Tuesday, September 03, 2013

BAUAW NEWSLETTER: TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 3, 2013

Tell Congress, NO New War on Syria!

Bay Area March & Rally in Solidarity w/Mass Protest at Capitol in DC

Petition the Obama Administration to:

Restore the United States’ human rights record and grant clemency to Pvt. Bradley Manning!

The prosecution of Private Manning starkly contrasts to the US govt's repeated failure to deliver justice for serious human rights violations committed during counter-terror operations of the past decade.

Manning, who released classified information exposing potential breaches of international humanitarian law by US forces, was sentenced in military court on Aug 21st to 35 yrs in prison.
Manning's severe sentence contrasts with the leniency given those responsible for torture and other types of grave human rights violations he revealed.

To reduce this blight on the US human rights record, President Obama should grant Manning clemency for time served, protect whistleblowers, and provide accountability for crimes like those Manning exposed.

AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL
PARDON.BRADLEYMANNING.ORG

Created: Aug 20, 2013

https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/restore-united-states%E2%80%99-human-rights-record-and-grant-clemency-pvt-bradley-manning/L7zHZv4r

Announcing the Private Manning Support Network!

http://www.bradleymanning.org/featured/announcing-the-private-manning-support-network

August 26, 2013, By David Edward Coombs and the Private Manning Support Network (formerly the Bradley Manning Support Network)

Additional clarification on PVT Manning’s request

On Thursday, August 22, 2013, a day following the sentencing verdict for the court-martial of United States v. PFC Bradley E. Manning, PVT Manning, who has experienced gender dysphoria and gone through a process of gender questioning and exploration for years, announced that she would like to begin to be known publicly by the name of Chelsea Elizabeth Manning, pursue hormone therapy and be referred to with female pronouns.

While PVT Manning wants supporters to acknowledge and respect her gender identity as she proceeds into the post-trial state of her life, she also expects that the name Bradley Manning and the male pronoun will continue to be used in certain instances. These instances include any reference to the trial, in legal documents, in communication with the government, in the current petition to the White House calling for clemency, and on the envelope of letters written to her by supporters. She also expects that many old photos and graphics will remain in use for the time being.

In response to PVT Manning’s announcement, the Bradley Manning Support Network is changing its name to the Private Manning Support Network, and will work on changing other frequently used parts of its website and materials to incorporate the name Chelsea and the female pronoun. However, completing this process may take some time.

The Support Network has played an important role in organizing public support for PVT Manning since her arrest, and in raising funds to cover 100% of her legal fees. The Support Network will continue its political advocacy efforts to support PVT Manning through this new phase of her life by raising money for the appeals process, advocating for clemency from the Convening Authority and the President and supporting PVT Manning’s right to appropriate medical treatment while imprisoned.

Thank you all for supporting our efforts over the years. The fight for PVT Manning’s freedom is far from over, but we take hope from the many caring and compassionate people who have taken time out of their day to write to her, to sign petitions, to attend the court-martial and to join protests and other actions around the world. We hope you will help us continue this important work to bring truth and transparency to the forefront of America’s conscious. And we hope you will continue to support PVT Manning, a humanist that we have already learned a great deal from, and who we believe still has much to offer this world.

Sincerely,
–David Edward Coombs
–Private Manning Support Network
(formerly the Bradley Manning Support Network)
The Private Manning Support Network continues to be responsible for 100% of Manning's legal fees, as well as international education efforts. Funded by over 22,000 individuals, the Support Network has mustered $1.4 million in Manning's defense.To support our efforts to free Bradley during this next phase of struggle, please donate.
http://ymlp.com/zuPp2k

COURAGE TO RESIST
http://couragetoresist.org
http://bradleymanning.org
484 Lake Park Ave #41, Oakland CA 94610
510-488-3559
For more info about Bradley Manning:http://bradleymanning.org

Write to Bradley Manning:
Commander, HHC USAG
Attn: PFC Bradley Manning
239 Sheridan Ave, Bldg 417
JBM-HH, VA 22211

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

Lawyers' Rights Watch Canada 08/14/13

letter on behalf of Lynne Stewart

FULL TEXT OF ATTACHED LETTER FROM LAWYERS' RIGHTS WATCH CANADA TO U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL ERIC HOLDER, FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS DIRECTOR CHARLES E. SAMUELS, JR. AMPLIFIED BY COMMUNICATIONS TO UNITED NATIONS HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION AGENCIES ON THE OBLIGATION IN INTERNATIONAL LAW TO MANDATE THE IMMEDIATE RELEASE OF LYNNE STEWART FOR ADVANCED MEDICAL TREATMENT AT MEMORIAL SLOAN-KETTERING CANCER CENTER:

Subject: Lawyers' Rights Watch Canada 08/14/13 letter

FULL TEXT:

LAWYERS' RIGHTS WATCH CANADA

Letter to U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder and Federal Bureau of Prisons Director Charles E. Samuels, Jr.

Wednesday, August 14, 2013

Dear Sirs;

Re: International law duty to release Lynne Stewart for medical treatment at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center.

LRWC writes to:

-- alert you to the international law that imposes a duty on the United States to ensure that Lynne Stewart is released immediately for the treatment recommended at the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center; and,
-- urge United States compliance with international law; and,
-- request the immediate release of Lynne Stewart for medical treatment at the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center

A review of the 24 June 2013 letter from the U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Prisons and the 9 August 2013 decision of the United States District Court, Southern Division of New York, indicates that judicial and prison authorities and counsel for the Department of Justice failed to consider the applicable international law duties of the United States to protect the life of Lynne Stewart (and other prisoners) by ensuring proper medical treatment.

The procedural requirements of 28 U.S.C. § 2255 and 18 U.S.C. § 3582 do not exhaust or defeat this overarching international law duty. Adherence to domestic statutory provisions allowing the modification of a sentence based on compassionate grounds do not exhaust the state’s duty to ensure that Ms Stewart as a prisoner receives the recommended and medically advisable treatment. Nor do the statutory provisions extinguish or limit a prisoner’s internationally protected right to receive medical treatment outside the prison to preserve or extend life.

Authorities erred in proceedings as though: a/the statutory provisions allowing release on compassionate grounds were the only law protecting Ms Stewart’s entitlement to be released for medical treatment outside the prison; and, b/ when the statutory requirements were not met, both the individual right and the state duty were exhausted.

Authorities further erred in considering only whether the sentence could be vacated, set aside or corrected. The international law provisions entitling a prisoner in Lynne Stewart’s circumstances to medical treatment of choice in a civil facility, trigger the state’s duty to alter how and where the sentence will be served during treatment, not the length of the sentence.

These international law duties arise, inter alia, from the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights ratified by the U.S. in 1992 and the American Declaration on the Rights and Duties of Man adopted by the Ninth International Conference of American States, 1948. As explained in our 27 May 2013 and 24 July 2013 letters, these and other instruments impose a legal duty on the United States to protect the right to life of all persons. Specific state duties to protect prisoner are further defined in instruments such as the Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners. Article 22(2) of the Minimum Rules obliges states to ensure that “Sick prisoner who require specialist treatment shall be transferred to specialized institution or to civil hospitals...” (emphasis added).

The US Supreme Court in Estelle v. Gamble acknowledged the Standard Minimum Rules when determining whether a prison failed to provide adequate medical care to an inmate:

The infliction of such unnecessary suffering is inconsistent with contemporary standards of decency as manifested in modern legislation codifying the common-law view that ‘[i]t is but just that the public be required to care for the prisoner, who cannot by reason of the deprivation of his liberty, care for himself.’ (Estelle v. Gamble, 429 U.S. 97, 103–04 (1976) (internal quotation marks omitted)

The scope of the right to life as it applies to persons sentenced to imprisonment has been determined by Comments and decisions of the United Nations Human Rights Committee and by decisions of other international tribunals including the Inter-American Court of Human Rights.

The jurisprudence is clear that a state’s right to deprive a convicted person of liberty carries with it the legal duty to ensure proper medical treatment so that the loss of liberty does not cause a deprivation or shortening of life not authorized by the sentence. The duty to allow and ensure medical treatment of choice in a civil facility is triggered by one or more of the following circumstances all of which are present in Lynne Stewart’s case.

-- the person’s medical condition has deteriorated in prison;
-- the person has, subsequent to sentencing, been diagnosed as terminally ill;
-- treatment that is medically advisable to extend the prisoner’s life and/or improve their
condition is available in a civil facility;
-- treatment inside the prison has been substandard or contrary to prevailing medical
standards;
-- treatment comparable to that recommended and available in a civil facility has not been
provided or is not available in the prison;
-- civil and prison doctors disagree as to prognosis and/and recommended treatment and
the patient opts for the treatment recommended in the civil facility;

The court ruled on 9 August 2013 that it has no jurisdiction to review and reduce Lynne Stewart’s sentence unless and until the Director of the Bureau of Federal Prisons makes a motion to the court and that the refusal of the Director to make file a motion is not reviewable. In making this latter determination, the court noted (at p. 15) that “the Director’s ability to seek a sentence reduction is a power not a duty.” The court was not advised of and failed to note, the state’s overarching international law duty to ensure Ms Stewart’s access to the medical treatment considered optimum -- i.e. the treatment proposed by the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center. We note also that, in view of Ms Stewart’s grave condition, audita querela (see p. 22) should have been issued on the grounds that the petitioner has a legal right to release that arose subsequent to conviction and sentencing.

Finally the court observed that it would “give prompt and sympathetic consideration to any motion for compassionate release filed by the BOP, but is it for the BOP to make that motion in the first instance.” We urge you to give “prompt and sympathetic consideration” to the international law rights and duties cited and to comply with them in releasing Ms Stewart.

The issue that requires immediate attention is not whether the law allows the continued imprisonment of a person diagnosed after sentencing as terminally ill. The issue is the absolute right of access to necessary medical treatment—i.e. treatment that is medically advisable to extend the prisoner’s life and/or improve their condition. Lynne Stewart has an absolute right to be released for the purpose of accessing treatment outside the prison when, as in this case, comparable treatment is not available inside the prison and/or when treatment inside the prison has been demonstrably substandard.

We call on you to ensure that all steps are taken to ensure that Lynne Stewart is released for treatment at the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center.

Sincerely,

Gail Davidson, LRWC Executive Director

Marjorie Cohn
Professor, Thomas Jefferson School of Law Deputy Secretary General,
International Association of Democratic Lawyers

Copied to:

Gabriela Carina Knaul de Albuquerque e Silva
Special Rapporteur of the Human Council on the independence of judges and lawyers C/o Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights
United Nations Office at Geneva
8-14 Avenue de la Paix
1211 Geneva 10 Switzerland
SrindependenceJL@ohchr.org

Juan Mendez
Special Rapporteur on Torture Email: sr-torture@ohchr.org

******

http://lynnestewart.org/

KEEP THE PRESSURE ON:

3 ways we can
SEND A "SHOUT" OUT!

1.
"LET'S DOUBLE THE # OF SIGNATURES!"
A "BREAK THE CHAINS" LETTER ~ You've already signed the petition - now please write a personal note and forward this email to 2 of your closest friends - and ask them to sign and send this to 2 of their closest friends, and so on!

http://lynnestewart.org/

2.
WRITE 3 LETTERS!
TO:

PRESIDENT OBAMA
The White House
Pennsylvania Ave,
Washington, DC 20500

ATTORNEY GENERAL ERIC HOLDER
U.S. Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20530-0001

MR. CHARLES E. SAMUELS, Jr., Director,
Federal Bureau of Prisons,
320 First Street, NW
Washington, DC 20534
Re: Lynne Stewart, #53504-054 Compassionate Release

3.
MAKE 3 CALLS!
(AND KEEP CALLING 'TIL LYNNE IS FREE!)

PRESIDENT OBAMA
(202) 456-1111

ATTORNEY GENERAL HOLDER
(202) 353-1555

CHARLES E. SaAMUELS

(202) 307-3250/3062

"THANK YOU, THANK YOU!!!"
- Ralph Poynter, Lynne's husband

ATTENTION MEDIA
AND ALL YOU CREATIVE TYPES OUT THERE:

Can you think of a way to help Ralph help Lynne?
CALL HIM AT (917) 853-9759

BACKGROUND + UPDATES: http://lynnestewart.org/

"Like" LYNNE on Facebook! - IT'S WORKING!

Here are the stats for Justice for Lynne Stewart on FB:

Yesterday: 1,878 likes · 480 talking about this
Today: 1,894 likes · 661 talking about this

https://www.facebook.com/pages/Justice-for-Lynne-Stewart/113306425405940

Lynne has filed a SECOND request for Compassionate Release, so please continue to get signatures on the petition at http://lynnestewart.org/

**********
"In the Beginning was the Deed" (Rosa Luxemburg)

• Join Archbishop Desmond Tutu, former Attorney General Ramsey Clark, Dick Gregory, Alice Walker, Bianca Jagger, Pete Seeger, Ed Asner, Father Miguel D’Escoto Brockmann, Daniel Berrigan, Daniel Ellsberg, Noam Chomsky, and 25,000 others in the United States and internationally who have signed the petition to free Lynne Stewart – at www.lynnestewart.org.

Encourage others to sign the petition to Free Lynne Stewart:

directly at:

http://www.change.org/petitions/petition-to-free-lynne-stewart-save-her-life-release-her-now-2

or via:
www.lynnestewart.org

For more information, go to http://www.lynnestewart.org

Write to Lynne Stewart at:

Lynne Stewart #53504-054
??Federal Medical Center, Carswell
PO Box 27137
Fort Worth, TX 76127

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

Bay Area United Against War Newsletter

Table of Contents:
A. ARTICLES IN FULL
B. EVENTS AND ACTIONS
C. SPECIAL APPEALS AND ONGOING CAMPAIGNS
D. VIDEO, FILM, AUDIO. ART, POETRY, ETC.

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

A. ARTICLES IN FULL

(Unless otherwise noted)

1) Family of Dead Inmate Says Investigation Is Moving Too Slowly
By BENJAMIN WEISER

August 28, 2013

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/29/nyregion/family-of-dead-inmate-says-investigation-is-moving-too-slowly.html?ref=nyregion

2) The Face Scan Arrives
By GINGER McCALL

August 29, 2013

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/30/opinion/the-face-scan-arrives.html?hp

3) New Leaked Document Outlines U.S. Spending on Intelligence Agencies
By SCOTT SHANE

August 29, 2013

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/30/us/politics/leaked-document-outlines-us-spending-on-intelligence.html?hp

4) In New Wave of Walkouts, Fast-Food Strikers Gain Momentum

By STEVEN GREENHOUSE

August 29, 2013, 9:20 pm

http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/08/29/marching-at-mcdonalds-for-a-15-wage/?hp

5) U.S. Won’t Sue to Reverse States’ Legalization of Marijuana
By ASHLEY SOUTHALL and JACK HEALY

August 29, 2013

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/30/us/politics/us-says-it-wont-sue-to-undo-state-marijuana-laws.html?ref=us

6) Six U.S. Corporations Profit From Aid to Egyptian Military

The $1.3 billion sent to Egypt’s armed forces every year functions as a major subsidy program to American military contractors.

By Alex Kane

AlterNet, August 30, 2013

http://www.alternet.org/world/6-corporations-making-money-us-aid-brutal-egyptian-military?akid=10870.229473.JBSfBO&rd=1&src=newsletter890330&t=8

7) Exclusive: CIA Files Prove America Helped Saddam as He Gassed Iran

The U.S. knew Hussein was launching some of the worst chemical attacks in history -- and still gave him a hand.

BY SHANE HARRIS AND MATTHEW M. AID

AUGUST 26, 2013

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2013/08/25/secret_cia_files_prove_america_helped_saddam_as_he_gassed_iran

8) Labor, Then and Now
By THE EDITORIAL BOARD

August 31, 2013

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/01/opinion/sunday/labor-then-and-now.html?hp&_r=0

9) For a Classic Motown Song About Money, Credit Is What He Wants
By LARRY ROHTER

August 31, 2013

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/01/arts/music/for-a-classic-motown-song-about-money-credit-is-what-he-wants.html?hp

10) Pa. Lawsuit: Renters Fear Eviction Over 911 Calls
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
September 1, 2013
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2013/09/01/us/ap-us-911-calls-evictions.html?hp

11) Budget Documents Detail Extent of U.S. Cyberoperations
By DAVID E. SANGER

August 31, 2013

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/01/world/americas/documents-detail-cyberoperations-by-us.html?ref=world

12) Drone Strike Is Said to Kill 4 Militants in Pakistan
By ISMAIL KHAN

August 31, 2013

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/01/world/asia/drone-strike-kills-suspected-militants-in-pakistan.html?ref=world

13) Radiation Near Japanese Plant’s Tanks Suggests New Leaks
By MARTIN FACKLER

August 31, 2013

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/01/world/asia/radiation-near-japanese-plants-tanks-suggests-new-leaks.html?ref=world

14) Income Gap Grows Wider (and Faster)
By ANNA BERNASEK

August 31, 2013

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/01/business/income-gap-grows-wider-and-faster.html?ref=us

15) New Study Finds That State Crime Labs Are Paid Per Conviction

By Radley Balko Posted: 08/29/2013

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/08/29/in-some-states-crime-labs_n_3837471.html

16) Japan to Spend Almost $500 Million on Water Crisis at Fukushima Nuclear Plant
By REUTERS

September 3, 2013

http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2013/09/03/world/asia/03reuters-japan-fukushima.html?hp

17) Britain: Skyscraper Said to Have ‘Melted’ Luxury Car
By REUTERS

September 2, 2013

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/03/world/europe/britain-skyscraper-said-to-have-melted-luxury-car.html?ref=world

August 28, 2013

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/29/nyregion/family-of-dead-inmate-says-investigation-is-moving-too-slowly.html?ref=nyregion

Early last December, Ronald Spear, a prisoner at Rikers Island with kidney problems, sued medical and nursing personnel there, claiming he was being denied medication. He said that he had been in touch with Legal Aid lawyers and as a result, “I have correction officers retaliating against me.”

