Sunday, October 06, 2019

BAUAW NEWSLETTER, SUNDAY, OCTOBER 6, 2019












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


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

You are invited to the following event:
DEATH PENALTY: INEFFECTIVE, IRREVERSIBLE AND IMMORAL
Event to be held at the following time, date, and location:
Thursday, October 10, 2019 from 6:30 PM to 8:30 PM (PDT)
J. Paul Leonard Library
1630 Holloway Avenue
San Francisco, CA 94132
View Map 
Share:
FacebookTwitterLinkedIn
Please join us for a critical conversation on the World Day Against the Death Penalty.

Featuring:
Kevin Cooper, Artist, Writer and Abolitionist, currently on Death Row, San Quentin (phoning into the panel from death row)
Jarvis Jay Masters, Writer and Buddhist, currently on Death Row, San Quentin (recent recording about life on death row at San Quentin)
Nancy Haydt, Executive Director, Death Penalty Focus
Carina Gallo, Assistant Professor of Criminal Justice Studies, SFSU
Beth Webb, Board Member, Death Penalty Focus

Light refreshments will be provided
Share this event on Facebook and Twitter.
We hope you can make it!
Cheers!


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

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



PLEASE JOIN US TO PROTEST FLEET WEEK!
Sunday, October 13, 2019 from Noon to 4 pm
San Francisco's Embarcadero - Fisherman's Wharf area
< Boats off shore with Peace Banners
< Us on shore handing out Flyers

MEET AT THE ENTRANCE TO PIER 39 AT 11:30 AM ON SUNDAY the 13th TO GET FLYERS TO HAND OUT
< CONTACT PERSON FRED BIALY - CodePINK Men's Auxiliary 
LAND LINE (leave messages before the 13th…but they won't be heard until Oct. 11):  
510-215-5974
CELL (on the 13th only please):  510-541-6874

If you have questions beforehand, you can text to the cell phone,
and Fred will respond as he's able.  
Toby & Fred are at www.ShutDownCreech.blogspot.com 
for a week of killer drone resistance!

Please join Bay Area CODEPINK-Women for Peace and Bay Area Veterans For Peace. AS THE "BLUE ANGELS" SCREAM OVERHEAD, WE'LL PASS OUT TO THE CROWDS OF THOUSANDS LEAFLETS SAYING:
"Angels Don't Bomb!" .... plus lots of info on Drones, the anti-war work of the 2 orgs and webs to check out (alternatives to the military, etc.)
We'll also have a counter-recruitment flyer to hand out to young people.

WE'LL ALSO HAVE AT LEAST 3 "PEACE FLEET" BOATS ON THE BAY, DECKED OUT WITH BANNERS, etc.
If you are interested in being on a boat, 
Please email Toby Blome:  ratherbenyckeling@comcast.net
Current boats are pretty full, so you will be put on a wait list, in case more boats join us.
You will hear back from Toby on Friday, Oct. 11 to confirm a seat.
If you know a boat owner please encourage them to contact us.

NEW DEVELOPMENTS:   A totally independent "PEACE NAVY" event on the bay is being organized on Oct. 6, Sunday.  More on that later, but the organizers of both events are collaborating, so that we can ENCIRCLE Fleet Week before and after with the values of S.F:   
Peace & Love and ZERO tolerance to war!

Big Thanks to Nadya, our liaison between Veterans For Peaceh and CODEPINK!!




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

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









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

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





Vote Socialist 2020!
Gloria La Riva and Leonard Peltier announce presidential run

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

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







New Evidence of Innocence Spurs two Court Filings for Mumia Abu Jamal

Press Release

mobilization4mumia.com

September 9, 2019 Philadelphia—The struggle to free unfairly convicted Mumia Abu-Jamal took a significant step forward on September 3, 2019, when his attorneys submitted two documents to Pennsylvania Superior Court.
Judith L Ritter, Widener University-Delaware Law School, and Samuel Spital, NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc. released this statement: 
"This week, Mumia Abu-Jamal filed a brief in Pennsylvania Superior Court to support his claim that his 1982 trial was fundamentally unfair in violation of the Constitution. For example, he argues that the prosecution failed to disclose evidence as required and discriminated against African Americans when selecting the jury. And, his lawyer did not adequately challenge the State's witnesses. 
"Mr. Abu-Jamal also filed a motion containing new evidence of constitutional violations such as promises by the prosecutor to pay or give leniency to two witnesses. There is also new evidence of racial discrimination in jury selection."
Abu-Jamal has always said he is innocent and the new documents go a long way in supporting his case, undermining police and prosecution claims of how Philadelphia police officer Danny Faulkner was killed.
The filings are in response to the December 27, 2018 decision by Court of Common Pleas Judge Leon Tucker reinstating Post Conviction Relief Act (PCRA) petitions for the defendant. Tucker ruled Justice Ronald Castille unconstitutionally participated in deciding the appeals in the Pennsylvania Supreme Court after denying Mr. Abu-Jamal's motions asking for his recusal, creating an appearance of judicial bias.
The "Brief For Appellant" in support of his struggle to gain his freedom after 37 years in Pennsylvania prisons re-opens the PCRA petitions as ordered by Tucker.
The "Appellant's motion for remand to the court of common pleas to consider newly discovered evidence" ask the Superior Court that the case be sent back to the Court of Common Pleas "so that he may present newly discovered evidence."
Among the arguments resubmitted in the "Brief For Appellant:"
Ineffective Assistance of Counsel:Failure to make right argument because counsel did not know the law.
Brady Violation—District Attorney Withheld Evidence:Namely that Prosecutor said that he would look into reinstating the driver's license of key witness, Robert Chobert;
Rights Violation of fifth, sixth, and 14th Amendments:District Attorney manipulated key witness to falsely identify Abu-Jamal as the shooter.
Ineffective Assistance of Counsel:Failure to retain ballistics expert when the trial counsel knew Officer Faulkner was killed by a .44 caliber bullet even though it was known Abu-Jamal's firearm was not a .44 weapon.
Batson:Discrimination in jury selection that kept Black jurors from being sworn in.
Juror Misconduct:Several jurors violated court rules by conducting premature discussions, creating potential for prejudgment of evidence.
Basym Hassan, Philadelphia political activist, said: "The district attorney clearly violated Mumia's constitutional rights by withholding clear evidence that should have been exposed from the beginning. Throughout the entire process of Mumia's approaching the scene up until today's current developments, the law has not been applied as it was created—to get to the truth of a matter. Hopefully, Mumia will get a re-trial and the truth will finally get told. We await his release from hell."
Cindy Miller, Food Not Bombs, Solidarity and Mobilization for Mumia reminds us: "Does everybody remember on December 28, when current Philadelphia District Attorney Larry Krasner and his staff happened to find six boxes of evidence that had not beforehand been shown? That evidence is partly the reason for this new motion."
The "Appellant's motion for remand to the court of common pleas to consider newly discovered evidence" Miller refers to, includes the suppression of evidence of improper prosecutorial interactions with the state's main two witnesses that were instrumental in ensuring Abu-Jamal's conviction. The motion charges that "Abu-Jamal's capital trial was fundamentally unfair and tainted by serious constitutional violations. Mr. Abu-Jamal respectfully requests that this Court remand the case to the Court of Common Pleas so that Mr. Abu-Jamal may litigate the claims arising from this new evidence."
Pam Africa: "Here's another example of why Mumia shoulda been home—an example of police and prosecutorial misconduct. That evidence has been there for years. It shoulda been in trial records but it was hidden. What else is hidden besides the few things that we have right here."
MOVE 9 member, Eddie Africa said: "If they deal with this issue honestly, they'll have to release him because they know what they did was wrong."
Mumia, 65-years-old, remains in SCI Mahanoy in poor health, suffering from severe itching and cirrhosis of the liver. He recently had cataract surgery in his left eye and is awaiting surgery in his right eye. He also has glaucoma. 
Janine Africa, from the MOVE 9, said: "I just got released from prison after 41 years in May. I want to say, everyone work hard to bring Mumia home so he can be taken care of and get proper medical care, and he don't deserve to be in jail from the beginning."
Mike Africa Jr. added: "The pressure of the people, and of the power of the people is squeezing the evidence of Mumia's innocence out. We shall win."


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

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



Board Game

https://www.thegamecrafter.com/games/race-for-solidarity

Solidarity against racism has existed from the 1600's and continues until today
An exciting board game of chance, empathy and wisdom, that entertains and educates as it builds solidarity through learning about the destructive history of American racism and those who always fought back. Appreciate the anti-racist solidarity of working people, who built and are still building, the great progressive movements of history. There are over 200 questions, with answers and references.
Spread the word!!
By Dr. Nayvin Gordon


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

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

50 years in prison: 
ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!!

FREE Chip Fitzgerald 
Grandfather, Father, Elder, Friend
former Black Panther 
              
Romaine "Chip" Fitzgerald has been in prison since he was locked up 50 years ago. A former member of the Black Panther Party, Chip is now 70 years old, and suffering the consequences of a serious stroke. He depends on a wheelchair for his mobility. He has appeared before the parole board 17 times, but they refuse to release him.

NOW is the time for Chip to come home!

In September 1969, Chip and two other Panthers were stopped by a highway patrolman. During the traffic stop, a shooting broke out, leaving Chip and a police officer both wounded. Chip was arrested a month later and charged with attempted murder of the police and an unrelated murder of a security guard. Though the evidence against him was weak and Chip denied any involvement, he was convicted and sentenced to death.

In 1972, the California Supreme Court outlawed the death penalty. Chip and others on Death Row had their sentences commuted to Life imprisonment with the possibility of parole. All of them became eligible for parole after serving 7 more years. But Chip was rejected for parole, as he has been ever since. 

Parole for Lifers basically stopped under Governors Deukmajian, Wilson, and Davis (1983-2003), resulting in increasing numbers of people in prison and 23 new prisons. People in prison filed lawsuits in federal courts: people were dying as a result of the overcrowding. To rapidly reduce the number of people in prison, the court mandated new parole hearings:
·        for anyone 60 years or older who had served 25 years or more;
·        for anyone convicted before they were 23 years old;
·        for anyone with disabilities 

Chip qualified for a new parole hearing by meeting all three criteria.

But the California Board of Parole Hearings has used other methods to keep Chip locked up. Although the courts ordered that prison rule infractions should not be used in parole considerations, Chip has been denied parole because he had a cellphone.

Throughout his 50 years in prison, Chip has been denied his right to due process – a new parole hearing as ordered by Federal courts. He is now 70, and addressing the challenges of a stroke victim. His recent rules violation of cellphone possession were non-violent and posed no threat to anyone. He has never been found likely to commit any crimes if released to the community – a community of his children, grandchildren, friends and colleagues who are ready to support him and welcome him home.

The California Board of Parole Hearings is holding Chip hostage.

We call on Governor Newsom to release Chip immediately.

What YOU can do to support this campaign to FREE CHIP:


1)   Sign and circulate the petition to FREE Chip. Download it at https://www.change.org/p/california-free-chip-fitzgerald
Print out the petition and get signatures at your workplace, community meeting, or next social gathering.

2)   Write an email to Governor Newsom's office (sample message at:https://docs.google.com/document/d/1iwbP_eQEg2J1T2h-tLKE-Dn2ZfpuLx9MuNv2z605DMc/edit?usp=sharing

3)   Write to Chip: Romaine "Chip" Fitzgerald #B27527,
CSP-LAC
P.O. Box 4490
B-4-150
Lancaster, CA 93539

--
Freedom Archives 522 Valencia Street San Francisco, CA 94110 415 863.9977 https://freedomarchives.org/

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

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

Political Prisoners and Assange: Carole Seligman At S.F. Assange Rally
As part of an international action to free Julian Assange, a rally was held on June 12, 2019 at the US Federal Building in San Francisco and Carole Seligman was one of the speakers. She also speaks about imperialist wars and  the cases of Mumia Abu-Jamal and Fumiaki Hoshino.
For more info:
Production of Labor Video Project
www.laborvideo.org 

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

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

One Democratic State of Palestine
https://odspal.net


Why One Democratic State of Palestine

The colonial entity and its imperial patrons have brought the people of Palestine to a historic juncture.  We, the residents of historic Palestine, must dismantle the terms of our collective extermination so as to set up relations which reject racial segregation and mutual negation.  We must dismantle the closed structure and replace it with an open, non-imperial and humane system.  This can only be achieved by establishing One Democratic State of Palestine for its indigenous people, the refugees who were forced out of the country and its current citizens.  This is the key to a 'fair and permanent resolution of conflict' in the region, and to a 'just solution' for the Palestinian cause.  Failing this, war and mutual destruction will continue.

