Yesterday Iraq War veteran Sgt.
Kevin Benderman was sentenced to 15 months
in a military brig for refusing to return to Iraq.
At Fort Stewart, Georgia, Iraq
Veterans Against the War members Camilo Mejia
and Aidan Delgado attended his court
martial to lend their support. In
Oakland, California, Not in Our Name
activists joined Courage to Resist for
a solidarity rally and poetry speak
out in front of the downtown military
recruiting center.
Usually open until 8 pm, the military
closed the center early due to the
late afternoon protest. About three
dozen folks gathered to declare that the
real heroes of illegal war and
occupation were those that refuse to fight
it.
Here are a few photos from Oakland I took:
http://www.indybay.org/news/2005/07/1756754.php
For news links, including photos from Georgia:
http://www.bendermandefense.org
I'm sure that Kevin's wife Monica
will have his mailing address in the brig
posted as soon as it is available.
Free Kevin Benderman Now!
-Jeff Paterson
A Note From Monica Benderman
"A note to all those who supported Kevin Bendermam,
the soldier who refused to deploy to Iraq and has been
given 15 months jailtime, from his wife Monica Benderman."
By Monica Benderman
July 29, 2005
THANK YOU -- to everyone for supporting Kevin and me.
Kevin is currently in a local county jail -- but he is being treated
well. We are waiting to see where he will be going next, and what
will be happening.
The appeals process has been initiated - BUT -- Kevin has not
actually been convicted as yet. He is in prison, but the conviction
will not be official until the Convening Authority, Col. John Kidd,
has signed off on it. He cannot make the sentence any greater, but
he can reduce it. It's doubtful that he will do that, he has an
inordinate amount of disdain for me. The entire prosecution team,
including witnesses, all stood outside the doorway and laughed while
Kevin was walking to the van. They wanted to put him in shackles and
chains "so that the media could take pictures of him that way" but
his supervisor, the man they had placed in charge of that, refused to
do that, so Kevin walked freely. This supervisor has been very
supportive of Kevin from the start - and continues to be very upset
about what is happening, as he knows the truth.
Kevin could serve his entire sentence without Col. Kidd approving the
sentence, which means that he will have the potential to serve
without being convicted. The reason this is a possibility is that
until the sentence is confirmed, they cannot officially process the
appeal, and until the conviction is official, the defense team cannot
receive the full transcripts from the trial. Without these, they
cannot begin to create the brief to file for the appeal.
People need to be aware of this. Please... let people know just
what they are capable of.
Kevin is fine, and says THANK YOU for staying with him.
Love, Monica
---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*--------
1) Pastors for Peace Friendshipment
Caravan to Cuba being held up at
US-Mexico Border!
EMERGENCY NETWORKS AND PRESS CONTACTS:
2) Order your advance tickets to
Howard Zinn's Marx in Soho
Send check for $10.00 for each advance ticket to:
Bay Area United Against War
P.O. Box 318021
San Francisco, CA 94131-8021
Please indicate which show:
Thursday, August 4, 7:00 p.m.
Friday, August 5, 7:00 p.m.
Saturday, August 6, 2:00 p.m.
Jon Sims Center for the Performing Arts
1519 Mission Street between 11th Street
3) Palestine, the Anti-War Movement and the Quest
for Genuine Unity
A Response to Ted Glick
BY TOUFIC HADDAD
4) Building Unity at a Time of Possibility
BY TED GLICK
5) Did Greenspan Know About the London Bombings
Two Days Before?
by Mike Whitney
www.dissidentvoice.org
July 21, 2005
http://www.dissidentvoice.org/July05/Whitney0721.htm
6) Subject: [Al-Awda-SF] Breaking News Correction Note:
36,000 Trees of Land Set Ablaze in Occupied Qaffin and Akkaba
To: al-awda-sf@yahoogroups.com, bayareapalestine@yahoogroups.com
From: "Jess Ghannam"
Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2005 08:29:14 –0700
7) Plan to Shift Army Units Is Complete, Officials Say
By THOM SHANKER
Published: July 27, 2005\
In one of the most significant shifts of troops since the
end of the cold war, the restationing program finds new
homes for not only the 50,000 troops returning from abroad,
but also for 30,000 new soldiers financed temporarily
by Congress. Those increases are to help the Army add
10 brigades to its current 33 under a program to convert
all of its combat units into more deployable modular
units....Units will be relocated for better access to
the service's two major training centers, Fort Polk, La.,
for lighter forces, and Fort Irwin, Calif., for armor.
The locations were also chosen for access to airports
and seaports for easier deployment abroad, which for
most soldiers today means Afghanistan or Iraq.
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/27/politics/
27army.html?adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1122487217-HS2flQfv5nap8aV1YfYjOw
8) For immediate release: July 27, 2005, 5:15 p.m. CDT
Please distribute widely!
AFL-CIO Calls for
Rapid Return of U.S. Troops
9) The death of Pierre Broué, an irreparable loss to Marxism
By Alan Woods
Wednesday, 27 July 2005
http://www.marxist.com/pierre-broue-death270705.htm
10) Don't miss this exciting opportunity to hear
Dennis Banks, Ojibwa Warrior, Indian Rights Activist,
Co-founder of the American Indian Movement
(AIM), led the occupation of Wounded Knee, S.D.
in 1973, Author, Teacher, Lecturer.
When: Wednesday, August 3, 2005, 7:00 PM
Where: Muggs Coffee at the Vallejo Ferry Terminal
289 Mare Island Way
Vallejo, CA
Sponsor: Vallejo
11) CASUALTY OF WAR: THE U.S. ECONOMY
James Sterngold, Chronicle Staff Writer
Sunday, July 17, 2005
The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have already cost taxpayers
$314 billion, and the Congressional Budget Office projects
additional expenses of perhaps $450 billion over
the next 10 years.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2005/07/17/
MNG5GDPEK31.DTL
12) Lance Armstrong criticizes cost of Iraq war
Wed, 27 Jul 2005 17:21:23 -0700
From: "Patty Mote"
The item below comes from "Democracy Now" July 27, 2005,
excerpted from a Time Magazine interview. Lance Armstrong,
right now, is probably one of THE major figures in sports,
his name recognition, internationally, is right up there
with Tiger Woods and Barry Bonds. He is also known to be
extremely careful about all public statements. He doesn't
actually say anything all that radical, but the fact that
he is critical of the war at all is significant. Recent
history shows us that any time a major sports figure makes
a political statement in a major media venue, the
reverberations can be substantial. - Tom Lacey
Lance Armstrong Criticizes Cost of Iraq War
Cycling champion Lance Armstrong - who just won his seventh
Tour de France --has publicly criticized the war in Iraq
because it has prevented the country from spending more
on cancer research. He told Time Magazine, "'Funding
[for cancer research] is tough to come by these days. The
biggest downside to a war in Iraq is what you could do
with that money. What does a war in Iraq cost a week?
A billion? Maybe a billion a day?" He went on to say " The
budget for the National Cancer Institute is four billion.
That has to change. It needs to become a priority again.
Polls say people are much more afraid of cancer than of
a plane flying into their house or a bomb or any other
form of terrorism. It is a priority for the American public."
13) Brazilian did not wear bulky jacket
Relatives say Met admits that, contrary to reports,
electrician did
not leap tube station barrier
Mark Honigsbaum
Thursday July 28, 2005
The Guardian
Jean Charles de Menezes, the Brazilian shot dead in the head,
was not wearing a heavy jacket that might have concealed
a bomb, and did not jump the ticket barrier when challenged
by armed plainclothes police, his cousin said yesterday...Flanked
by the de Menezes family's solicitor, Gareth Peirce, and by Bianca
Jagger, the anti-Iraq war campaigner, she condemned the shoot-
to-kill policy which had led to her cousin's death and vowed that
what she called the "crime" would not go unpunished....Mr de
Menezes was shot seven times in the head and once in the
shoulder at 10am last Friday after being followed from Tulse Hill.
Scotland Yard initially claimed he wore a bulky jacket and jumped
the barrier when police identified themselves and ordered him
to stop. The same day the Met commissioner, Sir Ian Blair, said
the shooting was "directly linked" to the unprecedented anti-terror
operation on London's streets.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,3604,1537457,00.html
14) OpEd
Oil and Blood
By BOB HERBERT
Published: July 28, 2005
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/28/opinion/28herbert.html?hp
15) Editorial
Energy Shortage
Published: July 28, 2005
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/28/opinion/28thu1.html?hp
16) Shots to the Heart of Iraq
Innocent civilians, including people who are considered
vital to building democracy, are increasingly being
killed by U.S. troops.
By Richard C. Paddock, Times Staff Writer
BAGHDAD - Three men in an unmarked sedan pulled up near
the headquarters of the national police major crimes unit.
The two passengers, wearing traditional Arab dishdasha
gowns, stepped from the car.
At the same moment, a U.S. military convoy emerged from
an underpass. Apparently believing the men were staging
an ambush, the Americans fired, killing one passenger and
wounding the other. The sedan's driver was hit in the
head by two bullet fragments.
The soldiers drove on without stopping.
This kind of shooting is far from rare in Baghdad, but
the driver of the car was no ordinary casualty. He was
Iraqi police Brig. Gen. Majeed Farraji, chief of the major
crimes unit. His passengers were unarmed hitchhikers whom
he was dropping off on his way to work.
http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/la-fg-civilians25jul25,1,693664.story
17) $1.5 Billion Giveaway Secretly Slipped into Energy Bill, Waxman Says
By: Rep. Henry Waxman
Published: July 27, 2005 at 15:40
http://www.yubanet.com/artman/publish/article_23241.shtml
18) STAFF SALARIES: WHO'S MAKING WHAT
By Alexis Simendinger
National Journal
July 26, 2005
http://nationaljournal.com/about/njweekly/stories/2005/0726nj_wh_dollar.htm
19) Op-Ed Contributor
When You Have to Shoot First
By HAIM WATZMAN
Published: July 28, 2005
Jerusalem
(When reading this article please note the article above,
'Brazilian did not wear bulky jacket' in which it is pointed
out that this man wasn't wearing a bulky jacket and didn't
jump the turnstile...BW)
"...A terrible thing happened in London last Friday. On his
way to work, Jean Charles de Menezes, a 27-year-old Brazilian
electrician, was chased down by suspicious police officers.
When he tripped and fell, the officers asked no questions and
gave him no warning.
One of them fired eight bullets point-blank into his head and
shoulder and that was that. At first sight, it was an act much
more severe than Eldad's, because Eldad had been under attack
and shot a man he had good reason to think was armed.
Mr. Menezes had hurt no one.
On the other hand, it was an easier call. The police saw
a man wearing a long coat out of place on a hot summer day
jumping over a turnstile and running for a crowded subway
train. He did not stop when he had been ordered to do so.
Just two weeks before the killing, four suicide bombers had
blown themselves up on subway trains and buses in London.
