From chicoverde@cox.net Sun Feb 20 04:05:16 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: usgp-mx-peace-discussion@lists.gp-us.org Received: (qmail 4404 invoked from network); 20 Feb 2005 04:05:16 -0000 Received: from lakermmtao05.cox.net (68.230.240.34) by cesarchavez.cagreens.org with SMTP; 20 Feb 2005 04:05:16 -0000 Received: from cox.net ([68.101.88.147]) by lakermmtao05.cox.net (InterMail vM.6.01.04.00 201-2131-117-20041022) with ESMTP id <20050220040447.PBMM20274.lakermmtao05.cox.net@cox.net> for ; Sat, 19 Feb 2005 23:04:47 -0500 Message-ID: <42180C5B.9070504@cox.net> Date: Sat, 19 Feb 2005 23:04:43 -0500 From: Michael Canney Reply-To: chicoverde@cox.net User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.0.2) Gecko/20030208 Netscape/7.02 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, es-mx MIME-Version: 1.0 To: peace-discussion@lists.gp-us.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Subject: [Peace-discussion] Email test Sender: peace-discussion-admin@lists.gp-us.org Errors-To: peace-discussion-admin@lists.gp-us.org X-BeenThere: peace-discussion@lists.gp-us.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.13 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Email test From nschmader@cox.net Thu Mar 10 21:39:31 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: usgp-mx-peace-discussion@lists.gp-us.org Received: (qmail 13402 invoked from network); 10 Mar 2005 21:39:30 -0000 Received: from lakermmtao10.cox.net (68.230.240.29) by cesarchavez.cagreens.org with SMTP; 10 Mar 2005 21:39:30 -0000 Received: from cox.net ([70.188.140.234]) by lakermmtao10.cox.net (InterMail vM.6.01.04.00 201-2131-118-20041027) with ESMTP id <20050310213902.ZSWY29924.lakermmtao10.cox.net@cox.net> for ; Thu, 10 Mar 2005 16:39:02 -0500 Message-ID: <4230BDA9.4000405@cox.net> Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 16:35:37 -0500 From: Nick Schmader User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: peace-discussion@lists.gp-us.org X-StripMime: Non-text section removed by stripmime Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Subject: [Peace-discussion] [Fwd: [HumanRights] Thoughts on stasis] Sender: peace-discussion-admin@lists.gp-us.org Errors-To: peace-discussion-admin@lists.gp-us.org X-BeenThere: peace-discussion@lists.gp-us.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.13 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Mazin Qumsiyeh is a Palestinian woman who works tirelessly to advocate for her people. She maintains a very informative listserv, but the following forwarding, which relates the end of her recent trip to Palestine, is a fine first-person account and well worth the read. We should keep her words in mind if we continue to move toward a GPUS official position on P/I. -------- Original Message -------- Subject: [HumanRights] Thoughts on stasis Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 15:55:36 -0500 From: Mazin Qumsiyeh To: Mazin.qumsiyeh@lists.riseup.net ( to unsubscribe from this occasional email list- some 3-4 messages PER WEEK, reply with subject heading "UNSUBSCRIBE") Thoughts on stasis and individual responsibilities Mazin Qumsiyeh (http://qumsiyeh.org) On the way back our Royal Jordanian flight included two groups of Americans. One was a group of women returning from religious pilgrimage to the Holy Land (but not to visit its native people including Palestinian Christians). The other group was apparently US "tough guys" who were "serving" in Iraq ("special" service or security). They were muscular and loud. One even brutishly unhinged the cabin luggage closet and carried it through the airplane forward towards the Stewardess. At one point, one of the tough guys was flirting with one of the Church ladies. As I listened to the conversations, I felt a sense of sadness which only dissipated when I was back in New Haven. Here in the past few days I conversed with surgeons who kindly operated on a Palestinian girl, with hardworking people making minimum wage, and with hardworking activists organizing for March 19th demonstrations and rallies against the war. The contrast was stark between how open-minded and self-reflecting those folks are compared to the folks on the airplane. But a bit of self-reflection is also relevant among Palestinians and Israelis (and does happen). Like all Palestinians, we are barred by the Israeli military from meeting or interacting with ordinary Israelis; only occupation soldiers. But my interactions with Israelis over the decades have shown levels of complexity not often appreciated and analogous to that I found among Americans of various backgrounds (although perhaps Israeli racists are slightly more informed than American racists). As for Palestinians, I would say the contrasts and diversity of opinion are perhaps even greater. Americans of course have not lived under a ruthless military and colonial occupation for decades as Palestinians have. I listened to Palestinians in all walks of life as I did throughout decades of interactions. While I cannot make generalizations, I think it is safe to say that the Israeli occupation had exacted a fairly heavy price in terms of intellectual and physical growth of average Palestinians but has not succeeded in its goal of "breaking" the collective will. Let me explain. I remember as a child that uncles were discussing physics and math with us kids. I remember how we debated within our families how much intelligence is inherited or acquired. I remember us anxiously taking turns touching the first calculator. I even remember discussions of astronomy, possible inhabitants of other planets, and UFOs. Today, most discussions center on conditions of imprisonments in the large ghettos that are known as area A of the West Bank. This of course includes the ubiquitous political differences between various national factions (Fatah, PFLP, Hamas, DFLP etc) and of course corruption. Corruption is rampant indeed not only among the misnamed Palestinian "authority" (which really has no authority) but also among civil sectors most especially many of the wealthy non-governmental organizations. Occasionally people do exaggerate how much corruption consumes from money intended for public purposes (I think it is significant but less than what most Palestinians believe). But focusing on the negatives of corruption, graft, and waste, we may not notice the positive gems. I am amazed that despite the incredible oppression and dispossession (which an Israeli professor dubbed "Politicide"), there are still large segments of Palestinian society who function well, do good work, and most importantly do not lose their belief in humanity and justice. I observed the same among fellow Americans. There are indeed many lessons to be learned from fellow humans but few seem to learn them. Instead, we find various forms of blindness: - Sheepish regurgitation of media distortions - Paranoia and ugly racism manifest in notions of ideological or religious superiority (e.g. seen in Zionism and BinLadism). - Some positive knowledge but misdirected effort to sloganism and rhetoric; witness the countless conventions and conferences issuing resolutions (escapism in many ways from taking serious positive actions). - Simplified notions usually of the condemnatory type used to insulate their holders from any self-reflection or critical thought. But also in all such struggles, it is possible to find people who act positively on their belief in humanity and truly advance the cause of peace with justice: - Principled boycott and divestment work - The wheels of justice (JusticeWheels.org) - Students work for justice (e.g at Bir Zeit and Al-Najah Universities) - Direct aid to victims - The hard work of entering into uncharted waters and seeking support from those who are not automatically guaranteed to give support (this is very hard work but essential). - Media work (both mainstream and alternative) When I finished high school, my grandfather wrote a note to me that, in addition to the expected, stated that change is the norm in life and people need to modify their thinking; that doing so requires shedding the chains that come from upbringing and "cultural norms." The past 30 years since kept reinforcing that simple but powerful truth. Palestinians are reeling under occupation and colonization and yet many escape the corruption of ignorance and stasis. Of course many Palestinians, Israelis, and Americans don't and merely continue in the old tired ways. For those of us living in America (or Israel), it is nothing short of criminal to keep ignorant/acquiescent of how our taxes and political anesthesia are used to suppress and oppress others. I find it shameful that many participate in war crimes (such as those folks returning from Iraq or Israeli soldiers, settlers, and their government) and others give their money to support war and Israel's ethnic cleansing of Palestinians. While some of them pray for a return of Jesus, they violate his basic commands of seeking justice and totally rejecting violence. In the 21st century/the age of the internet, people do not have the luxury to say "I didn't know" or even "couldn't have known." So if knowledge is available, the only excuse left is accepting the oppressors' lies that individual action will make no difference ("leave politics to us" and "us vs them"). History shows that all good social change happened by individuals working together and challenging the myths of entrenched power (e.g. civil rights, right of women to vote, ending war on Vietnam). But it is also a moral issue, knowing of evil and not acting to stop it (especially when it is done with our taxes and in our name) is nothing short of a sin against God and humanity. Action indeed speaks louder than words and inaction is complicity. Please take time to write letter to editors of newspapers, magazines, TV, and Radio stations; it is important and does make a difference e.g. today you can point out the hypocrisy of demanding 14,000 Syrian troops leave Lebanon while not demanding that tens of thousands of Israeli troops and hundreds of thousands of colonial settlers leave occupied Palestine. _________________________________________________________________ Is your PC infected? Get a FREE online computer virus scan from McAfee® Security. http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963 --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- multipart/alternative text/plain (text body -- kept) text/html --- From rebelrot@yahoo.com Tue Mar 22 15:56:16 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: usgp-mx-peace-discussion@gp-us.org Received: (qmail 32165 invoked from network); 22 Mar 2005 15:56:16 -0000 Received: from web14823.mail.yahoo.com (216.136.225.178) by cesarchavez.cagreens.org with SMTP; 22 Mar 2005 15:56:16 -0000 Received: (qmail 74340 invoked by uid 60001); 22 Mar 2005 15:56:14 -0000 Comment: DomainKeys? See http://antispam.yahoo.com/domainkeys DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; b=SGz3ounrsaHc4yu573vuKxiuBCJdiRjwgSiq3o8OX/cmoX/OO1+wsVg2NHN1Pp2XBP67djdlIhkxQfjQinx1neGjq4H17kqj6WO3H+dMcVYQQXCwJH1LmG9yIzz0ZaW1Js32T1+6Y/ENDH6lRj3WuRM9Cp+hjj5VKy/FzNAruQM= ; Message-ID: <20050322155614.74338.qmail@web14823.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [64.75.66.11] by web14823.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Tue, 22 Mar 2005 07:56:14 PST Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 07:56:14 -0800 (PST) From: Rebecca Rot To: peace-discussion@lists.gp-us.org MIME-Version: 1.0 X-StripMime: Non-text section removed by stripmime Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Subject: [Peace-discussion] Let's use this! Sender: peace-discussion-admin@lists.gp-us.org Errors-To: peace-discussion-admin@lists.gp-us.org X-BeenThere: peace-discussion@lists.gp-us.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.13 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: We are having some issues with this list but we can begin using it! --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Make Yahoo! your home page --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- multipart/alternative text/plain (text body -- kept) text/html --- From rebelrot@yahoo.com Wed Mar 23 05:05:54 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: usgp-mx-peace-discussion@gp-us.org Received: (qmail 16077 invoked from network); 23 Mar 2005 05:05:54 -0000 Received: from web14825.mail.yahoo.com (216.136.225.196) by cesarchavez.cagreens.org with SMTP; 23 Mar 2005 05:05:54 -0000 Received: (qmail 27188 invoked by uid 60001); 23 Mar 2005 05:05:51 -0000 Comment: DomainKeys? See http://antispam.yahoo.com/domainkeys DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; b=173vP3aqsuKw8zjxnb3tGCPYlfKst1WSgAQXAn4NtSSq9ZsmJ9AKMArZt7/hWOVAikBJBm1qgQqKLDcJjfHwFEBi8WsiCycugoX8h96cp6yc9hTv0Ewr7NeRG16PHBGXyJ+GpxSy2sCVPpbI4BFNm6Xr3/oWUVLrqdJ3h6Nv9EI= ; Message-ID: <20050323050551.27186.qmail@web14825.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [66.6.181.16] by web14825.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Tue, 22 Mar 2005 21:05:51 PST Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 21:05:51 -0800 (PST) From: Rebecca Rot To: Rebecca Rot , peace-discussion@lists.gp-us.org In-Reply-To: 6667 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-StripMime: Non-text section removed by stripmime Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Subject: [Peace-discussion] Article on Haiti, please read Sender: peace-discussion-admin@lists.gp-us.org Errors-To: peace-discussion-admin@lists.gp-us.org X-BeenThere: peace-discussion@lists.gp-us.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.13 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Haiti Trip: Health Care and Human Rights By Johanna Berrigan Editors Note: From Feb. 21 thru 24, Johanna Berrigan, House of Grace Catholic Worker; Robert Boucher, Ear, Nose and Throat Surgeon; Thomas Gumbleton, Auxillary Bishop of Detroit; Bill Quigley, Social Justice Lawyer; Claire Schaeffer – Duffy, Catholic Worker, Free Lance Journalist and Karen Wisniewski, Registered Nurse were in Haiti to investigate human rights abuses from a health care perspective and the possibility of establishing an ongoing health care presence at St. Claire’s parish. The following is a summary of their trip. We urge everyone to become more aware of the tragedy of the human rights abuses and suffering of the Haitian people which has escalated to an alarming degree since the U.S.