On Dec. 19, Mr. Spear, 52, was dead, after suffering “blunt force trauma to the head,” according to his death certificate.

The New York City medical examiner’s office has ruled that the manner of death was homicide, and inmate witnesses have provided the family’s lawyers with sworn statements, saying Mr. Spear was kicked in the face and chest by a correction officer while two other officers held him down.

Whether he was a victim of retaliation is unknown, but the Bronx district attorney’s office said this week that it was investigating Mr. Spear’s death. Meanwhile, his family’s lawyers, who said they were considering a wrongful-death lawsuit, have asked federal prosecutors in Manhattan to open an investigation, complaining that the Bronx prosecutors are moving too slowly.

The family’s lawyers, writing on Aug. 13 to David J. Kennedy, the chief of the civil rights unit in the United States attorney’s office, said “part of what makes the underlying facts in this case so disturbing was Mr. Spear’s obvious vulnerability at the time.” They noted that he was being held at the North Infirmary Command, and had been “struggling to get medical care for a serious and chronic kidney disease.”

“It appears that correction officers had grown impatient with Mr. Spear’s persistent requests for medical treatment,” the lawyers wrote, “and that they punished him by beating him to death.”

The lawyers also cited the sworn statements signed by three inmates that summarized what they saw on the morning of Dec. 19.

Two of the inmates — Jesse James and Shawn Fraser — said in statements that Mr. Spear often complained about his medical care. He had a disagreement with an officer about his treatment, they said, and after he asked to see a captain, the officer grabbed his arm and hit him several times, knocking him down.

The officer then repeatedly kicked him in the face and chest while two other officers restrained him, the inmates said.

A third inmate, Julius Newton, said in his statement that he was awakened by the sounds of officers shouting and another inmate saying “something like, ‘They’re stomping him!’ ” Mr. Newton looked and saw an officer “kicking Ronald, who was lying on the ground” and not moving, according to his statement.

The Village Voice, which raised questions about Mr. Spear’s death in an article in January, reported that Mr. James, after witnessing the episode, called Mr. Spear’s sister, Nellie Kelly, from the jail and told her what had happened. Mr. James, who has since been released from Rikers, confirmed that account in a recent telephone interview, as did Ms. Kelly.

Margarette Daniels, the stepmother of Mr. Spear, said this week that the family had photographs of his body on which bruises could be seen.

The lawyers who sent the letter to the federal prosecutor’s office included Jonathan S. Abady and Zoe Salzman of the firm Emery Celli Brinckerhoff & Abady and Jonathan S. Chasan and Mary Lynne Werlwas of the Legal Aid Society’s prisoners’ rights project.

“This is a death case with a grieving family that wants answers as to how and why this happened,” Mr. Abady said this week. Mr. Chasan said that Mr. Spear’s death was “an example of the frequency with which guards used severe physical force” on city inmates in 2012.

The lawyers said in their letter that an assistant Bronx district attorney told them in May that a decision on whether to present the case to a grand jury would be made within two weeks; in recent conversations, that prosecutor told them that although not all witnesses had been interviewed, “he nevertheless does not think he will present the case to the grand jury,” the lawyers wrote.

Eldin L. Villafañe, deputy commissioner of public information for the Department of Correction, said on Wednesday: “The department has not reached a final assessment as to the propriety of the officers’ actions. This matter has been under the jurisdiction of the Bronx D.A. since mid-March, and that office is responsible for the investigation and determination of criminal charges.”

The Bronx district attorney’s office said “the circumstances surrounding the death are still under review.” The United States attorney’s office said through a spokeswoman that it was aware of the case, and that when the district attorney completed the investigation and made a decision, the office would take whatever steps it deemed appropriate.

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

2) The Face Scan Arrives
By GINGER McCALL

August 29, 2013

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/30/opinion/the-face-scan-arrives.html?hp

WASHINGTON — THE future of technological surveillance is fast approaching — and we are doing far too little to prepare ourselves.

Last week, thanks in part to documents that I and the Electronic Privacy Information Center obtained under the Freedom of Information Act, the American public learned that the Department of Homeland Security is making considerable progress on a computerized tool called the Biometric Optical Surveillance System. The system, if completed, will use video cameras to scan people in public (or will be fed images of people from other sources) and then identify individuals by their faces, presumably by cross-referencing databases of driver’s license photos, mug shots or other facial images cataloged by name.

While this sort of technology may have benefits for law enforcement (recall that the suspects in the Boston Marathon bombings were identified with help from camera footage), it also invites abuse. Imagine how easy it would be, in a society increasingly videotaped and monitored on closed-circuit television, for the authorities to identify antiwar protesters or Tea Party marchers and open dossiers on them, or for officials to track the public movements of ex-lovers or rivals. “Mission creep” often turns crime-fighting programs into instruments of abuse.

At the moment, there is little to no regulation or legal oversight of technologies like the Biometric Optical Surveillance System. We need to implement safeguards to protect our civil liberties — in particular, our expectation of some degree of anonymity in public.

The Department of Homeland Security is not the only agency developing facial-surveillance capacities. The Federal Bureau of Investigation has spent more than $1 billion on its Next Generation Identification program, which includes facial-recognition technology. This technology is expected to be deployed as early as next year and to contain at least 12 million searchable photos. The bureau has partnerships with at least seven states that give the agency access to facial-recognition-enabled databases of driver’s license photos.

State agencies are also participating in this technological revolution, though not yet using video cameras. On Monday, Ohio’s attorney general, Mike DeWine, confirmed reports that law enforcement officers in his state, without public notice, had deployed facial-recognition software on its driver’s license photo database, ostensibly to identify criminal suspects.

A total of 37 states have enabled facial-recognition software to search driver’s license photos, and only 11 have protections in place to limit access to such technologies by the authorities.

Defenders of this technology will say that no one has a legitimate expectation of privacy in public. But as surveillance technology improves, the distinction between public spaces and private spaces becomes less meaningful. There is a vast difference between a law enforcement officer’s sifting through thousands of hours of video footage in search of a person of interest, and his using software to instantly locate that person anywhere, at any time.

A person in public may have no reasonable expectation of privacy at any given moment, but he certainly has a reasonable expectation that the totality of his movements will not be effortlessly tracked and analyzed by law enforcement without probable cause. Such tracking, as the federal appellate judge Douglas H. Ginsburg once ruled, impermissibly “reveals an intimate picture of the subject’s life that he expects no one to have — short perhaps of his wife.”

Before the advent of these new technologies, time and effort created effective barriers to surveillance abuse. But those barriers are now being removed. They must be rebuilt in the law.

Two policies are necessary. First, facial-recognition databases should be populated only with images of known terrorists and convicted felons. Driver’s license photos and other images of “ordinary” people should never be included in a facial-recognition database without the knowledge and consent of the public.

Second, access to databases should be limited and monitored. Officers should be given access only after a court grants a warrant. The access should be tracked and audited. The authorities should have to publicly report what databases are being mined and provide aggregate numbers on how often they are used. We cannot leave it to law enforcement agencies to determine, behind closed doors, how these databases are used. With the right safeguards, facial-recognition technology can be employed effectively without sacrificing essential liberties.

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

3) New Leaked Document Outlines U.S. Spending on Intelligence Agencies
By SCOTT SHANE

August 29, 2013

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/30/us/politics/leaked-document-outlines-us-spending-on-intelligence.html?hp

The most detailed public disclosure of American intelligence spending in history shows a surprisingly dominant role for the Central Intelligence Agency, a growing emphasis on both defensive and offensive cyberoperations, and significant gaps in knowledge about targeted countries despite the sharp increase in spending after the 2001 terrorist attacks.

The top secret budget request for the current fiscal year was obtained by The Washington Post from the former National Security Agency contractor Edward J. Snowden and published in part on its Web site on Thursday. The newspaper said it was withholding most of the 178-page document at the request of government officials because “sensitive details are so pervasive” in its description of spying programs.

The document shows that the agencies’ budget request for the year ending Sept. 30 was $52.6 billion, a small decrease from the 2011 peak of $54.6 billion, which came after a decade of rapid spending growth. Of that, the biggest share was taken by the C.I.A., which carries out traditional human spying and intelligence analysis but also now conducts drone strikes against terrorism suspects in Pakistan and Yemen.

The C.I.A. asked for $14.7 billion, significantly outpacing the two big technological spy agencies, the eavesdropping N.S.A., which sought $10.8 billion, and the National Reconnaissance Office, which operates surveillance satellites and sought $10.3 billion. While the document reflects the money requested for the 2013 fiscal year and not what was actually received, the record of past expenditures suggests that real spending this year is probably very close to the amount requested.

The 16 American spy agencies employ about 107,000 people, including some 21,800 working on contract, the document shows. The number does not include tens of thousands of contractors who work in support of the intelligence agencies, in some cases outnumbering actual employees, said Jeffrey T. Richelson, a prolific author on intelligence.

Mr. Richelson said he thought the N.S.A. budget figure understated the real cost of its electronic surveillance, because it omits much of the support it receives from military personnel who carry out eavesdropping on its behalf.

The latest disclosure underscores the extraordinary impact of the leaks by Mr. Snowden, 30, who has accepted temporary asylum in Russia as he tries to avoid prosecution in the United States on espionage charges.

The documents he took from his job as an N.S.A. contractor and provided to The Guardian, The Post and other publications have set off the most significant public debate in decades about surveillance and data collection by the government. The parts of the new budget document published by The Post, while containing no major surprises, offer by far the most granular look to date at how billions of dollars is spent for intelligence collection. (The Guardian has recently shared some of Mr. Snowden’s documents with The New York Times.)

On Thursday, complying with President Obama’s call for greater transparency about government surveillance, the director of national intelligence, James R. Clapper Jr., announced that his office would release more detailed information each year on the number of secret court orders and national security letters demanding data on Americans and the number of people affected.

For decades, administrations from both parties have hidden spy spending in what is popularly known as the “black budget,” asserting that letting adversaries know what the United States is spending would make the country less safe. Only since 2007 has even the total annual spending on what is called the national intelligence program been made public; another $23 billion is spent each year in a separate military intelligence budget.

Experts estimate that the government has spent about $500 billion on the intelligence agencies in the dozen years since the Sept. 11 attacks. That was a sharp increase in spending over the 1990s but is roughly what the Pentagon is spending this year alone.

The budget request lists five major missions for the intelligence agencies: warning American leaders about threats and instability; battling terrorism; countering weapons proliferation; cyberoperations; and counterespionage.

In a statement introducing the budget request, the director of national intelligence, Mr. Clapper wrote that counterterrorism efforts would be focused in particular on Yemen, Somalia and the Horn of Africa and would continue efforts in Libya “to deny terrorists a safe haven.”

Despite the declining budget, Mr. Clapper said, the N.S.A.’s eavesdropping would get additional money to use on “foreign leadership targets” as well as to break the encryption used on foreign communications and “exploit Internet traffic.”

The budget called for some $278 million for the N.S.A.’s “corporate partner access,” a reference to payments to Internet and fiber cable companies to provide it with access to their customers’ communications, and more than $48 million to study “coping with information overload,” a longstanding problem for the agency.

Even as Mr. Snowden was quietly beginning to collect the documents he would provide to the news media, The Post reported, the budget request emphasized “safeguarding classified networks” and a rigorous “review of high-risk, high-gain applicants and contractors” — an apparent reference to the young computer technicians the agencies have been recruiting. N.S.A. officials said they would carry out “a minimum of 4,000 periodic reinvestigations” of employees to avoid “insider compromise of sensitive information,” the document said.

Steven Aftergood, who runs the Project on Government Secrecy at the Federation of American Scientists and has long campaigned for greater budget transparency, said the document “highlights the ascension of the C.I.A.,” which before the Sept. 11 era accounted for about 10 percent of intelligence spending and now approaches a third of the total. President George W. Bush began a rapid expansion of the C.I.A.’s work force in response to the terrorist attacks and in support of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

“The C.I.A. has a presence in many places where they did not 15 years ago,” Mr. Aftergood said. In addition, it has taken on a major paramilitary role in combating terrorism, notably by carrying out missile strikes from drones in places where the United States is not officially at war.

The document reveals that agency spends about $2.5 billion on covert action, including the drone program.

The budget included $4.3 billion for cyberoperations, a relatively new and increasingly central part of national security programs. That covers both intrusions into foreign computers to gather intelligence and prepare for possible cyberattack, and spending to prevent electronic spying and hacking against the United States. But it is only a fraction of the entire government spending, since the Defense Department and the Department of Homeland Security account for most cyberspending.

According to The Post, the budget request included a candid account of the remaining holes in the government’s knowledge of the world despite the aggressive spying. The governments of China, Russia and Iran are hard to penetrate, but North Korea may be the hardest target of all, the document suggests.

Mr. Aftergood said the document suggested that the agencies could safely be far more open about their priorities and spending without damaging national security. “We did not need this document to tell us that North Korea is a hard target,” he said.

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

4) In New Wave of Walkouts, Fast-Food Strikers Gain Momentum

By STEVEN GREENHOUSE

August 29, 2013, 9:20 pm

http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/08/29/marching-at-mcdonalds-for-a-15-wage/?hp

As a wave of one-day walkouts by fast-food workers gains momentum in a push for a $15 hourly wage, the movement has been notable both for the prominence of young faces and for the audacity of their demand.

On Thursday, the protests involved workers at nearly 1,000 restaurants in more than 50 cities, organizers said, spreading to areas of the South and West including Atlanta, Los Angeles, Memphis, and Raleigh, N.C.

The Service Employees International Union has provided financial support to the one-day walkouts since they began a month ago at restaurants of McDonald’s, Burger King and other chains in seven cities. Many and perhaps most of the workers have been in their 20s.

Jake Rosenfeld, a sociology professor and labor expert at the University of Washington, said the strikes could elevate the union movement’s standing among younger workers who have grown up in an era when unions have steadily lost membership and power.

“It should reinforce the labor movement as something new and relevant to the young workers of today,” Professor Rosenfeld said. And pointing to the use of the Internet to spread the strike call, he added, “The combination of old and new organizing strategies really seems to have paid off here.”

But even with the attention the strikes have drawn, the big question remains whether the walkouts can achieve any traction on the main demand — the wage increase to $15 an hour in an industry in which many of the 2.3 million fast food workers earn the federal minimum of $7.25 an hour.

Arne Kalleberg, a sociology professor at the University of North Carolina and author of the book “Good Jobs, Bad Jobs,” said: “The strikes are an indication of a great frustration that’s been building up over a long time. It reflects the fact that people are really concerned with increasing inequality.”

One such frustrated worker was Roberto Tejada, who earns $8 an hour at a Taco Bell in Los Angeles. “People can’t survive on the minimum wage,” he said. “Nobody who works full time should live in poverty.”

Labor Secretary Thomas E. Perez has pointed to the strikes as evidence that the federal minimum wage should be increased. President Obama has proposed a $9 minimum wage, but many Republicans have denounced the idea, saying it would eliminate jobs.

Steve Caldeira, president of the International Franchise Association, warned that a raise to $15 an hour would hurt franchisees – and would result in less hiring. “Mandating increased wages would lead to higher prices for consumers, lower foot traffic” and lost jobs, he said.

And a corporate-backed group, the Employment Policies Institute, ran a full-page advertisement in The Wall Street Journal, saying that a $15 wage would mean “fewer entry-level jobs and more automated alternatives – even in the kitchen.”

The strike’s organizers have had feverish discussions – including a meeting with academics in Las Vegas – to figure out how to attain their goal. One idea is to persuade city councils to pass a $15-an-hour minimum wage for fast-food workers. Another is not to hit up hard-pressed franchisees for the raises, but instead to get the chains to channel some of the fees they obtain from franchises into higher wages.

Mary Kay Henry, president of the Service Employees International Union, said the expansion of the strikes was helping to persuade government officials and community groups that the demand was not unrealistic.

