more details to follow

The judge's argument that the Farm land was sold to Horowitz at roughly fair market value is a mockery on its face.

As far back as 1994 the City sold the land to the Harbor Department for more than twice the amount the judge called fair market value.

That's nine _years_ before it was re-sold to Horowitz. If the market value of the land _decreased_ by roughly eight million dollars over a nine year period, it will be a first in Los Angeles history.

For more detail see the link and excerpt below from Seeds of Hope, Seeds of War:Race, Class and the Battle for the South Central Farm by Leslie Radford and myself.



http://la.indymedia.org/news/2006/07/168199.php



"In 1994, as part of a broader fundraising plan, the city sold the farmland it had purchased from Horowitz for $4.7M, to the semi-autonomous Los Angeles Harbor Department for the price of $13.3M. The City had turned a significant profit on the sale of the plot to the Harbor, roughly tripling the amount it had paid to Horowitz.

"In 2000, the Harbor turned down the offer by Horowitz to use the land for the Forever 21 sweatshop. Horowitz had a ten-year option to repurchase the land, negotiated after the City took the land in 1986 for an incinerator project. Horowitz had approached the City in 1995, objecting to the sale to the Harbor, but the City Council had refused to hear him.

"By 2001, Horowitz returned to the City Council; this time, the Council flat out refused to sell the land to him.

"In 2003, the City Council abruptly reversed itself, and in closed session arranged to sell the plot back to Horowitz.

"But the City, of course, no longer owned the land it was selling. It was the Harbor's Chief of Operations who signed over the title over to Horowitz, finalizing the sale.

"The City had cut a deal with Horowitz and had pocketed the $8.6M leftover from its sale to the Harbor - plus the $5.3M it made in selling the land back to Horowitz.

"The Harbor Department confirms that is out the $13.3M, and that the City has not reimbursed it for the loss. The Harbor's budget is entirely separate from the City's. Its revenues come from Port activities, not from tax dollars.

"The Harbor's loss was the City's gain – and a massive gain for Horowitz, as well. By 2006, Deputy Mayor Larry Frank announced the value of the property at $25M. Horowitz received property now publicly stated by City officials to be worth nearly five times his cost. Twenty years of patience and two years of property taxes had netted him something over $20M.

"With the profits he may yet accrue form the re-sale of the Farm, Horowitz will have made a considerable fortune in transactions involving the City, and in his role as both manipulator and pawn in at least one highly irregular deal.

"In the end, when Villaraigosa offered to "raise" money from charitable sources to buy back the Farm from Horowitz, he had at his disposal both the profit the City had made from the Harbor Department sale, and also the money it had made in the more recent back room sale to Horowitz. The Mayor didn't have to beg money from anyone. He didn't have to lose a moment. He only had to use the massive profits from the land to buy it back.

"To do so of course, would be problematic; it could only emphasize a question the Farmers are asking this week in court – "Why would the City sell land to Horowitz for $5.3M when it was worth at least three times that amount"? Especially when the City had already sold it once before for triple that amount?

"Using City funds to buy back property from Horowitz for $16M – the same property that it had just sold to him for $5.3M - could only raise questions the Mayor didn't want asked. Like, "Where would the City's money come from"? And, "How can the City sell land it doesn't own"? And, "What happened in the closed session as the Council sold the land back to Horowitz?" These are questions the Mayor and the City don't want asked – or answered. The Council records of the transaction are sealed."

Justice is served...

One problem with government mediated land disputes at South Central community Farm dates back to 'corporate personhood' laws enabling corporations like the modern Libaw-Horowitz investment group to own any land that they desired. Corporations are not people and cannot legally own land beyond their initial charters. (Outside question; should corporations even exist?) The recent conflict between the campesino SC farmers and development CEO Horowitz would not have occurred since Libaw-Horowitz wouldn't have been able to consume more land over time in his characteristically ruthless manner..

Prior to the late 1800's corporations were kept in check by anti-trust laws. The anti-slavery laws in place after the Civil War that granted African-americans full rights as human beings were quickly usurped by corporations instead..

"Here are a few examples of how different the rules were in the US until the late 1800's. In many states, corporations were prohibited from owning other corporations, prohibited from donating to political candidates or charitable organizations, and prohibited from owning any land beyond what was necessary for the carrying out of their chartered duties. Boards of directors and stockholders were held personally liable for all harms and debts. The ‘limited liability corporation’, as we know it today, did not exist."

more on abolishing corporate personhood @;

http://www.corporations.org/afd-paradigm-shift.html

When corporations exhibit greater control over people on regular basis, something is clearly wrong with society. What people are rushing into as they overconsume petroleum derived products is the impending wall of eco-collapse. The south central community farm is the beginning of an interconnected universal safety net of greenspaces that can physically show people other sustainable alternatives to petrol dependency. However, the petro-cartel of corporations and Bush/Cheney regime politicos that currently runs the US is deeply threatened by overt displays of self-sufficiency and sustainability..

("What if others get the same idea? What if they grow their own food for free then they won't buy our corporate made products anymore? Let's call our pal Horowitz.")