Just days before, there were all the signs of another coordinated
attack - and the police had reason to believe that bombers
were still at large. The long coat on a summer day was just
the sort of telltale clue that the police had been told to
look out for. A number of suicide bombers in recent years
have used such coats to conceal the belt of explosives
strapped around their waists. What's more, the police
acted under express orders to shoot in the head someone
they thought was about to commit a suicide bombing.
Suicide charges are usually built to be set off with
the flick of the bomber's finger. The terrorist can be
disabled, flat on the ground, and surrounded by heavily
armed men and still blow up everything around him.
So the officer who killed Mr. Menezes did a horrible
thing. But he also did the right thing. One of the
tragedies of this age of suicide bombers - indeed of
any war - is that the right thing to do is sometimes
a horrible thing. Remember: there's an essential distinction
between us and the suicide bombers. The suicide bombers
perpetrate gratuitous horrors. We do terrible things only
when it is necessary to prevent something even worse
from happening...."
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/28/opinion/28watzman.html
20) Anti-war groups call for massive September mobilization
By Askia Muhammad
White House Correspondent
Updated Jun 16, 2005, 09:17 am
http://www.finalcall.com/artman/publish/article_2057.shtml
21) This article is a short summary of one of the main elements
in Fidel's July 26th speech. You can see the full talk here:
http://www.cuba.cu/gobierno/discursos/2005/ing/f260705i.html
Fidel Castro Says History Will Absolve Him and Chavez
http://www.ain.cubaweb.cu/idioma/ingles/2005/jul26fidel-26juliopart3.htm
22) And from Jon Snow (Channel 4 news, UK) last evening:
Sign of the times?
23) PACIFIC FILM ARCHIVE THEATER: 2575 BANCROFT WAY
@ BOWDITCH, BERKELEY
WWW.BAMPFA.BERKELEY.EDU / $4-$8
TUESDAY AUGUST 9
7:30 The Forest for the Trees: Judi Bari vs. the FBI
Bernadine Mellis (U.S., 2005)
Artist in Person
24) Gaza Will Be 'Vacated But Still Occupied'
by Ushani Agalawatta
JERUSALEM - A growing number of Palestinians are beginning
to believe that Israeli disengagement from the Gaza Strip
will not mean the end of occupation
"The Gaza Strip will still be occupied territory under
international law," says Renad Qubbaj of the Palestinian
NGO Network based in Ramallah in the West Bank. "After
implementation of the disengagement plan, the Israeli
army will remain in effective control of all border
crossings."
Published on Thursday, July 28, 2005 by the Inter Press Service
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/0728-04.htm
25) Friends
There are three important events coming up in the next
few days. Hope to see all of you at all of them!
thanks.
en la lucha
tommi
"tommi avicolli mecca" avimecca@yahoo.com
26) Scientists Warn Fewer Kinds of Fish Are Swimming the Oceans
By CORNELIA DEAN
Published: July 29, 2005
Researchers who studied decades of catch records from Japanese
fishing fleets say fishing has greatly reduced the diversity
of fish in the world's open oceans, leaving ocean ecosystems
less resilient against environmental changes like global warming.
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/29/science/29fishing.html
27) US energy bill funnels billions to oil,
utility corporations
By Patrick Martin
29 July 2005
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2005/jul2005/ener-j29.shtml
28) JAMES CONNOLLY FILM
The second of 2 films on Irish Themes.
Connolly was born in Scotland and
was alos an activist in the USA so
he has a relevance broader than
Ireland. Interesting that up to 1917
these isalands were more influenced
by American radicalism than anything
towards the East.
The other film is on the post
Connolly War of Independence by Ken Loach.
Jim Monaghan
From: "Library SIPTU College"
http://www.rascal-films.com
http://www.connolly-thefilm.com
29) Communist Party,
Russia
Referendum Appeal Fails
The Supreme Court's appeals board
on Thursday upheld the court's earlier
rejection of a nationwide referendum
proposed by the Communist Party,
Russian news agencies reported.
The Communists had sought to put
a series of social, economic and
political questions to Russians for
a vote. The questions included
issues such as guarantees of free
education and salaries above the
subsistence level, free television
airtime for political parties and a
progressive tax for the wealthy.
But the Central Elections Commission
refused to allow the vote, saying
the questions were vague and had legal
problems that could result in
additional expenditures for the state budget.
The Supreme Court upheld that ruling
last month and on Thursday, the
court's appeals board turned down
the communists' appeal.
Communist Party leaders said they
might appeal further to the
Constitutional Court and also to
the European Court for Human Rights.
Several dozen Communist demonstrators
picketed outside the court
building. (AP)
Marxism mailing list
Marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism
http://www.themoscowtimes.com/stories/2005/07/29/031.html
30) Unravelling of the US Military
Newspapers describe the US army as facing one of the
greatest recruiting challenges in its history, despite
the enormous incentives now being offered to join the
military. A study commissioned by the army found that
resistance to recruitment was due to popular objection
to the war in Iraq, the casualties and media coverage
of the torture at Abu Ghraib. Solutions include a bill
that was introduced in the Senate but that has not yet
been voted on: offering legal status and eligibility
for citizenship to the children of illegal immigrants
residing in the US. The nightmare of war is offered as
the prelude to the 'American dream'.
Zia Mian
http://www.epw.org.in/
showArticles.php?root=2005&leaf=07&filename=8893&filetype=html
31) Air Force Plans To Invade: 48 High Schools
Set to Start AF JROTC
---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*--------
1) Pastors for Peace Friendshipment
Caravan to Cuba being held up at
US-Mexico Border!
EMERGENCY NETWORKS AND PRESS CONTACTS:
SPREAD THE WORD FAR AND WIDE!
http://www.commerce.gov
202-482-2000
Secretary of Commerce Carlos Gutierrez
cgutierrez@doc.gov
As of 1:30 pm EDT, The Pastors for Peace
Friendshipment Caravan to Cuba is
being held up at the US-Mexico border
by US Commerce Department officials.
They are threatening to search every
vehicle and every item of humanitarian
aid. They are telling us that "only
licensable goods will be allowed to
cross into Mexico."
Pastors for Peace does not accept
or apply for a license to deliver
humanitarian aid to Cuba.
There are 130 US citizens
traveling with the caravan. They and the
humanitarian aid are traveling
in eight busses, a box truck and two small
cars. It will take days to inspect
the 140 tons of aid. We are prepared to
do whatever we need to do to
deliver our humanitarian aid to Cuba. Stay
posted...
Marxism mailing list
Marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism
---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*--------
2) In honor of Karl Marx, the BBC Radio 4's "In Our Time
Greatest Philosopher Vote" winner, Bay Area United Against
War is presenting a Benefit Presentation of Howard Zinn's
one man play, MARX IN SOHO
Starring Jerry Levy as Karl Marx
Directed by Michael Fox Kennedy.
Thursday, August 4, 7:00 p.m.
Friday, August 5, 7:00 p.m.
Saturday, August 6, 2:00 p.m.
Jon Sims Center for the Performing Arts
1519 Mission Street between 11th Street
and South Van Ness*
Advance tickets: $10
Door: $20.00
For advance tickets: Send a check to:
Bay Area United Against War
P.O. Box 318021
San Francisco, CA 94131-8021
Please indicate which performance.
Call: 415-824-8730
The premise of the play is that after Marx dies in 1883, he
is able to see what's happening on earth for next 100 years
and comes back to talk about it. Imagine all Karl Marx would
have to say after one hundred years of just being able to watch...
The single actor in this one-man play is Jerry Levy,
who has been teaching sociology at Marlboro College
and been acting with the Actors' Theater of Brattleboro
since he moved there from Chicago in 1975. Originally
directed by Michael Fox Kennedy of the Actors' Theater,
Levy has been on the road with Zinn's version of Karl
Marx for a year, performing at benefits, colleges, small
theaters and other venues around the state. At Middle
Earth he was sponsored by the Bradford-based Coos Peace
and Justice Alliance and performed free of charge but
charged with mighty talent and a bottomless love of the play.
www.bauaw.org
Contact person: Bonnie Weinstein 415-824-8730-office/home
415-990-4237-cell
*The Jon Sims Center is located at 1519 Mission Street
(between 11th Street and South Van Ness), South of Market,
San Francisco, CA 94103
BY CAR:
From the East Bay: Take 80 North then 101 North to the
Mission Street exit. Stay on the right hand side of the exit.
Turn right off the exit, and stay on Mission Street. The Jon
Sims Center is two blocks past Van Ness, next to Firestone.
From the South Bay: Take 101 North to the Mission Street
Exit. Stay on the right hand side of the exit. Turn right off
the exit, and stay on Mission Street. The Jon Sims Center
is two blocks past Van Ness, next to Firestone.
From the North Bay: Take 101 South to Lombard, make
a right on Van Ness and then a left onto Mission. Jon Sims
Center is two blocks past Van Ness, next to Firestone.
Parking: Daytime parking is very difficult. We encourage
day users to take public transportation. In the evening,
street parking along Mission Street, Minna Street and
11th Street is not horrible (in San Francisco terms) after
6:00 PM, but the closer you are to 6:00 PM, the better
your chances of finding parking. There is no parking
along Mission between 4-6 PM, and you will be
promptly towed.
VIA BART/MUNI/SAMTRANS:
Go to http://www.transitinfo.org for more information
about Bay Area public transportation.
BART: Take BART to the Civic Center station, then transfer
to the outbound Muni J,K,L,M or N train. Exit at the next
stop (Van Ness Station). Walk 1 block south, cross Mission,
and the Jon Sims Center is next to Firestone.
MUNI: The Jon Sims Center is 1 block south of the Van
Ness Muni underground station, accessible from any Muni
streetcar. Additionally, the 14 Mission, 42 Loop 49 and
47 Van Ness bus stop at Mission and 11th Street, only
1/2 block from the Jon Sims Center. Current Muni fare is $1.25.
SamTrans: The SamTrans DX, KX, MX, NX, PX, RX and
TX buses stops at Mission and 9th Streets. Walk three
blocks west (towards Sutro tower) to reach the Jon Sims
Center. Current SamTrans fare is $1.10. Please note that
SamTrans buses to the City only run during rush hours.
---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*--------
3) Palestine, the Anti-War Movement and the Quest
for Genuine Unity
A Response to Ted Glick
BY TOUFIC HADDAD
Ted Glick's article "Building Unity at a Time of
Possibility" (Znet July 20, 2005) provides a window into
the thinking of the UFPJ leadership and its vocal supporters
regarding how best to build a broad and effective anti-war
movement capable of bringing about the end of the brutal
U.S. occupation of Iraq. The thrust of the article attempts
to tackle the division within the U.S. anti-war movement
organizers largely surrounding the question of Palestine,
while providing a rationalization for why the UFPJ leadership
has chosen to keep Palestine and particularly the question
of the right of return out of the agenda of the anti-war
movement.
The basis for Glick and presumably the UFPJ leadership
reaching this conclusion rests upon his opening argument:
"Narrow approaches are a dead-end for our movement . . .
What is needed is an approach that can appeal to millions
of people, that connects with and draws strength from the
deep-seated traditions of struggle for justice among the
peoples who make up this country."