-backed coup d’ etat Feb. 29, 2004, which removed the Democratically elected President, Jean Bertrand Aristide. Overthrow this oppression, Oh God; confuse all that seeks to destroy. For I see violence and strife all around me. Day and night it patrols our cities; they are full of wickedness and evil, ruin is in their midst; oppression and fraud do not depart from their market places. Psalm 55 Haitian police, under the guise of searching for escaped criminals, went to Bel Air and gunned down more than fifteen people in cold blood with UN troops providing firepower cover, an email from Marguerite Laurent of the Haitian Lawyers Leadership Network said.. It was written on Saturday, February 26, just two days after our delegation returned home from Haiti. The e-mail continued, "Who do we call for help here? This is an evil, evil world with international officials turning their heads away while our people simply are murdered under UN mandate and the media staying absolutely blind, dumb and deaf as Haitians die and die and die and die. It is horrifying." This morning, Sunday, I am trying to make sense of my feelings upon hearing more sad news that a two-year-old girl, whom we had met at St. Catherine’s Hospital in Cite’ Soleil just days before, had died. The exact cause of death has not been determined. Her mother dead and her father too sick to care for her, she had been left at the hospital by her uncle. No one there knew her name. Angelic, dressed in a beautiful white dress, she appeared to be only nine months old. The nurse caring for her offered a casual reply - malnutrition. Her breathing labored due to pneumonia, we were informed that the hospital had run out of oxygen and had no money to purchase more. Our delegation arranged for more oxygen to be purchased for her, but now we know that it was too late. Her plight, this sad tragedy, is the plight of Haiti’s poor - abandoned and struggling to live; suffocating under the U.S.-backed oppressive regime of Gerard LaTortue. During our stay in Haiti the quote by Dorothy Day, "When they come for the innocent without crossing over your body, cursed be your religion and your life" ran through my mind like a mantra as both a profound truth and a call. We witnessed first hand the ways in which they have come, and continue to come for the innocent. Visitation House, founded by Ron Voss in 1993, is the guest house where our delegations stay and receive gracious hospitality while in Port-au-Prince. It is also the operating center for a group of neighborhood projects which offer local residents an opportunity to escape poverty and disease. The project includes: a health clinic and laboratory, a clean water distribution program, a food co-op, a legal services bureau, a youth sports program, and a variety of educational, informational and training programs. It is also the guest house for thousands of people who have come to Haiti through the Parish Twinning Program founded by Theresa Patterson. The interim government has accused Ron Voss of holding a meeting at Visitation House to plan the prison escape of former Prime Minister, Yvon Neptune, former Minister of Interior, Jocelerme Privert, and 480 other prisoners which occurred on February 19. This is a bizarre and unsubstantiated accusation. Nonetheless, 12 heavily armed, masked policemen invaded Visitation House, seized personal property, ransacked the house and took Ron away for questioning. No evidence has been found, yet he remains under investigation. We visited two of the police stations in Port-au-Prince where we spoke with some of the more than 700 political prisoners who have been unjustly arrested and illegally detained because of their support for President Aristide and involvement with the Fanmi Lavalas Party. At the Anti-Gang station there were as many as 20 men in one small holding cell, ages 14 to 51 years old. The conditions in which they are being held represent, as Fr. Gerard Jean-Juste so aptly stated, "inhumanity at its peak". The prisoners have to remain in the cell 24 hours a day. A small window allows for some light; otherwise there is none. The detainees are allowed to use the bathroom once in the morning. There is no food, unless family members or friends provide it. For some, their families have no idea that they are in jail. They cannot lie down to sleep; there is not enough room. The Haitian constitution states that prisoners should go before a judge within 48 hours of their arrest. Many had been in this cell for months and have not seen a judge. Many simply had no idea what their charges were. Their stories went something like this: "I got picked up in a raid." "I was just walking down the street and since I am poor and have no job, they picked me up." One elderly man asked, "Is it legal to be arrested for a crime that someone else committed? I was arrested because of the crime that my sons committed." One man came forward, saying he had been arrested because he looked like the cousin of Dred Wilme, a well-known President Aristide supporter and Fanmi Lavalas Party leader in Cite’ Soleil. He held a Bible in his hand and said, " I have been serving God since I was 11 years old. Maybe God sent you here to help." At the Comissariat in Port-au-Prince, one by one in solemn succession the prisoners stepped forward to relay their stories. As we turned to leave, one man said, "Don’t you have anything to give us?" We were not permitted to bring in our bags and had no money or food to give. I simply said, "No, we don’t, but I can tell you that on Monday morning, Feb. 28th we will be holding a demonstration in front of the White House to demand respect for your human rights and to call for the return of President Aristide and Democracy in Haiti." Those words instantaneously turned the darkness to light. All of the men were smiling and giving us the peace sign and holding our hands in gratitude and solidarity. One man said, "Take our picture, and put what we said in Arisitide’s ear so he can see how his sons are suffering. We need him to come back." We visited with people in the slums of Cite’ Soleil, perhaps the poorest people in the western hemisphere who are the victims suffering deeply from structural and political violence. One woman, Marianne Fifi, had sustained a gun shot wound to her left breast. Her chest wall, now a gaping hole, was infected due to lack of proper medical care. Sitting in the darkness of the hovel that is her home, she rocked back and forth in pain, a dirty rag to cover her wound. Although we had an interpreter, I had no words to console her. Robert, Karen and I had only a laying-on of hands for her treatment and healing. A young man who had been beaten by the police weeks earlier and suffered from both malaria and typhoid complained of being anemic and very weak. He thought that his last substantial meal was approximately two months ago. There was no money for food. We visited a 26 year old woman who had been in bed since November with a "weak heart". We observed her to be too weak to move or talk. She had a fever and bad cough. She had received no medical attention and had no money for food. She cried and cried as Bishop Gumbleton gave her a blessing. We were taken to one of the elders of the community who had been sick for the past three days with a stomach virus. His son demanded, aggressively in our faces, to know what we were going to do for his father. Luckily, Robert had some medicines to help and won him over by discussing with him not only his father’s condition, but concerns about his own health as well. I cannot find words to describe the stench, nor the squalid situation in which these sick and suffering people were living. Tom Griffin, Immigration Lawyer, in his recent report on Haiti refers to Cite’ Soleil as "one of the most distressed and hungry gatherings of humanity in the world". Mercifully, through Anne Sosin of The Institute of Justice and Democracy, we were able to arrange for these people’s care at the hospital and to buy food and water for them during their recovery. One of our goals for this particular delegation was to assess the possibility of establishing a health care presence at St. Claire’s parish at the request of Fr. Jean-Juste, who was recently released from 7 weeks in prison on false charges. I am happy to say that the goal was accomplished. We are in the process of organizing the next delegation. The plan is to begin by training members of St. Claire’s parish to be community health workers. We will also begin by providing basic health care to the children of the parish who come to the church for the feeding program. Ultimately, we hope to establish a House of Grace Catholic Worker sister clinic, which would be run by Haitian people with delegations from the U.S. assisting throughout the year as support staff. Feb. 28 marked the one year anniversary of the coup d’etat that forced out Haiti’s democratically elected President, Jean Bertrand Aristide. Haiti Action Committee writes, "The coup not only overthrew President Aristide, it overthrew a progressive economic and social agenda supported by the vast majority of Haiti’s population. Literacy programs, health care centers, the fight for children’s rights, a raise in the minimum wage, resistance to privatization, the struggle to bring human rights violators to justice and the effort to create an independent judiciary – these were the real targets of the coup. The coup has created a grave human rights situation in Haiti. Assassination squads now roam the cities and countryside searching for Fanmi Lavalas supporters. Bodies appear daily with hands cuffed behind their backs and plastic bags over their heads…thousands of Aristide supporters remain in hiding while other Haitians try to flee the country only to be turned back by the U.S. Coast Guard." Our experiences while in Haiti have proven that one year later Haiti remains politically unstable, plagued by violence, and horrendously impoverished. Many of the advances that had been made under President Aristide have been reversed. True to our promise to the Haitian political prisoners, approximately 50 people gathered for a demonstration in front of the White House to mark the anniversary of the coup. At the same time, thousands of Haitians held a demonstration in Bel Air, a neighborhood of Port-au-Prince. To the beat of drums they chanted, "Bring back Titi" (Aristide) in Creole, French and English. As both groups nonviolently demanded respect for Haitian human rights and the return of President Aristide and Democracy to Haiti, the U.S. protesters were ignored at the White House, while in Haiti the police opened fire on the unarmed crowds, killing two people and wounding many more. Bill Quigley, a member of our delegation who had remained in Haiti, said after witnessing the atrocity, "It was a horrifying and totally unprovoked massacre. People didn't have -- they had no guns, no bats, no pipes, no rocks, no anything. They were holding up political signs and dancing." Upon leaving the demonstration together, Fr Jean-Juste turned to him and said, "You see, Bill, you know what we face trying to do a nonviolent return of democracy in Haiti. The challenges we face are just incredible. We need international support to help us bring back our president, release our political prisoners, and restore constitutional democracy in Haiti." --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site! --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- multipart/alternative text/plain (text body -- kept) text/html --- From rebelrot@yahoo.com Wed Mar 23 05:08:07 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: usgp-mx-peace-discussion@gp-us.org Received: (qmail 16173 invoked from network); 23 Mar 2005 05:08:07 -0000 Received: from web14822.mail.yahoo.com (216.136.225.172) by cesarchavez.cagreens.org with SMTP; 23 Mar 2005 05:08:07 -0000 Received: (qmail 37422 invoked by uid 60001); 23 Mar 2005 05:08:05 -0000 Comment: DomainKeys? See http://antispam.yahoo.com/domainkeys DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; b=irBTl57temhRfmyOF2bhFxEf5d5qdJcq1+OzbmMM2htRcT/s9EqYyLIhxNru+2QbDBJHvghcZXcRagGj8nY/49IptGXtg4dGhm+qyEAvvWnNL1Gh4BsxETCURgxGTsPhY802PYSTofGmfYqjUgUz1OhOHx0/8IkwkfjDuB51IYM= ; Message-ID: <20050323050805.37420.qmail@web14822.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [66.6.181.16] by web14822.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Tue, 22 Mar 2005 21:08:04 PST Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 21:08:04 -0800 (PST) From: Rebecca Rot To: Rebecca Rot , peace-discussion@lists.gp-us.org In-Reply-To: <20050323050551.27186.qmail@web14825.mail.yahoo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-StripMime: Non-text section removed by stripmime Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Subject: [Peace-discussion] Re: [MARKS ON CONGRESSMAN'S WALL REPRESENT DEAD IN IRAQ Sender: peace-discussion-admin@lists.gp-us.org Errors-To: peace-discussion-admin@lists.gp-us.org X-BeenThere: peace-discussion@lists.gp-us.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.13 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Excellent action! Hope each of you owns a red and a black Sharpie. They are made in the USA. Rebecca --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site! --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- multipart/alternative text/plain (text body -- kept) text/html --- From jodyhaug@hotmail.com Wed Mar 02 18:37:29 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: usgp-mx-peace-discussion@lists.gp-us.org Received: (qmail 23122 invoked from network); 2 Mar 2005 18:37:28 -0000 Received: from bay16-dav10.bay16.hotmail.com (HELO hotmail.com) (65.54.186.190) by cesarchavez.cagreens.org with SMTP; 2 Mar 2005 18:37:28 -0000 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Wed, 2 Mar 2005 10:37:00 -0800 Message-ID: Received: from 168.103.155.152 by BAY16-DAV10.phx.gbl with DAV; Wed, 02 Mar 2005 18:36:22 +0000 X-Originating-IP: [168.103.155.152] X-Originating-Email: [jodyhaug@hotmail.com] X-Sender: jodyhaug@hotmail.com From: "Jody Grage Haug" To: Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2005 10:47:27 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1437 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 02 Mar 2005 18:37:00.0441 (UTC) FILETIME=[D2373890:01C51F56] Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Type: text/plain;charset="iso-8859-1" Subject: [Peace-discussion] Attacking Iran: I Know It Sounds Crazy, But....by Ray McGovern(former CIA analyst) Sender: peace-discussion-admin@lists.gp-us.org Errors-To: peace-discussion-admin@lists.gp-us.org X-BeenThere: peace-discussion@lists.gp-us.