pennlive.com The Associated Press 3/22/03 5:31 PM

CARACAS, Venezuela (AP) -- Government supporters clashed with protesters gathering Saturday for a rally against President Hugo Chavez.

About 60 government supporters, many on motorcycles, blocked roads and threw sticks, stones and fireworks at the group in a Caracas suburb, Globovision television reported.

Six people suffered minor injuries and demonstrators later called off the rally.

The local headquarters of one of Venezuela's main opposition parties, Democratic Action, also was looted and set on fire, said Edgar Leoni, administrator of the Caricuao parish in southwestern Caracas.

Chavez's left-wing presidency has bitterly divided Venezuela's population and clashes between the two sides have become common.

A two-month national strike aimed at forcing the president to resign or call early elections ended in February without success.

Taking pride in training Leader Dogs

By:Linda May, Columnist March 22, 2003

Puppies, wearing their Leader Dog School for the Blind identification tags and bandannas, must be exposed to places they may have to accompany a blind person.

Jewel, a golden retriever puppy, came to our house last week for a "playdate" with Andy, our Pembroke Welsh corgi puppy. The afternoon was both fun and work. Jewel and Andy romped and wrestled, and Jewel saw her first power wheelchair and climbed open stairways.

Jewel is a Leader Dog-in-training. Her puppy-raiser, Shirley Koebbe of Warren, takes puppies to meetings, Sweet Adelines chorus rehearsals, shopping, shows, church - virtually anywhere the family goes. Koebbe has raised five dogs, giving them basic behavior training and socialization.

Puppies, wearing their Leader Dog School for the Blind identification tags and bandannas, must be exposed to places they may have to accompany a blind person.

There are 22 puppy-raisers in Macomb County.

Dixie, a yellow Labrador retriever trained by Koebbe, now lives with a young woman in Venezuela. In an e-mail message, she wrote that she and her dog recently came in near the top of a walk/race. Another puppy of Koebbe's went to Spain, and served its blind master for 17 years.

"We keep in mind that our puppy belongs to the school," Koebbe said. "I'm proud and happy my puppy is going to a person who will love her. The dogs are doing what they were bred to do."

Leader Dogs, based in Rochester, has about a dozen breeding stock host homes in Macomb County and is looking for more families to keep male dogs, or pregnant dogs and their puppies until the puppies are ready to go to puppy-raisers.

Angel Biggert, 16, of Harrison Township, wanted to participate in Leader Dogs breeding project to get a Girl Scouts Gold Award. Her mother, Mary-Anne Polan, applied to the training school. The family got Maggie, a 3-year-old yellow Lab who, because of her exceptionally sweet temperament and good health, was chosen by the school to produce several litters.

Biggert, her mother and brother, assist in the births of the puppies, share feeding and care-giving, then work to socialize them.

"It's exciting to know you are part of the start of the Leader Dog process," Polan said. "We give the puppies a lot of love. We know they are going to great foster homes and have a great life ahead of them."

For information about puppies, call Sam Ziegenmeyer at Leader Dogs at (888) 777-5332.

It costs about $17,000 to train a Leader Dog. There is no charge to the blind person who lives at the school for 25 days to train with a dog that gives them more freedom, independence, protection from travel hazards, and companionship.

Leader Dogs is supported by Lions clubs. It is one of many charities that benefit from upcoming Lions clubs' events.

* * * The Shelby Township Lions Club Kronk boxing fight night is March 25 at the Sterling Inn in Sterling Heights. A steak dinner and open bar begin at 6 p.m. and dinner is at 7:30 p.m., followed by boxing. There are eight boxing matches and two kick-boxing matches. VIP seating is $100 per ticket and general seating is $75. For ticket information and reservations, call (586) 784-8725.

The Center Line Lions Club holds its 47th annual pancake and sausage breakfast 8 a.m.-noon Sunday at the St. Clement High School cafeteria, 8155 Ritter, near 10 Mile Road and Van Dyke Avenue. Donation is $3 general and $1.50 children.