“It’s moving people to understand that $15 is increasingly reasonable,” she said. “It’s becoming crystal clear to a lot of people that if these workers who earn $9,000 a year could earn $18,000, that could make a big change in their neighborhoods.”

But Professor Kalleberg acknowledged that the chains would not be so easily persuaded.

“You’ll have to put consumer pressure on the companies,” he said. “The consumer is the lever here. I don’t know how about $15. Obama is having a problem getting to $9. I think something in between may be realistic.”

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

5) U.S. Won’t Sue to Reverse States’ Legalization of Marijuana
By ASHLEY SOUTHALL and JACK HEALY

August 29, 2013

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/30/us/politics/us-says-it-wont-sue-to-undo-state-marijuana-laws.html?ref=us

WASHINGTON — The Justice Department on Thursday said it would not sue to block laws legalizing marijuana in 20 states and the District of Columbia, a move that proponents hailed as an important step toward ending the prohibition of the drug.

In a memo to federal prosecutors nationwide on Thursday, James M. Cole, the deputy attorney general, erased some uncertainty about how the government would respond to state laws making it legal to use marijuana for medical or recreational purposes.

Citing “limited prosecutorial resources,” Mr. Cole explained the change in economic terms. But the memo also made clear that the Justice Department expects states to put in place regulations aimed at preventing marijuana sales to minors, illegal cartel and gang activity, interstate trafficking of marijuana, and violence and accidents involving the drug.

“A system adequate to that task must not only contain robust controls and procedures on paper; it must also be effective in practice,” he wrote.

Voters in Washington and Colorado recently approved measures decriminalizing the possession of small amounts of recreational marijuana, while 18 other states and the District of Columbia permit the use of marijuana for medical purposes.

In a phone call on Thursday afternoon, Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. explained the government’s “trust but verify” approach to Gov. Jay Inslee of Washington and Gov. John W. Hickenlooper of Colorado, a Justice Department official said.

Marijuana advocates praised the decision as a potentially historic shift in the federal government’s attitude toward a drug it once viewed as a menace to public health. By allowing states to legalize and regulate marijuana, advocates said, the federal government could reduce jail populations and legal backlogs, create thousands of jobs, and replenish state coffers with marijuana taxes.

“This is a historic day,” said Ean Seeb, a co-owner of a marijuana dispensary called Denver Relief. “This is the beginning of the end of marijuana prohibition.”

But the prospect that marijuana could be legalized after a ban of decades drew criticism from law enforcement and drug policy officials. They warned that the Justice Department’s decision would have unintended consequences, like more impaired driving and more criminal marijuana operations.

“This sends the wrong message,” said former Representative Patrick J. Kennedy, who is a recovering prescription drug addict and a founder of Smart Approaches to Marijuana, a policy group. “Are we going to send up the white flag altogether and surrender and say ‘have at it’? Or are we going to try to reduce the availability and accessibility of drugs and alcohol? That should be our mission.”

Under the new guidance, a large scale and a for-profit status would no longer make dispensaries and cultivation centers a potential target for criminal prosecution.

However, prosecutors have broad discretion in determining, for instance, whether drug laws exacerbate “adverse public health consequences associated with marijuana use.”

If federal prosecutors believe that a state’s controls are inadequate, “the federal government may seek to challenge the regulatory structure itself in addition to continuing to bring individual enforcement actions, including criminal prosecutions,” Mr. Cole wrote.

The Justice Department official said the guidance was mandatory and did not apply retroactively.

In Colorado and Washington, the passage of ballot measures left the states’ drug laws in sharp opposition to federal drug policy, and raised questions about how federal law enforcement agents would respond to new retail marijuana stores. Some members of Congress sought to have the administration clarify whether state officials risked federal criminal prosecution while carrying out their duties under the state laws.

“It’s a relief,” said Representative Jared Polis, a Colorado Democrat. “It’ll get the criminal element out of the marijuana trade. It’ll provide legitimate business opportunities for everything from farmers to processors to retail store owners.”

Mr. Cole is scheduled to testify on Sept. 10 at a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing focused on clarifying the administration’s stance.

The White House said last week that President Obama did not support changing federal laws regulating marijuana, which treat the drug as a dangerous substance with no medical purpose.

Josh Earnest, a White House spokesman, said the president believed it was best to focus on high-level offenders like kingpins and traffickers.

The decision on Thursday followed Mr. Holder’s announcement this month that federal prosecutors would no longer seek federal mandatory minimum sentences for certain low-level nonviolent drug offenders.

The announcement did not address the financial hurdles facing marijuana dispensaries and growing operations, like their access to loans and other banking services. Many banks are reluctant to do business with marijuana growers and sellers, for fear of violating federal laws.

Ashley Southall reported from Washington, and Jack Healy from Denver.

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

6) Six U.S. Corporations Profit From Aid to Egyptian Military

The $1.3 billion sent to Egypt’s armed forces every year functions as a major subsidy program to American military contractors.

By Alex Kane

AlterNet, August 30, 2013

http://www.alternet.org/world/6-corporations-making-money-us-aid-brutal-egyptian-military?akid=10870.229473.JBSfBO&rd=1&src=newsletter890330&t=8

Most of the tanks, tear gas and bullets used to brutally clear the Muslim Brotherhood sit-ins in Cairo in mid-August were bought with American money. While there are a number of reasons why the U.S. continues to allocate an annual $1.3 billion in cash for the Egyptian military—Israel, access to the Suez Canal and counter-terrorism cooperation—the profits that go to American weapons companies are a major incentive.

Since 1979, the glue that has stuck the Pentagon and Egyptian military together has been cash. In total, America has given the Egyptian military nearly $42 billion since 1948, according to a Congressional Research Service report. Under the terms of the Foreign Military Financing deal struck with Egypt, the vast majority of the arms equipment the country buys is American. Currently, an estimated 80 percent of the Egyptian military’s weapons purchases are covered by American military aid.

Here’s how the financing system works: the money allocated for the military aid gets sent to the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. Then, it gets delivered to a trust fund at the Treasury Department, and is finally given to military contractors who make the tanks and bullets that have transformed the Egyptian armed forces into one of the most powerful forces in the Middle East.

This system benefits some of the most powerful American military companies like Lockheed Martin and General Dynamics.

“It’s clearly a major subsidy program for these companies,” said Shana Marshall, an expert on military aid to Egypt and associate director and research instructor at the Institute for Middle East Studies at George Washington University. “It’s kept open their production line when they would have otherwise been closed down and it’s a source of really reliable profits for them.”

In the aftermath of the military’s massacre of supporters of the Muslim Brotherhood, these defense contractors are closely watching the unfolding debate about U.S. aid to Egypt. But they have little reason to worry.

While reports about the Obama administration reviewing the U.S. military aid package have emerged in recent weeks, there is little chance of an U.S. aid cut off, despite the fact that American law mandates one if a coup is implemented.

“Every time someone mentions a suspension of aid or rethinking the aid program, they send a team of defense industry lobbyists to Capitol Hill to knock on doors to make sure that there’s no suspension of the aid program,” said Marshall.

Further complicating any talk of an aid cut-off is the fact that contracts to provide equipment to the military extend far into the future. Penalties for breaking those contracts would be inflicted on the U.S. taxpayer.

So these military contractors will continue to rake in cash from the U.S.-Egypt relationship for the foreseeable future. Here’s a look at six of them.

1. Lockheed Martin

The Maryland-based military company is a tried-and-true customer of the U.S. military. With gross profits of $2.7 billion in 2011, Lockheed Martin is one of the most cash-rich military companies. The vast majority of those profits come from U.S. government contractors to provide fighter jets, missile defense and more. It’s also benefited handsomely from the Egypt-U.S. relationship.

In 2010, Lockheed Martin inked a $2.5 billion deal with the U.S. military to provide 20 F-16 fighter jets to the Egyptian military. Fourteen of the jets have been delivered to Egypt; under the terms of the deal, the remaining six are to be delivered by December 2014. But in the wake of the Egyptian military’s violence against supporters of deposed President Mohamed Morsi, the Obama administration announced it would delay the delivery of the remaining jets. While it was a punitive measure in response to human rights violations, in the grand scheme of things it’s only a symbolic step, given that it’s a temporary suspension and that the vast majority of U.S. military equipment will continue to be sent to the country.

A month after the fighter jet deal was reached, a Lockheed Martin subsidiary in Florida was awarded a $46 million contract to provide night vision sensor systems for Apache helicopters for Egypt.

2. General Dynamics

This major military company has also benefited from the Egyptian-American military relationship. Specifically, it is the source for key parts needed to build Egypt’s M1A1 tanks, a vehicle that the U.S. has delivered to the country since the late 1980s. In total, Egypt’s military has acquired more than 1,000 of these tanks—far more than the armed forces actually need—for over $3.9 billion.

Since 1992, General Dynamics has provided components for tank kits for M1A1 vehicles. In 2011, the U.S. military awarded the company a $395 million deal to provide these tank kits to Egypt. The parts are shipped to a production facility in Egypt—an example of how the military relationship with the U.S. also benefits Egyptian military engineers and provides some jobs for Egyptians. (Other contracts have similar arrangements, where some of the production of military goods occurs in the U.S. and the other portion occurring in Egyptian factories.) The deliveries of these specific tank kits will take place from July 2013-January 2016.

In 2012, General Dynamics signed another contract, this time for $37 million, related to M1A1 tanks.

3. L-3 Communications

Known for its prowess in the production of communications, surveillance and reconnaissance equipment for the U.S. government, L-3 Communications brings in billions of dollars in profits each year. Some of the money comes from its contracts with the U.S. military to provide Egypt communications equipment.

This year, L-3 Communications was awarded a $10.5 million contract to provide high-frequency transceivers for Egypt’s military.

In 2010, L-3 Communications received even more benefits from the U.S. aid package to Egypt. The company made $24 million to assemble a sonar system for the Egyptian navy. “L-3’s sonar provides long range and detection capability under the harshest of sea state conditions, and we are honored to provide the Egyptian Navy with our high-performance solution,” crowed Jerry Ozovek, the president of L-3’s Ocean Systems.

4. General Electric

General Electric has its hands in everything: energy, computers, digital cameras—and U.S. military contracting, specifically in the aviation field.

In August 2013, General Electric signed a $13.6 million deal with the U.S. Air Force to give Egypt’s air force “service life extension kits” for the F110 jet fighter engine used in the Lockheed Martin-produced F16s.

“Orders like these translate into stable employment for years,” a GE spokesman told an Ohio newspaper.

5. Exelis

While this company is a relatively small name in the world of military contractors, Exelis does well for itself. The Virginia-based company made nearly $6 million last year. The Washington Post describes it as specializing in “electronics and communications equipment such as radios, as well as technical services such as cybersecurity and intelligence offerings.”

This year, it inked a $24 million deal with the U.S. Navy to produce “six radio frequency repeater systems for the government of Egypt.”

6. Boeing

Boeing is the second largest military contractor in the world. Its relationship with the Egyptian military stretches back years.

In 2000, Boeing agreed to upgrade 35 of Egypt’s Apache helicopters for $400 million. Nine years later, Boeing signed a $820 million contract to provide more Apache aircraft. The U.S. is set to deliver some of the remaining helicopters from that 2009 deal next month.

And in 2010, Boeing signed yet another contract to provide Apache helicopters, this time for $22.5 million.

Alex Kane is AlterNet’s New York-based World editor, and an assistant editor for Mondoweiss.

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

7) Exclusive: CIA Files Prove America Helped Saddam as He Gassed Iran

The U.S. knew Hussein was launching some of the worst chemical attacks in history -- and still gave him a hand.

BY SHANE HARRIS AND MATTHEW M. AID

AUGUST 26, 2013

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2013/08/25/secret_cia_files_prove_america_helped_saddam_as_he_gassed_iran

The U.S. government may be considering military action in response to chemical strikes near Damascus. But a generation ago, America's military and intelligence communities knew about and did nothing to stop a series of nerve gas attacks far more devastating than anything Syria has seen, Foreign Policy has learned.

In 1988, during the waning days of Iraq's war with Iran, the United States learned through satellite imagery that Iran was about to gain a major strategic advantage by exploiting a hole in Iraqi defenses. U.S. intelligence officials conveyed the location of the Iranian troops to Iraq, fully aware that Hussein's military would attack with chemical weapons, including sarin, a lethal nerve agent.

The intelligence included imagery and maps about Iranian troop movements, as well as the locations of Iranian logistics facilities and details about Iranian air defenses. The Iraqis used mustard gas and sarin prior to four major offensives in early 1988 that relied on U.S. satellite imagery, maps, and other intelligence. These attacks helped to tilt the war in Iraq's favor and bring Iran to the negotiating table, and they ensured that the Reagan administration's long-standing policy of securing an Iraqi victory would succeed. But they were also the last in a series of chemical strikes stretching back several years that the Reagan administration knew about and didn't disclose.

U.S. officials have long denied acquiescing to Iraqi chemical attacks, insisting that Hussein's government never announced he was going to use the weapons. But retired Air Force Col. Rick Francona, who was a military attaché in Baghdad during the 1988 strikes, paints a different picture.

"The Iraqis never told us that they intended to use nerve gas. They didn't have to. We already knew," he told Foreign Policy.

According to recently declassified CIA documents and interviews with former intelligence officials like Francona, the U.S. had firm evidence of Iraqi chemical attacks beginning in 1983. At the time, Iran was publicly alleging that illegal chemical attacks were carried out on its forces, and was building a case to present to the United Nations. But it lacked the evidence implicating Iraq, much of which was contained in top secret reports and memoranda sent to the most senior intelligence officials in the U.S. government. The CIA declined to comment for this story.

In contrast to today's wrenching debate over whether the United States should intervene to stop alleged chemical weapons attacks by the Syrian government, the United States applied a cold calculus three decades ago to Hussein's widespread use of chemical weapons against his enemies and his own people. The Reagan administration decided that it was better to let the attacks continue if they might turn the tide of the war. And even if they were discovered, the CIA wagered that international outrage and condemnation would be muted.

In the documents, the CIA said that Iran might not discover persuasive evidence of the weapons' use -- even though the agency possessed it. Also, the agency noted that the Soviet Union had previously used chemical agents in Afghanistan and suffered few repercussions.

It has been previously reported that the United States provided tactical intelligence to Iraq at the same time that officials suspected Hussein would use chemical weapons. But the CIA documents, which sat almost entirely unnoticed in a trove of declassified material at the National Archives in College Park, Md., combined with exclusive interviews with former intelligence officials, reveal new details about the depth of the United States' knowledge of how and when Iraq employed the deadly agents. They show that senior U.S. officials were being regularly informed about the scale of the nerve gas attacks. They are tantamount to an official American admission of complicity in some of the most gruesome chemical weapons attacks ever launched.

Top CIA officials, including the Director of Central Intelligence William J. Casey, a close friend of President Ronald Reagan, were told about the location of Iraqi chemical weapons assembly plants; that Iraq was desperately trying to make enough mustard agent to keep up with frontline demand from its forces; that Iraq was about to buy equipment from Italy to help speed up production of chemical-packed artillery rounds and bombs; and that Iraq could also use nerve agents on Iranian troops and possibly civilians.

Officials were also warned that Iran might launch retaliatory attacks against U.S. interests in the Middle East, including terrorist strikes, if it believed the United States was complicit in Iraq's chemical warfare campaign.

"As Iraqi attacks continue and intensify the chances increase that Iranian forces will acquire a shell containing mustard agent with Iraqi markings," the CIA reported in a top secret document in November 1983. "Tehran would take such evidence to the U.N. and charge U.S. complicity in violating international law."

At the time, the military attaché's office was following Iraqi preparations for the offensive using satellite reconnaissance imagery, Francona told Foreign Policy. According to a former CIA official, the images showed Iraqi movements of chemical materials to artillery batteries opposite Iranian positions prior to each offensive.

Francona, an experienced Middle East hand and Arabic linguist who served in the National Security Agency and the Defense Intelligence Agency, said he first became aware of Iraq's use of chemical weapons against Iran in 1984, while serving as air attaché in Amman, Jordan. The information he saw clearly showed that the Iraqis had used Tabun nerve agent (also known as "GA") against Iranian forces in southern Iraq.

The declassified CIA documents show that Casey and other top officials were repeatedly informed about Iraq's chemical attacks and its plans for launching more. "If the Iraqis produce or acquire large new supplies of mustard agent, they almost certainly would use it against Iranian troops and towns near the border," the CIA said in a top secret document.

But it was the express policy of Reagan to ensure an Iraqi victory in the war, whatever the cost.

The CIA noted in one document that the use of nerve agent "could have a significant impact on Iran's human wave tactics, forcing Iran to give up that strategy." Those tactics, which involved Iranian forces swarming against conventionally armed Iraqi positions, had proved decisive in some battles. In March 1984, the CIA reported that Iraq had "begun using nerve agents on the Al Basrah front and likely will be able to employ it in militarily significant quantities by late this fall."