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.13 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: ----- Original Message ----- From: "Nancy Allen" To: Cc: ; Sent: Wednesday, March 02, 2005 10:07 AM Subject: [GPUS-PAX] Attacking Iran: I Know It Sounds Crazy, But....by Ray McGovern(former CIA analyst) This should be required reading for everyone in the US...nancy http://www.antiwar.com/engelhardt/?articleid=5024 Attacking Iran: I Know It Sounds Crazy, But. by Ray McGovern "'This notion that the United States is getting ready to attack Iran is simply ridiculous.' "(Short pause) "'And having said that, all options are on the table.' "Even the White House stenographers felt obliged to note the result: '(Laughter).'" - Washington Post's Dan Froomkin on George Bush's Feb. 22 press conference For a host of good reasons - the huge and draining commitment of U.S. forces to Iraq and Iran's ability to stir the Iraqi pot to boiling, for starters - the notion that the Bush administration would mount a "preemptive" air attack on Iran seems insane. And still more insane if the objective includes overthrowing Iran's government again, as in 1953 - this time under the rubric of "regime change." But Bush administration policy toward the Middle East is being run by men - yes, only men - who were routinely referred to in high circles in Washington during the 1980s as "the crazies." I can attest to that personally, but one need not take my word for it. According to James Naughtie, author of The Accidental American: Tony Blair and the Presidency, former Secretary of State Colin Powell added an old soldier's adjective to the "crazies" sobriquet in referring to the same officials. Powell, who was military aide to Defense Secretary Casper Weinberger in the early '80s, was overheard calling them "the f***ing crazies" during a phone call with British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw before the war in Iraq. At the time, Powell was reportedly deeply concerned over their determination to attack - with or without UN approval. Small wonder that they got rid of Powell after the election, as soon as they had no more use for him. If further proof of insanity were needed, one could simply look at the unnecessary carnage in Iraq since the invasion in March 2003. That unprovoked attack was, in my view, the most fateful foreign policy blunder in our nation's history . so far. It Can Get Worse "The crazies" are not finished. And we do well not to let their ultimate folly obscure their current ambition, and the further trouble that ambition is bound to bring in the four years ahead. In an immediate sense, with U.S. military power unrivaled, they can be seen as "crazy like a fox," with a value system in which "might makes right." Operating out of that value system, and now sporting the more respectable misnomer/moniker "neoconservative," they are convinced that they know exactly what they are doing. They have a clear ideology and a geopolitical strategy, which leap from papers they put out at the Project for the New American Century over recent years. The very same men who, acting out of that paradigm, brought us the war in Iraq are now focusing on Iran, which they view as the only remaining obstacle to American domination of the entire oil-rich Middle East. They calculate that, with a docile, corporate-owned press, a co-opted mainstream church, and a still-trusting populace, the United States and/or the Israelis can launch a successful air offensive to disrupt any Iranian nuclear weapons programs - with the added bonus of possibly causing the regime in power in Iran to crumble. But why now? After all, the director of the Defense Intelligence Agency has just told Congress that Iran is not likely to have a nuclear weapon until "early in the next decade." The answer, according to some defense experts, is that several of the Iranian facilities are still under construction and there is only a narrow "window of opportunity" to destroy them without causing huge environmental problems. That window, they say, will begin to close this year. Other analysts attribute the sense of urgency to worry in Washington that the Iranians may have secretly gained access to technology that would facilitate a leap forward into the nuclear club much sooner than now anticipated. And it is, of course, neoconservative doctrine that it is best to nip - the word in current fashion is "preempt" - any conceivable threats in the bud. One reason the Israelis are pressing hard for early action may simply be out of a desire to ensure that George W. Bush will have a few more years as president after an attack on Iran, so that they will have him to stand with Israel when bedlam breaks out in the Middle East. What about post-attack "Day Two?" Not to worry. Well-briefed pundits are telling us about a wellspring of Western-oriented moderates in Iran who, with a little help from the U.S., could seize power in Tehran. I find myself thinking: Right; just like all those Iraqis who welcomed invading American and British troops with open arms and cut flowers. For me, this evokes a painful flashback to the early '80s when "intelligence," pointing to "moderates" within the Iranian leadership, was conjured up to help justify the imaginative but illegal arms-for-hostages-and-proceeds-to-Nicaraguan-contras caper. The fact that the conjurer-in-chief of that spurious "evidence" on Iranian "moderates," former chief CIA analyst (later director) Robert Gates, was recently offered the newly created position of director of national intelligence makes the flashback more eerie - and alarming. George H. W. Bush Saw Through "The Crazies" During his term in office, George H. W. Bush, with the practical advice of his national security adviser Gen. Brent Scowcroft and Secretary of State James Baker, was able to keep "the crazies" at arm's length, preventing them from getting the country into serious trouble. They were kept well below the level of "principal" - that is, below the level of secretary of state or defense. Even so, heady in the afterglow of victory in the Gulf War of 1990, "the crazies" stirred up considerable controversy when they articulated their radical views. Their vision, for instance, became the centerpiece of the draft "Defense Planning Guidance" that Paul Wolfowitz, de facto dean of the neoconservatives, prepared in 1992 for then-Defense Secretary Dick Cheney. It dismissed deterrence as an outdated relic of the Cold War and argued that the United States must maintain military strength beyond conceivable challenge - and use it in preemptive ways in dealing with those who might acquire "weapons of mass destruction." Sound familiar? Aghast at this radical imperial strategy for the post-Cold War world, someone with access to the draft leaked it to the New York Times, forcing President George H. W. Bush either to endorse or disavow it. Disavow it he did - and quickly, on the cooler-head recommendations of Scowcroft and Baker, who proved themselves a bulwark against the hubris and megalomania of "the crazies." Unfortunately, their vision did not die. No less unfortunately, there is method to their madness - even if it threatens to spell eventual disaster for our country. Empires always overreach and fall. The Return of the Neocons In 2001, the new President Bush brought the neocons back and put them in top policymaking positions. Even former Assistant Secretary of State Elliot Abrams, convicted in October 1991 of lying to Congress and then pardoned by George H. W. Bush, was called back and put in charge of Middle East policy in the White House. In January, he was promoted to the influential post (once occupied by Robert Gates) of deputy assistant to the president for national security affairs. From that senior position, Abrams will once again be dealing closely with John Negroponte, an old colleague from rogue-elephant Contra War days, who has now been picked to be the first director of national intelligence. Those of us who - like Colin Powell - had front-row seats during the 1980s are far too concerned to dismiss the re-emergence of the neocons as a simple case of déjà vu. They are much more dangerous now. Unlike in the '80s, they are the ones crafting the adventurous policies our sons and daughters are being called on to implement. Why dwell on this? The neocons seem to believe that, in the wake of the November election, they now have a carte-blanche "mandate." And with the president's new "capital to spend," they appear determined to spend it, sooner rather than later. Next Stop, Iran When a Special Forces platoon leader just back from Iraq matter-of-factly tells a close friend of mine, as happened last week, that he and his unit are now training their sights (literally) on Iran, we need to take that seriously. It provides us with a glimpse of reality as seen at ground level. For me, it brought to mind an unsolicited e-mail I received from the father of a young soldier training at Ft. Benning in the spring of 2002, soon after I wrote an op-ed discussing the timing of George W. Bush's decision to make war on Iraq. The father informed me that, during the spring of 2002, his son kept writing home saying his unit was training to go into Iraq. No, said the father; you mean Afghanistan. That's where the war is, not Iraq. In his next e-mail, the son said, "No, Dad, they keep saying Iraq. I asked them and that's what they mean." Now, apparently, they keep saying Iran; and that appears to be what they mean. Anecdotal evidence like this is hardly conclusive. Put it together with administration rhetoric and a preponderance of other "dots," though, and everything points in the direction of an air attack on Iran, possibly also involving some ground forces. Indeed, from the New Yorker reports of Seymour Hersh to Washington Post articles, accounts of small-scale American intrusions on the ground as well as into Iranian airspace are appearing with increasing frequency. In a speech given on Feb. 18, former UN arms inspector and Marine officer Scott Ritter (who was totally on target before the Iraq War on that country's lack of weapons of mass destruction) claimed that the president has already "signed off" on plans to bomb Iran in June in order to destroy its alleged nuclear weapons program and eventually bring about "regime change." This does not necessarily mean an automatic green light for a large attack in June, but it may signal the president's seriousness about this option. So, again, against the background of what we have witnessed over the past four years, and the troubling fact that the circle of second-term presidential advisers has become even tighter, we do well to inject a strong note of urgency into any discussion of the "Iranian option." Why Would Iran Want Nukes? So why would Iran think it has to acquire nuclear weapons? Senator Richard Lugar, chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, was asked this on a Sunday talk show a few months ago. Apparently having a senior moment, he failed to give the normal answer. Instead, he replied, "Well, you know, Israel has." At that point, he caught himself and abruptly stopped. Recovering quickly and realizing that he could not just leave the word "Israel" hanging there, Lugar began again: "Well, Israel is alleged to have a nuclear capability." Is alleged to have.? Lugar is chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and yet he doesn't know that Israel has, by most estimates, a major nuclear arsenal, consisting of several hundred nuclear weapons? (Mainstream newspapers are allergic to dwelling on this topic, but it is mentioned every now and then, usually buried in obscurity on an inside page.) Just imagine how the Iranians and Syrians would react to Lugar's disingenuousness. Small wonder our highest officials and lawmakers - and Lugar, remember, is one of the most decent among them - are widely seen abroad as hypocritical. Our media, of course, ignore the hypocrisy. This is standard operating procedure when the word "Israel" is spoken in this or other unflattering contexts. And the objections of those appealing for a more balanced approach are quashed. If the truth be told, Iran fears Israel at least as much as Israel fears the internal security threat posed by the thugs supported by Tehran. Iran's apprehension is partly fear that Israel (with at least tacit support from the Bush administration) will send its aircraft to bomb Iranian nuclear facilities, just as American-built Israeli bombers destroyed the Iraqi nuclear reactor at Osiraq in 1981. As part of the current war of nerves, recent statements by the president and vice president can be read as giving a green light to Israel to do just that; while Israeli Air Force commander Major General Eliezer Shakedi told reporters on Feb. 21 that Israel must be prepared for an air strike on Iran "in light of its nuclear activity." U.S.-Israel Nexus The Iranians also remember how Israel was able to acquire and keep its nuclear technology. Much of it was stolen from the United States by spies for Israel. As early as the late 1950s, Washington knew Israel was building the bomb and could have aborted the project. Instead, American officials decided to turn a blind eye and let the Israelis go ahead. Now Israel's nuclear capability is truly formidable. Still, it is a fact of strategic life that a formidable nuclear arsenal can be deterred by a far more modest one, if an adversary has the means to deliver it. (Look at North Korea's success with, at best, a few nuclear weapons and questionable means of delivery in deterring the "sole remaining superpower in the world.") And Iran already has missiles with the range to hit Israel. Israeli Prime Minister Sharon has for some time appeared eager to enlist Washington's support for an early "preemptive" strike on Iran. Indeed, American defense officials have told reporters that visiting Israeli officials have been pressing the issue for the past year and a half. And the Israelis are now claiming publicly that Iran could have a nuclear weapon within six months - years earlier than the Defense Intelligence Agency estimate mentioned above. In the past, President Bush has chosen to dismiss unwelcome intelligence estimates as "guesses" - especially when they threatened to complicate decisions to implement the neoconservative agenda. It is worth noting that several of the leading neocons - Richard Perle, chair of the Defense Policy Board (2001-03); Douglas Feith, undersecretary of defense for policy; and David Wurmser, Middle East adviser to Vice President Dick Cheney - actually wrote policy papers for the Israeli government during the 1990s. They have consistently had great difficulty distinguishing between the strategic interests of Israel and those of the U.S. - at least as they imagine them. As for President Bush, over the past four years he has amply demonstrated his preference for the counsel of Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, who, as Gen. Scowcroft said publicly, has the president "wrapped around his little finger." (As chairman of the President's Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board until he was unceremoniously removed at the turn of the year, Scowcroft was in a position to know.) If Scowcroft is correct in also saying that the president has been "mesmerized" by Sharon, it seems possible that the Israelis already have successfully argued for an attack on Iran. When "Regime Change" Meant Overthrow for Oil To remember why the United States is no favorite in Tehran, one needs to go back at least to 1953 when the U.S. and Great Britain overthrew Iran's democratically elected Premier Mohammed Mossadegh as part of a plan to insure access to Iranian oil. They then emplaced the young shah in power, who, with his notorious secret police, proved second to none in cruelty. The shah ruled from 1953 to 1979. Much resentment can build up over a whole generation. His regime fell like a house of cards, when supporters of Ayatollah Khomeini rose up to do some regime change of their own. Iranians also remember Washington's strong support for Saddam Hussein's Iraq after it decided to make war on Iran in 1980. U.S. support for Iraq (which included crucial intelligence support for the war and an implicit condoning of Saddam's use of chemical