He then argues that although he "personally understand[s]
and support[s] the right of Palestinian organizations to
put this demand forward" and importantly recognizes that
"no one can legitimately deny this just demand of the
Palestinians", he nonetheless concludes that "to put this
particular demand forward rather than, say, a demand to
end U.S. support for the Israeli occupation, can only
have the effect of confusing, alienating or turning away
potential participants in and organizers of September 24th,
and not just in the white community."
He further argues that tactically "It is not a demand
broadly understood or supported within the United States,
even within the U.S. progressive movement", and that
within "the context of the movement to force the United
States to pull its military troops and military bases
out of Iraq and end its neo-colonial plans to control
Iraqi oil, this is a demand that will weaken
and narrow that movement."
Glick's concerns should not be taken lightly, or for
that matter immediately eschewed out of implicit purist
idealism. Nonetheless, as I will argue in this article,
he is wrong both with regards to the pre-assumptions to
his argument, as well as with regards to the conclusions
he draws, which I believe can only lead the anti-war
movement down a dangerous path, built upon an untenable
footing. This is made all the more serious and damaging
within the context of the enormous human costs borne by
the people of Iraq and Palestine, not to mention the
lives of U.S. soldiers, and the draining financial costs
these policies are having domestically. I hereby put
forth my arguments within the spirit of constructive
debate and the desire to set the necessary political
and methodological parameters for actualizing the
long deterred goals of our movements.
Why is Glick wrong?
First it is important to clarify the severity and hence
urgency of the political situation in Palestine, and
the direct culpability of the U.S. government,
historically and into the present, for bringing this
situation about. On this there should be no debate:
U.S. government support for Israel (spanning both
Democrat and Republican legislators) in the form of
virtually unlimited political, financial and military
aid, forms the basis for allowing Israel to do what
it does throughout Palestine. In its more 'favorable'
interpretation Israeli policies are leading to the
erecting of a brutal form of apartheid across
historical Palestine, while in its more 'critical'
interpretation, these policies aim toward transferring
the Palestinians from their historical homeland be it
in 'slow motion' (through walls, settlements and the
making of the most elementary function of daily life
intolerable), or in 'fast motion', if sufficient
historical conditions arise (such as regional war).
Without U.S. governmental support for these policies,
Israel truly would be a pariah state. Here it is important
to emphasize that the extent of Israeli policies is not
limited to the brutality of its illegal 38-year
occupation of the West Bank and Gaza, whose abuses are
so numerous it would be impossible to cover in an article
of this length. Rather, Israeli policies flow from its
Apartheid-like structure, which defines itself as "the
state of the Jews throughout the world", and not as the
state of its citizens. This definition necessitates the
structural discrimination of the Palestinian citizens
of Israel (who number more than one million people-one
fifth of the populace) and is incomparable to any other
political regime around the world. It should be
categorically rejected by progressive's world wide,
not only because it is fundamentally racist against
the indigenous Palestinian population, but also because
the way this ideology is activated on the ground both
historically and in the present necessitates the
exclusion, and indeed transfer of Palestinians to
maintain a "Jewish majority".
If one fifth of the citizens of the United States
were excluded on religious bases from elementary
rights such as access to land, (93 percent of which
in Israel cannot be sold to non-Jews), or the ability
to give their spouses citizenship (as is the case of
Israeli citizens who marry Palestinians from the West
Bank or Gaza), it would elicit justified domestic
and international opprobrium. Wasn't this similar
to the basis for the Civil Rights movement, which
fought against racial discrimination and segregation
in the form of Jim Crow Laws? Wasn't this also the
basis of the movement against apartheid South Africa?
It is the nature of the Israeli state, embodied in
the Zionist conception of an exclusive Jewish state
which guides Israel's policies in the 1967 occupied
territories, against its Palestinian citizenry, and
which likewise prevents the legitimate return of
Palestinian refugees to their lands and homes-a
right which needless to say has been acknowledged
in the UN General Assembly more than 110 times.
Here lies the importance of the inclusion of the
latter demand (the right of return) within the
agenda of the anti-war movement. Unlike the demand
to merely call for the end of the 1967 occupation,
which Glick seems more amenable to, the question of
the right of return goes to the heart of exposing the
nature and extent of the issues faced in the
"Palestinian-Israeli conflict." The Palestinian
people categorically reject conceding their individual
and collective right to return to their land and homes,
as they justly should. After bearing witness in
recent years to the return of Afghan and Kosovar
refugees, and after it is acknowledged quite openly
among Israeli historians that Palestinians were
intentionally driven off their land in 1948 to
create "the Jewish state" in the first place,
support for such a demand is an elementary human
right which no reasonable person committed to
progressive values can deny. The right of return
has the tactical significance of being able to
combine the pre-1967 historical oppression of
Palestinians (yet to be recognized or amended
by Israel), and the current racist nature of
the Israeli state, which prevents their return
because they are simply not Jews.
The point is that given the historical culpability
of the U.S. government in supporting Israeli policies,
the U.S. anti-war movement cannot pretend that it
is blind to these abuses, nor that it does not have
a role to play in their resolution. That is why
the inclusion of a systematic and holistic
critique of Israel, and more importantly
Zionism-embodied in the demand for the right of
return-is so important. Israel cannot remain Zionist
and accept the right of return. An entirely new
arrangement would have to be brought about if
Palestinian refugees were accorded their long
denied rights. Furthermore, the right of return
does not allow for the question of Palestine to
be reduced, as many have attempted, to the question
of the oppression and occupation of the West Bank
and Gaza Strip alone. Many have forgotten that the
PLO was formed in 1964-three years before the 1967
occupation even began-and was founded as a movement
of return for the 800,000 Palestinian refugees who
were driven from their land, and the wholesale
destruction of 532 of their towns and villages.
This issue is an open wound not just in Palestine
but across the Arab world, and has consistently been
at the forefront of Arabs and Muslims internationally,
including within the U.S. Attempts made at de-linking
the right of return from the question of the 1967
occupation will end in failure as this right represents
the heart and soul of the Palestinian national
movement, without which there is no basis for a
“solution" to the "Israeli Palestinian conflict"
in the first place-whoever may negotiate on the
Palestinian side.
Unfortunately that is exactly what Glick suggests,
when he says that these issues "must be dealt with
as part of the process of serious negotiations
between the Palestinian and Israeli government
representatives, leading to an end to the Israeli
occupation." Since when is the anti-war movement
limited in the setting of its agenda, to the actions
and policies of various elites, rather than setting
the principles for what must be the basis of human
rights and historical justice? By the same logic,
the anti-war movement is in no position to call for
ending the occupation of Iraq and for "Troops out
Now", given that this is not something raised by
the governments of Iraq and the U.S.. Abstaining
from setting the principles for what constitutes
the basis for a genuine anti-occupation position
based upon respect for human rights, the end of an
unjust and illegal war and occupation, and the end
to a dehumanizing and intolerable dispossession of
an entire nation, means abdicating the responsibility
of leadership to the agendas of organized power-the
very same powers which brought about the occupations
of Iraq and Palestine in the first place.
The anti-war movement must clarify whether it wishes
to set principles for what constitutes genuine anti-war,
anti-occupation, and anti-racist positions, or whether
these are in fact negotiable issues. If these principles
are non-negotiable, then there should be no reticence
in including these demands as part of the anti-war
movement agenda. If they are in fact negotiable then
the anti-war movement is attempting to erect itself upon
a footing, which by necessity concedes its principles and
power to elites. There can be no middle ground on these
questions (though certainly tactical considerations are
another question, once this has been determined.) This is
also why Glick's implicit description of such demands as
"narrow approaches" that will "weaken" the movement is
a mischaracterization. On the contrary, failing to
establish principles of what constitutes the rights
that we are fighting for is a recipe for building
a movement which does not truly know what it is fighting
for, resulting in an ambiguity which can only confuse
the movement, making it subject to disorientation by
the spectacle of "Iraqi elections", the "writing of the
Iraqi constitution" or the next "Palestinian-Israeli
peace summit" etc. Over time this can only result in
the movement's ineffectuality, demoralization and the
depleting of its ranks.
Once this principled question is answered by the anti-war
movement-a question which is actually independent of the
particular context of Iraq or Palestine, but which is
actualized through it-only then can an effective movement
be built. The lack of political clarity around the
reasons for this war; the feeling amongst many in the
anti-war movement that the UN could stop it; that the
problem was the Bush administration (and not U.S. imperial
policies in the region), and hence the need to back
a pro-war Democratic party candidate (who could 'do
the job better') are indeed the reasons for the splintered,
ineffectual state of the U.S. anti-war movement today.
The movement simply cannot repeat these mistakes again,
or the consequences for Iraq, Palestine, and the
American people will be devastating.
Determining the need for erecting the anti-war
movement upon a sound political basis whose values
it sets, is the best way to rebuild the movement upon
an effective footing. Doing so also necessitates that
the anti-war movement not be in the pocket of the
Democratic Party, which cynically takes its support
for granted while functionally supporting the war in
Iraq, the "war against terror", the occupation of
Palestine, and the Zionist nature of Israel.
Only once this fundamental question is resolved can
the question of raising tactical considerations be
addressed. Here, Glick indeed does have a point that
we must not be ashamed to concede. The question of
Palestine overall, the right of return, and all
aspects surrounding it, are indeed impeded by the
fact that there is not sufficient political clarity
in the U.S. in general, and within the anti-war movement
overall, regarding these issues. Additionally it
should be clearly noted that there is also a vocal
minority within the anti-war movement that is pro-Zionist
and which strives to perennially scuttle addressing the
issue of Palestine in a just way as part of its agenda.
But if clarity around the need for a principled anti-war
movement is determined, the politics and orientation of
the anti-war movement will naturally flow. Rather than
making attempts to force out Palestine as an organic
element of anti-war movement organizing, the anti-war
movement must move towards forcing out the Zionist
elements within it, as a corrupting and contradictory
force, which sews ideological confusion within its ranks.
Hereafter the anti-war movement can begin to take up
the issue of addressing the need for a broad based
educational campaign around the issue of Palestine,
in order to clarify the outstanding questions which
remain and are in need of clarification: the difference
between anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism; demythologizing
the "peace process"; understanding the exclusivist
racist nature of Zionism etc.
The need for such a campaign will also have important
theoretical contributions to the movement for ending
the occupation of Iraq and for bringing the troops
home. This is because the occupation of Iraq is not
an isolated byproduct of a deranged American president,
but the aggressive expansion of U.S. imperial policies
in the region-policies it is worth pointing out which
are supported by both Democrats and Republicans in
Congress and the Senate. U.S. support for Israel
represents a core axis of U.S. policies in the region,
of which the direct U.S. occupation of Iraq is merely
an extension. While Israel has worked furiously since
its inception defending the interests of it imperial
backers (including ensuring access through the Suez
canal, destroying pan-Arab nationalist regimes and
leftist movements, defending pro-American Arab
dictatorships, ensuring that no counter-hegemonic
anti-U.S. imperialist project emerges to 'threaten'
access to this crucial geo-strategic region etc.),
the U.S. now works to secure control of the oil spigot
itself, so as to be able to leverage control over this
crucial resource against its economic competitors,
particularly the EU, Japan and China. Iraq and Palestine
thus represents two wings of one U.S. imperial strategy,
and the sooner the anti-war movement internalizes this,
the sooner it can begin to develop effect counter
strategies and movements.