Call for a Palestine Liberation Movement

Call initiated by the One State Assembly, February 9, 2019
We are calling for signatures on the statement to create national and global public opinion specially among Palestinians, Arabs and international supporters about the genuine, just and long lasting solution to the seven decades of the ethnic cleansing war and catastrophe of 1948. The One Democratic State  of Palestine (ODSP) initiative stands in opposition and objection to the dead solution of the two states, the Oslo Accords and exposing the latest racist Nation-State Law that was issued by the apartheid state of Israel which emphasizes the real nature of this manufactured colonial state.
This is a crucial time in the history of our struggle, which needs all activists, individuals and organizations, to consolidate and coordinate their efforts in an organized manner to make an impact, make a difference towards the only solution that guarantees the right of return and deals with our people as one united nation on one united homeland: the One Democratic State of Palestine.
Signatories include: Richard Falk, Alison Weir, Ann Wright, Cindy Sheehan, Tariq Ali, Paul Larudee, Kevin Zeese, Joe Lombardo, Tim Anderson, Amal Wahdan, Judith Bello, Ken Stone, Issa Chaer,  Ali Mallah, Alicia Jrapko …..
Endorsers: Free Palestine Movement, Palestine Solidarity Forum (India), Syria Solidarity Movement, International Committee for Peace Justice and Dignity, Hands Off Syria Coalition, Hamilton Coalition to Stop the War, United Front Against Facism and War (Canada), Communist Reconstruction (Canada), Palestine Solidarity Association/University of Western Cape (South Africa), India Palestine Solidarity Forum, Venezuela Solidarity Network, Free Palestine Movement, Akashma News, Media Review Network,  Solidarity Net, Kenya, Human Rights in the Middle East, Cleveland Peace Action, Interfaith Council For Peace In The Middle East Northeast Ohio, Pax Christi Hilton Head, Portsmouth South Downs Palestine Solidarity Campaign
https://odspal.net/call-for-a-palestine-liberation-movement/



Call for A Palestine Liberation Movement and One Democratic State of Palestine

We say YES to the just national struggle for our rights, which unifies the living energies of our people. We are inspired by our glorious history, our great leaders and their decisive battles, our martyrs, our prisoners, our restless youth and those in refugee camps, waiting on the realization of their inalienable right of return. We say NO to begging at the doors of the occupiers in pursuit of crumbs. This has led Palestinians and will lead them to more division and bloody infighting
Palestine was colonized for strategic, imperial reasons: it is at the junction of three continents, with key transport links and easy access for the hegemonic powers on their way to the oil wealth of the Arab nations. But the colonists could not evacuate the Palestinian people, who have lived here for more than 6,000 years.
After a century of dealing with the European colonial states and American imperialism, our Arab nation has been betrayed, and is still being betrayed, by the terror of these countries.
The illusion that Zionists want peace must be confronted. When will we wake up? We cannot speak of a national state for the Palestinians if we do not liberate ourselves from our petty differences while under siege and occupation. We have to recognize reality: that we continue in a period of national liberation, not in a period of state building.
For this reason we believe in the need to withdraw completely from farcical negotiations with the colonial entity. These only cover up and legalize the occupation. They suggest fair solutions which don't exist, deepening Palestinian conflicts and leading to bloody infighting.
The national liberation stage must precede the construction of the national state. Recognizing this provides a compass to guide us in our national priorities and relations with others. This means no more agreements with the occupiers. They will not commit to agreements, and experience shows they are part of a great deception, falsely called a 'peace process'.
This 'Peace Process' became a façade for the colonial entity to proceed with a so-called 'political solution'. Really, they needed Palestinian participation to pave the way for the oppressive Arab regimes to end the boycott and 'normalize' relationships with the entity.
As Arab markets were closed to the Zionist entity by a blockade, it was necessary to find ways to open them through 'normalization'. But Palestinian resistance had generated popular sympathy in the Arab and Islamic world, and formed a major obstacle to this 'normalization'. Zionist leader Shimon Perez admitted: "The main goal of the Oslo conventions was not Palestinians, but rather normalization with the Arab world and opening its markets."
Yet national liberation requires confronting, not submitting to, foreign hegemony. We say that the leadership of our national movement has ignored this, and has instead engaged in binding relations with the occupying entity and its patrons.
The history of the colonial entity in Palestine is nothing more than a history of the destruction of the Palestinian people and their civilization. Two thirds of our people have been displaced and more than 90% of our land has been stolen. Our land, water and houses are stolen and demolished every day, while apartheid walls are built and the racist nation-state law is being enforced by Israeli legislators. There is also a permanent aggression against the peoples of the region, to subjugate them through Salafist terrorism and economic siege.
The USA supports the Zionist entity with money, weapons, missiles and aircraft, while protecting it from punishment at the UN, recognizing Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, abolishing its financial support for the United Nations Refugees and Work Agency (UNRWA) and halting its financial aid to the Palestinian Authority. How can the USA or its regional puppets ever be 'honest brokers' for the people of Palestine?
The invaders falsely used divine religion in attempts to destroy the indigenous people and their cultures. They said this was an 'empty land', available for another people with no land, but with the 'divine promise' of a religious homeland. Yet hiding settler colonization behind the banner of Judaism wrongly places responsibility on religion for the crimes of the colonizers.
We have no problem with 'Jewish' people in Palestine. That problem emerged in capitalist Europe, not in our countries. We are not the ones to create a solution to Europe's 'Jewish problem'. Rather, we have to deal with colonization and foreign hegemony in our region.
The colonial entity and its imperial patrons have brought the people of Palestine to a historic juncture. We, the residents of historic Palestine, must dismantle the terms of our collective extermination so as to set up relations which reject racial segregation and mutual negation. We must dismantle the closed structure and replace it with an open, non-imperial and humane system. This can only be achieved by establishing One Democratic State of Palestine for its indigenous people, the refugees who we were forced out of the country and its current citizens. This is the key to a 'fair and permanent solution of conflict' in the region, and to a 'just solution' for the Palestinian cause. Failing this, war and mutual destruction will continue.
Yet the old Palestinian leadership has presided over regression. They make agreements for the benefit of the colonial entity and its patrons. They abandon 1948 Palestine and the refugees. They collaborate with our enemies while delivering no tangible benefit for our people.
For these reasons we say that this leadership has become a real obstacle to any future development or advancement for our people. This leadership has lost its qualifications to lead national action. It looks to its own benefit and is too weak to learn the lessons of the anti-colonial movements of the peoples of Asia, Africa and the Americas. It does not see the advances elsewhere in challenging US hegemony. It does not even see the resistance in the Arab and Muslim World, when they manage to foil US and Zionist projects.
Our movement must be an organic part of the Arab Liberation Movement, putting an end to foreign hegemony, achieving national unity and liberating Palestine from the current apartheid system. Yet this great humanitarian goal directly clashes with the interests of the dominant triad - the forces of global hegemony, settler apartheid and the comprador Arab regimes.
We warn all against chasing the myth of 'two contiguous states' in Palestine. This is a major deception, to portray ethnic enclaves within Palestine as an expression of the right to popular self-determination. The goal must be to replace apartheid with equal citizenship and this can only be achieved by establishing One Democratic State in historic Palestine for all, including its indigenous people, the refugees who we were forced out of the country and its current citizens, including those who were drawn into the country as settlers through the Zionist project.
Palestinian parties negotiating for unity and reform should focus on restoring liberation to the core of the Palestinian National Charter. The Arab homeland will never be liberated and unified by subordination to the USA! It will only be liberated by confronting and ending colonial and imperial dominance.
We say YES to national unity in the framework of our Palestinian Liberation Movement, freed from deceptive agreements which only serve the hegemonic powers and comprador regimes.
LONG LIVE PALESTINE, liberated from racial colonization and built on the foundations of equality for all its citizens, rejecting segregation and discrimination by religion, culture or ethnicity; friends with its regional neighbours and with all progressive forces of the world!
**Your Signature**

HTTPS://ODSPAL.NET/CALL-FOR-A-PALESTINE-LIBERATION-MOVEMENT/

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

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

Support Chuck Africa for Parole

Michael Africa Jr. started this petition to Pennsylvania Governor


Charles Sims Africa #AM 4975 has been in prison since age 18. He is now 59 years old and a recovering cancer patient. He has been eligible for parole since 2008 but continually denied because of  his political views.
Charles has 8 codefendants. Two has died in prison, four has been released from prison onto parole. Chuck's sister Debbie Sims Africa is one of the four codefendants released onto parole.
Since coming home from prison, Debbie is thriving. Our community of support has supported Debbie to excel and we are committed to do the same for Chuck so that he can excel as well. 
http://chng.it/Yprs8pXBBp

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

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








On Abortion: From Facebook

Best explanation I've heard so far..., Copied from a friend who copied from a friend who copied..., "Last night, I was in a debate about these new abortion laws being passed in red states. My son stepped in with this comment which was a show stopper. One of the best explanations I have read:, , 'Reasonable people can disagree about when a zygote becomes a "human life" - that's a philosophical question. However, regardless of whether or not one believes a fetus is ethically equivalent to an adult, it doesn't obligate a mother to sacrifice her body autonomy for another, innocent or not., , Body autonomy is a critical component of the right to privacy protected by the Constitution, as decided in Griswold v. Connecticut (1965), McFall v. Shimp (1978), and of course Roe v. Wade (1973). Consider a scenario where you are a perfect bone marrow match for a child with severe aplastic anemia; no other person on earth is a close enough match to save the child's life, and the child will certainly die without a bone marrow transplant from you. If you decided that you did not want to donate your marrow to save the child, for whatever reason, the state cannot demand the use of any part of your body for something to which you do not consent. It doesn't matter if the procedure required to complete the donation is trivial, or if the rationale for refusing is flimsy and arbitrary, or if the procedure is the only hope the child has to survive, or if the child is a genius or a saint or anything else - the decision to donate must be voluntary to be constitutional. This right is even extended to a person's body after they die; if they did not voluntarily commit to donate their organs while alive, their organs cannot be harvested after death, regardless of how useless those organs are to the deceased or how many lives they would save., , That's the law., , Use of a woman's uterus to save a life is no different from use of her bone marrow to save a life - it must be offered voluntarily. By all means, profess your belief that providing one's uterus to save the child is morally just, and refusing is morally wrong. That is a defensible philosophical position, regardless of who agrees and who disagrees. But legally, it must be the woman's choice to carry out the pregnancy., , She may choose to carry the baby to term. She may choose not to. Either decision could be made for all the right reasons, all the wrong reasons, or anything in between. But it must be her choice, and protecting the right of body autonomy means the law is on her side. Supporting that precedent is what being pro-choice means.", , Feel free to copy/paste and re-post., y
Sent from my iPhone

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

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


Celebrating the release of Janet and Janine Africa
Take action now to support Jalil A. Muntaqim's release


Jalil A. Muntaqim was a member of the Black Panther Party and has been a political prisoner for 48 years since he was arrested at the age of 19 in 1971. He has been denied parole 11 times since he was first eligible in 2002, and is now scheduled for his 12th parole hearing. Additionally, Jalil has filed to have his sentence commuted to time served by New York Governor Andrew Cuomo. Visit Jalil's support page, check out his writing and poetry, and Join Critical Resistance in supporting a vibrant intergenerational movement of freedom fighters in demanding his release.

