ACTIVIST CALENDAR, Dec. 7, 2009, Issue #153
Of the Hudson Valley Activist Newsletter
Send event announcements to jacdon@earthlink.net.
——————————
EDITOR'S NOTE:
The Activist Newsletter's been delayed for another week because we've been tied up in organizing demonstrations. Our latest one was the Saturday, Dec. 5, "Snowstorm" protest in New Paltz against the escalation of the Afghanistan war. The storm began at 1:30 p.m. and the vigil-picket on Main St. began at 2 p.m. Despite the windy, cold, snowy, and miserable afternoon 40 people took part before the 4 p.m. closing. Some stayed the entire two hours, many for an hour or so before their hands froze. Spirits were quite good, and a lot of car horns were honked in approval. We wrapped our signs in transparent plastic sheeting, so they survived the storm and will be fit for duty for the next eight years of Afghan war protests. Thanks to all who took part. We'll try to arrange for a lightening storm at the next demonstration.
Enjoy the winter holidays friends. Activism through the region will pick up near the end of January, unless there's a new crisis earlier, as there was in late December last year.
Jack
——————————
ACTIVIST CALENDAR EVENTS
Tuesday, Dec. 8, ALBANY: A number of healthcare vigils are taking place across the country today, initiated by MoveOn, with the title, "Cost of Delay Candlelight Vigil: Shine a Light on an American Tragedy!" Help "shine a light" on the number of Americans who cannot afford healthcare, while the Senate delays passing a meaningful bill. The Albany vigil will be stationed at Central Ave and Wolf Rd. at 5:30 p.m. Sponsored by Moveon.org Capital Region Council. Information (518) 393-8913, (518) 583-4326, wbrown45@nycap.rr.com, http://pol.moveon.org/event/costofdelay/99690.
Tuesday, Dec. 8, NEW PALTZ: Here's another Cost of Delay Healthcare Vigil (see above). It begins at 7 p.m. in front of the Elting Library at 93 Main St., diagonally across from Starbucks. Say the local organizers Linda and Barbara: "We are at the eleventh hour and a real health care reform bill with a public option is within reach. But Blue Dog Dems are now threatening to block any real reform. Meanwhile, people are losing their homes trying to pay for health care bills and others are suffering and dying because they have no insurance. Let's get out once more and let the government know that we demand a strong bill now. Please bring candles (must be in holders to prevent wax on the sidewalk). Bring signs (and we'll have some too) telling Congress we need a health care bill with a strong public option now!"
Tuesday-Thursday, Dec. 8-10, RHINEBECK: The documentary "Crude" will be screened at Upstate Films, 6415 Montgomery St. (Rt. 9), just north of the traffic light. This film documents the Amazon River oil spill by Chevron at the headwaters of the Amazon River. Much larger than the Exxon Valdez, Chevron's spills have been going on in this area for almost 30 years. Tens of thousands of lawsuits have been filed against the corporation. For times consult http://upstatefilms.org. Admission is $7.50 for adults, $6.50 for seniors. Sponsored by Amazon Watch. Information, (917) 418-4133, han@amazonwatch.org, http://www.amazonwatch.org.
Tuesday, Dec. 8, ALBANY: An Afghan-American woman, Fahima Vorgetts, discusses "Paths to Peace in Afghanistan: The Impact of the U.S. Military Presence" at the Unitarian Universalist Society of Albany, 405 Washington Ave. at 7 p.m. The speaker fled from Afghanistan in 1979, and travels back several times a year, working to improve the position of women in Afghan society. Rugs and crafts for sale to benefit women's projects in Afghanistan. Sponsored by Women Against War and the Social Responsibilities Council of the First Unitarian Universalist Society of Albany. Information, (518) 426-0710, http://www.womenagainstwar.org.
Wednesday, Dec. 9, BEACON: A discussion, "Our Fight Against Global Warming," will be held at Bank Square Coffeehouse, 129 Main St., 7:30-8:30 p.m. Dr. Sacha Spector, Scenic Hudson's director of Conservation Science, will discuss what some of the latest climate change projections mean for the communities of the Hudson Valley, and what can be done to prevent negative impacts. Information, Anthony Coneski (845) 473-4440 ext. 273, http://www.scenichudson.org/events.
Thursday, Dec. 10, DELMAR: In conjunction with the recent 10th anniversary of the dramatic 1999 protests in opposition to the World Trade Organization meeting in Seattle, there will be a screening tonight of the 98-minute 2007 film, "The Battle in Seattle." This free public showing starts at 6:45 p.m. at the Bethlehem Public Library, 451 Delaware Ave. The protest was in opposition to WTO trade regulations that harm developing nations. The film is a dramatization of the events that took place when tens of thousands of demonstrators took to the streets of Seattle for five days of protest outside the WTO Ministerial Meeting. A peaceful demonstration to stop the talks quickly escalated into a full-scale police riot, with a State of Emergency declared by the city's mayor. Following the showing, Brooke Newell of the N.Y. Citizens Trade Campaign will lead a discussion of the 2009 Trade Act. The event is sponsored by Bethlehem Neighbors for Peace. Information, (518) 466-1192, http://www.BethlehemforPeace.org/.
Thursday, Dec. 10, OSSINING: A benefit consisting of a cultural evening with fashion, music and dance will take place at the Ossining High School Auditorium, 29 S. Highland Ave., 7-9 p.m. Fashions by Nime Jamal and Vershawn London will be shown, including cruelty-free and sweatshop-free clothing. The event will benefit a college fund for African-American and Latina women. Admission: $20/$10 for students. Sponsored by NY-based fashion designers and WESPAC Foundation. Information, (914) 449-6514, http://www.wespac.org.
Friday, Dec. 11, SARATOGA SPRINGS: A Climate Change vigil will take place in front of the Post Office, 475 Broadway, 6:30-7:30 p.m., to support the framework for an agreement at the Copenhagen Summit. Participants are encouraged to bring a candle and a sign. Information, patsymce@earthlink.net (518) 587-2661.
Saturday, Dec. 12, BEACON: A candlelight walk and vigil in solidarity with the UN Climate Change Conference — taking place in Copenhagen Dec. 7-19 — will begin at 5:30 p.m. from the east end of Main St., across from City Hall. Participants will walk to the Howland Cultural Center at the west end of the street. The organizers advise: "Bring friends and family, candles or flashlights, and signs and leaflets, if you wish. And wear warm clothing." Sponsored by Mid-Hudson Progressive Alliance, Beacon Sloop Club, River Pool at Beacon, Philipstown for Democracy and Climate Crisis Coalition.
[REPEAT FROM LAST CALENDAR] Saturday, Dec. 12, WASHINGTON: An Emergency Rally Against Escalating the Afghan War will be conducted in Lafayette Park, across from the White House, 11 a.m.-4 p.m. The event has been called by more than 100 leading U.S. peace activists from most major national and regional antiwar organizations. Former Rep. Cynthia McKinney is a leading initiator of the event. In addition to McKinney, speakers include Sen. Mike Gravel, Kathy Kelly, Chris Hedges, David Swanson, Rev. Graylan Hagler, Gael Murphy, Coy McKinney, Debra Sweet, Brian Becker, Mathis Chiroux, Lynne Williams, Hon. Betty Hall, Elaine Brower, Marian Douglas, Dr. Michael Knox, Ralph Lopez, and ( Ret.) Capt. Ron Fisher. In addition there will be music by Jordan Page, Head-Roc, Emma's Revolution and Precise Science. We're told: "Rally organizers are calling for the left to end its support for Obama now that he has committed to a troop surge, and to condemn and oppose Obama’s war policy." Organizers also note that "This is a peaceful demonstration. We are committed to nonviolence and do not condone illegal acts of any kind, including civil disobedience." Information: (207) 604-8988, contact@enduswars.org, http://www.enduswars.org/.
Sunday, Dec. 13, WOODSTOCK: Woodstock Peace Economy, a local group opposed to the arms manufacturing industry, is screening a short 1960s documentary titled "Rotron in Woodstock" at 4 p.m. in The Colony Cafe, 22 Rock City Rd. It's an old promotional film for the military contractor Rotron, which is still located in Woodstock. It will be followed by a slideshow presenting some of Rotron's products at work, and a discussion of the issues raised by the presence of the company in the region. Free and public. Information, Laurie Kirby at (845) 679-9140, L@woodstockpeaceeconomy.org.
Sunday, Dec. 13, STAATSBURG: A discussion, "Bread Not Bombs: Funding Human Security First," will take place at St. Margaret's Episcopal Church, Old Post Rd. and E. Elm Ave., 4-6 p.m. The featured speaker is Frida Berrigan, the senior program associate of the Arms and Security Initiative at the New America Foundation, and senior research associate at the Arms Trade Resource Center. She is an expert on the arms trade and human rights, and on Washington's policies concerning nuclear and space weapons, and missile defense. Sponsored by the Justice for All Speakers Forum, Universalist Fellowship of Poughkeepsie, St. Margaret's Episcopal Church, Hyde Park United Methodist Church, Poughkeepsie Friends Meeting, Christ Episcopal Church, Unitarian Universalist Congregation of the Catskills, Freedom Plains Presbyterian Church, Rural & Migrant Ministry, and the Office of Religious and Spiritual Life at Vassar College, with a grant from Trinity Wall Street. Information, jfaspeakers@gmail.com, http://allforjustice.org.
Sunday, Dec. 13 to Sunday, Dec. 20, NEW YORK CITY & NEARBY: Attention Animal Rights Advocates. There will be a number of anti-fur protests sponsored by Caring Activists Against Fur, including today, 1-3 p.m. outside Macy's department store, 151 W. 34th St. in Manhattan. For a full listing visit http://caafgroup.com/. Information, info@caafgroup.com.
Monday, Dec. 14, GUILDERLAND: The new documentary by progressive filmmaker Robert Greenwald, "Rethink Afghanistan," will be shown 7-9 p.m., following the monthly meeting of Guilderland Neighbors for Peace. All are invited admission free. This critical look at Washington's unnecessary Afghan war will be followed by a discussion led by photojournalist Connie Frisbee Houde, who recently returned from a visit to Afghanistan. It's sponsored by Guilderland Neighbors and takes place at the Public Library, 2228 Western Ave. Information, (518) 464-6788, Steve@simpletosendcards.com, http://rethink.bravenewtheaters.com/screening/show/13586-guilderland.
Wednesday-Saturday, Dec. 16-19, NEW PALTZ: Hudson Valley Materials Exchange will be holding their Winter Solstice Sale, at the New Paltz Recycling Center, Clearwater Rd. from 12-5 p.m. Find holiday gifts from recycled craft and building materials from this non-profit community warehouse that keeps many useable items out of the waste stream. Information, (845) 567-1455, http://www.hvme.com.
Saturday, Dec. 19, NEW ROCHELLE: Women in Black Palestine Solidarity Vigil, 2-3 p.m. at Main St. and Memorial Hwy. Wear black if you wish. Men are also welcome. Sponsored by Code Pink Westchester and WESPAC. Information, ceilie@aol.com, (914) 654-8990.
Saturday, Dec. 19, ALBANY: Consumer societies are the target of a documentary that will be shown at 7:30 p.m. at the First Unitarian Universalist Society of Albany, 405 Washington Ave. The title is "Surplus: Terrorized into Being Consumers." According to the film notes, "Shot in the United States, India, China, Italy, Sweden, Hungary, and elsewhere, this very unusual 2003 film explores the superficial nature of what has become the major 'freedom' encouraged in many societies: the freedom to consume." A discussion will follow the free public showing. The event is sponsored by the Solidarity Committee of the Capital District, Bethlehem Neighbors for Peace, and Upper Hudson Peace Action. Information dbull4@verizon.net, (518) 426-0883 http://www.jflan.net/solidarity.
Monday, December 7, 2009
Friday, December 4, 2009
12-4-9 Criticism of Obama's war policy
Obama's Supporters
Have Second Thoughts
Following are four articles questioning President Barack Obama's decision to widen the Afghan war:
Ten Progressives Voice Deep Concerns
President Obama's decision to escalate the Afghanistan war was an extreme disappointment for a number of progressive Democrats who were among his staunchest supporters during the election campaign and the first several months of the new administration. It's reached the point where the support group known as Progressives for Obama — which defined itself as the "Left-Progressive Wing of the Coalition that elected Obama" — just changed its name to Progressive America Rising.
According to AlterNet today: "As soon as his intentions to send tens of thousands more troops became clear, dozens of progressive leaders and writers — including many former prominent Obama supporters — voiced their concerns in newspapers, on the radio and on the Internet." The website then sent the following sample of their responses:
1. Tom Hayden writes for The Nation:
"It's time to strip the Obama sticker off my car. Obama's escalation in Afghanistan is the last in a string of disappointments. His flip-flopping acceptance of the military coup in Honduras has squandered the trust of Latin America. His Wall Street bailout leaves the poor, the unemployed, minorities and college students on their own. And now comes the Afghanistan-Pakistan decision to escalate the stalemate, which risks his domestic agenda, his Democratic base, and possibly even his presidency."
2. Laura Flanders writes on GritTV,
"...for those who’d thought they’d voted for the death of the Bush Doctrine. Sorry. Bush/Cheney live on in the new president’s embrace of the idea that the U.S. has a right, not only to respond to attacks, but also to deploy men and women in anticipation of them."
3. Jim Hightower used his most recent column to warn:
"Obama has been taken over by the military industrial hawks and national security theorists who play war games with other people's lives and money. I had hoped Obama might be a more forceful leader who would reject the same old interventionist mindset of those who profit from permanent war. But his newly announced Afghan policy shows he is not that leader."
Hightower says that just because we've lost Obama on this issue, it's not over; that we as citizens...
"...have both a moral and patriotic duty to reach out to others to inform, organize and mobilize our grassroots objections, taking common sense to high places. Also, look to leaders in Congress who are standing up against Obama's war and finally beginning to reassert the legislative branch's constitutional responsibility to oversee and direct military policy. For example, Rep. Jim McGovern is pushing for a specific, congressionally mandated exit strategy; Rep. Barbara Lee wants to use Congress' control of the public purse strings to stop Obama's escalation; and Rep. David Obey is calling for a war tax on the richest Americans to put any escalation on-budget, rather than on a credit card for China to finance and future generations to pay."
4. Black Agenda Report editor Glen Ford compares Obama's delivery to how George Bush might have given the speech:
"Barack Obama's oratorical skills have turned on him, revealing, as George Bush’s low-grade delivery never could, the perfect incoherence of the current American imperial project in South Asia. Bush’s verbal eccentricities served to muddy his entire message, leaving the observer wondering what was more ridiculous, the speechmaker or the speech. There is no such confusion when Obama is on the mic. His flawless delivery of superbly structured sentences provides no distractions, requiring the brain to examine the content – the policy in question – on its actual merits. The conclusion comes quickly: the U.S. imperial enterprise in Afghanistan and Pakistan is doomed, as well as evil.
"The president’s speech to West Point cadets was a stream of non sequiturs so devoid of logic as to cast doubt on the sanity of the authors. '[T]hese additional American and international troops,' said the president, 'will allow us to accelerate handing over responsibility to Afghan forces, and allow us to begin the transfer of our forces out of Afghanistan in July of 2011.'
"Obama claims that the faster an additional 30,000 Americans pour into Afghanistan, the quicker will come the time when they will leave. More occupation means less occupation, you see? This breakneck intensification of the U.S. occupation is necessary, Obama explains, because 'We have no interest in occupying your country.'"
5. Foreign Policy in Focus's Phyllis Bennis demolished Obama's attempt to discourage comparisons to Vietnam:
"Near the end of his speech, Obama tried to speak to his antiwar one-time supporters, speaking to the legacy of Vietnam. It was here that the speech’s internal weakness was perhaps most clear. Obama refused to respond to the actual analogy between the quagmire of Vietnam, which led to the collapse of Johnson’s Great Society programs, and the threat to Obama’s ambitious domestic agenda collapsing under the pressure of funding the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Instead, he created straw analogies, ignoring the massive challenge of waging an illegitimate, unpopular war at a moment of dire economic crisis."
6. New America Media's Andrew Lam also addressed the Afghanistan-Vietnam parallel:
"On the eve of the second wave of a U.S. invasion in Afghanistan, I wish to tell the American media, as well as President Obama, that the Vietnam syndrome cannot be kicked through acts of war. That only through a view that’s rooted in people, rooted in human kindness, and not historical vehemence, would a country open itself up and stop being a haunting metaphor. That not until human basic needs are addressed and human dignity upheld can we truly pacify our enemies and bring about human liberty. And that more soldiers and bombs and droids in the sky will never appease the haunting ghosts of the past. Quite the opposite. We are in the process of creating more ghosts to haunt future generations."
7. Glenn Greenwald, writing on Salon, addresses Obama's supporters who are going along with his decision to escalate the troops:
"The most bizarre defense of Obama's escalation is also one of the most common: since he promised during the campaign to escalate in Afghanistan, it's unfair to criticize him for it now -- as though policies which are advocated during a campaign are subsequently immunized from criticism. For those invoking this defense: in 2004, Bush ran for re-election by vowing to prosecute the war in Iraq, keep Guantanamo open, and "reform" privatize Social Security. When he won and then did those things (or tried to), did you refrain from criticizing those policies on the grounds that he promised to do them during the campaign? I highly doubt it."
8. AlterNet's Adele Stan noted that Obama also changed the justification for the war:
"If you listened to the subtext of the speech, you might find that the mission has changed. In fact, you might say that the mission in Afghanistan is as much about creating stability in Pakistan -- a nuclear power that NBC's Andrea Mitchell yesterday referred to as a nearly failed state -- as it is about Afghanistan. Last night, a senior administration official confirmed to AlterNet that the U.S. mission to Pakistan has broadened.
From the president's speech:
"In the past, we too often defined our relationship with Pakistan narrowly. Those days are over. Moving forward, we are committed to a partnership with Pakistan that is built on a foundation of mutual interest, mutual respect, and mutual trust. We will strengthen Pakistan’s capacity to target those groups that threaten our countries, and have made it clear that we cannot tolerate a safe haven for terrorists whose location is known and whose intentions are clear. America is also providing substantial resources to support Pakistan’s democracy and development. We are the largest international supporter for those Pakistanis displaced by the fighting. And going forward, the Pakistani people must know America will remain a strong supporter of Pakistan’s security and prosperity long after the guns have fallen silent, so that the great potential of its people can be unleashed."
9. Rory O' Connor lambasted Obama on MediaChannel.org:
"The Afghan escalation speech was classic Obama. His enigmatic and epigrammatic split the baby in half Yoda/Spock-speak offered something for everyone: good-news-bad-news; back and forth; give and take; get in to get out; speed up to slow down; and in the end, let’s all come together and get along to end the war – by waging the war more intensely…but only for eighteen months, and then we all get to go home."
10. Blogger Digby highlighted that the American public never really gets to discuss the real issues underlying the US military build up in the Mideast and Asia:
"The wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, the standoff with Iran and all the other obsessions with the Mideast are at least informed, if not entirely motivated, by larger geopolitical efforts to maintain stability at a time of impending competition over resources and access to them -- oil. Sure that's simplistic, but it's at the 'heart' of what's going on in the leadership's 'minds.'