The de-linking of Iraq and Palestine within the U.S.
anti-war movement is illogical when viewed in this light.
Furthermore, the pre-assumption that anti-war activists
don't sufficiently understand the question of Palestine
and hence would leave its ranks if it were to be included
in its agenda, is also illogical. On the contrary, including
Palestine within the anti-war movement's agenda necessitates
having a holistic critique of the causes of this war
(U.S. imperial ambitions, and U.S. capitalist competition
against its competitors), and can only serve to galvanize,
orient and engage anti-war movement actors for the long
haul. In this we must have no pretensions: the occupation
of Palestine has already lasted 57 years, and despite the
enormous human costs witnessed so far, the U.S. occupation
of Iraq is merely in its infancy. If we look to the
historical experience of Vietnam, the U.S. ruling classes
showed that they were willing to kill 2-3 million Vietnamese,
Cambodians and Laotians, and 60,000 U.S. troops in its failed
effort to ensure that this region did not fall beyond its
bounds of control. How then will these same forces act to
defend their interests when 60 percent of the world oil
reserves are at stake? The anti-war movement must soberly
pose the question of how many Iraqis, Palestinians and U.S.
soldiers the U.S. and Israel are willing to let die to
ensure that the U.S. maintains control of Arab oil.
I believe all genuine anti-war forces in the U.S. can achieve
and internalize this understanding, without serious dissention.
The problem with anti-war movement organizers is that both
UFPJ and ANSWER/ TONC do not trust their own constituencies-as
though only the leaders can understand these supposedly complex
issues. Both coalitions act as though their agendas, with or
without the inclusion of Palestine, is a fait accompli,
without seeing the need to address and dialogue with their
constituencies about the need to set firm principles upon
which the anti-war movement is to be based, and then to work
to develop and educate the movement as a whole to address
their respective educational insufficiencies-be it regarding
Palestine or Iraq. Needless to say, let there be no illusions
as to the fact that plenty of educational work also needs to
be taken up around the issue of Iraq, given the gross
misunderstandings and indeed dehumanization that exist
within the anti-war movement surrounding issues like the
right of Iraqis to resist, their right to self-determination etc.
UFPJ drew the conclusion after the last U.S. presidential
campaign that their movement needs "to reach potential new
allies and expand our base . . . An education working group
will be created to develop the long-term educational
strategy to reach new constituencies." What new constituencies
is UFPJ talking about? The increasingly organized Right wing?
As Glick himself acknowledges, the statistic polls already
show that the majority of Americans are against the war
in Iraq. This is the anti-war movement's constituency-a
constituency which proved its forces even before the war
in Iraq began in the largest demonstrations witnessed in
the history of the planet. UFPJ's strategy mirrors the
policies of the Democratic party which believes it must
"reach out" to "red staters"-as though there is a middle
ground on issues like the war in Iraq, or a woman's right
to an abortion. The role of the Left must be to organize
its real and potential constituency around its principles,
trusting that its values and interpretation of reality are
applicable and necessary for the American people to live
in freedom, equality and at peace with other people around
the world. It must not see its role as organizing the Right.
The problem with the anti-war movement was not that it wasn't
big enough, but that it was not organized around a set of
politics which could tackle the reasons for this war,
and what it would take to stop it.
Is it is any wonder then, that while UFPJ heads off in
search of "new constituencies", Arab and Muslims in
America-representing a constituency severely effected
by the wars in Iraq and Palestine, the bogus "war against
terror", and domestically targeted and scapegoated by
everyone from "homeland security" to the Columbia
University administration-are distancing themselves as
far as possible from this wing of the anti-war movement?
Is it any wonder that Arab and Muslim representation
at the UFPJ conference was virtually non-existent, when
beneath the banner of "inclusiveness" UFPJ bumps out
Palestine, so as not to alienate open Zionists? Is it
any wonder why Arab and Muslim organizations like the
National Council of Arab Americans and the Muslim
American Society are calling the UFPJ demonstration
on September 24th "segregated", when advocates like
Glick characterize the inclusion of Palestine and
the right of return in the agenda for the anti war
movement as "troubling"? Tragically I am sure that
the great majority of the UFPJ constituency would
side with Palestinian rights if given a fair chance
to hear and learn about the necessity to have Palestine
within its agenda for the health of the anti-war movement
as a whole, and for its ability to build an effective
struggle. But when they are precisely prevented from
doing so by the leadership of UFPJ beneath the bogus
concern that it will "narrow and weaken" the anti-war
movement, the result can only be further splintering of
anti-war movement ranks, and deeper confusion over the
anti-war movement's trajectory. All this indeed during
"a time of possibility" when the everyday scandals, lies
and incessant blood-letting of the war in Iraq provides
the anti-war movement with more than enough fodder to
expose and demythologize the U.S. campaign in Iraq for
the savagery and colonialism that it is.
As for ANSWER and TONC, both coalitions should indeed
be credited for their principled and courageous stand,
and for seeing the political and organizational
importance of the inclusion of Palestine at the forefront
of the anti-war movement's agenda. Acknowledging this
however does not excuse their anti-democratic methods
of organizing, which have also tragically shown themselves
to be incredibly destructive for movement building as
a whole. Each demonstration they organize is like
a carbon copy of those organized years ago, as though
history is static and new circumstances and questions
have not arisen that need to be addressed. Although
in name ANSWER says it is a coalition, in reality the
decisions it makes are done behind closed doors and
are not accountable to needs and demands of what should
be anti-war movement priorities. I know this from
experience, after having attended one such meeting
in which I attempted to raise a political disagreement
regarding the question of whether the anti-war movement
has achieved an anti-imperialist consciousness. The next
day I received word from one of ANSWER's main national
organizers that "The ANSWER meetings have brief political
updates/orientations, followed by short discussions on
the various points, and then breakdown into working groups.
They are organizing meetings and are not meant to be
forums for carrying out political debates..."
If ANSWER were a genuine democratic coalition made of
groups and individuals committed to building an antiwar
movement, why would it eschew political debate? In fact
without political debate, the movement remains constipated
and insular, unable to process and adapt to the changing
reality on the ground, thereby aborting its ability to
undertake the challenges a changing reality poses to
movement organizers in building effective struggle.
If the methods of ANSWER organizing are not seriously
reformed they will over time (if they haven't already)
lead the movement and its constituency in ANSWER-organized
cities, into political obscurity.
Needless to say, as the anti-war movement experience
throughout the course of the past few years has shown,
the process and methods of organizing cannot be separated
from the goals we are trying to attain. Likewise the goals
we strive for cannot be separated from defining the movement's
independent elementary principles and values, which must
uphold the categorical rejection of occupation, colonialism,
and racism while defending the right of self-determination,
the right to resist an illegal occupation and the need for
historical justice. Without having all these elements
combined within democratic structures that encourage
political debate, the unity we all strive for to once and
for all put an end to the inhuman occupation of Iraq and
Palestine, will never materialize.
Needless to say the urgency of immediately and
comprehensively addressing these issues is made all
the more stark in the context of the destruction Israel
is preparing to inflict upon the Gaza Strip as part of
its unilateral disengagement from Gaza-a plan which aims
at nothing less than permanently transforming Gaza into
an open air prison, expanding and annexing Israeli
settlement blocs in the West Bank, and dealing a crushing
blow to the Palestinian national movement in the process.
As Israeli Gen. Eival Giladi recently stated, "Israel
will act in a very resolute manner in order to prevent
terror attacks and [militant] fire while the disengagement
is being implemented" and that "If pinpoint response
proves insufficient, we may have to use weaponry that
causes major collateral damage, including helicopters
and planes, with mounting danger to surrounding people."
It would be a genuine catastrophe for the people of
Palestine and for the U.S. anti-war movement as a whole
if on September 24th, the anti-war movement cannot
formulate a united position on this impending blood
bath. Worse yet, if UFPJ led demonstrations entirely
ignore the issue of Palestine like an ostrich putting
its head in the sand. Without a radical transformation
of the approaches and agendas of the anti-war movement,
the blood flowing from Iraqis, Palestinians, and U.S.
soldiers will be so plentiful and mixed together that
it threatens to soak into every hole, where every
ostrich burrows its head.
26 July 2005
http://www.zmag.org/content/print_article.cfm?itemID=8392§ionID=1
---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*--------
4) Building Unity at a Time of Possibility
BY TED GLICK
"Narrow approaches are a dead-end for our movement . . .
What is needed is an approach that can appeal to millions
of people, that connects with and draws strength from the
deep-seated traditions of struggle for justice among the
peoples who make up this country. This is what we need to
fight against the sham 'war on terrorism,' U.S. support of
Israeli occupation, attacks on our civil liberties and civil
rights, racism in all its forms, and the economic terrorism
experienced by people from Watts to the Mississippi Delta to
Harlem to Colombia, Africa, Argentina, Afghanistan and
elsewhere in the world."
I wrote these words in a column, "On Leftist Parties,"
in January of 2003. They're still very relevant.
Since that time there have been a number of changes
as far as the make-up of the national peace and justice
movement. Back then United for Peace and Justice (UFPJ)
was just getting off the ground, and International ANSWER
was the predominant national coalition mobilizing anti-war
demonstrations. But today, following a split about a year
ago within the Workers World Party-a group with significant
influence within ANSWER-there is now a Workers World
Party-less ANSWER, and there is a newly formed Troops Out
Now Coalition (TONC) within which WWP and its International
Action Center play a major role. Both coalitions are
significantly weaker, even taken together, than they
used to be before the WWP split.
UFPJ, on the other hand, has become the major national
peace and justice coalition. It has more than 1,000
member groups and a million dollar budget. 10 months
ago it organized a demonstration of [a] million people
outside the Republican National Convention, and on
May 1st of this year it organized an anti-nuke, anti-war
demonstration in New York City of approximately 30,000.
On the same day in NYC, the Troops Out Now Coalition
organized a demonstration of around 1,000.
UFPJ is also undergoing some qualitative changes. One
example is the election a couple of months of ago of
three national co-chairs of color, George Friday, George
Martin and Judith LeBlanc. At its national assembly in
St. Louis in February, it adopted as one of its top
priorities a Grassroots Education Campaign "to reach
potential new allies and expand our base. . . An education
working group will be created to develop the long-term
educational strategy to reach new constituencies." This
decision was made, and there has been follow-up since,
in response to internal criticism that UFPJ was not taking
seriously enough the importance of outreach to communities
of color and a linking of international and domestic
issues as they are experienced by people at the grassroots.