The use of chemical weapons in war is banned under the Geneva Protocol of 1925, which states that parties "will exert every effort to induce other States to accede to the" agreement. Iraq never ratified the protocol; the United States did in 1975. The Chemical Weapons Convention, which bans the production and use of such arms, wasn't passed until 1997, years after the incidents in question.

The initial wave of Iraqi attacks, in 1983, used mustard agent. While generally not fatal, mustard causes severe blistering of the skin and mucus membranes, which can lead to potentially fatal infections, and can cause blindness and upper respiratory disease, while increasing the risk of cancer. The United States wasn't yet providing battlefield intelligence to Iraq when mustard was used. But it also did nothing to assist Iran in its attempts to bring proof of illegal Iraqi chemical attacks to light. Nor did the administration inform the United Nations. The CIA determined that Iran had the capability to bomb the weapons assembly facilities, if only it could find them. The CIA believed it knew the locations.

Hard evidence of the Iraqi chemical attacks came to light in 1984. But that did little to deter Hussein from using the lethal agents, including in strikes against his own people. For as much as the CIA knew about Hussein's use of chemical weapons, officials resisted providing Iraq with intelligence throughout much of the war. The Defense Department had proposed an intelligence-sharing program with the Iraqis in 1986. But according to Francona, it was nixed because the CIA and the State Department viewed Saddam Hussein as "anathema" and his officials as "thugs."

The situation changed in 1987. CIA reconnaissance satellites picked up clear indications that the Iranians were concentrating large numbers of troops and equipment east of the city of Basrah, according to Francona, who was then serving with the Defense Intelligence Agency. What concerned DIA analysts the most was that the satellite imagery showed that the Iranians had discovered a gaping hole in the Iraqi lines southeast of Basrah. The seam had opened up at the junction between the Iraqi III Corps, deployed east of the city, and the Iraqi VII Corps, which was deployed to the southeast of the city in and around the hotly contested Fao Peninsula.

The satellites detected Iranian engineering and bridging units being secretly moved to deployment areas opposite the gap in the Iraqi lines, indicating that this was going to be where the main force of the annual Iranian spring offensive was going to fall, Francona said.

In late 1987, the DIA analysts in Francona's shop in Washington wrote a Top Secret Codeword report partially entitled "At The Gates of Basrah," warning that the Iranian 1988 spring offensive was going to be bigger than all previous spring offensives, and this offensive stood a very good chance of breaking through the Iraqi lines and capturing Basrah. The report warned that if Basrah fell, the Iraqi military would collapse and Iran would win the war.

President Reagan read the report and, according to Francona, wrote a note in the margin addressed to Secretary of Defense Frank C. Carlucci: "An Iranian victory is unacceptable."

Subsequently, a decision was made at the top level of the U.S. government (almost certainly requiring the approval of the National Security Council and the CIA). The DIA was authorized to give the Iraqi intelligence services as much detailed information as was available about the deployments and movements of all Iranian combat units. That included satellite imagery and perhaps some sanitized electronic intelligence. There was a particular focus on the area east of the city of Basrah where the DIA was convinced the next big Iranian offensive would come. The agency also provided data on the locations of key Iranian logistics facilities, and the strength and capabilities of the Iranian air force and air defense system. Francona described much of the information as "targeting packages" suitable for use by the Iraqi air force to destroy these targets.

The sarin attacks then followed.

The nerve agent causes dizziness, respiratory distress, and muscle convulsions, and can lead to death. CIA analysts could not precisely determine the Iranian casualty figures because they lacked access to Iranian officials and documents. But the agency gauged the number of dead as somewhere between "hundreds" and "thousands" in each of the four cases where chemical weapons were used prior to a military offensive. According to the CIA, two-thirds of all chemical weapons ever used by Iraq during its war with Iran were fired or dropped in the last 18 months of the war.

By 1988, U.S. intelligence was flowing freely to Hussein's military. That March, Iraq launched a nerve gas attack on the Kurdish village of Halabja in northern Iraq.

A month later, the Iraqis used aerial bombs and artillery shells filled with sarin against Iranian troop concentrations on the Fao Peninsula southeast of Basrah, helping the Iraqi forces win a major victory and recapture the entire peninsula. The success of the Fao Peninsula offensive also prevented the Iranians from launching their much-anticipated offensive to capture Basrah. According to Francona, Washington was very pleased with the result because the Iranians never got a chance to launch their offensive.

The level of insight into Iraq's chemical weapons program stands in marked contrast to the flawed assessments, provided by the CIA and other intelligence agencies about Iraq's program prior to the United States' invasion in 2003. Back then, American intelligence had better access to the region and could send officials out to assess the damage.

Francona visited the Fao Peninsula shortly after it had been captured by the Iraqis. He found the battlefield littered with hundreds of used injectors once filled with atropine, the drug commonly used to treat sarin's lethal effects. Francona scooped up a few of the injectors and brought them back to Baghdad -- proof that the Iraqis had used sarin on the Fao Peninsula.

In the ensuing months, Francona reported, the Iraqis used sarin in massive quantities three more times in conjunction with massed artillery fire and smoke to disguise the use of nerve agents. Each offensive was hugely successful, in large part because of the increasingly sophisticated use of mass quantities of nerve agents. The last of these attacks, called the Blessed Ramadan Offensive, was launched by the Iraqis in April 1988 and involved the largest use of sarin nerve agent employed by the Iraqis to date. For a quarter-century, no chemical attack came close to the scale of Saddam's unconventional assaults. Until, perhaps, the strikes last week outside of Damascus.

Click here to read the secret CIA files:
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2013/08/25/secret_cia_files_prove_america_helped_saddam_as_he_gassed_iran?page=0,3

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

8) Labor, Then and Now
By THE EDITORIAL BOARD

August 31, 2013

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/01/opinion/sunday/labor-then-and-now.html?hp&_r=0

On Thursday, the day after the 50th anniversary of the March on Washington, thousands of fast-food workers in 60 cities walked off their jobs, the latest in an escalating series of walkouts by low-wage workers demanding higher pay and the right to organize without retaliation.

The parallels, though inexact, are compelling. A half-century ago, the marchers called on Congress to increase the minimum wage from $1.15 an hour to $2 “so that men may live in dignity,” in the words of Bayard Rustin, one of the chief organizers of the march. Today, the fast-food workers also seek a raise, from the $9 an hour that most of them make to $15.00 an hour. That’s not much different from what the marchers wanted in 1963; adjusted for inflation, $2 then is $13.39 an hour today.

The strikers are targeting their employers — profitable companies like McDonald’s, Yum Brands (which includes Taco Bell, Pizza Hut and KFC) and Wendy’s. But Congress could help. Today’s minimum wage is a miserly $7.25 an hour — which is actually lower, adjusted for inflation, than it was 50 long years ago. Raising it would support the legitimate demands of the strikers and underscore the pressing needs of the country’s growing ranks of low-wage workers.

President Obama has noted, correctly, that increases in labor productivity have long failed to translate into higher wages for most Americans, even while income for the richest households has skyrocketed. His proposed remedies, however, leave much to be desired — a pathetic increase in the minimum wage, to $9 an hour by 2016, plus hopeful assertions that revolutions in energy, technology, manufacturing and health care will create good-paying jobs.

On its own, however, growth will not raise wages. What’s missing are policies to ensure that a large and growing share of rising labor productivity flows to workers in the form of wages and salaries, rather than to executives and shareholders. Start with an adequate minimum wage. Provide increased protections for workers to unionize, in order to strengthen their bargaining power. Provide protections for undocumented workers that would limit exploitation. Add to the mix regulations to prevent financial bubbles, thereby protecting jobs and wages from ruinous busts. Adopt expansionary fiscal and monetary policies in troubled times to sustain jobs and wages.

Low-wage workers would also benefit from executive-branch orders to ensure fair pay for employees of federal contractors. All workers need stronger enforcement of labor law so they are not routinely misclassified in ways that deny wages, overtime and benefits. They also need a tax system that is more progressive to shield wage earners from unduly burdensome tax increases or government cutbacks.

They need, in brief, pro-labor policies that have been overlooked for decades, with devastating results: from 1979 to 2012, typical workers saw wage increases of just 5 percent, despite productivity growth of nearly 75 percent, while wage gains for low-wage workers were flat or declined. Recent experience has been even worse. In the decade from 2002 to 2012, wages have stagnated or declined for the entire bottom 70 percent of the wage ladder. The marchers had it right 50 years ago. The fast-food strikers have it right today. Washington has it wrong.

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

9) For a Classic Motown Song About Money, Credit Is What He Wants
By LARRY ROHTER

August 31, 2013

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/01/arts/music/for-a-classic-motown-song-about-money-credit-is-what-he-wants.html?hp

DETROIT — On the lawn outside Motown Records’ former headquarters here, a historical marker honors the pivotal role that the song “Money (That’s What I Want)” played in building the Motown empire. With its hypnotic piano riff and unabashedly materialistic refrain, “Money,” recorded in 1959, was the first national success for the label that came to be known as “Hitsville U.S.A.,” giving the fledgling company credibility and a vital infusion of cash.

Over the years, “Money” has generated millions of dollars in publishing royalties. It was recorded by both the Beatles and the Rolling Stones, has been widely used in films and advertisements and is now featured in “Motown: The Musical” on Broadway. But the pianist and singer Barrett Strong, who first recorded “Money” and, according to records at the United States Copyright Office in Washington, was originally listed as a writer of the song, says that he has never seen a penny of those profits.

Unbeknown to Mr. Strong, who also helped write many other Motown hits, his name was removed from the copyright registration for “Money” three years after the song was written, restored in 1987 when the copyright was renewed, then removed again the next year — his name literally crossed out.

Documents at the copyright office show that all of these moves came at the direction of Motown executives, who dispute Mr. Strong’s claim of authorship. Berry Gordy Jr., Motown’s founder, declined requests for an interview, but his lawyers contend that the original registration resulted from a clerical error, and that Mr. Strong passed up numerous opportunities to assert his claim.

Mr. Strong said he learned of the alterations only late in 2010 and has been struggling ever since to have his authorship officially reinstated. At stake: his ability to share in the lucrative royalties from the song’s use. But his efforts have been blocked by a provision of copyright law that says he relinquished his rights by failing to act in a timely fashion to contest Motown’s action.

Mr. Strong’s predicament illustrates a little-known oddity in the American copyright system, one that record and music publishing companies have not hesitated to exploit. The United States Copyright Office, a division of the Library of Congress, does not notify authors of changes in registrations, and until recently the only way to check on any alterations was to go to Washington and visit the archives personally.

“For 50 years, I had no idea about any of this,” Mr. Strong, 72, said in an interview here, in which he acknowledged his lack of business acumen. “It was hidden from me. So how do they expect me to have acted to protect myself? It’s crazy and unfair.”

The long and complicated tale of “Money” begins, in Mr. Strong’s telling, with a simple but mesmerizing piano riff that came to him more than half a century ago as he was working as a session musician in a recording studio here. He was 18, a Mississippi native who had grown up in Detroit dreaming of a music career and had just been signed to a contract with Mr. Gordy, who was both his label president and his personal manager — an arrangement unthinkable today because of its inherent conflict of interest, but not unheard-of at the time.

“We were doing another session, and I just happened to be sitting there playing the piano,” he recalled. “I was playing ‘What’d I Say,’ by Ray Charles, and the groove spun off of that.”

As Mr. Strong was polishing the riff, the recording engineer, Robert Bateman, recalls becoming increasingly animated. “And when I get excited, the very first thing I do is call Berry,” Mr. Bateman said at an event at the Hard Rock Cafe in 2010. “ ‘Whoa, Berry, you’ve got to hear this, you’ve got to hear this, you’ve got to hear this.’ ”

“Anyway,” Mr. Bateman added, “it all emanated from Barrett Strong.”

The guitarist on the “Money” sessions was Eugene Grew, who recalls taking musical direction from Mr. Strong. “We sat there, practicing, and Barrett said, ‘Do this,’ and, ‘Do that,’ ” Mr. Grew said in an interview here. “It’s a real simple figure, over and over. Barrett showed me what to play and then Berry came by.”

Once the instrumental track was recorded, Mr. Strong said, Janie Bradford, who had written songs with Mr. Gordy for Jackie Wilson, helped on the lyrics. But Mr. Strong said he also contributed words.

On Nov. 12, 1959, Motown’s new song-publishing company, Jobete Music, of which Mr. Gordy was the sole owner, registered “Money (That’s What I Want)” with the United States Copyright Office. That filing, bearing Ms. Bradford’s signature, designated Mr. Strong as an “author of words & music,” with Ms. Bradford also getting a credit for words and Mr. Gordy for words and music.

Early in 1960, “Money” was issued under Mr. Strong’s name. It rose to No. 2 on Billboard’s rhythm and blues chart, peaked at No. 23 on the pop charts and eventually sold nearly a million copies.

Then, in August 1962, Jobete filed an amended copyright on “Money,” instructing the copyright office to remove Mr. Strong’s name. Under procedures in place at the copyright office then (and still in effect today), Mr. Strong had three years to contest that filing — which he said he would have done had he only known of it.

Mr. Strong’s case may stretch back decades, but the potential for other artists to find themselves in a similar bureaucratic limbo remains written into copyright law. The copyright office has begun digitizing its vast archive, which includes handwritten filings dating back to the 19th century, and that should improve access for all copyright holders. But the process has been proceeding slowly.

“I think he’s got an uphill battle,” said June M. Besek, executive director of the Kernochan Center for Law, Media and the Arts at the Columbia University School of Law. “It’s really a statute of limitations issue. He could be depicted as someone who did not conscientiously pursue his rights.”

In a letter, Barry Langberg and Deborah Drooz, lawyers for Mr. Gordy, wrote that Ms. Bradford had “erroneously listed Mr. Strong as one of ‘Money’s’ co-writers” in 1959, because “she was inexperienced and confused about the ‘authorship’ section’ ” of the copyright form, and that “when the mistake was discovered, it was rectified.” They enclosed a recently executed affidavit from Ms. Bradford to that effect.

In a separate letter, Nansci LeGette, the director of one of Mr. Gordy’s production companies, noted that Mr. Strong later signed songwriting agreements with Jobete and Mr. Gordy in which he failed to assert authorship rights to “Money.” Those “multiple transactions conducted by Barrett Strong over the years indicate that without any doubt, he did not himself believe that he was a co-writer” of the song, the letter stated.

Mr. Strong, however, said that he repeatedly asserted his rights as a writer directly in conversations with Mr. Gordy when “Money” became a hit. In retrospect, he said, he believes his name may have been removed from the songwriting credits because Mr. Gordy had come to see him as a troublemaker.

“I wasn’t getting any statements, so I started asking not too long after the record came out,” he recalled. “You couldn’t ask too many questions back then, because they’d say: ‘You’re being a bad boy. You’re getting smart.’ But I kept inquiring, and Mr. Gordy told me, ‘Don’t worry about statements and things, you’ll make your money on the road.’ On the road to what?”

Unable to generate a follow-up hit and sensing that Motown’s future resided with emerging stars like Marvin Gaye, Smokey Robinson and Little Stevie Wonder, Mr. Strong concluded he had to look elsewhere to make a living. “I had to take care of my kids,” he said, “so I went and got myself a job at Chrysler, on the production line.”

In the mid-1960s, Mr. Strong returned to Motown as a staff songwriter at the urging of his friend, the record producer Norman Whitfield; he rushed over to the studio every afternoon when his shift at the auto plant was over. Together, Mr. Strong and Mr. Whitfield wrote a string of hits that led to them being inducted into the Songwriters Hall of Fame in 2004: “I Heard It Through the Grapevine,” “Just My Imagination” and “Papa Was a Rolling Stone” among them.

Mr. Strong’s coauthorship of those hits has never been altered at the copyright office, and he said he had received some royalties for them. A few years ago, he said, he relinquished future royalties from his later songs to a third party for a $2 million payment in what he thought was a fixed-term licensing agreement but which turned out to be an outright sale; he invested that money in a recording studio project that has since failed.

Music royalties are generally divided into two categories, one for the performance of a song and the other for the composition itself. Sales of recordings may have plummeted since the late 1990s, but the songs themselves — or snippets of them — have increasingly become the soundtracks for TV shows and movies, advertisements and ring tones. Broadway can provide yet another revenue stream: Besides “Money,” the Broadway show “Motown: The Musical” features more than 50 other songs from the label’s catalog, and a two-CD soundtrack has been released.

In 2009, Mr. Strong had a stroke, limiting his ability to play the piano and sing. He now lives in a retirement home here, and hopes that by recouping rights to “Money” he will more easily be able to pay his medical bills and residence fees. But he also wants his accomplishments properly remembered. “Songs outlive people,” he said, with a mixture of sadness, resignation and anger. “The real reason Motown worked was the publishing. The records were just a vehicle to get the songs out there to the public. The real money is in the publishing, and if you have publishing, then hang on to it. That’s what it’s all about. If you give it away, you’re giving away your life, your legacy. Once you’re gone, those songs will still be playing.”