"We don't talk about any of that because it might lead us to get serious about changing our way of life and evidently nobody important thinks that's the right way to deal with the problem. And frankly, among many of our elites, maintaining a military presence everywhere is necessary to preserve American global dominance. Period."
——————————
Afghanistan: The Betrayal
By Garry Wills
[Author, journalist and historian Wills wrote this article Dec. 2 in the New York Review of Books blog]
I did not think he would lose me so soon — sooner than Bill Clinton did. Like many people, I was deeply invested in the success of our first African-American president. I had written op-ed pieces and articles to support him in The New York Times and The New York Review of Books. My wife and I had maxed out in donations for him. Our children had been ardent for his cause.
Others I respect have given up on him before now. I can see why. His backtracking on the treatment of torture (and photographs of torture), his hesitations to give up on rendition, on detentions, on military commissions, and on signing statements, are disheartening continuations of George W. Bush’s heritage. But I kept hoping that he was using these concessions to buy leeway for his most important position, for the ground on which his presidential bid was predicated.
There was only one thing that brought him to the attention of the nation as a future president. It was opposition to the Iraq war. None of his serious rivals for the Democratic nomination had that credential—not Hillary Clinton, not Joseph Biden, not John Edwards. It set him apart. He put in clarion terms the truth about that war—that it was a dumb war, that it went after an enemy where he was not hiding, that it had no indigenous base of support, that it had no sensible goal and no foreseeable cutoff point.
He said that he would not oppose war in general, but dumb wars. On that basis, we went for him. And now he betrays us. Although he talked of a larger commitment to Afghanistan during his campaign, he has now officially adopted his very own war, one with all the disqualifications that he attacked in the Iraq engagement. This war too is a dumb one. It has even less indigenous props than Iraq did.
Iraq at least had a functioning government (though a tyrannical one). The Afghanistan government that replaced the Taliban is not only corrupt but ineffectual. The country is riven by tribal war, Islamic militancy, and warlordism, and fueled by a drug economy —interrupting the drug industry will destabilize what order there is and increase hostility to us.
We have been in Afghanistan for eight years, earning hatred as occupiers, and after this record for longevity in American wars we will be there for still more years earning even more hatred. It gives us not another Iraq but another Vietnam, with wobbly rulers and an alien culture.
Although Obama says he plans to begin withdrawal from Afghanistan in July 2011, he will meanwhile be sending there not only soldiers but the contract employees that cling about us now like camp followers, corrupt adjuncts in perpetuity. Obama did not mention these plagues that now equal the number of military personnel we dispatch. We are sending off thousands of people to take and give bribes to drug dealers in Afghanistan.
If we had wanted Bush’s wars, and contractors, and corruption, we could have voted for John McCain. At least we would have seen our foe facing us, not felt him at our back, as now we do. The Republicans are given a great boon by this new war. They can use its cost to say that domestic needs are too expensive to be met—health care, education, infrastructure. They can say that military recruitments from the poor make job creation unnecessary. They can call it Obama’s war when it is really theirs. They can attack it and support it at the same time, with equal advantage.
I cannot vote for any Republican. But Obama will not get another penny from me, or another word of praise, after this betrayal. And in all this I know that my disappointment does not matter. What really matters are the lives of the young men and women he is sending off to senseless deaths.
——————————
Obama’s Contributions to a Dying Empire
By Francis Shor
[Shor teaches at Wayne State University and is the author of the recently published Routledge Press book, Dying Empire: U.S. Imperialism and Global Resistance. This article appeared on the website of the History News Network Dec. 2.]
Old habits die hard, especially imperialist ones. Imperial imperatives, whether economic, geopolitical, or ideological, persist because the ruling elites are dependent on them. In order to conceal imperialist objectives, presidents and other leaders of the U.S. political class rely on the rhetoric of national security and America’s supposed benevolent global purpose.
And, so, with President Obama’s announcement of sending 30,000 more U.S. troops to Afghanistan, the cadets at West Point and the viewing public once more heard that our national security was at stake. A spreading "cancer," threatening to metastasize throughout Afghanistan and Pakistan, had to be militarily extirpated. Conveniently overlooking the correlation between the growth of a Pashtun insurgency and U.S. occupation, Obama tried to wrap his rhetoric in the resonances of 9/11 and the longer shadow of U.S.-sponsored global security. No mention of the politics of pipelines, only the "noble struggle for freedom."
Once more an imperial mission was hidden behind an ideological smokescreen. Yet, this continuing military intervention, even with a well-timed exit strategy, cannot stop the inexorable march of declining U.S. global hegemony. It is proving more difficult to round-up an international posse for this so-called "reluctant sheriff." Although Obama made obtuse allusions to NATO allies in Afghanistan, many countries are pulling out, the most recent being Canada and the Netherlands.
In Afghanistan and Pakistan, civilian casualties from U.S. drone attacks continue, even in the face of universal condemnation by human rights organizations. All of Obama’s rhetorical skills cannot hide these hideous facts on the ground. Added to these egregious war crimes are other instances of on-going U.S. arrogance from refusing to sign the landmine treaty to expanding military bases in Colombia.
When Obama cites, as he did in his West Point address, U.S. criticism of tyranny, he pointedly neglects Colombia’s abysmal human rights record. Alluding briefly to the "fraud" of the recent Afghanistan presidential election, Obama ignores the endemic corruption and tyranny of U.S. allies among Tajik warlords. In Honduras, while Obama seemed to signal opposition to the brutal coup against Zelaya, he eventually reconciled U.S. policy with support for an illegitimate presidential election there.
From Latin America to the Middle East and South Asia, the U.S. is more and more a declining and isolated power, alienated from the aspirations of people throughout these regions. Beyond the growing geopolitical isolation, the Obama Administration’s Wall Street economic orientation is on the defensive against erstwhile allies like England and France and major investors like China. Even the 2008 U.S. National Intelligence Council’s report on Global Trends in 2025 predicted declining U.S. power and constrained leverage.
For all Obama’s efforts to use "smart" power to navigate during this period of decline, he cannot, as a member of the political class, acknowledge that decline and eschew, in the process, an imperial agenda. At best, he may try to find ways to bargain with the inevitable death of the empire. But bargaining, as psychologist Elisabeth Kubler-Ross noted in her classic study of death and dying, is a temporary and last-ditch effort to escape the inevitable. For historian Eric Hobsbawm, "the age of empires is dead. We shall have to find another way of organizing the globalized world of the 21st century." And we will have to do it against those elite forces, whether neo-conservative or neo-liberal, that are incapable of ending their self-appointed imperial missions.
——————————————
Obama's folly
By Andrew J. Bacevich
[This article appeared in yesterday's Los Angeles Times. Bacevich, a moderate conservative, is a professor of history and international relations at Boston University. He is a retired Army colonel and Vietnam vet, who has written several important books about militarism, war, imperialism and the limits of empire.]
Which is the greater folly: To fancy that war offers an easy solution to vexing problems, or, knowing otherwise, to opt for war anyway?
In the wake of 9/11, American statecraft emphasized the first approach: President George W. Bush embarked on a "global war" to eliminate violent jihadism. President Obama now seems intent on pursuing the second approach: Through military escalation in Afghanistan, he seeks to "finish the job" that Bush began there, then all but abandoned.
Through war, Bush set out to transform the greater Middle East. Despite immense expenditures of blood and treasure, that effort failed. In choosing Obama rather than John McCain to succeed Bush, the American people acknowledged that failure as definitive. Obama's election was to mark a new beginning, an opportunity to "reset" America's approach to the world.
The president's chosen course of action for Afghanistan suggests he may well squander that opportunity. Rather than renouncing Bush's legacy, Obama apparently aims to salvage something of value. In Afghanistan, he will expend yet more blood and more treasure hoping to attenuate or at least paper over the wreckage left over from the Bush era.
However improbable, Obama thereby finds himself following in the footsteps of Richard Nixon. Running for president in 1968, Nixon promised to end the Vietnam War. Once elected, he balked at doing so. Obsessed with projecting an image of toughness and resolve -- U.S. credibility was supposedly on the line -- Nixon chose to extend and even to expand that war. Apart from driving up the costs that Americans were called on to pay, this accomplished nothing.
If knowing when to cut your losses qualifies as a hallmark of statesmanship, Nixon flunked. Vietnam proved irredeemable.
Obama's prospects of redeeming Afghanistan appear hardly more promising. Achieving even a semblance of success, however modestly defined, will require an Afghan government that gets its act together, larger and more competent Afghan security forces, thousands of additional reinforcements from allies already heading toward the exits, patience from economically distressed Americans as the administration shovels hundreds of billions of dollars toward Central Asia, and even greater patience from U.S. troops shouldering the burdens of seemingly perpetual war. Above all, success will require convincing Afghans that the tens of thousands of heavily armed strangers in their midst represent Western beneficence rather than foreign occupation.
The president seems to appreciate the odds. The reluctance with which he contemplates the transformation of Afghanistan into "Obama's war" is palpable. Gone are the days of White House gunslingers barking "Bring 'em on" and of officials in tailored suits and bright ties vowing to do whatever it takes. The president has made clear his interest in "offramps" and "exit strategies."
So if the most powerful man in the world wants out, why doesn't he simply get out? For someone who vows to change the way Washington works, Afghanistan seemingly offers a made-to-order opportunity to make good on that promise. Why is Obama muffing the chance?
Have Second Thoughts
Following are four articles questioning President Barack Obama's decision to widen the Afghan war:
Ten Progressives Voice Deep Concerns
President Obama's decision to escalate the Afghanistan war was an extreme disappointment for a number of progressive Democrats who were among his staunchest supporters during the election campaign and the first several months of the new administration. It's reached the point where the support group known as Progressives for Obama — which defined itself as the "Left-Progressive Wing of the Coalition that elected Obama" — just changed its name to Progressive America Rising.
According to AlterNet today: "As soon as his intentions to send tens of thousands more troops became clear, dozens of progressive leaders and writers — including many former prominent Obama supporters — voiced their concerns in newspapers, on the radio and on the Internet." The website then sent the following sample of their responses:
1. Tom Hayden writes for The Nation:
"It's time to strip the Obama sticker off my car. Obama's escalation in Afghanistan is the last in a string of disappointments. His flip-flopping acceptance of the military coup in Honduras has squandered the trust of Latin America. His Wall Street bailout leaves the poor, the unemployed, minorities and college students on their own. And now comes the Afghanistan-Pakistan decision to escalate the stalemate, which risks his domestic agenda, his Democratic base, and possibly even his presidency."
2. Laura Flanders writes on GritTV,
"...for those who’d thought they’d voted for the death of the Bush Doctrine. Sorry. Bush/Cheney live on in the new president’s embrace of the idea that the U.S. has a right, not only to respond to attacks, but also to deploy men and women in anticipation of them."
3. Jim Hightower used his most recent column to warn:
"Obama has been taken over by the military industrial hawks and national security theorists who play war games with other people's lives and money. I had hoped Obama might be a more forceful leader who would reject the same old interventionist mindset of those who profit from permanent war. But his newly announced Afghan policy shows he is not that leader."
Hightower says that just because we've lost Obama on this issue, it's not over; that we as citizens...
"...have both a moral and patriotic duty to reach out to others to inform, organize and mobilize our grassroots objections, taking common sense to high places. Also, look to leaders in Congress who are standing up against Obama's war and finally beginning to reassert the legislative branch's constitutional responsibility to oversee and direct military policy. For example, Rep. Jim McGovern is pushing for a specific, congressionally mandated exit strategy; Rep. Barbara Lee wants to use Congress' control of the public purse strings to stop Obama's escalation; and Rep. David Obey is calling for a war tax on the richest Americans to put any escalation on-budget, rather than on a credit card for China to finance and future generations to pay."
4. Black Agenda Report editor Glen Ford compares Obama's delivery to how George Bush might have given the speech:
"Barack Obama's oratorical skills have turned on him, revealing, as George Bush’s low-grade delivery never could, the perfect incoherence of the current American imperial project in South Asia. Bush’s verbal eccentricities served to muddy his entire message, leaving the observer wondering what was more ridiculous, the speechmaker or the speech. There is no such confusion when Obama is on the mic. His flawless delivery of superbly structured sentences provides no distractions, requiring the brain to examine the content – the policy in question – on its actual merits. The conclusion comes quickly: the U.S. imperial enterprise in Afghanistan and Pakistan is doomed, as well as evil.
"The president’s speech to West Point cadets was a stream of non sequiturs so devoid of logic as to cast doubt on the sanity of the authors. '[T]hese additional American and international troops,' said the president, 'will allow us to accelerate handing over responsibility to Afghan forces, and allow us to begin the transfer of our forces out of Afghanistan in July of 2011.'
"Obama claims that the faster an additional 30,000 Americans pour into Afghanistan, the quicker will come the time when they will leave. More occupation means less occupation, you see? This breakneck intensification of the U.S. occupation is necessary, Obama explains, because 'We have no interest in occupying your country.'"
5. Foreign Policy in Focus's Phyllis Bennis demolished Obama's attempt to discourage comparisons to Vietnam:
"Near the end of his speech, Obama tried to speak to his antiwar one-time supporters, speaking to the legacy of Vietnam. It was here that the speech’s internal weakness was perhaps most clear. Obama refused to respond to the actual analogy between the quagmire of Vietnam, which led to the collapse of Johnson’s Great Society programs, and the threat to Obama’s ambitious domestic agenda collapsing under the pressure of funding the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Instead, he created straw analogies, ignoring the massive challenge of waging an illegitimate, unpopular war at a moment of dire economic crisis."
6. New America Media's Andrew Lam also addressed the Afghanistan-Vietnam parallel:
"On the eve of the second wave of a U.S. invasion in Afghanistan, I wish to tell the American media, as well as President Obama, that the Vietnam syndrome cannot be kicked through acts of war. That only through a view that’s rooted in people, rooted in human kindness, and not historical vehemence, would a country open itself up and stop being a haunting metaphor. That not until human basic needs are addressed and human dignity upheld can we truly pacify our enemies and bring about human liberty. And that more soldiers and bombs and droids in the sky will never appease the haunting ghosts of the past. Quite the opposite. We are in the process of creating more ghosts to haunt future generations."
7. Glenn Greenwald, writing on Salon, addresses Obama's supporters who are going along with his decision to escalate the troops:
"The most bizarre defense of Obama's escalation is also one of the most common: since he promised during the campaign to escalate in Afghanistan, it's unfair to criticize him for it now -- as though policies which are advocated during a campaign are subsequently immunized from criticism. For those invoking this defense: in 2004, Bush ran for re-election by vowing to prosecute the war in Iraq, keep Guantanamo open, and "reform" privatize Social Security. When he won and then did those things (or tried to), did you refrain from criticizing those policies on the grounds that he promised to do them during the campaign? I highly doubt it."
8. AlterNet's Adele Stan noted that Obama also changed the justification for the war:
"If you listened to the subtext of the speech, you might find that the mission has changed. In fact, you might say that the mission in Afghanistan is as much about creating stability in Pakistan -- a nuclear power that NBC's Andrea Mitchell yesterday referred to as a nearly failed state -- as it is about Afghanistan. Last night, a senior administration official confirmed to AlterNet that the U.S. mission to Pakistan has broadened.
From the president's speech:
"In the past, we too often defined our relationship with Pakistan narrowly. Those days are over. Moving forward, we are committed to a partnership with Pakistan that is built on a foundation of mutual interest, mutual respect, and mutual trust. We will strengthen Pakistan’s capacity to target those groups that threaten our countries, and have made it clear that we cannot tolerate a safe haven for terrorists whose location is known and whose intentions are clear. America is also providing substantial resources to support Pakistan’s democracy and development. We are the largest international supporter for those Pakistanis displaced by the fighting. And going forward, the Pakistani people must know America will remain a strong supporter of Pakistan’s security and prosperity long after the guns have fallen silent, so that the great potential of its people can be unleashed."
9. Rory O' Connor lambasted Obama on MediaChannel.org:
"The Afghan escalation speech was classic Obama. His enigmatic and epigrammatic split the baby in half Yoda/Spock-speak offered something for everyone: good-news-bad-news; back and forth; give and take; get in to get out; speed up to slow down; and in the end, let’s all come together and get along to end the war – by waging the war more intensely…but only for eighteen months, and then we all get to go home."
10. Blogger Digby highlighted that the American public never really gets to discuss the real issues underlying the US military build up in the Mideast and Asia:
"The wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, the standoff with Iran and all the other obsessions with the Mideast are at least informed, if not entirely motivated, by larger geopolitical efforts to maintain stability at a time of impending competition over resources and access to them -- oil. Sure that's simplistic, but it's at the 'heart' of what's going on in the leadership's 'minds.'
"We don't talk about any of that because it might lead us to get serious about changing our way of life and evidently nobody important thinks that's the right way to deal with the problem. And frankly, among many of our elites, maintaining a military presence everywhere is necessary to preserve American global dominance. Period."
——————————
Afghanistan: The Betrayal
By Garry Wills
[Author, journalist and historian Wills wrote this article Dec. 2 in the New York Review of Books blog]
I did not think he would lose me so soon — sooner than Bill Clinton did. Like many people, I was deeply invested in the success of our first African-American president. I had written op-ed pieces and articles to support him in The New York Times and The New York Review of Books. My wife and I had maxed out in donations for him. Our children had been ardent for his cause.
Others I respect have given up on him before now. I can see why. His backtracking on the treatment of torture (and photographs of torture), his hesitations to give up on rendition, on detentions, on military commissions, and on signing statements, are disheartening continuations of George W. Bush’s heritage. But I kept hoping that he was using these concessions to buy leeway for his most important position, for the ground on which his presidential bid was predicated.
There was only one thing that brought him to the attention of the nation as a future president. It was opposition to the Iraq war. None of his serious rivals for the Democratic nomination had that credential—not Hillary Clinton, not Joseph Biden, not John Edwards. It set him apart. He put in clarion terms the truth about that war—that it was a dumb war, that it went after an enemy where he was not hiding, that it had no indigenous base of support, that it had no sensible goal and no foreseeable cutoff point.
He said that he would not oppose war in general, but dumb wars. On that basis, we went for him. And now he betrays us. Although he talked of a larger commitment to Afghanistan during his campaign, he has now officially adopted his very own war, one with all the disqualifications that he attacked in the Iraq engagement. This war too is a dumb one. It has even less indigenous props than Iraq did.
Iraq at least had a functioning government (though a tyrannical one). The Afghanistan government that replaced the Taliban is not only corrupt but ineffectual. The country is riven by tribal war, Islamic militancy, and warlordism, and fueled by a drug economy —interrupting the drug industry will destabilize what order there is and increase hostility to us.
We have been in Afghanistan for eight years, earning hatred as occupiers, and after this record for longevity in American wars we will be there for still more years earning even more hatred. It gives us not another Iraq but another Vietnam, with wobbly rulers and an alien culture.
Although Obama says he plans to begin withdrawal from Afghanistan in July 2011, he will meanwhile be sending there not only soldiers but the contract employees that cling about us now like camp followers, corrupt adjuncts in perpetuity. Obama did not mention these plagues that now equal the number of military personnel we dispatch. We are sending off thousands of people to take and give bribes to drug dealers in Afghanistan.
