Αγορά Πολιτών

Τρόπος Συμμετοχής


Πολίτες στην Αγορά

Έχουμε 624 επισκέπτες συνδεδεμένους


Γερμανία 004917667046073 

 Μόνο S.M.S.

Gang-stalking Greeks


Byzantine Atrocities


European Dissidents ALARM


Human Rights' Court


The used up men


Dissidents - USG RICO crimes


Open Letter to Theresa May


Open Letter to António Guterres UN's SG


Triangulation - Zersetzen


Open Letter to Andrew Parker, MI5


Πράξεις ποταπές - Despicable choices



My father's death


Cavitation damage


Burglary and vandalism


Dry mini submarine


Message to Bundeswehr 2


Message to Bundeswehr 1


“Tough” guys and TOUGH guys


Μοναδική λύση, το Χόλιγουντ




Zeppelin: Beyond Gravity


Foreign intervention in Greece?


Η ανελεύθερη Ελλάδα


Η Ελλάδα καταγώγιο;


Αν.Επ. Π. Παυλόπουλο


Intangible prisons


Plausible deniability


Images of German w & s


Crimes against Humanity


"Chimera" - "Bellerophon"


pr. Donald Trump



Legal Notice 87


Βδέλλες, αποικιοκρατικές


Being a German


Legal Notice 84


Dirty colonial methods


Georgi Markov, BG - KGB


Samples of Barbarity


Ελλάδα - αποκόλληση


Έλληνες, στο έλεος...


Harvester's log 16/3/17



Legal Notice 66




Legal Notice 62



My story






Η Εστία μου



Why so untidy?






Εξόντωση Ελλήνων αντιφρονούντων;



Ζήτημα εμπιστοσύνης






Ανοικτή Επιστολή πρέσβη ΗΠΑ

Αφορμή, U2RIT vs Ελλάδα;


A request to U2RIT

Colonial aggression - 2

Open Letter to UN S.G.

Open Letter to p.C. & p. O.

Δήλωση πρόθεσης επαναπατρισμού


Ο "εφιάλτης" της Νυρεμβέργης

Συλλογή Φωτογραφιών

Αίτημα προστασίας, προς Ιταλία

Chroma key, background removal

Science and Ethics

Να συμβάλει και η U2RIT

Θα ξαναφτιάξουν πολλές φορές Άουσβιτς και Zyclon B


Split-Screen effect

Η Ζωή είναι Ωραία.

Βόρεια Κορέα

Λευτεριά στους Έλληνες, εξανα- γκαστικά "Εξαφανισμένους"


Μυστικές δίκες;


Πολιτισμό, ή, απληστία;

Ακραία Στυγνότητα

Η Τέχνη της Επιβίωσης

Political Asylum 3

Επιστροφή στις ρίζες

The Human Cost of Torture

An urgent appeal for solidarity

More obvious than the Sun

Western "culture"

Political Asylum

Έννομη Προστασία

Μια μήνυση που εγείρει ερωτηματικά




Honor your father...


Creative Greeks

A pair of Dictatorships

International Criminal Court - Claims against U.K. PDF Εκτύπωση E-mail
Αξιολόγηση Χρήστη: / 0
Συνεννόηση για Δράση - Απόψεις
Συντάχθηκε απο τον/την Χρήστος Μπούμπουλης (Christos Boumpoulis)   
Παρασκευή, 18 Μάιος 2018 23:02