* * * The Richmond Rotary Club holds a "Richmond Swings" swing dance at 7 p.m. March 29 at Maniaci's Banquet Center, 69227 Main St. in Richmond. Tickets are $25 for dance lessons and music of the 1930s and '40s by the Westside Big Band and DJ Cochese. For information, call Jim Berg at (586) 727-3729.

Send news of your service club to: Linda May c/o The Macomb Daily, P.O. Box 929, Mount Clemens, MI 48046 or lindamay@ameritech.net. Phone/fax (586) 791-8116.

www.counterpunch.org March 22, 2003 By TOM CRUMPACKER

Coming to Terms with the Real Havana

My interest in things Latin started as a teenager in the 50's when I read W. H. Hudson's 19th century novel Green Mansions. It's about a young Englishman who lives with an old Indian in the mountains of Venezuela and falls in love with his daughter Rima, a fairy-like creature who talks to the animals and birds in the forest. I've spent an increasing amount of time in Cuba in the past five years and some of my friends claim I'm being "romantic" in my enthusiasm for the country and it's people. They're probably right. Here's a paradox: the real world, the one we see, actually exists out there for all of us, but we each also create it for ourselves. Perspective is a key word for me. I think all honest individual perspectives have value, the trouble is they're also too limited. It's in society or community with others that our perspectives broaden and our contradictions are transcended.

Cuba is a very different kind of society than ours, and one needs to have or adopt a broad perspective to appreciate it. Looking at it through our US politico-economic lens, making comparisons based on our standards, won't do the trick. Some of the things I like about Cuba are the strong sense of equality among people, the strong sense of community, the relative lack of commercialization. Many people there have found ways to live productive, high quality lives outside the rat-race of consumption-accumulation. I'm comfortable living among people who are trying to improve their lot in life by collective action. I'm not saying it's for everyone, in fact I think most Americans wouldn't like it.

In order to understand any people, one needs to know their history. The last century and a half has been one long struggle for Cubans. Against slavery, colonialism, neocolonialism, imperialism and blockade. For social justice, equality and above all national identity and autonomy. Some Cubans criticize their government (openly and without fear). But I've never met anyone on the island who wants US business to return and run things again. They are entering the global economy on their own terms, and in this sense they differ from the rest of Latin America. They are attracting capital even though their foreign investment law prevents companies from having more than a 49% interest in the profits " in joint venture with the government -- this is how they finance their education, health care, social services and safety net. They (perhaps naively) believe that collective human action rather than just blind market forces can affect the direction of history. In a sense it might be said they are trying to put themselves in position to determine their own destiny by giving up some of the short-term economic benefit they could have otherwise had by submitting to US commercial domination.

I just returned from spending the winter in the capital city. Today's Havana is the fastest changing place I've ever seen. To the Habaneros I know, change indicates a desire to experiment, find new ways of doing things, progress. Cooperatives have become the main form of property ownership. Their new small scale urban and organic agriculture methods are being studied by many foreign experts, especially from the Third World. Wide assortments of fresh fruit and vegetables are brought every morning to their open air markets from their community gardens. Their goal is to reduce dependence on foreign imports and become self sustaining. Not all the changes are for the good, increasing auto traffic for instance " and the rapid growth of tourism is endangering the commitment to equality and social justice. The present situation with money--US dollar vs. Cuban peso, with different uses for each (Cubans obtaining many of their life necessities on a collective basis) " looks to me like it can't continue much longer. They say that if you want to see socialism, you have to go to the smaller towns and countryside. Capitalism is bursting through in La Habana, but it's the good kind, the mom and pop store kind that we used to know when we were young.

Habaneros are coming out of a very hard period for them in the nineties. As they say, it was then, when the dogs and cats were disappearing from the streets, that the Yankees tried to bring them to their knees with the Toricelli and Helms-Burton laws. But now they've survived and there's pervading sense of pride and optimism. I saw some incredible theater, art, music and dancing in Havana this winter. Their cultural heritage is mostly African and Spanish but you can also see the Yankee influence, particularly in music and sports. Construction and architecture are booming. When I first went there in '97, Habana Vieja looked like London after the blitz. With the help of the UN and Spain, the plazas, churches and other buildings are being restored to their 18th and 19th century glory, slowly and carefully, much like what happened in Venice 30 years ago. Canada, France, Germany, China, Italy and many other countries are contributing to beneficial projects in the city.

