<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
<style type="text/css">p { margin-bottom: 0.08in; }</style>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0in;" align="CENTER"><font
style="font-size: 20pt;" size="5"><b><u>The
Anti-War Anti-Racism Effort of Champaign-Urbana</u> (AWARE)</b></font></p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0in; font-style: normal;" align="CENTER"><br>
</p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0in; font-style: normal;" align="CENTER"><font
size="5"><b>~
CALLS ON THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION</b></font></p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0in; font-style: normal;" align="CENTER"> </p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0in; font-style: normal;" align="CENTER"><font
size="5"><b>TO
REVERSE ITS POLICIES ON WAR & THE ECONOMY:</b></font></p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0in; font-style: normal;" align="LEFT"><br>
</p>
<p style="margin-left: 0.49in; margin-bottom: 0in; font-style:
normal;" align="LEFT">
<font style="font-size: 16pt;" size="4"><b>(1.) bring all U.S.
troops
home (including mercenaries and the CIA)</b></font></p>
<p style="margin-left: 0.49in; margin-bottom: 0in; font-style:
normal;" align="LEFT">
<font style="font-size: 16pt;" size="4"><b>(2.) cut military
expenditures - only for defense, not for intervention </b></font>
</p>
<p style="margin-left: 0.49in; margin-bottom: 0in; font-style:
normal;" align="LEFT">
<font style="font-size: 16pt;" size="4"><b>(3.) for the richest
1%: no
bailouts for banks and corporations</b></font></p>
<p style="margin-left: 0.49in; margin-bottom: 0in; font-style:
normal;" align="LEFT">
<font style="font-size: 16pt;" size="4"><b>(4.) for the 99%: jobs
(like
the WPA) and an end to foreclosures</b></font></p>
<p style="margin-left: 0.49in; margin-bottom: 0in; font-style:
normal;" align="LEFT">
<br>
</p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0in; font-style: normal;" align="CENTER"><font
size="5"><b>~
AND CALLS ON STATE & FEDERAL GOVERNMENTS</b></font></p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0in; font-style: normal;" align="CENTER"><br>
</p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0in; font-style: normal;" align="CENTER"> <font
size="5"><b>TO
STOP ATTACKS ON UNIONS</b></font></p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0in; font-style: normal;" align="JUSTIFY"><br>
</p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0in;" align="JUSTIFY"><font
style="font-size: 10pt;" size="2"><b>The
Obama administration launched a new war this week</b></font><font
style="font-size: 10pt;" size="2">
- or rather opened a new front in the war that it continued from
earlier administrations. American and European military forces
(under
the name of NATO) attacked Libya and intervened in a civil war,
supposedly to enforce a United Nations Security Council
Resolution.
That resolution was supported at home and abroad because it was
said
to protect civilians. But the US and its allies (subordinates,
really, in international war-making) quickly went beyond its
terms in
an attempt to remove the Qaddafi government - one more exercise
in
"regime change." </font><font style="font-size: 10pt;" size="2"><span
lang="en">There
was no effort to limit action to instituting a no-fly zone;
instead
the US attacked with cruise missiles and gunships - contrary
to the
explicit requirements of the US War Powers Resolution of 1973.
Members of both parties said that President Obama was liable
to
impeachment as a result.</span></font></p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0in;" align="JUSTIFY"><br>
</p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0in;" align="JUSTIFY"><font
style="font-size: 10pt;" size="2"><b>Ever
since the Second World War</b>, American leaders have
considered the
Middle East - including North Africa - the “most strategically
important region of the world”: their primary concern was and
remains its incomparable energy reserves. Control of these would
yield “substantial control of the world,” as American planners
have asserted for two generations. In oil-rich countries,
reliable
dictators are given virtual free rein by US administrations. In
recent weeks, for example, there was no reaction when the Saudi
dictatorship used massive force to prevent any sign of protest;
also
in Kuwait, when small demonstrations were instantly crushed; and
in
Bahrain, when Saudi-led forces intervened to protect the
minority
Sunni monarch from calls for reform on the part of the repressed
Shiite population.</font></p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0in;" align="JUSTIFY"><br>
</p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0in;" align="JUSTIFY"><font
style="font-size: 10pt;" size="2"><b>Libya
is rich in oil</b>, and though the US and UK have often given
quite
remarkable support to its cruel dictator, right to the present,
he is
not reliable. The US government would much prefer a more
obedient
client. Furthermore, the vast territory of Libya is mostly
unexplored, and oil specialists believe it may have rich
untapped
resources, which a more dependable government might open to
Western
exploitation. US and British internal documents stress that “the
virus of nationalism” is their greatest fear, not just in the
Middle East but everywhere. Nationalist regimes might not follow
orders from Washington; they might seek to direct resources to
the
needs of their own people, rather than to the profits of
American
corporations. </font>
</p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0in;" align="JUSTIFY"><br>
</p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0in;" align="JUSTIFY"><font
style="font-size: 10pt;" size="2"><b>A
majority of Americans are opposed to the ongoing wars </b></font><font
style="font-size: 10pt;" size="2"><span style="font-weight:
normal;">in
the Mideast and North Africa; about the same percentage as
opposed
the war in Vietnam in the late 1960s. Americans are outraged</span></font><font
style="font-size: 10pt;" size="2">
that in the worst recession since the 1930s, the federal
government
has no trouble finding money for these extremely expensive wars,
which benefit the rich, but will not provide jobs for Americans
or
keep them in their homes - except by giving ever more money to
rich
corporations and individuals, in hopes that they might hire more
