From galliher at illinois.edu Thu Jun 1 02:47:49 2017 From: galliher at illinois.edu (Carl G. Estabrook) Date: Wed, 31 May 2017 21:47:49 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] DemNow! andTimothy Snyder In-Reply-To: <4AA391A1-4E53-4B6F-A02B-B95AE8E4B361@illinois.edu> References: <4AA391A1-4E53-4B6F-A02B-B95AE8E4B361@illinois.edu> Message-ID: https://www.jacobinmag.com/2014/09/timothy-snyders-lies/ > On May 31, 2017, at 4:21 PM, Brussel, Morton K via Peace-discuss wrote: > > Interesting interview with smart guy, Yale prof Timothy Snyder, who talks about how to prevent authoritarianism without ever taking into account what the U.S. has done in its overthrow of governments and its wars to in fact promote authoritarianism (think of Chile, Brazil, Central America, Iran, Egypt, Saudi Arabia,…). > He is also the one who most vociferously defended the coup in Ukraine, the attacks against the separatist Donbas region, and its fascist overtones. What lies behind this is his deep antagonism to Russia.. I found it curious also that he never alluded to American militarism and the consequences it has for authoritarianism. > > He’s written a book “On Tyranny”. It might be interesting to parse. > > When I saw that Snyder was featured on DemocracyNow!, I was tempted to ignore it. > > —mkb > _______________________________________________ > Peace-discuss mailing list > Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From davegreen84 at yahoo.com Thu Jun 1 02:57:05 2017 From: davegreen84 at yahoo.com (David Green) Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2017 02:57:05 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Peace-discuss] DemNow! andTimothy Snyder In-Reply-To: References: <4AA391A1-4E53-4B6F-A02B-B95AE8E4B361@illinois.edu> Message-ID: <1665821361.313863.1496285825624@mail.yahoo.com> We commented on Snyder a couple of weeks ago on NfN, prompted by my hearing an interview with him by the usually perspicacious Chuck Mertz of This is Hell. During that week, Goodman had interviewed a related individual, Ruth Ben-Ghiat, regarding Italian fascism, so this is by now a familiar pattern. Snyder's pamphlet is downloadable from the Champaign Public Library Cloud, and I assume Urbana as well; it's not exactly Common Sense. But the interview reflects the lack of criticism that Chomsky/Zinn etc. regularly have brought to Democracy Now, and the depths to which Trump has driven what is called the progressive media. DG On Wednesday, May 31, 2017 9:49 PM, Carl G. Estabrook via Peace-discuss wrote: https://www.jacobinmag.com/2014/09/timothy-snyders-lies/ On May 31, 2017, at 4:21 PM, Brussel, Morton K via Peace-discuss wrote: Interesting interview with smart guy, Yale prof Timothy Snyder, who talks about how to prevent authoritarianism without ever taking into account what the U.S. has done in its overthrow of governments and its wars to in fact promote authoritarianism (think of Chile, Brazil, Central America, Iran, Egypt, Saudi Arabia,…). He is also the one who most vociferously defended the coup in Ukraine, the attacks against the separatist Donbas region, and its fascist overtones. What lies behind this is his deep antagonism to Russia.. I found it curious also that he never alluded to American militarism and the consequences it has for authoritarianism. He’s written a book “On Tyranny”. It might be interesting to parse. When I saw that Snyder was featured on DemocracyNow!, I was tempted to ignore it. —mkb _______________________________________________ Peace-discuss mailing list Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss _______________________________________________ Peace-discuss mailing list Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From davegreen84 at yahoo.com Thu Jun 1 03:04:53 2017 From: davegreen84 at yahoo.com (David Green) Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2017 03:04:53 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Peace-discuss] =?utf-8?q?Brzezinski=E2=80=99s_Biggest_Disaster?= =?utf-8?q?=3A_Camp_David?= References: <1920780717.314481.1496286293655.ref@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1920780717.314481.1496286293655@mail.yahoo.com> Brzezinski’s Biggest Disaster: Camp David   Posted By Sam Husseini On May 31, 2017                  On Tuesday’s “Morning Joe,” Zbigniew Brzezinski was eulogized by Jimmy Carter along with the MSNBC show co-hosts, Joe Scarborough and Mika Brzezinski — daughter of the former national security advisor.The segment, of course, avoided issues that Brzezinski has been criticized for, see “How Jimmy Carter and I Started the Mujahideen.” Though even the New York Times obit noted: “But in at least one respect — his rigid hatred of the Soviet Union — he had stood to the right of many Republicans, including Mr. Kissinger and President Richard M. Nixon. And during his four years under Mr. Carter, beginning in 1977, thwarting Soviet expansionism at any cost guided much of American foreign policy, for better or worse. He supported billions in military aid for Islamic militants fighting invading Soviet troops in Afghanistan.”The shadow cast by such policies quite arguably lead to the 9/11 attacks and a great deal of other pain and suffering in the Mideast and beyond.Few have delved into the depths and aims of Brzezinski’s anti-Russian bias. He wrote in “A Geostrategy for Eurasia” in the journal Foreign Affairs (1997): “A loosely confederated Russia — composed of a European Russia, a Siberian Republic, and a Far Eastern Republic — would also find it easier to cultivate closer economic relations with its neighbors. Each of the confederated entities would be able to tap its local creative potential, stifled for centuries by Moscow’s heavy bureaucratic hand. In turn, a decentralized Russia would be less susceptible to imperial mobilization.”Indeed, two main strains that we see in our current foreign policy owe a great deal to Brzezinski. One is a desire of much of U.S. establishment to further neuter — if not actually break up — Russia. The other — being employed in Syria now — is using militarized fanatics fighting in the name of Islam for foreign policy purposes.What was highlighted by Carter and others after Brzezinski’s death was the “triumph” of the Camp David agreement between Israel and Egypt.And this is something that few question, though such praise leads to some wild statements, as in this MSNBC interview.Joe Scarborough claimed: “Mr. President, I was talking to Mika’s daughters this weekend and trying to explain the impact that you all had on the world and talking about the Middle East. You hear about the Middle East peace. But you know, President Carter’s peace efforts between Israel and Egypt prevented a ground war in the Middle East for 40 years.”Huh? Joe Scarborough is unaware of any ground wars in the Mideast over the last 40 years. He must have tuned out the Iran-Iraq war in the 1980s, the 1991 Gulf War, as well as the 2003 U.S. invasion of Iraq. Never mind the numerous Israeli invasions of Lebanon.And it’s quite arguable that Camp David actually set the stage for all those things. As the late Eqbal Ahmad stated in 1990 (at an event I attended): There has been nothing (that I have seen) in the media about what compels Saddam Hussein’s extraordinary ambitions. … What has suddenly in 1990 compelled his ambition, that requires 350,000 American troops to control? What did it?No one has named the Camp David Accords. And Saddam Hussein’s ambitions are directly attributable to the Camp David Accords. I won’t go into details of it — just in two sentences, remember the following. Since the decline of the Ottoman Empire (in other words, since the beginning of the 19th Century) Egypt has played the role of the regional influential in the Arab World. Politically, culturally, even militarily, Egypt has led the Arab World (and ideologically). The Camp David Accords’ supreme achievement was to isolate Egypt from its Arab milieu.When Anwar Sadat signed that piece of paper, his hope had been that this would lead to the return of Egyptian territory to Egypt. Occupied territories, one (which he did get). And two, a modicum of justice for the Palestinians. So that, over time his isolation will be ameliorated. And that minimum that was promised to Sadat in the Camp David Accords was not honored. In fact, the maximum was dishonored.To remind you of one reality alone, Carter, and Saunders, and William B. Quandt — the three American negotiators from top to the bottom (with Carter at the top, Saunders in the middle, and Quandt at the bottom) — have testified and recorded in their books that in the last three days of the Camp David negotiations, the negotiations had broken down on one issue. And the issue was Sadat’s insistence that there should be written in the Camp David Accords that Israel will put up no more settlements in the West Bank and Gaza. And Begin would say, “I am willing to agree on it informally, but won’t do it in writing.” And Carter weighs in and says, “You must understand Begin’s difficult position. I give you guarantee that there will be no settlements. … Now, obviously, Camp David meant moral, ideological, political isolation of Egypt from its Arab milieu. There would be a political vacuum in the Middle East after Camp David. And smaller players — like Syria and Iraq — would love, would aim at, would have the ambition, to fill that vacuum.Similarly, the late Patrick Seale wrote in 2011 in “The future of the (de)stabilizing Egypt-Israel Peace Treaty“: By removing Egypt — the strongest and most populous of the Arab countries — from the Arab line-up, the treaty ruled out any possibility of an Arab coalition that might have contained Israel or restrained its freedom of action. As Israeli Foreign Minister Moshe Dayan remarked at the time: “If a wheel is removed, the car will not run again.”Western commentators routinely describe the treaty as a “pillar of regional stability,” a “keystone of Middle East diplomacy,” a “centerpiece of America’s diplomacy” in the Arab and Muslim world. This is certainly how Israel and its American friends have seen it.But for most Arabs, it has been a disaster. Far from providing stability, it exposed them to Israeli power. Far from bringing peace, the treaty ensured an absence of peace, since a dominant Israel saw no need to compose or compromise with Syria or the Palestinians.Instead, the treaty opened the way for Israeli invasions, occupations and massacres in Lebanon and the Palestinian territories, for strikes against Iraqi and Syrian nuclear sites, for brazen threats against Iran, for the 44-year occupation of the West Bank and the cruel blockade of Gaza, and for the pursuit of a “Greater Israel” agenda by fanatical Jewish settlers and religious nationalists.In turn, Arab dictators, invoking the challenge they faced from an aggressive and expansionist Israel, were able to justify the need to maintain tight control over their populations by means of harsh security measures. All these factors deflated Arab Nationalism and ultimately opened the way for Saudi dominance of much of the region. This helped lead to the collapse of the three other major secular states in the region: Iraq, Syria and Libya. Egypt itself has been relegated to the role of puppet police state and may descend further given the current dynamics.  Brzezinski’s Biggest Disaster: Camp David | | | | | | | | | | | Brzezinski’s Biggest Disaster: Camp David On Tuesday’s “Morning Joe,” Zbigniew Brzezinski was eulogized by Jimmy Carter along with the MSNBC show co-hosts... | | | |      -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From galliher at illinois.edu Thu Jun 1 03:13:00 2017 From: galliher at illinois.edu (Carl G. Estabrook) Date: Wed, 31 May 2017 22:13:00 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] =?utf-8?q?Brzezinski=E2=80=99s_Biggest_Disaster?= =?utf-8?q?=3A_Camp_David?= In-Reply-To: <1920780717.314481.1496286293655@mail.yahoo.com> References: <1920780717.314481.1496286293655.ref@mail.yahoo.com> <1920780717.314481.1496286293655@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: http://johnhelmer.net/the-presidents-inferiority-complex-his-advisors-russia-hating-obsession-and-the-putsch-plotter-with-the-itchy-trigger-finger/ > On May 31, 2017, at 10:04 PM, David Green via Peace-discuss wrote: > > Brzezinski’s Biggest Disaster: Camp David > Posted By Sam Husseini On May 31, 2017 > > On Tuesday’s “Morning Joe,” Zbigniew Brzezinski was eulogized by Jimmy Carter along with the MSNBC show co-hosts, Joe Scarborough and Mika Brzezinski — daughter of the former national security advisor. > The segment, of course, avoided issues that Brzezinski has been criticized for, see “How Jimmy Carter and I Started the Mujahideen.” Though even the New York Times obit noted: “But in at least one respect — his rigid hatred of the Soviet Union — he had stood to the right of many Republicans, including Mr. Kissinger and President Richard M. Nixon. And during his four years under Mr. Carter, beginning in 1977, thwarting Soviet expansionism at any cost guided much of American foreign policy, for better or worse. He supported billions in military aid for Islamic militants fighting invading Soviet troops in Afghanistan.” > The shadow cast by such policies quite arguably lead to the 9/11 attacks and a great deal of other pain and suffering in the Mideast and beyond. > Few have delved into the depths and aims of Brzezinski’s anti-Russian bias. He wrote in “A Geostrategy for Eurasia” in the journal Foreign Affairs (1997): “A loosely confederated Russia — composed of a European Russia, a Siberian Republic, and a Far Eastern Republic — would also find it easier to cultivate closer economic relations with its neighbors. Each of the confederated entities would be able to tap its local creative potential, stifled for centuries by Moscow’s heavy bureaucratic hand. In turn, a decentralized Russia would be less susceptible to imperial mobilization.” > Indeed, two main strains that we see in our current foreign policy owe a great deal to Brzezinski. One is a desire of much of U.S. establishment to further neuter — if not actually break up — Russia. The other — being employed in Syria now — is using militarized fanatics fighting in the name of Islam for foreign policy purposes. > What was highlighted by Carter and others after Brzezinski’s death was the “triumph” of the Camp David agreement between Israel and Egypt. > And this is something that few question, though such praise leads to some wild statements, as in this MSNBC interview. > Joe Scarborough claimed: “Mr. President, I was talking to Mika’s daughters this weekend and trying to explain the impact that you all had on the world and talking about the Middle East. You hear about the Middle East peace. But you know, President Carter’s peace efforts between Israel and Egypt prevented a ground war in the Middle East for 40 years.” > Huh? Joe Scarborough is unaware of any ground wars in the Mideast over the last 40 years. He must have tuned out the Iran-Iraq war in the 1980s, the 1991 Gulf War, as well as the 2003 U.S. invasion of Iraq. Never mind the numerous Israeli invasions of Lebanon. > And it’s quite arguable that Camp David actually set the stage for all those things. As the late Eqbal Ahmad stated in 1990 (at an event I attended): > There has been nothing (that I have seen) in the media about what compels Saddam Hussein’s extraordinary ambitions. … What has suddenly in 1990 compelled his ambition, that requires 350,000 American troops to control? What did it? > No one has named the Camp David Accords. And Saddam Hussein’s ambitions are directly attributable to the Camp David Accords. I won’t go into details of it — just in two sentences, remember the following. Since the decline of the Ottoman Empire (in other words, since the beginning of the 19th Century) Egypt has played the role of the regional influential in the Arab World. Politically, culturally, even militarily, Egypt has led the Arab World (and ideologically). The Camp David Accords’ supreme achievement was to isolate Egypt from its Arab milieu. > When Anwar Sadat signed that piece of paper, his hope had been that this would lead to the return of Egyptian territory to Egypt. Occupied territories, one (which he did get). And two, a modicum of justice for the Palestinians. So that, over time his isolation will be ameliorated. And that minimum that was promised to Sadat in the Camp David Accords was not honored. In fact, the maximum was dishonored. > To remind you of one reality alone, Carter, and Saunders, and William B. Quandt — the three American negotiators from top to the bottom (with Carter at the top, Saunders in the middle, and Quandt at the bottom) — have testified and recorded in their books that in the last three days of the Camp David negotiations, the negotiations had broken down on one issue. And the issue was Sadat’s insistence that there should be written in the Camp David Accords that Israel will put up no more settlements in the West Bank and Gaza. And Begin would say, “I am willing to agree on it informally, but won’t do it in writing.” And Carter weighs in and says, “You must understand Begin’s difficult position. I give you guarantee that there will be no settlements. … > Now, obviously, Camp David meant moral, ideological, political isolation of Egypt from its Arab milieu. There would be a political vacuum in the Middle East after Camp David. And smaller players — like Syria and Iraq — would love, would aim at, would have the ambition, to fill that vacuum. > Similarly, the late Patrick Seale wrote in 2011 in “The future of the (de)stabilizing Egypt-Israel Peace Treaty“: > By removing Egypt — the strongest and most populous of the Arab countries — from the Arab line-up, the treaty ruled out any possibility of an Arab coalition that might have contained Israel or restrained its freedom of action. As Israeli Foreign Minister Moshe Dayan remarked at the time: “If a wheel is removed, the car will not run again.” > Western commentators routinely describe the treaty as a “pillar of regional stability,” a “keystone of Middle East diplomacy,” a “centerpiece of America’s diplomacy” in the Arab and Muslim world. This is certainly how Israel and its American friends have seen it. > But for most Arabs, it has been a disaster. Far from providing stability, it exposed them to Israeli power. Far from bringing peace, the treaty ensured an absence of peace, since a dominant Israel saw no need to compose or compromise with Syria or the Palestinians. > Instead, the treaty opened the way for Israeli invasions, occupations and massacres in Lebanon and the Palestinian territories, for strikes against Iraqi and Syrian nuclear sites, for brazen threats against Iran, for the 44-year occupation of the West Bank and the cruel blockade of Gaza, and for the pursuit of a “Greater Israel” agenda by fanatical Jewish settlers and religious nationalists. > In turn, Arab dictators, invoking the challenge they faced from an aggressive and expansionist Israel, were able to justify the need to maintain tight control over their populations by means of harsh security measures. > All these factors deflated Arab Nationalism and ultimately opened the way for Saudi dominance of much of the region. This helped lead to the collapse of the three other major secular states in the region: Iraq, Syria and Libya. Egypt itself has been relegated to the role of puppet police state and may descend further given the current dynamics. > > Brzezinski’s Biggest Disaster: Camp David > > Brzezinski’s Biggest Disaster: Camp David > On Tuesday’s “Morning Joe,” Zbigniew Brzezinski was eulogized by Jimmy Carter along with the MSNBC show co-hosts... > > > _______________________________________________ > Peace-discuss mailing list > Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss From galliher at illinois.edu Thu Jun 1 03:46:41 2017 From: galliher at illinois.edu (Carl G. Estabrook) Date: Wed, 31 May 2017 22:46:41 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] DemNow! andTimothy Snyder In-Reply-To: <1665821361.313863.1496285825624@mail.yahoo.com> References: <4AA391A1-4E53-4B6F-A02B-B95AE8E4B361@illinois.edu> <1665821361.313863.1496285825624@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Snyder’s ‘work’ supports the criminal intentions of the US political establishment to retard the economic integration of Eurasia by military and other means. Our government is willing to kill a lot of people - and tell a lot of lies - to prevent a challenge to the economic hegemony of the US 1%. Snyder’s down with the program: "Contrary to Snyder, the problem is not a Russian push to the west, but an American drive to the east that has only intensified since Euromaidan. While the State Department argues that a democratic wave is sweeping across Eastern Europe, the claim is belied by the mass disenfranchisment of Russian-speaking minorities, the growing Baltic identification with the Third Reich, and the exaltation of Bandera in places like Lvov and Kiev. "The rise of the double-genocide movement, which has enjoyed backing from Václav Havel, German President Joachim Gauck, and Vytautas Landsbergis, is perhaps most dangerous of all since it represents a major step toward the relativization of Nazi war crimes by equating them with the atrocities of Stalin. Bloodlands is important because it is less an effort to understand what happened in 1933–45 than a milestone in the process of engagement with local revanchist forces. "The rapturous reception that it received in the mainstream media is a sign that intellectual resistance to America’s drive to the east has all but collapsed…” [D. Lazare] —CGE > On May 31, 2017, at 9:57 PM, David Green wrote: > > We commented on Snyder a couple of weeks ago on NfN, prompted by my hearing an interview with him by the usually perspicacious Chuck Mertz of This is Hell. During that week, Goodman had interviewed a related individual, Ruth Ben-Ghiat, regarding Italian fascism, so this is by now a familiar pattern. > > Snyder's pamphlet is downloadable from the Champaign Public Library Cloud, and I assume Urbana as well; it's not exactly Common Sense. But the interview reflects the lack of criticism that Chomsky/Zinn etc. regularly have brought to Democracy Now, and the depths to which Trump has driven what is called the progressive media. > > DG > > > On Wednesday, May 31, 2017 9:49 PM, Carl G. Estabrook via Peace-discuss wrote: > > > https://www.jacobinmag.com/2014/09/timothy-snyders-lies/ > > >> On May 31, 2017, at 4:21 PM, Brussel, Morton K via Peace-discuss wrote: >> >> Interesting interview with smart guy, Yale prof Timothy Snyder, who talks about how to prevent authoritarianism without ever taking into account what the U.S. has done in its overthrow of governments and its wars to in fact promote authoritarianism (think of Chile, Brazil, Central America, Iran, Egypt, Saudi Arabia,…). >> He is also the one who most vociferously defended the coup in Ukraine, the attacks against the separatist Donbas region, and its fascist overtones. What lies behind this is his deep antagonism to Russia.. I found it curious also that he never alluded to American militarism and the consequences it has for authoritarianism. >> >> He’s written a book “On Tyranny”. It might be interesting to parse. >> >> When I saw that Snyder was featured on DemocracyNow!, I was tempted to ignore it. >> >> —mkb >> _______________________________________________ >> Peace-discuss mailing list >> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net >> https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss > > _______________________________________________ > Peace-discuss mailing list > Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss > > From karenaram at hotmail.com Thu Jun 1 14:29:35 2017 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2017 14:29:35 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] =?iso-8859-1?q?If_you_listen_or_watch_one_thing?= =?iso-8859-1?q?=2C_let_it_be_this=3A__From=A0Libya=A0to=A0Manchester=2C?= =?iso-8859-1?q?=A0Western=A0Intervention=A0Endangers=A0Civilians?= References: Message-ID: The Real News interviews Max Blumenthal > > Watch this video from The Real News Network, I think you'll find it interesting > > http://therealnews.com/t2/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=31&Itemid=74&jumival=19206 From davegreen84 at yahoo.com Thu Jun 1 14:50:18 2017 From: davegreen84 at yahoo.com (David Green) Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2017 14:50:18 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Peace-discuss] DemNow! andTimothy Snyder In-Reply-To: References: <4AA391A1-4E53-4B6F-A02B-B95AE8E4B361@illinois.edu> <1665821361.313863.1496285825624@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1294929588.400197.1496328618610@mail.yahoo.com> And of course, while the "relativization" of the Holocaust in relation to Stalin's crimes would ordinarily be anathema to the Zionists/neocons and "Holocaust Industry", Snyder is given a pass because he is down with the neocon-Zionist program. On Wednesday, May 31, 2017 10:46 PM, Carl G. Estabrook wrote: Snyder’s ‘work’ supports the criminal intentions of the US political establishment to retard the economic integration of Eurasia by military and other means. Our government is willing to kill a lot of people - and tell a lot of lies - to prevent a challenge to the economic hegemony of the US 1%. Snyder’s down with the program: "Contrary to Snyder, the problem is not a Russian push to the west, but an American drive to the east that has only intensified since Euromaidan. While the State Department argues that a democratic wave is sweeping across Eastern Europe, the claim is belied by the mass disenfranchisment of Russian-speaking minorities, the growing Baltic identification with the Third Reich, and the exaltation of Bandera in places like Lvov and Kiev. "The rise of the double-genocide movement, which has enjoyed backing from Václav Havel, German President Joachim Gauck, and Vytautas Landsbergis, is perhaps most dangerous of all since it represents a major step toward the relativization of Nazi war crimes by equating them with the atrocities of Stalin. Bloodlands is important because it is less an effort to understand what happened in 1933–45 than a milestone in the process of engagement with local revanchist forces. "The rapturous reception that it received in the mainstream media is a sign that intellectual resistance to America’s drive to the east has all but collapsed…” [D. Lazare] —CGE > On May 31, 2017, at 9:57 PM, David Green wrote: > > We commented on Snyder a couple of weeks ago on NfN, prompted by my hearing an interview with him by the usually perspicacious Chuck Mertz of This is Hell. During that week, Goodman had interviewed a related individual, Ruth Ben-Ghiat, regarding Italian fascism, so this is by now a familiar pattern. > > Snyder's pamphlet is downloadable from the Champaign Public Library Cloud, and I assume Urbana as well; it's not exactly Common Sense. But the interview reflects the lack of criticism that Chomsky/Zinn etc. regularly have brought to Democracy Now, and the depths to which Trump has driven what is called the progressive media. > > DG > > > On Wednesday, May 31, 2017 9:49 PM, Carl G. Estabrook via Peace-discuss wrote: > > > https://www.jacobinmag.com/2014/09/timothy-snyders-lies/ > > >> On May 31, 2017, at 4:21 PM, Brussel, Morton K via Peace-discuss wrote: >> >> Interesting interview with smart guy, Yale prof Timothy Snyder, who talks about how to prevent authoritarianism without ever taking into account what the U.S. has done in its overthrow of governments and its wars to in fact promote authoritarianism (think of Chile, Brazil, Central America, Iran, Egypt, Saudi Arabia,…). >> He is also the one who most vociferously defended the coup in Ukraine, the attacks against the separatist Donbas region, and its fascist overtones. What lies behind this is his deep antagonism to Russia.. I found it curious also that he never alluded to American militarism and the consequences it has for authoritarianism. >> >> He’s written a book “On Tyranny”. It might be interesting to parse. >> >> When I saw that Snyder was featured on DemocracyNow!, I was tempted to ignore it. >> >> —mkb >> _______________________________________________ >> Peace-discuss mailing list >> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net >> https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss > > _______________________________________________ > Peace-discuss mailing list > Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cge at shout.net Thu Jun 1 15:28:39 2017 From: cge at shout.net (C. G. Estabrook) Date: Thu, 01 Jun 2017 10:28:39 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Demonstrate this Saturday, June 3, in downtown Champaign 2-4pm In-Reply-To: <03888a7961195446e7dd985988e8dfe9@shout.net> References: <5880c407a1db5_222964d980682c3@asgworker-qmb2-1.nbuild.prd.useast1.3dna.io.mail> <3014b58c3080570ba473a4b2bdcb0659@shout.net> <1f26ef3688b593a338a8fbc7cd45b7a6@shout.net> <67ddb84dcd90b85ed6339a05eaf437a4@shout.net> <03888a7961195446e7dd985988e8dfe9@shout.net> Message-ID: https://www.dailykos.com/story/2017/5/30/1667323/--Resist-March-for-Truth-will-be-held-in-100-cities-this-Saturday BUT AGAINST WAR, NOT FOR THE DEMOCRATS & NEOCONS This 'March for Truth' [sic] is nefarious 'Russiagate' nonsense. It supports Obama-Clinton/neocon war-making and hostility toward Russia and China. Instead, come demonstrate against war with AWARE this Saturday at the corner of Main and Neil in downtown Champaign, 2-4pm. We'll provide signs and flyers. ==================================================== [This is the text of the the flyer to be distributed] President Trump: End war in the Mideast! Get U.S. troops, weapons, mercenaries, and ‘coalition partners’ (NATO) out of the Mideast. Stop supporting human rights violators - notably the allies, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and Israel. No war with Iran, with whom the U.S. has a treaty. In the 1930s and 1940s, the countries most responsible for war in the world were Germany and Japan. Today the country most responsible for war is the one for which we are responsible, the United States. Since World War II ended in 1945, US presidents have killed more than 20 million people in 37 nations. The U.S. is - as Martin Luther King said - “The greatest purveyor of violence in the world today.” At this moment our government is making war and killing people in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Pakistan, Somalia, Syria, and Yemen. Thousands of U.S. troops are fighting in these wars, although most Americans are not aware of it. In addition, the 70,000-members of the U.S. ‘Special Operations Command’ are active in three-quarters of the countries of the world. Their activities include kidnapping (‘rendition’), torture, and murder. As the rest of the world recognizes - but Americans don’t - they are nothing less than American death squads - out to get ‘bad guys’ as they say, who might be thought of as affecting ‘American interests’ - usually financial. We rightly deplore “radical Islamic terrorism,” in spite of the fact that the US government set it up 40 years ago to use against Russia, and cooperates with it in various places today. But we are by far the greatest terrorist regime in the world. Why is our government terrorizing the world to the point that international polls show the US is by far the most feared country in the world - not Russia, China, North Korea, or Iran? The answer is simple and horrible. The US is killing people to protect the profits of the 1%, the American economic elite. The U.S. doesn’t need oil from the Mideast, but Mideast gas and oil are needed by America’s economic competitors in Europe and Asia, and so control over them gives the U.S. a major advantage over China, Germany, and other countries - a chokehold which benefits only that American economic elite, the one percent. In 2003 the US illegally invaded Iraq - and killed perhaps a million people for that purpose - and now has thousands of troops and mercenaries throughout the Mideast. The U.S. government says that we’re fighting terrorism, but we are in fact creating terrorists - in response particularly to our drone assassinations, “the most extreme terrorist campaign of modern times” - which have killed more than 5,000 people, including U.S. citizens and hundreds of children. Anti-war groups in the United States and around the world call upon President Trump to ~ (1) establish a foreign policy based on diplomacy, international law, human rights, and respect for the sovereignty of other nations; ~ (2) end the wars (in the Mideast and elsewhere) and stop the drone attacks; ~ (3) cut military spending by at least 50% and close the more than 700 US military bases around the world (Russia has 15; China has one); bring US troops (and weapons) home; and withdraw US ‘special forces,’ who’ve been sent into 3/4 of the world’s countries; ~ (4) stop US support for human rights abusers, notably Israel and Saudi Arabia; and ~ (5) lead on global nuclear disarmament. {AWARE of Champaign Urbana Illinois} ### From davegreen84 at yahoo.com Thu Jun 1 18:56:40 2017 From: davegreen84 at yahoo.com (David Green) Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2017 18:56:40 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Peace-discuss] Re March for Truth References: <866629093.640238.1496343400250.ref@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <866629093.640238.1496343400250@mail.yahoo.com> So please join the Good Americans this weekend as they do their part to help the corporatist establishment make an example of this monster (whose evil outstrips that of Hitler, and Pol Pot, and Stalin, and, well, pick your monster) and discourage any future billionaire ass hats from screwing with their simulation of democracy. They’ll be staging huge rallies all around the country to whip up support for the Pink Revolution, and possibly even all-out Blitzkrieg against our bestial Slavic enemies before they “influence” another election, or hack another rural power grid. They’re calling it the “March for Truth.” It’s a totally grassroots volunteer effort that has absolutely nothing to do with David Brock, Peter Daou, or Shareblue, or the Democratic Party, or any of its neoliberal backers. This one probably won’t quite match the Nuremberg rallies for flat-out hysteria, but give the ruling classes some time … “Resistance Summer” is just getting started. The Good Americans | | | | | | | | | | | The Good Americans The Pink Revolution of 2017, better known as Russiagate, is now more or less a fait accompli. Whether the corpor... | | | | -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From galliher at illinois.edu Thu Jun 1 19:33:57 2017 From: galliher at illinois.edu (Carl G. Estabrook) Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2017 14:33:57 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Re March for Truth In-Reply-To: <866629093.640238.1496343400250@mail.yahoo.com> References: <866629093.640238.1496343400250.ref@mail.yahoo.com> <866629093.640238.1496343400250@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <0A4FEF87-65EE-4FA9-906A-619D79C30E4B@illinois.edu> DEMONSTRATE SATURDAY 3 JUNE - BUT AGAINST WAR, NOT FOR THE DEMOCRATS & NEOCONS This 'March for Truth' [sic] is nefarious 'Russiagate' nonsense. It supports Obama-Clinton/neocon war-making and hostility toward Russia and China. Instead, come demonstrate against war with AWARE this Saturday at the corner of Main and Neil in downtown Champaign, 2-4pm. We'll provide signs and flyers. >. > On Jun 1, 2017, at 1:56 PM, David Green via Peace-discuss wrote: > > So please join the Good Americans this weekend as they do their part to help the corporatist establishment make an example of this monster (whose evil outstrips that of Hitler, and Pol Pot, and Stalin, and, well, pick your monster) and discourage any future billionaire ass hats from screwing with their simulation of democracy. They’ll be staging huge rallies all around the country to whip up support for the Pink Revolution, and possibly even all-out Blitzkrieg against our bestial Slavic enemies before they “influence” another election , or hack another rural power grid . They’re calling it the “March for Truth.” It’s a totally grassroots volunteer effort that has absolutely nothing to do with David Brock, Peter Daou, or Shareblue , or the Democratic Party, or any of its neoliberal backers. This one probably won’t quite match the Nuremberg rallies for flat-out hysteria, but give the ruling classes some time … “Resistance Summer” is just getting started. > > The Good Americans > > > The Good Americans > The Pink Revolution of 2017, better known as Russiagate, is now more or less a fait accompli. Whether the corpor... > > > _______________________________________________ > Peace-discuss mailing list > Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Fri Jun 2 20:47:04 2017 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2017 20:47:04 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] SINGLE PAYER FOR ALL CLEARS STATE SENATE IN CALIFORNIA!!! Message-ID: Published on Friday, June 02, 2017 by Common Dreams Offering 'Moral Model' for Nation, California's Medicare for All Plan Clears State Senate 'California Senators have sent an unmistakable message today to every Californian and people across the nation.' by Jon Queally, staff writer * * * * * * * 9 Comments [https://www.commondreams.org/sites/default/files/styles/cd_large/public/headlines/bakersfield-mobilization.jpeg?itok=Ix7XHK8O] "This is a banner day for California, and a moral model for the nation," said RoseAnn DeMoro, executive director of the California Nurses Association and National Nurses United. (Photo: Healthy California Campaign) A bill that would create the first state-level single payer healthcare system in the United States passed the California Senate on Thursday, generating applause as a major step forward in creating a necessary proving ground for a national 'Medicare for All' program. With a vote of 23-14, the Healthy California Act (SB 562) passed in the Democratic-controlled chamber largely along party lines. "Why should only seniors get the best healthcare in America? Give it to everybody and join the rest of the industrialized world." —Martin Schoen, state residentThough the bill is now headed to the California Assembly for consideration and debate, supporters of the proposal celebrated its passage in the Senate as a landmark development. "What we did today was really approve the concept of a single-payer system in California," Democratic State Sen. Ricardo Lara, a co-author of the bill, told the San Jose Mercury News following the vote. "This is a banner day for California, and a moral model for the nation," said RoseAnn DeMoro, executive director of the California Nurses Association and National Nurses United, in a statement. "California Senators have sent an unmistakable message today to every Californian and people across the nation," she continued. "We can act to end the nightmare of families who live in fear of getting sick and unable to get the care they need due to the enormous cost. We've shown that healthcare is not only a humanitarian imperative for the nation, it is politically feasible, and it is even the fiscally responsible step to take." Earlier this week, as Common Dreams reported, a fiscal analysis of SB 562, conducted by economists at the University of Massachusetts at Amherst and sponsored by the CNA/NNU, found that the plan—if implemented properly—would provide universal coverage in the state while actually driving down overall healthcare spending by 18 percent. "If you wish to see how a single payer system really could provide health care for everyone while reducing costs for businesses and households alike, you should download the full analysis and study it," said Dr. Don McCanne, a member of Physicians for a National Health Program (PNHP). Separately, a new poll out Wednesday showed 70 percent of California voters say they support the healthcare goals set forth by the Healthy California Act. Of those surveyed, 58 percent confirmed their support of the proposal even after being presented with the arguments made by those opposing it. Offering his perspective, Martin Schoen, a Temple City resident who works for a private insurance company, explained why even he supports a "Medicare for All" style system in the state. "I am an insurance agent. I think a single-payer plan for all Americans is the path this country should take. Calling such a plan socialized medicine is a regression to the red scares of the 1950s," Schoen wrote in a letter to Los Angeles Times on Friday. "Having insurance companies involved in our care is one of the major reasons why our healthcare system seems so confusing and unfair." He concluded, "Why should only seniors get the best healthcare in America? Give it to everybody and join the rest of the industrialized world." This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From stuartnlevy at gmail.com Sat Jun 3 12:59:40 2017 From: stuartnlevy at gmail.com (stuartnlevy) Date: Sat, 03 Jun 2017 07:59:40 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Mon 7pm- Peace Action call on Yemen war and Saudi arms sale Message-ID: Conference call - this Monday at 7pm - on the war and famine in Yemen, and the prospect of blocking an upcoming arms sale to Saudi Arabia which is promoting that war. With Peace Action, and a bunch of other groups including Just Foreign Policy.  -- Stuart -------- Original message --------From: "Paul Kawika Martin, Peace Action" Date: 6/3/17 07:00 (GMT-06:00) To: stuartnlevy at gmail.com Subject: Invitation: Join the call Monday 6/5 to end the war in Yemen Urgent Yemen Briefing and Action Steps: Stop the Saudi Arabia Arms Sales  Dear Stuart, Please join this important conference call to help prevent a further humanitarian disaster and mass famine from happening in Yemen and stop the U.S. from selling arms to Saudi Arabia. Next Monday, June 5th from 5:00 - 6:00 PM Pacific, 6:00 - 7:00 PM Mountain, 7:00 - 8:00 PM Central, 8:00 - 9:00 PM Eastern Dial-in Number:  (605) 472-5575 Access Code:  944808 iPhone: (605) 472-5575,,944808# And/or http://login.meetcheap.com/conference,25472621 RSVPs are extremely helpful but not required: https://goo.gl/forms/VCj0VUn2mO1Y2mW02 Agenda (Eastern Times) 8:00 - 8:20 PM (20 mins) What you need to know about the Yemen crisis and Saudi Arabia arms sales - Kate Kizer, Director of Policy & Advocacy, The Yemen Peace Project (Bio Below) 8:20 - 8:30 PM (10 mins) Q & A 8:30 - 8:40 PM (10 mins) What you can do to end the war in Yemen?  How can you stop the Saudi Arms sale? - Kate Gould, Legislative Representative for Middle East Policy, Friends Committee on National Legislation (FCNL)  (Bio Below) 8:40 - 8:55 PM (15 mins) Q & A 8:55 - 9:00 PM (5 mins) Next Steps Briefing Call Cosponsors: Center for International Policy CODEPINK Friends Committee on National Legislation (FCNL) Global Progressive Hub Just Foreign Policy National Priorities Project Peace Action People Demanding Action STAND: The Student-Led Movement to End Mass Atrocities The Conference of Major Superiors of Men (CMSM The Yemen Peace Project United for Peace & Justice United Methodist General Board of Church and Society US Labor Against the War Win Without War About the Expert Briefers: Kate Kizer Director of Policy & Advocacy, The Yemen Peace Project Kate has worked on human rights and democratization in the Middle East for nearly ten years. Kate received her B.A. in Middle Eastern and North African Studies from UCLA, studied Arabic at the American University in Cairo, and is currently an M.A. candidate at Georgetown University’s Democracy and Governance program. Kate has also traveled extensively in Egypt, Lebanon, Jordan, Israel, and Syria. Her writing and commentary have been featured in numerous news outlets, including Reuters, Al Jazeera America, Middle East Eye, OpenDemocracy, and the Huffington Post. Kate directs YPP’s policy and advocacy program to ensure US foreign policy in Yemen reflects the needs and interests of Yemenis and Yemeni Americans. Kate Gould Legislative Representative, Middle East Policy, FCNL Kate Gould serves as the Legislative Representative for Middle East Policy. Kate directs FCNL's lobbying on Middle East policy, and is one of only a handful of registered lobbyists in Washington, D.C. working to support diplomatic solutions to disputes between the U.S. and Iran and the conflicts in Syria, Iraq, Yemen and Israel/Palestine. Gould was profiled in 2015 as the “Quaker Lobbyist Behind the Iran Deal Fight,” by Congressional Quarterly, an outlet with readership that includes 95% of members of Congress. Kate's analysis on Middle East policy has been published in The New York Times, the Washington Post, USA Today, The Guardian, The Daily Beast, CNN, Reuters, AFP and other national outlets. Kate has appeared as an on-air analyst for various TV and radio programs, including the O'Reilly Factor on Fox News, The Thom Hartmann Show, The Real News Network and CCTV. She is a Political Partner at the Truman National Security Project, and serves as a board member of the Herbert Scoville Jr. Peace Fellowship and Churches for Middle East Peace. Before coming to FCNL, Kate taught Palestinian school teachers for AMIDEAST while coordinating a radio program on peace building efforts at a joint Israeli-Palestinian think tank in Jerusalem. Kate also interned for Senator Jeff Merkley both in her hometown of Medford, Oregon and in his Washington, DC office. Kate is inspired every day by people she met in the Middle East who practice nonviolence in the face of so much violence: the Palestinian shepherds, Israeli rabbis, Palestinian women’s cooperative owners, therapists in Gaza treating children who have lived through three wars, and Syrian and Iraqi refugees who have started over to make a new life. Kate is a member of the Friends Meeting of Washington. Cheers, Paul Kawika Martin Senior Director, Policy and Political Affairs Peace Action P.S. Please forward this invitation to your friends, family and colleagues. Click here to support Peace Action's campaigns today. Click here to unsubscribe -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Sat Jun 3 14:43:35 2017 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2017 14:43:35 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] The Black Agenda Report Message-ID: Black Agenda Report News, information and analysis from the black left. Search form Search * Africa * African America * Education * Environment * International * Media & Culture * Political Economy * US Politics * War and Empire You are here 1. Blogs 2. » Danny Haiphong's blog 10 Examples of How US imperialism Continues to Kill the People and Planet Submitted by Danny Haiphong on Tue, 05/30/2017 - 18:43 facebook twitter email [https://www.blackagendareport.com/sites/default/files/styles/image-400x300/public/HAIPHONG_US%20in%20decline.jpeg?itok=Cl13TwOt] * U.S. imperialism by Danny Haiphong The capitalist narrative, aggressively fronted by the Democratic Party in 2016, holds that “conditions in the U.S. were never better.” But all the objective facts say otherwise. “Imperialism's contradictions have been pushed to their natural limit.” By every social, economic and moral measure, conditions of life are deteriorating for the masses of people, while the rich suck up the wealth of the world. 10 Examples of How US imperialism Continues to Kill the People and Planet by Danny Haiphong “What has been called a "race to the bottom" by some scholars is really a permanent crisis in the system as a whole.” The US state apparatus is no longer able to rule in the old way. Trump's rise to power has placed the two-party duopoly in a crisis of legitimacy that cannot be reconciled with the tools at the system's disposal. The system as a whole cannot offer reforms to appease the masses, nor can it conceal the long-standing unity between the two parties on the questions of war, state repression, and austerity. This system, US imperialism, is on a steep decline that has necessitated an intense focus on ideological narratives to move forward with its objectives. One of the most pervasive narratives of the day is the idea that US imperialism's capitalist infrastructure is on the mend. For the last two years, corporate economists and media outlets have embraced a relative optimism about the state of the economy. Reports have asserted that unemployment has been dropping and median income rising. The Democratic Party campaigned in 2016 on the premise that conditions in the US were never better. Reality didn’t agree, and neither did the electorate. Here are ten examples of how US imperialism continues to kill the people and planet with no regard for the political and economic crisis being paved along the way. 1. US unemployment remains high: The measure of unemployment in the US is highly deceiving. It leaves out discouraged workers and those who have temporary, part-time jobs. This means that unemployment is actually a lot higher than the 4.3 percent being officially reported by Washington. In fact, the number of workers in their prime working years (25-54) who are employed is 1.7 percentage points lower than in 2008. According to the Economic Policy Institute, Black unemployment continues to be doublethat of Whites in 2017. 2. US wages remain low: In 2016, Oxfam reported that nearly half of the US population makes less than $15 per hour at their place of work. Twenty-five percent of these workers are without sick-time. To make matters worse, a recent Economic Policy Institute report found that capitalist employers reap an extra 15 billion USD per year in stolen wages. The precarious condition of workers in the US is little talked about in the corporate media. Yet for the majority of US workers, the so-called rise in median income alongside a lower unemployment rate has provided little relief from imperialism's race to the bottom. 3. US life expectancy has decreased: The US spends 18 percent of all GDP on healthcare but has some of the worst outcomes in the capitalist world. Healthcare in the United States is under the complete control of monopolies and corporations in the insurance and pharmaceutical industries. Not only are workers in the US working longer hours for less pay, but many of them cannot afford to go to the doctor when ill. In 2015, life expectancy decreased by one-tenth of a year. Preventable illnesses such as heart disease, diabetes, and drug overdoses were cited as primary causes for the change. 4. The rich continue to plunder the planet: Oxfam reports annually on the global wealth divide. And each year, the report reveals the extent to which the wealthy have consolidated most of the planet's wealth into fewer and fewer hands. In 2014, Michael Parenti criticized the conclusion that 85 billionaires had as much wealth as half of the world's population. He argued correctly that 85 billionaires have far more wealth than the rest of us, with concentrated wealth being the result of the private accumulation of surplus value from the world's working masses. The situation is far worse in 2017 than it was just three years prior. Now just six individuals possess more wealth than half of the global population. 5. The US is still the leading prison nation: More attention has been placed on the question of mass incarceration of late, especially since 2014. Yet despite all of Obama's PR gestures, such as the commutation of a few hundred sentences, the US remains a gulag state. The Prison Policy Initiative totals the US prison population at 2.3 million. Over half of all inmates identify as Black or Latino. Five hundred thousand prison inmates languish in prison for non-violent drug offenses. While just 5 percent of the world's population, the US possesses 25 percent of the world's prisoners. 6. The US continues to spend more on war than anyone else: The US spends over 600 billion USD per year on "defense," more than the next seven biggest defense budgets combined. This large sum of taxpayer dollars is distributed among 1,000 military bases and their weapons systems. Huge sums also go to lucrative contracts with weapons manufacturers. Saudi Arabia just struck a deal with the Trump administration that will total over 350 billion USD over ten years. Staunch US allies such as Israel and Saudi Arabia provide guaranteed markets for weapons contractors as they pursue wars of aggression in Palestine, Yemen, and Syria, to name a few. 7. The US continues to threaten Nuclear War: US military provocations both in the Korean Peninsula and along the Russian border have placed the planet on the precipice of nuclear war. NATO's exercises along the Russian border have yet to cease despite Trump's initial promise to scale back the Cold War institution during his campaign. Furthermore, one of the first military maneuvers made during Trump's Presidency was to threaten the Democratic People's Republic of Korea with a naval fleet armed with tomahawk missiles. The double edged sword of anti-Russia hysteria and military action in South East Asia points in the direction of a possible nuclear war between the US and the powers of the East; the consequences of which would be devastating. 8. Ecological Disaster: Nuclear war threatens the planet's ability to sustain human life. The US military is the world’s largest polluter. US military bases and facilities all over the world have been cited by the EPA for dumping waste materials into the ocean and spreading the dangerous effects of toxic weaponry far and wide. Of course, the system of imperialism that the military diligently serves has no interest in preserving the environment. US imperialism has one goal and one goal only, and that is to maximize private profit at the expense of the planet's habitability. 9. Privatization of Education: Donald Trump's proposed federal budget includes massive cuts to public education and anti-poverty programs generally. The GOP-led administration has set its sights on the "old-school" privatization model of funneling federal dollars into private school vouchers. Vouchers have been proven to enforce a segregation regime on school districts in a much more overt manner than the de facto segregation encouraged by charter schools. But charter school operators won't have to worry, either. Trump has vowed to continue the Obama and Bush II's assault on public education with similar incentive schemes that will close more schools, fire more teachers, and erect more charter schools into the near future. 10. Political instability: The conditions of US imperialism will no doubt continue to generate political instability both on the US mainland and abroad. What has been called a "race to the bottom" by some scholars is really a permanent crisis in the system as a whole. Imperialism's contradictions have been pushed to their natural limit. Tech and finance capital continue to speed up production and profit without regard for the future of the people or the planet. In response, a resurgence in right and left-wing political movements can be seen in nations such as France and the UK. Sanders and Trump represented the US manifestation of the political instability that currently plagues the imperial apparatus. The trends outlined in this article reveal the intensity of imperialism's assault on the working class and oppressed masses in all corners of the globe. Those in the US working to organize a movement strong enough to pave the way toward imperialism's demise must pay close attention to the interconnected character of all aspects of the system. Such an analysis is exactly what the US corporate media and the political class are trying to prevent from forming. The anti-Russia hysteria surrounding Trump's administration distracts the masses from the legitimate problems of the oppressed classes and lays the basis for war. And if the elite gets their way, it will be a war that the lot of humanity can ill afford. Danny Haiphong is an Asian activist and political analyst in the Boston area. He can bereachedatwakeupriseup1990@gmail.com * Danny Haiphong's blog -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cge at shout.net Sat Jun 3 22:45:53 2017 From: cge at shout.net (C. G. Estabrook) Date: Sat, 03 Jun 2017 17:45:53 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Demonstrate this Saturday, June 3, in downtown Champaign 2-4pm In-Reply-To: References: <5880c407a1db5_222964d980682c3@asgworker-qmb2-1.nbuild.prd.useast1.3dna.io.mail> <3014b58c3080570ba473a4b2bdcb0659@shout.net> <1f26ef3688b593a338a8fbc7cd45b7a6@shout.net> <67ddb84dcd90b85ed6339a05eaf437a4@shout.net> <03888a7961195446e7dd985988e8dfe9@shout.net> Message-ID: <898529f7a5749a1b7e288cc696cdd7ee@shout.net> I haven't much respect for MoveOn.org, but I signed their petition to US representatives and senators that says, "Cosponsor & vote for the resolution of disapproval against the president's Saudi arms deal." Would you like to you sign this anti-war petition? Click here: http://petitions.moveon.org/sign/congress-vote-no-on-trumps?source=s.em.mt&r_by=2656067 ### From davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net Sun Jun 4 01:06:25 2017 From: davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net (David Johnson) Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2017 20:06:25 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] Tomorrow I'll ask Carol Ammons to oppose the Saudi arms deal In-Reply-To: <5CB8941D-7259-4DD5-9542-7442892DC00F@illinois.edu> References: <5CB8941D-7259-4DD5-9542-7442892DC00F@illinois.edu> Message-ID: <003f01d2dcce$c9fbecf0$5df3c6d0$@comcast.net> Carol was one of only two State Reps who abstained from voting for the anti BDS bill, despite aggressive coercion from Madigan and lobbyists from the Israeli consulate for all State Reps and Senators to vote for it. David J. From: Peace [mailto:peace-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of Carl G. Estabrook via Peace Sent: Saturday, June 03, 2017 6:18 PM To: Robert Naiman Cc: peace Subject: Re: [Peace] Tomorrow I'll ask Carol Ammons to oppose the Saudi arms deal She was unwilling to oppose Illinois’ support for Israeli apartheid. On Jun 3, 2017, at 2:56 PM, Robert Naiman via Peace wrote: Tomorrow afternoon this event is happening in Champaign: IL - 13 Listening Session: Champaign-Urbana Public · Hosted by Carol Ammons https://www.facebook.com/events/1855909114660297/ Yesterday I asked Rodney Davis to oppose Trump's Saudi arms deal. I presented the IL-13 signers on our petition , and asked him to cosponsor the bipartisan Amash-Pocan resolution against the Saudi arms deal. Rodney Davis said he would speak with Amash and the other Republican sponsors and get back to me. Now Carol is asking: "What do you want your Representative in Congress to do?" I figure that's an easy question for me to answer. I want my Representative in Congress to oppose the Saudi arms deal. So, I figure, why not take Carol the same petition I took Rodney, and make the same ask? I figure: if Carol opposes the Saudi arms deal and challenges Rodney to do the same, it's win-win. Either Rodney agrees, in which case I win, or Rodney doesn't agree, in which case it's a public issue and the News-Gazette has to report on it and Rodney gets in trouble, in which case I also win. Is it plausible that Rodney, feeling a little heat, would agree to co-sponsor the Amash resolution? Last September, then-Illinois Senator Mark Kirk was one of only four Senate Republicans to vote against the Saudi tank deal. The other 23 no votes were Democrats. Mark Kirk had not previously been known as a critic of Saudi Arabia or its "particularly aggressive" war in Yemen, as the Vatican puts it. What made Mark Kirk flip? Tammy Duckworth was breathing down his neck, putting out a press release every time he didn't say "excuse me" after burping. Could we do that to Rodney Davis? Could we flip him with some pressure? If not, why not? I'll print out the petitions again around noon tomorrow. So there's still time to sign. Sign the petition: Congress: Vote NO on Trump's Saudi Arms Deal https://petitions.moveon.org/sign/congress-vote-no-on-trumps?r_by=1135580 === Robert Naiman Policy Director Just Foreign Policy www.justforeignpolicy.org naiman at justforeignpolicy.org (202) 448-2898 x1 _______________________________________________ Peace mailing list Peace at lists.chambana.net https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From galliher at illinois.edu Sun Jun 4 01:15:37 2017 From: galliher at illinois.edu (Carl G. Estabrook) Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2017 20:15:37 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] Tomorrow I'll ask Carol Ammons to oppose the Saudi arms deal In-Reply-To: <003f01d2dcce$c9fbecf0$5df3c6d0$@comcast.net> References: <5CB8941D-7259-4DD5-9542-7442892DC00F@illinois.edu> <003f01d2dcce$c9fbecf0$5df3c6d0$@comcast.net> Message-ID: She didn’t vote against it, as she would have, had the subject been South African apartheid. Has she often differed with the Democratic leadership? —CGE > On Jun 3, 2017, at 8:06 PM, David Johnson wrote: > > Carol was one of only two State Reps who abstained from voting for the anti BDS bill, despite aggressive coercion from Madigan and lobbyists from the Israeli consulate for all State Reps and Senators to vote for it. > > David J. > > > From: Peace [mailto:peace-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of Carl G. Estabrook via Peace > Sent: Saturday, June 03, 2017 6:18 PM > To: Robert Naiman > Cc: peace > Subject: Re: [Peace] Tomorrow I'll ask Carol Ammons to oppose the Saudi arms deal > > She was unwilling to oppose Illinois’ support for Israeli apartheid. > > >> On Jun 3, 2017, at 2:56 PM, Robert Naiman via Peace wrote: >> >> >> Tomorrow afternoon this event is happening in Champaign: >> >> IL - 13 Listening Session: Champaign-Urbana >> Public · Hosted by Carol Ammons >> https://www.facebook.com/events/1855909114660297/ >> >> Yesterday I asked Rodney Davis to oppose Trump's Saudi arms deal. I presented the IL-13 signers on our petition, and asked him to cosponsor the bipartisan Amash-Pocan resolution against the Saudi arms deal. Rodney Davis said he would speak with Amash and the other Republican sponsors and get back to me. >> >> Now Carol is asking: "What do you want your Representative in Congress to do?" I figure that's an easy question for me to answer. I want my Representative in Congress to oppose the Saudi arms deal. >> >> So, I figure, why not take Carol the same petition I took Rodney, and make the same ask? >> >> I figure: if Carol opposes the Saudi arms deal and challenges Rodney to do the same, it's win-win. Either Rodney agrees, in which case I win, or Rodney doesn't agree, in which case it's a public issue and the News-Gazette has to report on it and Rodney gets in trouble, in which case I also win. >> >> Is it plausible that Rodney, feeling a little heat, would agree to co-sponsor the Amash resolution? >> >> Last September, then-Illinois Senator Mark Kirk was one of only four Senate Republicans to vote against the Saudi tank deal. The other 23 no votes were Democrats. Mark Kirk had not previously been known as a critic of Saudi Arabia or its "particularly aggressive" war in Yemen, as the Vatican puts it. >> >> What made Mark Kirk flip? Tammy Duckworth was breathing down his neck, putting out a press release every time he didn't say "excuse me" after burping. >> >> Could we do that to Rodney Davis? Could we flip him with some pressure? If not, why not? >> >> I'll print out the petitions again around noon tomorrow. So there's still time to sign. >> >> Sign the petition: Congress: Vote NO on Trump's Saudi Arms Deal >> https://petitions.moveon.org/sign/congress-vote-no-on-trumps?r_by=1135580 >> >> === >> >> Robert Naiman >> Policy Director >> Just Foreign Policy >> www.justforeignpolicy.org >> naiman at justforeignpolicy.org >> (202) 448-2898 x1 >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Peace mailing list >> Peace at lists.chambana.net >> https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace From karenaram at hotmail.com Sun Jun 4 14:03:23 2017 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2017 14:03:23 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Climate change and all that entails. Message-ID: Organizing Notes Bruce Gagnon is coordinator of the Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space. He offers his own reflections on organizing and the state of America's declining empire.... About Me [My Photo] NAME: BRUCE K. GAGNON LOCATION: BATH, MAINE, UNITED STATES View my complete profile [Recent Posts] * Tragedy of the Niger Delta * My Mistake * Moving Words from a Vietnam Vet * Speaking at the White House * Terror in Britain: What did the Prime Minister Kno... * Photos from Two Days of Protest in Washington DC * VFP Brings Letters to the Vietnam Wall * U.S. Pushing Regime Change in Venezuela * Pentagon Pulls a Fast One on South Korea * Heading to Washington for Veterans Protest Watch Bruce's Cable TV Show:"This Issue" [http://www.space4peace.org/images/button_tv.jpg] Please like us on facebook [http://www.space4peace.org/images/facebook_logo11.jpg] Please help us by making an online donation [DonateNow] Watch Bruce's Cable TV Show:"This Issue" [http://www.space4peace.org/images/button_tv.jpg] Please like us on facebook [http://www.space4peace.org/images/facebook_logo11.jpg] Please help us by making an online donation [DonateNow] [Powered by Blogger] SATURDAY, JUNE 03, 2017 The Corporate Mega-Death Machine is Killing Everything [https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-4CNm28zImoo/WTL6FSDYtII/AAAAAAAAWhg/Bqu5VsxIPxACVI-g5tYwJWxNgJBqtV7jQCLcB/s640/bird.jpg] This morning Mary Beth came running down the stairs telling us all to go look at our crab apple tree in the front yard which was full of Cedar Waxwings. I can't ever recall hearing of a Cedar Waxwing - I've likely seen them but don't have any memory of it. But this morning dozens of the beautiful birds were flitting around the crab apple and picking off caterpillars that are presently feasting on the tree leaves. They must have worked that tree for at least an hour before taking off. Later on I went out and looked for evidence of caterpillars on the tree but only saw one. So hopefully the birds will come back in the days ahead and help save the tree from being totally denuded by the insects. The tree blossoms in late May - right around MB's birthday. The smell of the flowers on the tree is heavenly. I bought the tree for her birthday soon after we moved into this house. Following that hour of joy, we had both sat by the window and watched the beautiful show, MB and I went out to work in the garden. We planted 17 tomato plants, cucumbers, and squash and did a bunch of weeding. I had to move some lettuce that is growing in clumps due to my shaking hands when I was planting the seeds - the plants grow where the seeds fall and in my case I dumped a load of them in one spot. The garden ground is wet from almost non-stop rain during recent weeks. A farmer friend here in Maine says that more rain than usual is in our future due to climate change. All of this magnificent nature is now in peril as we see the US refusing to deal with the reality of global warming. Some people can argue all they want against climate change but I am a true believer that our weather is now totally fucked up. I was talking to someone in Texas yesterday who told me they've had rain for two weeks and she was coughing like mad. I was coughing as well and so was the Global Network's layout design person who I had spoken to earlier in the day. I caught the crud from MB. As the weather changes day-to-day our bodies are having a very hard time adjusting. Last month we had a 93 degree day (the hottest recorded temperature for that day in Maine's history). Then just days later we had to light a fire again to heat the kitchen. Add also to this reality the atmosphere regularly being filled with chemtrails that lace the sky from horizon to horizon. The aluminum (and god knows what other toxic elements are being sprayed from these planes) gets into our lungs, the soil, the water, and ultimately our food chain. That has to be lowering our immune system dramatically thus these hard bouts with the crud that never seems to go away. Don't you begin to wonder if someone is trying to thin the population? I was talking with a friend the other day about all this and I asked the question, "Why would they (the ruling oligarchies) want to thin us out?" The person's response was on the mark - "Because there are not going to be enough jobs." Nothing like an unemployed superfluous person who figures out what is really going on - they become radicalized and a danger to the capitalist system. But the ruling 1% also knows that the planet is over populated. So they know that their 'rule' on Earth is conditioned on reducing the global population and in doing so their mad hatter scientists come up with all kinds of insane programs for weather modification and geo-engineering. So in the back of my mind this morning, while having this spiritual experience watching the birds feast on our tree, was global warming and chemtrails and how these phenomenon are currently impacting the birds, other wildlife, plants, and trees. Instead of surrendering to helplessness, which can be like a drug addiction, I feel even more compelled to push for conversion of the military industrial complex toward a sustainable society. There is far too much beauty in life for me to walk away from working to stop this corporate industrial mega-polluting model of society. (I often feel like I am living in the middle of the collapse of the Aztec civilization. I figure their rulers ignored the hell out of critics at that time too.) We don't have much time left and so I will keep pushing to convert places like the General Dynamics Corp. Navy shipyard here in Bath, Maine. The US military has the largest carbon bootprint on the entire planet. Official Washington 'insisted' that the Pentagon be exempted from monitoring by the Kyoto and Paris climate change protocols. Why in hell do most mainstream environmental groups refuse to mention the Pentagon link to global warming? So while everyone is now yelling at Trump because he wants to withdraw from the Paris accords, hardly anyone is noticing the military footprint connection. It burns my britches. This is a collapsing industrial culture. I want to stand with the birds. Bruce posted by Bruce K. Gagnon | 1:56 PM [https://img2.blogblog.com/img/icon18_email.gif] 1 Comments: [Blogger] Lisa Savage said... Home run blog post, Bruce. I'm with you, MB and the birds. 6/4/17, 4:12 AM Post a Comment Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom] Links to this post: Create a Link << Home -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From deb.pdamerica at gmail.com Sun Jun 4 15:56:50 2017 From: deb.pdamerica at gmail.com (Debra Schrishuhn) Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2017 10:56:50 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] Climate change and all that entails. In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <176031D0-3DFB-4533-9617-50FC72D41919@gmail.com> I hope our panelists will mention the Pentagon's huge carbon footprint at our event "hidden Costs of War" panel discussion at Champaign Pub Lib June 18 1:30-3 pm free and open to the public BTW cedar waxwings are plentiful around C-U right now, especially Crystal Lake Park and Busey Woods. Deb Sent from my iPhone > On Jun 4, 2017, at 9:03 AM, Karen Aram via Peace wrote: > > > Organizing Notes > Bruce Gagnon is coordinator of the Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space. He offers his own reflections on organizing and the state of America's declining empire.... > About Me > NAME: BRUCE K. GAGNON LOCATION: BATH, MAINE, UNITED STATES > View my complete profile > > Tragedy of the Niger Delta > My Mistake > Moving Words from a Vietnam Vet > Speaking at the White House > Terror in Britain: What did the Prime Minister Kno... > Photos from Two Days of Protest in Washington DC > VFP Brings Letters to the Vietnam Wall > U.S. Pushing Regime Change in Venezuela > Pentagon Pulls a Fast One on South Korea > Heading to Washington for Veterans Protest > Watch Bruce's Cable TV Show:"This Issue" > > Please like us on facebook > > Please help us by making an online donation > > > Watch Bruce's Cable TV Show:"This Issue" > > Please like us on facebook > > Please help us by making an online donation > > > > > SATURDAY, JUNE 03, 2017 > The Corporate Mega-Death Machine is Killing Everything > > > This morning Mary Beth came running down the stairs telling us all to go look at our crab apple tree in the front yard which was full of Cedar Waxwings. > > I can't ever recall hearing of a Cedar Waxwing - I've likely seen them but don't have any memory of it. > > But this morning dozens of the beautiful birds were flitting around the crab apple and picking off caterpillars that are presently feasting on the tree leaves. They must have worked that tree for at least an hour before taking off. Later on I went out and looked for evidence of caterpillars on the tree but only saw one. So hopefully the birds will come back in the days ahead and help save the tree from being totally denuded by the insects. > > The tree blossoms in late May - right around MB's birthday. The smell of the flowers on the tree is heavenly. I bought the tree for her birthday soon after we moved into this house. > > Following that hour of joy, we had both sat by the window and watched the beautiful show, MB and I went out to work in the garden. We planted 17 tomato plants, cucumbers, and squash and did a bunch of weeding. I had to move some lettuce that is growing in clumps due to my shaking hands when I was planting the seeds - the plants grow where the seeds fall and in my case I dumped a load of them in one spot. The garden ground is wet from almost non-stop rain during recent weeks. A farmer friend here in Maine says that more rain than usual is in our future due to climate change. > > All of this magnificent nature is now in peril as we see the US refusing to deal with the reality of global warming. Some people can argue all they want against climate change but I am a true believer that our weather is now totally fucked up. I was talking to someone in Texas yesterday who told me they've had rain for two weeks and she was coughing like mad. I was coughing as well and so was the Global Network's layout design person who I had spoken to earlier in the day. I caught the crud from MB. > > As the weather changes day-to-day our bodies are having a very hard time adjusting. Last month we had a 93 degree day (the hottest recorded temperature for that day in Maine's history). Then just days later we had to light a fire again to heat the kitchen. > > Add also to this reality the atmosphere regularly being filled with chemtrails that lace the sky from horizon to horizon. The aluminum (and god knows what other toxic elements are being sprayed from these planes) gets into our lungs, the soil, the water, and ultimately our food chain. That has to be lowering our immune system dramatically thus these hard bouts with the crud that never seems to go away. > > Don't you begin to wonder if someone is trying to thin the population? I was talking with a friend the other day about all this and I asked the question, "Why would they (the ruling oligarchies) want to thin us out?" The person's response was on the mark - "Because there are not going to be enough jobs." Nothing like an unemployed superfluous person who figures out what is really going on - they become radicalized and a danger to the capitalist system. > > But the ruling 1% also knows that the planet is over populated. So they know that their 'rule' on Earth is conditioned on reducing the global population and in doing so their mad hatter scientists come up with all kinds of insane programs for weather modification and geo-engineering. > > So in the back of my mind this morning, while having this spiritual experience watching the birds feast on our tree, was global warming and chemtrails and how these phenomenon are currently impacting the birds, other wildlife, plants, and trees. > > Instead of surrendering to helplessness, which can be like a drug addiction, I feel even more compelled to push for conversion of the military industrial complex toward a sustainable society. > > There is far too much beauty in life for me to walk away from working to stop this corporate industrial mega-polluting model of society. (I often feel like I am living in the middle of the collapse of the Aztec civilization. I figure their rulers ignored the hell out of critics at that time too.) We don't have much time left and so I will keep pushing to convert places like the General Dynamics Corp. Navy shipyard here in Bath, Maine. > > The US military has the largest carbon bootprint on the entire planet. Official Washington 'insisted' that the Pentagon be exempted from monitoring by the Kyoto and Paris climate change protocols. Why in hell do most mainstream environmental groups refuse to mention the Pentagon link to global warming? So while everyone is now yelling at Trump because he wants to withdraw from the Paris accords, hardly anyone is noticing the military footprint connection. It burns my britches. > > This is a collapsing industrial culture. I want to stand with the birds. > > Bruce > posted by Bruce K. Gagnon | 1:56 PM > 1 Comments: > Lisa Savage said... > Home run blog post, Bruce. I'm with you, MB and the birds. > 6/4/17, 4:12 AM > Post a Comment > > Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom] > Links to this post: > Create a Link > > << Home > > _______________________________________________ > Peace mailing list > Peace at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From divisek at yahoo.com Sun Jun 4 16:34:49 2017 From: divisek at yahoo.com (Dianna Visek) Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2017 16:34:49 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] Climate change and all that entails. In-Reply-To: <176031D0-3DFB-4533-9617-50FC72D41919@gmail.com> References: <176031D0-3DFB-4533-9617-50FC72D41919@gmail.com> Message-ID: <361721413.1954085.1496594089728@mail.yahoo.com> The Champaign library doesn't show this event on its online calendar. Dianna Events | | | | | | | | | | | Events | | | | On Sunday, June 4, 2017 10:57 AM, Debra Schrishuhn via Peace-discuss wrote: I hope our panelists will mention the Pentagon's huge carbon footprint at our event "hidden Costs of War" panel discussion at Champaign Pub Lib June 18 1:30-3 pm free and open to the public BTW cedar waxwings are plentiful around C-U right now, especially Crystal Lake Park and Busey Woods.  Deb Sent from my iPhone On Jun 4, 2017, at 9:03 AM, Karen Aram via Peace wrote: Organizing Notes Bruce Gagnon is coordinator of the Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space. He offers his own reflections on organizing and the state of America's declining empire.... About Me - - NAME: BRUCE K. GAGNON  - LOCATION: BATH, MAINE, UNITED STATES View my complete profile - Tragedy of the Niger Delta - My Mistake - Moving Words from a Vietnam Vet - Speaking at the White House - Terror in Britain: What did the Prime Minister Kno... - Photos from Two Days of Protest in Washington DC - VFP Brings Letters to the Vietnam Wall - U.S. Pushing Regime Change in Venezuela - Pentagon Pulls a Fast One on South Korea - Heading to Washington for Veterans Protest Watch Bruce's Cable TV Show:"This Issue"    Please like us on facebook   Please help us by making an online donation   Watch Bruce's Cable TV Show:"This Issue"    Please like us on facebook   Please help us by making an online donation   SATURDAY, JUNE 03, 2017 The Corporate Mega-Death Machine is Killing Everything This morning Mary Beth came running down the stairs telling us all to go look at our crab apple tree in the front yard which was full of Cedar Waxwings. I can't ever recall hearing of a Cedar Waxwing - I've likely seen them but don't have any memory of it. But this morning dozens of the beautiful birds were flitting around the crab apple and picking off caterpillars that are presently feasting on the tree leaves.  They must have worked that tree for at least an hour before taking off.  Later on I went out and looked for evidence of caterpillars on the tree but only saw one.  So hopefully the birds will come back in the days ahead and help save the tree from being totally denuded by the insects. The tree blossoms in late May - right around MB's birthday.  The smell of the flowers on the tree is heavenly.  I bought the tree for her birthday soon after we moved into this house. Following that hour of joy, we had both sat by the window and watched the beautiful show, MB and I went out to work in the garden. We planted 17 tomato plants, cucumbers, and squash and did a bunch of weeding.  I had to move some lettuce that is growing in clumps due to my shaking hands when I was planting the seeds - the plants grow where the seeds fall and in my case I dumped a load of them in one spot. The garden ground is wet from almost non-stop rain during recent weeks.  A farmer friend here in Maine says that more rain than usual is in our future due to climate change. All of this magnificent nature is now in peril as we see the US refusing to deal with the reality of global warming.  Some people can argue all they want against climate change but I am a true believer that our weather is now totally fucked up.  I was talking to someone in Texas yesterday who told me they've had rain for two weeks and she was coughing like mad.  I was coughing as well and so was the Global Network's layout design person who I had spoken to earlier in the day.  I caught the crud from MB. As the weather changes day-to-day our bodies are having a very hard time adjusting.  Last month we had a 93 degree day (the hottest recorded temperature for that day in Maine's history).  Then just days later we had to light a fire again to heat the kitchen. Add also to this reality the atmosphere regularly being filled with chemtrails that lace the sky from horizon to horizon.  The aluminum (and god knows what other toxic elements are being sprayed from these planes) gets into our lungs, the soil, the water, and ultimately our food chain.  That has to be lowering our immune system dramatically thus these hard bouts with the crud that never seems to go away. Don't you begin to wonder if someone is trying to thin the population?  I was talking with a friend the other day about all this and I asked the question, "Why would they (the ruling oligarchies) want to thin us out?"  The person's response was on the mark - "Because there are not going to be enough jobs."  Nothing like an unemployed superfluous person who figures out what is really going on - they become radicalized and a danger to the capitalist system. But the ruling 1% also knows that the planet is over populated.  So they know that their 'rule' on Earth is conditioned on reducing the global population and in doing so their mad hatter scientists come up with all kinds of insane programs for weather modification and geo-engineering.    So in the back of my mind this morning, while having this spiritual experience watching the birds feast on our tree, was global warming and chemtrails and how these phenomenon are currently impacting the birds, other wildlife, plants, and trees. Instead of surrendering to helplessness, which can be like a drug addiction, I feel even more compelled to push for conversion of the military industrial complex toward a sustainable society. There is far too much beauty in life for me to walk away from working to stop this corporate industrial mega-polluting model of society.  (I often feel like I am living in the middle of the collapse of the Aztec civilization.  I figure their rulers ignored the hell out of critics at that time too.)  We don't have much time left and so I will keep pushing to convert places like the General Dynamics Corp. Navy shipyard here in Bath, Maine. The US military has the largest carbon bootprint on the entire planet.  Official Washington 'insisted' that the Pentagon be exempted from monitoring by the Kyoto and Paris climate change protocols.  Why in hell do most mainstream environmental groups refuse to mention the Pentagon link to global warming?  So while everyone is now yelling at Trump because he wants to withdraw from the Paris accords, hardly anyone is noticing the military footprint connection.  It burns my britches. This is a collapsing industrial culture.  I want to stand with the birds.  Bruceposted by Bruce K. Gagnon | 1:56 PM  1 Comments: -  Lisa Savage said... - Home run blog post, Bruce. I'm with you, MB and the birds. - 6/4/17, 4:12 AM Post a CommentSubscribe to Post Comments [Atom] Links to this post: Create a Link<< Home _______________________________________________ Peace mailing list Peace at lists.chambana.net https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace _______________________________________________ Peace-discuss mailing list Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From deb.pdamerica at gmail.com Sun Jun 4 16:48:13 2017 From: deb.pdamerica at gmail.com (Debra Schrishuhn) Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2017 11:48:13 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] Climate change and all that entails. In-Reply-To: <361721413.1954085.1496594089728@mail.yahoo.com> References: <176031D0-3DFB-4533-9617-50FC72D41919@gmail.com> <361721413.1954085.1496594089728@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Thanks. I will call them tomorrow Deb Sent from my iPhone > On Jun 4, 2017, at 11:34 AM, Dianna Visek wrote: > > The Champaign library doesn't show this event on its online calendar. > > Dianna > > Events > > Events > > > > On Sunday, June 4, 2017 10:57 AM, Debra Schrishuhn via Peace-discuss wrote: > > > I hope our panelists will mention the Pentagon's huge carbon footprint at our event "hidden Costs of War" panel discussion at Champaign Pub Lib June 18 1:30-3 pm free and open to the public > > BTW cedar waxwings are plentiful around C-U right now, especially Crystal Lake Park and Busey Woods. > > Deb > > Sent from my iPhone > >> On Jun 4, 2017, at 9:03 AM, Karen Aram via Peace wrote: >> > > > Organizing Notes > Bruce Gagnon is coordinator of the Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space. He offers his own reflections on organizing and the state of America's declining empire.... > About Me > NAME: BRUCE K. GAGNON LOCATION: BATH, MAINE, UNITED STATES > View my complete profile > > Tragedy of the Niger Delta > My Mistake > Moving Words from a Vietnam Vet > Speaking at the White House > Terror in Britain: What did the Prime Minister Kno... > Photos from Two Days of Protest in Washington DC > VFP Brings Letters to the Vietnam Wall > U.S. Pushing Regime Change in Venezuela > Pentagon Pulls a Fast One on South Korea > Heading to Washington for Veterans Protest > Watch Bruce's Cable TV Show:"This Issue" > > Please like us on facebook > > Please help us by making an online donation > > > Watch Bruce's Cable TV Show:"This Issue" > > Please like us on facebook > > Please help us by making an online donation > > > > SATURDAY, JUNE 03, 2017 > The Corporate Mega-Death Machine is Killing Everything > > > This morning Mary Beth came running down the stairs telling us all to go look at our crab apple tree in the front yard which was full of Cedar Waxwings. > > I can't ever recall hearing of a Cedar Waxwing - I've likely seen them but don't have any memory of it. > > But this morning dozens of the beautiful birds were flitting around the crab apple and picking off caterpillars that are presently feasting on the tree leaves. They must have worked that tree for at least an hour before taking off. Later on I went out and looked for evidence of caterpillars on the tree but only saw one. So hopefully the birds will come back in the days ahead and help save the tree from being totally denuded by the insects. > > The tree blossoms in late May - right around MB's birthday. The smell of the flowers on the tree is heavenly. I bought the tree for her birthday soon after we moved into this house. > > Following that hour of joy, we had both sat by the window and watched the beautiful show, MB and I went out to work in the garden. We planted 17 tomato plants, cucumbers, and squash and did a bunch of weeding. I had to move some lettuce that is growing in clumps due to my shaking hands when I was planting the seeds - the plants grow where the seeds fall and in my case I dumped a load of them in one spot. The garden ground is wet from almost non-stop rain during recent weeks. A farmer friend here in Maine says that more rain than usual is in our future due to climate change. > > All of this magnificent nature is now in peril as we see the US refusing to deal with the reality of global warming. Some people can argue all they want against climate change but I am a true believer that our weather is now totally fucked up. I was talking to someone in Texas yesterday who told me they've had rain for two weeks and she was coughing like mad. I was coughing as well and so was the Global Network's layout design person who I had spoken to earlier in the day. I caught the crud from MB. > > As the weather changes day-to-day our bodies are having a very hard time adjusting. Last month we had a 93 degree day (the hottest recorded temperature for that day in Maine's history). Then just days later we had to light a fire again to heat the kitchen. > > Add also to this reality the atmosphere regularly being filled with chemtrails that lace the sky from horizon to horizon. The aluminum (and god knows what other toxic elements are being sprayed from these planes) gets into our lungs, the soil, the water, and ultimately our food chain. That has to be lowering our immune system dramatically thus these hard bouts with the crud that never seems to go away. > > Don't you begin to wonder if someone is trying to thin the population? I was talking with a friend the other day about all this and I asked the question, "Why would they (the ruling oligarchies) want to thin us out?" The person's response was on the mark - "Because there are not going to be enough jobs." Nothing like an unemployed superfluous person who figures out what is really going on - they become radicalized and a danger to the capitalist system. > > But the ruling 1% also knows that the planet is over populated. So they know that their 'rule' on Earth is conditioned on reducing the global population and in doing so their mad hatter scientists come up with all kinds of insane programs for weather modification and geo-engineering. > > So in the back of my mind this morning, while having this spiritual experience watching the birds feast on our tree, was global warming and chemtrails and how these phenomenon are currently impacting the birds, other wildlife, plants, and trees. > > Instead of surrendering to helplessness, which can be like a drug addiction, I feel even more compelled to push for conversion of the military industrial complex toward a sustainable society. > > There is far too much beauty in life for me to walk away from working to stop this corporate industrial mega-polluting model of society. (I often feel like I am living in the middle of the collapse of the Aztec civilization. I figure their rulers ignored the hell out of critics at that time too.) We don't have much time left and so I will keep pushing to convert places like the General Dynamics Corp. Navy shipyard here in Bath, Maine. > > The US military has the largest carbon bootprint on the entire planet. Official Washington 'insisted' that the Pentagon be exempted from monitoring by the Kyoto and Paris climate change protocols. Why in hell do most mainstream environmental groups refuse to mention the Pentagon link to global warming? So while everyone is now yelling at Trump because he wants to withdraw from the Paris accords, hardly anyone is noticing the military footprint connection. It burns my britches. > > This is a collapsing industrial culture. I want to stand with the birds. > > Bruce > posted by Bruce K. Gagnon | 1:56 PM > 1 Comments: > Lisa Savage said... > Home run blog post, Bruce. I'm with you, MB and the birds. > 6/4/17, 4:12 AM > Post a Comment > Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom] > Links to this post: > Create a Link > << Home >> _______________________________________________ >> Peace mailing list >> Peace at lists.chambana.net >> https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace > > _______________________________________________ > Peace-discuss mailing list > Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From davegreen84 at yahoo.com Sun Jun 4 16:58:30 2017 From: davegreen84 at yahoo.com (David Green) Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2017 16:58:30 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Peace-discuss] Max Blumenthal takes down Jamie Raskin References: <1603544640.1950851.1496595510275.ref@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1603544640.1950851.1496595510275@mail.yahoo.com> Battle of the oedipal complexes, Blumenthal's father a Clintonite, Raskin's father founded the Institute for Policy Studies primarily to oppose the Vietnam War. Transcript not available yet. Max Blumenthal Grills Progressive Rep. Jamie Raskin about Russia Allegations | | | | | | | | | | | Max Blumenthal Grills Progressive Rep. Jamie Raskin about Russia Allegations By The Real News Network Part one of Real News coverage from the the March for Truth in Washington, D.C. | | | | -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kmedina67 at gmail.com Sun Jun 4 17:01:56 2017 From: kmedina67 at gmail.com (kmedina67) Date: Sun, 04 Jun 2017 12:01:56 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] Climate change and all that entails. Message-ID: Diana,fyi The library events tab only displays library sponsored events. Events by the community are not advertised by the library.  -Karen Medina -------- Original message --------From: Dianna Visek via Peace Date: 6/4/17 11:34 (GMT-06:00) To: Debra Schrishuhn , Karen Aram Cc: peace , peace-discuss Subject: Re: [Peace] [Peace-discuss]  Climate change and all that entails. The Champaign library doesn't show this event on its online calendar. Dianna Events Events On Sunday, June 4, 2017 10:57 AM, Debra Schrishuhn via Peace-discuss wrote: I hope our panelists will mention the Pentagon's huge carbon footprint at our event "hidden Costs of War" panel discussion at Champaign Pub Lib June 18 1:30-3 pm free and open to the public BTW cedar waxwings are plentiful around C-U right now, especially Crystal Lake Park and Busey Woods.  Deb Sent from my iPhone On Jun 4, 2017, at 9:03 AM, Karen Aram via Peace wrote: Organizing Notes Bruce Gagnon is coordinator of the Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space. He offers his own reflections on organizing and the state of America's declining empire.... About Me NAME: BRUCE K. GAGNON  LOCATION: BATH, MAINE, UNITED STATES View my complete profile Tragedy of the Niger DeltaMy MistakeMoving Words from a Vietnam VetSpeaking at the White HouseTerror in Britain: What did the Prime Minister Kno...Photos from Two Days of Protest in Washington DCVFP Brings Letters to the Vietnam WallU.S. Pushing Regime Change in VenezuelaPentagon Pulls a Fast One on South KoreaHeading to Washington for Veterans Protest Watch Bruce's Cable TV Show:"This Issue"    Please like us on facebook   Please help us by making an online donation   Watch Bruce's Cable TV Show:"This Issue"    Please like us on facebook   Please help us by making an online donation   SATURDAY, JUNE 03, 2017 The Corporate Mega-Death Machine is Killing Everything This morning Mary Beth came running down the stairs telling us all to go look at our crab apple tree in the front yard which was full of Cedar Waxwings. I can't ever recall hearing of a Cedar Waxwing - I've likely seen them but don't have any memory of it. But this morning dozens of the beautiful birds were flitting around the crab apple and picking off caterpillars that are presently feasting on the tree leaves.  They must have worked that tree for at least an hour before taking off.  Later on I went out and looked for evidence of caterpillars on the tree but only saw one.  So hopefully the birds will come back in the days ahead and help save the tree from being totally denuded by the insects. The tree blossoms in late May - right around MB's birthday.  The smell of the flowers on the tree is heavenly.  I bought the tree for her birthday soon after we moved into this house. Following that hour of joy, we had both sat by the window and watched the beautiful show, MB and I went out to work in the garden. We planted 17 tomato plants, cucumbers, and squash and did a bunch of weeding.  I had to move some lettuce that is growing in clumps due to my shaking hands when I was planting the seeds - the plants grow where the seeds fall and in my case I dumped a load of them in one spot. The garden ground is wet from almost non-stop rain during recent weeks.  A farmer friend here in Maine says that more rain than usual is in our future due to climate change. All of this magnificent nature is now in peril as we see the US refusing to deal with the reality of global warming.  Some people can argue all they want against climate change but I am a true believer that our weather is now totally fucked up.  I was talking to someone in Texas yesterday who told me they've had rain for two weeks and she was coughing like mad.  I was coughing as well and so was the Global Network's layout design person who I had spoken to earlier in the day.  I caught the crud from MB. As the weather changes day-to-day our bodies are having a very hard time adjusting.  Last month we had a 93 degree day (the hottest recorded temperature for that day in Maine's history).  Then just days later we had to light a fire again to heat the kitchen. Add also to this reality the atmosphere regularly being filled with chemtrails that lace the sky from horizon to horizon.  The aluminum (and god knows what other toxic elements are being sprayed from these planes) gets into our lungs, the soil, the water, and ultimately our food chain.  That has to be lowering our immune system dramatically thus these hard bouts with the crud that never seems to go away. Don't you begin to wonder if someone is trying to thin the population?  I was talking with a friend the other day about all this and I asked the question, "Why would they (the ruling oligarchies) want to thin us out?"  The person's response was on the mark - "Because there are not going to be enough jobs."  Nothing like an unemployed superfluous person who figures out what is really going on - they become radicalized and a danger to the capitalist system. But the ruling 1% also knows that the planet is over populated.  So they know that their 'rule' on Earth is conditioned on reducing the global population and in doing so their mad hatter scientists come up with all kinds of insane programs for weather modification and geo-engineering.    So in the back of my mind this morning, while having this spiritual experience watching the birds feast on our tree, was global warming and chemtrails and how these phenomenon are currently impacting the birds, other wildlife, plants, and trees. Instead of surrendering to helplessness, which can be like a drug addiction, I feel even more compelled to push for conversion of the military industrial complex toward a sustainable society. There is far too much beauty in life for me to walk away from working to stop this corporate industrial mega-polluting model of society.  (I often feel like I am living in the middle of the collapse of the Aztec civilization.  I figure their rulers ignored the hell out of critics at that time too.)  We don't have much time left and so I will keep pushing to convert places like the General Dynamics Corp. Navy shipyard here in Bath, Maine. The US military has the largest carbon bootprint on the entire planet.  Official Washington 'insisted' that the Pentagon be exempted from monitoring by the Kyoto and Paris climate change protocols.  Why in hell do most mainstream environmental groups refuse to mention the Pentagon link to global warming?  So while everyone is now yelling at Trump because he wants to withdraw from the Paris accords, hardly anyone is noticing the military footprint connection.  It burns my britches. This is a collapsing industrial culture.  I want to stand with the birds.  Bruce posted by Bruce K. Gagnon | 1:56 PM  1 Comments:  Lisa Savage said... Home run blog post, Bruce. I'm with you, MB and the birds. 6/4/17, 4:12 AM Post a Comment Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom] Links to this post: Create a Link << Home _______________________________________________ Peace mailing list Peace at lists.chambana.net https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace _______________________________________________ Peace-discuss mailing list Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From galliher at illinois.edu Sun Jun 4 17:07:51 2017 From: galliher at illinois.edu (Carl G. Estabrook) Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2017 12:07:51 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Max Blumenthal takes down Jamie Raskin In-Reply-To: <1603544640.1950851.1496595510275@mail.yahoo.com> References: <1603544640.1950851.1496595510275.ref@mail.yahoo.com> <1603544640.1950851.1496595510275@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <9A2C2587-617E-4C23-8776-C1608438106A@illinois.edu> So even to old age and gray hairs, O God, do not forsake me, until I proclaim your might to all the generations to come. --Psalm 71:18 On Jun 4, 2017, at 11:58 AM, David Green via Peace-discuss wrote: > > Battle of the oedipal complexes, Blumenthal's father a Clintonite, Raskin's father founded the Institute for Policy Studies primarily to oppose the Vietnam War. Transcript not available yet. > > Max Blumenthal Grills Progressive Rep. Jamie Raskin about Russia Allegations > > > Max Blumenthal Grills Progressive Rep. Jamie Raskin about Russia Allegations > By The Real News Network > Part one of Real News coverage from the the March for Truth in Washington, D.C. > > > _______________________________________________ > Peace-discuss mailing list > Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From davegreen84 at yahoo.com Sun Jun 4 18:10:46 2017 From: davegreen84 at yahoo.com (David Green) Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2017 18:10:46 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Peace-discuss] Sundiata Cha-Jua References: <1558536654.2009306.1496599846361.ref@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1558536654.2009306.1496599846361@mail.yahoo.com> Disturbing to see such misguided rhetoric added to the usual Sunday Commentary doggerel; frightening to realize how few "progressives" will have a problem with this:.Sundiata Cha-Jua/Real Talk: White supremacists are on a rampage | | | | | | | | | | | Sundiata Cha-Jua/Real Talk: White supremacists are on a rampage Since the murder of Trayvon Martin, most chroniclers of U.S. | | | | -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From davegreen84 at yahoo.com Sun Jun 4 19:09:43 2017 From: davegreen84 at yahoo.com (David Green) Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2017 19:09:43 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Peace-discuss] Sundiata Cha-Jua In-Reply-To: References: <1558536654.2009306.1496599846361.ref@mail.yahoo.com> <1558536654.2009306.1496599846361@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <638957621.2055840.1496603383984@mail.yahoo.com> Accusations of a pervasive "white rage" motivating Trump voters and supporters is both unproven and politically unhelpful in addressing the structural issues that affect the working class of all backgrounds in neoliberal capitalism. It is part of a form of privileged white identity politics that exonerates the professional class (see Thomas Frank), and casts blame on whites who are not "people like us." The notion of "white rage" has the same problems in explaining our current plight as that of anti-Semitism in explaining Nazi Germany--they're both lacking a material analysis and corresponding political program. The notion of "white rage" is transparently convenient for Clintonites, as are charges of misogyny against Trump voters. On Sunday, June 4, 2017 1:58 PM, Debra Erikson wrote: Could you please expand your response?Debra On Sun, Jun 4, 2017 at 1:10 PM, David Green via Peace-discuss wrote: Disturbing to see such misguided rhetoric added to the usual Sunday Commentary doggerel; frightening to realize how few "progressives" will have a problem with this:.Sundiata Cha-Jua/Real Talk: White supremacists are on a rampage | | | | | | | | | | | Sundiata Cha-Jua/Real Talk: White supremacists are on a rampage Since the murder of Trayvon Martin, most chroniclers of U.S. | | | | ______________________________ _________________ Peace-discuss mailing list Peace-discuss at lists.chambana. net https://lists.chambana.net/ mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss -- Debra Boros Erikson, Ph.D. College of Education Alexander Hall 3235 Murray State University Murray, KY 270-809-2679 derikson53 at gmail.com 217.637.0194 "When someone with the authority of a teacher, say, describes the world and you're not in it, there's a moment of psychic disequilibrium, as if you looked into a mirror and saw nothing." Adrienne Rich -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Mon Jun 5 12:56:43 2017 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2017 12:56:43 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Crosstalk Message-ID: It’s not always easy to access, but Crosstalk, bullhorns is really worthwhile listening. These guys are really good, especially Mark who nails it in relation to terrorism and climate change. https://www.rt.com/shows/crosstalk/390892-putin-trump-bullhorns-enough/#.WTU-EWRPGp8.facebook -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Mon Jun 5 16:14:44 2017 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2017 16:14:44 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] The Philippines, is it our next Iraq, Libya, Syria, Panama? Message-ID: This article is almost a year old, but prescient…… https://theduran.com/philippines-pivot-action-can-punisher-withstand-americas-punishment/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From davegreen84 at yahoo.com Mon Jun 5 17:31:23 2017 From: davegreen84 at yahoo.com (David Green) Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2017 17:31:23 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Peace-discuss] Finkelstein on Six Day War References: <1547220185.2946361.1496683883799.ref@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1547220185.2946361.1496683883799@mail.yahoo.com> Six-Day War, 50-Year Occupation: What Really Happened in June 1967? With Transcript | | | | | | | | | | | Six-Day War, 50-Year Occupation: What Really Happened in June 1967? By The Real News Network In the first of an extended three-part interview on the 50th anniversary of the June 1967 Arab-Israeli war, auth... | | | | OR Books: A WARNING FROM NORMAN G. FINKELSTEIN: BEWARE THE HALF CENTURY ANNIVERSARY OF THE ISRAELI OCCUPATION! June 5 is the 50th anniversary of the 1967 war, when Israel conquered the West Bank and Gaza Strip. Brace yourself for a big propaganda blitz! You’re going to be told that the Arabs were eager to attack Israel, that Israel faced an existential threat, that Israel unintentionally “came to” occupy Palestinian lands. But that’s a pack of lies. Basing himself on the findings of all US intelligence agencies, which were closely monitoring the situation, President Lyndon B. Johnson told Israel at the end of May 1967: “Our best judgment is that no military attack on Israel is imminent” and even if, against all odds, the Arabs do attack, “You will whip the hell out of them.” On June 1, the head of Israeli intelligence, who was in Washington, acknowledged that “There were no differences between the US and the Israelis on the military intelligence picture or its interpretation.” So, there you have it: America and Israel agreed that Egypt wasn’t going to attack and that, even if it did, Israel would win a crushing victory. But Israel nevertheless unleashed a surprise blitzkrieg on Egypt. What’s more, when Israel subsequently invaded and occupied the West Bank and Gaza, it wasn’t an accident. All of these facts are firmly established in the scholarly literature, but few of them are known to the broad public. —Norman G. Finkelstein, author, Method and Madness, Knowing Too Much, and What Gandhi Says -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Mon Jun 5 23:48:03 2017 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2017 23:48:03 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Qatar"The GCC States Led By Saudi Arabia Will Collapse Into Oblivion" Message-ID: [Moon of Alabama] [Brecht quote] « Theresa May Says "Enough Is Enough" - We Agree - Remove Her From Office | Main June 05, 2017 "The GCC States Led By Saudi Arabia Will Collapse Into Oblivion" Emboldened by U.S. backing Saudi Arabia launched a campaign to finally subjugate Qatar into client state status. The plan has now reached a high point. A few hours ago Bahrain, Egypt, the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia severed all ties with Qatar. All sea- and airspace have been closed for Qatari traffic and the land-routes severed. All Qataris will have to leave those countries within 14 days. Qatari diplomats were given just 48 hours. The immediate consequences are huge. Some 37 million passengers cross through Doha each year. But Qatar Airways now has to fly through Iranian, Iraqi and Turkish airspace to reach Europe. (If the situation persists the UAE owned Emirates Airways will likely order a huge bunch of new planes.) Half of the food in Qatar comes via Saudi Arabia through Qatar's only land border. 