If we had wanted Bush’s wars, and contractors, and corruption, we could have voted for John McCain. At least we would have seen our foe facing us, not felt him at our back, as now we do. The Republicans are given a great boon by this new war. They can use its cost to say that domestic needs are too expensive to be met—health care, education, infrastructure. They can say that military recruitments from the poor make job creation unnecessary. They can call it Obama’s war when it is really theirs. They can attack it and support it at the same time, with equal advantage.
I cannot vote for any Republican. But Obama will not get another penny from me, or another word of praise, after this betrayal. And in all this I know that my disappointment does not matter. What really matters are the lives of the young men and women he is sending off to senseless deaths.
——————————
Obama’s Contributions to a Dying Empire
By Francis Shor
[Shor teaches at Wayne State University and is the author of the recently published Routledge Press book, Dying Empire: U.S. Imperialism and Global Resistance. This article appeared on the website of the History News Network Dec. 2.]
Old habits die hard, especially imperialist ones. Imperial imperatives, whether economic, geopolitical, or ideological, persist because the ruling elites are dependent on them. In order to conceal imperialist objectives, presidents and other leaders of the U.S. political class rely on the rhetoric of national security and America’s supposed benevolent global purpose.
And, so, with President Obama’s announcement of sending 30,000 more U.S. troops to Afghanistan, the cadets at West Point and the viewing public once more heard that our national security was at stake. A spreading "cancer," threatening to metastasize throughout Afghanistan and Pakistan, had to be militarily extirpated. Conveniently overlooking the correlation between the growth of a Pashtun insurgency and U.S. occupation, Obama tried to wrap his rhetoric in the resonances of 9/11 and the longer shadow of U.S.-sponsored global security. No mention of the politics of pipelines, only the "noble struggle for freedom."
Once more an imperial mission was hidden behind an ideological smokescreen. Yet, this continuing military intervention, even with a well-timed exit strategy, cannot stop the inexorable march of declining U.S. global hegemony. It is proving more difficult to round-up an international posse for this so-called "reluctant sheriff." Although Obama made obtuse allusions to NATO allies in Afghanistan, many countries are pulling out, the most recent being Canada and the Netherlands.
In Afghanistan and Pakistan, civilian casualties from U.S. drone attacks continue, even in the face of universal condemnation by human rights organizations. All of Obama’s rhetorical skills cannot hide these hideous facts on the ground. Added to these egregious war crimes are other instances of on-going U.S. arrogance from refusing to sign the landmine treaty to expanding military bases in Colombia.
When Obama cites, as he did in his West Point address, U.S. criticism of tyranny, he pointedly neglects Colombia’s abysmal human rights record. Alluding briefly to the "fraud" of the recent Afghanistan presidential election, Obama ignores the endemic corruption and tyranny of U.S. allies among Tajik warlords. In Honduras, while Obama seemed to signal opposition to the brutal coup against Zelaya, he eventually reconciled U.S. policy with support for an illegitimate presidential election there.
From Latin America to the Middle East and South Asia, the U.S. is more and more a declining and isolated power, alienated from the aspirations of people throughout these regions. Beyond the growing geopolitical isolation, the Obama Administration’s Wall Street economic orientation is on the defensive against erstwhile allies like England and France and major investors like China. Even the 2008 U.S. National Intelligence Council’s report on Global Trends in 2025 predicted declining U.S. power and constrained leverage.
For all Obama’s efforts to use "smart" power to navigate during this period of decline, he cannot, as a member of the political class, acknowledge that decline and eschew, in the process, an imperial agenda. At best, he may try to find ways to bargain with the inevitable death of the empire. But bargaining, as psychologist Elisabeth Kubler-Ross noted in her classic study of death and dying, is a temporary and last-ditch effort to escape the inevitable. For historian Eric Hobsbawm, "the age of empires is dead. We shall have to find another way of organizing the globalized world of the 21st century." And we will have to do it against those elite forces, whether neo-conservative or neo-liberal, that are incapable of ending their self-appointed imperial missions.
——————————————
Obama's folly
By Andrew J. Bacevich
[This article appeared in yesterday's Los Angeles Times. Bacevich, a moderate conservative, is a professor of history and international relations at Boston University. He is a retired Army colonel and Vietnam vet, who has written several important books about militarism, war, imperialism and the limits of empire.]
Which is the greater folly: To fancy that war offers an easy solution to vexing problems, or, knowing otherwise, to opt for war anyway?
In the wake of 9/11, American statecraft emphasized the first approach: President George W. Bush embarked on a "global war" to eliminate violent jihadism. President Obama now seems intent on pursuing the second approach: Through military escalation in Afghanistan, he seeks to "finish the job" that Bush began there, then all but abandoned.
Through war, Bush set out to transform the greater Middle East. Despite immense expenditures of blood and treasure, that effort failed. In choosing Obama rather than John McCain to succeed Bush, the American people acknowledged that failure as definitive. Obama's election was to mark a new beginning, an opportunity to "reset" America's approach to the world.
The president's chosen course of action for Afghanistan suggests he may well squander that opportunity. Rather than renouncing Bush's legacy, Obama apparently aims to salvage something of value. In Afghanistan, he will expend yet more blood and more treasure hoping to attenuate or at least paper over the wreckage left over from the Bush era.
However improbable, Obama thereby finds himself following in the footsteps of Richard Nixon. Running for president in 1968, Nixon promised to end the Vietnam War. Once elected, he balked at doing so. Obsessed with projecting an image of toughness and resolve -- U.S. credibility was supposedly on the line -- Nixon chose to extend and even to expand that war. Apart from driving up the costs that Americans were called on to pay, this accomplished nothing.
If knowing when to cut your losses qualifies as a hallmark of statesmanship, Nixon flunked. Vietnam proved irredeemable.
Obama's prospects of redeeming Afghanistan appear hardly more promising. Achieving even a semblance of success, however modestly defined, will require an Afghan government that gets its act together, larger and more competent Afghan security forces, thousands of additional reinforcements from allies already heading toward the exits, patience from economically distressed Americans as the administration shovels hundreds of billions of dollars toward Central Asia, and even greater patience from U.S. troops shouldering the burdens of seemingly perpetual war. Above all, success will require convincing Afghans that the tens of thousands of heavily armed strangers in their midst represent Western beneficence rather than foreign occupation.
The president seems to appreciate the odds. The reluctance with which he contemplates the transformation of Afghanistan into "Obama's war" is palpable. Gone are the days of White House gunslingers barking "Bring 'em on" and of officials in tailored suits and bright ties vowing to do whatever it takes. The president has made clear his interest in "offramps" and "exit strategies."
So if the most powerful man in the world wants out, why doesn't he simply get out? For someone who vows to change the way Washington works, Afghanistan seemingly offers a made-to-order opportunity to make good on that promise. Why is Obama muffing the chance?
Thursday, December 3, 2009
12-3-9 Activist Calendar
ACTIVIST CALENDAR, Dec. 3, 2009, Issue #152B
Of the Hudson Valley Activist Newsletter/Calendar
Send event announcements to jacdon@earthlink.net
——————————
Editor's Note:
(1) We will be sending additional events in a few days. Activism drops off from mid-December to late January, but there are still several events worth consideration.
(2) We urge you to show up at our Saturday, Dec. 5, New Paltz picket line/vigil against an escalation of the Afghan War.
——————————
Friday, Dec. 4, POUGHKEEPSIE: There will be an "Iraqi Student Project (ISP) Pot-Luck Supper" starting at 6 p.m. at the Unitarian Universalist Fellowship, 67 South Randolph Ave. We're told: "Please bring your favorite dish, and have a night of fun! Meet ISP Bard College student, Raed Rakeen, enjoy good food, and participate in a silent auction and raffle. This supper/fundraiser is sponsored by the Board of Trustees, Social Justice Committee, the Coming of Age Class and the Dutchess Peace Coalition. Information, (845) 471-6580, http://www.uupok.org, http://www.dutchesspeace.org.
Saturday, Dec. 5, NEW PALTZ: Join the protest against sending more troops to the Afghan war from 2 p.m. to 4 p.m. on Main St. in front of the (Stop 'n' Shop) shopping plaza. Bring signs or use ours. Rain or shine. Organized by Peace & Social Progress Now and the Hudson Valley Activist Newsletter. Endorsed by New Paltz Women in Black. Information: jacdon@earthlink.net, http://activistnewsletter.blogspot.com/.
Saturday, Dec. 5, ALBANY: A free, public forum on healthcare reform, featuring both progressive and conservative activist speakers, will begin at 1 p.m. in the Linda Norris Auditorium of radio station WAMC at 339 Central Ave. (at Quail St.). It's titled "Getting Past the Sound Bites." The goal, according to the organizers, "is to go beyond the angry discourse typical of recent town hall meetings on healthcare." The speakers are Douglas A. Bullock, Andrew Coates M.D., Roger Davidson, John Minehan, Brooke Newell, and Steven Vasquez. The event is sponsored by "The Right, Left and In Between Dialogue Planning Committee," which consists of members active in the following local organizations: MoveOn.org Capital Region Council, Campaign for Liberty, Interfaith Alliance of NYS, 9-12 project, Capital District Greens, We The People, Bethlehem Neighbors for Peace, John Birch Society, Labor Religion Coalition, and ARISE. Information, Dennis Karius at (518) 456-5721.
Saturday, Dec. 5, WOODSTOCK: The 4th Annual Woodstock Phil Ochs Festival will be held at Colony Cafe, 22 Rock City Rd., 8-11 p.m. Featured artists remembering the legendary folk singer include The Flames of Discontent (the organizers), Graham and Barbara Dean, Greg Englesson (Mr. E), Raggedy Crew and others. Information, (845) 679-5342, leftmus@earthlink.net, http://www.colonycafe.com.
Saturday, Dec. 5, WOODSTOCK: A craft sale to raise funds for the Haitian People's Support Project will be held at the Dutch Reformed Church, 16 Tinker St., at the Village Green in the center of Woodstock. The hours are 11:30 a.m.-5 p.m. "There will be crafts from Haiti, and wares from Peru, such as alpaca gloves, hats, scarves, capes, etc., and kids sweaters." Information, prizantfanny77@hotmail.com.
Sunday, Dec. 6, NEW PALTZ: A lecture on Latin American Indigenous Movements with speaker Gerardo Renique, a history professor at City College/CUNY, will take place at 6 p.m. at Village Hall, 25 Plattekill Ave., a block south of Main St. next to the fire house. The main topic will be popular movements of resistance to land theft and environmental destruction by oil and mining corporations. A potluck dinner starts at 5 p.m. Sponsored by the Caribbean and Latin America Support Project (CLASP). Information, (845) 255-0113.
Saturday, Dec. 12, WASHINGTON: An Emergency Rally Against Escalating the Afghan War will be conducted in Lafayette Park, across from the White House, 11 a.m.-4 p.m. The event has been called by more than 100 leading U.S. peace activists from most major national and regional antiwar organizations. Former Rep. Cynthia McKinney is a leading initiator of the event. In addition to McKinney, speakers include Sen. Mike Gravel, Kathy Kelly, Chris Hedges, David Swanson, Rev. Graylan Hagler, Gael Murphy, Coy McKinney, Debra Sweet, Brian Becker, Mathis Chiroux, Lynne Williams, Hon. Betty Hall, Elaine Brower, Marian Douglas, Dr. Michael Knox, Ralph Lopez, and ( Ret.) Capt. Ron Fisher. In addition there will be music by Jordan Page, Head-Roc, Emma's Revolution and Precise Science. We're told: "Rally organizers are calling for the left to end its support for Obama now that he has committed to a troop surge, and to condemn and oppose Obama’s war policy." Organizers also note that "This is a peaceful demonstration. We are committed to nonviolence and do not condone illegal acts of any kind, including civil disobedience." Information: (207) 604-8988, contact@enduswars.org, http://www.enduswars.org/.
Of the Hudson Valley Activist Newsletter/Calendar
Send event announcements to jacdon@earthlink.net
——————————
Editor's Note:
(1) We will be sending additional events in a few days. Activism drops off from mid-December to late January, but there are still several events worth consideration.
(2) We urge you to show up at our Saturday, Dec. 5, New Paltz picket line/vigil against an escalation of the Afghan War.
——————————
Friday, Dec. 4, POUGHKEEPSIE: There will be an "Iraqi Student Project (ISP) Pot-Luck Supper" starting at 6 p.m. at the Unitarian Universalist Fellowship, 67 South Randolph Ave. We're told: "Please bring your favorite dish, and have a night of fun! Meet ISP Bard College student, Raed Rakeen, enjoy good food, and participate in a silent auction and raffle. This supper/fundraiser is sponsored by the Board of Trustees, Social Justice Committee, the Coming of Age Class and the Dutchess Peace Coalition. Information, (845) 471-6580, http://www.uupok.org, http://www.dutchesspeace.org.
Saturday, Dec. 5, NEW PALTZ: Join the protest against sending more troops to the Afghan war from 2 p.m. to 4 p.m. on Main St. in front of the (Stop 'n' Shop) shopping plaza. Bring signs or use ours. Rain or shine. Organized by Peace & Social Progress Now and the Hudson Valley Activist Newsletter. Endorsed by New Paltz Women in Black. Information: jacdon@earthlink.net, http://activistnewsletter.blogspot.com/.
Saturday, Dec. 5, ALBANY: A free, public forum on healthcare reform, featuring both progressive and conservative activist speakers, will begin at 1 p.m. in the Linda Norris Auditorium of radio station WAMC at 339 Central Ave. (at Quail St.). It's titled "Getting Past the Sound Bites." The goal, according to the organizers, "is to go beyond the angry discourse typical of recent town hall meetings on healthcare." The speakers are Douglas A. Bullock, Andrew Coates M.D., Roger Davidson, John Minehan, Brooke Newell, and Steven Vasquez. The event is sponsored by "The Right, Left and In Between Dialogue Planning Committee," which consists of members active in the following local organizations: MoveOn.org Capital Region Council, Campaign for Liberty, Interfaith Alliance of NYS, 9-12 project, Capital District Greens, We The People, Bethlehem Neighbors for Peace, John Birch Society, Labor Religion Coalition, and ARISE. Information, Dennis Karius at (518) 456-5721.
Saturday, Dec. 5, WOODSTOCK: The 4th Annual Woodstock Phil Ochs Festival will be held at Colony Cafe, 22 Rock City Rd., 8-11 p.m. Featured artists remembering the legendary folk singer include The Flames of Discontent (the organizers), Graham and Barbara Dean, Greg Englesson (Mr. E), Raggedy Crew and others. Information, (845) 679-5342, leftmus@earthlink.net, http://www.colonycafe.com.
Saturday, Dec. 5, WOODSTOCK: A craft sale to raise funds for the Haitian People's Support Project will be held at the Dutch Reformed Church, 16 Tinker St., at the Village Green in the center of Woodstock. The hours are 11:30 a.m.-5 p.m. "There will be crafts from Haiti, and wares from Peru, such as alpaca gloves, hats, scarves, capes, etc., and kids sweaters." Information, prizantfanny77@hotmail.com.
Sunday, Dec. 6, NEW PALTZ: A lecture on Latin American Indigenous Movements with speaker Gerardo Renique, a history professor at City College/CUNY, will take place at 6 p.m. at Village Hall, 25 Plattekill Ave., a block south of Main St. next to the fire house. The main topic will be popular movements of resistance to land theft and environmental destruction by oil and mining corporations. A potluck dinner starts at 5 p.m. Sponsored by the Caribbean and Latin America Support Project (CLASP). Information, (845) 255-0113.
Saturday, Dec. 12, WASHINGTON: An Emergency Rally Against Escalating the Afghan War will be conducted in Lafayette Park, across from the White House, 11 a.m.-4 p.m. The event has been called by more than 100 leading U.S. peace activists from most major national and regional antiwar organizations. Former Rep. Cynthia McKinney is a leading initiator of the event. In addition to McKinney, speakers include Sen. Mike Gravel, Kathy Kelly, Chris Hedges, David Swanson, Rev. Graylan Hagler, Gael Murphy, Coy McKinney, Debra Sweet, Brian Becker, Mathis Chiroux, Lynne Williams, Hon. Betty Hall, Elaine Brower, Marian Douglas, Dr. Michael Knox, Ralph Lopez, and ( Ret.) Capt. Ron Fisher. In addition there will be music by Jordan Page, Head-Roc, Emma's Revolution and Precise Science. We're told: "Rally organizers are calling for the left to end its support for Obama now that he has committed to a troop surge, and to condemn and oppose Obama’s war policy." Organizers also note that "This is a peaceful demonstration. We are committed to nonviolence and do not condone illegal acts of any kind, including civil disobedience." Information: (207) 604-8988, contact@enduswars.org, http://www.enduswars.org/.
Wednesday, December 2, 2009
12-2-9 Report on West Point protest
West Point March and Rally
Protests Obama's War Plan
Over 300 antiwar protesters took part in a demonstration at the gates to the U.S. Military Academy at West Point Dec. 1 as President Barack Obama sought to justify his decision to send 30,000 more troops to Afghanistan.
Facing police and soldiers at the Highland Falls gate to the Academy, demonstrators repeatedly chanted, "30,000 more! What the Hell for?, 30,000 more! —What the Hell for?" Drummers and a trumpet player accompanied the chanting.
Six protestors were arrested for sitting down to block the road into the military facility. They were charged with disorderly conduct, released and summoned to appear in court Dec. 15.
The protest was organized in less than a week, according to civil liberties attorney Michael Sussman, who leads the Orange County Democratic Alliance and was among the chief organizers. Another organizer, Nick Mottern of WESPAC and Consumers for Peace.org, first heard the announcement that Obama would speak locally, and sent out the message to a few local organizers. "They all got busy calling other people and groups and within 24 hours some 14 organizations signed up to protest Obama's speech," he said.
Hudson Valley peace groups sponsoring the demonstration were Rockland Coalition for Peace and Justice, WESPAC, Orange County Peace and Justice, Democratic Alliance, Hudson Valley Activist Newsletter, Peace & Social Progress Now, Consumers for Peace.org, Social Action Committee of the Unitarian Universalist Congregation (Rock Tavern, N.Y.). National groups backing the protest included the ANSWER Coalition, International Action Center, Iraq Veterans Against the War, Military Families Speak Out, Peace Action of New York State, Troops Out Now, and World Can’t Wait.
The protest began in the darkness of 6:30 p.m. at Veterans' Park in Orange County's Highland Falls, a town adjacent to the 16,000-acre military reservation on the banks of the Hudson River. Most of the demonstrators came from various peace groups in the counties of Orange, Rockland, Westchester, Ulster and Dutchess, but some attended from New York City, the Upper Hudson Valley, and even from Massachusetts.
Nine speakers representing different groups took the megaphone to denounce Obama's escalation of the war. They included Rev. Jim Bridges, Rock Tavern Unitarian Universalist Congregation; Elaine Brower, Military Families Speak Out; former Sgt. Matthis Chiroux, of Iraq Veterans Against the War; Don DeBar, Green Party activist and reporter; Larry McGovern, Westchester County Peace and Justice; Jack A. Smith, editor of Hudson Valley Activist Newsletter; Michael Sussman, Democratic Alliance; Deborah Sweet, World Can’t Wait; and Nancy Tsou, Rockland County Peace and Justice.