It is within this context that, once again, there is
contention over UFPJ and ANSWER/TONC calls for a massive
demonstration on September 24th in Washington, D.C.
and elsewhere.
There's a lot of "déjà vu all over again" to this
contention. It reminds me of an extremely difficult
and problematic political process in the first part
of 2002 as various groups struggled to organize
a united mass action on April 20th of that year. We
ended up doing so, with great difficulty, but two
aspects to the way ANSWER, supported by TONC, are
attempting to build support for their approach are
very similar to what they did then.
It is troubling that ANSWER/TONC is, ostensibly,
conducting what it calls a quest for "unity" via
the Internet. So far this spring I've received at
least five emails from one or the other group
trumpeting how committed they are to achieving "unity"
with UFPJ as they put forward the correctness of
their approach to making it happen. Three and
a half years ago, following some initial contact
between reps of ANSWER and reps of the April 20th
Mobilization coalition (the predecessor of UFPJ),
ANSWER sent out an email announcing that a "unity
statement" had been adopted. This false email was
issued rather than ANSWER responding to the April 20th
Mobilization's putting forward of several ideas on
a possible way to have a unified day of action on
April 20th. These ideas were given with an explicit
request/understanding that ANSWER would respond to
them so that we could further process this question
within our coalition. And up until two weeks before
April 20th, ANSWER continued to use the Internet to
attempt to force a "unity" on terms most favorable to them.
This is most definitely not the way to build principled
and effective unity, if that is truly the objective.
It is also troubling that ANSWER has put forward the
demand, "Support the Palestinian People's Right of
Return" as a major demand. TONC held a conference
earlier this month on the topic, "Building a United
Front to Stop the War," and the first bulleted point
that they made in their website report of that
conference was that "Support for the Right of all
Palestinian refugees and their descendants to return
to their original homes and property in all of
historic Palestine is not negotiable."
I personally understand and support the right of
Palestinian organizations to put this demand forward
as they struggle to end the Israeli occupation of Gaza,
the West Bank and East Jerusalem. When the state of
Israel has been aggressively acting upon the position
that any Jew anywhere in the world has the right to
emigrate to Israel and take up residence there, creating
"facts on the ground" that lead to more land grabs and
building of settlements to accommodate these immigrants,
no one can legitimately deny this just demand of the
Palestinians. It must be dealt with as part of the process
of serious negotiations between the Palestinian and
Israeli government representatives, leading to an end
to the Israeli occupation.
But to put this particular demand forward rather than,
say, a demand to end U.S. support for Israeli occupation,
can only have the effect of confusing, alienating or
turning away potential participants in and organizers
of September 24th, and not just in the white community.
It is not a demand broadly understood or supported within
the United States, even within the U.S. progressive movement.
In the context of the movement to force the United States
to pull its military troops and military bases out of
Iraq and end its neo-colonial plans to control Iraqi oil,
this is a demand that will weaken and narrow that movement.
It is just plain strategically wrong for ANSWER/TONC to
put this forward in the way that they are.
This is a very key political moment for our movement to
get the U.S. out of Iraq. The conservative North Carolina
Republican Congressman Walter Jones, who got "French fries"
in the Congressional cafeteria changed to "freedom fries,"
has joined with another Republican and two Democrats to
put forward a bill calling for a plan to begin withdrawing
U.S. troops next year. John Conyers has just convened
a very successful public hearing in Congress calling
attention to the Downing Street memo which has led to
widespread media coverage about that memo and has helped
to strengthen the peace movement. Public opinion polls
report that almost 60% of the U.S. American people are
against the war and want to begin bringing troops home.
Amnesty International is standing up to Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld
and their ilk and calling them out for the systematic torture
and abuse in their gulag of prisons at Guantanamo, Abu Ghraib
and elsewhere. The Bush/Cheney gang is on the defensive.
The last thing any group on the left which purports to
be against the war should be doing right now is conducting
itself in such a way that it divides, not unites, the broad
range of people of all colors and cultures who are prepared
to come out in massive numbers to demand an end to this war.
July 5, 2005
http://www.zmag.org/sustainers/content/2005-07/05glick.cfm
Ted Glick works with the Independent Progressive Politics
Network (www.ippn.org ) and the Climate Crisis Coalition
(www.climatecrisiscoalition.org ), although these ideas are
solely his own. He can be reached at indpol@igc.org or
P.O. Box 1132, Bloomfield, N.J. 07003.
---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*--------
5) Did Greenspan Know About the London Bombings
Two Days Before?
by Mike Whitney
www.dissidentvoice.org
July 21, 2005
http://www.dissidentvoice.org/July05/Whitney0721.htm
---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*--------
6) Subject: [Al-Awda-SF] Breaking News Correction Note:
36,000 Trees of Land Set Ablaze in Occupied Qaffin and Akkaba
To: al-awda-sf@yahoogroups.com, bayareapalestine@yahoogroups.com
From: "Jess Ghannam"
Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2005 08:29:14 -0700
July 26th , 2005
Steering The Vision of Expulsion:
36,000 Trees of Land Set Ablaze in Occupied
Qaffin and Akkaba
Thousands of dunums of agricultural lands have been
scorched in a series of devastating fires ignited by
Occupation Forces and their settlers in the most fertile
areas of Palestine. In the villages of Qaffin and Akkaba
in Tulkarem District in the northwest region of the West
Bank, over 36,000 trees in 4000 dunums have been burnt
through five separate attacks since May 2005. Over the
past three days alone, as fires continue to blaze through
strong winds, 65% of Qaffin's lands and 80% of Akkaba's
have been burnt, destroying collectively 80% of their
ancient olive trees, 15% of their almond trees, and 2%
of their carob trees. Villagers and Palestinian firemen
have been prevented by Occupation Forces and the Apartheid
Wall from putting out the fires, unable to protect areas
that remain tenuously unaffected. On July 7th, agricultural
lands in Ain Yaboos, Nablus, were also torched in this
same manner, destroying 130 dunums.
The lands set ablaze have been confiscated and isolated
behind the Apartheid Wall since 2002, and declared a
"closed military zone" accessible only to Occupation
Forces and the few farmers who have recently been allowed
to cross. On July 24th at eleven am, villagers noticed
their fields on fire directly after Occupation Forces
left the area. Palestinian firemen attempting to access
the burning fields were denied entry through the gate of
the Wall, as Occupation firemen on the scene stood by
watching the fires intensifying. Farmers have had
tremendous difficulty caring for their lands since
the Apartheid Wall was erected, yet their determination
to fight for their land has been unbreakable.
Qaffin and Akkaba are situated in an area known as the
breadbasket of Palestine, the heartbeat of economic and
agricultural activity for Palestinians that is rapidly
being appropriated and destroyed. The burning of already
expropriated Palestinian land builds upon a long and
elaborate racist structural system of Zionist Occupation
designed to expel Palestinians from their ancestral
lands. The Apartheid Wall is an integral element of
this broader scheme that has unfolded in progressive
stages: its construction, the annexing of Palestinian
land, isolating Palestinians from these lands, and now,
burning any "evidence" of Palestinian ties to the land.
In doing so-as the legacy of the Occupation supports-
territorial expansion can continue to be legitimated
through the manipulation of old Ottoman Law that
stipulates land uncultivated for three years may be
confiscated and declared "state land".
Destruction of land through its isolation began
immediately after the first phase of the wall was
completed in October 2003, whereby the isolated areas
were declared a military zone. Hundreds of farmers have,
subsequently, been unable to cross to their lands, or
those who have been "lucky' enough to obtain permission
to do so have been subjected to humiliating procedures
of control at the gate. In Jayyous and Falamya alone,
20,000 citrus trees dried out last year, as well as
60 dunums of greenhouses because farmers were denied
access. This policy continues now through the burning
of Qaffin and Akkaba's trees, to isolate and,
ultimately, transform once fertile agricultural lands
into deserts that leave no reason for farmers to cross
to their land. As Rushdi Tumeh, one of the farmers
watching his land burning behind the gate in Qaffin
stated, "this is proof of Zionist plans to expel us
from our lands", to burn us out of the history and
future of Palestine. But this will remain an illusive
Zionist dream, for despite the struggle and humiliation,
the long term Zionist vision of the Wall will never
succeed to sever us. The roots of the olive tree,
like the will of Palestinian people, run deep into
the landscape and continue to feed our resistance.
---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*--------
7) Plan to Shift Army Units Is Complete, Officials Say
By THOM SHANKER
Published: July 27, 2005\
In one of the most significant shifts of troops since the
end of the cold war, the restationing program finds new
homes for not only the 50,000 troops returning from abroad,
but also for 30,000 new soldiers financed temporarily
by Congress. Those increases are to help the Army add
10 brigades to its current 33 under a program to convert
all of its combat units into more deployable modular
units....Units will be relocated for better access to
the service's two major training centers, Fort Polk, La.,
for lighter forces, and Fort Irwin, Calif., for armor.
The locations were also chosen for access to airports
and seaports for easier deployment abroad, which for
most soldiers today means Afghanistan or Iraq.
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/27/politics/
27army.html?adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1122487217-HS2flQfv5nap8aV1YfYjOw
---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*--------
8) For immediate release: July 27, 2005, 5:15 p.m. CDT
Please distribute widely!
AFL-CIO Calls for
Rapid Return of U.S. Troops
Chicago: In a major change of course, the AFL-CIO Convention
delegates voted this afternoon in favor of a resolution
calling for a "rapid" return of all U.S. troops from Iraq.
Eighteen AFL-CIO state federations, central labor councils
and unions had submitted resolutions to the convention
calling for an immediate or rapid end to the occupation
and return of the troops. The General Executive Council,
meeting on the eve of the convention, submitted a resolution
that borrowed heavily from elements of those eighteen but
failed to clearly call for a prompt end to the occupation.
When it came time for the convention to act on the resolution
Tuesday afternoon, Fred Mason, President of the Maryland/District
of Columbia AFL-CIO, offered a "friendly" amendment that clarified and strengthened
opposition to continued occupation of Iraq.
The amendment was accepted by the leadership and the modified
Resolution was adopted by an overwhelming majority of delegates
following a parade of delegates who spoke in favor of its
adoption (none spoke in opposition).
(This action occurred after delegates of four unions - SEIU,
Teamsters, UFCW, and UNITE HERE had already departed the
convention after announcing their decision to boycott the
proceedings. The SEIU and Teamsters subsequently also
announced their disaffiliation.)
Rising to speak in favor of the resolution, Henry Nicholas,
President of District 1199 of American Federation of State,
County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) of Pennsylvania,
told the delegates that his son had been deployed to Iraq
four times and was about to be sent again. He said, "In
my forty-five years in the labor movement, this is my
proudest moment in being a union member, because it is
the first time we had the courage to say 'enough is enough.'"
USLAW Co-Convenor Gene Bruskin observed, "The action taken
by this convention puts the AFL-CIO on record for a rapid
end to the Iraq occupation - a stand squarely in the mainstream
of American public opinion." Polls taken in late June show
more than half of the American people feel the war was
a mistake and similarly that it has made the U.S. less,
not more safe. A majority of Americans also say the
administration "intentionally misled" the public in going to war.
