step outside your door one of those evenings – if with a few friends, better yet! – look at the moon, think about the music festival going on in Okinawa, think about Okinawa’s long, hard history, and the people’s belief in the principle, Nuchi du Takara: Life is the Treasure.

And if you think you are likely to do that, they would appreciate it very much if you send them a message of solidarity in advance.  They already have promises from South Korea, the Philippines, Hawaii, Guam, and a number of cities in mainland Japan.  If you send a message to them, they will probably read it out at the Festival.

TEL/FAX:  +81-98-055-8587
Home Page:  http://mangetsumatsuri.ti-da.net/
e-mail; claphands2@yahoo.co.jp

Doug Lummis