600-800 trucks per day can no longer pass. The 19 flights per day between Doha and Dubai are called off. Oil prices rose some 1.6% and the Qatari stock exchange tanked. [http://www.moonofalabama.org/images5/gccmap.jpg] The reasons for the immediate spat are manifold. It has only little to do with Iran. The Saudis accuse Qatar of supporting terrorists. That is like Britain accusing the U.S. of imperialism, or the mafia cutting ties with the mob over gangsterism. As Joe Biden remarked (vid) when still Vice President, both Wahhabi countries, Qatar and Saudi Arabia, have been funding and fueling terrorism in Syria, Iraq and elsewhere. But the Saudi view is that the more "liberal" Qatar is simply supporting the "wrong" kind of terrorists. The Qatari government and its mouthpiece Al-Jazeera installed and supported the Muslim Brotherhood government in Egypt. The Saudis put that government down by financing a military coup against it. Qatar is supporting the Muslim Brotherhood government of Turkey. It is supporting the Palestinian Hamas, also a Muslim Brotherhood affiliate. Qatar is financing various al-Qaeda aligned groups in Libya, Syria and Afghanistan. The Taliban have their only diplomatic mission in Doha. Until recently the Saudis have been financing ISIS. They are now mainly back at financing various other Jihadi groups in Syria under CIA control. The UAE is sponsoring the Libyan general Hiftar who is fighting Qatari supported al-Qaeda aligned groups. The Saudis are making nice with Israel and have no interest in the Palestinian cause which Qatar supports. There are diverting interests in hydrocarbons. Qatar is the world's biggest exporter of natural gas - a serious competition to Saudi oil exports. It has recently intensified its relations with other producers and customers in the Gulf region and beyond. More local and personal dimensions of the spat include many intermarriages and competitions between Saudi and Qatari tribes and families. There are rumors that significant tribal groups in the Saudi's Najd desert, especially the al-Tamim, have recently renewed their ties to Qatar under its current emir Prince Tamim Bin Hamad al-Thani. This was an "in your face" for the al-Sauds. Oman and Kuwait have taken no position in the fight and try to mediate. Turkey is allied with Qatar but has stayed suspiciously quiet. There is a new defense agreement between Qatar and Turkey promising Turkish support if Qatar is attacked. The Turkish military has a base in Qatar with some 600 soldiers. A huge share of foreign investment in Turkey has come from Qatar. The Turkish and Qatari government coordinate tightly in their common support for al-Qaeda and other Takfiris in the war on Syria. The current standoff between Qatar and other Arab countries in the Gulf Cooperation Council were enabled by the Trump administration: Whereas the Obama administration sought to enhance U.S. engagement with the GCC as a bloc, Trump focused instead on Saudi Arabia and the UAE as the twin pillars of its regional approach. Strong bonds reportedly have formed between Trump’s adviser and son-in-law Jared Kushner and Mohammed bin Salman in Saudi Arabia as well as Yusuf al-Otaiba, the influential UAE ambassador in Washington. Key principals within the Trump administration, such as Defense Secretary Jim Mattis and CIA Director Mike Pompeo, hold views on Iran and the Muslim Brotherhood that are virtually indistinguishable from those in Riyadh and Abu Dhabi. Trump fell into a Saudi-Israeli trap. The Pentagon hawks have dreamed of an "Arab NATO" to fight Iran. The envisioned "Arab NATO" may soon have its first war but it will be against one of its members. The (not-satanic) "Orb" show and the unlimited U.S. support for Saudi Arabia have exacerbated the fissures within the GCC and will hinder any common operations. The U.S. military has huge interests in Qatar and other Gulf countries. Al-Udeid in Qatar is the biggest U.S. airbase in the Middle East. It is also the forward headquarter of the U.S. Central Command with some 10,000 U.S. soldiers and leads the fight against ISIS. The U.S. Navy fifth fleet is hosted in nearby Bahrain which has now declared a cold war with Qatar. Any spat or difficulty between the Gulf countries hinders U.S. military operations. In Washington an intense Saudi and UAE lobbying campaign against Qatar has been ongoing for months. A Saudi lobbyist threatened the Qatari ruler with the "same fate as Egypt's Morsi". In a reprisal hacked emails between the UAE ambassador Yusuf al-Otaiba and Israeli lobbying organizations in Washington were recently published. The documents show that the Zionist lobby organization "Foundation for the Defense of Democracy" is advising the dictatorship of the UAE on how to fight the dictatorship of Qatar. At the end of the "orb" show the Saudis and the U.S. pushed a document declaring various organizations and Iran "terrorist supporters." Qatar refused to sign it. Saudi clerics then declared that the Qatari al-Thani rulers are no longer considered to be "part of the Abdel Wahhab clan". That takes away the Wahhabi rulers religious legitimacy. Qatar had tried to calm the situation down. It announced that six of its soldiers had been wounded while fighting for the Saudis near Yemen. It expelled a few Hamas leaders from the country. A mediator was sent to Kuwait - so far to no avail. The extreme bullying of Qatar by the Saudis and the UAE, with total closure of all its borders, is designed to create an immediate capitulation. So far Qatar holds onto its course but in the end it is likely to fold. It will have to stop its support for "terrorism" i.e. the Muslim Brotherhood. Another scenario is a putsch in Doha with some Saudi puppet prepared to take over the realm. If that is unsuccessful a military move could follow. Qatar has little capabilities to withstand a potential Saudi invasion. For Iran this is a chance to further blow up the GCC by intensifying its relations with Qatar. It could increase its food exports to the country and host Qatar airline flights. This in exchange for a Qatari retreat from Syria. The U.S./Saudi plan of confronting Iran through the GCC would then be in complete jeopardy. [http://www.moonofalabama.org/images5/Khomeni.jpg] The Imam says: "More popcorn please." No matter how the spat with Qatar ends, the GCC unity has (again) been exposed as a sham. It can not be repaired. Saudi "leadership" is shown to be just brutal bullying and will be resisted. U.S. plans for a united GCC under Saudi leadership and U.S. control are in shambles. The linch pin of all this is the Saudi war on Yemen. The Saudis support the Hadi puppet government of Yemen and two years ago aligned the other Gulf states, including Qatar, to fight against the Houthi in north Yemen. They accuse the Houthi of receiving Iranian support. There is zero evidence for that claim. The war and the coalition have failed. Houthi resistance continues unabated. With Yemen sinking into a famine thanks to a Saudi border blockade and a Cholera epidemic rapidly extending, the war must come to a close. Kuwait, Oman and Qatar are talking with the Houthi in Sanaa. Last week troops from the UAE used helicopters to again fight Saudi supported militia around the southern airport in Aden. The U.S. and Britain urge for the war to end and, behind closed doors, threaten to withdraw their support for it. The Saudi under their new leadership overestimate their capabilities. So did Trump when he raised their role. The Saudi "apes with Macbooks" do not have the capabilities needed for a serious political actor in this world. Their money can paper over that for only so long. The above all reminds of a prediction made nearly two years ago by a Yemeni lawyer in Sanaa : @Bafana3 At the end of this war on #Yemen, the GCC states led by Saudi Arabia will collapse into oblivion. I do not know what will replace them. 9:29am · 15 Aug 2015 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net Tue Jun 6 12:10:23 2017 From: davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net (David Johnson) Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2017 07:10:23 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] Tomorrow I'll ask Carol Ammons to oppose the Saudi arms deal In-Reply-To: References: <5CB8941D-7259-4DD5-9542-7442892DC00F@illinois.edu> <003f01d2dcce$c9fbecf0$5df3c6d0$@comcast.net> Message-ID: <001501d2debd$e04996b0$a0dcc410$@comcast.net> Well Carl, AGAIN, she was one of only two State Reps who resisted pressure from Madigan and the Israeli consulate to vote for it. For that she deserves credit. IF the vote had been close and she abstained and by doing so caused the bill to pass, THEN she would be deserving of criticism. Would it had been better if she had been the only State Rep to vote no ? Yes, of course. But considering the vote was a short notice vote and we as her constituents did not have enough time to educate her ion this bill and demand that she vote against it, then again what she did by abstaining is not reason to villianize and condemn her. In response to your question about rather or not she often opposes the Democratic party leadership, the answer is yes ! First she refused to vote for the BDS bill mentioned above, she also co sponsored the Illinois single payer bill weeks after entering the General Assembly, she sponsored and was able to pass both an anti-wage theft bill and a bill stopping telephone gouging of prison inmates. She also has co-sponsored early on a bill to increase the Illinois minimum wage to $ 15.00 per hour, several years before it had enough votes to pass recently. So looking at the big picture here Carl, Carol has done pretty damn good since she was elected in 2014. Could she be better by being more aggressive and bold, ? Of course, but that is up to us to educate her and advocate for certain things we want to see done. If she had not been elected in 2014, her opponent Sam Rosenberg would have not done any of the above mentioned, nor would Naomi Jacobsen if she had not resigned. David J. -----Original Message----- From: Carl G. Estabrook [mailto:galliher at illinois.edu] Sent: Saturday, June 03, 2017 8:16 PM To: David Johnson Cc: peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net Subject: Re: [Peace] Tomorrow I'll ask Carol Ammons to oppose the Saudi arms deal She didn’t vote against it, as she would have, had the subject been South African apartheid. Has she often differed with the Democratic leadership? —CGE > On Jun 3, 2017, at 8:06 PM, David Johnson wrote: > > Carol was one of only two State Reps who abstained from voting for the anti BDS bill, despite aggressive coercion from Madigan and lobbyists from the Israeli consulate for all State Reps and Senators to vote for it. > > David J. > > > From: Peace [mailto:peace-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of > Carl G. Estabrook via Peace > Sent: Saturday, June 03, 2017 6:18 PM > To: Robert Naiman > Cc: peace > Subject: Re: [Peace] Tomorrow I'll ask Carol Ammons to oppose the > Saudi arms deal > > She was unwilling to oppose Illinois’ support for Israeli apartheid. > > >> On Jun 3, 2017, at 2:56 PM, Robert Naiman via Peace wrote: >> >> >> Tomorrow afternoon this event is happening in Champaign: >> >> IL - 13 Listening Session: Champaign-Urbana Public · Hosted by Carol >> Ammons https://www.facebook.com/events/1855909114660297/ >> >> Yesterday I asked Rodney Davis to oppose Trump's Saudi arms deal. I presented the IL-13 signers on our petition, and asked him to cosponsor the bipartisan Amash-Pocan resolution against the Saudi arms deal. Rodney Davis said he would speak with Amash and the other Republican sponsors and get back to me. >> >> Now Carol is asking: "What do you want your Representative in Congress to do?" I figure that's an easy question for me to answer. I want my Representative in Congress to oppose the Saudi arms deal. >> >> So, I figure, why not take Carol the same petition I took Rodney, and make the same ask? >> >> I figure: if Carol opposes the Saudi arms deal and challenges Rodney to do the same, it's win-win. Either Rodney agrees, in which case I win, or Rodney doesn't agree, in which case it's a public issue and the News-Gazette has to report on it and Rodney gets in trouble, in which case I also win. >> >> Is it plausible that Rodney, feeling a little heat, would agree to co-sponsor the Amash resolution? >> >> Last September, then-Illinois Senator Mark Kirk was one of only four Senate Republicans to vote against the Saudi tank deal. The other 23 no votes were Democrats. Mark Kirk had not previously been known as a critic of Saudi Arabia or its "particularly aggressive" war in Yemen, as the Vatican puts it. >> >> What made Mark Kirk flip? Tammy Duckworth was breathing down his neck, putting out a press release every time he didn't say "excuse me" after burping. >> >> Could we do that to Rodney Davis? Could we flip him with some pressure? If not, why not? >> >> I'll print out the petitions again around noon tomorrow. So there's still time to sign. >> >> Sign the petition: Congress: Vote NO on Trump's Saudi Arms Deal >> https://petitions.moveon.org/sign/congress-vote-no-on-trumps?r_by=113 >> 5580 >> >> === >> >> Robert Naiman >> Policy Director >> Just Foreign Policy >> www.justforeignpolicy.org >> naiman at justforeignpolicy.org >> (202) 448-2898 x1 >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Peace mailing list >> Peace at lists.chambana.net >> https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace From bjornsona at ameritech.net Tue Jun 6 13:22:22 2017 From: bjornsona at ameritech.net (Anne Parkinson) Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2017 13:22:22 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] Tomorrow I'll ask Carol Ammons to oppose the Saudi arms deal In-Reply-To: <003f01d2dcce$c9fbecf0$5df3c6d0$@comcast.net> References: <5CB8941D-7259-4DD5-9542-7442892DC00F@illinois.edu> <003f01d2dcce$c9fbecf0$5df3c6d0$@comcast.net> Message-ID: <498334222.3863103.1496755342871@mail.yahoo.com> Hi David.Anne Bjornson Parkinson here. I am very new to the group. What does the acronym BDS stand for? I have not been following that bill. Thanks, Anne On Saturday, June 3, 2017 8:06 PM, David Johnson via Peace-discuss wrote: #yiv4256518262 #yiv4256518262 -- _filtered #yiv4256518262 {panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;} _filtered #yiv4256518262 {font-family:Calibri;panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;} _filtered #yiv4256518262 {font-family:Tahoma;panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}#yiv4256518262 #yiv4256518262 p.yiv4256518262MsoNormal, #yiv4256518262 li.yiv4256518262MsoNormal, #yiv4256518262 div.yiv4256518262MsoNormal {margin:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;font-size:12.0pt;}#yiv4256518262 a:link, #yiv4256518262 span.yiv4256518262MsoHyperlink {color:blue;text-decoration:underline;}#yiv4256518262 a:visited, #yiv4256518262 span.yiv4256518262MsoHyperlinkFollowed {color:purple;text-decoration:underline;}#yiv4256518262 span.yiv4256518262EmailStyle17 {color:#1F497D;}#yiv4256518262 .yiv4256518262MsoChpDefault {font-size:10.0pt;} _filtered #yiv4256518262 {margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}#yiv4256518262 div.yiv4256518262WordSection1 {}#yiv4256518262 Carol was one of only two State Reps who abstained from voting for the anti BDS bill, despite aggressive coercion from Madigan and lobbyists from the Israeli consulate for all State Reps and Senators to vote for it.  David J.    From: Peace [mailto:peace-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of Carl G. Estabrook via Peace Sent: Saturday, June 03, 2017 6:18 PM To: Robert Naiman Cc: peace Subject: Re: [Peace] Tomorrow I'll ask Carol Ammons to oppose the Saudi arms deal  She was unwilling to oppose Illinois’ support for Israeli apartheid.      On Jun 3, 2017, at 2:56 PM, Robert Naiman via Peace wrote:    Tomorrow afternoon this event is happening in Champaign:  IL - 13 Listening Session: Champaign-UrbanaPublic · Hosted by Carol Ammonshttps://www.facebook.com/events/1855909114660297/  Yesterday I asked Rodney Davis to oppose Trump's Saudi arms deal. I presented the IL-13 signers on our petition, and asked him to cosponsor the bipartisan Amash-Pocan resolution against the Saudi arms deal. Rodney Davis said he would speak with Amash and the other Republican sponsors and get back to me.   Now Carol is asking: "What do you want your Representative in Congress to do?" I figure that's an easy question for me to answer. I want my Representative in Congress to oppose the Saudi arms deal.   So, I figure, why not take Carol the same petition I took Rodney, and make the same ask?   I figure: if Carol opposes the Saudi arms deal and challenges Rodney to do the same, it's win-win. Either Rodney agrees, in which case I win, or Rodney doesn't agree, in which case it's a public issue and the News-Gazette has to report on it and Rodney gets in trouble, in which case I also win.   Is it plausible that Rodney, feeling a little heat, would agree to co-sponsor the Amash resolution?   Last September, then-Illinois Senator Mark Kirk was one of only four Senate Republicans to vote against the Saudi tank deal. The other 23 no votes were Democrats. Mark Kirk had not previously been known as a critic of Saudi Arabia or its "particularly aggressive" war in Yemen, as the Vatican puts it.   What made Mark Kirk flip? Tammy Duckworth was breathing down his neck, putting out a press release every time he didn't say "excuse me" after burping.  Could we do that to Rodney Davis? Could we flip him with some pressure? If not, why not?   I'll print out the petitions again around noon tomorrow. So there's still time to sign.   Sign the petition: Congress: Vote NO on Trump's Saudi Arms Dealhttps://petitions.moveon.org/sign/congress-vote-no-on-trumps?r_by=1135580  === Robert Naiman Policy Director Just Foreign Policy www.justforeignpolicy.org naiman at justforeignpolicy.org(202) 448-2898 x1    _______________________________________________ Peace mailing list Peace at lists.chambana.net https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace  _______________________________________________ Peace-discuss mailing list Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cgestabrook at gmail.com Tue Jun 6 13:37:29 2017 From: cgestabrook at gmail.com (C G Estabrook) Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2017 08:37:29 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] Tomorrow I'll ask Carol Ammons to oppose the Saudi arms deal In-Reply-To: <001501d2debd$e04996b0$a0dcc410$@comcast.net> References: <5CB8941D-7259-4DD5-9542-7442892DC00F@illinois.edu> <003f01d2dcce$c9fbecf0$5df3c6d0$@comcast.net> <001501d2debd$e04996b0$a0dcc410$@comcast.net> Message-ID: <8E9E7F7D-D733-4DAA-9E72-EC9E67F86E6F@gmail.com> Let’s be clear what SB 1761 did, two years ago. The bill, actively promoted by the government of Israel, directed that Illinois' funds (like university pension funds) be removed from companies that observed the boycott of business conducted in the territories illegally occupied by Israel! Carol’s excuse when she spoke to AWARE about her (non)-vote was that no one opposed had contacted her about it. But she refused to say she would have voted against it, had anyone done so. That ‘everyone else was doing it’ (“only two State reps…”) is not much of an excuse. I want to vote for a Congressional representative who will vote against the military budget (as former Rep. Johnson eventually did) and for the withdrawal of US troops from the Mideast. Carol won’t do that. David Gill, who’s also running for the seat (13th IL CD) held by Rodney Davis, might. —CGE > On Jun 6, 2017, at 7:10 AM, David Johnson wrote: > > Well Carl, > > AGAIN, she was one of only two State Reps who resisted pressure from Madigan and the Israeli consulate to vote for it. For that she deserves credit. > > IF the vote had been close and she abstained and by doing so caused the bill to pass, THEN she would be deserving of criticism. > > Would it had been better if she had been the only State Rep to vote no ? Yes, of course. But considering the vote was a short notice vote and we as her constituents did not have enough time to educate her ion this bill and demand that she vote against it, then again what she did by abstaining is not reason to villianize and condemn her. > > In response to your question about rather or not she often opposes the Democratic party leadership, the answer is yes ! > > First she refused to vote for the BDS bill mentioned above, she also co sponsored the Illinois single payer bill weeks after entering the General Assembly, she sponsored and was able to pass both an anti-wage theft bill and a bill stopping telephone gouging of prison inmates. She also has co-sponsored early on a bill to increase the Illinois minimum wage to $ 15.00 per hour, several years before it had enough votes to pass recently. > > So looking at the big picture here Carl, Carol has done pretty damn good since she was elected in 2014. Could she be better by being more aggressive and bold, ? Of course, but that is up to us to educate her and advocate for certain things we want to see done. > If she had not been elected in 2014, her opponent Sam Rosenberg would have not done any of the above mentioned, nor would Naomi Jacobsen if she had not resigned. > > David J. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Carl G. Estabrook [mailto:galliher at illinois.edu] > Sent: Saturday, June 03, 2017 8:16 PM > To: David Johnson > Cc: peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > Subject: Re: [Peace] Tomorrow I'll ask Carol Ammons to oppose the Saudi arms deal > > She didn’t vote against it, as she would have, had the subject been South African apartheid. > > Has she often differed with the Democratic leadership? > > —CGE > > >> On Jun 3, 2017, at 8:06 PM, David Johnson wrote: >> >> Carol was one of only two State Reps who abstained from voting for the anti BDS bill, despite aggressive coercion from Madigan and lobbyists from the Israeli consulate for all State Reps and Senators to vote for it. >> >> David J. >> >> >> From: Peace [mailto:peace-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of >> Carl G. Estabrook via Peace >> Sent: Saturday, June 03, 2017 6:18 PM >> To: Robert Naiman >> Cc: peace >> Subject: Re: [Peace] Tomorrow I'll ask Carol Ammons to oppose the >> Saudi arms deal >> >> She was unwilling to oppose Illinois’ support for Israeli apartheid. >> >> >>> On Jun 3, 2017, at 2:56 PM, Robert Naiman via Peace wrote: >>> >>> >>> Tomorrow afternoon this event is happening in Champaign: >>> >>> IL - 13 Listening Session: Champaign-Urbana Public · Hosted by Carol >>> Ammons https://www.facebook.com/events/1855909114660297/ >>> >>> Yesterday I asked Rodney Davis to oppose Trump's Saudi arms deal. I presented the IL-13 signers on our petition, and asked him to cosponsor the bipartisan Amash-Pocan resolution against the Saudi arms deal. Rodney Davis said he would speak with Amash and the other Republican sponsors and get back to me. >>> >>> Now Carol is asking: "What do you want your Representative in Congress to do?" I figure that's an easy question for me to answer. I want my Representative in Congress to oppose the Saudi arms deal. >>> >>> So, I figure, why not take Carol the same petition I took Rodney, and make the same ask? >>> >>> I figure: if Carol opposes the Saudi arms deal and challenges Rodney to do the same, it's win-win. Either Rodney agrees, in which case I win, or Rodney doesn't agree, in which case it's a public issue and the News-Gazette has to report on it and Rodney gets in trouble, in which case I also win. >>> >>> Is it plausible that Rodney, feeling a little heat, would agree to co-sponsor the Amash resolution? >>> >>> Last September, then-Illinois Senator Mark Kirk was one of only four Senate Republicans to vote against the Saudi tank deal. The other 23 no votes were Democrats. Mark Kirk had not previously been known as a critic of Saudi Arabia or its "particularly aggressive" war in Yemen, as the Vatican puts it. >>> >>> What made Mark Kirk flip? Tammy Duckworth was breathing down his neck, putting out a press release every time he didn't say "excuse me" after burping. >>> >>> Could we do that to Rodney Davis? Could we flip him with some pressure? If not, why not? >>> >>> I'll print out the petitions again around noon tomorrow. So there's still time to sign. >>> >>> Sign the petition: Congress: Vote NO on Trump's Saudi Arms Deal >>> https://petitions.moveon.org/sign/congress-vote-no-on-trumps?r_by=113 >>> 5580 >>> >>> === >>> >>> Robert Naiman >>> Policy Director >>> Just Foreign Policy >>> www.justforeignpolicy.org >>> naiman at justforeignpolicy.org >>> (202) 448-2898 x1 >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Peace mailing list >>> Peace at lists.chambana.net >>> https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace > > From cgestabrook at gmail.com Tue Jun 6 13:53:23 2017 From: cgestabrook at gmail.com (C G Estabrook) Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2017 08:53:23 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] Tomorrow I'll ask Carol Ammons to oppose the Saudi arms deal In-Reply-To: References: <15c49d141bf-2621-17ee1@webprd-a68.mail.aol.com> Message-ID: Bob— What response did you get? —CGE ================================== Robert Naiman naiman at justforeignpolicy.org Sat Jun 3 19:56:04 UTC 2017 Tomorrow afternoon this event is happening in Champaign: IL - 13 Listening Session: Champaign-Urbana Public · Hosted by Carol Ammons https://www.facebook.com/events/1855909114660297/ Yesterday I asked Rodney Davis to oppose Trump's Saudi arms deal. I presented the IL-13 signers on our petition , and asked him to cosponsor the bipartisan Amash-Pocan resolution against the Saudi arms deal. Rodney Davis said he would speak with Amash and the other Republican sponsors and get back to me. Now Carol is asking: "What do you want your Representative in Congress to do?" I figure that's an easy question for me to answer. I want my Representative in Congress to oppose the Saudi arms deal. So, I figure, why not take Carol the same petition I took Rodney, and make the same ask? I figure: if Carol opposes the Saudi arms deal and challenges Rodney to do the same, it's win-win. Either Rodney agrees, in which case I win, or Rodney doesn't agree, in which case it's a public issue and the News-Gazette has to report on it and Rodney gets in trouble, in which case I also win. Is it plausible that Rodney, feeling a little heat, would agree to co-sponsor the Amash resolution? Last September, then-Illinois Senator Mark Kirk was one of only four Senate Republicans to vote against the Saudi tank deal. The other 23 no votes were Democrats. Mark Kirk had not previously been known as a critic of Saudi Arabia or its "particularly aggressive" war in Yemen, as the Vatican puts it. What made Mark Kirk flip? Tammy Duckworth was breathing down his neck, putting out a press release every time he didn't say "excuse me" after burping. Could we do that to Rodney Davis? Could we flip him with some pressure? If not, why not? I'll print out the petitions again around noon tomorrow. So there's still time to sign. Sign the petition: Congress: Vote NO on Trump's Saudi Arms Deal https://petitions.moveon.org/sign/congress-vote-no-on-trumps?r_by=1135580 === Robert Naiman Policy Director Just Foreign Policy www.justforeignpolicy.org naiman at justforeignpolicy.org (202) 448-2898 x1 From naiman at justforeignpolicy.org Tue Jun 6 14:06:48 2017 From: naiman at justforeignpolicy.org (Robert Naiman) Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2017 09:06:48 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] Tomorrow I'll ask Carol Ammons to oppose the Saudi arms deal In-Reply-To: References: <15c49d141bf-2621-17ee1@webprd-a68.mail.aol.com> Message-ID: I did not get called on during the questions. Niloofar did get called on, and asked a related question if not quite so specific. Carol answered Niloofar's question by criticizing U.S. support for the Saudi war in Yemen. I delivered our petition after the event to Carol's staffer Michelle. I also sent Michelle my letter in the News-Gazette yesterday: Saudi arms deal must be blocked http://www.news-gazette.com/opinion/letters-editor/2017-06-05/saudi-arms-deal-must-be-blocked.html How about your man David Gill? Has he put out any statement on this? Unlike Carol, your man David Gill is already a declared candidate for the seat. Seems like something he should weigh in on. Here is a draft statement you could send him: Congress: Vote NO on Trump's Saudi Arms Deal https://petitions.moveon.org/sign/congress-vote-no-on-trumps?r_by=1135580 Robert Naiman Policy Director Just Foreign Policy www.justforeignpolicy.org naiman at justforeignpolicy.org (202) 448-2898 x1 Sign the petition: Congress: Vote NO on Trump's Saudi Arms Deal https://petitions.moveon.org/sign/congress-vote-no-on-trumps?r_by=1135580 On Tue, Jun 6, 2017 at 8:53 AM, C G Estabrook via Peace-discuss < peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net> wrote: > Bob— > > What response did you get? > > —CGE > ================================== > Robert Naiman naiman at justforeignpolicy.org > Sat Jun 3 19:56:04 UTC 2017 > > Tomorrow afternoon this event is happening in Champaign: > > IL - 13 Listening Session: Champaign-Urbana > Public · Hosted by Carol Ammons > > https://www.facebook.com/events/1855909114660297/ > > > Yesterday I asked Rodney Davis to oppose Trump's Saudi arms deal. I > presented the IL-13 signers on our petition > >, > and asked him to cosponsor the bipartisan Amash-Pocan resolution against > the Saudi arms deal. Rodney Davis said he would speak with Amash and the > other Republican sponsors and get back to me. > > Now Carol is asking: "What do you want your Representative in Congress to > do?" I figure that's an easy question for me to answer. I want my > Representative in Congress to oppose the Saudi arms deal. > > So, I figure, why not take Carol the same petition I took Rodney, and make > the same ask? > > I figure: if Carol opposes the Saudi arms deal and challenges Rodney to do > the same, it's win-win. Either Rodney agrees, in which case I win, or > Rodney doesn't agree, in which case it's a public issue and the > News-Gazette has to report on it and Rodney gets in trouble, in which case > I also win. > > Is it plausible that Rodney, feeling a little heat, would agree to > co-sponsor the Amash resolution? > > Last September, then-Illinois Senator Mark Kirk was one of only four Senate > Republicans to vote against the Saudi tank deal. The other 23 no votes were > Democrats. Mark Kirk had not previously been known as a critic of Saudi > Arabia or its "particularly aggressive" war in Yemen, as the Vatican puts > it. > > What made Mark Kirk flip? Tammy Duckworth was breathing down his neck, > putting out a press release every time he didn't say "excuse me" after > burping. > > Could we do that to Rodney Davis? Could we flip him with some pressure? If > not, why not? > > I'll print out the petitions again around noon tomorrow. So there's still > time to sign. > > Sign the petition: Congress: Vote NO on Trump's Saudi Arms Deal > > https://petitions.moveon.org/sign/congress-vote-no-on-trumps?r_by=1135580 > > > === > > Robert Naiman > Policy Director > Just Foreign Policy > www.justforeignpolicy.org > > naiman at justforeignpolicy.org > > (202) 448-2898 x1 > > _______________________________________________ > Peace-discuss mailing list > Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cgestabrook at gmail.com Tue Jun 6 14:25:09 2017 From: cgestabrook at gmail.com (C G Estabrook) Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2017 09:25:09 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] Tomorrow I'll ask Carol Ammons to oppose the Saudi arms deal In-Reply-To: References: <15c49d141bf-2621-17ee1@webprd-a68.mail.aol.com> Message-ID: <8B01F089-BBAD-49EC-B3E9-206C29263D7F@gmail.com> “…your man David Gill…”? I’m not working on his campaign & find him hard to get in touch with. I sent him your MoveOn statement and asked for a response. Did you? —CGE > On Jun 6, 2017, at 9:06 AM, Robert Naiman via Peace-discuss wrote: > > I did not get called on during the questions. Niloofar did get called on, and asked a related question if not quite so specific. Carol answered Niloofar's question by criticizing U.S. support for the Saudi war in Yemen. > > I delivered our petition after the event to Carol's staffer Michelle. I also sent Michelle my letter in the News-Gazette yesterday: > > Saudi arms deal must be blocked > http://www.news-gazette.com/opinion/letters-editor/2017-06-05/saudi-arms-deal-must-be-blocked.html > > How about your man David Gill? Has he put out any statement on this? Unlike Carol, your man David Gill is already a declared candidate for the seat. Seems like something he should weigh in on. > > Here is a draft statement you could send him: > > Congress: Vote NO on Trump's Saudi Arms Deal > https://petitions.moveon.org/sign/congress-vote-no-on-trumps?r_by=1135580 > > > > > > > Robert Naiman > Policy Director > Just Foreign Policy > www.justforeignpolicy.org > naiman at justforeignpolicy.org > (202) 448-2898 x1 > > Sign the petition: Congress: Vote NO on Trump's Saudi Arms Deal > https://petitions.moveon.org/sign/congress-vote-no-on-trumps?r_by=1135580 > > > On Tue, Jun 6, 2017 at 8:53 AM, C G Estabrook via Peace-discuss > wrote: > Bob— > > What response did you get? > > —CGE > ================================== > Robert Naiman naiman at justforeignpolicy.org > Sat Jun 3 19:56:04 UTC 2017 > > Tomorrow afternoon this event is happening in Champaign: > > IL - 13 Listening Session: Champaign-Urbana > Public · Hosted by Carol Ammons > > https://www.facebook.com/events/1855909114660297/ > > > Yesterday I asked Rodney Davis to oppose Trump's Saudi arms deal. I > presented the IL-13 signers on our petition > >, > and asked him to cosponsor the bipartisan Amash-Pocan resolution against > the Saudi arms deal. Rodney Davis said he would speak with Amash and the > other Republican sponsors and get back to me. > > Now Carol is asking: "What do you want your Representative in Congress to > do?" I figure that's an easy question for me to answer. I want my > Representative in Congress to oppose the Saudi arms deal. > > So, I figure, why not take Carol the same petition I took Rodney, and make > the same ask? > > I figure: if Carol opposes the Saudi arms deal and challenges Rodney to do > the same, it's win-win. Either Rodney agrees, in which case I win, or > Rodney doesn't agree, in which case it's a public issue and the > News-Gazette has to report on it and Rodney gets in trouble, in which case > I also win. > > Is it plausible that Rodney, feeling a little heat, would agree to > co-sponsor the Amash resolution? > > Last September, then-Illinois Senator Mark Kirk was one of only four Senate > Republicans to vote against the Saudi tank deal. The other 23 no votes were > Democrats. Mark Kirk had not previously been known as a critic of Saudi > Arabia or its "particularly aggressive" war in Yemen, as the Vatican puts > it. > > What made Mark Kirk flip? Tammy Duckworth was breathing down his neck, > putting out a press release every time he didn't say "excuse me" after > burping. > > Could we do that to Rodney Davis? Could we flip him with some pressure? If > not, why not? > > I'll print out the petitions again around noon tomorrow. So there's still > time to sign. > > Sign the petition: Congress: Vote NO on Trump's Saudi Arms Deal > > https://petitions.moveon.org/sign/congress-vote-no-on-trumps?r_by=1135580 > > > === > > Robert Naiman > Policy Director > Just Foreign Policy > www.justforeignpolicy.org > > naiman at justforeignpolicy.org > > (202) 448-2898 x1 > > _______________________________________________ > Peace-discuss mailing list > Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss > > _______________________________________________ > Peace-discuss mailing list > Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From naiman at justforeignpolicy.org Tue Jun 6 15:07:51 2017 From: naiman at justforeignpolicy.org (Robert Naiman) Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2017 10:07:51 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] Tomorrow I'll ask Carol Ammons to oppose the Saudi arms deal In-Reply-To: <8B01F089-BBAD-49EC-B3E9-206C29263D7F@gmail.com> References: <15c49d141bf-2621-17ee1@webprd-a68.mail.aol.com> <8B01F089-BBAD-49EC-B3E9-206C29263D7F@gmail.com> Message-ID: Well, if David Gill is hard to get in touch with, maybe that's a warning sign about his candidacy. Carol is easy to get in touch with. Robert Naiman Policy Director Just Foreign Policy www.justforeignpolicy.org naiman at justforeignpolicy.org (202) 448-2898 x1 Sign the petition: Congress: Vote NO on Trump's Saudi Arms Deal https://petitions.moveon.org/sign/congress-vote-no-on-trumps?r_by=1135580 On Tue, Jun 6, 2017 at 9:25 AM, C G Estabrook via Peace-discuss < peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net> wrote: > “…your man David Gill…”? I’m not working on his campaign & find him hard > to get in touch with. > > I sent him your MoveOn statement and asked for a response. Did you? > > —CGE > > > On Jun 6, 2017, at 9:06 AM, Robert Naiman via Peace-discuss < > peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net> wrote: > > I did not get called on during the questions. Niloofar did get called on, > and asked a related question if not quite so specific. Carol answered > Niloofar's question by criticizing U.S. support for the Saudi war in Yemen. > > I delivered our petition after the event to Carol's staffer Michelle. I > also sent Michelle my letter in the News-Gazette yesterday: > > Saudi arms deal must be blocked > http://www.news-gazette.com/opinion/letters-editor/2017- > 06-05/saudi-arms-deal-must-be-blocked.html > > How about your man David Gill? Has he put out any statement on this? > Unlike Carol, your man David Gill is already a declared candidate for the > seat. Seems like something he should weigh in on. > > Here is a draft statement you could send him: > > Congress: Vote NO on Trump's Saudi Arms Deal > https://petitions.moveon.org/sign/congress-vote-no-on-trumps?r_by=1135580 > > > > > > > Robert Naiman > Policy Director > Just Foreign Policy > www.justforeignpolicy.org > naiman at justforeignpolicy.org > (202) 448-2898 x1 <(202)%20448-2898> > > Sign the petition: Congress: Vote NO on Trump's Saudi Arms Deal > https://petitions.moveon.org/sign/congress-vote-no-on-trumps?r_by=1135580 > > > On Tue, Jun 6, 2017 at 8:53 AM, C G Estabrook via Peace-discuss < > peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net> wrote: > >> Bob— >> >> What response did you get? >> >> —CGE >> ================================== >> Robert Naiman naiman at justforeignpolicy.org >> Sat Jun 3 19:56:04 UTC 2017 >> >> Tomorrow afternoon this event is happening in Champaign: >> >> IL - 13 Listening Session: Champaign-Urbana >> Public · Hosted by Carol Ammons >> >> https://www.facebook.com/events/1855909114660297/ >> >> >> Yesterday I asked Rodney Davis to oppose Trump's Saudi arms deal. I >> presented the IL-13 signers on our petition >> > s?r_by=1135580>, >> and asked him to cosponsor the bipartisan Amash-Pocan resolution against >> the Saudi arms deal. Rodney Davis said he would speak with Amash and the >> other Republican sponsors and get back to me. >> >> Now Carol is asking: "What do you want your Representative in Congress to >> do?" I figure that's an easy question for me to answer. I want my >> Representative in Congress to oppose the Saudi arms deal. >> >> So, I figure, why not take Carol the same petition I took Rodney, and make >> the same ask? >> >> I figure: if Carol opposes the Saudi arms deal and challenges Rodney to do >> the same, it's win-win. Either Rodney agrees, in which case I win, or >> Rodney doesn't agree, in which case it's a public issue and the >> News-Gazette has to report on it and Rodney gets in trouble, in which case >> I also win. >> >> Is it plausible that Rodney, feeling a little heat, would agree to >> co-sponsor the Amash resolution? >> >> Last September, then-Illinois Senator Mark Kirk was one of only four >> Senate >> Republicans to vote against the Saudi tank deal. The other 23 no votes >> were >> Democrats. Mark Kirk had not previously been known as a critic of Saudi >> Arabia or its "particularly aggressive" war in Yemen, as the Vatican puts >> it. >> >> What made Mark Kirk flip? Tammy Duckworth was breathing down his neck, >> putting out a press release every time he didn't say "excuse me" after >> burping. >> >> Could we do that to Rodney Davis? Could we flip him with some pressure? If >> not, why not? >> >> I'll print out the petitions again around noon tomorrow. So there's still >> time to sign. >> >> Sign the petition: Congress: Vote NO on Trump's Saudi Arms Deal >> >> https://petitions.moveon.org/sign/congress-vote-no-on-trumps?r_by=1135580 >> >> >> === >> >> Robert Naiman >> Policy Director >> Just Foreign Policy >> www.justforeignpolicy.org >> >> naiman at justforeignpolicy.org >> >> (202) 448-2898 x1 >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Peace-discuss mailing list >> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net >> https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss >> > > _______________________________________________ > Peace-discuss mailing list > Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss > > > > _______________________________________________ > Peace-discuss mailing list > Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Tue Jun 6 15:08:02 2017 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2017 15:08:02 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Another perspective on the Qatar issue Message-ID: * Home * Perspectives * World News * World Economy * Arts Review * History * Science * Philosophy * Workers Struggles * ICFI/Marxist Library * Chronology * Full Archive * Print * Leaflet * Feedback * Share » The Saudi offensive against Qatar and the global intensification of geopolitical conflict 6 June 2017 Backed by Egypt and its closest Gulf State allies, Saudi Arabia has launched a diplomatic and economic offensive against Qatar, a tiny, energy-rich neighbor. This offensive is aimed at forcing the emirate to fall fully in line with the Saudis’ belligerent stand against Iran and other of its predatory policies, including unstinting support for Egypt’s military regime. US President Donald Trump gave the Saudi autocracy and its plan to forge a Sunni-Arab military coalition against Iran Washington’s full-throated support when he visited Riyadh last month. This support, as even many western news reports on the Saudi-Qatari confrontation acknowledge, has “emboldened” Saudi Arabia. Yesterday, it, Egypt, the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, and Yemen announced a series of measures against Qatar that stop just short of war. They include: severing all diplomatic relations, travel, and economic ties with Qatar; denying Qatari aircraft, including all Qatar Airway flights, the right to use their airspace; closing their ports to all Qatari vessels; and shutting down all broadcasts by Qatar-based al-Jazeera. Saudi Arabia and its closest Gulf State allies are also closing their borders to Qataris and ordering all Qatari citizens currently in their countries to leave within two weeks. These measures threaten to roil the emirate’s economy. A peninsula-state whose only land-border is with Saudi Arabia, Qatar is heavily reliant on food shipments from Saudi Arabia. News agencies report that long lines have formed at supermarkets in Doha as residents—fully 80 percent of the 2.3 million people living in Qatar are non-citizen foreign workers—scramble to stock their shelves and refrigerators. In 2014, the Saudis and several of their allies suspended diplomatic relations with Qatar because Riyadh was rankled by the emirate’s opposition to the military coup that overthrew Egypt’s elected president, Muslim Brotherhood leader Mohamed Morsi. The current dispute is of a qualitatively different character, as exemplified by the Saudis’ imposition of an economic blockade that threatens to strangle Qatar’s economy. Qatar, not without reason, has charged that Saudi Arabia is seeking to subject it to “guardianship,” i.e., to reduce it to the status of a vassal state. The Saudis are accusing Qatar—as they have long done Iran—of supporting “terrorism.” They claim it is backing the opposition to the royal family in Bahrain, the anti-Saudi Houthi rebels in Yemen, and the opposition to Saudi rule in the country’s largely-Shia Al-Qatif region. Qatar has vehemently denied these claims. Riyadh is also charging that the emirate is in league with ISIS in Syria. In fact the ruling families of both sheikdoms have played a major role in the US regime-change war in Syria, helping finance, organize and arm various reactionary Islamist forces, including many of those that came together in ISIS. The Saudi’s overriding objective is to force Qatar to distance itself from Iran, which it considers its principal rival for regional influence. Qatar has developed extensive economic ties with Iran, including in the co-development of the massive South Pars Persian Gulf natural gas field. Until its ejection yesterday, Qatar was a reluctant member of the Islamic Military Alliance, the international coalition Riyadh formed ostensibly to fight terrorism, but which more and more openly has assumed the shape of a Sunni Arab alliance for waging war on predominantly Shia Iran. Last weekend, in an attempt to placate the Saudis, Qatar reportedly ordered several leaders of Hamas, the Palestinian Islamist group that has ties to Iran, to leave the country. But the Saudis are treating this as too little, too late. It cannot be excluded that the Saudis will threaten Qatar with military action in the coming days or weeks. They are already waging war, with US logistical support, in Yemen, causing an ever-widening humanitarian disaster, and in 2011 they led a military intervention in Bahrain so as to stave off the popular overthrow of its autocratic regime. Israel has welcomed the Saudi offensive against Qatar, calculating that it will weaken Tehran. Like the Saudis, the Zionist establishment views Iran as its principal strategic rival. Trump and the cabal of generals who head his administration have repeatedly made clear that Washington has Iran in its cross-hairs; and, whilst serious differences persist within the US political establishment over the Iran nuclear accord, the Democrats, no less than the Republicans, support America continuing to enforce sweeping economic sanctions against Tehran and threatening it with military action. That said, nothing suggests Washington wanted, let alone encouraged, Riyadh to move against Qatar. Qatar is the headquarters of the US Central Command and thus a pivotal staging area for the US wars in Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria, and the cockpit for war-planning against Iran. Bahrain, which is part of the Saudi’s anti-Qatar coalition, is on the other hand the home base of the US Fifth Fleet. The escalating conflict between Washington’s Gulf allies, complained the New York Times, “presents a fresh and unwelcome complication for the United States military.” That the Saudis, with the support of Egypt’s US-backed military regime, acted independently of Washington in no way takes away from America’s primary responsibility for the growing aggressiveness of the Saudi regime, let alone the wars and sabre-rattling that threaten the people of the Middle East. On the contrary, the Saudi offensive against Qatar should serve as a salutary warning as to the reckless and incendiary role of US imperialism. In its drive to offset the decline in its economic power through aggression and war, the US is arming and “emboldening” all sorts of right-wing, crisis-ridden regimes who in pursuit of their own reactionary interests, including mere survival, could lash out at their rivals, provoking a crisis that quickly spins into military conflict, drawing in the US and other world powers daggers-drawn. No less significantly, the sudden clash between Qatar and Saudi Arabia points to the explosive geopolitical tensions that run through the region and which are ever more enmeshed with the conflicts between the major imperialist and great powers. The reality is: the series of predatory wars Washington has waged in the Middle East since 1991 have shattered whole societies, killing millions, rendering millions more refugees, and engulfing ever greater areas in war and destruction. Their cumulative impact has been to cause the effective collapse of the state system French and British imperialism imposed on the region at the end of World War One and to engender a new struggle for the redivision of the Middle East. The developments in Syria reveal most clearly that the repartition of the Middle East has already begun. While nominally a joint struggle against ISIS, the war in Syria has drawn in a host of great and regional powers—including the US, Russia, France, Germany, Iran, Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Israel—each pursuing its own strategic interests. For US imperialism, Syria is a key front in its military-strategic offensive against Russia and Iran. And it is not just Syria, but the entire region that is in flames. Given the Middle East’s economic significance, as the world’s most important oil-producing region, and pivotal geographic position, as the hinge between Europe, Asia and Africa, all of the imperialist and great powers are increasingly compelled to intervene to assert their respective interests. The US views its drive against Iran through the prism of its world strategy: including the need to prevent China from leveraging its plans to develop Eurasian economic corridors to forge a strategic partnership with Iran; and the need to prevent European capital from beating corporate America in capturing Iran’s markets and oil concessions. As Trotsky explained in the run-up to the second imperialist world war of the last century, the only alternative to the war maps of the great powers is the map of the class struggle. The only answer to the incendiary struggle of the rival imperialist ruling elites for natural resources, markets and strategic advantage is the mobilization of the international working class against war and against the outmoded capitalist social order. Keith Jones -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cgestabrook at gmail.com Tue Jun 6 15:13:09 2017 From: cgestabrook at gmail.com (C. G. Estabrook ) Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2017 10:13:09 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] Tomorrow I'll ask Carol Ammons to oppose the Saudi arms deal In-Reply-To: References: <15c49d141bf-2621-17ee1@webprd-a68.mail.aol.com> <8B01F089-BBAD-49EC-B3E9-206C29263D7F@gmail.com> Message-ID: You've not been in touch with him? Sent from my iPhone > On Jun 6, 2017, at 10:07 AM, Robert Naiman wrote: > > Well, if David Gill is hard to get in touch with, maybe that's a warning sign about his candidacy. Carol is easy to get in touch with. > > > > > > Robert Naiman > Policy Director > Just Foreign Policy > www.justforeignpolicy.org > naiman at justforeignpolicy.org > (202) 448-2898 x1 > > Sign the petition: Congress: Vote NO on Trump's Saudi Arms Deal > https://petitions.moveon.org/sign/congress-vote-no-on-trumps?r_by=1135580 > > >> On Tue, Jun 6, 2017 at 9:25 AM, C G Estabrook via Peace-discuss wrote: >> “…your man David Gill…”? I’m not working on his campaign & find him hard to get in touch with. >> >> I sent him your MoveOn statement and asked for a response. Did you? >> >> —CGE >> >> >>> On Jun 6, 2017, at 9:06 AM, Robert Naiman via Peace-discuss wrote: >>> >>> I did not get called on during the questions. Niloofar did get called on, and asked a related question if not quite so specific. Carol answered Niloofar's question by criticizing U.S. support for the Saudi war in Yemen. >>> >>> I delivered our petition after the event to Carol's staffer Michelle. I also sent Michelle my letter in the News-Gazette yesterday: >>> >>> Saudi arms deal must be blocked >>> http://www.news-gazette.com/opinion/letters-editor/2017-06-05/saudi-arms-deal-must-be-blocked.html >>> >>> How about your man David Gill? Has he put out any statement on this? Unlike Carol, your man David Gill is already a declared candidate for the seat. Seems like something he should weigh in on. >>> >>> Here is a draft statement you could send him: >>> >>> Congress: Vote NO on Trump's Saudi Arms Deal >>> https://petitions.moveon.org/sign/congress-vote-no-on-trumps?r_by=1135580 >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Robert Naiman >>> Policy Director >>> Just Foreign Policy >>> www.justforeignpolicy.org >>> naiman at justforeignpolicy.org >>> (202) 448-2898 x1 >>> >>> Sign the petition: Congress: Vote NO on Trump's Saudi Arms Deal >>> https://petitions.moveon.org/sign/congress-vote-no-on-trumps?r_by=1135580 >>> >>> >>>> On Tue, Jun 6, 2017 at 8:53 AM, C G Estabrook via Peace-discuss wrote: >>>> Bob— >>>> >>>> What response did you get? >>>> >>>> —CGE >>>> ================================== >>>> Robert Naiman naiman at justforeignpolicy.org >>>> Sat Jun 3 19:56:04 UTC 2017 >>>> >>>> Tomorrow afternoon this event is happening in Champaign: >>>> >>>> IL - 13 Listening Session: Champaign-Urbana >>>> Public · Hosted by Carol Ammons >>>> >>>> https://www.facebook.com/events/1855909114660297/ >>>> >>>> >>>> Yesterday I asked Rodney Davis to oppose Trump's Saudi arms deal. I >>>> presented the IL-13 signers on our petition >>>> , >>>> and asked him to cosponsor the bipartisan Amash-Pocan resolution against >>>> the Saudi arms deal. Rodney Davis said he would speak with Amash and the >>>> other Republican sponsors and get back to me. >>>> >>>> Now Carol is asking: "What do you want your Representative in Congress to >>>> do?" I figure that's an easy question for me to answer. I want my >>>> Representative in Congress to oppose the Saudi arms deal. >>>> >>>> So, I figure, why not take Carol the same petition I took Rodney, and make >>>> the same ask? >>>> >>>> I figure: if Carol opposes the Saudi arms deal and challenges Rodney to do >>>> the same, it's win-win. Either Rodney agrees, in which case I win, or >>>> Rodney doesn't agree, in which case it's a public issue and the >>>> News-Gazette has to report on it and Rodney gets in trouble, in which case >>>> I also win. >>>> >>>> Is it plausible that Rodney, feeling a little heat, would agree to >>>> co-sponsor the Amash resolution? >>>> >>>> Last September, then-Illinois Senator Mark Kirk was one of only four Senate >>>> Republicans to vote against the Saudi tank deal. The other 23 no votes were >>>> Democrats. Mark Kirk had not previously been known as a critic of Saudi >>>> Arabia or its "particularly aggressive" war in Yemen, as the Vatican puts >>>> it. >>>> >>>> What made Mark Kirk flip? Tammy Duckworth was breathing down his neck, >>>> putting out a press release every time he didn't say "excuse me" after >>>> burping. >>>> >>>> Could we do that to Rodney Davis? Could we flip him with some pressure? If >>>> not, why not? >>>> >>>> I'll print out the petitions again around noon tomorrow. So there's still >>>> time to sign. >>>> >>>> Sign the petition: Congress: Vote NO on Trump's Saudi Arms Deal >>>> >>>> https://petitions.moveon.org/sign/congress-vote-no-on-trumps?r_by=1135580 >>>> >>>> >>>> === >>>> >>>> Robert Naiman >>>> Policy Director >>>> Just Foreign Policy >>>> www.justforeignpolicy.org >>>> >>>> naiman at justforeignpolicy.org >>>> >>>> (202) 448-2898 x1 >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Peace-discuss mailing list >>>> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net >>>> https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Peace-discuss mailing list >>> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net >>> https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Peace-discuss mailing list >> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net >> https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss >> > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From naiman at justforeignpolicy.org Tue Jun 6 15:16:51 2017 From: naiman at justforeignpolicy.org (Robert Naiman) Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2017 10:16:51 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] Tomorrow I'll ask Carol Ammons to oppose the Saudi arms deal In-Reply-To: References: <15c49d141bf-2621-17ee1@webprd-a68.mail.aol.com> <8B01F089-BBAD-49EC-B3E9-206C29263D7F@gmail.com> Message-ID: No, I was hoping you'd do it. It makes more sense for you to do it, since you are a vigorous public advocate of his candidacy. Robert Naiman Policy Director Just Foreign Policy www.justforeignpolicy.org naiman at justforeignpolicy.org (202) 448-2898 x1 Sign the petition: Congress: Vote NO on Trump's Saudi Arms Deal https://petitions.moveon.org/sign/congress-vote-no-on-trumps?r_by=1135580 On Tue, Jun 6, 2017 at 10:13 AM, C. G. Estabrook via Peace-discuss < peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net> wrote: > You've not been in touch with him? > > > Sent from my iPhone > > On Jun 6, 2017, at 10:07 AM, Robert Naiman > wrote: > > Well, if David Gill is hard to get in touch with, maybe that's a warning > sign about his candidacy. Carol is easy to get in touch with. > > > > > > Robert Naiman > Policy Director > Just Foreign Policy > www.justforeignpolicy.org > naiman at justforeignpolicy.org > (202) 448-2898 x1 <(202)%20448-2898> > > Sign the petition: Congress: Vote NO on Trump's Saudi Arms Deal > https://petitions.moveon.org/sign/congress-vote-no-on-trumps?r_by=1135580 > > > On Tue, Jun 6, 2017 at 9:25 AM, C G Estabrook via Peace-discuss < > peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net> wrote: > >> “…your man David Gill…”? I’m not working on his campaign & find him hard >> to get in touch with. >> >> I sent him your MoveOn statement and asked for a response. Did you? >> >> —CGE >> >> >> On Jun 6, 2017, at 9:06 AM, Robert Naiman via Peace-discuss < >> peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net> wrote: >> >> I did not get called on during the questions. Niloofar did get called on, >> and asked a related question if not quite so specific. Carol answered >> Niloofar's question by criticizing U.S. support for the Saudi war in Yemen. >> >> I delivered our petition after the event to Carol's staffer Michelle. I >> also sent Michelle my letter in the News-Gazette yesterday: >> >> Saudi arms deal must be blocked >> http://www.news-gazette.com/opinion/letters-editor/2017-06- >> 05/saudi-arms-deal-must-be-blocked.html >> >> How about your man David Gill? Has he put out any statement on this? >> Unlike Carol, your man David Gill is already a declared candidate for the >> seat. Seems like something he should weigh in on. >> >> Here is a draft statement you could send him: >> >> Congress: Vote NO on Trump's Saudi Arms Deal >> https://petitions.moveon.org/sign/congress-vote-no-on-trumps?r_by=1135580 >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Robert Naiman >> Policy Director >> Just Foreign Policy >> www.justforeignpolicy.org >> naiman at justforeignpolicy.org >> (202) 448-2898 x1 <(202)%20448-2898> >> >> Sign the petition: Congress: Vote NO on Trump's Saudi Arms Deal >> https://petitions.moveon.org/sign/congress-vote-no-on-trumps?r_by=1135580 >> >> >> On Tue, Jun 6, 2017 at 8:53 AM, C G Estabrook via Peace-discuss < >> peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net> wrote: >> >>> Bob— >>> >>> What response did you get? >>> >>> —CGE >>> ================================== >>> Robert Naiman naiman at justforeignpolicy.org >>> Sat Jun 3 19:56:04 UTC 2017 >>> >>> Tomorrow afternoon this event is happening in Champaign: >>> >>> IL - 13 Listening Session: Champaign-Urbana >>> Public · Hosted by Carol Ammons >>> >>> https://www.facebook.com/events/1855909114660297/ >>> >>> >>> Yesterday I asked Rodney Davis to oppose Trump's Saudi arms deal. I >>> presented the IL-13 signers on our petition >>> >> s?r_by=1135580>, >>> and asked him to cosponsor the bipartisan Amash-Pocan resolution against >>> the Saudi arms deal. Rodney Davis said he would speak with Amash and the >>> other Republican sponsors and get back to me. >>> >>> Now Carol is asking: "What do you want your Representative in Congress to >>> do?" I figure that's an easy question for me to answer. I want my >>> Representative in Congress to oppose the Saudi arms deal. >>> >>> So, I figure, why not take Carol the same petition I took Rodney, and >>> make >>> the same ask? >>> >>> I figure: if Carol opposes the Saudi arms deal and challenges Rodney to >>> do >>> the same, it's win-win. Either Rodney agrees, in which case I win, or >>> Rodney doesn't agree, in which case it's a public issue and the >>> News-Gazette has to report on it and Rodney gets in trouble, in which >>> case >>> I also win. >>> >>> Is it plausible that Rodney, feeling a little heat, would agree to >>> co-sponsor the Amash resolution? >>> >>> Last September, then-Illinois Senator Mark Kirk was one of only four >>> Senate >>> Republicans to vote against the Saudi tank deal. The other 23 no votes >>> were >>> Democrats. Mark Kirk had not previously been known as a critic of Saudi >>> Arabia or its "particularly aggressive" war in Yemen, as the Vatican puts >>> it. >>> >>> What made Mark Kirk flip? Tammy Duckworth was breathing down his neck, >>> putting out a press release every time he didn't say "excuse me" after >>> burping. >>> >>> Could we do that to Rodney Davis? Could we flip him with some pressure? >>> If >>> not, why not? >>> >>> I'll print out the petitions again around noon tomorrow. So there's still >>> time to sign. >>> >>> Sign the petition: Congress: Vote NO on Trump's Saudi Arms Deal >>> >>> https://petitions.moveon.org/sign/congress-vote-no-on-trumps >>> ?r_by=1135580 >>> >>> >>> === >>> >>> Robert Naiman >>> Policy Director >>> Just Foreign Policy >>> www.justforeignpolicy.org >>> >>> naiman at justforeignpolicy.org >>> >>> (202) 448-2898 x1 >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Peace-discuss mailing list >>> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net >>> https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Peace-discuss mailing list >> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net >> https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Peace-discuss mailing list >> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net >> https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > Peace-discuss mailing list > Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Tue Jun 6 15:37:45 2017 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2017 15:37:45 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Qatar, see what Col. Wilkerson has to say about it. Message-ID: http://therealnews.com/t2/story:19250:Wilkerson%3A-From-Qatar-Rift-to-Syria-Battlefield%2C-Trump-%26-Gulf-Allies-Target-Iran [http://therealnews.com/media/trn_2017-06-01/lwilkerson0605report.jpg] Wilkerson: From Qatar Rift to Syria Battlefield, Trump & Gulf Allies Target Iran therealnews.com Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson, former chief of staff to Secretary of State Colin Powell, says that the Trump administration and its Gulf allies are taking aim at Iran through the re-ignited dispute with Qatar. Sources also claim the Pentagon has directed U.S. troops to directly confront Iranian-backed forces inside Syria -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From davegreen84 at yahoo.com Tue Jun 6 15:47:43 2017 From: davegreen84 at yahoo.com (David Green) Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2017 15:47:43 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Peace-discuss] Letter to the editor References: <1681569783.4069281.1496764063148.ref@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1681569783.4069281.1496764063148@mail.yahoo.com> This responds to Sundiata Cha-Jua’s “White supremacists areon a rampage” (June 4th), supporting Carol Anderson’s emphasis on “whiterage” as fundamental throughout U.S. history. When the notion of “black rage” was popularized in the1960s, it referenced the historical, material, and social conditions thatprovoked such rage. The term was not used to define cultural pathology. That insidiouswork was concurrently done, in academic racist fashion, by the Moynihan Reportin 1965, characterizing black families as mired in a “tangle of pathology.”This flawed approach was appropriately called “blaming the victims” by itscritics. Generalizations rooted in notions of culture, character, andemotion, whether in reference to nation, religion, race, or ethnicity, poorlyserve our understanding of social conflicts rooted in fundamental materialconditions; that is, class struggle based in the means of economic production, currentlytaking the form of neoliberal warfare of the one percent vs. the rest,globally. The notion of “white rage” no better serves us, analyticallyand practically, than the hoary notion of “Muslim rage,” popularized by scholarBernard Lewis and his Islamophobic acolytes since 1990. Nor have lurid accusationsof collective Arab anti-Semitism served our understanding of Israel/Palestine. Regardless of ongoing and despicable racial violence, DonaldTrump was elected because enough members of the white working class in a fewkey states correctly observed that the Democratic Party has for decadesbetrayed their efforts to lead dignified lives. Anderson and Cha-Jua aregreatly mistaken in their neglect of structural analysis for thinly-disguised racialstereotyping. David GreenChampaign217-840-3979 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From davegreen84 at yahoo.com Tue Jun 6 15:49:56 2017 From: davegreen84 at yahoo.com (David Green) Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2017 15:49:56 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] Tomorrow I'll ask Carol Ammons to oppose the Saudi arms deal In-Reply-To: References: <15c49d141bf-2621-17ee1@webprd-a68.mail.aol.com> <8B01F089-BBAD-49EC-B3E9-206C29263D7F@gmail.com> Message-ID: <887758462.4009662.1496764196559@mail.yahoo.com> Don't know if that's fair to Dr. Gill; he often works nights at the ER; Carol doesn't seem exactly pre-occupied by being a state rep. On Tuesday, June 6, 2017 10:17 AM, Robert Naiman via Peace-discuss wrote: No, I was hoping you'd do it. It makes more sense for you to do it, since you are a vigorous public advocate of his candidacy.  Robert Naiman Policy Director Just Foreign Policy www.justforeignpolicy.org naiman at justforeignpolicy.org (202) 448-2898 x1 Sign the petition: Congress: Vote NO on Trump's Saudi Arms Deal https://petitions.moveon.org/sign/congress-vote-no-on-trumps?r_by=1135580 On Tue, Jun 6, 2017 at 10:13 AM, C. G. Estabrook via Peace-discuss wrote: You've not been in touch with him? Sent from my iPhone On Jun 6, 2017, at 10:07 AM, Robert Naiman wrote: Well, if David Gill is hard to get in touch with, maybe that's a warning sign about his candidacy. Carol is easy to get in touch with.  Robert Naiman Policy Director Just Foreign Policy www.justforeignpolicy.org naiman at justforeignpolicy.org (202) 448-2898 x1 Sign the petition: Congress: Vote NO on Trump's Saudi Arms Deal https://petitions.moveon.org/ sign/congress-vote-no-on- trumps?r_by=1135580 On Tue, Jun 6, 2017 at 9:25 AM, C G Estabrook via Peace-discuss wrote: “…your man David Gill…”? I’m not working on his campaign & find him hard to get in touch with. I sent him your MoveOn statement and asked for a response. Did you? —CGE  On Jun 6, 2017, at 9:06 AM, Robert Naiman via Peace-discuss wrote: I did not get called on during the questions. Niloofar did get called on, and asked a related question if not quite so specific. Carol answered Niloofar's question by criticizing U.S. support for the Saudi war in Yemen.  I delivered our petition after the event to Carol's staffer Michelle. I also sent Michelle my letter in the News-Gazette yesterday: Saudi arms deal must be blocked http://www.news-gazette.com/op inion/letters-editor/2017-06- 05/saudi-arms-deal-must-be-blo cked.html How about your man David Gill? Has he put out any statement on this? Unlike Carol, your man David Gill is already a declared candidate for the seat. Seems like something he should weigh in on.  Here is a draft statement you could send him: Congress: Vote NO on Trump's Saudi Arms Deal https://petitions.moveon.org/s ign/congress-vote-no-on-trumps ?r_by=1135580 Robert Naiman Policy Director Just Foreign Policy www.justforeignpolicy.org naiman at justforeignpolicy.org (202) 448-2898 x1 Sign the petition: Congress: Vote NO on Trump's Saudi Arms Deal https://petitions.moveon.org/s ign/congress-vote-no-on-trumps ?r_by=1135580 On Tue, Jun 6, 2017 at 8:53 AM, C G Estabrook via Peace-discuss wrote: Bob— What response did you get? —CGE ============================== ==== Robert Naiman naiman at justforeignpolicy.org Sat Jun 3 19:56:04 UTC 2017 Tomorrow afternoon this event is happening in Champaign: IL - 13 Listening Session: Champaign-Urbana Public · Hosted by Carol Ammons https://www.facebook.com/event s/1855909114660297/ Yesterday I asked Rodney Davis to oppose Trump's Saudi arms deal. I presented the IL-13 signers on our petition , and asked him to cosponsor the bipartisan Amash-Pocan resolution against the Saudi arms deal. Rodney Davis said he would speak with Amash and the other Republican sponsors and get back to me. Now Carol is asking: "What do you want your Representative in Congress to do?" I figure that's an easy question for me to answer. I want my Representative in Congress to oppose the Saudi arms deal. So, I figure, why not take Carol the same petition I took Rodney, and make the same ask? I figure: if Carol opposes the Saudi arms deal and challenges Rodney to do the same, it's win-win. Either Rodney agrees, in which case I win, or Rodney doesn't agree, in which case it's a public issue and the News-Gazette has to report on it and Rodney gets in trouble, in which case I also win. Is it plausible that Rodney, feeling a little heat, would agree to co-sponsor the Amash resolution? Last September, then-Illinois Senator Mark Kirk was one of only four Senate Republicans to vote against the Saudi tank deal. The other 23 no votes were Democrats. Mark Kirk had not previously been known as a critic of Saudi Arabia or its "particularly aggressive" war in Yemen, as the Vatican puts it. What made Mark Kirk flip? Tammy Duckworth was breathing down his neck, putting out a press release every time he didn't say "excuse me" after burping. Could we do that to Rodney Davis? Could we flip him with some pressure? If not, why not? I'll print out the petitions again around noon tomorrow. So there's still time to sign. Sign the petition: Congress: Vote NO on Trump's Saudi Arms Deal https://petitions.moveon.org/s ign/congress-vote-no-on-trumps ?r_by=1135580 === Robert Naiman Policy Director Just Foreign Policy www.justforeignpolicy.org naiman at justforeignpolicy.org (202) 448-2898 x1 ______________________________ _________________ Peace-discuss mailing list Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.n et https://lists.chambana.net/mai lman/listinfo/peace-discuss ______________________________ _________________ Peace-discuss mailing list Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.n et https://lists.chambana.net/mai lman/listinfo/peace-discuss ______________________________ _________________ Peace-discuss mailing list Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.n et https://lists.chambana.net/mai lman/listinfo/peace-discuss ______________________________ _________________ Peace-discuss mailing list Peace-discuss at lists.chambana. net https://lists.chambana.net/ mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss _______________________________________________ Peace-discuss mailing list Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cgestabrook at gmail.com Tue Jun 6 16:11:43 2017 From: cgestabrook at gmail.com (C G Estabrook) Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2017 11:11:43 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] Tomorrow I'll ask Carol Ammons to oppose the Saudi arms deal In-Reply-To: References: <15c49d141bf-2621-17ee1@webprd-a68.mail.aol.com> <8B01F089-BBAD-49EC-B3E9-206C29263D7F@gmail.com> Message-ID: <7B2B05E3-DA72-4704-A9DF-E16B51250AAA@gmail.com> No, I supported his last candidacy, only after he adopted an antiwar position. > On Jun 6, 2017, at 10:16 AM, Robert Naiman wrote: > > No, I was hoping you'd do it. It makes more sense for you to do it, since you are a vigorous public advocate of his candidacy. > > > Robert Naiman > Policy Director > Just Foreign Policy > www.justforeignpolicy.org > naiman at justforeignpolicy.org > (202) 448-2898 x1 > > Sign the petition: Congress: Vote NO on Trump's Saudi Arms Deal > https://petitions.moveon.org/sign/congress-vote-no-on-trumps?r_by=1135580 > > > On Tue, Jun 6, 2017 at 10:13 AM, C. G. Estabrook via Peace-discuss > wrote: > You've not been in touch with him? > > > Sent from my iPhone > > On Jun 6, 2017, at 10:07 AM, Robert Naiman > wrote: > >> Well, if David Gill is hard to get in touch with, maybe that's a warning sign about his candidacy. Carol is easy to get in touch with. >> >> >> >> >> >> Robert Naiman >> Policy Director >> Just Foreign Policy >> www.justforeignpolicy.org >> naiman at justforeignpolicy.org >> (202) 448-2898 x1 >> >> Sign the petition: Congress: Vote NO on Trump's Saudi Arms Deal >> https://petitions.moveon.org/sign/congress-vote-no-on-trumps?r_by=1135580 >> >> >> On Tue, Jun 6, 2017 at 9:25 AM, C G Estabrook via Peace-discuss > wrote: >> “…your man David Gill…”? I’m not working on his campaign & find him hard to get in touch with. >> >> I sent him your MoveOn statement and asked for a response. Did you? >> >> —CGE >> >> >>> On Jun 6, 2017, at 9:06 AM, Robert Naiman via Peace-discuss > wrote: >>> >>> I did not get called on during the questions. Niloofar did get called on, and asked a related question if not quite so specific. Carol answered Niloofar's question by criticizing U.S. support for the Saudi war in Yemen. >>> >>> I delivered our petition after the event to Carol's staffer Michelle. I also sent Michelle my letter in the News-Gazette yesterday: >>> >>> Saudi arms deal must be blocked >>> http://www.news-gazette.com/opinion/letters-editor/2017-06-05/saudi-arms-deal-must-be-blocked.html >>> >>> How about your man David Gill? Has he put out any statement on this? Unlike Carol, your man David Gill is already a declared candidate for the seat. Seems like something he should weigh in on. >>> >>> Here is a draft statement you could send him: >>> >>> Congress: Vote NO on Trump's Saudi Arms Deal >>> https://petitions.moveon.org/sign/congress-vote-no-on-trumps?r_by=1135580 >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Robert Naiman >>> Policy Director >>> Just Foreign Policy >>> www.justforeignpolicy.org >>> naiman at justforeignpolicy.org >>> (202) 448-2898 x1 >>> >>> Sign the petition: Congress: Vote NO on Trump's Saudi Arms Deal >>> https://petitions.moveon.org/sign/congress-vote-no-on-trumps?r_by=1135580 >>> >>> >>> On Tue, Jun 6, 2017 at 8:53 AM, C G Estabrook via Peace-discuss > wrote: >>> Bob— >>> >>> What response did you get? >>> >>> —CGE >>> ================================== >>> Robert Naiman naiman at justforeignpolicy.org >>> Sat Jun 3 19:56:04 UTC 2017 >>> >>> Tomorrow afternoon this event is happening in Champaign: >>> >>> IL - 13 Listening Session: Champaign-Urbana >>> Public · Hosted by Carol Ammons >>> >>> https://www.facebook.com/events/1855909114660297/ >>> >>> >>> Yesterday I asked Rodney Davis to oppose Trump's Saudi arms deal. I >>> presented the IL-13 signers on our petition >>> >, >>> and asked him to cosponsor the bipartisan Amash-Pocan resolution against >>> the Saudi arms deal. Rodney Davis said he would speak with Amash and the >>> other Republican sponsors and get back to me. >>> >>> Now Carol is asking: "What do you want your Representative in Congress to >>> do?" I figure that's an easy question for me to answer. I want my >>> Representative in Congress to oppose the Saudi arms deal. >>> >>> So, I figure, why not take Carol the same petition I took Rodney, and make >>> the same ask? >>> >>> I figure: if Carol opposes the Saudi arms deal and challenges Rodney to do >>> the same, it's win-win. Either Rodney agrees, in which case I win, or >>> Rodney doesn't agree, in which case it's a public issue and the >>> News-Gazette has to report on it and Rodney gets in trouble, in which case >>> I also win. >>> >>> Is it plausible that Rodney, feeling a little heat, would agree to >>> co-sponsor the Amash resolution? >>> >>> Last September, then-Illinois Senator Mark Kirk was one of only four Senate >>> Republicans to vote against the Saudi tank deal. The other 23 no votes were >>> Democrats. Mark Kirk had not previously been known as a critic of Saudi >>> Arabia or its "particularly aggressive" war in Yemen, as the Vatican puts >>> it. >>> >>> What made Mark Kirk flip? Tammy Duckworth was breathing down his neck, >>> putting out a press release every time he didn't say "excuse me" after >>> burping. >>> >>> Could we do that to Rodney Davis? Could we flip him with some pressure? If >>> not, why not? >>> >>> I'll print out the petitions again around noon tomorrow. So there's still >>> time to sign. >>> >>> Sign the petition: Congress: Vote NO on Trump's Saudi Arms Deal >>> >>> https://petitions.moveon.org/sign/congress-vote-no-on-trumps?r_by=1135580 >>> >>> >>> === >>> >>> Robert Naiman >>> Policy Director >>> Just Foreign Policy >>> www.justforeignpolicy.org >>> >>> naiman at justforeignpolicy.org >>> >>> (202) 448-2898 x1 >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Peace-discuss mailing list >>> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net >>> https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Peace-discuss mailing list >>> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net >>> https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Peace-discuss mailing list >> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net >> https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > Peace-discuss mailing list > Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From davegreen84 at yahoo.com Tue Jun 6 22:40:10 2017 From: davegreen84 at yahoo.com (David Green) Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2017 22:40:10 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Peace-discuss] Gershon Shafir References: <1305681889.4512971.1496788810547.ref@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1305681889.4512971.1496788810547@mail.yahoo.com> This book excerpt is probably too dense and detailed for most people, understandable, but I had occasion to know Shafir when we were both students at UCLA, and he has gone on to be perhaps the leading Jewish Israeli critical historical sociologist, now teaching at UCSD. | | | Why has the Occupation lasted this long? Read an excerpt from Gershon Shafir’s latest book, “A Half Century of Occupation: Israel, Palestine, and the Wor... | | | Why has the Occupation lasted this long? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Wed Jun 7 04:41:55 2017 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2017 04:41:55 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] The latest on the Qatar issue, this from mainstream media Message-ID: Qatar and the Gulf State Kerfuffle.... THE RUSSIANS DID IT. WAS THERE EVER ANY DOUBT. [https://www.facebook.com/images/emoji.php/v9/fda/1.5/16/1f60c.png]😌[https://www.facebook.com/images/emoji.php/v9/fda/1.5/16/1f60c.png]😌[https://www.facebook.com/images/emoji.php/v9/fda/1.5/16/1f60c.png]😌 "Washington (CNN)US investigators believe Russian hackers breached Qatar's state news agency and planted a fake news report that contributed to a crisis among the US' closest Gulf allies, according to US officials briefed on the investigation. "The FBI recently sent a team of investigators to Doha to help the Qatari government investigate the alleged hacking incident, Qatari and US government officials say. "Intelligence gathered by the US security agencies indicates that Russian hackers were behind the intrusion first reported by the Qatari government two weeks ago, US officials say. Qatar hosts one of the largest US military bases in the region. "The alleged involvement of Russian hackers intensifies concerns by US intelligence and law enforcement agencies that Russia continues to try some of the same cyber-hacking measures on US allies that intelligence agencies believe it used to meddle in the 2016 elections." [https://external.ford1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/safe_image.php?d=AQC6Xs_VtmNfqON9&w=487&h=255&url=http%3A%2F%2Fi2.cdn.cnn.com%2Fcnnnext%2Fdam%2Fassets%2F170606115750-qatar-rift-t1-super-tease.jpg&cfs=1&upscale=1&_nc_hash=AQAhLmPRlPpVuMtj] FIRST ON CNN: US suspects Russian hackers planted fake news behind Qatar crisis US investigators believe Russian hackers breached Qatar's state news agency and planted a fake news report that contributed to a crisis among the US'… CNN.COM -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net Thu Jun 8 11:57:29 2017 From: davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net (David Johnson) Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2017 06:57:29 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] Tomorrow I'll ask Carol Ammons to oppose the Saudi arms deal In-Reply-To: <8E9E7F7D-D733-4DAA-9E72-EC9E67F86E6F@gmail.com> References: <5CB8941D-7259-4DD5-9542-7442892DC00F@illinois.edu> <003f01d2dcce$c9fbecf0$5df3c6d0$@comcast.net> <001501d2debd$e04996b0$a0dcc410$@comcast.net> <8E9E7F7D-D733-4DAA-9E72-EC9E67F86E6F@gmail.com> Message-ID: <004001d2e04e$680318b0$38094a10$@comcast.net> Your " proof " that Carol " won't do that " ??? David J. -----Original Message----- From: C G Estabrook [mailto:cgestabrook at gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 06, 2017 8:37 AM To: David Johnson Cc: peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net Subject: Re: [Peace] Tomorrow I'll ask Carol Ammons to oppose the Saudi arms deal Let’s be clear what SB 1761 did, two years ago. The bill, actively promoted by the government of Israel, directed that Illinois' funds (like university pension funds) be removed from companies that observed the boycott of business conducted in the territories illegally occupied by Israel! Carol’s excuse when she spoke to AWARE about her (non)-vote was that no one opposed had contacted her about it. But she refused to say she would have voted against it, had anyone done so. That ‘everyone else was doing it’ (“only two State reps…”) is not much of an excuse. I want to vote for a Congressional representative who will vote against the military budget (as former Rep. Johnson eventually did) and for the withdrawal of US troops from the Mideast. Carol won’t do that. David Gill, who’s also running for the seat (13th IL CD) held by Rodney Davis, might. —CGE > On Jun 6, 2017, at 7:10 AM, David Johnson wrote: > > Well Carl, > > AGAIN, she was one of only two State Reps who resisted pressure from Madigan and the Israeli consulate to vote for it. For that she deserves credit. > > IF the vote had been close and she abstained and by doing so caused the bill to pass, THEN she would be deserving of criticism. > > Would it had been better if she had been the only State Rep to vote no ? Yes, of course. But considering the vote was a short notice vote and we as her constituents did not have enough time to educate her ion this bill and demand that she vote against it, then again what she did by abstaining is not reason to villianize and condemn her. > > In response to your question about rather or not she often opposes the Democratic party leadership, the answer is yes ! > > First she refused to vote for the BDS bill mentioned above, she also co sponsored the Illinois single payer bill weeks after entering the General Assembly, she sponsored and was able to pass both an anti-wage theft bill and a bill stopping telephone gouging of prison inmates. She also has co-sponsored early on a bill to increase the Illinois minimum wage to $ 15.00 per hour, several years before it had enough votes to pass recently. > > So looking at the big picture here Carl, Carol has done pretty damn good since she was elected in 2014. Could she be better by being more aggressive and bold, ? Of course, but that is up to us to educate her and advocate for certain things we want to see done. > If she had not been elected in 2014, her opponent Sam Rosenberg would have not done any of the above mentioned, nor would Naomi Jacobsen if she had not resigned. > > David J. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Carl G. Estabrook [mailto:galliher at illinois.edu] > Sent: Saturday, June 03, 2017 8:16 PM > To: David Johnson > Cc: peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > Subject: Re: [Peace] Tomorrow I'll ask Carol Ammons to oppose the > Saudi arms deal > > She didn’t vote against it, as she would have, had the subject been South African apartheid. > > Has she often differed with the Democratic leadership? > > —CGE > > >> On Jun 3, 2017, at 8:06 PM, David Johnson wrote: >> >> Carol was one of only two State Reps who abstained from voting for the anti BDS bill, despite aggressive coercion from Madigan and lobbyists from the Israeli consulate for all State Reps and Senators to vote for it. >> >> David J. >> >> >> From: Peace [mailto:peace-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of >> Carl G. Estabrook via Peace >> Sent: Saturday, June 03, 2017 6:18 PM >> To: Robert Naiman >> Cc: peace >> Subject: Re: [Peace] Tomorrow I'll ask Carol Ammons to oppose the >> Saudi arms deal >> >> She was unwilling to oppose Illinois’ support for Israeli apartheid. >> >> >>> On Jun 3, 2017, at 2:56 PM, Robert Naiman via Peace wrote: >>> >>> >>> Tomorrow afternoon this event is happening in Champaign: >>> >>> IL - 13 Listening Session: Champaign-Urbana Public · Hosted by Carol >>> Ammons https://www.facebook.com/events/1855909114660297/ >>> >>> Yesterday I asked Rodney Davis to oppose Trump's Saudi arms deal. I presented the IL-13 signers on our petition, and asked him to cosponsor the bipartisan Amash-Pocan resolution against the Saudi arms deal. Rodney Davis said he would speak with Amash and the other Republican sponsors and get back to me. >>> >>> Now Carol is asking: "What do you want your Representative in Congress to do?" I figure that's an easy question for me to answer. I want my Representative in Congress to oppose the Saudi arms deal. >>> >>> So, I figure, why not take Carol the same petition I took Rodney, and make the same ask? >>> >>> I figure: if Carol opposes the Saudi arms deal and challenges Rodney to do the same, it's win-win. Either Rodney agrees, in which case I win, or Rodney doesn't agree, in which case it's a public issue and the News-Gazette has to report on it and Rodney gets in trouble, in which case I also win. >>> >>> Is it plausible that Rodney, feeling a little heat, would agree to co-sponsor the Amash resolution? >>> >>> Last September, then-Illinois Senator Mark Kirk was one of only four Senate Republicans to vote against the Saudi tank deal. The other 23 no votes were Democrats. Mark Kirk had not previously been known as a critic of Saudi Arabia or its "particularly aggressive" war in Yemen, as the Vatican puts it. >>> >>> What made Mark Kirk flip? Tammy Duckworth was breathing down his neck, putting out a press release every time he didn't say "excuse me" after burping. >>> >>> Could we do that to Rodney Davis? Could we flip him with some pressure? If not, why not? >>> >>> I'll print out the petitions again around noon tomorrow. So there's still time to sign. >>> >>> Sign the petition: Congress: Vote NO on Trump's Saudi Arms Deal >>> https://petitions.moveon.org/sign/congress-vote-no-on-trumps?r_by=11 >>> 3 >>> 5580 >>> >>> === >>> >>> Robert Naiman >>> Policy Director >>> Just Foreign Policy >>> www.justforeignpolicy.org >>> naiman at justforeignpolicy.org >>> (202) 448-2898 x1 >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Peace mailing list >>> Peace at lists.chambana.net >>> https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace > > From fboyle at illinois.edu Thu Jun 8 13:10:48 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2017 13:10:48 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] FW: Qatar Crisis: 'It's Clear That Saudis Have Been Emboldened by Trump's Visit' Message-ID: Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2017 8:07 AM To: sectns.aals at lists.aals.org Subject: Qatar Crisis: 'It's Clear That Saudis Have Been Emboldened by Trump's Visit' https://sputniknews.com/middleeast/201706081054423820-qatar-saudi-arabia-trump-encouragement/ University of Illinois Professor of International Law Francis Boyle told Sputnik the Trump administration was irresponsibly supporting the Saudi aggressive policy against Qatar to advance its own anti-Iranian agenda. "It appears that President Trump is encouraging Saudi Arabia to put the screws into Qatar in order to force it into line with their hostile anti-Iranian Agenda along with the other GCC [Gulf Cooperation Council] states," he said. If Qatar does not capitulate to the Saudi demands, Riyadh would probably carry out an exercise in 'regime change' or even outright invasion as it did in Bahrain, Boyle warned. "This is also a harbinger of far worse things to come against Iran," he said. Boyle is the author of "Destroying World Order: US Imperialism in the Middle East Before and After September 11." From fboyle at illinois.edu Thu Jun 8 13:10:48 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2017 13:10:48 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] FW: Qatar Crisis: 'It's Clear That Saudis Have Been Emboldened by Trump's Visit' Message-ID: Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2017 8:07 AM To: sectns.aals at lists.aals.org Subject: Qatar Crisis: 'It's Clear That Saudis Have Been Emboldened by Trump's Visit' https://sputniknews.com/middleeast/201706081054423820-qatar-saudi-arabia-trump-encouragement/ University of Illinois Professor of International Law Francis Boyle told Sputnik the Trump administration was irresponsibly supporting the Saudi aggressive policy against Qatar to advance its own anti-Iranian agenda. "It appears that President Trump is encouraging Saudi Arabia to put the screws into Qatar in order to force it into line with their hostile anti-Iranian Agenda along with the other GCC [Gulf Cooperation Council] states," he said. If Qatar does not capitulate to the Saudi demands, Riyadh would probably carry out an exercise in 'regime change' or even outright invasion as it did in Bahrain, Boyle warned. "This is also a harbinger of far worse things to come against Iran," he said. Boyle is the author of "Destroying World Order: US Imperialism in the Middle East Before and After September 11." From naiman at justforeignpolicy.org Thu Jun 8 13:38:09 2017 From: naiman at justforeignpolicy.org (Robert Naiman) Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2017 08:38:09 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] FW: Qatar Crisis: 'It's Clear That Saudis Have Been Emboldened by Trump's Visit' In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: The Senate is expected to vote today on Trump's Saudi arms deal. There's still time to call your Senators. *1-855-68-NO-WAR. Talking points here .* https://www.fcnl.org/updates/today-call-your-senators-block-bombs-to-saudi-arabia-849 Robert Naiman Policy Director Just Foreign Policy www.justforeignpolicy.org naiman at justforeignpolicy.org (202) 448-2898 x1 Sign the petition: Congress: Vote NO on Trump's Saudi Arms Deal https://petitions.moveon.org/sign/congress-vote-no-on-trumps?r_by=1135580 On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 8:10 AM, Boyle, Francis A via Peace-discuss < peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net> wrote: > > > Francis A. Boyle > Law Building > 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. > Champaign, IL 61820 USA > 217-333-7954 (phone) > 217-244-1478 (fax) > (personal comments only) > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Boyle, Francis A > Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2017 8:07 AM > To: sectns.aals at lists.aals.org > Subject: Qatar Crisis: 'It's Clear That Saudis Have Been Emboldened by > Trump's Visit' > > https://sputniknews.com/middleeast/201706081054423820- > qatar-saudi-arabia-trump-encouragement/ > > University of Illinois Professor of International Law Francis Boyle told > Sputnik the Trump administration was irresponsibly supporting the Saudi > aggressive policy against Qatar to advance its own anti-Iranian agenda. > > "It appears that President Trump is encouraging Saudi Arabia to put the > screws into Qatar in order to force it into line with their hostile > anti-Iranian Agenda along with the other GCC [Gulf Cooperation Council] > states," he said. > > If Qatar does not capitulate to the Saudi demands, Riyadh would probably > carry out an exercise in 'regime change' or even outright invasion as it > did in Bahrain, Boyle warned. > > "This is also a harbinger of far worse things to come against Iran," he > said. > > Boyle is the author of "Destroying World Order: US Imperialism in the > Middle East Before and After September 11." > > > > _______________________________________________ > Peace-discuss mailing list > Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From naiman at justforeignpolicy.org Thu Jun 8 13:38:09 2017 From: naiman at justforeignpolicy.org (Robert Naiman) Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2017 08:38:09 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] FW: Qatar Crisis: 'It's Clear That Saudis Have Been Emboldened by Trump's Visit' In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: The Senate is expected to vote today on Trump's Saudi arms deal. There's still time to call your Senators. *1-855-68-NO-WAR. Talking points here .* https://www.fcnl.org/updates/today-call-your-senators-block-bombs-to-saudi-arabia-849 Robert Naiman Policy Director Just Foreign Policy www.justforeignpolicy.org naiman at justforeignpolicy.org (202) 448-2898 x1 Sign the petition: Congress: Vote NO on Trump's Saudi Arms Deal https://petitions.moveon.org/sign/congress-vote-no-on-trumps?r_by=1135580 On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 8:10 AM, Boyle, Francis A via Peace-discuss < peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net> wrote: > > > Francis A. Boyle > Law Building > 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. > Champaign, IL 61820 USA > 217-333-7954 (phone) > 217-244-1478 (fax) > (personal comments only) > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Boyle, Francis A > Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2017 8:07 AM > To: sectns.aals at lists.aals.org > Subject: Qatar Crisis: 'It's Clear That Saudis Have Been Emboldened by > Trump's Visit' > > https://sputniknews.com/middleeast/201706081054423820- > qatar-saudi-arabia-trump-encouragement/ > > University of Illinois Professor of International Law Francis Boyle told > Sputnik the Trump administration was irresponsibly supporting the Saudi > aggressive policy against Qatar to advance its own anti-Iranian agenda. > > "It appears that President Trump is encouraging Saudi Arabia to put the > screws into Qatar in order to force it into line with their hostile > anti-Iranian Agenda along with the other GCC [Gulf Cooperation Council] > states," he said. > > If Qatar does not capitulate to the Saudi demands, Riyadh would probably > carry out an exercise in 'regime change' or even outright invasion as it > did in Bahrain, Boyle warned. > > "This is also a harbinger of far worse things to come against Iran," he > said. > > Boyle is the author of "Destroying World Order: US Imperialism in the > Middle East Before and After September 11." > > > > _______________________________________________ > Peace-discuss mailing list > Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cgestabrook at gmail.com Thu Jun 8 15:29:37 2017 From: cgestabrook at gmail.com (C G Estabrook) Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2017 10:29:37 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] Tomorrow I'll ask Carol Ammons to oppose the Saudi arms deal In-Reply-To: <004001d2e04e$680318b0$38094a10$@comcast.net> References: <5CB8941D-7259-4DD5-9542-7442892DC00F@illinois.edu> <003f01d2dcce$c9fbecf0$5df3c6d0$@comcast.net> <001501d2debd$e04996b0$a0dcc410$@comcast.net> <8E9E7F7D-D733-4DAA-9E72-EC9E67F86E6F@gmail.com> <004001d2e04e$680318b0$38094a10$@comcast.net> Message-ID: Her disingenuous excuses on SB1761. I’d be glad to hear her pledge that she would vote against the military budget and for the withdrawal of US troops from the Mideast. But I don’t expect to. Regards, CGE > On Jun 8, 2017, at 6:57 AM, David Johnson via Peace-discuss wrote: > > Your " proof " that Carol " won't do that " ??? > > David J. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: C G Estabrook [mailto:cgestabrook at gmail.com] > Sent: Tuesday, June 06, 2017 8:37 AM > To: David Johnson > Cc: peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > Subject: Re: [Peace] Tomorrow I'll ask Carol Ammons to oppose the Saudi arms deal > > Let’s be clear what SB 1761 did, two years ago. The bill, actively promoted by the government of Israel, directed that Illinois' funds (like university pension funds) be removed from companies that observed the boycott of business conducted in the territories illegally occupied by Israel! > > Carol’s excuse when she spoke to AWARE about her (non)-vote was that no one opposed had contacted her about it. But she refused to say she would have voted against it, had anyone done so. > > That ‘everyone else was doing it’ (“only two State reps…”) is not much of an excuse. > > I want to vote for a Congressional representative who will vote against the military budget (as former Rep. Johnson eventually did) and for the withdrawal of US troops from the Mideast. > > Carol won’t do that. David Gill, who’s also running for the seat (13th IL CD) held by Rodney Davis, might. > > —CGE > > >> On Jun 6, 2017, at 7:10 AM, David Johnson wrote: >> >> Well Carl, >> >> AGAIN, she was one of only two State Reps who resisted pressure from Madigan and the Israeli consulate to vote for it. For that she deserves credit. >> >> IF the vote had been close and she abstained and by doing so caused the bill to pass, THEN she would be deserving of criticism. >> >> Would it had been better if she had been the only State Rep to vote no ? Yes, of course. But considering the vote was a short notice vote and we as her constituents did not have enough time to educate her ion this bill and demand that she vote against it, then again what she did by abstaining is not reason to villianize and condemn her. >> >> In response to your question about rather or not she often opposes the Democratic party leadership, the answer is yes ! >> >> First she refused to vote for the BDS bill mentioned above, she also co sponsored the Illinois single payer bill weeks after entering the General Assembly, she sponsored and was able to pass both an anti-wage theft bill and a bill stopping telephone gouging of prison inmates. She also has co-sponsored early on a bill to increase the Illinois minimum wage to $ 15.00 per hour, several years before it had enough votes to pass recently. >> >> So looking at the big picture here Carl, Carol has done pretty damn good since she was elected in 2014. Could she be better by being more aggressive and bold, ? Of course, but that is up to us to educate her and advocate for certain things we want to see done. >> If she had not been elected in 2014, her opponent Sam Rosenberg would have not done any of the above mentioned, nor would Naomi Jacobsen if she had not resigned. >> >> David J. >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Carl G. Estabrook [mailto:galliher at illinois.edu] >> Sent: Saturday, June 03, 2017 8:16 PM >> To: David Johnson >> Cc: peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net >> Subject: Re: [Peace] Tomorrow I'll ask Carol Ammons to oppose the >> Saudi arms deal >> >> She didn’t vote against it, as she would have, had the subject been South African apartheid. >> >> Has she often differed with the Democratic leadership? >> >> —CGE >> >> >>> On Jun 3, 2017, at 8:06 PM, David Johnson wrote: >>> >>> Carol was one of only two State Reps who abstained from voting for the anti BDS bill, despite aggressive coercion from Madigan and lobbyists from the Israeli consulate for all State Reps and Senators to vote for it. >>> >>> David J. >>> >>> >>> From: Peace [mailto:peace-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of >>> Carl G. Estabrook via Peace >>> Sent: Saturday, June 03, 2017 6:18 PM >>> To: Robert Naiman >>> Cc: peace >>> Subject: Re: [Peace] Tomorrow I'll ask Carol Ammons to oppose the >>> Saudi arms deal >>> >>> She was unwilling to oppose Illinois’ support for Israeli apartheid. >>> >>> >>>> On Jun 3, 2017, at 2:56 PM, Robert Naiman via Peace wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> Tomorrow afternoon this event is happening in Champaign: >>>> >>>> IL - 13 Listening Session: Champaign-Urbana Public · Hosted by Carol >>>> Ammons https://www.facebook.com/events/1855909114660297/ >>>> >>>> Yesterday I asked Rodney Davis to oppose Trump's Saudi arms deal. I presented the IL-13 signers on our petition, and asked him to cosponsor the bipartisan Amash-Pocan resolution against the Saudi arms deal. Rodney Davis said he would speak with Amash and the other Republican sponsors and get back to me. >>>> >>>> Now Carol is asking: "What do you want your Representative in Congress to do?" I figure that's an easy question for me to answer. I want my Representative in Congress to oppose the Saudi arms deal. >>>> >>>> So, I figure, why not take Carol the same petition I took Rodney, and make the same ask? >>>> >>>> I figure: if Carol opposes the Saudi arms deal and challenges Rodney to do the same, it's win-win. Either Rodney agrees, in which case I win, or Rodney doesn't agree, in which case it's a public issue and the News-Gazette has to report on it and Rodney gets in trouble, in which case I also win. >>>> >>>> Is it plausible that Rodney, feeling a little heat, would agree to co-sponsor the Amash resolution? >>>> >>>> Last September, then-Illinois Senator Mark Kirk was one of only four Senate Republicans to vote against the Saudi tank deal. The other 23 no votes were Democrats. Mark Kirk had not previously been known as a critic of Saudi Arabia or its "particularly aggressive" war in Yemen, as the Vatican puts it. >>>> >>>> What made Mark Kirk flip? Tammy Duckworth was breathing down his neck, putting out a press release every time he didn't say "excuse me" after burping. >>>> >>>> Could we do that to Rodney Davis? Could we flip him with some pressure? If not, why not? >>>> >>>> I'll print out the petitions again around noon tomorrow. So there's still time to sign. >>>> >>>> Sign the petition: Congress: Vote NO on Trump's Saudi Arms Deal >>>> https://petitions.moveon.org/sign/congress-vote-no-on-trumps?r_by=11 >>>> 3 >>>> 5580 >>>> >>>> === >>>> >>>> Robert Naiman >>>> Policy Director >>>> Just Foreign Policy >>>> www.justforeignpolicy.org >>>> naiman at justforeignpolicy.org >>>> (202) 448-2898 x1 >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Peace mailing list >>>> Peace at lists.chambana.net >>>> https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace >> >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Peace-discuss mailing list > Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss From naiman at justforeignpolicy.org Thu Jun 8 15:37:05 2017 From: naiman at justforeignpolicy.org (Robert Naiman) Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2017 10:37:05 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] Tomorrow I'll ask Carol Ammons to oppose the Saudi arms deal In-Reply-To: References: <5CB8941D-7259-4DD5-9542-7442892DC00F@illinois.edu> <003f01d2dcce$c9fbecf0$5df3c6d0$@comcast.net> <001501d2debd$e04996b0$a0dcc410$@comcast.net> <8E9E7F7D-D733-4DAA-9E72-EC9E67F86E6F@gmail.com> <004001d2e04e$680318b0$38094a10$@comcast.net> Message-ID: Anyone here know folks in Delaware? Democratic Senator Coons is a problem. Could you ask your friends in Delaware to call? It's plausible that we could win the Senate vote today. The path to victory looks like: all or almost all Dems plus 4-6 Republicans. All Dems plus Paul, Lee, Young, Heller would equal 52. Cardin came out on our side yesterday. Reed came out on our side today. Coons is holding out. Please send this info to your friends in Delaware: *1-855-68-NO-WAR* https://www.fcnl.org/updates/today-call-your-senators-block-bombs-to-saudi-arabia-849 Robert Naiman Policy Director Just Foreign Policy www.justforeignpolicy.org naiman at justforeignpolicy.org (202) 448-2898 x1 Sign the petition: Congress: Vote NO on Trump's Saudi Arms Deal https://petitions.moveon.org/sign/congress-vote-no-on-trumps?r_by=1135580 On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 10:29 AM, C G Estabrook via Peace-discuss < peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net> wrote: > Her disingenuous excuses on SB1761. > > I’d be glad to hear her pledge that she would vote against the military > budget and for the withdrawal of US troops from the Mideast. > > But I don’t expect to. > > Regards, CGE > > > > On Jun 8, 2017, at 6:57 AM, David Johnson via Peace-discuss < > peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net> wrote: > > > > Your " proof " that Carol " won't do that " ??? > > > > David J. > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: C G Estabrook [mailto:cgestabrook at gmail.com] > > Sent: Tuesday, June 06, 2017 8:37 AM > > To: David Johnson > > Cc: peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > > Subject: Re: [Peace] Tomorrow I'll ask Carol Ammons to oppose the Saudi > arms deal > > > > Let’s be clear what SB 1761 did, two years ago. The bill, actively > promoted by the government of Israel, directed that Illinois' funds (like > university pension funds) be removed from companies that observed the > boycott of business conducted in the territories illegally occupied by > Israel! > > > > Carol’s excuse when she spoke to AWARE about her (non)-vote was that no > one opposed had contacted her about it. But she refused to say she would > have voted against it, had anyone done so. > > > > That ‘everyone else was doing it’ (“only two State reps…”) is not much > of an excuse. > > > > I want to vote for a Congressional representative who will vote against > the military budget (as former Rep. Johnson eventually did) and for the > withdrawal of US troops from the Mideast. > > > > Carol won’t do that. David Gill, who’s also running for the seat (13th > IL CD) held by Rodney Davis, might. > > > > —CGE > > > > > >> On Jun 6, 2017, at 7:10 AM, David Johnson > wrote: > >> > >> Well Carl, > >> > >> AGAIN, she was one of only two State Reps who resisted pressure from > Madigan and the Israeli consulate to vote for it. For that she deserves > credit. > >> > >> IF the vote had been close and she abstained and by doing so caused the > bill to pass, THEN she would be deserving of criticism. > >> > >> Would it had been better if she had been the only State Rep to vote no > ? Yes, of course. But considering the vote was a short notice vote and we > as her constituents did not have enough time to educate her ion this bill > and demand that she vote against it, then again what she did by abstaining > is not reason to villianize and condemn her. > >> > >> In response to your question about rather or not she often opposes the > Democratic party leadership, the answer is yes ! > >> > >> First she refused to vote for the BDS bill mentioned above, she also co > sponsored the Illinois single payer bill weeks after entering the General > Assembly, she sponsored and was able to pass both an anti-wage theft bill > and a bill stopping telephone gouging of prison inmates. She also has > co-sponsored early on a bill to increase the Illinois minimum wage to $ > 15.00 per hour, several years before it had enough votes to pass recently. > >> > >> So looking at the big picture here Carl, Carol has done pretty damn > good since she was elected in 2014. Could she be better by being more > aggressive and bold, ? Of course, but that is up to us to educate her and > advocate for certain things we want to see done. > >> If she had not been elected in 2014, her opponent Sam Rosenberg would > have not done any of the above mentioned, nor would Naomi Jacobsen if she > had not resigned. > >> > >> David J. > >> > >> > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Carl G. Estabrook [mailto:galliher at illinois.edu] > >> Sent: Saturday, June 03, 2017 8:16 PM > >> To: David Johnson > >> Cc: peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > >> Subject: Re: [Peace] Tomorrow I'll ask Carol Ammons to oppose the > >> Saudi arms deal > >> > >> She didn’t vote against it, as she would have, had the subject been > South African apartheid. > >> > >> Has she often differed with the Democratic leadership? > >> > >> —CGE > >> > >> > >>> On Jun 3, 2017, at 8:06 PM, David Johnson < > davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net> wrote: > >>> > >>> Carol was one of only two State Reps who abstained from voting for the > anti BDS bill, despite aggressive coercion from Madigan and lobbyists from > the Israeli consulate for all State Reps and Senators to vote for it. > >>> > >>> David J. > >>> > >>> > >>> From: Peace [mailto:peace-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of > >>> Carl G. Estabrook via Peace > >>> Sent: Saturday, June 03, 2017 6:18 PM > >>> To: Robert Naiman > >>> Cc: peace > >>> Subject: Re: [Peace] Tomorrow I'll ask Carol Ammons to oppose the > >>> Saudi arms deal > >>> > >>> She was unwilling to oppose Illinois’ support for Israeli apartheid. > >>> > >>> > >>>> On Jun 3, 2017, at 2:56 PM, Robert Naiman via Peace < > peace at lists.chambana.net> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Tomorrow afternoon this event is happening in Champaign: > >>>> > >>>> IL - 13 Listening Session: Champaign-Urbana Public · Hosted by Carol > >>>> Ammons https://www.facebook.com/events/1855909114660297/ > >>>> > >>>> Yesterday I asked Rodney Davis to oppose Trump's Saudi arms deal. I > presented the IL-13 signers on our petition, and asked him to cosponsor the > bipartisan Amash-Pocan resolution against the Saudi arms deal. Rodney Davis > said he would speak with Amash and the other Republican sponsors and get > back to me. > >>>> > >>>> Now Carol is asking: "What do you want your Representative in > Congress to do?" I figure that's an easy question for me to answer. I want > my Representative in Congress to oppose the Saudi arms deal. > >>>> > >>>> So, I figure, why not take Carol the same petition I took Rodney, and > make the same ask? > >>>> > >>>> I figure: if Carol opposes the Saudi arms deal and challenges Rodney > to do the same, it's win-win. Either Rodney agrees, in which case I win, or > Rodney doesn't agree, in which case it's a public issue and the > News-Gazette has to report on it and Rodney gets in trouble, in which case > I also win. > >>>> > >>>> Is it plausible that Rodney, feeling a little heat, would agree to > co-sponsor the Amash resolution? > >>>> > >>>> Last September, then-Illinois Senator Mark Kirk was one of only four > Senate Republicans to vote against the Saudi tank deal. The other 23 no > votes were Democrats. Mark Kirk had not previously been known as a critic > of Saudi Arabia or its "particularly aggressive" war in Yemen, as the > Vatican puts it. > >>>> > >>>> What made Mark Kirk flip? Tammy Duckworth was breathing down his > neck, putting out a press release every time he didn't say "excuse me" > after burping. > >>>> > >>>> Could we do that to Rodney Davis? Could we flip him with some > pressure? If not, why not? > >>>> > >>>> I'll print out the petitions again around noon tomorrow. So there's > still time to sign. > >>>> > >>>> Sign the petition: Congress: Vote NO on Trump's Saudi Arms Deal > >>>> https://petitions.moveon.org/sign/congress-vote-no-on-trumps?r_by=11 > >>>> 3 > >>>> 5580 > >>>> > >>>> === > >>>> > >>>> Robert Naiman > >>>> Policy Director > >>>> Just Foreign Policy > >>>> www.justforeignpolicy.org > >>>> naiman at justforeignpolicy.org > >>>> (202) 448-2898 x1 > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>> Peace mailing list > >>>> Peace at lists.chambana.net > >>>> https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace > >> > >> > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Peace-discuss mailing list > > Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss > > _______________________________________________ > Peace-discuss mailing list > Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From stuartnlevy at gmail.com Thu Jun 8 15:51:46 2017 From: stuartnlevy at gmail.com (stuartnlevy) Date: Thu, 08 Jun 2017 10:51:46 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] FW: Qatar Crisis: 'It's Clear That Saudis Have Been Emboldened by Trump's Visit' Message-ID: The Duckworth staffer I spoke with yesterday said he'd gotten ten calls about the issue within just the preceding hour, and he wasn't the only person taking calls.  Durbin's office had been getting calls too, but didn't say how many.    It's being noticed!  -- Stuart -------- Original message --------From: Robert Naiman via Peace-discuss Date: 6/8/17 08:38 (GMT-06:00) To: "Boyle, Francis A" Cc: peace-discuss at anti-war.net, "C. G. ESTABROOK" , Jay , a-fields at uiuc.edu, "Hoffman, Valerie J" , "Miller, Joseph Thomas" , "Szoke, Ron" , Joe Lauria , David Swanson , peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net, abass10 at gmail.com, sherwoodross10 at gmail.com, Arlene Hickory , mickalideh at gmail.com, Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net, Lina Thorne , chicago at worldcantwait.net Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] FW: Qatar Crisis: 'It's Clear That Saudis Have Been Emboldened by Trump's Visit' The Senate is expected to vote today on Trump's Saudi arms deal. There's still time to call your Senators.  1-855-68-NO-WAR. Talking points here. https://www.fcnl.org/updates/today-call-your-senators-block-bombs-to-saudi-arabia-849  Robert Naiman Policy Director Just Foreign Policy www.justforeignpolicy.org naiman at justforeignpolicy.org (202) 448-2898 x1 Sign the petition: Congress: Vote NO on Trump's Saudi Arms Deal https://petitions.moveon.org/sign/congress-vote-no-on-trumps?r_by=1135580 On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 8:10 AM, Boyle, Francis A via Peace-discuss wrote: Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2017 8:07 AM To: sectns.aals at lists.aals.org Subject: Qatar Crisis: 'It's Clear That Saudis Have Been Emboldened by Trump's Visit' https://sputniknews.com/middleeast/201706081054423820-qatar-saudi-arabia-trump-encouragement/ University of Illinois Professor of International Law Francis Boyle told Sputnik the Trump administration was irresponsibly supporting the Saudi aggressive policy against Qatar to advance its own anti-Iranian agenda. "It appears that President Trump is encouraging Saudi Arabia to put the screws into Qatar in order to force it into line with their hostile anti-Iranian Agenda along with the other GCC [Gulf Cooperation Council] states," he said. If Qatar does not capitulate to the Saudi demands, Riyadh would probably carry out an exercise in 'regime change' or even outright invasion as it did in Bahrain, Boyle warned. "This is also a harbinger of far worse things to come against Iran," he said. Boyle is the author of "Destroying World Order: US Imperialism in the Middle East Before and After September 11." _______________________________________________ Peace-discuss mailing list Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From davegreen84 at yahoo.com Thu Jun 8 17:09:03 2017 From: davegreen84 at yahoo.com (David Green) Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2017 17:09:03 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Peace-discuss] Raqqa References: <1656176404.6356187.1496941743459.ref@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1656176404.6356187.1496941743459@mail.yahoo.com> Concludes with speculation of abandonment of YPG (Kurds) by US in favor of Turkey. - www.counterpunch.org - https://www.counterpunch.org - The Siege of Raqqa Posted By Patrick Cockburn On June 8, 2017 “I do not think the siege of Raqqa will be as long as Mosul,” says Awad, an Arab fighter in the US-backed Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), who belongs to a military unit attacking Raqqa, the de facto capital of Isis in Syria. In an exclusive interview with The Independent, he says that “we are advancing quickly and the geographical nature of Raqqa is different from Mosul”.The SDF has launched the crucial battle for Raqqa, a city with a population of 300,000 on the north bank of the Euphrates, after a long delay imposed by threats of military intervention by Turkey, which denounces the 45,000-strong SDF as “terrorists” dominated by the Syrian Kurds. The Turkish priority is to prevent the consolidation of a quasi-independent Kurdish statelet in northern Syria. Turkish Prime Minister Binali Yildirim today hinted strongly at Turkish military intervention, saying that “we will immediately give the necessary response if we come across a situation in Raqqa … that threatens our security”.Awad, 32, comes from Raqqa but fled to Tabqa to the west of the city last year before it was captured by the SDF and four months ago joined the SDF, which the US says has 13,000 Arab fighters in its ranks. In a phone interview, he gives a vivid description of conditions on the front line, which the SDF Raqqa Operations Room says is 3km away from Raqqa to the west and north and 1km away to the east. The US estimates that there are between 3,000 and 4,000 Isis fighters in Raqqa, who are isolated there because US coalition air strikes on 3 February destroyed the last two bridges linking it to the south bank of the Euphrates. The fighters can only cross the river by boats, but they would then be vulnerable to air attack.“They [Isis] are mostly withdrawing [into Raqqa], though some are fighting fiercely and do not leave their positions until they are killed,” says Awad. “We killed dozens when we liberated al-Mansoura [west of Raqqa] and Baath Dam [on the Euphrates, renamed Freedom Dam by the SDF]. In addition, we repelled many counter-attacks by Isis since the Tabqa battle until now.”The SDF captured the Tabqa Dam, the largest in Syria at the southern end of Lake Assad, and the nearby town of Tabqa, 25 miles west of Raqqa, on 10 May, ending a stalemate that had lasted for several weeks. The US decided in May to give the SDF additional military assistance including armoured cars, anti-tanks weapons, mortars and heavy machine guns, despite strong opposition from Turkey. The Turkish government had claimed that its proxy forces inside Syria, backed by the Turkish army, could replace the SDF as the main US military ally in Syria against Isis, but the US did not consider this a realistic option.Though Isis units have been retreating in the face of SDF advances and US-led air strikes, the jihadis are still resisting strongly. Awad says that “last week, Isis fighters attacked us from behind in a village called Abu Qebab, east of Raqqa. They were hiding in a tunnel that had not been checked yet by our comrades. In that attack, we surrounded them from two sides and killed about 10 of them.”It should become clear in the next few days if Isis will try to defend Raqqa strongly and risk losing many of its experienced fighters. In Mosul, Isis has fought skillfully using an innovative mix of urban guerrilla tactics that has withstood Iraqi government forces for seven months. When Isis was previously fighting for two other big cities, Ramadi and Fallujah, in Anbar province west of Baghdad, it resisted most strongly in the villages and countryside around them, but not in the built-up areas in the city centres.But in Mosul, where the siege began on 17 October last year, Isis fighters have reversed this approach, holding the periphery of the city lightly and concentrating its fighters in the centre. It tries to avoid its positions being identified from the air and destroyed, by using a mixture of mobile sniper teams, swiftly changing their positions by means of holes cut in the walls of houses, along with suicide bombers in vehicles, mines, booby traps and mortars. This has succeeded in slowing down and inflicting heavy casualties on the advancing Iraqi security forces.Isis may use the same tactics in Raqqa and seek to draw out the siege, but the city is a geographically smaller and less populous than Mosul which had a population of 1.3 million before the siege. Awad does not believe that the siege of Raqqa will be as prolonged as in Mosul and suspects that the determination of the Isis defenders may not be as high as in Iraq. He says that “the SDF made two calls last month for Isis to surrender, but those that did so were locals. No foreigners have surrendered so far.”Some of the Isis units are composed of foreigners who cannot blend into the local population, or expect much mercy, if they surrender. “I have been told by our officers that all the Isis snipers killed by our forces are foreigners,” says Awad. “We lost some of our commanders because of these snipers and a few days ago one of our snipers killed an Isis sniper when we fought in Mansoura, west of Raqqa.”The firepower and military expertise of the SDF is much enhanced by US support: “The US-led coalition air strikes and forces are working efficiently with us, we have many American experts who train our commanders and officers and instruct them in using new technical devices. We also have heavy weapons and armoured vehicles. Every week we receive many weapons on the three fronts around Raqqa.” This supply of modern weapons, and expertise on how to use them, will determine not only the fate of Raqqa but the future ability of the Syrian Kurds to stand up to Turkish military intervention or action by President Bashar al-Assad’s forces, which are advancing into Isis-held eastern Syria.The offensive by the SDF, whose military punching power comes primarily from the combat experienced YPG Kurdish militia backed by US air strikes, will determine who in the long term holds northern Syria. If Turkish troops cross the border into Kurdish held territory in Syria, then the Kurds have made clear that the attack on Raqqa would cease. An alternative strategy for Turkey would be wait before intervening in the hope that the SDF will become entangled in a long struggle for Raqqa in which it suffers serious casualties. The Turks may also calculate that once the SDF and the Syrian Kurds have defeated Isis, the US will have no more use for them and will return to its traditional alliance with Turkey. - Article printed from www.counterpunch.org: https://www.counterpunch.org The Siege of Raqqa | | | | | | | | | | | The Siege of Raqqa “I do not think the siege of Raqqa will be as long as Mosul,” says Awad, an Arab fighter in the US-backed Syrian... | | | | Click here to print. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From r-szoke at illinois.edu Thu Jun 8 21:03:42 2017 From: r-szoke at illinois.edu (Szoke, Ron) Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2017 21:03:42 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Fwd: NYTimes.com: The Democratic Party Is in Worse Shape Than You Thought References: <5939888D.000003AA@pmta04.ewr1.nytimes.com> Message-ID: A too-plausible diagnosis. What the data seem to show is that a simple thesis of economic deprivation is (again) wrong. What we have seen instead is a symptom of class resentment & defiance, esp. of the lowest quintile (20%) by the next higher quintile (20%—40%, the “working class"), who think the “tax & spend” Democrats are taxing them, the lower middle class, to buy the votes of the lowest 20% with welfare measures. ~~ Ron [cid:F445B5C3-840A-4545-AC87-F9F8740D5833] From: r-szoke > Subject: NYTimes.com: The Democratic Party Is in Worse Shape Than You Thought Date: June 8, 2017 at 12:25:33 PM CDT To: > Reply-To: > Sent by r-szoke at illinois.edu: [http://i1.nyt.com/images/misc/nytlogo194x27.gif] [https://static01.nyt.com/images/2017/06/08/opinion/08edsallWeb/08edsallWeb-thumbStandard.jpg] Contributing Op-Ed Writer The Democratic Party Is in Worse Shape Than You Thought By THOMAS B. EDSALL Declining turnout among minority, young and single voters is even more dangerous for Democrats than white flight. Or, copy and paste this URL into your browser: https://nyti.ms/2sWcprI Not a Subscriber? To get unlimited access to all New York Times articles, subscribe today. See Options To ensure delivery to your inbox, please add nytdirect at nytimes.com to your address book. Advertisement Copyright 2017 | The New York Times Company | NYTimes.com 620 Eighth Avenue New York, NY 10018 [http://p.nytimes.com/email/re?location=hdaNaYedr2/IomeWRKt0nffrak8aSGLbvtkkq/r7ihwOf5XePlpJ1w==&user_id=ee7558d54531b290bd05280f4b7d6eb4&email_type=eta&task_id=1496942733155846®i_id=0] -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: My dependents.jpeg Type: image/jpeg Size: 103125 bytes Desc: My dependents.jpeg URL: From galliher at illinois.edu Thu Jun 8 23:15:54 2017 From: galliher at illinois.edu (Carl G. Estabrook) Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2017 18:15:54 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Fwd: NYTimes.com: The Democratic Party Is in Worse Shape Than You Thought In-Reply-To: References: <5939888D.000003AA@pmta04.ewr1.nytimes.com> Message-ID: <039000DA-F41D-4503-BD32-E741DB93E62C@illinois.edu> Ron— If you’re right, it would seem that a universal basic income at the level of a living wage - in place of “welfare measures” - would go a way to answer the problem. Of course education, housing, and healthcare should be decommodified - i.e., taken out of the 'free market’ and provided at public expense. Those are things people have a right to, not just a right to purchase if they have the money. The failure of the Democratic party to support these things - in spite of tentative gestures from the Sanders campaign - indicates its irrelevance. —CGE > On Jun 8, 2017, at 4:03 PM, Szoke, Ron via Peace-discuss wrote: > > A too-plausible diagnosis. What the data seem to show is that a simple thesis of economic deprivation is (again) wrong. > What we have seen instead is a symptom of class resentment & defiance, esp. of the lowest quintile (20%) by the next higher quintile (20%—40%, the “working class"), who think the “tax & spend” Democrats are taxing them, the lower middle class, to buy the votes of the lowest 20% with welfare measures. ~~ Ron > > > > >> From: r-szoke > >> Subject: NYTimes.com : The Democratic Party Is in Worse Shape Than You Thought >> Date: June 8, 2017 at 12:25:33 PM CDT >> To: > >> Reply-To: > >> >> >> Sent by r-szoke at illinois.edu : >> >> CONTRIBUTING OP-ED WRITER >> The Democratic Party Is in Worse Shape Than You Thought >> BY THOMAS B. EDSALL >> >> Declining turnout among minority, young and single voters is even more dangerous for Democrats than white flight. >> Or, copy and paste this URL into your browser: https://nyti.ms/2sWcprI >> Not a Subscriber? To get unlimited access to all New York Times articles, subscribe today. See Options >> To ensure delivery to your inbox, please add nytdirect at nytimes.com to your address book. >> ADVERTISEMENT >> Copyright 2017 | The New York Times Company | NYTimes.com 620 Eighth Avenue New York, NY 10018 >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > Peace-discuss mailing list > Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Fri Jun 9 00:00:52 2017 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2017 00:00:52 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Fwd: NYTimes.com: The Democratic Party Is in Worse Shape Than You Thought In-Reply-To: <039000DA-F41D-4503-BD32-E741DB93E62C@illinois.edu> References: <5939888D.000003AA@pmta04.ewr1.nytimes.com> <039000DA-F41D-4503-BD32-E741DB93E62C@illinois.edu> Message-ID: Ron’s assertions based upon the article in the NYT’s, I think is accurate. When I speak with family members, they always complain about the high cost of health insurance etc., and how having worked all their lives it irritates them to see people they know, who don’t work, drink, do drugs and live off the system of welfare. This is and always has been promoted by mainstream media. Carl’s suggestion, if implemented properly, appears to be a good solution, I would be happy. However, we would still be living within a Capitalist system, which means control of funds by our corporate owners, so how long before they squeeze us and reduce it to less than a living wage, and how would it prevent wars of imperialism?. Anything short of “system change” is likely to be temporary. On Jun 8, 2017, at 16:15, Carl G. Estabrook via Peace-discuss > wrote: Ron— If you’re right, it would seem that a universal basic income at the level of a living wage - in place of “welfare measures” - would go a way to answer the problem. Of course education, housing, and healthcare should be decommodified - i.e., taken out of the 'free market’ and provided at public expense. Those are things people have a right to, not just a right to purchase if they have the money. The failure of the Democratic party to support these things - in spite of tentative gestures from the Sanders campaign - indicates its irrelevance. —CGE On Jun 8, 2017, at 4:03 PM, Szoke, Ron via Peace-discuss > wrote: A too-plausible diagnosis. What the data seem to show is that a simple thesis of economic deprivation is (again) wrong. What we have seen instead is a symptom of class resentment & defiance, esp. of the lowest quintile (20%) by the next higher quintile (20%—40%, the “working class"), who think the “tax & spend” Democrats are taxing them, the lower middle class, to buy the votes of the lowest 20% with welfare measures. ~~ Ron From: r-szoke > Subject: NYTimes.com: The Democratic Party Is in Worse Shape Than You Thought Date: June 8, 2017 at 12:25:33 PM CDT To: > Reply-To: > Sent by r-szoke at illinois.edu: [http://i1.nyt.com/images/misc/nytlogo194x27.gif] [https://static01.nyt.com/images/2017/06/08/opinion/08edsallWeb/08edsallWeb-thumbStandard.jpg] Contributing Op-Ed Writer The Democratic Party Is in Worse Shape Than You Thought By THOMAS B. EDSALL Declining turnout among minority, young and single voters is even more dangerous for Democrats than white flight. Or, copy and paste this URL into your browser: https://nyti.ms/2sWcprI Not a Subscriber? To get unlimited access to all New York Times articles, subscribe today. See Options To ensure delivery to your inbox, please add nytdirect at nytimes.com to your address book. Advertisement Copyright 2017 | The New York Times Company | NYTimes.com 620 Eighth Avenue New York, NY 10018 [http://p.nytimes.com/email/re?location=hdaNaYedr2/IomeWRKt0nffrak8aSGLbvtkkq/r7ihwOf5XePlpJ1w==&user_id=ee7558d54531b290bd05280f4b7d6eb4&email_type=eta&task_id=1496942733155846®i_id=0] _______________________________________________ Peace-discuss mailing list Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss _______________________________________________ Peace-discuss mailing list Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From galliher at illinois.edu Fri Jun 9 00:42:25 2017 From: galliher at illinois.edu (Carl G. Estabrook) Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2017 19:42:25 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Fwd: NYTimes.com: The Democratic Party Is in Worse Shape Than You Thought In-Reply-To: References: <5939888D.000003AA@pmta04.ewr1.nytimes.com> <039000DA-F41D-4503-BD32-E741DB93E62C@illinois.edu> Message-ID: <3B4148D7-F5FF-45B9-9A78-FAE4AE3BC3D0@illinois.edu> "Capitalism is the first mode of production in history in which the means whereby the surplus is pumped out of the direct producer is ‘purely' economic in form - the wage contract: the equal exchange between free agents which reproduces, hourly and daily, inequality and oppression. All other previous modes of exploitation operate through extra-economic sanctions -” kin, customary, religious, legal or political.” [Perry Anderson - the ‘Hegemony’ man…] Pending the abolition of class society, the “purely economic” extraction can be made more or less oppressive. Liberal politics (the New Deal, etc.) try to make it less oppressive by “welfare measures.” Identity politics insist all should be ‘free agents’ subject to oppression, without extra-economic discrimination (such as by race, sexuality, etc.) "...the core of a left politics is its critique of and resistance to capitalism — its commitment to decommodifying education, health care, and housing, and creating a more economically equal society. Neither hostility to discrimination nor the accompanying enthusiasm for diversity makes the slightest contribution to accomplishing any of those goals. Just the opposite, in fact. They function instead to provide inequality with a meritocratic justification: If everyone has an equal opportunity to succeed, there’s no injustice when some people fail.” [W. B. Michaels] —CGE > On Jun 8, 2017, at 7:00 PM, Karen Aram wrote: > > Ron’s assertions based upon the article in the NYT’s, I think is accurate. When I speak with family members, they always complain about the high cost of health insurance etc., and how having worked all their lives it irritates them to see people they know, who don’t work, drink, do drugs and live off the system of welfare. This is and always has been promoted by mainstream media. > > Carl’s suggestion, if implemented properly, appears to be a good solution, I would be happy. However, we would still be living within a Capitalist system, which means control of funds by our corporate owners, so how long before they squeeze us and reduce it to less than a living wage, and how would it prevent wars of imperialism?. > > Anything short of “system change” is likely to be temporary. > > >> On Jun 8, 2017, at 16:15, Carl G. Estabrook via Peace-discuss > wrote: >> >> Ron— >> >> If you’re right, it would seem that a universal basic income at the level of a living wage - in place of “welfare measures” - would go a way to answer the problem. >> >> Of course education, housing, and healthcare should be decommodified - i.e., taken out of the 'free market’ and provided at public expense. >> >> Those are things people have a right to, not just a right to purchase if they have the money. >> >> The failure of the Democratic party to support these things - in spite of tentative gestures from the Sanders campaign - indicates its irrelevance. >> >> —CGE >> >> >>> On Jun 8, 2017, at 4:03 PM, Szoke, Ron via Peace-discuss > wrote: >>> >>> A too-plausible diagnosis. What the data seem to show is that a simple thesis of economic deprivation is (again) wrong. >>> What we have seen instead is a symptom of class resentment & defiance, esp. of the lowest quintile (20%) by the next higher quintile (20%—40%, the “working class"), who think the “tax & spend” Democrats are taxing them, the lower middle class, to buy the votes of the lowest 20% with welfare measures. ~~ Ron >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>> From: r-szoke > >>>> Subject: NYTimes.com : The Democratic Party Is in Worse Shape Than You Thought >>>> Date: June 8, 2017 at 12:25:33 PM CDT >>>> To: > >>>> Reply-To: > >>>> >>>> >>>> Sent by r-szoke at illinois.edu : >>>> >>>> CONTRIBUTING OP-ED WRITER >>>> The Democratic Party Is in Worse Shape Than You Thought >>>> BY THOMAS B. EDSALL >>>> >>>> Declining turnout among minority, young and single voters is even more dangerous for Democrats than white flight. >>>> Or, copy and paste this URL into your browser: https://nyti.ms/2sWcprI >>>> Not a Subscriber? To get unlimited access to all New York Times articles, subscribe today. See Options >>>> To ensure delivery to your inbox, please add nytdirect at nytimes.com to your address book. >>>> ADVERTISEMENT >>>> Copyright 2017 | The New York Times Company | NYTimes.com 620 Eighth Avenue New York, NY 10018 >>>> >>>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Peace-discuss mailing list >>> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net >>> https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Peace-discuss mailing list >> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net >> https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From r-szoke at illinois.edu Fri Jun 9 02:32:33 2017 From: r-szoke at illinois.edu (Szoke, Ron) Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2017 02:32:33 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Fraudulent message : Beware Message-ID: <12E2BDFB-2503-4546-969D-FD0B0C8B7985@illinois.edu> Just received 71 copies of this sent to my old address. Looks like a clumsy attempt at computer fraud. ~~ Ron This message is from a trusted sender. [http://etfdailynews.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/paypal-pypl-logo.png] Some required informations are missing in your account ! Once you have updated your account records, we will try again to validate your information and your account suspens ion will be lifted. This will help protect your account in the future. This process does not take more than 3 minutes.To confirm your account details please click on the link below and follow the instructions. Activate Account Copyright ?2017 PayPal Inc. All rights reserved -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From galliher at illinois.edu Sat Jun 10 03:16:43 2017 From: galliher at illinois.edu (Carl G. Estabrook) Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2017 22:16:43 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Raqqa In-Reply-To: <1656176404.6356187.1496941743459@mail.yahoo.com> References: <1656176404.6356187.1496941743459.ref@mail.yahoo.com> <1656176404.6356187.1496941743459@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <4AD6998D-A89E-4AB7-9614-FF79B2A5D7F6@illinois.edu> CSMonitor | "Telling It Like It Is: Kissinger and the Kurds” | By Daniel Schorr* | October 18, 1996 Here was the elder statesman of foreign policy, Henry Kissinger, writing in the Los Angeles Times about the heroic Kurdish people and how American missiles in southern Iraq could not save the Kurds who had worked for America from the vengeance of Saddam Hussein. Mr. Kissinger, of all people! He knows better than anybody about American abandonment of the Kurds. For it was Kissinger, as Nixon's security adviser, who visited Tehran in May 1972, and agreed to do the Shah the favor of organizing a Kurdish insurrection against Saddam, with whom the Shah was having trouble. The Kurdish leader, Mustafa Barzani, believed implicitly in Kissinger's guarantee, and he even gave his patron three rugs and a gold and pearl necklace as gifts when Kissinger got married. The uprising was going great guns (literally) for three years, with the Kurds sustaining thousands of casualties. Then suddenly the Shah and Saddam patched up their differences and the Shah agreed to have the CIA call off the $16 million operation. Arms and supplies to the Kurds were abruptly cut off and Mr. Barzani's forces were left to Saddam's tender mercies. Thousands tried to flee into Iran and were sent back. Barzani wrote to Kissinger, "Your Excellency, the United States has a moral and political responsibility to our people." There was no reply. In 1975, Kissinger was asked before the House Intelligence Committee how he could justify this betrayal. He replied, "Covert action should not be confused with missionary work." In September, Kissinger was on hand to critique the latest betrayal. Saddam's army and intelligence agents swept into northern Iraq and went after Kurds who had worked for the American government trying to topple him. At least a hundred were executed. Twenty-one hundred were evacuated and flown to Guam, where they will be safely out of the way of media until after our election. But 3,000 to 4,000 who were not directly American employees were left behind in constant danger of arrest. Suddenly - no thanks to the US - the situation changed. The Iraqi-aided Kurdistan Democratic Party was driven back in a counteroffensive by the Iran-aided Patriotic Union of Kurdistan. At stake now was not just the fate of some misguided supporters of America, but the possibility of a proxy war between Iran and Iraq. The Clinton administration finally sent Ambassador Robert Pelletreau to try to bring the warring factions together. But in the Kurdish region, the memory still lingers of Henry Kissinger's dictum that covert action should not be confused with missionary work. * [Daniel Schorr is senior news analyst for National Public Radio.] > On Jun 8, 2017, at 12:09 PM, David Green via Peace-discuss wrote: > > Concludes with speculation of abandonment of YPG (Kurds) by US in favor of Turkey. > > - www.counterpunch.org - https://www.counterpunch.org - > The Siege of Raqqa > > Posted By Patrick Cockburn On June 8, 2017 > > “I do not think the siege of Raqqa will be as long as Mosul,” says Awad, an Arab fighter in the US-backed Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), who belongs to a military unit attacking Raqqa, the de facto capital of Isis in Syria. In an exclusive interview with The Independent, he says that “we are advancing quickly and the geographical nature of Raqqa is different from Mosul”. > The SDF has launched the crucial battle for Raqqa, a city with a population of 300,000 on the north bank of the Euphrates, after a long delay imposed by threats of military intervention by Turkey, which denounces the 45,000-strong SDF as “terrorists” dominated by the Syrian Kurds. The Turkish priority is to prevent the consolidation of a quasi-independent Kurdish statelet in northern Syria. Turkish Prime Minister Binali Yildirim today hinted strongly at Turkish military intervention, saying that “we will immediately give the necessary response if we come across a situation in Raqqa … that threatens our security”. > Awad, 32, comes from Raqqa but fled to Tabqa to the west of the city last year before it was captured by the SDF and four months ago joined the SDF, which the US says has 13,000 Arab fighters in its ranks. In a phone interview, he gives a vivid description of conditions on the front line, which the SDF Raqqa Operations Room says is 3km away from Raqqa to the west and north and 1km away to the east. The US estimates that there are between 3,000 and 4,000 Isis fighters in Raqqa, who are isolated there because US coalition air strikes on 3 February destroyed the last two bridges linking it to the south bank of the Euphrates. The fighters can only cross the river by boats, but they would then be vulnerable to air attack. > “They [Isis] are mostly withdrawing [into Raqqa], though some are fighting fiercely and do not leave their positions until they are killed,” says Awad. “We killed dozens when we liberated al-Mansoura [west of Raqqa] and Baath Dam [on the Euphrates, renamed Freedom Dam by the SDF]. In addition, we repelled many counter-attacks by Isis since the Tabqa battle until now.” > The SDF captured the Tabqa Dam, the largest in Syria at the southern end of Lake Assad, and the nearby town of Tabqa, 25 miles west of Raqqa, on 10 May, ending a stalemate that had lasted for several weeks. The US decided in May to give the SDF additional military assistance including armoured cars, anti-tanks weapons, mortars and heavy machine guns, despite strong opposition from Turkey. The Turkish government had claimed that its proxy forces inside Syria, backed by the Turkish army, could replace the SDF as the main US military ally in Syria against Isis, but the US did not consider this a realistic option. > Though Isis units have been retreating in the face of SDF advances and US-led air strikes, the jihadis are still resisting strongly. Awad says that “last week, Isis fighters attacked us from behind in a village called Abu Qebab, east of Raqqa. They were hiding in a tunnel that had not been checked yet by our comrades. In that attack, we surrounded them from two sides and killed about 10 of them.” > It should become clear in the next few days if Isis will try to defend Raqqa strongly and risk losing many of its experienced fighters. In Mosul, Isis has fought skillfully using an innovative mix of urban guerrilla tactics that has withstood Iraqi government forces for seven months. When Isis was previously fighting for two other big cities, Ramadi and Fallujah, in Anbar province west of Baghdad, it resisted most strongly in the villages and countryside around them, but not in the built-up areas in the city centres. > But in Mosul, where the siege began on 17 October last year, Isis fighters have reversed this approach, holding the periphery of the city lightly and concentrating its fighters in the centre. It tries to avoid its positions being identified from the air and destroyed, by using a mixture of mobile sniper teams, swiftly changing their positions by means of holes cut in the walls of houses, along with suicide bombers in vehicles, mines, booby traps and mortars. This has succeeded in slowing down and inflicting heavy casualties on the advancing Iraqi security forces. > Isis may use the same tactics in Raqqa and seek to draw out the siege, but the city is a geographically smaller and less populous than Mosul which had a population of 1.3 million before the siege. Awad does not believe that the siege of Raqqa will be as prolonged as in Mosul and suspects that the determination of the Isis defenders may not be as high as in Iraq. He says that “the SDF made two calls last month for Isis to surrender, but those that did so were locals. No foreigners have surrendered so far.” > Some of the Isis units are composed of foreigners who cannot blend into the local population, or expect much mercy, if they surrender. “I have been told by our officers that all the Isis snipers killed by our forces are foreigners,” says Awad. “We lost some of our commanders because of these snipers and a few days ago one of our snipers killed an Isis sniper when we fought in Mansoura, west of Raqqa.” > The firepower and military expertise of the SDF is much enhanced by US support: “The US-led coalition air strikes and forces are working efficiently with us, we have many American experts who train our commanders and officers and instruct them in using new technical devices. We also have heavy weapons and armoured vehicles. Every week we receive many weapons on the three fronts around Raqqa.” This supply of modern weapons, and expertise on how to use them, will determine not only the fate of Raqqa but the future ability of the Syrian Kurds to stand up to Turkish military intervention or action by President Bashar al-Assad’s forces, which are advancing into Isis-held eastern Syria. > The offensive by the SDF, whose military punching power comes primarily from the combat experienced YPG Kurdish militia backed by US air strikes, will determine who in the long term holds northern Syria. If Turkish troops cross the border into Kurdish held territory in Syria, then the Kurds have made clear that the attack on Raqqa would cease. An alternative strategy for Turkey would be wait before intervening in the hope that the SDF will become entangled in a long struggle for Raqqa in which it suffers serious casualties. The Turks may also calculate that once the SDF and the Syrian Kurds have defeated Isis, the US will have no more use for them and will return to its traditional alliance with Turkey. > > Article printed from www.counterpunch.org: https://www.counterpunch.org > The Siege of Raqqa > > The Siege of Raqqa > “I do not think the siege of Raqqa will be as long as Mosul,” says Awad, an Arab fighter in the US-backed Syrian... > > > Click here to print. > _______________________________________________ > Peace-discuss mailing list > Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Sat Jun 10 14:49:25 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2017 14:49:25 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] FW: Newspeak Times et al on Zbig Message-ID: Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Saturday, June 10, 2017 9:46 AM To: sectns.aals at lists.aals.org Subject: Newspeak Times et al on Zbig I went through the exact same PHD Program at Harvard that produced Kissinger and Brzezinski before me: The Harvard Graduate School of Arts and Sciences, Department of Government, where Harvard trains future professors of political science-not the Kennedy School, that trains future US Imperial Apparatchiks to rule the World. Zbig was an ex-patriate Pole who hated the Soviets and the Russians with a passion. He could not be rational and reasonable in dealing with them. He has inflicted terrible harm upon good and constructive relations between the United States and the Soviet Union/Russia throughout his career. In this regard, Zbig's pernicious and nefarious influence will live on long after him by means of his students and protégés who inhabit American Academia and high level positions in the United States government, pundits, "intelligentsia" and media today. Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Sun Jun 11 10:07:37 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2017 10:07:37 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] FW: Newspeak Times et al on Zbig v. George Ball--RIP Message-ID: Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Sunday, June 11, 2017 5:03 AM To: sectns.aals at lists.aals.org Subject: Newspeak Times et al on Zbig v. George Ball--RIP In his "Power and Principle"-LOL!-Zbig bragged about how he screwed George Ball out of becoming Secretary of State under President Carter. Zbig was so petty minded and insecure that he did not want to deal with someone of the Stature and Principle of Ball as a rival. George and I were friends. He would have made an excellent Secretary of State. During the Cuban Missile Crisis, George played a critical role convincing President Kennedy not to invade Cuba-that would have set off World War III. While working for President Johnson, George was the foremost internal opponent to the Vietnam War. George spent his career working for Peace among Israel and the Arab States and supported the Palestinians. Zbig could not hold a Candle to George. Zbig was never fit to carry George's Bag. RIP: George Ball Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A [mailto:support at lists.aals.org] Sent: Saturday, June 10, 2017 9:46 AM To: sectns.aals at lists.aals.org Subject: [SECTNS.aals] - Newspeak Times et al on Zbig I went through the exact same PHD Program at Harvard that produced Kissinger and Brzezinski before me: The Harvard Graduate School of Arts and Sciences, Department of Government, where Harvard trains future professors of political science-not the Kennedy School, that trains future US Imperial Apparatchiks to rule the World. Zbig was an ex-patriate Pole who hated the Soviets and the Russians with a passion. He could not be rational and reasonable in dealing with them. He has inflicted terrible harm upon good and constructive relations between the United States and the Soviet Union/Russia throughout his career. In this regard, Zbig's pernicious and nefarious influence will live on long after him by means of his students and protégés who inhabit American Academia and high level positions in the United States government, pundits, "intelligentsia" and media today. Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) ________________________________ Site Links: View post online View mailing list online Start new thread via email Unsubscribe from this mailing list Manage your subscription This email has been sent to: fboyle at illinois.edu This list is a forum for the exchange of points of view. Opinions expressed here are not necessarily those of the group associated with the list and do not necessarily represent the position of the Association of American Law Schools. Use of this email content is governed by the terms of service at: https://connect.aals.org/p/cm/ld/fid=280 ________________________________ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Sun Jun 11 11:49:16 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2017 11:49:16 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] FW: Zbig's Potty Training:Newspeak Times et al on Zbig v. George Ball--RIP In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A [mailto:support at lists.aals.org] Sent: Sunday, June 11, 2017 6:44 AM To: sectns.aals at lists.aals.org Subject: [SECTNS.aals] - Zbig's Potty Training:Newspeak Times et al on Zbig v. George Ball--RIP Back in 1986 I attended the 30th Anniversary of Harvard's Center for International Affairs, where I had been an Associate from 1976 to 1978 and on their Executive Committee for the 1977-78 Academic Year. They tried to get Kissinger to give their Keynote Address, but by then Kissy was such a big-shot that he did not have time for his old buddies at Harvard. So they got Zbig as their SECOND CHOICE to give their Keynote. Generally speaking the subject of Zbig's CFIA Keynote Address was Will Power and American Foreign Policy. For about 45 minutes Zbig ranted and raved and foamed at the mouth to the effect that the critical factor in American Foreign Policy was "will power" and that if only America "willed" it enough we could do whatever we wanted to in the world. After about half an hour of Zbig's inane imperial hubris, I turned to my friend who taught at Harvard and whispered in her ear: "Is he talking about American Foreign Policy or his toilet training?" And she whispered in my ear: " I think both!" A Brilliant Woman-now retired from teaching at Harvard.fab. Feed: Dissident Voice Posted on: Sunday, August 17, 2014 10:01 AM Author: Francis A. Boyle Subject: Kissy and Timmy and Me " You're moving into Kissinger's old office" Said Bud, the wizened old janitor And a decent guy at that "His file cabinets are in there." Sure enough they were So it must be true "And down the hallway there Is Timothy Leary's old office" So that must be true too Kissy and Timmy Kissing Cousins in the Vanserg Building Amazing! Did they pass in the hall? Glance at each other? Say a few words of greeting? The last probably not Did they piss in the men's room Silently standing next to each other? Maybe so. There was only one The counterfactuals of history What if Timmy had given Kissy Acid? Timmy turn Kissy on? Maybe the world would have become A more peaceful place With Kissinger on Acid It certainly Could not have been Worse The Kissinger War Prize For Vietnam Obama got one too Those Norwegians Surely have A wicked sense of humor "Timothy Leary's dead,' "No! No!' "He's on the outside,' "Looking in'" The Moodies Bards of My Generation Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A [mailto:support at lists.aals.org] Sent: Sunday, June 11, 2017 5:03 AM To: sectns.aals at lists.aals.org Subject: [SECTNS.aals] - Newspeak Times et al on Zbig v. George Ball--RIP In his "Power and Principle"-LOL!-Zbig bragged about how he screwed George Ball out of becoming Secretary of State under President Carter. Zbig was so petty minded and insecure that he did not want to deal with someone of the Stature and Principle of Ball as a rival. George and I were friends. He would have made an excellent Secretary of State. During the Cuban Missile Crisis, George played a critical role convincing President Kennedy not to invade Cuba-that would have set off World War III. While working for President Johnson, George was the foremost internal opponent to the Vietnam War. George spent his career working for Peace among Israel and the Arab States and supported the Palestinians. Zbig could not hold a Candle to George. Zbig was never fit to carry George's Bag. RIP: George Ball Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A [mailto:support at lists.aals.org] Sent: Saturday, June 10, 2017 9:46 AM To: sectns.aals at lists.aals.org Subject: [SECTNS.aals] - Newspeak Times et al on Zbig I went through the exact same PHD Program at Harvard that produced Kissinger and Brzezinski before me: The Harvard Graduate School of Arts and Sciences, Department of Government, where Harvard trains future professors of political science-not the Kennedy School, that trains future US Imperial Apparatchiks to rule the World. Zbig was an ex-patriate Pole who hated the Soviets and the Russians with a passion. He could not be rational and reasonable in dealing with them. He has inflicted terrible harm upon good and constructive relations between the United States and the Soviet Union/Russia throughout his career. In this regard, Zbig's pernicious and nefarious influence will live on long after him by means of his students and protégés who inhabit American Academia and high level positions in the United States government, pundits, "intelligentsia" and media today. Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----End Original Message----- -----End Original Message----- ________________________________ Site Links: View post online View mailing list online Start new thread via email Unsubscribe from this mailing list Manage your subscription This email has been sent to: fboyle at illinois.edu This list is a forum for the exchange of points of view. Opinions expressed here are not necessarily those of the group associated with the list and do not necessarily represent the position of the Association of American Law Schools. Use of this email content is governed by the terms of service at: https://connect.aals.org/p/cm/ld/fid=280 ________________________________ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Sun Jun 11 12:34:36 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2017 12:34:36 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Zbig's Potty Training:Newspeak Times et al on Zbig v. George Ball--RIP References: Message-ID: Now be sure to hit the link to the Moodies below. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Sunday, June 11, 2017 6:49 AM To: 'David Green' ; 'sherwoodross10 at gmail.com' ; 'peace-discuss at anti-war.net' ; 'C. G. ESTABROOK' ; 'a-fields at uiuc.edu' ; Hoffman, Valerie J ; 'Joe Lauria' ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; 'Arlene Hickory' ; 'David Swanson' ; 'Karen Aram' ; 'peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net' ; 'abass10 at gmail.com' ; 'mickalideh at gmail.com' ; 'Lina Thorne' ; 'chicago at worldcantwait.net' ; 'Jay' ; Estabrook, Carl G ; 'David Johnson' Subject: FW: Zbig's Potty Training:Newspeak Times et al on Zbig v. George Ball--RIP Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A [mailto:support at lists.aals.org] Sent: Sunday, June 11, 2017 6:44 AM To: sectns.aals at lists.aals.org Subject: [SECTNS.aals] - Zbig's Potty Training:Newspeak Times et al on Zbig v. George Ball--RIP Back in 1986 I attended the 30th Anniversary of Harvard's Center for International Affairs, where I had been an Associate from 1976 to 1978 and on their Executive Committee for the 1977-78 Academic Year. They tried to get Kissinger to give their Keynote Address, but by then Kissy was such a big-shot that he did not have time for his old buddies at Harvard. So they got Zbig as their SECOND CHOICE to give their Keynote. Generally speaking the subject of Zbig's CFIA Keynote Address was Will Power and American Foreign Policy. For about 45 minutes Zbig ranted and raved and foamed at the mouth to the effect that the critical factor in American Foreign Policy was "will power" and that if only America "willed" it enough we could do whatever we wanted to in the world. After about half an hour of Zbig's inane imperial hubris, I turned to my friend who taught at Harvard and whispered in her ear: "Is he talking about American Foreign Policy or his toilet training?" And she whispered in my ear: " I think both!" A Brilliant Woman-now retired from teaching at Harvard.fab. Feed: Dissident Voice Posted on: Sunday, August 17, 2014 10:01 AM Author: Francis A. Boyle Subject: Kissy and Timmy and Me " You're moving into Kissinger's old office" Said Bud, the wizened old janitor And a decent guy at that "His file cabinets are in there." Sure enough they were So it must be true "And down the hallway there Is Timothy Leary's old office" So that must be true too Kissy and Timmy Kissing Cousins in the Vanserg Building Amazing! Did they pass in the hall? Glance at each other? Say a few words of greeting? The last probably not Did they piss in the men's room Silently standing next to each other? Maybe so. There was only one The counterfactuals of history What if Timmy had given Kissy Acid? Timmy turn Kissy on? Maybe the world would have become A more peaceful place With Kissinger on Acid It certainly Could not have been Worse The Kissinger War Prize For Vietnam Obama got one too Those Norwegians Surely have A wicked sense of humor "Timothy Leary's dead,' "No! No!' "He's on the outside,' "Looking in'" The Moodies Bards of My Generation Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A [mailto:support at lists.aals.org] Sent: Sunday, June 11, 2017 5:03 AM To: sectns.aals at lists.aals.org Subject: [SECTNS.aals] - Newspeak Times et al on Zbig v. George Ball--RIP In his "Power and Principle"-LOL!-Zbig bragged about how he screwed George Ball out of becoming Secretary of State under President Carter. Zbig was so petty minded and insecure that he did not want to deal with someone of the Stature and Principle of Ball as a rival. George and I were friends. He would have made an excellent Secretary of State. During the Cuban Missile Crisis, George played a critical role convincing President Kennedy not to invade Cuba-that would have set off World War III. While working for President Johnson, George was the foremost internal opponent to the Vietnam War. George spent his career working for Peace among Israel and the Arab States and supported the Palestinians. Zbig could not hold a Candle to George. Zbig was never fit to carry George's Bag. RIP: George Ball Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A [mailto:support at lists.aals.org] Sent: Saturday, June 10, 2017 9:46 AM To: sectns.aals at lists.aals.org Subject: [SECTNS.aals] - Newspeak Times et al on Zbig I went through the exact same PHD Program at Harvard that produced Kissinger and Brzezinski before me: The Harvard Graduate School of Arts and Sciences, Department of Government, where Harvard trains future professors of political science-not the Kennedy School, that trains future US Imperial Apparatchiks to rule the World. Zbig was an ex-patriate Pole who hated the Soviets and the Russians with a passion. He could not be rational and reasonable in dealing with them. He has inflicted terrible harm upon good and constructive relations between the United States and the Soviet Union/Russia throughout his career. In this regard, Zbig's pernicious and nefarious influence will live on long after him by means of his students and protégés who inhabit American Academia and high level positions in the United States government, pundits, "intelligentsia" and media today. Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----End Original Message----- -----End Original Message----- ________________________________ Site Links: View post online View mailing list online Start new thread via email Unsubscribe from this mailing list Manage your subscription This email has been sent to: fboyle at illinois.edu This list is a forum for the exchange of points of view. Opinions expressed here are not necessarily those of the group associated with the list and do not necessarily represent the position of the Association of American Law Schools. Use of this email content is governed by the terms of service at: https://connect.aals.org/p/cm/ld/fid=280 ________________________________ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cgestabrook at gmail.com Sun Jun 11 14:56:14 2017 From: cgestabrook at gmail.com (C. G. Estabrook ) Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2017 09:56:14 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Fwd: ICH: Saudi Bring Trump into Line References: <1128157703985.1101581137416.1688.0.811744JL.2002@scheduler.constantcontact.com> Message-ID: <585CD4A4-D790-429A-8FA3-D904D5BA39BA@gmail.com> Sent from my iPhone Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message: > From: ICH Newsletter > Date: June 10, 2017 at 4:46:05 PM CDT > To: cge at shout.net > Subject: ICH: Saudi Bring Trump into Line > Reply-To: noreply-ichnews at live.com > > > > Having trouble viewing this email? Click here > > > > > > > Not For Profit - For Justice > 100% Non Commercial, Fearless, Forthright & Independent > "How would your life be different if...You stopped making negative judgmental assumptions about people you encounter? Let today be the day...You look for the good in everyone you meet and respect their journey." - Steve Maraboli > > "To belittle, you have to be little." - Kahlil Gibran > > "Our greatest glory is not in never falling, but in rising every time we fall." - Confucius > > "My religion is very simple. My religion is kindness." - Dalai Lama XIV > > June 10, 2017 > Click Here For Hard News Items > Click Here For Cost Of War > > > > Op-Ed > > The Crisis in Qatar > By The Saker > Yet another clumsy attempt by the Three Rogue States to weaken Iran. MailScanner has detected a possible fraud attempt from "r20.rs6.net" claiming to be http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/47214.htm > ===== > Saudi Royals Bring Trump into Line > By Daniel Lazare > How America's "Alice in Wonderland" war on terrorism is fanning the flames of sectarianism. MailScanner has detected a possible fraud attempt from "r20.rs6.net" claiming to be http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/47218.htm > ===== > Want to Stop Terrorism? Get out of the Middle East > By Dr Geoff Davies > Why are these young terrorists so angry? Is it really so hard to figure out? MailScanner has detected a possible fraud attempt from "r20.rs6.net" claiming to be http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/47211.htm > ===== > The Evil of Killing Children > By Jacob G. Hornberger > How can the killing of even one innocent child be worth achieving a political end. MailScanner has detected a possible fraud attempt from "r20.rs6.net" claiming to be http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/47210.htm > ===== > U.S. "Jihadi Express": Indonesia - Afghanistan, Syria, Philippines > By Andre Vltchek > In reality, the West has always been using (and finally it has managed to divert) Islam. MailScanner has detected a possible fraud attempt from "r20.rs6.net" claiming to be http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/47219.htm > ===== > Inside the US Fight to Fix Israel's Global Standing > By Jonathan Cook > US and Israel campaign against the UN to forcibly rehabilitate Israel's international standing. MailScanner has detected a possible fraud attempt from "r20.rs6.net" claiming to be http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/47216.htm > ===== > The Resurrection Of Jeremy Corbyn: Truth As An Effective Political Weapon > By Mark Weisbrot > The Labour Manifesto allowed voters to see that Corbyn stood for things they believed in. MailScanner has detected a possible fraud attempt from "r20.rs6.net" claiming to be http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/47215.htm > ===== > Was Russia Probing U.S. Electoral Systems? > By Philip Giraldi > Maybe, but gathering intelligence is not the same as full interference. MailScanner has detected a possible fraud attempt from "r20.rs6.net" claiming to be http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/47212.htm > ===== > Venezuela - Confronting the Propaganda Media Machine > By Peter Koenig > The Anglo-Zionist network that controls 90% of the news throughout the western world. MailScanner has detected a possible fraud attempt from "r20.rs6.net" claiming to be http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/47213.htm > ===== > Without Glass-Steagall America Will Fail > By Paul Craig Roberts > The repeal of Glass-Steagall forced the 99 percent to bail out the One Percent. MailScanner has detected a possible fraud attempt from "r20.rs6.net" claiming to be http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/47217.htm > > > Hard News > > > Iraqi forces repel ISIS offensive south of Mosul, 38 killed > MailScanner has detected a possible fraud attempt from "r20.rs6.net" claiming to be http://tinyurl.com/y8qg6wta > > Iraq; Airstrike kills 21 Islamic State militants in Anbar > MailScanner has detected a possible fraud attempt from "r20.rs6.net" claiming to be http://www.iraqinews.com/iraq-war/coalition-airstrike-kills-21-islamic-state-militants-anbar/ > > Iraq: Dozens of IS militants killed in army airstrikes, west of Mosul > MailScanner has detected a possible fraud attempt from "r20.rs6.net" claiming to be http://www.iraqinews.com/iraq-war/dozens-militants-killed-army-airstrikes-west-mosul/ > > Eight killed, five wounded as IS fire mortar missiles in western Mosul > MailScanner has detected a possible fraud attempt from "r20.rs6.net" claiming to be http://www.iraqinews.com/iraq-war/eight-killed-five-wounded-fire-mortar-missiles-western-mosul/ > > Three IS militants killed as troops foil attack against checkpoint in Diyala > MailScanner has detected a possible fraud attempt from "r20.rs6.net" claiming to be http://www.iraqinews.com/iraq-war/three-militants-killed-troops-foil-attack-checkpoint-diyala/ > > U.S.-led forces using white phosphorus in populated areas in Iraq and Syria; > The U.S.-led coalition in Iraq and Syria appears to have used white phosphorus-loaded munitions on at least two occasions in densely populated areas of Mosul and Raqqa > MailScanner has detected a possible fraud attempt from "r20.rs6.net" claiming to be http://tinyurl.com/y8tuttmc > > Syria: U.S. troops are in Raqqa near the Islamic State's front line; > Boots on the ground: Elite U.S. troops are in Raqqa near the Islamic State's front line > MailScanner has detected a possible fraud attempt from "r20.rs6.net" claiming to be http://tinyurl.com/y9vocdqc > > Syrian activists: At least 7 killed in Raqqa airstrike; > The activist collective Raqqa24 says seven people were killed Saturday when coalition aircraft bombed al-Nour street in Raqqa, in northern > MailScanner has detected a possible fraud attempt from "r20.rs6.net" claiming to be http://www.nydailynews.com/newswires/news/world/syrian-activists-7-killed-raqqa-airstrike-article-1.3236870 > > Russia: US Coalition Providing Safe Corridors For ISIS To Flee Raqqa: > MailScanner has detected a possible fraud attempt from "r20.rs6.net" claiming to be http://www.mintpressnews.com/russia-us-coalition-providing-safe-corridors-isis-flee-raqqa/228724/ > > US-led coalition warplanes 'shower IS' Syria bastion Raqqa with white phosphorus': > The aircraft reportedly dropped the incendiary substance, which if used in the vicinity of civilian concentrations can be considered a war crime, over the city on Thursday > MailScanner has detected a possible fraud attempt from "r20.rs6.net" claiming to be https://www.alaraby.co.uk/english/news/2017/6/9/us-led-coalition-warplanes-shower-syrias-raqqa-with-white-phosphorus > > Human rights groups say US-led coalition used white phosphorous in populated areas of Iraq, Syria > MailScanner has detected a possible fraud attempt from "r20.rs6.net" claiming to be http://tinyurl.com/ycq9sjp8 > > US-Led Forces Working With Islamic State Group in Raqqa: Russia: > "Instead of eliminating terrorists guilty of killing hundreds and thousands of Syrian civilians, the U.S.-led coalition - enters into collusion with ringleaders of the ISIL (Islamic State group), > MailScanner has detected a possible fraud attempt from "r20.rs6.net" claiming to be http://tinyurl.com/y849wc2s > > Syrian government soldiers and allied forces reach Iraqi border for first time since 2015. > The SANA report said the advance came after "the last" ISIL fighters in the area "were eliminated". > MailScanner has detected a possible fraud attempt from "r20.rs6.net" claiming to be http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2017/06/syrian-soldiers-push-isil-reach-iraqi-border-170610070401646.html > > 3 children, grandmother killed in Saudi coalition strike on Yemeni capital (VIDEO) > MailScanner has detected a possible fraud attempt from "r20.rs6.net" claiming to be https://www.rt.com/news/391770-yemen-children-saudi-strike/ > > Sudan to dispatch additional troops to Yemen: > Sudan's state minister of defence Maj. Gen. Ali Salim disclosed that preparations are underway to send a new batch of troops to Yemen > MailScanner has detected a possible fraud attempt from "r20.rs6.net" claiming to be http://sudantribune.com/spip.php?article62681 > > Qatar Must Stop Funding Terror, Extremist Ideology, Says Donald Trump: > "The nation of Qatar has unfortunately been funding terrorism, and at a very high level", President Trump said during an appearance alongside Romanian President Klaus Iohannis at the White House. > MailScanner has detected a possible fraud attempt from "r20.rs6.net" claiming to be http://tinyurl.com/y8mtkxjt > > > Tillerson Calls for Saudi-Led Group to Ease Qatar Blockade; > Tillerson said Friday in Washington that he believes the countries involved in the dispute -- all U.S. allies -- are stronger together, and "the elements of a solution are available." > MailScanner has detected a possible fraud attempt from "r20.rs6.net" claiming to be https://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2017-06-09/tillerson-calls-for-saudi-led-coalition-to-end-qatar-blockade > > > Israel, Saudi, UAE team up in anti-Qatar lobbying move: > US legislation threatening Qatar for Hamas support is tied to donations from UAE, Saudi, and Israel lobbyists. > MailScanner has detected a possible fraud attempt from "r20.rs6.net" claiming to be http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2017/06/israel-saudi-uae-team-anti-qatar-lobbying-move-170610023635122.html > > > Qatar, accused of supporting terrorism, hires ex-U.S. attorney general; > Qatar will pay the Ashcroft Law Firm $2.5 million for a 90-day period > MailScanner has detected a possible fraud attempt from "r20.rs6.net" claiming to be http://www.reuters.com/article/us-gulf-qatar-ashcroft-idUSKBN1910T6 > > Erdogan vows to keep supporting Qatar; > "There are those who are uncomfortable with us standing by our Qatari brothers, providing them with food. I'm sorry, we will continue to give Qatar every kind of support." > MailScanner has detected a possible fraud attempt from "r20.rs6.net" claiming to be https://www.thepeninsulaqatar.com/article/10/06/2017/Erdogan-vows-to-keep-supporting-Qatar > > Germany's Gabriel warns Qatar crisis could lead to war - newspaper > MailScanner has detected a possible fraud attempt from "r20.rs6.net" claiming to be http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-qatar-gulf-germany-idUKKBN1910RN?il=0 > > Watch: Shocking: Rep. Dana Rohrabacher Suggests Tehran ISIS Attack Was "Positive"; > MailScanner has detected a possible fraud attempt from "r20.rs6.net" claiming to be https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3vD1pJR98dA > > 14 killed as soldiers clash over drought relief aid in Somalia: > Soldiers clashed over food aid in drought-ravaged Somalia's southwestern city of Baidoa, where tens of thousands of people have streamed in seeking assistance. > MailScanner has detected a possible fraud attempt from "r20.rs6.net" claiming to be http://tinyurl.com/yarcbza7 > > Eight Migrant Bodies Found off Libya, Dozens Feared Missing: > Libyan coastguards recovered the bodies of eight migrants from an inflatable boat found east of Tripoli on Saturday, with dozens of other migrants feared missing, a spokesman said. > MailScanner has detected a possible fraud attempt from "r20.rs6.net" claiming to be http://tinyurl.com/ybr4nf69 > > Three UN peacekeepers killed in Mali attack: > More than 100 soldiers have died in recent months in Mali, making it the most deadly United Nations mission to date. > MailScanner has detected a possible fraud attempt from "r20.rs6.net" claiming to be http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2017/06/peacekeepers-killed-mali-attack-170609171532271.html > > Indian army says it has killed 6 insurgents in Kashmir; > An army spokesman, said the soldiers spotted a group of heavily armed militants in western Uri sector Friday and an exchange of gunfire left five "intruders" dead. > MailScanner has detected a possible fraud attempt from "r20.rs6.net" claiming to be http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/indian-army-killed-insurgents-kashmir-47955231 > > > US kills Afghan forces in Helmand: > The US military command confirms 'friendly-fire' incident during joint operation by Afghan and American forces. > MailScanner has detected a possible fraud attempt from "r20.rs6.net" claiming to be http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2017/06/air-raid-kills-afghan-forces-helmand-170610095748162.html > > U.S. kills at least 3 policemen in Afghanistan: > US military command in Kabul acknowledged the casualties and expressed condolences to those "affected by this unfortunate incident." > MailScanner has detected a possible fraud attempt from "r20.rs6.net" claiming to be https://www.rt.com/news/391791-us-airstrike-killed-afghan-police/ > > Gunmen attack mosque in Afghanistan, killing 3; > The ministry said that nine others were wounded in the Friday night attack in Gardez > MailScanner has detected a possible fraud attempt from "r20.rs6.net" claiming to be http://www.kcra.com/article/gunmen-attack-mosque-in-afghanistan-killing-3/10004924 > > 2 US soldiers killed by Afghan soldier; Taliban takes credit for attack > MailScanner has detected a possible fraud attempt from "r20.rs6.net" claiming to be http://www.fox4now.com/news/national/2-us-soldiers-killed-by-afghan-soldier > > 13 marines killed as fighting rages in Marawi City; > US confirms it is 'assisting' Philippine army in besieged Marawi where fighting broke out more than two weeks ago. > MailScanner has detected a possible fraud attempt from "r20.rs6.net" claiming to be http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2017/06/13-marines-killed-fighting-rages-marawi-city-170610072818527.html > > U.S. Joins Battle Against ISIS-Linked Militants in Philippines; > The U.S. Embassy in Manila said that U.S. special operations forces were providing help to Filipino troops battling the Maute and Abu Sayyaf militants in Marawi. > MailScanner has detected a possible fraud attempt from "r20.rs6.net" claiming to be http://time.com/4813644/philippines-marawi-isis-militants/ > > UK; MPs threaten to oust PM by end of the year -; > The party was plunged into civil war after the Prime Minister lost her Commons majority > MailScanner has detected a possible fraud attempt from "r20.rs6.net" claiming to be http://tinyurl.com/y7taql6s > > 'Lame duck' May fights for survival on two fronts; > She is likely to face a vote of confidence in the reconvened new parliament where the Conservatives are a minority after a disastrous election ended with a hung parliament. > MailScanner has detected a possible fraud attempt from "r20.rs6.net" claiming to be http://tinyurl.com/y8wql9o7 > > DUP says it will form government with Theresa May with no need for formal coalition; > The Northern Irish party, said their support would come at a cost and they would demand more resources for Northern Ireland and clout in trade deals and Brexit talks. > MailScanner has detected a possible fraud attempt from "r20.rs6.net" claiming to be http://tinyurl.com/y7kfjr8v > > What connects Brexit, the DUP, dark money and a Saudi prince?: > The story of a massive donation to the DUP is like a John le Carré novel - but voters need facts, not fiction > MailScanner has detected a possible fraud attempt from "r20.rs6.net" claiming to be http://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/what-connects-brexit-the-dup-dark-money-and-a-saudi-prince-1.3083586 > > ISIS Recruiter Who Radicalized London Bridge Attackers Was Protected by MI5 > MailScanner has detected a possible fraud attempt from "r20.rs6.net" claiming to be http://www.alternet.org/world/isis-recruiter-who-radicalized-london-bridge-attackers-was-protected-mi5 > > Brazil Court Decides Not to Oust Scandal-Plagued Temer; > The court voted 4-3 to acquit the Rousseff-Temer ticket, avoiding the removal of Temer, who has been besieged by economic recession and corruption scandals since replacing Rousseff last year. > MailScanner has detected a possible fraud attempt from "r20.rs6.net" claiming to be http://tinyurl.com/y6ur7w6j > > China Works with Venezuela to Diversify Economy, Expand Agriculture and Industry: > Menendez said that a working group was established to initiate the planning process for installing a truck factory, and an engine production line there. > MailScanner has detected a possible fraud attempt from "r20.rs6.net" claiming to be http://www.telesurtv.net/english/news/China-Works-with-Venezuela-to-Diversify-Economy-20170610-0005.html > > California teams up with Germany to tackle climate change amid US withdrawal : > The effort comes days after California signed a cooperation deal with China following the US pull-out from the Paris accord. > MailScanner has detected a possible fraud attempt from "r20.rs6.net" claiming to be https://www.rt.com/usa/391801-california-germany-climate-change/ > > Watch; Chelsea Manning thanks Obama in first interview: > Chelsea Manning, the former US soldier jailed for leaking classified information, has spoken out for the first time since her release, accepting responsibility for her crime and thanking President Barack Obama. > MailScanner has detected a possible fraud attempt from "r20.rs6.net" claiming to be http://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-us-canada-40226330/chelsea-manning-thanks-obama-in-first-interview > > Judge denies bail for accused NSA leaker Reality Winner after not guilty plea: > Winner faces up to 10 years in prison, if convicted. (Reuters) > MailScanner has detected a possible fraud attempt from "r20.rs6.net" claiming to be http://tinyurl.com/y7emlfsk > > US cities brace for 'anti-sharia' marches; > Marches against Islamic law were planned Saturday in more than two dozen cities across the United States > MailScanner has detected a possible fraud attempt from "r20.rs6.net" claiming to be http://indianexpress.com/article/world/us-cities-brace-for-anti-sharia-marches-4697378/ > > Secret Recording Reveals GOP Lawmaker Freaking out About 'Going Down With the Ship' for Trump; > As the president continues to unravel, Republicans are beginning to panic. > MailScanner has detected a possible fraud attempt from "r20.rs6.net" claiming to be http://tinyurl.com/y93b4h4f > > Trump Can Take Payments From Foreign Governments, U.S. Says: > President isn't violating the Constitution by accepting payments for goods and services from foreign governments without congressional approval. > MailScanner has detected a possible fraud attempt from "r20.rs6.net" claiming to be http://tinyurl.com/y7na3dqd > > The DNC's Security Firm, Was Under Contract With The FBI: > After the alleged hacking, the DNC retained a private security firm?-?CrowdStrike?-?which made the determination that the Russian government was responsible. > MailScanner has detected a possible fraud attempt from "r20.rs6.net" claiming to be https://medium.com/theyoungturks/crowdstrike-the-dncs-security-firm-was-under-contract-with-the-fbi-c6f884c34189 > > > "Let us be peace and joy" > > > Tom Feeley > Cost Of War > > Number Of Iraqis Slaughtered In US War And Occupation Of Iraq "1,455,590" > > > Number of U.S. Military Personnel Sacrificed (Officially acknowledged) In America's War On Iraq: 4,801 > > > Number Of International Occupation Force Troops Slaughtered In Afghanistan : 3,430 > > Cost of War in Iraq & Afghanistan > Total Cost of Wars Since 2001 > $1,766,677,838,469 MailScanner has detected a possible fraud attempt from "r20.rs6.net" claiming to be http://www.costofwar.com/ > > > Quick Links... > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > Our Website > > More About Us > Contact Information > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > Phone:San Diego USA 619-407-7054 > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > > Information Clearing House, Po Box 365, Imperial Beach, CA 91933 > Forward this email to a friend | About our service provider > Sent by noreply-ichnews at live.com in collaboration with > > Try it free today -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From a-fields at illinois.edu Sun Jun 11 17:25:26 2017 From: a-fields at illinois.edu (Fields, A Belden) Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2017 17:25:26 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] FW: Someone has sent you a message from News-Gazette.com In-Reply-To: <20170611172327.4300426933@web-2.prod.news-gazette.com> References: <20170611172327.4300426933@web-2.prod.news-gazette.com> Message-ID: <4BEF5039AB283245B9B22D29042452EB7434AB1B@CITESMBX4.ad.uillinois.edu> ________________________________ From: noreply at news-gazette.com [noreply at news-gazette.com] on behalf of Belden Fields [belden.fields at gmail.com] Sent: Sunday, June 11, 2017 12:23 PM To: Fields, A Belden Subject: Someone has sent you a message from News-Gazette.com Message from sender: No need to county loan for nursing home to meet payroll despite earlier articles in News-Gazette. Please help us spread the real facts out. Send to all lists you can. We are still fighting to keep this home out of privaate hands. Belden [News-Gazette.com] Published on News-Gazette.com (http://www.news-gazette.com) Home > State payment good news for county nursing home ________________________________ State payment good news for county nursing home Won't have to tap into $250,000 loan to meet payroll this week URBANA — The Champaign County Nursing Home will not need to tap into a $250,000 loan to meet its payroll this week, county board Chair C. Pius Weibel said Wednesday. The $250,000 fund was set up earlier this year by the county board to help with the nursing home's cash flow problems. ________________________________ Source URL: http://www.news-gazette.com/news/local/2017-06-07/state-payment-good-news-county-nursing-home.html -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From r-szoke at illinois.edu Sun Jun 11 17:35:39 2017 From: r-szoke at illinois.edu (Szoke, Ron) Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2017 17:35:39 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [sf-core] FW: Someone has sent you a message from News-Gazette.com In-Reply-To: <4BEF5039AB283245B9B22D29042452EB7434AB1B@CITESMBX4.ad.uillinois.edu> References: <20170611172327.4300426933@web-2.prod.news-gazette.com> <4BEF5039AB283245B9B22D29042452EB7434AB1B@CITESMBX4.ad.uillinois.edu> Message-ID: <812528C5-6343-4E27-8084-C662DDFCFEDB@illinois.edu> What about next week, & the week after? Will there be a weekly “crisis” & “emergency”? On Jun 11, 2017, at 12:25 PM, 'Fields, A Belden' a-fields at illinois.edu [sf-core] > wrote: ________________________________ From: noreply at news-gazette.com [noreply at news-gazette.com] on behalf of Belden Fields [belden.fields at gmail.com] Sent: Sunday, June 11, 2017 12:23 PM To: Fields, A Belden Subject: Someone has sent you a message from News-Gazette.com Message from sender: No need to county loan for nursing home to meet payroll despite earlier articles in News-Gazette. Please help us spread the real facts out. Send to all lists you can. We are still fighting to keep this home out of privaate hands. Belden [News-Gazette.com] Published on News-Gazette.com (http://www.news-gazette.com) Home > State payment good news for county nursing home ________________________________ State payment good news for county nursing home Won't have to tap into $250,000 loan to meet payroll this week URBANA — The Champaign County Nursing Home will not need to tap into a $250,000 loan to meet its payroll this week, county board Chair C. Pius Weibel said Wednesday. The $250,000 fund was set up earlier this year by the county board to help with the nursing home's cash flow problems. ________________________________ Source URL: http://www.news-gazette.com/news/local/2017-06-07/state-payment-good-news-county-nursing-home.html __._,_.___ ________________________________ Posted by: "Fields, A Belden" > ________________________________ Reply via web post • Reply to sender • Reply to group • Start a New Topic • Messages in this topic (1) ________________________________ [https://s.yimg.com/ru/static/images/yg/img/megaphone/1464031581_phpFA8bON] Have you tried the highest rated email app? With 4.5 stars in iTunes, the Yahoo Mail app is the highest rated email app on the market. What are you waiting for? Now you can access all your inboxes (Gmail, Outlook, AOL and more) in one place. Never delete an email again with 1000GB of free cloud storage. ________________________________ VISIT YOUR GROUP [Yahoo! Groups] • Privacy • Unsubscribe • Terms of Use . __,_._,___ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Sun Jun 11 18:01:02 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2017 18:01:02 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] FW: SNYTREV:Harvard Law's Charles Fried-- Just Another Pot Calling The Kettle Black Message-ID: Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Sunday, June 11, 2017 12:58 PM To: sectns.aals at lists.aals.org Subject: SNYTREV:Harvard Law's Charles Fried-- Just Another Pot Calling The Kettle Black "I would've thought until just recently that one would be willing to take the job of solicitor general even in a Trump administration," said Charles Fried, Ronald Reagan's solicitor general...I would think a solicitor general today might worry about being asked to say all kinds of things and take all kinds of positions which are essentially unprofessional." LOL! Truly Orwellian! As Reagan's Solicitor General, Fried justified at the U. S. Supreme Court and all lower Federal Courts every hideous atrocity Reagan et al inflicted on everyone. That qualifies him to be a Professor at Harvard Law School. Fab. 22. Harvard Law School Harvard Law School Is a Neo-Con Cesspool After Deans Clark and Kagan I would not send my dog to I like my dog Nor my kids Nor others' kids I like them too To learn torture And become torturers To learn war crimes And become war criminals To learn kangaroo courts And become kangaroos To learn drones And become droners To learn murder And become murderers To learn assassinations And become assassins To trash the Constitution And International Law Human Rights too This is not the HLS I entered in 1971 A Pox upon their House! Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Sun Jun 11 18:01:02 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2017 18:01:02 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] FW: SNYTREV:Harvard Law's Charles Fried-- Just Another Pot Calling The Kettle Black Message-ID: Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Sunday, June 11, 2017 12:58 PM To: sectns.aals at lists.aals.org Subject: SNYTREV:Harvard Law's Charles Fried-- Just Another Pot Calling The Kettle Black "I would've thought until just recently that one would be willing to take the job of solicitor general even in a Trump administration," said Charles Fried, Ronald Reagan's solicitor general...I would think a solicitor general today might worry about being asked to say all kinds of things and take all kinds of positions which are essentially unprofessional." LOL! Truly Orwellian! As Reagan's Solicitor General, Fried justified at the U. S. Supreme Court and all lower Federal Courts every hideous atrocity Reagan et al inflicted on everyone. That qualifies him to be a Professor at Harvard Law School. Fab. 22. Harvard Law School Harvard Law School Is a Neo-Con Cesspool After Deans Clark and Kagan I would not send my dog to I like my dog Nor my kids Nor others' kids I like them too To learn torture And become torturers To learn war crimes And become war criminals To learn kangaroo courts And become kangaroos To learn drones And become droners To learn murder And become murderers To learn assassinations And become assassins To trash the Constitution And International Law Human Rights too This is not the HLS I entered in 1971 A Pox upon their House! Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From brussel at illinois.edu Sun Jun 11 18:52:16 2017 From: brussel at illinois.edu (Brussel, Morton K) Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2017 18:52:16 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Gershon Shafir In-Reply-To: <1305681889.4512971.1496788810547@mail.yahoo.com> References: <1305681889.4512971.1496788810547.ref@mail.yahoo.com> <1305681889.4512971.1496788810547@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <6CCF4951-D52A-4BC2-BDA4-861092139A1E@illinois.edu> Suggest that our local libraries purchase the book. —mkb On Jun 6, 2017, at 5:40 PM, David Green via Peace-discuss > wrote: This book excerpt is probably too dense and detailed for most people, understandable, but I had occasion to know Shafir when we were both students at UCLA, and he has gone on to be perhaps the leading Jewish Israeli critical historical sociologist, now teaching at UCSD. Why has the Occupation lasted this long? Read an excerpt from Gershon Shafir’s latest book, “A Half Century of Occupation: Israel, Palestine, and the Wor... Why has the Occupation lasted this long? _______________________________________________ Peace-discuss mailing list Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Sun Jun 11 20:01:43 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2017 20:01:43 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] FW: NYT: Harvard Law's Dirty Dersh Defends Female Genital Mutilation! Message-ID: Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Sunday, June 11, 2017 2:57 PM To: sectns.aals at lists.aals.org Subject: NYT: Harvard Law's Dirty Dersh Defends Female Genital Mutilation! "Recently, the Dawat-e-Hadiya, an organization overseeing smaller Shiite Muslim sects {including this one that practices FGM}, hired two well known lawyers, Alan Dershowitz and Mayer Morganroth, to help the defense {in the Michigan FGM prosecution.} Way to go HLS Dirty Dersh! Johnny on the spot when it comes to defending gross human rights violations. In a debate HLS Dirty Dersh once had with me, he admitted that I was the "expert" on international human rights law, not he. That's for sure! I was honored and privileged to have taken the very first International Human Rights Law Course taught at Harvard Law School by the late, great Clyde Ferguson-RIP. Back in the days before HLS became a NeoCon Cesspool overwhelmed by DirtyDershlike Professors. Since Dirty Dersh already supports torture it only makes sense for him to defend FGM, which is torture. Fab. Copyright 2010 Newstex LLC All Rights Reserved Newstex Web Blogs Copyright 2010 Atlantic Free Press Atlantic Free Press April 2, 2010 Friday 12:27 AM EST LENGTH: 2153 words HEADLINE: Harvard's Gitmo Kangaroo Law School: The School for Torturers BYLINE: Francis A Boyle BODY: Apr. 2, 2010 (Atlantic Free Press delivered by Newstex) -- by Francis A. Boyle Ph.D. Not surprisingly, the January 2007 issue of the American Journal of Imperial Law--otherwise known as the self-styled American Journal of International Law but originally founded a century ago and still operated by U. S. War and State Department legal apparatchiks and their law professorial fellow-travelers-- published an article by Harvard Law School's recently retired Bemis Professor of International Law Detlev Vagts (who only taught me the required course on Legal Accounting) arguing in favor of the Pentagon's Kangaroo Courts System on Guantanamo despite the fact that they have been soundly condemned by every human rights organization and every human rights official and leader in the entire world as well as by the United States Supreme Court itself in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld (2006). I am not going to bother to recite here all the grievous deficiencies of the Gitmo Kangaroo Courts under International Law and U.S. Constitutional Law. But suffice it to say that the Gitmo Kangaroo Courts constitute war crimes under the Laws of War, the Four Geneva Conventions of 1949, and even the U. S. Army's own Field Manual 27-10, The Law of Land Warfare (1956). Field Manual 27-10 was drafted for the Pentagon by my Laws of War teacher Richard R. Baxter, who was generally recognized as the world's leading expert on that subject. That is precisely why I voluntarily chose to study International Law with him and his long-time collaborator Louis B. Sohn, and not with the bean-counter Vagts. For the entire post-World War II generation of international law students at Harvard Law School, Louis Sohn shall always be our real Bemis Professor of International Law and never the False Pretender to that Throne known as Detlev Vagts. Since those student days I have personally appeared pro bono publico in five U.S. military courts-martial proceedings involving warfare that were organized in accordance with the Congress's Uniform Code of Military Justice (U.C.M.J.)--which still does not apply to the Gitmo Kangaroo Courts despite the ruling by the U. S. Supreme Court in Hamdan that the U.C.M.J. should be applied in Guantanamo--on behalf of five U. S. military personnel who each acted as matters of courage, integrity, principle, conscience and at great risk to their own freedom: 1. U. S. Marine Corporal Jeff Paterson, the first U.S. military resister to President Bush Sr.'s genocidal war against Iraq; 2. Army Captain Doctor Yolanda Huet-Vaughn, the highest ranking U. S. commissioned officer to be court-martialed for refusing to participate in President Bush Sr.'s genocidal war against Iraq; 3. Captain Lawrence Rockwood, who was court-martialed by the U. S. Army for trying to stop torture in Haiti after the Clinton administration had illegally invaded that country in 1994; 4. Army Staff Sergeant Camilo Mejia, the first U. S. military resister to be court-martialed for refusing to participate in President Bush Jr.'s war of aggression against Iraq; and 5. Army First Lieutenant Ehren Watada, the first U. S. commissioned officer to be court-martialed for his refusal to participate in President Bush Jr.'s war of aggression against Iraq. As I can attest from my direct personal involvement, each and every one of these five courts-martial under the U.C.M.J. were Stalinist show-trials produced and directed by the Pentagon that predictably and readily degenerated into travesties of justice. These five U.C.M.J. courts-martial involving U.S. warfare each proved correct the old adage attributed to Groucho Marx that military justice is to justice as military music is to music. By comparison, the Gitmo Kangaroo Courts will not even be run in accordance with the U.C.M.J. despite the fact that the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Hamdan that they should be. The Marx Brothers are running the Gitmo Kangaroo Courts. Whenever they are up and fully operating the Gitmo Courts will constitute Stalinist Show Trials as well as Kangaroo Courts, and their preliminary proceedings have already proven them to be Travesties of Justice. Even worse yet, fully-functioning Stalinist Gitmo Kangaroo Courts will quickly become conveyor-belts of death for alleged and already tortured terrorist suspects along the lines of the Texas execution chamber operated by George Bush Jr. when he was the "governor" of that state and tortured to death 152 victims by means of lethal injection. Gitmo and/or Gitmo-North in Illinois will become Americas first-ever Nazi-style death camp. But today under the Four Geneva Conventions of 1949, executing persons detained as a result of armed conflict without a fair trial before a regularly constituted court constitutes a grave war crime. To be sure, under the First Amendment to the United States Constitution Harvard Law Professor Vagts has the freedom to advocate war crimes so long as he does not participate in their commission, or incite them, or aid and abet them. But precisely where is that line to be drawn for law professors? In this regard, the Harvard Law School Faculty currently has at least five professors who have advocated torture and war crimes: 1. Vagts himself, who supported abusing the then recently captured President of Iraq Saddam Hussein despite his being publicly acknowledged to be a Prisoner of War by the Bush Jr. administration itself and thus absolutely protected by the Third Geneva Convention of 1949 and the Convention against Torture; 2. the infamous Alan Dershowitz, a self-incriminated war criminal in his own right. Dersh publicly acknowledged being a member of a Mossad Committee for approving the murder and assassination of Palestinians, which violates the Geneva Conventions and is thus a grave war crime; 3. the Neo-Con Con Law non-entity known as Richard Parker; 4. Another one of my teachers, Waco Phil Heymann. Previously, Waco Phil had been Deputy to U.S. Attorney General Janet Reno, the Butcher of Waco. Reno ordered the Waco Massacre, while Heymann ordered its cover-up and thus earned his well-deserved sobriquet of Waco Phil as an Accessory After The Fact. All those incinerated women and children! 5. The war criminal Jack Goldsmith who while working as a lawyer for the Bush Jr. administration at both the Pentagon and later its Department of In-Justice did much of the legal spade-work designing, justifying and approving the hideous human rights atrocities that the Bush Jr. administration inflicted on everyone after 9/11. Goldsmith and his co-felon accomplice and co-conspirator from the Bush Jr. administration Professor John Yoo--now desecrating Berkeley's Law School where my friend and colleague the late, great Dean Frank Newman had taught Human Rights and International Law--are functionally analogous to Nazi Law Professor Carl Schmitt, who justified every hideous atrocity that Hitler and the Nazis inflicted on anyone, including the Jews. Despite my best efforts to prevent it, the Harvard Law School Faculty and Deans hired the war criminal Goldsmith right out of the Bush Jr. administration knowing full well that he was up to his eyeballs in the Gitmo Kangaroo Courts, torture, war crimes, enforced disappearances, murder, kidnapping, and crimes against humanity, at a minimum. And when Goldsmith's proverbial "smoking-gun" Department of In-Justice Memorandum was published by the Washington Post, then Harvard Law School's Dean Elena Kagan contemptuously boasted in response about how "proud" she was to have hired this notorious war criminal. Previously Kagan had also publicly bragged that the future of International Legal Studies at Harvard Law School would be in the "good hands" of their resident war criminal Goldsmith. How perversely and tragically true! The Neo-Conservative Harvard Law School Faculty and Deans deliberately hired this Neo-Nazi legal architect of the Bush Jr. administration's bogus and nefarious "war against terrorism" because they fully support it together with all its essential accouterments of torture, kangaroo courts, war crimes, murder, kidnapping, enforced disappearances, crimes against humanity, and Nuremburg crimes against peace. By contrast, after the terrorist bombing of the Murrah Federal Building by Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols in alleged revenge for the Waco Massacre and Cover-up by Janet Reno and Waco Phil Heymann, to the best of my recollection I do not remember that the Neo-Conservative Harvard Law School Faculty and Deans advocated kangaroo courts, torture, war crimes, and racist profiling for America's population of White Judeo-Christian Males. Yet after 9/11 the fundamentally White Racist Harvard Law School Faculty and Deans have no problem with inflicting torture, kangaroo courts, war crimes, and racist profiling upon Muslims/Arabs/Asians of Color, which is exactly why they hired the war criminal Goldsmith to teach such criminal practices to their own law students and thus someday turn them into racist U. S. governmental war criminals in their own right. This is because for the most part the Harvard Law School Faculty and Deans have always been viscerally bigoted and racist against Muslims/Arabs/Asians and other People of Color since at least when I first matriculated there in September of 1971. The Harvard Law School (H.L.S.) Faculty and Deans are no longer fit to educate Lawyers, Members of the Bar, and Officers of the Court. They are a sick joke and a demented fraud. Groucho Marx would have had a field day with them: Harvard is to Law School as Torture is to Law. The Harvard Law School Faculty and Deans torture the Law. Do not send your children or students to Harvard Law School where they will grow up to become racist war criminals! Harvard Law School is a Neo-Con cesspool. As for Harvard Laws Neo-Con Dean Kagan, Harvard Law Graduate President Barack Obama appointed her Solicitor General in his Department of Justice as the third highest ranking official in that department and thus as the proverbial oeTenth Justice for the 9-Justice U.S. Supreme Court. In this capacity Kagan has quarter-backed, supervised, and defended in all U.S. federal courts the Obama administrations continuation of the Bush Jr. administrations hideous atrocities perpetrated against human rights, international law, civil rights, civil liberties, the U.S. Constitution, and Americas Bill of Rights. As payback for her yeoman Neo-Con efforts, Kagan is now reportedly at the top of a very short list for President Obama to nominate to the U.S. Supreme Court upon the expected retirement of Mr. Justice Stevens, the reputed leader of the Courts oeliberal wing. Of course Stevens widespread denomination as a oeliberal just proves how far to the reactionary right the Supreme Court has moved since Stevens was recommended for the Supremes to President Gerald Ford by the arch-reactionary jurist Edward Hirsh Levi, then U.S. Attorney General and previously Dean of the arch-reactionary University of Chicago Law School where Antonin Scalia, Obama, Kagan, and her pet war criminal Goldsmith would all teach. As President of the entire arch-reactionary University of Chicago itself, Levi drove out about 30% of my undergraduate class that in 1968 had unwittingly entered this Birthplace and Warren for the Neo-Con Movement that was founded there by Chicago Professor Leo Strauss, a protégé of Nazi Law Professor Carl Schmitt. Americas Neo-Cons are Neo-Nazis. In an interview she recently gave to National Public Radio, Obamas Neo-Con Solicitor General Kagan went out of her way to proclaim: oeI love the Federalist Society! (Emphasis in the original.) The Federalist Society is a gang of lawyers, law professors, and judges who for the most part are right-wing, racist, bigoted, reactionary, elitist, war-mongering, and totalitarian. For example, almost all of the Bush Jr. administration lawyers responsible for its war criminal torture scandal were and still are members of the Federalist Society. Likewise, five Justices on the current U.S. Supreme Court were/are members of the Federalist Society: Harvard Law Graduate Roberts; Harvard Law Graduate Scalia; Harvard Law Graduate Kennedy; Yale Law Graduate Thomas; and Yale Law Graduate Alito. Thats what an oeelite legal education will do for you. In any event, H.L.S. President Obamas elevation of the H.L.S. Neo-Con Kagan to the Supremes would cement the Federalist Societys Neo-Con stranglehold over the U.S. Supreme Court for the next generation. As for another publicly touted Supremes candidate, the Neo-Con Cass Sunstein of the University of Chicago Law School and Harvard Law School, who is currently working at the White House as Obamas Disinformation and Infiltration Czar, would be just as lethal as Kagan to the American Constitution and Republic if sitting on the U.S. Supreme Court. Time for the Ordinary People of America to get organized against these Neo-Con legal elites! Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Sun Jun 11 20:01:43 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2017 20:01:43 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] FW: NYT: Harvard Law's Dirty Dersh Defends Female Genital Mutilation! Message-ID: Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Sunday, June 11, 2017 2:57 PM To: sectns.aals at lists.aals.org Subject: NYT: Harvard Law's Dirty Dersh Defends Female Genital Mutilation! "Recently, the Dawat-e-Hadiya, an organization overseeing smaller Shiite Muslim sects {including this one that practices FGM}, hired two well known lawyers, Alan Dershowitz and Mayer Morganroth, to help the defense {in the Michigan FGM prosecution.