48 years is enough. Write, email, call, and tweet at Governor Cuomo in support of Jalil's commutation and sign this petition demanding his release.

http://freedomarchives.org/Support.Jalil/Campaign.html
Write:
The Honorable Andrew M. Cuomo
Governor of the State of New York
Executive Chamber State Capital Building
Albany, New York 12224

Michelle Alexander – Author, The New Jim Crow
Ed Asner - Actor and Activist
Charles Barron - New York Assemblyman, 60th District
Inez Barron - Counci member, 42nd District, New York City Council
Rosa Clemente - Scholar Activist and 2008 Green Party Vice-Presidential candidate
Patrisse Cullors – Co-Founder Black Lives Matter, Author, Activist
Elena Cohen - President, National Lawyers Guild
"Davey D" Cook - KPFA Hard Knock Radio
Angela Davis - Professor Emerita, University of California, Santa Cruz
Roxanne Dunbar-Ortiz - Native American historian, writer and feminist
Mike Farrell - Actor and activist
Danny Glover – Actor and activist
Linda Gordon - New York University
Marc Lamont Hill - Temple University
Jamal Joseph - Columbia University
Robin D.G. Kelley - University of California, Los Angeles
Tom Morello - Rage Against the Machine
Imani Perry - Princeton University
Barbara Ransby - University of Illinois, Chicago
Boots Riley - Musician, Filmmaker
Walter Riley - Civil rights attorney
Dylan Rodriguez - University of California, Riverside, President American Studies Association
Maggie Siff, Actor
Heather Ann Thompson - University of Michigan
Cornel West - Harvard University
Institutional affiliations listed for identification purposes only
Call: 1-518-474-8390

Email Gov. Cuomo with this form

Tweet at @NYGovCuomo
Any advocacy or communications to Gov. Cuomo must refer to Jalil as:
ANTHONY JALIL BOTTOM, 77A4283,
Sullivan Correctional Facility,
P.O. Box 116,
Fallsburg, New York 12733-0116


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

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

Painting by Kevin Cooper, an innocent man on San Quentin's death row. www.freekevincooper.org

Decarcerate Louisiana

Declaration of Undersigned Prisoners
We, the undersigned persons, committed to the care and custody of the Louisiana Department of Corrections (LDOC), hereby submit the following declaration and petition bearing witness to inhumane conditions of solitary confinement in the N-1 building at the David Wade Corrections Center (DWCC). 
Our Complaint:
We, the Undersigned Persons, declare under penalty of perjury: 
1.    We, the undersigned, are currently housed in the N-1 building at DWCC, 670 Bell Hill Road, Homer, LA 71040. 
2.    We are aware that the Constitution, under the 8th Amendment, bans cruel and unusual punishments; the Amendment also imposes duties on prison officials who must provide humane conditions of confinement and ensure that inmates receive adequate food, clothing, shelter, medical care, and must take reasonable measures to guarantee the safety of the inmates. 
3.    We are aware that Louisiana prison officials have sworn by LSA-R.S.15:828 to provide humane treatment and rehabilitation to persons committed to its care and to direct efforts to return every person in its custody to the community as promptly as practicable. 
4.    We are confined in a double-bunked six-by-nine foot or 54 square feet cell with another human being 22-hours-a-day and are compelled to endure the degrading experience of being in close proximity of another human being while defecating. 
5.    There are no educational or rehabilitation programs for the majority of prisoners confined in the N-1 building except for a selected few inmates who are soon to be released. 
6.    We get one hour and 30 minutes on the yard and/or gym seven days a week. Each day we walk to the kitchen for breakfast, lunch, and dinner, which takes about one minute to get there. We are given ten minutes to eat. 
7.    The daily planner for inmates confined in the N-1 building is to provide inmates one hour and 30 minutes on yard or gym; escort inmates to kitchen for breakfast, lunch, and dinner to sit and eat for approximately ten minutes each meal; provide a ten minute shower for each cell every day; provide one ten minute phone call per week; confine prisoners in cell 22-hours-a-day. 
8.    When we are taking a shower we are threatened by guards with disciplinary reports if we are not out on time. A typical order is: "if you are not out of shower in ten minutes pack your shit and I'm sending you back to N-2, N-3, or N-4"—a more punitive form of solitary confinement. 
9.    When walking outside to yard, gym or kitchen, guards order us to put our hands behind our back or they'll write us up and send us back to N-2, N-3, N-4. 
10.  When we are sitting at the table eating, guards order us not to talk or they'll write us up and send us back to N-2, N-3, N-4. ) 
11.  Guards are harassing us every day and are threatening to write up disciplinary reports and send us back to a more punitive cellblock (N-2, N-3, N-4) if we question any arbitrary use of authority or even voice an opinion in opposition to the status quo. Also, guards take away good time credits, phone, TV, radio, canteen, and contact visits for talking too loud or not having hands behind back or for any reason they want. We are also threatened with slave labor discipline including isolation (removing mattress from cell from 5:00 A.M. to 9:00 P.M.,) strip cell (removing mattress and bedding and stationery from cell for ten to 30 days or longer), food loaf  (taking one's meal for breakfast, lunch, or dinner and mixing it all together into one big mass, bake it in oven and serve it to prisoners for punishment.)
12.  When prison guards write up disciplinary reports and transfer us to the more punitive restrictive solitary confinement in N-2, N-3, N-4 or N-5, guards then enforce an arbitrary rule that gives prisoners the ultimatum of sending all their books and personal property home or let the prison dispose of it. 
13.  Louisiana prison officials charge indigent prisoners (who earn less than four cents an hour) $3.00 for routine requests for healthcare services, $6.00 for emergency medical requests, and $2.00 for each new medical prescription. They wait until our family and friends send us money and take it to pay prisoners' medical bills. 
Our concerns:
14.  How much public monies are appropriated to the LDOC budget and specifically allotted to provide humane treatment and implement the rehabilitation program pursuant to LSA- R.S.15:828? 
15.  Why does Elayn Hunt Correctional Center located in the capitol of Louisiana have so many educational and rehabilitation programs teaching prisoners job and life skills for reentry whereas there are no such programs to engage the majority of prisoners confined in the N-1, N- 2, N-3, and N-4 solitary confinement buildings at DWCC. 
16.  It is customary for Louisiana prison officials and DWCC prison guards to tell inmates confined in the prison's cellblocks to wait until transfer to prison dormitory to participate in programs when in fact there are no such programs available and ready to engage the majority of the state's 34,000 prisoner population. The programs are especially needed for prisoners confined in a six-by-nine foot or 54 square feet cell with another person for 22-or-more-hours-per-day. 
17.  Why can't prisoners use phone and computers every day to communicate with family and peers as part of rehabilitation and staying connected to the community? 
18.  Why do prisoners have to be transferred miles and miles away from loved ones to remote correctional facilities when there are facilities closer to loved ones? 
19.  Why are prison guards allowed to treat prisoners as chattel slaves, confined in cages 22-or-more-hours-per-day, take away phone calls and visitation and canteen at will, and take away earned good time credits for any reason at all without input from family, one's peers and community? 
20.  Why do the outside communities allow prison guards to create hostile living environments and conditions of confinement that leaves prisoners in a state of chattel slavery, stress, anxiety, anger, rage, inner torment, despair, worry, and in a worse condition from when we first entered the prison? 
21.  Why do state governments and/or peers in the community allow racist or bigoted white families who reside in the rural and country parts of Louisiana to run the state's corrections system with impunity? For example, DWCC Warden Jerry Goodwin institutes racist and bigoted corrections policies and practices for the very purpose of oppression, repression, antagonizing and dehumanizing the inmates who will one day be released from prison. 
22.  David Wade Correctional Center Colonel Lonnie Nail, a bigot and a racist, takes his orders from Warden Jerry Goodwin, another racist and bigot. Both Goodwin and Nail influences subordinate corrections officers to act toward prisoners in a racist or bigoted manner and with an arrogant attitude. This creates a hostile living environment and debilitating conditions of confinement for both guards and prisoners and prevents rehabilitation of inmates.
23.  In other industrialized democracies like Norway, Denmark, Sweden, Germany, the Netherlands, et al, it is reported that no prisoner should be declared beyond reform or redemption without first attempting to rehabilitate them. Punitive or harsh conditions of confinement are not supported because they see the loss of freedom inherent in a prison sentence as punishment enough. One Netherlands official reported that their motto is to start with the idea of "Reintegration back into society on day one" when people are locked up. "You can't make an honest argument that how someone is treated while incarcerated doesn't affect how they behave when they get out," the official added. 
24.  Additionally, some Scandinavian countries have adopted open prison programs without fences or armed guards. Prisoners who prove by their conduct that they can be trusted are placed in a prison resembling a college campus more than a prison. The result is a 20 percent recidivism rate, compared to a 67 percent rate in the United States. 
25.  The National Commission on Correctional Health Care (NCCHC) in a position statement says: "Prolonged (greater than 15 consecutive days) solitary confinement is cruel, inhumane and degrading treatment, and harmful to an individual's health."
 What We Believe: 
26.  We believe that when the greater portion of public monies goes to war and the military, this leaves little funds left for community reinvestment and human development.The people have less access to resources by which to get a better idea of human behavior and rely on higher education instead of prison to solve cultural, social, political, economic problems in the system that may put people at risk to domestic violence and crime as a way to survive and cope with shortcomings in the system. 
27.  We believe that investing public monies in the rehabilitation program LSA-R.S.15:828 to teach prisoners job and life skills will redeem inmates, instill morals, and make incarcerated people productive and fit for society. 
28.  We believe that confining inmates in cellblocks 15-or-more=hours-per-day is immoral, uncivilized, brutalizing, a waste of time and counter-productive to rehabilitation and society's goals of "promoting the general welfare" and "providing a more perfect union with justice for all." 
29.  We believe that corrections officers who prove by their actions that incarcerated people are nothing more than chattel slaves are bucking the laws and creating hardening criminals and these corrections officers are, therefore, a menace to society. 
Our Demands:
30.  We are demanding a public conversation from community activists and civil rights leaders about (1) the historic relationship between chattel slavery, the retaliatory assassination of President Abraham Lincoln, and the resurrection of slavery written into the 13th Amendment; (2) the historic relationship between the 13th Amendment, the backlash against Reconstruction, Peonage, Convict Leasing, and Slavery; (3) the historic relationship between the 13th Amendment, the War Against Poverty, the War on Drugs, Criminal Justice and Prison Slavery. 
31.  We demand that the Louisiana legislature pass the Decarcerate Louisiana Anti-Slavery and Freedom Liberation Act of 2020 into law and end prison slavery and the warehousing of incarcerated people for the very purpose of repression, oppression, and using prisoners and their families and supporters as a profit center for corporate exploitation and to generate revenue to balance the budget and stimulate the state economy. 
32.  We are demanding that Warden Jerry Goodwin and Colonel Lonnie Nail step down and be replaced by people are deemed excellent public servants in good standing with human rights watchdog groups and civil rights community. 
33.  We are demanding that the LDOC provide public monies to operate state prison dormitories and cellblocks as rehabilitation centers to teach incarcerated people job and life skills five-days-a-week from 7:00 A.M. to 4:00 P.M. 
34.  We are demanding that the LDOC release a public statement announcing that "from this day forward it will not support punitive or harsh conditions of confinement," and that "no prisoner should be declared beyond reform or redemption without first attempting to rehabilitate them."
35.  We are demanding that the prison cellblocks be operated as open dormitories (made in part a health clinic and part college campus) so that incarcerated people can have enough space to walk around and socialize, participate in class studies, exercise, use telephone as the need arise. Prisoners are already punished by incarceration so there is no need to punish or further isolate them. Racism and abuse of power will not be tolerated. 
36.  We are demanding an end to unjust policies and practices that impose punishments and deprive incarcerated people of phone calls, visitation, canteen, good time credits, books and other personal property that pose no threat to public safety. 
37.  We are demanding that LDOC provide incarcerated people cellphones and computers to communicate with the public and stay connected to the community. 
38.  We are demanding the right to communicate with reporters to aid and assist incarcerated persons in preparing a press release to communicate to the public Decarcerate Louisiana's vision and mission statements, aims, and plans for moving forward. 
39.  We are demanding the right to participate in the U.S.-European Criminal Justice Innovation Project and share our complaint, concerns, and demands for a humane corrections program. 
40.  We are only demanding the right to enough space to create, to innovate, to excel in learning, to use scientific knowledge to improve our person and place and standing in the free world. The rule of law must support the betterment and uplifting of all humanity. As Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., said: "injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere." 
41.  We demand that the responsibility for prisoner medical care be removed from DOC wardens and place it under the management of the state's health office; increase state health officer staff to better monitor prisoner healthcare and oversee vendor contracts. 
42.  We have a God-given right and responsibility to resist abuse of power from the wrongdoers, to confront unjust authority and oppression, to battle for justice until we achieve our demands for liberation and freedom. 
We, the undersigned, declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. 
Executed on this 28th Day of January 2019. 
Ronald Brooks #385964 
David Johnson #84970 
Freddie Williams #598701 
Earl Hollins #729041 
James Harris #399514 
Tyrone Carter #550354 
Kerry Carter #392013 
Ivo Richardson #317371 
Rondrikus Fulton #354313 
Kentell Simmons #601717 
Jayvonte Pines #470985 
Deandre Miles #629008 
Kenneth P. #340729 
Brandon Ceaser #421453 
Tyronne Ward #330964 
Jermaine Atkins #448421 
Charles Rodgers #320513 
Steve Givens #557854 
Timothy Alfred #502378 
—wsimg.com, January 2019
https://img1.wsimg.com/blobby/go/1f4bce95-7ddd-4b2d-8ee7-d8edf36f394f/downloads/Declaration_of_Undersigned_Prisoners.pdf?ver=1555809786117