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

10) Pa. Lawsuit: Renters Fear Eviction Over 911 Calls
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
September 1, 2013
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2013/09/01/us/ap-us-911-calls-evictions.html?hp

PHILADELPHIA — Last summer, Lakisha Briggs' ex-boyfriend, who was living with her, allegedly smashed an ashtray across her face, then stabbed her in the neck with the broken glass. She was airlifted to a Philadelphia hospital.

Briggs had let him move in after a jail stint for a previous attack because she'd been afraid to call police when he showed up at her door. Not necessarily because of the threat of violence, but because one more call to 911 and Briggs knew she would lose her home, a tidy row house she rented in Norristown for herself and her 3-year-old daughter.

Norristown has what's called a three strikes law, which threatens renters with eviction if they call 911 three times within four months. Their landlords lose their rental license under the ordinance, which is designed to promote safe neighborhoods in the gritty suburb.

"Every strike has a chilling effect on whether you're going to make that outreach (to police) ... and incur that strike," said lawyer Sandra Park of the American Civil Liberties Union's Women's Rights Project in New York.

Park has been monitoring similar laws around the country, which are often aimed at addressing drug activity or reducing nuisance calls to 911. The ACLU filed a test case on behalf of Briggs that challenges the constitutionality of such ordinances. Federal court arguments are set for this month in Philadelphia.

"I felt like I was being punished for being assaulted," Briggs, a 34-year-old nursing assistant, said Friday.

Robert DeDomenicis, who represents Norristown in the case, declined to comment last week. The New York Times first reported on the lawsuit.

According to the town's court brief, police were called to Briggs' home 10 times in the first five months of 2012, often over arguments with her 21-year-old daughter and the ex-boyfriend, who were sometimes arrested. He is back in jail after a conviction for attacking Briggs.

Some claim the law is aimed at reducing police budgets. The borough says that's "an oversimplification ... which fails to take into consideration the health, welfare and safety of all neighbors who live in proximity to a disorderly house. Everyone has the right to peaceful enjoyment of their property."

The borough also said it had tried to work with Briggs and landlord Darren Sudman by giving her time to get a restraining order and keep her home.

Sudman said he considered Briggs a good tenant.

"I enjoyed living there. I lived there for about a year and a half before anybody even knew I was on the block," Briggs said. "It was a new house, a new start for me and my little one."

But she eventually moved out rather than face eviction.

The lawsuit alleges that the ordinances disproportionately affect women, since they are more often the victims of domestic violence, and that the federal Violence Against Women Act protects their housing rights.

The borough, in its brief, said it had agreed to restore Sudman's rental license and suspend all action against Briggs before the litigation began, and has not been enforcing the ordinance this year while city officials review it.

Briggs now lives in another rental unit. But she recently chose not to call 911 to report a problem she witnessed.

"I understand what the concept of (the law is), but I think that they need to really sit down and re-evaluate it," she said. "To me, there's a difference between being a nuisance, as opposed to someone really needing help."

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

11) Budget Documents Detail Extent of U.S. Cyberoperations
By DAVID E. SANGER

August 31, 2013

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/01/world/americas/documents-detail-cyberoperations-by-us.html?ref=world

WASHINGTON — Newly disclosed budget documents for America’s intelligence agencies show how aggressively the United States is now conducting offensive cyberoperations against other nations, even as the Obama administration protests attacks on American computer networks by China, Iran and Russia.

The documents, obtained by The Washington Post from Edward J. Snowden, the former National Security Agency contractor, and described by the paper in its Saturday editions, indicate 231 such operations in 2011, a year after the first evidence emerged of an American- and Israeli-led cyberattack against Iran’s nuclear-enrichment center.

That number suggests that President Obama was not deterred by the disclosure of the Iranian operation, which became evident because of a technological error, and is pressing ahead on using cyberweapons against a variety of targets.

The Post did not publish the documents. Last week, it said it had withheld most of the 178 pages of documents at the request of government officials because of the sensitivities of the spying operations they describe.

Unlike drone attacks, which the administration has begun to acknowledge publicly and provide legal justifications for, cyberattacks are still regarded as part of a secret arsenal that officials will not discuss.

The attacks described in the budget documents appear to be on a far smaller scale than the series of attacks on Iran, which were part of a classified operation called Olympic Games.

The Post reported a parallel effort, code-named GENIE, which it described as an effort by American intelligence officials working for the N.S.A. and the military’s Cyber Command to insert surreptitious controls into foreign computer networks. That computer code, a form of malware, allows American officials to hijack the computers or route some of their data to servers that enable American espionage.

It is unclear how many, if any, of those 231 operations were merely for espionage or data manipulation, and how many may have been intended to destroy or disable infrastructure. Computerized espionage is not new, though the sophistication and scale of it has increased in recent years.

Offensive operations intended to alter data, turn off networks or destroy machines — which is what made the Iran operation so complex and unusual — are a far newer phenomenon. President Obama, in an executive order signed last year, has reserved the right to decide when the United States should conduct such operations. It is not clear how many of the 231 he approved.

Diplomatically, the disclosure of the latest Snowden documents poses a new challenge to Mr. Obama. He has pressed China to cease its own cyberoperations in the United States, many of which are aimed at the theft of intellectual property including corporate secrets and the plans for the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, the country’s most expensive new weapons system.

The Chinese have responded that America also conducts extensive cyberoperations, including against China, and will doubtless use the most recent disclosures to press that case. So far, Mr. Obama’s effort to get the Chinese engaged in a deeper dialogue on cyberissues has yielded discussions, but little fruit.

The Pentagon has insisted that the United States does not engage in economic espionage, the specialty of Chinese forces like Unit 61398, a People’s Liberation Army operation behind many of the intrusions into American systems.

But it does conduct what specialists call “network exploitation,” which it distinguishes from “attacks,” to obtain military or intelligence secrets and intercept cell and digital communications. Attacks, at least as defined by the military, would involve destruction of computer equipment or the facilities those networks run.

The Post said a budget document defined network exploitation as “surreptitious virtual or physical access to create and sustain a presence inside targeted systems or facilities.” That appears to be part of the offensive operations, and can often pave the way to “facilitate future access,” the document said.

The documents indicate that the N.S.A. spent $25 million on “covert purchases of software vulnerabilities.” These are often flaws in commercial software, often in the near-ubiquitous Windows operating system, that make it possible to secretly enter and manipulate data.

The bulk of the work inside the N.S.A. is conducted by the Tailored Access Operations group, one of the most secretive units in a secretive agency.

Recently, Gen. Keith B. Alexander, who directs the N.S.A. and commands the military’s Cyber Command, spoke publicly of creating 40 cyberteams, including 13 focused on offensive operations.

The defensive operations include protections for the American military and other government agencies, and efforts to detect broad cyberattacks launched on the United States.

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

12) Drone Strike Is Said to Kill 4 Militants in Pakistan
By ISMAIL KHAN

August 31, 2013

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/01/world/asia/drone-strike-kills-suspected-militants-in-pakistan.html?ref=world

PESHAWAR, Pakistan — A drone suspected of being American killed at least four militants early Saturday in an attack on a compound in the North Waziristan tribal district, near the border with Afghanistan, a Pakistani security official and local residents said.

The drone fired missiles at a building and a nearby parked vehicle in a village close to Mir Ali, a notorious hub for militants from the Taliban and Al Qaeda in North Waziristan, where the majority of C.I.A. drone strikes have taken place.

The security official said the main building in the targeted compound had once been an Islamic school t run by Hafiz Gul Bahadur, the principal pro-Taliban warlord in North Waziristan, but added that it was currently occupied by militants from the Asian republic of Tajikistan.

“Militants are clearing the rubble and pulling out the bodies,” the official said, citing local residents. “These are preliminary reports. We do not know the identity of those killed as yet.”

It was the 18th American drone strike in the tribal belt this year, according to the London-based Bureau of Investigative Journalism, which collates data about the attacks. The strikes have drawn fierce criticism from Pakistani officials, with the country’s new prime minister, Nawaz Sharif, demanding that the United States end such attacks.

The last strike occurred on July 28, when a missile struck a group of militants near the Afghan border. As is typical, details of that strike were blurry. Between five and eight people were killed then, according to reports, some of which said the fighters had gathered for an evening meal while others said they had just crossed into Pakistan from Afghanistan.

There have been over 370 American drone strikes in Pakistan since the covert C.I.A.-directed campaign started in 2004.

Ihsanullah Tipu Mehsud contributed reporting from Islamabad, Pakistan, and Declan Walsh from London.

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

13) Radiation Near Japanese Plant’s Tanks Suggests New Leaks
By MARTIN FACKLER

August 31, 2013

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/01/world/asia/radiation-near-japanese-plants-tanks-suggests-new-leaks.html?ref=world

TOKYO — A crisis over contaminated water at Japan’s stricken nuclear plant worsened on Saturday when the plant’s operator said it had detected high radiation levels near storage tanks, a finding that raised the possibility of additional leaks.

The operator, Tokyo Electric Power Company, or Tepco, said it had found the high levels of radiation at four separate spots on the ground, near some of the hundreds of tanks used to store toxic water produced by makeshift efforts to cool the Fukushima Daiichi plant’s three damaged reactors. The highest reading was 1,800 millisieverts per hour, or enough to give a lethal dose in about four hours, Tepco said.

The contaminated spots were found as Tepco employees checked the integrity of the tanks after a leak two weeks ago released 300 tons of toxic water into the Pacific. That leak prompted Prime Minister Shinzo Abe to announce that the government would step in at the plant, which was crippled two years ago by a huge earthquake and tsunami, to help get it under control amid rising public fears of a second environmental disaster.

Saturday’s discoveries suggested that there may have been other leaks from the tanks, many of which appear to have been shoddily built as Tepco has scrambled to find enough storage space for the contaminated water being produced by the plant. However, Tepco said that it had found no evidence of fallen water levels in nearby tanks, making it unclear how much water, if any, may have leaked out, and whether any reached the Pacific, about 1,500 feet away.

About 430,000 tons of contaminated water, or enough to fill 170 Olympic-size pools, are stored in rows of tanks at the plant, which appears to be running out of open space to put them all. The contaminated water increases by 400 tons every day as groundwater flows into the basements of the damaged buildings housing the three ruined reactors, which melted down in the worst nuclear accident since Chernobyl in 1986. Tepco must draw off that water to prevent it from overwhelming jury-rigged cooling systems that keep the reactors’ melted cores from reheating and melting into the ground in a phenomenon known as the China syndrome. Tepco has struggled to safely handle and store all the water.

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

14) Income Gap Grows Wider (and Faster)
By ANNA BERNASEK

August 31, 2013

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/01/business/income-gap-grows-wider-and-faster.html?ref=us

INCOME inequality in the United States has been growing for decades, but the trend appears to have accelerated during the Obama administration. One measure of this is the relationship between median and average wages.

The median wage is straightforward: it’s the midpoint of everyone’s wages. Interpreting the average, though, can be tricky. If the income of a handful of people soars while everyone else’s remains the same, the entire group’s average may still rise substantially. So when average wages grow faster than the median, as happened from 2009 through 2011, it means that lower earners are falling further behind those at the top.

One way to see the acceleration in inequality is to look at the ratio of average to median annual wages. From 2001 through 2008, during the George W. Bush administration, that ratio grew at 0.28 percentage point per year. From 2009 through 2011, the latest year for which the data is available, the ratio increased 1.14 percentage points annually, or roughly four times faster.

The reasons for the widening income gap aren’t entirely clear. Yes, the nation has had a big recession, but recessions typically tend to lessen inequality rather than increase it.

“We’re seeing the continued effects of the weak labor market and the long-term trends involving technology and globalization,” said Lawrence Katz, an economics professor at Harvard, “Our self-inflicted wounds from austerity are also exacerbating things.” It’s always possible that the data for 2012 will show a narrowing of the gap, but Professor Katz says he wouldn’t count on it.

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

15) New Study Finds That State Crime Labs Are Paid Per Conviction

By Radley Balko Posted: 08/29/2013

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/08/29/in-some-states-crime-labs_n_3837471.html

I've previously written about the cognitive bias problem in state crime labs. This is the bias that can creep into the work of crime lab analysts when they report to, say, a state police agency, or the state attorney general. If they're considered part of the state's "team" -- if performance reviews and job assessments are done by police or prosecutors -- even the most honest and conscientious of analysts are at risk of cognitive bias. Hence, the countless and continuing crime lab scandals we've seen over the last couple decades. And this of course doesn't even touch on the more blatant examples of outright corruption.

In a new paper for the journal Criminal Justice Ethics, Roger Koppl and Meghan Sacks look at how the criminal justice system actually incentivizes wrongful convictions. In their section on state crime labs, they discover some astonishing new information about how many of these labs are funded.

Funding crime labs through court-assessed fees creates another channel for bias to enter crime lab analyses. In jurisdictions with this practice the crime lab receives a sum of money for each conviction of a given type. Ray Wickenheiser says, ‘‘Collection of court costs is the only stable source of funding for the Acadiana Crime Lab. $10 is received for each guilty plea or verdict from each speeding ticket, and $50 from each DWI (Driving While Impaired) and drug offense.’’

In Broward County, Florida, ‘‘Monies deposited in the Trust Fund are principally court costs assessed upon conviction of driving or boating under the influence ($50) or selling, manufacturing, delivery, or possession of a controlled substance ($100).’’

Several state statutory schemes require defendants to pay crime laboratory fees upon conviction. North Carolina General Statutes require, ‘‘[f]or the services of’’ the state or local crime lab, that judges in criminal cases assess a $600 fee to be charged ‘‘upon conviction’’ and remitted to the law enforcement agency containing the lab whenever that lab ‘‘performed DNA analysis of the crime, tests of bodily fluids of the defendant for the presence of alcohol or controlled substances, or analysis of any controlled substance possessed by the defendant or the defendant’s agent.’’

Illinois crime labs receive fees upon convictions for sex offenses, controlled substance offenses, and those involving driving under the influence. Mississippi crime labs require crime laboratory fees for various conviction types, including arson, aiding suicide, and driving while intoxicated.

Similar provisions exist in Alabama, New Mexico, Kentucky, New Jersey, Virginia, and, until recently, Michigan. Other states have broadened the scope even further. Washington statutes require a $100 crime lab fee for any conviction that involves lab analysis. Kansas statutes require offenders ‘‘to pay a separate court cost of $400 for every individual offense if forensic science or laboratory services or forensic computer examination services are provided in connection with the investigation.’’
In addition to those already listed, the following states also require crime lab fees in connection with various conviction types: Arizona, California, Missouri, Tennessee, and Wisconsin.

Think about how these fee structures play out in the day-to-day work in these labs. Every analyst knows that a test result implicating a suspect will result in a fee paid to the lab. Every result that clears a suspect means no fee. They're literally being paid to provide the analysis to win convictions. Their findings are then presented to juries as the careful, meticulous work of an objective scientist.
No wonder there have been so many scandals. I'm sure we'll continue to see more.

(Disclosure: In 2008, Koppl and I co-wrote an article for Slate on how to fix some of these problems.)

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

16) Japan to Spend Almost $500 Million on Water Crisis at Fukushima Nuclear Plant
By REUTERS

September 3, 2013

http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2013/09/03/world/asia/03reuters-japan-fukushima.html?hp

TOKYO — Japan pledged nearly $500 million (321.4 million pounds) to contain leaks and decontaminate radioactive water from the tsunami-crippled Fukushima nuclear plant, stepping up government efforts to cope with the legacy of the worst atomic disaster in a quarter of a century.

The announcement comes just days before the International Olympic Committee decides whether Tokyo - 230 km (140 miles) from the wrecked plant - will host the 2020 Olympic Games and the government is keen to show the crisis is under control. Madrid and Istanbul are the rival candidates.

"The world is watching to see if we can carry out the decommissioning of the Fukushima nuclear power plant, including addressing the contaminated water issues," Prime Minister Shinzo Abe told cabinet ministers, who met to approve the plan.

The government intervention represents only a tiny slice of the response to the Fukushima crisis triggered by the March 2011 earthquake and tsunami, which caused reactor meltdowns at the plant. The clean-up, including decommissioning the ruined reactors, will take decades and rely on unproven technology.

The measures do not address the full problem of water management at the plant or the bigger issue of decommissioning. The sensitive job of removing spent fuel rods is to start in the coming months. The ultimate fate of the plant's operator, Tokyo Electric Power Co (Tepco), also remains unclear, as does the question of who will eventually foot the bill - Japanese taxpayers, or the embattled Tepco.

"This is a matter of public safety, so the country has to take the lead on this issue and respond as quickly as possible. Figuring out who to bill for the costs can come later," Economics Minister Akira Amari told a news conference.

Chief Cabinet Secretary Yoshihide Suga told a separate news conference that the government would spend a total of 47 billion yen (304.1 million pounds), including 21 billion yen in emergency reserve funds from this year's budget.