weapons) was perhaps the crucial factor in staving off an Iranian victory. Imagine then, the threat Iranians see, should the Bush administration succeed in establishing up to 14 permanent military bases in neighboring Iraq. Any Iranian can look at a map of the Middle East (including occupied Iraq) and conclude that this administration might indeed be willing to pay the necessary price in blood and treasure to influence what happens to the black gold under Iranian as well as Iraqi sands. And with four more years to play with, a lot can be done along those lines. The obvious question is: How to deter it? Well, once again, Iran can hardly be blind to the fact that a small nation like North Korea has so far deterred U.S. action by producing, or at least claiming to have produced, nuclear weapons. Nuclear Is the Nub The nuclear issue is indeed paramount, and we would do well to imagine and craft fresh approaches to the nub of the problem. As a start, I'll bet if you made a survey, only 20 percent of Americans would answer "yes" to the question, "Does Israel have nuclear weapons?" That is key, it seems to me, because at their core Americans are still fair-minded people. On the other hand, I'll bet that 95 percent of the Iranian population would answer, "Of course Israel has nuclear weapons; that's why we Iranians need them" - which was, of course, the unmentionable calculation that Senator Lugar almost conceded. "And we also need them," many Iranians would probably say, "in order to deter 'the crazies' in Washington. It seems to be working for the North Koreans, who, after all, are the other remaining point on President Bush's 'axis of evil.'" The ideal approach would, of course, be to destroy all nuclear weapons in the world and ban them for the future, with a very intrusive global inspection regime to verify compliance. A total ban is worth holding up as an ideal, and I think we must. But this approach seems unlikely to bear fruit over the next four years. So what then? A Nuclear-Free Middle East How about a nuclear-free Middle East? Could the U.S. make that happen? We could if we had moral clarity - the underpinning necessary to bring it about. Each time this proposal is raised, the Syrians, for example, clap their hands in feigned joyful anticipation, saying, "Of course such a pact would include Israel, right?" The issue is then dropped from all discussion by U.S. policymakers. Required: not only moral clarity but also what Thomas Aquinas labeled the precondition for all virtue, courage. In this context, courage would include a refusal to be intimidated by inevitable charges of anti-Semitism. The reality is that, except for Israel, the Middle East is nuclear-free. But the discussion cannot stop there. It is not difficult to understand why the first leaders of Israel, with the Holocaust experience written indelibly on their hearts and minds, and feeling surrounded by perceived threats to the fledgling state's existence, wanted the bomb. And so, before the Syrians or Iranians, for example, get carried away with self-serving applause for the nuclear-free Middle East proposal, they will have to understand that for any such negotiation to succeed it must have as a concomitant aim the guarantee of an Israel able to live in peace and protect itself behind secure borders. That guarantee has got to be part of the deal. That the obstacles to any such agreement are formidable is no excuse for not trying. But the approach would have to be new and everything would have to be on the table. Persisting in a state of denial about Israel's nuclear weapons is dangerously shortsighted; it does nothing but aggravate fears among the Arabs and create further incentive for them to acquire nuclear weapons of their own. A sensible approach would also have to include a willingness to engage the Iranians directly, attempt to understand their perspective, and discern what the United States and Israel could do to alleviate their concerns. Preaching to Iran and others about not acquiring nuclear weapons is, indeed, like the village drunk preaching sobriety - the more so as our government keeps developing new genres of nuclear weapons and keeps looking the other way as Israel enhances its own nuclear arsenal. Not a pretty moral picture, that. Indeed, it reminds me of the Scripture passage about taking the plank out of your own eye before insisting that the speck be removed from another's. Lessons From the Past . Like Mutual Deterrence Has everyone forgotten that deterrence worked for some 40 years, while for most of those years the U.S. and the USSR had not by any means lost their lust for ever enhanced nuclear weapons? The point is simply that, while engaging the Iranians bilaterally and searching for more imaginative nuclear-free proposals, the U.S. might adopt a more patient interim attitude regarding the striving of other nation states to acquire nuclear weapons - bearing in mind that the Bush administration's policies of "preemption" and "regime change" themselves create powerful incentives for exactly such striving. As was the case with Iraq two years ago, there is no imminent Iranian strategic threat to Americans - or, in reality, to anyone. Even if Iran acquired a nuclear capability, there is no reason to believe that it would risk a suicidal first strike on Israel. That, after all, is what mutual deterrence is all about; it works both ways. It is nonetheless clear that the Israelis' sense of insecurity - however exaggerated it may seem to those of us thousands of miles away - is not synthetic but real. The Sharon government appears to regard its nuclear monopoly in the region as the only effective "deterrence insurance" it can buy. It is determined to prevent its neighbors from acquiring the kind of capability that could infringe on the freedom it now enjoys to carry out military and other actions in the area. Government officials have said that Israel will not let Iran acquire a nuclear weapon; it would be folly to dismiss this as bravado. The Israelis have laid down a marker and mean to follow through - unless the Bush administration assumes the attitude that "preemption" is an acceptable course for the United States but not for Israel. It seems unlikely that the neoconservatives would take that line. Rather. "Israel Is Our Ally." Or so said our president before the cameras on Feb. 17, 2005. But I didn't think we had a treaty of alliance with Israel; I don't remember the Senate approving one. Did I miss something? Clearly, the long-standing U.S.-Israeli friendship and the ideals we share dictate continuing support for Israel's defense and security. It is quite another thing, though, to suggest the existence of formal treaty obligations that our country does not have. To all intents and purposes, our policymakers - from the president on down - seem to speak and behave on the assumption that we do have such obligations toward Israel. A former colleague CIA analyst, Michael Scheuer, author of Imperial Hubris, has put it this way: "The Israelis have succeeded in lacing tight the ropes binding the American Gulliver to Israel and its policies." An earlier American warned: "A passionate attachment of one nation for another produces a variety of evils. Sympathy for the favorite nation facilitates the illusion of an imaginary common interest in cases where no real common interest exists, infuses into one the enmities of the other, and betrays the former into participation in the quarrels and wars of the latter without adequate inducement or justification. . It also gives to ambitious, corrupted, or deluded citizens, who devote themselves to the favorite nation, facility to betray or sacrifice the interests of their own country." - George Washington, Farewell Address, 1796 In my view, our first president's words apply only too aptly to this administration's lash-up with the Sharon government. As responsible citizens, we need to overcome our timidity about addressing this issue, lest our fellow Americans continue to be denied important information neglected or distorted in our domesticated media. Ray McGovern served as a CIA analyst for 27 years - from the administration of John F. Kennedy to that of George H. W. Bush. During the early 1980s, he was one of the writers/editors of the President's Daily Brief and briefed it one-on-one to the president's most senior advisers. He also chaired National Intelligence Estimates. In January 2003, he and four former colleagues founded Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity. _______________________________________________ Peace mailing list Peace@lists.gp-us.org http://lists.gp-us.org/mailman/listinfo/peace From rebelrot@yahoo.com Tue Apr 12 02:58:17 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: usgp-mx-peace-discussion@gp-us.org Received: (qmail 16981 invoked from network); 12 Apr 2005 02:58:17 -0000 Received: from web14827.mail.yahoo.com (216.136.225.225) by cesarchavez.cagreens.org with SMTP; 12 Apr 2005 02:58:17 -0000 Received: (qmail 44925 invoked by uid 60001); 12 Apr 2005 02:58:15 -0000 Comment: DomainKeys? See http://antispam.yahoo.com/domainkeys DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; b=hxTkfLP9p7y9EqCtywy1aLzrCrtiu6YemrwCaqmdFLc6wg/l/devmLWWDus663i8+kRvxv9GULD9On0nuWv3XxoSy5ru+Zs0ql2794pU0YXqt0h5Bs11mM0jIu7PQ31+2cGwUthGxPUtlGxYF8JAJbeE2j/TvUsU8RUCefXrKJQ= ; Message-ID: <20050412025815.44923.qmail@web14827.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [24.97.124.242] by web14827.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Mon, 11 Apr 2005 19:58:14 PDT Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2005 19:58:14 -0700 (PDT) From: Rebecca Rot To: peace-discussion@lists.gp-us.org MIME-Version: 1.0 X-StripMime: Non-text section removed by stripmime Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Subject: [Peace-discussion] Washington Univ. update Sender: peace-discussion-admin@lists.gp-us.org Errors-To: peace-discussion-admin@lists.gp-us.org X-BeenThere: peace-discussion@lists.gp-us.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.13 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: The following is from a student participating in the ongoing sit-in/occupation in the main administrative building of Washington University in St. Louis. The sit-in is in support of campus workers who do not currently receive a living wage. Currently the sit-in has been going on for over 24 hours(as of noon april 5). Below this message is a list of ways you can take action and a summary of what we've been doing over the past 10 days. Hello from Brookings Hall. I sent out information about our living wage campaign on the first day students occupied Washington University's admissions office; today we are on day 8 of our sit-in. Washington University's chancellor has remained as unresponsive as he can get away with, even going so far as guaranteeing his presence at a meeting today and then sending representatives at the last minute. We have, however, received endorsements from national AFL-CIO president John Sweeney, Missouri AFL-CIO president Hugh McVey, Congressman Lacy Clay, and Senator John Edwards. With such overwhelming support and our refusal to leave this office, we are optimistic about our chances of winning. In today's meeting we requested a start to negotiations but were put off. Besides sending representatives that had no binding authority, the administration showed no intention of directly responding to our proposed code of conduct. We expect this to be a sticking point given the Chancellor's previous response, a stateme! nt to the effect of, "Students don't negotiate. Only I negotiate." Our action will prove to him that students do in fact have the power to negotiate what happens with their tuition money and to hold such supposedly progressive institutions accountable. Please let our chancellor, Mark Wrighton, know that we are not alone in our sentiments: email wrighton@wustl.edu or call 314.935.5100. ~Meredith Davis mldavis@wustl.edu Student Worker Alliance Direct Contact with SWA: Ojiugo Uzoma ouzoma@wustl.edu 314-680-8016 ----------------------------------------------------- What You Can Do: 1. Contact Chancellor Mark S. Wrighton and tell him you are in support of a living wage email: wrighton@wustl.edu phone: +1 314 935-5100 fax: +1 314 935-4744 -And if you are in St. Louis we are having rallies at noon and 5pm at the university. 2. Forward This Email and Tell Your Friends 3. Sign the online petition in support of a living wage for Washington University Workers. You can sign on behalf of yourself or an organization. If you are an alum, please sign the petition here: http://www.petitiononline.com/WUwages/petition.html On Our Website, follow the Endorsements link on The Left: http://www.artsci.wustl.edu/~tjzander/ There is a direct link to the petition form here: http://www.artsci.wustl.edu/~tjzander/solidarity.html ------------------------------------------------------------- The Sit-In at Washington University in St. Louis What has SWA done in the first 5 days? Rally on Friday March 31 Two Aramark workers speak in support of a living wage. Give Chancellor Code of Conduct and demand a meeting on Monday April 4 Day 1 - April 4 Chancellor did not come when we asked. Establish Presence- 50 people in office. WU announces that Chancellor will meet with University Council to review Code of Conduct on Mon. April 11. -attempt to delay and wait us out. 5 reps from SWA meet with Vice Chancellor Givens and 4 Deans to go over Code. 150 visitors sign their names in support. Alumni Petition that halts donations begins. Initiate daily rallies at noon and five. More than 20 students sleep in the office. Day 2 - April 5 The Sit-In appears in St. Louis Post-Dispatch. Increased contact with PFs(pre-freshmen, prospective students). Distribute fliers. Orange arm bands. 'Living Wage Now' shirts. Endorsement from John J. Sweeney, president of national AFL-CIO. Sit-IN on: Local Fox-2 News, CBS Channel 4, UPN Day 3 - April 6 Professor petition continues to circulate Living Wage Campaigns from Georgetown, Harvard, and Stanford wrote to SWA with encouragement to stay committed. Tent city kicks off! to show --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site! --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- multipart/alternative text/plain (text body -- kept) text/html --- From adog2@earthlink.net Tue Apr 12 19:03:06 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: usgp-mx-peace-discussion@lists.gp-us.org Received: (qmail 32766 invoked from network); 12 Apr 2005 19:03:06 -0000 Received: from smtpauth04.mail.atl.earthlink.net (209.86.89.64) by cesarchavez.cagreens.org with SMTP; 12 Apr 2005 19:03:06 -0000 Received: from [63.13.234.16] (helo=computer) by smtpauth04.mail.atl.earthlink.net with asmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1DLQf9-0002O2-RU for peace-discussion@lists.gp-us.org; Tue, 12 Apr 2005 15:03:04 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=simple; s=test1; d=earthlink.net; h=Message-ID:From:To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-Priority:X-MSMail-Priority:X-Mailer:X-MimeOLE; b=EcBFk4XHFFhXeJSHHa8ZguNkovgJ2iAtORp+7lLB/dAtmZ9Bl0E1Qbp4eId84QIc; Message-ID: <028c01c53f92$6e0dcb20$0a0110ac@computer> From: "Tim Casebolt" To: "PAX-discussion" Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2005 12:04:17 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1409 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1409 X-ELNK-Trace: 5b0a68cd7db84fa074bf435c0eb9d47871d827ff0926bd876f97f303e161e6d68764b0dfbb6826e9350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 63.13.234.16 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain;charset="iso-8859-1" Subject: [Peace-discussion] Fw: ACT NOW | International Day of Action Against Caterpillar, April 13, 2005 Sender: peace-discussion-admin@lists.gp-us.org Errors-To: peace-discussion-admin@lists.gp-us.org X-BeenThere: peace-discussion@lists.gp-us.