[Peace-discuss] [Peace] Urge Champaign County Dems to back Keith Ellison for DNC

Mon Nov 21 06:32:02 UTC 2016

I’ll communicate your threat of isolation and marginalization to my next Acolytes’ Meeting, Bob.

Meanwhile, you have my sympathy for what your head is going to feel like in the morning.

Regards, Carl

> On Nov 21, 2016, at 12:03 AM, Robert Naiman <naiman at justforeignpolicy.org> wrote:
> 
> Now you're just lying, Carl, which can hardly be a surprise to anyone who knows you. 
> 
> You advocated for Trump on this list. People can search the archives.
> 
> I see you and your acolytes as a menace. 
> 
> I think that you and your acolytes, including the Green Party, should be isolated and marginalized. 
> 
> /eot
> 
> 
> Robert Naiman
> Policy Director
> Just Foreign Policy
> www.justforeignpolicy.org <http://www.justforeignpolicy.org/>
> naiman at justforeignpolicy.org <mailto:naiman at justforeignpolicy.org>
> (202) 448-2898 x1
> 
> On Sun, Nov 20, 2016 at 11:52 PM, C. G. Estabrook via Peace-discuss <peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net <mailto:peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net>> wrote:
> Is the cooking sherry bottle empty, Bob? Something at least seems to be keeping you from reading - at least, what I write - very closely.
> 
> I supported (and voted for) Stein, not Trump, for president. I wanted her - not Trump - to win. But I wouldn’t be dissuaded from voting for the Green party by the claim that voting for a third party helped Trump, because his positions on war and the economy were better than Clinton’s - if not so good as Stein's (not to mention global warming).
> 
> Do you admit that some of the ‘protests across the country’ were promoted by MoveOn and financed by George Soros? That seems to be the case - especially since outrage at proposed deportations looks odd, when Obama has already deported more people that Trump proposes to do - without many demonstrations...
> 
> As to 'reproductive choice,’ I do think we should have a comprehensive program of free health care and education: all of my friends who’ve had abortions or seriously considered it - even quite privileged people - have done so for economic or career reasons. As the saying has it, "My political views? I’m basically against anything that kills people [even in the womb] or destroys the planet we live on.” 
> 
> I am interested in the Catholic aspect of this and other questions: I spent a number of years as a professor of the history of religion (including the Abrahamic religions) at various institutions of the higher learning… But if the American Catholic bishops (or the bishop of Rome) were suddenly to decide that ending the lives of unborn children was an acceptable practice, I wouldn’t agree.
> 
> I doubt you’re very interested in my views on the matter (except perhaps for polemical purposes) but if I’m wrong, you can find two brief pieces I wrote long ago that tried to consider abortion in political contexts: “Abortion and the Left” <http://www.counterpunch.org/2003/01/17/abortion-and-the-left/ <http://www.counterpunch.org/2003/01/17/abortion-and-the-left/>> and “Support Our Euphemism” <http://www.counterpunch.org/2003/04/15/support-our-euphemism/ <http://www.counterpunch.org/2003/04/15/support-our-euphemism/>>.
> 
> Regards, Carl
>   
> 
> 
>> On Nov 20, 2016, at 11:03 PM, Robert Naiman <naiman at justforeignpolicy.org <mailto:naiman at justforeignpolicy.org>> wrote:
>> 
>> Carl, you openly advocated for Trump. You stated repeatedly on this listserv that you wanted Trump to win. The election result that occurred - Trump's victory - was exactly the result that you publicly advocated for, repeatedly. 
>> 
>> The protests across the country following Trump's victory - including people concerned about threatened mass deportations of immigrants, attacks on Muslims, attacks on Latinos, climate change denial based attacks on the Paris agreement, Trump's threats to expand fossil fuel energy projects, attacks on reproductive choice - which you, everyone here is well aware, being a fanatic right-wing Catholic, strongly and viciously oppose - all these protests were against an outcome for which you publicly, repeatedly advocated. 
>> 
>> The Green Party is a pro-Trump political party. Like you, Jill Stein and the Green Party openly advocated for Trump's victory. 
>> 
>> You are a fanatic, Carl, and your followers are fanatics. Cultists.  
>> 
>> You have nothing useful to contribute to any conversation that is outside the purview of your Green Party cult. 
>> 
>> Robert Naiman
>> Policy Director
>> Just Foreign Policy
>> www.justforeignpolicy.org <http://www.justforeignpolicy.org/>
>> naiman at justforeignpolicy.org <mailto:naiman at justforeignpolicy.org>
>> (202) 448-2898 x1 <tel:%28202%29%20448-2898%20x1>
>> 
>> On Sun, Nov 20, 2016 at 10:42 PM, C. G. Estabrook via Peace-discuss <peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net <mailto:peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net>> wrote:
>> Why "Green Party Death Cult” when Greens - not the Democrats or Republicans - are the ones demanding attention to climate catastrophe and its threat to life on the planet?
>> 