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

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


New Prison and Jail Population Figures Released by U.S. Department of Justice

By yearend 2017, the United States prison population had declined by 7.3% since reaching its peak level in 2009, according to new data released by the Department of Justice. The prison population decreases are heavily influenced by a handful of states that have reduced their populations by 30% or more in recent years. However, as of yearend 2017 more than half the states were still experiencing increases in their populations or rates of decline only in the single digits. 
Analysis of the new data by The Sentencing Project reveals that: 
  • The United States remains as the world leader in its rate of incarceration, locking up its citizens at 5-10 times the rate of other industrialized nations. At the current rate of decline it will take 75 years to cut the prison population by 50%.
      
  • The population serving life sentences is now at a record high. One of every seven individuals in prison – 206,000 – is serving life.
      
  • Six states have reduced their prison populations by at least 30% over the past two decades – Alaska, Connecticut, California, New Jersey, New York, and Vermont.  
  • The rate of women's incarceration has been rising at a faster rate than men's since the 1980s, and declines in recent years have been slower than among men.
      
  • Racial disparities in women's incarceration have changed dramatically since the start of the century. Black women were incarcerated at 6 times the rate of white women in 2000, while the 2017 figure is now 1.8 times that rate. These changes have been a function of both a declining number of black women in prison and a rising number of white women. For Hispanic women, the ratio has changed from 1.6 times that of white women in 2000 to 1.4 times in 2017. 
The declines in prison and jail populations reported by the Department of Justice today are encouraging, but still fall far short of what is necessary for meaningful criminal justice reform. In order to take the next step in ending mass incarceration policymakers will need to scale back excessive sentencing for all offenses, a key factor which distinguishes the U.S. from other nations. 

Share This 

[Note: China's population is 1,419,147,756* as of April 26, 2019 with 1,649,804 in prison***; while the population of the USA is 328,792,291 as of April 27, 2019** with 2,121,600 in prison.*** 
*http://www.worldometers.info/world-population/china-population/
**https://www.census.gov/popclock/
***https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_incarceration_rate]


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

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


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

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

Funds for Kevin Cooper

https://www.gofundme.com/funds-for-kevin-cooper?member=1994108

For 34 years, an innocent man has been on death row in California. 

Kevin Cooper was wrongfully convicted of the brutal 1983 murders of the Ryen family and houseguest. The case has a long history of police and prosecutorial misconduct, evidence tampering, and numerous constitutional violations including many incidences of the prosecution withholding evidence of innocence from the defense. You can learn more here . 

In December 2018 Gov. Brown ordered  limited DNA testing and in February 2019, Gov. Newsom ordered additional DNA testing. Meanwhile, Kevin remains on Death Row at San Quentin Prison. 

The funds raised will be used to help Kevin purchase art supplies for his paintings . Additionally, being in prison is expensive, and this money would help Kevin pay for stamps, paper, toiletries, supplementary food, and/or phone calls.

Please help ease the daily struggle of an innocent man on death row!




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

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

Don't extradite Assange!

To the government of the UK
Julian Assange, through Wikileaks, has done the world a great service in documenting American war crimes, its spying on allies and other dirty secrets of the world's most powerful regimes, organisations and corporations. This has not endeared him to the American deep state. Both Obama, Clinton and Trump have declared that arresting Julian Assange should be a priority. We have recently received confirmation [1] that he has been charged in secret so as to have him extradited to the USA as soon as he can be arrested. 
Assange's persecution, the persecution of a publisher for publishing information [2] that was truthful and clearly in the interest of the public - and which has been republished in major newspapers around the world - is a danger to freedom of the press everywhere, especially as the USA is asserting a right to arrest and try a non-American who neither is nor was then on American soil. The sentence is already clear: if not the death penalty then life in a supermax prison and ill treatment like Chelsea Manning. The very extradition of Julian Assange to the United States would at the same time mean the final death of freedom of the press in the West. 
The courageous nation of Ecuador has offered Assange political asylum within its London embassy for several years until now. However, under pressure by the USA, the new government has made it clear that they want to drive Assange out of the embassy and into the arms of the waiting police as soon as possible. They have already curtailed his internet and his visitors and turned the heating off, leaving him freezing in a desolate state for the past few months and leading to the rapid decline of his health, breaching UK obligations under the European Convention of Human Rights. Therefore, our demand both to the government of Ecuador and the government of the UK is: don't extradite Assange to the US! Guarantee his human rights, make his stay at the embassy as bearable as possible and enable him to leave the embassy towards a secure country as soon as there are guarantees not to arrest and extradite him. Furthermore, we, as EU voters, encourage European nations to take proactive steps to protect a journalist in danger. The world is still watching.
[1] https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/16/us/politics/julian-assange-indictment-wikileaks.html
[2] https://theintercept.com/2018/11/16/as-the-obama-doj-concluded-prosecution-of-julian-assange-for-publishing-documents-poses-grave-threats-to-press-freedom/
https://internal.diem25.org/en/petitions/1

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

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

Words of Wisdom

Louis Robinson Jr., 77
Recording secretary for Local 1714 of the United Auto Workers from 1999 to 2018, with the minutes from a meeting of his union's retirees' chapter.

"One mistake the international unions in the United States made was when Ronald Reagan fired the air traffic controllers. When he did that, the unions could have brought this country to a standstill. All they had to do was shut down the truck drivers for a month, because then people would not have been able to get the goods they needed. So that was one of the mistakes they made. They didn't come together as organized labor and say: "No. We aren't going for this. Shut the country down." That's what made them weak. They let Reagan get away with what he did. A little while after that, I read an article that said labor is losing its clout, and I noticed over the years that it did. It happened. It doesn't feel good."

[On the occasion of the shut-down of the Lordstown, Ohio GM plant March 6, 2019.]
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/05/01/magazine/lordstown-general-motors-plant.html

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

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


Get Malik Out of Ad-Seg


Keith "Malik" Washington is an incarcerated activist who has spoken out on conditions of confinement in Texas prison and beyond:  from issues of toxic water and extreme heat, to physical and sexual abuse of imprisoned people, to religious discrimination and more.  Malik has also been a tireless leader in the movement to #EndPrisonSlavery which gained visibility during nationwide prison strikes in 2016 and 2018.  View his work at comrademalik.com or write him at:

Keith H. Washington
TDC# 1487958
McConnell Unit
3001 S. Emily Drive
Beeville, TX 78102
Friends, it's time to get Malik out of solitary confinement.

Malik has experienced intense, targeted harassment ever since he dared to start speaking against brutal conditions faced by incarcerated people in Texas and nationwide--but over the past few months, prison officials have stepped up their retaliation even more.

In Administrative Segregation (solitary confinement) at McConnell Unit, Malik has experienced frequent humiliating strip searches, medical neglect, mail tampering and censorship, confinement 23 hours a day to a cell that often reached 100+ degrees in the summer, and other daily abuses too numerous to name.  It could not be more clear that they are trying to make an example of him because he is a committed freedom fighter.  So we have to step up.


Who to contact:
TDCJ Executive Director Bryan Collier
Phone: (936)295-6371

Senior Warden Philip Sinfuentes (McConnell Unit)
Phone: (361) 362-2300

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

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


Major George Tillery
MAJOR TILLERY FILES NEW LEGAL PETITION
SEX FOR LIES AND
MANUFACTURED TESTIMONY
April 25, 2018-- The arrest of two young men in Starbucks for the crime of "sitting while black," and the four years prison sentence to rapper Meek Mill for a minor parole violation are racist outrages in Philadelphia, PA that made national news in the past weeks. Yesterday Meek Mills was released on bail after a high profile defense campaign and a Pa Supreme Court decision citing evidence his conviction was based solely on a cop's false testimony.
These events underscore the racism, frame-up, corruption and brutality at the core of the criminal injustice system. Pennsylvania "lifer" Major Tillery's fight for freedom puts a spotlight on the conviction of innocent men with no evidence except the lying testimony of jailhouse snitches who have been coerced and given favors by cops and prosecutors.

Sex for Lies and Manufactured Testimony
For thirty-five years Major Tillery has fought against his 1983 arrest, then conviction and sentence of life imprisonment without parole for an unsolved 1976 pool hall murder and assault. Major Tillery's defense has always been his innocence. The police and prosecution knew Tillery did not commit these crimes. Jailhouse informant Emanuel Claitt gave lying testimony that Tillery was one of the shooters.

In May and June 2016, Emanuel Claitt gave sworn statements that his testimony was a total lie, and that the homicide cops and the prosecutors told him what to say and coached him before trial. Not only was he coerced to lie that Major Tillery was a shooter, but to lie and claim there were no plea deals made in exchange for his testimony. He provided the information about the specific homicide detectives and prosecutors involved in manufacturing his testimony and details about being allowed "sex for lies". In August 2016, Claitt reaffirmed his sworn statements in a videotape, posted on YouTube and on JusticeforMajorTillery.org.

Major Tillery has Fought his Conviction and Advocated for Other Prisoners for over 30 Years

Major Tillery Needs Your Help:


Major Tillery and family

HOW YOU CAN HELP
    Financial Support—Tillery's investigation is ongoing. He badly needs funds to fight for his freedom.
    Go to JPay.com;
    code: Major Tillery AM9786 PADOC

    Tell Philadelphia District Attorney Larry Krasner:
    The Conviction Review Unit should investigate Major Tillery's case. He is innocent. The only evidence at trial was from lying jail house informants who now admit it was false.
    Call: 215-686-8000 or

    Write to:
    Security Processing Center
    Major Tillery AM 9786
    268 Bricker Road
    Bellefonte, PA 16823
    For More Information, Go To: JusticeForMajorTillery.org
    Call/Write:
    Kamilah Iddeen (717) 379-9009, Kamilah29@yahoo.com
    Rachel Wolkenstein (917) 689-4009, RachelWolkenstein@gmail.com




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

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


    ILPDC NEWSLETTER BANNER
      

    On Monday March 4th, 2019 Leonard Peltier was advised that his request for a transfer had been unceremoniously denied by the United States Bureau of Prisons.