Of that, 32 billion yen will fund the building of a massive underground wall of frozen earth around the damaged reactors to contain groundwater flows, and 15 billion yen to improve a water treatment system meant to drastically reduce radiation levels in the contaminated water.

TEPCO CRITICISM

Tepco, Japan's biggest utility, has come under a fresh flood of criticism following a stream of bad news including its admission, after repeated denials, that contaminated water was flowing into the Pacific Ocean. That was followed by leaks from above-ground tanks used to store radiated water.

The problems have revived notions, debated but rejected in the months after the March 2011 disaster, of liquidating Tepco or at least splitting off the Fukushima operation from its other businesses and putting it under direct government control.

"Is anyone at Tepco taking responsibility for these mistakes? I haven't heard of anyone stepping down or being fired," said Taro Kono, a ruling Liberal Democratic Party deputy secretary general who is critical of nuclear utilities. "Tepco needs to go down and the government needs to take over," he said, acknowledging his was a minority view in the ruling party.

Industry minister Toshimitsu Motegi and ruling party officials have said liquidating Tepco was not being considered as an option.

Critics said the government was mainly trying to cool down international media coverage ahead of the Olympics decision.

"At a moment when international public opinion is worrying about the long-term consequences of repeated leaks at the site, Tokyo seems to obeying the short-term logic of waiting until the Olympics decision is over," Mycle Schneider, an independent nuclear energy analyst based in Paris who frequently visits Japan, said by email. A more sustainable option, he added, would be to seek global support to confront Fukushima's unprecedented challenges.

Motegi denied the Olympic bid was the main motivating factor. "The government felt that we want to be fully involved and put together fundamental measures regardless of the decision on where they will hold the Games," he said.

OFF-LIMITS

Measurable radiation from water leaking from the facility is confined to the harbour around the plant, Motegi noted, and is not an environmental threat to other countries because the radiation will be diluted by the sea.

The peak release of radiation in the sea around Fukushima came about a month after the earthquake and tsunami. Ocean currents have since dispersed the plume and sent the diluted radiation in a slow drift towards the West Coast of the United States, studies have shown. The amount of radiation expected to reach Canadian and U.S. coastal waters in the years ahead is projected to be well within safety limits for drinking water as it will have been greatly diluted.

The closest towns to the stricken plant remain deserted and off-limits to the public. But some former residents have started to return to their homes, some of which are less than 20 kms away, as decontamination work progresses.

China said last month it was "shocked" to hear that contaminated water was still leaking from storage tanks and urged Japan to give timely and accurate information. [ID:nL4N0GM0DG] Tepco is storing enough contaminated water to fill more than 130 Olympic-sized swimming pools, mostly in hastily built tanks that officials have said may spring further leaks.

The planned measures are daunting. Freezing earth to block water flows is a technology commonly used in digging subway tunnels, but is untested on the Fukushima scale and the planned duration of years or decades. The decontamination technology has repeatedly suffered from glitches.

The Advanced Liquid Processing System (ALPS), developed by Utah-based EnergySolutions and Toshiba Corp, can remove all radioactive particles from water except tritium, considered the least harmful to humans. But the system has been stalled for months due to mishaps.

Tepco said earlier that patrolling workers had found a new area of high radiation near water storage tanks.

(Additional reporting by Sumio Ito, Aaron Sheldrick and Stanley White; Writing by Billy Mallard and Linda Sieg; Editing by Ian Geoghegan)

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

17) Britain: Skyscraper Said to Have ‘Melted’ Luxury Car
By REUTERS

September 2, 2013

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/03/world/europe/britain-skyscraper-said-to-have-melted-luxury-car.html?ref=world

A cluster of new skyscrapers transforming the London skyline are often blamed for spoiling the view. Now one has been accused of “melting” a car. A motorist said the intense sunlight reflected from the “Walkie Talkie” — one of several flashy towers under construction in the historic financial district — had warped his Jaguar, which he had parked across the street. The skyscraper’s developers said they were seeking to rectify the problem, which they blamed on the position of the sun at certain times of day. “The phenomenon is caused by the current elevation of the sun in the sky. It currently lasts for approximately two hours per day, with initial modeling suggesting that it will be present for approximately two-three weeks,” Land Securities and Canary Wharf Group said in a statement. Three parking spaces had been taken out of service pending a solution, it added. The car’s owner, Martin Lindsay, told the BBC that he had left his car for an hour and returned to find that the side mirror, panels and Jaguar badge had “melted.” The 37-story building has been nicknamed the “Walkie Talkie” after its distinctive shape, which appears to expand outward at the top.

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

B. EVENTS AND ACTIONS

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

Tell Congress, NO New War on Syria!

Bay Area March & Rally in Solidarity w/Mass Protest at Capitol in DC

Sat. Sept. 7, 12 noon

Gather at Chelsea Manning Plaza (Embarcadero), SF

Time is of the essence. We have been in the streets all over the country. The opposition to a new war is everywhere. This forced the administration to step back from imminent bombings.

But the danger also exists for an even larger war against Syria as Obama seeks to make a deal with pro-war senators and congresspersons like John McCain, Lindsey Graham, Nancy Pelosi and others.

Now is the time for the people to step up pressure on Congress and demand that they vote NO to any resolution authorizing a military attack on Syria.

On Saturday, September 7, people are descending on Congress for a major demonstration as Congress returns to Washington, D.C., and prepares to vote. This demonstration is initiated by a broad ad hoc coalition called the Vote No War Against Syria Coalition. If you or your organization would like to be an endorser of the Sept. 7 demonstration, email votenowaronsyria@yahoo.com .

Here in the Bay Area, there will be a parallel march and rally in solidarity with the mass protest in Washington DC, beginning at Chelsea Manning Plaza (Embarcadero) at 12 noon. We urge everyone who wants to stop a new war against Syria before it starts, to endorse, help organize and join the demonstration on Saturday, Sept. 7.

To volunteer or for more info: 415-821-6545 or answer@answersf.org.

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

C. SPECIAL APPEALS AND
ONGOING CAMPAIGNS

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

We need to save City College of San Francisco. The Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges
(ACCJC) should be disbanded.
Sign the petition:
http://petitions.moveon.org/sign/save-city-college-of?source=mo&id=71563-24372784-v5AC0qx

That's why we started a petition to the Department of Education, which says:

Reverse the ACCJC's unjust decision to cancel City College of San Francisco's accreditation. The Department of Education must immediately rescind its recognition of the ACCJC. The ACCJC has violated state and federal laws as well as their own policies. Their agenda to downsize and privatize public education has tremendously harmed the diverse communities of the San Francisco Bay Area.

We call on the Department of Education to save CCSF by revoking its recognition of the ACCJC and replacing it with a transparent and publicly-accountable accreditation body.

Click here to add your name to this petition, and then pass it along to your friends.

–Save City College of SF Coalition

This petition was created on MoveOn's online petition site, where anyone can start their own online petitions. Save City College of SF Coalition didn't pay us to send this email—we never rent or sell the MoveOn.org list.

Want to support our work? MoveOn Civic Action is entirely funded by our 8 million members—no corporate contributions, no big checks from CEOs. And our tiny staff ensures that small contributions go a long way.
*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

16 Years in Solitary Confinement Is Like a "Living Tomb"
American Civil Liberties Union petition to end long-term solitary confinement:
California Corrections Secretary Jeffrey Beard: We stand with the prisoners on hunger strike. We urge you to comply with the US Commission on Safety and Abuse in America’s Prisons 2006 recommendations regarding an end to long-term solitary confinement.
Sign the petition:
https://www.aclu.org/secure/ca-hunger-strike?emsrc=Nat_Appeal_AutologinEnabled&emissue=criminal_justice&emtype=petition&ms=eml_130719_acluaction_cahungerstrike&af=k%2FxKX1cIRdoonPVmvnAfAit8jzOCulLOnCX4AAFljff%2B%2BVOdOHNe6CKwl7glWQSjSakzXt53zF%2FodPf00T3rRHlglO3tjEA6DcMSLJRlTbfVBHAizX6uOxoSy5%2FbP93EBFj5xi6Lwm3RWHjmDOZDARHLBSl1rqTr07kLhONZrnU1UIIgPs0P%2FXQ%2BJL3reyE8%2BoiI1nlfPZPBVhbfYxUzMQ%3D%3D&etname=130719+CA+prisoners+hunger+strike&etjid=946739
In California, hundreds of prisoners have been held in solitary for more than a decade – some for infractions as trivial as reading Machiavelli's "The Prince."

Gabriel Reyes describes the pain of being isolated for at least 22 hours a day for the last 16 years:

“Unless you have lived it, you cannot imagine what it feels like to be by yourself, between four cold walls, with little concept of time…. It is a living tomb …’ I have not been allowed physical contact with any of my loved ones since 1995…I feel helpless and hopeless. In short, I am being psychologically tortured.”

That’s why over 30,000 prisoners in California began a hunger strike – the biggest the state has ever seen. They’re refusing food to protest prisoners being held for decades in solitary and to push for other changes to improve their basic conditions.

California Corrections Secretary Jeffrey Beard has tried to dismiss the strikers and refuses to negotiate, but the media pressure is building through the strike. If tens of thousands of us take action, we can help keep this issue in the spotlight so that Secretary Beard can’t ignore the inhumane treatment of prisoners.

Sign the petition urging Corrections Secretary Beard to end the use of long-term solitary confinement.

Solitary is such an extreme form of punishment that a United Nations torture rapporteur called for an international ban on the practice except in rare occasions. Here’s why:

The majority of the 80,000 people held in solitary in this country are severely mentally ill or because of a minor infraction (it’s a myth that it’s only for violent prisoners)
Even for people with stable mental health, solitary causes severe psychological reactions, often leading people to attempt suicide
It jeopardizes public safety because prisoners held in solitary have a harder time reintegrating into society.

And to add insult to injury, the hunger strikers are now facing retaliation – their lawyers are being restricted from visiting and the strikers are being punished. But the media continues to write about the hunger strike and we can help keep the pressure on Secretary Beard by signing this petition.

Sign the petition urging Corrections Secretary Beard to end the use of long-term solitary confinement.

Our criminal justice system should keep communities safe and treat people fairly. The use of solitary confinement undermines both of these goals – but little by little, we can help put a stop to such cruelty.

Thank you,
Anthony for the ACLU Action team
P.S. The hunger strikers have developed five core demands to address their basic conditions, the main one being an end to long-term solitary confinement. They are:

-End group punishment – prisoners say that officials often punish groups to address individual rule violations

-Abolish the debriefing policy, which is often demanded in return for better food or release from solitary

-End long-term solitary confinement

-Provide adequate and nutritious food

-Expand or provide constructive programming and privileges for indefinite SHU inmates

Sources
“Solitary - and anger - in California's prisons.” Los Angeles Times July 13, 2013
“Pelican Bay Prison Hunger-Strikers' Stories: Gabriel Reyes.” TruthOut July 9, 2013
“Solitary confinement should be banned in most cases, UN expert says.” UN News October 18, 2011
"Stop Solitary - Two Pager" ACLU.org

What you Didn't know about NYPD's Stop & Frisk program !
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=rfJHx0Gj6ys#at=990

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

Egypt: The Next President -- a little Egyptian boy speaks his remarkable mind!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QeDm2PrNV1I

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

Wealth Inequality in America

[This is a must see to believe video...bw]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=QPKKQnijnsM

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

Read the transcription of hero Bradley Manning's 35-page statement explaining why he leaked "state secrets" to WikiLeaks.

March 1, 2013

Alternet

The statement was read by Pfc. Bradley Manning at a providence inquiry for his formal plea of guilty to one specification as charged and nine specifications for lesser included offenses. He pled not guilty to 12 other specifications. This rush transcript was taken by journalist Alexa O'Brien at Thursday's pretrial hearing and first appeared on Salon.com.

http://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/bradley-mannings-surprising-statement-court-details-why-he-made-his-historic?akid=10129.229473.UZvQfK&rd=1&src=newsletter802922&t=7

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

Call for a Compassionate Release for Lynne Stewart:
Attorney General Eric Holder: 202-514-2001
White House President Obama: 202-456-1414
Bureau of Prisons Director Charles Samuels: 202-307-3198 ext 3

Urgent: Please sign the petition for compassionate release for Lynne Stewart
http://www.change.org/petitions/petition-to-free-lynne-stewart-save-her-life-release-her-now-2

For more information, go to http://www.lynnestewart.org

Write to Lynne Stewart at:

Lynne Stewart #53504-054
??Federal Medical Center, Carswell
PO Box 27137
Fort Worth, TX 76127

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

You Have the Right to Remain Silent: NLG Guide to Law Enforcement Encounters

Posted 1 day ago on July 27, 2012, 10:28 p.m. EST by OccupyWallSt

Occupy Wall Street is a nonviolent movement for social and economic justice, but in recent days disturbing reports have emerged of Occupy-affiliated activists being targeted by US law enforcement, including agents from the FBI and Department of Homeland Security. To help ensure Occupiers and allied activists know their rights when encountering law enforcement, we are publishing in full the National Lawyers Guild's booklet: You Have the Right to Remain Silent. The NLG provides invaluable support to the Occupy movement and other activists – please click here to support the NLG.

We strongly encourage all Occupiers to read and share the information provided below. We also recommend you enter the NLG's national hotline number (888-654-3265) into your cellphone (if you have one) and keep a copy handy. This information is not a substitute for legal advice. You should contact the NLG or a criminal defense attorney immediately if you have been visited by the FBI or other law enforcement officials. You should also alert your relatives, friends, co-workers and others so that they will be prepared if they are contacted as well.

You Have the Right to Remain Silent: A Know Your Rights Guide for Law Enforcement Encounters

What Rights Do I Have?

Whether or not you're a citizen, you have rights under the United States Constitution. The Fifth Amendment gives every person the right to remain silent: not to answer questions asked by a police officer or government agent. The Fourth Amendment restricts the government's power to enter and search your home or workplace, although there are many exceptions and new laws have expanded the government's power to conduct surveillance. The First Amendment protects your right to speak freely and to advocate for social change. However, if you are a non-citizen, the Department of Homeland Security may target you based on your political activities.

Standing Up For Free Speech

The government's crusade against politically-active individuals is intended to disrupt and suppress the exercise of time-honored free speech activities, such as boycotts, protests, grassroots organizing and solidarity work. Remember that you have the right to stand up to the intimidation tactics of FBI agents and other law enforcement officials who, with political motives, are targeting organizing and free speech activities. Informed resistance to these tactics and steadfast defense of your and others' rights can bring positive results. Each person who takes a courageous stand makes future resistance to government oppression easier for all. The National Lawyers Guild has a long tradition of standing up to government repression. The organization itself was labeled a "subversive" group during the McCarthy Era and was subject to FBI surveillance and infiltration for many years. Guild attorneys have defended FBI-targeted members of the Black Panther Party, the American Indian Movement, and the Puerto Rican independence movement. The NLG exposed FBI surveillance, infiltration and disruption tactics that were detailed during the 1975-76 COINTELPRO hearings. In 1989 the NLG prevailed in a lawsuit on behalf of several activist organizations, including the Guild, that forced the FBI to expose the extent to which it had been spying on activist movements. Under the settlement, the FBI turned over roughly 400,000 pages of its files on the Guild, which are now available at the Tamiment Library at New York University.

What if FBI Agents or Police Contact Me?

What if an agent or police officer comes to the door?

Do not invite the agents or police into your home. Do not answer any questions. Tell the agent that you do not wish to talk with him or her. You can state that your lawyer will contact them on your behalf. You can do this by stepping outside and pulling the door behind you so that the interior of your home or office is not visible, getting their contact information or business cards and then returning inside. They should cease questioning after this. If the agent or officer gives a reason for contacting you, take notes and give the information to your attorney. Anything you say, no matter how seemingly harmless or insignificant, may be used against you or others in the future. Lying to or misleading a federal agent is a crime. The more you speak, the more opportunity for federal law enforcement to find something you said (even if not intentionally) false and assert that you lied to a federal officer.

Do I have to answer questions?

You have the constitutional right to remain silent. It is not a crime to refuse to answer questions. You do not have to talk to anyone, even if you have been arrested or are in jail. You should affirmatively and unambiguously state that you wish to remain silent and that you wish to consult an attorney. Once you make the request to speak to a lawyer, do not say anything else. The Supreme Court recently ruled that answering law enforcement questions may be taken as a waiver of your right to remain silent, so it is important that you assert your rights and maintain them. Only a judge can order you to answer questions. There is one exception: some states have "stop and identify" statutes which require you to provide identity information or your name if you have been detained on reasonable suspicion that you may have committed a crime. A lawyer in your state can advise you of the status of these requirements where you reside.

Do I have to give my name?

As above, in some states you can be detained or arrested for merely refusing to give your name. And in any state, police do not always follow the law, and refusing to give your name may make them suspicious or more hostile and lead to your arrest, even without just cause, so use your judgment. Giving a false name could in some circumstances be a crime.