>> Meanwhile a Democratic president has attacked eight countries and killed thousands with drone attacks - after a Republican president killed a million people in the greatest international crime of the century (so far). Democrat and Republican presidents together have killed more than 20 million people in 37 countries since WWII.
>> 
>> Which party has a death cult? 
>> 
>>  
>>> On Nov 20, 2016, at 10:26 PM, Robert Naiman via Peace-discuss <peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net <mailto:peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> David Swanson is not an authority on this. He is also a dues-paying member of the Green Party Death Cult. He said the same stuff about Bernie during the primary. Welcome to the Green Party Death Cult. That's how they roll. 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Robert Naiman
>>> Policy Director
>>> Just Foreign Policy
>>> www.justforeignpolicy.org <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.justforeignpolicy.org&d=DQMFaQ&c=8hUWFZcy2Z-Za5rBPlktOQ&r=tfHzwZBcTLEveiewRiq0OdhFmfRmlvZjpIBS0AUJ2v0&m=HTvqhbuliA3Ausq4XW6TCGCNxlV4F8feImi2elWrVEg&s=WYOUegB_Us_mP5IFMwG_KdOPbHF8KlV1mJuuwK-Bi8U&e=>
>>> naiman at justforeignpolicy.org <mailto:naiman at justforeignpolicy.org>
>>> (202) 448-2898 x1 <tel:%28202%29%20448-2898%20x1>
>>> 
>>> On Sun, Nov 20, 2016 at 10:23 PM, C. G. Estabrook via Peace-discuss <peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net <mailto:peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net>> wrote:
>>> Congressman Keith Ellison, candidate of progressive Democrats and many regressive Democrats for chair of the Democratic National Committee eagerly urged the illegal and disastrous violent overthrow of the government of Libya in 2011, which he celebrated as a success despite what it meant for the rule of law, despite all the death and suffering, despite the predictable instability and weapons proliferation to follow.
>>> 
>>> Ellison moved on to pushing, and using his perch as co-chair of the Progressive Caucus to push, for a similar war on Syria. For years now he has advocated for the illegal and murderous creation of no fly zones and “safe zones” — what Hillary Clinton admitted only to Goldman Sachs would require that you “kill a lot of Syrians.” Ellison was an early backer of bombing Syria in 2013. He met with peace activists but rejected their appeal.
>>> 
>>> Back in 2007, before Ellison’s leadership, the Congressional Progressive Caucus had helped organize 90 Congress members to commit to voting against war funding. Most of them turned around and voted for war funding. That ridiculous disappointment was a high point for the CPC.
>>> 
>>> Since then, the CPC’s commitments — such as to vote against corporate healthcare — have hardly been taken seriously, and so it’s hardly been news when most members have gone back on their commitments.
>>> 
>>> But in recent years, the CPC has shifted away from even pretending to take a stand on things, and instead moved toward issuing statements full of non-committal rhetoric. Some began referring to it as the Congressional Progressive Statement Caucus.
>>> 
>>> Yet even that standard must be looked back to with nostalgia when it comes to Co-Chair Ellison’s rhetoric on war. He promotes misinformation about protecting innocent people in Libya and Syria and uses those claims to justify war making. This is exactly what the war makers were looking for in funding Hillary Clinton for President. Should the Democratic National Committee now give it to them in the form of Ellison as Chair? [David Swanson]
>>> 
>>> 
>>> > On Nov 20, 2016, at 10:11 PM, Robert Naiman via Peace-discuss <peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net <mailto:peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net>> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > If you really want to know what's going on, just type "Keith Ellison" in Google News and start reading.
>>> >
>>> > Here's one of the things you'll find:
>>> >
>>> > JTA: Keith Elllison’s Jewish defenders rally after attacks from the pro-Israel right
>>> > http://www.jta.org/2016/11/18/news-opinion/politics/keith-elllisons-jewish-defenders-rally-after-attacks-from-the-pro-israel-right <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.jta.org_2016_11_18_news-2Dopinion_politics_keith-2Delllisons-2Djewish-2Ddefenders-2Drally-2Dafter-2Dattacks-2Dfrom-2Dthe-2Dpro-2Disrael-2Dright&d=DQMFaQ&c=8hUWFZcy2Z-Za5rBPlktOQ&r=tfHzwZBcTLEveiewRiq0OdhFmfRmlvZjpIBS0AUJ2v0&m=HTvqhbuliA3Ausq4XW6TCGCNxlV4F8feImi2elWrVEg&s=hht36_W3LYH-7zMh6SWwisRm-D0rfFJSj0CraWkyh1w&e=>
>>> > WASHINGTON (JTA) — Jewish allies of Keith Ellison defended him against mounting attacks from the pro-Israel right wing as the first Muslim congressman is positioned to lead the Democratic Party.
>>> >
>>> > “For anyone to attack or vilify him as anti-Israel or anti-Semitic is outrageous,” said Rabbi Marc Schneier, a co-founder of the Foundation for Ethnic Understanding, a group that promotes joint activities among ethnic groups.
>>> >
>>> > Schneier called JTA Friday, unsolicited, as attacks on Ellison, D-Minn., have mounted. Among Jewish groups, also defending Ellison have been J Street, the liberal Middle East policy group, Americans for Peace Now, a dovish pro-Israel group, and Bend the Arc, a social action group.