In spite of present US policy, Habaneros are very friendly to American visitors. They are a very well educated people and they know enough to distinguish the ruled from their rulers. But I feel ashamed to be an American when I see these policies continuing: blockading Cuba by threatening and punishing foreign companies who dare to do business there; preventing medicine, medical equipment and nutritional food from reaching Cubans by unreasonable financing conditions; funneling money to groups in Florida who are trying to destabilize the Cuban people's government; conducting a relentless propaganda campaign against the revolution while prohibiting us from traveling there to learn what is really happening.

I think present US-Cuba policy says a lot more about the lack of democracy here than in Cuba. Congress took charge of Cuba affairs in the '80s and there have been bills pending to normalize relations between the countries for at least five years. Despite a clear majority in favor, a few powerful men called "party leaders" have prevented votes on these bills. Since the Cuban people have no lobby here to push and pay for change, nothing happens.

In any event Havana is an interesting and exciting place to be these days, especially for those visitors who want a different kind of experience. Because the travel restrictions are unconstitutional they're not being enforced, they're just being used to frighten people out of going there. If you're one of the very few who get penalty notices, however, to be safe you need to demand a hearing within thirty days. Since our government doesn't want a court ruling the matter apparently will go into perpetual abeyance.

Tom Crumpacker is with the Miami Coalition to End the US Embargo of Cuba. He can be reached at: Crump8@aol.com

<a href=forum.interference.com>U2 feedback March 20 2003

George Bush planned "regime change" in Iraq before becoming United States President in January 2001. The events of September 11, 2001, were the pretext for invasion of Iraq, not the reason.

The blueprint for the creation of a "global Pax America", to which Bush subscribes and which is driving the invasion of Iraq, was drawn up in September 2000 for Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, Jeb Bush (George's younger brother) and Lewis Libby (Cheney's chief of staff).

The document, called Rebuilding America's Defences: strategies, forces and resources for a new century, was written in September 2000 by the neo-conservative think tank Project for the New American Century.

According to the document, written three months before Bush became president, "the US for decades sought to play a more permanent role in Gulf regional security. While unresolved conflict with Iraq provides the immediate justification, the need for substantial American force presence in the Gulf transcends the issue of the regime of Saddam Hussein."

The document outlines the global ambitions of the Bush Administration. It sets out a "blueprint for maintaining global US pre-eminence, precluding the rise of a great power rival, and shaping the international security order in line with American principles and interests".

The question for John Howard must be: to what extent does his Government subscribe to the Bush strategy outlined in the think tank's document?

Howard says Australia's participation in this war is in Australia's national interests. How?

To answer that question we must know why the war is being fought in the first place. For all I know, Bush, Howard and Tony Blair may be absolutely sincere when they claim that getting rid of Saddam is a humanitarian act that will make the Iraqis better off, or that Saddam has the will, the motive and the weapons of mass destruction capable of threatening other countries. But these are not the real reasons for the invasion.

The real reasons can be summed up as deciding who controls Middle East oil and gets access to the water from the Tigris and Euphrates, and what currency will be used to pay for the development of the oil and water resources.

According to the think tank document, the US would have to increase its defence spending to 3.8 per cent of GDP (which it has just achieved) to finance an American military capability "to fight and decisively win multiple, simultaneous major theatre wars" and to "perform constabulary duties associated with shaping the security environment in critical regions".

This is a massive task that can only be achieved if the US can continue to draw on the resources of the whole world, which in turn is only possible if the US can continue to run massive trading deficits with Western Europe, China and Japan. In other words, these regions must remain willing to exchange the product of their industries for American dollars.

It would be fatal to America's global strategic ambitions if countries in Europe began to ask for euros instead of US dollars for their exports, or if China demanded settlement of their accounts with the US in yuan instead of US dollars. The US would have to redirect domestic demand for imported goods paid for in dollar-denominated IOUs into exports to earn yuan and euros to pay for US imports.