Following the 45-minute rally, MC Bennett Weiss instructed participants to line up single file for the nearly half-mile silent, candlelight peace walk to the Academy gates. A full moon illuminated the night.
At the gates, demonstrators spontaneously began singing peace songs in subdued and unsure voices, but as the crowds grew the voices became more strident and determined. Individuals, then groups, began chanting "End the War," "Bring them Home Now," "What do you want — Peace. When do you want it — Now!
About 30 protesters sat down on the pavement in front of the gates, and were not removed by police. But when six of them moved to the road, they were arrested and transported to night court.
The Hudson Valley peace movement, as in the rest of the nation, has suffered declines in number in recent years, and particularly after warmaking President George W. Bush left office. Many Democratic voters who opposed Bush's military adventurism have been reluctant to protest against any of Obama's policies, including his enthusiastic support for the Afghan war.
Movement observers believe that after nearly 11 months of Obama's presidency the tide is slowing turning, in good part since it became clear he was going to order a significant increase in U.S. troop strength in Afghanistan. The demonstration in West Point, as well as many protests throughout the country during and after the Dec. 1 speech, appears to be a harbinger of a movement in the process of rebuilding itself.
A test of this thesis will be on Saturday, March 20 — on the sixth anniversary of the U.S. invasion of Iraq — when a mass peace demonstration is set for Washington DC, and a number of large cities across America.
——————————
Protest Wider War in New Paltz, N.Y., Dec. 5
Join the protest against sending more troops to war on Saturday, Dec. 5, in New Paltz from 2 p.m. to 4 p.m. on Main St. in front of the (Stop 'n' Shop) shopping plaza. Bring signs or use ours. Rain or shine. Organized by Peace & Social Progress Now and the Hudson Valley Activist Newsletter. Endorsed by New Paltz Women in Black. Information: jacdon@earthlink.net, http://activistnewsletter.blogspot.com/.
Protests Obama's War Plan
Over 300 antiwar protesters took part in a demonstration at the gates to the U.S. Military Academy at West Point Dec. 1 as President Barack Obama sought to justify his decision to send 30,000 more troops to Afghanistan.
Facing police and soldiers at the Highland Falls gate to the Academy, demonstrators repeatedly chanted, "30,000 more! What the Hell for?, 30,000 more! —What the Hell for?" Drummers and a trumpet player accompanied the chanting.
Six protestors were arrested for sitting down to block the road into the military facility. They were charged with disorderly conduct, released and summoned to appear in court Dec. 15.
The protest was organized in less than a week, according to civil liberties attorney Michael Sussman, who leads the Orange County Democratic Alliance and was among the chief organizers. Another organizer, Nick Mottern of WESPAC and Consumers for Peace.org, first heard the announcement that Obama would speak locally, and sent out the message to a few local organizers. "They all got busy calling other people and groups and within 24 hours some 14 organizations signed up to protest Obama's speech," he said.
Hudson Valley peace groups sponsoring the demonstration were Rockland Coalition for Peace and Justice, WESPAC, Orange County Peace and Justice, Democratic Alliance, Hudson Valley Activist Newsletter, Peace & Social Progress Now, Consumers for Peace.org, Social Action Committee of the Unitarian Universalist Congregation (Rock Tavern, N.Y.). National groups backing the protest included the ANSWER Coalition, International Action Center, Iraq Veterans Against the War, Military Families Speak Out, Peace Action of New York State, Troops Out Now, and World Can’t Wait.
The protest began in the darkness of 6:30 p.m. at Veterans' Park in Orange County's Highland Falls, a town adjacent to the 16,000-acre military reservation on the banks of the Hudson River. Most of the demonstrators came from various peace groups in the counties of Orange, Rockland, Westchester, Ulster and Dutchess, but some attended from New York City, the Upper Hudson Valley, and even from Massachusetts.
Nine speakers representing different groups took the megaphone to denounce Obama's escalation of the war. They included Rev. Jim Bridges, Rock Tavern Unitarian Universalist Congregation; Elaine Brower, Military Families Speak Out; former Sgt. Matthis Chiroux, of Iraq Veterans Against the War; Don DeBar, Green Party activist and reporter; Larry McGovern, Westchester County Peace and Justice; Jack A. Smith, editor of Hudson Valley Activist Newsletter; Michael Sussman, Democratic Alliance; Deborah Sweet, World Can’t Wait; and Nancy Tsou, Rockland County Peace and Justice.
Following the 45-minute rally, MC Bennett Weiss instructed participants to line up single file for the nearly half-mile silent, candlelight peace walk to the Academy gates. A full moon illuminated the night.
At the gates, demonstrators spontaneously began singing peace songs in subdued and unsure voices, but as the crowds grew the voices became more strident and determined. Individuals, then groups, began chanting "End the War," "Bring them Home Now," "What do you want — Peace. When do you want it — Now!
About 30 protesters sat down on the pavement in front of the gates, and were not removed by police. But when six of them moved to the road, they were arrested and transported to night court.
The Hudson Valley peace movement, as in the rest of the nation, has suffered declines in number in recent years, and particularly after warmaking President George W. Bush left office. Many Democratic voters who opposed Bush's military adventurism have been reluctant to protest against any of Obama's policies, including his enthusiastic support for the Afghan war.
Movement observers believe that after nearly 11 months of Obama's presidency the tide is slowing turning, in good part since it became clear he was going to order a significant increase in U.S. troop strength in Afghanistan. The demonstration in West Point, as well as many protests throughout the country during and after the Dec. 1 speech, appears to be a harbinger of a movement in the process of rebuilding itself.
A test of this thesis will be on Saturday, March 20 — on the sixth anniversary of the U.S. invasion of Iraq — when a mass peace demonstration is set for Washington DC, and a number of large cities across America.
——————————
Protest Wider War in New Paltz, N.Y., Dec. 5
Join the protest against sending more troops to war on Saturday, Dec. 5, in New Paltz from 2 p.m. to 4 p.m. on Main St. in front of the (Stop 'n' Shop) shopping plaza. Bring signs or use ours. Rain or shine. Organized by Peace & Social Progress Now and the Hudson Valley Activist Newsletter. Endorsed by New Paltz Women in Black. Information: jacdon@earthlink.net, http://activistnewsletter.blogspot.com/.
12-2-9 West Point Speech
Yes We Can... Stop This War!
Following is the text of the talk given at the Dec. 1 West Point demonstration by Jack A. Smith, editor of the Hudson Valley Activist Newsletter and co-chair of Peace & Social Progress Now.
During the election, at Barack Obama rallies, we frequently heard the multitudes exclaim in unison — Yes We Can! The crowds also spoke of "change we can believe in."
I was suspicious of such slogans because it was never explained what they meant. Yes we can — what? And what was the "change we can believe in"?
Although a great deal was implied by these slogans — not least that Obama would end the wars and bring the troops home — the Democratic candidate never spelled it out.
But now I think we know what both statements mean.
Yes We Can vastly expand the war in Afghanistan/Pakistan by adding another 30,000 U.S. troops on top of nearly 68,000 already there, which include the 30,000 Obama sent in March. Obama has doubled Bush's troop allotment.
Now that's a change we can believe in!
And Yes We Can, in Obama's recent words, "finish the job" in Afghanistan.
What job? The "job" of vastly expanding a totally unnecessary war. The intelligent response to 9/11 was worldwide police work, sanctions and other means short of war. But Bush wanted a war to extend U.S. hegemony into Central Asia, and also to pave the way for invading Iraq.
Bush failed in Afghanistan. Obama wants to convey the impression he is "winning" in Afghanistan. By "winning" Obama will show his right wing antagonists that he's no weak-kneed, cut-and-run liberal, much less a leftist or socialist. Far from winning, however, a bigger war means a deeper quagmire.
The Republican Party supports the Afghan war. But 70% of Democratic voters oppose the war. That won't stop Obama. Yes He Can thumb his nose at his own constituency because antiwar Democrats have no place else to go. Most will stick with the so-called "lesser evil."
That's the trouble with the two-party system when one party represents the right/far right and the other party represents the center/center right, and there's no mass party of the left. It's always a choice between evils.
So Yes We Can be led to the slaughter of other people who have done us no harm.
Yes We Can manipulate the masses of the American people.
Yes We Can in actual effect support an undemocratic coup in Honduras despite our rhetorical critique.
Yes We Can continue the Cold War economic embargo and travel restrictions against our small neighbor, Cuba.
Yes We Can raise the military budget to unparalleled heights.
Yes We Can end up supporting the worst aspects of the Patriot Act.
Yes We Can bail out the bankers and Wall St. but No We Can't implement government programs to get people back to work or stop the foreclosures.
Yes We Can get rid of single payer, and transform the public option into a joke.
Yes We Can make the enrichment of insurance companies the key objective of the new healthcare plan.
Friends, we have to rebuild our antiwar movement. We're in for a much longer war.
Our movement — the base of which is composed of Democratic voters — suffered a major decline since the 2006 election when the Democrats took control of Congress. And it nearly fell apart when Obama won the election, because Democratic voters thought they elected a president who would end Bush's wars.
Even though Democrats oppose this war, most have not come back to antiwar activism. The main reason is not wanting to publicly oppose Obama. Also, too many Democrats think of Bush's Afghan adventure as a "good war."
To become a truly mass movement once again we'll have to win those people back to the peace movement. We must convince them this is not a good war. We must bring them back into the streets by the millions.
In three and a half months — on March 20 in Washington — there will be a mass demonstration on the sixth anniversary of the Iraq invasion. ANSWER is the main organizer, and scores of national and regional organizations and coalitions are co-sponsoring. The Hudson Valley Activist Newsletter will supply the buses from several Mid-Hudson towns. Please help us fill them.
Friends, the American people oppose Obama's war buildup, but without a mass peace movement their voices will never reach those in power. We have our work cut out for us.
You want a real change you can believe in? Here's how:
End all the wars! Bring all the troops home now! Money for jobs and people's needs, not for militarism, imperialism, and war!
Following is the text of the talk given at the Dec. 1 West Point demonstration by Jack A. Smith, editor of the Hudson Valley Activist Newsletter and co-chair of Peace & Social Progress Now.
During the election, at Barack Obama rallies, we frequently heard the multitudes exclaim in unison — Yes We Can! The crowds also spoke of "change we can believe in."
I was suspicious of such slogans because it was never explained what they meant. Yes we can — what? And what was the "change we can believe in"?
Although a great deal was implied by these slogans — not least that Obama would end the wars and bring the troops home — the Democratic candidate never spelled it out.
But now I think we know what both statements mean.
Yes We Can vastly expand the war in Afghanistan/Pakistan by adding another 30,000 U.S. troops on top of nearly 68,000 already there, which include the 30,000 Obama sent in March. Obama has doubled Bush's troop allotment.
Now that's a change we can believe in!
And Yes We Can, in Obama's recent words, "finish the job" in Afghanistan.
What job? The "job" of vastly expanding a totally unnecessary war. The intelligent response to 9/11 was worldwide police work, sanctions and other means short of war. But Bush wanted a war to extend U.S. hegemony into Central Asia, and also to pave the way for invading Iraq.
Bush failed in Afghanistan. Obama wants to convey the impression he is "winning" in Afghanistan. By "winning" Obama will show his right wing antagonists that he's no weak-kneed, cut-and-run liberal, much less a leftist or socialist. Far from winning, however, a bigger war means a deeper quagmire.
The Republican Party supports the Afghan war. But 70% of Democratic voters oppose the war. That won't stop Obama. Yes He Can thumb his nose at his own constituency because antiwar Democrats have no place else to go. Most will stick with the so-called "lesser evil."
That's the trouble with the two-party system when one party represents the right/far right and the other party represents the center/center right, and there's no mass party of the left. It's always a choice between evils.
So Yes We Can be led to the slaughter of other people who have done us no harm.
Yes We Can manipulate the masses of the American people.
Yes We Can in actual effect support an undemocratic coup in Honduras despite our rhetorical critique.
Yes We Can continue the Cold War economic embargo and travel restrictions against our small neighbor, Cuba.
Yes We Can raise the military budget to unparalleled heights.
Yes We Can end up supporting the worst aspects of the Patriot Act.
Yes We Can bail out the bankers and Wall St. but No We Can't implement government programs to get people back to work or stop the foreclosures.
Yes We Can get rid of single payer, and transform the public option into a joke.
Yes We Can make the enrichment of insurance companies the key objective of the new healthcare plan.
Friends, we have to rebuild our antiwar movement. We're in for a much longer war.
Our movement — the base of which is composed of Democratic voters — suffered a major decline since the 2006 election when the Democrats took control of Congress. And it nearly fell apart when Obama won the election, because Democratic voters thought they elected a president who would end Bush's wars.
Even though Democrats oppose this war, most have not come back to antiwar activism. The main reason is not wanting to publicly oppose Obama. Also, too many Democrats think of Bush's Afghan adventure as a "good war."
To become a truly mass movement once again we'll have to win those people back to the peace movement. We must convince them this is not a good war. We must bring them back into the streets by the millions.
In three and a half months — on March 20 in Washington — there will be a mass demonstration on the sixth anniversary of the Iraq invasion. ANSWER is the main organizer, and scores of national and regional organizations and coalitions are co-sponsoring. The Hudson Valley Activist Newsletter will supply the buses from several Mid-Hudson towns. Please help us fill them.
Friends, the American people oppose Obama's war buildup, but without a mass peace movement their voices will never reach those in power. We have our work cut out for us.
You want a real change you can believe in? Here's how:
End all the wars! Bring all the troops home now! Money for jobs and people's needs, not for militarism, imperialism, and war!
Tuesday, December 1, 2009
12-1-9 West Point Today
Join the Peace Action TODAY (Dec. 1) Outside West Point
As President Obama Announces His Decision
To Widen the War in Afghanistan
Peace forces throughout the United States are planning to protest President Obama's Dec. 1 announcement that he is substantially escalating the eight-year-old war in Afghanistan.
The first major demonstration will take place in the Hudson Valley just before and during Obama's 8 p.m. announcement at the West Point Military Academy tonight. Other actions are scheduled for the day after the president's message and on Saturday, Dec. 5. (See below for New Paltz peace event Saturday, Dec. 5.)
Some 14 local and national peace groups are sponsoring Tuesday's protest with a rally and march in Highland Falls, which is adjacent to the Military Academy. Demonstrators will start to gather around 5:30 p.m. for a 6:30 p.m. rally at Veterans' Park on Main St. (Rt. 218). Several speakers will briefly address the crowd before a silent, candlelight (or flashlight) march begins to West Point's Thayer Gate. After a brief, spirited rally at the gate, the antiwar marchers will then return to the park for some final words. The demand will be to withdraw from Afghanistan.
Sponsoring the rally, which is led by the local peace groups, are the ANSWER Coalition, Consumers for Peace.org, Hudson Valley Activist Newsletter, International Action Center, Iraq Veterans Against the War, Military Families Speak Out, Orange County Democratic Alliance, Peace Action of New York State, Orange County Peace and Justice, Peace and Social Progress Now, Rockland Coalition for Peace and Justice, Social Action Committee of the Unitarian Universalist Congregation (Rock Tavern), Troops Out Now, WESPAC, World Can’t Wait.
Civil liberties attorney Michael Sussman of the Democratic Alliance, an organizer of the event, commented: “Our national interest demands the focus of our treasure and priorities on pressing domestic issues like the extension of health care to all Americans and the active promotion of a full employment economy. The commitment of more troops to Afghanistan retards fulfillment of these critical priorities, serves no compelling military interest and will only further polarize our relations with the Moslem world."
The weather forecast predicts it will be "mostly clear" with temperatures in the mid-to-upper 30s in Highland Falls during the protest, but it's "rain or shine." Bring candles or a flashlight. Local streets should accommodate parking.
Highland Falls is about 32 miles south of New Paltz and 16 miles south of Newburgh. Driving from the north, Rt. 9W is your best bet. There are two entrances to the town from 9W. From the north the first one is where Rt. 218 cuts into Highland Falls and it will take you after 1.1 miles to Main St. and Veterans Way, where the park is located. (If you are coming from Albany, it's quicker to take the Thruway to exit 17 Newburgh, and switch to 9W south.) If you approach from the south, there's another entrance about a mile and a half below the first which connects directly with Main St. (Rt. 218) which you take for a mile or so to the park.
Contact the Activist Newsletter, jacdon@earthlink.net, for information about possible car pools from Ulster and Dutchess counties. For information about the rally contact Bennett Weiss at (845) 569-8662, benweiss@aol.com, and Nick Mottern (914) 806-6179, nickmottern@earthlink.net. For carpooling from Westchester County coordinated by WESPAC, (914) 449-6514.
PICKET FOR PEACE, DECEMBER 5 IN NEW PALTZ
There will be demonstration against Washington's expansion of the Afghan War that will take place Saturday, Dec. 5, in New Paltz between 2 p.m. and 4 p.m. on Main St. (Rt. 299) on the sidewalk in front of New Paltz Plaza shopping center (with Stop 'n' Shop). It is sponsored by Peace and Social Progress Now, the H.V. Activist Newsletter and New Paltz Women in Black. For information or for a group to enlist as a co-sponsor, contact jacdon@earthlink.net, (845) 255-5779.
As President Obama Announces His Decision
To Widen the War in Afghanistan
Peace forces throughout the United States are planning to protest President Obama's Dec. 1 announcement that he is substantially escalating the eight-year-old war in Afghanistan.
The first major demonstration will take place in the Hudson Valley just before and during Obama's 8 p.m. announcement at the West Point Military Academy tonight. Other actions are scheduled for the day after the president's message and on Saturday, Dec. 5. (See below for New Paltz peace event Saturday, Dec. 5.)
Some 14 local and national peace groups are sponsoring Tuesday's protest with a rally and march in Highland Falls, which is adjacent to the Military Academy. Demonstrators will start to gather around 5:30 p.m. for a 6:30 p.m. rally at Veterans' Park on Main St. (Rt. 218). Several speakers will briefly address the crowd before a silent, candlelight (or flashlight) march begins to West Point's Thayer Gate. After a brief, spirited rally at the gate, the antiwar marchers will then return to the park for some final words. The demand will be to withdraw from Afghanistan.
Sponsoring the rally, which is led by the local peace groups, are the ANSWER Coalition, Consumers for Peace.org, Hudson Valley Activist Newsletter, International Action Center, Iraq Veterans Against the War, Military Families Speak Out, Orange County Democratic Alliance, Peace Action of New York State, Orange County Peace and Justice, Peace and Social Progress Now, Rockland Coalition for Peace and Justice, Social Action Committee of the Unitarian Universalist Congregation (Rock Tavern), Troops Out Now, WESPAC, World Can’t Wait.
Civil liberties attorney Michael Sussman of the Democratic Alliance, an organizer of the event, commented: “Our national interest demands the focus of our treasure and priorities on pressing domestic issues like the extension of health care to all Americans and the active promotion of a full employment economy. The commitment of more troops to Afghanistan retards fulfillment of these critical priorities, serves no compelling military interest and will only further polarize our relations with the Moslem world."
The weather forecast predicts it will be "mostly clear" with temperatures in the mid-to-upper 30s in Highland Falls during the protest, but it's "rain or shine." Bring candles or a flashlight. Local streets should accommodate parking.