>>> >
>>> > The Zionist Organization of America, in a release this week, noted Ellison’s role in drafting a congressional letter following the 2009 Gaza War urging the Obama administration to press Israel to loosen its blockade on Gaza. (The letter also noted that security needs led to the blockade). The ZOA also noted that Ellison was among a handful of congressmen who voted against additional funding for Israel’s Iron Dome anti-missile system during the 2014 Gaza War. (Ellison had previously backed Iron Dome, but said it made more sense during the 2014 war to press for a cease-fire.)
>>> >
>>> > “If he becomes DNC leader, Ellison will likely be empowered to persuade even more Democratic Congresspersons to join him in actions hostile to Israel’s security and Israeli civilians’ lives – wreaking enormous damage to the prospects for future bipartisan support for America’s closest ally in the Middle East,” the ZOA said.
>>> >
>>> > Ellison seems likely to be the next Democratic National Committee chairman, having garnered the backing of figures from the party’s establishment as well as the insurgent left that backed Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., in his unsuccessful bid this year for the party’s presidential nomination. Among Ellison’s endorsers are Sanders and Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., the incoming party chief in the next Senate, who is very much of the party establishment.
>>> >
>>> > The ZOA release and a barrage of critical coverage in the conservative media led to the release of comments in Ellison’s defense.
>>> >
>>> > Some conservative outlets, as well as the ZOA, noted Ellison’s youthful involvement in the anti-Semitic Nation of Islam movement, which he renounced in a 2006 letter to the Jewish Community Relations Council in Minnesota, a group that he has become friendly with. That year he was elected a freshman to Congress, and became the first Muslim elected to the body.
>>> >
>>> > Seth Mandel, the New York Post Op-Ed editor, said in a column that “Ellison has left [Nation of Islam leader Louis] Farrakhan far behind, but his Israel criticism remains scathing,” and suggested his front-runner status signaled a drifting away of Democrats from Israel.
>>> >
>>> > Ellison was also one of three Sanders appointees to the DNC Platform Drafting Committee this summer who tried to get language critical of Israel’s occupation into the platform. They did not succeed.
>>> >
>>> > Ellison’s defenders say his vigorous defense of the two-state solution make him a valuable partner. Schneier remembered that his first meeting with Ellis was in 2007 at a Foundation event welcoming congressional freshmen, where Ellison in a speech – unprompted – lambasted the Iranian regime for its Holocaust denial.
>>> >
>>> > A group called “Jews for Keith” on Thursday launched a petition to the DNC defending Ellison. J Street in its Nov. 16 statement called the attacks on Ellison, who was backed by J Street’s affiliated political action committee in the last election “hateful.”
>>> >
>>> > “His support for a two-state solution, opposition to settlement construction and advocacy for U.S. leadership to help resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict are supported by the majority of American Jews,” it said.
>>> >
>>> > Robert Naiman
>>> > Policy Director
>>> > Just Foreign Policy
>>> > www.justforeignpolicy.org <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.justforeignpolicy.org&d=DQMFaQ&c=8hUWFZcy2Z-Za5rBPlktOQ&r=tfHzwZBcTLEveiewRiq0OdhFmfRmlvZjpIBS0AUJ2v0&m=HTvqhbuliA3Ausq4XW6TCGCNxlV4F8feImi2elWrVEg&s=WYOUegB_Us_mP5IFMwG_KdOPbHF8KlV1mJuuwK-Bi8U&e=>
>>> > naiman at justforeignpolicy.org <mailto:naiman at justforeignpolicy.org>
>>> > (202) 448-2898 x1 <tel:%28202%29%20448-2898%20x1>
>>> >
>>> > On Sun, Nov 20, 2016 at 9:57 PM, David Green via Peace-discuss <peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net <mailto:peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net>> wrote:
>>> > But seriously, if Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, and Keith Ellison have a roadmap for turning the Democratic Party into a populist/labor/socialist party, based on small contributions from millions (like the Sanders campaign), then let's hear it. And if they're serious about being anti-imperialist, then let's hear that too. If they want to use the word "revolution" to describe their ambitions, let them put some real meat on it and present it to the waiting world. What's with all the insider jockeying in the DNC? Tell us what you stand for!
>>> >
>>> 
>>> _________
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Peace-discuss mailing list
> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net <mailto:Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net>
> https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss <https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss>
> 
> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.chambana.net/pipermail/peace-discuss/attachments/20161121/e5f63234/attachment-0001.html>