    The International Leonard Peltier Defense Committee appreciates and thanks the large number of his supporters who took the time to write, call, email, or fax the BOP in support of Leonard's request for a transfer.
    Those of us who have been supporting Leonard's freedom for a number of years are disappointed but resolute to continue pushing for his freedom and until that day, to continue to push for his transfer to be closer to his relatives and the Indigenous Nations who support him.
    44 years is too damn long for an innocent man to be locked up. How can his co-defendants be innocent on the grounds of self-defense but Leonard remains in prison? The time is now for all of us to dig deep and do what we can and what we must to secure freedom for Leonard Peltier before it's too late.
    We need the support of all of you now, more than ever. The ILPDC plans to appeal this denial of his transfer to be closer to his family. We plan to demand he receive appropriate medical care, and to continue to uncover and utilize every legal mechanism to secure his release. To do these things we need money to support the legal work.
    Land of the Brave postcard-page-0

    Please call the ILPDC National office or email us for a copy of the postcard you can send to the White House. We need your help to ask President Trump for Leonard's freedom.
    DONATE 
      
    ©2019 ILPDC | 116 W Osborne Avenue Tampa, FL 33603 


    Free Leonard Peltier!


    Art by Leonard Peltier
    Write to:
    Leonard Peltier 89637-132
    USP Coleman 1,  P.O. Box 1033
    Coleman, FL 33521

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

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

    Working people are helping to feed the poor hungry corporations! 
    Charity for the Wealthy!


    Evo Morales: The Root of the Problem Is the Capitalist System
    teleSUR/MS, September 24, 2019
    https://www.telesurenglish.net/news/Evo-Morales-The-Root-of-the-Problem-Is-the-Capitalist-System-20190924-0017.html
    • He described as


    • He described as "unfair, immoral and inadmissible" that 26 people in the world have the same wealth as 3.8 billion people. | Photo: Reuters


    The president also warned that "Bolivia will not renounce its right to sovereign access to the Pacific Ocean."


    The president of Bolivia, Evo Morales,   said Tuesday that the multiple problems that afflict the planet have their roots in the capitalist system, which favors the unequal distribution of wealth and the senseless accumulation of goods and money in a few people.
    "Let's say it very clearly: the root of the problem is in capitalism," said the Bolivian president in his speech at the 74th General Assembly of the United Nations, which began work on Tuesday.

    The president also warned that "Bolivia will not renounce its right to sovereign access to the Pacific Ocean."

    The president of Bolivia, Evo Morales,   said Tuesday that the multiple problems that afflict the planet have their roots in the capitalist system, which favors the unequal distribution of wealth and the senseless accumulation of goods and money in a few people.
    "Let's say it very clearly: the root of the problem is in capitalism," said the Bolivian president in his speech at the 74th General Assembly of the United Nations, which began work on Tuesday.
    The World's Oceans Are in Danger, Major Climate Change Report Warns
    By Brad Plumer, September 25, 2019
    https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/25/climate/climate-change-oceans-united-nations.html?action=click&module=Top%20Stories&pgtype=Homepage
    The warming world is disrupting aquatic life and ocean patterns, with dire global consequences.CreditCreditScott McIntyre for The New York Times

    WASHINGTON — Earth's oceans are under severe strain from climate change, a major new United Nations report warns, which threatens everything from the ability to harvest seafood to the well-being of hundreds of millions of people living along the coasts.
    Rising temperatures are contributing to a drop in fish populations in many regions, and oxygen levels in the ocean are declining while acidity levels are on the rise, posing risks to important marine ecosystems, according to the report issued Wednesday by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, a group of scientists convened by the United Nations to guide world leaders in policymaking.
    In addition, warmer ocean waters, when combined with rising sea levels, threaten to fuel ever more powerful tropical cyclones and floods, the report said, further imperiling coastal regions and worsening a phenomenon that is already contributing to storms like Hurricane Harvey, which devastated Houston two years ago.

    "The oceans are sending us so many warning signals that we need to get emissions under control," said Hans-Otto Pörtner, a marine biologist at the Alfred Wegener Institute in Germany and a lead author of the report. "Ecosystems are changing, food webs are changing, fish stocks are changing, and this turmoil is affecting humans."

    For decades, the oceans have served as a crucial buffer against global warming, soaking up roughly a quarter of the carbon dioxide that humans emit from power plants, factories and cars, and absorbing more than 90 percent of the excess heat trapped on Earth by carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases. Without that protection, the land would be heating much more rapidly.
    But the oceans themselves are becoming hotter and less oxygen-rich as a result, according to the report. If humans keep pumping greenhouse gases into the atmosphere at an increasing rate, the risks to human food security and coastal communities will increase sharply, particularly since marine ecosystems are already facing threats from plastic pollution, unsustainable fishing practices and other man-made stresses. 
    "We are an ocean world, run and regulated by a single ocean, and we are pushing that life support system to its very limits through heating, deoxygenation and acidification," said Dan Laffoley of the International Union for Conservation of Nature, a leading environmental group that tracks the status of plant and animal species, in response to the report. 
    The report, which was written by more than 100 international experts and is based on more than 7,000 studies, represents the most extensive look to date at the effects of climate change on oceans, ice sheets, mountain snowpack and permafrost.

    Changes deep in the ocean or high in the mountains are not always as noticeable as some of the other hallmarks of global warming, such as heat waves on land, or wildfires and droughts. But the report makes clear that what happens in these remote regions will have ripple effects across the globe. 
    For instance, as ice sheets in Greenland and Antarctica melt and push up ocean levels, the report said, extreme flooding that was once historically rare could start occurring once a year or more, on average, in many coastal regions this century. How quickly this happens depends largely on the ability of humanity to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases that are heating the planet.
    Around the world, glaciers in the mountains are receding quickly, affecting the availability of water for millions of people who depend on meltwater downstream to supply drinking water, irrigate agricultural land and produce electricity through dams and hydropower. 
    But some of the report's starkest warnings concern the ocean, where major shifts are already underway.
    The frequency of marine heat waves — which can kill fish, seabirds, coral reefs and seagrasses — have doubled since the 1980s. Many fish populations are migrating far from their usual locations to find cooler waters, throwing local fishing industries into disarray. Floating sea ice in the Arctic Ocean is declining at rates that are "likely unprecedented for at least 1,000 years," the report said.
    There have even been unwelcome surprises. The report notes that some pathogens are proliferating in warmer waters, including vibrio, a bacteria that can infect oysters and other shellfish, and that already sickens some 80,000 Americans who eat raw or undercooked seafood each year. "That's a good example of how changes in the ocean can affect even people who live far from the coasts," said Sherilee Harper, a public health expert at the University of Alberta and an author on the report.

    The report warns that more dramatic changes could be in store. If fossil-fuel emissions continue to rise rapidly, for instance, the maximum amount of fish in the ocean that can be sustainably caught could decrease by as much as a quarter by century's end. That would have sweeping implications for global food security: Fish and seafood provide about 17 percent of the world's animal protein, and millions of people worldwide depend on fishing economies for their livelihoods. 
    And heat waves in the ocean are expected to become 20 to 50 times more frequent this century, depending on how much greenhouse-gas emissions increase. 
    The potential for these heat waves to wreak havoc in coastal communities is already becoming noticeable in areas like the North Pacific Ocean, where what became known as a "blob" of unusually hot water in 2013 and 2014, partly fueled by global warming, killed thousands of seabirds and helped spawn toxic algae blooms that forced fisheries to close down from California to British Columbia. 
    Last year, officials in the Gulf of Alaska had to reduce permitted cod catches by 80 percent to allow stocks to rebuild in the wake of the heat wave, roiling the local fishing industry.
    "When that happens, it's like a punch in the gut," said Brett Veerhusen, 33, a fisheries consultant and commercial fisherman based in Seattle and Homer, Alaska. "And it's not just fishermen who are affected, it's an entire supply chain, from processing plants to shipping to grocery stores and restaurants."

    Changes in the ocean also threaten to disrupt the complex and often delicate ecosystems that underpin marine environments. The report notes that the upper layers of the open ocean have lost between 0.5 percent and 3.3 percent of their oxygen since 1970 as temperatures have risen. And, as the ocean absorbs more carbon dioxide, it is becoming more acidic, which could make it harder for corals, oysters, mussels and other organisms to build their hard shells.

    Acidification and declining oxygen levels are already affecting the California Current, a nutrient-rich pattern of water currents in the Pacific Ocean that supports one of the world's most lucrative fisheries, the report notes. While scientists are still trying to understand the full effects of these changes, one risk is that shifts in the food chain could cause fish to migrate away. 
    "If the fish leave, that affects the small fishing fleets we have up and down the California coast," said Gretchen Hofmann, a professor of marine biology at the University of California, Santa Barbara who was not involved in the report. "So there's the risk of real economic and social problems."
    While the report recommends that the world's nations sharply reduce greenhouse gas emissions to lessen the severity of most of these threats, it also points out that countries will need to adapt to many changes that have now become unavoidable.
    Even if, for instance, nations rapidly phase out their greenhouse gas emissions in the decades ahead and limit global warming to well below an increase of 2 degrees Celsius from preindustrial levels — a goal enshrined in the Paris Agreement, a pact among nations to fight warming — the world's oceans and frozen landscapes would still look very different by the end of the century than they do today. Warm-water coral reefs would still face devastation. Global sea levels could still rise another 1 to 2 feet this century as ice sheets and glaciers melted. Fish populations would still migrate, creating winners and losers among fishing nations and potentially leading to increased conflicts, the report noted.
    To cope with these problems, coastal cities will need to build costly sea walls and many people will likely need to move away from low-lying areas, the report said. Fishery managers will need to crack down on unsustainable fishing practices to prevent seafood stocks from collapsing. Nations could also expand protected areas of the ocean to help marine ecosystems stay resilient against shifting conditions.
    But the report also makes clear that if greenhouse gas emissions keep rising, many of these adaptation measures could lose their effectiveness. In the report's worst-case emissions scenario, where greenhouse gases continue piling up unchecked in the atmosphere throughout the century, sea levels could keep rising at a relentless pace for hundreds of years, potentially reaching 17 feet or higher by 2300, the report said.

    "Our fate is probably somewhere in between" the best- and worst-case emissions scenarios laid out in the report, said Michael Oppenheimer, a climate scientist at Princeton University and a lead author of the report's chapter on sea levels. "But if you think about the possibility of indefinite or even accelerating sea level rise for centuries to come, that bodes very poorly for coastal civilization."

    Brad Plumer is a reporter covering climate change, energy policy and other environmental issues for The Times's climate team


    Shoot Migrants' Legs, Build Alligator Moat: Behind Trump's Ideas for Border
    By Michael D. Sheer and Julie Hirshfield Davis, October 1, 2019
    https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/01/us/politics/trump-border-wars.html?searchResultPosition=1
    A Customs and Border Protection boat patrolling the Rio Grande separating Laredo, Tex., from Nuevo Laredo, Mexico.CreditCreditLuis Antonio Rojas for The New York Times
    WASHINGTON — The Oval Office meeting this past March began, as so many had, with President Trump fuming about migrants. But this time he had a solution. As White House advisers listened astonished, he ordered them to shut down the entire 2,000-mile border with Mexico — by noon the next day.
    The advisers feared the president's edict would trap American tourists in Mexico, strand children at schools on both sides of the border and create an economic meltdown in two countries. Yet they also knew how much the president's zeal to stop immigration had sent him lurching for solutions, one more extreme than the next.
    Privately, the president had often talked about fortifying a border wall with a water-filled trench, stocked with snakes or alligators, prompting aides to seek a cost estimate. He wanted the wall electrified, with spikes on top that could pierce human flesh. After publicly suggesting that soldiers shoot migrants if they threw rocks, the president backed off when his staff told him that was illegal. But later in a meeting, aides recalled, he suggested that they shoot migrants in the legs to slow them down. That's not allowed either, they told him.

    "The president was frustrated and I think he took that moment to hit the reset button," said Thomas D. Homan, who had served as Mr. Trump's acting director of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, recalling that week in March. "The president wanted it to be fixed quickly."