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.13 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: ----- Original Message ----- From: "US Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation" To: Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2005 11:58 AM Subject: ACT NOW | International Day of Action Against Caterpillar, April 13, 2005 US Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation International Day of Action against Caterpillar Wednesday, April 13, 2005 Tomorrow activists around the world will participate in an international day of action against Caterpillar to protest its policy of selling bulldozers to the Israeli army. Israel uses Caterpillar bulldozers to commit numerous human rights violations against Palestinians, including the killing of innocent civilians, the demolishing of homes, the destruction of agricultural land, and the building of an illegal wall in the West Bank. Protests will be taking place tomorrow around the country and throughout the world. Below is a partial list of actions-find one near you and participate! If you know of an action taking place that is not listed below, please post it to: http://www.catdestroyshomes.org/calendar_input.php For more details on these events, please see: http://www.catdestroyshomes.org/calendar.php TBA, Washington: International Day of Action Against Caterpillar Wednesday, April 13th 2005 TBA Rally with speakers to express our demand that Caterpillar end its support of the Israeli occupation and stop supplying bulldozers to the Israeli military as long as they continue to abuse Palestinian human rights. Peoria, Illinois: Cat Protest Wednesday, April 13th 2005 noon Protest in front of Cat headquarters at noon until one. We will be passing out educational flyers also. Corvallis, Oregon: Corvallis/Albany Caterpillar Protest Vigil Wednesday, April 13th 2005 We are planning to do some sort of vigil, but I don't have the details worked out yet. We meet March 15 and will have more after that. Chicago, Illinois: Chicago - Protest outside shareholder meeting Wednesday, April 13th 2005 12 pm - 3 pm, press conference 12:30 pm Press conference and rally outside of the annual Caterpillar shareholder meeting. Specific details coming very soon. If you can only make it for an hour, come from Noon-1pm. Dallas, Texas: Dallas Protest Wednesday, April 13th 2005 5pm This will be an informational picket. We will stand in front of the Cat dealership holding signs and banners and will give out informational fliers. Memphis, Tennessee: Protest Against Caterpillar Wednesday, April 13th 2005 11:00am Protest with signs and banners against Caterpillar's continued cooperation with the Israeli Military despite the grave human rights abuses committed by their equipment. Buffalo, New York: Rally Against CAT Wednesday, April 13th 2005 Rally Against CAT -- for details, call 894-2013 or email colin@wnypeace.org Greenville, South Carolina: Billboard unveiling Wednesday, April 13th 2005 10:00 am Billboard unveiling and educational leafletting on Israeli human rights violations and Catepillar's complicity. San Francisco, California: Global Day of Action -- Protest the sale of CAT-branded merchandise Wednesday, April 13th 2005 4:30 PM-6:30 PM Join the demonstration outside of Shoe Pavillion, which sells CAT-branded boots. Given that Caterpillar sells mostly industrial equipment, consumers can make a statement by not purchasing this CAT-branded merchandise. Raleigh, North Carolina: NCSU students host street theatre demonstration Wednesday, April 13th 2005 11:00 am- 3:00pm Street Theatre with representations of Palestinian Villages being destroyed by imitation CAT bulldozers. St. Louis, Missouri: Day of Action Against CAT Wednesday, April 13th 2005 morning SUSTAIN-St. Louis will be meeting with representatives of John Fabick Tractor Co., a local authorized CAT dealership to encourage them to send a letter of endorsement for the shareholder resolution. Poughkeepsie, New York: Stop Caterpillar Sales to Israel Wednesday, April 13th 2005 5 PM Rally at Caterpillar dealership,122 Noxon Rd. (off Rt. 55), east of Poughkeepsie Cambridge, Massachusetts: Information Session and Rally Wednesday, April 13th 2005 5:15-7:00 PM The bootCAT campaign is organizing an Informational Session on Caterpillar to which Cambridge City Councilors are invited, on Wednesday, April 13 from 5:15-6:15 PM at the First Parish Church in Harvard Square, followed by a rally in Harvard Square. Large banners, speakers, educational materials. This action follows rallies outside the CAT dealership in Milford, Massachusetts on four successive Saturdays. New York City, New York: Protest Outside the Home of a CAT Board Member Wednesday, April 13th 2005 4:15 pm Rally outside the Manhattan office of a Caterpillar Board Member Kansas City, Missouri: Day of Action Against Caterpillar Wednesday, April 13th 2005 11:30 AM Kansas City area peace groups are planning to observe the National Day of Action Against Caterpillar which is scheduled for Wednesday, April 13. Did you know that 50,000 Palestinians have been made homeless by Caterpillar bulldozers? Did you know that Caterpillar has a home office just off Southwest Trafficway? Join the rally outside Dean Machinery, a local Caterpillar dealership on Wednesday, April 13 from 11:30 am to 1:00 pm, 1201 W. 31st Street, Kansas City, Missouri. This dealership is located a quarter-mile (0.25 miles) west of 31st & Southwest Trafficway. Parking is available in a lot just to the east of Dean Machinery on the south side of the street. Iowa City, Iowa: STOP CAT Informational Leafletting and Fillm showings Wednesday, April 13th 2005 12:00 PM NOON STOP CAT Informational Leafletting and Fillm showings Austin, Texas: Cat Protest Wednesday, April 13th 2005 12:00 pm Gather at the I-35 & Slaughter Ln. Holt Caterpillar dealer in support of the resolution to divest from Israel to be voted on same day in Chicago. Bloomington, Minnesota: CAT Protest Wednesday, April 13th 2005 11 am Rally with signs, banners in front of Ziegler Cat, midwest Caterpillar dealership Birmingham, International: Caterkiller Protest Motorcade, near Birmingham, UK Saturday, April 16th 2005 11 am Oakland, California: Celebrate the successes of the CAT campaign Wednesday, April 20th 2005 8:00 PM-?? _____________________________________________________ To unsubscribe or update your listing go to: http://www.endtheoccupation.org/email.php?id=3043&token=802004 From rebelrot@yahoo.com Fri Apr 15 03:24:02 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: usgp-mx-Peace-discussion@gp-us.org Received: (qmail 19311 invoked from network); 15 Apr 2005 03:24:02 -0000 Received: from web14823.mail.yahoo.com (216.136.225.178) by cesarchavez.cagreens.org with SMTP; 15 Apr 2005 03:24:02 -0000 Received: (qmail 70893 invoked by uid 60001); 15 Apr 2005 03:23:59 -0000 Comment: DomainKeys? See http://antispam.yahoo.com/domainkeys DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; b=FvdJe5LZh1LX0F4amUCW0ZOczbCfrqH00bYgKG63/5mJ6StjCh9zAZq7/7xL3XnAvu9xCljAsrbNrvETtX84z5QEl70NtkecB+2bQqkK1yfr0MPlekOqhYol2z7ACxMCMu5qoAE9Hjmvrx4yyg0Bb3V5VNeYyDWS2c/8n+/U9HI= ; Message-ID: <20050415032359.70891.qmail@web14823.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [24.97.124.242] by web14823.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Thu, 14 Apr 2005 20:23:59 PDT Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 20:23:59 -0700 (PDT) From: Rebecca Rot To: Peace-discussion@lists.gp-us.org MIME-Version: 1.0 X-StripMime: Non-text section removed by stripmime Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Subject: [Peace-discussion] Indigenous Peoples oppose National Geographic & IBM, etc. Sender: peace-discussion-admin@lists.gp-us.org Errors-To: peace-discussion-admin@lists.gp-us.org X-BeenThere: peace-discussion@lists.gp-us.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.13 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: BIO-IPR docserver | http://www.grain.org/bio-ipr >________________________________________________________ > >TITLE: Indigenous Peoples Oppose National Geographic & IBM Genetic >Research Project that Seeks Indigenous Peoples DNA >AUTHOR: Indigenous Peoples Council on Biocolonialism >PUBLICATION: Press Release >DATE: 13 April 2005 >URL: http://www.ipcb.org >________________________________________________________ > >Press Release > >Dated: April 13, 2005 - 12:01 am >Released by: Indigenous Peoples Council on Biocolonialism >Contact: Debra Harry (dharry@ipcb.org) or Le'a Kanehe (lkanehe@ipcb.org) >Tel: 001 (775) 574-0248 >Cell: 001 (775) 338-0079 > > >INDIGENOUS PEOPLES OPPOSE NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC & IBM GENETIC RESEARCH PROJECT THAT SEEKS INDIGENOUS PEOPLES DNA > >(Nixon, NV) The Indigenous Peoples Council on Biocolonialism (IPCB) is >alarmed at the launching of new global genetic research project that >will focus on the collection of Indigenous peoples DNA. The National >Geographic Society and the IBM Corporation announced the launch of the >Genographic Project today that purports to "help people better >understand their ancient history." The project, funded by the Waitt >Family Foundation, expects to collect 100,000 DNA samples from >Indigenous peoples around the world. The taking of samples will be >coordinated by ten worldwide regional research centers. With centers in >Australia, Brazil, North America and Southeast Asia, Sub-Sahara and >South Africa, this project is certain to affect many Indigenous peoples >around the world. > >The IPCB, an Indigenous organization that addresses issues of biopiracy >began its work in 1993 to oppose the Human Genome Diversity Project >(HGDP), a project so fraught with ethical and scientific problems it >failed to get endorsement from the National Science Foundation, or >UNESCO. Debra Harry, who is Northern Paiute and serves as IPCB's >Executive Director, noting this new project's similarities with the >HGDP, said, "This is a recurrent nightmare. It's essentially the same >project we defeated years ago. Some of the actors are different, but >also some are the same. With the founder of the HGDP serving on this >new project's advisory committee, I can't help but think this is simply >a new reiteration of the HGDP." > >The HGDP faced international opposition by Indigenous peoples who >considered the project an unconscionable attempt by genetic researchers >to pirate their DNA for their own means. That experience has led to >strong advocacy by Indigenous peoples to insure human rights standards >are entrenched in research. Cherryl Smith, a Maori bioethicist from >Aotearoa (New Zealand) said, "Indigenous groups around the world are >much more aware of biopiracy, and our own human and collective rights in >research. In the past ten years, we have developed extensive networks of >Indigenous peoples who are knowledgeable and active in defense of their >rights." > >Le'a Kanehe, a Native Hawaiian who serves as the IPCB's Legal Analyst, >gives the example of the Havasupai Tribe, who filed a lawsuit in 2004 >against Arizona State University for the taking and misuse of their >genetic samples. "Indigenous peoples are holding scientists accountable >for use of their genetic material without prior informed consent, which >is the accepted legal standard." The tribe authorized diabetes research, >but later discovered their samples were used for schizophrenia, >inbreeding and migration theories. > >The Genographic Project press release claims that an international >advisory board will oversee the selection of Indigenous populations for >testing as well as adhering to strict sampling and research protocols. >The HGDP was unable to secure federal or UN support for failure to meet >ethical concerns and standards. The Genographic Project has striking >similarities to the HGDP. Dr. Jonathan Marks, genetic anthropologist and >board member of the IPCB, said, "The HGDP was terminated because of >intractable bioethical issues. Has IBM and National Geographic been able >to remedy those issues? I don't think so." Harry is similarly concerned >that the Genographic Project is an attempt to escape public and legal >scrutiny by going private. > >Kanehe says that "It's interesting how in the past racist scientists, >such as those in the eugenics movement, did studies asserting that we >are biologically inferior to them; and now, they are saying their >research will show that we're all related to each other and share common >origins. Both ventures are based on racist science and produce invalid, >yet damaging conclusions about Indigenous cultures." > >IPCB Chairperson Judy Gobert (Blackfoot), said, "These kinds of projects >have to stretch to claim any tangible benefits to Indigenous peoples. >Somehow, the Genographic Project has led its Indigenous participants to >believe its work will insure their people's cultural preservation. There >is a huge disconnect between genetic research and cultural >preservation." Smith says, "If they really want to help promote >Indigenous peoples cultures there are more productive ways and methods >for doing so." > >Noting the project's goal to map the migratory history of humankind >through DNA, Marla Big Boy, a Lakota attorney on IPCB's board, says, >"Our creation stories and languages carry information about our >genealogy and ancestors. We don't need genetic testing to tell us where >we come from." Big Boy notes with concern that the project proposes to >do studies on ancient DNA. "We will not stand by while our ancestors are >desecrated in the name of scientific discovery." > >The IPCB is calling on all Indigenous peoples, and our friends and >colleagues to join in an international boycott of IBM, Gateway Computers >(the source of the Waitt family fortune), and National Geographic until >it's demand that this project be abandoned are met. Harry said, "We are >prepared to stop projects that treat us as scientific curiosities. We >must act to protect our most vulnerable communities from this unwanted >intrusion. We resisted the HGDP, and we will defeat this proposal as well." > > >For more information contact: > >Indigenous Peoples Council on Biocolonism >ipcb@ipcb.org >http://www.ipcb.org > > >________________________________________________________ >ABOUT BIO-IPR -- BIO-IPR is an irregular listserver produced by GRAIN. >Its purpose is to circulate news and information about recent >developments in the field of intellectual property rights related to >biodiversity and associated knowledge. BIO-IPR is a strictly >non-commercial and educational service for nonprofit organisations and >individuals active in the struggle against IPRs on life. The views >expressed in each post are those of the indicated author(s). >ARCHIVES -- The full archives are online at http://www.grain.org/bio-ipr. >SUBSCRIPTIONS -- To subscribe or modify your subscription details, >please go to http://www.grain.org/subscribe/bioipr.cfm and either join >or login. (Those without web access can send a blank message to >mailto:subscribe-bio-ipr@grain.org.) >SUBMISSIONS -- To submit material for posting on BIO-IPR, or any >questions about the list, please contact us at mailto:bio-ipr@grain.org. >ABOUT US -- GRAIN is a small international NGO working to strengthen >farmers' control over agricultural biodiversity and local knowledge, >particularly in developing countries. For more information about GRAIN, >please visit http://www.grain.org. --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site! --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- multipart/alternative text/plain (text body -- kept) text/html --- From rebelrot@yahoo.com Mon Apr 18 20:40:37 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: usgp-mx-Peace-discussion@gp-us.org Received: (qmail 22611 invoked from network); 18 Apr 2005 20:40:37 -0000 Received: from web14827.mail.yahoo.com (216.136.225.225) by cesarchavez.cagreens.org with SMTP; 18 Apr 2005 20:40:37 -0000 Received: (qmail 47261 invoked by uid 60001); 18 Apr 2005 20:40:35 -0000 Comment: DomainKeys? See http://antispam.yahoo.com/domainkeys DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; b=kMT0aYl+V/0pnSwA2ElxC6oaxQ68nLxvWq2pNxDcvO/NDWVYi4zVZMn9szNWpljs/IT8wu3xs83vmP2+upOgEbPWAbDv71UGgCR/sQ2gpRRXO20obQ3LkJ3EJSS6dDEX8xdlKoZ6HvUdIfsjsb7vRyfSRBqSSC4XFOhuEiju1aw= ; Message-ID: <20050418204035.47255.qmail@web14827.