International Criminal Court - Claims against U.K.
To: International Criminal Court of Hague
From: Mr. Christos Boumpoulis
Date: 8/5/2018
Subject: Submition of Claims
Dear Sir/Lady,
I would like to issue the following claim against the State of the United Kingdom in order for persuading your court to initiate a formal investigation about this claim.
According to sufficient indications, the perpetrator caused serious mental harm to the majority of the Greek citizens; this majority is constituted, mostly, by the indigenous Greeks; the perpetrator intended to partially and probably temporarily, destroy the mentality of the indigenous Greeks; and the conduct taken place in the context of a manifest pattern, as, if it was otherwise, the victims would had not remained unsuspected about this destruction, as they currently do.
Therefore, these sufficient indications dictate the committement of a Genocide by causing serious mental harm to the Greek indigenous citizens.
The facts.
1. During 1997, the law n. 2472, art 12 par 2, art 24 par 5, forbided the citizens' access to the full content, of their criminal record and of their judicial files. By this unconstitutional law, the citizens' Human Rights were violated; the Rule of Law, which is a principle of Democracy, was also violated, therefore, the entire foundation of Democracy, in Greece, was violated. From 1997 since today, the indigenous Greeks remain, abnormaly, passive about these violations.
2. There was a referendum, in Greece, on 5/7/2015 which rised the question about the acceptance or not, of the loan's conditions that were proposed by the European Union administration, the so called "Troika". The indigenous Greeks remained, abnormaly, passive when, the Greek government, brutally, violated the vote of the majority of the voters, which was a "No", and acted as if, the voters had voted a "Yes".
3. On 2015 there was the law 4332 by which, immigrants were granted the Greek nationality. In the Greek language, nationality is "ιθαγένεια" which, obviously, means, "from the same breed/race". Therefore, it is totally irrational, a biological property, meaning nationality, to become twisted so to become a legal property and by this law to become granted to the, inhabiting Greece, immigrants. This notional violation combined with the same law's insufficient provisions as to the cultural compatibility of each candidate immigrant with the Greek culture, indirectly refers to an illegal restlers' colonization of Greece. In this issue, also, the indigenous Greeks remained, abnormaly, passive.
4. Too many indigenous Greek legitimate dissidents die seemingly from "cancer" or seemingly from "cardiovascular deseases". For example, Archibishop Christodoulos, Malvina Karali, the singer Arleta, etc. In this issue, also, the indigenous Greeks remained, abnormaly, passive.
5. Finding an individual, within anyone of Greece's most crucial social foundations, namely, the political system, the mass media, the judicial system, the "psychiatry", the business elite, the banking elite, the "food chain" people, etc., with a Greek indigenous physiognomy remains a very rare phenomenon. In this issue, also, the indigenous Greeks remain, abnormaly, passive.
6. Certain epidemics (including cancer) exist in Greece. As to those epidemics, the indigenous Greeks remain, abnormaly, passive.
7. Greece's natural resources are enormously reach. There are huge mineral reserves of oil, natural gas and other rare earths. Also, at the village Kirki, at the Thrace region, of the northern Greece there are, approximately, one hundread times the corresponding to Chile, mineral reserves of Copper. Despite all this enormous mineral wealth, which remains unexplicitly non-exploited, Greece suffers from a, supposed, economic crisis and, approximately, ten thousand innocent citizens lost, unjustly, their lives due to desperation related to poverty. Simultaneously, many hundreds of thousands of Greek scientists immigrated to other countries due to domestic unemployment. In this issue, also, the indigenous Greeks remain, abnormaly, passive.
8. According to the prominent professor of constitutional law, George Kasimatis, the related to Greek State's E.U. loans treaties, they weren't validate by the creation of corresponding legislation, something which violates, both, the Greek constitution and certain principles of a Democratic State. In this issue, also, the indigenous Greeks remain, abnormaly, passive.
The links between, the indigenous Greeks'  mental degradation and the United Kingdom are the followings.
1. During the Greek Revolution and specifically on 1825, the, then, Greece's administration contributed towards an attempt for turning Greece to a British Protektorate (please see appendix).
2. On October 1944, the United Kingdom and the Soviet Union, arbitrarily, degraded Greece to, partially, a British colony (please see appendix).
3. The United Kingdom, according to various historical facts embeds, a very long colonizing tradition together, as a letter by F. L. Lucas of King's College, Cambridge, British anti-appeasement campaigner, to The Daily Telegraph, 25 July 1935, sudjests, with an urge, which remains far less than sufficient, in obeying the international treaties.
4. Profound and overt links exist between, the United Kingdom and members of the current, Greek political administration.
5. For many decades, the voting results, of an intermitent sequence of general elections, in Greece, were issued, unexplicitly, by a specific private company.
In Greece, the situation has become horrible from many perspectives and since many decades.
Too many people die, unjustly. Legitimate political dissidents; prominent elder journalists; prominent elder businessmen; people which held for many years a "gate keeping" position, die and shortly, others, mostly with non indigenous Greek physiognomy, are unexplicitly chosen for replacing them.
Too many people are loosing their good health, unjustly. The correlation between, the ownerships of health domain's, demand and supply, is horrible. A profound conflict of interests, which lead to, unavoidable, massive violations of the indigenous Greek citizens' human rights.
The Human Rights of too many people are being violated, unjustly. Certain political assassinations (e.g. Pavlos Bakogiannis, George Athanasiadis, Socratis Giolias, etc.) confirm the illegimate operation of an illegitimate, non uniformed colonial army. Certain training centers, for the members of this colonial army, upon Greek soil, with the form of "front organizations", a, potential, formal investigation may, easily, reveal.
Being an eye witness doesn't necessarilly means that, hard evidence exist for presentation, other than the testimony, itself. And also, even if such hard evidence existed, their disclosure by unprotected witnessess would, most probably, lead to the assassination of those witnessess.
More than one, crimes against humanity may have been perpetrated in Greece, also.
More than one, war crimes may have been perpetrated in Greece, also.
The perpetrators of the above mentioned Genocide and the potentially perpetreted, crimes against humanity and war crimes, are ruthless, organized and armed with nonconventional weapons, also.
In many occassions there may have been, indirect and credible threats against my life for not revealing what I learned, as an eye witness, during the last thirty nine years. During this period, too much, unjust, suffering has manifested, in Greece, on behalf of innocent citizens.
Concluding, I would like, to express my hope that, your court shall decide to initiate a formal investigation about the Genocide and progressively, we might extend also to the rest of the potential issues; and to assure you that, should you decide to help, an entire Nation shall become gratefull to each and every one member of your court.
Christos Boumpoulis
P.S.: Please inform me wether this email has been accepted by I.C.C. as a formal submition of claim.
An attempt to transform Greece into a British protectorate
At a critical point for the fate of the Greek Revolution, in the summer of 1825, with Ibrahim, on the one hand, almost having burned the entire Peloponnese and Riesid Mehmet (Kioutachi) had shrouded Mesolonghi in a siege ring, Mavrocordatus, at Georges Kunning's suggestion, submits to the executive body a "draft report" by which Greece was asking to be placed under the protection of Great Britain. The document was signed by almost all members of the cabinet, the members of Nafplio as well as the ecclesiastical hierarchy, as well as some chieftains (except 2-3 dissidents) and sent it to England. Following this, British Ambassador to Istanbul, Stagford was recalled and replaced by the nephew of the British Prime Minister, Statford Kunnigs. The latter came to talks with Mavrocordatos and Zografos, as representatives of the Greek government, who, in order to secure British protection, accepted Greece to resign from its request for full independence and to accept subordination to the Sultan, as the English sought. However, this plan was rejected by the High Gate and was not implemented. His tough opponents stood, initially, Th. Kolokotronis, who was later agreed, after the defeat in the Battle of the Trikrorfon and Dim. Ypsilantis, unsubstantiated, denouncing it in a speech at the Third National Assembly in Epidaurus (April 1826), as a consequence of which he was punished with deprivation of his political rights for a year. The majority of the struggling people was opposed to the "draft report", arguing that the revolution should call for the protection of all Christian European nations, not unilaterally, and for their own reasons, the Frenchophile Kolettis, and Gouras, refused to sign it and G. Kountouriotis also. The Minister of Justice (Justice) I. Theotokis has totally disagreed, and for this reason he was sentenced to three months jail in Bourtzi, while Adamantios Korais from Paris expressed his disapproval in writing dated July 24, 1825. Also two important philhellenes, the French general Ross and the American Georgios Taussen Washington complained about the "draft report" to the Nafplion government. The latter, with a newer reference, revealed that the editor of the "draft report" was the English Commissioner of the Ionian Islands, Adam.
Source: www.el.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ελληνική_Επανάσταση_του_1821
Percentages agreement
The Percentages agreement was a secret agreement between British prime minister Winston Churchill and Soviet leader Joseph Stalin during the Fourth Moscow Conference in October 1944. It gave the percentage division of control over Eastern European countries, dividing them into spheres of influence. Franklin Roosevelt was consulted tentatively and conceded to the agreement. The agreement was officially made public by Churchill twelve years later in the final volume of his memoir of the Second World War. The US ambassador Averell Harriman, who was supposed to represent Roosevelt in these meetings, was excluded from this discussion.
British historian Andrew Roberts states:
the Second Moscow Conference was not able to resolve major issues in Eastern Europe, and when Churchill did complete his percentages deal with Stalin, it was not ratified by the Americans.
The agreement
Winston Churchill, not Stalin, proposed the agreement, under which the UK and USSR agreed to divide Europe into spheres of influence, with one country having "predominance" in one sphere, and the other country having "predominance" in another sphere. According to Churchill's account of the incident, Churchill suggested that the Soviet Union should have 90 percent influence in Romania and 75 percent in Bulgaria; the United Kingdom should have 90 percent in Greece; and they should have 50 percent each in Hungary and Yugoslavia. Churchill wrote it on a piece of paper which he pushed across to Stalin, who ticked it off and passed it back. The result of these discussions was that the percentages of Soviet influence in Bulgaria and, more significantly, Hungary were amended to 80 percent.
Churchill called it a "naughty document".
Some historians, including Gabriel Kolko and Geoffrey Roberts believe that the importance of the agreement is overrated. Kolko writes :
There is little significance to the memorable and dramatic passage in Churchill's autobiography recalling how he and Stalin divided Eastern Europe ... Stalin's "tick," translated into real words, indicated nothing whatsoever. The very next day Churchill sent Stalin a draft of the discussion, and the Russian carefully struck out phrases implying the creation of spheres of influence, a fact Churchill excluded from his memoirs. [British Foreign Minister] Anthony Eden assiduously avoided the term, and considered the understanding merely as a practical agreement on how problems would be worked out in each country, and the very next day he and [Soviet Foreign Minister] Vyacheslav Molotov modified the percentages in a manner which Eden assumed was general rather than precise.
Henry Butterfield Ryan writes, that "Eden and Molotov haggled over these quantities as though they were bargaining over a rug in a bazaar, with Molotov trying, eventually successfully, to trim Britain's figures."
Most historians consider the agreement to be deeply significant, however. In The Cambridge History of the Cold War, Norman Naimark writes that together with the Yalta and Potsdam agreements, "the notorious percentages agreement between Joseph Stalin and Winston Churchill...confirmed that Eastern Europe, initially at least, would lie within the sphere of influence of the Soviet Union."
In his acclaimed biography of Churchill, Roy Jenkins writes that the agreement "proposed Realpolitik spheres of influence in the Balkans. The [Foreign Office] record reported [Churchill] as saying that 'the Americans would be shocked if they saw how crudely he had put it.'" Historian David Carlton similarly notes that "[With the October contract] a clear if informal deal had been done on the point that mattered most to Churchill: he had Stalin's consent to handle Greece as he saw fit." Anthony Eden wrote that months before the meeting, he and Churchill had discussed the issue and "we felt entitled to ask for Soviet support for our policy [with regard to Greece] in return for the support we were giving to Soviet policy with regard to Romania." Carlton recounts that
[Churchill told Franklin Roosevelt] on 31 May…that the proposed Anglo-Soviet arrangement applied only to war conditions and was not an attempt to carve up the Balkans. Roosevelt was unimpressed and on 11 June held that the result would be "the division of the Balkan region into spheres of influence despite the declared intention to limit the arrangement to military matters." Churchill then urged the President to consent to the arrangement being given a three-month trial. And on the 13th Roosevelt rather weakly gave way…This turned out to be a decision of great importance.
Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Percentages_agreement
'Treaties or scraps of paper?'
To the Editor of The Daily Telegraph
Last Saturday’s leading article on “Abyssinia: Our Duty” is welcome indeed after the advice liberally offered to the Emperor of Abyssinia by some sections of the English Press, urging him to submit to Italy, not because the Italian blackmail is just, but because it would be so inconvenient for ourselves if he resisted.
We might be called on to do more than lip-service to the League; and how extravagant would that be!
Twenty-one years ago, when the consequences of honoring our obligations were far more menacing, we were indignant enough at the suggestion that treaties were, after all, only “scraps of paper.” But geography plays strange tricks with justice. Italy is breaking at least three solemn pledges in her aggression on a fellow member of the League – the very type of aggression that the League was created to prevent: but many of us do not find it matters very much. The League has not yet called on us; but there are already plenty of voices busy finding pretexts for us to shuffle out of the whole thing.
It is not our duty to defend Abyssinia single-handed – no-one has suggested it; but it is our duty, if covenants mean anything whatsoever, to oppose this piece of brigandage at Geneva, and after. It is our duty to be concerting with whatever Powers retain some decency, particularly the United States, what measures may be needed.
Europe has at its disposal sanctions that Italy could not defy, provided we have the courage to use them. But instead of that the English Press, with a few honourable exceptions, has been taken up with nauseating discussion of our own interests. Later on, one gathers, we shall be very firm with Italy about the water of Lake Tana. Meanwhile, Ethiopian blood is a cheaper commodity.
If this is to be the way of our world, why make treaties at all? Let us at least have the courage of our cynicism. Let us have done with covenants, since they no longer serve to deceive anybody. Let us have done with the League, since “collective security” means simply the security of those strong enough to be secure. And then, if we perish in the chaos for which the world is heading, it will at least be without having canted to our last breath.
This jungle-law may have ruled between nations in the past; the time is rapidly approaching when either it ends or else the world. If the League cannot enforce one law for weak and strong, black and white, sooner or later we are finished. And if we flinch every time a test arises, we shall have deserved it.
[From a letter by F. L. Lucas of King's College, Cambridge, British anti-appeasement campaigner, to The Daily Telegraph, 25 July 1935]
Source: www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abyssinia_Crisis
Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples
Adopted by General Assembly resolution 1514 (XV) of 14 December 1960
The General Assembly,
Mindful of the determination proclaimed by the peoples of the world in the Charter of the United Nations to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person, in the equal rights of men and women and of nations large and small and to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom,
Conscious of the need for the creation of conditions of stability and well-being and peaceful and friendly relations based on respect for the principles of equal rights and self-determination of all peoples, and of universal respect for, and observance of, human rights and fundamental freedoms for all without distinction as to race, sex, language or religion,
Recognizing the passionate yearning for freedom in all dependent peoples and the decisive role of such peoples in the attainment of their independence,
A ware of the increasing conflicts resulting from the denial of or impediments in the way of the freedom of such peoples, which constitute a serious threat to world peace,
Considering the important role of the United Nations in assisting the movement for independence in Trust and Non-Self-Governing Territories,
Recognizing that the peoples of the world ardently desire the end of colonialism in all its manifestations,
Convinced that the continued existence of colonialism prevents the development of international economic co-operation, impedes the social, cultural and economic development of dependent peoples and militates against the United Nations ideal of universal peace,
Affirming that peoples may, for their own ends, freely dispose of their natural wealth and resources without prejudice to any obligations arising out of international economic co-operation, based upon the principle of mutual benefit, and international law,
Believing that the process of liberation is irresistible and irreversible and that, in order to avoid serious crises, an end must be put to colonialism and all practices of segregation and discrimination associated therewith,
Welcoming the emergence in recent years of a large number of dependent territories into freedom and independence, and recognizing the increasingly powerful trends towards freedom in such territories which have not yet attained independence,
Convinced that all peoples have an inalienable right to complete freedom, the exercise of their sovereignty and the integrity of their national territory,
Solemnly proclaims the necessity of bringing to a speedy and unconditional end colonialism in all its forms and manifestations;
And to this end Declares that:
1. The subjection of peoples to alien subjugation, domination and exploitation constitutes a denial of fundamental human rights, is contrary to the Charter of the United Nations and is an impediment to the promotion of world peace and co-operation.
2. All peoples have the right to self-determination; by virtue of that right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development.
3. Inadequacy of political, economic, social or educational preparedness should never serve as a pretext for delaying independence.
4. All armed action or repressive measures of all kinds directed against dependent peoples shall cease in order to enable them to exercise peacefully and freely their right to complete independence, and the integrity of their national territory shall be respected.