    Mr. Trump's order to close the border was a decision point that touched off a frenzied week of presidential rages, round-the-clock staff panic and far more White House turmoil than was known at the time. By the end of the week, the seat-of-the-pants president had backed off his threat but had retaliated with the beginning of a purge of the aides who had tried to contain him.
    Today, as Mr. Trump is surrounded by advisers less willing to stand up to him, his threat to seal off the country from a flood of immigrants remains active. "I have absolute power to shut down the border," he said in an interview this summer with The New York Times.
    This article is based on interviews with more than a dozen White House and administration officials directly involved in the events of that week in March. They were granted anonymity to describe sensitive conversations with the president and top officials in the government.
    In the Oval Office that March afternoon, a 30-minute meeting extended to more than two hours as Mr. Trump's team tried desperately to placate him.

    "You are making me look like an idiot!" Mr. Trump shouted, adding in a profanity, as multiple officials in the room described it. "I ran on this. It's my issue."

    Among those in the room were Kirstjen Nielsen, the homeland security secretary at the time; Mike Pompeo, the secretary of state; Kevin K. McAleenan, the Customs and Border Protection chief at the time; and Stephen Miller, the White House aide who, more than anyone, had orchestrated Mr. Trump's immigration agenda. Mick Mulvaney, the acting chief of staff was also there, along with Jared Kushner, the president's son-in-law, and other senior staff.
    Ms. Nielsen, a former aide to George W. Bush brought into the department by John F. Kelly, the president's former chief of staff, was in a perilous position. She had always been viewed with suspicion by the president, who told aides she was "a Bushie," and part of the "deep state" who once contributed to a group that supported Jeb Bush's presidential campaign.
    Mr. Trump had routinely berated Ms. Nielsen as ineffective and, worse — at least in his mind — not tough-looking enough. "Lou Dobbs hates you, Ann Coulter hates you, you're making me look bad," Mr. Trump would tell her, referring to the Fox Business Network host and the conservative commentator.
    The happiest he had been with Ms. Nielsen was a few months earlier, when American border agents had fired tear gas into Mexico to try to stop migrants from crossing into the United States. Human rights organizations condemned the move, but Mr. Trump loved it. More often, though, she drew the president's scorn.
    That March day, he was furious at Mr. Pompeo, too, for having cut a deal with Mexico to allow the United States to reject some asylum seekers — a plan Mr. Trump said was clearly failing.
    A complete shutdown of the border, Mr. Trump said, was the only way.
    Ms. Nielsen had tried reasoning with the president on many occasions. When she stood up to him during a cabinet meeting the previous spring, he excoriated her and she almost resigned.

    Now, she tried again to reason with him.
    We can close the border, she told the president, but it's not going to fix anything. People will still be permitted to claim asylum.
    But Mr. Trump was unmoved. Even Mr. Kushner, who had developed relationships with Mexican officials and now sided with Ms. Nielsen, could not get through to him.
    "All you care about is your friends in Mexico," the president snapped, according to people in the room. "I've had it. I want it done at noon tomorrow."
    The president's advisers left the meeting in a near panic.
    Every year more than $200 billion worth of American exports flow across the Mexican border. Closing it would wreak havoc on American farmers and automakers, among many others. Senator Mitch McConnell, Republican of Kentucky and the majority leader, said in an interview at the time that a border shutdown would have "a potentially catastrophic economic impact on our country."

    That night, White House advisers succeeded in convincing the president to give them a reprieve, but only for a week, until the following Friday. That gave them very little time to change the president's mind.
    They started by pressuring their Mexican counterparts to rapidly increase apprehensions of migrants. Mr. Kushner and others in the West Wing showered the president with emails proving that the Mexicans had already started apprehending more migrants before they could enter the United States.

    White House advisers encouraged a stream of corporate executives, Republican lawmakers and officials from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce to tell Mr. Trump how damaging a border closure would be.
    Mr. Miller, meanwhile, saw an opportunity.
    It was his view that the president needed to completely overhaul the Homeland Security Department and get rid of senior officials who he believed were thwarting efforts to block immigrants. Although many were the president's handpicked aides, Mr. Miller told him they had become part of the problem by constantly citing legal hurdles.
    Ms. Nielsen, who regularly found herself telling Mr. Trump why he couldn't have what he wanted, was an obvious target. When the president demanded "flat black" paint on his border wall, she said it would cost an additional $1 million per mile. When he ordered wall construction sped up, she said they needed permission from property owners. Take the land, Mr. Trump would say, and let them sue us.
    When Ms. Nielsen tried to get him to focus on something other than the border, the president grew impatient. During a briefing on the need for new legal authority to take down drones, Mr. Trump cut her off midsentence.
    "Kirstjen, you didn't hear me the first time, honey," Mr. Trump said, according to two people familiar with the conversation. "Shoot 'em down. Sweetheart, just shoot 'em out of the sky, O.K.?"
    But the problem went deeper than Ms. Nielsen, Mr. Miller believed. L. Francis Cissna, the head of the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services until earlier this year, regularly pushed back on Mr. Miller's demand for a "culture change" at the agency, where Mr. Miller believed asylum officers were bleeding hearts, too quick to extend protections to immigrants.
    They needed to start with the opposite point of view, Mr. Miller told him, and start turning people away.

    ohn Mitnick, the homeland security general counsel who often raised legal concerns about Mr. Trump's immigration policies, was also on Mr. Miller's blacklist. Mr. Miller had also turned against Ronald D. Vitiello, a top official at Customs and Border Protection whom the president had nominated to lead Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

    By midweek, the campaign to change Mr. Trump's mind about closing the border seemed to be working.
    Maybe there's another way to do this, the president told Ms. Nielsen. How about if I impose tariffs on the Mexicans, or threaten to impose tariffs? Tariffs are great.
    But the staff worried that his retreat would only be temporary. The president never really let go of his obsessions.
    They were right. On a trip to California late in the week, Mr. Trump turned to Mr. McAleenan, the Customs and Border Protection chief, with a new idea: He wanted him to stop letting migrants cross the border at all, with no exceptions. If you get into any trouble for it, Mr. Trump told him, I'll pardon you.
    Once on the ground, Mr. Trump met up with Ms. Nielsen and worked a room filled with Border Patrol agents. Start turning away migrants at the border, he told them. My message to you is, keep them all out, the president said. Every single one of them. The country is full.
    After the president left the room, Mr. McAleenan told the agents to ignore the president. You absolutely do not have the authority to stop processing migrants altogether, he warned.

    As she and her staff flew back to Washington that Friday evening, Ms. Nielsen called the president. She knew he was angry with her.
    "Sir, I know you're really frustrated," she told him. The president invited her to meet with him on Sunday in the White House residence.
    Ms. Nielsen knew that Mr. Miller wanted her out, so she spent the flight huddled with aides on a strategy for getting control of the border, a Hail Mary pass. She called it the "Six C's" — Congress, Courts, Communications, Countries, Criminals, Cartels.
    Unbeknown to her, Ms. Nielsen's staff started work on her letter of resignation.
    When Ms. Nielsen presented her plan to Mr. Trump at the White House, he dismissed it and told her what he really needed was a cement wall.
    "Sir," she said, "I literally don't think that's even possible." They couldn't build that now even if it would work, which it wouldn't, Ms. Nielsen told him. The designs for steel barriers had long since been finalized, the contracts bid and signed.

    The president responded that it was time for her to go, Mr. Trump recalled later. "Kirstjen, I want to make a change," he said.

    The president said he would wait a week to announce her resignation, to leave time for a transition. But before Ms. Nielsen had left the White House that day, the word was leaking out. By evening, Mr. Trump was tweeting about it.
    "Secretary of Homeland Security Kirstjen Nielsen will be leaving her position," Trump wrote, "and I would like to thank her for her service."
    The dismissal was a turning point for Mr. Trump's immigration agenda, the start of the purge that ushered in a team that embraced Mr. Miller's policies.
    Mr. Trump quickly dismissed Claire M. Grady, the homeland security under secretary, and moved Mr. McAleenan to take Ms. Nielsen's old job. Within two months, Mr. Cissna was out as well, replaced by Kenneth T. Cuccinelli II, a former Virginia attorney general and an immigration hard-liner.
    On Aug. 12, Mr. Cuccinelli announced that the government would deny green cards for immigrants deemed likely to become "public charges." Nine days later, Mr. McAleenan announced regulations to allow immigrant families to be detained indefinitely.
    In the months since the purge, the president has repeated his threat of placing tariffs on Mexico to spur aggressive enforcement at the border. Mr. McAleenan and Mr. Cuccinelli have embraced restrictive asylum rules. And the Pentagon approved shifting $3.6 billion to build the wall.
    Mr. Trump has continued to face resistance in the courts and public outrage about his immigration agenda. But the people who tried to restrain him have largely been replaced.

    In the interview with The Times this past summer, Mr. Trump said he had seriously considered sealing the border during March, but acknowledged that doing so would have been "very severe."
    "The problem you have with the laws the way they are, we can have 100,000 of our soldiers standing up there — they can't do a thing," Mr. Trump said ruefully.

    This article is adapted from "Border Wars: Inside Trump's Assault on Immigration," to be published by Simon & Schuster on Oct. 8.

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

    4) Trump Will Deny Immigrant Visas to Those Who Can't Pay for Health Care
    Visa applicants will have to prove they have insurance or the financial resources for medical costs.
    https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/04/us/immigrant-visas-health-care.html?action=click&module=News&pgtype=Homepage

    WASHINGTON — The Trump administration will deny visas to immigrants who cannot prove they will have health insurance or the ability to pay for medical costs once they become permanent residents of the United States, the White House announced Friday in the latest move by President Trump to undermine legal immigration.
    Mr. Trump issued a proclamation, effective Nov. 3, ordering consular officers to bar immigrants seeking to live in the United States unless they "will be covered by approved health insurance" or can prove that they have "the financial resources to pay for reasonably foreseeable medical costs."
    The president justified the move by saying that legal immigrants are three times as likely as American citizens to lack health insurance, making them a burden on hospitals and taxpayers in the United States. Officials cited a Kaiser Family Foundation study that said that among the nonelderly population, 23 percent of legal immigrants were likely to be uninsured, compared with about 8 percent of American citizens.
    "The United States government is making the problem worse by admitting thousands of aliens who have not demonstrated any ability to pay for their health care costs," Mr. Trump wrote, adding, "immigrants who enter this country should not further saddle our health care system, and subsequently American taxpayers, with higher costs."

    The president's proclamation, which has been in the works for several months, is aimed primarily at immigrants seeking to join their families in the United States, according to a White House official who spoke under condition of anonymity to more openly discuss the new policy. It does not affect refugees, asylum seekers or students seeking to attend college in the United States, according to the White House.
    Immigrant visas are the vehicle for receiving a green card in the United States for people who are processing their paperwork abroad. Once the policy is in place, people seeking those visas would be asked by consular officers to show how they intend to be covered by health insurance within 30 days of arriving in the United States. That could include proof that they will have health care through a job or will be covered under a relative's insurance.
    If they cannot show that to the satisfaction of the consular office, their visa will be denied, the White House official said. The State Department will develop standards and rules that consular officials will follow in making the determination, the official said.
    Thousands of people annually would be denied green cards if the executive order takes effect, said Steve Yale-Loehr, an immigration scholar at Cornell Law School.
    "President Trump has failed to build a physical wall along the U.S.-Mexico border to deter illegal immigrants," he said, "but he has effectively built an invisible wall to keep out legal immigrants."

    The surprise order is the latest step in a long effort by Stephen Miller, the president's top immigration adviser, and others in the administration, to limit what they consider the financial burdens of allowing immigrants into the United States.
    After years of effort by Mr. Miller, the administration issued a regulation in August that would allow officials to deny permanent legal status to immigrants who are poor. The regulation, which imposes an aggressive wealth test on legal immigrants, has faced several legal challenges but will go into effect on Oct. 15 unless it is blocked by a court.
    That policy, known as the "public charge" rule, says immigrants seeking to live permanently in the United States could be denied if officials deem it is likely they will be a burden on society by, for example, being unable to pay for health care or seeking food and housing assistance.
    Under the new proclamation, which was earlier reported by The Wall Street Journal, officials are directed to use a similar approach in determining whether to grant immigrant visas to people seeking to live in the United States.
    Immigration advocates were taken aback by the proclamation, noting there are already several steps that applicants for a green card must take to qualify, including passing background checks and health examinations.
    Elizabeth Jamae, an immigration lawyer at Pearl Law Group in San Francisco, said she doubted the assertion in the proclamation that lawful immigrants were about three times as likely as United States citizens to lack health insurance.
    "Most people who are receiving green cards already have a job waiting or have a spouse that is employed," Ms. Jamae said. "When you apply for a green card you already have to meet certain financial requirements."