Highland Falls is about 32 miles south of New Paltz and 16 miles south of Newburgh. Driving from the north, Rt. 9W is your best bet. There are two entrances to the town from 9W. From the north the first one is where Rt. 218 cuts into Highland Falls and it will take you after 1.1 miles to Main St. and Veterans Way, where the park is located. (If you are coming from Albany, it's quicker to take the Thruway to exit 17 Newburgh, and switch to 9W south.) If you approach from the south, there's another entrance about a mile and a half below the first which connects directly with Main St. (Rt. 218) which you take for a mile or so to the park.
Contact the Activist Newsletter, jacdon@earthlink.net, for information about possible car pools from Ulster and Dutchess counties. For information about the rally contact Bennett Weiss at (845) 569-8662, benweiss@aol.com, and Nick Mottern (914) 806-6179, nickmottern@earthlink.net. For carpooling from Westchester County coordinated by WESPAC, (914) 449-6514.
PICKET FOR PEACE, DECEMBER 5 IN NEW PALTZ
There will be demonstration against Washington's expansion of the Afghan War that will take place Saturday, Dec. 5, in New Paltz between 2 p.m. and 4 p.m. on Main St. (Rt. 299) on the sidewalk in front of New Paltz Plaza shopping center (with Stop 'n' Shop). It is sponsored by Peace and Social Progress Now, the H.V. Activist Newsletter and New Paltz Women in Black. For information or for a group to enlist as a co-sponsor, contact jacdon@earthlink.net, (845) 255-5779.
Thursday, November 26, 2009
11-26-09 West Point Protest
Protest Near West Point Tuesday Dec. 1
as Obama Announces a wider Afghan war
As President Obama announces his plans to escalate the Afghan war in a speech at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point Tuesday, Dec. 1, the Hudson Valley peace movement will be conducting a nearby protest against his decision to send additional American troops to the battlefield.
The antiwar action will start in the Main St. park in the town of Highland Falls in Orange County, which is adjacent to the grounds of the Military Academy. People will begin gathering at 5:30 p.m. for a rally at 6:30 p.m. featuring several speakers. After about a half hour, participants will join a quarter-mile candlelight march to the gates of West Point, then return to the park.
This demonstration is a rain or shine event. Bring candles or a flashlight. It is sponsored by Orange County Democratic Alliance, WESPAC, Peace Action of New York State, World Can’t Wait, Peace and Social Progress Now, and the Hudson Valley Activist Newsletter.
The organizers are urging activists from throughout the region to take part in this important event. The world will be watching Obama's speech that evening and it is important to show that representatives of the majority of the American people who oppose the Afghan war are making their views known.
Contact the Activist Newsletter, jacdon@earthlink.net, for information about possible car pools from Ulster and Dutchess counties. For information about the rally contact Bennett Weiss at (845) 569-8662, benweiss@aol.com, and Nick Mottern (914) 806-6179, nickmottern@earthlink.net. For carpooling from Westchester County coordinated by WESPAC, (914) 449-6514.
Highland Falls is about 32 miles south of New Paltz and 16 miles south of Newburgh. Driving from the north, Rt. 9W is your best bet. There are two entrances to the town from 9W. The first one is where Rt. 218 cuts into Highland Falls and it will take you into Main St. in 1.1 miles. The second, about mile and a half further south on 9W connects directly with Main St. (Rt. 218) and you go north a mile or so. (If you are coming from Albany, its quicker to take the Thruway to exit 17 Newburgh, and switch to 9W south.)
AND DON'T FORGET:
There will be another demonstration against Washington's expansion of the Afghan War that will take place Saturday, Dec. 5, in New Paltz between 2 p.m. and 4 p.m. on Main St. (Rt. 299) on the sidewalk in front of New Paltz Plaza shopping center (with Stop 'n' Shop). It is sponsored by Peace and Social Progress Now, the H.V. Activist Newsletter and New Paltz Women in Black. For information or for a group to enlist as a co-sponsor, contact jacdon@earthlink.net, (845) 255-5779.
as Obama Announces a wider Afghan war
As President Obama announces his plans to escalate the Afghan war in a speech at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point Tuesday, Dec. 1, the Hudson Valley peace movement will be conducting a nearby protest against his decision to send additional American troops to the battlefield.
The antiwar action will start in the Main St. park in the town of Highland Falls in Orange County, which is adjacent to the grounds of the Military Academy. People will begin gathering at 5:30 p.m. for a rally at 6:30 p.m. featuring several speakers. After about a half hour, participants will join a quarter-mile candlelight march to the gates of West Point, then return to the park.
This demonstration is a rain or shine event. Bring candles or a flashlight. It is sponsored by Orange County Democratic Alliance, WESPAC, Peace Action of New York State, World Can’t Wait, Peace and Social Progress Now, and the Hudson Valley Activist Newsletter.
The organizers are urging activists from throughout the region to take part in this important event. The world will be watching Obama's speech that evening and it is important to show that representatives of the majority of the American people who oppose the Afghan war are making their views known.
Contact the Activist Newsletter, jacdon@earthlink.net, for information about possible car pools from Ulster and Dutchess counties. For information about the rally contact Bennett Weiss at (845) 569-8662, benweiss@aol.com, and Nick Mottern (914) 806-6179, nickmottern@earthlink.net. For carpooling from Westchester County coordinated by WESPAC, (914) 449-6514.
Highland Falls is about 32 miles south of New Paltz and 16 miles south of Newburgh. Driving from the north, Rt. 9W is your best bet. There are two entrances to the town from 9W. The first one is where Rt. 218 cuts into Highland Falls and it will take you into Main St. in 1.1 miles. The second, about mile and a half further south on 9W connects directly with Main St. (Rt. 218) and you go north a mile or so. (If you are coming from Albany, its quicker to take the Thruway to exit 17 Newburgh, and switch to 9W south.)
AND DON'T FORGET:
There will be another demonstration against Washington's expansion of the Afghan War that will take place Saturday, Dec. 5, in New Paltz between 2 p.m. and 4 p.m. on Main St. (Rt. 299) on the sidewalk in front of New Paltz Plaza shopping center (with Stop 'n' Shop). It is sponsored by Peace and Social Progress Now, the H.V. Activist Newsletter and New Paltz Women in Black. For information or for a group to enlist as a co-sponsor, contact jacdon@earthlink.net, (845) 255-5779.
Wednesday, November 25, 2009
11-25-09 Protest
Protest Wider Afghan War!
It's not yet official but on December 1 President Obama will announce he is sending 25,000 to 30,000 more U.S. troops to fight in Afghanistan and Pakistan. This will bring the American troop commitment to about 100,000, along with 50,000 NATO troops. A New York Times article today about the troop increase, plus an AP article on the Obama Administration's refusal to to sign an international convention banning land mines, follows below.Join us the Saturday after the wider war announcement — probably Saturday Dec. 5 — in an antiwar picket line in New Paltz village. It will take place 2 p.m. to 4 p.m. on the sidewalk in front of New Paltz Plaza shopping center (the one with the movie theater) on Main St. (Rt. 299). Bring your own sign or use ours.
Organized by Peace and Social Progress Now and endorsed by New Paltz Women in Black and the Hudson Valley Activist Newsletter.
Information: jacdon@earthlink.net
11-25-09 Obama Widens War
Obama May Add 30,000 Troops in Afghanistan
By Helene Cooper and Eric Schmitt
New York Times, Nov. 25, 2009
WASHINGTON — President Obama said Tuesday that he was determined to “finish the job” in Afghanistan, and his aides signaled to allies that he would send as many as 25,000 to 30,000 additional American troops there even as they cautioned that the final number remained in flux.
The White House said Mr. Obama had completed his consultations with his war council on Monday night and would formally announce his decision in a national address in the next week, probably on Tuesday.
At a news conference in the East Room with Prime Minister Manmohan Singh of India, Mr. Obama suggested that his approach would break from the policies he had inherited from the Bush administration and said that the goals would be to keep Al Qaeda from using the region to launch more attacks against the United States and to bring more stability to Afghanistan.
“After eight years — some of those years in which we did not have, I think, either the resources or the strategy to get the job done — it is my intention to finish the job,” he said.
He said that he would outline his Afghanistan strategy after Thanksgiving, adding, “I feel very confident that when the American people hear a clear rationale for what we’re doing there and how we intend to achieve our goals, that they will be supportive.”
Though he and his advisers have drawn up benchmarks to measure progress and put pressure on the Afghan government to do its part, Mr. Obama offered no details in his public remarks on Tuesday. He was also silent on precisely what would constitute finishing the job in Afghanistan or how soon he envisioned being able to begin extricating the United States from the war there.
While the troop levels he orders will go a long way toward defining his position, the White House has stressed that Mr. Obama’s review has gone far beyond the numbers to better define the military and civilian-aid components of the effort in Afghanistan, how they fit into efforts to combat Al Qaeda in Pakistan and how to ensure that the American commitment in the region is not open-ended.
At the meeting on Monday night, Mr. Obama went around the table in the White House Situation Room asking his senior advisers for summations of their individual assessments and to voice any concerns they still had, said an administration official who was briefed on the two-hour meeting.
“There was a lot of back and forth,” said the official, with Mr. Obama interjecting questions and top aides cutting each other off at times. When the meeting finished shortly after 10 p.m., some of the senior advisers lingered in small groups to continue their discussions, said the official, who like others interviewed for this article spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the meeting’s confidentiality.
The meeting covered a wide variety of issues, including benchmarks to measure progress by Pakistan and Afghanistan, as well as the specific number of additional American troops to send.
Although his aides told some allies that the troop increase would most likely be slightly below 30,000 — there are currently 68,000 American troops in Afghanistan — several officials said Mr. Obama did not appear completely settled on a final number.
“He’s still not happy,” one official said.
One reason for Mr. Obama’s disquiet might be discontent among the members of his own party on Capitol Hill over the prospect of escalating the war and paying for it. Among those present at Monday night’s session was Peter R. Orszag, the White House budget director.
Before a meeting with Mr. Obama on Tuesday afternoon, Nancy Pelosi, the House speaker, said during a conference call of economists and bloggers that there was “serious unrest in our caucus about can we afford this war.”
Ms. Pelosi said she did not want to sacrifice the party’s domestic agenda to the cost of the troop buildup. “The American people believe that if something is in our national security interest, we have to be able to afford it,” she said. “That doesn’t mean that we hold everything else” hostage to that.
Administration officials said that during the Monday meeting, officials discussed a proposal to deploy the American troops in waves, the first of which would go early next year to be in place in southern or eastern Afghanistan by spring. They said the American military should be able to deploy one brigade per quarter.
One administration official involved in Afghanistan policy said the president and his top advisers were thinking in terms of “exit strategies” and not necessarily “exit timetables.” He compared the current thinking to the “conditional engagement” that President George W. Bush used in Iraq.
As Afghan security forces are trained and deployed, the official said, American officials and commanders would watch closely to determine when operational control of a given area could be turned over to them. That is what happened in Iraq, as American forces gradually turned over control of territory to Iraqis once they had proved their ability.
“As you go along, you might have some target dates,” the administration official said, noting as an example the proposal by Senator Carl Levin, the Michigan Democrat who leads the Armed Services Committee, that by 2012, the Afghan Army should be increased to 240,000 soldiers from 92,000, and police forces to 160,000 officers from 84,000.
Mr. Obama declined to say what day he would make his announcement, but officials said the Congressional leadership had been invited to the White House for a briefing next Tuesday.
Administration officials said that as part of his Afghanistan strategy, Mr. Obama would also announce strict benchmarks, or “performance” targets, which the United States will expect the Afghan government to meet. Mr. Obama will be tying both military and economic aid to Afghanistan to those targets, the officials said.
As the debate over the size of the troop increasehas played out over the last few months, an increase of about 30,000 reinforcements has won the support of Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton and Adm. Mike Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
That number would fall between the 40,000 additional troops requested by the American commander in Afghanistan, Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal, and the far smaller number favored by some Obama advisers, including Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. Mr. Obama will also be making a broader appeal for Afghanistan’s neighbors and regional actors to play a role, the officials said.
“We have to do it as part of a broader international community,” Mr. Obama said at the news conference. “So one of the things I’m going to be discussing is the obligations of our international partners in this process.”
After Mr. Obama announces his Afghanistan strategy, Mrs. Clinton will brief NATO allies at a meeting of foreign ministers in Brussels on Dec. 3 and 4. There, Mrs. Clinton is expected to solicit specific contributions from them, including as many as 10,000 additional soldiers, bringing the total number of allied troops in line with General McChrystal’s request. Administration officials cautioned that they did not expect contributions to be nailed down until January.
By Helene Cooper and Eric Schmitt
New York Times, Nov. 25, 2009
WASHINGTON — President Obama said Tuesday that he was determined to “finish the job” in Afghanistan, and his aides signaled to allies that he would send as many as 25,000 to 30,000 additional American troops there even as they cautioned that the final number remained in flux.
The White House said Mr. Obama had completed his consultations with his war council on Monday night and would formally announce his decision in a national address in the next week, probably on Tuesday.
At a news conference in the East Room with Prime Minister Manmohan Singh of India, Mr. Obama suggested that his approach would break from the policies he had inherited from the Bush administration and said that the goals would be to keep Al Qaeda from using the region to launch more attacks against the United States and to bring more stability to Afghanistan.
“After eight years — some of those years in which we did not have, I think, either the resources or the strategy to get the job done — it is my intention to finish the job,” he said.
He said that he would outline his Afghanistan strategy after Thanksgiving, adding, “I feel very confident that when the American people hear a clear rationale for what we’re doing there and how we intend to achieve our goals, that they will be supportive.”
Though he and his advisers have drawn up benchmarks to measure progress and put pressure on the Afghan government to do its part, Mr. Obama offered no details in his public remarks on Tuesday. He was also silent on precisely what would constitute finishing the job in Afghanistan or how soon he envisioned being able to begin extricating the United States from the war there.
While the troop levels he orders will go a long way toward defining his position, the White House has stressed that Mr. Obama’s review has gone far beyond the numbers to better define the military and civilian-aid components of the effort in Afghanistan, how they fit into efforts to combat Al Qaeda in Pakistan and how to ensure that the American commitment in the region is not open-ended.
At the meeting on Monday night, Mr. Obama went around the table in the White House Situation Room asking his senior advisers for summations of their individual assessments and to voice any concerns they still had, said an administration official who was briefed on the two-hour meeting.
“There was a lot of back and forth,” said the official, with Mr. Obama interjecting questions and top aides cutting each other off at times. When the meeting finished shortly after 10 p.m., some of the senior advisers lingered in small groups to continue their discussions, said the official, who like others interviewed for this article spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the meeting’s confidentiality.
The meeting covered a wide variety of issues, including benchmarks to measure progress by Pakistan and Afghanistan, as well as the specific number of additional American troops to send.
Although his aides told some allies that the troop increase would most likely be slightly below 30,000 — there are currently 68,000 American troops in Afghanistan — several officials said Mr. Obama did not appear completely settled on a final number.
“He’s still not happy,” one official said.
One reason for Mr. Obama’s disquiet might be discontent among the members of his own party on Capitol Hill over the prospect of escalating the war and paying for it. Among those present at Monday night’s session was Peter R. Orszag, the White House budget director.
Before a meeting with Mr. Obama on Tuesday afternoon, Nancy Pelosi, the House speaker, said during a conference call of economists and bloggers that there was “serious unrest in our caucus about can we afford this war.”
Ms. Pelosi said she did not want to sacrifice the party’s domestic agenda to the cost of the troop buildup. “The American people believe that if something is in our national security interest, we have to be able to afford it,” she said. “That doesn’t mean that we hold everything else” hostage to that.
Administration officials said that during the Monday meeting, officials discussed a proposal to deploy the American troops in waves, the first of which would go early next year to be in place in southern or eastern Afghanistan by spring. They said the American military should be able to deploy one brigade per quarter.
One administration official involved in Afghanistan policy said the president and his top advisers were thinking in terms of “exit strategies” and not necessarily “exit timetables.” He compared the current thinking to the “conditional engagement” that President George W. Bush used in Iraq.
As Afghan security forces are trained and deployed, the official said, American officials and commanders would watch closely to determine when operational control of a given area could be turned over to them. That is what happened in Iraq, as American forces gradually turned over control of territory to Iraqis once they had proved their ability.
“As you go along, you might have some target dates,” the administration official said, noting as an example the proposal by Senator Carl Levin, the Michigan Democrat who leads the Armed Services Committee, that by 2012, the Afghan Army should be increased to 240,000 soldiers from 92,000, and police forces to 160,000 officers from 84,000.
Mr. Obama declined to say what day he would make his announcement, but officials said the Congressional leadership had been invited to the White House for a briefing next Tuesday.
Administration officials said that as part of his Afghanistan strategy, Mr. Obama would also announce strict benchmarks, or “performance” targets, which the United States will expect the Afghan government to meet. Mr. Obama will be tying both military and economic aid to Afghanistan to those targets, the officials said.
As the debate over the size of the troop increasehas played out over the last few months, an increase of about 30,000 reinforcements has won the support of Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton and Adm. Mike Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
That number would fall between the 40,000 additional troops requested by the American commander in Afghanistan, Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal, and the far smaller number favored by some Obama advisers, including Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. Mr. Obama will also be making a broader appeal for Afghanistan’s neighbors and regional actors to play a role, the officials said.
“We have to do it as part of a broader international community,” Mr. Obama said at the news conference. “So one of the things I’m going to be discussing is the obligations of our international partners in this process.”
After Mr. Obama announces his Afghanistan strategy, Mrs. Clinton will brief NATO allies at a meeting of foreign ministers in Brussels on Dec. 3 and 4. There, Mrs. Clinton is expected to solicit specific contributions from them, including as many as 10,000 additional soldiers, bringing the total number of allied troops in line with General McChrystal’s request. Administration officials cautioned that they did not expect contributions to be nailed down until January.
11-25-09 US rejects landmine ban
Obama administration will not sign land mine ban
By Desmond Butler
WASHINGTON (AP, Nov. 24) — The Obama administration has decided not to sign an international convention banning land mines.
State Department spokesman Ian Kelly said Tuesday that the administration recently completed a review and decided not to change the Bush-era policy.
"We decided that our land mine policy remains in effect," he said.
More than 150 countries have agreed to the Mine Ban Treaty's provisions to end the production, use, stockpiling and trade in mines. Besides the United States, holdouts include: China, India, Pakistan, Myanmar and Russia.
Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., criticized the State Department's review of the land mine policy as "cursory and halfhearted."
The senator described the decision to stand fast on the current policy as "a lost opportunity .... The United States took some of the earliest and most effective steps to restrict the use of land mines. We should be leading this effort, not sitting on the sidelines."
Human rights groups had expressed hopes that the Obama administration would sign the treaty.
Stephen Goose, the director of Human Rights Watch's arms division, said he was surprised by the announcement and called it disappointing. He said that his group had been pushing the administration to conduct a review of its policy but that the administration had given no indication that one was under way.
"If one was already completed, it was not very extensive," he said.
Kelly said that the United States would send an observer group of mine experts to a review conference on the treaty in Cartegena, Colombia, next week.
A report this month by the International Campaign to Ban Landmines found that mines remain planted in the earth in more than 70 countries and killed at least 1,266 people and wounded 3,891 last year. More than 2.2 million anti-personnel mines, 250,000 anti-vehicle mines and 17 million other explosives left over from wars have been removed since 1999, the report said.