Conspiracy theories about petro-cartels secretly planning to destroy organic community farms aside, the Libaw-Horowitz corporation's greatest blunder may have been their eagerness to destroy the SC farm via Caterpillar bulldozers, police, etc.. and using corporate media PR to villify the SC campesinos as "anti-Semites". The misuse of anti-Semitism by powerful capitalists like Horowitz AND supporters of Zionist Israeli apartheid is not looked upon with favor by people who are aware of real racism. Horowitz relies on police enforcement of Eurocentric corporate property laws to support his theft of land from indigenous Meso-american (Mexican) campesino farmers. The evicted campesinos are putting Madre Tierra to much better use at SC farm than Horowitz's corporation ever will with another sweatshop (Forever 21?) warehouse in the concrete wasteland of LA. Horowitz's deceitful "anti-Semite" slander campaign against campesinos will only magnify racist Eurocentric domination and exploitation of the original indigenous inhabitants of the americas (north, meso, south) to (inter)national observers. Furthermore, the misuse of anti-Semitism is deeply tied into the racist neocolonialist mentality of US "Manifest Destiny" imperialists..

"In his 2000 book The Holocaust Industry: Reflections on the Exploitation of Jewish Suffering, scholar and critic Norman Finkelstein convincingly argues three general points. First, since the 1967 war and Israel's military alliance with the United States, the Nazi holocaust-a historical event-has become the Holocaust, a narrow and ideologically-driven Zionist interpretation of that genocide that has been used to justify Israeli and American policies, and aggrandize Jewish-American elites in the halls of power. Second, and concurrently since 1967, a Holocaust literature has evolved apart from credible historical scholarship about the Nazi holocaust, the former which is without scholarly merit and is often fraudulent. Holocaust literature, most notably that of Elie Wiesel, has propagated specious notions of the "uniqueness" of the Holocaust and the eternal nature of anti-Semitism, both of which serve to silence criticism of Israel."

more on misuse of anti-Semitism @;

http://www.counterpunch.org/green03192005.html

Another reason for discussing the misuse and monopolization of the term "genocide" and "holocaust" by pro-Israeli think tanks is the lack of coverage given to the genocide of indigenous peoples of the americas following the arrival of Cristobal Colon, leading up til the present. We could compare the demolition of an organic community garden that contains medicinal plants from throughout the americas with the slaughter of bison in the north american midwest, the intent being to deprive natives of the plains of their traditional food, housing clothing source, leaving them to starve hungry and cold in the winter..

Infamous author/teacher Ward Churchill (yeah, owner of the "9/11 victims = little Eichmann" comments) had already published info on genocide of Native Americans ("A Little Matter of Genocide") before his temper got the better of him and he made those infamous and innaccurate post-9/11 remarks he's now known for. That doesn't mean we should throw the baby out with the bathwater as many of his writings are detailed, relevent and accurate. Would recommend Ward's book to campesinos and their allies at south central farm for historical references of broken land treaties, forced relocations and genocide of indigenous americans as this continues today..

"A Little Matter of Genocide; Holocaust and Denial in the Americas, 1492 to the Present" @;

http://www.citylights.com/pub/catalog/BClittlematter.html

When dealing with Meso-american indigenous peoples at sc farm, their realistic options today are limited to either to work in virtual below minimum wage-slavery for a non-sustainable plantation agriculture corporation exposed to toxic pesticides, OR to commune with indigenous medicinal plant crop diversity in the healthy greenspace of SC community farm, neither slave nor owner..

In most cases the first choice (wage-slavery on plantation) would have resulted in an early demise after life of physical, emotional and spiritual hardships. The second choice (sustainable biodiverse community sc farm) would have resulted in a fulfilling life in harmony with seasons, neighbors, friends, la familia, la tierra, etc..

What Horowitz and the establishment of LA decided was that the second choice was no longer an option. Being that Horowitz is in the position of Eurocolonialist, his actions contribute to the genocide of indigenous meso-americans who were forcibly relocated to LA from their homes in Mexico (or elsewhere) from economic inequality (same WTO/NAFTA based policies that punish Mexicans and reward capitalist corporate CEOs like Horowitz) and then relocated a second time by Horowitz's hired bulldozers, who demolished their medicinal and food plants at sc farm in the process. When the people's war crimes tribunal finally arrives in the US, following Bush/Cheney's trial people also will demand justice for people's emotional and physical injuries at the hands of all the petite bourgeosis land barons like Horowitz and return of ALL lands stolen by corporate criminals..

Thanks again to all the campesinos and their supporters who remain strong like old growth trees against the invasive bulldozers of imperialism and colonialism..

Now that the SC community farm has become an (inter)national issue, the concept of campesino community farms can be amplified throughout the world, as happened in Cuba following their "Special Period" of petrochemical pesticide/herbicide/fertilizer embargo. As peak oil approaches, people in the US would be wise to learn from SC farm's crop diversity symbiosis before peak oil hits..

"Clara Irazábal, Professor of Policy, Planning, and Development at the University of Southern California framed the issue this way:

[T]he relevant question is not whether this urban farm should be preserved. This is the wrong question and one that diminishes the stature of your office and the trust we have invested in you. The question is, rather, how can we best help multiply urban farms like this one throughout Los Angeles and cities of the Americas and the world. As the era of oil inescapably comes to an end, we are going to be faced with the need, whether we like it or not, to live more compactly, thrifty, cooperatively, and in more direct connection with, and responsible for, the production of our own food. In this context, not only [sic] does the South Central Farm not constitute a backward use of land in one of the largest and more prominent and modern cities of the world. Instead, it is a model for the future (and the future is now), one that can support the survival of our growing urban civilization. Maintaining the South Central Farm, Los Angeles and you as its mayor have the unique opportunity to become world visionaries and trail breakers.11 "

more on SC farm, Cuban organic farms, peak oil, etc..

@;

http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/032206_war_past.shtml