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [64.75.66.11] by web14827.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Mon, 18 Apr 2005 13:40:35 PDT Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 13:40:35 -0700 (PDT) From: Rebecca Rot To: Peace-discussion@lists.gp-us.org In-Reply-To: <20050415032359.70891.qmail@web14823.mail.yahoo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-StripMime: Non-text section removed by stripmime Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Subject: [Peace-discussion] Free Breakfast at the Green Tea House! Sender: peace-discussion-admin@lists.gp-us.org Errors-To: peace-discussion-admin@lists.gp-us.org X-BeenThere: peace-discussion@lists.gp-us.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.13 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Subject: Fwd: Free Breakfast Program > > >FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE > >CONTACT >zool at 646-549-1615 or zoolTheArtandPolitics@hotmail.com > >WHO >Hon. Charles Barron and the artists and activists collective of the >East New York Green Tea House. > >WHAT >The East New York Green Tea House, a free community meeting space, >opens with a FREE BREAKFAST PROGRAM honoring NYC Councilmember >Charles Barron. The Free Breakfast Program will serve green tea, >fresh fruit and organic whole grain cereal the last Friday of every >month. > >WHEN >Friday, April 29, 7-9 AM >Ceremony and Press Conference at 9 AM > >WHERE >EAST NEW YORK GREEN TEA HOUSE >300 Logan Street >(Between Atlantic & Liberty Avenues) >Brooklyn NY 11208 >718-277-6276 >646-549-1615 >zoolTheArtandPolitics@hotmail.com > >PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION >A Train to Euclid, J to Norwood > >BACKGROUND >The East New York Green Tea House, a newly formed artists & >activists collective, is located at 300 Logan Street, Brooklyn. It >has been the family home of co-founder Gary Davidson for nearly 100 >years. The East New York Green Tea House is now open to the public >as a free community meeting space. > >Our Open House Weekend (Friday, April 29 - Sunday, May 1) will kick >off with a Free Breakfast Program (last Friday of every month, 7-9 >AM), serving free green tea, fresh fruit and organic whole grain >cereal. > >On Friday, April 29 at 9 AM, the East New York Green Tea House >collective will hold a ceremony and press conference to honor NYC >Councilmember Charles Barron for his community work as a member of >the Black Panther Party. > >On Saturday, April 30 and Sunday, May 1, the East New York Green Tea >House invites the community to a "Painting & Scheduling Open House." >Monthly free bicycle workshops, "spoken word" nights, and a free >legal clinic will be scheduled for the coming season. Members of >the community are invited to propose additional projects and events. >(Work clothes are suggested for those who wish to participate in >house renovation and gardening projects.) > >The East New York Green Tea House artists & activists collective >intends to serve basic community needs and to promote community >gardening, the East New York Farmers Market and the start-up of the >East New York Food Coop (with the East New York Food Policy >Council); as well as bicycling, better public transportation, energy >coops and energy conservation, clean air and water, and the >re-development of East New York--prioritizing the empowerment of the >neediest residents. Rebecca Rot wrote: BIO-IPR docserver | http://www.grain.org/bio-ipr >________________________________________________________ > >TITLE: Indigenous Peoples Oppose National Geographic & IBM Genetic >Research Project that Seeks Indigenous Peoples DNA >AUTHOR: Indigenous Peoples Council on Biocolonialism >PUBLICATION: Press Release >DATE: 13 April 2005 >URL: http://www.ipcb.org >________________________________________________________ > >Press Release > >Dated: April 13, 2005 - 12:01 am >Released by: Indigenous Peoples Council on Biocolonialism >Contact: Debra Harry (dharry@ipcb.org) or Le'a Kanehe (lkanehe@ipcb.org) >Tel: 001 (775) 574-0248 >Cell: 001 (775) 338-0079 > > >INDIGENOUS PEOPLES OPPOSE NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC & IBM GENETIC RESEARCH PROJECT THAT SEEKS INDIGENOUS PEOPLES DNA > >(Nixon, NV) The Indigenous Peoples Council on Biocolonialism (IPCB) is >alarmed at the launching of new global genetic research project that >will focus on the collection of Indigenous peoples DNA. The National >Geographic Society and the IBM Corporation announced the launch of the >Genographic Project today that purports to "help people better >understand their ancient history." The project, funded by the Waitt >Family Foundation, expects to collect 100,000 DNA samples from >Indigenous peoples around the world. The taking of samples will be >coordinated by ten worldwide regional research centers. With centers in >Australia, Brazil, North America and Southeast Asia, Sub-Sahara and >South Africa, this project is certain to affect many Indigenous peoples >around the world. > >The IPCB, an Indigenous organization that addresses issues of biopiracy >began its work in 1993 to oppose the Human Genome Diversity Project >(HGDP), a project so fraught with ethical and scientific problems it >failed to get endorsement from the National Science Foundation, or >UNESCO. Debra Harry, who is Northern Paiute and serves as IPCB's >Executive Director, noting this new project's similarities with the >HGDP, said, "This is a recurrent nightmare. It's essentially the same >project we defeated years ago. Some of the actors are different, but >also some are the same. With the founder of the HGDP serving on this >new project's advisory committee, I can't help but think this is simply >a new reiteration of the HGDP." > >The HGDP faced international opposition by Indigenous peoples who >considered the project an unconscionable attempt by genetic researchers >to pirate their DNA for their own means. That experience has led to >strong advocacy by Indigenous peoples to insure human rights standards >are entrenched in research. Cherryl Smith, a Maori bioethicist from >Aotearoa (New Zealand) said, "Indigenous groups around the world are >much more aware of biopiracy, and our own human and collective rights in >research. In the past ten years, we have developed extensive networks of >Indigenous peoples who are knowledgeable and active in defense of their >rights." > >Le'a Kanehe, a Native Hawaiian who serves as the IPCB's Legal Analyst, >gives the example of the Havasupai Tribe, who filed a lawsuit in 2004 >against Arizona State University for the taking and misuse of their >genetic samples. "Indigenous peoples are holding scientists accountable >for use of their genetic material without prior informed consent, which >is the accepted legal standard." The tribe authorized diabetes research, >but later discovered their samples were used for schizophrenia, >inbreeding and migration theories. > >The Genographic Project press release claims that an international >advisory board will oversee the selection of Indigenous populations for >testing as well as adhering to strict sampling and research protocols. >The HGDP was unable to secure federal or UN support for failure to meet >ethical concerns and standards. The Genographic Project has striking >similarities to the HGDP. Dr. Jonathan Marks, genetic anthropologist and >board member of the IPCB, said, "The HGDP was terminated because of >intractable bioethical issues. Has IBM and National Geographic been able >to remedy those issues? I don't think so." Harry is similarly concerned >that the Genographic Project is an attempt to escape public and legal >scrutiny by going private. > >Kanehe says that "It's interesting how in the past racist scientists, >such as those in the eugenics movement, did studies asserting that we >are biologically inferior to them; and now, they are saying their >research will show that we're all related to each other and share common >origins. Both ventures are based on racist science and produce invalid, >yet damaging conclusions about Indigenous cultures." > >IPCB Chairperson Judy Gobert (Blackfoot), said, "These kinds of projects >have to stretch to claim any tangible benefits to Indigenous peoples. >Somehow, the Genographic Project has led its Indigenous participants to >believe its work will insure their people's cultural preservation. There >is a huge disconnect between genetic research and cultural >preservation." Smith says, "If they really want to help promote >Indigenous peoples cultures there are more productive ways and methods >for doing so." > >Noting the project's goal to map the migratory history of humankind >through DNA, Marla Big Boy, a Lakota attorney on IPCB's board, says, >"Our creation stories and languages carry information about our >genealogy and ancestors. We don't need genetic testing to tell us where >we come from." Big Boy notes with concern that the project proposes to >do studies on ancient DNA. "We will not stand by while our ancestors are >desecrated in the name of scientific discovery." > >The IPCB is calling on all Indigenous peoples, and our friends and >colleagues to join in an international boycott of IBM, Gateway Computers >(the source of the Waitt family fortune), and National Geographic until >it's demand that this project be abandoned are met. Harry said, "We are >prepared to stop projects that treat us as scientific curiosities. We >must act to protect our most vulnerable communities from this unwanted >intrusion. We resisted the HGDP, and we will defeat this proposal as well." > > >For more information contact: > >Indigenous Peoples Council on Biocolonism >ipcb@ipcb.org >http://www.ipcb.org > > >________________________________________________________ >ABOUT BIO-IPR -- BIO-IPR is an irregular listserver produced by GRAIN. >Its purpose is to circulate news and information about recent >developments in the field of intellectual property rights related to >biodiversity and associated knowledge. BIO-IPR is a strictly >non-commercial and educational service for nonprofit organisations and >individuals active in the struggle against IPRs on life. The views >expressed in each post are those of the indicated author(s). >ARCHIVES -- The full archives are online at http://www.grain.org/bio-ipr. >SUBSCRIPTIONS -- To subscribe or modify your subscription details, >please go to http://www.grain.org/subscribe/bioipr.cfm and either join >or login. (Those without web access can send a blank message to >mailto:subscribe-bio-ipr@grain.org.) >SUBMISSIONS -- To submit material for posting on BIO-IPR, or any >questions about the list, please contact us at mailto:bio-ipr@grain.org. >ABOUT US -- GRAIN is a small international NGO working to strengthen >farmers' control over agricultural biodiversity and local knowledge, >particularly in developing countries. For more information about GRAIN, >please visit http://www.grain.org. --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site! --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- multipart/alternative text/plain (text body -- kept) text/html --- _______________________________________________ Peace-discussion mailing list Peace-discussion@lists.gp-us.org http://lists.gp-us.org/mailman/listinfo/peace-discussion --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Make Yahoo! your home page --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- multipart/alternative text/plain (text body -- kept) text/html --- From rebelrot@yahoo.com Tue Apr 19 02:52:47 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: usgp-mx-Peace-discussion@gp-us.org Received: (qmail 14638 invoked from network); 19 Apr 2005 02:52:47 -0000 Received: from web14821.mail.yahoo.com (216.136.225.68) by cesarchavez.cagreens.org with SMTP; 19 Apr 2005 02:52:47 -0000 Received: (qmail 95796 invoked by uid 60001); 19 Apr 2005 02:52:45 -0000 Comment: DomainKeys? See http://antispam.yahoo.com/domainkeys DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; b=sB3Y5zvOyA5Gy8SGdCTKO3CXfSgqyT/Ybfm/8Cf2Fjz1WgwytY+DL9QGnQLdcDE0uSW4bPzSI96Habl57qLzMtrm6rjaIgQOw28+b2eUAcVjCh4V+WnvNfVaFll9wFb7hr4H3k6cwZyHCfVG5dkAd1Kc3H8kIyAcpYaWRUfy3gA= ; Message-ID: <20050419025245.95794.qmail@web14821.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [24.97.124.242] by web14821.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Mon, 18 Apr 2005 19:52:44 PDT Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 19:52:44 -0700 (PDT) From: Rebecca Rot To: Peace-discussion@lists.gp-us.org In-Reply-To: <20050418204035.47255.qmail@web14827.mail.yahoo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-StripMime: Non-text section removed by stripmime Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Subject: [Peace-discussion] Albany, NY event Sender: peace-discussion-admin@lists.gp-us.org Errors-To: peace-discussion-admin@lists.gp-us.org X-BeenThere: peace-discussion@lists.gp-us.