By Desmond Butler
WASHINGTON (AP, Nov. 24) — The Obama administration has decided not to sign an international convention banning land mines.
State Department spokesman Ian Kelly said Tuesday that the administration recently completed a review and decided not to change the Bush-era policy.
"We decided that our land mine policy remains in effect," he said.
More than 150 countries have agreed to the Mine Ban Treaty's provisions to end the production, use, stockpiling and trade in mines. Besides the United States, holdouts include: China, India, Pakistan, Myanmar and Russia.
Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., criticized the State Department's review of the land mine policy as "cursory and halfhearted."
The senator described the decision to stand fast on the current policy as "a lost opportunity .... The United States took some of the earliest and most effective steps to restrict the use of land mines. We should be leading this effort, not sitting on the sidelines."
Human rights groups had expressed hopes that the Obama administration would sign the treaty.
Stephen Goose, the director of Human Rights Watch's arms division, said he was surprised by the announcement and called it disappointing. He said that his group had been pushing the administration to conduct a review of its policy but that the administration had given no indication that one was under way.
"If one was already completed, it was not very extensive," he said.
Kelly said that the United States would send an observer group of mine experts to a review conference on the treaty in Cartegena, Colombia, next week.
A report this month by the International Campaign to Ban Landmines found that mines remain planted in the earth in more than 70 countries and killed at least 1,266 people and wounded 3,891 last year. More than 2.2 million anti-personnel mines, 250,000 anti-vehicle mines and 17 million other explosives left over from wars have been removed since 1999, the report said.
Saturday, November 14, 2009
11-14-09 Peace Groups Call for Action
From the Activist Newsletter, Nov. 14, 2009
U.S. PEACE GROUPS UNITE FOR
CALL TO ACTION WHEN THE
AFGHAN WAR IS ESCALATED
Seven American antiwar coalitions and organizations are calling for various local actions before and after President Obama decides to widen the Afghanistan war. The decision is expected in a matter of days or a couple of weeks. The groups include A.N.S.W.E.R Coalition, United for Peace and Justice, World Can’t Wait, Veterans For Peace, National Assembly, Military Families Speak Out, and National Campaign for Nonviolent Resistance. Their call to action is below.
MID-HUDSON RESIDENTS: Join us in New Paltz the Saturday after the announcement for a 2 p.m. to 4 p.m. picket line on Main St. in front of New Paltz Plaza shopping center (the one with the movie theater). We have lots of signs calling for an end to the Afghan war, or bring your own. The protest is being organized by Peace and Social Progress Now and the Hudson Valley Activist Newsletter. We invite other groups to join us as co-sponsors, and rely on our readers to spread the world. For information or to co-sponsor, contact jacdon@earthlink.net.
TEXT OF CALL TO ACTION BY SEVEN GROUPS
Any day will likely come the sickening news that President Obama has decided to escalate the war in Afghanistan.
Here in the U.S. and no doubt around the world people will react in pain, anger and sorrow, knowing what tragedy and suffering will follow.
It will mean at a very minimum that the U.S. will occupy Afghanistan for several more years, sending home dead and wounded soldiers while killing and wounding many times more Afghani people. The suffering in Afghanistan today will grow by orders of magnitude and the U.S. will be that much less secure in direct proportion.
As tragic as it was to see Lyndon Johnson's "Great Society" crash and burn on the rocks of the Vietnam war, the stakes are much higher now. The U.S. economy today still teeters at the abyss. Escalating the Afghanistan war will not just be the ruin of desperately needed domestic programs but may very possibly destroy the entire economy.
For those reasons and many more we call upon our members and every U.S. citizen with a love of humanity in their heart to pledge to at least the following actions:
1) Within the next few days, ideally prior to any decision from President Obama, conduct any of a wide range of local activities — from calling Members of Congress to nonviolent civil resistance and everything in between — demonstrating our opposition to and disgust with any decision to widen the war in Afghanistan. To show unity of purpose, we suggest local “March of the Dead” to Federal Buildings, local Congressional offices and government buildings of any sort.
2) On the day immediately following an announcement to escalate the war in Afghanistan, respond again in a variety of ways. To show unity of purpose, we suggest:
a) Making an appointment that day with at least one group that you're not already a member of — a church, union, civic group, etc. — to go and speak with them about the war
b) Return to the streets and again conduct any of a wide range of local activities — from calling Members of Congress to nonviolent civil resistance and everything in between — and be prepared to comment to the news media about the escalation of the war.
U.S. PEACE GROUPS UNITE FOR
CALL TO ACTION WHEN THE
AFGHAN WAR IS ESCALATED
Seven American antiwar coalitions and organizations are calling for various local actions before and after President Obama decides to widen the Afghanistan war. The decision is expected in a matter of days or a couple of weeks. The groups include A.N.S.W.E.R Coalition, United for Peace and Justice, World Can’t Wait, Veterans For Peace, National Assembly, Military Families Speak Out, and National Campaign for Nonviolent Resistance. Their call to action is below.
MID-HUDSON RESIDENTS: Join us in New Paltz the Saturday after the announcement for a 2 p.m. to 4 p.m. picket line on Main St. in front of New Paltz Plaza shopping center (the one with the movie theater). We have lots of signs calling for an end to the Afghan war, or bring your own. The protest is being organized by Peace and Social Progress Now and the Hudson Valley Activist Newsletter. We invite other groups to join us as co-sponsors, and rely on our readers to spread the world. For information or to co-sponsor, contact jacdon@earthlink.net.
TEXT OF CALL TO ACTION BY SEVEN GROUPS
Any day will likely come the sickening news that President Obama has decided to escalate the war in Afghanistan.
Here in the U.S. and no doubt around the world people will react in pain, anger and sorrow, knowing what tragedy and suffering will follow.
It will mean at a very minimum that the U.S. will occupy Afghanistan for several more years, sending home dead and wounded soldiers while killing and wounding many times more Afghani people. The suffering in Afghanistan today will grow by orders of magnitude and the U.S. will be that much less secure in direct proportion.
As tragic as it was to see Lyndon Johnson's "Great Society" crash and burn on the rocks of the Vietnam war, the stakes are much higher now. The U.S. economy today still teeters at the abyss. Escalating the Afghanistan war will not just be the ruin of desperately needed domestic programs but may very possibly destroy the entire economy.
For those reasons and many more we call upon our members and every U.S. citizen with a love of humanity in their heart to pledge to at least the following actions:
1) Within the next few days, ideally prior to any decision from President Obama, conduct any of a wide range of local activities — from calling Members of Congress to nonviolent civil resistance and everything in between — demonstrating our opposition to and disgust with any decision to widen the war in Afghanistan. To show unity of purpose, we suggest local “March of the Dead” to Federal Buildings, local Congressional offices and government buildings of any sort.
2) On the day immediately following an announcement to escalate the war in Afghanistan, respond again in a variety of ways. To show unity of purpose, we suggest:
a) Making an appointment that day with at least one group that you're not already a member of — a church, union, civic group, etc. — to go and speak with them about the war
b) Return to the streets and again conduct any of a wide range of local activities — from calling Members of Congress to nonviolent civil resistance and everything in between — and be prepared to comment to the news media about the escalation of the war.
Friday, November 13, 2009
11-13-09 Activist Calendar
ACTIVIST CALENDAR, Nov. 13, 2009, Issue #152A
Of the Hudson Valley Activist Newsletter
Send event announcements to jacdon@earthlink.net
[Editor's Note: 1. We obtained these items just after posting our Nov. 12 Activist Calendar. See this previous calendar below for the rest of the November-early December events. 2. If clicking on email addresses doesn't work, copy and paste (we're trying to work this out). The web addresses should be okay.]
Sunday, Nov. 15, UPPER NYACK: "Poems For Peace From The World Of War" is the title of an interesting 2-4 p.m. public meeting to hear antiwar military veterans reading from their own poetic works. The soldier-poets are Jan Berry, Thomas Brinson, Michael Gillen, Gerry McCarthy, Jim Murphy, Walt Nygard, Dan Wilcox, Larry Winters and Dayl Wise. We're told: "As men of peace, all nine voices come from the direct experience of the military, more specifically, the intense experience of war." An open discussion will follow the readings. The event takes place at the Fellowship of Reconciliation, 521 N. Broadway. Information, Mary Heckler (845) 358-4601, mheckler@forusa.org.
Sunday, Nov. 15, NEW ROCHELLE: Women in Black will conduct a 2-3 p.m. Palestine Solidarity Vigil at Main St. and Memorial Highway, demanding an end the occupation of Palestine, an investigation of war crimes in Gaza, and a stop to the siege of Gaza. We're told: "Women and men are welcome. Wear black if you like." The sponsors are WESPAC and CodePink/Westchester. Information, ceilie@aol.com, (914) 654-8990.
Tuesday, Nov. 17, NEW PALTZ (SUNY campus): The New Paltz Feminist Collective and the college Women's Studies Program are sponsoring a 6 p.m. public meeting on the topic "Women Speak Out: Breaking the Silence about Abortion." This "celebration of female voices" will be held in room 409 of the Student Union Building. We're told: "Various speakers from different generational periods will be sharing their experiences with abortion. This is also a time for anyone to share their own experiences but it is not required. Food and drink will be provided. Please join in this important event to help break the silence about abortion. Feel free to bring a friend." Information, newpaltzfeministcollective@gmail.com. Campus map: http://www.newpaltz.edu/map/.
Saturday, Dec. 5, WOODSTOCK: A craft sale to raise funds for the Haitian People's Support Project will be held at the Dutch Reformed Church, 16 Tinker St., at the Village Green in the center of Woodstock. The hours are 11:30 a.m.-5 p.m. "There will be crafts from Haiti, and wares from Peru, such as alpaca gloves, hats, scarves, capes, etc., and kids sweaters." Information, prizantfanny77@hotmail.com.
Of the Hudson Valley Activist Newsletter
Send event announcements to jacdon@earthlink.net
[Editor's Note: 1. We obtained these items just after posting our Nov. 12 Activist Calendar. See this previous calendar below for the rest of the November-early December events. 2. If clicking on email addresses doesn't work, copy and paste (we're trying to work this out). The web addresses should be okay.]
Sunday, Nov. 15, UPPER NYACK: "Poems For Peace From The World Of War" is the title of an interesting 2-4 p.m. public meeting to hear antiwar military veterans reading from their own poetic works. The soldier-poets are Jan Berry, Thomas Brinson, Michael Gillen, Gerry McCarthy, Jim Murphy, Walt Nygard, Dan Wilcox, Larry Winters and Dayl Wise. We're told: "As men of peace, all nine voices come from the direct experience of the military, more specifically, the intense experience of war." An open discussion will follow the readings. The event takes place at the Fellowship of Reconciliation, 521 N. Broadway. Information, Mary Heckler (845) 358-4601, mheckler@forusa.org.
Sunday, Nov. 15, NEW ROCHELLE: Women in Black will conduct a 2-3 p.m. Palestine Solidarity Vigil at Main St. and Memorial Highway, demanding an end the occupation of Palestine, an investigation of war crimes in Gaza, and a stop to the siege of Gaza. We're told: "Women and men are welcome. Wear black if you like." The sponsors are WESPAC and CodePink/Westchester. Information, ceilie@aol.com, (914) 654-8990.
Tuesday, Nov. 17, NEW PALTZ (SUNY campus): The New Paltz Feminist Collective and the college Women's Studies Program are sponsoring a 6 p.m. public meeting on the topic "Women Speak Out: Breaking the Silence about Abortion." This "celebration of female voices" will be held in room 409 of the Student Union Building. We're told: "Various speakers from different generational periods will be sharing their experiences with abortion. This is also a time for anyone to share their own experiences but it is not required. Food and drink will be provided. Please join in this important event to help break the silence about abortion. Feel free to bring a friend." Information, newpaltzfeministcollective@gmail.com. Campus map: http://www.newpaltz.edu/map/.
Saturday, Dec. 5, WOODSTOCK: A craft sale to raise funds for the Haitian People's Support Project will be held at the Dutch Reformed Church, 16 Tinker St., at the Village Green in the center of Woodstock. The hours are 11:30 a.m.-5 p.m. "There will be crafts from Haiti, and wares from Peru, such as alpaca gloves, hats, scarves, capes, etc., and kids sweaters." Information, prizantfanny77@hotmail.com.
11-13-09 Progressives Hit Health Bill
Six Smart Progressive Complaints About House Health Bill
By John Nichols, The Nation, Nov. 9, 2009
The Affordable Health Care for America Act was approved by the U.S. House Nov. 7 with overwhelming support from progressive Democrats who serve in the chamber and from a president who was nominated and elected with the enthusiastic support of progressive voters.
But that does not mean that informed and engaged progressives are entirely enthusiastic about the measure. In fact, some are openly and explicitly opposed to it — among them former Congressional Progressive Caucus chair Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio), and CPC member Rep. Eric Massa (D-New York), both of whom broke with the majority of their fellow Democrats to vote "no" when the House approved the measure by a narrow 220-215 vote. \
How can this be? Isn't this a fight between Democrats and Republicans? Between reforming liberals and tea-party conservatives? How can there possibly be any subtlety or nuance to this debate? Well, of course, the debate over this 1,900-page behemoth of a bill is more complicated than the easy spin of political insiders — and media cheering sections — would have Americans believe.
Key interest groups, such as the National Organization for Women, and key congressmen who have been long-term supporters of reform, such as single-payer backers Massa and Kucinich, argue that the bill is not the cure for what ails the U.S. health care system. Indeed, they suggest, the bill as it is currently constructed could make a bad situation worse.
Many sincere progressives in the House, and outside of it, chose to back the bill as the best that could be gotten. Others supported it on the theory that flaws could be fixed in the Senate and in the reconciliation of the House and Senate bills. But those repairs will only be made if activists are conscious of what ails this bill. For that reason, even supporters of the House legislation would be wise to consider the criticisms of it by groups that advocate for the rights of women, patient advocates, unions, and some of the most progressive members of the House.
Here are six smart progressive complaints about the House bill:
1. FROM CONGRESSMAN ERIC MASSA: "This Bill Will Enshrine in Law the Monopolistic Powers of the Private Health Insurance Industry"
At the highest level, this bill will enshrine in law the monopolistic powers of the private health insurance industry, period. There's really no other way to look at it. I believe the private health insurance industry is part of the problem.
This bill also, I believe, fails to address the fundamental question before the American people, and that is how do we control the costs of health care. It does not address interstate portability, as Medicare does. It does not address real medical malpractice insurance reform. It does not address the incredible waste and fraud that are currently in the system.
2. FROM THE CALIFORNIA NURSES ASSOCIATION: "This Bill Fails to Control Costs."
While the current bills will provide limited assistance for some, the inconvenient truth is they fall far short in effective controls on skyrocketing insurance, pharmaceutical and hospital costs, do little to stop insurance companies from denying needed medical care recommended by doctors, and provide little relief for Americans with employer-sponsored insurance worried about health security for themselves and their families.
3. FROM THE NATIONAL ORGANIZATION FOR WOMEN: [3] "This Bill Obliterates Women's Fundamental Right to Choose"
The House of Representatives has dealt the worst blow to women's fundamental right to self-determination in order to buy a few votes for reform of the profit-driven health insurance industry. We must protect the rights we fought for in Roe v. Wade. We cannot and will not support a health care bill that strips millions of women of their existing access to abortion.
Birth control and abortion are integral aspects of women's health care needs. Health care reform should not be a vehicle to obliterate a woman's fundamental right to choose.
The Stupak Amendment (to the House bill, which was approved and attached on Saturday) goes far beyond the abusive Hyde Amendment, which has denied federal funding of abortion since 1976. The Stupak Amendment, if incorporated into the final version of health insurance reform legislation, will:
• Prevent women receiving tax subsidies from using their own money to purchase private insurance that covers abortion;
• Prevent women participating in the public health insurance exchange, administered by private insurance companies, from using 100% of their own money to purchase private insurance that covers abortion;
• Prevent low-income women from accessing abortion entirely, in many cases.
NOW calls on the Senate to pass a health care bill that respects women's constitutionally protected right to abortion and calls on President Obama to refuse to sign any health care bill that restricts women's access to affordable, quality reproductive health care.
4. FROM PLANNED PARENTHOOD'S CECILE RICHARDS: "This Bill Embraces Religious-Right Extremes."
It is extremely unfortunate that the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops and anti-choice opponents were able to hijack the health care reform bill in their dedicated attempt to ban all legal abortion In the United States.
Most telling is the fact that the vast majority of members of the House who supported the Stupak/Pitts amendment in today's vote do not support HR 3962, revealing their true motive, which is to kill the health care reform bill.
These single-issue advocates simply used health care reform to advance their extreme, ideological agenda at the expense of tens of millions of women.
5. FROM REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: "This Bill Worries About the Health of Wall Street, Not America."
We have been led to believe that we must make our health care choices only within the current structure of a predatory, for-profit insurance system which makes money not providing health care. We cannot fault the insurance companies for being what they are. But we can fault legislation in which the government incentivizes the perpetuation, indeed the strengthening, of the for-profit health insurance industry, the very source of the problem. When health insurance companies deny care or raise premiums, co-pays and deductibles they are simply trying to make a profit. That is our system.
Clearly, the insurance companies are the problem, not the solution. They are driving up the cost of health care. Because their massive bureaucracy avoids paying bills so effectively, they force hospitals and doctors to hire their own bureaucracy to fight the insurance companies to avoid getting stuck with an unfair share of the bills. The result is that since 1970, the number of physicians has increased by less than 200% while the number of administrators has increased by 3000%. It is no wonder that 31 cents of every health care dollar goes to administrative costs, not toward providing care. Even those with insurance are at risk. The single biggest cause of bankruptcies in the U.S. is health insurance policies that do not cover you when you get sick.
But instead of working toward the elimination of for-profit insurance, H.R. 3962 would put the government in the role of accelerating the privatization of health care. In H.R. 3962, the government is requiring at least 21 million Americans to buy private health insurance from the very industry that causes costs to be so high, which will result in at least $70 billion in new annual revenue, much of which is coming from taxpayers. This inevitably will lead to even more costs, more subsidies, and higher profits for insurance companies - a bailout under a blue cross.
By incurring only a new requirement to cover pre-existing conditions, a weakened public option, and a few other important but limited concessions, the health insurance companies are getting quite a deal. The Center for American Progress' blog, Think Progress, states, 'since the President signaled that he is backing away from the public option, health insurance stocks have been on the rise.' Similarly, healthcare stocks rallied when Senator Max Baucus introduced a bill without a public option. Bloomberg reports that Curtis Lane, a prominent health industry investor, predicted a few weeks ago that 'money will start flowing in again' to health insurance stocks after passage of the legislation. Investors.com last month reported that pharmacy benefit managers share prices are hitting all-time highs, with the only industry worry that the Administration would reverse its decision not to negotiate Medicare Part D drug prices, leaving in place a Bush Administration policy.
During the debate, when the interests of insurance companies would have been effectively challenged, that challenge was turned back. The 'robust public option' which would have offered a modicum of competition to a monopolistic industry was whittled down from an initial potential enrollment of 129 million Americans to 6 million. An amendment which would have protected the rights of states to pursue single-payer health care was stripped from the bill at the request of the Administration. Looking ahead, we cringe at the prospect of even greater favors for insurance companies.