5. Immediate steps shall be taken, in Trust and Non-Self-Governing Territories or all other territories which have not yet attained independence, to transfer all powers to the peoples of those territories, without any conditions or reservations, in accordance with their freely expressed will and desire, without any distinction as to race, creed or colour, in order to enable them to enjoy complete independence and freedom.
6. Any attempt aimed at the partial or total disruption of the national unity and the territorial integrity of a country is incompatible with the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations.
7. All States shall observe faithfully and strictly the provisions of the Charter of the United Nations, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the present Declaration on the basis of equality, non-interference in the internal affairs of all States, and respect for the sovereign rights of all peoples and their territorial integrity.
OTP-CR-158/18 15/5/2018
To: The International Criminal Court at Hague
From: Mr. Christos Boumpoulis
Date: 15/5/2018
Subject: Supplemental evidence with regard to the OTP-CR-158/18 Claims
Dear Sir/Lady,
The United Kingdom follows the, ages long, British colonizing traditions.
The History of Australian indigenous people is repeated against the indigenous Greeks, though by using modern and less obvious, violent means.
In Greece, we also have minorities of foreigners and others mostly, non-indigenous Greeks, which enforce the fundamental decisions affecting the lives of the colonized Greek indigenous people, which are made and implemented by the British colonial rulers in pursuit of their own interests. Rejecting cultural compromises with the colonized, indigenous population, the British colonizers are convinced of their own superiority and their ordained mandate to rule.
History teaches as that the Britons have suffered poisoning from members of their past, colonies. The colonizing Nations along with the intruding minorities which serve their colonial domination, remain exposed to the threat of becoming poisoned by the members of the colonized Nations; unless, the justified aggression, the justified rebelliousness, and the spontaneous activity in general, of the members of these colonized Nations, become, somehow, instrumentally, suppressed.
The neuroleptics mainly suppress aggression, rebelliousness, and spontaneous activity in general. This is why they are effective whenever and wherever social control is at a premium, such as in mental hospitals, nursing homes, prisons, institutions for persons with developmental disabilities, children's facilities and public clinics, as well as in Russian and Cuban psychiatric political prisons. Their widespread use for social control in such a wide variety of people and institutions makes the claim that they are specific for schizophrenia ridiculous [pls. See evidence].
In Greece, sufficient indications exist that chemical and biological, among many other kinds of, weapons are being, systematically, used against the Greek indigenous civilians in order to cause mental harm to them.
Few incidents of the usage of such weapons, when accidentally surfaced the knowledge of the public opinion, they were twisted so as to become presented as false conflicts of interests in order for “plausible deniability” pretext to become fabricated, for covering up the atrocious usage of such weapons, during peace time [pls see evidence].
Innumerable obvious evidence exist as to the indigenous Greek citizens' abnormal suppression, of their justified aggression, their justified rebelliousness, and their spontaneous activity, in general. Consequently, the Greek Nation is being, gradually, destroyed by the effects of the Genocide, due to the mental harm caused to the indigenous Greeks, which is being perpetrated against them, by the British colonizers and the members of the colonial army, consisted by various minorities, which remain loyal to the Britons.
Christos Boumpoulis
In his preface to Jörgen Osterhammel's Colonialism: A Theoretical Overview, Roger Tignor says, "For Osterhammel, the essence of colonialism is the existence of colonies, which are by definition governed differently from other territories such as protectorates or informal spheres of influence."[7] In the book, Osterhammel asks, "How can 'colonialism' be defined independently from 'colony?'"[8] He settles on a three-sentence definition:
Colonialism is a relationship between an indigenous (or forcibly imported) majority and a minority of foreign invaders. The fundamental decisions affecting the lives of the colonized people are made and implemented by the colonial rulers in pursuit of interests that are often defined in a distant metropolis. Rejecting cultural compromises with the colonized population, the colonizers are convinced of their own superiority and their ordained mandate to rule.[9]
The Impacts of English Colonial Terrorism and Genocide on Indigenous/Black Australians
Asafa Jalata
First Published August 7, 2013
This article critically explores the essence of colonial terrorism and its consequences on the indigenous people of Australia during their colonization and incorporation into the European-dominated racialized capitalist world system in the late 18th century. It uses multidimensional, comparative methods, and critical approaches to explain the dynamic interplay among social structures, human agency, and terror to explain the connection between terrorism and the emergence of the capitalist world system or globalization. Raising complex moral, intellectual, philosophical, ethical, and political questions, this article explores the essence, roles, and impacts of colonial terrorism on the indigenous Australians. First, the article provides background historical and cultural information. Second, it conceptualizes and theorizes colonial terrorism as an integral part of the capitalist world system. Specifically, it links capitalist incorporation and colonialism and various forms of violence to terrorism. Third, the article examines the structural aspects of colonial terrorism by connecting it to some specific colonial policies and practices. Finally, it identifies and explains different kinds of ideological justifications that the English colonial settlers and their descendants used in committing crimes against humanity.
With the expansion of European-dominated capitalist world system to the Australia continent in the late 18th century, the English settlers started terror and genocide on indigenous Australians to expropriate their economic resources and to takeover their homeland. These crimes against humanity had continued in the 19th century until the indigenous peoples were almost destroyed and the ownership of their land was entirely transferred to the English colonial settlers and their descendants. These colonial settlers and their descendants have justified their theft and robbery of the resources of the indigenous people in the discourses of race, backwardness, civilization, and modernity. This article first introduces the indigenous Australians, their cultures and social organizations that made them vulnerable to the British attack. Second, it explains how the British colonial settlers expropriated the land of indigenous Australians through terrorism and genocide, and justified their criminal actions in the doctrine ofterra nullius (empty land), (Lindqvist, 2007). Third, it identifies and explores different mechanisms of terrorism and genocide and their impacts on different groups of indigenous Australians.
The indigenous Australians occupied the continent for more than 65,000 years before the arrival of English colonial settlers in 1788. They were hunters and food-gatherers, and survived on wild foods. While men hunted or fished, women collected vegetable foods, insects, shellfish, honey, and other small creatures; they did not have permanent settlements, and moved depending on the availability water and food resources (Cranstone, 1973). They did not keep domestic animals, except the dog. Men used weapons such as the stone axe, hunting spears, throwing sticks or clubs, shields, and boomerangs, and they were “expert at tracking and stalking game and knowledgeable about its habits, and even in open country” (Cranstone, 1973, p. 13). Indigenous women used a digging stick for digging up food resources such as grubs, roots, edible ants, and burrowing animals. Men usually traveled over higher grounds to see and hunt animals, and women walked on lowlands to collect vegetable foods (Tindale, 1974).
They changed their environment through burning, managed their resources, and reached “a possible technological peak in the ‘eel farming’” in some areas (Bultin, 1993, p. 56). Like other nonagricultural societies, indigenous Australians might have started some practices that might have led to the initial domestication of animals and plants, irrigation, and gardening (Tindale, 1974). According to Norman B. Tindale (1974),
Australia has one of the largest areas of territory occupied by peoples in an approximately uniform state of hunting culture differing from region to region chiefly because of the different animals and plants upon which the people depend for a living and because of the acquisition of ideas by some which have not yet spread to all. (p. 30)
Indigenous Australians produced for their own consumption or satisfaction, not for exchange; they had small group property rights in land and other assets (Bultin, 1993). As G. Bultin (1993) wrote, indigenous Australians
recognized larger kinship relations, vital to many of their social and economic practices and these larger kin groups, in turn, acknowledged property, ritual and other rights. From time to time, [they] came together physically in larger associations for special purposes. To a limited degree, they traded within and beyond these kin groups; and there were episodes of conflict between them. (p. 53)
They not only spent their times in economic activities, but they also engaged in other activities such as education, learning-by-doing, leisure, ritual and religion, order, reproduction, administration and management, warfare, and investment (Bultin, 1993). Based on customary laws and values, indigenous communities had coherence-based similar thought and communication because of their common language, common life experiences, like exchange of women between extended families, and sharing of initiation rites.
Euro-American scholars call indigenous people tribes to claim that they are primitive and less developed and call Europeans or their descents nations or ethnic groups. Tindale (1974) defines
the “tribe” as the normally endogamous unit most commonly recognized in Australia, generally known as occupying a given territory, speaking mutually intelligible dialectics, having a common kinship system, and sharing the performance of ceremonial rites of interest to them all. (p. 33)
In this discussion, the term tribe is rejected as it is a modernist or racist concept. The indigenous groups prefer to be called by their ethno-national names.1 There were between 600 and 700 cultural-linguistic groups when English settlers arrived in Australia, and there are about 250 languages in use today.2
Eleanor Bourke (1998) estimated that in 1788 there were between 300,000 and 1 million indigenous people inhabited in Australia. There are different precontact population estimates of indigenous Australians: A. R. Radcliffe-Brown (1930) estimated between 250,000 and 300,000, and D. J. Mulvaney and J. P. White (1987) proposed about 700,000. N. G. Bultin (1993) estimated that they were between 1 and 1.5 million in 1788 and concluded that “precontact populations of 700 000, 1 or 1.5 million imply massive depopulation and widespread destruction of indigenous societies and economies” (p. 99). In 1901, however, fewer than 100,000 of them remained (Kiernan, 2007). Bultin (1993) suggested three major reasons for the societal destruction: disease episodes, the withdrawal of resources, and killing. European diseases that exposed the population lacking immunological defenses to destruction included smallpox, venereal disease (e.g., gonorrhea), influenza, measles, pneumonia, and tuberculosis. The English settlers and their descendants expropriated native land and removed the indigenous people by cutting them from their food resources, and engaged in genocidal massacres.
The indigenous Australians were oral communities and kept “their cultural heritage alive by passing their knowledge, arts, rituals and performances from one generation to another, speaking and teaching languages, protecting cultural materials, sacred and significant sites, and objects.”3 Customary laws that passed from generation to generation through values and oral discourse governed them. As N. B. Tindale (1974) noted, indigenous Australians controlled their communities
by the use of song and the powers of ridicule and rebuke in them, although in some songs the added power of the man practicing ‘death magic’ [was] also seen as a controlling force. In this regard old dances and songs, describing the fate of ancients who misbehaved and suffered for their actions were made topical, ‘pieces’ being put in to make them fit the new circumstances. (p. 34)
The British Captain James Cook who visited Australia in 1770 appreciated their egalitarian social system (Kiernan, 2007). Indigenous Australians had a loose political organization based on the authorities of elders or holders of traditions: There were situations in which
a good hunter, a man given either to sorcery or to magical practices, or even a particularly skilled fighter, could [or] sometimes has exerted some authority. There is in general no formal institution of ‘chief’ or true leader, although ever since white settlement began efforts have been made to establish some sort of leadership role, and some pretense of chiefly authority has been made by natives who have adopted white ways. (Tindale, 1974, p. 33)
Indigenous Australians were organized in families, clans, kinship networks, and ethno-national groups. According to John Mulvaney (1981), they were
organized around small social units, families and clans, which coalesced on occasions when seasonal conditions permitted or when kinship obligations required. Hundreds of individuals often congregated for ceremonial activities such as initiation rituals, and for reciprocal gifts or marriage exchange. These larger social groupings are termed tribes. (p. 18)
The smaller social groups, such as the family, extended families, the patrilineal or matrilineal descent group, and clans were the effective economic, social, and political unites (Cranstone, 1973). Indigenous Australians were not warlike people, and they did not engage in war to capture territory or to dominate others; there was small-scale fighting for reasons connected with magical killing, revenge expeditions, with disputes about women, and with trespassing on hunting grounds or sacred places (Cranstone, 1973).
Indigenous communities made decisions based on the simple family, extended families, clans and kinship systems:
Kinship influences marriage decisions and governs much of everyday behaviour. By adulthood people know exactly how to behave, and in what manner, to all other people around them as well as in respect to specific land areas. Kinship is about meeting the obligations of one’s clan, and forms part of Aboriginal Law, sometimes known as the Dreaming.4
The Dreaming is as an aspect of indigenous beliefs that recognizes mythical beings that in the beginnings arrived in Australia fighting, hunting, and forming the natural features; these religious “myths usually conclude with the Dreamtime heroes turning into rocks or animals or going to live in water holes, and losing individual physical existence, but their non-material essence survives and they are still actively concerned with human affairs” (Cranstone, 1973, p. 24). According to some stories of the Dreaming, the spirits of ancestors had created the world and then changed into rocks, stars, trees, watering holes, and have remained in sacred sites; “the Dreaming is never-ending, linking the past and the present, the people and the land.”5 Furthermore, some of the Dreaming stories claim that
the ancestors’ spirits came to the earth in human form and as they moved through the land, they created the animals, plants, rocks and other forms of the land that we know today. They also created the relationships between groups and individuals to the land, the animals and other people.6
Before English colonial settlement, like preagricultural and industrial European or other societies, indigenous Australians were living simple and egalitarian lifestyles:
Their approach to life was minimalist yet nurturing of members of the group. Clothing was either not worn or minimal, shelter was easily assembled or non-permanent structures, tools were made from materials readily available on the land, there was no written language, [and] children were cared for by the extended family group and Elders were treated as respected purveyors of important spiritual and cultural formation.7
Although the English settlers and their descendants rejected the artistic contribution of indigenous Australians until recently, systematic archaeological investigation reveals the significance of their artistic heritage in the world (Mulvaney, 1981). Indigenous arts include carving, painting (i.e., the decoration of the body, the preparation of ritual grounds, and totem ceremonies), and visual art. Because of their capitalist technology, social organization, and the desire to acquire land and accumulate wealth at any cost, the English settlers overpowered, terrorized, and almost exterminated indigenous Australians.
Conceptualizing and Theorizing Terrorism
Considering the historical and global context in which terrorism developed and intensified, we need a more comprehensive, historical, and broader definition of terrorism. So, I define terrorism as a systematic governmental or organizational policy or strategy through which lethal violence is practiced openly or covertly to instill fear on a given population group beyond the direct victims of terror to change their behavior of political resistance to domination or the behavior of dominant group for political and economic gains or other reasons. State and nonstate actors use terrorism; the former has used it to maintain state power or to loot resources and the latter mostly to resist the oppressive and exploitative policies of states. There are also nonstate terrorist agencies that advance extremist religious and racist ideologies and practices on a subnational or international level.
As the frequency, intensity, and the volume of terrorism have increased with the development of global capitalism, a definition and theory of terrorism cannot be adequately developed without considering terrorism as an aspect of the racialized capitalist world system. Beginning in 1492, European colonialists engaged in terrorism, genocide, and enforced servitude in the Americas and extended their violence into Africa through racial slavery. Then, in the 17th, 18th, 19 centuries, they incorporated other parts of the world into this system through colonial terrorism and genocidal wars. Most scholars have avoided providing a comprehensive and critical analysis and an objective definition and theorization of this aspect of the modern world system. Even critical scholars and others who have studied the emergence, development, and expansion of the capitalist world system have primarily focused on trade, the international division of labor, exploitation, capital accumulation, political structures, development and underdevelopment, and social inequality, and did not adequately address the role of terrorism in creating and maintaining the system.
History teaches us that different forms of political violence including terrorism have increased as different societies engaged in improved techniques of production, produced surplus wealth, developed their organizational capacities, and improved their technological innovations. The emergence of the nation-state with the development of capitalism in the 16th century in Europe increased the organizational and technological capacity to engage in more lethal violence including terrorism. In European countries such as England, France, Italy, Spain, Portugal, and the Netherlands, the 16th century was the period of the formation of the nation-state (Frank, 1978). With the formation of the nation-states, state-centered colonial terrorism expanded all over the world. For instance, Bartolome’ De Las Casas, who traveled to the New World in 1502 with the Spaniards in their quest to colonize and rob the treasures and lands of the indigenous peoples of the Indies, provides an eyewitness account of the anatomy of colonial terrorism and genocide:
They forced their way into native settlements, slaughtering everyone they found there. . .Some they chose to keep alive and simply cut their wrists, leaving their hands dangling, saying to them: ‘Take this letter’—meaning that their sorry condition would act as a warning to those hiding in the hills. (De Las Casas, 1992, p. 15)