U.S. Labor Against the War had rallied its affiliates
and supporters to press for the AFL-CIO to take an
unambiguous stand for an end to the occupation and
return of all U.S. troops. Widespread antiwar and
anti-occupation sentiment among the delegates became even
more evident when USLAW and Pride at Work, the AFL-CIO
constituency group for gay, lesbian, bisexual and trans-
gendered union members (also affiliated with USLAW)
hosted a reception for Iraqi union leaders attending
the convention as guests. The reception, which took
place after the plenary on Monday, drew more than 150
delegates and guests, including top officials of
a number of unions.
The convention action comes on the heels of a 26-city U.S.
tour by six Iraqi trade union leaders from three of Iraq's
major labor federations organized by U.S. Labor Against
the War in mid-June. The Iraqi union leaders were unanimous
in their call for an immediate end to the U.S. occupation,
describing it as a source of instability, violence and
terrorism in Iraq. (For more about the tour, visit the
USLAW website at www.uslaboragainstwar.org
The resolution pays tribute to the troops in Iraq and
says, ". . . they deserve a commitment from our country's
leaders to bring them home rapidly. . . ." It accuses the
Bush administration of misinforming the American people
about the reasons for going to war and about the reality
on the ground since it launched the invasion. It calls
for expanded benefits for veterans and protection for
workers affected by military base closings. The resolution
also heralds the courage demonstrated by Iraqi workers and
unions. It calls for full respect for the right of Iraqi
workers to freely organize and bargain in unions of their
choice and unconditional cancellation of the foreign debt
and reparations accumulated by Iraq during the Hussein
regime. It pledges continuing solidarity in concert with
the international trade union movement with the workers
of Iraq ". . . as they lead the struggle for an end to
the violence and a more just and democratic nation."
Adoption of this resolution represents the first time in
its 50 year history that the federation has taken
a position squarely in opposition to a major U.S.
foreign policy or military action.
Resolution #53 The War in Iraq
Submitted by the Executive Council, as amended from the
floor and adopted by the delegates to the AFL-CIO
Convention in Chicago, July 26, 2005
The AFL-CIO supports the brave men and women deployed
in Iraq, which include our members in all branches of
the armed services.
Our soldiers˜the men and women risking their lives in
Iraq˜come from America's working families. They are our
sons and daughters, our sisters and brothers, our
husbands and wives. They deserve to be properly equipped
with protective body gear and up-armored vehicles. And
they deserve leadership that fully values their courage
and sacrifice. Most importantly, they deserve
a commitment from our country's leaders to bring
them home rapidly. An unending military presence
will waste lives and resources, undermine our nation's
security and weaken our military.
We have lost more than 1,700 brave Americans in Iraq
to date, and Iraqi civilian casualties are in the
thousands. In recent months, the insurgency increasingly
has focused its terror on the Iraqi people, engaging
in a deliberate campaign to frustrate their aspirations
to take control of their own destiny. These aspirations
were clearly demonstrated earlier this year when Iraqis
defied widespread intimidation and escalating violence
by turning out in the millions to elect a new Iraqi
interim government tasked with writing a constitution.
The AFL-CIO applauds the courage of the Iraqi people
and unequivocally condemns the use of terror in Iraq
and indeed anywhere in the world.
No foreign policy can be sustained without the informed
consent of the American people. The American people
were misinformed before the war began and have not
been informed about the reality on the ground and
the very difficult challenges that lie ahead.
It is long past time for the Bush administration to
level with the American people and for Congress to
fulfill its constitutionally mandated oversight
responsibilities. The AFL-CIO supports the call from
members of Congress for the establishment of benchmarks
in the key areas of security, governance, reconstruction
and internationalization.
Since the beginning of the war almost two-and-a-half
years ago, the AFL-CIO has emphasized the support and
participation of a broad coalition of nations and the
United Nations is vital to building a democratic Iraq.
Greater security on the ground remains an unmet
precondition for such efforts to succeed. The AFL-CIO
calls on the international community to help the Iraqi
people build its capacity to maintain law and order
through a concerted international effort to train
Iraqi security and police forces.
Future efforts to rebuild the country are hampered by
the weight of the massive foreign debt accumulated
under the Saddam Hussein regime. The AFL-CIO calls
for cancellation of Saddam's foreign debt without any
conditions imposed upon the people of Iraq, who
suffered under the regime that was supported by
these loans. Further, the AFL-CIO calls for the
cancellation of reparations imposed as a result
of wars waged by Saddam Hussein's regime and the
return of all Iraqi property and antiquities taken
during the war and occupation.
The bedrock of any democracy is a strong, free,
democratic labor movement.
That is true in the United States and Iraq.
Our returning troops should be afforded all
resources and services available to meet their
needs. Our members should return to their jobs,
with seniority and benefits.
The AFL-CIO calls on Congress and President Bush
to expand benefits for veterans and assist those
affected by military base closings, including
a G.I. Bill for returning Iraq veterans and
a Veterans Administration housing program that
meets current needs.
The AFL-CIO supports the efforts of Iraqi workers
to form independent labor unions. In the absence
of an adequate labor law, the AFL-CIO calls on the
Iraqi government, as well as domestic and
international companies operating in Iraq, to
respect internationally recognized International
Labor Organization standards that call for
protecting the right of workers to organize free
from all government and employer interference and
the right to organize and bargain collectively in
both the public and private sectors. These rights
must be extended to include full equality for
working women.
The AFL-CIO condemns the fact that Saddam's decree
No. 150 issued in 1987 that abolished union rights
for workers in the extensive Iraqi public sector
has not been repealed. Under current laws, payroll
deductions for union dues are not even permitted.
The AFL-CIO calls on the Iraqi government to place
as a top priority the adoption of a new labor law
that conforms to international labor standards to
replace the old anti-worker laws and decrees.
Despite legal obstacles, Iraq's workers and their
institutions are already leaders in the struggle
for democracy. Trade unionists are being targeted
for their activism, and some have paid for their
valor with their lives. The AFL-CIO condemns these
brutal acts of intimidation.
The AFL-CIO has a proud history of solidarity with
worker movements around the world in their opposition
to tyranny. In concert with the international trade
union movement, the AFL-CIO will continue to provide
our full solidarity to Iraq's workers as they lead
the struggle for an end to the violence and a more
just and democratic nation.
U.S. Labor Against War (USLAW)
www.uslaboragainstwar.org
PMB 153
1718 "M" Street, NW
Washington, D.C. 20036
Messages: 202-521-5265
Co-convenors: Gene Bruskin, Maria Guillen,
Fred Mason, Bob Muehlenkamp, and Nancy Wohlforth
Michael Eisenscher, National Organizer & Website
Coordinator Adrienne Nicosia, Administrative Staff
U.S. Labor Against the War –
www.uslaboragainstwar.org - 1718 M St.,
NW #153, Washington, DC 20036.
---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*--------
9) The death of Pierre Broué, an irreparable loss to Marxism
By Alan Woods
Wednesday, 27 July 2005
http://www.marxist.com/pierre-broue-death270705.htm
With profound sadness we learned of the death of comrade
Pierre Broué, the outstanding Trotskyist historian and
veteran revolutionary militant. After a long and painful
battle against cancer, Pierre passed away at 03h04 on
Wednesday July 27, at the age of 79.
Pierre Broué will be remembered for his marvellous books
which trace the history of the international revolutionary
movement and particularly the life and work of Leon Trotsky
and his followers. Among these are the History of the
Bolshevik Party ,Communists against Stalin , Trotsky,
and many books on the Spanish and German revolution
He was a man who dedicated his entire life to the cause
of revolutionary communism. As a young man, he fought in
the ranks of the French resistance against Nazi occupation.
He joined the Young Communists, and soon adopted the
standpoint of Trotskyism, which he has consistently
defended ever since.
In the last years of his life, Pierre moved close to the
political positions of the International Marxist Tendency,
the public expression of which is Marxist.com.
Pierre Broué enthusiastically supported the Leon Trotsky
publishing project, which we launched two years ago.
He recently wrote a preface to our edition of Not Guilty ,
the conclusion of the Dewey Commission on the Moscow Trials,
which have been out of print for many years.
The death of Pierre Broué represents an irreparable loss
for international Marxism. Had he lived, we have no doubt
that he would have produced even more works of lasting
importance for our movement.
We extend our heartfelt sympathy to Pierre's family,
friends and comrades, in particular Jean-Pierre, his
close collaborator, comrade and friend.
Marxist.com will be publishing tributes to
Pierre Broué next week.
---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*--------
10) Don't miss this exciting opportunity to hear
Dennis Banks, Ojibwa Warrior, Indian Rights Activist,
Co-founder of the American Indian Movement
(AIM), led the occupation of Wounded Knee, S.D.
in 1973, Author, Teacher, Lecturer.
When: Wednesday, August 3, 2005, 7:00 PM
Where: Muggs Coffee at the Vallejo Ferry Terminal
289 Mare Island Way
Vallejo, CA
Sponsor: Vallejo
Dennis Banks will be in Vallejo speaking about
plans for a massive cross-country walk/run early
2006. This event will focus on World Peace. All
Peace & Justice groups, activists, churches, synagogues,
environmental groups and individuals are encouraged
to attend and take part in this historic effort.
Inter-tribal Council
FREE
http://www.vallejointertribalcouncil.org/
---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*--------
11) CASUALTY OF WAR: THE U.S. ECONOMY
James Sterngold, Chronicle Staff Writer
Sunday, July 17, 2005
The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have already cost taxpayers
$314 billion, and the Congressional Budget Office projects
additional expenses of perhaps $450 billion over
the next 10 years.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2005/07/17/
MNG5GDPEK31.DTL
$313.9 BILLION
. . . is the U.S. cost for operations
in Iraq and Afghanistan since 2001.
The following shows a breakdown of that
total by year and by type of costs:
IRAQ
Fiscal year 2003 2004 2005
Military 48.9 77.9 62.9
Reconstruction, foreign 6.6 20.1 1.8
assistance and training.
AFGHANISTAN
Fiscal year 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
Military 13.0 17.5 27.1 18.0 13.0
Reconstruction, foreign 0.5 0.6 1.4 1.9 2.7
assistance and training.
IRAQ
Military $189.7 billion
Reconstruction, foreign +28.5 billion
assistance and training
TOTAL: $218.2 billion.