Recent rises in unemployment indicate a widening separation between the finance economy and the real economy. The finance economy considers the health of Wall Street, rising corporate profits, and banks' hoarding of cash, much of it from taxpayers, as sign of an economic recovery. However in the real economy - in which most Americans live - the recession is not over. Rising unemployment, business failures, bankruptcies and foreclosures are still hammering Main Street.
This health care bill continues the redistribution of wealth to Wall Street at the expense of America's manufacturing and service economies which suffer from costs other countries do not have to bear, especially the cost of health care. America continues to stand out among all industrialized nations for its privatized health care system. As a result, we are less competitive in steel, automotive, aerospace and shipping while other countries subsidize their exports in these areas through socializing the cost of health care.
Notwithstanding the fate of H.R. 3962, America will someday come to recognize the broad social and economic benefits of a not-for-profit, single-payer health care system, which is good for the American people and good for America's businesses, with of course the notable exceptions being insurance and pharmaceuticals.
6. FROM "SICKO'S" DONNA SMITH: "The Bill Does Not Cure What Ails Us."
Passing a healthcare reform bill that does not provide me with better access to care or protection from bankruptcy and financial ruin is not what I asked you all to do. Stripping away all reference to a progressively financed, single standard of high quality healthcare for all - also known as single-payer -- is done only to more deeply ensconce the deep pocketed interests in healthcare: the private, for-profit insurance giants, the big pharmaceuticals, the medical equipment companies, the hospital corporations and all the other making huge profits as thousands die needless deaths.
Healthcare is a basic human right. Granting that right is not something to be calculated differently in swing Congressional districts, off-year election strategy or second-Presidential term planning. It is your (members of Congress') duty to me, to my fellow citizens and to your nation.
And (members of Congress) are marching away from reality when you think all the hard-working people who counted on you to make this a better healthcare system will not notice when you deliver insurance purchase mandates and a corporate bail-out that will dwarf the Wall Street trillions you've already justified.
— John Nichols is Washington correspondent for The Nation and associate editor of The Capital Times in Madison, Wisconsin.
— http://www.commondreams.org/view/2009/11/09-10
By John Nichols, The Nation, Nov. 9, 2009
The Affordable Health Care for America Act was approved by the U.S. House Nov. 7 with overwhelming support from progressive Democrats who serve in the chamber and from a president who was nominated and elected with the enthusiastic support of progressive voters.
But that does not mean that informed and engaged progressives are entirely enthusiastic about the measure. In fact, some are openly and explicitly opposed to it — among them former Congressional Progressive Caucus chair Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio), and CPC member Rep. Eric Massa (D-New York), both of whom broke with the majority of their fellow Democrats to vote "no" when the House approved the measure by a narrow 220-215 vote. \
How can this be? Isn't this a fight between Democrats and Republicans? Between reforming liberals and tea-party conservatives? How can there possibly be any subtlety or nuance to this debate? Well, of course, the debate over this 1,900-page behemoth of a bill is more complicated than the easy spin of political insiders — and media cheering sections — would have Americans believe.
Key interest groups, such as the National Organization for Women, and key congressmen who have been long-term supporters of reform, such as single-payer backers Massa and Kucinich, argue that the bill is not the cure for what ails the U.S. health care system. Indeed, they suggest, the bill as it is currently constructed could make a bad situation worse.
Many sincere progressives in the House, and outside of it, chose to back the bill as the best that could be gotten. Others supported it on the theory that flaws could be fixed in the Senate and in the reconciliation of the House and Senate bills. But those repairs will only be made if activists are conscious of what ails this bill. For that reason, even supporters of the House legislation would be wise to consider the criticisms of it by groups that advocate for the rights of women, patient advocates, unions, and some of the most progressive members of the House.
Here are six smart progressive complaints about the House bill:
1. FROM CONGRESSMAN ERIC MASSA: "This Bill Will Enshrine in Law the Monopolistic Powers of the Private Health Insurance Industry"
At the highest level, this bill will enshrine in law the monopolistic powers of the private health insurance industry, period. There's really no other way to look at it. I believe the private health insurance industry is part of the problem.
This bill also, I believe, fails to address the fundamental question before the American people, and that is how do we control the costs of health care. It does not address interstate portability, as Medicare does. It does not address real medical malpractice insurance reform. It does not address the incredible waste and fraud that are currently in the system.
2. FROM THE CALIFORNIA NURSES ASSOCIATION: "This Bill Fails to Control Costs."
While the current bills will provide limited assistance for some, the inconvenient truth is they fall far short in effective controls on skyrocketing insurance, pharmaceutical and hospital costs, do little to stop insurance companies from denying needed medical care recommended by doctors, and provide little relief for Americans with employer-sponsored insurance worried about health security for themselves and their families.
3. FROM THE NATIONAL ORGANIZATION FOR WOMEN: [3] "This Bill Obliterates Women's Fundamental Right to Choose"
The House of Representatives has dealt the worst blow to women's fundamental right to self-determination in order to buy a few votes for reform of the profit-driven health insurance industry. We must protect the rights we fought for in Roe v. Wade. We cannot and will not support a health care bill that strips millions of women of their existing access to abortion.
Birth control and abortion are integral aspects of women's health care needs. Health care reform should not be a vehicle to obliterate a woman's fundamental right to choose.
The Stupak Amendment (to the House bill, which was approved and attached on Saturday) goes far beyond the abusive Hyde Amendment, which has denied federal funding of abortion since 1976. The Stupak Amendment, if incorporated into the final version of health insurance reform legislation, will:
• Prevent women receiving tax subsidies from using their own money to purchase private insurance that covers abortion;
• Prevent women participating in the public health insurance exchange, administered by private insurance companies, from using 100% of their own money to purchase private insurance that covers abortion;
• Prevent low-income women from accessing abortion entirely, in many cases.
NOW calls on the Senate to pass a health care bill that respects women's constitutionally protected right to abortion and calls on President Obama to refuse to sign any health care bill that restricts women's access to affordable, quality reproductive health care.
4. FROM PLANNED PARENTHOOD'S CECILE RICHARDS: "This Bill Embraces Religious-Right Extremes."
It is extremely unfortunate that the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops and anti-choice opponents were able to hijack the health care reform bill in their dedicated attempt to ban all legal abortion In the United States.
Most telling is the fact that the vast majority of members of the House who supported the Stupak/Pitts amendment in today's vote do not support HR 3962, revealing their true motive, which is to kill the health care reform bill.
These single-issue advocates simply used health care reform to advance their extreme, ideological agenda at the expense of tens of millions of women.
5. FROM REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: "This Bill Worries About the Health of Wall Street, Not America."
We have been led to believe that we must make our health care choices only within the current structure of a predatory, for-profit insurance system which makes money not providing health care. We cannot fault the insurance companies for being what they are. But we can fault legislation in which the government incentivizes the perpetuation, indeed the strengthening, of the for-profit health insurance industry, the very source of the problem. When health insurance companies deny care or raise premiums, co-pays and deductibles they are simply trying to make a profit. That is our system.
Clearly, the insurance companies are the problem, not the solution. They are driving up the cost of health care. Because their massive bureaucracy avoids paying bills so effectively, they force hospitals and doctors to hire their own bureaucracy to fight the insurance companies to avoid getting stuck with an unfair share of the bills. The result is that since 1970, the number of physicians has increased by less than 200% while the number of administrators has increased by 3000%. It is no wonder that 31 cents of every health care dollar goes to administrative costs, not toward providing care. Even those with insurance are at risk. The single biggest cause of bankruptcies in the U.S. is health insurance policies that do not cover you when you get sick.
But instead of working toward the elimination of for-profit insurance, H.R. 3962 would put the government in the role of accelerating the privatization of health care. In H.R. 3962, the government is requiring at least 21 million Americans to buy private health insurance from the very industry that causes costs to be so high, which will result in at least $70 billion in new annual revenue, much of which is coming from taxpayers. This inevitably will lead to even more costs, more subsidies, and higher profits for insurance companies - a bailout under a blue cross.
By incurring only a new requirement to cover pre-existing conditions, a weakened public option, and a few other important but limited concessions, the health insurance companies are getting quite a deal. The Center for American Progress' blog, Think Progress, states, 'since the President signaled that he is backing away from the public option, health insurance stocks have been on the rise.' Similarly, healthcare stocks rallied when Senator Max Baucus introduced a bill without a public option. Bloomberg reports that Curtis Lane, a prominent health industry investor, predicted a few weeks ago that 'money will start flowing in again' to health insurance stocks after passage of the legislation. Investors.com last month reported that pharmacy benefit managers share prices are hitting all-time highs, with the only industry worry that the Administration would reverse its decision not to negotiate Medicare Part D drug prices, leaving in place a Bush Administration policy.
During the debate, when the interests of insurance companies would have been effectively challenged, that challenge was turned back. The 'robust public option' which would have offered a modicum of competition to a monopolistic industry was whittled down from an initial potential enrollment of 129 million Americans to 6 million. An amendment which would have protected the rights of states to pursue single-payer health care was stripped from the bill at the request of the Administration. Looking ahead, we cringe at the prospect of even greater favors for insurance companies.
Recent rises in unemployment indicate a widening separation between the finance economy and the real economy. The finance economy considers the health of Wall Street, rising corporate profits, and banks' hoarding of cash, much of it from taxpayers, as sign of an economic recovery. However in the real economy - in which most Americans live - the recession is not over. Rising unemployment, business failures, bankruptcies and foreclosures are still hammering Main Street.
This health care bill continues the redistribution of wealth to Wall Street at the expense of America's manufacturing and service economies which suffer from costs other countries do not have to bear, especially the cost of health care. America continues to stand out among all industrialized nations for its privatized health care system. As a result, we are less competitive in steel, automotive, aerospace and shipping while other countries subsidize their exports in these areas through socializing the cost of health care.
Notwithstanding the fate of H.R. 3962, America will someday come to recognize the broad social and economic benefits of a not-for-profit, single-payer health care system, which is good for the American people and good for America's businesses, with of course the notable exceptions being insurance and pharmaceuticals.
6. FROM "SICKO'S" DONNA SMITH: "The Bill Does Not Cure What Ails Us."
Passing a healthcare reform bill that does not provide me with better access to care or protection from bankruptcy and financial ruin is not what I asked you all to do. Stripping away all reference to a progressively financed, single standard of high quality healthcare for all - also known as single-payer -- is done only to more deeply ensconce the deep pocketed interests in healthcare: the private, for-profit insurance giants, the big pharmaceuticals, the medical equipment companies, the hospital corporations and all the other making huge profits as thousands die needless deaths.
Healthcare is a basic human right. Granting that right is not something to be calculated differently in swing Congressional districts, off-year election strategy or second-Presidential term planning. It is your (members of Congress') duty to me, to my fellow citizens and to your nation.
And (members of Congress) are marching away from reality when you think all the hard-working people who counted on you to make this a better healthcare system will not notice when you deliver insurance purchase mandates and a corporate bail-out that will dwarf the Wall Street trillions you've already justified.
— John Nichols is Washington correspondent for The Nation and associate editor of The Capital Times in Madison, Wisconsin.
— http://www.commondreams.org/view/2009/11/09-10
11-13-09 Fidel Castro on Obama
FIDEL CASTRO ON OBAMA'S ASIAN TRIP
Since his resignation as president of Cuba, Fidel Castro has become a regular columnist for the national daily Granma, printed under the heading “Reflections by comrade Fidel.” His writings are circulated around the world by the Cuban news agency Prensa Latina, including this article Nov. 12, titled "A Science Fiction Story," commenting on President Barack Obama’s current trip to Asia. While sharply critical of White House policies, Fidel has adopted a measured attitude toward Obama, perhaps more so than to the 10 previous U.S. leaders since the victory of the Cuban Revolution on Jan. 1, 2009.
I very much regret to have to criticize Obama knowing that there are in that country other could-be presidents worse than him. I am aware that that position in the United States is today a major headache. The best example of this is the report in yesterday’s edition of Granma that 237 U.S. members of Congress, or 44%, are millionaires. This does not mean that every one of them is an incorrigible reactionary but it is extremely difficult that they feel like the many million Americans who do not have access to medical care, who are unemployed or who need to work very hard to earn their living.
Of course, Obama himself is no beggar; he owns millions of dollars. He excelled as a professional and his command of language, his eloquence and intellect are unquestionable. Also, he was elected president despite his being an African American, a first time occurrence in the history of his country’s racist society, which is enduring a profound international economic crisis of its own making.
This is not about being an anti-American, as the system and its huge media tend to label its adversaries. The American people are not the culprits but rather the victims of a system that is not only unsustainable, but worse still: it is incompatible with the life of humanity.
The smart and rebellious Obama who suffered humiliation and racism in his childhood and youth understands this, but the Obama educated by the system and committed to it and to the methods that took him to the US presidency cannot resist the temptation to pressure, to threaten and even to deceive others.
He is a workaholic. Perhaps no other American president would dare to engage in such an intense program as he intends to carry out in the next eight days.
According to plan, he will take an extensive tour of Alaska where he intends to address the troops stationed there. He will be visiting Japan, Singapore, the People’s Republic of China and South Korea. He will attend the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation forum (APEC) and that of the Association of East Asian Nations (ASEAN). He will hold talks with the Prime Minister of Japan and His Majesty Emperor Akihito in the land of the Rising Sun as well as with the prime ministers of Singapore and South Korea and the presidents of Indonesia Susilo Bambang, of Russia Dimitri Medvedev and of the People’s Republic of China Hu Jintao. He will be making speeches and giving press conferences. He will be carrying with him his nuclear briefcase, which we hope he will have no need to use during his hasty tour.
His Security advisor has said that Obama will discuss with the president of Russia the continuance of the START-1 Treaty set to expire on Dec. 5, 2009. There is no doubt that some reductions of the enormous nuclear arsenal will be agreed upon, albeit this will be of no consequence to world peace and economy.
What is our distinguished friend planning to discuss during his intense journey? The White House has made its solemn announcement: climate change and economic recovery; nuclear disarmament and the Afghan war; and, the risks of war in Iran and in the People’s Democratic Republic of Korea. There is plenty of material to produce a science fiction book.
But, how can Obama unravel the problems of climate change when the position of his representatives during the preparatory meetings of the Copenhagen Summit on the greenhouse effect gas emissions was the worst among those of the industrialized and rich nations, both in Bangkok and Barcelona, because the United States chose not to sign the Kyoto Protocol and the oligarchy of that country is not willing to really cooperate.
How can he contribute to the solution of the grave economic problems afflicting a large part of humanity when at the end of 2008 the total debt of the United States—including that of the federal, state and local administrations, the businesses and families—amounted to 57 trillion dollars, that is, over 400% of its GDP; and that country’s budget deficit reached almost 13% of its GDP in fiscal year 2009, information that Obama is certainly aware of.
What can he offer Hu Jintao, when his openly protectionist policies have been aimed against Chinese exports and he is demanding at all costs that the Chinese government revaluate the Yuan, an action that would adversely impact on the growing Third World imports from China?
The Brazilian theologian Leonardo Boff, who is not a disciple of Karl Marx but an honest Catholic among others who are not willing to cooperate with the imperialism in Latin America, has recently said that “...we are risking our destruction and the devastation of life’s diversity.”
“[A]lmost half of humanity is living today under the poverty line. The wealthiest 20% are consuming 82.49% of all of the riches on Earth while the poorest 20% are living on a tiny 1.6%.” He also quotes the FAO as he warns that “.there will be in the upcoming years from 150 to 200 million climate refugees.” And then he adds that “humanity is consuming today 30% above the regenerating capacity ofthe planet, which is giving unmistakable signs that it can stand it no more.”
What Leonardo Boff says here is true, but Obama and the US Congress have yet to find out.
What is he describing for us in the hemisphere? The shameful problem in Honduras and the annexation of Colombia where the United States will set up seven military bases. They also established a military base in Cuba more than one-hundred years ago and remain there by force. It was in that base where they installed the horrible torture center widely known around the world; the same that Obama has been unable to close, yet.
I hold the view that before Obama completes his term there will be from six to eight right-wing governments in Latin America that will be allies of the empire. Likewise, the US extreme right will try to limit his administration to one term. Once again there will be a Nixon, a Bush or the like of a Cheney in the White House. Then, the meaning will be clear of those absolutely unjustifiable bases threatening today the South American peoples—with the pretext of fighting drug-trafficking, a problem created by the tens of billions of dollars that organized crime and the production of drugs in Latin America receive from the United States.
Cuba has shown it only takes justice and social development to fight drugs. In our country, the crime rate per 100,000 people is one of the lowest in the world. No other country in the hemisphere can exhibit such low rates of violence. It is known that, despite the blockade, no other country can boast our high education levels.
The Latin American peoples will resist the onslaught of the empire! Obama’s trip seems a science fiction story.
Since his resignation as president of Cuba, Fidel Castro has become a regular columnist for the national daily Granma, printed under the heading “Reflections by comrade Fidel.” His writings are circulated around the world by the Cuban news agency Prensa Latina, including this article Nov. 12, titled "A Science Fiction Story," commenting on President Barack Obama’s current trip to Asia. While sharply critical of White House policies, Fidel has adopted a measured attitude toward Obama, perhaps more so than to the 10 previous U.S. leaders since the victory of the Cuban Revolution on Jan. 1, 2009.
I very much regret to have to criticize Obama knowing that there are in that country other could-be presidents worse than him. I am aware that that position in the United States is today a major headache. The best example of this is the report in yesterday’s edition of Granma that 237 U.S. members of Congress, or 44%, are millionaires. This does not mean that every one of them is an incorrigible reactionary but it is extremely difficult that they feel like the many million Americans who do not have access to medical care, who are unemployed or who need to work very hard to earn their living.
Of course, Obama himself is no beggar; he owns millions of dollars. He excelled as a professional and his command of language, his eloquence and intellect are unquestionable. Also, he was elected president despite his being an African American, a first time occurrence in the history of his country’s racist society, which is enduring a profound international economic crisis of its own making.
This is not about being an anti-American, as the system and its huge media tend to label its adversaries. The American people are not the culprits but rather the victims of a system that is not only unsustainable, but worse still: it is incompatible with the life of humanity.
The smart and rebellious Obama who suffered humiliation and racism in his childhood and youth understands this, but the Obama educated by the system and committed to it and to the methods that took him to the US presidency cannot resist the temptation to pressure, to threaten and even to deceive others.
He is a workaholic. Perhaps no other American president would dare to engage in such an intense program as he intends to carry out in the next eight days.
According to plan, he will take an extensive tour of Alaska where he intends to address the troops stationed there. He will be visiting Japan, Singapore, the People’s Republic of China and South Korea. He will attend the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation forum (APEC) and that of the Association of East Asian Nations (ASEAN). He will hold talks with the Prime Minister of Japan and His Majesty Emperor Akihito in the land of the Rising Sun as well as with the prime ministers of Singapore and South Korea and the presidents of Indonesia Susilo Bambang, of Russia Dimitri Medvedev and of the People’s Republic of China Hu Jintao. He will be making speeches and giving press conferences. He will be carrying with him his nuclear briefcase, which we hope he will have no need to use during his hasty tour.