    People coming to the United States who are sponsored by companies for a specific job are likely to have insurance through their employer, and are unlikely to be affected. But many adults who are not immediately eligible for employment-based health insurance or who cannot afford private health insurance will be denied entry.
    "Without the power to change U.S. law on his own, Trump is trying to find end runs around Congress and the legislative process to impose his will by fiat," said Julie Dinnerstein, an immigration lawyer with CUNY Citizenship NOW, which provides free legal services to the public.
    The president's proclamation relies on the same immigration laws that he used in issuing his travel ban shortly after taking office. In that case, Mr. Trump asserted that the threat of terrorism required a ban on entry from certain majority-Muslim countries.
    He cited the same code in Friday's proclamation, writing that allowing immigrants without health care into the United States would "be detrimental to the interests of the United States, and that their entry should be subject to certain restrictions, limitations, and exceptions."
    Doug Rand, a former White House official who worked on immigration in the Obama administration, predicted that the president's proclamation would be met by legal challenges.
    "This came out of the same authority as the Muslim ban and the asylum ban," said Mr. Rand, who co-founded Boundless, a technology firm that helps immigrants apply for visas.
    Both bans were met with immediate litigation that was partly successful. A watered-down version of the Muslim ban was approved by the Supreme Court after several lawsuits. The asylum ban, which would have excluded most asylum seekers, was blocked by the courts.

    The latest proclamation also has logistical obstacles, Mr. Rand said, noting that the State Department has a brief window to teach thousands of consular officers how to determine whether prospective immigrants can pay for their medical care.
    "If this is not going to be enjoined by a court in the next month," Mr. Rand said, "it will cause complete chaos."




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

    5) Hong Kong Rallies Turn Violent After Thousands Defy Face Mask Ban
    The rallies were the first significant public gatherings since the ban took effect the day before, and a test of the government’s resolve to stop months of protests.
    By Mike Ives and Edward Wong, October 6, 2019
    https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/06/world/asia/hong-kong-protest-mask.html?action=click&module=Well&pgtype=Homepage&section=World%20News
    CreditLam Yik Fei for The New York Times

    Credit
    HONG KONG — A jittery Hong Kong was again engulfed by clashes between protesters and the police on Sunday, hours after tens of thousands of people marched in a largely peaceful show of force against a contentious ban on face masks. 
    Two large marches on Sunday afternoon were the first significant public gatherings since the ban took effect the day before, under a rarely invoked emergency powers law. Despite pouring rain, angry protesters turned out en masse, many on edge from the growing violence of the recent weeks and from patriotic celebrations around a politically important Chinese anniversary this past week.
    The large marches and the widespread defiance of the ban were symbols of the staying power of the monthslong pro-democracy movement, and a test of the local government’s resolve and ability to stop its momentum.

    Hong Kong’s leader, Carrie Lam, used a colonial-era law to try to isolate the hard-core activists at the center of recent street clashes with the police. She is under pressure to act after months of violence have strained the local economy and prompted concerns about intervention by Beijing. China’s ruling Communist Party has warned that it would consider using force to suppress the demonstrations.

    The risk is that Mrs. Lam’s move could backfire, provoking moderate protesters and exacerbating a sense that officials are infringing on the civil freedoms that the semiautonomous territory has maintained since its return to Chinese control in 1997.
    Jeannie Mok, a 19-year-old student who was protesting on the Kowloon Peninsula on Sunday, said the ban had given the movement another rallying cry. She noted that many protesters felt that their cause had lost some potency in September after Mrs. Lam promised to withdraw the unpopular extradition bill that first inspired the pro-democracy protests this summer.
    “I see more people here today, angry and ready to do more damage,” Ms. Mok said. “I don’t understand why the government would provoke when they want the protests to end.”
    The marches began peacefully on Sunday afternoon, as demonstrators in face masks chanted “Hong Kongers, resist!” outside the shuttered malls and stores of the Causeway Bay shopping district.

    But the marches quickly morphed into pitched battles, as protesters blocked roads, threw bricks, set fires and vandalized police stations or stores that they perceived to be pro-government. 
    “The heavens will exterminate the C.C.P.,” one protester wrote in graffiti, referring to the Chinese Communist Party.
    By evening, with a drizzle of rain falling, the neighborhoods in the center of Hong Kong Island had taken on a post-apocalyptic pallor, with wide streets devoid of people and shops and restaurants shut down. A few people wandered the streets trying to hail taxis, in vain. 
    The protests began four months ago in opposition to the now-abandoned bill that would have allowed the extradition of criminal suspects to the Chinese mainland. They have since evolved into a broader call to protect the high degree of autonomy that Beijing promised to grant the former British colony until at least 2047 under the city’s mini-constitution. 
    Street clashes between protesters and police officers have steadily grown more combative and dangerous. On Tuesday, a protester was shot by the police for the first time. Another was shot on Friday, though the police did not claim responsibility. Both were teenagers. 
    The Hong Kong authorities are “using the police force to solve political problems” and stifling public opinion in a way that leaves little daylight between Hong Kong and China’s central government, said Ken Chan, a 21-year-old university student who joined Sunday’s rally in Causeway Bay.
    Hong Kong has been bracing for more unrest since Friday, when the government announced the ban on face masks, which many protesters use to protect their identity and guard against tear gas. In doing so, Mrs. Lam invoked a rarely used, colonial-era law that allows for new regulations when the territory faces “a state of serious danger.”

    The ban draws on the so-called Emergency Regulations Ordinance, which offers Hong Kong’s leader extensive legal authority to bypass the local legislature. It was last used during deadly pro-Communist riots in 1967 against the British colonial government.
    Mrs. Lam’s announcement immediately unleashed violent protests across the city on Friday. Hong Kong came to a virtual standstill on Saturday amid a shutdown of the entire subway system, although masked protesters openly flouted the mask ban at scattered gatherings.
    “Maybe they’re trying a new model of dealing with the Hong Kong situation — of turning it into a de facto emergency state,” Gary Fong, a lecturer at Hong Kong Community College who studies policing strategies, said of the ban. It applies to public gatherings of more than a few dozen people and is punishable by a fine and up to a year in jail.
    Enforcing the ban is likely to prove difficult, not least because face masks are so common at protests. Mr. Fong said that the punishment of up to one year — a tenth of what protesters already face whenever they join any of the many unauthorized marches — may not prove much of a deterrent.

    The ban has already prompted stiff opposition from Mrs. Lam’s opponents in Hong Kong’s pro-democracy legislative minority. Two dozen of them took the government to court over the weekend, arguing that Mrs. Lam had overstepped her authority under the city’s mini-constitution, known as the Basic Law. 
    “Today is a battle between totalitarianism and the rule of law,” one of the lawmakers, Dennis Kwok, told reporters on Sunday morning. “So the government can implement any law they want — is that the way it is now? Or is Hong Kong still a society under the rule of law?”

    After a day of eerie quiet on Saturday, parts of Hong Kong and its subway system had partially returned to life by Sunday morning. But the city still felt hushed all day, even as protesters with umbrellas and gas masks squared off against the riot police.
    With chaos gripping pockets of central Hong Kong on Sunday evening, some protesters sought refuge in local churches. 
    At a Methodist church in Wan Chai, where scores of protesters had retreated from advancing police lines, a line of pastors stood at the glass doors while medics treated those overcome by tear gas. As protesters left, pastors wished them well and reminded everyone to take their umbrellas.
    Down the street at Our Lady of Mount Carmel Church — where Mrs. Lam, Hong Kong’s embattled leader, is a parishioner — more than a hundred young protesters in black shirts sat resting on the floor of a common area.
    As a Mass took place in a room next door, some of the protesters removed their black shirts and masks, and changed into civilian clothing before heading outside.
    Andrew Jacobs, Elaine Yu, Ezra Cheung, Katherine Li, Tiffany May, Keith Bradsher and Austin Ramzy contributed reporting.
    Edward Wong is a diplomatic and international correspondent who has reported for The Times for more than 20 years, 13 of those in Iraq and China. He received a Livingston Award for his Iraq War coverage and was on a team of Pulitzer Prize finalists. He has been a Nieman Fellow at Harvard and a Ferris Professor of Journalism at Princeton.


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

    6) Jeremy Corbyn or No-Deal Brexit? The U.K. Might Have to Choose
    By Benjamin Mueller, October 6, 2019
    https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/06/world/europe/brexit-uk-business-corbyn.html
    Credit

    LONDON — He is the bane of bankers, a bearded, teetotaling socialist often derided in the British press and in Parliament for his efforts to suppress dissent inside the Labour Party and his radical plans to remake the British economy.
    But in the unmitigated chaos of Brexit, Jeremy Corbyn, the opposition Labour leader, is trying to remint himself as a safe pair of hands, and an unlikely salve to jittery British markets panicked by Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s plans for an abrupt split with the European Union.
    And, surprisingly, it might be working.
    “‘What method of execution would you prefer?’ is basically the question,” said David Willetts, a Conservative former minister who was once an aide to Margaret Thatcher. “Corbyn would in normal circumstances look like an off-the-scale risky gamble. However, Brexit is the single biggest change in Britain’s economic and political relations in 40 years, so Brexit itself is an off-the-scale economic gamble.”
    With an early election looming, Mr. Johnson’s Conservative Party, once a friend to big business and a refuge for establishment figures of all types, has torched one convention after another, creating dust-ups with Queen Elizabeth II, the Supreme Court and Parliament. The prime minister’s proposed Brexit deal, proffered last week to Brussels, was met with so much dismay that most analysts believe he is fully resigned to Britain leaving the bloc without one.

    That has turned Mr. Corbyn — a lifelong rabble-rouser and one of the most left-wing leaders in Labour’s century-long history — into an improbable figure of restraint. He is implacably opposed to a no-deal Brexit and promises a second referendum that could reverse the split altogether.
    Suddenly, banks have been left grudgingly weighing the benefits of a party run by neo-Marxists, radical union leaders and lawmakers with a history of supporting communist regimes.

    And some parts of Labour, famously anti-establishment under Mr. Corbyn, are fretting that they will somehow look like the soberer party in an election dominated by voters’ desire for a shake-up.
    “The Tories are promising the most radical and extreme economic disruption in nearly 200 years,” said Tom Kibasi, the director of the left-leaning Institute for Public Policy Research, calling a no-deal Brexit the biggest upheaval since the British Empire abolished slavery in the 1830s. “The scale of economic chaos the Tories are promising means that any of Labour’s policies pale in significance.”

    But, he said: “The issue is right now the public have a clear appetite for change. The question is, are you going to offer them positive change, or change that’s chaos and disruption?”
    Mr. Corbyn’s new sheen of acceptability has not yet paid dividends with the public. In carving out the middle ground on Brexit — promising a second referendum, but refusing to commit to one side or the other — he has alienated both Leave and Remain voters. And analysts say it is not clear whether Mr. Corbyn’s plans for a generational reordering of the economy will cut through as long as voters remain obsessed with Brexit.
    Despite his involvement in efforts to avert a no-deal Brexit, Mr. Corbyn is still despised by a cohort of anti-Brexit lawmakers, some of whom blame him for failing to get a grip on anti-Semitism in the Labour Party. Those lawmakers have resisted trying to unseat the government and install him as a caretaker prime minister.
    But in Britain’s winner-take-all voting system, Labour is still the party best positioned to wrench power from the Conservatives. That has narrowed the choice awaiting Britain, some analysts say: a Johnson-led government increasingly bent on a no-deal Brexit, or a Corbyn-led government that would stop it.