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.13 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: This was posted by Mark Dunlea who organized the event: 04/17/2005 Calls for troop withdrawal, peace heard By: Shawn Charniga , The Record Photo of Patti and Ralph on front page. Story page A7 ALBANY - The Capital District Green Party held a rally Saturday at Emmanual Baptist Church on State Street, with former presidential candidate Ralph Nader and poetess/musician Patti Smith as its keynote speakers. Also speaking was Alice Green, a state University at Albany professor and criminal justice activist, who decried GOP political machinery, alleged corporate profiteering, the war in Iraq and supported the protection of civil liberties. Also participating were New Paltz Deputy Mayor Rebecca Rotzler and local activist Joe Lombardo. Green spoke against anti-crime laws signed by Republican Gov. George Pataki and compared prisons to plantations using slave labor and portraying them as often filled with the untreated mentally ill and describing state prisons boards as overwhelmingly white. Green also had much to say against the policies of President Bush, also a Republican, namely the invasion of Iraq. Smith, a longtime resident of New York City, is a two-time Grammy nominee, oft-published poet and is described as the godmother of the American "punk rock" movement of the mid-1970s. According to local Green Mark Dunlea, this was her first performance in Albany since 1979. She brought with her two male acoustic guitarists. Her performance, which book-ended Nader's speech, included a reading of her song "Radio Baghdad," a scathing, wounded retort to the U.S. invasion, written from the perspective of an Iraqi mother singing her children to sleep on the eve of the invasion. "Shock and awe, like some crazy TV show, you're robbing the cradle of civilization," Smith read. According to Nader, during last year's presidential election, many voters decided what he called "the least-worst" approach was the best way to elect a candidate who supported their views, but in his opinion, voters should have made more demands of Democratic challenger John Kerry. Other poll-watchers have dubbed this strategy the "anybody but Bush" approach. By any name, it freed Kerry to be more "hawkish" and supportive of corporate interests than Greens would prefer, he believes. "The 'least-worst' approach makes both parties worse every four years," Nader said. He commended organizers for the strong turnout at the rally, which was more than 250 persons and also weighed in on the Iraq war. "This war we were plunged into by Bush and Cheney, it is the first war in my memory that was entered despite the best counsel of many" ex-soldiers and retired diplomats who likely knew best, he said, calling this shift of influence "really extraordinary" and claiming many other government figures opposed the war but were unable to speak publicly. Those in the know, including persons of high standing in military ground forces, anticipated a war against guerillas supported by the Iraqi public and under conditions that are tough for U.S. troops, Nader said. "They knew what they were getting into, but the two draft-dodgers in the White House didn't care," he said to loud applause. Nader said he believes the fact that the nation didn't rise up against the Bush administration is a testament to the power of "about a dozen" who have highjacked the government and set a precedent for future leaders. "We have a moral obligation, a citizen's obligation, to get out of that country and we can do it because of our assets. The way to respect the troops is to get them out of there and back safely," Nader said, naming four assets held by this point of view. The first is that, according to polls, most Americans want the war to end, he said; the second is that, with some encouragement, ex-soldiers who served in Iraq as well as former spies and diplomats would speak to the public. The fact that some returning soldiers are already speaking out was labeled by Nader as the a --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Plan great trips with Yahoo! Travel: Now over 17,000 guides! --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- multipart/alternative text/plain (text body -- kept) text/html --- From owen.broadhurst@gmail.com Thu Apr 21 20:21:47 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: usgp-mx-peace-discussion@lists.gp-us.org Received: (qmail 17882 invoked from network); 21 Apr 2005 20:21:47 -0000 Received: from zproxy.gmail.com (64.233.162.192) by cesarchavez.cagreens.org with SMTP; 21 Apr 2005 20:21:47 -0000 Received: by zproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id 34so1081472nzf for ; Thu, 21 Apr 2005 13:21:19 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=ivjjVoNN8IxrhHW8dQXMf26/mSE+mOx7XNghRH1He/JJDzxV4Tr/YPkZ0Cqf5E8KxNsOGHpC3aT6WCoQ0NVHQg5Kz6FluC/JXqReyu5d4C9uKoecXZoD1rQ+zhPVu16p4uCB4LcVsQOuT6spHRrAmVa6ynhdc3zSAz4owVGYCSs= Received: by 10.36.61.11 with SMTP id j11mr230394nza; Thu, 21 Apr 2005 13:14:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.36.58.8 with HTTP; Thu, 21 Apr 2005 13:14:38 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <8e192b12050421131420a51f5f@mail.gmail.com> Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2005 16:14:38 -0400 From: Owen Broadhurst Reply-To: Owen Broadhurst To: peace-discussion@lists.gp-us.org In-Reply-To: <8e192b120504211311181b69ea@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline References: <8e192b120504211311181b69ea@mail.gmail.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Subject: [Peace-discussion] Fwd: A Recent Orwellian Warmongering Editorial Sender: peace-discussion-admin@lists.gp-us.org Errors-To: peace-discussion-admin@lists.gp-us.org X-BeenThere: peace-discussion@lists.gp-us.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.13 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Owen Broadhurst Date: Apr 21, 2005 4:11 PM Subject: A Recent Orwellian Warmongering Editorial To: Natlcomaffairs@green.gpus.org "Since the publication of Swing's report, armed military operations have led to the end of war in Kosovo; the disarmament of several paramilitary groups in Northern Ireland and Chechnya; and Liberia's president, Charles Taylor, being forced to resign, which helped clear the way for peace. These results seem to indicate that violence is an effective way to engender nonviolence." Guess which newspaper this was from. C'mon, guess! From chicoverde@cox.net Tue Apr 26 16:53:23 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: usgp-mx-peace-discussion@lists.gp-us.org Received: (qmail 8030 invoked from network); 26 Apr 2005 16:53:23 -0000 Received: from lakermmtao07.cox.net (68.230.240.32) by cesarchavez.cagreens.org with SMTP; 26 Apr 2005 16:53:23 -0000 Received: from cox.net ([68.101.88.147]) by lakermmtao07.cox.net (InterMail vM.6.01.04.00 201-2131-118-20041027) with ESMTP id <20050426165254.NHGW28809.lakermmtao07.cox.net@cox.net> for ; Tue, 26 Apr 2005 12:52:54 -0400 Message-ID: <426E71E1.8080500@cox.net> Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2005 12:52:49 -0400 From: Michael Canney Reply-To: chicoverde@cox.net, chicoverde@cox.net User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.0.2) Gecko/20030208 Netscape/7.02 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, es-mx MIME-Version: 1.0 To: peace-discussion@lists.gp-us.org References: <20050425161842.232C21640E5@ws1-4.us4.outblaze.com> X-StripMime: Non-text section removed by stripmime Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Subject: [Peace-discussion] Re: [GPUS-PAX] PAX Committee action request Sender: peace-discussion-admin@lists.gp-us.org Errors-To: peace-discussion-admin@lists.gp-us.org X-BeenThere: peace-discussion@lists.gp-us.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.13 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: If the committee decides to take up Steve's proposal to address this and take action, I'll respond on the GPAX list. Fornow I'd like to share my thoughts on this without burdening committee members who would rather see the list used for committee business. Steve has suggested there are really two issues here. One is the position of the GP regarding military violence, which will inevitably involve an ongoing discussion and debate for Greens, especially regarding the issue of self defense. The other is what constitutes an appropriate editorial policy for Green Pages. I'm not yet sure what the appropriate role of the GPAX committee is in either of these issues, but they seem important enought to warrant discussion on this list, and on the GPAX list if the committee agrees, so I'd like to address them, beginning with the Green Pages editorial. Since Green Pages is considered an "official" publication of the Green Party of the U.S., it seems logical to expect its editors to refrain from adopting editorial positions on matters that are not clearly and/consistent with the GP Platform or properly approved GP position papers. One remedy could be for the GP-US and Green Pages to clarify their relationship with a disclaimerexplicitly stating that editorials "reflect only the opinions of the Green Pages editors and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or positions of the Green Party of the United States." This would allow the editorial staff some leeway in expressing opinions on issues that may be controversial. But absent such a disclaimer, whenever Green Pages publishes an opinion that has not passed the test of consensus or a vote, and which could be the subject of considerable controversy (I believe the editorial we're discussing falls into this category), the opinions published should be those of individuals and should not be presented in a way that implies it could be the position of the GP-US. I haven't seen the entire editorial Steve refers to, but from what he has posted here I'd agree that such an opinion should appear in Green Pages only under the byline of its author and not as an editorial reflecting the GP's official position. And if the issue is indeed a subject being debated, among Greens, space for dissenting opinions should be provided. For me, this is a policy issue more than a concern about the "Greenness" of the editorial. I hope we won't get bogged down in mudslinging and personal attacks regarding honest differences of opinion. I would have no problem with Green Pages publishing this editorial as an opinion piece and inviting responses, because I believe such a dialog would benefit the party. I presume that was really the intended purpose of its publication. The problem arises when the article is billed as an "editorial" rather than an opinion piece attributed to an individual Green. On the second point: A commitment to nonviolence seems rather simple until you get into all the nuanced self defense situations that occur in real life. I had always discussed nonviolence from a philosophical and historical perspective until I spent a few months in Nicaragua back in 1986, when the country was under attack from a counterrevolutionary army, trained, armed and directed by the U.S. (popularly known as the "contras"). I spent some time in a war zone on the Atlantic Coast, in a primitive agricultural coop of about 100 families. These hardy folks were living in crude thatched-roof cabins made of rough slabs cut by hand with a chainsaw. The cabin I stayed in was inhabited by seven young volunteers from the MInistry of Agrarian Reform, and since employees of the Sandinista government (even teachers, doctors and nurses) were routinely being murdered by the Contras, there were seven AK-47 rifles and 5,000 rounds of ammunition in the cabin, and the rifles were carried everywhere because one's life depended on it. This village was in an isolated rural area, three hours north of Bluefields by boat and then a couple of hours inland.The Contras were active in the vicinity but never entered the coop, mainly because the village had an armed militia, which patrolled the village a 24 hours a day. Every cabin had a weapon of some sort, though most were aging hunting rifles and not military issue. When the men headed for work in the morning in the fields, they had no choice but to carry their rifle with them Unarmed campesinos in the area routinely suffered theft of their livestock and any other possessions the contras desired. It was common for young girls to be kidnapped by the contras to serve as cooks for the mercenaries, and boys were forcibly conscripted into service as well. Resistance was futile, because the contras could burn down the farmhouse and kill with impunity. Many members of the coop were in fact refugees from areas where it was not safe to live unless they were contra supporters. I tell this story because the situation faced by Nicaraguans under fire has been repeated in many places around the world. I have friends from Guatemala and El Salvador who saw family members and friends raped, tortured and killed by brutal military and paramilitary thugs. I cannot in good conscience engage in a debate about the superiority of nonviolendce with people who face such a reality. While I can respect those who proifess and practice absolute pacifism, renouncing the use of violence even in self defense, this is not the intent of our Green Key Value. Self defense has been universally recognized as a moral, ethical and legal right. If the Nicaraguan contras had attacked the village I stayed in, I would not have hesitated for a second to shoot back and defend the lives of the families there. If I witnessed a woman being raped, I would not hesitate to use violence to stop it. There is no question that violence can and should be used in cases involving self defense. The question that is debated is where rightful self defense ends and offensive violence begins. I always supported the main political goals of Sinn Fein and the Irish Republican Army, and I recognized their roight to defend themselves against violence perpetrated by the British colonialists and their allies in Northern Ireland. But I always opposed the use of violence against civilians, such as the bombings of buses, markets, etc., as immoral and unethical. The ends do not justify the means. But where do we draw the line? If an armed group is committing systematic genocide against a civilian population, it is unreasonable to ask what is the appropriate moral and ethical response? What is acceptable action to take, from a Green perspective? We may agree that sending in the US Marines is not an appropriate response. Supporting a UN intervention may be problematic as well. But is doing nothing an appropriate response, if 1000 people a day are being slaughtered? Exclaiming our adherence to noviolence certainly isn't an adequate response. It was probably a good thing this editorial was published, because the ensuing discussion will be edifying for our party. Peace, Michael Owen Broadhurst wrote: >I second the request of Mr. Greenfield. I'm shocked and apalled. > >Owen R. Broadhurst >GRP (MA) > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Steve Greenfield" >To: peace@lists.gp-us.org >Subject: [GPUS-PAX] PAX Committee action request >Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 12:05:38 -0400 > > > >>Re: [GPUS-PAX] The idea for an Initiative for preserving government >>funded "C...The current edition of Green Pages