Such terrorist acts were sponsored by European states or state agencies. A. P. Schmid (1991) asserts that
state terrorism can be seen as a method of rule whereby some groups of people are victimized with great brutality, and more or less arbitrarily by the state or state supported actors, so that others who have reason to identify with those murdered, will despair, obey or comply. (p. 31)
Furthermore, terrorism and war can be seen as a continuum process, and it is often impossible to draw a clear and neat boundary between political repression, state terrorism, war, and genocide. The policy of state terror can sometimes lead to genocide (Schmid, 1991). The Spaniards imposed fear through mass terror and genocide so that they could achieve their economic and political goals without any obstacle. These acts of terrorism and genocide were guided and financed by the government of Spain (see Cohen, 1969). Later, several European governments engaged in committing similar crimes. Today mainstream Euro-American scholars gloss over such crimes and refer to them as actions of “discovery” and “civilization.”
Although some government elites and their apologists claim that the state provides protection from domestic and external violence, “governments organize and, wherever possible, monopolize the concentrated means of violence” such as political terror (Tilly, 1985, p. 171). Political terror and other forms of violence have always been involved in producing and maintaining structures, institutions, and organizations of privileged hierarchy and domination in society. State terrorism is a massive and extreme aspect of political violence. Those who have state power, which includes the power to define terrorism, deny their involvement in political violence or terrorism and confuse abstract theories of the state with reality. Based on the assumption of the ideal relationship between the state and society, philosophers and political thinkers identified three functions of the state that would earn it legitimacy. According to these theorists, the state protects and maintains internal peace and order in society; it organizes and protects national economic activities; and it defends national sovereignty and national interests (Campanella, 1981). In reality, most states violate most of these theoretical principles by engaging in political repression and state terrorism to defend the interest of powerful elites, particularly when they engage in colonial expansion. Various forms of violence including political terrorism are closely related to the art of statecraft (Tilly, 1985).
As capitalism developed in Western Europe, the need for raw materials like gold and silver, markets, and free or cheap labor expanded due to the desire to minimize the cost of production and to increase the rate of profit and accumulation of capital or wealth. This need was fulfilled through colonialism, racial slavery, terrorism and genocide. “The treasures captured outside of Europe by undisguised looting, enslavement, and murder,” Marx (1967) wrote, “floated back to the mother-country and were there turned to capital” (pp. 753-754). Capitalism had “witnessed the first long, sustained, and widespread quantitative and qualitative development. . .in its mercantile stage and the first period of concentrated capital accumulation in Europe” (Frank, 1978, p. 52). Western powers and some states in the Global South still engage in terrorism and hidden genocide to implement their draconian economic and political policies. “The war on terrorism is being used as a continuation of the war on social justice, as waged with the economic weapons of the international financial institutions” (Eisenstein, 2001, p. 136). Western powers, multinational corporations, and state elites in the Global South have collaborated and engaged in massive human rights violations and terrorism (Blakeley, 2009) even as Western-based human right organizations have systematically exposed such crimes.
In theorizing nonstate terrorism, scholars like Senechal de la Roche (1996)noted that the accumulation of grievances causes terrorism and “social polarization” between socially and culturally distant groups. Long-standing collective grievances and the right social geometry, such as a higher degree of cultural and religious differences, relational distance, and social inequality between the aggrieved and the dominant population groups can sometimes contribute to the development of nonstate terrorism (see Black, 2004). Jeff Goodwin (2006) advanced a theory of categorical terrorism:
The main strategic objective—the primary incentive—of categorical terrorism is to induce complicitous civilians to support or to proactively demand changes in, certain government policies or the government itself. Categorical terrorism, in other words, mainly aims to apply such intense pressure to complicitous civilians that they will demand that ‘their’ government change or abandon policies that the revolutionaries oppose. (p. 2038)
Using this theory, Godwin concludes that Al Qaeda attacked the United States on September 11, 2001, because it considered Americans to be “complicitous citizens” who support the foreign policy of the United States in the Middle East.
Recently a few critical scholars have started to explore the essence and characteristics of state terrorism or colonial terrorism. These scholars include Caroline Elkins, Mark Curtis, Ruth Blakeley, Richard Jackson, Doug Stokes, Sam Raphael, and Marie Breen Smyth. Elkins (2005) explains that the British colonial government used political terror to destroy a Kenyan liberation movement known as the Land and Freedom Army (the Mau Mau) in the early 1950s through forced removals and deportations of millions of Kenyans, tortures (“a kind of public spectacle, often conducted in the open barbed-wire areas for all to see”) and public rape at gunpoint for introducing public terror to the whole population. Scholars such as Blakeley (2009) and Curtis (1995,1998) explored how the Global North or the West particularly the United States and the United Kingdom have been contributing to gross human rights violations and state terrorism in the Global South. Particularly Blakeley (2009) provides
a detailed history of Northern state terrorism, within the context of the foreign policy objectives of those states and the strategies they use to achieve them, dating back to the European colonial era, through to the practices of the US and its allies in the “War on Terror.” (p. 4)
Western powerful states directly or indirectly engage in terrorism to dominate economic resources and markets in the Global South and to promote the politics of order at the cost of democracy and social justice. Generally speaking, as some states and their agencies engage in terrorist activities to promote their economic and political domination, nonstate terrorist forces use similar tactics to oppose and challenge such policies, behavior, and practices, and to advance their agendas. In this piece, I demonstrate that colonial terrorism was a form of state terrorism as it was planned and executed by colonial states and their agencies.
Terror and Genocide
The European mariners started to explore the waters of the Australian continent in the 17th century; between 1606 and 1770, about 54 European ships arrived on the coast of Australia and made contact with the inhabitants of the continent. These European explorers called the Australian continent Terra Austalis Incognita (unknown southern land). In the 17th century, many of the merchant ships that visited the continent belonged to the Dutch East Indies Company. In 1606, Willem Janszoon, a Dutchman, with a ship called the Duyfken and his crew explored the Australian coast and met indigenous people. In November 1642, Abel Tasman reached the west coast of Tasmania with two ships known as Heemskerck and Zeehaen and named it Van Diemen’s Land. Anthony Van Diemen, Governor-General of the Dutch East Indies commissioned Abel Tasman,8 a sea captain employed by the Dutch East India Company in 1642 to explore the unknown South Seas. Two years later, Tasman and his crew sailed along the northern coast of Australia (which later named New Holland) from Cape York to North West Cape.
Following the Dutch mariners, Lieutenant James Cook, an English mariner, in 1770 explored the Australian east coast in his ship HM Barque Endeavour. King George III of England instructed Cook on August 22, 1770, to claim the possession of the east coast of Australia that was later named New South Wales. Queensland was separated from New South Wales in 1859. Although French expeditions led by D’Entrecasteaus, Baudin, and Furneaux visited a few areas of Australia between 1790 and the 1830s, as the Dutch mariners did in the 17th century, the continent of Australia was totally colonized by England. The first British colonial fleet led by Captain Arthur Philip reached at Botany Bay between 18 and 20 January 1788. This fleet consisted of 11 ships and around 1,350 crew and convicts. These English colonialists found that Botany Bay was unsuitable for settlement, and hence they moved to north to Port Jackson on January 26, 1788, and camped at Cove called Cadi by the Cadigal people. They traded food with indigenous people. Richard Broome (2002) asserted that the English colonized Australia beginning January 26, 1788, when “ships containing 290 seamen, soldiers and officials and 717 convicts sailed into Port Jackson, to confront the Gamaraigal people of the Sydney area” (p. 26).
Because of the following three reasons the Gamaraigal people avoided to deal with these settlers for 2 years: The first reason was that they did not like how the British ordered convicts around and flogged or hanged them. The second reason was that they did not like the British unearthing of graves to steal the bones of indigenous people. The third reason was that the Gamaraigal people “objected to the Europeans clearing the ground around a waterhole (possibly sacred) and casting nets in the area without permission” (Broome, 2002, p. 26). The second fleet arrived in 1790 with needed food and other supplies. George Vancouver started the process of British colonialism in Western Australia in 1791 by claiming the Albany region in the name of King George III. Tasmania was occupied in1803 and 1825, Western Australia in 1827, South Australia between 1836 and 1842, Victoria in 1851, and Northern Territory in 1825. England sent to Australia over 162,000 convicts in 806 ships between 1788 and 1850 to colonize the continent.9 Mathew Flinders suggested the name Australia and later it was adopted as the name of this country. Australia emerged in 1901 as a federation of the six English colonies.
How did the English colonialists create this new country? What happened to indigenous Australians in the process of creating this country? The English settlers and indigenous people initially exchanged items such as food, cloth, artifacts, and other supplies in amicable and understanding ways. How did these relationships change? Indigenous Australians did not resist when the British invaders were arriving in Australia. Richard Broome (2002) argued,
Had they known the implications the arrival of these strangers would have for their future, they may have met the intruders more frequently with violence and less with curiosity. The irony was that the Aborigines had often helped the European explorers and the first settlers as they bumbled through the bush loaded down with equipment and plagued by inexperience. (p. 40)
Despite the fact that indigenous people never tried to harm these invaders at the beginning, the invaders turned their cooperation and friendly relationship into conflict, war, and terrorism to expropriate the homeland of the indigenous people. Gradually indigenous people realized that the English settlers were expropriating their land and other resources on which they depended and disturbed their ways of living. Consequently, between 1790 and 1810, the Eora group in the Sydney region initiated the campaign of resistance against the English invaders in a series of attacks under the leadership of Pemulwuy.10 Did other indigenous Australians engage in such resistance? How did such conflicts end? According to Michael Cannon (1993),
The white newcomers were determined that the whole continent of Australia should belong to them—the soil, the beasts and birds, the rivers and fish, the minerals and trees. A dream of total possession had taken hold of normally stolid men. Such lust for new lands ran through the whole British race that monarch and lowliest labourers alike glowed with the glory of creating a new empire. (pp. 1-2)
The more the settlers expropriated the native land and destroyed their means of survival, the more the indigenous population groups engaged in resistance. The settlers interpreted the resistance “as barbarous opposition to the enlightened forces of White civilization” (Cannon, 1993, p. 169).
The English colonizers and their descendants called indigenous Australian Aborigines by giving them a new name that had no meaning for peoples who had their own ethno-national group names. For the English settlers, the name Aborigines characterized the backwardness, inferiority, and otherness of indigenous Australians. This name was invented to create a racial boundary between White Europeans and Black Australians for dehumanizing them later. According to B?n?dicte Deschamps and Michel Prum (2007),
Depriving . . . victim of their rights to life or property is the very act by which the injured party is constructed as Other . . . Naming and killing often are indeed two sides of the same coin. Naming the Other is often a way of obliterating their identity. . .This metaphorical murder of people who are marginalised by mainstream society boils down to an exclusion that can be felt by the victim as complete annihilation. (p. 1)
Once indigenous Australians were objectified and dehumanized it became easier to terrorize and kill them:
Massacres of Aborigines were usually the work of groups of settlers or colonial police, and less often military units, sometimes in a part-time or volunteer capacity. But . . . killings could occur with impunity in an ideological atmosphere that mixed expansionism, racism, and classical models with a fetish for cultivation and contempt for indigenous land use. (Kiernan, 2007, p. 252)
The Australian colonial government used eugenics and social-Darwinist ideology to legitimize a series of racist policies and colonial terrorism on indigenous Australians; to dispossess the rights of indigenous Australians to life and property, it developed “classification schemes allegedly proving the inferiority of the native populations living on the territory they conquered” (Deschamps & Prum, 2007, p. 2). Only a few of the settlers recognized the humanity of indigenous people. For instance, Tom Browne, one of the settlers, wrote that many indigenous warriors were “grandly-formed specimens of humanity, dignified in manner, and possessing. . .intelligence by no means to be despised. Why should these proud men give ground peacefully to white settlers and their abominable convict servant” (quoted in Cannon, 1993, pp. 3-4). The English settlers considered the Australian continent
a paradise on earth, for here laid one of the fairest domains ever created by nature. Permanent life-giving rivers meandered through its extensive plains; lush grasslands and forests flourished on its rich soil. The white men could scarcely believe their luck, as they penetrated further into undulating pastures and negotiable bushlands. (Cannon, 1993, p. 10)
The British settlers used the doctrine of terra nullius to expropriate native lands through violence; according to this doctrine, Australia belonged to no one and as indigenous people did not have concept of law of ownership, they did not have rights to land. “The continuing pressure of agrarian ideology even when actual settlement patterns were pastoral took on new virulence with spread of scientific racism,” Ben Kiernan (2007) wrote, “which justified mass murder of indigenous communities to safeguard investments in animal stock” (p. 309). As hunters and food-gatherers, the land use of indigenous people was different from a European way of land use. The British colonizers used this as pretext in confiscating the land of indigenous people calling it terra nullius, free wasteland for taking. As mighty was right in colonialism, the British settlers used this ideological discourse and terrorism to extinguish all indigenous rights to land and other resources. These activities involved “multiple deliberate killings and a series of genocidal massacres” (Kiernan, 2007, p. 250). “As killing escalated, racial justification did, too”; colonial officers said, “disgrace would it be the human race to call them Men” (Rowley, 1972, p. 275). Colonial terrorism in Australia involved the destruction of essential foundation of the lifestyles indigenous people in economic, political, social cultural, biological, physical existence, religious, and moral arenas.
The English settlers confiscated land and other economic resources and destroyed or obliterated indigenous institutions of self-government by replacing them with the structures of colonial governments and by repressing cultural and knowledge systems, by reducing quality of food and depriving basic nutrients and causing physical debilitation and death, by engaging in mass killings, intellectual and resistance leaders, by destroying indigenous religions, and by undermining moral and ethical values.11 Depending on their capitalist technological and organizational capacity, the English setters expropriated more and more land to make more money by engaging in agricultural capitalism. As Cannon (1993) asserts, “Australia was suitable for rapid expansion of wool-growing. Flocks spread over all available grasslands. By the end of the 1840s, the then-amazing figure of 40,000,000 pounds of wool was being exported to Europe each year” (p. 2). To justify their crimes against humanity, the English settlers promoted the idea of a White Australia and the extinction of indigenous Australians; the native “land was declared desert and uninhabited later represented as terra nullius and the various nations declared uncivilized.” The English setters gradually decimated indigenous population groups, obliterated their cultures, and challenged their survival and identity (Bourke, 1998, p. 40).
The British settlers expropriated the land of indigenous hunters and food-gatherers for farming and pastoral interests and destroyed their livelihood. A. P. Elkin (1951) noted,
When cultivation is associated with grazing cattle and sheep. . .ever increasing in numbers, the settlers required all the grass and must not be disturbed by hunts-men’s activities. So the native fauna must go, including the Aborigines, unless they change their ways of living. (p. 166)
Indigenous people did not understand why the English settlers expropriated their land and claimed private ownership on it. For instance in 1843, Yagan, an indigenous man, told the advocate general of Victoria the following:
Why do you white people come in ships to our country and shoot down poor blackfellows who do not understand you—you listen to me! The wild blackfellows do not understand your laws, every living animal that roams the country, and every edible fruit that grows in the ground are common property. . .For every black man you fellows shoot, I will kill a white man. (quoted in Kiernan, 2007, p. 289)
Colonial governors granted land and ordered their troops to kill indigenous people and to kidnap their children as unpaid laborers; they ordered their troops to strike the Blacks with terror or teach them by terror (Kiernan, 2007). On a public meeting a colonial officer declared,
the best thing that could be done would be to shoot all the blacks and manure the ground with their carcasses. Cox or others recommended likewise that the women and children should specially be shot as the most certain method of getting rid of the race. (quoted in Kiernan, 2007, p. 262)
One English juror called indigenous Australians “a set of [monkeys] and the earlier they are exterminated from the face of the earth better” (Kiernan, 2007, p. 286). Nobody exactly knows how many indigenous people were exterminated. Indigenous people were
shot down like dogs while sleeping round their fires, their women taken from them to gratify the lusts of white men, hunted and persecuted in all directions, and in fact looked upon as savage beasts of the forest, whom it was necessary to get rid of, no matter how. (quoted in Kiernan, 2007, p. 278)
For instance, in colonial Victoria, in 1834, Blacks were estimated between 5,000 and 10,000, but by 1886, only 806 of them survived (Kiernan, 2007). Tasmania’s Blacks were reduced from an estimated 4,000 or more to under 2,000 by 1818; “settlers would shoot on sight. . .killing the men and taking the children from the women”; the settlers would often “chase the mother through the bush until she had to leave her children, then make a selection” of child labor (Rowley, 1972, pp. 44, 120).