people!</font></p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0in; font-style: normal; page-break-before:
always;" align="CENTER">
<font size="5"><b>We said it to Nixon 40 years ago...</b></font></p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0in; font-style: normal;" align="CENTER"><font
size="5"><b>--to
Reagan 25 years ago... </b></font>
</p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0in; font-style: normal;" align="CENTER"><font
size="5"><b>--to
Clinton 12 years ago...</b></font></p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0in; font-style: normal;" align="CENTER"><font
size="5"><b>--to
Bush Jr. 8 years ago...</b></font></p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0in; font-style: normal;" align="CENTER"><font
size="5"><b>--and
now to Obama today:</b></font></p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0in; font-style: normal;" align="CENTER"><br>
</p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0in;" align="CENTER"><font size="5"><b>YOUR
FOREIGN WARS ARE ILLEGAL AND UNJUST! </b></font>
</p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0in;" align="CENTER"><font size="5"><b>BRING
ALL
U.S. TROOPS HOME NOW!</b></font></p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0in;" align="CENTER"><br>
</p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0in;" align="JUSTIFY"><font
style="font-size: 10pt;" size="2"><b>Nixon's
wars in Southeast Asia</b> ended because of the brave
resistance of
an invaded people, the revolt of the US conscript army in
Vietnam (so
now there is no more draft), and the growing conviction of the
American people (70% by 1969) that the Vietnam War was
"fundamentally
wrong and immoral," not "a mistake."</font></p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0in;" align="JUSTIFY"><br>
</p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0in;" align="JUSTIFY"><font
style="font-size: 10pt;" size="2"><b>Reagan's
wars in Central America</b> ended because of the brave
resistance of
an invaded people, a largely religious-based anti-war movement
in the
US, and eventual cutting off of funds for a clandestine war by
Congress. </font>
</p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0in; font-style: normal;" align="JUSTIFY"><br>
</p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0in;" align="JUSTIFY"><font
style="font-size: 10pt;" size="2"><span style="font-style:
normal;"><b>But
Clinton, Bush Jr., and Obama</b></span><i> </i><i><u>were
able to
kill millions of people in undeclared and unlawful
presidential wars</u></i><i>
</i>because of the connivance of Congress and the lack of an
effective popular movement in the US. The largest anti-war
demonstrations in history occurred around the world before Bush
and
Blair launched the invasion of Iraq in 2003. But the decline of
the
effectiveness of American popular opinion continued. Clinton,
Bush
and Obama were able to make war as they wished despite polls
that
showed that a majority of Americans were against it.</font></p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0in;" align="JUSTIFY"><br>
</p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0in;" align="JUSTIFY"><font
style="font-size: 10pt;" size="2"><b>A
high percentage of Americans</b>, more than 80%, tell
pollsters that
the US government serves "the few and the special interests,"
not "the people." In recent presidential elections, polls
showed that about 75% saw it as mostly a farce having nothing to
do
with them, a game played by rich contributors, party bosses, and
the
public relations industry, which trained candidates to say
mostly
meaningless things that might pick up some votes.</font></p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0in;" align="JUSTIFY"><br>
</p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0in;" align="JUSTIFY"><font
style="font-size: 10pt;" size="2"><b>In
2006 the Democrats were given control of Congress</b> to end
the
Mideast war: they spent the next two years saying that they'd
like to
- but continuing to vote money for it. In 2008 Obama was elected
as
the anti-war candidate, in opposition to the belligerent McCain
- and
then immediately expanded Bush's Mideast war and made it even
more
brutal, notably by drone attacks on Pakistan, a large and
powerful
country (with more nuclear weapons than the UK), with which we
are
not at war. Now he has intervened - in violation of the
Constitution
- in a civil war in Libya, as another front in the
generations-long
American war to dominate the energy-producing region of the
world</font></p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0in;" align="JUSTIFY"><br>
</p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0in;" align="JUSTIFY"><font
style="font-size: 10pt;" size="2"><b>If
you object to the Obama administration's</b> conducting an
unjustified war in the Middle East - and misrepresenting the
reason
for it - while doing nothing about the economy except aiding the
rich, tell your representatives in Congress. Representative Tim
Johnson, and Senators Dick Durbin and Mark Kirk, can be reached
through the Capitol switchboard at 202-224-3121. <i><b>Your
protest
makes a difference: local congressman Tim Johnson, who voted
for the
invasions of Afghanistan and Pakistan, decided that he was
wrong to
do so and refuses to vote for any more money for war in the
Middle
East. He has kept his promise, while our senators continue
to vote
for war. Now Rep. Johnson has joined other members of the
House to
initiate legislation calling for an end to the Libyan
intervention
unless Congress approves it. You can call him and thank him
for his
stance against the war at 217-403-4690. </b></i></font>
</p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0in;" align="JUSTIFY"><br>
</p>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0in;" align="JUSTIFY"><font
style="font-size: 10pt;" size="2"><b>AWARE,
the </b><i><b>Anti-War Anti-Racism Effort of Champaign-Urbana</b></i><b>,</b>
meets every Sunday at 5pm in the McKinley Foundation, 5th and
Daniel
Streets in Champaign, near the UIUC campus. We discuss the war
and
what can be done against it. Visitors are welcome - and see our
Facebook page. We also present <i>AWARE on the Air </i>each
Tuesday
10-11pm on Urbana Public Television, channel 6. Each week we
bring
you comments by members and friends of AWARE about the war and
the
opposition to it, locally and nationally, by Americans who
oppose our
government's betrayal of our democratic principles. <b>###</b></font></p>
</body>
</html>