AFGHANISTAN
Military $88.6 billion
Reconstruction, foreign +7.1 billion
assistance and training
TOTAL: $95.7 billion
GRAND TOTAL: $313.9 billion
Sources: Office of Management and Budget;
Defense Department; Congressional Research Service;
House Budget Committee Democratic Caucus
Todd Trumbull / The Chronicle
---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*--------
12) Lance Armstrong criticizes cost of Iraq war
Wed, 27 Jul 2005 17:21:23 -0700
From: "Patty Mote"
The item below comes from "Democracy Now" July 27, 2005,
excerpted from a Time Magazine interview. Lance Armstrong,
right now, is probably one of THE major figures in sports,
his name recognition, internationally, is right up there
with Tiger Woods and Barry Bonds. He is also known to be
extremely careful about all public statements. He doesn't
actually say anything all that radical, but the fact that
he is critical of the war at all is significant. Recent
history shows us that any time a major sports figure makes
a political statement in a major media venue, the
reverberations can be substantial. - Tom Lacey
Lance Armstrong Criticizes Cost of Iraq War
Cycling champion Lance Armstrong - who just won his seventh
Tour de France --has publicly criticized the war in Iraq
because it has prevented the country from spending more
on cancer research. He told Time Magazine, "'Funding
[for cancer research] is tough to come by these days. The
biggest downside to a war in Iraq is what you could do
with that money. What does a war in Iraq cost a week?
A billion? Maybe a billion a day?" He went on to say " The
budget for the National Cancer Institute is four billion.
That has to change. It needs to become a priority again.
Polls say people are much more afraid of cancer than of
a plane flying into their house or a bomb or any other
form of terrorism. It is a priority for the American public."
---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*--------
13) Brazilian did not wear bulky jacket
Relatives say Met admits that, contrary to reports,
electrician did
not leap tube station barrier
Mark Honigsbaum
Thursday July 28, 2005
The Guardian
Jean Charles de Menezes, the Brazilian shot dead in the head,
was not wearing a heavy jacket that might have concealed
a bomb, and did not jump the ticket barrier when challenged
by armed plainclothes police, his cousin said yesterday...Flanked
by the de Menezes family's solicitor, Gareth Peirce, and by Bianca
Jagger, the anti-Iraq war campaigner, she condemned the shoot-
to-kill policy which had led to her cousin's death and vowed that
what she called the "crime" would not go unpunished....Mr de
Menezes was shot seven times in the head and once in the
shoulder at 10am last Friday after being followed from Tulse Hill.
Scotland Yard initially claimed he wore a bulky jacket and jumped
the barrier when police identified themselves and ordered him
to stop. The same day the Met commissioner, Sir Ian Blair, said
the shooting was "directly linked" to the unprecedented anti-terror
operation on London's streets.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,3604,1537457,00.html
---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*--------
14) OpEd
Oil and Blood
By BOB HERBERT
Published: July 28, 2005
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/28/opinion/28herbert.html?hp
---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*--------
15) Editorial
Energy Shortage
Published: July 28, 2005
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/28/opinion/28thu1.html?hp
---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*--------
16) Shots to the Heart of Iraq
Innocent civilians, including people who are considered
vital to building democracy, are increasingly being
killed by U.S. troops.
By Richard C. Paddock, Times Staff Writer
BAGHDAD - Three men in an unmarked sedan pulled up near
the headquarters of the national police major crimes unit.
The two passengers, wearing traditional Arab dishdasha
gowns, stepped from the car.
At the same moment, a U.S. military convoy emerged from
an underpass. Apparently believing the men were staging
an ambush, the Americans fired, killing one passenger and
wounding the other. The sedan's driver was hit in the
head by two bullet fragments.
The soldiers drove on without stopping.
This kind of shooting is far from rare in Baghdad, but
the driver of the car was no ordinary casualty. He was
Iraqi police Brig. Gen. Majeed Farraji, chief of the major
crimes unit. His passengers were unarmed hitchhikers whom
he was dropping off on his way to work.
http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/la-fg-civilians25jul25,1,693664.story
---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*--------
17) $1.5 Billion Giveaway Secretly Slipped into Energy Bill, Waxman Says
By: Rep. Henry Waxman
Published: July 27, 2005 at 15:40
http://www.yubanet.com/artman/publish/article_23241.shtml
---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*--------
18) STAFF SALARIES: WHO'S MAKING WHAT
By Alexis Simendinger
National Journal
July 26, 2005
http://nationaljournal.com/about/njweekly/stories/2005/0726nj_wh_dollar.htm
---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*--------
19) Op-Ed Contributor
When You Have to Shoot First
By HAIM WATZMAN
Published: July 28, 2005
Jerusalem
(When reading this article please note the article above,
'Brazilian did not wear bulky jacket' in which it is pointed
out that this man wasn't wearing a bulky jacket and didn't
jump the turnstile...BW)
"...A terrible thing happened in London last Friday. On his
way to work, Jean Charles de Menezes, a 27-year-old Brazilian
electrician, was chased down by suspicious police officers.
When he tripped and fell, the officers asked no questions and
gave him no warning.
One of them fired eight bullets point-blank into his head and
shoulder and that was that. At first sight, it was an act much
more severe than Eldad's, because Eldad had been under attack
and shot a man he had good reason to think was armed.
Mr. Menezes had hurt no one.
On the other hand, it was an easier call. The police saw
a man wearing a long coat out of place on a hot summer day
jumping over a turnstile and running for a crowded subway
train. He did not stop when he had been ordered to do so.
Just two weeks before the killing, four suicide bombers had
blown themselves up on subway trains and buses in London.
Just days before, there were all the signs of another coordinated
attack - and the police had reason to believe that bombers
were still at large. The long coat on a summer day was just
the sort of telltale clue that the police had been told to
look out for. A number of suicide bombers in recent years
have used such coats to conceal the belt of explosives
strapped around their waists. What's more, the police
acted under express orders to shoot in the head someone
they thought was about to commit a suicide bombing.
Suicide charges are usually built to be set off with
the flick of the bomber's finger. The terrorist can be
disabled, flat on the ground, and surrounded by heavily
armed men and still blow up everything around him.
So the officer who killed Mr. Menezes did a horrible
thing. But he also did the right thing. One of the
tragedies of this age of suicide bombers - indeed of
any war - is that the right thing to do is sometimes
a horrible thing. Remember: there's an essential distinction
between us and the suicide bombers. The suicide bombers
perpetrate gratuitous horrors. We do terrible things only
when it is necessary to prevent something even worse
from happening...."
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/28/opinion/28watzman.html
---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*--------
20) Anti-war groups call for massive September mobilization
By Askia Muhammad
White House Correspondent
Updated Jun 16, 2005, 09:17 am
http://www.finalcall.com/artman/publish/article_2057.shtml
---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*--------
21) This article is a short summary of one of the main elements
in Fidel's July 26th speech. You can see the full talk here:
http://www.cuba.cu/gobierno/discursos/2005/ing/f260705i.html
Fidel Castro Says History Will Absolve Him and Chavez
http://www.ain.cubaweb.cu/idioma/ingles/2005/jul26fidel-26juliopart3.htm
Havana, July 26 (AIN) In the face of relentless attacks by
the US government against Cuba, Venezuela, and their
leaders, Fidel Castro responded Tuesday by saying:
"Condemn us, it doesn't matter, history will absolve us."
In the main function commemorating National Rebellion Day
the leader of the Cuban Revolution elaborated on what he
called the noble, constructive and peaceful efforts of the
two countries to achieve true integration, something the
Bush administration calls spreading subversion in the
region.
Nonetheless, Fidel assured that the agreements signed with
Hugo Chavez to make the Bolivarian Alternative for the
Americas a reality constitutes an important step towards
the unity and integration of the Latin American and
Caribbean nations.
He added that Venezuela's Petrocaribe energy initiative is
an extraordinary example of brotherhood and solidarity
between peoples.
The Cuban leader said the growing trade between Venezuela
and the island is expected to reach 3 billion dollars in
2005.
He said the two countries will undoubtedly have this year's
highest growth figures in the hemisphere.
If President Chavez would be in agreement, one day like
today would be a perfect occasion to respond to the US
government's hostility with: "Condemn us, it doesn't
matter, history will absolve us."
Fidel was thus referring to the historic phrase with which
he ended his self-defense during the trial following the
attack on the Moncada and Cespedes garrisons on July 26,
1953, which sparked the Cuban Revolution.
During his speech, the Cuban leader strongly criticized the
US government's politics, marked by dirty wars and plans
for world domination. He said through such politics
Washington not only threatens Venezuela but seeks to
install military bases in other parts of the continent, in
the belief that arms would be able to stop the emergence of
revolutionary movements.
In that respect, Fidel Castro denounced the arrival in
Paraguay a few days ago of hundreds of US soldiers; he
asked what the purpose of installing a US military base
there would be other than seeking to stop the winds of
change in Latin America.
The US knows that conditions in the continent are becoming
unbearable, that the system they have put in place has
failed, said President Castro, stressing that Washington
wants to have a military capacity to intervene in Bolivia
or Brazil if radical political movements were to emerge
there.
Fidel Castro said the Free Trade Area of the Americas
(FTAA), aimed at the annexation of Latin America to the US,
has proved to be a failure. Faced with growing protests,
unrest and desperation, he said Washington has begun to
deploy an advanced military force in Central America and
other countries of the hemisphere, scared by the
integration process occurring.
President Castro insisted on the need to stage protests
against US destabilization maneuvers that threaten the
survival of humanity. He noted that Washington is already
talking about beaming hostile radio broadcasts to
Venezuela.
However, he appeared optimistic about the creation of the
Telesur regional satellite TV channel and the end of the
information monopolies. He added that Telesur will not be
stopped from becoming an instrument to develop culture and
knowledge.
Fidel Castro gave the closing speech at the main ceremony
marking National Rebellion Day at Havana's Karl Marx
Theater. The event was attended by Communist Party leaders,
government officials, representatives of grassroots
organizations and visiting solidarity delegations from the
US and Puerto Rico.
Marxism mailing list
Marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism
---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*--------
22) And from Jon Snow (Channel 4 news, UK) last evening:
Sign of the times?
A day in the life of London, maybe even a commonplace day in the life
of a Muslim. I am cycling back from Channel 4 at ten thirty seven
this morning past the back of Horse guards parade in line of sight of
the back of number 10 Downing Street - suddenly on the edge of the
park I notice armed police, four of them, their guns raised
surrounding a tall Muslim man with a dark beard.
He is smartly dressed and has a brand new silver coloured camera bag
on the ground at his feet. The voices are raised with the guns, in
the time that I take to pass the guns lower, the bag is searched, the
incident passes, no one seems to notice. Up on the mall a small knot
of tourists are looking from a distance. One now normal unreported,
maybe unreportable incident and a searing experience for one innocent
Muslim man. Which isn't to say that the level of anxiety and tension
which prompts such a scene isn't all too understandable.
I am white, crazy-looking on a bike, with a shoulder bag across my
back, yet I am not stopped in line of sight of number 10: here lies
tonight's central dilemma - do only bag carrying bearded Muslims need
to worry about passing public buildings? Soon they will begin to keep
away from them and what is shared, what is all of ours, will become
places they no longer come to. Not just the pubs where they never
might have drank anyway, but now the places that are central to our
democracy and our identity...
Something we are addressing at seven with John Denham chair of the
commons Home affairs select committee. He's arguing Mr Blair has got
some of it wrong and must make amends.