The Tasmania indigenous people were also terrorized and destroyed. The genocide of indigenous Tasmanians was considered “the only true genocide in English colonial history” (Hughes, 1987, p. 120). The genocide of the early 19th century in Tasmania “directed and organized by the government substantially eliminated the indigenous population” (Bultin, 1993, p. 134). Similarly, in the colony of Queensland, the settlers’ inroads were “marked with blood, the forests were ruthlessly seized, and the [Blacks] hunted down like their native dogs” (quoted in Kiernan, 2007, p. 303). Between 1824 and 1908, the settlers killed approximately between 8,000 and 10,000 Blacks in Queensland (Kiernan, 2007). According to Kiernan (2007), the
roaring expansion [between 1850 and 1900] produced a crescendo of genocidal killings that exceeded all previous Australian catastrophe. What the governor termed a ‘steady, silent flow’ of pastoral settlement included a series of large-scale massacres of Aboriginal communities. (pp. 303-305)
Mechanisms and Discourses of Terror and Genocide
The English settlers used several mechanisms of terrorism and genocide against indigenous Australians, and justified them with a racist discourse. These mechanisms included shooting, burning, disease, rape, ethnocide, or cultural destruction. According to A. Dirk Moses (2004), terrorism and genocide or “indigenocide” involved five elements:
the intentional invasion/colonization of land; the conquest of the indigenous peoples; the killing of them to the extent that they can barely reproduce themselves and thereby come close to extinction; their classification as vermin by invaders; and the attempted destruction of their religious systems. (p. 27)
Raymond Evans and Bill Thrope created a new term called indigenocide to explain the extermination of the indigenous population in Australia: Indigenocide
is a means of analyzing those circumstances where one, or more peoples, usually immigrants, deliberately set out to supplant a group or groups of other people whom as far as we know, represent the Indigenous, or Aboriginal peoples of the country that the immigrants usurp. (Moses, 2004, p. 27)
The English settlers shot indigenous people and divided them to turn them on one another. The colonial government created the “Native Police Force” by providing food, money, uniforms, horses, and guns to motivate some opportunistic elements to fight against and kill their own people (Broome, 2002, pp. 48-49). Furthermore, diseases like smallpox, measles, and tuberculosis killed several thousands of indigenous people. The settlers used food poisoning to kill Blacks; they distributed poisoned flour to commit premeditated murder (Broome, 2002). Biological warfare was also used in colonies such as New South Wales, particularly at Port Jackson in 1789, in the form of affecting the White settlers. According to Jan Kociumbas (2004),
The British had at their disposal “variolus matter in bottles,” but though written accounts from the period describe with wonder and sometimes horror the number of corpses strewn around the harbor, none mention the use of the variola, even for the purposes of inoculating the newly-born white children who, though particularly susceptible to the disease, nevertheless appeared to have survived. (pp. 80-81)
The colonialists and English scholars tried to minimize the effects of colonial shooting and poisoning on indigenous Australians; they argued that indigenous Australians died out because of their inability to adapt to a changing socioeconomic environment. Jan Kociumbas (2004) asserts,
By dwelling on smallpox and other infectious diseases as faceless killers, colonialists and historians directed attention away from more overtly murderous acts such as shooting and poisoning. In particular, the 1789 epidemic laid the foundation for the notion that Aboriginal people were not killed outright, but owing to their own personal weaknesses and cultural flaws, sadly just “faded away.” It was as if smallpox was nothing more than the first stage in the tragic but necessary workings of evolutionary law, annihilating all species slow to “adapt.” (p. 82)
In their political discourses, the colonialists and their apologists blamed the conflicts among indigenous people, lack of healthy conditions, and the behavior of indigenous people for the destruction of indigenous communities.
While openly advocating and engaging in exterminating indigenous people, the settlers and their descendants were also arguing that “indigenous society was not destroyed by the Europeans, but collapsed under the weight of its own pathologies” (Moses, 2004, p. 15). In other words, they suggested that it was not the English settlers and their violence that destroyed indigenous communities, but the indigenous communities themselves that caused their own destruction: “Coupled with emphasis on intertribal killings, alcoholism, unhygienic living conditions and, more recently, deaths in police custody, the result has been to blame the victims of their own demise” (Kociumbas, 2004, p. 82). In reality, the British settlers and their descendants declared their intentions to exterminate indigenous communities and translated them into actions through different mechanisms although they tried their best not to take responsibility for their crimes against humanity.
The settlers and indigenous communities have exactly known who were responsible for the crimes that were committed in Australia. For example, Dalaipi, a Queensland Black, in the late 19th century said:
We were hunted from our ground, shot, poisoned, and had our daughters, sisters and wives taken from us. . .What a number were poisoned at Kilcoy . . . They stole our ground where we used to get food, and when we got hungry and took a bit of flour or killed a bullock to eat, they shot us or poisoned us. All they give us now for our land is blanket once a year. (quoted in Broome, 2002, p. 55)
The settlers raped women or slaughtered and massacred women, children, and the aged (Broome, 2002). They also kidnapped young children to satisfy their demand of labor for housework and harvesting (Kociumbas, 2004). As there were no rich mines and manufacturing industries in Australia, “the settlers had never wanted much from Aboriginal people except their women and their land; for labor the settlers mainly depended on convict labor and imported coolies” (Kociumbas, 2004, p. 92).
Rape was also used as a mechanism of terror to destroy indigenous families and communities. Some settlers held indigenous women and small girls and used them for sexual gratification. According to Richard Broome (2002),
The violence took sexual forms as well . . . Reverend Threlkeld . . . in 1825 wrote that he was tormented “at night [by] the shrieks of girls, about 8 or 9 years of age, taken by force by the vile men of Newcastle. One man came to see me with his head broken by the butt-end of a musket because he would not give up his wife.” Some of the worst abuses occurred in Tasmania, where Aborigines were allegedly flogged, branded, castrated and mutilated by convicts. (p. 45)
The use of sexual violence is a tactic of terrorism and genocide that a dominant society practices in destroying the dominated communities. Terrorism and genocide studies ignore
the full extent of the humiliation of the ethnic group through the rape of its women, the symbols of honor and vessels of culture. When a woman’s and [or a girl’s] honor is tarnished through illicit intercourse, even if against her will, the ethnic group is also dishonored. The after affects of rape—forced impregnation, psychological trauma, degradation, and demoralization—go beyond the rape victims themselves. (Sharlack, 2002, p. 107)
Some English settlers and their descendants captured indigenous women and small girls from their husbands and families without any fear and repercussion because colonial governments sanctioned these actions. Such inhumane activities were sanctioned to demoralize, destroy, and to show that the English settlers and their descendants had power to do any thing on indigenous families and communities. Explaining such abuses Catharine MacKinnon (1994) says,
It is . . . rape unto death, rape as massacre, rape to kill and to make the victims wish they were dead. It is rape as an instrument of forced exile, rape to make you leave your home and never want to go back. It is rape to be seen and heard and watched and told to others: rape as spectacle. It is rape to drive a wedge through a community, to shatter a society, to destroy a people. It is rape as genocide. (pp. 11-12)
In addition to raping small indigenous girls and women, the English settlers and descendants killed them whenever they wanted.
Genocide can occur in many ways:
The end may be accomplished by the forced disintegration of political and social institutions, of the culture of the people, of their languages, their national feeling and their religion. It may be accomplished by wiping out all [bases] of personal security, liberty, health and dignity. When these means fail the machine gun can always be utilized as a last resort. (quoted in Moses, 2004, p. 21)
The English colonial settlers and their descendants in Australia used all these mechanisms of terrorism and genocide. They used the discourse of racism to hide their crimes against humanity. As the brutal dispossession of land increased in the early 19th century in the continent, colonialists and scholars started to theorize, “indigenous survivors were not really people at all” (Kociumbas, 2004, p. 96). Colonial officials justified the total extermination of indigenous people by calling them nonhuman beings. They proclaimed that “let us at once exterminate these useless and obnoxious wretches” (Moses, 2004, pp. 15-16).
The English settlers engaged in trade in body parts of indigenous people for scientific purposes. Medical schools and scientific societies in Europe were interested in living and dead specimens; they purchased skeletons and skulls too (Kociumbas, 2004). According to Jan Kociumbas (2004),
The fact that Australia’s indigenous people were so extensively dismembered and exhibited as scientific freaks made for a particularly virulent form of racism, which rendered it increasingly impossible for even model, educated Aboriginal people to find acceptable in settler society. Men became extremely vulnerable to capital conviction of rape against white women, though white men continued to rape Aboriginal women virtually as a right. (p. 98)
It is disturbing to realize that one human group used modern education, technology, and legal means to hide crimes against humanity:
What is unique about genocide in Australia is not its violence, but its apparent legality and above all its modernity. It was modern technology that made possible the pace and effectiveness of the killing, and modern law that provided the judicial niceties that condoned it. [I] T was modern education, not colonial ignorance that helped create the conditions where official silence and legally-sanctioned cover-ups could prevail. (Kociumbas, 2004, pp. 98-99)
The English colonialists and their descendants had used capitalist technology and social organization and engaged in violent crimes against humanity in the Americas, Australia, Africa, and Asia. They perfected their acts of terrorism and genocide in the Australian continent to benefit the English settler community at the cost of indigenous Australians. Ward Churchill (1997), the indigenous American activist-scholar, considers the English as
global leaders in genocidal activities, both in terms of overall efficiency—as they consummated the total extinction of the Tasmanians in 1876—and a flair for innovation embodied in their deliberate use of alcohol to effect the dissolution of many of North America’s indigenous peoples. (p. 405)
But most of the English descendants still refuse to accept the moral, economic, and political responsibility for the crimes committed against humanity in Australia despite the fact that they enjoy the economic and political benefits of these crimes that resulted in destruction of indigenous communities. According to Michael Cannon (1993),
The whole white community [has] benefited economically from the development of productive enterprises on the European model. However, it may now be accepted that these enterprises were established on land seized by force from an almost defenseless race of people, and that most of the population is still benefiting from that original seizure. If the Australian ideal of ‘fair play’ has any meaning at all, it is surely time to redouble efforts to give descendants of the Aboriginal race a better chance in life. (p. 265)
While boasting about dominating the world and spreading English civilization, modernity, Christianity, and commerce, the descendants of English colonialists, like others who have committed similar crimes against humanity, do not want to deal with the crimes of the past and they prefer to be silent in Austria and other continents. As J?rgen Zimmerer (2004) notes,
The question of colonial genocide is disturbing, in part because it increases the number of mass murders regarded as genocide, and in part, too, because it calls into question the Europeanization of the globe as a modernizing project. Where the descendants of perpetrators still comprise the majority or a large proportion of the population, and control political life and public discourse, recognition of colonial genocides is even more difficult, as it undermines the image of the past on which national identity is built. Australian conservatives, for example, have difficulties recognizing the genocide of the Aborigines. (p. 51)
It is impossible to bring national reconciliation between White and Black Australians without recognizing and dealing with the crimes of the pas and present adequately on the latter by the former. According to Bruce Elder (1988),
The blood of tens of thousands of Aborigines killed since 1788, and the sense of despair and hopelessness which informs so much modern-today Aborigine society, is a moral responsibility all white Australians share. Our wealth and lifestyle is a direct consequence of Aboriginal dispossession. We should bow our heads in shame. (p. 200)
There are White politicians in Australia who would like to use the discourse of the ignorance of past generations without explaining their inhumane behavior and the consequences of their criminal acts: Some contemporary politicians in Australia claim that their European ancestors acted to the “standards of the time,” and the present generation does not need to acknowledge, apologize, and compensate for the crimes committed on the indigenous Australians. In 1999, Prime Minister John Howard announced that
present generations of Australians cannot be held accountable . . . for the errors and misdeeds of earlier generations . . . To apply retrospectively the standards of today in relation to their behaviour does some of those people who were sincere an immense injustice. (quoted in Deschamps & Prum, 2007, p. 3)
The indigenous communities deserve apologies and reparations. By taking such actions, governments and dominant societies recognize that there are always prices to be paid for the crimes committed against humanity and learn how to avoid such in humane acts in present time. According to B?n?dicte and Michel Prum (2007),
Portraying colonisers’ atrocities or the systematic victimisation and extermination of specific groups by a dictatorship provides a mirror which is essential not only to the understanding of the dark pages of a country’s history, but also to addressing past governments’ errors, abuses and misconduct. Only in this way can the malfunctions of the present be acknowledged and a just future constructed. (p. 3)
Successive Australian White governments not only exterminated indigenous Australians and refused to recognize the crimes they committed against them, but they also attempted to commit ethnocide on the survivors. They kidnapped those mixed children of the settlers and indigenous mothers to Anglicize them and distance them from their Black mothers:
Assimilating communities by trying to wipe out differences through what could be called an ethnocide has been the common policy of the various Australian governments. While authorities have sought to achieve aboriginal conformity to a national culture modeled on white values, thus forcing the indigenous population into an uncalled-for sameness, this has meant trying to negate their historical specificity as a colonial group, and play the card of “sameness” to reduce them to the status of “disadvantaged minority.” Paradoxically, then, the inclusion of Aborigines into the wide spectrum of a “diverse Australia” is a way of excluding them once more, by depriving them of a past that not only constitutes a part of their identity but also entitles to reparation in today’s society. Indigenous people are currently involved in a judicial battle, and demand compensation for the abuse of human rights they have endured. (Deschamps & Prum, 2007, p. 2)
The settlers and their descendants attempted to totally eradicate the culture of the surviving of indigenous people. “Obsessed by the need to impose on [the survivors] their own kind of organization,” Michael Cannon (1993) writes, “Anglo-Australian settlers could visualize no other end but that the black people should behave like white people or die out” (p. 253). Once governments and dominant societies commit crimes against humanity, unless they realize and change their criminal policies, they continue to engage in gross human rights violations in an attempt to hide the injustices committed in the past and present by attacking cultural diversity in the name of “national culture” and the politics of the sameness.
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
The author(s) received no financial support for the research and/or authorship of this article.
1.These names include Airiman, Ajabakan, Ajabatha, Alawa, Alura, Alyawarre, Amangu, Amarak, Amijangal, Anaiwan, Andakerebina, Andinyin, Andyamathanha, Anguthimri, Ankamuti, Anmatyerre, Antakirinja, Araba, Arabana, Arakwal, Arrernte, Arnga, Atjinuri, Awabakal, Awarai, Awinmul, Awngthim, Baada, Badjalang, Badjiri, Baiali, Baijungu, Bailgu, Bakanambia, Balardong, Banbai, Bandjigali, Bandjin, Barada, Baranbinja, Baraparapa, Barbaram, Barimaia, Barindji, Barkindji, Barna, Barunggam, Barungguan, Batjala, Beriguruk, Daii, Dainggati, Darambal, Darkinjang, Darug, Dharawal, Diakui, Dieri, Duwala, Eora, Erawirung, Ewamin, Gaari, Gadjalivia, Gambalang, Gandangara, Gia, Goeng, Ilba, Idindji, Iwaidja, Ingura, Iningai, Irukandji, Ithu, Iwaidja, Jaadwa, Jaako, Jaara, Juburara, Jadira, Jadliaura, Jagara, Janda, Jeidji, Jiegara, Kaantiju, Kalali, Kamilaroi, Kamor, Kandju, Koa, Kula, Laia, Larrakia, Madoitja, Nakako, Nana, Ngalea, Oitbi, Ola, Pini, Rakkaia, Tagalag, Taior, Ualarai, Wadere, Wik, Yolngu, and Yuin.
4.Ibid., p. 2.
8.Tasmania was named after Abel Tasman.
11.R. Lemkin (1944/1973) raises similar issues in explaining the consequences of terrorism and genocide.
Black, D. (2004). The geometry of terrorism. Sociological Theory, 22, 14-25. Google Scholar, SAGE Journals, ISI
Blakeley, R. (2009). State terrorism and neoliberalism: The north in the south. New York, NY: Routledge. Google Scholar
Bourke, E. (1998). Images and realities (2nd ed.). In Bourke, C., Bourke, E., Edwards, B. (Eds.), Aboriginal Australia (pp. 1-15). St. Lucia, Queensland: University of Queensland Press. Google Scholar
Broome, R. (2002). Aboriginal Australians: Black responses to White dominance (3rd ed.). Sydney, Australia: Allen & Unwin. Google Scholar
Bultin, N. G. (1993). Economics and the dreamtime: A hypothetical history.Melbourne, Australia: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar
Campanella, T. (1981). The city of the sun: A poetical dialogue (Donno, D. J., Trans.). Berkeley: University of California Press. Google Scholar
Cannon, M. (1993). Black land, White land. Melbourne, Australia: Minerva. Google Scholar
Churchill, W. (1997). A little matter of genocide. San Francisco, CA: City Lights Books. Google Scholar
Cohen, J. M. (Ed.). (1969). Christopher Columbus: The four voyages (Cohen, J. M., Trans.) London, England: Penguin Books. Google Scholar
Cranstone, B. A. L. (1973). The Australian aborigines. London, England: The Trustees of the British Museum. Google Scholar
Curtis, M. (1995). The ambiguities of power: British foreign policy since 1945.London, England: Zed Books. Google Scholar
Curtis, M. (1998). The great deception: Anglo-American power and world order.London, England: Pluto Press. Google Scholar
De Las Casas, B. (1992). A short account of the destruction of the Indies (Griffin, N., Ed. & Trans.). London, England: Penguin Books. Google Scholar
Deschamps, B., Prum, M. (2007). “Introduction,” Racial, ethnic, and homophobic violence: Killing in the name of otherness. New York, NY: Taylor & Francis Group.Google Scholar
Eisenstein, H. (2001). After 9/11: Globalization and the events of September 11. Journal of the Research Group on Socialism and Democracy, 16, 131-136. Google Scholar, Crossref