His Security advisor has said that Obama will discuss with the president of Russia the continuance of the START-1 Treaty set to expire on Dec. 5, 2009. There is no doubt that some reductions of the enormous nuclear arsenal will be agreed upon, albeit this will be of no consequence to world peace and economy.
What is our distinguished friend planning to discuss during his intense journey? The White House has made its solemn announcement: climate change and economic recovery; nuclear disarmament and the Afghan war; and, the risks of war in Iran and in the People’s Democratic Republic of Korea. There is plenty of material to produce a science fiction book.
But, how can Obama unravel the problems of climate change when the position of his representatives during the preparatory meetings of the Copenhagen Summit on the greenhouse effect gas emissions was the worst among those of the industrialized and rich nations, both in Bangkok and Barcelona, because the United States chose not to sign the Kyoto Protocol and the oligarchy of that country is not willing to really cooperate.
How can he contribute to the solution of the grave economic problems afflicting a large part of humanity when at the end of 2008 the total debt of the United States—including that of the federal, state and local administrations, the businesses and families—amounted to 57 trillion dollars, that is, over 400% of its GDP; and that country’s budget deficit reached almost 13% of its GDP in fiscal year 2009, information that Obama is certainly aware of.
What can he offer Hu Jintao, when his openly protectionist policies have been aimed against Chinese exports and he is demanding at all costs that the Chinese government revaluate the Yuan, an action that would adversely impact on the growing Third World imports from China?
The Brazilian theologian Leonardo Boff, who is not a disciple of Karl Marx but an honest Catholic among others who are not willing to cooperate with the imperialism in Latin America, has recently said that “...we are risking our destruction and the devastation of life’s diversity.”
“[A]lmost half of humanity is living today under the poverty line. The wealthiest 20% are consuming 82.49% of all of the riches on Earth while the poorest 20% are living on a tiny 1.6%.” He also quotes the FAO as he warns that “.there will be in the upcoming years from 150 to 200 million climate refugees.” And then he adds that “humanity is consuming today 30% above the regenerating capacity ofthe planet, which is giving unmistakable signs that it can stand it no more.”
What Leonardo Boff says here is true, but Obama and the US Congress have yet to find out.
What is he describing for us in the hemisphere? The shameful problem in Honduras and the annexation of Colombia where the United States will set up seven military bases. They also established a military base in Cuba more than one-hundred years ago and remain there by force. It was in that base where they installed the horrible torture center widely known around the world; the same that Obama has been unable to close, yet.
I hold the view that before Obama completes his term there will be from six to eight right-wing governments in Latin America that will be allies of the empire. Likewise, the US extreme right will try to limit his administration to one term. Once again there will be a Nixon, a Bush or the like of a Cheney in the White House. Then, the meaning will be clear of those absolutely unjustifiable bases threatening today the South American peoples—with the pretext of fighting drug-trafficking, a problem created by the tens of billions of dollars that organized crime and the production of drugs in Latin America receive from the United States.
Cuba has shown it only takes justice and social development to fight drugs. In our country, the crime rate per 100,000 people is one of the lowest in the world. No other country in the hemisphere can exhibit such low rates of violence. It is known that, despite the blockade, no other country can boast our high education levels.
The Latin American peoples will resist the onslaught of the empire! Obama’s trip seems a science fiction story.
Thursday, November 12, 2009
11-12-09 Activist Calendar
ACTIVIST CALENDAR, Nov. 12 2009, Issue #152
Of the Hudson Valley Activist Newsletter
Send event announcements to jacdon@earthlink.net.
Thursday, Nov. 12, SCHENECTADY: Well known peace activist Kathy Kelly will speak tonight on her recent experiences with refugees in Pakistan who were victims of U.S. drone attacks and stories related to her visits in Iraq before and during the war. The event, which will also raise funds for Voices for Creative Nonviolence, will be held at the First Unitarian Society of Schenectady, 1221 Wendell Ave. A pot luck dinner begins at 6 p.m., followed by Kelly's talk. The meeting is sponsored by the society's Social Action Council. There will be a "free will donation" as admission (and bring a dish to share for dinner). Information (518) 765-4386, info4co@yahoo.com, http://fussonline.org.
Saturday, Nov. 14, CLIFTON PARK: Dr. Shamshad Ahmad, the author of "Rounded Up: Artificial Terrorists and Muslim Entrapment After 9/11," will be signing books and speaking about the Aref-Hossain "sting" case at East Line Books, 1714 Rt. 9. Sponsored by Muslim Solidarity Committee. Information, (518) 371-4151, finlandia@nycap.rr.com.
Saturday, Nov. 14, TROY: Kathy Kelly will speak about creative nonviolence at a "networking" event taking place at The Sanctuary for Independent Media, 3361 6th Ave. Members and supporters of various local peace, justice, refugee, veterans, and art groups will attend. A pot luck dinner begins at 6 p.m., followed by the program at 7 p.m. This event is part of a six month, nationwide Peaceable Assembly Campaign, aimed at ending the wars in Iraq, Pakistan, and Afghanistan. Admission is $10, $5 for students. Sponsored by The Sanctuary for Independent Media, Veterans for Peace, and Voices for Creative Nonviolence. Information, info4co@yahoo.com, (518) 765-4386, http://www.thesanctuaryforindependentmedia.org/node/734.
Sunday, Nov. 15, POUGHKEEPSIE: A 4-6 p.m. discussion about the issue of same-sex marriage in New York State will be conducted by members of the gay and faith communities at Christ Episcopal Church, 20 Carrol St. Speakers include Tobias Haller, Jachie McNeil, Rev. Orlanda Brugnola, and Rev. Blake Rider. This free public event is sponsored by Justice For All Speakers Forum. Information, (845) 889-4181, fred@acornfilm.com, http://www.allforjustice.org.
Wednesday, Nov. 18, ALBANY: The film "Franz Jägerstätter: A Man of Conscience" will be screened at Emmaus House, 45 Trinity Place, at 7 p.m. Jägerstätter was a conscientious objector who refused to serve in the German Army during World War II, and was executed. He was declared a Catholic martyr by Pope Benedict XVI in 2007. A pot luck dinner begins at 6 p.m. Sponsored by Albany Catholic Worker, Local Secular Franciscan Order, and Thomas Merton Society. Information, (518) 482-4966, fred.acw@gmail.com, http://www.stfranz.org.
Wednesday, Nov. 18, POUGHKEEPSIE: Rusty Johnson, wildlife educator and author of "The Twilight of the Wild," will speak at the Hudson River Rowing Association Boathouse, 270 North River St. at 7:30 p.m. as part of Mid Hudson Sierra Club's Third Wednesdays Speaker Social. Free and public. Information, (845) 255-5528.
Wednesday, Nov. 18, PLEASANTVILLE (Pace Univ. campus): A discussion of "Profiling: Protection or Discrimination?" will take place 12:15-1:15 p.m. at the Kessel Student Center (861 Bedford Rd.), Gottesman Dining Room. Both sides of the issue will be represented. Speakers include Linda Berns, director of the Lower Hudson Valley Chapter of the N.Y. Civil Liberties Union, and Vinnie Beatty, director of Security and Adjunct Professor in the Criminal Justice Department at Pace. Sponsored by the Peace and Justice Studies Advisory Board, Psi Chi, Dyson College, The Black Students’ Organization and the Division for Student Success.
Thursday-Sunday, Nov. 19-22, ALBANY: The Albany High School Theatre Ensemble is sponsoring the showing of "The Laramie Project," a play about Matthew Shepard, the Wyoming college student who was beaten to death at the age of 21 because he was gay. The play is based on some 200 interviews with local residents and court transcripts. From the organizers: "This touching true story transcends the persecution of a single minority group, exploring core issues of hate and violence, and the indelible scars they leave on communities plagued by intolerance." The first three performances begin at 7 p.m. Sunday's opening is at 2 p.m. The venue is the auditorium at Albany High School, 700 Washington Ave. Admission, $10 for adults, $5 for students and seniors. Information, (518) 894-1684, fthompson001@nycap.rr.com/.
Friday, Nov. 20, NEW PALTZ: The documentary "Rethink Afghanistan" will be shown at Elting Library, 93 Main St., at 8 p.m. Filmmaker Robert Greenwald critically examines the Bush Administration's stalemated eight-year war, now being managed and widened by President Obama. A discussion will follow. This free public event is sponsored by New Paltz Neighbors for Peace. Information, (845) 255-4815, tellall45@yahoo.com.
Friday-Sunday Nov. 20-22, FORT BENNING, GA: Thousands of activists from throughout the country will arrive at this military base for the annual weekend vigil and direct action to protest the existence of the School of Americas. This is where the Pentagon trains military forces from willing countries in Latin America and the Caribbean. Many school graduates have participated in repressive actions against their own people. For example, the military leaders of the recent coup in Honduras are among those who were trained at Ft. Benning. Information, http://www.soaw.org.
Saturday, Nov. 21, ALBANY: The documentary, "Rethink Afghanistan" will be shown at First Unitarian Society of Albany, 405 Washington Ave. at 7 p.m. Filmmaker Robert Greenwald looks at the ever-escalating U.S.-NATO military adventure and its human and financial costs. Film to be followed by a short discussion featuring Connie Frisbee Houde. Sponsored by Solidarity Committee, Bethlehem Neighbors for Peace, Upper Hudson Peace Action and Women Against War. Information, (518) 466-1182, tquaif@yahoo.com, http://www.bethlehemforpeace.org.
Sunday, Nov. 22, NEW PALTZ: Israeli-American Bekah Wolf will discuss "Beyond the Rhetoric: The Realities of the Israeli Occupation and Prospects for a Just Resolution in Palestine," beginning at 2:30 p.m. at the United Methodist Church, 1 Grove St.. She co-founded the Palestine Solidarity Project, an organization based in the West Bank village of Beit Ommar and dedicated to supporting popular, nonviolent resistance to the Israeli occupation. Sponsored by Middle East Crisis Response. Information, (845) 876-7906, http://www.mideastcrisis.org.
Thursday, Nov. 26, PLYMOUTH, MA: Join Native American activists on this 40th National Day of Mourning, and learn the real history of this Thanksgiving Day holiday at a 12 noon demonstration at Coles Hill. This year's annual event is dedicated to Native American political prisoner Leonard Peltier. Sponsored by United American Indians of New England. Information, http://www.uaine.org, (617) 232-5131, uainedom@earthlink.net.
Tuesday, Dec. 1, TROY (Russell Sage campus): Rep. Paul Tonko (NY 21st CD), an expert on energy issues, will discuss "Prospects for Copenhagen: Building an International Climate Pact" 7:30-9:30 p.m. at Bush Memorial Hall, First and Congress Sts. He will be joined in the discussion by Professor Steven Leibo. This free public event is sponsored by Sage Climate Project and the Climate Project. Information, (518) 244-2330, leibos@sage.edu. Map, directions: http://www.sage.edu/aboutsage/location/troy/.
Saturday, Dec. 5, WOODSTOCK: The 4th Annual Woodstock Phil Ochs Festival will be held at Colony Cafe, 22 Rock City Rd., 8-11 p.m. Featured artists remembering the legendary folk singer include The Flames of Discontent (the organizers), Graham and Barbara Dean, Greg Englesson (Mr. E), Raggedy Crew and others. Information, (845) 679-5342, leftmus@earthlink.net, http://www.colonycafe.com.
Of the Hudson Valley Activist Newsletter
Send event announcements to jacdon@earthlink.net.
Thursday, Nov. 12, SCHENECTADY: Well known peace activist Kathy Kelly will speak tonight on her recent experiences with refugees in Pakistan who were victims of U.S. drone attacks and stories related to her visits in Iraq before and during the war. The event, which will also raise funds for Voices for Creative Nonviolence, will be held at the First Unitarian Society of Schenectady, 1221 Wendell Ave. A pot luck dinner begins at 6 p.m., followed by Kelly's talk. The meeting is sponsored by the society's Social Action Council. There will be a "free will donation" as admission (and bring a dish to share for dinner). Information (518) 765-4386, info4co@yahoo.com, http://fussonline.org.
Saturday, Nov. 14, CLIFTON PARK: Dr. Shamshad Ahmad, the author of "Rounded Up: Artificial Terrorists and Muslim Entrapment After 9/11," will be signing books and speaking about the Aref-Hossain "sting" case at East Line Books, 1714 Rt. 9. Sponsored by Muslim Solidarity Committee. Information, (518) 371-4151, finlandia@nycap.rr.com.
Saturday, Nov. 14, TROY: Kathy Kelly will speak about creative nonviolence at a "networking" event taking place at The Sanctuary for Independent Media, 3361 6th Ave. Members and supporters of various local peace, justice, refugee, veterans, and art groups will attend. A pot luck dinner begins at 6 p.m., followed by the program at 7 p.m. This event is part of a six month, nationwide Peaceable Assembly Campaign, aimed at ending the wars in Iraq, Pakistan, and Afghanistan. Admission is $10, $5 for students. Sponsored by The Sanctuary for Independent Media, Veterans for Peace, and Voices for Creative Nonviolence. Information, info4co@yahoo.com, (518) 765-4386, http://www.thesanctuaryforindependentmedia.org/node/734.
Sunday, Nov. 15, POUGHKEEPSIE: A 4-6 p.m. discussion about the issue of same-sex marriage in New York State will be conducted by members of the gay and faith communities at Christ Episcopal Church, 20 Carrol St. Speakers include Tobias Haller, Jachie McNeil, Rev. Orlanda Brugnola, and Rev. Blake Rider. This free public event is sponsored by Justice For All Speakers Forum. Information, (845) 889-4181, fred@acornfilm.com, http://www.allforjustice.org.
Wednesday, Nov. 18, ALBANY: The film "Franz Jägerstätter: A Man of Conscience" will be screened at Emmaus House, 45 Trinity Place, at 7 p.m. Jägerstätter was a conscientious objector who refused to serve in the German Army during World War II, and was executed. He was declared a Catholic martyr by Pope Benedict XVI in 2007. A pot luck dinner begins at 6 p.m. Sponsored by Albany Catholic Worker, Local Secular Franciscan Order, and Thomas Merton Society. Information, (518) 482-4966, fred.acw@gmail.com, http://www.stfranz.org.
Wednesday, Nov. 18, POUGHKEEPSIE: Rusty Johnson, wildlife educator and author of "The Twilight of the Wild," will speak at the Hudson River Rowing Association Boathouse, 270 North River St. at 7:30 p.m. as part of Mid Hudson Sierra Club's Third Wednesdays Speaker Social. Free and public. Information, (845) 255-5528.
Wednesday, Nov. 18, PLEASANTVILLE (Pace Univ. campus): A discussion of "Profiling: Protection or Discrimination?" will take place 12:15-1:15 p.m. at the Kessel Student Center (861 Bedford Rd.), Gottesman Dining Room. Both sides of the issue will be represented. Speakers include Linda Berns, director of the Lower Hudson Valley Chapter of the N.Y. Civil Liberties Union, and Vinnie Beatty, director of Security and Adjunct Professor in the Criminal Justice Department at Pace. Sponsored by the Peace and Justice Studies Advisory Board, Psi Chi, Dyson College, The Black Students’ Organization and the Division for Student Success.
Thursday-Sunday, Nov. 19-22, ALBANY: The Albany High School Theatre Ensemble is sponsoring the showing of "The Laramie Project," a play about Matthew Shepard, the Wyoming college student who was beaten to death at the age of 21 because he was gay. The play is based on some 200 interviews with local residents and court transcripts. From the organizers: "This touching true story transcends the persecution of a single minority group, exploring core issues of hate and violence, and the indelible scars they leave on communities plagued by intolerance." The first three performances begin at 7 p.m. Sunday's opening is at 2 p.m. The venue is the auditorium at Albany High School, 700 Washington Ave. Admission, $10 for adults, $5 for students and seniors. Information, (518) 894-1684, fthompson001@nycap.rr.com/.
Friday, Nov. 20, NEW PALTZ: The documentary "Rethink Afghanistan" will be shown at Elting Library, 93 Main St., at 8 p.m. Filmmaker Robert Greenwald critically examines the Bush Administration's stalemated eight-year war, now being managed and widened by President Obama. A discussion will follow. This free public event is sponsored by New Paltz Neighbors for Peace. Information, (845) 255-4815, tellall45@yahoo.com.
Friday-Sunday Nov. 20-22, FORT BENNING, GA: Thousands of activists from throughout the country will arrive at this military base for the annual weekend vigil and direct action to protest the existence of the School of Americas. This is where the Pentagon trains military forces from willing countries in Latin America and the Caribbean. Many school graduates have participated in repressive actions against their own people. For example, the military leaders of the recent coup in Honduras are among those who were trained at Ft. Benning. Information, http://www.soaw.org.
Saturday, Nov. 21, ALBANY: The documentary, "Rethink Afghanistan" will be shown at First Unitarian Society of Albany, 405 Washington Ave. at 7 p.m. Filmmaker Robert Greenwald looks at the ever-escalating U.S.-NATO military adventure and its human and financial costs. Film to be followed by a short discussion featuring Connie Frisbee Houde. Sponsored by Solidarity Committee, Bethlehem Neighbors for Peace, Upper Hudson Peace Action and Women Against War. Information, (518) 466-1182, tquaif@yahoo.com, http://www.bethlehemforpeace.org.
Sunday, Nov. 22, NEW PALTZ: Israeli-American Bekah Wolf will discuss "Beyond the Rhetoric: The Realities of the Israeli Occupation and Prospects for a Just Resolution in Palestine," beginning at 2:30 p.m. at the United Methodist Church, 1 Grove St.. She co-founded the Palestine Solidarity Project, an organization based in the West Bank village of Beit Ommar and dedicated to supporting popular, nonviolent resistance to the Israeli occupation. Sponsored by Middle East Crisis Response. Information, (845) 876-7906, http://www.mideastcrisis.org.
Thursday, Nov. 26, PLYMOUTH, MA: Join Native American activists on this 40th National Day of Mourning, and learn the real history of this Thanksgiving Day holiday at a 12 noon demonstration at Coles Hill. This year's annual event is dedicated to Native American political prisoner Leonard Peltier. Sponsored by United American Indians of New England. Information, http://www.uaine.org, (617) 232-5131, uainedom@earthlink.net.
Tuesday, Dec. 1, TROY (Russell Sage campus): Rep. Paul Tonko (NY 21st CD), an expert on energy issues, will discuss "Prospects for Copenhagen: Building an International Climate Pact" 7:30-9:30 p.m. at Bush Memorial Hall, First and Congress Sts. He will be joined in the discussion by Professor Steven Leibo. This free public event is sponsored by Sage Climate Project and the Climate Project. Information, (518) 244-2330, leibos@sage.edu. Map, directions: http://www.sage.edu/aboutsage/location/troy/.
Saturday, Dec. 5, WOODSTOCK: The 4th Annual Woodstock Phil Ochs Festival will be held at Colony Cafe, 22 Rock City Rd., 8-11 p.m. Featured artists remembering the legendary folk singer include The Flames of Discontent (the organizers), Graham and Barbara Dean, Greg Englesson (Mr. E), Raggedy Crew and others. Information, (845) 679-5342, leftmus@earthlink.net, http://www.colonycafe.com.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)