    And even for some of Mr. Corbyn’s biggest foes, that is an easy choice to make.
    Ken Clarke, a Conservative former chancellor of the Exchequer who has locked horns with Labour for decades, said last month, “Both are awful prospects, but I think a no-deal Brexit could cause far more damage to our future economic success than Corbyn.”
    Even in the City of London, there is growing feeling that the financial industry could withstand the shock of Mr. Corbyn’s hard-left economic plans if that were what it had to do to avoid Britain leaving the European Union without a deal managing future relations. For financial analysts, there is nothing that tempers fears of Labour’s plans to redistribute wealth and assets like an even more daring economic experiment: cutting adrift an export market of half a billion people.

    “Between a Corbyn government that delivers a second referendum at the cost of some policies which from an economic perspective we may not be entirely happy with, and a Conservative government that is broadly pro-business but does the irreversible damage of the U.K. leaving without a deal, I’d choose the former,” said Christian Schulz, an analyst for Citi.
    Peter Dixon, a senior economist for Commerzbank, said companies could adjust to Mr. Corbyn, but not as easily to the sudden turmoil of a no-deal Brexit.
    “They’re looking at the prospect of a no-deal and saying, actually, this would be an even bigger shock to the economy than a Corbyn government because perhaps at least you’d have a period of time to adjust,” he said.
    For Britain’s financial district, it is the end of an era of being able to freely hammer Labour for moderate tax increases, safe in the knowledge that the Conservative Party would follow market orthodoxy on open trading arrangements.

    “The markets can’t have their cake and eat it,” said Paul Dales, the chief United Kingdom economist for Capital Economics, a research company.
    Mr. Corbyn, a vegetarian with a grandfatherly manner who for decades wandered the hard-left hinterlands of the Labour Party, has not made himself many friends in the City of London with a series of bold proposals he has rolled out over the last few weeks: creating a state-owned pharmaceutical company, attacking private schools, forcing companies to make their workforces into shareholders.

    He also wants to nationalize the railways, raise new taxes on the financial industry and create a four-day workweek.
    Those policies could permanently undo the anti-regulatory crusade waged 40 years ago by Ms. Thatcher, cementing high-tax, pro-workforce rules. Labour supporters hope these measures will address gaping inequality, while critics fear they are built on an outdated vision of Britain’s economy.
    It’s still, to many if not most bankers, a program that looks politically repugnant and personally costly. And the calculation that it might be less catastrophic to banks than a no-deal Brexit remains hotly contested in some circles.
    But analysts say the markets have taken comfort in the fact that even if Mr. Corbyn performs well in the next election, he will probably not win enough seats in Parliament to govern alone. Being forced to rely on the backing of one or more smaller parties, like the centrist Liberal Democrats or the economically center-left Scottish National Party, would rein in Labour’s most radical plans.

    Labour has also made a concerted, if low-key, effort in recent months to prepare the financial industry for a turnover in Downing Street. Industry representatives say they have largely left impressed by John McDonnell, Labour’s Treasury spokesman, describing him as solicitous of their needs when it comes to Brexit and matter-of-fact in laying out his party’s more confrontational economic plans.
    “John McDonnell is someone they can talk to, do business with,” said Lord Robert Kerslake, a former civil service chief who has set up some of Labour’s meetings with businesspeople.

    (Bankers cannot, though, buy dinner for Mr. McDonnell, who has protected his abstemious reputation — and the party’s anti-elite bona fides — by insisting on “tea and biscuits, nothing else,” Lord Kerslake said. That is a contrast with the “prawn cocktail offensive” that a more corporate Labour Party waged under Tony Blair in the City of London two decades ago.)
    Labour’s rehabilitation in the eye of the markets mirrors a lift that leftist parties have gotten across Europe simply for treading cautiously on European trade. Facing up against right-wing, populist campaigns against European integration, left-wing parties, said Mr. Schulz, the Citi analyst, are finding that “their pro-Europe credentials ultimately trumped question marks about their economic policies.”
    Whatever respectability Mr. Corbyn has won in the bare-knuckled fight over Brexit may not last long. One of his biggest selling points for bankers, after all, is that some of them think they can reverse his policies within a matter of years. And some of his grudging Conservative backers, like Guto Bebb, a former junior defense minister, have in mind nothing more than “a short-term Jeremy Corbyn government” that would avert what he called “the generational damage that would be caused by a no-deal Brexit.”
    Mr. Corbyn’s more immediate problem is not only pitching himself as a sober option in an era of political madness, but also how to make his proposals stand out amid fervent campaigning on Brexit on all sides.
    Mr. Johnson, analysts say, has a slew of ready-made slogans for his anti-establishment, no-holds-barred Brexit campaign, even if they disguise the tumult that is almost sure to follow. Mr. Corbyn, on the other hand, has to make a knottier case for caution on Brexit.
    “It depends whether the Tories are found out or not,” Mr. Kibasi said. “Labour’s story is more complicated, if more truthful.”



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

    7) Extinction Rebellion Takes Aim at Fashion
    XR says it is the fastest growing direct action climate movement in history. And it has the fashion business in its sights.
    By Elizabeth Paton, October 6, 2019
    https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/06/fashion/extinction-rebellion-fashion-protest.html
    CreditAlexander Coggin for The New York Times

    LONDON — Last month, on the final day of London Fashion Week, hundreds of black-clad demonstrators gathered in Trafalgar Square to embark on what they called “a funeral march for fashion.” 
    Gathering behind a band and giant painted coffin, they slowly processed en masse down the Strand, shutting down traffic on the busy thoroughfare as they chanted and handed out leaflets, leaving gridlock and chaos in their wake.
    It was just the latest in a series of efforts designed by Extinction Rebellion, or XR, to disrupt the most visible British fashion event of the year. First, protesters covered in fake blood performed a die-in and demanded fashion week be canceled on opening day. Then, outside the Victoria Beckham show, activists had lined up, brandishing posters emblazoned with statements like “R.I.P. LFW 1983-2019” and “Fashion = Ecocide.”

    Sustainability is at the forefront of the fashion conversation today in a way it has never been before, and the emergence of XR — which 18 months ago consisted of just 10 people in Britain and has since swelled to millions of followers across 72 countries — has stoked the increasingly heated discussion.

    Although the movement targets numerous industries and governments worldwide, a recent focus on fashion has been particularly high profile.
    Extinction Rebellion, which held demonstrations outside the Manhattan headquarters of The New York Times earlier this year demanding the newspaper increase its focus on climate change, has a distinctive hourglass logo, viral social media campaigns and creatively packaged demands for drastic action. It calls itself the fastest-growing climate and ecology direct action movement in history.
    Come Monday, the most ambitious protest effort by the group yet will get underway, with tens of thousands of protesters planning to bring roads around Westminster to gridlock; there will also be a sit-in at London City Airport. This is the beginning of two weeks of environmental demonstrations that will also include repair stations where people can bring their old or damaged clothes.
    So how does it all work?
    Extinction Rebellion, which originally grew out of the activist group Rising Up! and relies solely on crowdfunding and donations, has three key goals: that governments are transparent about the impact of climate change; that they reduce net greenhouse gas emissions to zero by 2025; and that governments worldwide create citizens’ assemblies to set climate priorities.

    The group has been deliberately conceived as a self-organizing, non-hierarchical holacracy. There is no single leader or group steering its strategy, tactics and goals. Instead, it is a loose alliance of 150 groups across Britain alone, with volunteers organized into working subgroups, and support teams and responsibilities distributed among chapters. 
    Meetings and planning sessions tend to take place in online forums and on messaging apps, with meetings offline used for training and creating a sense of community.
    Extinction Rebellion is not the first modern protest movement to organize in such a way (there are parallels in particular with the Occupy movement), though the setup can foster a general sense of confusion and disarray. 
    Volunteers cheerfully describe planning meetings as “pretty crazy and disorganized.” A news conference last week ahead of the latest mass protests involved a fair amount of shouting and technical difficulties, and at London Fashion Week, certain planned protests failed to materialize. With the exception of the funeral march, turnouts were generally lower than anticipated.
    Indeed, the success, and confusion, around the XR approach to fashion — a sector responsible for about 10 percent of all greenhouse gas emissions, according to the United Nations — is fairly representative of the state of the group at large

    “It’s always somewhat chaotic and messy, but I suppose that’s part of the beauty of Extinction Rebellion,” said Sara Arnold, a coordinator of Boycott Fashion, an XR subgroup that has made headlines by urging people to buy no new clothes for a year. “You learn to just run with it and hope for the best.”
    Ms. Arnold, 32, studied fashion design at Central St Martins before environmental concerns led to a decision not to design or produce new clothes. She founded the clothes rental company Higher Rental, and though she refuses to be classified as a leader — “there are no leaders at XR,” she said — she has been one of the more visible and vocal figureheads in the group’s efforts to hold the fashion industry to account. 
    For her, a key reason fashion has become a target for XR activists is because it shapes people’s aspirations.

    “This is not about the survival of the fashion industry, this is about the survival of the planet,” Ms. Arnold said, peering through her trademark oversize glasses. “We are now in a state of emergency. Stopping people consuming is really the only way of having any impact at this point, which is a difficult message for many people to take on board. The changes we are seeing from some brands remain extremely superficial.” Ms. Arnold continued.

    Unsurprisingly, XR’s mission and messaging are not popular among many conventional fashion brands and retailers. But the group has also been spurned by another, more surprising, industry faction: sustainable brands. 
    Another coordinator, Bel Jacobs, a former fashion editor of the free daily newspaper Metro, said that she and other Extinction Rebellion members had found themselves the target of ire from those who said the campaigning was damaging to a new wave of businesses attempting to improve the ethical and environmental footprint of clothes.
    “By asking for huge sacrifices, we know we are alienating ourselves but we are also shifting the Overton window and empowering people, both in and outside the industry,” Ms. Jacobs said. “As a communication tool, fashion is so influential. We all have to put clothes on and that has power.”
    There is some dispute even inside XR about whether it is better to work with the fashion industry or against it.

    Last summer, for example, three members of Extinction Rebellion appeared in an advertising campaign for the luxury fashion designer Stella McCartney, roaming the Welsh coastline in expensive new designer clothing, without letting other chapters know. The Boycott Fashion coordinators said the first they heard of the partnership was when they saw the photographs. They were, Ms. Jacobs put delicately, somewhat surprised.

    However, at the London news conference last week, Douglas Rogers, an XR spokesman, insisted that the absence of a solid hierarchy is what gives the movement its strength. Fresh efforts were underway to further decentralize its organizing systems from a London rebellion support office to autonomous regional bases, as British police announced this week that they would seek new legal powers against protesters.

    More than 1,100 people were arrested at Extinction Rebellion’s protests in April, in a police operation that cost £16 million, or $19.7 million. About 850 protesters have been prosecuted and 250 convicted.
    “Of course it can be challenging to maintain a communal sense of control, but without visible leadership it makes us stronger in the face of those who would want to break the movement down,” Mr. Rogers said, amid a scrum of reporters and activists and vocal pleas that chairs get stacked to make more space in the room.
    “I actually find moments like the Stella McCartney campaign reassuring because it shows this really is a rebellion,” he said. “Rebellions are messy and overlap and are forged from lots of opinions and actions. It would be very worrying if XR acted like some superslick Silicon Valley-style business. Not that there is much chance of anyone actually thinking that.”

    Elizabeth Paton is a reporter for the Styles section, covering the fashion and luxury sectors in Europe. Before joining The Times in 2015, she was a reporter at the Financial Times both in London and New York.



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





































































































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




    .



    __._,_.___
    Posted by: bonnieweinstein@yahoo.com 
    Reply via web post                       •Reply to sender                       •Reply to group                       •Start a New Topic           •Messages in this topic (1)                       

    Yahoo! Groups
    • Privacy • Unsubscribe • Terms of Use 



    .


    __,_._,___
    Posted by at

    No comments:

    Post a Comment