Elder, B. (1988). Blood on the wattle: Massacres and maltreatment of Australian aborigines since 1788. Sydney, Australia: National Book Distributors. Google Scholar
Elkin, A. P. (1951). Reaction and interaction: A food gathering people and European settlement in Australia. American Anthropologist, 53, 164-186. Google Scholar,Crossref, ISI
Elkins, C. (2005). Imperial reckoning: The untold story of Britain’s Gulag in Kenya.New York, NY: Henry Holt and Company. Google Scholar
Frank, A. G. (1978). World accumulation, 1492-1789. New York, NY: Monthly Review Press. Google Scholar, Crossref
Goodwin, J. (2006). A theory of categorical terrorism. Social Forces, 84, 2027-2046.Google Scholar, Crossref, ISI
Hughes, R. (1987). The fatal shore. London, England: Collins Harvill. Google Scholar
Kiernan, B. (2007). Blood and soil: A world history of genocide and extermination in from Sparta to Darfur. New Haven, CT: Yale University. Google Scholar
Kociumbas, J. (2004). Genocide and modernity in colonial Australia, 1788-1850. In Drik Moses, A. (Ed.), Genocide and settler society: Frontier violence and stolen indigenous children in Australian history (pp. 77-102). New York, NY: Berghahn Books. Google Scholar
Lemkin, R. (1973). Axis rule in occupied Europe: Laws of occupation analysis of government proposals for redress. Washington, DC: Carnegie endowment for International Peace. (Original work published 1944) Google Scholar
Lindqvist, S. (2007). Terra nullius: A journey through no one’ land. New York, NY:New Press. Google Scholar
Mackinnon, C. (1994). Rape, genocide, and women’s human rights. Harvard Women’s Law Journal, 17, 5-17. Google Scholar
Marx, K. (1967). Capital (Engels, F., Ed.). New York, NY: International Publishers.Google Scholar
Moses, A. D. (2004). Genocide and settler society in Australian history. In Dirk, M. A. (Ed.), Genocide and settler society: Frontier violence and stolen indigenous children in Australian history (pp. 3-48). New York, NY: Berghahn Books. Google Scholar
Mulvaney, D. J. (1981). Origins. In Carol Cooper (Ed.) Aboriginal Australia. Sydney, Australia: Australian Gallery Directors. Google Scholar
Mulvaney, D. J., White, J. P. (Eds.). (1987). Australians to 1788. Sydney, Australia:Fairfax, Syme & Weldon. Google Scholar
Prum, M. B., Narie-Claude, B. (Eds.). (2007). Racial, ethnic, and homophobic violence: Killing in the name of otherness. New York, NY: Taylor & Francis. Google Scholar
Radcliffe-Brown, A. R. (1930). Former numbers and distribution of the Australian aborigines. Official Yearbook of the Commonwealth of Australia. Canberra, Australia:Australian Government Publishing Service. Google Scholar
Rowley, C. D. (1972). The destruction of aboriginal society. Ringwood, Australia:Penguin. Google Scholar
Schmid, A. P. (1991). Repression, state terrorism and genocide: Conceptual clarifications. In Timothy Bushnell, P., Shlapentokh, V., Vanderpool, C. K., Sundram, J. (Eds.), State organized terror (pp. 23-37). Boulder, CO: Westview. Google Scholar
Senechal de la Roche, R. (1996). Collective violence as social control. Sociological Forum, 11, 97-128. Google Scholar, Crossref, ISI
Sharlack, L. (2002). State rape: Sexual violence as genocide. In Worcester, K., Bermanzohn, S. A., Ungar, M. (Eds.), Violence and politics: Globalization’s paradox (pp. 107-123). New York, NY: Routledge. Google Scholar
Tilly, C. (1985). War making and state making as organized. In Evans, P., Ruessschemeyer, D., Skocpol, T. (Eds.), Bringing the state back (pp. 170-185).Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar, Crossref
Tindale, N. B. (1974). Aboriginal tribes of Australia: Their terrain, environmental controls, distribution, limits and proper names. Berkeley: University of California Press. Google Scholar
Zimmerer, J. (2004). Colonialism and the holocaust: Towards a archeology of genocide. In Beattie, A. H. (Ed. & Trans.), Genocide and settler society: Frontier violence and stolen indigenous children in Australian history (pp. 49-76). New York, NY: Berghahn Books. Google Scholar
Author Biography
Asafa Jalata is Professor of Sociology and Global and Africana Studies at the University of Tennessee, Knoxville. He has widely published on indigenous and terrorism studies, globalization and uneven development, and Oromo and Africana Studies in regional and international scholarly journals as well as several books.
Racial tensions mixed with a dash of arsenic and yeast
While Hongkongers this morning eat their breakfast, few may be aware that on this day exactly 150 years ago the city woke to find that almost its entire European population of about 500 people was in the throes of an attempt to kill them all.
At the time, in the midst of the second opium war, most westerners lived in fear of their Chinese neighbours. Barely 10 years old, Hong Kong 'was a city under siege', according to local historian Arthur Hacker, in Wan Chai, his history of the district.
The British Navy, acting in the interests of merchants trying to sell opium to China, had just blockaded the Pearl River. After bombarding what is now Guangzhou, they were awaiting reinforcements.
Outgunned and unable to attack the European settlement, Yeh Mingchen, the Qing emperor's viceroy for Guangxi and Guangdong, retaliated with a 'terrorist campaign'. Yeh's militia had beheaded 11 Europeans found on the captured steamer Thistle, and there was a 'proliferation of unexplained fires around Hong Kong'. Yeh had placed a bounty on the heads of Europeans, and severed ones (including some stolen from the cemetery in Happy Valley) were displayed in Guangzhou.
'Most households employed a Malay guard armed with a musket to protect them,' writes Hacker, adding that 'British troops supported by French and American sailors patrolled the streets'.
However, on January 15, 1857, no musket could protect the Europeans from the wares of Cheong Ah-lum, who baked most of Hong Kong's bread at the time.
To this day, accounts vary as to who was responsible for the 'great bread poisoning incident' or the 'Esing Bakery incident'. Hacker and G.B. Endacott, author of A History of Hong Kong, among others, have no doubt that it was done on the orders of Qing mandarins. But Jan Morris, in Hong Kong Xianggang, believes that Cheong acted out of his own, patriotic convictions.
'Responding to the wave of xenophobia then sweeping China, [Cheong] decided to exterminate the principal residents of Hong Kong,' Morris writes. 'Since he was the principal baker of the island, he was in a strong position to achieve this, by slipping arsenic into his loaves.'
A clan record of Cheong's lineage, written in 1904 on the instructions of the Qing imperial court and translated by the Royal Asiatic Society's Hong Kong branch, gives another version.
Cheong, a man of intelligence and ability, had 'learned the ways of doing business with the foreigners' from an early age, according to the clan record.
By the time of the poisoning, he was 29 and well respected 'by the Chinese as well as by the foreigners'. After a successful career as a comprador with Murrow, Stephenson & Co, he became a chandler to the European ships arriving in Kowloon. This business included a bakery, which the clan record calls the 'Yu-cheng Bakery'.
According to the clan record, the poisoning was merely an accident. 'Because [Cheong] had too many workers, he had no time to check minute details. One day, through carelessness, he dropped some odd things into the flour. When the westerners bought and ate the bread, they all felt sick and fainted.'
Fortunately for the westerners, those who ingested these 'odd things' immediately vomited up the poison before any serious harm could be done. Among the hundreds poisoned - exact numbers vary - was Lady Bowring, wife of the governor, Sir John Bowring.
The governor - as quoted by Hacker - wrote that the poison 'left its effect for some days in racking headaches, pains to the limbs and bowels' and that his wife 'never really recovered'. Although most accounts of the Esing Bakery incident claimed that no lasting injuries were caused, Lady Bowring left Hong Kong soon thereafter and died in Taunton later that year.
Police arrested anyone connected to Cheong and his bakery staff, and scores of suspects were detained and locked into a small cell. Cheong was brought back to Hong Kong from Macau and his own children were found to have fallen ill with arsenic poisoning.
After governor Bowring stood firm in rejecting calls for Cheong's lynching, Cheong and his fellow accused, who included his father and one of his wives, faced charges before chief justice Hulme. During the three-day trial, the judge and some members of the jury were reported to be still suffering the after-effects of arsenic poisoning, but Cheong and his fellow accused were all acquitted on February 5.
One account states that two bakery foremen who fled to Guangzhou before they could be brought to trial were probably to blame.
Cheong's 'acquittal was a triumph for British justice', writes Hacker. 'What followed was not.'
Cheong was rearrested as 'a suspicious character' and, after protests by 'the leaders of the Chinese community', he agreed to leave the colony in 'voluntary banishment', forfeiting his profitable businesses, including the bakery. One account, in the Lonely Planet guide to Hong Kong, suggests the bakery was taken over by the chandlers Lane, Crawford & Co, founders of the department store chain.
For years after the incident, visitors to Hong Kong called on Cheong's bakery, which Hacker places next to Wan Chai's Hung Shing Temple, on Queen's Road East, viewing it 'as a chamber of horrors', according to Morris. 'A chunk of the poisoned bread, well preserved by its arsenic, was kept in a cabinet in the chief justice's office until the 1930s,' she adds.
Although Cheong disappears into destitution in most accounts of the incident, the clan record recounts a happier ending. After banishment, he prospered in Macau and Vietnam, where he became a consul for the Qing imperial court. Near the end of his life, Cheong received a title from the emperor - 'Hua-ling-tao', which is translated as 'an official who may wear a colourful ribbon'. He died in 1900 at the age of 73, and was buried in his native village, near Foshan.
Ποιοι πότισαν με ψυχοφάρμακο τους ρώσους μπασκετμπολίστες
Οι πρωταγωνιστές του αγώνα Ολυμπιακός - ΤΣΣΚΑ (79-54) θυμούνται τι συνέβη στις 16 Μαρτίου 1995 στο Στάδιο Ειρήνης και Φιλίας όταν πέντε από τους δέκα παίκτες της μοσχοβίτικης ομάδας αντί για το γήπεδο βρέθηκαν δηλητηριασμένοι με αλοπεριντίν σε νοσοκομεία του Πειραιά και της Αθήνας!
Με μία πεντάδα έμεινε η τσσκα Μόσχας, αφού οι άλλοι πέντε παίκτες της διεκομίσθησαν σε νοσοκομεία, αλλά τόσο οι ιθύνοντες του Ολυμπιακού όσο και ο βούλγαρος κομισάριος του αγώνα επέμεναν να διεξαχθεί το ματς. Οπερ εγένετο...
Εκλεισαν δέκα χρόνια από τη 16η Μαρτίου 1995 και το τρίτο παιχνίδι του Ολυμπιακού με την ΤΣΣΚΑ Μόσχας (79-54) στο Στάδιο Ειρήνης και Φιλίας για την προημιτελική φάση της Ευρωλίγκας, το οποίο οι πέντε από τους δέκα μπασκετμπολίστες της ομάδας του πρώην Κόκκινου Στρατού παρακολούθησαν δηλητηριασμένοι από το νοσοκομείο. H ρωσική εφημερίδα «Σπορτ Εξπρές» άνοιξε τώρα τον φάκελο εκείνου του αγώνα, που αποτελεί ασφαλώς την πιο μελανή σελίδα στην (εξωαγωνιστική) ιστορία της ελληνικής καλαθοσφαίρισης. Παίκτες και των δύο ομάδων και κυρίως το τεχνικό τιμ της ΤΣΣΚΑ, αλλά και ο κομισάριος του αγώνα, επαναφέρουν στη μνήμη τους τα όσα δραματικά βίωσαν εκείνη την ημέρα. Οι Ρώσοι είναι κατηγορηματικοί ότι στα μπουκάλια με το νερό τα οποία υπήρχαν στον πάγκο τους στη διάρκεια του δεύτερου αγώνα ανιχνεύθηκε μεγάλη δόση του ψυχοφάρμακου αλοπεριντίν ή αλοπεριδόλη, το οποίο - σύμφωνα με τους γιατρούς - χορηγείται σε περιπτώσεις οξείας διεγερτικής κατάστασης του (ψυχ)ασθενούς και έχει παρενέργειες ανάλογες με εκείνες που προκαλεί η λήψη στρυχνίνης. Ο Μοργκουνόφ, ο Κουντέλιν, ο Κόρνιεφ, ο Καράσεφ και ο Πανόφ υποστηρίζουν ότι εκτός των άλλων κινδύνεψε η ζωή τους και από την αδυναμία των ελλήνων γιατρών να τους βοηθήσουν. Ο τότε προπονητής της ΤΣΣΚΑ Στάνισλαβ Ερέμιν δηλώνει ότι υποχρεώθηκε να αγωνισθεί με τους υπόλοιπους πέντε παίκτες που είχε στη διάθεσή του επειδή η ομάδα του απειλήθηκε ακόμη και από τον βούλγαρο κομισάριο του αγώνα με μεγάλο για την εποχή πρόστιμο. Ο κομισάριος αντιτείνει ότι οι έλληνες γιατροί τον διαβεβαίωσαν προφορικά ότι οι ρώσοι... ασθενείς δεν είχαν τίποτε σπουδαίο και θα έδιναν κανονικά το παρών στο παιχνίδι. Δέκα χρόνια αργότερα θα είναι ψέμα να ισχυριστεί κανείς ότι γνωρίζει ολόκληρη την αλήθεια. Σημειώνεται όμως ότι πέρυσι υπήρξε ανάλογη υπόθεση με τα μολυσμένα νερά του Ακράτητου στο ποδοσφαιρικό ματς με τον Ηρακλή και στα οποία ανιχνεύθηκε το ίδιο ψυχοφάρμακο. Από την άποψη αυτή, η γνώμη των πρωταγωνιστών και των παθόντων τη 16η Μαρτίου του 1995 έχει ακόμη και σήμερα ιδιαίτερη αξία.
Με πέντε παίκτες της μοσχοβίτικης ομάδας στο νοσοκομείο, θα αναρωτηθεί κανείς γιατί δεν αναβλήθηκε το παιχνίδι Ολυμπιακός - ΤΣΣΚΑ έστω για δύο-τρία εικοσιτετράωρα. Σύμφωνα με τον τότε διευθυντή της ΤΣΣΚΑ Γιούρι Γιουρκόφ, την ημέρα του αγώνα έγινε σύσκεψη στο ξενοδοχείο στην οποία, εκτός από τον ίδιο, συμμετείχαν ο προπονητής της ομάδας Στάνισλαβ Ερέμιν, ο πρόεδρος του συλλόγου Μιχαήλ Ρέζνικοφ και ο πρώην προπονητής της ομάδας Αλεξάντρ Γκομέλσκι.
«Ολοι μας συμφωνήσαμε ότι κάποιοι είχαν δηλητηριάσει τους παίκτες, όμως, προφανώς για πατριωτικούς λόγους, επικράτησε η άποψη ότι πρέπει να αγωνισθούμε» είπε τώρα στην «Σπορτ Εξπρές» ο κ. Γιουρκόφ. Ο κ. Ερέμιν υποστηρίζει ότι η απόφαση να αγωνισθούν ήταν αποτέλεσμα του φόβου ότι θα υπάρξουν οικονομικές κυρώσεις. Ο προπονητής της ΤΣΣΚΑ κατηγορεί τη FIBA ότι «επέμενε πρώτα να γίνει το παιχνίδι και μετά να διερευνηθούν τα αίτια».
* Το συμβόλαιο και η απειλή για πρόστιμο
Ο βούλγαρος κομισάριος του αγώνα κ. Βαλεντίν Λαζάροφ φορτώνει την ευθύνη για τη διεξαγωγή του ματς στους έλληνες γιατρούς. «Το μεσημέρι με ενημέρωσαν ότι κάποιοι παίκτες της ΤΣΣΚΑ είναι στο νοσοκομείο, μάλλον με δηλητηρίαση. Ο Γκομέλσκι μου είπε ότι ενδεχομένως η ΤΣΣΚΑ δεν θα μπορεί να συμπληρώσει ούτε πεντάδα. Επικοινώνησε μάλιστα με τον γενικό γραμματέα της FIBA κ. Στάνκοβιτς, ο οποίος του είπε ότι η FIBA δεν θέλει να ασχοληθεί με το θέμα. Επικοινώνησα τότε με τους έλληνες γιατρούς οι οποίοι με διαβεβαίωσαν ότι οι παίκτες της ΤΣΣΚΑ δεν έχουν τίποτε σοβαρό. Πρότεινα στον Ολυμπιακό να μεταφερθεί κατά ένα-δύο εικοσιτετράωρα το παιχνίδι. Ο μάνατζερ της πειραϊκής ομάδας μού έδειξε το τηλεοπτικό συμβόλαιο, θέτοντας το ερώτημα ποιος θα πληρώσει τις συνέπειες σε περίπτωση καταγγελίας του. Πιστέψτε με, μίλησε για πολύ μεγάλο ποσό. Επειτα από αυτό δεν μπορούσα να μεταθέσω το παιχνίδι» υποστηρίζει τώρα ο κ. Λαζάροφ.
Την άποψη ότι οι κκ. Ρέζνικοφ και Γκομέλσκι επέμεναν στη διεξαγωγή του αγώνα υποστηρίζει και ο γιατρός της ΤΣΣΚΑ Ολεγκ Παρφιόνοφ. Οπως λέει, «οι προπονητές της ΤΣΣΚΑ δεν ήθελαν να κατεβάσουν την ομάδα στο γήπεδο, όμως οι Ρέζνικοφ και Γκομέλσκι, παρά το ότι δεν ήθελαν να χρεωθούν την ευθύνη, επέμεναν ότι ο σύλλογος κινδυνεύει με πρόστιμο από 50.000 ως 100.000 δολάρια».
Οι πέντε παίκτες, τους οποίους είχε ο κ. Ερέμιν στη διάθεσή του, είναι αλήθεια ότι πάλεψαν ηρωικά. Μάλιστα στο 16ο λεπτό προηγήθηκαν 28-27. Στο 5ο λεπτό του δευτέρου ημιχρόνου ο Κουρασόφ αποβάλλεται με πέντε φάουλ. Εξι λεπτά και δέκα δευτερόλεπτα πριν από το τέλος τραυματίζεται ο Σπιριντόνοφ και η ΤΣΣΚΑ συνεχίζει με τρεις παίκτες! Σύμφωνα με τη «Σπορτ Εξπρές», ο (τότε) προπονητής του Ολυμπιακού Γιάννης Ιωαννίδης «απαντάει με πρέσινγκ. Πέντε εναντίον τριών. Οταν η διαφορά φτάνει στους 20 πόντους, ο Ιωαννίδης αποφασίζει να παίξει το παιχνίδι στα ίσια, τρεις εναντίων τριών».
Οπως ομολογεί ο προπονητής της ΤΣΣΚΑ, είχε σκεφθεί το ενδεχόμενο να μείνει η ομάδα του με δύο παίκτες και να διακοπεί το παιχνίδι. Στην περίπτωση αυτή «το σκάνδαλο για τον Ολυμπιακό θα ήταν δεδομένο και με το παιχνίδι θα ασχολούνταν όλη η Ευρώπη αλλά και η Πειθαρχική Επιτροπή της FIBA. Εδωσα εντολή στον Βαντέεφ να υποπέσει σε πέμπτο φάουλ για να διακοπεί το παιχνίδι. Ο Σπιριντόνοφ δεν είχε αντιληφθεί όμως την εντολή μου και βλέποντας την ομάδα να μένει με δύο παίκτες σηκώνεται και συνεχίζει τραυματίας».
* Οι μαρτυρίες Τόμιτς, Βολκόφ και Σιγάλα
Αποψη στην έρευνα της ρωσικής εφημερίδας για το τι συνέβη σε εκείνο το παιχνίδι εξέφρασαν και μπασκετμπολίστες του Ολυμπιακού. «Οταν μάθαμε ότι θα παίζαμε δέκα εναντίον πέντε, δεν αισθανθήκαμε καλά. Ο Ιωαννίδης ήταν ιδιαίτερα ενοχλημένος από την απόδοσή μας και στο ημίχρονο ακούσαμε τα εξ αμάξης» θυμάται ο Μίλαν Τόμιτς.
Παίκτης του Ολυμπιακού ήταν τότε και ο Ουκρανός Αλεξάντρ Βολκόφ. «Φοβήθηκα για τους παίκτες της ΤΣΣΚΑ, οι οποίοι βρίσκονταν μεταξύ ζωής και θανάτου. Ζήτησα από τον Ιωαννίδη να μην αγωνισθώ. Στο πρώτο ημίχρονο δεν με άκουσε. Βλέποντας όμως την έκφραση στο πρόσωπό μου με κάθισε στον πάγκο και δεν με ξαναέβαλε στο παιχνίδι» θυμάται τώρα.
Το ενδεχόμενο να διακοπεί το παιχνίδι είχε όμως συζητήσει και ο τότε αρχηγός του Ολυμπιακού Γιώργος Σιγάλας με τον κ. Ιωαννίδη. «Δεν καταλήξαμε σε κάποια απόφαση. Ισως θα έπρεπε αμέσως να παίξουμε με ίδιο αριθμό παικτών. Ο αντίπαλος με την απόδοσή του δεν μας έδωσε όμως αυτή τη δυνατότητα. Βγάζω το καπέλο στους παίκτες της ΤΣΣΚΑ. Αυτό που έκαναν ήταν κατόρθωμα» λέει σήμερα ο Σιγάλας.
Παραισθήσεις, μυϊκοί πόνοι και συμπτώματα παράλυσης
Παραθέτουμε ορισμένα χαρακτηριστικά αποσπάσματα από τις τωρινές μαρτυρίες παικτών, γιατρών και παραγόντων της ΤΣΣΚΑ για το τι ακριβώς (τους) συνέβη στις 16 Μαρτίου του 1995:
Ερέμιν (προπονητής): «Στη Μόσχα είχαμε διαλύσει τον Ολυμπιακό 95-65. Για να προκριθούμε στο φάιναλ φορ χρειαζόμασταν μία νίκη στα δύο παιχνίδια της Αθήνας. Ο δεύτερος αγώνας έγινε στις 14 Μαρτίου. Ο Ολυμπιακός νίκησε πολύ δύσκολα και όχι χωρίς τη βοήθεια των διαιτητών με 86-77. Την παραμονή του τρίτου αγώνα συνέβη το απίστευτο...».
Μπαρτσό (μασέρ): «Πριν από το πρώτο παιχνίδι οι γηπεδούχοι, ως είθισται, τοποθέτησαν στον πάγκο της ομάδας μας μπουκάλια με νερό τα οποία ήταν σφραγισμένα. Στην προθέρμανση και κατά τη διάρκεια του αγώνα ήπιε από αυτά όλη η ομάδα. Μετά τον αγώνα ζήτησα από τους παίκτες να πάρουν μερικά μπουκάλια στο ξενοδοχείο. Ο Μοργκουνόφ πήρε ένα και όπως το πίεσε για να το σηκώσει, είδε ότι υπήρχε διαρροή. Κανείς μας δεν έδωσε ιδιαίτερη σημασία».
Κισούριν (παίκτης): «Το πρωί με τον Καράσεφ πήγαμε για καφέ. Περπατήσαμε 50 μ. ως την καφετέρια και αισθανθήκαμε κατάκοποι. Καθήσαμε στην καρέκλα. Αν είναι δυνατόν, σκεφθήκαμε. Χθες το βράδυ πετούσαμε. Ο Βασίλι αρχίζει να έχει συσπάσεις στο πρόσωπο. Επιστρέψαμε στο ξενοδοχείο και πήγαμε κατευθείαν στον γιατρό της ομάδας. Μας έκανε κάποια ένεση η οποία προς στιγμήν μας ανακούφισε. Αμέσως μετά το παιχνίδι αισθανόμουν κατάθλιψη, μελαγχολία. "Αν είχα πιστόλι αυτή τη στιγμή θα αυτοκτονούσα" μου λέει ο Καράσεφ. "Και εγώ το ίδιο" του απάντησα».
Κουντέλιν (παίκτης): «Στο ξενοδοχείο άρχισα να έχω παραισθήσεις. Τη μια το δωμάτιο κουνιόταν σαν λάστιχο, την άλλη εμφανίζονταν μπροστά μου κάτι αρχαία βάζα. Εκείνη τη στιγμή αισθανόμουν ότι είχα πάθει εγκεφαλική παράλυση. Δεν μπορούσα να εκπνεύσω, είχα πρόβλημα στους πνεύμονες και οι κόρες των ματιών μου κόντευαν να πεταχτούν έξω».
Μοργκουνόφ (παίκτης): «Πριν από την προπόνηση όλη η ομάδα έδειχνε νυσταγμένη. Προσωπικά αισθανόμουν ότι στιγμές στιγμές δεν έλεγχα τον εαυτό μου. Κατά την προθέρμανση αρχίζω τα σουτάκια στο ταμπλό, όταν ακούω τον Ερέμιν: "Νικίτα, σταμάτα να κάνεις βλακείες". Τότε συνειδητοποιώ ότι το κεφάλι μου έχει γύρει στον ώμο. Ακολούθησαν συσπάσεις στους μυς των ποδιών και της μέσης. Μπορούσαμε να αναπνεύσουμε, όχι όμως και να εκπνεύσουμε. Σοκαρίστηκα. Το νοσοκομείο στο οποίο μας μετέφεραν (σ.σ.: Γενικό Κρατικό Νίκαιας), θύμιζε κλινική σοβιετικής περιόδου. Οι γιατροί όταν μας είδαν πανικοβλήθηκαν. Στην αρχή νόμισαν ότι ήμαστε ναρκομανείς και άρχισαν να μας ρωτάνε κάποια γελοία πράγματα. Στη συνέχεια έκριναν ότι κάτι είχαμε καταπιεί και μας πήγαν για ακτινογραφίες».
Κόρνιεφ (παίκτης): «Εμένα με μετέφεραν στο νοσοκομείο λίγες ώρες πριν από την έναρξη του αγώνα. Κατά τη διαδρομή προς το στάδιο αισθάνθηκα σπασμούς στους μυς της πλάτης».
Αβραμένκο (γιατρός): «Για πρώτη φορά στην καριέρα μου αντιμετώπιζα ένα τέτοιο περιστατικό. Είχαν διπλώσει η μέση και τα χέρια του Κουντέλιν και του Μοργκουνόφ, ενώ και οι δύο αισθάνονταν ασφυξία. Οι έλληνες γιατροί τα είχαν χαμένα. Κανείς δεν ήξερε τι να κάνει».
Γιουρκόφ (διευθυντής ΤΣΣΚΑ): «Μετά την προπόνηση ο Πανόφ ήταν ο τρίτος τον οποίο μετέφεραν με τις πρώτες βοήθειες στο νοσοκομείο. Δεν γνωρίζαμε σε ποιο νοσοκομείο είχαν μεταφερθεί ο Κουντέλιν με τον Μοργκουνόφ και τον πήγαν σε κάποιο άλλο (σ.σ.: Ερυθρός Σταυρός). Ο Πανόφ εκτός των άλλων, έβγαζε αφρούς από το στόμα. Αναγκάστηκα να φωνάξω με όλη μου τη δύναμη βοήθεια για να ασχοληθούν έγκαιρα μαζί του. Στη Μόσχα μάς εξήγησαν αργότερα ότι μπορούσε να είχε πάθει αναπνευστική ανεπάρκεια, να πέσει σε κώμα και να σταματήσει η καρδιά του».
Τα σενάρια για τους αυτουργούς
«Οι Ελληνες ως σήμερα αρνούνται ότι είχαν κάποια σχέση με τη δηλητηρίαση. Ομως η ουσία αλοπεριντίν πώς μπήκε στα μπουκάλια με το νερό; Δεν νομίζω βέβαια ότι έγινε από τον Ολυμπιακό. Θα ήταν ευκολότερο να αγοράσει τους διαιτητές. Εξάλλου ήταν τότε μία από τις πλουσιότερες ομάδες. Κατά τη γνώμη μου, τη ζημιά την έκαναν οι οπαδοί» υποστηρίζει ο γιατρός της ΤΣΣΚΑ Βιτάλι Αβραμένκο.