Do I need a lawyer?

You have the right to talk to a lawyer before you decide whether to answer questions from law enforcement. It is a good idea to talk to a lawyer if you are considering answering any questions. You have the right to have a lawyer present during any interview. The lawyer's job is to protect your rights. Once you tell the agent that you want to talk to a lawyer, he or she should stop trying to question you and should make any further contact through your lawyer. If you do not have a lawyer, you can still tell the officer you want to speak to one before answering questions. Remember to get the name, agency and telephone number of any investigator who visits you, and give that information to your lawyer. The government does not have to provide you with a free lawyer unless you are charged with a crime, but the NLG or another organization may be able to help you find a lawyer for free or at a reduced rate.

If I refuse to answer questions or say I want a lawyer, won't it seem like I have something to hide?

Anything you say to law enforcement can be used against you and others. You can never tell how a seemingly harmless bit of information might be used or manipulated to hurt you or someone else. That is why the right not to talk is a fundamental right under the Constitution. Keep in mind that although law enforcement agents are allowed to lie to you, lying to a government agent is a crime. Remaining silent is not. The safest things to say are "I am going to remain silent," "I want to speak to my lawyer," and "I do not consent to a search." It is a common practice for law enforcement agents to try to get you to waive your rights by telling you that if you have nothing to hide you would talk or that talking would "just clear things up." The fact is, if they are questioning you, they are looking to incriminate you or someone you may know, or they are engaged in political intelligence gathering. You should feel comfortable standing firm in protection and defense of your rights and refusing to answer questions.

Can agents search my home or office?

You do not have to let police or agents into your home or office unless they have and produce a valid search warrant. A search warrant is a written court order that allows the police to conduct a specified search. Interfering with a warrantless search probably will not stop it and you might get arrested. But you should say "I do not consent to a search," and call a criminal defense lawyer or the NLG. You should be aware that a roommate or guest can legally consent to a search of your house if the police believe that person has the authority to give consent, and your employer can consent to a search of your workspace without your permission.

What if agents have a search warrant?

If you are present when agents come for the search, you can ask to see the warrant. The warrant must specify in detail the places to be searched and the people or things to be taken away. Tell the agents you do not consent to the search so that they cannot go beyond what the warrant authorizes. Ask if you are allowed to watch the search; if you are allowed to, you should. Take notes, including names, badge numbers, what agency each officer is from, where they searched and what they took. If others are present, have them act as witnesses to watch carefully what is happening. If the agents ask you to give them documents, your computer, or anything else, look to see if the item is listed in the warrant. If it is not, do not consent to them taking it without talking to a lawyer. You do not have to answer questions. Talk to a lawyer first. (Note: If agents present an arrest warrant, they may only perform a cursory visual search of the premises to see if the person named in the arrest warrant is present.)

Do I have to answer questions if I have been arrested?

No. If you are arrested, you do not have to answer any questions. You should affirmatively and unambiguously state that you wish to assert your right to remain silent. Ask for a lawyer right away. Do not say anything else. Repeat to every officer who tries to talk to or question you that you wish to remain silent and that you wish to speak to a lawyer. You should always talk to a lawyer before you decide to answer any questions.

What if I speak to government agents anyway?

Even if you have already answered some questions, you can refuse to answer other questions until you have a lawyer. If you find yourself talking, stop. Assert that you wish to remain silent and that you wish to speak to a lawyer.

What if the police stop me on the street?

Ask if you are free to go. If the answer is yes, consider just walking away. If the police say you are not under arrest, but are not free to go, then you are being detained. The police can pat down the outside of your clothing if they have reason to suspect you might be armed and dangerous. If they search any more than this, say clearly, "I do not consent to a search." They may keep searching anyway. If this happens, do not resist because you can be charged with assault or resisting arrest. You do not have to answer any questions. You do not have to open bags or any closed container. Tell the officers you do not consent to a search of your bags or other property.

What if police or agents stop me in my car?

Keep your hands where the police can see them. If you are driving a vehicle, you must show your license, registration and, in some states, proof of insurance. You do not have to consent to a search. But the police may have legal grounds to search your car anyway. Clearly state that you do not consent. Officers may separate passengers and drivers from each other to question them, but no one has to answer any questions.

What if I am treated badly by the police or the FBI?

Write down the officer's badge number, name or other identifying information. You have a right to ask the officer for this information. Try to find witnesses and their names and phone numbers. If you are injured, seek medical attention and take pictures of the injuries as soon as you can. Call a lawyer as soon as possible.

What if the police or FBI threaten me with a grand jury subpoena if I don't answer their questions?

A grand jury subpoena is a written order for you to go to court and testify about information you may have. It is common for the FBI to threaten you with a subpoena to get you to talk to them. If they are going to subpoena you, they will do so anyway. You should not volunteer to speak just because you are threatened with a subpoena. You should consult a lawyer.

What if I receive a grand jury subpoena?

Grand jury proceedings are not the same as testifying at an open court trial. You are not allowed to have a lawyer present (although one may wait in the hallway and you may ask to consult with him or her after each question) and you may be asked to answer questions about your activities and associations. Because of the witness's limited rights in this situation, the government has frequently used grand jury subpoenas to gather information about activists and political organizations. It is common for the FBI to threaten activists with a subpoena in order to elicit information about their political views and activities and those of their associates. There are legal grounds for stopping ("quashing") subpoenas, and receiving one does not necessarily mean that you are suspected of a crime. If you do receive a subpoena, call the NLG National Hotline at 888-NLG-ECOL (888-654-3265) or call a criminal defense attorney immediately.

The government regularly uses grand jury subpoena power to investigate and seek evidence related to politically-active individuals and social movements. This practice is aimed at prosecuting activists and, through intimidation and disruption, discouraging continued activism.

Federal grand jury subpoenas are served in person. If you receive one, it is critically important that you retain the services of an attorney, preferably one who understands your goals and, if applicable, understands the nature of your political work, and has experience with these issues. Most lawyers are trained to provide the best legal defense for their client, often at the expense of others. Beware lawyers who summarily advise you to cooperate with grand juries, testify against friends, or cut off contact with your friends and political activists. Cooperation usually leads to others being subpoenaed and investigated. You also run the risk of being charged with perjury, a felony, should you omit any pertinent information or should there be inconsistencies in your testimony.

Frequently prosecutors will offer "use immunity," meaning that the prosecutor is prohibited from using your testimony or any leads from it to bring charges against you. If a subsequent prosecution is brought, the prosecutor bears the burden of proving that all of its evidence was obtained independent of the immunized testimony. You should be aware, however, that they will use anything you say to manipulate associates into sharing more information about you by suggesting that you have betrayed confidences.

In front of a grand jury you can "take the Fifth" (exercise your right to remain silent). However, the prosecutor may impose immunity on you, which strips you of Fifth Amendment protection and subjects you to the possibility of being cited for contempt and jailed if you refuse to answer further. In front of a grand jury you have no Sixth Amendment right to counsel, although you can consult with a lawyer outside the grand jury room after each question.

What if I don't cooperate with the grand jury?

If you receive a grand jury subpoena and elect to not cooperate, you may be held in civil contempt. There is a chance that you may be jailed or imprisoned for the length of the grand jury in an effort to coerce you to cooperate. Regular grand juries sit for a basic term of 18 months, which can be extended up to a total of 24 months. It is lawful to hold you in order to coerce your cooperation, but unlawful to hold you as a means of punishment. In rare instances you may face criminal contempt charges.

What If I Am Not a Citizen and the DHS Contacts Me?

The Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) is now part of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and has been renamed and reorganized into: 1. The Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration Services (BCIS); 2. The Bureau of Customs and Border Protection (CBP); and 3. The Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). All three bureaus will be referred to as DHS for the purposes of this pamphlet.

? Assert your rights. If you do not demand your rights or if you sign papers waiving your rights, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) may deport you before you see a lawyer or an immigration judge. Never sign anything without reading, understanding and knowing the consequences of signing it.

? Talk to a lawyer. If possible, carry with you the name and telephone number of an immigration lawyer who will take your calls. The immigration laws are hard to understand and there have been many recent changes. DHS will not explain your options to you. As soon as you encounter a DHS agent, call your attorney. If you can't do it right away, keep trying. Always talk to an immigration lawyer before leaving the U.S. Even some legal permanent residents can be barred from returning.

Based on today's laws, regulations and DHS guidelines, non-citizens usually have the following rights, no matter what their immigration status. This information may change, so it is important to contact a lawyer. The following rights apply to non-citizens who are inside the U.S. Non-citizens at the border who are trying to enter the U.S. do not have all the same rights.

Do I have the right to talk to a lawyer before answering any DHS questions or signing any DHS papers?

Yes. You have the right to call a lawyer or your family if you are detained, and you have the right to be visited by a lawyer in detention. You have the right to have your attorney with you at any hearing before an immigration judge. You do not have the right to a government-appointed attorney for immigration proceedings, but if you have been arrested, immigration officials must show you a list of free or low cost legal service providers.

Should I carry my green card or other immigration papers with me?

If you have documents authorizing you to stay in the U.S., you must carry them with you. Presenting false or expired papers to DHS may lead to deportation or criminal prosecution. An unexpired green card, I-94, Employment Authorization Card, Border Crossing Card or other papers that prove you are in legal status will satisfy this requirement. If you do not carry these papers with you, you could be charged with a crime. Always keep a copy of your immigration papers with a trusted family member or friend who can fax them to you, if need be. Check with your immigration lawyer about your specific case.

Am I required to talk to government officers about my immigration history?

If you are undocumented, out of status, a legal permanent resident (green card holder), or a citizen, you do not have to answer any questions about your immigration history. (You may want to consider giving your name; see above for more information about this.) If you are not in any of these categories, and you are being questioned by a DHS or FBI agent, then you may create problems with your immigration status if you refuse to provide information requested by the agent. If you have a lawyer, you can tell the agent that your lawyer will answer questions on your behalf. If answering questions could lead the agent to information that connects you with criminal activity, you should consider refusing to talk to the agent at all.

If I am arrested for immigration violations, do I have the right to a hearing before an immigration judge to defend myself against deportation charges?

Yes. In most cases only an immigration judge can order you deported. But if you waive your rights or take "voluntary departure," agreeing to leave the country, you could be deported without a hearing. If you have criminal convictions, were arrested at the border, came to the U.S. through the visa waiver program or have been ordered deported in the past, you could be deported without a hearing. Contact a lawyer immediately to see if there is any relief for you.

Can I call my consulate if I am arrested?

Yes. Non-citizens arrested in the U.S. have the right to call their consulate or to have the police tell the consulate of your arrest. The police must let your consulate visit or speak with you if consular officials decide to do so. Your consulate might help you find a lawyer or offer other help. You also have the right to refuse help from your consulate.

What happens if I give up my right to a hearing or leave the U.S. before the hearing is over?

You could lose your eligibility for certain immigration benefits, and you could be barred from returning to the U.S. for a number of years. You should always talk to an immigration lawyer before you decide to give up your right to a hearing.

What should I do if I want to contact DHS?

Always talk to a lawyer before contacting DHS, even on the phone. Many DHS officers view "enforcement" as their primary job and will not explain all of your options to you.

What Are My Rights at Airports?

IMPORTANT NOTE: It is illegal for law enforcement to perform any stops, searches, detentions or removals based solely on your race, national origin, religion, sex or ethnicity.

If I am entering the U.S. with valid travel papers can a U.S. customs agent stop and search me?

Yes. Customs agents have the right to stop, detain and search every person and item.

Can my bags or I be searched after going through metal detectors with no problem or after security sees that my bags do not contain a weapon?

Yes. Even if the initial screen of your bags reveals nothing suspicious, the screeners have the authority to conduct a further search of you or your bags.

If I am on an airplane, can an airline employee interrogate me or ask me to get off the plane?

The pilot of an airplane has the right to refuse to fly a passenger if he or she believes the passenger is a threat to the safety of the flight. The pilot's decision must be reasonable and based on observations of you, not stereotypes.

What If I Am Under 18?

Do I have to answer questions?

No. Minors too have the right to remain silent. You cannot be arrested for refusing to talk to the police, probation officers, or school officials, except in some states you may have to give your name if you have been detained.

What if I am detained?

If you are detained at a community detention facility or Juvenile Hall, you normally must be released to a parent or guardian. If charges are filed against you, in most states you are entitled to counsel (just like an adult) at no cost.

Do I have the right to express political views at school?

Public school students generally have a First Amendment right to politically organize at school by passing out leaflets, holding meetings, etc., as long as those activities are not disruptive and do not violate legitimate school rules. You may not be singled out based on your politics, ethnicity or religion.

Can my backpack or locker be searched?

School officials can search students' backpacks and lockers without a warrant if they reasonably suspect that you are involved in criminal activity or carrying drugs or weapons. Do not consent to the police or school officials searching your property, but do not physically resist or you may face criminal charges.

Disclaimer

This booklet is not a substitute for legal advice. You should contact an attorney if you have been visited by the FBI or other law enforcement officials. You should also alert your relatives, friends, co-workers and others so that they will be prepared if they are contacted as well.

NLG National Hotline for Activists Contacted by the FBI

888-NLG-ECOL

(888-654-3265)

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

Free Mumia NOW!

Prisonradio.org

Write to Mumia:

Mumia Abu-Jamal AM 8335

SCI Mahanoy

301 Morea Road

Frackville, PA 17932

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Contact: Rachel Wolkenstein

August 21, 2011 (917) 689-4009

MUMIA ABU-JAMAL ILLEGALLY SENTENCED TO

LIFE IMPRISONMENT WITHOUT PAROLE!

FREE MUMIA NOW!

www.FreeMumia.com

http://blacktalkradionetwork.com/profiles/blogs/mumia-is-formally-sentenced-to-life-in-prison-w-out-hearing-he-s

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

"A Child's View from Gaza: Palestinian Children's Art and the Fight Against

Censorship" book

https://www.mecaforpeace.org/civicrm/contribute/transact?reset=1&id=25

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

Justice for Albert Woodfox and Herman Wallace: Decades of isolation in Louisiana

state prisons must end

Take Action -- Sign Petition Here:

http://www.amnesty.org/en/appeals-for-action/justice-for-albert-woodfox-and-herm\

an-wallace

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

WITNESS GAZA

http://www.witnessgaza.com/

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

Write to Bradley

http://bradleymanning.org/donate

View the new 90 second "I am Bradley Manning" video:

I am Bradley Manning

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o-P3OXML00s

Courage to Resist

484 Lake Park Ave. #41

Oakland, CA 94610

510-488-3559

couragetoresist.org

"A Fort Leavenworth mailing address has been released for Bradley Manning:

Bradley Manning 89289

830 Sabalu Road

Fort Leavenworth, KS 66027

The receptionist at the military barracks confirmed that if someone sends

Bradley Manning a letter to that address, it will be delivered to him."

http://www.bradleymanning.org/news/update-42811

This is also a Facebook event

http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=207100509321891#!/event.php?eid=2071005093\

21891

Courage to Resist needs your support

Please donate today:

https://co.clickandpledge.com/sp/d1/default.aspx?wid=38590

"Soldiers sworn oath is to defend and support the Constitution. Bradley Manning

has been defending and supporting our Constitution." --Dan Ellsberg, Pentagon

Papers whistle-blower

Jeff Paterson

Project Director, Courage to Resist

First US military service member to refuse to fight in Iraq

Please donate today.

https://co.clickandpledge.com/sp/d1/default.aspx?wid=38590

P.S. I'm asking that you consider a contribution of $50 or more, or possibly

becoming a sustainer at $15 a month. Of course, now is also a perfect time to

make a end of year tax-deductible donation. Thanks again for your support!

Please click here to forward this to a friend who might also be interested in

supporting GI resisters.

http://ymlp.com/forward.php?id=lS3tR&e=bonnieweinstein@yahoo.com

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

The Battle Is Still On To

FREE MUMIA ABU-JAMAL!

The Labor Action Committee To Free Mumia Abu-Jamal

PO Box 16222 • Oakland CA 94610

www.laboractionmumia.org

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

KEVIN COOPER IS INNOCENT! FREE KEVIN COOPER!

Reasonable doubts about executing Kevin Cooper

Chronicle Editorial

Monday, December 13, 2010

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/12/13/EDG81GP0I7.DTL

Death penalty -- Kevin Cooper is Innocent! Help save his life from San Quentin's

death row!

http://www.savekevincooper.org/

http://www.savekevincooper.org/pages/essays_content.html?ID=255

URGENT ACTION APPEAL

- From Amnesty International USA

17 December 2010

Click here to take action online:

http://takeaction.amnestyusa.org/siteapps/advocacy/index.aspx?c=jhKPIXPCIoE&\

b=2590179&template=x.ascx&action=15084

To learn about recent Urgent Action successes and updates, go to

http://www.amnestyusa.org/iar/success

For a print-friendly version of this Urgent Action (PDF):

http://www.amnestyusa.org/actioncenter/actions/uaa25910.pdf

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

Short Video About Al-Awda's Work

The following link is to a short video which provides an overview of Al-Awda's

work since the founding of our organization in 2000. This video was first shown

on Saturday May 23, 2009 at the fundraising banquet of the 7th Annual Int'l

Al-Awda Convention in Anaheim California. It was produced from footage collected

over the past nine years.

Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kTiAkbB5uC0&eurl

Support Al-Awda, a Great Organization and Cause!

Al-Awda, The Palestine Right to Return Coalition, depends on your financial

support to carry out its work.

To submit your tax-deductible donation to support our work, go to

http://www.al-awda.org/donate.html

and follow the simple instructions.

Thank you for your generosity!

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

D. VIDEO, FILM, AUDIO. ART, POETRY, ETC.:

[Some of these videos are embeded on the BAUAW website:

http://bauaw.blogspot.com/ or bauaw.org ...bw]

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

NYC RESTAURANT WORKERS DANCE & SING FOR A WAGE HIKE

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L_s8e1R6rG8&feature=player_embedded

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

On Gun Control, Martin Luther King, the Deacons of Defense and the history of Black Liberation

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qzYKisvBN1o&feature=player_embedded

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

Fukushima Never Again

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LU-Z4VLDGxU

"Fukushima, Never Again" tells the story of the Fukushima nuclear plant meltdowns in north east Japan in March of 2011 and exposes the cover-up by Tepco and the Japanese government.

This is the first film that interviews the Mothers Of Fukushima, nuclear power experts and trade unionists who are fighting for justice and the protection of the children and the people of Japan and the world. The residents and citizens were forced to buy their own geiger counters and radiation dosimeters in order to test their communities to find out if they were in danger.

The government said contaminated soil in children's school grounds was safe and then

when the people found out it was contaminated and removed the top soil, the government and TEPCO refused to remove it from the school grounds.

It also relays how the nuclear energy program for "peaceful atoms" was brought to Japan under the auspices of the US military occupation and also the criminal cover-up of the safety dangers of the plant by TEPCO and GE management which built the plant in Fukushima. It also interviews Kei Sugaoka, the GE nulcear plant inspector from the bay area who exposed cover-ups in the safety at the Fukushima plant and was retaliated against by GE. This documentary allows the voices of the people and workers to speak out about the reality of the disaster and what this means not only for the people of Japan but the people of the world as the US government and nuclear industry continue to push for more new plants and government subsidies. This film breaks

the information blockade story line of the corporate media in Japan, the US and around the world that Fukushima is over.

Production Of Labor Video Project

P.O. Box 720027

San Francisco, CA 94172

www.laborvideo.org

lvpsf@laborvideo.org

For information on obtaining the video go to:

www.fukushimaneveragain.com

(415)282-1908

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

1000 year of war through the world

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NiG8neU4_bs&feature=share

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

Anatomy of a Massacre - Afganistan

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v6BnRc11aug&feature=player_embedded

Afghans accuse multiple soldiers of pre-meditated murder

To see more go to http://www.youtube.com/user/journeymanpictures

Follow us on Facebook (http://goo.gl/YRw42) or Twitter

(http://www.twitter.com/journeymanvod)

The recent massacre of 17 civilians by a rogue US soldier has been shrouded in

mystery. But through unprecedented access to those involved, this report

confronts the accusations that Bales didn't act alone.

"They came into my room and they killed my family". Stories like this are common

amongst the survivors in Aklozai and Najiban. As are the shocking accusations

that Sergeant Bales was not acting alone. Even President Karzai has announced

"one man can not do that". Chief investigator, General Karimi, is suspicious

that despite being fully armed, Bales freely left his base without raising

alarm. "How come he leaves at night and nobody is aware? Every time we have

weapon accountability and personal accountability." These are just a few of the

questions the American army and government are yet to answer. One thing however

is very clear, the massacre has unleashed a wave of grief and outrage which

means relations in Kandahar will be tense for years to come: "If I could lay my

hands on those infidels, I would rip them apart with my bare hands."

A Film By SBS

Distributed By Journeyman Pictures

April 2012

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

Photo of George Zimmerman, in 2005 photo, left, and in a more recent photo.

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2012/04/02/us/the-events-leading-to-the-sooti\

ng-of-trayvon-martin.html?hp

SPD Security Cams.wmv

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9WWDNbQUgm4&feature=player_embedded

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

Kids being put on buses and transported from school to "alternate locations" in

Terror Drills

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qFia_w8adWQ

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

Private prisons,

a recession resistant investment opportunity

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DIGLDOxx9Vg

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

Attack Dogs used on a High School Walkout in MD, Four Students Charged With

"Thought Crimes"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_wafMaML17w

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

Common forms of misconduct by Law Enforcement Officials and Prosecutors

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ViSpM4K276w&feature=related

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

Organizing and Instigating: OCCUPY - Ronnie Goodman

http://arthazelwood.com/instigator/occupy/occupy-birth-video.html

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

Rep News 12: Yes We Kony

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=68GbzIkYdc8

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

The New Black by The Mavrix - Official Music Video

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y4rLfja8488

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

Japan One Year Later

http://www.onlineschools.org/japan-one-year-later/

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

The CIA's Heart Attack Gun

http://www.brasschecktv.com/videos/assassination-studies/the-cias-heart-attack-g\

un-.html

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

The Invisible American Workforce

http://www.democracynow.org/2011/8/5/new_expos_tracks_alec_private_prison

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

Labor Beat: NATO vs The 1st Amendment

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HbQxnb4so3U

For more detailed information, send us a request at mail@laborbeat.org.

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

The Battle of Oakland

by brandon jourdan plus

http://vimeo.com/36256273

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

Officers Pulled Off Street After Tape of Beating Surfaces

By ANDY NEWMAN

February 1, 2012, 10:56 am

http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/02/01/officers-pulled-off-street-after-ta\

pe-of-beating-surfaces/?ref=nyregion

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

This is excellent! Michelle Alexander pulls no punches!

Michelle Alexander, Author of The New Jim Crow, speaks about the political

strategy

behind the War on Drugs and its connection to the mass incarceration of Black

and Brown people in the United States.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P75cbEdNo2U&feature=player_embedded

If you think Bill Clinton was "the first black President" you need to watch this

video and see how much damage his administration caused for the black community

as a result of his get tough attitude on crime that appealed to white swing

voters.

This speech took place at Abyssinian Baptist Church in Harlem on January 12,

2012.

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

FREE BRADLEY MANNING

http://www.bradleymanning.org/news/national-call-in-for-bradley

I received the following reply from the White House November 18, 2011 regarding

the Bradley Manning petition I signed:

"Why We Can't Comment on Bradley Manning

"Thank you for signing the petition 'Free PFC Bradley Manning, the accused

WikiLeaks whistleblower.' We appreciate your participation in the We the People

platform on WhiteHouse.gov.

The We the People Terms of Participation explain that 'the White House may

decline to address certain procurement, law enforcement, adjudicatory, or

similar matters properly within the jurisdiction of federal departments or

agencies, federal courts, or state and local government.' The military justice

system is charged with enforcing the Uniform Code of

Military Justice. Accordingly, the White House declines to comment on the

specific case raised in this petition...

That's funny! I guess Obama didn't get this memo. Here's what Obama said about

Bradley:

BRADLEY MANNING "BROKE THE LAW" SAYS OBAMA!

"He broke the law!" says Obama about Bradley Manning who has yet to even be

charged, let alone, gone to trial and found guilty. How horrendous is it for the

President to declare someone guilty before going to trial or being charged with

a crime! Justice in the U.S.A.!

Obama on FREE BRADLEY MANNING protest... San Francisco, CA. April 21, 2011-

Presidential remarks on interrupt/interaction/performance art happening at

fundraiser. Logan Price queries Barack after org. FRESH JUICE PARTY political

action:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IfmtUpd4id0&feature=youtu.be

Release Bradley Manning

Almost Gone (The Ballad Of Bradley Manning)

Written by Graham Nash and James Raymond (son of David Crosby)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dAYG7yJpBbQ&feature=player_embedded

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

Julian Assange: Why the world needs WikiLeaks

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bVGqE726OAo&feature=player_embedded

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

School police increasingly arresting American students?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zl-efNBvjUU&feature=player_embedded

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

FYI:

Nuclear Detonation Timeline "1945-1998"

The 2053 nuclear tests and explosions that took place between 1945 and 1998 are

plotted visually and audibly on a world map.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I9lquok4Pdk&feature=share&mid=5408

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

We Are the 99 Percent

We are the 99 percent. We are getting kicked out of our homes. We are forced to

choose between groceries and rent. We are denied quality medical care. We are

suffering from environmental pollution. We are working long hours for little pay

and no rights, if we're working at all. We are getting nothing while the other 1

percent is getting everything. We are the 99 percent.

Brought to you by the people who occupy wall street. Why will YOU occupy?

OccupyWallSt.org

Occupytogether.org

wearethe99percentuk.tumblr.com

http://wearethe99percent.tumblr.com/

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

We Are The People Who Will Save Our Schools

YouTube:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lFAOJsBxAxY

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

In honor of the 75th Anniversary of the 44-Day Flint Michigan sit-down strike at

GM that began December 30, 1936:

According to Michael Moore, (Although he has done some good things, this clip

isn't one of them) in this clip from his film, "Capitalism a Love Story," it was

Roosevelt who saved the day!):

"After a bloody battle one evening, the Governor of Michigan, with the support

of the President of the United States, Franklin Roosevelt, sent in the National

Guard. But the guns and the soldiers weren't used on the workers; they were

pointed at the police and the hired goons warning them to leave these workers

alone. For Mr. Roosevelt believed that the men inside had a right to a redress

of their grievances." -Michael Moore's 'Capitalism: A Love Story'

- Flint Sit-Down Strike http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h8x1_q9wg58

But those cannons were not aimed at the goons and cops! They were aimed straight

at the factory filled with strikers! Watch what REALLY happened and how the

strike was really won!

'With babies & banners' -- 75 years since the 44-day Flint sit-down strike

http://links.org.au/node/2681

--Inspiring

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

HALLELUJAH CORPORATIONS (revised edition).mov

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ws0WSNRpy3g

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

ONE OF THE GREATEST POSTS ON YOUTUBE SO FAR!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M8C-qIgbP9o&feature=share&mid=552

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

ILWU Local 10 Longshore Workers Speak-Out At Oakland Port Shutdown

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3JUpBpZYwms

Uploaded by laborvideo on Dec 13, 2011

ILWU Local 10 longshore workers speak out during a blockade of the Port of

Oakland called for by Occupy Oakland. Anthony Levieges and Clarence Thomas rank

and file members of the union. The action took place on December 12, 2011 and

the interview took place at Pier 30 on the Oakland docks.

For more information on the ILWU Local 21 Longview EGT struggle go to

http://www.facebook.com/groups/256313837734192/

For further info on the action and the press conferernce go to:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jz3fE-Vhrw8&feature=youtu.be

Production of Labor Video Project www.laborvideo.org

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

UC Davis Police Violence Adds Fuel to Fire

By Scott Galindez, Reader Supported News

19 November 11

http://readersupportednews.org/opinion2/275-42/8485-uc-davis-police-violence-add\

s-fuel-to-fire

UC Davis Protestors Pepper Sprayed

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6AdDLhPwpp4&feature=player_embedded

Police PEPPER SPRAY UC Davis STUDENT PROTESTERS!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wuWEx6Cfn-I&feature=player_embedded

Police pepper spraying and arresting students at UC Davis

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WmJmmnMkuEM&feature=player_embedded

*---------*

UC Davis Chancellor Katehi walks to her car

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=CZ0t9ez_EGI#!

Occupy Seattle - 84 Year Old Woman Dorli Rainey Pepper Sprayed

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TTIyE_JlJzw&feature=related

*---------*

THE BEST VIDEO ON "OCCUPY THE WORLD"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S880UldxB1o

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

Shot by police with rubber bullet at Occupy Oakland

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I0pX9LeE-g8&feature=player_embedded

*---------*

Copwatch@Occupy Oakland: Beware of Police Infiltrators and Provocateurs

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VrvMzqopHH0

*---------*

Occupy Oakland 11-2 Strike: Police Tear Gas, Black Bloc, War in the Streets

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Tu_D8SFYck&feature=player_embedded

*----*

Quebec police admitted that, in 2007, thugs carrying rocks to a peaceful protest

were actually undercover Quebec police officers:

POLICE STATE Criminal Cops EXPOSED As Agent Provocateurs @ SPP Protest

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KoiisMMCFT0&feature=player_embedded

*----*

Quebec police admit going undercover at montebello protests

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gAfzUOx53Rg&feature=player_embedded

G20: Epic Undercover Police Fail

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jrJ7aU-n1L8&feature=player_embedded

*----*

WHAT HAPPENED IN OAKLAND TUESDAY NIGHT, OCTOBER 25:

Occupy Oakland Protest

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wlPs-REyl-0&feature=player_embedded

Cops make mass arrests at occupy Oakland

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R27kD2_7PwU&feature=player_embedded

Raw Video: Protesters Clash With Oakland Police

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CpO-lJr2BQY&feature=player_embedded

Occupy Oakland - Flashbangs USED on protesters OPD LIES

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QqNOPZLw03Q&feature=player_embedded

KTVU TV Video of Police violence

http://www.ktvu.com/video/29587714/index.html

Marine Vet wounded, tear gas & flash-bang grenades thrown in downtown

Oakland

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cMUgPTCgwcQ&feature=player_embedded

Tear Gas billowing through 14th & Broadway in Downtown Oakland

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OU4Y0pwJtWE&feature=player_embedded

Arrests at Occupy Atlanta -- This is what a police state looks like

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YStWz6jbeZA&feature=player_embedded

*---------*

Labor Beat: Hey You Billionaire, Pay Your Fair Share

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PY8isD33f-I

*---------*

Voices of Occupy Boston 2011 - Kwame Somburu (Paul Boutelle) Part I

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DA48gmfGB6U&feature=youtu.be

Voices of Occupy Boston 2011 - Kwame Somburu (Paul Boutelle) Part II

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cjKZpOk7TyM&feature=related

*---------*

#Occupy Wall Street In Washington Square: Mohammed Ezzeldin, former occupier of

Egypt's Tahrir Square Speaks at Washington Square!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ziodsFWEb5Y&feature=player_embedded

*---------*

#OccupyTheHood, Occupy Wall Street

By adele pham

http://vimeo.com/30146870

*---------*

Live arrest at brooklyn bridge #occupywallstreet by We are Change

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yULSI-31Pto&feature=player_embedded

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

FREE THE CUBAN FIVE!

http://www.thecuban5.org/wordpress/index.php

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JmS4kHC_OlY&feature=player_embedded

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

One World One Revolution -- MUST SEE VIDEO -- Powerful and beautiful...bw

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aE3R1BQrYCw&feature=player_embedded

"When injustice becomes law, resistance becomes duty." Thomas Jefferson

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

Japan: angry Fukushima citizens confront government (video)

Posted by Xeni Jardin on Monday, Jul 25th at 11:36am

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rVuGwc9dlhQ&feature=player_embedded

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

Labor Beat: Labor Stands with Subpoenaed Activists Against FBI Raids and Grand

Jury Investigation of antiwar and social justice activists.

"If trouble is not at your door. It's on it's way, or it just left."

"Investigate the Billionaires...Full investigation into Wall Street..." Jesse

Sharkey, Vice

President, Chicago Teachers Union

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BSNUSIGZCMQ

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

Coal Ash: One Valley's Tale

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6E7h-DNvwx4&feature=player_embedded

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*

Tuesday, September 03, 2013

BAUAW NEWSLETTER: TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 3, 2013

Tell Congress, NO New War on Syria!

Bay Area March & Rally in Solidarity w/Mass Protest at Capitol in DC

Petition the Obama Administration to:

Restore the United States’ human rights record and grant clemency to Pvt. Bradley Manning!

Announcing the Private Manning Support Network!

http://www.bradleymanning.org/featured/announcing-the-private-manning-support-network

Lawyers' Rights Watch Canada 08/14/13

letter on behalf of Lynne Stewart

LAWYERS' RIGHTS WATCH CANADA

KEEP THE PRESSURE ON:

Here are the stats for Justice for Lynne Stewart on FB: Yesterday: 1,878 likes · 480 talking about thisToday: 1,894 likes · 661 talking about this

Lynne has filed a SECOND request for Compassionate Release, so please continue to get signatures on the petition at http://lynnestewart.org/

Encourage others to sign the petition to Free Lynne Stewart:

directly at:

Bay Area United Against War Newsletter

A. ARTICLES IN FULL

(Unless otherwise noted)

B. EVENTS AND ACTIONS

Tell Congress, NO New War on Syria!

Bay Area March & Rally in Solidarity w/Mass Protest at Capitol in DC

Here are the stats for Justice for Lynne Stewart on FB:

Yesterday: 1,878 likes · 480 talking about this
Today: 1,894 likes · 661 talking about this