Paddy
http://apling.freeservers.com
Marxism mailing list
Marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism
---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*--------
23) PACIFIC FILM ARCHIVE THEATER: 2575 BANCROFT WAY
@ BOWDITCH, BERKELEY
WWW.BAMPFA.BERKELEY.EDU / $4-$8
TUESDAY AUGUST 9
7:30 The Forest for the Trees: Judi Bari vs. the FBI
Bernadine Mellis (U.S., 2005)
Artist in Person
Tonight we present two very different portraits of activism
that detail visionary citizens' efforts to preserve the natural
world. The Forest for the Trees documents Earth First! organizer
Judi Bari's case against the FBI and Oakland police. Following
her passionate and effective efforts to create alliances between
environmental activists and loggers and mill workers, in 1990,
the car she was driving in Oakland was bombed, and within hours
she was accused of transporting the explosives and labeled
a terrorist. The filmmaker's father was one of Bari's lawyers,
giving inside access to the intricacies of the legal battle,
which continued to be waged in Oakland courtrooms after Bari's
death from cancer in 1997. * (2005, 54 mins, Video)
Preceded by:
Under Foot and Overstory
Jason Livingston (U.S., 2004)
Under Foot and Overstory is a playful and poetic portrait of
an Iowa City-based group of environmentalists who work together
to protect 200 acres of urban parkland...but first they must
write their mission statement. Revealing a love of nature,
group dynamics, and wordplay, Underfoot and Overstory
explores "an aesthetics of ecology" (JL). * (2004, 35 mins, 16mm)
* (Total running time: 89 mins, Color, From the artists)
Laura Deutch
Outreach Coordinator
Pacific Film Archive
2625 Durant Avenue
Berkeley, CA 94720-2250
510/642-6883
www.bampfa.berkeley.edu/pfa
---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*--------
24) Gaza Will Be 'Vacated But Still Occupied'
by Ushani Agalawatta
JERUSALEM - A growing number of Palestinians are beginning
to believe that Israeli disengagement from the Gaza Strip
will not mean the end of occupation
"The Gaza Strip will still be occupied territory under
international law," says Renad Qubbaj of the Palestinian
NGO Network based in Ramallah in the West Bank. "After
implementation of the disengagement plan, the Israeli
army will remain in effective control of all border
crossings."
Published on Thursday, July 28, 2005 by the Inter Press Service
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/0728-04.htm
---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*--------
25) Friends
There are three important events coming up in the next
few days. Hope to see all of you at all of them!
thanks.
en la lucha
tommi
"tommi avicolli mecca"
SAT. JULY 30: BADLANDS RALLY -- 9PM @ LYRIC (127
Collingwood): Join guest speakers Rev. Penny Nixon
from the Metropolitan Community Church (MCC),
Roberto Ordenana from the SF LGBT Community Center,
and civil rights staff attorney Malcolm Yeung from our
newest co-sponsor, the Asian Law Caucus! Special star
MC: community activist/leader and writer Tommi
Avicolli Mecca.
SAT. JULY 30 @ 10PM, picket @ Badlands (18th &
Castro)!
SUN. JULY 31: Close down TIC sales: meet at noon at
the Tenants Union, 558 Capp/21st. Picketers will be
car-pooled out to various sites. Help inform potential
buyers that tenants have been evicted for TICs and
that they will not be able to condo-convert because of
those evictions.
TUES. AUG. 2: Entertainment Commission Hearing on
Badlands--5PM at City Hall (Room TBD)! Please let the
City know that discrimination won't be tolerated in
our City: not at Badlands, not anywhere, not ever. If
you'd like to speak before the Commission, please
contact Julie Carlson at julieecarlson@yahoo.com .
Otherwise, please just show up, and bring your friends.
---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*--------
26) Scientists Warn Fewer Kinds of Fish Are Swimming the Oceans
By CORNELIA DEAN
Published: July 29, 2005
Researchers who studied decades of catch records from Japanese
fishing fleets say fishing has greatly reduced the diversity
of fish in the world's open oceans, leaving ocean ecosystems
less resilient against environmental changes like global warming.
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/29/science/29fishing.html
---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*--------
27) US energy bill funnels billions to oil,
utility corporations
By Patrick Martin
29 July 2005
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2005/jul2005/ener-j29.shtml
---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*--------
28) JAMES CONNOLLY FILM
The second of 2 films on Irish Themes.
Connolly was born in Scotland and
was alos an activist in the USA so
he has a relevance broader than
Ireland. Interesting that up to 1917
these isalands were more influenced
by American radicalism than anything
towards the East.
The other film is on the post
Connolly War of Independence by Ken Loach.
Jim Monaghan
From: "Library SIPTU College"
http://www.rascal-films.com
http://www.connolly-thefilm.com
---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*--------
29) Communist Party,
Russia
Referendum Appeal Fails
The Supreme Court's appeals board
on Thursday upheld the court's earlier
rejection of a nationwide referendum
proposed by the Communist Party,
Russian news agencies reported.
The Communists had sought to put
a series of social, economic and
political questions to Russians for
a vote. The questions included
issues such as guarantees of free
education and salaries above the
subsistence level, free television
airtime for political parties and a
progressive tax for the wealthy.
But the Central Elections Commission
refused to allow the vote, saying
the questions were vague and had legal
problems that could result in
additional expenditures for the state budget.
The Supreme Court upheld that ruling
last month and on Thursday, the
court's appeals board turned down
the communists' appeal.
Communist Party leaders said they
might appeal further to the
Constitutional Court and also to
the European Court for Human Rights.
Several dozen Communist demonstrators
picketed outside the court
building. (AP)
Marxism mailing list
Marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism
http://www.themoscowtimes.com/stories/2005/07/29/031.html
---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*--------
30) Unravelling of the US Military
Newspapers describe the US army as facing one of the
greatest recruiting challenges in its history, despite
the enormous incentives now being offered to join the
military. A study commissioned by the army found that
resistance to recruitment was due to popular objection
to the war in Iraq, the casualties and media coverage
of the torture at Abu Ghraib. Solutions include a bill
that was introduced in the Senate but that has not yet
been voted on: offering legal status and eligibility
for citizenship to the children of illegal immigrants
residing in the US. The nightmare of war is offered as
the prelude to the 'American dream'.
Zia Mian
http://www.epw.org.in/
showArticles.php?root=2005&leaf=07&filename=8893&filetype=html
---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*--------
31) Air Force Plans To Invade: 48 High Schools
Set to Start AF JROTC
Based on research by Peacework intern Jamie Munro and
materials on JROTC from the Central Committee for
Conscientious Objectors and the American Friends
Service Committee Youth and Militarism Program.
Compiled by Sam Diener .
The Air Force currently has 746 high school Junior
Reserve Officer Training Corps (JROTC) units militarizing
106,000 students across the country. In the fall of 2005,
the Air Force plans to open 48 more units.
Peacework Magazine has obtained the list of these schools
(please see the list on-line or call the numbers listed
below for the list). The AF JROTC Cadet Command plans to
open an additional 75 units each year through the fall of
2007, which would bring the total number of invaded
schools to 945.
In the 1990s, during a previous round of JROTC expansion,
activists worked to expose the realities of the JROTC
program to community members and school officials. Because
of community opposition, JROTC never opened in approximately
30 schools which had been on the military's target list.
Most communities which decided to reject planned units did
so after learning that: each unit costs school districts
at least $50,000, with an average cost of more than $76,000.
Why should the public chools be subsidizing the military?
(Please see Trading Books for Soldiers: The True Cost of
JROTC ,Peacework , October 2004,
< www.afsc.org/pwork/0410/041021.htm >);
JROTC discriminates. JROTC instructors must meet current
active military duty standards. Therefore, they can not
be openly gay, bisexual, or lesbian. Honorably discharged
disabled veterans are also ineligible. The latter stricture
violates every school district's employment non-discrimination
policy and most teacher's union contracts. Also, according
to a fact sheet distributed by AF JROTC Cadet Command in
March, 2005, a student is only eligible for AF JROTC if
they are "physically fit and citizens of the United States."
Thus, the program discriminates against students on the
basis of disability and citizenship;
a school district has no control over the JROTC curriculum,
which is dictated by the national JROTC cadet command;
JROTC curricula are inherently biased. A militaristic
tone is consistent throughout. The textbooks imply that
immigrants and national minorities have to prove their
American-ness through participation in US wars. The Air
Force JROTC textbooks imply that it is air power that wins
US wars; the Navy implies that it's sea power, etc.;
there is no evidence to support the military's claim that
JROTC prevents students from dropping out of school; the
JROTC program makes a mockery of schools' weapon-free zones
policies by bringing guns (especially in Army JROTC) and
mock-guns into the schools; there are numerous cases of
JROTC-connected violence, including murders, gang-activities,
and violent hazing; the military's vaunted leadership skill
training focuses instead on following orders;
JROTC is more of a recruiting program than a leadership
program. When testifying to Congress about JROTC on
February 9, 2000, then Secretary of Defense William Cohen
gushed, it's "one of the best recruiting devices that we
could have." there are serious drawbacks, attested to by
Veterans for Peace especially, of militarizing young minds
Future protests might also raise questions about the
appropriateness of high schools preparing military personnel
for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. A Chicago Tribune
article (December 17, 2004), reported that two graduates
of the AF JROTC program at Brentwood High School who joined
the military were recently killed. The Long Island, NY school
is in a working class community where 62% of students live
below the federal poverty line, more than 65% are Latino,
and 23% are African-American. According to the Tribune ,
Principal Thomas O'Brien is now reconsidering the JROTC
program at Brentwood. He reflected, "Certainly what's
happened here gives you pause for thought: Are you
placing your kids at risk?"
Some communities might not have had any public discussion
of the impending school invasions. In the past, activists
in communities threatened by imminent JROTC units have
raised a red flag with community organizations, gay rights
groups, disability rights groups, peace groups, student
councils, parent-teacher organizations, teachers' unions,
and school boards in order to delay or stop the military
training programs. Some activists have stressed the
importance of delaying the start of such a controversial
program for at least a year until the community can
thoroughly investigate and discuss the pros and cons of JROTC.
Peacework has also learned that the Navy plans to open one
new JROTC unit in the fall of 2005, and has 207 schools on
their target list .Peacework Magazine has requested but as
of press time has not yet received similar lists from the
Army and Marines.
For additional alternative information about JROTC, including
fact sheets, analyses, case histories, and activist assistance,
please contact the Central Committee for Conscientious
Objectors, 800/NO-JROTC, < www.objector.org/jrotc/why.html >;
the American Friends Service Committee Youth and Militarism
Program, 215/241-7046,
< www.afsc.org/youthmil/militarism-in-schools/JROTC.htm >;
and Project Project YANO (Youth and Non-Military Opportunities),
760/634-3604). The website of YANO's sister organization, the
Committee Opposed to Militarism and the Draft,
< www.comdsd.org/alerts_archive/jrotc_expansion_alerts.htm >
features a single page document summarizing points for
JROTC opponents to make at school board meetings.
---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*--------
---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*--------
---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*--------
---------*---------*---------*---------*---------*--------