Ο κ. Ερέμιν υποστηρίζει με βεβαιότητα ότι δεν είχε καμία σχέση ο επίσημος Ολυμπιακός και ρίχνει την ευθύνη σε εκείνους «οι οποίοι θα έχαναν χρήματα σε περίπτωση ήττας του Ολυμπιακού». ο κομισάριος του αγώνα επισημαίνει ότι αργότερα έφτασε στα αφτιά του η άποψη ότι οι παίκτες της ΤΣΣΚΑ δηλητηριάστηκαν σε κάποιο εστιατόριο όπου πήγαν για φαγητό. Ο κ. Λαζάροφ συμπληρώνει επίσης ότι υπάρχουν και εκείνοι που υποστηρίζουν ότι «οι παίκτες της ΤΣΣΚΑ δηλητηριάστηκαν μόνοι τους και για πάρα πολλά χρήματα»...
Τέλος, ενδιαφέρον έχουν οι (τωρινοί) ισχυρισμοί δύο Ρώσων. Ο παίκτης Σπιριντόνοφ λέει ότι υποχρεώθηκε να βάλει τέλος στην καριέρα του νωρίτερα του αναμενομένου, επειδή αντιμετώπισε προβλήματα στα νεφρά και στο συκώτι μετά τα όσα έγιναν στον Πειραιά και παρά το γεγονός ότι τότε ο οργανισμός του είχε αντέξει και δεν μεταφέρθηκε στο νοσοκομείο. Επίσης ο διευθυντής της ΤΣΣΚΑ κ. Γιουρκόφ αναφέρει ότι την επίμαχη ημέρα τούς πλησίασαν άνθρωποι του Παναθηναϊκού οι οποίοι προσφέρθηκαν να τους βοηθήσουν ώστε να γίνουν στην Ελλάδα οι αναλύσεις του νερού από το οποίο υποστηρίζουν οι Ρώσοι ότι δηλητηριάστηκαν.
Με δέκα εναντίον πέντε!
Ιδού για την ιστορία και το «φιλμ» του τρίτου και... φαρμακερού αγώνα της 16ης Μαρτίου 1995: ΟΛΥΜΠΙΑΚΟΣ - ΤΣΣΚΑ 79-54 (ημίχρ. 37-32). Οι συνθέσεις των ομάδων και οι πόντοι:
ΟΛΥΜΠΙΑΚΟΣ: Τζόνσον 24, Βολκόφ 6, Φασούλας 9, Τόμιτς 5, Σιγάλας 3, Τάρλατς 7, Νάκιτς 17, Λημνιάτης 4, Παπαδάκης 2, Σταμάτης 2.
ΤΣΣΚΑ ΜΟΣΧΑΣ: Γκρέζιν 8, Σπιριντόνοφ 21, Κουρασόφ 5, Βαντέεφ 6, Κισούριν 14.
Διαιτητές: Ντάγκαν (Ισραήλ) - Κατσάρο (Ιταλία).
Who polled the Russian basketball players with a psychotropic medication?
The protagonists of Olympiacos - CSKA (79-54) remember what happened on March 16, 1995 at the Peace and Friendship Stadium when five out of the ten Muscovite team players instead of the stadium were found to be Haloperidin poisoned, in Piraeus and Athens hospitals!
Ten years have passed since March 16, 1995, and Olympiakos's third game with CSKA Moscow (79-54) at the Peace and Friendship Stadium for the quarter-finals of Euroleague, which five of the ten former Red Army's basketball team attended poisoned by the hospital. The Russian newspaper "Sports Express" has now opened the case of that match, which is certainly the most grim side of the (basketball) history of Greek basketball. Players of both teams, especially the CSKA Technical Coach and the Commissar of the Race, bring back to their memory what they have dramatically experienced on that day. The Russians are categorical that a large dose of haloperidin or haloperidoly has been detected in the water bottles that were on their counter during the second race, which - according to the doctors - is given in cases of acute stimulatory status of the patient has side effects similar to those caused by strychnine. Ogorgunov, Kundelin, Korniev, Karasev and Panov argue that their lives were also endangered by the weakness of Greek doctors to help them. CSKA coach Stanislaw Eremine said he had to fight with the other five players he had available because his team was even threatened by the Bulgarian football team with a fine for the season. The Commissar opposes that Greek physicians verbally assured him that the Russians ... had nothing to do and would normally give this to the game. Ten years later, it would be a lie to claim that he knows the whole truth. It should be noted, however, that last year there was a similar case with the contaminated waters of Akratitos in the football match with Hercules and in which the same psychotropic medication was detected. In this respect, the opinion of the protagonists and the victims on March 16, 1995 still has a special value today.
With five Muscovite team players in the hospital, one wonders why the Olympiacos - CSKA game has not been postponed for two to three days. According to the then CSKA director Yuriy Yurkov, on the day of the match a meeting took place at the hotel, in which, apart from him, participated the coach of the team Stanislav Eremine, the president of the club Michael Resnikov and the former coach of the team Aleksandr Gomelsky.
"We all agreed that some had poisoned the players, but obviously for patriotic reasons, the view was that we must fight," Mr. Yurkov said in Sport Spy now. Mr. Eremine argues that the decision to fight was the result of the fear of economic sanctions. The CSKA coach accuses FIBA of "insisting on playing the game first and then investigating the causes".
* The contract and the threat to a fine
Bulgarian coach of the match, Mr. Valentin Lazarov, bears the responsibility for conducting the match to the Greek doctors. "At noon they informed me that some CSKA players are in the hospital, probably poisoned. G?melski told me that maybe CSKA will not be able to fill in five. He even contacted FIBA Secretary General Stankovic, who told him that FIBA did not want to deal with the issue. I then contacted the Greek doctors who assured me that the players of CSKA have nothing serious about. I suggested to Olympiacos to move the game a couple or two times a day. The Pereas' group manager showed me the TV contract, asking the question who will pay the consequences in case of a complaint. Believe me, he spoke of a very large amount. After that I could not move the game, "says Lazarov.
The opinion that Mr Reznikov and Mr Gomelsky insisted on the fight is also supported by CSKA doctor Oleg Parfyanov. "The CSKA coaches did not want to pull down the team on the court, but Resnikov and Gomelski, despite not wanting to be charged, insisted that the club was in danger of fining from $ 50,000 to $ 100,000."
The five players that Mr Eremine had at his disposal are true heroically fought. In the 16th minute they were 28-27. In the 5th minute of the second half, Kurasov is eliminated with five fouls. Six minutes and ten seconds before the end, Sprintonov is injured and CSKA continues with three players! According to Sport Express, the (then) coach of Olympiacos Yannis Ioannidis' answer by pressing. Five against three. When the difference reaches 20 points, Ioannides decides to play the game on the straight, three against three. "
As the CSKA coach confessed, he thought he might leave his team with two players and stop the game. In this case "the scandal for Olympiacos would have been a given and the game would be all over Europe and the FIBA Disciplinary Committee. I commanded Vadeyev to undergo a fifth foul to interrupt the game. Spirintonov did not realize my command and seeing the team stay with two players standing up and continuing injured. "
* The testimonies Tomic, Volkov and Sigala
An Olympic newspaper's survey of what happened in that game was also expressed by Olympiacos basketball players. "When we learned that we would play ten against five, we did not feel well. Ioannides was particularly annoyed by our performance and at halftime we heard of the car, "recalls Milan Tomic.
Player of Olympiacos was then Ukrainian Aleksandr Volkov. "I was afraid of the CSKA players who were between life and death. I asked Joanidis not to fight. In the first half he did not hear me. But seeing the expression on my face sat on the bench and did not put me back in the game, "he remembers now.
However, the possibility of the interruption of the game was discussed by the then head of Olympiacos Giorgos Sigalas with Mr. Ioannidis. "We did not make a decision. Maybe we should immediately play with the same number of players. The opponent with his performance did not give us this opportunity. I take the hat to CSKA players. What they did was a feat, "Sigalas says today.
Hallucinations, muscle aches and paralysis symptoms
Here are some extracts from the current testimonies of CSKA players, doctors and actors about exactly what happened on March 16, 1995:
Eremin (coach): "In Moscow we have dismantled Olympic 95-65. To qualify for the Final we needed a win in both Athens games. The second match took place on March 14th. Olympiacos defeated very hard and not without the help of the referees with 86-77. On the eve of the third race, the incredible ... ".
Barcode: "Before the first game, the hosts, as usual, placed bottles of water on the bench of our team that were sealed. In the warm-up and during the race, they drank the whole team. After the fight I asked the players to get some bottles at the hotel. Morgunov took one and as he pushed it to pick it up, he saw that there was a leak. None of us gave much attention. "
Kissouin (player): "In the morning with Karasev we went for coffee. We walked 50m to the cafeteria and we felt shabby. We sat in the chair. If possible, we thought. Last night we were flying. Vasily starts to have contractions on the face. We went back to the hotel and went straight to the team doctor. He injected us with a moment of relief. Immediately after the game I felt depressed, melancholy. "If I had a pistol at the moment I would sue," Karasheff says. "And I did the same thing" I replied. "
Kundelin (player): "In the hotel I started to have hallucinations. The one room was shaking like a rubber, the other before me appeared in ancient vases. At that time I felt I was suffering from cerebral palsy. I could not exhale, I had a problem in the lungs, and the daughters of my eyes were trying to throw themselves out. "
Morgunov (player): "Before the training, the whole team seemed sleepy. Personally I felt grom moments to momentsthat I did not control myself. When I warm up, I start the shit on the dashboard when I hear Eremin: "Nikita, stop doing stupid things." Then I realize that my head is on the shoulder. There were contractions in the muscles of the legs and the waist. We could breathe, but not exhale. I was shocked. The hospital in which they were transported to us (General State Nicaea) which reminded a clinic from the Soviet period. The doctors when they saw us panicked. At first they thought we were drug addicts, and they were asking us some ridiculous things. Then they felt that something had been swallowed and they were taken to X-rays. "
Kornieff (player): "They took me to the hospital a few hours before the start of the match. On the way to the stage I felt spasms in my back muscles. "
Avramenko (Doctor): "For the first time in my career I was facing such an incident. They had folded the waist and arms of Kundelin and Morgunov, both of them feeling asphyxiated. The Greek doctors were lost. No one knew what to do ".
Yurkoff (Director of CSKA): "After the training, Panov was the third person to carry with the first aid to the hospital. We did not know in which hospital Kundelin had been transferred to Morgunov and went to another hospital (Red Cross). Panof, among other things, made foam from his mouth. I have been forced to shout with all my power to help me deal with it in time. In Moscow, they later explained to us that he might have suffered respiratory failure, falling into a coma and stopping his heart. "
Scenarios for perpetrators
"To date, Greeks deny that they have a relationship with poisoning. But what did the haloperidin stuff get into the bottles with water? I do not think it was Olympiacos. It would be easier to buy the referees. It was then one of the richest groups. In my opinion, the fans did the damage, "says CSKA doctor Vitali Abramenko.
Mr. Eremine asserts with certainty that the official Olympiacos has nothing to do with the responsibility of those who "would lose money in the event of the defeat of Olympiakos". The commissar of the match points out that later he came to the ears of the opinion that CSKA players were poisoned in a restaurant where they went to eat. Lazarov also says there are those who claim that "CSKA players were poisoned by themselves for too much money" ...
Finally, the (current) claims of two Russians are interesting. Spirintonov says he had to put an end to his career earlier than expected, because he had problems with the kidneys and the liver after what was done in Piraeus and despite the fact that his body had endured and was not transferred to the hospital. Also, CSKA Director Yurkov reports that Panathinaikos' people approached the day in question, who offered to help them make water analyzes in Greece, which the Russians claim to be poisoned.
With ten against five!
Here is the story and the "film" of the third and ... most decisive match of 16 March 1995: OLYMPIAKOS - CSKA 79-54 (semifinals 37-32). Team compositions and points:
OLYMPIAKOS: Johnson 24, Volkov 6, Fasoulas 9, Tomic 5, Sigalas 3, Tarlac 7, Nacic 17, Limnias 4, Papadakis 2, Stamatis 2.
TSKA MOSCHAS: Grezin 8, Sprintonov 21, Kurasov 5, Vadeev 6, 14 Kissurin.
Referees: Dagan (Israel) - Katsaro (Italy).
Should the use of neuroleptics be severely limited?
Peter Breggin
The neuroleptics drugs have gradually become promoted as
agents with a specific" antipsychotic" effect on schizophrenic
symptoms. Meanwhile, psychosocial approaches have fallen
into disrepute among many psychiatrists. Patients have been
instructed to remain on neuroleptics for a lifetime and told
that it was safe to do so. The public was told that the
"miracle" drugs had emptied the hospitals and returned
millions of patients to normal lives.
the reality
In 1973, psychiatrist George Crane gained the attention of the
medical community by disclosing that many, and perhaps
most, long-term neuroleptic patients were developing a
largely irreversible, untreatable neurological disorder, tardive
dyskinesia (Crane, 1973). The disease, even its mild forms, is
often disfiguring, with involuntary movements of the face,
mouth or tongue. Frequently, the patients grimace in a
manner that makes them look "crazy", undermining their
credibility with other people. In more severe cases, patients
become disabled by twitches, spasms, and other abnormal
movements of any muscle groups, including those of the neck,
shoulders, back, arms and legs, and hands and feet (American
Psychiatric Association, 1992; Breggin, 1983; 1990; 1991). The
muscles of respiration and speech can also be impaired. In the
worst cases, patients thrash about continually.
The rates for tardive dyskinesia are astronomical. The latest
estimate from the American Psychiatric Association (1992,
p.68) indicates a rate for all patients of five per cent per year,
so that 15 per cent of patients develop tardive dyskinesia
within only three years. In long-term studies, the prevalence of
tardive dyskinesia often exceeds 50 per cent of all treated
patients and is probably much higher. The disease affects
people of all ages, including children, but among older
patients rates escalate. In a controlled study, 41 per cent of
patients aged 65 and older developed tardive dyskinesia in a
mere 24 months (Yassa et aI., 1988). Hundreds of thousands of older people
receive these drugs in nursing homes and state hospitals.
Other closely related, untreatable neurological disorders have now been
recognised as variants of tardive dyskinesia. Tardive akathisia involves painful
feelings of inner tension and anxiety and a compulsive drive to move the body. In
the extreme, the individual undergoes internal torture and can no longer sit still.
Tardive akathisia often develops in children who have been treated for
"hyperactivity", ironically and tragica lly subjecting them to permanent inner
torture. Tardive dystonia involves muscle spasms, frequently of the face, neck and
shoulders, and it too can be disfiguring, disabling and agonizing.
There are no accurate surveys of the total number of patients afflicted with
tardive dyskinesia. There are probably a million or more tardive dyskinesia
patients in the United States today, and tens of millions have been afflicted
throughout the world since the inception of neuroleptic treatment (Breggin, 1991).
Despite this tragic situation, psychiatrists too often fail to give proper warning to
patients and their families. Often psychiatrists fail to notice that their patients are
suffering from tardive dyskinesia, even when the symptoms are flagrant (Brown
and Funk, 1986; Breggin, 1991).
In 1983 I published the first in-depth analysis of the vulnerability of children to a
particularly virulent form of the tardive dyskinesia that attacks the muscles of the
trunk, making it difficult for them to stand or walk. This is now an established fact.
In the same medical book, I offered the first detailed documentation showing that
many or most tardive dyskinesia patients also show signs of dementia-an
irreversible loss of overall higher brain and mental function. Indeed, it was
inevitable that these losses would occur. The basal ganglia, which are afflicted in
tardive dyskinesia, are richly interconnected with the higher centres of the brain,
so that their dysfunction almost inevitably leads to disturbances in cognitive
processes (for the functional neuroanatomy, see Alheid et aI., 1990). Since my
observations, a multitude of studies have confirmed that long-term neuroleptic use
is associated with both cognitive deterioration and atrophy of the brain (Breggin,
1990; Gualtieri and Barnhill, 1988). While defenders of the drugs sometimes claim
that this mental and neurological deterioration is caused by schizophrenia itself,
their position is untenable. More than 100 years of autopsy studies of patients
labelled as schizophrenic failed to show any such deterioration, until the recent
advent of neuroleptics.
Growing evidence indicates that these drugs produce tardive psychoses that are
irreversible and more severe than the patients' prior problems. In children,
permanent behavioural or mental disorders frequently develop as a result of the
drugs (Gualtieri and Barnhill, 1988). Furthermore, drug withdrawal often causes
rebound of the anticholinergic neurotransmitter system, resulting in a flu-like
syndrome that includes emotional upset, insomnia, nausea and vomiting. Many
patients find themselves unable to stop taking the drugs, suggesting that we
should consider them as addictive (Breggin, 1989a, 1989b).
Shocking as it may seem, this brief review can only scratch the surface of
neurological disorders associated with these drugs, let alone the vast number of
other potentially serious side effects. For example, in a small percentage of patients
the neuroleptic reaction goes out of control, producing neuroleptic malignant
syndrome. The disorder is indistinguishable from an acute inflammation of the
brain comparable to lethargic encephalitis (Breggin, 1990, 1991) and can be fatal.
Given that these are exceedingly dangerous drugs, what about their
advantages? How do they "work"? It is well known that these drugs suppress
dopamine neurotransmission in the brain, directly impairing the function of the
basal ganglia and the emotion-regulating limbic system and frontal lobes and
indirectly impairing the reticular activating system as well. The overall impact is a
chemical lobotomy-literally so, since frontal lobe function is suppressed (Breggin,
1983, 1991). The patient becomes de-energised or de-enervated. Will or volition is
crushed, and passivity and docility are induced. The patient complains less and
becomes more manageable. Despite the claims made for symptom cure, multiple
clinical studies document a non-specific emotional flattening or blunting effect
(reviewed in Breggin 1983, 1991).
There is no significant body of research to prove that neuroleptics have any
specific effect on psychotic symptoms, such as hallucinations and delusions. To the contrary, these remain rather resistant to the drugs. The neuroleptics mainly
suppress aggression, rebelliousness, and spontaneous activity in general. This is
why they are effective whenever and wherever social control is at a premium, such
as in mental hospitals, nursing homes, prisons, institutions for persons with
developmental disabilities, children's facilities and public clinics, as well as in
Russian and Cuban psychiatric political prisons. Their widespread use for social
control in such a wide variety of people and institutions makes the claim that they
are specific for schizophrenia ridiculous. (They are even used in veterinary
medicine to bend or subdue the will of animals. When one of our dogs was given a
neuroleptic for car sickness, our daughter observed, "He's behaving himself for
the first time in his life".)
The neuroleptics are supposedly most effective in treating the acute phase of
schizophrenia, but a recent definitive review of controlled studies showed that
they perform no better than sedatives or narcotics and even no better than placebo
(Keck et aI., 1989). One psychiatrist (Turns, 1990) responded to these revelations
with anguished questions: "Has our clinical judgement about the efficacy of
anti psychotics been a fixed, encapsulated, delusional perception . .. Are we back to
square one in antipsychotic psychopharmacology?".
That the neuroleptics emptied the U.s. mental hospitals is a myth. The drugs
were in widespread use as early as 1954 and 1955, but the hospital population did
not decline until nearly ten years later, starting in 1963. That year the federal
government first provided disability insurance coverage for mental disorders. The
States could at last relieve themselves of the financial burden by refusing
admission to new patients and by discharging old ones. The discharged patients,