} Way to go HLS Dirty Dersh! Johnny on the spot when it comes to defending gross human rights violations. In a debate HLS Dirty Dersh once had with me, he admitted that I was the "expert" on international human rights law, not he. That's for sure! I was honored and privileged to have taken the very first International Human Rights Law Course taught at Harvard Law School by the late, great Clyde Ferguson-RIP. Back in the days before HLS became a NeoCon Cesspool overwhelmed by DirtyDershlike Professors. Since Dirty Dersh already supports torture it only makes sense for him to defend FGM, which is torture. Fab. Copyright 2010 Newstex LLC All Rights Reserved Newstex Web Blogs Copyright 2010 Atlantic Free Press Atlantic Free Press April 2, 2010 Friday 12:27 AM EST LENGTH: 2153 words HEADLINE: Harvard's Gitmo Kangaroo Law School: The School for Torturers BYLINE: Francis A Boyle BODY: Apr. 2, 2010 (Atlantic Free Press delivered by Newstex) -- by Francis A. Boyle Ph.D. Not surprisingly, the January 2007 issue of the American Journal of Imperial Law--otherwise known as the self-styled American Journal of International Law but originally founded a century ago and still operated by U. S. War and State Department legal apparatchiks and their law professorial fellow-travelers-- published an article by Harvard Law School's recently retired Bemis Professor of International Law Detlev Vagts (who only taught me the required course on Legal Accounting) arguing in favor of the Pentagon's Kangaroo Courts System on Guantanamo despite the fact that they have been soundly condemned by every human rights organization and every human rights official and leader in the entire world as well as by the United States Supreme Court itself in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld (2006). I am not going to bother to recite here all the grievous deficiencies of the Gitmo Kangaroo Courts under International Law and U.S. Constitutional Law. But suffice it to say that the Gitmo Kangaroo Courts constitute war crimes under the Laws of War, the Four Geneva Conventions of 1949, and even the U. S. Army's own Field Manual 27-10, The Law of Land Warfare (1956). Field Manual 27-10 was drafted for the Pentagon by my Laws of War teacher Richard R. Baxter, who was generally recognized as the world's leading expert on that subject. That is precisely why I voluntarily chose to study International Law with him and his long-time collaborator Louis B. Sohn, and not with the bean-counter Vagts. For the entire post-World War II generation of international law students at Harvard Law School, Louis Sohn shall always be our real Bemis Professor of International Law and never the False Pretender to that Throne known as Detlev Vagts. Since those student days I have personally appeared pro bono publico in five U.S. military courts-martial proceedings involving warfare that were organized in accordance with the Congress's Uniform Code of Military Justice (U.C.M.J.)--which still does not apply to the Gitmo Kangaroo Courts despite the ruling by the U. S. Supreme Court in Hamdan that the U.C.M.J. should be applied in Guantanamo--on behalf of five U. S. military personnel who each acted as matters of courage, integrity, principle, conscience and at great risk to their own freedom: 1. U. S. Marine Corporal Jeff Paterson, the first U.S. military resister to President Bush Sr.'s genocidal war against Iraq; 2. Army Captain Doctor Yolanda Huet-Vaughn, the highest ranking U. S. commissioned officer to be court-martialed for refusing to participate in President Bush Sr.'s genocidal war against Iraq; 3. Captain Lawrence Rockwood, who was court-martialed by the U. S. Army for trying to stop torture in Haiti after the Clinton administration had illegally invaded that country in 1994; 4. Army Staff Sergeant Camilo Mejia, the first U. S. military resister to be court-martialed for refusing to participate in President Bush Jr.'s war of aggression against Iraq; and 5. Army First Lieutenant Ehren Watada, the first U. S. commissioned officer to be court-martialed for his refusal to participate in President Bush Jr.'s war of aggression against Iraq. As I can attest from my direct personal involvement, each and every one of these five courts-martial under the U.C.M.J. were Stalinist show-trials produced and directed by the Pentagon that predictably and readily degenerated into travesties of justice. These five U.C.M.J. courts-martial involving U.S. warfare each proved correct the old adage attributed to Groucho Marx that military justice is to justice as military music is to music. By comparison, the Gitmo Kangaroo Courts will not even be run in accordance with the U.C.M.J. despite the fact that the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Hamdan that they should be. The Marx Brothers are running the Gitmo Kangaroo Courts. Whenever they are up and fully operating the Gitmo Courts will constitute Stalinist Show Trials as well as Kangaroo Courts, and their preliminary proceedings have already proven them to be Travesties of Justice. Even worse yet, fully-functioning Stalinist Gitmo Kangaroo Courts will quickly become conveyor-belts of death for alleged and already tortured terrorist suspects along the lines of the Texas execution chamber operated by George Bush Jr. when he was the "governor" of that state and tortured to death 152 victims by means of lethal injection. Gitmo and/or Gitmo-North in Illinois will become Americas first-ever Nazi-style death camp. But today under the Four Geneva Conventions of 1949, executing persons detained as a result of armed conflict without a fair trial before a regularly constituted court constitutes a grave war crime. To be sure, under the First Amendment to the United States Constitution Harvard Law Professor Vagts has the freedom to advocate war crimes so long as he does not participate in their commission, or incite them, or aid and abet them. But precisely where is that line to be drawn for law professors? In this regard, the Harvard Law School Faculty currently has at least five professors who have advocated torture and war crimes: 1. Vagts himself, who supported abusing the then recently captured President of Iraq Saddam Hussein despite his being publicly acknowledged to be a Prisoner of War by the Bush Jr. administration itself and thus absolutely protected by the Third Geneva Convention of 1949 and the Convention against Torture; 2. the infamous Alan Dershowitz, a self-incriminated war criminal in his own right. Dersh publicly acknowledged being a member of a Mossad Committee for approving the murder and assassination of Palestinians, which violates the Geneva Conventions and is thus a grave war crime; 3. the Neo-Con Con Law non-entity known as Richard Parker; 4. Another one of my teachers, Waco Phil Heymann. Previously, Waco Phil had been Deputy to U.S. Attorney General Janet Reno, the Butcher of Waco. Reno ordered the Waco Massacre, while Heymann ordered its cover-up and thus earned his well-deserved sobriquet of Waco Phil as an Accessory After The Fact. All those incinerated women and children! 5. The war criminal Jack Goldsmith who while working as a lawyer for the Bush Jr. administration at both the Pentagon and later its Department of In-Justice did much of the legal spade-work designing, justifying and approving the hideous human rights atrocities that the Bush Jr. administration inflicted on everyone after 9/11. Goldsmith and his co-felon accomplice and co-conspirator from the Bush Jr. administration Professor John Yoo--now desecrating Berkeley's Law School where my friend and colleague the late, great Dean Frank Newman had taught Human Rights and International Law--are functionally analogous to Nazi Law Professor Carl Schmitt, who justified every hideous atrocity that Hitler and the Nazis inflicted on anyone, including the Jews. Despite my best efforts to prevent it, the Harvard Law School Faculty and Deans hired the war criminal Goldsmith right out of the Bush Jr. administration knowing full well that he was up to his eyeballs in the Gitmo Kangaroo Courts, torture, war crimes, enforced disappearances, murder, kidnapping, and crimes against humanity, at a minimum. And when Goldsmith's proverbial "smoking-gun" Department of In-Justice Memorandum was published by the Washington Post, then Harvard Law School's Dean Elena Kagan contemptuously boasted in response about how "proud" she was to have hired this notorious war criminal. Previously Kagan had also publicly bragged that the future of International Legal Studies at Harvard Law School would be in the "good hands" of their resident war criminal Goldsmith. How perversely and tragically true! The Neo-Conservative Harvard Law School Faculty and Deans deliberately hired this Neo-Nazi legal architect of the Bush Jr. administration's bogus and nefarious "war against terrorism" because they fully support it together with all its essential accouterments of torture, kangaroo courts, war crimes, murder, kidnapping, enforced disappearances, crimes against humanity, and Nuremburg crimes against peace. By contrast, after the terrorist bombing of the Murrah Federal Building by Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols in alleged revenge for the Waco Massacre and Cover-up by Janet Reno and Waco Phil Heymann, to the best of my recollection I do not remember that the Neo-Conservative Harvard Law School Faculty and Deans advocated kangaroo courts, torture, war crimes, and racist profiling for America's population of White Judeo-Christian Males. Yet after 9/11 the fundamentally White Racist Harvard Law School Faculty and Deans have no problem with inflicting torture, kangaroo courts, war crimes, and racist profiling upon Muslims/Arabs/Asians of Color, which is exactly why they hired the war criminal Goldsmith to teach such criminal practices to their own law students and thus someday turn them into racist U. S. governmental war criminals in their own right. This is because for the most part the Harvard Law School Faculty and Deans have always been viscerally bigoted and racist against Muslims/Arabs/Asians and other People of Color since at least when I first matriculated there in September of 1971. The Harvard Law School (H.L.S.) Faculty and Deans are no longer fit to educate Lawyers, Members of the Bar, and Officers of the Court. They are a sick joke and a demented fraud. Groucho Marx would have had a field day with them: Harvard is to Law School as Torture is to Law. The Harvard Law School Faculty and Deans torture the Law. Do not send your children or students to Harvard Law School where they will grow up to become racist war criminals! Harvard Law School is a Neo-Con cesspool. As for Harvard Laws Neo-Con Dean Kagan, Harvard Law Graduate President Barack Obama appointed her Solicitor General in his Department of Justice as the third highest ranking official in that department and thus as the proverbial oeTenth Justice for the 9-Justice U.S. Supreme Court. In this capacity Kagan has quarter-backed, supervised, and defended in all U.S. federal courts the Obama administrations continuation of the Bush Jr. administrations hideous atrocities perpetrated against human rights, international law, civil rights, civil liberties, the U.S. Constitution, and Americas Bill of Rights. As payback for her yeoman Neo-Con efforts, Kagan is now reportedly at the top of a very short list for President Obama to nominate to the U.S. Supreme Court upon the expected retirement of Mr. Justice Stevens, the reputed leader of the Courts oeliberal wing. Of course Stevens widespread denomination as a oeliberal just proves how far to the reactionary right the Supreme Court has moved since Stevens was recommended for the Supremes to President Gerald Ford by the arch-reactionary jurist Edward Hirsh Levi, then U.S. Attorney General and previously Dean of the arch-reactionary University of Chicago Law School where Antonin Scalia, Obama, Kagan, and her pet war criminal Goldsmith would all teach. As President of the entire arch-reactionary University of Chicago itself, Levi drove out about 30% of my undergraduate class that in 1968 had unwittingly entered this Birthplace and Warren for the Neo-Con Movement that was founded there by Chicago Professor Leo Strauss, a protégé of Nazi Law Professor Carl Schmitt. Americas Neo-Cons are Neo-Nazis. In an interview she recently gave to National Public Radio, Obamas Neo-Con Solicitor General Kagan went out of her way to proclaim: oeI love the Federalist Society! (Emphasis in the original.) The Federalist Society is a gang of lawyers, law professors, and judges who for the most part are right-wing, racist, bigoted, reactionary, elitist, war-mongering, and totalitarian. For example, almost all of the Bush Jr. administration lawyers responsible for its war criminal torture scandal were and still are members of the Federalist Society. Likewise, five Justices on the current U.S. Supreme Court were/are members of the Federalist Society: Harvard Law Graduate Roberts; Harvard Law Graduate Scalia; Harvard Law Graduate Kennedy; Yale Law Graduate Thomas; and Yale Law Graduate Alito. Thats what an oeelite legal education will do for you. In any event, H.L.S. President Obamas elevation of the H.L.S. Neo-Con Kagan to the Supremes would cement the Federalist Societys Neo-Con stranglehold over the U.S. Supreme Court for the next generation. As for another publicly touted Supremes candidate, the Neo-Con Cass Sunstein of the University of Chicago Law School and Harvard Law School, who is currently working at the White House as Obamas Disinformation and Infiltration Czar, would be just as lethal as Kagan to the American Constitution and Republic if sitting on the U.S. Supreme Court. Time for the Ordinary People of America to get organized against these Neo-Con legal elites! Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Mon Jun 12 14:29:12 2017 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2017 14:29:12 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Paul Jay interview with Nina Turner in relation to the People's Summit. Message-ID: Interesting interview. The People’s Summit, is in fact, the Democratic Party Summit, given they would not allow The Green Party, or Socialist Alternative to participate. Last year it was all about promotion of Hillary, this year's focus is on Bernie. Discussion revolves around reform of the Democratic Party, with focus on electoral politics, because mere reform unless there are significant changes in the "system" of government, will do nothing to change the Party's policies. Paul Jay did elicit, finally, an acknowledgement that the Peoples Summit, the Democratic Party only focuses on domestic issues, avoiding all discussion of foreign policy. He also made the point, that supplying billions of dollars to the US war machine, while cutting social services is and should be the main concern or topic of discussion, not his words, mine. Please see the link below: http://therealnews.com/t2/story:19310:Wall-St.-Democrats-vs-Working-Class-Democrats -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Mon Jun 12 14:33:09 2017 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2017 14:33:09 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Fwd: [Peace] The Hidden Costs of War References: Message-ID: From: Niloofar Shambayati via Peace > Subject: [Peace] The Hidden Costs of War A panel discussion on the toll the U.S. military expenditure takes on the lives of the American people, followed by Q & A. Sunday, June 18, 1:30-3:00 PM Champaign Public Library Please, see the attached flyer, spread the word and participate in this important discussion. _______________________________________________ Peace mailing list Peace at lists.chambana.net https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: HIDDEN COSTS OF WAR-use this file.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 273853 bytes Desc: HIDDEN COSTS OF WAR-use this file.pdf URL: From deb.pdamerica at gmail.com Mon Jun 12 14:52:45 2017 From: deb.pdamerica at gmail.com (Debra Schrishuhn) Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2017 09:52:45 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] Paul Jay interview with Nina Turner in relation to the People's Summit. In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Curious report. As one of the partnering organizations and as one of the very few organizations with the word "Democrats" in our name, I can unequivocally state that promoting the Democratic Party was not a core part of the agenda. In fact we (Progressive Democrats of America) had to fight hard to get a break-out session on transforming the Democratic Party. Mostly the speakers focused on issues, and when they focused on electoral politics, the message was getting more progressives elected no matter their party affiliation. I met a lot of activists there who do not identify as Democrats. I also attended last year's People's Summit, and can state with absolute certainty that it was NOT focused on supporting Clinton, but on how to get a progressive agenda pushed forward through the Democratic Party platform and the remainder of the 2016 election cycle, and exploring options of supporting progressives, again regardless of party affiliation, while avoiding election of reactionary Republicans. In that last goal there were a few successes and at least one spectacular failure. Deb Sent from my iPhone > On Jun 12, 2017, at 9:29 AM, Karen Aram via Peace wrote: > > Interesting interview. The People’s Summit, is in fact, the Democratic Party Summit, given they would not allow The Green Party, or Socialist Alternative to participate. Last year it was all about promotion of Hillary, this year's focus is on Bernie. Discussion revolves around reform of the Democratic Party, with focus on electoral politics, because mere reform unless there are significant changes in the "system" of government, will do nothing to change the Party's policies. Paul Jay did elicit, finally, an acknowledgement that the Peoples Summit, the Democratic Party only focuses on domestic issues, avoiding all discussion of foreign policy. He also made the point, that supplying billions of dollars to the US war machine, while cutting social services is and should be the main concern or topic of discussion, not his words, mine. Please see the link below: > > http://therealnews.com/t2/story:19310:Wall-St.-Democrats-vs-Working-Class-Democrats > _______________________________________________ > Peace mailing list > Peace at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Mon Jun 12 18:08:18 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2017 18:08:18 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] FW: Truly Orwellian!Press Releases: Global Peace Operations Initiative Promotes International Peacekeeping Message-ID: Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Monday, June 12, 2017 1:05 PM To: sectns.aals at lists.aals.org Subject: Truly Orwellian!Press Releases: Global Peace Operations Initiative Promotes International Peacekeeping All the War Mongers and War Criminals in the United States government have perverted legitimate peacekeeping operations by the United Nations (that I studied with the late, great Louis B. Sohn--Mr. United Nations Law, RIP) into their Instruments of American Imperial control, domination and exploitation of the world-doing their US Imperial Dirty Work for them. The Bluewashing of Unlimited American Imperialism. Fab. -----Original Message----- From: CERJ at igc.org [mailto:CERJ at igc.org] Sent: Saturday, June 17, 2006 11:05 AM To: CERJ at igc.org Subject: Louis B. Sohn, Peacemaker (1914-2006) Below the Washington Post obituary, please read CERJer Francis Boyle's remarks on Louis B. Sohn's legacy, made at a testimonial event in his honor in 1984. -- John Wilmerding <...> International Law Expert Louis Sohn by Patricia Sullivan © 2006 The Washington Post Company Wednesday, June 14, 2006 -- Louis B. Sohn, 92, considered one of the world's greatest scholars of international law -- who helped draft the United Nations charter, define international human rights, and design disarmament agreements -- died of Alzheimer's disease June 7 at the Goodwin House West in Falls Church, Virginia. A teacher and an advocate, Sohn wrote extensively on legal matters from human rights to environmental law. As a law professor at Harvard University, the University of Georgia, and George Washington University, he taught a number of students who later became ambassadors to the United Nations. "Professor Sohn has been an architect of much of modern international law," Edith Brown Weiss, a Georgetown law professor who is chairwoman of the World Bank inspection panel, said in a 2003 address honoring him. He worked on the 1972 Stockholm Conference on the Human Environment and was important in establishing the U.S. Arms Control and Disarmament Agency. He shaped the Law of the Sea Convention and the Law of the Sea Tribunal, insisting that countries consider dispute settlement, and he drafted a text for the tribunal. Born in what is now the Ukrainian city of Lviv, Mr. Sohn received degrees in science and law in 1935 from John Casimir University. He stayed on as a researcher, but as a Jew, he was forced to enter the library early in the morning and leave late at night. Invited to work as a research assistant and study for an advanced law degree at Harvard, he left Poland on one of the last boats to get out before the Nazi invasion. However, upon his arrival in Massachusetts, Sohn was informed that the law professor who had invited him had just died. Still, the law school dean found him a low-rent room and a job in a university cafeteria, and he entered Harvard, receiving a master's degree in law in 1940. He then received a doctoral degree in law, also at Harvard, in 1961. Sohn went on to participate in the San Francisco conference in 1945 that established the United Nations charter. Sohn began teaching at Harvard, and became the Bemis Professor of Law in 1961. After retiring from the Harvard faculty in 1981, he went to the University of Georgia to become the first holder of the Woodruff Chair in International Law. In 1991, he moved to Washington to join the U.S. Institute of Peace and the George Washington University law faculty. His knowledge of international law and attention to detail were legendary. "The notion of challenging him on a factual or analytical point just does not occur to anyone I know," lawyer James Silkenat said in a 1990 article in the journal The International Lawyer. Sohn spent 20 months as a counselor on international law at the State Department in 1970 and 1971, and was the U.S. delegate to the Law of the Sea Convention from 1974 to 1982. Several international awards are named for him, and he served as chairman of the international law section of the American Bar Association and president of the American Society of International Law. He was the first recipient of the International Environmental Law Award from the Washington-based Center for International Environmental Law in 2003. Survivors include his wife of 65 years, Betty Mayo Sohn of Falls Church. <...> Remarks in Honor of Louis B. Sohn by Francis A. Boyle American University, Washington College of Law October 11, 1984 "Blessed Are The Peacemakers, for They Shall Be Called the Children of God." -- (Matthew 5:9) It is a great privilege for me to have been asked by the organizer of this Conference, Tom Buergenthal, to say a few words in honor of our mutual teacher and mentor, Louis Sohn. About 15 years ago, I commenced my study of international relations at the University of Chicago with the late Hans Morgenthau. As I am sure you know, it is a cardinal tenet of self-styled political realists such as Morgenthau and his colleague George Kennan that international law and organizations are essentially irrelevant to matters of "high" international politics concerning conflicts between states over matters of vital national interest. Morgenthau and Kennan carried this hypothesis one step further to argue that those who actually espoused the establishment of World Peace Through World Law, such as Grenville Clark and Louis Sohn, were naive, idealistic, and utopian. Even more seriously, they maintained, such theories were in fact pernicious, because if the statesmen of the Western Democracies and their respective public opinions ever came to believe in them and to act accordingly, their necessarily altruistic foreign policies would simply encourage aggression by the tota litarian dictators of the Communist bloc. In the opinion of political realists such as Morgenthau and Kennan, it was crucial for U.S. statesmen to understand that international relations consisted essentially of the Machiavellian law of power politics where, in the words of Thucydides, the strong do what they will, and the weak suffer what they must. In this so-called zero-sum game of international politics, the pursuit of international law and organizations, let alone world government, would ineluctably prove fatal to their proponents and ultimately for all mankind. Although I was, and still am, enamored of the analytical brilliance of Morgenthau, I could never accept his prescription of Machiavellian power politics as the legitimate basis for the proper conduct of international relations, especially by the United States of America, nor his rejection of world government as a practical solution to the impending doom of nuclear Armageddon. Nevertheless, at the time I did not possess the intellectual apparatus and sophistication to develop an alternative approach to understanding the dynamic relationship between international law and politics. I therefore decided that it would be necessary to continue my international studies at the Harvard Law School with none other than the bete-noire of Morgenthau's folklore -- Louis Sohn. I took Louis' course on the United Nations Organization ten years ago this Fall. There were many great teachers at the Harvard Law School, and Louis was certainly one of them. There were likewise many great scholars at the Harvard Law School, and Louis was undoubtedly one of the most prolific members in the entire history of that faculty. And yet what set Louis apart from all the rest of the great teachers and scholars at the Harvard Law School was his grand vision of creating a future world order based upon the rule of law. Louis' powerful conveyance of that vision to all his students was far more important than any of the substantive rules of international law and organizations which he taught us. And I think I speak for most of us when I say that much of the rest of my career has been spent -- and will continue to be spent -- attempting to comprehend, particularize, and effectuate, the ramifications of Louis' grand vision when it comes to the relatively mundane aspects of day-to-day international relations. We all write glosses on the magna opera of Louis Sohn. Not surprisingly, Louis has lived to witness the conversion of his two most formidable intellectual adversaries: Hans Morgenthau and George Kennan. During a private seminar held at Harvard's Center for International Affairs in 1978, Morgenthau explicitly repudiated Machiavellian power politics in favor of international law, international organizations and world government. And when I specifically asked him if this meant he finally agreed with that same Louis Sohn whose theories he had been castigating for the past twenty years, Morgenthau responded: "Sohn and I might start from different principles, but we have arrived at the same conclusion." See 10 Calif. W. Int'l L.J. 217-19 (1980). About four years later, George Kennan reached the exact same conclusion in an essay entitled 'On Nuclear War', published in the January 21, 1982 issue of the New York Review of Books: "Nearly a quarter of a century ago, Grenville Clark and Louis B. Sohn put forward, in a monumental work entitled 'World Peace Through World Law', their ideas for a program of universal disarmament, and for a system of world law to replace the chaotic and dangerous institution of unlimited national sovereignty upon which international life was then and is now based. "To many of us -- and I think particularly those of us who had been in the practice of diplomacy -- these ideas looked, at the time, impractical, if not naive. Today, two decades later, and in the light of what has occurred in the interval, the logic of them is more compelling. "It is still too early for their realization on a universal basis; but efforts to achieve the limitation of sovereignty in favor of a system of international law on a regional basis are another thing; and when men begin to come seriously to grips with this possibility, as I think they will, it is to the carefully thought-out and profoundly humane ideas of Grenville Clark and Louis Sohn that they will have to turn for inspiration and guidance." So despite their innate genius, it took Morgenthau and Kennan more than twenty years to realize the profound wisdom of Louis' grand vision. It is one of the greatest of all tributes to Louis that these two mortal intellectual enemies have come to subscribe to the Clark-Sohn Proposals, if only during the twilight of their careers. And perhaps we, as students of Louis, can all take some small degree of satisfaction in this vindication of our teacher's perspicuity. But I submit that in all honor to Louis, we really cannot afford to do so. For although the founders of modern Machiavellian power politics, such as Morgenthau and Kennan, have changed their minds on this subject, most tragically they have left in their wake an entire generation of American foreign policy decision-makers who really believe that international law and organizations are totally irrelevant to the conduct of international relations, and, even more insidiously, that the proper way in which the United States government should conduct its foreign affairs is accurately prescribed by Machiavelli's 'The Prince'. This endemic attitude of legal nihilism towards international relations reached its apotheosis in the Vietnam War. And if you read the memoirs of more recent American statesmen such as Richard Nixon, Henry Kissinger, Zbigniew Brzezinski, and Alexander Haig, you will find that Machiavellianism still remains the predominant mode of thought about international relations among the members of today's U.S. foreign affairs and defense decision-making establishment. Therefore, I propose that it is up to each one of us as students of Louis to bring his grand vision of 'World Peace Through World Law' to bear upon the current and future generations of American foreign policy decision-makers. If we can successfully perform this task, then that achievement would be the best and most fitting honor which any of his students could ever bestow upon Louis. ========================================= COLLEGIUM IUSTITIÆ ÆQUITATEM RESTITUENTI +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ John Woolman College of Equity-Restorative Justice Peacemaking and Conflict Transformation [CERJ] c/o John Wilmerding > 217 High Street, Brattleboro, VT, USA 05301 Phone: (01)-802-254-2826 Email to: CERJ at igc.org +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ "There is no time left except to make peace work a part of our every waking activity." -- Elise Boulding, Quaker Scholar & Peace Activist +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ To join (or leave) the College's email list, send an email message to wilmerding at earthlink.net or to CERJ at igc.org, including your first & last name, your email address, and your state, province or country of residence. A partial CERJ list archive is at this site: http://lists.topica.com/lists/CERJ/read ========================================= Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: U.S. Department of State [mailto:usstatebpa at subscriptions.fcg.gov] Sent: Monday, June 12, 2017 12:21 PM To: Boyle, Francis A > Subject: Press Releases: Global Peace Operations Initiative Promotes International Peacekeeping You are subscribed to Press Releases for U.S. Department of State. This information has recently been updated, and is now available. Press Releases: Global Peace Operations Initiative Promotes International Peacekeeping 06/12/2017 12:37 PM EDT Media Note Office of the Spokesperson Washington, DC June 12, 2017 ________________________________ The Department of State's Bureau of Political-Military Affairs and the Department of Defense's Office of the Secretary of Defense are co-hosting the 11th annual Global Peace Operations Initiative (GPOI) Worldwide Consultations at the State Department on June 12-16, 2017. Participants from the Department of State, Department of Defense, other key U.S. government organizations, and the United Nations are discussing the evolving nature of peacekeeping; ways to strengthen performance and operational readiness of peacekeeping units; and efforts to address sexual exploitation and abuse by peacekeepers. Participants will also review ongoing GPOI activities, share implementers' best practices, and discuss program priorities for the years ahead. GPOI represents the U.S.'s primary global investment for strengthening international capacity and capabilities to execute peace operations around the world. The GPOI program accomplishes this goal by enhancing partner-country capabilities to train and sustain peacekeeping proficiencies and by building the capacity of the UN and regional organizations to conduct such missions. GPOI has created a tangible return on investment by helping to expand the base of capable peacekeepers. For example, GPOI partners have increased their military deployment rates to UN and African Union (AU) peace operations by 161 percent since becoming GPOI partners. Additionally, GPOI is helping the majority of its partner countries develop critical enabling capabilities which are in short supply in UN and regional peace operations, such as aviation, engineering, logistics, and medical support. GPOI is also helping partner countries recognize the important role women play in peace operations. For example, over the past five years, active GPOI partners have increased the number of female military peacekeepers deployed by 62 percent. GPOI's positive impact can be seen in virtually every UN or regional organizations' peace operation around the world today. For more information, please contact the Bureau of Political-Military Affairs, Office of Congressional and Public Affairs at PM-CPA at state.gov and follow us on Twitter @StateDeptPM. The Office of Website Management, Bureau of Public Affairs, manages this site as a portal for information from the U.S. State Department. External links to other Internet sites should not be construed as an endorsement of the views or privacy policies contained therein. ________________________________ Stay connected with the State Department: [State Dept website][DipNote Blog][Twitter][Tumblr][RSS Feed][Facebook][Flickr][YouTube][Google Plus] [Instagram] ________________________________ External links found in this content or on Department of State websites that go to other non-Department websites should not be construed as an endorsement of the views or privacy policies contained -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Mon Jun 12 18:08:18 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2017 18:08:18 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] FW: Truly Orwellian!Press Releases: Global Peace Operations Initiative Promotes International Peacekeeping Message-ID: Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Monday, June 12, 2017 1:05 PM To: sectns.aals at lists.aals.org Subject: Truly Orwellian!Press Releases: Global Peace Operations Initiative Promotes International Peacekeeping All the War Mongers and War Criminals in the United States government have perverted legitimate peacekeeping operations by the United Nations (that I studied with the late, great Louis B. Sohn--Mr. United Nations Law, RIP) into their Instruments of American Imperial control, domination and exploitation of the world-doing their US Imperial Dirty Work for them. The Bluewashing of Unlimited American Imperialism. Fab. -----Original Message----- From: CERJ at igc.org [mailto:CERJ at igc.org] Sent: Saturday, June 17, 2006 11:05 AM To: CERJ at igc.org Subject: Louis B. Sohn, Peacemaker (1914-2006) Below the Washington Post obituary, please read CERJer Francis Boyle's remarks on Louis B. Sohn's legacy, made at a testimonial event in his honor in 1984. -- John Wilmerding <...> International Law Expert Louis Sohn by Patricia Sullivan © 2006 The Washington Post Company Wednesday, June 14, 2006 -- Louis B. Sohn, 92, considered one of the world's greatest scholars of international law -- who helped draft the United Nations charter, define international human rights, and design disarmament agreements -- died of Alzheimer's disease June 7 at the Goodwin House West in Falls Church, Virginia. A teacher and an advocate, Sohn wrote extensively on legal matters from human rights to environmental law. As a law professor at Harvard University, the University of Georgia, and George Washington University, he taught a number of students who later became ambassadors to the United Nations. "Professor Sohn has been an architect of much of modern international law," Edith Brown Weiss, a Georgetown law professor who is chairwoman of the World Bank inspection panel, said in a 2003 address honoring him. He worked on the 1972 Stockholm Conference on the Human Environment and was important in establishing the U.S. Arms Control and Disarmament Agency. He shaped the Law of the Sea Convention and the Law of the Sea Tribunal, insisting that countries consider dispute settlement, and he drafted a text for the tribunal. Born in what is now the Ukrainian city of Lviv, Mr. Sohn received degrees in science and law in 1935 from John Casimir University. He stayed on as a researcher, but as a Jew, he was forced to enter the library early in the morning and leave late at night. Invited to work as a research assistant and study for an advanced law degree at Harvard, he left Poland on one of the last boats to get out before the Nazi invasion. However, upon his arrival in Massachusetts, Sohn was informed that the law professor who had invited him had just died. Still, the law school dean found him a low-rent room and a job in a university cafeteria, and he entered Harvard, receiving a master's degree in law in 1940. He then received a doctoral degree in law, also at Harvard, in 1961. Sohn went on to participate in the San Francisco conference in 1945 that established the United Nations charter. Sohn began teaching at Harvard, and became the Bemis Professor of Law in 1961. After retiring from the Harvard faculty in 1981, he went to the University of Georgia to become the first holder of the Woodruff Chair in International Law. In 1991, he moved to Washington to join the U.S. Institute of Peace and the George Washington University law faculty. His knowledge of international law and attention to detail were legendary. "The notion of challenging him on a factual or analytical point just does not occur to anyone I know," lawyer James Silkenat said in a 1990 article in the journal The International Lawyer. Sohn spent 20 months as a counselor on international law at the State Department in 1970 and 1971, and was the U.S. delegate to the Law of the Sea Convention from 1974 to 1982. Several international awards are named for him, and he served as chairman of the international law section of the American Bar Association and president of the American Society of International Law. He was the first recipient of the International Environmental Law Award from the Washington-based Center for International Environmental Law in 2003. Survivors include his wife of 65 years, Betty Mayo Sohn of Falls Church. <...> Remarks in Honor of Louis B. Sohn by Francis A. Boyle American University, Washington College of Law October 11, 1984 "Blessed Are The Peacemakers, for They Shall Be Called the Children of God." -- (Matthew 5:9) It is a great privilege for me to have been asked by the organizer of this Conference, Tom Buergenthal, to say a few words in honor of our mutual teacher and mentor, Louis Sohn. About 15 years ago, I commenced my study of international relations at the University of Chicago with the late Hans Morgenthau. As I am sure you know, it is a cardinal tenet of self-styled political realists such as Morgenthau and his colleague George Kennan that international law and organizations are essentially irrelevant to matters of "high" international politics concerning conflicts between states over matters of vital national interest. Morgenthau and Kennan carried this hypothesis one step further to argue that those who actually espoused the establishment of World Peace Through World Law, such as Grenville Clark and Louis Sohn, were naive, idealistic, and utopian. Even more seriously, they maintained, such theories were in fact pernicious, because if the statesmen of the Western Democracies and their respective public opinions ever came to believe in them and to act accordingly, their necessarily altruistic foreign policies would simply encourage aggression by the tota litarian dictators of the Communist bloc. In the opinion of political realists such as Morgenthau and Kennan, it was crucial for U.S. statesmen to understand that international relations consisted essentially of the Machiavellian law of power politics where, in the words of Thucydides, the strong do what they will, and the weak suffer what they must. In this so-called zero-sum game of international politics, the pursuit of international law and organizations, let alone world government, would ineluctably prove fatal to their proponents and ultimately for all mankind. Although I was, and still am, enamored of the analytical brilliance of Morgenthau, I could never accept his prescription of Machiavellian power politics as the legitimate basis for the proper conduct of international relations, especially by the United States of America, nor his rejection of world government as a practical solution to the impending doom of nuclear Armageddon. Nevertheless, at the time I did not possess the intellectual apparatus and sophistication to develop an alternative approach to understanding the dynamic relationship between international law and politics. I therefore decided that it would be necessary to continue my international studies at the Harvard Law School with none other than the bete-noire of Morgenthau's folklore -- Louis Sohn. I took Louis' course on the United Nations Organization ten years ago this Fall. There were many great teachers at the Harvard Law School, and Louis was certainly one of them. There were likewise many great scholars at the Harvard Law School, and Louis was undoubtedly one of the most prolific members in the entire history of that faculty. And yet what set Louis apart from all the rest of the great teachers and scholars at the Harvard Law School was his grand vision of creating a future world order based upon the rule of law. Louis' powerful conveyance of that vision to all his students was far more important than any of the substantive rules of international law and organizations which he taught us. And I think I speak for most of us when I say that much of the rest of my career has been spent -- and will continue to be spent -- attempting to comprehend, particularize, and effectuate, the ramifications of Louis' grand vision when it comes to the relatively mundane aspects of day-to-day international relations. We all write glosses on the magna opera of Louis Sohn. Not surprisingly, Louis has lived to witness the conversion of his two most formidable intellectual adversaries: Hans Morgenthau and George Kennan. During a private seminar held at Harvard's Center for International Affairs in 1978, Morgenthau explicitly repudiated Machiavellian power politics in favor of international law, international organizations and world government. And when I specifically asked him if this meant he finally agreed with that same Louis Sohn whose theories he had been castigating for the past twenty years, Morgenthau responded: "Sohn and I might start from different principles, but we have arrived at the same conclusion." See 10 Calif. W. Int'l L.J. 217-19 (1980). About four years later, George Kennan reached the exact same conclusion in an essay entitled 'On Nuclear War', published in the January 21, 1982 issue of the New York Review of Books: "Nearly a quarter of a century ago, Grenville Clark and Louis B. Sohn put forward, in a monumental work entitled 'World Peace Through World Law', their ideas for a program of universal disarmament, and for a system of world law to replace the chaotic and dangerous institution of unlimited national sovereignty upon which international life was then and is now based. "To many of us -- and I think particularly those of us who had been in the practice of diplomacy -- these ideas looked, at the time, impractical, if not naive. Today, two decades later, and in the light of what has occurred in the interval, the logic of them is more compelling. "It is still too early for their realization on a universal basis; but efforts to achieve the limitation of sovereignty in favor of a system of international law on a regional basis are another thing; and when men begin to come seriously to grips with this possibility, as I think they will, it is to the carefully thought-out and profoundly humane ideas of Grenville Clark and Louis Sohn that they will have to turn for inspiration and guidance." So despite their innate genius, it took Morgenthau and Kennan more than twenty years to realize the profound wisdom of Louis' grand vision. It is one of the greatest of all tributes to Louis that these two mortal intellectual enemies have come to subscribe to the Clark-Sohn Proposals, if only during the twilight of their careers. And perhaps we, as students of Louis, can all take some small degree of satisfaction in this vindication of our teacher's perspicuity. But I submit that in all honor to Louis, we really cannot afford to do so. For although the founders of modern Machiavellian power politics, such as Morgenthau and Kennan, have changed their minds on this subject, most tragically they have left in their wake an entire generation of American foreign policy decision-makers who really believe that international law and organizations are totally irrelevant to the conduct of international relations, and, even more insidiously, that the proper way in which the United States government should conduct its foreign affairs is accurately prescribed by Machiavelli's 'The Prince'. This endemic attitude of legal nihilism towards international relations reached its apotheosis in the Vietnam War. And if you read the memoirs of more recent American statesmen such as Richard Nixon, Henry Kissinger, Zbigniew Brzezinski, and Alexander Haig, you will find that Machiavellianism still remains the predominant mode of thought about international relations among the members of today's U.S. foreign affairs and defense decision-making establishment. Therefore, I propose that it is up to each one of us as students of Louis to bring his grand vision of 'World Peace Through World Law' to bear upon the current and future generations of American foreign policy decision-makers. If we can successfully perform this task, then that achievement would be the best and most fitting honor which any of his students could ever bestow upon Louis. ========================================= COLLEGIUM IUSTITIÆ ÆQUITATEM RESTITUENTI +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ John Woolman College of Equity-Restorative Justice Peacemaking and Conflict Transformation [CERJ] c/o John Wilmerding > 217 High Street, Brattleboro, VT, USA 05301 Phone: (01)-802-254-2826 Email to: CERJ at igc.org +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ "There is no time left except to make peace work a part of our every waking activity." -- Elise Boulding, Quaker Scholar & Peace Activist +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ To join (or leave) the College's email list, send an email message to wilmerding at earthlink.net or to CERJ at igc.org, including your first & last name, your email address, and your state, province or country of residence. A partial CERJ list archive is at this site: http://lists.topica.com/lists/CERJ/read ========================================= Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: U.S. Department of State [mailto:usstatebpa at subscriptions.fcg.gov] Sent: Monday, June 12, 2017 12:21 PM To: Boyle, Francis A > Subject: Press Releases: Global Peace Operations Initiative Promotes International Peacekeeping You are subscribed to Press Releases for U.S. Department of State. This information has recently been updated, and is now available. Press Releases: Global Peace Operations Initiative Promotes International Peacekeeping 06/12/2017 12:37 PM EDT Media Note Office of the Spokesperson Washington, DC June 12, 2017 ________________________________ The Department of State's Bureau of Political-Military Affairs and the Department of Defense's Office of the Secretary of Defense are co-hosting the 11th annual Global Peace Operations Initiative (GPOI) Worldwide Consultations at the State Department on June 12-16, 2017. Participants from the Department of State, Department of Defense, other key U.S. government organizations, and the United Nations are discussing the evolving nature of peacekeeping; ways to strengthen performance and operational readiness of peacekeeping units; and efforts to address sexual exploitation and abuse by peacekeepers. Participants will also review ongoing GPOI activities, share implementers' best practices, and discuss program priorities for the years ahead. GPOI represents the U.S.'s primary global investment for strengthening international capacity and capabilities to execute peace operations around the world. The GPOI program accomplishes this goal by enhancing partner-country capabilities to train and sustain peacekeeping proficiencies and by building the capacity of the UN and regional organizations to conduct such missions. GPOI has created a tangible return on investment by helping to expand the base of capable peacekeepers. For example, GPOI partners have increased their military deployment rates to UN and African Union (AU) peace operations by 161 percent since becoming GPOI partners. Additionally, GPOI is helping the majority of its partner countries develop critical enabling capabilities which are in short supply in UN and regional peace operations, such as aviation, engineering, logistics, and medical support. GPOI is also helping partner countries recognize the important role women play in peace operations. For example, over the past five years, active GPOI partners have increased the number of female military peacekeepers deployed by 62 percent. GPOI's positive impact can be seen in virtually every UN or regional organizations' peace operation around the world today. For more information, please contact the Bureau of Political-Military Affairs, Office of Congressional and Public Affairs at PM-CPA at state.gov and follow us on Twitter @StateDeptPM. The Office of Website Management, Bureau of Public Affairs, manages this site as a portal for information from the U.S. State Department. External links to other Internet sites should not be construed as an endorsement of the views or privacy policies contained therein. ________________________________ Stay connected with the State Department: [State Dept website][DipNote Blog][Twitter][Tumblr][RSS Feed][Facebook][Flickr][YouTube][Google Plus] [Instagram] ________________________________ External links found in this content or on Department of State websites that go to other non-Department websites should not be construed as an endorsement of the views or privacy policies contained -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cgestabrook at gmail.com Tue Jun 13 16:35:38 2017 From: cgestabrook at gmail.com (C G Estabrook) Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2017 11:35:38 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] No AOTA recording today Message-ID: <41958174-2A00-4E72-8B28-182C75C67F4F@gmail.com> We will not be recording a new AWARE ON THE AIR today. Apologies for the late notice. —CGE From karenaram at hotmail.com Tue Jun 13 18:59:34 2017 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2017 18:59:34 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Paul Street on Counterpunch with twelve blasphemous thoughts to be shared Message-ID: JUNE 13, 2017 Twelve Blasphemous Thoughts: Some Summer Sacrilege by PAUL STREET * * * * Email * * [https://uziiw38pmyg1ai60732c4011-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/dropzone/2015/07/print-sp.png] [https://uziiw38pmyg1ai60732c4011-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/dropzone/2017/06/Screen-Shot-2017-06-13-at-6.37.10-AM.png] Photo by Thomas sauzedde | CC BY 2.0 Summer’s here and the time is right for sacrilege in the streets. Here are twelve blasphemous thoughts for the current Russo-phobic season, likely to be a real carbon- and (see below) capital-cooked scorcher. Wouldn’t That Have Been Russia’s Job? Forget for now the question of whether the Kremlin intervened to any significant degree against Hillary Clinton in “our great democratic process and elections” last year. I’ve been consistently skeptical about the claim, which continues to be made in the absence of any smoking gun. At the same time, I’ve always harbored the following question in the back of my mind: if the Russian did do what they are accused of, wouldn’t that have been the Russian foreign policy intelligence apparatus doing its very basic job of patriotic national self-defense? Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton and the broader Russo-phobic U.S.-imperial foreign policy establishment she represented seemed Hellbent on provoking a potentially deadly conflict with Russia over Ukraine, Crimea, and/or Syria. Hello? What Democratic Process and Elections? The Big Money-run United States is a damn near openly plutocratic oligarchy where the wealthy Few get what they want again and again regardless of majority working class sentiment. There’s a strong body of solid academic research demonstrating what Joe and Jane Six Pack already know about U.S. politics and policy: “money talks, bullshit walks.” You can’t have meaningful “democracy” in a nation where the top tenth of the upper 1 Percent owns more wealth than the bottom 90 percent. Eighty-six years ago, the great American philosopher John Dewey observed that “politics is the shadow cast on society by big business.” Dewey rightly prophesized that U.S. politics would stay that way for as long as power resided in “business for private profit through private control of banking, land, industry, reinforced by command of the press, press agents, and other means of publicity and propaganda.” Ten years later, the U.S. Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis made the very basic and elementary observation that Americans “must make our choice. We may have democracy, or we may have wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, but we can’t have both.” Why all this nonsensical talk about “American democracy”? It’s a childish fantasy. Uncle Sam Interferes Abroad Like Crazy Who on Earth is the United States to get enraged about Russia or anyone else’s real or possible interference in other nation’s political processes and elections? Uncle Sam has long and regularly undertaken such interference across the planet. It still does. Just for starters, ask the people of Latin America about U.S. political interference past and present. “We” interfered like crazy in Russian politics during the 1990s and certainly continue to conduct covert political operations there as in countless other sovereign nations. “We” have acted to topple and overthrow dozens of foreign governments since World War Two. Why shouldn’t other nations try to impact U.S. politics by any means possible? Washington and Wall Street exercise powerful influence on life and politics in other nations whose people never have a say in U.S. policy. The United States’ outsized and deadly Superpower role (responsible for many millions of deaths around the world since 1945) means that other nations (Russia is certainly no exception) have a vested interest in the U.S. political process. Hello Mike Pence? But let’s ask another unpleasant question. If it were ever shown that the Orange-Tinted Beast treasonously colluded with Russia, do we really want Mike Pence in the White House? Impeachment and removal would put a vicious right-wing Christian white-nationalist zealot (Pence) in the Oval Office and probably speed the passage of the full right wing Republican agenda through Washington. That’s what the Constitution says. It lets Trump use Pence as a kind of deadly insurance policy against removal. What’s so Great About the Holy Constitution? This suggests another and truly sacrilegious question: what’s so damn great about the widely fetishized and damn-near deified U.S. Constitution? I won’t elaborate on this as I have recently published a Truthdig report on why we should hold a Constituent Assembly to go beyond that absurdly glorified and hideously anti-democratic charter, which was crafted with expressly classist intent and consequences by the early republic’s propertied masters near the end of the 18thcentury. Read that essay, titled “Impeach the Constitution,” here.Certainly, it’s absurd to think that a document crafted by wealthy slave-owners, opulent merchants, and other vast property-holders with the explicit purpose of keeping the “wicked” popular majority and its “secret sigh for a more equal distribution” of wealth (James Madison’s lovely phrase) at bay (see my essay if you think I’m lying) can function in meaningful service to popular self-rule in the 21st (or any other) century. Questions Not Posed to Comey Speaking of class rule, notice how none of James Comey’s examiners during the nationally televised hearings of the Senate Intelligence Committee last Thursday asked the former FBI Director any of the following questions suggested by Amy Goodman and Dennis Moynihan: “How far-reaching is the FBI’s surveillance of journalists?…Why did the FBI label nonviolent water protectors at Standing Rock, North Dakota, possible domestic terrorists? What about the FBI’s similar infiltration of Occupy Wall Street and Black Lives Matter?…Regarding the FBI’s illegal COINTELPRO suppression of dissent in the ’50s, ’60s and ’70s, how many of those targeted who are still incarcerated, such as American Indian Movement activist Leonard Peltier, and the many imprisoned former Black Panthers, were imprisoned based on FBI misconduct?….Finally, where do you think we would be, as a country, if the FBI hadn’t targeted Martin Luther King Jr., with its unrelenting campaign of surveillance, intimidation and harassment, which very likely contributed to the climate of hate that led to his assassination?” Of course these queries were not posed. Russiagate is following in the footsteps of the Watergate hearings, which focused on Richard Nixon’s cover-up of an amateurish break-in of the headquarters of one of the nation’s leading capitalist parties but ignored the Nixon White House and FBI’s egregious violation of basic civil liberties in the domestic police state war on the New Left and the Black Freedom struggle. The small potatoes Watergate investigation also steered clear of Nixon’s arch-criminal invasion and bombing of Cambodia. See Noam Chomsky Weapons of Mass Distraction: The Biggest Issue of Our or Any Time is Not a News Story Here’s a scandalous observation: the news is a constant maddening distraction from the issues and problems that matter most, especially the deepening environmental crisis generated by the profits system. Nothing that Anderson Cooper and the rest of his Trump- and Comey- and Russia-obsessed panels have been jabbering about on CNN these days is remotely significant compared to the chilling (no irony originally intended) fact that atmospheric carbon parts per million (ppm) is now at a shocking 409.21, nearly full 10 points above just four years ago. We are now heading to 500 ppm by 2050. As Steven Newton wrote on Huffington Post almost one year ago: “That’s only 35 years away. A child born today will barely have moved out of Mom’s basement (at least, judging by some millennials) by the time CO2 reaches 500 ppm. The hundred-point rise between 300 to 400 ppm took about a century; the rise between 400 to 500 ppm will take only about 35 years, and with accelerating rates, the rise to 600 ppm will happen even faster.” Newton left something out: that is not survivable for the species. As the Australian Earth and paleoclimate scientist, Andrew Gliskon explained seven years ago: “The consequences of open ended rise in atmospheric CO2 are manifest in the geological record (Frontispiece). The world is in a lag period, when increasing atmospheric energy is expressed by intense hurricanes, increased pressure at mid-latitude high pressure zones and shift of climate zones toward the poles. With ensuing desertification of temperate zones, i.e. southern Europe , southern Australia , southern Africa , the desiccated forests become prey to firestorms….There is nowhere the 6.5 billion of contemporary humans can go, not even the barren planets into the study of which space agencies have been pouring more funding than governments allocate for environmental mitigation to date. At 460 ppm CO2-equivalent, the climate is tracking close to the upper stability limit of the Antarctic ice sheet, defined at approximately 500 ppm [5,7]. Once transcended, mitigation measures would hardly be able to re-form the cryosphere. According to Joachim Schellnhuber, Director of the Potsdam Climate Impacts Institute and advisor to the German government: ‘We’re simply talking about the very life support system of this planet.’” “Humans can not argue with the physics and chemistry of the atmosphere. What is needed are urgent measures including: Deep cuts in carbon emissions; Parallel Fast track transformation to non-polluting energy utilities – solar, solar-thermal, wind, tide, geothermal, hot rocks; Global reforestation and re-vegetation campaigns, including application of biochar. The alternative does not bear contemplation.” As the left philosopher John Sanbonmatsu told me years ago, global warming “is the biggest issue of our or any time.” (Though correspondent Richard Matthews recently reminded me to worry about “the 400 nuke power plants that will melt down as industrial civilization collapses if nuke war doesn’t come first.”). Please note the deafening silence in the reigning media and politics culture on “the biggest issue of our or any time.” Of all the maddening and insane things about the malignant narcissist Donald Trump, the most dangerous of all and is his climate change-denialist promise to “deregulate energy” – a pledge that amounts to what Noam Chomsky considers a potential “death-knell for the species.” The corporate media-politics system is deadening the citizenry to the most significant existential threats the species has ever faced. It’s insane. BDS the USA? Now that Trump has pulled the world’s top cumulative carbon contributor (USA, USA! being far in the historical lead) out of even the painfully modest and inadequate Paris Climate Accord, I am moved to ask another sacrilegious and not-entirely tongue-in-cheek question: Given U.S. leadership of geocidal climate destruction, the unparalleled and racist U.S. incarceration rate, the mass-murderous U.S. military Empire (which accounts for more than 40 percent of world military spending, eats up more than half of U.S. federal discretionary spending, maintains more than 1000 military installation across more than 100 “sovereign” nations, and has the largest carbon footprint of any institution on Earth), and the extreme inequality and plutocracy prevalent in the U.S….given all these and other problems (including rampant hedonistic idiocy and indifference), should we now issue a call to the international community for boycotts, divestment, and sanctions (BDS) targeting the United States and its institutions engaged in the destruction of the common good? Think Capitalogenic, not Anthropogenic Climate Change Now for some sacrilege on our holy “free market” profits system. We should follow the lead of the brilliant Marxist environmental historian and sociologist Jason Moore and replace the term “anthropogenic global warming” with “capitalogenic global warming.” The currently popular scientific concept of “the Anthropocene” – an era in which Earth systems are now for the first time decisively influenced by human activity – has rich geological validity and holds welcome political relevance in countering the carbon-industrial complex’s denial of humanity’s responsibility for contemporary climate change. Still, we must guard against lapsing into the historically unspecific and class-blind uses of “anthros,” projecting the currently and historically recent age of capital onto the broad 100,000-year swath of human activity on and in nature. As Moore told the left interviewer Sasha Lilley two years ago, “It was not humanity as whole that created …large-scale industry and the massive textile factories of Manchester in the 19th century or Detroit in the last century or Shenzen today. It was capital.” Read those two sentences again and commit them to memory. It is only during a relatively small slice of human history – roughly the last half-millennium giveor take a century or so – that humanity has been socially and institutionally wired from the top down to wreck livable ecology. Moore and other left analysts argue with good reason that it is more appropriate to understand humanity’s Earth-altering assault on livable ecology as “Capitalocene.” After all, it is only during the relatively brief period of history when capitalism has existed and ruled the world system (since 1600 or thereabouts by some academic calculations, earlier and later by others) that human social organization has developed the capacity and inner accumulation- and commodification – and “productivity” – and growth-mad compulsion to transform Earth systems – with profitability and “productivity” dependent upon on the relentless appropriation of “cheap nature” (cheap food, cheap energy, cheap raw materials and cheap human labor power or cheap human nature). Moore maintains that human destruction of livable ecology is best explained by changes that capitalism’s addictive and interrelated pursuits of profit and empire imposed on humanity’s relationships with “the web of life” since “the long sixteenth century” starting in 1450. One of the great and tragic consequences of contemporary class (capitalist) rule and mass consent manufacture is that most U.S. Americans can now more readily imagine the end of life itself than they can envision the end of the relatively recent and very specific historical phenomenon known as capitalism. No More Children Until We Fix This Now for some real blasphemy. I really cannot recommend anyone having children at this juncture. I know that’s a terrible thing to say but we are currently on track for 500 ppm, by 2050 (that’s 33 years away) and 500 ppm is the dissolution of the cryosphere. Antarctica is gone at that level. That’s game over. The “very life support of the system of this planet” is now in epic crisis and the most powerful nation on earth and in history (the U.S.) is also the leading cumulative carbon emission contributor by far and is ruled by a soulless, socio-pathological capitalist class that is shockingly ready to lead the world over the cliff. Talk about “The End of History.” Fukuyama may have been right but not in quite the way he thought. The only thing that can save chances for a decent future worthy of new life is a massive popular upheaval leading to a full conversion from fossil fuels to renewable energy along with giant programs of global re-forestation and re-vegetation. I see young adults with 1-2-year old babies and toddlers in strollers and car seats and I have three blasphemous thoughts these days: (1) are they aware that those strollers and car seats (posture nightmares) are destroying the structure and development of their child’s backs and necks? (2) did they look at the Earth science before they brought new life into this world? (3) They’d better figure out how to focus their lives on bringing about an eco-socialist revolution if they want their kids to have any shot at a decent life. Bernie is Who We Said He Was Let me re-state some especially irritating sacrilege to my “progressive” friends: we “perfectionist” radicals told you so and not just about Obama, but also about Bernie F-35 Sanders. It’s considered rude to gloat about having gotten things right while others didn’t. But I don’t really mean to gloat. I wish instead to instead to suggest that the progressive and liberal left (think The Nation, AlterNet, In These Times and the like) might want to pay more attention to its more serious “hard radical” voices (think Black Agenda Report, Counterpunch, John Pilger) when we issue serious and deeply considered warnings about Democratic Party politicos posing as populist champions of peace, equality, and the common good. I won’t belabor the point about Obama, who Dr. Adolph Reed, Jr. all too easily and accurately identified as a “vacuous to repressive neoliberal” as early as January of 1996. That’s old news though now with the added proof of the Dollar Obomber’s great and highly distasteful post-presidential cash-in (since nothing says “show me the money” like POTUS on your resume). With Bernie of late, we have gotten yet more evidence that he is in fact the imperialist and sheep-dogging fake-socialist Democratic Party company man that some of us the “hard radical” Left said he was. “Bomber Bernie” (as he was quite properly nicknamed by Vermont peace activists when he jumped on board Bill Clinton’s criminal attack on Serbia in 1999) let his imperialist colors fly regarding Donald Trump’s ridiculous, dog-wagging missile-launch into Syria this last spring. Behold this reflection from Young Turk Michael Tracy last April 11th: “Sanders’ initial statement on the strikes contained nothing that could be reasonably construed as a declaration of opposition…misleadingly, the statement was then excerpted into individual tweets, which falsely gave the impression that Sanders opposed the strikes, when all he had done was signal his “deep concern” as to the potential ramifications of the strikes. That’s a crucial distinction….’Raising concerns’ is not tantamount to an expression of clear, articulable opposition. One can support the Syria strikes, and yet be ‘concerned’ about the second-order effect of them, and the escalated conflict that might result. (See Schumer, Chuck, who rushed to endorse Trump’s attack within hours, only to then follow-up later with expressions of “worry” as to the long-term consequences).” “Similarly, Sanders expressed ‘concern’ about the potential consequences of Trump’s attack, but not opposition to the act itself. Unlike Schatz, Paul, and Gabbard, he has not rejected on principle the utility of American military force in this circumstance. He merely wants Trump to ‘explain to the American people’ what is to be achieved by the strikes, and to put forward a plan for a ‘political solution.’ Neither of these demands constitutes first-order opposition to the strikes: They are second-order worries. Even Sanders’ procedural complaints don’t signify opposition — unlike [even] Kaine, he doesn’t declare the strikes ‘unlawful,’ he merely says that ‘Congress has a responsibility to weigh in,’ which virtually no one in that body would disagree with.” “Then, on Meet the Press this past Sunday, Sanders went further: ‘We eventually have got to get rid of Assad,’ he told Chuck Todd, thereby endorsing the underlying logic of regime change. His only apparent recommendation is that this particular regime change be effectuated multi-laterally, i.e, the US should enlist some Middle Eastern autocrats to help out.” (emphasis added). How’s was that for Left Resistance, Bernie-style? That’s war socialism for you, as in Kautsky, Karl (who was, however, actually a Marxist and socialist, unlike the New Deal liberal Sanders). One is not a “perfectionist” just because they can’t get behind a politician who claims to a social democrat – even a democratic socialist – but who can’t seem to grasp the elementary moral and practical (fiscal and programmatic) contradiction between (a) calling for progressive policy and (b) backing the giant Pentagon System and the historically unmatched global empire it equips and staffs. If one is a left “perfectionist” because they expect post-Vietnam era progressives to honor the basic anti-imperial wisdom of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s April 4th 1967 “A Time to Break the Silence” speech, then I plead guilty. It’s true that Bernie recently gave a rousing Chicago speech in which he properly bellowed that “Trump didn’t win the election, the [neoliberal Clinton-Obama – P.S.] Democratic Party lost the election” and that “the current model and the current strategy of the Democratic Party is an absolute failure.” Sanders’ criticism of the Democratic party as out-of-touch and elitist resonated with activists at the People’s Summit. Audience members roared their approval when Sanders said that “the Democratic Party needs fundamental change [and to] understand what side it is on. And that cannot be the side of Wall Street, or the fossil fuel industry, or the drug companies.” I won’t bother to criticize the notion that significant revolutionary change will or even can take place within and through the Democratic Party (it can’t and won’t). That’s an ancient, never-ending progressive fantasy. The main things that struck me were (a) that Sanders’ oration indicated no movement left (Dr. King-ward) on U.S. foreign policy (imperialism) and (b) that he repeated the establishment claim that Vladimir Putin has been trying to “destabilize democracy” (listen the speech hyperlinked above from 38:45 to 39:10) in the U.S. What democracy, Bernie? (There was also this strange and repellent line in Sanders speech: “Even a very conservative Republican president like George W. Bush understood that one of the important functions of a leader in a democratic society is to bring people together, not separate them.” That statement, which must be some kind of reference to Dubya rallying the nation [in nationalistic hatred] after the 9/11 jetliner attacks [the hatred was then exploited for the arch-criminal U.S. invasion of Iraq], is so stupid and reactionary it almost defies belief.) Something Rotten in the State of Independent Left Media My final blasphemy: there’s something wrong with what passes for independent “left” media in the U.S. today. In an interview concerning David J. Garrow’s recent epic biography of Barack Obama on Dr. Jared Ball’s show imixwhatilike last week, I told the host the story of my last-minute cancellation at Democracy Now! (DN) in December of 2008. I had been scheduled to discuss my all-too sadly predictive book Barack Obama and the Future of American Politics(Paradigm, June 2008). I was in New York, flown out there with assistance from my publisher to try to warn folks about the fake-progressive and arch-corporatist, Goldman Sachs-staffed, and imperialist Obama presidency to come. The then the call came to my cell phone on the morning of my scheduled interview as I walked out of midtown Manhattan’s Port Authority and started heading down to DN’s headquarters. The spot was off, cancelled. I had trekked out to the Big Apple for…nothing. Amy and Juan had other matters to which to attend. There was no hint of rescheduling or revisiting prior to the Inauguration. A very basic calculation took hold: nice middle-class DN viewers and contributors would have been put off by my all-too subsequently validated evidence- and history-based projections on the Obamanistic betrayals to come. Ball then related how having “perfectionist” me on to speak candidly and seriously about the limits of candidate Sanders from a left perspective was a factor in his recent dismissal from another leading left media outlet. DN’s Goodman has given some credence to the dismal dollar-drenched Dems’ cynical and distracting Russiagate narrative. So now has The Intercept, founded by the E-Bay and Pay Pal billionaire Pierre Omidyar, who pays the journal’s top and brilliant civil-libertarian writer Glenn Greenwald between $250K and $1 million per year. To his credit, the Rolling Stone’s also brilliant and left-liberal, Trump presidency-predicting writer Matt Taibbi ran away from Omidyar’s “independent journalism” scheme after a brief fling three years ago. But now comes depressing news from the left Canadian writer Joe Emersberger: “In an op-ed for Rolling Stone, Matt Taibbi called Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro ‘the infamous left-wing dictator of Venezuela.’ To back up his case, Taibbi cited Julio Borges, president of the National Assembly and a leading opposition figure and Henrique Capriles, the opposition governor of the state of Miranda. Didn’t Taibbi notice a huge contradiction in his piece right there? How does the opposition win major elections in a dictatorship?…It gets worse. Julio Borges, as Taibbi also alludes to in his piece, has been using his position as head to the National Assembly to try to get economic sanctions implemented against Maduro’s government. Borges’ predecessor as president of the National Assembly, another opposition leader (Henry Ramos), boasted about having a lot of success scaring away investors – again by using his position as head of the National Assembly which the opposition won control over in December of 2015.” Good grief. I like Matt Taibbi and have learned a lot about Goldman Sachs and Wall Street’s perversion of America from him, but now even he has lined up with the vicious U.S.-sponsored right-wing assault on Bolivarian Revolution in Venezuela. Is nothing sacred? Join the debate on Facebook More articles by:PAUL STREET Paul Street’s latest book is They Rule: The 1% v. Democracy (Paradigm, 2014) CounterPunch Magazine [minimag-edit] Subscribe! 36 Pages, 6 Times a Year [bernie-the-sandernistas-cover-344x550] [zen economics] June 13, 2017 PAUL STREET Twelve Blasphemous Thoughts: Some Summer Sacrilege TYLER WILCH The Drone War: Understanding Who Must Die From Above REV. WILLIAM ALBERTS “Forgive Us Our Trespasses, as We Forgive Those Who Trespass Against Us” CHRIS WRIGHT A 21st-Century Marxism: The Revolutionary Possibilities of the “New Economy” BEN DANGL “For the Many, Not the Few:” Labour Party Gains in Britain Highlight Political Viability of Socialism MEDEA BENJAMIN Head of National Nurses Encourages Bernie Sanders to Start a People’s Party FRANK SCOTT Islamophobic Neocons, Russophobic Neolibs JOHN K. WHITE Liars, Damn Liars, and Scoundrels DAVID MACARAY Trump’s Extraordinary Cabinet N.D. JAYAPRAKASH No More Con Games: Abolish Nuclear Weapons Now! LAWRENCE WITTNER National Illusions and Global Realities JEFFREY PERRY 100th Anniversary of Hubert Harrison’s Founding of the First Organization of the Militant “New Negro Movement” CLANCY SIGAL Wonder Women ANDRÉS CASTRO Without a Grain of Salt June 12, 2017 KENNETH SURIN Sometimes Our Nightmares Don’t Come True: the Tories Lose Their Majority BILL MEULEMANS What the Nazis Did to Us ELLEN BROWN Mr. President, Be Careful What You Wish for: Higher Interest Rates Will Kill the Recovery DAVID ROSEN An End to Conversion Therapy? PATRICK COCKBURN Britain Refuses to Accept How Terrorists Really Work DANIEL READ Qatar on the Back Foot: Even Without “Shock and Awe” Trump’s Foreign Policy Lurks Behind Renewed Crisis in the Middle East KEVIN ZEESE - MARGARET FLOWERS Corbyn’s Lesson: Embrace Change We Need SUSAN BABBITT What Not to say to New Graduates Who do Care About the Planet NICK OLTMANN Katie McHugh’s Expendable Labor THOMAS S. HARRINGTON Such a “Surprise” in the UK! YVES ENGLER Trudeau Ramps Up Military MARK WEISBROT The Resurrection of Jeremy Corbyn BINOY KAMPMARK The Comey Show JESSELYN RADACK Reality Winner is a Whistleblower Weekend Edition June 09, 2017 Friday - Sunday CHRIS FLOYD False Dawn or New Hope: Right-Wing Pact Imperils UK Paradigm Shift ANDREW LEVINE Pro-Trump Identity Politics JEFFREY ST. CLAIR The Architect vs. the FBI: Frank Lloyd Wright at 150 JONATHAN COOK The Facts Proving Corbyn’s Election Triumph VIJAY PRASHAD Trump’s World Order BEN DEBNEY The Paranoid Style of Counter-Terrorism CHRIS WELZENBACH The Plight of the “Other”: Immigrants and Refugees in America’s Heartland SHAMUS COOKE Lessons From Portland’s Clashes With Fascists RUSSELL MOKHIBER Single-Payer is Not a Priority Even for Democrats Who Say They Support Single-Payer TED RALL The Donald Trump Lies You Forgot PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS Without a New Glass-Steagall America Will Fail STANLEY L. COHEN Breaking With Qatar PETE DOLACK A Climatic Baby Step Forward Beats a Leap Backward RYAN LAMOTHE Patriotism: the Future of an Illusion THOMAS S. HARRINGTON The Relentless Pulse of Pro-Israel Propaganda in Our Lives JOHN FEFFER Can South Korea Prevent a US Attack on North Korea? ANN GARRISON Putin vs. Megyn Kelly: a Poorly Planned Match CounterPunch Tells the Facts and Names the Names Published since 1996 Copyright © CounterPunch All rights reserved. counterpunch at counterpunch.org Mailing Address CounterPunch PO Box 228 Petrolia, CA 95558 Telephone 1(707) 629-3683 or 1(800) 840-3683 Editorial Jeffrey St. Clair, Editor Joshua Frank, Managing Editor Nathaniel St. Clair, Social Media Alexander Cockburn, -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From galliher at illinois.edu Tue Jun 13 19:53:08 2017 From: galliher at illinois.edu (Carl G. Estabrook) Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2017 14:53:08 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] The Hidden Costs of War In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: What would we have said of a discussion in a German university town in 1942 "about the financial, social, and environment costs Germans bear to support and pay for the conduct of endless military interventions in Asia and Africa"? That it was an exercise in missing the point? —CGE > On Jun 12, 2017, at 9:33 AM, Karen Aram via Peace-discuss wrote: > > >> >> From: Niloofar Shambayati via Peace >> Subject: [Peace] The Hidden Costs of War >> >> A panel discussion on the toll the U.S. military expenditure takes on the lives of the American people, followed by Q & A. >> >> Sunday, June 18, 1:30-3:00 PM >> Champaign Public Library >> >> Please, see the attached flyer, spread the word and participate in this important discussion. >> _______________________________________________ >> Peace mailing list >> Peace at lists.chambana.net >> https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace > > _______________________________________________ > Peace-discuss mailing list > Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss From karenaram at hotmail.com Tue Jun 13 20:39:20 2017 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2017 20:39:20 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] The Hidden Costs of War In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Perhaps had the discussion taken place in Germany in the thirty’s, the German people might not have been so ready to support Hitler and his wars of aggression throughout Europe. Letting people know the costs of war, rather than just the “glory” or the excuse of fighting “terrorists” is a means of educating and organizing. Only when the American people rise up against their government war policies, which means mass movements, will there be any change. We did it in the sixties, we should be doing it now. Like · Reply · 8 hrsOn Jun 13, 2017, at 12:53, Carl G. Estabrook > wrote: What would we have said of a discussion in a German university town in 1942 "about the financial, social, and environment costs Germans bear to support and pay for the conduct of endless military interventions in Asia and Africa"? That it was an exercise in missing the point? —CGE On Jun 12, 2017, at 9:33 AM, Karen Aram via Peace-discuss > wrote: From: Niloofar Shambayati via Peace > Subject: [Peace] The Hidden Costs of War A panel discussion on the toll the U.S. military expenditure takes on the lives of the American people, followed by Q & A. Sunday, June 18, 1:30-3:00 PM Champaign Public Library Please, see the attached flyer, spread the word and participate in this important discussion. _______________________________________________ Peace mailing list Peace at lists.chambana.net https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace _______________________________________________ Peace-discuss mailing list Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From galliher at illinois.edu Tue Jun 13 21:15:00 2017 From: galliher at illinois.edu (Carl G. Estabrook) Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2017 16:15:00 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] The Hidden Costs of War In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <5D67F997-5941-40F3-8789-505A407548BD@illinois.edu> Of course we should be calling upon the US government not to reduce the cost of war, but vastly to increase it - by paying reparations. —CGE > On Jun 13, 2017, at 3:39 PM, Karen Aram wrote: > > Perhaps had the discussion taken place in Germany in the thirty’s, the German people might not have been so ready to support Hitler and his wars of aggression throughout Europe. Letting people know the costs of war, rather than just the “glory” or the excuse of fighting “terrorists” is a means of educating and organizing. > > Only when the American people rise up against their government war policies, which means mass movements, will there be any change. We did it in the sixties, we should be doing it now. > > > >> Like · Reply · 8 hrs On Jun 13, 2017, at 12:53, Carl G. Estabrook > wrote: >> >> What would we have said of a discussion in a German university town in 1942 "about the financial, social, and environment costs Germans bear to support and pay for the conduct of endless military interventions in Asia and Africa"? >> >> That it was an exercise in missing the point? >> >> —CGE >> >>> On Jun 12, 2017, at 9:33 AM, Karen Aram via Peace-discuss > wrote: >>> >>> >>>> >>>> From: Niloofar Shambayati via Peace > >>>> Subject: [Peace] The Hidden Costs of War >>>> >>>> A panel discussion on the toll the U.S. military expenditure takes on the lives of the American people, followed by Q & A. >>>> >>>> Sunday, June 18, 1:30-3:00 PM >>>> Champaign Public Library >>>> >>>> Please, see the attached flyer, spread the word and participate in this important discussion. >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Peace mailing list >>>> Peace at lists.chambana.net >>>> https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Peace-discuss mailing list >>> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net >>> https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss >> > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Tue Jun 13 21:37:20 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2017 21:37:20 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] FW: Brzezinski a hawk against Russia | News-Gazette.com Message-ID: Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2017 4:36 PM To: Killeacle Subject: Brzezinski a hawk against Russia | News-Gazette.com http://www.news-gazette.com/opinion/letters-editor/2017-06-13/brzezinski-hawk-against-russia.html Brzezinski a hawk against Russia Tue, 06/13/2017 - 3:54am | The News-Gazette I went through the exact same doctoral program at Harvard University that produced Henry Kissinger and Zbigniew Brzezinski (a Carter administration adviser who died May 26) : The Harvard Graduate School of Arts and Sciences, Department of Government, where Harvard trains future professors of political science - not the Kennedy School, that trains future U.S. imperial apparatchiks to rule the world. Zbig was an ex-patriate Pole who hated the Soviets and the Russians with a passion. He could not be rational and reasonable in dealing with them. He has inflicted terrible harm upon good and constructive relations between the United States and the Soviet Union/Russia throughout his career. In this regard, Zbig's pernicious and nefarious influence will live on long after him by means of his students and proteges who inhabit American academia and high-level positions in the United States government, pundits, "intelligentsia" and media today. FRANCIS A. BOYLE College of Law University of Illinois Champaign From fboyle at illinois.edu Tue Jun 13 21:37:20 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2017 21:37:20 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] FW: Brzezinski a hawk against Russia | News-Gazette.com Message-ID: Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2017 4:36 PM To: Killeacle Subject: Brzezinski a hawk against Russia | News-Gazette.com http://www.news-gazette.com/opinion/letters-editor/2017-06-13/brzezinski-hawk-against-russia.html Brzezinski a hawk against Russia Tue, 06/13/2017 - 3:54am | The News-Gazette I went through the exact same doctoral program at Harvard University that produced Henry Kissinger and Zbigniew Brzezinski (a Carter administration adviser who died May 26) : The Harvard Graduate School of Arts and Sciences, Department of Government, where Harvard trains future professors of political science - not the Kennedy School, that trains future U.S. imperial apparatchiks to rule the world. Zbig was an ex-patriate Pole who hated the Soviets and the Russians with a passion. He could not be rational and reasonable in dealing with them. He has inflicted terrible harm upon good and constructive relations between the United States and the Soviet Union/Russia throughout his career. In this regard, Zbig's pernicious and nefarious influence will live on long after him by means of his students and proteges who inhabit American academia and high-level positions in the United States government, pundits, "intelligentsia" and media today. FRANCIS A. BOYLE College of Law University of Illinois Champaign From karenaram at hotmail.com Tue Jun 13 21:59:09 2017 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2017 21:59:09 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] The Hidden Costs of War In-Reply-To: <5D67F997-5941-40F3-8789-505A407548BD@illinois.edu> References: <5D67F997-5941-40F3-8789-505A407548BD@illinois.edu> Message-ID: I would agree to that. On Jun 13, 2017, at 14:15, Carl G. Estabrook > wrote: Of course we should be calling upon the US government not to reduce the cost of war, but vastly to increase it - by paying reparations. —CGE On Jun 13, 2017, at 3:39 PM, Karen Aram > wrote: Perhaps had the discussion taken place in Germany in the thirty’s, the German people might not have been so ready to support Hitler and his wars of aggression throughout Europe. Letting people know the costs of war, rather than just the “glory” or the excuse of fighting “terrorists” is a means of educating and organizing. Only when the American people rise up against their government war policies, which means mass movements, will there be any change. We did it in the sixties, we should be doing it now. Like · Reply · 8 hrsOn Jun 13, 2017, at 12:53, Carl G. Estabrook > wrote: What would we have said of a discussion in a German university town in 1942 "about the financial, social, and environment costs Germans bear to support and pay for the conduct of endless military interventions in Asia and Africa"? That it was an exercise in missing the point? —CGE On Jun 12, 2017, at 9:33 AM, Karen Aram via Peace-discuss > wrote: From: Niloofar Shambayati via Peace > Subject: [Peace] The Hidden Costs of War A panel discussion on the toll the U.S. military expenditure takes on the lives of the American people, followed by Q & A. Sunday, June 18, 1:30-3:00 PM Champaign Public Library Please, see the attached flyer, spread the word and participate in this important discussion. _______________________________________________ Peace mailing list Peace at lists.chambana.net https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace _______________________________________________ Peace-discuss mailing list Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Wed Jun 14 11:28:40 2017 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2017 11:28:40 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Brzezinski a hawk against Russia | News-Gazette.com In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Professor Boyle Your article in todays NG is a reminder that not only did this person cause so much damage in his role as Advisor to Presidents, How many people have died as a result of his influence. As a teacher he has influenced generations. We should never forget the role that teachers play in forming young minds, and we need to continue to counter the propaganda they spew. Thank you. > > http://www.news-gazette.com/opinion/letters-editor/2017-06-13/brzezinski-hawk-against-russia.html > Brzezinski a hawk against Russia > > > > > Tue, 06/13/2017 - 3:54am | The News-Gazette > > > I went through the exact same doctoral program at Harvard University that produced Henry Kissinger and Zbigniew Brzezinski (a Carter administration adviser who died May 26) : The Harvard Graduate School of Arts and Sciences, Department of Government, where Harvard trains future professors of political science - not the Kennedy School, that trains future U.S. imperial apparatchiks to rule the world. > > Zbig was an ex-patriate Pole who hated the Soviets and the Russians with a passion. He could not be rational and reasonable in dealing with them. He has inflicted terrible harm upon good and constructive relations between the United States and the Soviet Union/Russia throughout his career. > > In this regard, Zbig's pernicious and nefarious influence will live on long after him by means of his students and proteges who inhabit American academia and high-level positions in the United States government, pundits, "intelligentsia" and media today. > > FRANCIS A. BOYLE > > > > > > College of Law > > University of Illinois > > Champaign > _______________________________________________ > Peace-discuss mailing list > Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss From karenaram at hotmail.com Wed Jun 14 11:28:40 2017 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2017 11:28:40 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Brzezinski a hawk against Russia | News-Gazette.com In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Professor Boyle Your article in todays NG is a reminder that not only did this person cause so much damage in his role as Advisor to Presidents, How many people have died as a result of his influence. As a teacher he has influenced generations. We should never forget the role that teachers play in forming young minds, and we need to continue to counter the propaganda they spew. Thank you. > > http://www.news-gazette.com/opinion/letters-editor/2017-06-13/brzezinski-hawk-against-russia.html > Brzezinski a hawk against Russia > > > > > Tue, 06/13/2017 - 3:54am | The News-Gazette > > > I went through the exact same doctoral program at Harvard University that produced Henry Kissinger and Zbigniew Brzezinski (a Carter administration adviser who died May 26) : The Harvard Graduate School of Arts and Sciences, Department of Government, where Harvard trains future professors of political science - not the Kennedy School, that trains future U.S. imperial apparatchiks to rule the world. > > Zbig was an ex-patriate Pole who hated the Soviets and the Russians with a passion. He could not be rational and reasonable in dealing with them. He has inflicted terrible harm upon good and constructive relations between the United States and the Soviet Union/Russia throughout his career. > > In this regard, Zbig's pernicious and nefarious influence will live on long after him by means of his students and proteges who inhabit American academia and high-level positions in the United States government, pundits, "intelligentsia" and media today. > > FRANCIS A. BOYLE > > > > > > College of Law > > University of Illinois > > Champaign > _______________________________________________ > Peace-discuss mailing list > Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss From fboyle at illinois.edu Wed Jun 14 11:47:46 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2017 11:47:46 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Brzezinski a hawk against Russia | News-Gazette.com In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Especially here at the College of Law, which is why I am so grateful that all of you showed up to protest Killer Koh on October 28th. My sincere thanks to everyone involved. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Karen Aram [mailto:karenaram at hotmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2017 6:29 AM To: Boyle, Francis A Cc: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Brzezinski a hawk against Russia | News-Gazette.com Professor Boyle Your article in todays NG is a reminder that not only did this person cause so much damage in his role as Advisor to Presidents, How many people have died as a result of his influence. As a teacher he has influenced generations. We should never forget the role that teachers play in forming young minds, and we need to continue to counter the propaganda they spew. Thank you. > > http://www.news-gazette.com/opinion/letters-editor/2017-06-13/brzezinski-hawk-against-russia.html > Brzezinski a hawk against Russia > > > > > Tue, 06/13/2017 - 3:54am | The News-Gazette > > > I went through the exact same doctoral program at Harvard University that produced Henry Kissinger and Zbigniew Brzezinski (a Carter administration adviser who died May 26) : The Harvard Graduate School of Arts and Sciences, Department of Government, where Harvard trains future professors of political science - not the Kennedy School, that trains future U.S. imperial apparatchiks to rule the world. > > Zbig was an ex-patriate Pole who hated the Soviets and the Russians with a passion. He could not be rational and reasonable in dealing with them. He has inflicted terrible harm upon good and constructive relations between the United States and the Soviet Union/Russia throughout his career. > > In this regard, Zbig's pernicious and nefarious influence will live on long after him by means of his students and proteges who inhabit American academia and high-level positions in the United States government, pundits, "intelligentsia" and media today. > > FRANCIS A. BOYLE > > > > > > College of Law > > University of Illinois > > Champaign > _______________________________________________ > Peace-discuss mailing list > Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss From fboyle at illinois.edu Wed Jun 14 11:47:46 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2017 11:47:46 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Brzezinski a hawk against Russia | News-Gazette.com In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Especially here at the College of Law, which is why I am so grateful that all of you showed up to protest Killer Koh on October 28th. My sincere thanks to everyone involved. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Karen Aram [mailto:karenaram at hotmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2017 6:29 AM To: Boyle, Francis A Cc: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Brzezinski a hawk against Russia | News-Gazette.com Professor Boyle Your article in todays NG is a reminder that not only did this person cause so much damage in his role as Advisor to Presidents, How many people have died as a result of his influence. As a teacher he has influenced generations. We should never forget the role that teachers play in forming young minds, and we need to continue to counter the propaganda they spew. Thank you. > > http://www.news-gazette.com/opinion/letters-editor/2017-06-13/brzezinski-hawk-against-russia.html > Brzezinski a hawk against Russia > > > > > Tue, 06/13/2017 - 3:54am | The News-Gazette > > > I went through the exact same doctoral program at Harvard University that produced Henry Kissinger and Zbigniew Brzezinski (a Carter administration adviser who died May 26) : The Harvard Graduate School of Arts and Sciences, Department of Government, where Harvard trains future professors of political science - not the Kennedy School, that trains future U.S. imperial apparatchiks to rule the world. > > Zbig was an ex-patriate Pole who hated the Soviets and the Russians with a passion. He could not be rational and reasonable in dealing with them. He has inflicted terrible harm upon good and constructive relations between the United States and the Soviet Union/Russia throughout his career. > > In this regard, Zbig's pernicious and nefarious influence will live on long after him by means of his students and proteges who inhabit American academia and high-level positions in the United States government, pundits, "intelligentsia" and media today. > > FRANCIS A. BOYLE > > > > > > College of Law > > University of Illinois > > Champaign > _______________________________________________ > Peace-discuss mailing list > Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss From futureup2us at gmail.com Wed Jun 14 12:35:27 2017 From: futureup2us at gmail.com (Jay) Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2017 07:35:27 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Brzezinski a hawk against Russia | News-Gazette.com In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <55C9B54E-3221-4078-8AA2-51129225A373@gmail.com> Thank you, Francis, I'm sharing your letter! Jay > On Jun 14, 2017, at 06:47, Boyle, Francis A wrote: > > Especially here at the College of Law, which is why I am so grateful that all of you showed up to protest Killer Koh on October 28th. My sincere thanks to everyone involved. Fab. > > Francis A. Boyle > Law Building > 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. > Champaign IL 61820 USA > 217-333-7954 (phone) > 217-244-1478 (fax) > (personal comments only) > > -----Original Message----- > From: Karen Aram [mailto:karenaram at hotmail.com] > Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2017 6:29 AM > To: Boyle, Francis A > Cc: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Brzezinski a hawk against Russia | News-Gazette.com > > Professor Boyle > > Your article in todays NG is a reminder that not only did this person cause so much damage in his role as Advisor to Presidents, How many people have died as a result of his influence. As a teacher he has influenced generations. We should never forget the role that teachers play in forming young minds, and we need to continue to counter the propaganda they spew. > > Thank you. > >> >> http://www.news-gazette.com/opinion/letters-editor/2017-06-13/brzezinski-hawk-against-russia.html >> Brzezinski a hawk against Russia >> >> >> >> >> Tue, 06/13/2017 - 3:54am | The News-Gazette >> >> >> I went through the exact same doctoral program at Harvard University that produced Henry Kissinger and Zbigniew Brzezinski (a Carter administration adviser who died May 26) : The Harvard Graduate School of Arts and Sciences, Department of Government, where Harvard trains future professors of political science - not the Kennedy School, that trains future U.S. imperial apparatchiks to rule the world. >> >> Zbig was an ex-patriate Pole who hated the Soviets and the Russians with a passion. He could not be rational and reasonable in dealing with them. He has inflicted terrible harm upon good and constructive relations between the United States and the Soviet Union/Russia throughout his career. >> >> In this regard, Zbig's pernicious and nefarious influence will live on long after him by means of his students and proteges who inhabit American academia and high-level positions in the United States government, pundits, "intelligentsia" and media today. >> >> FRANCIS A. BOYLE >> >> >> >> >> >> College of Law >> >> University of Illinois >> >> Champaign >> _______________________________________________ >> Peace-discuss mailing list >> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net >> https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss > From futureup2us at gmail.com Wed Jun 14 12:35:27 2017 From: futureup2us at gmail.com (Jay) Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2017 07:35:27 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Brzezinski a hawk against Russia | News-Gazette.com In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <55C9B54E-3221-4078-8AA2-51129225A373@gmail.com> Thank you, Francis, I'm sharing your letter! Jay > On Jun 14, 2017, at 06:47, Boyle, Francis A wrote: > > Especially here at the College of Law, which is why I am so grateful that all of you showed up to protest Killer Koh on October 28th. My sincere thanks to everyone involved. Fab. > > Francis A. Boyle > Law Building > 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. > Champaign IL 61820 USA > 217-333-7954 (phone) > 217-244-1478 (fax) > (personal comments only) > > -----Original Message----- > From: Karen Aram [mailto:karenaram at hotmail.com] > Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2017 6:29 AM > To: Boyle, Francis A > Cc: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Brzezinski a hawk against Russia | News-Gazette.com > > Professor Boyle > > Your article in todays NG is a reminder that not only did this person cause so much damage in his role as Advisor to Presidents, How many people have died as a result of his influence. As a teacher he has influenced generations. We should never forget the role that teachers play in forming young minds, and we need to continue to counter the propaganda they spew. > > Thank you. > >> >> http://www.news-gazette.com/opinion/letters-editor/2017-06-13/brzezinski-hawk-against-russia.html >> Brzezinski a hawk against Russia >> >> >> >> >> Tue, 06/13/2017 - 3:54am | The News-Gazette >> >> >> I went through the exact same doctoral program at Harvard University that produced Henry Kissinger and Zbigniew Brzezinski (a Carter administration adviser who died May 26) : The Harvard Graduate School of Arts and Sciences, Department of Government, where Harvard trains future professors of political science - not the Kennedy School, that trains future U.S. imperial apparatchiks to rule the world. >> >> Zbig was an ex-patriate Pole who hated the Soviets and the Russians with a passion. He could not be rational and reasonable in dealing with them. He has inflicted terrible harm upon good and constructive relations between the United States and the Soviet Union/Russia throughout his career. >> >> In this regard, Zbig's pernicious and nefarious influence will live on long after him by means of his students and proteges who inhabit American academia and high-level positions in the United States government, pundits, "intelligentsia" and media today. >> >> FRANCIS A. BOYLE >> >> >> >> >> >> College of Law >> >> University of Illinois >> >> Champaign >> _______________________________________________ >> Peace-discuss mailing list >> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net >> https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss > From fboyle at illinois.edu Wed Jun 14 12:41:04 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2017 12:41:04 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Brzezinski a hawk against Russia | News-Gazette.com In-Reply-To: <55C9B54E-3221-4078-8AA2-51129225A373@gmail.com> References: <55C9B54E-3221-4078-8AA2-51129225A373@gmail.com> Message-ID: Thanks Jay. And I personally appreciate your organizing the Chicago Contingent for our Killer Koh Protest and that Bang-up Banner. It really meant a lot to me personally having taught full time here since August 21, 1978 that all of you joined together to make our point: Evil shall not pass without Resistance! Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Jay [mailto:futureup2us at gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2017 7:35 AM To: Boyle, Francis A Cc: Karen Aram ; David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Brzezinski a hawk against Russia | News-Gazette.com Thank you, Francis, I'm sharing your letter! Jay > On Jun 14, 2017, at 06:47, Boyle, Francis A wrote: > > Especially here at the College of Law, which is why I am so grateful that all of you showed up to protest Killer Koh on October 28th. My sincere thanks to everyone involved. Fab. > > Francis A. Boyle > Law Building > 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. > Champaign IL 61820 USA > 217-333-7954 (phone) > 217-244-1478 (fax) > (personal comments only) > > -----Original Message----- > From: Karen Aram [mailto:karenaram at hotmail.com] > Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2017 6:29 AM > To: Boyle, Francis A > Cc: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Brzezinski a hawk against Russia | News-Gazette.com > > Professor Boyle > > Your article in todays NG is a reminder that not only did this person cause so much damage in his role as Advisor to Presidents, How many people have died as a result of his influence. As a teacher he has influenced generations. We should never forget the role that teachers play in forming young minds, and we need to continue to counter the propaganda they spew. > > Thank you. > >> >> http://www.news-gazette.com/opinion/letters-editor/2017-06-13/brzezinski-hawk-against-russia.html >> Brzezinski a hawk against Russia >> >> >> >> >> Tue, 06/13/2017 - 3:54am | The News-Gazette >> >> >> I went through the exact same doctoral program at Harvard University that produced Henry Kissinger and Zbigniew Brzezinski (a Carter administration adviser who died May 26) : The Harvard Graduate School of Arts and Sciences, Department of Government, where Harvard trains future professors of political science - not the Kennedy School, that trains future U.S. imperial apparatchiks to rule the world. >> >> Zbig was an ex-patriate Pole who hated the Soviets and the Russians with a passion. He could not be rational and reasonable in dealing with them. He has inflicted terrible harm upon good and constructive relations between the United States and the Soviet Union/Russia throughout his career. >> >> In this regard, Zbig's pernicious and nefarious influence will live on long after him by means of his students and proteges who inhabit American academia and high-level positions in the United States government, pundits, "intelligentsia" and media today. >> >> FRANCIS A. BOYLE >> >> >> >> >> >> College of Law >> >> University of Illinois >> >> Champaign >> _______________________________________________ >> Peace-discuss mailing list >> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net >> https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss > From fboyle at illinois.edu Wed Jun 14 12:41:04 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2017 12:41:04 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Brzezinski a hawk against Russia | News-Gazette.com In-Reply-To: <55C9B54E-3221-4078-8AA2-51129225A373@gmail.com> References: <55C9B54E-3221-4078-8AA2-51129225A373@gmail.com> Message-ID: Thanks Jay. And I personally appreciate your organizing the Chicago Contingent for our Killer Koh Protest and that Bang-up Banner. It really meant a lot to me personally having taught full time here since August 21, 1978 that all of you joined together to make our point: Evil shall not pass without Resistance! Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Jay [mailto:futureup2us at gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2017 7:35 AM To: Boyle, Francis A Cc: Karen Aram ; David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Brzezinski a hawk against Russia | News-Gazette.com Thank you, Francis, I'm sharing your letter! Jay > On Jun 14, 2017, at 06:47, Boyle, Francis A wrote: > > Especially here at the College of Law, which is why I am so grateful that all of you showed up to protest Killer Koh on October 28th. My sincere thanks to everyone involved. Fab. > > Francis A. Boyle > Law Building > 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. > Champaign IL 61820 USA > 217-333-7954 (phone) > 217-244-1478 (fax) > (personal comments only) > > -----Original Message----- > From: Karen Aram [mailto:karenaram at hotmail.com] > Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2017 6:29 AM > To: Boyle, Francis A > Cc: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Brzezinski a hawk against Russia | News-Gazette.com > > Professor Boyle > > Your article in todays NG is a reminder that not only did this person cause so much damage in his role as Advisor to Presidents, How many people have died as a result of his influence. As a teacher he has influenced generations. We should never forget the role that teachers play in forming young minds, and we need to continue to counter the propaganda they spew. > > Thank you. > >> >> http://www.news-gazette.com/opinion/letters-editor/2017-06-13/brzezinski-hawk-against-russia.html >> Brzezinski a hawk against Russia >> >> >> >> >> Tue, 06/13/2017 - 3:54am | The News-Gazette >> >> >> I went through the exact same doctoral program at Harvard University that produced Henry Kissinger and Zbigniew Brzezinski (a Carter administration adviser who died May 26) : The Harvard Graduate School of Arts and Sciences, Department of Government, where Harvard trains future professors of political science - not the Kennedy School, that trains future U.S. imperial apparatchiks to rule the world. >> >> Zbig was an ex-patriate Pole who hated the Soviets and the Russians with a passion. He could not be rational and reasonable in dealing with them. He has inflicted terrible harm upon good and constructive relations between the United States and the Soviet Union/Russia throughout his career. >> >> In this regard, Zbig's pernicious and nefarious influence will live on long after him by means of his students and proteges who inhabit American academia and high-level positions in the United States government, pundits, "intelligentsia" and media today. >> >> FRANCIS A. BOYLE >> >> >> >> >> >> College of Law >> >> University of Illinois >> >> Champaign >> _______________________________________________ >> Peace-discuss mailing list >> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net >> https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss > From fboyle at illinois.edu Wed Jun 14 12:45:18 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2017 12:45:18 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Brzezinski a hawk against Russia | News-Gazette.com References: <55C9B54E-3221-4078-8AA2-51129225A373@gmail.com> Message-ID: And don't anyone forget: The College of Law is Evil! Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2017 7:41 AM To: 'Jay' Cc: Karen Aram ; David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Subject: RE: [Peace-discuss] Brzezinski a hawk against Russia | News-Gazette.com Thanks Jay. And I personally appreciate your organizing the Chicago Contingent for our Killer Koh Protest and that Bang-up Banner. It really meant a lot to me personally having taught full time here since August 21, 1978 that all of you joined together to make our point: Evil shall not pass without Resistance! Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Jay [mailto:futureup2us at gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2017 7:35 AM To: Boyle, Francis A Cc: Karen Aram ; David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Brzezinski a hawk against Russia | News-Gazette.com Thank you, Francis, I'm sharing your letter! Jay > On Jun 14, 2017, at 06:47, Boyle, Francis A wrote: > > Especially here at the College of Law, which is why I am so grateful that all of you showed up to protest Killer Koh on October 28th. My sincere thanks to everyone involved. Fab. > > Francis A. Boyle > Law Building > 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. > Champaign IL 61820 USA > 217-333-7954 (phone) > 217-244-1478 (fax) > (personal comments only) > > -----Original Message----- > From: Karen Aram [mailto:karenaram at hotmail.com] > Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2017 6:29 AM > To: Boyle, Francis A > Cc: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Brzezinski a hawk against Russia | News-Gazette.com > > Professor Boyle > > Your article in todays NG is a reminder that not only did this person cause so much damage in his role as Advisor to Presidents, How many people have died as a result of his influence. As a teacher he has influenced generations. We should never forget the role that teachers play in forming young minds, and we need to continue to counter the propaganda they spew. > > Thank you. > >> >> http://www.news-gazette.com/opinion/letters-editor/2017-06-13/brzezinski-hawk-against-russia.html >> Brzezinski a hawk against Russia >> >> >> >> >> Tue, 06/13/2017 - 3:54am | The News-Gazette >> >> >> I went through the exact same doctoral program at Harvard University that produced Henry Kissinger and Zbigniew Brzezinski (a Carter administration adviser who died May 26) : The Harvard Graduate School of Arts and Sciences, Department of Government, where Harvard trains future professors of political science - not the Kennedy School, that trains future U.S. imperial apparatchiks to rule the world. >> >> Zbig was an ex-patriate Pole who hated the Soviets and the Russians with a passion. He could not be rational and reasonable in dealing with them. He has inflicted terrible harm upon good and constructive relations between the United States and the Soviet Union/Russia throughout his career. >> >> In this regard, Zbig's pernicious and nefarious influence will live on long after him by means of his students and proteges who inhabit American academia and high-level positions in the United States government, pundits, "intelligentsia" and media today. >> >> FRANCIS A. BOYLE >> >> >> >> >> >> College of Law >> >> University of Illinois >> >> Champaign >> _______________________________________________ >> Peace-discuss mailing list >> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net >> https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss > From fboyle at illinois.edu Wed Jun 14 12:45:18 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2017 12:45:18 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Brzezinski a hawk against Russia | News-Gazette.com References: <55C9B54E-3221-4078-8AA2-51129225A373@gmail.com> Message-ID: And don't anyone forget: The College of Law is Evil! Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2017 7:41 AM To: 'Jay' Cc: Karen Aram ; David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Subject: RE: [Peace-discuss] Brzezinski a hawk against Russia | News-Gazette.com Thanks Jay. And I personally appreciate your organizing the Chicago Contingent for our Killer Koh Protest and that Bang-up Banner. It really meant a lot to me personally having taught full time here since August 21, 1978 that all of you joined together to make our point: Evil shall not pass without Resistance! Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Jay [mailto:futureup2us at gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2017 7:35 AM To: Boyle, Francis A Cc: Karen Aram ; David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Brzezinski a hawk against Russia | News-Gazette.com Thank you, Francis, I'm sharing your letter! Jay > On Jun 14, 2017, at 06:47, Boyle, Francis A wrote: > > Especially here at the College of Law, which is why I am so grateful that all of you showed up to protest Killer Koh on October 28th. My sincere thanks to everyone involved. Fab. > > Francis A. Boyle > Law Building > 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. > Champaign IL 61820 USA > 217-333-7954 (phone) > 217-244-1478 (fax) > (personal comments only) > > -----Original Message----- > From: Karen Aram [mailto:karenaram at hotmail.com] > Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2017 6:29 AM > To: Boyle, Francis A > Cc: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Brzezinski a hawk against Russia | News-Gazette.com > > Professor Boyle > > Your article in todays NG is a reminder that not only did this person cause so much damage in his role as Advisor to Presidents, How many people have died as a result of his influence. As a teacher he has influenced generations. We should never forget the role that teachers play in forming young minds, and we need to continue to counter the propaganda they spew. > > Thank you. > >> >> http://www.news-gazette.com/opinion/letters-editor/2017-06-13/brzezinski-hawk-against-russia.html >> Brzezinski a hawk against Russia >> >> >> >> >> Tue, 06/13/2017 - 3:54am | The News-Gazette >> >> >> I went through the exact same doctoral program at Harvard University that produced Henry Kissinger and Zbigniew Brzezinski (a Carter administration adviser who died May 26) : The Harvard Graduate School of Arts and Sciences, Department of Government, where Harvard trains future professors of political science - not the Kennedy School, that trains future U.S. imperial apparatchiks to rule the world. >> >> Zbig was an ex-patriate Pole who hated the Soviets and the Russians with a passion. He could not be rational and reasonable in dealing with them. He has inflicted terrible harm upon good and constructive relations between the United States and the Soviet Union/Russia throughout his career. >> >> In this regard, Zbig's pernicious and nefarious influence will live on long after him by means of his students and proteges who inhabit American academia and high-level positions in the United States government, pundits, "intelligentsia" and media today. >> >> FRANCIS A. BOYLE >> >> >> >> >> >> College of Law >> >> University of Illinois >> >> Champaign >> _______________________________________________ >> Peace-discuss mailing list >> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net >> https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss > From karenaram at hotmail.com Wed Jun 14 22:07:06 2017 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2017 22:07:06 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Where the US is headed Message-ID: * Print * Leaflet * Feedback * Share » Marching toward a wider war in the Middle East 14 June 2017 Behind the bitter political warfare in Washington and the endless media flogging of hysterical claims of Russian interference in the election with the supposed collusion of Donald Trump, very real wars in the Middle East are threatening to coalesce into a regional and even global conflagration with ominous implications for the peoples of not only the region, but the entire planet. These two fields of battle are by no means unconnected. The US ruling establishment is bitterly divided over US foreign policy and, most decisively, its war strategy. Behind the anti-Russia hysteria, the opposition to Trump on the part of the Democratic Party and significant layers of the Republicans is bound up with a determination to prevent him from in any way weakening the escalation of US aggression against Moscow, in particular over Washington’s drive for regime change in Syria. The Trump administration and the cabal of recently retired and active duty military officers who effectively steer its foreign and military policy have spelled out with increasing clarity a policy directed at planning war with Iran in preparation for confrontation with China. This was the unconcealed agenda of Trump’s trip last month to Israel and Saudi Arabia, Tehran’s two major regional enemies. The administration’s stated aim of forging an anti-Iranian, NATO-like alliance with the Sunni oil sheikdoms of the Gulf Cooperation Council has translated into a de facto state of war imposed by Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Egypt against Qatar, which has been subjected to an all-out economic blockade. The Saudi monarchy, the principal ideological and financial sponsor of Islamist extremism, has—with Trump’s blessings—absurdly cast its attack on Qatar as a crusade against terrorism. The real issues are Qatar’s ties to Tehran and its reluctance to join the anti-Iranian war drive. Turkey, meanwhile, has sided with the Qatari regime, sending food and taking steps toward establishing a military base on the small gas-rich Qatar Peninsula. Ankara had fallen out previously with Saudi Arabia and its allies over its opposition to the military coup that toppled Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi in 2013. These tensions have been exacerbated by charges that the UAE funneled billions of dollars into Turkey to support the abortive July 2016 coup against President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan. Amid this spiraling regional conflict, there is a seeming element of incoherence in the Trump administration’s policy. Qatar hosts the strategically vital al-Udeid air base along with some 10,000 US troops. The base is used to carry out airstrikes from Iraq and Syria to Afghanistan, all in the name of a campaign against terrorism and the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) in particular. With Iraqi forces, backed by a murderous US bombing campaign, close to conquering Mosul, a once great city turned to rubble, and Washington’s Kurdish proxies advancing under similarly devastating air cover into the Syrian city of Raqqa, ISIS is being driven out of its last two major strongholds. These apparent victories, however, spell not the end of the latest US war in the Middle East, but rather its increasingly dangerous transformation and escalation. In a report that could accurately be characterized as “straight from the horse’s mouth,” the New York Times published an article over the weekend titled “Beyond Raqqa, an Even Bigger Battle to Defeat ISIS and Control Syria Looms.” The author is Anne Barnard, who since the beginning of the US-orchestrated war for regime change six years ago has served as a faithful conduit for the CIA and Pentagon and a cheerleader for the US-backed, Al-Qaeda-linked “rebels” employed in the attempt to topple the government of President Bashar al-Assad. Barnard’s article indicates that the Pentagon and the CIA view the crusade against ISIS as a sideshow, a useful pretext for pursuing US imperialist interests in Syria and throughout the region. The battle against the Islamist militia, itself the product of the succession of US wars from Iraq to Libya and Syria, is being eclipsed, she writes, by a conflict in southeastern Syria “with far more geopolitical import and risk.” Barnard refers to this unfolding military confrontation as the “21st-century version of the Great Game,” a telling historical reference to the protracted rivalry between British imperialism and the Russian empire for dominance over Central Asia. Precisely such predatory aims are involved in Syria, where Washington seeks to overthrow the Assad regime and replace it with a puppet government, as a means of isolating and preparing for war against Iran, which it sees as a rival for hegemony in the energy-rich and strategically vital regions of the Persian Gulf and Central Asia. The focus of this new stage in a Syrian war that has killed hundreds of thousands and turned millions into refugees is a desert outpost run by US and British special forces commandos in al-Tanf, Syria’s southeastern border crossing with Iraq that controls the main highway between Damascus and Baghdad. The Pentagon is using the base to train so-called rebels, ostensibly to fight ISIS, but in reality to turn against the Syrian regime. It has unilaterally declared a 34-mile radius surrounding the base a “deconfliction zone,” using this as the pretext for launching three separate airstrikes—the latest on June 8—against militias aligned with the Damascus government. It also recently shot down what it claimed was an armed drone operated by pro-regime forces. Meanwhile, in the US-backed siege of ISIS-controlled Raqqa to the north, Washington’s Kurdish-dominated proxy ground forces have deliberately left ISIS an escape route to the south so that its fighters can join in the attack on the government-held half of Deir ez-Zor, a city of 200,000 in eastern Syria. In a blow to the unfolding US war strategy, pro-regime forces have fought their way east to the Iraqi border between the US base at al-Tanf and the ISIS-held border town of al-Bukamal on the Euphrates river. The Pentagon had claimed that its aim is to prepare the “rebels” it is training to take the town from ISIS. This would serve to consolidate US domination of the border area, opening the way for a drive up the Euphrates and ultimately the partition of Syria in preparation for an all-out war for regime change. The Syrian advance has disrupted US attempts to cut off supply routes linking Syria to Iraq and, further east, to Iran. Iraqi Shiite militias, backed by Iran, have reportedly moved toward the Syrian border. As the New York Times article makes clear, this is a matter of strategic importance to US imperialist aims. “...[W]hat is really at stake are even larger issues. Will the Syrian government re-establish control of the country all the way to its eastern borders? Will the desert straddling the Syrian-Iraqi border remain a no man’s land ripe for militant control? If not, who will dominate there—forces aligned with Iran, Russia or the United States?” One would never suspect that what is being described is a sovereign country. The US operation in Syria and Iraq is emerging clearly as the axis of a new imperialist carve-up of the Middle East after a quarter century of US wars that have laid waste to much of the region and left the rickety nation-state system imposed by the former colonial powers in shambles. Just as with earlier such colonial carve-ups, the resulting antagonisms pave the way toward world war. “With all these forces on a collision course, several recent escalations have raised fears of a direct confrontation between the United States and Iran, or even Russia,” the Times notes. The logic of the US intervention in Syria points toward a marked escalation of US military force to reverse the tactical defeats the Pentagon has suffered on the Iraqi-Syrian border. That such an offensive may provoke a direct military confrontation with “Iran, or even Russia” will not be unwelcome to dominant layers within the US ruling establishment that see war as the essential instrument for reversing the protracted decline of US capitalism’s global hegemony. For masses of working people in the Middle East, the United States and across the planet, however, these developments pose a mortal threat. This threat can be answered only through the building of a mass antiwar movement uniting the international working class on the basis of a fight to put an end to imperialism and reorganize society on socialist foundations. Bill Van Auken/WSWS.ORG -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Wed Jun 14 23:17:37 2017 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2017 23:17:37 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] New infrastructure, but privatized? Message-ID: * Print * Leaflet * Feedback * Share » What is in Trump’s $200 billion infrastructure plan? By Gabriel Black 14 June 2017 Trump’s infrastructure plan was released late last month as part of his proposed 2018 budget. The vague proposal, which according to his administration will be worked out in detail by the fall of this year, will lead to the mass sell-off of public infrastructure throughout the country while simultaneously slashing the transportation budget. The plan earmarks $200 billion over 10 years. Though there are no details yet, a Trump administration memo suggests that the bulk of the money will be given to states and local governments as incentives for privatizing public infrastructure. Moreover, more than $200 billion will simultaneously be cut from the transportation budget. This will likely hurt, among other programs, Amtrak, the national passenger rail service, potentially shutting it down, and TIGER, a program that gives state grants to fund infrastructure projects. Trump’s dubious plan will not repair or upgrade the decrepit and outmoded American infrastructure and transit systems. The proposal will force the public to pay new tolls and fees for basic transportation needs with no guarantees that the monopolies that control the roads will maintain them properly. The true beneficiaries of Trump’s plan are a handful of financial parasites and corporate conglomerates that will rake in the cash from this unprecedented transaction. Everything about the plan stinks of a disastrous con job. Trump ran for president on the promise that he would bring $1 trillion in infrastructure spending to the decaying and broken infrastructure of the United States. It is notable then that his administration has essentially slipped this into the 2018 budget without any mention of it to the public. The deal is too rotten to show more publicly. The heart of the deal seems to be the encouragement of something known as P3, that is a public-private partnership schemes. The plan has most notably been tested in Australia, where it is known as the “Asset Recycling Initiative.” Since 2013, the Australian government has paid an Australian state and two territories 15 percent of public assets they sell off as an incentive to make the sale. Joyce Nelson, an economist, writes in her book Beyond Banksters: “Australian critics of ‘asset recycling’ say it is basically ‘selling a hospital to build a road,’ with the federal government bribing local governments with incentive payments in order to sell off public assets.” Australian economist William Mitchell notes that these schemes “have systematically failed to deliver on the promises made by the consultants.” Meanwhile, he writes, “The stockbroking and legal companies and economists who advised governments in these public robberies have all done very well.” The Trump Administration is also considering some direct federal investments, but its memo makes clear that it believes local governments have become too reliant on federal funds. It euphemistically calls on “encouraging self-help” at the local level, by which it means pressuring local governments to make the choice to sell off assets. It must be stressed that there is nothing unique in Trump’s championing of P3. The Democratic Party and Republican Party have both stressed the need for public-private partnerships as the solution to the infrastructural and local-public debt problem in the United States. In the Detroit metro area, for example, Democratic politicians have played a key role in selling off infrastructure to private companies. The American Society of Civil Engineers, which has repeatedly warned about the dismal state of US infrastructure, also advocates P3 as the solution. The group has written, “Infrastructure owners and operators must charge, and Americans must be willing to pay, rates and fees that reflect the true cost of using, maintaining, and improving infrastructure.” The ASCE advocates “user generated fees,” hiking the gasoline tax, and other regressive proposals that would disproportionately affect the country’s poorest citizens. The group also calls for more “public-private” partnerships, along with the streamlining of approval for private investment in public infrastructure projects. These are all currently being considered by the Trump administration. Because roads, highways, transit lines, and other infrastructure investments are expensive long-term investments, it is rare to be able to have any kind of competition between service providers in a region. Having two highways going between the same places would be unprofitable, not to say irrational. The result is that privatization of public infrastructure always means monopoly privatization, with one company in charge of necessary infrastructure. This monopoly allows the company to charge exorbitant fees or provide sub-standard service with no repercussions. Reorienting American infrastructure along private lines would only create an ever more class-based infrastructure system, where only those who could afford to will be able to drive on high-toll expressways and bridges, send their children to quality schools, drink clean water and live in areas not threatened with constant flooding or environmental disasters. States and local municipalities whose budgets partially rely on revenue from transportation will likely be hurt in the long run by P3 schemes. For example, a privatization scheme of Chicago meters cost the city $974 million in revenue, according to the Inspector General’s office. Depriving states and municipalities of this source of revenue would compound a future budget crisis in the event of a future financial collapse. This would encourage cases like Detroit and Stockton where the collapse of city funds acts as a springboard for brutal cuts to worker pensions, pay, medical benefit and city services. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Thu Jun 15 01:26:57 2017 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2017 01:26:57 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Democrats Foreign Policy Vision? Message-ID: Democrats Don’t Have a Progressive Foreign Policy Vision. And They Need One by Evan Popp * * * * * * * 13 Comments [https://www.commondreams.org/sites/default/files/styles/cd_large/public/views-article/afghanistan_12.jpeg?itok=orFzF4Sd] President Barack Obama waves at the conclusion of his remarks to U.S. troops at Bagram Airfield in Bagram, Afghanistan, Sunday, May 25, 2014. (Official White House Photo by Pete Souza) Former President Barack Obama once articulated his vision of foreign policy as not doing “stupid shit.” By this he meant not putting boots on the ground in long-term, unwinnable wars. What this vision didn’t include was ending those wars or pursuing a progressive foreign policy based on peace and diplomacy. Obama’s Democratic Party has not advanced far past this vision since the end of his time in office. While the party has moved to the left on many domestic issues, and emerged as an effective counterbalance to the meanness and incoherence of Donald Trump, many Democrats remain wedded to Obama’s foreign policy legacy. This is the one area in which Trump has managed to win bipartisan support. He does not deserve it. For example, last week airstrikes in Syria by a U.S.-led coalition killed at least 12 people, including women and children. The response from Democrats in Congress: radio silence. Former President Barack Obama once articulated his vision of foreign policy as not doing “stupid shit,” but his vision didn’t include a progressive foreign policy based on peace and diplomacy. Even worse, consider the Democrats’ reaction to Trump’s April airstrike in Syria after the Syrian government’s horrific use of chemical weapons on its own people. Critics slammed Trump for bypassing Congress, arguing that the airstrike was unconstitutional and didn’t solve any of the underlying issues in Syria. But twenty-nine Democratic Senators supported the strike; only five opposed it. In addition, a number of Democratic leaders in the House praised the strike. Beyond their support for the Syrian airstrike, top Democrats have disappointing records on issues of war and peace. Senate Minority leader Chuck Schumer is a leading supporter of Israel, despite its illegal occupation of Palestinian territory. Democratic House leader Nancy Pelosi also has a history of hawkishness in the Middle East, as documented by the Institute for Policy Studies. And Hillary Clinton, the Democratic standard bearer in the 2016 presidential election, promoted militaristic solutions to international issues as Secretary of State, as well as during her campaign for President. Even Democrats like Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders have failed to articulate a progressive foreign policy. During his presidential campaign, Sanders’s main foreign policy talking point was his vote against the war in Iraq. While he was less hawkish overall than Clinton, Sanders didn’t rule out continuing Obama’s drone program that has killed thousands of civilians. Medea Benjamin, co-founder of the women-led peace group CODEPINK, tells The Progressive that Democrats “have a foreign policy message that is pretty much a continuation of what George Bush had and Obama followed. It’s hard for them to challenge Donald Trump because they have a vision that’s quite similar. I think that the Democrats are really a war party, just like the Republicans are.” There are individual Democrats whose foreign policy is less hawkish. Representative Barbara Lee of California, for example, has consistently opposed war. Lee, the only member of Congress to vote against the post 9/11 authorization of military force, has spoken outagainst Obama’s aggressive use of drone strikes. And Democratic Senator Chris Murphy of Connecticut has called for a de-emphasis of American military force and slammed the proposed $110 billion arms deal with Saudi Arabia, which is using U.S. weapons in its brutal war against Yemen. But Murphy also opposes cuts to the United States’ bloated military budget, which is larger than the next seven highest spending countries combined. Norman Solomon, author of the book “War Made Easy: How Presidents and Pundits Keep Spinning Us to Death” and co-founder of the group RootsAction, tells The Progressive that Democrats would likely gain politically if they had a more forward-looking foreign policy. [A free and independent press is essential to the health of a functioning democracy] “The Democratic Party base is more skeptical of and opposed to the warfare state than most Democrats in the House and Senate,” he argues. Polls back him up. A 2017 survey found more than half of Democratic voters disapproved of Trump’s airstrike in Syria. In addition, a 2016 poll showed that a majority of Democrats would support cutting the defense budget by $36 billion. “The Democratic Party base is more skeptical of and opposed to the warfare state than most Democrats in the House and Senate.” Paul Kawika Martin, senior director of policy and political affairs at Peace Action, tells The Progressive that one problem with Democratic foreign policy is that many lawmakers were previously on city councils or were members of state legislatures and didn’t have to deal with foreign affairs. He says when they get to Congress, lawmakers often follow the Democratic leadership on foreign policy votes. Martin says there needs to be a focus on educating lawmakers about foreign policy. “It’s important that Democrats think about foreign policy and find a good position,” he says. “They need to take some ownership for their positions and not fall into the trap where they feel like they have to react to things with force all the time.” With terror attacks on the rise and fears growing over ISIS, the temptation to pursue military strategies will only grow. As the opposition party, Democrats need an alternative foreign policy based on international diplomacy and the pursuit of peace, rather than the same warmongering strategies that create terrorist organizations like ISIS. If the Democrats regain power in Congress and the White House, it’s important they have a foreign policy that breaks from the Bush-Obama-Trump continuum of endless war. But what would such a foreign policy look like? Along with ending the war in Afghanistan, CODEPINK’s Benjamin says it would mean challenging the Pentagon on its extreme budget as well as stopping weapons deals with oppressive regimes like Israel and Saudi Arabia. Democrats appear to be taking a step forward on that front, with the majority opposing an arms deal with Saudi Arabia. Phyllis Bennis, director of the New Internationalism Project at the Institute for Policy Studies, tells The Progressive that forward-thinking foreign policy also has to rely on negotiations rather than violence. “If you look at Obama’s foreign policy successes like the Paris climate deal, the move toward normalcy in Cuba and most of all the Iran nuclear deal, they were all examples of the victory of diplomacy over war,” she says, adding that Obama’s foreign policy failures in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, and Somalia were instances when war trumped diplomacy. However, Bennis says the peace movement will have to pressure Democrats to move toward a progressive foreign policy. They won’t do it themselves, she argues. “The Democrats are never going to lead the progressive movement,” Bennis says. “The movements lead and demand of the Democratic Party that if they want support from the most mobilized, most conscious, and most committed component of their base, they damn well better include a progressive foreign policy vision.” © 2016 The Progressive [https://www.commondreams.org/sites/default/files/styles/cd_bio_small/public/authors/popp.jpg?itok=NbTRQODk] Evan Popp is a journalism student at Ithaca College currently interning at the Institute for Public Accuracy. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Thu Jun 15 10:59:53 2017 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2017 10:59:53 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] Democrats Foreign Policy Vision? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Carl G. Estabrook Nonsense. Democrats (and Republicans) have a progressive [sic] foreign policy vision, as the State Department pointed out years ago: "...we have about 50% of the world’s wealth but only 6.3% of its population. This disparity is particularly great as between ourselves and the peoples of Asia. In this situation, we cannot fail to be the object of envy and resentment. Our real task in the coming period is to devise a pattern of relationships which will permit us to maintain this position of disparity without positive detriment to our national security. To do so, we will have to dispense with all sentimentality and day-dreaming; and our attention will have to be concentrated everywhere on our immediate national objectives. We need not deceive ourselves that we can afford today the luxury of altruism and world-benefaction." — Report by the Policy Planning Staff | top secret | February 24, 1948 | PPS/23 On Jun 14, 2017, at 18:26, Karen Aram via Peace > wrote: Democrats Don’t Have a Progressive Foreign Policy Vision. And They Need One by Evan Popp * * * * * * * 13 Comments [https://www.commondreams.org/sites/default/files/styles/cd_large/public/views-article/afghanistan_12.jpeg?itok=orFzF4Sd] President Barack Obama waves at the conclusion of his remarks to U.S. troops at Bagram Airfield in Bagram, Afghanistan, Sunday, May 25, 2014. (Official White House Photo by Pete Souza) Former President Barack Obama once articulated his vision of foreign policy as not doing “stupid shit.” By this he meant not putting boots on the ground in long-term, unwinnable wars. What this vision didn’t include was ending those wars or pursuing a progressive foreign policy based on peace and diplomacy. Obama’s Democratic Party has not advanced far past this vision since the end of his time in office. While the party has moved to the left on many domestic issues, and emerged as an effective counterbalance to the meanness and incoherence of Donald Trump, many Democrats remain wedded to Obama’s foreign policy legacy. This is the one area in which Trump has managed to win bipartisan support. He does not deserve it. For example, last week airstrikes in Syria by a U.S.-led coalition killed at least 12 people, including women and children. The response from Democrats in Congress: radio silence. Former President Barack Obama once articulated his vision of foreign policy as not doing “stupid shit,” but his vision didn’t include a progressive foreign policy based on peace and diplomacy. Even worse, consider the Democrats’ reaction to Trump’s April airstrike in Syria after the Syrian government’s horrific use of chemical weapons on its own people. Critics slammed Trump for bypassing Congress, arguing that the airstrike was unconstitutional and didn’t solve any of the underlying issues in Syria. But twenty-nine Democratic Senators supported the strike; only five opposed it. In addition, a number of Democratic leaders in the House praised the strike. Beyond their support for the Syrian airstrike, top Democrats have disappointing records on issues of war and peace. Senate Minority leader Chuck Schumer is a leading supporter of Israel, despite its illegal occupation of Palestinian territory. Democratic House leader Nancy Pelosi also has a history of hawkishness in the Middle East, as documented by the Institute for Policy Studies. And Hillary Clinton, the Democratic standard bearer in the 2016 presidential election, promoted militaristic solutions to international issues as Secretary of State, as well as during her campaign for President. Even Democrats like Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders have failed to articulate a progressive foreign policy. During his presidential campaign, Sanders’s main foreign policy talking point was his vote against the war in Iraq. While he was less hawkish overall than Clinton, Sanders didn’t rule out continuing Obama’s drone program that has killed thousands of civilians. Medea Benjamin, co-founder of the women-led peace group CODEPINK, tells The Progressive that Democrats “have a foreign policy message that is pretty much a continuation of what George Bush had and Obama followed. It’s hard for them to challenge Donald Trump because they have a vision that’s quite similar. I think that the Democrats are really a war party, just like the Republicans are.” There are individual Democrats whose foreign policy is less hawkish. Representative Barbara Lee of California, for example, has consistently opposed war. Lee, the only member of Congress to vote against the post 9/11 authorization of military force, has spoken outagainst Obama’s aggressive use of drone strikes. And Democratic Senator Chris Murphy of Connecticut has called for a de-emphasis of American military force and slammed the proposed $110 billion arms deal with Saudi Arabia, which is using U.S. weapons in its brutal war against Yemen. But Murphy also opposes cuts to the United States’ bloated military budget, which is larger than the next seven highest spending countries combined. Norman Solomon, author of the book “War Made Easy: How Presidents and Pundits Keep Spinning Us to Death” and co-founder of the group RootsAction, tells The Progressive that Democrats would likely gain politically if they had a more forward-looking foreign policy. [A free and independent press is essential to the health of a functioning democracy] “The Democratic Party base is more skeptical of and opposed to the warfare state than most Democrats in the House and Senate,” he argues. Polls back him up. A 2017 survey found more than half of Democratic voters disapproved of Trump’s airstrike in Syria. In addition, a 2016 poll showed that a majority of Democrats would support cutting the defense budget by $36 billion. “The Democratic Party base is more skeptical of and opposed to the warfare state than most Democrats in the House and Senate.” Paul Kawika Martin, senior director of policy and political affairs at Peace Action, tells The Progressive that one problem with Democratic foreign policy is that many lawmakers were previously on city councils or were members of state legislatures and didn’t have to deal with foreign affairs. He says when they get to Congress, lawmakers often follow the Democratic leadership on foreign policy votes. Martin says there needs to be a focus on educating lawmakers about foreign policy. “It’s important that Democrats think about foreign policy and find a good position,” he says. “They need to take some ownership for their positions and not fall into the trap where they feel like they have to react to things with force all the time.” With terror attacks on the rise and fears growing over ISIS, the temptation to pursue military strategies will only grow. As the opposition party, Democrats need an alternative foreign policy based on international diplomacy and the pursuit of peace, rather than the same warmongering strategies that create terrorist organizations like ISIS. If the Democrats regain power in Congress and the White House, it’s important they have a foreign policy that breaks from the Bush-Obama-Trump continuum of endless war. But what would such a foreign policy look like? Along with ending the war in Afghanistan, CODEPINK’s Benjamin says it would mean challenging the Pentagon on its extreme budget as well as stopping weapons deals with oppressive regimes like Israel and Saudi Arabia. Democrats appear to be taking a step forward on that front, with the majority opposing an arms deal with Saudi Arabia. Phyllis Bennis, director of the New Internationalism Project at the Institute for Policy Studies, tells The Progressive that forward-thinking foreign policy also has to rely on negotiations rather than violence. “If you look at Obama’s foreign policy successes like the Paris climate deal, the move toward normalcy in Cuba and most of all the Iran nuclear deal, they were all examples of the victory of diplomacy over war,” she says, adding that Obama’s foreign policy failures in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, and Somalia were instances when war trumped diplomacy. However, Bennis says the peace movement will have to pressure Democrats to move toward a progressive foreign policy. They won’t do it themselves, she argues. “The Democrats are never going to lead the progressive movement,” Bennis says. “The movements lead and demand of the Democratic Party that if they want support from the most mobilized, most conscious, and most committed component of their base, they damn well better include a progressive foreign policy vision.” © 2016 The Progressive [https://www.commondreams.org/sites/default/files/styles/cd_bio_small/public/authors/popp.jpg?itok=NbTRQODk] Evan Popp is a journalism student at Ithaca College currently interning at the Institute for Public Accuracy. _______________________________________________ Peace mailing list Peace at lists.chambana.net https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Thu Jun 15 11:42:34 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2017 11:42:34 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] FW: News Gazette Letter to the Editor: AAUP lies on Salaita! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 6:42 AM To: 'Dan Corkery' ; Julie Wurth Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: News Gazette Letter to the Editor: AAUP lies on Salaita! Importance: High A report from an AAUP representative who visited the UI in April found that the climate for academic freedom is "robust", said Anita Levy, Senior program officer for Academic Freedom,Tenure and Governance. That is a bald-faced lie by the AAUP! The bigoted and racist persecution of Steven Salaita by the entire University Administration, many Faculty and large elements of the surrounding Community has terrorized and intimidated Palestinians/Arabs/Muslims of Color on this Campus and absolutely nothing has been done to alleviate it by the University of Illinois. Likewise, the University's longstanding bigotry and racism against American Indians still remains and has never been repudiated, rectified or even apologized for. Chancellor Wise's illegal firing of Steven Salaita was a two'fer for bigotry and racism on this Campus that is still pervasive against all People of Color here. Francis A. Boyle Professor of Law Ex-AAUP Member Resigned in Protest. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Thu Jun 15 11:42:34 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2017 11:42:34 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] FW: News Gazette Letter to the Editor: AAUP lies on Salaita! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 6:42 AM To: 'Dan Corkery' ; Julie Wurth Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: News Gazette Letter to the Editor: AAUP lies on Salaita! Importance: High A report from an AAUP representative who visited the UI in April found that the climate for academic freedom is "robust", said Anita Levy, Senior program officer for Academic Freedom,Tenure and Governance. That is a bald-faced lie by the AAUP! The bigoted and racist persecution of Steven Salaita by the entire University Administration, many Faculty and large elements of the surrounding Community has terrorized and intimidated Palestinians/Arabs/Muslims of Color on this Campus and absolutely nothing has been done to alleviate it by the University of Illinois. Likewise, the University's longstanding bigotry and racism against American Indians still remains and has never been repudiated, rectified or even apologized for. Chancellor Wise's illegal firing of Steven Salaita was a two'fer for bigotry and racism on this Campus that is still pervasive against all People of Color here. Francis A. Boyle Professor of Law Ex-AAUP Member Resigned in Protest. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Thu Jun 15 11:49:26 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2017 11:49:26 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] FW: News Gazette Letter to the Editor: AAUP lies on Salaita! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 6:42 AM To: 'Dan Corkery' ; Julie Wurth Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: News Gazette Letter to the Editor: AAUP lies on Salaita! Importance: High A report from an AAUP representative who visited the UI in April found that the climate for academic freedom is "robust", said Anita Levy, Senior program officer for Academic Freedom,Tenure and Governance. That is a bald-faced lie by the AAUP! The bigoted and racist persecution of Steven Salaita by the entire University Administration, many Faculty and large elements of the surrounding Community has terrorized and intimidated Palestinians/Arabs/Muslims of Color on this Campus and absolutely nothing has been done to alleviate it by the University of Illinois. Likewise, the University's longstanding bigotry and racism against American Indians still remains and has never been repudiated, rectified or even apologized for. Chancellor Wise's illegal firing of Steven Salaita was a two'fer for bigotry and racism on this Campus that is still pervasive against all People of Color here. Francis A. Boyle Professor of Law Ex-AAUP Member Resigned in Protest. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Thu Jun 15 12:56:16 2017 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2017 12:56:16 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] "An important upcoming event Message-ID: WHAT: A panel discussion about the financial, social, and environment costs Americans bear to support and pay for the conduct of endless military interventions in Asia and Africa. WHERE: Champaign Public Library, Rooms A&B, 200 W. Green St., Champaign WHEN: Sunday, June 18, 1:30 - 3 PM PANELISTS: * Maryam Ar-Raheem, Chair, Champaign County Democrats; Racial Justice Task Force; founding member, Sister Net; fmr. Dir., A Woman’s Place; fmr. Exec. Dir., UI YWCA; ret. AFSCME union rep at- large. * Morton Brussel, Professor of Physics emeritus, UIUC, nuclear physics research, Union of Concerned Scientists * David Johnson, Host, World Labor Hour; Jobs with Justice; Industrial Workers of the World ( I.W.W.); AFL-CIO of Champaign County * Augustus Wood, UIUC PhD candidate; Co-President, Graduate Employees Organization; Black Students for Revolution; Co-Host, World Labor Hour CO-SPONSORS: Build Programs, Not Jails; Channing Murray Foundation; Central Illinois Jobs with Justice; Eco-Justice Collaborative; People Demanding Action; The People’s Agenda; Food Not Bombs; Prairie Group of Sierra Club; Peace & Service Comm. of the U-C Friends Meeting; Three Spinners. [https://scontent.ford1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-0/c0.4.733.386/p526x395/18922092_10155467631117502_218656547965845180_n.jpg?oh=fe52cee55010b574f4358645efa3a424&oe=59DF99D8] JUN18 Going Hidden Costs of War panel Sun 1:30 PM CDT · Champaign Public Library · Champaign, IL 8 Going · 46 Interested -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Thu Jun 15 13:03:52 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2017 13:03:52 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] News Gazette Letter to the Editor: AAUP lies on Salaita! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: The Principles on Which We Stand at the University of Illiniwaks1 The Principles on Which We Stand At the University of Illiniwaks: The Cult of Chief Illiniwak Long Live Chief Illiniwak! Our Official Honored and Revered Symbol For the University of Illiniwaks And Illiniwaks all over the world! Illiniwak Pride! Illiniwak Fever! The Daily Illiniwak Illiniwaks Yearbooks Illiniwaks Homecoming Our Redskin Tradition Eagle Feathers too Illiniwak Stadium Our Illiniwakettes Our Fighting Illiniwaks Illiniwak Cheerleaders Our Marching Illiniwaks Band Our Famous 3 in 1 Illiniwak Spectacle Dumb! Dumb! Dumb! Dumb! Oskee! Bow! Wow! Just Honoring American Indians Not demeaning anyone Nor meaning them too All very civil How White of us all! The University of Illiniwaks Dumb! Dumb! Dumb! Dumb! Racists to boot Genocidaires too So very educational Cult of Chief Illiniwak Anthro 101 A required course To get our degrees >From the University of Illiniwaks Oskee! Bow! Wow! Forever! Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 6:43 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Subject: FW: News Gazette Letter to the Editor: AAUP lies on Salaita! Importance: High Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 6:42 AM To: 'Dan Corkery' >; Julie Wurth > Cc: Wise, Phyllis M > Subject: News Gazette Letter to the Editor: AAUP lies on Salaita! Importance: High A report from an AAUP representative who visited the UI in April found that the climate for academic freedom is "robust", said Anita Levy, Senior program officer for Academic Freedom,Tenure and Governance. That is a bald-faced lie by the AAUP! The bigoted and racist persecution of Steven Salaita by the entire University Administration, many Faculty and large elements of the surrounding Community has terrorized and intimidated Palestinians/Arabs/Muslims of Color on this Campus and absolutely nothing has been done to alleviate it by the University of Illinois. Likewise, the University's longstanding bigotry and racism against American Indians still remains and has never been repudiated, rectified or even apologized for. Chancellor Wise's illegal firing of Steven Salaita was a two'fer for bigotry and racism on this Campus that is still pervasive against all People of Color here. Francis A. Boyle Professor of Law Ex-AAUP Member Resigned in Protest. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) ________________________________ 1 My response to the Illiniwaks illegally firing the Palestinian American Professor Steven Salaita under the pretext of "civility" as set forth in their Statement of Principles on Which They Stand. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Thu Jun 15 13:03:52 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2017 13:03:52 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] News Gazette Letter to the Editor: AAUP lies on Salaita! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: The Principles on Which We Stand at the University of Illiniwaks1 The Principles on Which We Stand At the University of Illiniwaks: The Cult of Chief Illiniwak Long Live Chief Illiniwak! Our Official Honored and Revered Symbol For the University of Illiniwaks And Illiniwaks all over the world! Illiniwak Pride! Illiniwak Fever! The Daily Illiniwak Illiniwaks Yearbooks Illiniwaks Homecoming Our Redskin Tradition Eagle Feathers too Illiniwak Stadium Our Illiniwakettes Our Fighting Illiniwaks Illiniwak Cheerleaders Our Marching Illiniwaks Band Our Famous 3 in 1 Illiniwak Spectacle Dumb! Dumb! Dumb! Dumb! Oskee! Bow! Wow! Just Honoring American Indians Not demeaning anyone Nor meaning them too All very civil How White of us all! The University of Illiniwaks Dumb! Dumb! Dumb! Dumb! Racists to boot Genocidaires too So very educational Cult of Chief Illiniwak Anthro 101 A required course To get our degrees >From the University of Illiniwaks Oskee! Bow! Wow! Forever! Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 6:43 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Subject: FW: News Gazette Letter to the Editor: AAUP lies on Salaita! Importance: High Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 6:42 AM To: 'Dan Corkery' >; Julie Wurth > Cc: Wise, Phyllis M > Subject: News Gazette Letter to the Editor: AAUP lies on Salaita! Importance: High A report from an AAUP representative who visited the UI in April found that the climate for academic freedom is "robust", said Anita Levy, Senior program officer for Academic Freedom,Tenure and Governance. That is a bald-faced lie by the AAUP! The bigoted and racist persecution of Steven Salaita by the entire University Administration, many Faculty and large elements of the surrounding Community has terrorized and intimidated Palestinians/Arabs/Muslims of Color on this Campus and absolutely nothing has been done to alleviate it by the University of Illinois. Likewise, the University's longstanding bigotry and racism against American Indians still remains and has never been repudiated, rectified or even apologized for. Chancellor Wise's illegal firing of Steven Salaita was a two'fer for bigotry and racism on this Campus that is still pervasive against all People of Color here. Francis A. Boyle Professor of Law Ex-AAUP Member Resigned in Protest. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) ________________________________ 1 My response to the Illiniwaks illegally firing the Palestinian American Professor Steven Salaita under the pretext of "civility" as set forth in their Statement of Principles on Which They Stand. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Thu Jun 15 13:10:45 2017 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2017 13:10:45 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] Democrats Foreign Policy Vision? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I had a point in posting this article from Common Dreams, which I rarely read anymore, but the lies contained within aren’t worth the trouble disputing. Carl Estabrook disputed one below: Others I have commented on FB, such as the lie in relation to the Syrian government being responsible for the gas attacks on their own people, a statement I missed, also any suggestion that the Democratic Party has moved to the left, is ridiculous of course, given they have moved to the right over the years. So please ignore this article, and chalk it up to my foggy glasses when reading it. On Jun 15, 2017, at 03:59, Karen Aram > wrote: Carl G. Estabrook Nonsense. Democrats (and Republicans) have a progressive [sic] foreign policy vision, as the State Department pointed out years ago: "...we have about 50% of the world’s wealth but only 6.3% of its population. This disparity is particularly great as between ourselves and the peoples of Asia. In this situation, we cannot fail to be the object of envy and resentment. Our real task in the coming period is to devise a pattern of relationships which will permit us to maintain this position of disparity without positive detriment to our national security. To do so, we will have to dispense with all sentimentality and day-dreaming; and our attention will have to be concentrated everywhere on our immediate national objectives. We need not deceive ourselves that we can afford today the luxury of altruism and world-benefaction." — Report by the Policy Planning Staff | top secret | February 24, 1948 | PPS/23 On Jun 14, 2017, at 18:26, Karen Aram via Peace > wrote: Democrats Don’t Have a Progressive Foreign Policy Vision. And They Need One by Evan Popp * * * * * * * 13 Comments [https://www.commondreams.org/sites/default/files/styles/cd_large/public/views-article/afghanistan_12.jpeg?itok=orFzF4Sd] President Barack Obama waves at the conclusion of his remarks to U.S. troops at Bagram Airfield in Bagram, Afghanistan, Sunday, May 25, 2014. (Official White House Photo by Pete Souza) Former President Barack Obama once articulated his vision of foreign policy as not doing “stupid shit.” By this he meant not putting boots on the ground in long-term, unwinnable wars. What this vision didn’t include was ending those wars or pursuing a progressive foreign policy based on peace and diplomacy. Obama’s Democratic Party has not advanced far past this vision since the end of his time in office. While the party has moved to the left on many domestic issues, and emerged as an effective counterbalance to the meanness and incoherence of Donald Trump, many Democrats remain wedded to Obama’s foreign policy legacy. This is the one area in which Trump has managed to win bipartisan support. He does not deserve it. For example, last week airstrikes in Syria by a U.S.-led coalition killed at least 12 people, including women and children. The response from Democrats in Congress: radio silence. Former President Barack Obama once articulated his vision of foreign policy as not doing “stupid shit,” but his vision didn’t include a progressive foreign policy based on peace and diplomacy. Even worse, consider the Democrats’ reaction to Trump’s April airstrike in Syria after the Syrian government’s horrific use of chemical weapons on its own people. Critics slammed Trump for bypassing Congress, arguing that the airstrike was unconstitutional and didn’t solve any of the underlying issues in Syria. But twenty-nine Democratic Senators supported the strike; only five opposed it. In addition, a number of Democratic leaders in the House praised the strike. Beyond their support for the Syrian airstrike, top Democrats have disappointing records on issues of war and peace. Senate Minority leader Chuck Schumer is a leading supporter of Israel, despite its illegal occupation of Palestinian territory. Democratic House leader Nancy Pelosi also has a history of hawkishness in the Middle East, as documented by the Institute for Policy Studies. And Hillary Clinton, the Democratic standard bearer in the 2016 presidential election, promoted militaristic solutions to international issues as Secretary of State, as well as during her campaign for President. Even Democrats like Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders have failed to articulate a progressive foreign policy. During his presidential campaign, Sanders’s main foreign policy talking point was his vote against the war in Iraq. While he was less hawkish overall than Clinton, Sanders didn’t rule out continuing Obama’s drone program that has killed thousands of civilians. Medea Benjamin, co-founder of the women-led peace group CODEPINK, tells The Progressive that Democrats “have a foreign policy message that is pretty much a continuation of what George Bush had and Obama followed. It’s hard for them to challenge Donald Trump because they have a vision that’s quite similar. I think that the Democrats are really a war party, just like the Republicans are.” There are individual Democrats whose foreign policy is less hawkish. Representative Barbara Lee of California, for example, has consistently opposed war. Lee, the only member of Congress to vote against the post 9/11 authorization of military force, has spoken outagainst Obama’s aggressive use of drone strikes. And Democratic Senator Chris Murphy of Connecticut has called for a de-emphasis of American military force and slammed the proposed $110 billion arms deal with Saudi Arabia, which is using U.S. weapons in its brutal war against Yemen. But Murphy also opposes cuts to the United States’ bloated military budget, which is larger than the next seven highest spending countries combined. Norman Solomon, author of the book “War Made Easy: How Presidents and Pundits Keep Spinning Us to Death” and co-founder of the group RootsAction, tells The Progressive that Democrats would likely gain politically if they had a more forward-looking foreign policy. [A free and independent press is essential to the health of a functioning democracy] “The Democratic Party base is more skeptical of and opposed to the warfare state than most Democrats in the House and Senate,” he argues. Polls back him up. A 2017 survey found more than half of Democratic voters disapproved of Trump’s airstrike in Syria. In addition, a 2016 poll showed that a majority of Democrats would support cutting the defense budget by $36 billion. “The Democratic Party base is more skeptical of and opposed to the warfare state than most Democrats in the House and Senate.” Paul Kawika Martin, senior director of policy and political affairs at Peace Action, tells The Progressive that one problem with Democratic foreign policy is that many lawmakers were previously on city councils or were members of state legislatures and didn’t have to deal with foreign affairs. He says when they get to Congress, lawmakers often follow the Democratic leadership on foreign policy votes. Martin says there needs to be a focus on educating lawmakers about foreign policy. “It’s important that Democrats think about foreign policy and find a good position,” he says. “They need to take some ownership for their positions and not fall into the trap where they feel like they have to react to things with force all the time.” With terror attacks on the rise and fears growing over ISIS, the temptation to pursue military strategies will only grow. As the opposition party, Democrats need an alternative foreign policy based on international diplomacy and the pursuit of peace, rather than the same warmongering strategies that create terrorist organizations like ISIS. If the Democrats regain power in Congress and the White House, it’s important they have a foreign policy that breaks from the Bush-Obama-Trump continuum of endless war. But what would such a foreign policy look like? Along with ending the war in Afghanistan, CODEPINK’s Benjamin says it would mean challenging the Pentagon on its extreme budget as well as stopping weapons deals with oppressive regimes like Israel and Saudi Arabia. Democrats appear to be taking a step forward on that front, with the majority opposing an arms deal with Saudi Arabia. Phyllis Bennis, director of the New Internationalism Project at the Institute for Policy Studies, tells The Progressive that forward-thinking foreign policy also has to rely on negotiations rather than violence. “If you look at Obama’s foreign policy successes like the Paris climate deal, the move toward normalcy in Cuba and most of all the Iran nuclear deal, they were all examples of the victory of diplomacy over war,” she says, adding that Obama’s foreign policy failures in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, and Somalia were instances when war trumped diplomacy. However, Bennis says the peace movement will have to pressure Democrats to move toward a progressive foreign policy. They won’t do it themselves, she argues. “The Democrats are never going to lead the progressive movement,” Bennis says. “The movements lead and demand of the Democratic Party that if they want support from the most mobilized, most conscious, and most committed component of their base, they damn well better include a progressive foreign policy vision.” © 2016 The Progressive [https://www.commondreams.org/sites/default/files/styles/cd_bio_small/public/authors/popp.jpg?itok=NbTRQODk] Evan Popp is a journalism student at Ithaca College currently interning at the Institute for Public Accuracy. _______________________________________________ Peace mailing list Peace at lists.chambana.net https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Thu Jun 15 13:14:13 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2017 13:14:13 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] Democrats Foreign Policy Vision? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Yeah, Carl is right. Nothing has changed Democrats versus Republicans Tweedledumb versus Tweedlegreed Plus ca change…. Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Peace [mailto:peace-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of Karen Aram via Peace Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 8:11 AM To: Karen Aram Cc: peace ; peace-discuss Subject: Re: [Peace] Democrats Foreign Policy Vision? I had a point in posting this article from Common Dreams, which I rarely read anymore, but the lies contained within aren’t worth the trouble disputing. Carl Estabrook disputed one below: Others I have commented on FB, such as the lie in relation to the Syrian government being responsible for the gas attacks on their own people, a statement I missed, also any suggestion that the Democratic Party has moved to the left, is ridiculous of course, given they have moved to the right over the years. So please ignore this article, and chalk it up to my foggy glasses when reading it. On Jun 15, 2017, at 03:59, Karen Aram > wrote: Carl G. Estabrook Nonsense. Democrats (and Republicans) have a progressive [sic] foreign policy vision, as the State Department pointed out years ago: "...we have about 50% of the world’s wealth but only 6.3% of its population. This disparity is particularly great as between ourselves and the peoples of Asia. In this situation, we cannot fail to be the object of envy and resentment. Our real task in the coming period is to devise a pattern of relationships which will permit us to maintain this position of disparity without positive detriment to our national security. To do so, we will have to dispense with all sentimentality and day-dreaming; and our attention will have to be concentrated everywhere on our immediate national objectives. We need not deceive ourselves that we can afford today the luxury of altruism and world-benefaction." — Report by the Policy Planning Staff | top secret | February 24, 1948 | PPS/23 On Jun 14, 2017, at 18:26, Karen Aram via Peace > wrote: Democrats Don’t Have a Progressive Foreign Policy Vision. And They Need One by Evan Popp · · · · · · · 13 Comments [https://www.commondreams.org/sites/default/files/styles/cd_large/public/views-article/afghanistan_12.jpeg?itok=orFzF4Sd] President Barack Obama waves at the conclusion of his remarks to U.S. troops at Bagram Airfield in Bagram, Afghanistan, Sunday, May 25, 2014. (Official White House Photo by Pete Souza) Former President Barack Obama once articulated his vision of foreign policy as not doing “stupid shit.” By this he meant not putting boots on the ground in long-term, unwinnable wars. What this vision didn’t include was ending those wars or pursuing a progressive foreign policy based on peace and diplomacy. Obama’s Democratic Party has not advanced far past this vision since the end of his time in office. While the party has moved to the left on many domestic issues, and emerged as an effective counterbalance to the meanness and incoherence of Donald Trump, many Democrats remain wedded to Obama’s foreign policy legacy. This is the one area in which Trump has managed to win bipartisan support. He does not deserve it. For example, last week airstrikes in Syria by a U.S.-led coalition killed at least 12 people, including women and children. The response from Democrats in Congress: radio silence. Former President Barack Obama once articulated his vision of foreign policy as not doing “stupid shit,” but his vision didn’t include a progressive foreign policy based on peace and diplomacy. Even worse, consider the Democrats’ reaction to Trump’s April airstrike in Syria after the Syrian government’s horrific use of chemical weapons on its own people. Critics slammed Trump for bypassing Congress, arguing that the airstrike was unconstitutional and didn’t solve any of the underlying issues in Syria. But twenty-nine Democratic Senators supported the strike; only five opposed it. In addition, a number of Democratic leaders in the House praised the strike. Beyond their support for the Syrian airstrike, top Democrats have disappointing records on issues of war and peace. Senate Minority leader Chuck Schumer is a leading supporter of Israel, despite its illegal occupation of Palestinian territory. Democratic House leader Nancy Pelosi also has a history of hawkishness in the Middle East, as documented by the Institute for Policy Studies. And Hillary Clinton, the Democratic standard bearer in the 2016 presidential election, promoted militaristic solutions to international issues as Secretary of State, as well as during her campaign for President. Even Democrats like Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders have failed to articulate a progressive foreign policy. During his presidential campaign, Sanders’s main foreign policy talking point was his vote against the war in Iraq. While he was less hawkish overall than Clinton, Sanders didn’t rule out continuing Obama’s drone program that has killed thousands of civilians. Medea Benjamin, co-founder of the women-led peace group CODEPINK, tells The Progressive that Democrats “have a foreign policy message that is pretty much a continuation of what George Bush had and Obama followed. It’s hard for them to challenge Donald Trump because they have a vision that’s quite similar. I think that the Democrats are really a war party, just like the Republicans are.” There are individual Democrats whose foreign policy is less hawkish. Representative Barbara Lee of California, for example, has consistently opposed war. Lee, the only member of Congress to vote against the post 9/11 authorization of military force, has spoken outagainst Obama’s aggressive use of drone strikes. And Democratic Senator Chris Murphy of Connecticut has called for a de-emphasis of American military force and slammed the proposed $110 billion arms deal with Saudi Arabia, which is using U.S. weapons in its brutal war against Yemen. But Murphy also opposes cuts to the United States’ bloated military budget, which is larger than the next seven highest spending countries combined. Norman Solomon, author of the book “War Made Easy: How Presidents and Pundits Keep Spinning Us to Death” and co-founder of the group RootsAction, tells The Progressive that Democrats would likely gain politically if they had a more forward-looking foreign policy. [A free and independent press is essential to the health of a functioning democracy] “The Democratic Party base is more skeptical of and opposed to the warfare state than most Democrats in the House and Senate,” he argues. Polls back him up. A 2017 survey found more than half of Democratic voters disapproved of Trump’s airstrike in Syria. In addition, a 2016 poll showed that a majority of Democrats would support cutting the defense budget by $36 billion. “The Democratic Party base is more skeptical of and opposed to the warfare state than most Democrats in the House and Senate.” Paul Kawika Martin, senior director of policy and political affairs at Peace Action, tells The Progressive that one problem with Democratic foreign policy is that many lawmakers were previously on city councils or were members of state legislatures and didn’t have to deal with foreign affairs. He says when they get to Congress, lawmakers often follow the Democratic leadership on foreign policy votes. Martin says there needs to be a focus on educating lawmakers about foreign policy. “It’s important that Democrats think about foreign policy and find a good position,” he says. “They need to take some ownership for their positions and not fall into the trap where they feel like they have to react to things with force all the time.” With terror attacks on the rise and fears growing over ISIS, the temptation to pursue military strategies will only grow. As the opposition party, Democrats need an alternative foreign policy based on international diplomacy and the pursuit of peace, rather than the same warmongering strategies that create terrorist organizations like ISIS. If the Democrats regain power in Congress and the White House, it’s important they have a foreign policy that breaks from the Bush-Obama-Trump continuum of endless war. But what would such a foreign policy look like? Along with ending the war in Afghanistan, CODEPINK’s Benjamin says it would mean challenging the Pentagon on its extreme budget as well as stopping weapons deals with oppressive regimes like Israel and Saudi Arabia. Democrats appear to be taking a step forward on that front, with the majority opposing an arms deal with Saudi Arabia. Phyllis Bennis, director of the New Internationalism Project at the Institute for Policy Studies, tells The Progressive that forward-thinking foreign policy also has to rely on negotiations rather than violence. “If you look at Obama’s foreign policy successes like the Paris climate deal, the move toward normalcy in Cuba and most of all the Iran nuclear deal, they were all examples of the victory of diplomacy over war,” she says, adding that Obama’s foreign policy failures in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, and Somalia were instances when war trumped diplomacy. However, Bennis says the peace movement will have to pressure Democrats to move toward a progressive foreign policy. They won’t do it themselves, she argues. “The Democrats are never going to lead the progressive movement,” Bennis says. “The movements lead and demand of the Democratic Party that if they want support from the most mobilized, most conscious, and most committed component of their base, they damn well better include a progressive foreign policy vision.” © 2016 The Progressive [https://www.commondreams.org/sites/default/files/styles/cd_bio_small/public/authors/popp.jpg?itok=NbTRQODk] Evan Popp is a journalism student at Ithaca College currently interning at the Institute for Public Accuracy. _______________________________________________ Peace mailing list Peace at lists.chambana.net https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From galliher at illinois.edu Thu Jun 15 13:33:03 2017 From: galliher at illinois.edu (Carl G. Estabrook) Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2017 08:33:03 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] Democrats Foreign Policy Vision? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <072B4774-F769-4A5F-A49D-3E7E4902863B@illinois.edu> I think you were quite right to post this article. Many of our liberal friends accept the WWII myth about the US - that it won that war and has ever since been a force for peace, economic development, and democracy - a force best represented by the Democrats, occasionally retarded by Republicans (Nixon, Reagan). This malign lie reaches a certain apotheosis in the HRC campaign and its mad aftermath (‘Russiagate’). Anything that exposes that is worthwhile. —CGE > On Jun 15, 2017, at 8:10 AM, Karen Aram via Peace-discuss wrote: > > I had a point in posting this article from Common Dreams, which I rarely read anymore, but the lies contained within aren’t worth the trouble disputing. Carl Estabrook disputed one below: Others I have commented on FB, such as the lie in relation to the Syrian government being responsible for the gas attacks on their own people, a statement I missed, also any suggestion that the Democratic Party has moved to the left, is ridiculous of course, given they have moved to the right over the years. So please ignore this article, and chalk it up to my foggy glasses when reading it. > >> On Jun 15, 2017, at 03:59, Karen Aram wrote: >> >>> Carl G. Estabrook Nonsense. Democrats (and Republicans) have a progressive [sic] foreign policy vision, as the State Department pointed out years ago: >>> >>> "...we have about 50% of the world’s wealth but only 6.3% of its population. This disparity is particularly great as between ourselves and the peoples of Asia. In this situation, we cannot fail to be the object of envy and resentment. Our real task in the coming period is to devise a pattern of relationships which will permit us to maintain this position of disparity without positive detriment to our national security. To do so, we will have to dispense with all sentimentality and day-dreaming; and our attention will have to be concentrated everywhere on our immediate national objectives. We need not deceive ourselves that we can afford today the luxury of altruism and world-benefaction." >>> — >>> Report by the Policy Planning Staff | top secret | February 24, 1948 | PPS/23 >> >>> On Jun 14, 2017, at 18:26, Karen Aram via Peace wrote: >>> >>> Democrats Don’t Have a Progressive Foreign Policy Vision. And They Need One >>> by Evan Popp >>> • >>> • >>> • >>> • >>> • >>> • >>> • >>> 13 Comments >>> >>> President Barack Obama waves at the conclusion of his remarks to U.S. troops at Bagram Airfield in Bagram, Afghanistan, Sunday, May 25, 2014. (Official White House Photo by Pete Souza) >>> Former President Barack Obama once articulated his vision of foreign policy as not doing “stupid shit.” By this he meant not putting boots on the ground in long-term, unwinnable wars. What this vision didn’t include was ending those wars or pursuing a progressive foreign policy based on peace and diplomacy. >>> >>> Obama’s Democratic Party has not advanced far past this vision since the end of his time in office. While the party has moved to the left on many domestic issues, and emerged as an effective counterbalance to the meanness and incoherence of Donald Trump, many Democrats remain wedded to Obama’s foreign policy legacy. >>> >>> This is the one area in which Trump has managed to win bipartisan support. He does not deserve it. >>> >>> For example, last week airstrikes in Syria by a U.S.-led coalition killed at least 12 people, including women and children. The response from Democrats in Congress: radio silence. >>> >>> Former President Barack Obama once articulated his vision of foreign policy as not doing “stupid shit,” but his vision didn’t include a progressive foreign policy based on peace and diplomacy. >>> >>> Even worse, consider the Democrats’ reaction to Trump’s April airstrike in Syria after the Syrian government’s horrific use of chemical weapons on its own people. Critics slammed Trump for bypassing Congress, arguing that the airstrike was unconstitutional and didn’t solve any of the underlying issues in Syria. >>> >>> But twenty-nine Democratic Senators supported the strike; only five opposed it. In addition, a number of Democratic leaders in the House praised the strike. >>> >>> Beyond their support for the Syrian airstrike, top Democrats have disappointing records on issues of war and peace. Senate Minority leader Chuck Schumer is a leading supporter of Israel, despite its illegal occupation of Palestinian territory. Democratic House leader Nancy Pelosi also has a history of hawkishness in the Middle East, as documented by the Institute for Policy Studies. And Hillary Clinton, the Democratic standard bearer in the 2016 presidential election, promoted militaristic solutions to international issues as Secretary of State, as well as during her campaign for President. >>> >>> Even Democrats like Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders have failed to articulate a progressive foreign policy. During his presidential campaign, Sanders’s main foreign policy talking point was his vote against the war in Iraq. While he was less hawkish overall than Clinton, Sanders didn’t rule out continuing Obama’s drone program that has killed thousands of civilians. >>> >>> Medea Benjamin, co-founder of the women-led peace group CODEPINK, tells The Progressive that Democrats “have a foreign policy message that is pretty much a continuation of what George Bush had and Obama followed. It’s hard for them to challenge Donald Trump because they have a vision that’s quite similar. I think that the Democrats are really a war party, just like the Republicans are.” >>> >>> There are individual Democrats whose foreign policy is less hawkish. Representative Barbara Lee of California, for example, has consistently opposed war. Lee, the only member of Congress to vote against the post 9/11 authorization of military force, has spoken outagainst Obama’s aggressive use of drone strikes. >>> >>> And Democratic Senator Chris Murphy of Connecticut has called for a de-emphasis of American military force and slammed the proposed $110 billion arms deal with Saudi Arabia, which is using U.S. weapons in its brutal war against Yemen. But Murphy also opposes cuts to the United States’ bloated military budget, which is larger than the next seven highest spending countries combined. >>> >>> Norman Solomon, author of the book “War Made Easy: How Presidents and Pundits Keep Spinning Us to Death” and co-founder of the group RootsAction, tells The Progressive that Democrats would likely gain politically if they had a more forward-looking foreign policy. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> “The Democratic Party base is more skeptical of and opposed to the warfare state than most Democrats in the House and Senate,” he argues. >>> >>> Polls back him up. A 2017 survey found more than half of Democratic voters disapproved of Trump’s airstrike in Syria. In addition, a 2016 poll showed that a majority of Democrats would support cutting the defense budget by $36 billion. >>> >>> “The Democratic Party base is more skeptical of and opposed to the warfare state than most Democrats in the House and Senate.” >>> >>> Paul Kawika Martin, senior director of policy and political affairs at Peace Action, tells The Progressive that one problem with Democratic foreign policy is that many lawmakers were previously on city councils or were members of state legislatures and didn’t have to deal with foreign affairs. He says when they get to Congress, lawmakers often follow the Democratic leadership on foreign policy votes. >>> >>> Martin says there needs to be a focus on educating lawmakers about foreign policy. >>> >>> “It’s important that Democrats think about foreign policy and find a good position,” he says. “They need to take some ownership for their positions and not fall into the trap where they feel like they have to react to things with force all the time.” >>> >>> With terror attacks on the rise and fears growing over ISIS, the temptation to pursue military strategies will only grow. As the opposition party, Democrats need an alternative foreign policy based on international diplomacy and the pursuit of peace, rather than the same warmongering strategies that create terrorist organizations like ISIS. >>> >>> If the Democrats regain power in Congress and the White House, it’s important they have a foreign policy that breaks from the Bush-Obama-Trump continuum of endless war. >>> >>> But what would such a foreign policy look like? Along with ending the war in Afghanistan, CODEPINK’s Benjamin says it would mean challenging the Pentagon on its extreme budget as well as stopping weapons deals with oppressive regimes like Israel and Saudi Arabia. Democrats appear to be taking a step forward on that front, with the majority opposing an arms deal with Saudi Arabia. >>> >>> Phyllis Bennis, director of the New Internationalism Project at the Institute for Policy Studies, tells The Progressive that forward-thinking foreign policy also has to rely on negotiations rather than violence. >>> >>> “If you look at Obama’s foreign policy successes like the Paris climate deal, the move toward normalcy in Cuba and most of all the Iran nuclear deal, they were all examples of the victory of diplomacy over war,” she says, adding that Obama’s foreign policy failures in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, and Somalia were instances when war trumped diplomacy. >>> >>> However, Bennis says the peace movement will have to pressure Democrats to move toward a progressive foreign policy. They won’t do it themselves, she argues. >>> >>> “The Democrats are never going to lead the progressive movement,” Bennis says. “The movements lead and demand of the Democratic Party that if they want support from the most mobilized, most conscious, and most committed component of their base, they damn well better include a progressive foreign policy vision.” >>> >>> © 2016 The Progressive >>> >>> Evan Popp is a journalism student at Ithaca College currently interning at the Institute for Public Accuracy. >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Peace mailing list >>> Peace at lists.chambana.net >>> https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace >> From fboyle at illinois.edu Thu Jun 15 15:38:12 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2017 15:38:12 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] FW: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Sure. Let’s bring the War Criminal, Murderer, Felon, Bigot, Racist and Genocidaire Killer Koh into our Law School on October 28, 2016, hold him up as a Role Model to our Law Students, and then turn our Law Students into War Criminals, Murderers, Felons, Bigots, Racists and Genocidaires just like Killer Koh. Fab. Diss-Ode to Harold Killer Koh1 Harold Killer Koh Killing Babies where he go Muslim life is cheap you see Jewish life too for the Nazi Carl Schmitt Professor of Law At the Yale Law School Boot-licking Gene Rostow Of the infamous Rostow Brothers Who gave us Vietnam Genociding “gooks” too Obama’s War Consigliere Gene and his “kids” for LBJ Some things never change for Dems And their Elite Law School Whores Today At Harvard Law School too Where Killers Obama and Koh First dropped their pooh Along with “Judge” Davey Barron too Obama’s Droner-in-Chief Destined for a Cell in The Hague Right next to his student John Yoo A Chip off of Harold’s Old Block Cold-blooded Killers and War Criminals too Killer Koh disteaching “human rights” at N.Y.U. Supported by his gang of Dem law prof thugs Beating up on the N.Y.U. law students few With the courage, integrity, and principles to say Never again! Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Justia Verdict [mailto:verdictsupport at justia.com] Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 10:09 AM To: Boyle, Francis A Subject: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 Illinois Law dean and professor Vikram David Amar laments recent instances of censored speech, particularly on university campuses, and reminds us that freedom of speech and academic freedom protect even those speakers whose message might be perceived odious, racist, sexist, or hateful. Amar points out that both freedom of speech and academic freedom are rooted in the principle that ideas and arguments ought to be evaluated on their substance and that the essence of both kinds of freedom is the opportunity to persuade others of the merits of one's argument, rather than the use of power to coerce or silence others. Click here to view in your browser if you are having trouble viewing this email. [Verdict - Legal Analysis and commentary from Justia.] Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom Vikram David Amar Jun 15, 2017 [https://i2.wp.com/verdict.justia.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/IMG_0590.jpg?quality=90&resize=426%2C350&strip=all&fit=1000%25&ssl=1] It distresses me to see episodes these days in which speakers who are controversial for their conservative or ultra-conservative views are prevented from delivering invited remarks at universities (including public universities) because protestors choose to violate laws designed to protect public safety. It also distresses me to see so few liberal analysts decry how illiberal these episodes of group-imposed censorship are. As I have written at length elsewhere, no matter how repressive or otherwise abhorrent a speaker’s message, the appropriate response under our Constitution is counter speech, not shouting down or physically obstructing or threatening the speaker or the speaker’s audience. To be sure, protesting a speaker’s presence—registering profound objection to a speaker’s viewpoint—is perfectly appropriate and has a rich tradition dating from even before the 1960s free speech revolution through the Occupy movement. But what we have seen over the past several months is a transition from protesting against bad speakers to preventing them from being able to speak, and that is not acceptable. An unflinching commitment to freedom of speech—even odious, racist, sexist, hateful speech—is the cornerstone of constitutional democracy in the United States. Certainly we protect freedom of speech more vigorously than any other western democracy. We also have a venerable tradition of respecting academic freedom at colleges and universities. These two principles, freedom of speech and academic freedom, overlap and are interconnected, even as they are distinct ideas. Freedom of speech is a broadly applicable right codified in the federal First Amendment and state constitutional analogues that protects speakers both on and off public campuses from unwarranted government interference with expression. Academic freedom, which may extend beyond what the Constitution protects, is grounded on the idea that, at least in the academy, free inquiry unburdened by the constraints of orthodoxy will lead to the development of new ideas and knowledge. Notwithstanding their different scopes, both freedom of speech and academic freedom rest on the bedrock belief that ideas and arguments ought to be evaluated on their substance. The essence of both kinds of freedom is the opportunity to persuade others of the merits of one’s argument, rather than the use of power to coerce others into acceding to the proponent’s point of view. Sometimes the heat and passion of political protests on college campuses causes these basic principles to be overlooked or ignored. When that happens, it is important for us to go back to what freedom of speech and academic freedom really mean and how easily both of these principles can be misused and misinterpreted. Governments Can and Should Prohibit Certain Obstructive Conduct The short of the matter is that blockading, obstructing, assaulting, destroying property, and making threats, are not, in any stretch of the imagination, constitutionally protected things to do, no matter what the objective behind them. These activities are conduct the government has always had the legitimate authority to proscribe because they so obviously interfere with the liberty and lawful pursuits of others. As the Supreme Court of California stated in an important free speech case, In Re Kay: [T]he state retains a legitimate concern in ensuring that some individuals unruly assertion of their rights of free expression does not imperil other citizen’s rights of free association and discussion. … Freedom of everyone to talk at once can destroy the right of anyone effectively to talk at all. Free expression can expire as tragically in the tumult of license as in the silence of censorship. Government actions to prohibit blockades or obstruction have been held to be permissible under the First Amendment too many times to count. To cite just one example, a federal law, the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act (FACE), that prohibits anyone from physically obstructing any person from obtaining or providing reproductive health services, has been upheld repeatedly against constitutional challenge, and those cases raise harder questions than do generic obstruction laws because FACE targets specific places where protestors with particular messages may be expected. Blockades and obstructions can and should be prohibited consistent with the First Amendment primarily because they are not intended to and do not persuade anyone of the merits of the protestors’ position. They are employed to coerce third parties to change their behavior, not their minds. As such, they are actually antithetical to, rather than in furtherance of, the values on which freedom of speech and academic freedom are grounded — a commitment to the power of ideas rather than the use of force to change the way that people act. Creative But Unavailing Counterarguments In recent weeks, I have heard defenders of those who obstruct conservative speakers make two novel but completely unconvincing arguments. First, the obstruction defenders try to invoke the civil rights movement by pointing out that Martin Luther King, Jr. and his supporters were often guilty of civil disobedience—that is violating duly enacted laws. But this analogy is unavailing because King and his followers were violating laws that were (in the eyes of the protestors and many others) themselves unjust, not laws that were completely unobjectionable but simply stood in the way of the desires of the violators. Another distinction between the two settings is that to the extent that civil rights protestors violated laws regulating their political activity, they were violating laws in order to be heard themselves, not in order to prevent others from being heard. But today’s obstructors cannot credibly complain that they cannot be heard; they simply want others not to be listened to. The second creative yet deeply flawed argument I’ve heard in defense of the obstructors is the idea that controversial speakers of the kind who are being suppressed are themselves not appropriate speakers to be invited to university settings because they are not sufficiently academic in character. Putting aside the fact that these speakers were invited (whether they ought to have been or not), and putting aside whether some of these speakers do have some academic bona fides (even if their ideas are often very wrong-headed), this argument mischaracterizes the kind of speakers who belong at universities. Higher education is a place not just to sharpen one’s critical thinking skills through exposure to brilliant academics who make data-informed arguments in multiple directions; it is also a place where one should learn how to become a full citizen in American society. As the Supreme Court observed in the context of high school students in Tinker v. Des Moines Independent School District, this often means that students need to engage each other on the contentious political issues of the day. And in today’s college world this sometimes means hearing and evaluating strident political advocates, some of whom even border on demagoguery. To be sure, student and faculty organizations should give some thought (perhaps more thought than they currently do) to the question of whom they invite to speak on campus—certainly not everyone should be offered a platform—but many campus speakers, on the Left as well as the Right, are not particularly grounded in rigorous theoretical or empirical analysis, and this does not mean that they are per se inappropriate speakers for college audiences. Again, colleges should be preparing young people not just to navigate the economy, but also to navigate democracy. And, for better or worse, modern democracy means having to deal with a lot of ideas that are widely held even though they don’t hold up to analytic rigor. Debunking those ideas—not shouting them down or trying to suppress their expression—is what I want my students to learn how to do. [https://justatic.com/v/20170601a/verdict/images/authors/thumbs/amar.jpg] Follow @prof_amar Vikram David Amar is the Iwan Foundation Professor of Law and the Dean at the University of Illinois College of Law. Previously, he served as the Associate Dean for Academic Affairs and Professor of Law at the University of California, Davis School of Law. He is a 1988 graduate of the Yale Law School and a former clerk to Justice Harry Blackmun. He is a co-author, along with William Cohen and Jonathan Varat, of a major constitutional law casebook, and a co-author of several volumes of the Wright & Miller treatise on federal practice and procedure. Before teaching, Professor Amar spent a few years at the firm of Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher. RECENT ARTICLES Supreme Court Rules That Citizenship Must Be Equally Heritable Through Fathers and Mothers Cornell University law professor Michael C. Dorf comments on a recent decision by the U.S. Supreme Court on the heritability of citizenship and explains why the decision might have implications for other immigration issues, such as the “Muslim ban” executive order. Dorf argues that the precedents the Court had to distinguish to reach its conclusion might give some insight into whether and how it might defer to other political branches on immigration issues.... Read More Trump Is Not Ready To Deal With His Legal Problems John W. Dean, former counsel to President Nixon, reflects on the much-anticipated testimony of former FBI Director James Comey before the Senate Intelligence Committee on Thursday. Dean briefly summarizes the takeaways from Comey’s testimony and discusses the response by President Trump and his lawyer.... Read More Absolute Power Corrupts Absolutely in The Keepers Marci A. Hamilton, a Fox Distinguished Scholar in the Fox Leadership Program at the University of Pennsylvania and CEO of CHILD USA, encourages everyone to watch the Netflix docuseries The Keepers, which addresses child sex abuse in the Catholic Church. Hamilton describes the progress toward justice for child sex abuse victims, including the growing awareness of the pervasiveness the problem and increasing numbers of states who extend or eliminate statutes of limitations for these types of lawsuits and prosecutions.... Read More [Forward this email.] Have friends who like law? Forward this email. [Like Verdict on Facebook] Like Verdict for legal discussions on Facebook. [Follow @verdictjustia on Twitter] Follow @verdictjustia for news and updates on Twitter. [Justia] Contact Us | Privacy Policy | Unsubscribe [Facebook][Twitter][LinkedIn][Justia][GooglePlus] You received this email because you have subscribed to the Verdict News E-Mail Feed. Justia | 1380 Pear Ave, Suite 2B, Mountain View, CA 94043 ________________________________ 1 Behind me at Harvard Law School, Killer Koh was President Obama’s War Consigliere and Droner-in-Chief. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Thu Jun 15 15:38:12 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2017 15:38:12 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] FW: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Sure. Let’s bring the War Criminal, Murderer, Felon, Bigot, Racist and Genocidaire Killer Koh into our Law School on October 28, 2016, hold him up as a Role Model to our Law Students, and then turn our Law Students into War Criminals, Murderers, Felons, Bigots, Racists and Genocidaires just like Killer Koh. Fab. Diss-Ode to Harold Killer Koh1 Harold Killer Koh Killing Babies where he go Muslim life is cheap you see Jewish life too for the Nazi Carl Schmitt Professor of Law At the Yale Law School Boot-licking Gene Rostow Of the infamous Rostow Brothers Who gave us Vietnam Genociding “gooks” too Obama’s War Consigliere Gene and his “kids” for LBJ Some things never change for Dems And their Elite Law School Whores Today At Harvard Law School too Where Killers Obama and Koh First dropped their pooh Along with “Judge” Davey Barron too Obama’s Droner-in-Chief Destined for a Cell in The Hague Right next to his student John Yoo A Chip off of Harold’s Old Block Cold-blooded Killers and War Criminals too Killer Koh disteaching “human rights” at N.Y.U. Supported by his gang of Dem law prof thugs Beating up on the N.Y.U. law students few With the courage, integrity, and principles to say Never again! Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Justia Verdict [mailto:verdictsupport at justia.com] Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 10:09 AM To: Boyle, Francis A Subject: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 Illinois Law dean and professor Vikram David Amar laments recent instances of censored speech, particularly on university campuses, and reminds us that freedom of speech and academic freedom protect even those speakers whose message might be perceived odious, racist, sexist, or hateful. Amar points out that both freedom of speech and academic freedom are rooted in the principle that ideas and arguments ought to be evaluated on their substance and that the essence of both kinds of freedom is the opportunity to persuade others of the merits of one's argument, rather than the use of power to coerce or silence others. Click here to view in your browser if you are having trouble viewing this email. [Verdict - Legal Analysis and commentary from Justia.] Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom Vikram David Amar Jun 15, 2017 [https://i2.wp.com/verdict.justia.