It is difficult to see how the US could develop new, internationally competitive industries and run a military machine on the scale envisaged by the think tank without a massive increase in taxation and redistribution of wealth to the productive elements in the economy without precipitating a global recession.

In 2000, Saddam's regime had the temerity to demand payment in euros for the trickle of Iraqi oil the US has allowed onto the international market. Iran and Venezuela are following Iraq's example. This is the real threat to US hegemony.

If the US can control Middle East oil production, it can control the industrial development of Europe, China and Japan (and Australia), to prevent a rival to its hegemony emerging. But to do this it must retain the greenback as the world currency.

It is possible to make a weak case based on realpolitik why Blair is along for the ride with Bush in Iraq (BP and Shell), but it is impossible to see what Australia will get out of this adventure even if it "succeeds".

Bush personifies the American quest for absolute security. Americans don't yet understand or care that this status can only be achieved by making everybody else absolutely insecure.

This is why the most lasting thing to come out of the war with Iraq is likely to be the faster development of a unified Western Europe and an economically powerful China to challenge US hegemony.

Kenneth Davidson is a staff columnist. dissentmagazine@ozemail.com.au

This story was found at: www.theage.com.au

Bush Plan to Exploit Alaskan Oil Thwarted --Environmentalists Celebrate as Senate Votes Against Drilling

Published on Friday, March 21, 2003 by the Guardian/UK by Duncan Campbell in Los Angeles

Just as the war was starting in Iraq, President Bush lost a different kind of battle in the senate as his plans for drilling for oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska were defeated.

But supporters of the drilling plans were yesterday warning that this battle was far from over, and they would be returning with new plans.

By a vote of 52 to 48, the senate rejected President Bush's plan to open the refuge for drilling. Eight Republicans joined 43 Democrats and one independent to remove the drilling clause from a budget vote on Wednesday night. The outcome of the vote had been in doubt until the final moment.

The president believed the war in Iraq and the uncertain situation in Venezuela would convince waverers that the domestic oil supply should be expanded.

He has been opposed by environmental groups which warned that it would cause ecological damage to the area. The local Native American people, the Gwich'in, have also opposed the drilling and were present for the vote in Washington this week.

The vote in effect kills off drilling in the area for the year, conceded the chairman of the Senate energy committee, Pete Domenici, who had backed the plan. But its supporters believe a petrol-price hike due to the war in the Gulf would put senators under renewed pressure from their constituents.

The failure of last-minute attempts by vice president Dick Cheney to sway Republican senators who were opposed to drilling on the eve of war was significant. The White House criticized the senate vote, saying it was "unfortunate that the senate missed an opportunity to increase our energy independence at a time when that's critically important".

The California senator Barbara Boxer, a Democrat, was the most vocal opponent to the plan. She produced photos of the wilderness area where drilling would have taken place, showing caribou and polar bears. "Cast your eyes on this," said Ms Boxer. "One cannot paint anything quite as magnificent as what God has created."

Ms Boxer argued that the government should be concentrating instead on fuel economy measures. "We can do more for our troops if we just increase fuel economy," she said.

Senator Ted Stevens, a Republican from Alaska who has been a main supporter of drilling, attended the debate wearing an Incredible Hulk tie. Mr Stevens, who argued that drilling would bring much-needed employment to the state, said afterwards: "There will be another vote, another day."

Mr Stevens had argued that it would have been possible to have extracted oil with a minimum of ecological damage. He said that the issue had been taken over by "extreme environmental organizations" who had spread "propaganda". He told Californians that when their petrol prices went up, they should call Ms Boxer.

Supporters of the drilling mocked the photos produced by Ms Boxer, saying that the area concerned was just a frozen wasteland.

The other Alaska senator, Lisa Murkowski, also a Republican, attacked the opponents of the plan, saying: "The rest of the country would just as soon lock us up and say, 'nothing, nada, zip, you cannot do anything.'"

The US uses around 7bn barrels of oil a year, and the government had estimated that as many as 16bn barrels could have been found in Alaska. Opponents suggested that only around 3bn could have been recovered without causing major damage.

The Bush plan would have allowed for drilling over 600,000 hectares (1.5m acres) of the 8m-hectare (20m-acre) refuge.