callously abandoned by psychiatry, received a small federal check for their
support in other facilities, such as nursing or board and care homes. Some patients
went home as dependents while others went onto the streets. Follow-up studies
show that very, very few patients became independent or led better lives following
these new policies (Mosher and Burti, 1989; Breggin, 1991).
But are there better psychosocial alternatives? Controlled studies by Loren
Mosher have shown that patients diagnosed with acute schizophrenia improve
better without medication in small home-like settings run by non-professional staff
who know how to listen and to care (Mosher and Burti, 1989). The patients become
more independent, and do so at no greater financial cost, because non-professional
salaries are so much lower. As an enormous added benefit, the drug-free patients
do not get tardive dyskinesia or tardive dementia, as well as other drug-induced
and sometimes life-threatening disorders.
Controlled studies by Karon and Vandenbos (1981) indicate that even in
traditional psychiatric facilities psychotherapy is the treatment of choice for
patients labelled as schizophrenic. My own experience in psychiatry began as a
college student volunteer in a State mental hospital. We proved that untrained
college students, with only minimal supervision, could work as case aides to help
nearly all of our chronic patients leave the hospital (Breggin, 1991).
But isn't schizophrenia a biochemical and genetic disease? In reality, there's no
convincing evidence that schizophrenia is a biochemical disorder. While there are
a host of conjectures about biochemical imbalances, the only ones we know of in
the brains of mental patients are those produced by the drugs. Similarly, no
substantial evidence exists for a genetic basis of schizophrenia. The frequently
cited Scandinavian genetic studies (Kety et aI., 1975; reviewed in Breggin, 1991)
actually confirm an environmental factor while disproving a genetic one. Such
conclusions may seem incredible to readers who have been bombarded With
psychiatric propaganda, and I can only hope they will personally review the
literature and read Toxic Psychiatry for a review and analysis. But even if
schizophrenia were a brain disease, it would not make sense to add further brain
damage and dysfunction by administering neuroleptics.
If the neuroleptics are so dangerous and have such limited usefulness, and if
psychosocial approaches are relatively effective, why is the profession so devoted
to the drugs? The answer lies in maintaining psychiatric power, prestige, and
income. What mainly distinguishes psychiatrists from oilier mental health
professionals, and of course from non-professionals, is their ability to prescribe
drugs. To compete against other mental health professionals, psychiatry has wed
itself to the medical model, including biological and genetic explanations, and
physical treatments. It has no choice: anything else would be professional suicide.
In providing psychosocial therapies, psychiatry cannot compete with less
expensive, more helpful non-medical therapists, so it must create myths that
support the need for medically trained psychiatrists.
After falling behind economically in competition with psychosocial approaches,
psychiatry formed what ilie American Psychiatric Association now admits is a
"partnership" with the drug companies (Sabshin, 1992). Organised psychiatry has
become wholly dependent for financial support on this unl10ly collaboration with
the pharmaceutical industry (Breggin, 1991). To deny the effectiveness of drugs or
to admit their dangerousness would result in huge economic losses on every level
from the individual psychiatrist who makes his or her living by prescribing
medication, to the American Psychiatric Association which tllfives on drug
company largesse.
If neuroleptics were used to treat anyone other than mental patients, they would
have been banned a long time ago. If ilieir use wasn't supported by powerful
interest groups, such as the pharmaceutical industry and organised psychiatry,
they would be rarely used at all. Meanwhile, the neuroleptics have produced ilie
worst epidemic of neurological disease in history. At the least, their use should be
severely curtailed.
Beyond the specific issue of the neuroleptics, there is a much broader one how
are we to understand and to show care for people who undergo emotional
pain and anguish (Breggin, 1991, 1992; Mosher and Burti, 1989). Are we to view
them as defective objects or as human beings struggling with emotional and
social problems and personal conflict? Are we to drug them into oblivion, or are
we to understand and empower them? Giving a drug disempowers the
recipient. It says, "You are helpless in the face of your problems. You need less
feeling and energy, and less brain function" . The true aim of therapy should be
to strengthen and to empower the individual. People, not pills, are the only
source of real help.
Alheid, G. F., Heimer, L. and Switzer, TTT, R. D. Basal ganglia. In G. Paxinos (ed.) The hUlIlall nervous
system. New York: Academic Press
American Psychiatric Association (1992) Taskforce 011 tardive dyskillcsin. Washington DC: APA
Breggin, P. R. (1983) Psychiatric drugs. New York: Springer
Breggin, P. R. (1989a) Addiction to neuroleptics? (letter) American JOllrnal of Psychiatry, 146, 560
Breggin, P. R. (1989b) Dr Breggin replies (follow-up letter on addiction to neuroleptics). American
JOI/TIIIlI of Psychiatry, 146, 1240
Breggin, P. R. (1990) Brain damage, dementia and persistent cognitive dyshmction associated with
neuroleptic drugs. Evidence, etiology, implications. Journal of Mind alld Behavior, 11,425-64
Breggin, P. R. (1991) Toxic psychiatry. New York: St Martin's Press
Breggin, P. R. (1992) Beyo1ld conflict. New York: St Martin's Press
Brmvll, P. and Funk, S. C. (1986) Tardive dyskinesia: barriers to professional recognition of an
iatrogenic disease. JOllrna} of Health and Social Behavior, 27, 116-32
Crane, C. (1973) Clinical psydlopharmacology in its 20th year. Science, 181, 124-8
Gualtieri, C. T. and Barnhill, L. J. (1988) Tardive dyskinesia in special populations. In M. E. Wolf and
A. D. Mosnaim (eds) Tardive dyskinesia. Washington DC: American Psychiatric Press
Karon, B. and Vandenbos, C. (1981) Tile psycJlOtherapy of scJlizophrCIJia. New York: Jason Aronson
Keck, P. E. Jr., Cohen, B. M. and Baldessarini, R. (1989) Time course of antipsychotic effects of
neuroleptic drugs. American jOllmnl of Psychiatry, 146, 1289- 92
Kety, 5., Rosenthal, D., Wender, P., Schulsinger, F. and Jacobsen, N. B. (1975) Mental ilh,ess in the
biological and adoptive families of adopted individuals who have become schizophrenic. Tn E.
Fieve, D. Rosenthal and H. Brill (eds) Ge1letic research in psychiafry. Baltimore: Jolms Hopkins
Mosher, L R. and Burti, L. (1989) ComrJllmity mellta! health. New York: Norton
Sabshin, M. (1992, 10 March) To aid understanding of mental disorders. New York Times AI 22
Turns, C. N. (1990) Effects of sedatives and neuroleptics (letter). American JOllrnal of Psychiatry, 147,
Yassa, R, Nastase, c., Camille, Y. and Belzile, L (1988) Tardive dyskinesia in a psychogeriatric
population. In M. D. Wolf and A. D. Mosnaim (eds) Tardive dyskinesia . \Nashington DC: American
Psychia trie Press
To: The International Criminal Court, at Hague
From: Mr. Christos Boumpoulis
Date: 15/5/2018
Subject: OTP-CR-158/18 related 2nd batch supplumental evidence - Christos Boumpoulis
Dear Sir\Lady,
The indigenous Greek citizens remained, abnormally, idle when the, then, Greek Government didn't unilaterally terminated the illegitimate treaty "Hugh Cooper & Co" as it had the contractual right to do so. From what it seems, this idleness can only found, literary, also to the former, Soviet, psychiatric Gulag's (Psykhoushka) prisoners.
That treaty was conducted, under the violation of the fundamental principles of the UNPA, at 1940 and was ending on 30/12/2010, six months before which, the Greek Govenrment could declare its unilateral termination; otherwise, the treaty was, non-verbally, renewed for twenty five years more.
By this illegitimate treaty, the control of the total of Greece's mineral wealth was granted to the U.S.A.
The mineral wealth of Greece worths, approximatelly, around 100 trilion euros and it is more than one hundread times the corresponding mineral wealth of Chile.
The prices of Greece's mineral products, if they could reach the international markets, as in the case that Greece would be allowed to exploit them, they would cause the significant drop of the related prices. This potential dropping of prices would cause enormous economic lossess for the United Kingdom, which possesess a vast portion (only in Africa, they worth over 1 trillion USD) of our world's mines.
This is one of the motives for, the perpetration of mental harm caused to the Greek indigenous citizens, for not defending their legitimate interests; this is one of the motives for perpetrating all this catastrophy, the so called "Greek economic crisis"; this is one of the motives for the perpetration of the unjust deaths of more than ten thousent innocent Greek civilians.
Christos Boumpoulis
Στρατηγός ε.α. Γεώργιος Αϋφαντής
Η Ελλάδα, κύριοι, που έχει ορυκτό πλούτο περισσότερο από εκατό φορές, από την Χιλή, γιατί πεινάει; Γιατί δεν μας επιτρέπουν την εκμετάλλευση. Και δεν μας επιτρέπουν την εκμετάλλευση, Κύριοι, του ορυκτού μας πλούτου, με μια παραχώρηση η οποία έγινε, κάποτε, στο παρελθόν, εις τις Αμερικανικές εταιρίες και κρατείται δεσμευμένος από την Αμερική, ο κρατικός μας πλούτος για άλλα είκοσι πέντε χρόνια.
Διότι, όταν πριν ένα χρόνο, στις τηλεοράσεις των Αθηνών, παρουσιάστηκα και εζήτησα, επειγόντως, η, τότε, Κυβέρνηση, να καταγγείλλει την σύμβαση Κούπερ, διότι, είχε ένα τρομερό άρθρο,  το τριάντα άρθρο, που έλεγε: "έξι μήνες προ της λήξεως", έληγε στις 30/12/2010, "εάν, μέχρι 30/12/2010, δεν καταγγείλλει η Ελληνική Κυβέρνηση την σύμβαση, ανανεώνεται σιωπηρώς για άλλα είκοσι πέντε χρόνια. Και επομένως, Έλληνες, προσέξτε καλά, εάν αφήσετε την ίδια Κυβέρνηση και τα ίδια κόμματα, να κυβερνούν την χώρα μας, εις το μέλλον, μετά από τις νέες εκλογές, πρέπει να ξέρετε ότι, θα είμαστε σκλάβοι για άλλα είκοσι πέντε χρόνια, διότι ανανεώθηκε η σύμβαση Κούπερ, σιωπηρώς. Και ελέγχονται όλα τα ορυκτά μας από την Αμερική.
Εάν, όμως, Έλληνες, αλλάξετε κυβερνήσεις· αλλάξετε Σύνταγμα· και ψηφίσετε Έλληνες πολιτικούς, στις ερχόμενες εκλογές και σχηματιστεί Ελληνική Κυβέρνηση, [αυτή] δύναται να θεωρήσει άκυρη τη σύμβαση Κούπερ. Διότι, πέρασαν πενήντα χρόνια χωρίς να ενεργοποιηθεί και δύναται να την καταγγείλει.
Οι σημερινοί, όμως, βουλευτές που βγάλατε, όλων των κομμάτων, καίτοι, είπα ότι, το κομμουνιστικό κόμμα έφερε ηθική υποχρέωση γιατί, εκείνος ο οποίος απεκάλυψε πρώτος την σύμβαση Κούπερ, τον ετυφέκησαν και έδωσε το αίμα του και την ζωή του, για την αποκάλυψη της συμβάσες Κούπερ, είχαν ηθικό έροισμα.
Ορθά κοφτά και ξεκάθαρα, αφού έφτασαν τριάντα χρόνια και να έχουν γίνει γεωτρήσεις, στη Θεσσαλία, στα Γρεβενά, να έχουν αποδειχθεί, αέριο και πετρέλαιο· να υπάρχει η μυστική έκθεση στο ΙΓΜΕ, το οποίο είναι, από την αρχή, ελεγχόμενο και δεν τις βγάζει τις εκθέσεις να τις δώσει στον Ελληνικό λαό και εμείς, να πεινάμε.
Ο Χίτλερ, όταν έφερε στρατεύματα κατοχής, εδώ, δούλεψαν στο χωριό Βάθη, Κιλκίς, ουράνιο. Και πήρε ουράνιο και έφτιαξε εφτά βόμβες. Το τί έγιναν οι βόμβες, θα το βρείτε στο βιβλίο μου, "Αφύπνισης". Αυτές, που ρίξανε οι Αμερικάνοι στην Χιροσίμα και Ναγκασάκι, ήταν του Χίτλερ. Δεν είχαν βόμβες, τότε, οι Αμερικάνοι. Και πάρθηκαν από το ουράνιο του Κιλκίς, χωριό Βάθη, Κιλκίς. Δούλεψε, στην Κίρκη, μεταξύ, Αλεξανδρουπόλεως και Σαπών. Κοντά στο τραίνο υπάρχει το χωριό Κίρκη. Κοντά στο χωριό αυτό, είναι τα μεταλλεία Κίρκης, τα θειούχα μικτά.
Τα θειούχα μικτά, αγαπητοί μου Έλληνες, είναι θειάφι ενωμένο, είναι η φύση έτσι, ενώνεται με πολλά μέταλλα: σίδηρο, χαλκό, χρυσό, μόλυβδο, ασήμι.
Είναι τόσο πλούσια τα μεταλλεία της Κίρκης, εις, χαλκό, ασήμι, χρυσό και μόλυβδο, που είναι τα πλουσιότερα του κόσμου.
Τα φελόνια, φελόνια λέμε, εμείς που έχουμε ασχοληθεί με τα μεταλλεία, διότι, υπόψιν, Κύριοι, εγώ έχω σπουδάσει και φυσικοχημεία και έχω ασχοληθεί με τα μεταλλεία αρκετά χρόνια. Γιατί με είχε διώξει, η Χούντα, από το στρατό, μερικά χρόνια και για να ζήσω τα παιδιά μου, επειδή ήξερα φυσική και χημεία, γύριζα τα βουνά και εύρισκα μάρμαρα και μεταλλεία και τα πούλαγα σε αυτούς που είχαν λεφτά, για να ζήσουν τα παιδιά μου. Και τα έχω πατήσει και τα γνωρίζω καλύτερα από τους ΙΓΜΕδες, που τα παίρνουν, από τα βιβλία και τους χάρτες· τα βιβλία, όμως, τα παίρνουν από την Αγγλία και την Γερμανία, όχι από δικές μας έρευνες.
Το μέταλλο που πηγαίνει μέσα στον βράχο, εάν είναι τριάντα εκατοστά, σαράντα εκατοστά, το πλάτος του, αυτό το λέμε, φελόνι. Έχει βγεί από την Ελληνική, "φλέβα".
Τα φελόνια, σε όλο τον κόσμο, που εκμεταλλεύονται, Κύριοι, σε θειούχα μικτά είναι, το ανώτερο, μισό μέτρο, εξήντα, εβδομήντα εκατοστά. Ξέρετε πόσο είναι τα φελόνια της Κίρκης; Είκοσι πέντε και τριάντα μέτρα, Κύριοι. Και είναι ανεκμετάλλευτα. Εκείνοι που έχουν, είκοσι εκατοστά, τριάντα, φελόνια, τα εκμεταλλεύονται και ζουν τους λαούς τους. Από την μέρα που έφυγε ο Χίτλερ, οι Ελληνικές Κυβερνήσεις δεν έβαλαν [ούτε] μια κασμαδιά.
Translation to English
Retired Greek Army General George Aifantis
Greece, gentlemen, who has mineral wealth more than a hundred times, than Chile's, why then is she hungry? Because they do not allow us to exploit this wealth. And they do not allow us to exploit, gentlemen, our mineral wealth, because of a concession that once happened towards the American companies and the consequence is that the U.S.A. is going to dominate the wealth of our Stat  held by America, our state wealt for another twenty-five years.
Because when a year ago, on television in Athens, I was presented and urged the government to unilaterally, terminate the Cooper contract, because it had a magnificent article, the thirty article, saying: "Six months before the ending of the contract, which it was on 30/12/2010, if, until 30/12/2010, the Greek Government does not declare the unilateral termination of the contract, it is non-verbaly renewed for another twenty-five years, and therefore, fellow Greeks, be careful if you let the same Government and the same political parties, to govern our country in the future, after the new elections, you must know that we will be slaves for another twenty-five years because the Cooper contract was renewed, silently, and all our minerals shall be controlled by the U.S.A.
If, however, fellow Greeks, you manage to change governments; to change the Constitution; and vote for Greek politicians, in the upcoming elections and consequently a Greek government becomes formed then, [she] may consider the Cooper contract void. Because, there have already been fifty years passed without, this contruct, being activated and concequently, it can become unilaterally terminated.
However, the current members of all parties, although I said that the Communist Party had a moral obligation, because the one who first revealed the Cooper's treaty was sacrificed and he gave his own blood and his own life for the revelation of Cooper's contracts, that political Party had a moral line.
Good and clear words, after thirty years of drilling, at Thessaly and Grevena, has been proven to exist as mineral reserves, gas and oil; there is a secret report at IGME, which is being manipulated from the outset and does not take its reports out for giving them to the Greek people and we, as a result, remain collectively hungry.
Hitler, when he brought troops of occupation, worked here in the village of Vathi, Kilkis, for mining uranium. And he took uranium and made seven bombs. What happened to the bombs, you'll find it in my book, "Awakening". Those, which the Americans threw at Hiroshima and Nagasaki, were Hitler's. They did not have bombs, then, the Americans. And they were taken from the uranium of Kilkis, the village of Vathi, Kilkis. He worked in Kirki village, between Alexandroupolis and Sappes. Close to the train there is the Kirki village. Close to this village, there is Kirki's mines, sulfur-mixed.
The sulfur-mixed, my dear Greeks, are chemical composites, it is from the nature, so it is joined with many metals: iron, copper, gold, lead, silver.
It is so rich the Kirki's mine, in copper, silver, gold and lead, which are the richest in the world.
The pellons, we call them so, we which are dealing with the mines, because, of course, Sirs, I have also studied physicochemistry and have been dealing with the mines for several years. Because he had thrown me away, the junta from the army for a few years and in order to brought up my children, because I knew physics and chemistry, I was making research over the mountains and I was discovering marbles and mines and then I was selling them to those who had money in order to live my children. I have see them and I know them better than the IGME's executives who get information them from the books and maps; however, the books are taken from England and Germany, not from our own domestic research.
The metal that goes into the rock, if it is thirty centimeters, forty centimeters, its width, we call it, a pellon. It has come out of the Greek word, "vein".
All over the world, exploiting, Gentlemen, in sulfur-mixed are, at most, half a meter, sixty, seventy centimeters. Do you know how much Kirki's pellons are? Twenty-five and thirty meters, Gentlemen. And it is totally unexploited. Those Nations who have, twenty centimeters, thirty, pellons, exploit and live their peoples. Since the day Hitler left, the Greek governments have not put, at Kirki's mine not even a glimpse.
Source: transcript from the Youtube video, title: "ΑΫΦΑΝΤΗΣ ΚΟΥΠΕΡ NEWSΚΟΣΜΟΣ", link:  www.youtube.com/watch?v=UiP2DlSCIBc
Britain's scramble for Africa's energy and mineral resources.
The continent of Africa is today facing a  new colonial invasion, no less devastating  in scale and impact than that which it  suffered during the nineteenth century.  As before, the new colonialism is driven  by a determination to plunder the natural  resources of Africa, especially its strategic  energy and mineral resources.  At the  forefront of this ‘scramble for Africa’ are  British companies, actively aided and  abetted by the UK government.
This report reveals the degree to which British  companies now control Africa’s key mineral  resources, notably gold, platinum, diamonds,  copper, oil, gas and coal. It documents how 101  companies listed on the London Stock Exchange  (LSE) — most of them British — have mining  operations in 37 sub-Saharan African countries.  They collectively control over $1 trillion worth  of Africa’s most valuable resources.
The UK government has used its power  and inuence to ensur e that British mining  companies have access to Africa’s raw  materials. This was the case during the colonial  period and is still the case today.
This report exposes the long term involvement  of the British government, (whether Labour or  Conservative) through its trade and investment  policies, to inuence and contr ol British  companies’ access to raw materials and the way  trade is conducted with Africa. It has been secured  through a revolving door between Whitehall and  British mining companies, with at least v e British  government ofcials taking up seats on the boar ds  of mining companies operating in Africa.  This kind of close control and inuence o ver  the political and economic systems of African  countries has enabled a company like Glencore  to show revenues 10 times that of the gross  domestic product (GDP) of Zambia.
Under the guise of the UK helping Africa in its  economic development (a mere continuation  of the colonial paternal narrative), $134  billion has owed into the continent each  year in the form of loans, foreign investment  and aid. However, the British government  has aided and abetted the extraction of  $192 billion from Africa mainly in prots b y  foreign companies, tax dodging and the cost of  adapting to climate change.
This report also highlights British mining  companies being at the forefront of  environmental degradation in Africa.  It also  shows mining operations of British companies  being associated with killings in or near mine  areas, unfair and often forced resettlement  programmes, labour rights and abuses.  War on Want believes that UK companies  must be held responsible for their extractivist  behaviour in Africa. The UK government must  be held accountable for its complicity in the  plunder. We work with grassroots communities  affected by mining in sub-Saharan Africa and  support their call for mining revenues to stay  in the countries where they are mined; for  raw materials to be processed in the countries  where they are mined to promote maximum  value addition; and for governments to act to  protect the rights of people affected by mining  rather than protecting the prot margins of corporations exploiting them.
We urge the UK public to engage in  solidarity actions here in the UK to hold   British companies and the British   government accountable.
Source: www.waronwant.org

Τελευταία Ενημέρωση στις Παρασκευή, 18 Μάιος 2018 23:18