contains an >>editorial that argues for military action as a superior alternative >>to nonviolent action. There are two significant problems with this, >>one which is within the PAX Committee mission, and the other which >>merits review by PAX but probably is not specifically within our >>mission. >> >>"Committee Description: >>The Peace Action Committee (PAX) of the Green Party of the United >>States (GPUS) exists to facilitate the planning and achievement of >>peace and justice action proposals adopted by GPUS, and to support >>and promote the Party's Anti-War candidates and agenda." >> >>First of all, and this is the part that may not be specifically >>under PAX jurisdiction, is that Green Pages has no policy allowing >>for an editorial. Their mission and policies allow for opinion >>pages with all articles listed as the opinions of the authors and >>not that of the Green Party, but do not allow for an actual >>editorial, which by definition would be a statement of a position >>supported by the Green Party itself (Green Pages being defined as >>the official newsletter of the Green Party of the United States). >>Position statements of GPUS are released through the Media >>Committee and are drafted in a group dynamic. The publication of an >>official editorial by the editorial board of Green Pages conflicts >>directly with the policies of GPUS pertaining to the creation and >>dissemination of official position statements. >> >>The current issue's Opinion section opens with a major piece >>specifically entitled "Editorial" as distinct from all the other >>articles which are attributed solely to their authors. This >>editorial is entitled "The Nonviolence of UN Peacekeepers" and is >>not yet available in the online edition, only the print version. >> >>In this editorial, it is argued that the Green Party must review >>its policy towards non-defensive violent action by outside agencies >>and nations not specifically party to a conflict. The example used >>to justify the call for review is the bombings of Kosovo. Quoting >>the text: "The means by which Swing proposes this strategic >>nonviolence includes blocking and resisting military aggression >>with large-scale acts of nonviolent citizen resitancee and >>noncooperation. Not all Green Party members share Swing's >>interpretation of nonviolence. Since the publication of Swing's >>article, armed military operations have led to the end of the war >>in Kosovo; the disarmament of several paramilitary groups from >>Northern Ireland and Chechnya; and Liberia's president, Charles >>Taylor, being forced to resign, which helped clear the way for >>peace. These results seem to indicate that violence is an effective >>way to engender nonviolence." The editorial goes on to conclude >>"By considering non-violence thus, the Green Party enables itself >>to cultivate a more comprehensive, nuanced platform for keeping >>peace." >> >>Aside from problems of fact in the declaration of the >>accomplishments of military interventions in this editorial, the >>author had already acknowledged that "over a series of >>investigations, the UN has found that at least 20 UN Peacekeepers >>have violently exploited and abused women and children in an >>already pillaged, war-torn African nation. As a result of these >>investigations, the United Nations has placed the UN Peacekeepers >>on the list of 42 armed groups that continue to threaten children >>either sexually or by forcing them into military service." This can >>hardly be reconciled with the claims of the "success" of violence >>in establishing peace. >> >>What is up with this? When did Green Pages adopt an editorial >>policy outside its own policies and procedures ( >>http://www.gp.org/greenpages/edpolicy.php) and choose to include a >>new section under the title "editorial", and why did it not notify >>and or seek the input of the GPUS committee created to address >>these very questions before going to press? >> >>The Green Party had in fact considered the specific question of >>military intervention in Kosovo and had resoundingly rejected it. >>http://www.gp.org/position/kosovo2.html This link is to a position >>paper published during the American/NATO bombings of Kosovo. The >>Green Party of the United States and its member states, as >>witnessed in publications from the states, were resolutely against >>military action by outside agencies as a solution to the >>centuries-old violence in the former Yugoslavia. >> >>I believe the Peace Action Committee must engage in informed >>dialogue regarding the specific editorial in the current edition of >>Green Pages for purposes of issuing a response. I also believe we >>should issue a memo internally to the Coordinating Committee and >>Steering Committee of GPUS raising the question of Green Pages >>assuming new authority to itself that is properly the domain of the >>Media Committee, the Steering Committee, the Coordinating >>Committee, and various standing and ad-hoc committees related to >>various topics. >> >>Steve Greenfield >> >> > > > --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- multipart/alternative text/plain (text body -- kept) text/html --- From owen.broadhurst@gmail.com Tue Apr 26 21:09:34 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: usgp-mx-peace-discussion@lists.gp-us.org Received: (qmail 27068 invoked from network); 26 Apr 2005 21:09:34 -0000 Received: from zproxy.gmail.com (64.233.162.194) by cesarchavez.cagreens.org with SMTP; 26 Apr 2005 21:09:34 -0000 Received: by zproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id 34so111256nzf for ; Tue, 26 Apr 2005 14:09:03 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=V5dkv3tc+bkUenuPMt4VqKvwZY8ZoNl613aDVLMtd+ZWEO8/zBSdGI64mOC3yI7KFRWLwdBhfxWUXYbdpCjQS5bR1PIC+J6OJ7Zmr0m28lqoWCrN5afYLoCh+KzpCubUhuHJxD87CdIhOZZMvKahFcI115E60EuB8T/Zy4lO/iM= Received: by 10.36.25.5 with SMTP id 5mr9528nzy; Tue, 26 Apr 2005 14:09:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.36.58.8 with HTTP; Tue, 26 Apr 2005 14:09:03 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <8e192b120504261409efa039e@mail.gmail.com> Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2005 17:09:03 -0400 From: Owen Broadhurst Reply-To: Owen Broadhurst To: chicoverde@cox.net Subject: Re: [Peace-discussion] Re: [GPUS-PAX] PAX Committee action request Cc: peace-discussion@lists.gp-us.org In-Reply-To: <426E71E1.8080500@cox.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline References: <20050425161842.232C21640E5@ws1-4.us4.outblaze.com> <426E71E1.8080500@cox.net> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: peace-discussion-admin@lists.gp-us.org Errors-To: peace-discussion-admin@lists.gp-us.org X-BeenThere: peace-discussion@lists.gp-us.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.13 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Thank you, Michael, for writing. I must agree that, until such point as any plan of action regarding this is specifically placed on a meeting agenda, this list may be the best forum for the discussion of various implications and viewpoints. Presently, some appear convinced that the PAX itself has agreed as a committee that it should address this. On the contrary, concerns were raised, together with the suggestion that PAX might address them. > Steve has suggested there are really two issues here. One is the > position of the GP regarding military violence, which will inevitably > involve an ongoing discussion and debate for Greens, especially > regarding the issue of self defense. The other is what constitutes an > appropriate editorial policy for Green Pages. We must take care, please, to not equate the notion of military violence with what I would term the right to resist. The noted editorial addresses specifically military violence, although the right to resist may have obliquely factored into some portions of it. I have not yet received my copy. Therefore, the substance of the whole editorial is not yet before me. However, this editorial appears mainly focused on how the GPUS should regard such matters as military intervention under the auspices of the UN or like organs. This editorial implied in at least one of its portions that UN intervention in the Kosovo somehow made manifest what said editorial's author, at least, regards as a "peace." Specifically what said author could imagine, of any discussion on UN military intervention, pertinent to goings-on in Ireland's illegally occupied northern counties annexed illegally by the United Kingdom eludes me. My very own understanding of the situation in Ireland's occupied northern counties leads me to the belief that there was no UN role in the progress of any discussions of paramilitary disarmament, but that any such progress is mainly due to the military resistance of IRA command to the persistence of Jim Crow segregation in the North. Said author then, it seems to me, happens to mixing apples and oranges. Armed military operations by various States and international agencies have never, to the best of my knowledge, been able to facilitate any "peace" that has not also facilitated the reinforcement of a political status quo within such areas as they have patrolled. On the contrary, such interventions have universally had geo-political concerns of resource exploitation and market exploitation behind them. > I'm not yet sure what the appropriate role of the GPAX committee is in > either of these issues, but they seem important enought to warrant > discussion on this list, and on the GPAX list if the committee agrees, > so I'd like to address them, beginning with the Green Pages editorial. >=20 > Since Green Pages is considered an "official" publication of the Green > Party of the U.S., it seems logical to expect its editors to refrain > from adopting editorial positions on matters that are not clearly > and/consistent with the GP Platform or properly approved GP position > papers. I concur. We could begin with an insistence that, as those labeled editorials indeed are commonly regarded official viewpoints of a journal fashioning editorials, the word "editorial" ought not be used to describe individual viewpoints that are not endorsed by the journal. > One remedy could be for the GP-US and Green Pages to clarify their > relationship with a disclaimerexplicitly stating that editorials > "reflect only the opinions of the Green Pages editors and do not > necessarily reflect the official policy or positions of the Green Party > of the United States." This would allow the editorial staff some leeway > in expressing opinions on issues that may be controversial. I would rather that the Green Pages offer no such editorial positions at all, as that would in essence transform Green Pages into a body that both drafts policy for the the party, and advocates for such policy. From alsmith@alum.mit.edu Tue Apr 26 22:45:13 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: usgp-mx-peace-discussion@gp-us.org Received: (qmail 939 invoked from network); 26 Apr 2005 22:45:13 -0000 Received: from smtp803.mail.sc5.yahoo.com (66.163.168.182) by cesarchavez.cagreens.org with SMTP; 26 Apr 2005 22:45:13 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO tecschange) (smith.aimee@sbcglobal.net@68.248.10.172 with login) by smtp803.mail.sc5.yahoo.com with SMTP; 26 Apr 2005 22:45:09 -0000 Message-ID: <001f01c54ab1$24d78ca0$4001a8c0@gateway.2wire.net> Reply-To: "Aimee Smith" From: "Aimee Smith" To: "Owen Broadhurst" , Cc: References: <20050425161842.232C21640E5@ws1-4.us4.outblaze.com> <426E71E1.8080500@cox.net> <8e192b120504261409efa039e@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: [Peace-discussion] Re: [GPUS-PAX] PAX Committee action request Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2005 18:41:46 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4807.1700 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4807.1700 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain;charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: peace-discussion-admin@lists.gp-us.org Errors-To: peace-discussion-admin@lists.gp-us.org X-BeenThere: peace-discussion@lists.gp-us.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.13 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: I, too, am very glad to see this issue being raised and will reply here, even as now we have a thread on pax and another on pax-discuss... I certainly second the many concerns raised that several posted that they share, and I also share Owen's understanding of the need to differentiate between external military intervention and self-defense, such as we see in Iraq today. On the one hand, there is the conquest of the US lead coalition, on the other is the people of that country organizing and fighting to protect their families, communities, and society and are well aware of the genocidal mentality of their occupiers after more than a decade of sanctions and two previous large scale invasions. The former is aggressive military conquest waged under the *pretext* of self-defense and democracy building. The latter is *actual* self-defense and the victory of which is the only way actual democracy, rahter than participation as a neo-colony, can flourish in Iraq. The former in its latest form is completely against international law, the resistance is provided for within international law. The point I wish to raise is that, unfortuantely, this editorial is not very out of line with our own national platform that was approved at the convention with apparently less consideration than passage of the PATRIOT Act. In it, there is a lot of emphesis on the role of the UN, that certain features of the UN should be changed, but that the US should send troops to support UN "peacekeeping" operations without a conditionality on restructuring the UN. I would go further myself and caution about the effectiveness for promoting "peace" by UN military even if those changes were effected, due to the way certain societies and perspectives get disproportionate air time and due to other coercive means of empire (military, economic and political) besides a veto in the secutiry council. So, not to muddy the waters, but the problem is a bit broader than Green Pages, who can shelter their "editorial" as being rather consistent with the way the new platform reads. (By the way, some effort was made to have this and other aspects challenged, but the process on platcom leaves a bit to be desired. Maybe PAX can be part of the process next time around.) What can probably be contested without broadening the discussion to the problems of the platform are the claims about "peace" having flowered in Liberia, Kosovo, etc. Personally I think both need to be confronted, but I am not sure how best to go about it the broader discussion that includes taking stock of the ways our platform falls short of the requirements of the 10 key values. Sincerely, Aimee ----- Original Message ----- From: "Owen Broadhurst" To: Cc: Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2005 5:09 PM Subject: Re: [Peace-discussion] Re: [GPUS-PAX] PAX Committee action request Thank you, Michael, for writing. I must agree that, until such point as any plan