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/IMG_0590.jpg?quality=90&resize=426%2C350&strip=all&fit=1000%25&ssl=1] It distresses me to see episodes these days in which speakers who are controversial for their conservative or ultra-conservative views are prevented from delivering invited remarks at universities (including public universities) because protestors choose to violate laws designed to protect public safety. It also distresses me to see so few liberal analysts decry how illiberal these episodes of group-imposed censorship are. As I have written at length elsewhere, no matter how repressive or otherwise abhorrent a speaker’s message, the appropriate response under our Constitution is counter speech, not shouting down or physically obstructing or threatening the speaker or the speaker’s audience. To be sure, protesting a speaker’s presence—registering profound objection to a speaker’s viewpoint—is perfectly appropriate and has a rich tradition dating from even before the 1960s free speech revolution through the Occupy movement. But what we have seen over the past several months is a transition from protesting against bad speakers to preventing them from being able to speak, and that is not acceptable. An unflinching commitment to freedom of speech—even odious, racist, sexist, hateful speech—is the cornerstone of constitutional democracy in the United States. Certainly we protect freedom of speech more vigorously than any other western democracy. We also have a venerable tradition of respecting academic freedom at colleges and universities. These two principles, freedom of speech and academic freedom, overlap and are interconnected, even as they are distinct ideas. Freedom of speech is a broadly applicable right codified in the federal First Amendment and state constitutional analogues that protects speakers both on and off public campuses from unwarranted government interference with expression. Academic freedom, which may extend beyond what the Constitution protects, is grounded on the idea that, at least in the academy, free inquiry unburdened by the constraints of orthodoxy will lead to the development of new ideas and knowledge. Notwithstanding their different scopes, both freedom of speech and academic freedom rest on the bedrock belief that ideas and arguments ought to be evaluated on their substance. The essence of both kinds of freedom is the opportunity to persuade others of the merits of one’s argument, rather than the use of power to coerce others into acceding to the proponent’s point of view. Sometimes the heat and passion of political protests on college campuses causes these basic principles to be overlooked or ignored. When that happens, it is important for us to go back to what freedom of speech and academic freedom really mean and how easily both of these principles can be misused and misinterpreted. Governments Can and Should Prohibit Certain Obstructive Conduct The short of the matter is that blockading, obstructing, assaulting, destroying property, and making threats, are not, in any stretch of the imagination, constitutionally protected things to do, no matter what the objective behind them. These activities are conduct the government has always had the legitimate authority to proscribe because they so obviously interfere with the liberty and lawful pursuits of others. As the Supreme Court of California stated in an important free speech case, In Re Kay: [T]he state retains a legitimate concern in ensuring that some individuals unruly assertion of their rights of free expression does not imperil other citizen’s rights of free association and discussion. … Freedom of everyone to talk at once can destroy the right of anyone effectively to talk at all. Free expression can expire as tragically in the tumult of license as in the silence of censorship. Government actions to prohibit blockades or obstruction have been held to be permissible under the First Amendment too many times to count. To cite just one example, a federal law, the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act (FACE), that prohibits anyone from physically obstructing any person from obtaining or providing reproductive health services, has been upheld repeatedly against constitutional challenge, and those cases raise harder questions than do generic obstruction laws because FACE targets specific places where protestors with particular messages may be expected. Blockades and obstructions can and should be prohibited consistent with the First Amendment primarily because they are not intended to and do not persuade anyone of the merits of the protestors’ position. They are employed to coerce third parties to change their behavior, not their minds. As such, they are actually antithetical to, rather than in furtherance of, the values on which freedom of speech and academic freedom are grounded — a commitment to the power of ideas rather than the use of force to change the way that people act. Creative But Unavailing Counterarguments In recent weeks, I have heard defenders of those who obstruct conservative speakers make two novel but completely unconvincing arguments. First, the obstruction defenders try to invoke the civil rights movement by pointing out that Martin Luther King, Jr. and his supporters were often guilty of civil disobedience—that is violating duly enacted laws. But this analogy is unavailing because King and his followers were violating laws that were (in the eyes of the protestors and many others) themselves unjust, not laws that were completely unobjectionable but simply stood in the way of the desires of the violators. Another distinction between the two settings is that to the extent that civil rights protestors violated laws regulating their political activity, they were violating laws in order to be heard themselves, not in order to prevent others from being heard. But today’s obstructors cannot credibly complain that they cannot be heard; they simply want others not to be listened to. The second creative yet deeply flawed argument I’ve heard in defense of the obstructors is the idea that controversial speakers of the kind who are being suppressed are themselves not appropriate speakers to be invited to university settings because they are not sufficiently academic in character. Putting aside the fact that these speakers were invited (whether they ought to have been or not), and putting aside whether some of these speakers do have some academic bona fides (even if their ideas are often very wrong-headed), this argument mischaracterizes the kind of speakers who belong at universities. Higher education is a place not just to sharpen one’s critical thinking skills through exposure to brilliant academics who make data-informed arguments in multiple directions; it is also a place where one should learn how to become a full citizen in American society. As the Supreme Court observed in the context of high school students in Tinker v. Des Moines Independent School District, this often means that students need to engage each other on the contentious political issues of the day. And in today’s college world this sometimes means hearing and evaluating strident political advocates, some of whom even border on demagoguery. To be sure, student and faculty organizations should give some thought (perhaps more thought than they currently do) to the question of whom they invite to speak on campus—certainly not everyone should be offered a platform—but many campus speakers, on the Left as well as the Right, are not particularly grounded in rigorous theoretical or empirical analysis, and this does not mean that they are per se inappropriate speakers for college audiences. Again, colleges should be preparing young people not just to navigate the economy, but also to navigate democracy. And, for better or worse, modern democracy means having to deal with a lot of ideas that are widely held even though they don’t hold up to analytic rigor. Debunking those ideas—not shouting them down or trying to suppress their expression—is what I want my students to learn how to do. [https://justatic.com/v/20170601a/verdict/images/authors/thumbs/amar.jpg] Follow @prof_amar Vikram David Amar is the Iwan Foundation Professor of Law and the Dean at the University of Illinois College of Law. Previously, he served as the Associate Dean for Academic Affairs and Professor of Law at the University of California, Davis School of Law. He is a 1988 graduate of the Yale Law School and a former clerk to Justice Harry Blackmun. He is a co-author, along with William Cohen and Jonathan Varat, of a major constitutional law casebook, and a co-author of several volumes of the Wright & Miller treatise on federal practice and procedure. Before teaching, Professor Amar spent a few years at the firm of Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher. RECENT ARTICLES Supreme Court Rules That Citizenship Must Be Equally Heritable Through Fathers and Mothers Cornell University law professor Michael C. Dorf comments on a recent decision by the U.S. Supreme Court on the heritability of citizenship and explains why the decision might have implications for other immigration issues, such as the “Muslim ban” executive order. Dorf argues that the precedents the Court had to distinguish to reach its conclusion might give some insight into whether and how it might defer to other political branches on immigration issues.... Read More Trump Is Not Ready To Deal With His Legal Problems John W. Dean, former counsel to President Nixon, reflects on the much-anticipated testimony of former FBI Director James Comey before the Senate Intelligence Committee on Thursday. Dean briefly summarizes the takeaways from Comey’s testimony and discusses the response by President Trump and his lawyer.... Read More Absolute Power Corrupts Absolutely in The Keepers Marci A. Hamilton, a Fox Distinguished Scholar in the Fox Leadership Program at the University of Pennsylvania and CEO of CHILD USA, encourages everyone to watch the Netflix docuseries The Keepers, which addresses child sex abuse in the Catholic Church. Hamilton describes the progress toward justice for child sex abuse victims, including the growing awareness of the pervasiveness the problem and increasing numbers of states who extend or eliminate statutes of limitations for these types of lawsuits and prosecutions.... Read More [Forward this email.] Have friends who like law? Forward this email. [Like Verdict on Facebook] Like Verdict for legal discussions on Facebook. [Follow @verdictjustia on Twitter] Follow @verdictjustia for news and updates on Twitter. [Justia] Contact Us | Privacy Policy | Unsubscribe [Facebook][Twitter][LinkedIn][Justia][GooglePlus] You received this email because you have subscribed to the Verdict News E-Mail Feed. Justia | 1380 Pear Ave, Suite 2B, Mountain View, CA 94043 ________________________________ 1 Behind me at Harvard Law School, Killer Koh was President Obama’s War Consigliere and Droner-in-Chief. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Thu Jun 15 16:19:05 2017 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2017 16:19:05 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Ireland pays tribute to Native American tribe for 1847 famine support Message-ID: BREXIT NEGOTIATIONS WILL START ON MONDAY, UK GOVT CONFIRMS HomeViral Ireland pays tribute to Native American tribe for 1847 famine support (PHOTO, VIDEO) Published time: 15 Jun, 2017 14:28Edited time: 15 Jun, 2017 14:31 Get short URL [Ireland pays tribute to Native American tribe for 1847 famine support (PHOTO, VIDEO)] The ‘Kindred Spirits’ sculpture in Midleton, Co Cork, Ireland © Brian Martin / YouTube 57 Ireland is set to recognize the extraordinary charity shown to its people by a Native American tribe during the country’s 19th-century famine. A sculpture is to be unveiled in Bailic Park, Midleton, Co. Cork, on Sunday to honor the Choctaw Nation, an indigenous tribe from the southeastern US who, upon learning of the plight of the Irish during the height of the country’s famine in 1847, raised $170 to send aid to the country – the equivalent of tens of thousands of dollars in today’s money. Speaking to the Irish Times, Joe McCarthy, the municipal manager for East Cork County Council, said: “The gift from the Choctaw people was a demonstration of love and this monument acknowledges that and hopefully will encourage the Irish people to act as the Choctaw people did.” View image on Twitter [View image on Twitter] Follow [https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/735092267732619264/hxdDO7oT_normal.jpg]Naomi O'Leary ✔@NaomiOhReally Sculpture to be unveiled in Cork to remember generosity of the Choctaw Nation, Native American tribe that sent famine aid to Ireland in 1847 1:56 AM - 15 Jun 2017 * * 850850 Retweets * 1,8981,898 likes Twitter Ads info and privacy The piece, titled ‘Kindred Spirits’, is made up of nine 20ft stainless steel eagle feathers, each arranged in a shape reminiscent of a circular food bowl. Read more [Native American leaders and climate activists join together in song outside of a Chase Bank location, to oppose the Keystone XL pipeline, in Seattle, Washington. © Reuters]US, Canada tribes to sign declaration against Keystone XL “I wanted to show the courage, fragility and humanity that they displayed in my work,” said designer Alex Pentek. At the time of the donation, the Choctaw people were living in extreme poverty after being forcibly removed from their ancestral homeland in states such as Florida and Mississippi and driven west to Oklahoma in 1838. Thousands died during the 500-mile forced migration which would later become known as the ‘Trail of Tears’. Moved by tales of Ireland’s own instances of starvation and forced migration, the Choctaw Nation set about raising funds for famine relief. Choctaw chief Gary Batton and a delegation of representatives from the Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma will attend the Midleton ceremony. “We didn’t have any income,” said Batton. “This was money pulled from our pockets. We had gone through the biggest tragedy that we could endure, and saw what was happening in Ireland and just felt compelled to help.” Sunday’s event will not be the first time Ireland and the Choctaw people have honored one another. In 1990, Choctaw leaders traveled to Co. Mayo in western Ireland to take part in a series of historical reenactments. Two years later, a group of Irish anthropologists completed a 500-mile trek from Oklahoma to Mississippi in remembrance of Native Americans who perished on the Trail of Tears. Former Irish President Mary Robinson is also an honorary Choctaw chief. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cgestabrook at gmail.com Thu Jun 15 20:16:43 2017 From: cgestabrook at gmail.com (C G Estabrook) Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2017 15:16:43 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] HRC may get her war with Russia after all Message-ID: <7C745621-851B-4D66-AC12-7EF0C126B821@gmail.com> https://www.rt.com/news/392455-us-rocket-launchers-syria/ The US has moved long-range rocket launchers from Jordan to its base in At Tanf in Syria, Russia’s Defense Ministry confirmed, adding that the hardware could be used against Syrian government forces. At Tanf is on the road half way from Damascus to Syria and is a military base in eastern Syria. The US strategy now seems to be to overthrow the Syrian government (while pretending to fight IS and AQ, both US clients) and/or Balkanize eastern Syria, to limit the influence of Iran and Russia, who really do want to fight terrorism (AQ and IS) - a threat to them, covertly employed by the US for 40 years. US duplicity contrasts with Russian candor in this matter. —CGE -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Thu Jun 15 22:07:08 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2017 22:07:08 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: This Law School is EVIL! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 10:38 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Subject: FW: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 Sure. Let’s bring the War Criminal, Murderer, Felon, Bigot, Racist and Genocidaire Killer Koh into our Law School on October 28, 2016, hold him up as a Role Model to our Law Students, and then turn our Law Students into War Criminals, Murderers, Felons, Bigots, Racists and Genocidaires just like Killer Koh. Fab. Diss-Ode to Harold Killer Koh1 Harold Killer Koh Killing Babies where he go Muslim life is cheap you see Jewish life too for the Nazi Carl Schmitt Professor of Law At the Yale Law School Boot-licking Gene Rostow Of the infamous Rostow Brothers Who gave us Vietnam Genociding “gooks” too Obama’s War Consigliere Gene and his “kids” for LBJ Some things never change for Dems And their Elite Law School Whores Today At Harvard Law School too Where Killers Obama and Koh First dropped their pooh Along with “Judge” Davey Barron too Obama’s Droner-in-Chief Destined for a Cell in The Hague Right next to his student John Yoo A Chip off of Harold’s Old Block Cold-blooded Killers and War Criminals too Killer Koh disteaching “human rights” at N.Y.U. Supported by his gang of Dem law prof thugs Beating up on the N.Y.U. law students few With the courage, integrity, and principles to say Never again! Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Justia Verdict [mailto:verdictsupport at justia.com] Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 10:09 AM To: Boyle, Francis A > Subject: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 Illinois Law dean and professor Vikram David Amar laments recent instances of censored speech, particularly on university campuses, and reminds us that freedom of speech and academic freedom protect even those speakers whose message might be perceived odious, racist, sexist, or hateful. Amar points out that both freedom of speech and academic freedom are rooted in the principle that ideas and arguments ought to be evaluated on their substance and that the essence of both kinds of freedom is the opportunity to persuade others of the merits of one's argument, rather than the use of power to coerce or silence others. Click here to view in your browser if you are having trouble viewing this email. [Verdict - Legal Analysis and commentary from Justia.] Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom Vikram David Amar Jun 15, 2017 [https://i2.wp.com/verdict.justia.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/IMG_0590.jpg?quality=90&resize=426%2C350&strip=all&fit=1000%25&ssl=1] It distresses me to see episodes these days in which speakers who are controversial for their conservative or ultra-conservative views are prevented from delivering invited remarks at universities (including public universities) because protestors choose to violate laws designed to protect public safety. It also distresses me to see so few liberal analysts decry how illiberal these episodes of group-imposed censorship are. As I have written at length elsewhere, no matter how repressive or otherwise abhorrent a speaker’s message, the appropriate response under our Constitution is counter speech, not shouting down or physically obstructing or threatening the speaker or the speaker’s audience. To be sure, protesting a speaker’s presence—registering profound objection to a speaker’s viewpoint—is perfectly appropriate and has a rich tradition dating from even before the 1960s free speech revolution through the Occupy movement. But what we have seen over the past several months is a transition from protesting against bad speakers to preventing them from being able to speak, and that is not acceptable. An unflinching commitment to freedom of speech—even odious, racist, sexist, hateful speech—is the cornerstone of constitutional democracy in the United States. Certainly we protect freedom of speech more vigorously than any other western democracy. We also have a venerable tradition of respecting academic freedom at colleges and universities. These two principles, freedom of speech and academic freedom, overlap and are interconnected, even as they are distinct ideas. Freedom of speech is a broadly applicable right codified in the federal First Amendment and state constitutional analogues that protects speakers both on and off public campuses from unwarranted government interference with expression. Academic freedom, which may extend beyond what the Constitution protects, is grounded on the idea that, at least in the academy, free inquiry unburdened by the constraints of orthodoxy will lead to the development of new ideas and knowledge. Notwithstanding their different scopes, both freedom of speech and academic freedom rest on the bedrock belief that ideas and arguments ought to be evaluated on their substance. The essence of both kinds of freedom is the opportunity to persuade others of the merits of one’s argument, rather than the use of power to coerce others into acceding to the proponent’s point of view. Sometimes the heat and passion of political protests on college campuses causes these basic principles to be overlooked or ignored. When that happens, it is important for us to go back to what freedom of speech and academic freedom really mean and how easily both of these principles can be misused and misinterpreted. Governments Can and Should Prohibit Certain Obstructive Conduct The short of the matter is that blockading, obstructing, assaulting, destroying property, and making threats, are not, in any stretch of the imagination, constitutionally protected things to do, no matter what the objective behind them. These activities are conduct the government has always had the legitimate authority to proscribe because they so obviously interfere with the liberty and lawful pursuits of others. As the Supreme Court of California stated in an important free speech case, In Re Kay: [T]he state retains a legitimate concern in ensuring that some individuals unruly assertion of their rights of free expression does not imperil other citizen’s rights of free association and discussion. … Freedom of everyone to talk at once can destroy the right of anyone effectively to talk at all. Free expression can expire as tragically in the tumult of license as in the silence of censorship. Government actions to prohibit blockades or obstruction have been held to be permissible under the First Amendment too many times to count. To cite just one example, a federal law, the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act (FACE), that prohibits anyone from physically obstructing any person from obtaining or providing reproductive health services, has been upheld repeatedly against constitutional challenge, and those cases raise harder questions than do generic obstruction laws because FACE targets specific places where protestors with particular messages may be expected. Blockades and obstructions can and should be prohibited consistent with the First Amendment primarily because they are not intended to and do not persuade anyone of the merits of the protestors’ position. They are employed to coerce third parties to change their behavior, not their minds. As such, they are actually antithetical to, rather than in furtherance of, the values on which freedom of speech and academic freedom are grounded — a commitment to the power of ideas rather than the use of force to change the way that people act. Creative But Unavailing Counterarguments In recent weeks, I have heard defenders of those who obstruct conservative speakers make two novel but completely unconvincing arguments. First, the obstruction defenders try to invoke the civil rights movement by pointing out that Martin Luther King, Jr. and his supporters were often guilty of civil disobedience—that is violating duly enacted laws. But this analogy is unavailing because King and his followers were violating laws that were (in the eyes of the protestors and many others) themselves unjust, not laws that were completely unobjectionable but simply stood in the way of the desires of the violators. Another distinction between the two settings is that to the extent that civil rights protestors violated laws regulating their political activity, they were violating laws in order to be heard themselves, not in order to prevent others from being heard. But today’s obstructors cannot credibly complain that they cannot be heard; they simply want others not to be listened to. The second creative yet deeply flawed argument I’ve heard in defense of the obstructors is the idea that controversial speakers of the kind who are being suppressed are themselves not appropriate speakers to be invited to university settings because they are not sufficiently academic in character. Putting aside the fact that these speakers were invited (whether they ought to have been or not), and putting aside whether some of these speakers do have some academic bona fides (even if their ideas are often very wrong-headed), this argument mischaracterizes the kind of speakers who belong at universities. Higher education is a place not just to sharpen one’s critical thinking skills through exposure to brilliant academics who make data-informed arguments in multiple directions; it is also a place where one should learn how to become a full citizen in American society. As the Supreme Court observed in the context of high school students in Tinker v. Des Moines Independent School District, this often means that students need to engage each other on the contentious political issues of the day. And in today’s college world this sometimes means hearing and evaluating strident political advocates, some of whom even border on demagoguery. To be sure, student and faculty organizations should give some thought (perhaps more thought than they currently do) to the question of whom they invite to speak on campus—certainly not everyone should be offered a platform—but many campus speakers, on the Left as well as the Right, are not particularly grounded in rigorous theoretical or empirical analysis, and this does not mean that they are per se inappropriate speakers for college audiences. Again, colleges should be preparing young people not just to navigate the economy, but also to navigate democracy. And, for better or worse, modern democracy means having to deal with a lot of ideas that are widely held even though they don’t hold up to analytic rigor. Debunking those ideas—not shouting them down or trying to suppress their expression—is what I want my students to learn how to do. [https://justatic.com/v/20170601a/verdict/images/authors/thumbs/amar.jpg] Follow @prof_amar Vikram David Amar is the Iwan Foundation Professor of Law and the Dean at the University of Illinois College of Law. Previously, he served as the Associate Dean for Academic Affairs and Professor of Law at the University of California, Davis School of Law. He is a 1988 graduate of the Yale Law School and a former clerk to Justice Harry Blackmun. He is a co-author, along with William Cohen and Jonathan Varat, of a major constitutional law casebook, and a co-author of several volumes of the Wright & Miller treatise on federal practice and procedure. Before teaching, Professor Amar spent a few years at the firm of Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher. RECENT ARTICLES Supreme Court Rules That Citizenship Must Be Equally Heritable Through Fathers and Mothers Cornell University law professor Michael C. Dorf comments on a recent decision by the U.S. Supreme Court on the heritability of citizenship and explains why the decision might have implications for other immigration issues, such as the “Muslim ban” executive order. Dorf argues that the precedents the Court had to distinguish to reach its conclusion might give some insight into whether and how it might defer to other political branches on immigration issues.... Read More Trump Is Not Ready To Deal With His Legal Problems John W. Dean, former counsel to President Nixon, reflects on the much-anticipated testimony of former FBI Director James Comey before the Senate Intelligence Committee on Thursday. Dean briefly summarizes the takeaways from Comey’s testimony and discusses the response by President Trump and his lawyer.... Read More Absolute Power Corrupts Absolutely in The Keepers Marci A. Hamilton, a Fox Distinguished Scholar in the Fox Leadership Program at the University of Pennsylvania and CEO of CHILD USA, encourages everyone to watch the Netflix docuseries The Keepers, which addresses child sex abuse in the Catholic Church. Hamilton describes the progress toward justice for child sex abuse victims, including the growing awareness of the pervasiveness the problem and increasing numbers of states who extend or eliminate statutes of limitations for these types of lawsuits and prosecutions.... Read More [Forward this email.] Have friends who like law? Forward this email. [Like Verdict on Facebook] Like Verdict for legal discussions on Facebook. [Follow @verdictjustia on Twitter] Follow @verdictjustia for news and updates on Twitter. [Justia] Contact Us | Privacy Policy | Unsubscribe [Facebook][Twitter][LinkedIn][Justia][GooglePlus] You received this email because you have subscribed to the Verdict News E-Mail Feed. Justia | 1380 Pear Ave, Suite 2B, Mountain View, CA 94043 ________________________________ ________________________________ 1 Behind me at Harvard Law School, Killer Koh was President Obama’s War Consigliere and Droner-in-Chief. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Thu Jun 15 22:07:08 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2017 22:07:08 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: This Law School is EVIL! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 10:38 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Subject: FW: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 Sure. Let’s bring the War Criminal, Murderer, Felon, Bigot, Racist and Genocidaire Killer Koh into our Law School on October 28, 2016, hold him up as a Role Model to our Law Students, and then turn our Law Students into War Criminals, Murderers, Felons, Bigots, Racists and Genocidaires just like Killer Koh. Fab. Diss-Ode to Harold Killer Koh1 Harold Killer Koh Killing Babies where he go Muslim life is cheap you see Jewish life too for the Nazi Carl Schmitt Professor of Law At the Yale Law School Boot-licking Gene Rostow Of the infamous Rostow Brothers Who gave us Vietnam Genociding “gooks” too Obama’s War Consigliere Gene and his “kids” for LBJ Some things never change for Dems And their Elite Law School Whores Today At Harvard Law School too Where Killers Obama and Koh First dropped their pooh Along with “Judge” Davey Barron too Obama’s Droner-in-Chief Destined for a Cell in The Hague Right next to his student John Yoo A Chip off of Harold’s Old Block Cold-blooded Killers and War Criminals too Killer Koh disteaching “human rights” at N.Y.U. Supported by his gang of Dem law prof thugs Beating up on the N.Y.U. law students few With the courage, integrity, and principles to say Never again! Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Justia Verdict [mailto:verdictsupport at justia.com] Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 10:09 AM To: Boyle, Francis A > Subject: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 Illinois Law dean and professor Vikram David Amar laments recent instances of censored speech, particularly on university campuses, and reminds us that freedom of speech and academic freedom protect even those speakers whose message might be perceived odious, racist, sexist, or hateful. Amar points out that both freedom of speech and academic freedom are rooted in the principle that ideas and arguments ought to be evaluated on their substance and that the essence of both kinds of freedom is the opportunity to persuade others of the merits of one's argument, rather than the use of power to coerce or silence others. Click here to view in your browser if you are having trouble viewing this email. [Verdict - Legal Analysis and commentary from Justia.] Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom Vikram David Amar Jun 15, 2017 [https://i2.wp.com/verdict.justia.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/IMG_0590.jpg?quality=90&resize=426%2C350&strip=all&fit=1000%25&ssl=1] It distresses me to see episodes these days in which speakers who are controversial for their conservative or ultra-conservative views are prevented from delivering invited remarks at universities (including public universities) because protestors choose to violate laws designed to protect public safety. It also distresses me to see so few liberal analysts decry how illiberal these episodes of group-imposed censorship are. As I have written at length elsewhere, no matter how repressive or otherwise abhorrent a speaker’s message, the appropriate response under our Constitution is counter speech, not shouting down or physically obstructing or threatening the speaker or the speaker’s audience. To be sure, protesting a speaker’s presence—registering profound objection to a speaker’s viewpoint—is perfectly appropriate and has a rich tradition dating from even before the 1960s free speech revolution through the Occupy movement. But what we have seen over the past several months is a transition from protesting against bad speakers to preventing them from being able to speak, and that is not acceptable. An unflinching commitment to freedom of speech—even odious, racist, sexist, hateful speech—is the cornerstone of constitutional democracy in the United States. Certainly we protect freedom of speech more vigorously than any other western democracy. We also have a venerable tradition of respecting academic freedom at colleges and universities. These two principles, freedom of speech and academic freedom, overlap and are interconnected, even as they are distinct ideas. Freedom of speech is a broadly applicable right codified in the federal First Amendment and state constitutional analogues that protects speakers both on and off public campuses from unwarranted government interference with expression. Academic freedom, which may extend beyond what the Constitution protects, is grounded on the idea that, at least in the academy, free inquiry unburdened by the constraints of orthodoxy will lead to the development of new ideas and knowledge. Notwithstanding their different scopes, both freedom of speech and academic freedom rest on the bedrock belief that ideas and arguments ought to be evaluated on their substance. The essence of both kinds of freedom is the opportunity to persuade others of the merits of one’s argument, rather than the use of power to coerce others into acceding to the proponent’s point of view. Sometimes the heat and passion of political protests on college campuses causes these basic principles to be overlooked or ignored. When that happens, it is important for us to go back to what freedom of speech and academic freedom really mean and how easily both of these principles can be misused and misinterpreted. Governments Can and Should Prohibit Certain Obstructive Conduct The short of the matter is that blockading, obstructing, assaulting, destroying property, and making threats, are not, in any stretch of the imagination, constitutionally protected things to do, no matter what the objective behind them. These activities are conduct the government has always had the legitimate authority to proscribe because they so obviously interfere with the liberty and lawful pursuits of others. As the Supreme Court of California stated in an important free speech case, In Re Kay: [T]he state retains a legitimate concern in ensuring that some individuals unruly assertion of their rights of free expression does not imperil other citizen’s rights of free association and discussion. … Freedom of everyone to talk at once can destroy the right of anyone effectively to talk at all. Free expression can expire as tragically in the tumult of license as in the silence of censorship. Government actions to prohibit blockades or obstruction have been held to be permissible under the First Amendment too many times to count. To cite just one example, a federal law, the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act (FACE), that prohibits anyone from physically obstructing any person from obtaining or providing reproductive health services, has been upheld repeatedly against constitutional challenge, and those cases raise harder questions than do generic obstruction laws because FACE targets specific places where protestors with particular messages may be expected. Blockades and obstructions can and should be prohibited consistent with the First Amendment primarily because they are not intended to and do not persuade anyone of the merits of the protestors’ position. They are employed to coerce third parties to change their behavior, not their minds. As such, they are actually antithetical to, rather than in furtherance of, the values on which freedom of speech and academic freedom are grounded — a commitment to the power of ideas rather than the use of force to change the way that people act. Creative But Unavailing Counterarguments In recent weeks, I have heard defenders of those who obstruct conservative speakers make two novel but completely unconvincing arguments. First, the obstruction defenders try to invoke the civil rights movement by pointing out that Martin Luther King, Jr. and his supporters were often guilty of civil disobedience—that is violating duly enacted laws. But this analogy is unavailing because King and his followers were violating laws that were (in the eyes of the protestors and many others) themselves unjust, not laws that were completely unobjectionable but simply stood in the way of the desires of the violators. Another distinction between the two settings is that to the extent that civil rights protestors violated laws regulating their political activity, they were violating laws in order to be heard themselves, not in order to prevent others from being heard. But today’s obstructors cannot credibly complain that they cannot be heard; they simply want others not to be listened to. The second creative yet deeply flawed argument I’ve heard in defense of the obstructors is the idea that controversial speakers of the kind who are being suppressed are themselves not appropriate speakers to be invited to university settings because they are not sufficiently academic in character. Putting aside the fact that these speakers were invited (whether they ought to have been or not), and putting aside whether some of these speakers do have some academic bona fides (even if their ideas are often very wrong-headed), this argument mischaracterizes the kind of speakers who belong at universities. Higher education is a place not just to sharpen one’s critical thinking skills through exposure to brilliant academics who make data-informed arguments in multiple directions; it is also a place where one should learn how to become a full citizen in American society. As the Supreme Court observed in the context of high school students in Tinker v. Des Moines Independent School District, this often means that students need to engage each other on the contentious political issues of the day. And in today’s college world this sometimes means hearing and evaluating strident political advocates, some of whom even border on demagoguery. To be sure, student and faculty organizations should give some thought (perhaps more thought than they currently do) to the question of whom they invite to speak on campus—certainly not everyone should be offered a platform—but many campus speakers, on the Left as well as the Right, are not particularly grounded in rigorous theoretical or empirical analysis, and this does not mean that they are per se inappropriate speakers for college audiences. Again, colleges should be preparing young people not just to navigate the economy, but also to navigate democracy. And, for better or worse, modern democracy means having to deal with a lot of ideas that are widely held even though they don’t hold up to analytic rigor. Debunking those ideas—not shouting them down or trying to suppress their expression—is what I want my students to learn how to do. [https://justatic.com/v/20170601a/verdict/images/authors/thumbs/amar.jpg] Follow @prof_amar Vikram David Amar is the Iwan Foundation Professor of Law and the Dean at the University of Illinois College of Law. Previously, he served as the Associate Dean for Academic Affairs and Professor of Law at the University of California, Davis School of Law. He is a 1988 graduate of the Yale Law School and a former clerk to Justice Harry Blackmun. He is a co-author, along with William Cohen and Jonathan Varat, of a major constitutional law casebook, and a co-author of several volumes of the Wright & Miller treatise on federal practice and procedure. Before teaching, Professor Amar spent a few years at the firm of Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher. RECENT ARTICLES Supreme Court Rules That Citizenship Must Be Equally Heritable Through Fathers and Mothers Cornell University law professor Michael C. Dorf comments on a recent decision by the U.S. Supreme Court on the heritability of citizenship and explains why the decision might have implications for other immigration issues, such as the “Muslim ban” executive order. Dorf argues that the precedents the Court had to distinguish to reach its conclusion might give some insight into whether and how it might defer to other political branches on immigration issues.... Read More Trump Is Not Ready To Deal With His Legal Problems John W. Dean, former counsel to President Nixon, reflects on the much-anticipated testimony of former FBI Director James Comey before the Senate Intelligence Committee on Thursday. Dean briefly summarizes the takeaways from Comey’s testimony and discusses the response by President Trump and his lawyer.... Read More Absolute Power Corrupts Absolutely in The Keepers Marci A. Hamilton, a Fox Distinguished Scholar in the Fox Leadership Program at the University of Pennsylvania and CEO of CHILD USA, encourages everyone to watch the Netflix docuseries The Keepers, which addresses child sex abuse in the Catholic Church. Hamilton describes the progress toward justice for child sex abuse victims, including the growing awareness of the pervasiveness the problem and increasing numbers of states who extend or eliminate statutes of limitations for these types of lawsuits and prosecutions.... Read More [Forward this email.] Have friends who like law? Forward this email. [Like Verdict on Facebook] Like Verdict for legal discussions on Facebook. [Follow @verdictjustia on Twitter] Follow @verdictjustia for news and updates on Twitter. [Justia] Contact Us | Privacy Policy | Unsubscribe [Facebook][Twitter][LinkedIn][Justia][GooglePlus] You received this email because you have subscribed to the Verdict News E-Mail Feed. Justia | 1380 Pear Ave, Suite 2B, Mountain View, CA 94043 ________________________________ ________________________________ 1 Behind me at Harvard Law School, Killer Koh was President Obama’s War Consigliere and Droner-in-Chief. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Thu Jun 15 22:08:57 2017 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2017 22:08:57 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Washington's war crimes in Syria Message-ID: * Print * Leaflet * Feedback * Share » Washington’s war crimes in Syria 15 June 2017 The United States government is guilty of war crimes. This is the stark conclusion reached by the independent international commission of inquiry established by the United Nations in 2011 to investigate human rights violations stemming from the protracted US-backed war for regime change in Syria. The Pentagon’s relentless bombing campaign in and around the northern Syrian city of Raqqa, the so-called “capital” of the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS), has inflicted a “staggering loss of civilian life,” while forcing over 160,000 civilians to flee their homes, Paulo Pinheiro, chairman of the UN’s commission of inquiry, said on Wednesday. US warplanes have dropped tens of thousands of munitions on Raqqa and the surrounding area, killing and maiming thousands of Syrian men, women and children. US Marines units, which have steadily swelled the ground forces illegally deployed on Syrian soil, have unleashed further lethal firepower, firing 155mm howitzers into crowded urban neighborhoods and flying Apache attack helicopters to provide close air support to the so-called Syrian Democratic Forces. This proxy force of Washington is dominated by the Kurdish YPG militia and “advised” by US Special Operations troops. The bloody siege of Raqqa is unfolding even as the Pentagon is carrying out a similar slaughter, begun last October, in Mosul, an Iraqi city 232 miles to the east that once boasted a population of over 2 million. Most of Mosul has been pulverized by US bombs, rockets and shells. Thousands have been killed and wounded, while many remain still buried under the rubble. The scope of the war crimes being carried out by the Pentagon comes more sharply into focus with the verified reports that US artillery units are firing white phosphorus shells into both Raqqa and Mosul. These incendiary chemical weapons, banned under international law for use in populated areas, ignite human flesh on contact, burning it to the bone, while those who breathe the gases released by the shells suffocate and burn from the inside out. The horrific wounds caused by these weapons reopen when exposed to air. White phosphorus is used to strike terror among those under attack. Another murderous weapon being employed against the populations of Raqqa and Mosul is the MGM-140B rocket. Fired from a mobile rocket launcher, the weapon detonates in midair, scattering some 274 anti-personnel grenades, each of which is capable of killing anyone within a 15-meter radius. Last month, US Defense Secretary James Mattis told the media that the Pentagon was adopting “annihilation tactics” in its anti-ISIS campaign, adding, “Civilian casualties are a fact of life in this sort of situation.” Mattis, a recently retired Marine general whom the military nicknamed “Mad Dog,” knows whereof he speaks. In 2004, he led the two murderous sieges of Fallujah that claimed the lives of thousands of Iraqis, and, as in the latest US atrocities, made use of white phosphorus shells against a civilian population. The US military interventions in Iraq and Syria are not aimed at “annihilating” ISIS, itself the product of the 2003 US invasion and occupation of Iraq, followed by Washington’s utilization of Islamist fighters as proxy ground forces in the regime-change wars in both Libya and Syria. While Raqqa has been surrounded by US-backed forces from the north, east and west, an escape route for ISIS fighters has been opened up to the southeast in order to funnel them into the province of Deir al-Zour, so they can fight the Syrian army there. Similarly, large numbers of ISIS fighters were allowed to flee Mosul, crossing the border into Syria for the same purpose. Washington’s strategic objectives in Iraq and Syria are not those of “fighting terrorism,” but rather consolidating US hegemony over the oil-rich Middle East and preparing for war against the principal obstacles to this objective, Iran and Russia. For US imperialism, undisputed control over both the Persian Gulf and Central Asia would provide the means to cut off energy supplies to its global rival, China. These predatory aims are the source of war crimes, and not only in Iraq and Syria. In Yemen, Washington is backing a near-genocidal war led by the Saudi monarchy with the objective of weakening Iran’s influence in the Persian Gulf. During his visit to Riyadh last month, President Donald Trump announced a $110 billion arms deal with the kingdom, which will, in the first instance, replenish the bombs and missiles it is raining on the population of the most impoverished nation in the Arab world. This arms package follows similar deals signed by the Obama administration, which also supplied the Saudis with logistical and intelligence aid for the Yemen war, including mid-air refueling for its warplanes and US naval backing for a blockade that is starving the population and denying it medical supplies. In addition to killing 12,000 people outright, the US-Saudi war has left at least 7 million Yemenis on the brink of famine, while cholera is threatening to kill thousands more. Save the Children reports that, on average, one Yemeni child is contracting the disease every 35 seconds. Meanwhile, Washington is preparing to once again escalate the protracted slaughter in Afghanistan. US officials reported Tuesday that Trump has authorized Mattis to set troop levels in the country, which the US has occupied since 2001. Thousands more soldiers are expected to be deployed, with the aim of carrying out the “annihilation tactics” favored by the defense secretary. A taste of what is to come was seen Monday when US troops whose convoy hit a roadside bomb opened fire indiscriminately on civilians, killing a brick kiln laborer and his two sons, ages eight and 10. As these atrocities play out across an ever-expanding global battlefield, what is striking is the absence of any organized opposition to US war crimes. The continuous wars are not even a subject of debate in Congress and are supported by both Democrats and Republicans. The media, a faithful propaganda arm of the Pentagon and the CIA, has shown a complete disinterest in US war crimes, paying attention only when allegations are made against Russia or the Syrian government. Moreover, while masses of working people in the US and around the world are opposed to war, the pseudo-left groups that got their start in the middle class antiwar protests of the 1960s and 1970s have abandoned even verbal opposition to US military aggression. Reflecting the interests of privileged middle-class layers, groups like the International Socialist Organization in the US, the Left Party in Germany and the New Anti-capitalist Party in France have articulated the politics of this new constituency for imperialism, justifying neo-colonial interventions in the name of “human rights” and portraying CIA regime-change operations as in Libya and Syria as “revolutions.” The emergence of a genuine antiwar movement is today a matter of life and death, as the war crimes being carried out by Washington across the globe threaten to coalesce into a global conflict involving the major nuclear powers. Such a movement can be built only in the fight to mobilize the working class independently on the basis of a socialist program to put an end to capitalism, the source of war. Bill Van Auken WSWS.ORG -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Thu Jun 15 22:13:12 2017 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2017 22:13:12 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Our government is evil, and if we the people don’t stop them from the wars and killings, then we are complicit in their warcrimes. On Jun 15, 2017, at 15:07, Boyle, Francis A > wrote: This Law School is EVIL! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 10:38 AM To: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; Karen Aram >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: FW: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 Sure. Let’s bring the War Criminal, Murderer, Felon, Bigot, Racist and Genocidaire Killer Koh into our Law School on October 28, 2016, hold him up as a Role Model to our Law Students, and then turn our Law Students into War Criminals, Murderers, Felons, Bigots, Racists and Genocidaires just like Killer Koh. Fab. Diss-Ode to Harold Killer Koh1 Harold Killer Koh Killing Babies where he go Muslim life is cheap you see Jewish life too for the Nazi Carl Schmitt Professor of Law At the Yale Law School Boot-licking Gene Rostow Of the infamous Rostow Brothers Who gave us Vietnam Genociding “gooks” too Obama’s War Consigliere Gene and his “kids” for LBJ Some things never change for Dems And their Elite Law School Whores Today At Harvard Law School too Where Killers Obama and Koh First dropped their pooh Along with “Judge” Davey Barron too Obama’s Droner-in-Chief Destined for a Cell in The Hague Right next to his student John Yoo A Chip off of Harold’s Old Block Cold-blooded Killers and War Criminals too Killer Koh disteaching “human rights” at N.Y.U. Supported by his gang of Dem law prof thugs Beating up on the N.Y.U. law students few With the courage, integrity, and principles to say Never again! Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Justia Verdict [mailto:verdictsupport at justia.com] Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 10:09 AM To: Boyle, Francis A > Subject: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 Illinois Law dean and professor Vikram David Amar laments recent instances of censored speech, particularly on university campuses, and reminds us that freedom of speech and academic freedom protect even those speakers whose message might be perceived odious, racist, sexist, or hateful. Amar points out that both freedom of speech and academic freedom are rooted in the principle that ideas and arguments ought to be evaluated on their substance and that the essence of both kinds of freedom is the opportunity to persuade others of the merits of one's argument, rather than the use of power to coerce or silence others. Click here to view in your browser if you are having trouble viewing this email. [Verdict - Legal Analysis and commentary from Justia.] Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom Vikram David Amar Jun 15, 2017 [https://i2.wp.com/verdict.justia.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/IMG_0590.jpg?quality=90&resize=426%2C350&strip=all&fit=1000%25&ssl=1] It distresses me to see episodes these days in which speakers who are controversial for their conservative or ultra-conservative views are prevented from delivering invited remarks at universities (including public universities) because protestors choose to violate laws designed to protect public safety. It also distresses me to see so few liberal analysts decry how illiberal these episodes of group-imposed censorship are. As I have written at length elsewhere, no matter how repressive or otherwise abhorrent a speaker’s message, the appropriate response under our Constitution is counter speech, not shouting down or physically obstructing or threatening the speaker or the speaker’s audience. To be sure, protesting a speaker’s presence—registering profound objection to a speaker’s viewpoint—is perfectly appropriate and has a rich tradition dating from even before the 1960s free speech revolution through the Occupy movement. But what we have seen over the past several months is a transition from protesting against bad speakers to preventing them from being able to speak, and that is not acceptable. An unflinching commitment to freedom of speech—even odious, racist, sexist, hateful speech—is the cornerstone of constitutional democracy in the United States. Certainly we protect freedom of speech more vigorously than any other western democracy. We also have a venerable tradition of respecting academic freedom at colleges and universities. These two principles, freedom of speech and academic freedom, overlap and are interconnected, even as they are distinct ideas. Freedom of speech is a broadly applicable right codified in the federal First Amendment and state constitutional analogues that protects speakers both on and off public campuses from unwarranted government interference with expression. Academic freedom, which may extend beyond what the Constitutionprotects, is grounded on the idea that, at least in the academy, free inquiry unburdened by the constraints of orthodoxy will lead to the development of new ideas and knowledge. Notwithstanding their different scopes, both freedom of speech and academic freedom rest on the bedrock belief that ideas and arguments ought to be evaluated on their substance. The essence of both kinds of freedom is the opportunity to persuade others of the merits of one’s argument, rather than the use of power to coerce others into acceding to the proponent’s point of view. Sometimes the heat and passion of political protests on college campuses causes these basic principles to be overlooked or ignored. When that happens, it is important for us to go back to what freedom of speech and academic freedom really mean and how easily both of these principles can be misused and misinterpreted. Governments Can and Should Prohibit Certain Obstructive Conduct The short of the matter is that blockading, obstructing, assaulting, destroying property, and making threats, are not, in any stretch of the imagination, constitutionally protected things to do, no matter what the objective behind them. These activities are conduct the government has always had the legitimate authority to proscribe because they so obviously interfere with the liberty and lawful pursuits of others. As the Supreme Court of California stated in an important free speech case,In Re Kay: [T]he state retains a legitimate concern in ensuring that some individuals unruly assertion of their rights of free expression does not imperil other citizen’s rights of free association and discussion. … Freedom of everyone to talk at once can destroy the right of anyone effectively to talk at all. Free expression can expire as tragically in the tumult of license as in the silence of censorship. Government actions to prohibit blockades or obstruction have been held to be permissible under the First Amendment too many times to count. To cite just one example, a federal law, the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act (FACE), that prohibits anyone from physically obstructing any person from obtaining or providing reproductive health services, has been upheld repeatedly against constitutional challenge, and those cases raise harder questions than do generic obstruction laws because FACE targets specific places where protestors with particular messages may be expected. Blockades and obstructions can and should be prohibited consistent with the First Amendment primarily because they are not intended to and do not persuade anyone of the merits of the protestors’ position. They are employed to coerce third parties to change their behavior, not their minds. As such, they are actually antithetical to, rather than in furtherance of, the values on which freedom of speech and academic freedom are grounded — a commitment to the power of ideas rather than the use of force to change the way that people act. Creative But Unavailing Counterarguments In recent weeks, I have heard defenders of those who obstruct conservative speakers make two novel but completely unconvincing arguments. First, the obstruction defenders try to invoke the civil rights movement by pointing out that Martin Luther King, Jr. and his supporters were often guilty of civil disobedience—that is violating duly enacted laws. But this analogy is unavailing because King and his followers were violating laws that were (in the eyes of the protestors and many others) themselves unjust, not laws that were completely unobjectionable but simply stood in the way of the desires of the violators. Another distinction between the two settings is that to the extent that civil rights protestors violated laws regulating their political activity, they were violating laws in order to be heard themselves, not in order to prevent others from being heard. But today’s obstructors cannot credibly complain that they cannot be heard; they simply want others not to be listened to. The second creative yet deeply flawed argument I’ve heard in defense of the obstructors is the idea that controversial speakers of the kind who are being suppressed are themselves not appropriate speakers to be invited to university settings because they are not sufficiently academic in character. Putting aside the fact that these speakers were invited (whether they ought to have been or not), and putting aside whether some of these speakers do have some academic bona fides (even if their ideas are often very wrong-headed), this argument mischaracterizes the kind of speakers who belong at universities. Higher education is a place not just to sharpen one’s critical thinking skills through exposure to brilliant academics who make data-informed arguments in multiple directions; it is also a place where one should learn how to become a full citizen in American society. As the Supreme Court observed in the context of high school students in Tinker v. Des Moines Independent School District, this often means that students need to engage each other on the contentious political issues of the day. And in today’s college world this sometimes means hearing and evaluating strident political advocates, some of whom even border on demagoguery. To be sure, student and faculty organizations should give some thought (perhaps more thought than they currently do) to the question of whom they invite to speak on campus—certainly not everyone should be offered a platform—but many campus speakers, on the Left as well as the Right, are not particularly grounded in rigorous theoretical or empirical analysis, and this does not mean that they are per se inappropriate speakers for college audiences. Again, colleges should be preparing young people not just to navigate the economy, but also to navigate democracy. And, for better or worse, modern democracy means having to deal with a lot of ideas that are widely held even though they don’t hold up to analytic rigor. Debunking those ideas—not shouting them down or trying to suppress their expression—is what I want my students to learn how to do. [https://justatic.com/v/20170601a/verdict/images/authors/thumbs/amar.jpg] Follow @prof_amar Vikram David Amar is the Iwan Foundation Professor of Law and the Dean at the University of Illinois College of Law. Previously, he served as the Associate Dean for Academic Affairs and Professor of Law at the University of California, Davis School of Law. He is a 1988 graduate of the Yale Law School and a former clerk to Justice Harry Blackmun. He is a co-author, along with William Cohen and Jonathan Varat, of a major constitutional law casebook, and a co-author of several volumes of the Wright & Miller treatise on federal practice and procedure. Before teaching, Professor Amar spent a few years at the firm of Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher. RECENT ARTICLES SUPREME COURT RULES THAT CITIZENSHIP MUST BE EQUALLY HERITABLE THROUGH FATHERS AND MOTHERS Cornell University law professor Michael C. Dorf comments on a recent decision by the U.S. Supreme Court on the heritability of citizenship and explains why the decision might have implications for other immigration issues, such as the “Muslim ban” executive order. Dorf argues that the precedents the Court had to distinguish to reach its conclusion might give some insight into whether and how it might defer to other political branches on immigration issues.... Read More TRUMP IS NOT READY TO DEAL WITH HIS LEGAL PROBLEMS John W. Dean, former counsel to President Nixon, reflects on the much-anticipated testimony of former FBI Director James Comey before the Senate Intelligence Committee on Thursday. Dean briefly summarizes the takeaways from Comey’s testimony and discusses the response by President Trump and his lawyer.... Read More ABSOLUTE POWER CORRUPTS ABSOLUTELY IN THE KEEPERS Marci A. Hamilton, a Fox Distinguished Scholar in the Fox Leadership Program at the University of Pennsylvania and CEO of CHILD USA, encourages everyone to watch the Netflix docuseries The Keepers, which addresses child sex abuse in the Catholic Church. Hamilton describes the progress toward justice for child sex abuse victims, including the growing awareness of the pervasiveness the problem and increasing numbers of states who extend or eliminate statutes of limitations for these types of lawsuits and prosecutions....Read More [Forward this email.] Have friends who like law? Forward this email. [Like Verdict on Facebook] Like Verdict for legal discussions on Facebook. [Follow @verdictjustia on Twitter] Follow @verdictjustia for news and updates on Twitter. [Justia] Contact Us | Privacy Policy | Unsubscribe [Facebook][Twitter][LinkedIn][Justia][GooglePlus] You received this email because you have subscribed to the Verdict News E-Mail Feed. Justia | 1380 Pear Ave, Suite 2B, Mountain View, CA 94043 ________________________________ ________________________________ 1 Behind me at Harvard Law School, Killer Koh was President Obama’s War Consigliere and Droner-in-Chief. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Thu Jun 15 22:13:12 2017 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2017 22:13:12 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Our government is evil, and if we the people don’t stop them from the wars and killings, then we are complicit in their warcrimes. On Jun 15, 2017, at 15:07, Boyle, Francis A > wrote: This Law School is EVIL! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 10:38 AM To: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; Karen Aram >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: FW: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 Sure. Let’s bring the War Criminal, Murderer, Felon, Bigot, Racist and Genocidaire Killer Koh into our Law School on October 28, 2016, hold him up as a Role Model to our Law Students, and then turn our Law Students into War Criminals, Murderers, Felons, Bigots, Racists and Genocidaires just like Killer Koh. Fab. Diss-Ode to Harold Killer Koh1 Harold Killer Koh Killing Babies where he go Muslim life is cheap you see Jewish life too for the Nazi Carl Schmitt Professor of Law At the Yale Law School Boot-licking Gene Rostow Of the infamous Rostow Brothers Who gave us Vietnam Genociding “gooks” too Obama’s War Consigliere Gene and his “kids” for LBJ Some things never change for Dems And their Elite Law School Whores Today At Harvard Law School too Where Killers Obama and Koh First dropped their pooh Along with “Judge” Davey Barron too Obama’s Droner-in-Chief Destined for a Cell in The Hague Right next to his student John Yoo A Chip off of Harold’s Old Block Cold-blooded Killers and War Criminals too Killer Koh disteaching “human rights” at N.Y.U. Supported by his gang of Dem law prof thugs Beating up on the N.Y.U. law students few With the courage, integrity, and principles to say Never again! Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Justia Verdict [mailto:verdictsupport at justia.com] Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 10:09 AM To: Boyle, Francis A > Subject: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 Illinois Law dean and professor Vikram David Amar laments recent instances of censored speech, particularly on university campuses, and reminds us that freedom of speech and academic freedom protect even those speakers whose message might be perceived odious, racist, sexist, or hateful. Amar points out that both freedom of speech and academic freedom are rooted in the principle that ideas and arguments ought to be evaluated on their substance and that the essence of both kinds of freedom is the opportunity to persuade others of the merits of one's argument, rather than the use of power to coerce or silence others. Click here to view in your browser if you are having trouble viewing this email. [Verdict - Legal Analysis and commentary from Justia.] Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom Vikram David Amar Jun 15, 2017 [https://i2.wp.com/verdict.justia.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/IMG_0590.jpg?quality=90&resize=426%2C350&strip=all&fit=1000%25&ssl=1] It distresses me to see episodes these days in which speakers who are controversial for their conservative or ultra-conservative views are prevented from delivering invited remarks at universities (including public universities) because protestors choose to violate laws designed to protect public safety. It also distresses me to see so few liberal analysts decry how illiberal these episodes of group-imposed censorship are. As I have written at length elsewhere, no matter how repressive or otherwise abhorrent a speaker’s message, the appropriate response under our Constitution is counter speech, not shouting down or physically obstructing or threatening the speaker or the speaker’s audience. To be sure, protesting a speaker’s presence—registering profound objection to a speaker’s viewpoint—is perfectly appropriate and has a rich tradition dating from even before the 1960s free speech revolution through the Occupy movement. But what we have seen over the past several months is a transition from protesting against bad speakers to preventing them from being able to speak, and that is not acceptable. An unflinching commitment to freedom of speech—even odious, racist, sexist, hateful speech—is the cornerstone of constitutional democracy in the United States. Certainly we protect freedom of speech more vigorously than any other western democracy. We also have a venerable tradition of respecting academic freedom at colleges and universities. These two principles, freedom of speech and academic freedom, overlap and are interconnected, even as they are distinct ideas. Freedom of speech is a broadly applicable right codified in the federal First Amendment and state constitutional analogues that protects speakers both on and off public campuses from unwarranted government interference with expression. Academic freedom, which may extend beyond what the Constitutionprotects, is grounded on the idea that, at least in the academy, free inquiry unburdened by the constraints of orthodoxy will lead to the development of new ideas and knowledge. Notwithstanding their different scopes, both freedom of speech and academic freedom rest on the bedrock belief that ideas and arguments ought to be evaluated on their substance. The essence of both kinds of freedom is the opportunity to persuade others of the merits of one’s argument, rather than the use of power to coerce others into acceding to the proponent’s point of view. Sometimes the heat and passion of political protests on college campuses causes these basic principles to be overlooked or ignored. When that happens, it is important for us to go back to what freedom of speech and academic freedom really mean and how easily both of these principles can be misused and misinterpreted. Governments Can and Should Prohibit Certain Obstructive Conduct The short of the matter is that blockading, obstructing, assaulting, destroying property, and making threats, are not, in any stretch of the imagination, constitutionally protected things to do, no matter what the objective behind them. These activities are conduct the government has always had the legitimate authority to proscribe because they so obviously interfere with the liberty and lawful pursuits of others. As the Supreme Court of California stated in an important free speech case,In Re Kay: [T]he state retains a legitimate concern in ensuring that some individuals unruly assertion of their rights of free expression does not imperil other citizen’s rights of free association and discussion. … Freedom of everyone to talk at once can destroy the right of anyone effectively to talk at all. Free expression can expire as tragically in the tumult of license as in the silence of censorship. Government actions to prohibit blockades or obstruction have been held to be permissible under the First Amendment too many times to count. To cite just one example, a federal law, the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act (FACE), that prohibits anyone from physically obstructing any person from obtaining or providing reproductive health services, has been upheld repeatedly against constitutional challenge, and those cases raise harder questions than do generic obstruction laws because FACE targets specific places where protestors with particular messages may be expected. Blockades and obstructions can and should be prohibited consistent with the First Amendment primarily because they are not intended to and do not persuade anyone of the merits of the protestors’ position. They are employed to coerce third parties to change their behavior, not their minds. As such, they are actually antithetical to, rather than in furtherance of, the values on which freedom of speech and academic freedom are grounded — a commitment to the power of ideas rather than the use of force to change the way that people act. Creative But Unavailing Counterarguments In recent weeks, I have heard defenders of those who obstruct conservative speakers make two novel but completely unconvincing arguments. First, the obstruction defenders try to invoke the civil rights movement by pointing out that Martin Luther King, Jr. and his supporters were often guilty of civil disobedience—that is violating duly enacted laws. But this analogy is unavailing because King and his followers were violating laws that were (in the eyes of the protestors and many others) themselves unjust, not laws that were completely unobjectionable but simply stood in the way of the desires of the violators. Another distinction between the two settings is that to the extent that civil rights protestors violated laws regulating their political activity, they were violating laws in order to be heard themselves, not in order to prevent others from being heard. But today’s obstructors cannot credibly complain that they cannot be heard; they simply want others not to be listened to. The second creative yet deeply flawed argument I’ve heard in defense of the obstructors is the idea that controversial speakers of the kind who are being suppressed are themselves not appropriate speakers to be invited to university settings because they are not sufficiently academic in character. Putting aside the fact that these speakers were invited (whether they ought to have been or not), and putting aside whether some of these speakers do have some academic bona fides (even if their ideas are often very wrong-headed), this argument mischaracterizes the kind of speakers who belong at universities. Higher education is a place not just to sharpen one’s critical thinking skills through exposure to brilliant academics who make data-informed arguments in multiple directions; it is also a place where one should learn how to become a full citizen in American society. As the Supreme Court observed in the context of high school students in Tinker v. Des Moines Independent School District, this often means that students need to engage each other on the contentious political issues of the day. And in today’s college world this sometimes means hearing and evaluating strident political advocates, some of whom even border on demagoguery. To be sure, student and faculty organizations should give some thought (perhaps more thought than they currently do) to the question of whom they invite to speak on campus—certainly not everyone should be offered a platform—but many campus speakers, on the Left as well as the Right, are not particularly grounded in rigorous theoretical or empirical analysis, and this does not mean that they are per se inappropriate speakers for college audiences. Again, colleges should be preparing young people not just to navigate the economy, but also to navigate democracy. And, for better or worse, modern democracy means having to deal with a lot of ideas that are widely held even though they don’t hold up to analytic rigor. Debunking those ideas—not shouting them down or trying to suppress their expression—is what I want my students to learn how to do. [https://justatic.com/v/20170601a/verdict/images/authors/thumbs/amar.jpg] Follow @prof_amar Vikram David Amar is the Iwan Foundation Professor of Law and the Dean at the University of Illinois College of Law. Previously, he served as the Associate Dean for Academic Affairs and Professor of Law at the University of California, Davis School of Law. He is a 1988 graduate of the Yale Law School and a former clerk to Justice Harry Blackmun. He is a co-author, along with William Cohen and Jonathan Varat, of a major constitutional law casebook, and a co-author of several volumes of the Wright & Miller treatise on federal practice and procedure. Before teaching, Professor Amar spent a few years at the firm of Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher. RECENT ARTICLES SUPREME COURT RULES THAT CITIZENSHIP MUST BE EQUALLY HERITABLE THROUGH FATHERS AND MOTHERS Cornell University law professor Michael C. Dorf comments on a recent decision by the U.S. Supreme Court on the heritability of citizenship and explains why the decision might have implications for other immigration issues, such as the “Muslim ban” executive order. Dorf argues that the precedents the Court had to distinguish to reach its conclusion might give some insight into whether and how it might defer to other political branches on immigration issues.... Read More TRUMP IS NOT READY TO DEAL WITH HIS LEGAL PROBLEMS John W. Dean, former counsel to President Nixon, reflects on the much-anticipated testimony of former FBI Director James Comey before the Senate Intelligence Committee on Thursday. Dean briefly summarizes the takeaways from Comey’s testimony and discusses the response by President Trump and his lawyer.... Read More ABSOLUTE POWER CORRUPTS ABSOLUTELY IN THE KEEPERS Marci A. Hamilton, a Fox Distinguished Scholar in the Fox Leadership Program at the University of Pennsylvania and CEO of CHILD USA, encourages everyone to watch the Netflix docuseries The Keepers, which addresses child sex abuse in the Catholic Church. Hamilton describes the progress toward justice for child sex abuse victims, including the growing awareness of the pervasiveness the problem and increasing numbers of states who extend or eliminate statutes of limitations for these types of lawsuits and prosecutions....Read More [Forward this email.] Have friends who like law? Forward this email. [Like Verdict on Facebook] Like Verdict for legal discussions on Facebook. [Follow @verdictjustia on Twitter] Follow @verdictjustia for news and updates on Twitter. [Justia] Contact Us | Privacy Policy | Unsubscribe [Facebook][Twitter][LinkedIn][Justia][GooglePlus] You received this email because you have subscribed to the Verdict News E-Mail Feed. Justia | 1380 Pear Ave, Suite 2B, Mountain View, CA 94043 ________________________________ ________________________________ 1 Behind me at Harvard Law School, Killer Koh was President Obama’s War Consigliere and Droner-in-Chief. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Fri Jun 16 00:22:27 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2017 00:22:27 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Back up criticism with examples | News-Gazette.com Message-ID: http://www.news-gazette.com/opinion/letters-editor/2017-06-14/back-criticism-examples.html Let me count the ways. Fab. From karenaram at hotmail.com Fri Jun 16 00:22:20 2017 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2017 00:22:20 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: It does make sense that the law schools connected with Yale and Harvard would be “evil” given law schools are the first academic institution that the oligarchs controlling our government, would by necessity need to corrupt, in order to control the masses. I was astonished over a year ago, before I’d ever heard of “Killer Koh,” to attend a lecture on “The legitimacy of targeted killing” in relation to our drone warfare, at the U of I Law School. It was clearly a charade to present drones as legitimate in spite of International law and US laws of due process. Again, I had almost a year later, the frustration of attending a lecture by Dean Amar’s brother, a constitutional law professor from Yale, on “Freedom of Speech”, The lecture had nothing to do with freedom of speech, it was a promotion of his book and Hillary as well as local Democrats, along with an attempt to portray Obama in a good light. Then “killer Koh” Hillary’s advisor on drone warfare, being brought to the U of I as a representative of the “law” and speaking on human rights, to law students? Sometimes, too much is too much for sensible minds. On Jun 15, 2017, at 17:06, Boyle, Francis A > wrote: Well at least we all stood up against this Evil Law School on October 28. But from what Amar is saying here, I am sure we will have to do so again. So stay tuned. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Karen Aram [mailto:karenaram at hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 5:13 PM To: Boyle, Francis A > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: Re: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 Our government is evil, and if we the people don’t stop them from the wars and killings, then we are complicit in their warcrimes. On Jun 15, 2017, at 15:07, Boyle, Francis A > wrote: This Law School is EVIL! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 10:38 AM To: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; Karen Aram >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: FW: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 Sure. Let’s bring the War Criminal, Murderer, Felon, Bigot, Racist and Genocidaire Killer Koh into our Law School on October 28, 2016, hold him up as a Role Model to our Law Students, and then turn our Law Students into War Criminals, Murderers, Felons, Bigots, Racists and Genocidaires just like Killer Koh. Fab. Diss-Ode to Harold Killer Koh1 Harold Killer Koh Killing Babies where he go Muslim life is cheap you see Jewish life too for the Nazi Carl Schmitt Professor of Law At the Yale Law School Boot-licking Gene Rostow Of the infamous Rostow Brothers Who gave us Vietnam Genociding “gooks” too Obama’s War Consigliere Gene and his “kids” for LBJ Some things never change for Dems And their Elite Law School Whores Today At Harvard Law School too Where Killers Obama and Koh First dropped their pooh Along with “Judge” Davey Barron too Obama’s Droner-in-Chief Destined for a Cell in The Hague Right next to his student John Yoo A Chip off of Harold’s Old Block Cold-blooded Killers and War Criminals too Killer Koh disteaching “human rights” at N.Y.U. Supported by his gang of Dem law prof thugs Beating up on the N.Y.U. law students few With the courage, integrity, and principles to say Never again! Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Justia Verdict [mailto:verdictsupport at justia.com] Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 10:09 AM To: Boyle, Francis A > Subject: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 Illinois Law dean and professor Vikram David Amar laments recent instances of censored speech, particularly on university campuses, and reminds us that freedom of speech and academic freedom protect even those speakers whose message might be perceived odious, racist, sexist, or hateful. Amar points out that both freedom of speech and academic freedom are rooted in the principle that ideas and arguments ought to be evaluated on their substance and that the essence of both kinds of freedom is the opportunity to persuade others of the merits of one's argument, rather than the use of power to coerce or silence others. Click here to view in your browser if you are having trouble viewing this email. [Verdict - Legal Analysis and commentary from Justia.] Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom Vikram David Amar Jun 15, 2017 [https://i2.wp.com/verdict.justia.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/IMG_0590.jpg?quality=90&resize=426%2C350&strip=all&fit=1000%25&ssl=1] It distresses me to see episodes these days in which speakers who are controversial for their conservative or ultra-conservative views are prevented from delivering invited remarks at universities (including public universities) because protestors choose to violate laws designed to protect public safety. It also distresses me to see so few liberal analysts decry how illiberal these episodes of group-imposed censorship are. As I have written at length elsewhere, no matter how repressive or otherwise abhorrent a speaker’s message, the appropriate response under our Constitution is counter speech, not shouting down or physically obstructing or threatening the speaker or the speaker’s audience. To be sure, protesting a speaker’s presence—registering profound objection to a speaker’s viewpoint—is perfectly appropriate and has a rich tradition dating from even before the 1960s free speech revolution through the Occupy movement. But what we have seen over the past several months is a transition from protesting against bad speakers to preventing them from being able to speak, and that is not acceptable. An unflinching commitment to freedom of speech—even odious, racist, sexist, hateful speech—is the cornerstone of constitutional democracy in the United States. Certainly we protect freedom of speech more vigorously than any other western democracy. We also have a venerable tradition of respecting academic freedom at colleges and universities. These two principles, freedom of speech and academic freedom, overlap and are interconnected, even as they are distinct ideas. Freedom of speech is a broadly applicable right codified in the federal First Amendment and state constitutional analogues that protects speakers both on and off public campuses from unwarranted government interference with expression. Academic freedom, which may extend beyond what the Constitutionprotects, is grounded on the idea that, at least in the academy, free inquiry unburdened by the constraints of orthodoxy will lead to the development of new ideas and knowledge. Notwithstanding their different scopes, both freedom of speech and academic freedom rest on the bedrock belief that ideas and arguments ought to be evaluated on their substance. The essence of both kinds of freedom is the opportunity to persuade others of the merits of one’s argument, rather than the use of power to coerce others into acceding to the proponent’s point of view. Sometimes the heat and passion of political protests on college campuses causes these basic principles to be overlooked or ignored. When that happens, it is important for us to go back to what freedom of speech and academic freedom really mean and how easily both of these principles can be misused and misinterpreted. Governments Can and Should Prohibit Certain Obstructive Conduct The short of the matter is that blockading, obstructing, assaulting, destroying property, and making threats, are not, in any stretch of the imagination, constitutionally protected things to do, no matter what the objective behind them. These activities are conduct the government has always had the legitimate authority to proscribe because they so obviously interfere with the liberty and lawful pursuits of others. As the Supreme Court of California stated in an important free speech case,In Re Kay: [T]he state retains a legitimate concern in ensuring that some individuals unruly assertion of their rights of free expression does not imperil other citizen’s rights of free association and discussion. … Freedom of everyone to talk at once can destroy the right of anyone effectively to talk at all. Free expression can expire as tragically in the tumult of license as in the silence of censorship. Government actions to prohibit blockades or obstruction have been held to be permissible under the First Amendment too many times to count. To cite just one example, a federal law, the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act (FACE), that prohibits anyone from physically obstructing any person from obtaining or providing reproductive health services, has been upheld repeatedly against constitutional challenge, and those cases raise harder questions than do generic obstruction laws because FACE targets specific places where protestors with particular messages may be expected. Blockades and obstructions can and should be prohibited consistent with the First Amendment primarily because they are not intended to and do not persuade anyone of the merits of the protestors’ position. They are employed to coerce third parties to change their behavior, not their minds. As such, they are actually antithetical to, rather than in furtherance of, the values on which freedom of speech and academic freedom are grounded — a commitment to the power of ideas rather than the use of force to change the way that people act. Creative But Unavailing Counterarguments In recent weeks, I have heard defenders of those who obstruct conservative speakers make two novel but completely unconvincing arguments. First, the obstruction defenders try to invoke the civil rights movement by pointing out that Martin Luther King, Jr. and his supporters were often guilty of civil disobedience—that is violating duly enacted laws. But this analogy is unavailing because King and his followers were violating laws that were (in the eyes of the protestors and many others) themselves unjust, not laws that were completely unobjectionable but simply stood in the way of the desires of the violators. Another distinction between the two settings is that to the extent that civil rights protestors violated laws regulating their political activity, they were violating laws in order to be heard themselves, not in order to prevent others from being heard. But today’s obstructors cannot credibly complain that they cannot be heard; they simply want others not to be listened to. The second creative yet deeply flawed argument I’ve heard in defense of the obstructors is the idea that controversial speakers of the kind who are being suppressed are themselves not appropriate speakers to be invited to university settings because they are not sufficiently academic in character. Putting aside the fact that these speakers were invited (whether they ought to have been or not), and putting aside whether some of these speakers do have some academic bona fides (even if their ideas are often very wrong-headed), this argument mischaracterizes the kind of speakers who belong at universities. Higher education is a place not just to sharpen one’s critical thinking skills through exposure to brilliant academics who make data-informed arguments in multiple directions; it is also a place where one should learn how to become a full citizen in American society. As the Supreme Court observed in the context of high school students in Tinker v. Des Moines Independent School District, this often means that students need to engage each other on the contentious political issues of the day. And in today’s college world this sometimes means hearing and evaluating strident political advocates, some of whom even border on demagoguery. To be sure, student and faculty organizations should give some thought (perhaps more thought than they currently do) to the question of whom they invite to speak on campus—certainly not everyone should be offered a platform—but many campus speakers, on the Left as well as the Right, are not particularly grounded in rigorous theoretical or empirical analysis, and this does not mean that they are per se inappropriate speakers for college audiences. Again, colleges should be preparing young people not just to navigate the economy, but also to navigate democracy. And, for better or worse, modern democracy means having to deal with a lot of ideas that are widely held even though they don’t hold up to analytic rigor. Debunking those ideas—not shouting them down or trying to suppress their expression—is what I want my students to learn how to do. [https://justatic.com/v/20170601a/verdict/images/authors/thumbs/amar.jpg] Follow @prof_amar Vikram David Amar is the Iwan Foundation Professor of Law and the Dean at the University of Illinois College of Law. Previously, he served as the Associate Dean for Academic Affairs and Professor of Law at the University of California, Davis School of Law. He is a 1988 graduate of the Yale Law School and a former clerk to Justice Harry Blackmun. He is a co-author, along with William Cohen and Jonathan Varat, of a major constitutional law casebook, and a co-author of several volumes of the Wright & Miller treatise on federal practice and procedure. Before teaching, Professor Amar spent a few years at the firm of Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher. RECENT ARTICLES SUPREME COURT RULES THAT CITIZENSHIP MUST BE EQUALLY HERITABLE THROUGH FATHERS AND MOTHERS Cornell University law professor Michael C. Dorf comments on a recent decision by the U.S. Supreme Court on the heritability of citizenship and explains why the decision might have implications for other immigration issues, such as the “Muslim ban” executive order. Dorf argues that the precedents the Court had to distinguish to reach its conclusion might give some insight into whether and how it might defer to other political branches on immigration issues.... Read More TRUMP IS NOT READY TO DEAL WITH HIS LEGAL PROBLEMS John W. Dean, former counsel to President Nixon, reflects on the much-anticipated testimony of former FBI Director James Comey before the Senate Intelligence Committee on Thursday. Dean briefly summarizes the takeaways from Comey’s testimony and discusses the response by President Trump and his lawyer.... Read More ABSOLUTE POWER CORRUPTS ABSOLUTELY IN THE KEEPERS Marci A. Hamilton, a Fox Distinguished Scholar in the Fox Leadership Program at the University of Pennsylvania and CEO of CHILD USA, encourages everyone to watch the Netflix docuseries The Keepers, which addresses child sex abuse in the Catholic Church. Hamilton describes the progress toward justice for child sex abuse victims, including the growing awareness of the pervasiveness the problem and increasing numbers of states who extend or eliminate statutes of limitations for these types of lawsuits and prosecutions....Read More [Forward this email.] Have friends who like law? Forward this email. [Like Verdict on Facebook] Like Verdict for legal discussions on Facebook. [Follow @verdictjustia on Twitter] Follow @verdictjustia for news and updates on Twitter. [Justia] Contact Us | Privacy Policy | Unsubscribe [Facebook][Twitter][LinkedIn][Justia][GooglePlus] You received this email because you have subscribed to the Verdict News E-Mail Feed. Justia | 1380 Pear Ave, Suite 2B, Mountain View, CA 94043 ________________________________ ________________________________ 1 Behind me at Harvard Law School, Killer Koh was President Obama’s War Consigliere and Droner-in-Chief. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Fri Jun 16 00:22:20 2017 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2017 00:22:20 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: It does make sense that the law schools connected with Yale and Harvard would be “evil” given law schools are the first academic institution that the oligarchs controlling our government, would by necessity need to corrupt, in order to control the masses. I was astonished over a year ago, before I’d ever heard of “Killer Koh,” to attend a lecture on “The legitimacy of targeted killing” in relation to our drone warfare, at the U of I Law School. It was clearly a charade to present drones as legitimate in spite of International law and US laws of due process. Again, I had almost a year later, the frustration of attending a lecture by Dean Amar’s brother, a constitutional law professor from Yale, on “Freedom of Speech”, The lecture had nothing to do with freedom of speech, it was a promotion of his book and Hillary as well as local Democrats, along with an attempt to portray Obama in a good light. Then “killer Koh” Hillary’s advisor on drone warfare, being brought to the U of I as a representative of the “law” and speaking on human rights, to law students? Sometimes, too much is too much for sensible minds. On Jun 15, 2017, at 17:06, Boyle, Francis A > wrote: Well at least we all stood up against this Evil Law School on October 28. But from what Amar is saying here, I am sure we will have to do so again. So stay tuned. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Karen Aram [mailto:karenaram at hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 5:13 PM To: Boyle, Francis A > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: Re: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 Our government is evil, and if we the people don’t stop them from the wars and killings, then we are complicit in their warcrimes. On Jun 15, 2017, at 15:07, Boyle, Francis A > wrote: This Law School is EVIL! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 10:38 AM To: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; Karen Aram >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: FW: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 Sure. Let’s bring the War Criminal, Murderer, Felon, Bigot, Racist and Genocidaire Killer Koh into our Law School on October 28, 2016, hold him up as a Role Model to our Law Students, and then turn our Law Students into War Criminals, Murderers, Felons, Bigots, Racists and Genocidaires just like Killer Koh. Fab. Diss-Ode to Harold Killer Koh1 Harold Killer Koh Killing Babies where he go Muslim life is cheap you see Jewish life too for the Nazi Carl Schmitt Professor of Law At the Yale Law School Boot-licking Gene Rostow Of the infamous Rostow Brothers Who gave us Vietnam Genociding “gooks” too Obama’s War Consigliere Gene and his “kids” for LBJ Some things never change for Dems And their Elite Law School Whores Today At Harvard Law School too Where Killers Obama and Koh First dropped their pooh Along with “Judge” Davey Barron too Obama’s Droner-in-Chief Destined for a Cell in The Hague Right next to his student John Yoo A Chip off of Harold’s Old Block Cold-blooded Killers and War Criminals too Killer Koh disteaching “human rights” at N.Y.U. Supported by his gang of Dem law prof thugs Beating up on the N.Y.U. law students few With the courage, integrity, and principles to say Never again! Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Justia Verdict [mailto:verdictsupport at justia.com] Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 10:09 AM To: Boyle, Francis A > Subject: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 Illinois Law dean and professor Vikram David Amar laments recent instances of censored speech, particularly on university campuses, and reminds us that freedom of speech and academic freedom protect even those speakers whose message might be perceived odious, racist, sexist, or hateful. Amar points out that both freedom of speech and academic freedom are rooted in the principle that ideas and arguments ought to be evaluated on their substance and that the essence of both kinds of freedom is the opportunity to persuade others of the merits of one's argument, rather than the use of power to coerce or silence others. Click here to view in your browser if you are having trouble viewing this email. [Verdict - Legal Analysis and commentary from Justia.] Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom Vikram David Amar Jun 15, 2017 [https://i2.wp.com/verdict.justia.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/IMG_0590.jpg?quality=90&resize=426%2C350&strip=all&fit=1000%25&ssl=1] It distresses me to see episodes these days in which speakers who are controversial for their conservative or ultra-conservative views are prevented from delivering invited remarks at universities (including public universities) because protestors choose to violate laws designed to protect public safety. It also distresses me to see so few liberal analysts decry how illiberal these episodes of group-imposed censorship are. As I have written at length elsewhere, no matter how repressive or otherwise abhorrent a speaker’s message, the appropriate response under our Constitution is counter speech, not shouting down or physically obstructing or threatening the speaker or the speaker’s audience. To be sure, protesting a speaker’s presence—registering profound objection to a speaker’s viewpoint—is perfectly appropriate and has a rich tradition dating from even before the 1960s free speech revolution through the Occupy movement. But what we have seen over the past several months is a transition from protesting against bad speakers to preventing them from being able to speak, and that is not acceptable. An unflinching commitment to freedom of speech—even odious, racist, sexist, hateful speech—is the cornerstone of constitutional democracy in the United States. Certainly we protect freedom of speech more vigorously than any other western democracy. We also have a venerable tradition of respecting academic freedom at colleges and universities. These two principles, freedom of speech and academic freedom, overlap and are interconnected, even as they are distinct ideas. Freedom of speech is a broadly applicable right codified in the federal First Amendment and state constitutional analogues that protects speakers both on and off public campuses from unwarranted government interference with expression. Academic freedom, which may extend beyond what the Constitutionprotects, is grounded on the idea that, at least in the academy, free inquiry unburdened by the constraints of orthodoxy will lead to the development of new ideas and knowledge. Notwithstanding their different scopes, both freedom of speech and academic freedom rest on the bedrock belief that ideas and arguments ought to be evaluated on their substance. The essence of both kinds of freedom is the opportunity to persuade others of the merits of one’s argument, rather than the use of power to coerce others into acceding to the proponent’s point of view. Sometimes the heat and passion of political protests on college campuses causes these basic principles to be overlooked or ignored. When that happens, it is important for us to go back to what freedom of speech and academic freedom really mean and how easily both of these principles can be misused and misinterpreted. Governments Can and Should Prohibit Certain Obstructive Conduct The short of the matter is that blockading, obstructing, assaulting, destroying property, and making threats, are not, in any stretch of the imagination, constitutionally protected things to do, no matter what the objective behind them. These activities are conduct the government has always had the legitimate authority to proscribe because they so obviously interfere with the liberty and lawful pursuits of others. As the Supreme Court of California stated in an important free speech case,In Re Kay: [T]he state retains a legitimate concern in ensuring that some individuals unruly assertion of their rights of free expression does not imperil other citizen’s rights of free association and discussion. … Freedom of everyone to talk at once can destroy the right of anyone effectively to talk at all. Free expression can expire as tragically in the tumult of license as in the silence of censorship. Government actions to prohibit blockades or obstruction have been held to be permissible under the First Amendment too many times to count. To cite just one example, a federal law, the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act (FACE), that prohibits anyone from physically obstructing any person from obtaining or providing reproductive health services, has been upheld repeatedly against constitutional challenge, and those cases raise harder questions than do generic obstruction laws because FACE targets specific places where protestors with particular messages may be expected. Blockades and obstructions can and should be prohibited consistent with the First Amendment primarily because they are not intended to and do not persuade anyone of the merits of the protestors’ position. They are employed to coerce third parties to change their behavior, not their minds. As such, they are actually antithetical to, rather than in furtherance of, the values on which freedom of speech and academic freedom are grounded — a commitment to the power of ideas rather than the use of force to change the way that people act. Creative But Unavailing Counterarguments In recent weeks, I have heard defenders of those who obstruct conservative speakers make two novel but completely unconvincing arguments. First, the obstruction defenders try to invoke the civil rights movement by pointing out that Martin Luther King, Jr. and his supporters were often guilty of civil disobedience—that is violating duly enacted laws. But this analogy is unavailing because King and his followers were violating laws that were (in the eyes of the protestors and many others) themselves unjust, not laws that were completely unobjectionable but simply stood in the way of the desires of the violators. Another distinction between the two settings is that to the extent that civil rights protestors violated laws regulating their political activity, they were violating laws in order to be heard themselves, not in order to prevent others from being heard. But today’s obstructors cannot credibly complain that they cannot be heard; they simply want others not to be listened to. The second creative yet deeply flawed argument I’ve heard in defense of the obstructors is the idea that controversial speakers of the kind who are being suppressed are themselves not appropriate speakers to be invited to university settings because they are not sufficiently academic in character. Putting aside the fact that these speakers were invited (whether they ought to have been or not), and putting aside whether some of these speakers do have some academic bona fides (even if their ideas are often very wrong-headed), this argument mischaracterizes the kind of speakers who belong at universities. Higher education is a place not just to sharpen one’s critical thinking skills through exposure to brilliant academics who make data-informed arguments in multiple directions; it is also a place where one should learn how to become a full citizen in American society. As the Supreme Court observed in the context of high school students in Tinker v. Des Moines Independent School District, this often means that students need to engage each other on the contentious political issues of the day. And in today’s college world this sometimes means hearing and evaluating strident political advocates, some of whom even border on demagoguery. To be sure, student and faculty organizations should give some thought (perhaps more thought than they currently do) to the question of whom they invite to speak on campus—certainly not everyone should be offered a platform—but many campus speakers, on the Left as well as the Right, are not particularly grounded in rigorous theoretical or empirical analysis, and this does not mean that they are per se inappropriate speakers for college audiences. Again, colleges should be preparing young people not just to navigate the economy, but also to navigate democracy. And, for better or worse, modern democracy means having to deal with a lot of ideas that are widely held even though they don’t hold up to analytic rigor. Debunking those ideas—not shouting them down or trying to suppress their expression—is what I want my students to learn how to do. [https://justatic.com/v/20170601a/verdict/images/authors/thumbs/amar.jpg] Follow @prof_amar Vikram David Amar is the Iwan Foundation Professor of Law and the Dean at the University of Illinois College of Law. Previously, he served as the Associate Dean for Academic Affairs and Professor of Law at the University of California, Davis School of Law. He is a 1988 graduate of the Yale Law School and a former clerk to Justice Harry Blackmun. He is a co-author, along with William Cohen and Jonathan Varat, of a major constitutional law casebook, and a co-author of several volumes of the Wright & Miller treatise on federal practice and procedure. Before teaching, Professor Amar spent a few years at the firm of Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher. RECENT ARTICLES SUPREME COURT RULES THAT CITIZENSHIP MUST BE EQUALLY HERITABLE THROUGH FATHERS AND MOTHERS Cornell University law professor Michael C. Dorf comments on a recent decision by the U.S. Supreme Court on the heritability of citizenship and explains why the decision might have implications for other immigration issues, such as the “Muslim ban” executive order. Dorf argues that the precedents the Court had to distinguish to reach its conclusion might give some insight into whether and how it might defer to other political branches on immigration issues.... Read More TRUMP IS NOT READY TO DEAL WITH HIS LEGAL PROBLEMS John W. Dean, former counsel to President Nixon, reflects on the much-anticipated testimony of former FBI Director James Comey before the Senate Intelligence Committee on Thursday. Dean briefly summarizes the takeaways from Comey’s testimony and discusses the response by President Trump and his lawyer.... Read More ABSOLUTE POWER CORRUPTS ABSOLUTELY IN THE KEEPERS Marci A. Hamilton, a Fox Distinguished Scholar in the Fox Leadership Program at the University of Pennsylvania and CEO of CHILD USA, encourages everyone to watch the Netflix docuseries The Keepers, which addresses child sex abuse in the Catholic Church. Hamilton describes the progress toward justice for child sex abuse victims, including the growing awareness of the pervasiveness the problem and increasing numbers of states who extend or eliminate statutes of limitations for these types of lawsuits and prosecutions....Read More [Forward this email.] Have friends who like law? Forward this email. [Like Verdict on Facebook] Like Verdict for legal discussions on Facebook. [Follow @verdictjustia on Twitter] Follow @verdictjustia for news and updates on Twitter. [Justia] Contact Us | Privacy Policy | Unsubscribe [Facebook][Twitter][LinkedIn][Justia][GooglePlus] You received this email because you have subscribed to the Verdict News E-Mail Feed. Justia | 1380 Pear Ave, Suite 2B, Mountain View, CA 94043 ________________________________ ________________________________ 1 Behind me at Harvard Law School, Killer Koh was President Obama’s War Consigliere and Droner-in-Chief. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Fri Jun 16 00:22:27 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2017 00:22:27 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Back up criticism with examples | News-Gazette.com Message-ID: http://www.news-gazette.com/opinion/letters-editor/2017-06-14/back-criticism-examples.html Let me count the ways. Fab. From karenaram at hotmail.com Fri Jun 16 00:23:48 2017 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2017 00:23:48 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Back up criticism with examples | News-Gazette.com In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: LMAO, does this person know of what they ask? > On Jun 15, 2017, at 17:22, Boyle, Francis A wrote: > > http://www.news-gazette.com/opinion/letters-editor/2017-06-14/back-criticism-examples.html > Let me count the ways. Fab. From karenaram at hotmail.com Fri Jun 16 00:23:48 2017 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2017 00:23:48 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Back up criticism with examples | News-Gazette.com In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: LMAO, does this person know of what they ask? > On Jun 15, 2017, at 17:22, Boyle, Francis A wrote: > > http://www.news-gazette.com/opinion/letters-editor/2017-06-14/back-criticism-examples.html > Let me count the ways. Fab. From fboyle at illinois.edu Fri Jun 16 00:06:05 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2017 00:06:05 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Well at least we all stood up against this Evil Law School on October 28. But from what Amar is saying here, I am sure we will have to do so again. So stay tuned. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Karen Aram [mailto:karenaram at hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 5:13 PM To: Boyle, Francis A Cc: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Subject: Re: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 Our government is evil, and if we the people don’t stop them from the wars and killings, then we are complicit in their warcrimes. On Jun 15, 2017, at 15:07, Boyle, Francis A > wrote: This Law School is EVIL! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 10:38 AM To: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; Karen Aram >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: FW: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 Sure. Let’s bring the War Criminal, Murderer, Felon, Bigot, Racist and Genocidaire Killer Koh into our Law School on October 28, 2016, hold him up as a Role Model to our Law Students, and then turn our Law Students into War Criminals, Murderers, Felons, Bigots, Racists and Genocidaires just like Killer Koh. Fab. Diss-Ode to Harold Killer Koh1 Harold Killer Koh Killing Babies where he go Muslim life is cheap you see Jewish life too for the Nazi Carl Schmitt Professor of Law At the Yale Law School Boot-licking Gene Rostow Of the infamous Rostow Brothers Who gave us Vietnam Genociding “gooks” too Obama’s War Consigliere Gene and his “kids” for LBJ Some things never change for Dems And their Elite Law School Whores Today At Harvard Law School too Where Killers Obama and Koh First dropped their pooh Along with “Judge” Davey Barron too Obama’s Droner-in-Chief Destined for a Cell in The Hague Right next to his student John Yoo A Chip off of Harold’s Old Block Cold-blooded Killers and War Criminals too Killer Koh disteaching “human rights” at N.Y.U. Supported by his gang of Dem law prof thugs Beating up on the N.Y.U. law students few With the courage, integrity, and principles to say Never again! Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Justia Verdict [mailto:verdictsupport at justia.com] Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 10:09 AM To: Boyle, Francis A > Subject: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 Illinois Law dean and professor Vikram David Amar laments recent instances of censored speech, particularly on university campuses, and reminds us that freedom of speech and academic freedom protect even those speakers whose message might be perceived odious, racist, sexist, or hateful. Amar points out that both freedom of speech and academic freedom are rooted in the principle that ideas and arguments ought to be evaluated on their substance and that the essence of both kinds of freedom is the opportunity to persuade others of the merits of one's argument, rather than the use of power to coerce or silence others. Click here to view in your browser if you are having trouble viewing this email. [Verdict - Legal Analysis and commentary from Justia.] Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom Vikram David Amar Jun 15, 2017 [https://i2.wp.com/verdict.justia.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/IMG_0590.jpg?quality=90&resize=426%2C350&strip=all&fit=1000%25&ssl=1] It distresses me to see episodes these days in which speakers who are controversial for their conservative or ultra-conservative views are prevented from delivering invited remarks at universities (including public universities) because protestors choose to violate laws designed to protect public safety. It also distresses me to see so few liberal analysts decry how illiberal these episodes of group-imposed censorship are. As I have written at length elsewhere, no matter how repressive or otherwise abhorrent a speaker’s message, the appropriate response under our Constitution is counter speech, not shouting down or physically obstructing or threatening the speaker or the speaker’s audience. To be sure, protesting a speaker’s presence—registering profound objection to a speaker’s viewpoint—is perfectly appropriate and has a rich tradition dating from even before the 1960s free speech revolution through the Occupy movement. But what we have seen over the past several months is a transition from protesting against bad speakers to preventing them from being able to speak, and that is not acceptable. An unflinching commitment to freedom of speech—even odious, racist, sexist, hateful speech—is the cornerstone of constitutional democracy in the United States. Certainly we protect freedom of speech more vigorously than any other western democracy. We also have a venerable tradition of respecting academic freedom at colleges and universities. These two principles, freedom of speech and academic freedom, overlap and are interconnected, even as they are distinct ideas. Freedom of speech is a broadly applicable right codified in the federal First Amendment and state constitutional analogues that protects speakers both on and off public campuses from unwarranted government interference with expression. Academic freedom, which may extend beyond what the Constitutionprotects, is grounded on the idea that, at least in the academy, free inquiry unburdened by the constraints of orthodoxy will lead to the development of new ideas and knowledge. Notwithstanding their different scopes, both freedom of speech and academic freedom rest on the bedrock belief that ideas and arguments ought to be evaluated on their substance. The essence of both kinds of freedom is the opportunity to persuade others of the merits of one’s argument, rather than the use of power to coerce others into acceding to the proponent’s point of view. Sometimes the heat and passion of political protests on college campuses causes these basic principles to be overlooked or ignored. When that happens, it is important for us to go back to what freedom of speech and academic freedom really mean and how easily both of these principles can be misused and misinterpreted. Governments Can and Should Prohibit Certain Obstructive Conduct The short of the matter is that blockading, obstructing, assaulting, destroying property, and making threats, are not, in any stretch of the imagination, constitutionally protected things to do, no matter what the objective behind them. These activities are conduct the government has always had the legitimate authority to proscribe because they so obviously interfere with the liberty and lawful pursuits of others. As the Supreme Court of California stated in an important free speech case,In Re Kay: [T]he state retains a legitimate concern in ensuring that some individuals unruly assertion of their rights of free expression does not imperil other citizen’s rights of free association and discussion. … Freedom of everyone to talk at once can destroy the right of anyone effectively to talk at all. Free expression can expire as tragically in the tumult of license as in the silence of censorship. Government actions to prohibit blockades or obstruction have been held to be permissible under the First Amendment too many times to count. To cite just one example, a federal law, the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act (FACE), that prohibits anyone from physically obstructing any person from obtaining or providing reproductive health services, has been upheld repeatedly against constitutional challenge, and those cases raise harder questions than do generic obstruction laws because FACE targets specific places where protestors with particular messages may be expected. Blockades and obstructions can and should be prohibited consistent with the First Amendment primarily because they are not intended to and do not persuade anyone of the merits of the protestors’ position. They are employed to coerce third parties to change their behavior, not their minds. As such, they are actually antithetical to, rather than in furtherance of, the values on which freedom of speech and academic freedom are grounded — a commitment to the power of ideas rather than the use of force to change the way that people act. Creative But Unavailing Counterarguments In recent weeks, I have heard defenders of those who obstruct conservative speakers make two novel but completely unconvincing arguments. First, the obstruction defenders try to invoke the civil rights movement by pointing out that Martin Luther King, Jr. and his supporters were often guilty of civil disobedience—that is violating duly enacted laws. But this analogy is unavailing because King and his followers were violating laws that were (in the eyes of the protestors and many others) themselves unjust, not laws that were completely unobjectionable but simply stood in the way of the desires of the violators. Another distinction between the two settings is that to the extent that civil rights protestors violated laws regulating their political activity, they were violating laws in order to be heard themselves, not in order to prevent others from being heard. But today’s obstructors cannot credibly complain that they cannot be heard; they simply want others not to be listened to. The second creative yet deeply flawed argument I’ve heard in defense of the obstructors is the idea that controversial speakers of the kind who are being suppressed are themselves not appropriate speakers to be invited to university settings because they are not sufficiently academic in character. Putting aside the fact that these speakers were invited (whether they ought to have been or not), and putting aside whether some of these speakers do have some academic bona fides (even if their ideas are often very wrong-headed), this argument mischaracterizes the kind of speakers who belong at universities. Higher education is a place not just to sharpen one’s critical thinking skills through exposure to brilliant academics who make data-informed arguments in multiple directions; it is also a place where one should learn how to become a full citizen in American society. As the Supreme Court observed in the context of high school students in Tinker v. Des Moines Independent School District, this often means that students need to engage each other on the contentious political issues of the day. And in today’s college world this sometimes means hearing and evaluating strident political advocates, some of whom even border on demagoguery. To be sure, student and faculty organizations should give some thought (perhaps more thought than they currently do) to the question of whom they invite to speak on campus—certainly not everyone should be offered a platform—but many campus speakers, on the Left as well as the Right, are not particularly grounded in rigorous theoretical or empirical analysis, and this does not mean that they are per se inappropriate speakers for college audiences. Again, colleges should be preparing young people not just to navigate the economy, but also to navigate democracy. And, for better or worse, modern democracy means having to deal with a lot of ideas that are widely held even though they don’t hold up to analytic rigor. Debunking those ideas—not shouting them down or trying to suppress their expression—is what I want my students to learn how to do. [https://justatic.com/v/20170601a/verdict/images/authors/thumbs/amar.jpg] Follow @prof_amar Vikram David Amar is the Iwan Foundation Professor of Law and the Dean at the University of Illinois College of Law. Previously, he served as the Associate Dean for Academic Affairs and Professor of Law at the University of California, Davis School of Law. He is a 1988 graduate of the Yale Law School and a former clerk to Justice Harry Blackmun. He is a co-author, along with William Cohen and Jonathan Varat, of a major constitutional law casebook, and a co-author of several volumes of the Wright & Miller treatise on federal practice and procedure. Before teaching, Professor Amar spent a few years at the firm of Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher. RECENT ARTICLES SUPREME COURT RULES THAT CITIZENSHIP MUST BE EQUALLY HERITABLE THROUGH FATHERS AND MOTHERS Cornell University law professor Michael C. Dorf comments on a recent decision by the U.S. Supreme Court on the heritability of citizenship and explains why the decision might have implications for other immigration issues, such as the “Muslim ban” executive order. Dorf argues that the precedents the Court had to distinguish to reach its conclusion might give some insight into whether and how it might defer to other political branches on immigration issues.... Read More TRUMP IS NOT READY TO DEAL WITH HIS LEGAL PROBLEMS John W. Dean, former counsel to President Nixon, reflects on the much-anticipated testimony of former FBI Director James Comey before the Senate Intelligence Committee on Thursday. Dean briefly summarizes the takeaways from Comey’s testimony and discusses the response by President Trump and his lawyer.... Read More ABSOLUTE POWER CORRUPTS ABSOLUTELY IN THE KEEPERS Marci A. Hamilton, a Fox Distinguished Scholar in the Fox Leadership Program at the University of Pennsylvania and CEO of CHILD USA, encourages everyone to watch the Netflix docuseries The Keepers, which addresses child sex abuse in the Catholic Church. Hamilton describes the progress toward justice for child sex abuse victims, including the growing awareness of the pervasiveness the problem and increasing numbers of states who extend or eliminate statutes of limitations for these types of lawsuits and prosecutions....Read More [Forward this email.] Have friends who like law? Forward this email. [Like Verdict on Facebook] Like Verdict for legal discussions on Facebook. [Follow @verdictjustia on Twitter] Follow @verdictjustia for news and updates on Twitter. [Justia] Contact Us | Privacy Policy | Unsubscribe [Facebook][Twitter][LinkedIn][Justia][GooglePlus] You received this email because you have subscribed to the Verdict News E-Mail Feed. Justia | 1380 Pear Ave, Suite 2B, Mountain View, CA 94043 ________________________________ ________________________________ 1 Behind me at Harvard Law School, Killer Koh was President Obama’s War Consigliere and Droner-in-Chief. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Fri Jun 16 00:33:26 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2017 00:33:26 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I was astonished over a year ago, before I’d ever heard of “Killer Koh,” to attend a lecture on “The legitimacy of targeted killing” in relation to our drone warfare, at the U of I Law School. It was clearly a charade to present drones as legitimate in spite of International law and US laws of due process. Yeah, if I remember correctly, I think that might have been the Dirty Work of Fired and Disgraced Dean Heidi Hurd’s Consort Michael Moore, who bragged that he works for the CIA and the Mossad-- and both of whom have stunk up this Campus and this Community for years by publicly advocating Torture. Moore also publicly congratulated everyone for bringing in Killer Koh after I had done everything humanly possible to stop them. As I said, this Law School is EVIL INCARNATE! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Karen Aram [mailto:karenaram at hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 7:22 PM To: Boyle, Francis A Cc: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Subject: Re: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 It does make sense that the law schools connected with Yale and Harvard would be “evil” given law schools are the first academic institution that the oligarchs controlling our government, would by necessity need to corrupt, in order to control the masses. I was astonished over a year ago, before I’d ever heard of “Killer Koh,” to attend a lecture on “The legitimacy of targeted killing” in relation to our drone warfare, at the U of I Law School. It was clearly a charade to present drones as legitimate in spite of International law and US laws of due process. Again, I had almost a year later, the frustration of attending a lecture by Dean Amar’s brother, a constitutional law professor from Yale, on “Freedom of Speech”, The lecture had nothing to do with freedom of speech, it was a promotion of his book and Hillary as well as local Democrats, along with an attempt to portray Obama in a good light. Then “killer Koh” Hillary’s advisor on drone warfare, being brought to the U of I as a representative of the “law” and speaking on human rights, to law students? Sometimes, too much is too much for sensible minds. On Jun 15, 2017, at 17:06, Boyle, Francis A > wrote: Well at least we all stood up against this Evil Law School on October 28. But from what Amar is saying here, I am sure we will have to do so again. So stay tuned. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Karen Aram [mailto:karenaram at hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 5:13 PM To: Boyle, Francis A > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: Re: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 Our government is evil, and if we the people don’t stop them from the wars and killings, then we are complicit in their warcrimes. On Jun 15, 2017, at 15:07, Boyle, Francis A > wrote: This Law School is EVIL! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 10:38 AM To: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; Karen Aram >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: FW: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 Sure. Let’s bring the War Criminal, Murderer, Felon, Bigot, Racist and Genocidaire Killer Koh into our Law School on October 28, 2016, hold him up as a Role Model to our Law Students, and then turn our Law Students into War Criminals, Murderers, Felons, Bigots, Racists and Genocidaires just like Killer Koh. Fab. Diss-Ode to Harold Killer Koh1 Harold Killer Koh Killing Babies where he go Muslim life is cheap you see Jewish life too for the Nazi Carl Schmitt Professor of Law At the Yale Law School Boot-licking Gene Rostow Of the infamous Rostow Brothers Who gave us Vietnam Genociding “gooks” too Obama’s War Consigliere Gene and his “kids” for LBJ Some things never change for Dems And their Elite Law School Whores Today At Harvard Law School too Where Killers Obama and Koh First dropped their pooh Along with “Judge” Davey Barron too Obama’s Droner-in-Chief Destined for a Cell in The Hague Right next to his student John Yoo A Chip off of Harold’s Old Block Cold-blooded Killers and War Criminals too Killer Koh disteaching “human rights” at N.Y.U. Supported by his gang of Dem law prof thugs Beating up on the N.Y.U. law students few With the courage, integrity, and principles to say Never again! Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Justia Verdict [mailto:verdictsupport at justia.com] Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 10:09 AM To: Boyle, Francis A > Subject: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 Illinois Law dean and professor Vikram David Amar laments recent instances of censored speech, particularly on university campuses, and reminds us that freedom of speech and academic freedom protect even those speakers whose message might be perceived odious, racist, sexist, or hateful. Amar points out that both freedom of speech and academic freedom are rooted in the principle that ideas and arguments ought to be evaluated on their substance and that the essence of both kinds of freedom is the opportunity to persuade others of the merits of one's argument, rather than the use of power to coerce or silence others. Click here to view in your browser if you are having trouble viewing this email. [Verdict - Legal Analysis and commentary from Justia.] Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom Vikram David Amar Jun 15, 2017 [https://i2.wp.com/verdict.justia.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/IMG_0590.jpg?quality=90&resize=426%2C350&strip=all&fit=1000%25&ssl=1] It distresses me to see episodes these days in which speakers who are controversial for their conservative or ultra-conservative views are prevented from delivering invited remarks at universities (including public universities) because protestors choose to violate laws designed to protect public safety. It also distresses me to see so few liberal analysts decry how illiberal these episodes of group-imposed censorship are. As I have written at length elsewhere, no matter how repressive or otherwise abhorrent a speaker’s message, the appropriate response under our Constitution is counter speech, not shouting down or physically obstructing or threatening the speaker or the speaker’s audience. To be sure, protesting a speaker’s presence—registering profound objection to a speaker’s viewpoint—is perfectly appropriate and has a rich tradition dating from even before the 1960s free speech revolution through the Occupy movement. But what we have seen over the past several months is a transition from protesting against bad speakers to preventing them from being able to speak, and that is not acceptable. An unflinching commitment to freedom of speech—even odious, racist, sexist, hateful speech—is the cornerstone of constitutional democracy in the United States. Certainly we protect freedom of speech more vigorously than any other western democracy. We also have a venerable tradition of respecting academic freedom at colleges and universities. These two principles, freedom of speech and academic freedom, overlap and are interconnected, even as they are distinct ideas. Freedom of speech is a broadly applicable right codified in the federal First Amendment and state constitutional analogues that protects speakers both on and off public campuses from unwarranted government interference with expression. Academic freedom, which may extend beyond what the Constitutionprotects, is grounded on the idea that, at least in the academy, free inquiry unburdened by the constraints of orthodoxy will lead to the development of new ideas and knowledge. Notwithstanding their different scopes, both freedom of speech and academic freedom rest on the bedrock belief that ideas and arguments ought to be evaluated on their substance. The essence of both kinds of freedom is the opportunity to persuade others of the merits of one’s argument, rather than the use of power to coerce others into acceding to the proponent’s point of view. Sometimes the heat and passion of political protests on college campuses causes these basic principles to be overlooked or ignored. When that happens, it is important for us to go back to what freedom of speech and academic freedom really mean and how easily both of these principles can be misused and misinterpreted. Governments Can and Should Prohibit Certain Obstructive Conduct The short of the matter is that blockading, obstructing, assaulting, destroying property, and making threats, are not, in any stretch of the imagination, constitutionally protected things to do, no matter what the objective behind them. These activities are conduct the government has always had the legitimate authority to proscribe because they so obviously interfere with the liberty and lawful pursuits of others. As the Supreme Court of California stated in an important free speech case,In Re Kay: [T]he state retains a legitimate concern in ensuring that some individuals unruly assertion of their rights of free expression does not imperil other citizen’s rights of free association and discussion. … Freedom of everyone to talk at once can destroy the right of anyone effectively to talk at all. Free expression can expire as tragically in the tumult of license as in the silence of censorship. Government actions to prohibit blockades or obstruction have been held to be permissible under the First Amendment too many times to count. To cite just one example, a federal law, the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act (FACE), that prohibits anyone from physically obstructing any person from obtaining or providing reproductive health services, has been upheld repeatedly against constitutional challenge, and those cases raise harder questions than do generic obstruction laws because FACE targets specific places where protestors with particular messages may be expected. Blockades and obstructions can and should be prohibited consistent with the First Amendment primarily because they are not intended to and do not persuade anyone of the merits of the protestors’ position. They are employed to coerce third parties to change their behavior, not their minds. As such, they are actually antithetical to, rather than in furtherance of, the values on which freedom of speech and academic freedom are grounded — a commitment to the power of ideas rather than the use of force to change the way that people act. Creative But Unavailing Counterarguments In recent weeks, I have heard defenders of those who obstruct conservative speakers make two novel but completely unconvincing arguments. First, the obstruction defenders try to invoke the civil rights movement by pointing out that Martin Luther King, Jr. and his supporters were often guilty of civil disobedience—that is violating duly enacted laws. But this analogy is unavailing because King and his followers were violating laws that were (in the eyes of the protestors and many others) themselves unjust, not laws that were completely unobjectionable but simply stood in the way of the desires of the violators. Another distinction between the two settings is that to the extent that civil rights protestors violated laws regulating their political activity, they were violating laws in order to be heard themselves, not in order to prevent others from being heard. But today’s obstructors cannot credibly complain that they cannot be heard; they simply want others not to be listened to. The second creative yet deeply flawed argument I’ve heard in defense of the obstructors is the idea that controversial speakers of the kind who are being suppressed are themselves not appropriate speakers to be invited to university settings because they are not sufficiently academic in character. Putting aside the fact that these speakers were invited (whether they ought to have been or not), and putting aside whether some of these speakers do have some academic bona fides (even if their ideas are often very wrong-headed), this argument mischaracterizes the kind of speakers who belong at universities. Higher education is a place not just to sharpen one’s critical thinking skills through exposure to brilliant academics who make data-informed arguments in multiple directions; it is also a place where one should learn how to become a full citizen in American society. As the Supreme Court observed in the context of high school students in Tinker v. Des Moines Independent School District, this often means that students need to engage each other on the contentious political issues of the day. And in today’s college world this sometimes means hearing and evaluating strident political advocates, some of whom even border on demagoguery. To be sure, student and faculty organizations should give some thought (perhaps more thought than they currently do) to the question of whom they invite to speak on campus—certainly not everyone should be offered a platform—but many campus speakers, on the Left as well as the Right, are not particularly grounded in rigorous theoretical or empirical analysis, and this does not mean that they are per se inappropriate speakers for college audiences. Again, colleges should be preparing young people not just to navigate the economy, but also to navigate democracy. And, for better or worse, modern democracy means having to deal with a lot of ideas that are widely held even though they don’t hold up to analytic rigor. Debunking those ideas—not shouting them down or trying to suppress their expression—is what I want my students to learn how to do. [https://justatic.com/v/20170601a/verdict/images/authors/thumbs/amar.jpg] Follow @prof_amar Vikram David Amar is the Iwan Foundation Professor of Law and the Dean at the University of Illinois College of Law. Previously, he served as the Associate Dean for Academic Affairs and Professor of Law at the University of California, Davis School of Law. He is a 1988 graduate of the Yale Law School and a former clerk to Justice Harry Blackmun. He is a co-author, along with William Cohen and Jonathan Varat, of a major constitutional law casebook, and a co-author of several volumes of the Wright & Miller treatise on federal practice and procedure. Before teaching, Professor Amar spent a few years at the firm of Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher. RECENT ARTICLES SUPREME COURT RULES THAT CITIZENSHIP MUST BE EQUALLY HERITABLE THROUGH FATHERS AND MOTHERS Cornell University law professor Michael C. Dorf comments on a recent decision by the U.S. Supreme Court on the heritability of citizenship and explains why the decision might have implications for other immigration issues, such as the “Muslim ban” executive order. Dorf argues that the precedents the Court had to distinguish to reach its conclusion might give some insight into whether and how it might defer to other political branches on immigration issues.... Read More TRUMP IS NOT READY TO DEAL WITH HIS LEGAL PROBLEMS John W. Dean, former counsel to President Nixon, reflects on the much-anticipated testimony of former FBI Director James Comey before the Senate Intelligence Committee on Thursday. Dean briefly summarizes the takeaways from Comey’s testimony and discusses the response by President Trump and his lawyer.... Read More ABSOLUTE POWER CORRUPTS ABSOLUTELY IN THE KEEPERS Marci A. Hamilton, a Fox Distinguished Scholar in the Fox Leadership Program at the University of Pennsylvania and CEO of CHILD USA, encourages everyone to watch the Netflix docuseries The Keepers, which addresses child sex abuse in the Catholic Church. Hamilton describes the progress toward justice for child sex abuse victims, including the growing awareness of the pervasiveness the problem and increasing numbers of states who extend or eliminate statutes of limitations for these types of lawsuits and prosecutions....Read More [Forward this email.] Have friends who like law? Forward this email. [Like Verdict on Facebook] Like Verdict for legal discussions on Facebook. [Follow @verdictjustia on Twitter] Follow @verdictjustia for news and updates on Twitter. [Justia] Contact Us | Privacy Policy | Unsubscribe [Facebook][Twitter][LinkedIn][Justia][GooglePlus] You received this email because you have subscribed to the Verdict News E-Mail Feed. Justia | 1380 Pear Ave, Suite 2B, Mountain View, CA 94043 ________________________________ ________________________________ 1 Behind me at Harvard Law School, Killer Koh was President Obama’s War Consigliere and Droner-in-Chief. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Fri Jun 16 00:33:26 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2017 00:33:26 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I was astonished over a year ago, before I’d ever heard of “Killer Koh,” to attend a lecture on “The legitimacy of targeted killing” in relation to our drone warfare, at the U of I Law School. It was clearly a charade to present drones as legitimate in spite of International law and US laws of due process. Yeah, if I remember correctly, I think that might have been the Dirty Work of Fired and Disgraced Dean Heidi Hurd’s Consort Michael Moore, who bragged that he works for the CIA and the Mossad-- and both of whom have stunk up this Campus and this Community for years by publicly advocating Torture. Moore also publicly congratulated everyone for bringing in Killer Koh after I had done everything humanly possible to stop them. As I said, this Law School is EVIL INCARNATE! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Karen Aram [mailto:karenaram at hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 7:22 PM To: Boyle, Francis A Cc: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Subject: Re: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 It does make sense that the law schools connected with Yale and Harvard would be “evil” given law schools are the first academic institution that the oligarchs controlling our government, would by necessity need to corrupt, in order to control the masses. I was astonished over a year ago, before I’d ever heard of “Killer Koh,” to attend a lecture on “The legitimacy of targeted killing” in relation to our drone warfare, at the U of I Law School. It was clearly a charade to present drones as legitimate in spite of International law and US laws of due process. Again, I had almost a year later, the frustration of attending a lecture by Dean Amar’s brother, a constitutional law professor from Yale, on “Freedom of Speech”, The lecture had nothing to do with freedom of speech, it was a promotion of his book and Hillary as well as local Democrats, along with an attempt to portray Obama in a good light. Then “killer Koh” Hillary’s advisor on drone warfare, being brought to the U of I as a representative of the “law” and speaking on human rights, to law students? Sometimes, too much is too much for sensible minds. On Jun 15, 2017, at 17:06, Boyle, Francis A > wrote: Well at least we all stood up against this Evil Law School on October 28. But from what Amar is saying here, I am sure we will have to do so again. So stay tuned. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Karen Aram [mailto:karenaram at hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 5:13 PM To: Boyle, Francis A > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: Re: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 Our government is evil, and if we the people don’t stop them from the wars and killings, then we are complicit in their warcrimes. On Jun 15, 2017, at 15:07, Boyle, Francis A > wrote: This Law School is EVIL! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 10:38 AM To: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; Karen Aram >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: FW: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 Sure. Let’s bring the War Criminal, Murderer, Felon, Bigot, Racist and Genocidaire Killer Koh into our Law School on October 28, 2016, hold him up as a Role Model to our Law Students, and then turn our Law Students into War Criminals, Murderers, Felons, Bigots, Racists and Genocidaires just like Killer Koh. Fab. Diss-Ode to Harold Killer Koh1 Harold Killer Koh Killing Babies where he go Muslim life is cheap you see Jewish life too for the Nazi Carl Schmitt Professor of Law At the Yale Law School Boot-licking Gene Rostow Of the infamous Rostow Brothers Who gave us Vietnam Genociding “gooks” too Obama’s War Consigliere Gene and his “kids” for LBJ Some things never change for Dems And their Elite Law School Whores Today At Harvard Law School too Where Killers Obama and Koh First dropped their pooh Along with “Judge” Davey Barron too Obama’s Droner-in-Chief Destined for a Cell in The Hague Right next to his student John Yoo A Chip off of Harold’s Old Block Cold-blooded Killers and War Criminals too Killer Koh disteaching “human rights” at N.Y.U. Supported by his gang of Dem law prof thugs Beating up on the N.Y.U. law students few With the courage, integrity, and principles to say Never again! Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Justia Verdict [mailto:verdictsupport at justia.com] Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 10:09 AM To: Boyle, Francis A > Subject: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 Illinois Law dean and professor Vikram David Amar laments recent instances of censored speech, particularly on university campuses, and reminds us that freedom of speech and academic freedom protect even those speakers whose message might be perceived odious, racist, sexist, or hateful. Amar points out that both freedom of speech and academic freedom are rooted in the principle that ideas and arguments ought to be evaluated on their substance and that the essence of both kinds of freedom is the opportunity to persuade others of the merits of one's argument, rather than the use of power to coerce or silence others. Click here to view in your browser if you are having trouble viewing this email. [Verdict - Legal Analysis and commentary from Justia.] Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom Vikram David Amar Jun 15, 2017 [https://i2.wp.com/verdict.justia.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/IMG_0590.jpg?quality=90&resize=426%2C350&strip=all&fit=1000%25&ssl=1] It distresses me to see episodes these days in which speakers who are controversial for their conservative or ultra-conservative views are prevented from delivering invited remarks at universities (including public universities) because protestors choose to violate laws designed to protect public safety. It also distresses me to see so few liberal analysts decry how illiberal these episodes of group-imposed censorship are. As I have written at length elsewhere, no matter how repressive or otherwise abhorrent a speaker’s message, the appropriate response under our Constitution is counter speech, not shouting down or physically obstructing or threatening the speaker or the speaker’s audience. To be sure, protesting a speaker’s presence—registering profound objection to a speaker’s viewpoint—is perfectly appropriate and has a rich tradition dating from even before the 1960s free speech revolution through the Occupy movement. But what we have seen over the past several months is a transition from protesting against bad speakers to preventing them from being able to speak, and that is not acceptable. An unflinching commitment to freedom of speech—even odious, racist, sexist, hateful speech—is the cornerstone of constitutional democracy in the United States. Certainly we protect freedom of speech more vigorously than any other western democracy. We also have a venerable tradition of respecting academic freedom at colleges and universities. These two principles, freedom of speech and academic freedom, overlap and are interconnected, even as they are distinct ideas. Freedom of speech is a broadly applicable right codified in the federal First Amendment and state constitutional analogues that protects speakers both on and off public campuses from unwarranted government interference with expression. Academic freedom, which may extend beyond what the Constitutionprotects, is grounded on the idea that, at least in the academy, free inquiry unburdened by the constraints of orthodoxy will lead to the development of new ideas and knowledge. Notwithstanding their different scopes, both freedom of speech and academic freedom rest on the bedrock belief that ideas and arguments ought to be evaluated on their substance. The essence of both kinds of freedom is the opportunity to persuade others of the merits of one’s argument, rather than the use of power to coerce others into acceding to the proponent’s point of view. Sometimes the heat and passion of political protests on college campuses causes these basic principles to be overlooked or ignored. When that happens, it is important for us to go back to what freedom of speech and academic freedom really mean and how easily both of these principles can be misused and misinterpreted. Governments Can and Should Prohibit Certain Obstructive Conduct The short of the matter is that blockading, obstructing, assaulting, destroying property, and making threats, are not, in any stretch of the imagination, constitutionally protected things to do, no matter what the objective behind them. These activities are conduct the government has always had the legitimate authority to proscribe because they so obviously interfere with the liberty and lawful pursuits of others. As the Supreme Court of California stated in an important free speech case,In Re Kay: [T]he state retains a legitimate concern in ensuring that some individuals unruly assertion of their rights of free expression does not imperil other citizen’s rights of free association and discussion. … Freedom of everyone to talk at once can destroy the right of anyone effectively to talk at all. Free expression can expire as tragically in the tumult of license as in the silence of censorship. Government actions to prohibit blockades or obstruction have been held to be permissible under the First Amendment too many times to count. To cite just one example, a federal law, the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act (FACE), that prohibits anyone from physically obstructing any person from obtaining or providing reproductive health services, has been upheld repeatedly against constitutional challenge, and those cases raise harder questions than do generic obstruction laws because FACE targets specific places where protestors with particular messages may be expected. Blockades and obstructions can and should be prohibited consistent with the First Amendment primarily because they are not intended to and do not persuade anyone of the merits of the protestors’ position. They are employed to coerce third parties to change their behavior, not their minds. As such, they are actually antithetical to, rather than in furtherance of, the values on which freedom of speech and academic freedom are grounded — a commitment to the power of ideas rather than the use of force to change the way that people act. Creative But Unavailing Counterarguments In recent weeks, I have heard defenders of those who obstruct conservative speakers make two novel but completely unconvincing arguments. First, the obstruction defenders try to invoke the civil rights movement by pointing out that Martin Luther King, Jr. and his supporters were often guilty of civil disobedience—that is violating duly enacted laws. But this analogy is unavailing because King and his followers were violating laws that were (in the eyes of the protestors and many others) themselves unjust, not laws that were completely unobjectionable but simply stood in the way of the desires of the violators. Another distinction between the two settings is that to the extent that civil rights protestors violated laws regulating their political activity, they were violating laws in order to be heard themselves, not in order to prevent others from being heard. But today’s obstructors cannot credibly complain that they cannot be heard; they simply want others not to be listened to. The second creative yet deeply flawed argument I’ve heard in defense of the obstructors is the idea that controversial speakers of the kind who are being suppressed are themselves not appropriate speakers to be invited to university settings because they are not sufficiently academic in character. Putting aside the fact that these speakers were invited (whether they ought to have been or not), and putting aside whether some of these speakers do have some academic bona fides (even if their ideas are often very wrong-headed), this argument mischaracterizes the kind of speakers who belong at universities. Higher education is a place not just to sharpen one’s critical thinking skills through exposure to brilliant academics who make data-informed arguments in multiple directions; it is also a place where one should learn how to become a full citizen in American society. As the Supreme Court observed in the context of high school students in Tinker v. Des Moines Independent School District, this often means that students need to engage each other on the contentious political issues of the day. And in today’s college world this sometimes means hearing and evaluating strident political advocates, some of whom even border on demagoguery. To be sure, student and faculty organizations should give some thought (perhaps more thought than they currently do) to the question of whom they invite to speak on campus—certainly not everyone should be offered a platform—but many campus speakers, on the Left as well as the Right, are not particularly grounded in rigorous theoretical or empirical analysis, and this does not mean that they are per se inappropriate speakers for college audiences. Again, colleges should be preparing young people not just to navigate the economy, but also to navigate democracy. And, for better or worse, modern democracy means having to deal with a lot of ideas that are widely held even though they don’t hold up to analytic rigor. Debunking those ideas—not shouting them down or trying to suppress their expression—is what I want my students to learn how to do. [https://justatic.com/v/20170601a/verdict/images/authors/thumbs/amar.jpg] Follow @prof_amar Vikram David Amar is the Iwan Foundation Professor of Law and the Dean at the University of Illinois College of Law. Previously, he served as the Associate Dean for Academic Affairs and Professor of Law at the University of California, Davis School of Law. He is a 1988 graduate of the Yale Law School and a former clerk to Justice Harry Blackmun. He is a co-author, along with William Cohen and Jonathan Varat, of a major constitutional law casebook, and a co-author of several volumes of the Wright & Miller treatise on federal practice and procedure. Before teaching, Professor Amar spent a few years at the firm of Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher. RECENT ARTICLES SUPREME COURT RULES THAT CITIZENSHIP MUST BE EQUALLY HERITABLE THROUGH FATHERS AND MOTHERS Cornell University law professor Michael C. Dorf comments on a recent decision by the U.S. Supreme Court on the heritability of citizenship and explains why the decision might have implications for other immigration issues, such as the “Muslim ban” executive order. Dorf argues that the precedents the Court had to distinguish to reach its conclusion might give some insight into whether and how it might defer to other political branches on immigration issues.... Read More TRUMP IS NOT READY TO DEAL WITH HIS LEGAL PROBLEMS John W. Dean, former counsel to President Nixon, reflects on the much-anticipated testimony of former FBI Director James Comey before the Senate Intelligence Committee on Thursday. Dean briefly summarizes the takeaways from Comey’s testimony and discusses the response by President Trump and his lawyer.... Read More ABSOLUTE POWER CORRUPTS ABSOLUTELY IN THE KEEPERS Marci A. Hamilton, a Fox Distinguished Scholar in the Fox Leadership Program at the University of Pennsylvania and CEO of CHILD USA, encourages everyone to watch the Netflix docuseries The Keepers, which addresses child sex abuse in the Catholic Church. Hamilton describes the progress toward justice for child sex abuse victims, including the growing awareness of the pervasiveness the problem and increasing numbers of states who extend or eliminate statutes of limitations for these types of lawsuits and prosecutions....Read More [Forward this email.] Have friends who like law? Forward this email. [Like Verdict on Facebook] Like Verdict for legal discussions on Facebook. [Follow @verdictjustia on Twitter] Follow @verdictjustia for news and updates on Twitter. [Justia] Contact Us | Privacy Policy | Unsubscribe [Facebook][Twitter][LinkedIn][Justia][GooglePlus] You received this email because you have subscribed to the Verdict News E-Mail Feed. Justia | 1380 Pear Ave, Suite 2B, Mountain View, CA 94043 ________________________________ ________________________________ 1 Behind me at Harvard Law School, Killer Koh was President Obama’s War Consigliere and Droner-in-Chief. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Fri Jun 16 00:34:38 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2017 00:34:38 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Back up criticism with examples | News-Gazette.com In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I could write a book about Zbig's Crimes Against Humanity. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Karen Aram [mailto:karenaram at hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 7:24 PM To: Boyle, Francis A Cc: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Subject: Re: Back up criticism with examples | News-Gazette.com LMAO, does this person know of what they ask? > On Jun 15, 2017, at 17:22, Boyle, Francis A wrote: > > http://www.news-gazette.com/opinion/letters-editor/2017-06-14/back-criticism-examples.html > Let me count the ways. Fab. From fboyle at illinois.edu Fri Jun 16 00:34:38 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2017 00:34:38 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Back up criticism with examples | News-Gazette.com In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I could write a book about Zbig's Crimes Against Humanity. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Karen Aram [mailto:karenaram at hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 7:24 PM To: Boyle, Francis A Cc: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Subject: Re: Back up criticism with examples | News-Gazette.com LMAO, does this person know of what they ask? > On Jun 15, 2017, at 17:22, Boyle, Francis A wrote: > > http://www.news-gazette.com/opinion/letters-editor/2017-06-14/back-criticism-examples.html > Let me count the ways. Fab. From fboyle at illinois.edu Fri Jun 16 00:06:05 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2017 00:06:05 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Well at least we all stood up against this Evil Law School on October 28. But from what Amar is saying here, I am sure we will have to do so again. So stay tuned. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Karen Aram [mailto:karenaram at hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 5:13 PM To: Boyle, Francis A Cc: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Subject: Re: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 Our government is evil, and if we the people don’t stop them from the wars and killings, then we are complicit in their warcrimes. On Jun 15, 2017, at 15:07, Boyle, Francis A > wrote: This Law School is EVIL! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 10:38 AM To: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; Karen Aram >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: FW: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 Sure. Let’s bring the War Criminal, Murderer, Felon, Bigot, Racist and Genocidaire Killer Koh into our Law School on October 28, 2016, hold him up as a Role Model to our Law Students, and then turn our Law Students into War Criminals, Murderers, Felons, Bigots, Racists and Genocidaires just like Killer Koh. Fab. Diss-Ode to Harold Killer Koh1 Harold Killer Koh Killing Babies where he go Muslim life is cheap you see Jewish life too for the Nazi Carl Schmitt Professor of Law At the Yale Law School Boot-licking Gene Rostow Of the infamous Rostow Brothers Who gave us Vietnam Genociding “gooks” too Obama’s War Consigliere Gene and his “kids” for LBJ Some things never change for Dems And their Elite Law School Whores Today At Harvard Law School too Where Killers Obama and Koh First dropped their pooh Along with “Judge” Davey Barron too Obama’s Droner-in-Chief Destined for a Cell in The Hague Right next to his student John Yoo A Chip off of Harold’s Old Block Cold-blooded Killers and War Criminals too Killer Koh disteaching “human rights” at N.Y.U. Supported by his gang of Dem law prof thugs Beating up on the N.Y.U. law students few With the courage, integrity, and principles to say Never again! Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Justia Verdict [mailto:verdictsupport at justia.com] Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 10:09 AM To: Boyle, Francis A > Subject: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 Illinois Law dean and professor Vikram David Amar laments recent instances of censored speech, particularly on university campuses, and reminds us that freedom of speech and academic freedom protect even those speakers whose message might be perceived odious, racist, sexist, or hateful. Amar points out that both freedom of speech and academic freedom are rooted in the principle that ideas and arguments ought to be evaluated on their substance and that the essence of both kinds of freedom is the opportunity to persuade others of the merits of one's argument, rather than the use of power to coerce or silence others. Click here to view in your browser if you are having trouble viewing this email. [Verdict - Legal Analysis and commentary from Justia.] Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom Vikram David Amar Jun 15, 2017 [https://i2.wp.com/verdict.justia.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/IMG_0590.jpg?quality=90&resize=426%2C350&strip=all&fit=1000%25&ssl=1] It distresses me to see episodes these days in which speakers who are controversial for their conservative or ultra-conservative views are prevented from delivering invited remarks at universities (including public universities) because protestors choose to violate laws designed to protect public safety. It also distresses me to see so few liberal analysts decry how illiberal these episodes of group-imposed censorship are. As I have written at length elsewhere, no matter how repressive or otherwise abhorrent a speaker’s message, the appropriate response under our Constitution is counter speech, not shouting down or physically obstructing or threatening the speaker or the speaker’s audience. To be sure, protesting a speaker’s presence—registering profound objection to a speaker’s viewpoint—is perfectly appropriate and has a rich tradition dating from even before the 1960s free speech revolution through the Occupy movement. But what we have seen over the past several months is a transition from protesting against bad speakers to preventing them from being able to speak, and that is not acceptable. An unflinching commitment to freedom of speech—even odious, racist, sexist, hateful speech—is the cornerstone of constitutional democracy in the United States. Certainly we protect freedom of speech more vigorously than any other western democracy. We also have a venerable tradition of respecting academic freedom at colleges and universities. These two principles, freedom of speech and academic freedom, overlap and are interconnected, even as they are distinct ideas. Freedom of speech is a broadly applicable right codified in the federal First Amendment and state constitutional analogues that protects speakers both on and off public campuses from unwarranted government interference with expression. Academic freedom, which may extend beyond what the Constitutionprotects, is grounded on the idea that, at least in the academy, free inquiry unburdened by the constraints of orthodoxy will lead to the development of new ideas and knowledge. Notwithstanding their different scopes, both freedom of speech and academic freedom rest on the bedrock belief that ideas and arguments ought to be evaluated on their substance. The essence of both kinds of freedom is the opportunity to persuade others of the merits of one’s argument, rather than the use of power to coerce others into acceding to the proponent’s point of view. Sometimes the heat and passion of political protests on college campuses causes these basic principles to be overlooked or ignored. When that happens, it is important for us to go back to what freedom of speech and academic freedom really mean and how easily both of these principles can be misused and misinterpreted. Governments Can and Should Prohibit Certain Obstructive Conduct The short of the matter is that blockading, obstructing, assaulting, destroying property, and making threats, are not, in any stretch of the imagination, constitutionally protected things to do, no matter what the objective behind them. These activities are conduct the government has always had the legitimate authority to proscribe because they so obviously interfere with the liberty and lawful pursuits of others. As the Supreme Court of California stated in an important free speech case,In Re Kay: [T]he state retains a legitimate concern in ensuring that some individuals unruly assertion of their rights of free expression does not imperil other citizen’s rights of free association and discussion. … Freedom of everyone to talk at once can destroy the right of anyone effectively to talk at all. Free expression can expire as tragically in the tumult of license as in the silence of censorship. Government actions to prohibit blockades or obstruction have been held to be permissible under the First Amendment too many times to count. To cite just one example, a federal law, the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act (FACE), that prohibits anyone from physically obstructing any person from obtaining or providing reproductive health services, has been upheld repeatedly against constitutional challenge, and those cases raise harder questions than do generic obstruction laws because FACE targets specific places where protestors with particular messages may be expected. Blockades and obstructions can and should be prohibited consistent with the First Amendment primarily because they are not intended to and do not persuade anyone of the merits of the protestors’ position. They are employed to coerce third parties to change their behavior, not their minds. As such, they are actually antithetical to, rather than in furtherance of, the values on which freedom of speech and academic freedom are grounded — a commitment to the power of ideas rather than the use of force to change the way that people act. Creative But Unavailing Counterarguments In recent weeks, I have heard defenders of those who obstruct conservative speakers make two novel but completely unconvincing arguments. First, the obstruction defenders try to invoke the civil rights movement by pointing out that Martin Luther King, Jr. and his supporters were often guilty of civil disobedience—that is violating duly enacted laws. But this analogy is unavailing because King and his followers were violating laws that were (in the eyes of the protestors and many others) themselves unjust, not laws that were completely unobjectionable but simply stood in the way of the desires of the violators. Another distinction between the two settings is that to the extent that civil rights protestors violated laws regulating their political activity, they were violating laws in order to be heard themselves, not in order to prevent others from being heard. But today’s obstructors cannot credibly complain that they cannot be heard; they simply want others not to be listened to. The second creative yet deeply flawed argument I’ve heard in defense of the obstructors is the idea that controversial speakers of the kind who are being suppressed are themselves not appropriate speakers to be invited to university settings because they are not sufficiently academic in character. Putting aside the fact that these speakers were invited (whether they ought to have been or not), and putting aside whether some of these speakers do have some academic bona fides (even if their ideas are often very wrong-headed), this argument mischaracterizes the kind of speakers who belong at universities. Higher education is a place not just to sharpen one’s critical thinking skills through exposure to brilliant academics who make data-informed arguments in multiple directions; it is also a place where one should learn how to become a full citizen in American society. As the Supreme Court observed in the context of high school students in Tinker v. Des Moines Independent School District, this often means that students need to engage each other on the contentious political issues of the day. And in today’s college world this sometimes means hearing and evaluating strident political advocates, some of whom even border on demagoguery. To be sure, student and faculty organizations should give some thought (perhaps more thought than they currently do) to the question of whom they invite to speak on campus—certainly not everyone should be offered a platform—but many campus speakers, on the Left as well as the Right, are not particularly grounded in rigorous theoretical or empirical analysis, and this does not mean that they are per se inappropriate speakers for college audiences. Again, colleges should be preparing young people not just to navigate the economy, but also to navigate democracy. And, for better or worse, modern democracy means having to deal with a lot of ideas that are widely held even though they don’t hold up to analytic rigor. Debunking those ideas—not shouting them down or trying to suppress their expression—is what I want my students to learn how to do. [https://justatic.com/v/20170601a/verdict/images/authors/thumbs/amar.jpg] Follow @prof_amar Vikram David Amar is the Iwan Foundation Professor of Law and the Dean at the University of Illinois College of Law. Previously, he served as the Associate Dean for Academic Affairs and Professor of Law at the University of California, Davis School of Law. He is a 1988 graduate of the Yale Law School and a former clerk to Justice Harry Blackmun. He is a co-author, along with William Cohen and Jonathan Varat, of a major constitutional law casebook, and a co-author of several volumes of the Wright & Miller treatise on federal practice and procedure. Before teaching, Professor Amar spent a few years at the firm of Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher. RECENT ARTICLES SUPREME COURT RULES THAT CITIZENSHIP MUST BE EQUALLY HERITABLE THROUGH FATHERS AND MOTHERS Cornell University law professor Michael C. Dorf comments on a recent decision by the U.S. Supreme Court on the heritability of citizenship and explains why the decision might have implications for other immigration issues, such as the “Muslim ban” executive order. Dorf argues that the precedents the Court had to distinguish to reach its conclusion might give some insight into whether and how it might defer to other political branches on immigration issues.... Read More TRUMP IS NOT READY TO DEAL WITH HIS LEGAL PROBLEMS John W. Dean, former counsel to President Nixon, reflects on the much-anticipated testimony of former FBI Director James Comey before the Senate Intelligence Committee on Thursday. Dean briefly summarizes the takeaways from Comey’s testimony and discusses the response by President Trump and his lawyer.... Read More ABSOLUTE POWER CORRUPTS ABSOLUTELY IN THE KEEPERS Marci A. Hamilton, a Fox Distinguished Scholar in the Fox Leadership Program at the University of Pennsylvania and CEO of CHILD USA, encourages everyone to watch the Netflix docuseries The Keepers, which addresses child sex abuse in the Catholic Church. Hamilton describes the progress toward justice for child sex abuse victims, including the growing awareness of the pervasiveness the problem and increasing numbers of states who extend or eliminate statutes of limitations for these types of lawsuits and prosecutions....Read More [Forward this email.] Have friends who like law? Forward this email. [Like Verdict on Facebook] Like Verdict for legal discussions on Facebook. [Follow @verdictjustia on Twitter] Follow @verdictjustia for news and updates on Twitter. [Justia] Contact Us | Privacy Policy | Unsubscribe [Facebook][Twitter][LinkedIn][Justia][GooglePlus] You received this email because you have subscribed to the Verdict News E-Mail Feed. Justia | 1380 Pear Ave, Suite 2B, Mountain View, CA 94043 ________________________________ ________________________________ 1 Behind me at Harvard Law School, Killer Koh was President Obama’s War Consigliere and Droner-in-Chief. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cgestabrook at gmail.com Fri Jun 16 02:19:59 2017 From: cgestabrook at gmail.com (C G Estabrook) Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2017 21:19:59 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] Tomorrow I'll ask Carol Ammons to oppose the Saudi arms deal In-Reply-To: <004001d2e04e$680318b0$38094a10$@comcast.net> References: <5CB8941D-7259-4DD5-9542-7442892DC00F@illinois.edu> <003f01d2dcce$c9fbecf0$5df3c6d0$@comcast.net> <001501d2debd$e04996b0$a0dcc410$@comcast.net> <8E9E7F7D-D733-4DAA-9E72-EC9E67F86E6F@gmail.com> <004001d2e04e$680318b0$38094a10$@comcast.net> Message-ID: David— How about this? >. All the regular Democrats voted for it. "The bill now heads to the House, where it faces an uncertain future…" I wouldn’t vote for a candidate who refused to pledge to vote against a measure like that. —CGE > On Jun 8, 2017, at 6:57 AM, David Johnson wrote: > > Your " proof " that Carol " won't do that " ??? > > David J. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: C G Estabrook [mailto:cgestabrook at gmail.com] > Sent: Tuesday, June 06, 2017 8:37 AM > To: David Johnson > Cc: peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > Subject: Re: [Peace] Tomorrow I'll ask Carol Ammons to oppose the Saudi arms deal > > Let’s be clear what SB 1761 did, two years ago. The bill, actively promoted by the government of Israel, directed that Illinois' funds (like university pension funds) be removed from companies that observed the boycott of business conducted in the territories illegally occupied by Israel! > > Carol’s excuse when she spoke to AWARE about her (non)-vote was that no one opposed had contacted her about it. But she refused to say she would have voted against it, had anyone done so. > > That ‘everyone else was doing it’ (“only two State reps…”) is not much of an excuse. > > I want to vote for a Congressional representative who will vote against the military budget (as former Rep. Johnson eventually did) and for the withdrawal of US troops from the Mideast. > > Carol won’t do that. David Gill, who’s also running for the seat (13th IL CD) held by Rodney Davis, might. > > —CGE > > >> On Jun 6, 2017, at 7:10 AM, David Johnson wrote: >> >> Well Carl, >> >> AGAIN, she was one of only two State Reps who resisted pressure from Madigan and the Israeli consulate to vote for it. For that she deserves credit. >> >> IF the vote had been close and she abstained and by doing so caused the bill to pass, THEN she would be deserving of criticism. >> >> Would it had been better if she had been the only State Rep to vote no ? Yes, of course. But considering the vote was a short notice vote and we as her constituents did not have enough time to educate her ion this bill and demand that she vote against it, then again what she did by abstaining is not reason to villianize and condemn her. >> >> In response to your question about rather or not she often opposes the Democratic party leadership, the answer is yes ! >> >> First she refused to vote for the BDS bill mentioned above, she also co sponsored the Illinois single payer bill weeks after entering the General Assembly, she sponsored and was able to pass both an anti-wage theft bill and a bill stopping telephone gouging of prison inmates. She also has co-sponsored early on a bill to increase the Illinois minimum wage to $ 15.00 per hour, several years before it had enough votes to pass recently. >> >> So looking at the big picture here Carl, Carol has done pretty damn good since she was elected in 2014. Could she be better by being more aggressive and bold, ? Of course, but that is up to us to educate her and advocate for certain things we want to see done. >> If she had not been elected in 2014, her opponent Sam Rosenberg would have not done any of the above mentioned, nor would Naomi Jacobsen if she had not resigned. >> >> David J. >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Carl G. Estabrook [mailto:galliher at illinois.edu] >> Sent: Saturday, June 03, 2017 8:16 PM >> To: David Johnson >> Cc: peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net >> Subject: Re: [Peace] Tomorrow I'll ask Carol Ammons to oppose the >> Saudi arms deal >> >> She didn’t vote against it, as she would have, had the subject been South African apartheid. >> >> Has she often differed with the Democratic leadership? >> >> —CGE >> >> >>> On Jun 3, 2017, at 8:06 PM, David Johnson wrote: >>> >>> Carol was one of only two State Reps who abstained from voting for the anti BDS bill, despite aggressive coercion from Madigan and lobbyists from the Israeli consulate for all State Reps and Senators to vote for it. >>> >>> David J. >>> >>> >>> From: Peace [mailto:peace-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of >>> Carl G. Estabrook via Peace >>> Sent: Saturday, June 03, 2017 6:18 PM >>> To: Robert Naiman >>> Cc: peace >>> Subject: Re: [Peace] Tomorrow I'll ask Carol Ammons to oppose the >>> Saudi arms deal >>> >>> She was unwilling to oppose Illinois’ support for Israeli apartheid. >>> >>> >>>> On Jun 3, 2017, at 2:56 PM, Robert Naiman via Peace wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> Tomorrow afternoon this event is happening in Champaign: >>>> >>>> IL - 13 Listening Session: Champaign-Urbana Public · Hosted by Carol >>>> Ammons https://www.facebook.com/events/1855909114660297/ >>>> >>>> Yesterday I asked Rodney Davis to oppose Trump's Saudi arms deal. I presented the IL-13 signers on our petition, and asked him to cosponsor the bipartisan Amash-Pocan resolution against the Saudi arms deal. Rodney Davis said he would speak with Amash and the other Republican sponsors and get back to me. >>>> >>>> Now Carol is asking: "What do you want your Representative in Congress to do?" I figure that's an easy question for me to answer. I want my Representative in Congress to oppose the Saudi arms deal. >>>> >>>> So, I figure, why not take Carol the same petition I took Rodney, and make the same ask? >>>> >>>> I figure: if Carol opposes the Saudi arms deal and challenges Rodney to do the same, it's win-win. Either Rodney agrees, in which case I win, or Rodney doesn't agree, in which case it's a public issue and the News-Gazette has to report on it and Rodney gets in trouble, in which case I also win. >>>> >>>> Is it plausible that Rodney, feeling a little heat, would agree to co-sponsor the Amash resolution? >>>> >>>> Last September, then-Illinois Senator Mark Kirk was one of only four Senate Republicans to vote against the Saudi tank deal. The other 23 no votes were Democrats. Mark Kirk had not previously been known as a critic of Saudi Arabia or its "particularly aggressive" war in Yemen, as the Vatican puts it. >>>> >>>> What made Mark Kirk flip? Tammy Duckworth was breathing down his neck, putting out a press release every time he didn't say "excuse me" after burping. >>>> >>>> Could we do that to Rodney Davis? Could we flip him with some pressure? If not, why not? >>>> >>>> I'll print out the petitions again around noon tomorrow. So there's still time to sign. >>>> >>>> Sign the petition: Congress: Vote NO on Trump's Saudi Arms Deal >>>> https://petitions.moveon.org/sign/congress-vote-no-on-trumps?r_by=11 >>>> 3 >>>> 5580 >>>> >>>> === >>>> >>>> Robert Naiman >>>> Policy Director >>>> Just Foreign Policy >>>> www.justforeignpolicy.org >>>> naiman at justforeignpolicy.org >>>> (202) 448-2898 x1 >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Peace mailing list >>>> Peace at lists.chambana.net >>>> https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace >> >> > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Fri Jun 16 03:13:45 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2017 03:13:45 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] FW: Trump Embroiled in War With US Political Elite Over Russia Policy Message-ID: Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 10:11 PM To: sectns.aals at lists.aals.org Subject: Trump Embroiled in War With US Political Elite Over Russia Policy https://sputniknews.com/analysis/201706161054681917-trump-embroiled-elite-war/ Sputnik International all editions> 06:01 GMT +316 June 2017 President Donald Trump arrives for a ceremony in the East Room of the White House in Washington, Monday, June 5, 2017 Trump Embroiled in War With US Political Elite Over Russia Policy Opinion 05:57 16.06.2017 Get short URL 0 4 0 0 Analysts claim that Donald Trump is involved in an intense conflict against the US foreign policy elite in his bid to improve relations with Russia. Robert Mueller (c) AP Photo/ J. Scott Applewhite So Much for Impartial? Justice Department Team Heading Trump-Russia Probe Donated Big to US Democrats WASHINGTON (Sputnik) - President Donald Trump is involved in an intense conflict against the US foreign policy elite in his bid to improve relations with Russia, analysts told Sputnik. "I think President Putin is correct: We are seeing a battle of elites here in the country and it is all over policy towards Russia," University of Illinois Professor of International Law Francis Boyle said on Thursday Boyle observed that in his testimony on Wednesday before the House Foreign Affairs Committee (HFAC), Secretary of State Rex Tillerson said he was trying to negotiate with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov a solution to the conflict in Ukraine. However, Republican and Democratic hardliners in Congress, especially in the Senate were trying to push through new sanctions against Russia to destroy the new peace initiative, Boyle pointed out. "The Senate just approved a new package of sanctions on Russia... We see the Democratic Party, the Hillary Clinton people and the US news media and it also appears the CIA and the FBI, the pillars of the Deep State are lining up against improved relations," he said. The hostility against reducing tensions with Russia was reminiscent of the most dangerous period of the Joe McCarthy anti-communist hysteria of the early 1950s, Boyle recalled. "NSA [National Security Agency] is doing all the leaking. They are lining up for continuation of the Obama aggressive policies on Russia. This is a very dangerous situation," he said Tillerson made it clear in his HFAC testimony that on May 10 he was discussing Ukraine with Lavrov, Boyle noted. "They are trying to set up a new process with Russia to resolve the conflict. Now it appears that Trump and Putin through Tillerson and Lavrov hope to take matters into their own hands," he said. President Donald Trump listens during a news conference with NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg in the East Room of the White House in Washington, Wednesday, April 12, 2017. (c) AP Photo/ Andrew Harnik How Obama's State Department Sabotaged Trump's Efforts to Normalize US-Russia Relations Tillerson had made clear that the US government was prepared to work with Russia directly to bypass the Minsk process to try and resolve the Ukraine conflict, Boyle added. "But these elite factions are fighting back. They are determined to prevent it," he said. "That is why you are seeing this furious fight back." Ohio State University Professor Emeritus of International Law John Quigley told Sputnik that dominant forces in Congress in both parties are opposed improving relations with Russia. "The US Congress is presently regarding the relationship with Russia as one of hostility. The US Congress is calling for more sanctions against Russia. It would be helpful if, instead, cooperation could be sought on the range of issues that confront the world right now," he said. However, world peace would be better served if Russia and the United States could develop a common approach on Syria, Quigley suggested. ... 0 0 Sponsored Video by Taboola by Taboola Promoted Links . Russia's New Helicopter Is Straight Out Of A Sci-Fi Film HistoryInOrbit.com Champaign, Illinois: This Brilliant Company Is Disrupting a $200 Bi... EverQuote Insurance Quotes Shoppers Are Getting Unbelievable Deals With This Little-Know... Tophatter Top Ten Cash Kings and Queens in 2017 Forbes Celebrity 100 Ten Most Mind-Blowing Archaeological Findings Assad Explains Why Syrian Air Defense Did Not Down US Cruise Missiles Equalizer: How a Russian 4th Gen Su-35S Will Be Able to Defeat 5th Gen F-22s Independent Russian military analyst Vladimir Tuchkov outlines why Russia's Su-35S 4++ generation fighter aircraft may soon receive the capability to... India Plans to Cancel Defense Deals Worth $3 Billion The Indian government is set to announce the scrapping of defense deals worth more than $3 billion of naval helicopters, armored recovery vehicles... by Taboola Sponsored Links Trending on The Web There Are 7 Types of Irish Last Names - Which One Is Yours? Ancestry My Husband and I Tried Blue Apron, Here's What Happened Blue Apron Russian Experts Give Their Impressions of China's 'Stealth Drone-Like' Chopper China's new attack and reconnaissance helicopter, the Z-19E, made its maiden flight over the port city of Harbin, northeastern China on Thursday.... Leopard vs. Python in Blood-Chilling Fight Watch a thrilling fight scene featuring a big cat and a rock python, Africa's largest snake species. by Taboola Sponsored Links Trending on The Web Illinois Landlines Get Replaced (But Not With Cell Phones) Talk Tech Daily App made by 100+ linguists gets you speaking a new language in 3 weeks Babbel Related: Trump 'Impeachable' if Comey Fired to Stop Russia Probe - US LawmakerHow Obama's State Department Sabotaged Trump Efforts to Calm US-Russia RelationsUS-Russia Economic Ties Hampered by Trump Administration Understaffing - Embassy Tags: Donald Trump, Russia, United States Community standardsDiscussion Comment via FacebookComment via Sputnik avatar captcha avatar News Latest Most Read Most Discussed 05:51Ukraine Drafting Legislation to Restore State Sovereignty Over Donbass 05:30Shaolin Temple Organizing the 'Olympics' of Martial Arts 05:20Russian Progress MS-06 Resupply Ship to Dock at ISS on Friday 05:05Hepatitis B Sufferers Turn to Surrogate Agencies to Pass Job Health Checks 05:05Putin: US Always Interfered in Russian Elections, Especially in 2012 All news Recommended by Taboola Promoted Links You May Like Champaign, Hire a Pro: The Best Solution for Your Small Home Projects HomeAdvisor Bashar's Brilliant 'Response' to US Ambassador Haley's 'Assad Must Go' Rant Dawn Well Kept These Hidden Throughout Filming Of "Gilligan's Island" WorldLifeStyle Trending News by Ideal Media Floating solar farm reflects China's clean energy ambitions jamaicaobserver.com Flight Attendants Reveal the Places You Don't Want to Touch on a Plane time.com Vladimir Putin's secret French family hideaway. Video time.com Multimedia Photo Cartoons Infographics Voyage Voyage! Welcome Aboard Russia's Knyaz Vladimir Cruise Liner Voyage Voyage! Welcome Aboard Russia's Knyaz Vladimir Cruise Liner Boomerang Effect 2017 FIFA Confederations Cup: Facts and Figures TRENDING Putin Reveals He Has Grandchildren This is How Japanese Beauty Finds Herself a Husband via Crowdfunding 'Siberian Rapunzel:' Meet Russian Girl Who Has Never Cut Her Hair Follow us Facebook Twitter NewsHomeWorldEurope US Russia Latin America Middle East Asia & Pacific Africa PoliticsBusinessMilitary & IntelligenceSocietyTech Environment Life SportAnalysis & OpinionOpinionColumnistsInterviewsBlogsMultimediaPhotoInfographicsCartoonsVideoRadioShowsIn DepthSputnikAbout UsPress InfoProductsAppsTerms of UseContact Us (c) 2017 Sputnik. All rights reserved captcha captcha avatar avatar By Taboola From fboyle at illinois.edu Fri Jun 16 03:13:45 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2017 03:13:45 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] FW: Trump Embroiled in War With US Political Elite Over Russia Policy Message-ID: Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 10:11 PM To: sectns.aals at lists.aals.org Subject: Trump Embroiled in War With US Political Elite Over Russia Policy https://sputniknews.com/analysis/201706161054681917-trump-embroiled-elite-war/ Sputnik International all editions> 06:01 GMT +316 June 2017 President Donald Trump arrives for a ceremony in the East Room of the White House in Washington, Monday, June 5, 2017 Trump Embroiled in War With US Political Elite Over Russia Policy Opinion 05:57 16.06.2017 Get short URL 0 4 0 0 Analysts claim that Donald Trump is involved in an intense conflict against the US foreign policy elite in his bid to improve relations with Russia. Robert Mueller (c) AP Photo/ J. Scott Applewhite So Much for Impartial? Justice Department Team Heading Trump-Russia Probe Donated Big to US Democrats WASHINGTON (Sputnik) - President Donald Trump is involved in an intense conflict against the US foreign policy elite in his bid to improve relations with Russia, analysts told Sputnik. "I think President Putin is correct: We are seeing a battle of elites here in the country and it is all over policy towards Russia," University of Illinois Professor of International Law Francis Boyle said on Thursday Boyle observed that in his testimony on Wednesday before the House Foreign Affairs Committee (HFAC), Secretary of State Rex Tillerson said he was trying to negotiate with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov a solution to the conflict in Ukraine. However, Republican and Democratic hardliners in Congress, especially in the Senate were trying to push through new sanctions against Russia to destroy the new peace initiative, Boyle pointed out. "The Senate just approved a new package of sanctions on Russia... We see the Democratic Party, the Hillary Clinton people and the US news media and it also appears the CIA and the FBI, the pillars of the Deep State are lining up against improved relations," he said. The hostility against reducing tensions with Russia was reminiscent of the most dangerous period of the Joe McCarthy anti-communist hysteria of the early 1950s, Boyle recalled. "NSA [National Security Agency] is doing all the leaking. They are lining up for continuation of the Obama aggressive policies on Russia. This is a very dangerous situation," he said Tillerson made it clear in his HFAC testimony that on May 10 he was discussing Ukraine with Lavrov, Boyle noted. "They are trying to set up a new process with Russia to resolve the conflict. Now it appears that Trump and Putin through Tillerson and Lavrov hope to take matters into their own hands," he said. President Donald Trump listens during a news conference with NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg in the East Room of the White House in Washington, Wednesday, April 12, 2017. (c) AP Photo/ Andrew Harnik How Obama's State Department Sabotaged Trump's Efforts to Normalize US-Russia Relations Tillerson had made clear that the US government was prepared to work with Russia directly to bypass the Minsk process to try and resolve the Ukraine conflict, Boyle added. "But these elite factions are fighting back. They are determined to prevent it," he said. "That is why you are seeing this furious fight back." Ohio State University Professor Emeritus of International Law John Quigley told Sputnik that dominant forces in Congress in both parties are opposed improving relations with Russia. "The US Congress is presently regarding the relationship with Russia as one of hostility. The US Congress is calling for more sanctions against Russia. It would be helpful if, instead, cooperation could be sought on the range of issues that confront the world right now," he said. However, world peace would be better served if Russia and the United States could develop a common approach on Syria, Quigley suggested. ... 0 0 Sponsored Video by Taboola by Taboola Promoted Links . Russia's New Helicopter Is Straight Out Of A Sci-Fi Film HistoryInOrbit.com Champaign, Illinois: This Brilliant Company Is Disrupting a $200 Bi... EverQuote Insurance Quotes Shoppers Are Getting Unbelievable Deals With This Little-Know... Tophatter Top Ten Cash Kings and Queens in 2017 Forbes Celebrity 100 Ten Most Mind-Blowing Archaeological Findings Assad Explains Why Syrian Air Defense Did Not Down US Cruise Missiles Equalizer: How a Russian 4th Gen Su-35S Will Be Able to Defeat 5th Gen F-22s Independent Russian military analyst Vladimir Tuchkov outlines why Russia's Su-35S 4++ generation fighter aircraft may soon receive the capability to... India Plans to Cancel Defense Deals Worth $3 Billion The Indian government is set to announce the scrapping of defense deals worth more than $3 billion of naval helicopters, armored recovery vehicles... by Taboola Sponsored Links Trending on The Web There Are 7 Types of Irish Last Names - Which One Is Yours? Ancestry My Husband and I Tried Blue Apron, Here's What Happened Blue Apron Russian Experts Give Their Impressions of China's 'Stealth Drone-Like' Chopper China's new attack and reconnaissance helicopter, the Z-19E, made its maiden flight over the port city of Harbin, northeastern China on Thursday.... Leopard vs. Python in Blood-Chilling Fight Watch a thrilling fight scene featuring a big cat and a rock python, Africa's largest snake species. by Taboola Sponsored Links Trending on The Web Illinois Landlines Get Replaced (But Not With Cell Phones) Talk Tech Daily App made by 100+ linguists gets you speaking a new language in 3 weeks Babbel Related: Trump 'Impeachable' if Comey Fired to Stop Russia Probe - US LawmakerHow Obama's State Department Sabotaged Trump Efforts to Calm US-Russia RelationsUS-Russia Economic Ties Hampered by Trump Administration Understaffing - Embassy Tags: Donald Trump, Russia, United States Community standardsDiscussion Comment via FacebookComment via Sputnik avatar captcha avatar News Latest Most Read Most Discussed 05:51Ukraine Drafting Legislation to Restore State Sovereignty Over Donbass 05:30Shaolin Temple Organizing the 'Olympics' of Martial Arts 05:20Russian Progress MS-06 Resupply Ship to Dock at ISS on Friday 05:05Hepatitis B Sufferers Turn to Surrogate Agencies to Pass Job Health Checks 05:05Putin: US Always Interfered in Russian Elections, Especially in 2012 All news Recommended by Taboola Promoted Links You May Like Champaign, Hire a Pro: The Best Solution for Your Small Home Projects HomeAdvisor Bashar's Brilliant 'Response' to US Ambassador Haley's 'Assad Must Go' Rant Dawn Well Kept These Hidden Throughout Filming Of "Gilligan's Island" WorldLifeStyle Trending News by Ideal Media Floating solar farm reflects China's clean energy ambitions jamaicaobserver.com Flight Attendants Reveal the Places You Don't Want to Touch on a Plane time.com Vladimir Putin's secret French family hideaway. Video time.com Multimedia Photo Cartoons Infographics Voyage Voyage! Welcome Aboard Russia's Knyaz Vladimir Cruise Liner Voyage Voyage! Welcome Aboard Russia's Knyaz Vladimir Cruise Liner Boomerang Effect 2017 FIFA Confederations Cup: Facts and Figures TRENDING Putin Reveals He Has Grandchildren This is How Japanese Beauty Finds Herself a Husband via Crowdfunding 'Siberian Rapunzel:' Meet Russian Girl Who Has Never Cut Her Hair Follow us Facebook Twitter NewsHomeWorldEurope US Russia Latin America Middle East Asia & Pacific Africa PoliticsBusinessMilitary & IntelligenceSocietyTech Environment Life SportAnalysis & OpinionOpinionColumnistsInterviewsBlogsMultimediaPhotoInfographicsCartoonsVideoRadioShowsIn DepthSputnikAbout UsPress InfoProductsAppsTerms of UseContact Us (c) 2017 Sputnik. All rights reserved captcha captcha avatar avatar By Taboola From fboyle at illinois.edu Fri Jun 16 14:08:07 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2017 14:08:07 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: If you want to read all about the Criminal Dirty Work performed by Harvard Law Obama’s Harvard/Yale Law Mafia including Killary and Killer Koh you should see Charlie Savage: Power Wars (770 pages)—the Nazis had their Lawyers and their Law Professors and their Law Schools too. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 7:33 PM To: Karen Aram Cc: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Subject: RE: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 I was astonished over a year ago, before I’d ever heard of “Killer Koh,” to attend a lecture on “The legitimacy of targeted killing” in relation to our drone warfare, at the U of I Law School. It was clearly a charade to present drones as legitimate in spite of International law and US laws of due process. Yeah, if I remember correctly, I think that might have been the Dirty Work of Fired and Disgraced Dean Heidi Hurd’s Consort Michael Moore, who bragged that he works for the CIA and the Mossad-- and both of whom have stunk up this Campus and this Community for years by publicly advocating Torture. Moore also publicly congratulated everyone for bringing in Killer Koh after I had done everything humanly possible to stop them. As I said, this Law School is EVIL INCARNATE! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Karen Aram [mailto:karenaram at hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 7:22 PM To: Boyle, Francis A > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: Re: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 It does make sense that the law schools connected with Yale and Harvard would be “evil” given law schools are the first academic institution that the oligarchs controlling our government, would by necessity need to corrupt, in order to control the masses. I was astonished over a year ago, before I’d ever heard of “Killer Koh,” to attend a lecture on “The legitimacy of targeted killing” in relation to our drone warfare, at the U of I Law School. It was clearly a charade to present drones as legitimate in spite of International law and US laws of due process. Again, I had almost a year later, the frustration of attending a lecture by Dean Amar’s brother, a constitutional law professor from Yale, on “Freedom of Speech”, The lecture had nothing to do with freedom of speech, it was a promotion of his book and Hillary as well as local Democrats, along with an attempt to portray Obama in a good light. Then “killer Koh” Hillary’s advisor on drone warfare, being brought to the U of I as a representative of the “law” and speaking on human rights, to law students? Sometimes, too much is too much for sensible minds. On Jun 15, 2017, at 17:06, Boyle, Francis A > wrote: Well at least we all stood up against this Evil Law School on October 28. But from what Amar is saying here, I am sure we will have to do so again. So stay tuned. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Karen Aram [mailto:karenaram at hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 5:13 PM To: Boyle, Francis A > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: Re: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 Our government is evil, and if we the people don’t stop them from the wars and killings, then we are complicit in their warcrimes. On Jun 15, 2017, at 15:07, Boyle, Francis A > wrote: This Law School is EVIL! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 10:38 AM To: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; Karen Aram >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: FW: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 Sure. Let’s bring the War Criminal, Murderer, Felon, Bigot, Racist and Genocidaire Killer Koh into our Law School on October 28, 2016, hold him up as a Role Model to our Law Students, and then turn our Law Students into War Criminals, Murderers, Felons, Bigots, Racists and Genocidaires just like Killer Koh. Fab. Diss-Ode to Harold Killer Koh1 Harold Killer Koh Killing Babies where he go Muslim life is cheap you see Jewish life too for the Nazi Carl Schmitt Professor of Law At the Yale Law School Boot-licking Gene Rostow Of the infamous Rostow Brothers Who gave us Vietnam Genociding “gooks” too Obama’s War Consigliere Gene and his “kids” for LBJ Some things never change for Dems And their Elite Law School Whores Today At Harvard Law School too Where Killers Obama and Koh First dropped their pooh Along with “Judge” Davey Barron too Obama’s Droner-in-Chief Destined for a Cell in The Hague Right next to his student John Yoo A Chip off of Harold’s Old Block Cold-blooded Killers and War Criminals too Killer Koh disteaching “human rights” at N.Y.U. Supported by his gang of Dem law prof thugs Beating up on the N.Y.U. law students few With the courage, integrity, and principles to say Never again! Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Justia Verdict [mailto:verdictsupport at justia.com] Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 10:09 AM To: Boyle, Francis A > Subject: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 Illinois Law dean and professor Vikram David Amar laments recent instances of censored speech, particularly on university campuses, and reminds us that freedom of speech and academic freedom protect even those speakers whose message might be perceived odious, racist, sexist, or hateful. Amar points out that both freedom of speech and academic freedom are rooted in the principle that ideas and arguments ought to be evaluated on their substance and that the essence of both kinds of freedom is the opportunity to persuade others of the merits of one's argument, rather than the use of power to coerce or silence others. Click here to view in your browser if you are having trouble viewing this email. [Verdict - Legal Analysis and commentary from Justia.] Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom Vikram David Amar Jun 15, 2017 [https://i2.wp.com/verdict.justia.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/IMG_0590.jpg?quality=90&resize=426%2C350&strip=all&fit=1000%25&ssl=1] It distresses me to see episodes these days in which speakers who are controversial for their conservative or ultra-conservative views are prevented from delivering invited remarks at universities (including public universities) because protestors choose to violate laws designed to protect public safety. It also distresses me to see so few liberal analysts decry how illiberal these episodes of group-imposed censorship are. As I have written at length elsewhere, no matter how repressive or otherwise abhorrent a speaker’s message, the appropriate response under our Constitution is counter speech, not shouting down or physically obstructing or threatening the speaker or the speaker’s audience. To be sure, protesting a speaker’s presence—registering profound objection to a speaker’s viewpoint—is perfectly appropriate and has a rich tradition dating from even before the 1960s free speech revolution through the Occupy movement. But what we have seen over the past several months is a transition from protesting against bad speakers to preventing them from being able to speak, and that is not acceptable. An unflinching commitment to freedom of speech—even odious, racist, sexist, hateful speech—is the cornerstone of constitutional democracy in the United States. Certainly we protect freedom of speech more vigorously than any other western democracy. We also have a venerable tradition of respecting academic freedom at colleges and universities. These two principles, freedom of speech and academic freedom, overlap and are interconnected, even as they are distinct ideas. Freedom of speech is a broadly applicable right codified in the federal First Amendment and state constitutional analogues that protects speakers both on and off public campuses from unwarranted government interference with expression. Academic freedom, which may extend beyond what the Constitutionprotects, is grounded on the idea that, at least in the academy, free inquiry unburdened by the constraints of orthodoxy will lead to the development of new ideas and knowledge. Notwithstanding their different scopes, both freedom of speech and academic freedom rest on the bedrock belief that ideas and arguments ought to be evaluated on their substance. The essence of both kinds of freedom is the opportunity to persuade others of the merits of one’s argument, rather than the use of power to coerce others into acceding to the proponent’s point of view. Sometimes the heat and passion of political protests on college campuses causes these basic principles to be overlooked or ignored. When that happens, it is important for us to go back to what freedom of speech and academic freedom really mean and how easily both of these principles can be misused and misinterpreted. Governments Can and Should Prohibit Certain Obstructive Conduct The short of the matter is that blockading, obstructing, assaulting, destroying property, and making threats, are not, in any stretch of the imagination, constitutionally protected things to do, no matter what the objective behind them. These activities are conduct the government has always had the legitimate authority to proscribe because they so obviously interfere with the liberty and lawful pursuits of others. As the Supreme Court of California stated in an important free speech case,In Re Kay: [T]he state retains a legitimate concern in ensuring that some individuals unruly assertion of their rights of free expression does not imperil other citizen’s rights of free association and discussion. … Freedom of everyone to talk at once can destroy the right of anyone effectively to talk at all. Free expression can expire as tragically in the tumult of license as in the silence of censorship. Government actions to prohibit blockades or obstruction have been held to be permissible under the First Amendment too many times to count. To cite just one example, a federal law, the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act (FACE), that prohibits anyone from physically obstructing any person from obtaining or providing reproductive health services, has been upheld repeatedly against constitutional challenge, and those cases raise harder questions than do generic obstruction laws because FACE targets specific places where protestors with particular messages may be expected. Blockades and obstructions can and should be prohibited consistent with the First Amendment primarily because they are not intended to and do not persuade anyone of the merits of the protestors’ position. They are employed to coerce third parties to change their behavior, not their minds. As such, they are actually antithetical to, rather than in furtherance of, the values on which freedom of speech and academic freedom are grounded — a commitment to the power of ideas rather than the use of force to change the way that people act. Creative But Unavailing Counterarguments In recent weeks, I have heard defenders of those who obstruct conservative speakers make two novel but completely unconvincing arguments. First, the obstruction defenders try to invoke the civil rights movement by pointing out that Martin Luther King, Jr. and his supporters were often guilty of civil disobedience—that is violating duly enacted laws. But this analogy is unavailing because King and his followers were violating laws that were (in the eyes of the protestors and many others) themselves unjust, not laws that were completely unobjectionable but simply stood in the way of the desires of the violators. Another distinction between the two settings is that to the extent that civil rights protestors violated laws regulating their political activity, they were violating laws in order to be heard themselves, not in order to prevent others from being heard. But today’s obstructors cannot credibly complain that they cannot be heard; they simply want others not to be listened to. The second creative yet deeply flawed argument I’ve heard in defense of the obstructors is the idea that controversial speakers of the kind who are being suppressed are themselves not appropriate speakers to be invited to university settings because they are not sufficiently academic in character. Putting aside the fact that these speakers were invited (whether they ought to have been or not), and putting aside whether some of these speakers do have some academic bona fides (even if their ideas are often very wrong-headed), this argument mischaracterizes the kind of speakers who belong at universities. Higher education is a place not just to sharpen one’s critical thinking skills through exposure to brilliant academics who make data-informed arguments in multiple directions; it is also a place where one should learn how to become a full citizen in American society. As the Supreme Court observed in the context of high school students in Tinker v. Des Moines Independent School District, this often means that students need to engage each other on the contentious political issues of the day. And in today’s college world this sometimes means hearing and evaluating strident political advocates, some of whom even border on demagoguery. To be sure, student and faculty organizations should give some thought (perhaps more thought than they currently do) to the question of whom they invite to speak on campus—certainly not everyone should be offered a platform—but many campus speakers, on the Left as well as the Right, are not particularly grounded in rigorous theoretical or empirical analysis, and this does not mean that they are per se inappropriate speakers for college audiences. Again, colleges should be preparing young people not just to navigate the economy, but also to navigate democracy. And, for better or worse, modern democracy means having to deal with a lot of ideas that are widely held even though they don’t hold up to analytic rigor. Debunking those ideas—not shouting them down or trying to suppress their expression—is what I want my students to learn how to do. [https://justatic.com/v/20170601a/verdict/images/authors/thumbs/amar.jpg] Follow @prof_amar Vikram David Amar is the Iwan Foundation Professor of Law and the Dean at the University of Illinois College of Law. Previously, he served as the Associate Dean for Academic Affairs and Professor of Law at the University of California, Davis School of Law. He is a 1988 graduate of the Yale Law School and a former clerk to Justice Harry Blackmun. He is a co-author, along with William Cohen and Jonathan Varat, of a major constitutional law casebook, and a co-author of several volumes of the Wright & Miller treatise on federal practice and procedure. Before teaching, Professor Amar spent a few years at the firm of Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher. RECENT ARTICLES SUPREME COURT RULES THAT CITIZENSHIP MUST BE EQUALLY HERITABLE THROUGH FATHERS AND MOTHERS Cornell University law professor Michael C. Dorf comments on a recent decision by the U.S. Supreme Court on the heritability of citizenship and explains why the decision might have implications for other immigration issues, such as the “Muslim ban” executive order. Dorf argues that the precedents the Court had to distinguish to reach its conclusion might give some insight into whether and how it might defer to other political branches on immigration issues.... Read More TRUMP IS NOT READY TO DEAL WITH HIS LEGAL PROBLEMS John W. Dean, former counsel to President Nixon, reflects on the much-anticipated testimony of former FBI Director James Comey before the Senate Intelligence Committee on Thursday. Dean briefly summarizes the takeaways from Comey’s testimony and discusses the response by President Trump and his lawyer.... Read More ABSOLUTE POWER CORRUPTS ABSOLUTELY IN THE KEEPERS Marci A. Hamilton, a Fox Distinguished Scholar in the Fox Leadership Program at the University of Pennsylvania and CEO of CHILD USA, encourages everyone to watch the Netflix docuseries The Keepers, which addresses child sex abuse in the Catholic Church. Hamilton describes the progress toward justice for child sex abuse victims, including the growing awareness of the pervasiveness the problem and increasing numbers of states who extend or eliminate statutes of limitations for these types of lawsuits and prosecutions....Read More [Forward this email.] Have friends who like law? Forward this email. [Like Verdict on Facebook] Like Verdict for legal discussions on Facebook. [Follow @verdictjustia on Twitter] Follow @verdictjustia for news and updates on Twitter. [Justia] Contact Us | Privacy Policy | Unsubscribe [Facebook][Twitter][LinkedIn][Justia][GooglePlus] You received this email because you have subscribed to the Verdict News E-Mail Feed. Justia | 1380 Pear Ave, Suite 2B, Mountain View, CA 94043 ________________________________ ________________________________ 1 Behind me at Harvard Law School, Killer Koh was President Obama’s War Consigliere and Droner-in-Chief. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Fri Jun 16 14:08:07 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2017 14:08:07 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: If you want to read all about the Criminal Dirty Work performed by Harvard Law Obama’s Harvard/Yale Law Mafia including Killary and Killer Koh you should see Charlie Savage: Power Wars (770 pages)—the Nazis had their Lawyers and their Law Professors and their Law Schools too. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 7:33 PM To: Karen Aram Cc: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Subject: RE: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 I was astonished over a year ago, before I’d ever heard of “Killer Koh,” to attend a lecture on “The legitimacy of targeted killing” in relation to our drone warfare, at the U of I Law School. It was clearly a charade to present drones as legitimate in spite of International law and US laws of due process. Yeah, if I remember correctly, I think that might have been the Dirty Work of Fired and Disgraced Dean Heidi Hurd’s Consort Michael Moore, who bragged that he works for the CIA and the Mossad-- and both of whom have stunk up this Campus and this Community for years by publicly advocating Torture. Moore also publicly congratulated everyone for bringing in Killer Koh after I had done everything humanly possible to stop them. As I said, this Law School is EVIL INCARNATE! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Karen Aram [mailto:karenaram at hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 7:22 PM To: Boyle, Francis A > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: Re: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 It does make sense that the law schools connected with Yale and Harvard would be “evil” given law schools are the first academic institution that the oligarchs controlling our government, would by necessity need to corrupt, in order to control the masses. I was astonished over a year ago, before I’d ever heard of “Killer Koh,” to attend a lecture on “The legitimacy of targeted killing” in relation to our drone warfare, at the U of I Law School. It was clearly a charade to present drones as legitimate in spite of International law and US laws of due process. Again, I had almost a year later, the frustration of attending a lecture by Dean Amar’s brother, a constitutional law professor from Yale, on “Freedom of Speech”, The lecture had nothing to do with freedom of speech, it was a promotion of his book and Hillary as well as local Democrats, along with an attempt to portray Obama in a good light. Then “killer Koh” Hillary’s advisor on drone warfare, being brought to the U of I as a representative of the “law” and speaking on human rights, to law students? Sometimes, too much is too much for sensible minds. On Jun 15, 2017, at 17:06, Boyle, Francis A > wrote: Well at least we all stood up against this Evil Law School on October 28. But from what Amar is saying here, I am sure we will have to do so again. So stay tuned. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Karen Aram [mailto:karenaram at hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 5:13 PM To: Boyle, Francis A > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: Re: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 Our government is evil, and if we the people don’t stop them from the wars and killings, then we are complicit in their warcrimes. On Jun 15, 2017, at 15:07, Boyle, Francis A > wrote: This Law School is EVIL! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 10:38 AM To: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; Karen Aram >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: FW: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 Sure. Let’s bring the War Criminal, Murderer, Felon, Bigot, Racist and Genocidaire Killer Koh into our Law School on October 28, 2016, hold him up as a Role Model to our Law Students, and then turn our Law Students into War Criminals, Murderers, Felons, Bigots, Racists and Genocidaires just like Killer Koh. Fab. Diss-Ode to Harold Killer Koh1 Harold Killer Koh Killing Babies where he go Muslim life is cheap you see Jewish life too for the Nazi Carl Schmitt Professor of Law At the Yale Law School Boot-licking Gene Rostow Of the infamous Rostow Brothers Who gave us Vietnam Genociding “gooks” too Obama’s War Consigliere Gene and his “kids” for LBJ Some things never change for Dems And their Elite Law School Whores Today At Harvard Law School too Where Killers Obama and Koh First dropped their pooh Along with “Judge” Davey Barron too Obama’s Droner-in-Chief Destined for a Cell in The Hague Right next to his student John Yoo A Chip off of Harold’s Old Block Cold-blooded Killers and War Criminals too Killer Koh disteaching “human rights” at N.Y.U. Supported by his gang of Dem law prof thugs Beating up on the N.Y.U. law students few With the courage, integrity, and principles to say Never again! Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Justia Verdict [mailto:verdictsupport at justia.com] Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 10:09 AM To: Boyle, Francis A > Subject: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 Illinois Law dean and professor Vikram David Amar laments recent instances of censored speech, particularly on university campuses, and reminds us that freedom of speech and academic freedom protect even those speakers whose message might be perceived odious, racist, sexist, or hateful. Amar points out that both freedom of speech and academic freedom are rooted in the principle that ideas and arguments ought to be evaluated on their substance and that the essence of both kinds of freedom is the opportunity to persuade others of the merits of one's argument, rather than the use of power to coerce or silence others. Click here to view in your browser if you are having trouble viewing this email. [Verdict - Legal Analysis and commentary from Justia.] Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom Vikram David Amar Jun 15, 2017 [https://i2.wp.com/verdict.justia.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/IMG_0590.jpg?quality=90&resize=426%2C350&strip=all&fit=1000%25&ssl=1] It distresses me to see episodes these days in which speakers who are controversial for their conservative or ultra-conservative views are prevented from delivering invited remarks at universities (including public universities) because protestors choose to violate laws designed to protect public safety. It also distresses me to see so few liberal analysts decry how illiberal these episodes of group-imposed censorship are. As I have written at length elsewhere, no matter how repressive or otherwise abhorrent a speaker’s message, the appropriate response under our Constitution is counter speech, not shouting down or physically obstructing or threatening the speaker or the speaker’s audience. To be sure, protesting a speaker’s presence—registering profound objection to a speaker’s viewpoint—is perfectly appropriate and has a rich tradition dating from even before the 1960s free speech revolution through the Occupy movement. But what we have seen over the past several months is a transition from protesting against bad speakers to preventing them from being able to speak, and that is not acceptable. An unflinching commitment to freedom of speech—even odious, racist, sexist, hateful speech—is the cornerstone of constitutional democracy in the United States. Certainly we protect freedom of speech more vigorously than any other western democracy. We also have a venerable tradition of respecting academic freedom at colleges and universities. These two principles, freedom of speech and academic freedom, overlap and are interconnected, even as they are distinct ideas. Freedom of speech is a broadly applicable right codified in the federal First Amendment and state constitutional analogues that protects speakers both on and off public campuses from unwarranted government interference with expression. Academic freedom, which may extend beyond what the Constitutionprotects, is grounded on the idea that, at least in the academy, free inquiry unburdened by the constraints of orthodoxy will lead to the development of new ideas and knowledge. Notwithstanding their different scopes, both freedom of speech and academic freedom rest on the bedrock belief that ideas and arguments ought to be evaluated on their substance. The essence of both kinds of freedom is the opportunity to persuade others of the merits of one’s argument, rather than the use of power to coerce others into acceding to the proponent’s point of view. Sometimes the heat and passion of political protests on college campuses causes these basic principles to be overlooked or ignored. When that happens, it is important for us to go back to what freedom of speech and academic freedom really mean and how easily both of these principles can be misused and misinterpreted. Governments Can and Should Prohibit Certain Obstructive Conduct The short of the matter is that blockading, obstructing, assaulting, destroying property, and making threats, are not, in any stretch of the imagination, constitutionally protected things to do, no matter what the objective behind them. These activities are conduct the government has always had the legitimate authority to proscribe because they so obviously interfere with the liberty and lawful pursuits of others. As the Supreme Court of California stated in an important free speech case,In Re Kay: [T]he state retains a legitimate concern in ensuring that some individuals unruly assertion of their rights of free expression does not imperil other citizen’s rights of free association and discussion. … Freedom of everyone to talk at once can destroy the right of anyone effectively to talk at all. Free expression can expire as tragically in the tumult of license as in the silence of censorship. Government actions to prohibit blockades or obstruction have been held to be permissible under the First Amendment too many times to count. To cite just one example, a federal law, the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act (FACE), that prohibits anyone from physically obstructing any person from obtaining or providing reproductive health services, has been upheld repeatedly against constitutional challenge, and those cases raise harder questions than do generic obstruction laws because FACE targets specific places where protestors with particular messages may be expected. Blockades and obstructions can and should be prohibited consistent with the First Amendment primarily because they are not intended to and do not persuade anyone of the merits of the protestors’ position. They are employed to coerce third parties to change their behavior, not their minds. As such, they are actually antithetical to, rather than in furtherance of, the values on which freedom of speech and academic freedom are grounded — a commitment to the power of ideas rather than the use of force to change the way that people act. Creative But Unavailing Counterarguments In recent weeks, I have heard defenders of those who obstruct conservative speakers make two novel but completely unconvincing arguments. First, the obstruction defenders try to invoke the civil rights movement by pointing out that Martin Luther King, Jr. and his supporters were often guilty of civil disobedience—that is violating duly enacted laws. But this analogy is unavailing because King and his followers were violating laws that were (in the eyes of the protestors and many others) themselves unjust, not laws that were completely unobjectionable but simply stood in the way of the desires of the violators. Another distinction between the two settings is that to the extent that civil rights protestors violated laws regulating their political activity, they were violating laws in order to be heard themselves, not in order to prevent others from being heard. But today’s obstructors cannot credibly complain that they cannot be heard; they simply want others not to be listened to. The second creative yet deeply flawed argument I’ve heard in defense of the obstructors is the idea that controversial speakers of the kind who are being suppressed are themselves not appropriate speakers to be invited to university settings because they are not sufficiently academic in character. Putting aside the fact that these speakers were invited (whether they ought to have been or not), and putting aside whether some of these speakers do have some academic bona fides (even if their ideas are often very wrong-headed), this argument mischaracterizes the kind of speakers who belong at universities. Higher education is a place not just to sharpen one’s critical thinking skills through exposure to brilliant academics who make data-informed arguments in multiple directions; it is also a place where one should learn how to become a full citizen in American society. As the Supreme Court observed in the context of high school students in Tinker v. Des Moines Independent School District, this often means that students need to engage each other on the contentious political issues of the day. And in today’s college world this sometimes means hearing and evaluating strident political advocates, some of whom even border on demagoguery. To be sure, student and faculty organizations should give some thought (perhaps more thought than they currently do) to the question of whom they invite to speak on campus—certainly not everyone should be offered a platform—but many campus speakers, on the Left as well as the Right, are not particularly grounded in rigorous theoretical or empirical analysis, and this does not mean that they are per se inappropriate speakers for college audiences. Again, colleges should be preparing young people not just to navigate the economy, but also to navigate democracy. And, for better or worse, modern democracy means having to deal with a lot of ideas that are widely held even though they don’t hold up to analytic rigor. Debunking those ideas—not shouting them down or trying to suppress their expression—is what I want my students to learn how to do. [https://justatic.com/v/20170601a/verdict/images/authors/thumbs/amar.jpg] Follow @prof_amar Vikram David Amar is the Iwan Foundation Professor of Law and the Dean at the University of Illinois College of Law. Previously, he served as the Associate Dean for Academic Affairs and Professor of Law at the University of California, Davis School of Law. He is a 1988 graduate of the Yale Law School and a former clerk to Justice Harry Blackmun. He is a co-author, along with William Cohen and Jonathan Varat, of a major constitutional law casebook, and a co-author of several volumes of the Wright & Miller treatise on federal practice and procedure. Before teaching, Professor Amar spent a few years at the firm of Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher. RECENT ARTICLES SUPREME COURT RULES THAT CITIZENSHIP MUST BE EQUALLY HERITABLE THROUGH FATHERS AND MOTHERS Cornell University law professor Michael C. Dorf comments on a recent decision by the U.S. Supreme Court on the heritability of citizenship and explains why the decision might have implications for other immigration issues, such as the “Muslim ban” executive order. Dorf argues that the precedents the Court had to distinguish to reach its conclusion might give some insight into whether and how it might defer to other political branches on immigration issues.... Read More TRUMP IS NOT READY TO DEAL WITH HIS LEGAL PROBLEMS John W. Dean, former counsel to President Nixon, reflects on the much-anticipated testimony of former FBI Director James Comey before the Senate Intelligence Committee on Thursday. Dean briefly summarizes the takeaways from Comey’s testimony and discusses the response by President Trump and his lawyer.... Read More ABSOLUTE POWER CORRUPTS ABSOLUTELY IN THE KEEPERS Marci A. Hamilton, a Fox Distinguished Scholar in the Fox Leadership Program at the University of Pennsylvania and CEO of CHILD USA, encourages everyone to watch the Netflix docuseries The Keepers, which addresses child sex abuse in the Catholic Church. Hamilton describes the progress toward justice for child sex abuse victims, including the growing awareness of the pervasiveness the problem and increasing numbers of states who extend or eliminate statutes of limitations for these types of lawsuits and prosecutions....Read More [Forward this email.] Have friends who like law? Forward this email. [Like Verdict on Facebook] Like Verdict for legal discussions on Facebook. [Follow @verdictjustia on Twitter] Follow @verdictjustia for news and updates on Twitter. [Justia] Contact Us | Privacy Policy | Unsubscribe [Facebook][Twitter][LinkedIn][Justia][GooglePlus] You received this email because you have subscribed to the Verdict News E-Mail Feed. Justia | 1380 Pear Ave, Suite 2B, Mountain View, CA 94043 ________________________________ ________________________________ 1 Behind me at Harvard Law School, Killer Koh was President Obama’s War Consigliere and Droner-in-Chief. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Fri Jun 16 16:21:37 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2017 16:21:37 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: And during the Five Year Tenure of Torture-Mongerers/CIA/Mossad/MichaelMoore/Dean HurricaneHeidiHurd, they brought onto this Faculty people as Evil as they are. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Friday, June 16, 2017 9:08 AM To: Karen Aram Cc: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Subject: RE: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 If you want to read all about the Criminal Dirty Work performed by Harvard Law Obama’s Harvard/Yale Law Mafia including Killary and Killer Koh you should see Charlie Savage: Power Wars (770 pages)—the Nazis had their Lawyers and their Law Professors and their Law Schools too. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 7:33 PM To: Karen Aram > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: RE: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 I was astonished over a year ago, before I’d ever heard of “Killer Koh,” to attend a lecture on “The legitimacy of targeted killing” in relation to our drone warfare, at the U of I Law School. It was clearly a charade to present drones as legitimate in spite of International law and US laws of due process. Yeah, if I remember correctly, I think that might have been the Dirty Work of Fired and Disgraced Dean Heidi Hurd’s Consort Michael Moore, who bragged that he works for the CIA and the Mossad-- and both of whom have stunk up this Campus and this Community for years by publicly advocating Torture. Moore also publicly congratulated everyone for bringing in Killer Koh after I had done everything humanly possible to stop them. As I said, this Law School is EVIL INCARNATE! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Karen Aram [mailto:karenaram at hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 7:22 PM To: Boyle, Francis A > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: Re: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 It does make sense that the law schools connected with Yale and Harvard would be “evil” given law schools are the first academic institution that the oligarchs controlling our government, would by necessity need to corrupt, in order to control the masses. I was astonished over a year ago, before I’d ever heard of “Killer Koh,” to attend a lecture on “The legitimacy of targeted killing” in relation to our drone warfare, at the U of I Law School. It was clearly a charade to present drones as legitimate in spite of International law and US laws of due process. Again, I had almost a year later, the frustration of attending a lecture by Dean Amar’s brother, a constitutional law professor from Yale, on “Freedom of Speech”, The lecture had nothing to do with freedom of speech, it was a promotion of his book and Hillary as well as local Democrats, along with an attempt to portray Obama in a good light. Then “killer Koh” Hillary’s advisor on drone warfare, being brought to the U of I as a representative of the “law” and speaking on human rights, to law students? Sometimes, too much is too much for sensible minds. On Jun 15, 2017, at 17:06, Boyle, Francis A > wrote: Well at least we all stood up against this Evil Law School on October 28. But from what Amar is saying here, I am sure we will have to do so again. So stay tuned. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Karen Aram [mailto:karenaram at hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 5:13 PM To: Boyle, Francis A > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: Re: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 Our government is evil, and if we the people don’t stop them from the wars and killings, then we are complicit in their warcrimes. On Jun 15, 2017, at 15:07, Boyle, Francis A > wrote: This Law School is EVIL! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 10:38 AM To: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; Karen Aram >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: FW: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 Sure. Let’s bring the War Criminal, Murderer, Felon, Bigot, Racist and Genocidaire Killer Koh into our Law School on October 28, 2016, hold him up as a Role Model to our Law Students, and then turn our Law Students into War Criminals, Murderers, Felons, Bigots, Racists and Genocidaires just like Killer Koh. Fab. Diss-Ode to Harold Killer Koh1 Harold Killer Koh Killing Babies where he go Muslim life is cheap you see Jewish life too for the Nazi Carl Schmitt Professor of Law At the Yale Law School Boot-licking Gene Rostow Of the infamous Rostow Brothers Who gave us Vietnam Genociding “gooks” too Obama’s War Consigliere Gene and his “kids” for LBJ Some things never change for Dems And their Elite Law School Whores Today At Harvard Law School too Where Killers Obama and Koh First dropped their pooh Along with “Judge” Davey Barron too Obama’s Droner-in-Chief Destined for a Cell in The Hague Right next to his student John Yoo A Chip off of Harold’s Old Block Cold-blooded Killers and War Criminals too Killer Koh disteaching “human rights” at N.Y.U. Supported by his gang of Dem law prof thugs Beating up on the N.Y.U. law students few With the courage, integrity, and principles to say Never again! Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Justia Verdict [mailto:verdictsupport at justia.com] Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 10:09 AM To: Boyle, Francis A > Subject: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 Illinois Law dean and professor Vikram David Amar laments recent instances of censored speech, particularly on university campuses, and reminds us that freedom of speech and academic freedom protect even those speakers whose message might be perceived odious, racist, sexist, or hateful. Amar points out that both freedom of speech and academic freedom are rooted in the principle that ideas and arguments ought to be evaluated on their substance and that the essence of both kinds of freedom is the opportunity to persuade others of the merits of one's argument, rather than the use of power to coerce or silence others. Click here to view in your browser if you are having trouble viewing this email. [Verdict - Legal Analysis and commentary from Justia.] Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom Vikram David Amar Jun 15, 2017 [https://i2.wp.com/verdict.justia.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/IMG_0590.jpg?quality=90&resize=426%2C350&strip=all&fit=1000%25&ssl=1] It distresses me to see episodes these days in which speakers who are controversial for their conservative or ultra-conservative views are prevented from delivering invited remarks at universities (including public universities) because protestors choose to violate laws designed to protect public safety. It also distresses me to see so few liberal analysts decry how illiberal these episodes of group-imposed censorship are. As I have written at length elsewhere, no matter how repressive or otherwise abhorrent a speaker’s message, the appropriate response under our Constitution is counter speech, not shouting down or physically obstructing or threatening the speaker or the speaker’s audience. To be sure, protesting a speaker’s presence—registering profound objection to a speaker’s viewpoint—is perfectly appropriate and has a rich tradition dating from even before the 1960s free speech revolution through the Occupy movement. But what we have seen over the past several months is a transition from protesting against bad speakers to preventing them from being able to speak, and that is not acceptable. An unflinching commitment to freedom of speech—even odious, racist, sexist, hateful speech—is the cornerstone of constitutional democracy in the United States. Certainly we protect freedom of speech more vigorously than any other western democracy. We also have a venerable tradition of respecting academic freedom at colleges and universities. These two principles, freedom of speech and academic freedom, overlap and are interconnected, even as they are distinct ideas. Freedom of speech is a broadly applicable right codified in the federal First Amendment and state constitutional analogues that protects speakers both on and off public campuses from unwarranted government interference with expression. Academic freedom, which may extend beyond what the Constitutionprotects, is grounded on the idea that, at least in the academy, free inquiry unburdened by the constraints of orthodoxy will lead to the development of new ideas and knowledge. Notwithstanding their different scopes, both freedom of speech and academic freedom rest on the bedrock belief that ideas and arguments ought to be evaluated on their substance. The essence of both kinds of freedom is the opportunity to persuade others of the merits of one’s argument, rather than the use of power to coerce others into acceding to the proponent’s point of view. Sometimes the heat and passion of political protests on college campuses causes these basic principles to be overlooked or ignored. When that happens, it is important for us to go back to what freedom of speech and academic freedom really mean and how easily both of these principles can be misused and misinterpreted. Governments Can and Should Prohibit Certain Obstructive Conduct The short of the matter is that blockading, obstructing, assaulting, destroying property, and making threats, are not, in any stretch of the imagination, constitutionally protected things to do, no matter what the objective behind them. These activities are conduct the government has always had the legitimate authority to proscribe because they so obviously interfere with the liberty and lawful pursuits of others. As the Supreme Court of California stated in an important free speech case,In Re Kay: [T]he state retains a legitimate concern in ensuring that some individuals unruly assertion of their rights of free expression does not imperil other citizen’s rights of free association and discussion. … Freedom of everyone to talk at once can destroy the right of anyone effectively to talk at all. Free expression can expire as tragically in the tumult of license as in the silence of censorship. Government actions to prohibit blockades or obstruction have been held to be permissible under the First Amendment too many times to count. To cite just one example, a federal law, the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act (FACE), that prohibits anyone from physically obstructing any person from obtaining or providing reproductive health services, has been upheld repeatedly against constitutional challenge, and those cases raise harder questions than do generic obstruction laws because FACE targets specific places where protestors with particular messages may be expected. Blockades and obstructions can and should be prohibited consistent with the First Amendment primarily because they are not intended to and do not persuade anyone of the merits of the protestors’ position. They are employed to coerce third parties to change their behavior, not their minds. As such, they are actually antithetical to, rather than in furtherance of, the values on which freedom of speech and academic freedom are grounded — a commitment to the power of ideas rather than the use of force to change the way that people act. Creative But Unavailing Counterarguments In recent weeks, I have heard defenders of those who obstruct conservative speakers make two novel but completely unconvincing arguments. First, the obstruction defenders try to invoke the civil rights movement by pointing out that Martin Luther King, Jr. and his supporters were often guilty of civil disobedience—that is violating duly enacted laws. But this analogy is unavailing because King and his followers were violating laws that were (in the eyes of the protestors and many others) themselves unjust, not laws that were completely unobjectionable but simply stood in the way of the desires of the violators. Another distinction between the two settings is that to the extent that civil rights protestors violated laws regulating their political activity, they were violating laws in order to be heard themselves, not in order to prevent others from being heard. But today’s obstructors cannot credibly complain that they cannot be heard; they simply want others not to be listened to. The second creative yet deeply flawed argument I’ve heard in defense of the obstructors is the idea that controversial speakers of the kind who are being suppressed are themselves not appropriate speakers to be invited to university settings because they are not sufficiently academic in character. Putting aside the fact that these speakers were invited (whether they ought to have been or not), and putting aside whether some of these speakers do have some academic bona fides (even if their ideas are often very wrong-headed), this argument mischaracterizes the kind of speakers who belong at universities. Higher education is a place not just to sharpen one’s critical thinking skills through exposure to brilliant academics who make data-informed arguments in multiple directions; it is also a place where one should learn how to become a full citizen in American society. As the Supreme Court observed in the context of high school students in Tinker v. Des Moines Independent School District, this often means that students need to engage each other on the contentious political issues of the day. And in today’s college world this sometimes means hearing and evaluating strident political advocates, some of whom even border on demagoguery. To be sure, student and faculty organizations should give some thought (perhaps more thought than they currently do) to the question of whom they invite to speak on campus—certainly not everyone should be offered a platform—but many campus speakers, on the Left as well as the Right, are not particularly grounded in rigorous theoretical or empirical analysis, and this does not mean that they are per se inappropriate speakers for college audiences. Again, colleges should be preparing young people not just to navigate the economy, but also to navigate democracy. And, for better or worse, modern democracy means having to deal with a lot of ideas that are widely held even though they don’t hold up to analytic rigor. Debunking those ideas—not shouting them down or trying to suppress their expression—is what I want my students to learn how to do. [https://justatic.com/v/20170601a/verdict/images/authors/thumbs/amar.jpg] Follow @prof_amar Vikram David Amar is the Iwan Foundation Professor of Law and the Dean at the University of Illinois College of Law. Previously, he served as the Associate Dean for Academic Affairs and Professor of Law at the University of California, Davis School of Law. He is a 1988 graduate of the Yale Law School and a former clerk to Justice Harry Blackmun. He is a co-author, along with William Cohen and Jonathan Varat, of a major constitutional law casebook, and a co-author of several volumes of the Wright & Miller treatise on federal practice and procedure. Before teaching, Professor Amar spent a few years at the firm of Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher. RECENT ARTICLES SUPREME COURT RULES THAT CITIZENSHIP MUST BE EQUALLY HERITABLE THROUGH FATHERS AND MOTHERS Cornell University law professor Michael C. Dorf comments on a recent decision by the U.S. Supreme Court on the heritability of citizenship and explains why the decision might have implications for other immigration issues, such as the “Muslim ban” executive order. Dorf argues that the precedents the Court had to distinguish to reach its conclusion might give some insight into whether and how it might defer to other political branches on immigration issues.... Read More TRUMP IS NOT READY TO DEAL WITH HIS LEGAL PROBLEMS John W. Dean, former counsel to President Nixon, reflects on the much-anticipated testimony of former FBI Director James Comey before the Senate Intelligence Committee on Thursday. Dean briefly summarizes the takeaways from Comey’s testimony and discusses the response by President Trump and his lawyer.... Read More ABSOLUTE POWER CORRUPTS ABSOLUTELY IN THE KEEPERS Marci A. Hamilton, a Fox Distinguished Scholar in the Fox Leadership Program at the University of Pennsylvania and CEO of CHILD USA, encourages everyone to watch the Netflix docuseries The Keepers, which addresses child sex abuse in the Catholic Church. Hamilton describes the progress toward justice for child sex abuse victims, including the growing awareness of the pervasiveness the problem and increasing numbers of states who extend or eliminate statutes of limitations for these types of lawsuits and prosecutions....Read More [Forward this email.] Have friends who like law? Forward this email. [Like Verdict on Facebook] Like Verdict for legal discussions on Facebook. [Follow @verdictjustia on Twitter] Follow @verdictjustia for news and updates on Twitter. [Justia] Contact Us | Privacy Policy | Unsubscribe [Facebook][Twitter][LinkedIn][Justia][GooglePlus] You received this email because you have subscribed to the Verdict News E-Mail Feed. Justia | 1380 Pear Ave, Suite 2B, Mountain View, CA 94043 ________________________________ ________________________________ 1 Behind me at Harvard Law School, Killer Koh was President Obama’s War Consigliere and Droner-in-Chief. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Fri Jun 16 16:21:37 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2017 16:21:37 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: And during the Five Year Tenure of Torture-Mongerers/CIA/Mossad/MichaelMoore/Dean HurricaneHeidiHurd, they brought onto this Faculty people as Evil as they are. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Friday, June 16, 2017 9:08 AM To: Karen Aram Cc: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Subject: RE: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 If you want to read all about the Criminal Dirty Work performed by Harvard Law Obama’s Harvard/Yale Law Mafia including Killary and Killer Koh you should see Charlie Savage: Power Wars (770 pages)—the Nazis had their Lawyers and their Law Professors and their Law Schools too. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 7:33 PM To: Karen Aram > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: RE: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 I was astonished over a year ago, before I’d ever heard of “Killer Koh,” to attend a lecture on “The legitimacy of targeted killing” in relation to our drone warfare, at the U of I Law School. It was clearly a charade to present drones as legitimate in spite of International law and US laws of due process. Yeah, if I remember correctly, I think that might have been the Dirty Work of Fired and Disgraced Dean Heidi Hurd’s Consort Michael Moore, who bragged that he works for the CIA and the Mossad-- and both of whom have stunk up this Campus and this Community for years by publicly advocating Torture. Moore also publicly congratulated everyone for bringing in Killer Koh after I had done everything humanly possible to stop them. As I said, this Law School is EVIL INCARNATE! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Karen Aram [mailto:karenaram at hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 7:22 PM To: Boyle, Francis A > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: Re: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 It does make sense that the law schools connected with Yale and Harvard would be “evil” given law schools are the first academic institution that the oligarchs controlling our government, would by necessity need to corrupt, in order to control the masses. I was astonished over a year ago, before I’d ever heard of “Killer Koh,” to attend a lecture on “The legitimacy of targeted killing” in relation to our drone warfare, at the U of I Law School. It was clearly a charade to present drones as legitimate in spite of International law and US laws of due process. Again, I had almost a year later, the frustration of attending a lecture by Dean Amar’s brother, a constitutional law professor from Yale, on “Freedom of Speech”, The lecture had nothing to do with freedom of speech, it was a promotion of his book and Hillary as well as local Democrats, along with an attempt to portray Obama in a good light. Then “killer Koh” Hillary’s advisor on drone warfare, being brought to the U of I as a representative of the “law” and speaking on human rights, to law students? Sometimes, too much is too much for sensible minds. On Jun 15, 2017, at 17:06, Boyle, Francis A > wrote: Well at least we all stood up against this Evil Law School on October 28. But from what Amar is saying here, I am sure we will have to do so again. So stay tuned. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Karen Aram [mailto:karenaram at hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 5:13 PM To: Boyle, Francis A > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: Re: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 Our government is evil, and if we the people don’t stop them from the wars and killings, then we are complicit in their warcrimes. On Jun 15, 2017, at 15:07, Boyle, Francis A > wrote: This Law School is EVIL! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 10:38 AM To: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; Karen Aram >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: FW: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 Sure. Let’s bring the War Criminal, Murderer, Felon, Bigot, Racist and Genocidaire Killer Koh into our Law School on October 28, 2016, hold him up as a Role Model to our Law Students, and then turn our Law Students into War Criminals, Murderers, Felons, Bigots, Racists and Genocidaires just like Killer Koh. Fab. Diss-Ode to Harold Killer Koh1 Harold Killer Koh Killing Babies where he go Muslim life is cheap you see Jewish life too for the Nazi Carl Schmitt Professor of Law At the Yale Law School Boot-licking Gene Rostow Of the infamous Rostow Brothers Who gave us Vietnam Genociding “gooks” too Obama’s War Consigliere Gene and his “kids” for LBJ Some things never change for Dems And their Elite Law School Whores Today At Harvard Law School too Where Killers Obama and Koh First dropped their pooh Along with “Judge” Davey Barron too Obama’s Droner-in-Chief Destined for a Cell in The Hague Right next to his student John Yoo A Chip off of Harold’s Old Block Cold-blooded Killers and War Criminals too Killer Koh disteaching “human rights” at N.Y.U. Supported by his gang of Dem law prof thugs Beating up on the N.Y.U. law students few With the courage, integrity, and principles to say Never again! Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Justia Verdict [mailto:verdictsupport at justia.com] Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 10:09 AM To: Boyle, Francis A > Subject: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 Illinois Law dean and professor Vikram David Amar laments recent instances of censored speech, particularly on university campuses, and reminds us that freedom of speech and academic freedom protect even those speakers whose message might be perceived odious, racist, sexist, or hateful. Amar points out that both freedom of speech and academic freedom are rooted in the principle that ideas and arguments ought to be evaluated on their substance and that the essence of both kinds of freedom is the opportunity to persuade others of the merits of one's argument, rather than the use of power to coerce or silence others. Click here to view in your browser if you are having trouble viewing this email. [Verdict - Legal Analysis and commentary from Justia.] Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom Vikram David Amar Jun 15, 2017 [https://i2.wp.com/verdict.justia.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/IMG_0590.jpg?quality=90&resize=426%2C350&strip=all&fit=1000%25&ssl=1] It distresses me to see episodes these days in which speakers who are controversial for their conservative or ultra-conservative views are prevented from delivering invited remarks at universities (including public universities) because protestors choose to violate laws designed to protect public safety. It also distresses me to see so few liberal analysts decry how illiberal these episodes of group-imposed censorship are. As I have written at length elsewhere, no matter how repressive or otherwise abhorrent a speaker’s message, the appropriate response under our Constitution is counter speech, not shouting down or physically obstructing or threatening the speaker or the speaker’s audience. To be sure, protesting a speaker’s presence—registering profound objection to a speaker’s viewpoint—is perfectly appropriate and has a rich tradition dating from even before the 1960s free speech revolution through the Occupy movement. But what we have seen over the past several months is a transition from protesting against bad speakers to preventing them from being able to speak, and that is not acceptable. An unflinching commitment to freedom of speech—even odious, racist, sexist, hateful speech—is the cornerstone of constitutional democracy in the United States. Certainly we protect freedom of speech more vigorously than any other western democracy. We also have a venerable tradition of respecting academic freedom at colleges and universities. These two principles, freedom of speech and academic freedom, overlap and are interconnected, even as they are distinct ideas. Freedom of speech is a broadly applicable right codified in the federal First Amendment and state constitutional analogues that protects speakers both on and off public campuses from unwarranted government interference with expression. Academic freedom, which may extend beyond what the Constitutionprotects, is grounded on the idea that, at least in the academy, free inquiry unburdened by the constraints of orthodoxy will lead to the development of new ideas and knowledge. Notwithstanding their different scopes, both freedom of speech and academic freedom rest on the bedrock belief that ideas and arguments ought to be evaluated on their substance. The essence of both kinds of freedom is the opportunity to persuade others of the merits of one’s argument, rather than the use of power to coerce others into acceding to the proponent’s point of view. Sometimes the heat and passion of political protests on college campuses causes these basic principles to be overlooked or ignored. When that happens, it is important for us to go back to what freedom of speech and academic freedom really mean and how easily both of these principles can be misused and misinterpreted. Governments Can and Should Prohibit Certain Obstructive Conduct The short of the matter is that blockading, obstructing, assaulting, destroying property, and making threats, are not, in any stretch of the imagination, constitutionally protected things to do, no matter what the objective behind them. These activities are conduct the government has always had the legitimate authority to proscribe because they so obviously interfere with the liberty and lawful pursuits of others. As the Supreme Court of California stated in an important free speech case,In Re Kay: [T]he state retains a legitimate concern in ensuring that some individuals unruly assertion of their rights of free expression does not imperil other citizen’s rights of free association and discussion. … Freedom of everyone to talk at once can destroy the right of anyone effectively to talk at all. Free expression can expire as tragically in the tumult of license as in the silence of censorship. Government actions to prohibit blockades or obstruction have been held to be permissible under the First Amendment too many times to count. To cite just one example, a federal law, the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act (FACE), that prohibits anyone from physically obstructing any person from obtaining or providing reproductive health services, has been upheld repeatedly against constitutional challenge, and those cases raise harder questions than do generic obstruction laws because FACE targets specific places where protestors with particular messages may be expected. Blockades and obstructions can and should be prohibited consistent with the First Amendment primarily because they are not intended to and do not persuade anyone of the merits of the protestors’ position. They are employed to coerce third parties to change their behavior, not their minds. As such, they are actually antithetical to, rather than in furtherance of, the values on which freedom of speech and academic freedom are grounded — a commitment to the power of ideas rather than the use of force to change the way that people act. Creative But Unavailing Counterarguments In recent weeks, I have heard defenders of those who obstruct conservative speakers make two novel but completely unconvincing arguments. First, the obstruction defenders try to invoke the civil rights movement by pointing out that Martin Luther King, Jr. and his supporters were often guilty of civil disobedience—that is violating duly enacted laws. But this analogy is unavailing because King and his followers were violating laws that were (in the eyes of the protestors and many others) themselves unjust, not laws that were completely unobjectionable but simply stood in the way of the desires of the violators. Another distinction between the two settings is that to the extent that civil rights protestors violated laws regulating their political activity, they were violating laws in order to be heard themselves, not in order to prevent others from being heard. But today’s obstructors cannot credibly complain that they cannot be heard; they simply want others not to be listened to. The second creative yet deeply flawed argument I’ve heard in defense of the obstructors is the idea that controversial speakers of the kind who are being suppressed are themselves not appropriate speakers to be invited to university settings because they are not sufficiently academic in character. Putting aside the fact that these speakers were invited (whether they ought to have been or not), and putting aside whether some of these speakers do have some academic bona fides (even if their ideas are often very wrong-headed), this argument mischaracterizes the kind of speakers who belong at universities. Higher education is a place not just to sharpen one’s critical thinking skills through exposure to brilliant academics who make data-informed arguments in multiple directions; it is also a place where one should learn how to become a full citizen in American society. As the Supreme Court observed in the context of high school students in Tinker v. Des Moines Independent School District, this often means that students need to engage each other on the contentious political issues of the day. And in today’s college world this sometimes means hearing and evaluating strident political advocates, some of whom even border on demagoguery. To be sure, student and faculty organizations should give some thought (perhaps more thought than they currently do) to the question of whom they invite to speak on campus—certainly not everyone should be offered a platform—but many campus speakers, on the Left as well as the Right, are not particularly grounded in rigorous theoretical or empirical analysis, and this does not mean that they are per se inappropriate speakers for college audiences. Again, colleges should be preparing young people not just to navigate the economy, but also to navigate democracy. And, for better or worse, modern democracy means having to deal with a lot of ideas that are widely held even though they don’t hold up to analytic rigor. Debunking those ideas—not shouting them down or trying to suppress their expression—is what I want my students to learn how to do. [https://justatic.com/v/20170601a/verdict/images/authors/thumbs/amar.jpg] Follow @prof_amar Vikram David Amar is the Iwan Foundation Professor of Law and the Dean at the University of Illinois College of Law. Previously, he served as the Associate Dean for Academic Affairs and Professor of Law at the University of California, Davis School of Law. He is a 1988 graduate of the Yale Law School and a former clerk to Justice Harry Blackmun. He is a co-author, along with William Cohen and Jonathan Varat, of a major constitutional law casebook, and a co-author of several volumes of the Wright & Miller treatise on federal practice and procedure. Before teaching, Professor Amar spent a few years at the firm of Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher. RECENT ARTICLES SUPREME COURT RULES THAT CITIZENSHIP MUST BE EQUALLY HERITABLE THROUGH FATHERS AND MOTHERS Cornell University law professor Michael C. Dorf comments on a recent decision by the U.S. Supreme Court on the heritability of citizenship and explains why the decision might have implications for other immigration issues, such as the “Muslim ban” executive order. Dorf argues that the precedents the Court had to distinguish to reach its conclusion might give some insight into whether and how it might defer to other political branches on immigration issues.... Read More TRUMP IS NOT READY TO DEAL WITH HIS LEGAL PROBLEMS John W. Dean, former counsel to President Nixon, reflects on the much-anticipated testimony of former FBI Director James Comey before the Senate Intelligence Committee on Thursday. Dean briefly summarizes the takeaways from Comey’s testimony and discusses the response by President Trump and his lawyer.... Read More ABSOLUTE POWER CORRUPTS ABSOLUTELY IN THE KEEPERS Marci A. Hamilton, a Fox Distinguished Scholar in the Fox Leadership Program at the University of Pennsylvania and CEO of CHILD USA, encourages everyone to watch the Netflix docuseries The Keepers, which addresses child sex abuse in the Catholic Church. Hamilton describes the progress toward justice for child sex abuse victims, including the growing awareness of the pervasiveness the problem and increasing numbers of states who extend or eliminate statutes of limitations for these types of lawsuits and prosecutions....Read More [Forward this email.] Have friends who like law? Forward this email. [Like Verdict on Facebook] Like Verdict for legal discussions on Facebook. [Follow @verdictjustia on Twitter] Follow @verdictjustia for news and updates on Twitter. [Justia] Contact Us | Privacy Policy | Unsubscribe [Facebook][Twitter][LinkedIn][Justia][GooglePlus] You received this email because you have subscribed to the Verdict News E-Mail Feed. Justia | 1380 Pear Ave, Suite 2B, Mountain View, CA 94043 ________________________________ ________________________________ 1 Behind me at Harvard Law School, Killer Koh was President Obama’s War Consigliere and Droner-in-Chief. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Fri Jun 16 16:35:24 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2017 16:35:24 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 References: Message-ID: In other words, for five years CIA/Mossad/Torture ran this Law School and Everyone and Everything about it. So of course we ended up with Killer Koh on October 28, 2016. Plus ca change….fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Friday, June 16, 2017 11:22 AM To: Karen Aram Cc: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Subject: RE: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 And during the Five Year Tenure of Torture-Mongerers/CIA/Mossad/MichaelMoore/Dean HurricaneHeidiHurd, they brought onto this Faculty people as Evil as they are. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Friday, June 16, 2017 9:08 AM To: Karen Aram > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: RE: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 If you want to read all about the Criminal Dirty Work performed by Harvard Law Obama’s Harvard/Yale Law Mafia including Killary and Killer Koh you should see Charlie Savage: Power Wars (770 pages)—the Nazis had their Lawyers and their Law Professors and their Law Schools too. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 7:33 PM To: Karen Aram > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: RE: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 I was astonished over a year ago, before I’d ever heard of “Killer Koh,” to attend a lecture on “The legitimacy of targeted killing” in relation to our drone warfare, at the U of I Law School. It was clearly a charade to present drones as legitimate in spite of International law and US laws of due process. Yeah, if I remember correctly, I think that might have been the Dirty Work of Fired and Disgraced Dean Heidi Hurd’s Consort Michael Moore, who bragged that he works for the CIA and the Mossad-- and both of whom have stunk up this Campus and this Community for years by publicly advocating Torture. Moore also publicly congratulated everyone for bringing in Killer Koh after I had done everything humanly possible to stop them. As I said, this Law School is EVIL INCARNATE! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Karen Aram [mailto:karenaram at hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 7:22 PM To: Boyle, Francis A > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: Re: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 It does make sense that the law schools connected with Yale and Harvard would be “evil” given law schools are the first academic institution that the oligarchs controlling our government, would by necessity need to corrupt, in order to control the masses. I was astonished over a year ago, before I’d ever heard of “Killer Koh,” to attend a lecture on “The legitimacy of targeted killing” in relation to our drone warfare, at the U of I Law School. It was clearly a charade to present drones as legitimate in spite of International law and US laws of due process. Again, I had almost a year later, the frustration of attending a lecture by Dean Amar’s brother, a constitutional law professor from Yale, on “Freedom of Speech”, The lecture had nothing to do with freedom of speech, it was a promotion of his book and Hillary as well as local Democrats, along with an attempt to portray Obama in a good light. Then “killer Koh” Hillary’s advisor on drone warfare, being brought to the U of I as a representative of the “law” and speaking on human rights, to law students? Sometimes, too much is too much for sensible minds. On Jun 15, 2017, at 17:06, Boyle, Francis A > wrote: Well at least we all stood up against this Evil Law School on October 28. But from what Amar is saying here, I am sure we will have to do so again. So stay tuned. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Karen Aram [mailto:karenaram at hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 5:13 PM To: Boyle, Francis A > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: Re: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 Our government is evil, and if we the people don’t stop them from the wars and killings, then we are complicit in their warcrimes. On Jun 15, 2017, at 15:07, Boyle, Francis A > wrote: This Law School is EVIL! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 10:38 AM To: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; Karen Aram >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: FW: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 Sure. Let’s bring the War Criminal, Murderer, Felon, Bigot, Racist and Genocidaire Killer Koh into our Law School on October 28, 2016, hold him up as a Role Model to our Law Students, and then turn our Law Students into War Criminals, Murderers, Felons, Bigots, Racists and Genocidaires just like Killer Koh. Fab. Diss-Ode to Harold Killer Koh1 Harold Killer Koh Killing Babies where he go Muslim life is cheap you see Jewish life too for the Nazi Carl Schmitt Professor of Law At the Yale Law School Boot-licking Gene Rostow Of the infamous Rostow Brothers Who gave us Vietnam Genociding “gooks” too Obama’s War Consigliere Gene and his “kids” for LBJ Some things never change for Dems And their Elite Law School Whores Today At Harvard Law School too Where Killers Obama and Koh First dropped their pooh Along with “Judge” Davey Barron too Obama’s Droner-in-Chief Destined for a Cell in The Hague Right next to his student John Yoo A Chip off of Harold’s Old Block Cold-blooded Killers and War Criminals too Killer Koh disteaching “human rights” at N.Y.U. Supported by his gang of Dem law prof thugs Beating up on the N.Y.U. law students few With the courage, integrity, and principles to say Never again! Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Justia Verdict [mailto:verdictsupport at justia.com] Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 10:09 AM To: Boyle, Francis A > Subject: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 Illinois Law dean and professor Vikram David Amar laments recent instances of censored speech, particularly on university campuses, and reminds us that freedom of speech and academic freedom protect even those speakers whose message might be perceived odious, racist, sexist, or hateful. Amar points out that both freedom of speech and academic freedom are rooted in the principle that ideas and arguments ought to be evaluated on their substance and that the essence of both kinds of freedom is the opportunity to persuade others of the merits of one's argument, rather than the use of power to coerce or silence others. Click here to view in your browser if you are having trouble viewing this email. [Verdict - Legal Analysis and commentary from Justia.] Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom Vikram David Amar Jun 15, 2017 [https://i2.wp.com/verdict.justia.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/IMG_0590.jpg?quality=90&resize=426%2C350&strip=all&fit=1000%25&ssl=1] It distresses me to see episodes these days in which speakers who are controversial for their conservative or ultra-conservative views are prevented from delivering invited remarks at universities (including public universities) because protestors choose to violate laws designed to protect public safety. It also distresses me to see so few liberal analysts decry how illiberal these episodes of group-imposed censorship are. As I have written at length elsewhere, no matter how repressive or otherwise abhorrent a speaker’s message, the appropriate response under our Constitution is counter speech, not shouting down or physically obstructing or threatening the speaker or the speaker’s audience. To be sure, protesting a speaker’s presence—registering profound objection to a speaker’s viewpoint—is perfectly appropriate and has a rich tradition dating from even before the 1960s free speech revolution through the Occupy movement. But what we have seen over the past several months is a transition from protesting against bad speakers to preventing them from being able to speak, and that is not acceptable. An unflinching commitment to freedom of speech—even odious, racist, sexist, hateful speech—is the cornerstone of constitutional democracy in the United States. Certainly we protect freedom of speech more vigorously than any other western democracy. We also have a venerable tradition of respecting academic freedom at colleges and universities. These two principles, freedom of speech and academic freedom, overlap and are interconnected, even as they are distinct ideas. Freedom of speech is a broadly applicable right codified in the federal First Amendment and state constitutional analogues that protects speakers both on and off public campuses from unwarranted government interference with expression. Academic freedom, which may extend beyond what the Constitutionprotects, is grounded on the idea that, at least in the academy, free inquiry unburdened by the constraints of orthodoxy will lead to the development of new ideas and knowledge. Notwithstanding their different scopes, both freedom of speech and academic freedom rest on the bedrock belief that ideas and arguments ought to be evaluated on their substance. The essence of both kinds of freedom is the opportunity to persuade others of the merits of one’s argument, rather than the use of power to coerce others into acceding to the proponent’s point of view. Sometimes the heat and passion of political protests on college campuses causes these basic principles to be overlooked or ignored. When that happens, it is important for us to go back to what freedom of speech and academic freedom really mean and how easily both of these principles can be misused and misinterpreted. Governments Can and Should Prohibit Certain Obstructive Conduct The short of the matter is that blockading, obstructing, assaulting, destroying property, and making threats, are not, in any stretch of the imagination, constitutionally protected things to do, no matter what the objective behind them. These activities are conduct the government has always had the legitimate authority to proscribe because they so obviously interfere with the liberty and lawful pursuits of others. As the Supreme Court of California stated in an important free speech case,In Re Kay: [T]he state retains a legitimate concern in ensuring that some individuals unruly assertion of their rights of free expression does not imperil other citizen’s rights of free association and discussion. … Freedom of everyone to talk at once can destroy the right of anyone effectively to talk at all. Free expression can expire as tragically in the tumult of license as in the silence of censorship. Government actions to prohibit blockades or obstruction have been held to be permissible under the First Amendment too many times to count. To cite just one example, a federal law, the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act (FACE), that prohibits anyone from physically obstructing any person from obtaining or providing reproductive health services, has been upheld repeatedly against constitutional challenge, and those cases raise harder questions than do generic obstruction laws because FACE targets specific places where protestors with particular messages may be expected. Blockades and obstructions can and should be prohibited consistent with the First Amendment primarily because they are not intended to and do not persuade anyone of the merits of the protestors’ position. They are employed to coerce third parties to change their behavior, not their minds. As such, they are actually antithetical to, rather than in furtherance of, the values on which freedom of speech and academic freedom are grounded — a commitment to the power of ideas rather than the use of force to change the way that people act. Creative But Unavailing Counterarguments In recent weeks, I have heard defenders of those who obstruct conservative speakers make two novel but completely unconvincing arguments. First, the obstruction defenders try to invoke the civil rights movement by pointing out that Martin Luther King, Jr. and his supporters were often guilty of civil disobedience—that is violating duly enacted laws. But this analogy is unavailing because King and his followers were violating laws that were (in the eyes of the protestors and many others) themselves unjust, not laws that were completely unobjectionable but simply stood in the way of the desires of the violators. Another distinction between the two settings is that to the extent that civil rights protestors violated laws regulating their political activity, they were violating laws in order to be heard themselves, not in order to prevent others from being heard. But today’s obstructors cannot credibly complain that they cannot be heard; they simply want others not to be listened to. The second creative yet deeply flawed argument I’ve heard in defense of the obstructors is the idea that controversial speakers of the kind who are being suppressed are themselves not appropriate speakers to be invited to university settings because they are not sufficiently academic in character. Putting aside the fact that these speakers were invited (whether they ought to have been or not), and putting aside whether some of these speakers do have some academic bona fides (even if their ideas are often very wrong-headed), this argument mischaracterizes the kind of speakers who belong at universities. Higher education is a place not just to sharpen one’s critical thinking skills through exposure to brilliant academics who make data-informed arguments in multiple directions; it is also a place where one should learn how to become a full citizen in American society. As the Supreme Court observed in the context of high school students in Tinker v. Des Moines Independent School District, this often means that students need to engage each other on the contentious political issues of the day. And in today’s college world this sometimes means hearing and evaluating strident political advocates, some of whom even border on demagoguery. To be sure, student and faculty organizations should give some thought (perhaps more thought than they currently do) to the question of whom they invite to speak on campus—certainly not everyone should be offered a platform—but many campus speakers, on the Left as well as the Right, are not particularly grounded in rigorous theoretical or empirical analysis, and this does not mean that they are per se inappropriate speakers for college audiences. Again, colleges should be preparing young people not just to navigate the economy, but also to navigate democracy. And, for better or worse, modern democracy means having to deal with a lot of ideas that are widely held even though they don’t hold up to analytic rigor. Debunking those ideas—not shouting them down or trying to suppress their expression—is what I want my students to learn how to do. [https://justatic.com/v/20170601a/verdict/images/authors/thumbs/amar.jpg] Follow @prof_amar Vikram David Amar is the Iwan Foundation Professor of Law and the Dean at the University of Illinois College of Law. Previously, he served as the Associate Dean for Academic Affairs and Professor of Law at the University of California, Davis School of Law. He is a 1988 graduate of the Yale Law School and a former clerk to Justice Harry Blackmun. He is a co-author, along with William Cohen and Jonathan Varat, of a major constitutional law casebook, and a co-author of several volumes of the Wright & Miller treatise on federal practice and procedure. Before teaching, Professor Amar spent a few years at the firm of Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher. RECENT ARTICLES SUPREME COURT RULES THAT CITIZENSHIP MUST BE EQUALLY HERITABLE THROUGH FATHERS AND MOTHERS Cornell University law professor Michael C. Dorf comments on a recent decision by the U.S. Supreme Court on the heritability of citizenship and explains why the decision might have implications for other immigration issues, such as the “Muslim ban” executive order. Dorf argues that the precedents the Court had to distinguish to reach its conclusion might give some insight into whether and how it might defer to other political branches on immigration issues.... Read More TRUMP IS NOT READY TO DEAL WITH HIS LEGAL PROBLEMS John W. Dean, former counsel to President Nixon, reflects on the much-anticipated testimony of former FBI Director James Comey before the Senate Intelligence Committee on Thursday. Dean briefly summarizes the takeaways from Comey’s testimony and discusses the response by President Trump and his lawyer.... Read More ABSOLUTE POWER CORRUPTS ABSOLUTELY IN THE KEEPERS Marci A. Hamilton, a Fox Distinguished Scholar in the Fox Leadership Program at the University of Pennsylvania and CEO of CHILD USA, encourages everyone to watch the Netflix docuseries The Keepers, which addresses child sex abuse in the Catholic Church. Hamilton describes the progress toward justice for child sex abuse victims, including the growing awareness of the pervasiveness the problem and increasing numbers of states who extend or eliminate statutes of limitations for these types of lawsuits and prosecutions....Read More [Forward this email.] Have friends who like law? Forward this email. [Like Verdict on Facebook] Like Verdict for legal discussions on Facebook. [Follow @verdictjustia on Twitter] Follow @verdictjustia for news and updates on Twitter. [Justia] Contact Us | Privacy Policy | Unsubscribe [Facebook][Twitter][LinkedIn][Justia][GooglePlus] You received this email because you have subscribed to the Verdict News E-Mail Feed. Justia | 1380 Pear Ave, Suite 2B, Mountain View, CA 94043 ________________________________ ________________________________ 1 Behind me at Harvard Law School, Killer Koh was President Obama’s War Consigliere and Droner-in-Chief. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Fri Jun 16 16:35:24 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2017 16:35:24 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 References: Message-ID: In other words, for five years CIA/Mossad/Torture ran this Law School and Everyone and Everything about it. So of course we ended up with Killer Koh on October 28, 2016. Plus ca change….fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Friday, June 16, 2017 11:22 AM To: Karen Aram Cc: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Subject: RE: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 And during the Five Year Tenure of Torture-Mongerers/CIA/Mossad/MichaelMoore/Dean HurricaneHeidiHurd, they brought onto this Faculty people as Evil as they are. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Friday, June 16, 2017 9:08 AM To: Karen Aram > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: RE: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 If you want to read all about the Criminal Dirty Work performed by Harvard Law Obama’s Harvard/Yale Law Mafia including Killary and Killer Koh you should see Charlie Savage: Power Wars (770 pages)—the Nazis had their Lawyers and their Law Professors and their Law Schools too. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 7:33 PM To: Karen Aram > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: RE: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 I was astonished over a year ago, before I’d ever heard of “Killer Koh,” to attend a lecture on “The legitimacy of targeted killing” in relation to our drone warfare, at the U of I Law School. It was clearly a charade to present drones as legitimate in spite of International law and US laws of due process. Yeah, if I remember correctly, I think that might have been the Dirty Work of Fired and Disgraced Dean Heidi Hurd’s Consort Michael Moore, who bragged that he works for the CIA and the Mossad-- and both of whom have stunk up this Campus and this Community for years by publicly advocating Torture. Moore also publicly congratulated everyone for bringing in Killer Koh after I had done everything humanly possible to stop them. As I said, this Law School is EVIL INCARNATE! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Karen Aram [mailto:karenaram at hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 7:22 PM To: Boyle, Francis A > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: Re: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 It does make sense that the law schools connected with Yale and Harvard would be “evil” given law schools are the first academic institution that the oligarchs controlling our government, would by necessity need to corrupt, in order to control the masses. I was astonished over a year ago, before I’d ever heard of “Killer Koh,” to attend a lecture on “The legitimacy of targeted killing” in relation to our drone warfare, at the U of I Law School. It was clearly a charade to present drones as legitimate in spite of International law and US laws of due process. Again, I had almost a year later, the frustration of attending a lecture by Dean Amar’s brother, a constitutional law professor from Yale, on “Freedom of Speech”, The lecture had nothing to do with freedom of speech, it was a promotion of his book and Hillary as well as local Democrats, along with an attempt to portray Obama in a good light. Then “killer Koh” Hillary’s advisor on drone warfare, being brought to the U of I as a representative of the “law” and speaking on human rights, to law students? Sometimes, too much is too much for sensible minds. On Jun 15, 2017, at 17:06, Boyle, Francis A > wrote: Well at least we all stood up against this Evil Law School on October 28. But from what Amar is saying here, I am sure we will have to do so again. So stay tuned. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Karen Aram [mailto:karenaram at hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 5:13 PM To: Boyle, Francis A > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: Re: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 Our government is evil, and if we the people don’t stop them from the wars and killings, then we are complicit in their warcrimes. On Jun 15, 2017, at 15:07, Boyle, Francis A > wrote: This Law School is EVIL! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 10:38 AM To: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; Karen Aram >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: FW: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 Sure. Let’s bring the War Criminal, Murderer, Felon, Bigot, Racist and Genocidaire Killer Koh into our Law School on October 28, 2016, hold him up as a Role Model to our Law Students, and then turn our Law Students into War Criminals, Murderers, Felons, Bigots, Racists and Genocidaires just like Killer Koh. Fab. Diss-Ode to Harold Killer Koh1 Harold Killer Koh Killing Babies where he go Muslim life is cheap you see Jewish life too for the Nazi Carl Schmitt Professor of Law At the Yale Law School Boot-licking Gene Rostow Of the infamous Rostow Brothers Who gave us Vietnam Genociding “gooks” too Obama’s War Consigliere Gene and his “kids” for LBJ Some things never change for Dems And their Elite Law School Whores Today At Harvard Law School too Where Killers Obama and Koh First dropped their pooh Along with “Judge” Davey Barron too Obama’s Droner-in-Chief Destined for a Cell in The Hague Right next to his student John Yoo A Chip off of Harold’s Old Block Cold-blooded Killers and War Criminals too Killer Koh disteaching “human rights” at N.Y.U. Supported by his gang of Dem law prof thugs Beating up on the N.Y.U. law students few With the courage, integrity, and principles to say Never again! Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Justia Verdict [mailto:verdictsupport at justia.com] Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 10:09 AM To: Boyle, Francis A > Subject: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 Illinois Law dean and professor Vikram David Amar laments recent instances of censored speech, particularly on university campuses, and reminds us that freedom of speech and academic freedom protect even those speakers whose message might be perceived odious, racist, sexist, or hateful. Amar points out that both freedom of speech and academic freedom are rooted in the principle that ideas and arguments ought to be evaluated on their substance and that the essence of both kinds of freedom is the opportunity to persuade others of the merits of one's argument, rather than the use of power to coerce or silence others. Click here to view in your browser if you are having trouble viewing this email. [Verdict - Legal Analysis and commentary from Justia.] Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom Vikram David Amar Jun 15, 2017 [https://i2.wp.com/verdict.justia.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/IMG_0590.jpg?quality=90&resize=426%2C350&strip=all&fit=1000%25&ssl=1] It distresses me to see episodes these days in which speakers who are controversial for their conservative or ultra-conservative views are prevented from delivering invited remarks at universities (including public universities) because protestors choose to violate laws designed to protect public safety. It also distresses me to see so few liberal analysts decry how illiberal these episodes of group-imposed censorship are. As I have written at length elsewhere, no matter how repressive or otherwise abhorrent a speaker’s message, the appropriate response under our Constitution is counter speech, not shouting down or physically obstructing or threatening the speaker or the speaker’s audience. To be sure, protesting a speaker’s presence—registering profound objection to a speaker’s viewpoint—is perfectly appropriate and has a rich tradition dating from even before the 1960s free speech revolution through the Occupy movement. But what we have seen over the past several months is a transition from protesting against bad speakers to preventing them from being able to speak, and that is not acceptable. An unflinching commitment to freedom of speech—even odious, racist, sexist, hateful speech—is the cornerstone of constitutional democracy in the United States. Certainly we protect freedom of speech more vigorously than any other western democracy. We also have a venerable tradition of respecting academic freedom at colleges and universities. These two principles, freedom of speech and academic freedom, overlap and are interconnected, even as they are distinct ideas. Freedom of speech is a broadly applicable right codified in the federal First Amendment and state constitutional analogues that protects speakers both on and off public campuses from unwarranted government interference with expression. Academic freedom, which may extend beyond what the Constitutionprotects, is grounded on the idea that, at least in the academy, free inquiry unburdened by the constraints of orthodoxy will lead to the development of new ideas and knowledge. Notwithstanding their different scopes, both freedom of speech and academic freedom rest on the bedrock belief that ideas and arguments ought to be evaluated on their substance. The essence of both kinds of freedom is the opportunity to persuade others of the merits of one’s argument, rather than the use of power to coerce others into acceding to the proponent’s point of view. Sometimes the heat and passion of political protests on college campuses causes these basic principles to be overlooked or ignored. When that happens, it is important for us to go back to what freedom of speech and academic freedom really mean and how easily both of these principles can be misused and misinterpreted. Governments Can and Should Prohibit Certain Obstructive Conduct The short of the matter is that blockading, obstructing, assaulting, destroying property, and making threats, are not, in any stretch of the imagination, constitutionally protected things to do, no matter what the objective behind them. These activities are conduct the government has always had the legitimate authority to proscribe because they so obviously interfere with the liberty and lawful pursuits of others. As the Supreme Court of California stated in an important free speech case,In Re Kay: [T]he state retains a legitimate concern in ensuring that some individuals unruly assertion of their rights of free expression does not imperil other citizen’s rights of free association and discussion. … Freedom of everyone to talk at once can destroy the right of anyone effectively to talk at all. Free expression can expire as tragically in the tumult of license as in the silence of censorship. Government actions to prohibit blockades or obstruction have been held to be permissible under the First Amendment too many times to count. To cite just one example, a federal law, the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act (FACE), that prohibits anyone from physically obstructing any person from obtaining or providing reproductive health services, has been upheld repeatedly against constitutional challenge, and those cases raise harder questions than do generic obstruction laws because FACE targets specific places where protestors with particular messages may be expected. Blockades and obstructions can and should be prohibited consistent with the First Amendment primarily because they are not intended to and do not persuade anyone of the merits of the protestors’ position. They are employed to coerce third parties to change their behavior, not their minds. As such, they are actually antithetical to, rather than in furtherance of, the values on which freedom of speech and academic freedom are grounded — a commitment to the power of ideas rather than the use of force to change the way that people act. Creative But Unavailing Counterarguments In recent weeks, I have heard defenders of those who obstruct conservative speakers make two novel but completely unconvincing arguments. First, the obstruction defenders try to invoke the civil rights movement by pointing out that Martin Luther King, Jr. and his supporters were often guilty of civil disobedience—that is violating duly enacted laws. But this analogy is unavailing because King and his followers were violating laws that were (in the eyes of the protestors and many others) themselves unjust, not laws that were completely unobjectionable but simply stood in the way of the desires of the violators. Another distinction between the two settings is that to the extent that civil rights protestors violated laws regulating their political activity, they were violating laws in order to be heard themselves, not in order to prevent others from being heard. But today’s obstructors cannot credibly complain that they cannot be heard; they simply want others not to be listened to. The second creative yet deeply flawed argument I’ve heard in defense of the obstructors is the idea that controversial speakers of the kind who are being suppressed are themselves not appropriate speakers to be invited to university settings because they are not sufficiently academic in character. Putting aside the fact that these speakers were invited (whether they ought to have been or not), and putting aside whether some of these speakers do have some academic bona fides (even if their ideas are often very wrong-headed), this argument mischaracterizes the kind of speakers who belong at universities. Higher education is a place not just to sharpen one’s critical thinking skills through exposure to brilliant academics who make data-informed arguments in multiple directions; it is also a place where one should learn how to become a full citizen in American society. As the Supreme Court observed in the context of high school students in Tinker v. Des Moines Independent School District, this often means that students need to engage each other on the contentious political issues of the day. And in today’s college world this sometimes means hearing and evaluating strident political advocates, some of whom even border on demagoguery. To be sure, student and faculty organizations should give some thought (perhaps more thought than they currently do) to the question of whom they invite to speak on campus—certainly not everyone should be offered a platform—but many campus speakers, on the Left as well as the Right, are not particularly grounded in rigorous theoretical or empirical analysis, and this does not mean that they are per se inappropriate speakers for college audiences. Again, colleges should be preparing young people not just to navigate the economy, but also to navigate democracy. And, for better or worse, modern democracy means having to deal with a lot of ideas that are widely held even though they don’t hold up to analytic rigor. Debunking those ideas—not shouting them down or trying to suppress their expression—is what I want my students to learn how to do. [https://justatic.com/v/20170601a/verdict/images/authors/thumbs/amar.jpg] Follow @prof_amar Vikram David Amar is the Iwan Foundation Professor of Law and the Dean at the University of Illinois College of Law. Previously, he served as the Associate Dean for Academic Affairs and Professor of Law at the University of California, Davis School of Law. He is a 1988 graduate of the Yale Law School and a former clerk to Justice Harry Blackmun. He is a co-author, along with William Cohen and Jonathan Varat, of a major constitutional law casebook, and a co-author of several volumes of the Wright & Miller treatise on federal practice and procedure. Before teaching, Professor Amar spent a few years at the firm of Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher. RECENT ARTICLES SUPREME COURT RULES THAT CITIZENSHIP MUST BE EQUALLY HERITABLE THROUGH FATHERS AND MOTHERS Cornell University law professor Michael C. Dorf comments on a recent decision by the U.S. Supreme Court on the heritability of citizenship and explains why the decision might have implications for other immigration issues, such as the “Muslim ban” executive order. Dorf argues that the precedents the Court had to distinguish to reach its conclusion might give some insight into whether and how it might defer to other political branches on immigration issues.... Read More TRUMP IS NOT READY TO DEAL WITH HIS LEGAL PROBLEMS John W. Dean, former counsel to President Nixon, reflects on the much-anticipated testimony of former FBI Director James Comey before the Senate Intelligence Committee on Thursday. Dean briefly summarizes the takeaways from Comey’s testimony and discusses the response by President Trump and his lawyer.... Read More ABSOLUTE POWER CORRUPTS ABSOLUTELY IN THE KEEPERS Marci A. Hamilton, a Fox Distinguished Scholar in the Fox Leadership Program at the University of Pennsylvania and CEO of CHILD USA, encourages everyone to watch the Netflix docuseries The Keepers, which addresses child sex abuse in the Catholic Church. Hamilton describes the progress toward justice for child sex abuse victims, including the growing awareness of the pervasiveness the problem and increasing numbers of states who extend or eliminate statutes of limitations for these types of lawsuits and prosecutions....Read More [Forward this email.] Have friends who like law? Forward this email. [Like Verdict on Facebook] Like Verdict for legal discussions on Facebook. [Follow @verdictjustia on Twitter] Follow @verdictjustia for news and updates on Twitter. [Justia] Contact Us | Privacy Policy | Unsubscribe [Facebook][Twitter][LinkedIn][Justia][GooglePlus] You received this email because you have subscribed to the Verdict News E-Mail Feed. Justia | 1380 Pear Ave, Suite 2B, Mountain View, CA 94043 ________________________________ ________________________________ 1 Behind me at Harvard Law School, Killer Koh was President Obama’s War Consigliere and Droner-in-Chief. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Fri Jun 16 23:34:25 2017 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2017 23:34:25 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Interview with Max Blumenthal on The Real News, worth a listen, to the whole thing. Message-ID: http://therealnews.com/t2/story:19337:Bernie-Sanders-and-Rand-Paul-Buck-Party-Consensus-on-Russia-and-Iran-Sanctions -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From galliher at illinois.edu Sat Jun 17 00:07:32 2017 From: galliher at illinois.edu (Carl G. Estabrook) Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2017 19:07:32 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Interview with Max Blumenthal on The Real News, worth a listen, to the whole thing. In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <02CDA6DE-C39B-4921-8C93-8B8118863486@illinois.edu> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From r-szoke at illinois.edu Sat Jun 17 05:19:03 2017 From: r-szoke at illinois.edu (Szoke, Ron) Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2017 05:19:03 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Fwd: Fueling 'Perpetual War, ' Trump to Send 4, 000 Troops to Afghanistan References: Message-ID: <1B6571C2-AEEF-4165-AB14-62384EE1C523@illinois.edu> From: "Szoke, Ron" > Subject: Fueling 'Perpetual War,' Trump to Send 4,000 Troops to Afghanistan Date: June 17, 2017 at 12:11:45 AM CDT To: "Szoke, Ron" > Link: https://www.commondreams.org/news/2017/06/16/fueling-perpetual-war-trump-send-4000-troops-afghanistan?utm_campaign=shareaholic&utm_medium=email_this&utm_source=email -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Sat Jun 17 12:29:32 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2017 12:29:32 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I trust you can all comprehend how much Evil this law school has inflicted after five years of direct and personal control by the CIA, Mossad, Moore,Hurd, and Torture. Killer Koh is only the tip of the iceberg. This Law School is a Cancer eating away at the Heart of this Campus and of our Good Community, where I have lived, taught and raised my family since July of 1978 when I first moved here from Boston.Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Friday, June 16, 2017 11:35 AM To: Karen Aram Cc: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Subject: RE: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 In other words, for five years CIA/Mossad/Torture ran this Law School and Everyone and Everything about it. So of course we ended up with Killer Koh on October 28, 2016. Plus ca change….fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Friday, June 16, 2017 11:22 AM To: Karen Aram > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: RE: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 And during the Five Year Tenure of Torture-Mongerers/CIA/Mossad/MichaelMoore/Dean HurricaneHeidiHurd, they brought onto this Faculty people as Evil as they are. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Friday, June 16, 2017 9:08 AM To: Karen Aram > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: RE: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 If you want to read all about the Criminal Dirty Work performed by Harvard Law Obama’s Harvard/Yale Law Mafia including Killary and Killer Koh you should see Charlie Savage: Power Wars (770 pages)—the Nazis had their Lawyers and their Law Professors and their Law Schools too. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 7:33 PM To: Karen Aram > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: RE: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 I was astonished over a year ago, before I’d ever heard of “Killer Koh,” to attend a lecture on “The legitimacy of targeted killing” in relation to our drone warfare, at the U of I Law School. It was clearly a charade to present drones as legitimate in spite of International law and US laws of due process. Yeah, if I remember correctly, I think that might have been the Dirty Work of Fired and Disgraced Dean Heidi Hurd’s Consort Michael Moore, who bragged that he works for the CIA and the Mossad-- and both of whom have stunk up this Campus and this Community for years by publicly advocating Torture. Moore also publicly congratulated everyone for bringing in Killer Koh after I had done everything humanly possible to stop them. As I said, this Law School is EVIL INCARNATE! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Karen Aram [mailto:karenaram at hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 7:22 PM To: Boyle, Francis A > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: Re: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 It does make sense that the law schools connected with Yale and Harvard would be “evil” given law schools are the first academic institution that the oligarchs controlling our government, would by necessity need to corrupt, in order to control the masses. I was astonished over a year ago, before I’d ever heard of “Killer Koh,” to attend a lecture on “The legitimacy of targeted killing” in relation to our drone warfare, at the U of I Law School. It was clearly a charade to present drones as legitimate in spite of International law and US laws of due process. Again, I had almost a year later, the frustration of attending a lecture by Dean Amar’s brother, a constitutional law professor from Yale, on “Freedom of Speech”, The lecture had nothing to do with freedom of speech, it was a promotion of his book and Hillary as well as local Democrats, along with an attempt to portray Obama in a good light. Then “killer Koh” Hillary’s advisor on drone warfare, being brought to the U of I as a representative of the “law” and speaking on human rights, to law students? Sometimes, too much is too much for sensible minds. On Jun 15, 2017, at 17:06, Boyle, Francis A > wrote: Well at least we all stood up against this Evil Law School on October 28. But from what Amar is saying here, I am sure we will have to do so again. So stay tuned. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Karen Aram [mailto:karenaram at hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 5:13 PM To: Boyle, Francis A > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: Re: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 Our government is evil, and if we the people don’t stop them from the wars and killings, then we are complicit in their warcrimes. On Jun 15, 2017, at 15:07, Boyle, Francis A > wrote: This Law School is EVIL! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 10:38 AM To: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; Karen Aram >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: FW: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 Sure. Let’s bring the War Criminal, Murderer, Felon, Bigot, Racist and Genocidaire Killer Koh into our Law School on October 28, 2016, hold him up as a Role Model to our Law Students, and then turn our Law Students into War Criminals, Murderers, Felons, Bigots, Racists and Genocidaires just like Killer Koh. Fab. Diss-Ode to Harold Killer Koh1 Harold Killer Koh Killing Babies where he go Muslim life is cheap you see Jewish life too for the Nazi Carl Schmitt Professor of Law At the Yale Law School Boot-licking Gene Rostow Of the infamous Rostow Brothers Who gave us Vietnam Genociding “gooks” too Obama’s War Consigliere Gene and his “kids” for LBJ Some things never change for Dems And their Elite Law School Whores Today At Harvard Law School too Where Killers Obama and Koh First dropped their pooh Along with “Judge” Davey Barron too Obama’s Droner-in-Chief Destined for a Cell in The Hague Right next to his student John Yoo A Chip off of Harold’s Old Block Cold-blooded Killers and War Criminals too Killer Koh disteaching “human rights” at N.Y.U. Supported by his gang of Dem law prof thugs Beating up on the N.Y.U. law students few With the courage, integrity, and principles to say Never again! Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Justia Verdict [mailto:verdictsupport at justia.com] Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 10:09 AM To: Boyle, Francis A > Subject: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 Illinois Law dean and professor Vikram David Amar laments recent instances of censored speech, particularly on university campuses, and reminds us that freedom of speech and academic freedom protect even those speakers whose message might be perceived odious, racist, sexist, or hateful. Amar points out that both freedom of speech and academic freedom are rooted in the principle that ideas and arguments ought to be evaluated on their substance and that the essence of both kinds of freedom is the opportunity to persuade others of the merits of one's argument, rather than the use of power to coerce or silence others. Click here to view in your browser if you are having trouble viewing this email. [Verdict - Legal Analysis and commentary from Justia.] Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom Vikram David Amar Jun 15, 2017 [https://i2.wp.com/verdict.justia.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/IMG_0590.jpg?quality=90&resize=426%2C350&strip=all&fit=1000%25&ssl=1] It distresses me to see episodes these days in which speakers who are controversial for their conservative or ultra-conservative views are prevented from delivering invited remarks at universities (including public universities) because protestors choose to violate laws designed to protect public safety. It also distresses me to see so few liberal analysts decry how illiberal these episodes of group-imposed censorship are. As I have written at length elsewhere, no matter how repressive or otherwise abhorrent a speaker’s message, the appropriate response under our Constitution is counter speech, not shouting down or physically obstructing or threatening the speaker or the speaker’s audience. To be sure, protesting a speaker’s presence—registering profound objection to a speaker’s viewpoint—is perfectly appropriate and has a rich tradition dating from even before the 1960s free speech revolution through the Occupy movement. But what we have seen over the past several months is a transition from protesting against bad speakers to preventing them from being able to speak, and that is not acceptable. An unflinching commitment to freedom of speech—even odious, racist, sexist, hateful speech—is the cornerstone of constitutional democracy in the United States. Certainly we protect freedom of speech more vigorously than any other western democracy. We also have a venerable tradition of respecting academic freedom at colleges and universities. These two principles, freedom of speech and academic freedom, overlap and are interconnected, even as they are distinct ideas. Freedom of speech is a broadly applicable right codified in the federal First Amendment and state constitutional analogues that protects speakers both on and off public campuses from unwarranted government interference with expression. Academic freedom, which may extend beyond what the Constitutionprotects, is grounded on the idea that, at least in the academy, free inquiry unburdened by the constraints of orthodoxy will lead to the development of new ideas and knowledge. Notwithstanding their different scopes, both freedom of speech and academic freedom rest on the bedrock belief that ideas and arguments ought to be evaluated on their substance. The essence of both kinds of freedom is the opportunity to persuade others of the merits of one’s argument, rather than the use of power to coerce others into acceding to the proponent’s point of view. Sometimes the heat and passion of political protests on college campuses causes these basic principles to be overlooked or ignored. When that happens, it is important for us to go back to what freedom of speech and academic freedom really mean and how easily both of these principles can be misused and misinterpreted. Governments Can and Should Prohibit Certain Obstructive Conduct The short of the matter is that blockading, obstructing, assaulting, destroying property, and making threats, are not, in any stretch of the imagination, constitutionally protected things to do, no matter what the objective behind them. These activities are conduct the government has always had the legitimate authority to proscribe because they so obviously interfere with the liberty and lawful pursuits of others. As the Supreme Court of California stated in an important free speech case,In Re Kay: [T]he state retains a legitimate concern in ensuring that some individuals unruly assertion of their rights of free expression does not imperil other citizen’s rights of free association and discussion. … Freedom of everyone to talk at once can destroy the right of anyone effectively to talk at all. Free expression can expire as tragically in the tumult of license as in the silence of censorship. Government actions to prohibit blockades or obstruction have been held to be permissible under the First Amendment too many times to count. To cite just one example, a federal law, the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act (FACE), that prohibits anyone from physically obstructing any person from obtaining or providing reproductive health services, has been upheld repeatedly against constitutional challenge, and those cases raise harder questions than do generic obstruction laws because FACE targets specific places where protestors with particular messages may be expected. Blockades and obstructions can and should be prohibited consistent with the First Amendment primarily because they are not intended to and do not persuade anyone of the merits of the protestors’ position. They are employed to coerce third parties to change their behavior, not their minds. As such, they are actually antithetical to, rather than in furtherance of, the values on which freedom of speech and academic freedom are grounded — a commitment to the power of ideas rather than the use of force to change the way that people act. Creative But Unavailing Counterarguments In recent weeks, I have heard defenders of those who obstruct conservative speakers make two novel but completely unconvincing arguments. First, the obstruction defenders try to invoke the civil rights movement by pointing out that Martin Luther King, Jr. and his supporters were often guilty of civil disobedience—that is violating duly enacted laws. But this analogy is unavailing because King and his followers were violating laws that were (in the eyes of the protestors and many others) themselves unjust, not laws that were completely unobjectionable but simply stood in the way of the desires of the violators. Another distinction between the two settings is that to the extent that civil rights protestors violated laws regulating their political activity, they were violating laws in order to be heard themselves, not in order to prevent others from being heard. But today’s obstructors cannot credibly complain that they cannot be heard; they simply want others not to be listened to. The second creative yet deeply flawed argument I’ve heard in defense of the obstructors is the idea that controversial speakers of the kind who are being suppressed are themselves not appropriate speakers to be invited to university settings because they are not sufficiently academic in character. Putting aside the fact that these speakers were invited (whether they ought to have been or not), and putting aside whether some of these speakers do have some academic bona fides (even if their ideas are often very wrong-headed), this argument mischaracterizes the kind of speakers who belong at universities. Higher education is a place not just to sharpen one’s critical thinking skills through exposure to brilliant academics who make data-informed arguments in multiple directions; it is also a place where one should learn how to become a full citizen in American society. As the Supreme Court observed in the context of high school students in Tinker v. Des Moines Independent School District, this often means that students need to engage each other on the contentious political issues of the day. And in today’s college world this sometimes means hearing and evaluating strident political advocates, some of whom even border on demagoguery. To be sure, student and faculty organizations should give some thought (perhaps more thought than they currently do) to the question of whom they invite to speak on campus—certainly not everyone should be offered a platform—but many campus speakers, on the Left as well as the Right, are not particularly grounded in rigorous theoretical or empirical analysis, and this does not mean that they are per se inappropriate speakers for college audiences. Again, colleges should be preparing young people not just to navigate the economy, but also to navigate democracy. And, for better or worse, modern democracy means having to deal with a lot of ideas that are widely held even though they don’t hold up to analytic rigor. Debunking those ideas—not shouting them down or trying to suppress their expression—is what I want my students to learn how to do. [https://justatic.com/v/20170601a/verdict/images/authors/thumbs/amar.jpg] Follow @prof_amar Vikram David Amar is the Iwan Foundation Professor of Law and the Dean at the University of Illinois College of Law. Previously, he served as the Associate Dean for Academic Affairs and Professor of Law at the University of California, Davis School of Law. He is a 1988 graduate of the Yale Law School and a former clerk to Justice Harry Blackmun. He is a co-author, along with William Cohen and Jonathan Varat, of a major constitutional law casebook, and a co-author of several volumes of the Wright & Miller treatise on federal practice and procedure. Before teaching, Professor Amar spent a few years at the firm of Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher. RECENT ARTICLES SUPREME COURT RULES THAT CITIZENSHIP MUST BE EQUALLY HERITABLE THROUGH FATHERS AND MOTHERS Cornell University law professor Michael C. Dorf comments on a recent decision by the U.S. Supreme Court on the heritability of citizenship and explains why the decision might have implications for other immigration issues, such as the “Muslim ban” executive order. Dorf argues that the precedents the Court had to distinguish to reach its conclusion might give some insight into whether and how it might defer to other political branches on immigration issues.... Read More TRUMP IS NOT READY TO DEAL WITH HIS LEGAL PROBLEMS John W. Dean, former counsel to President Nixon, reflects on the much-anticipated testimony of former FBI Director James Comey before the Senate Intelligence Committee on Thursday. Dean briefly summarizes the takeaways from Comey’s testimony and discusses the response by President Trump and his lawyer.... Read More ABSOLUTE POWER CORRUPTS ABSOLUTELY IN THE KEEPERS Marci A. Hamilton, a Fox Distinguished Scholar in the Fox Leadership Program at the University of Pennsylvania and CEO of CHILD USA, encourages everyone to watch the Netflix docuseries The Keepers, which addresses child sex abuse in the Catholic Church. Hamilton describes the progress toward justice for child sex abuse victims, including the growing awareness of the pervasiveness the problem and increasing numbers of states who extend or eliminate statutes of limitations for these types of lawsuits and prosecutions....Read More [Forward this email.] Have friends who like law? Forward this email. [Like Verdict on Facebook] Like Verdict for legal discussions on Facebook. [Follow @verdictjustia on Twitter] Follow @verdictjustia for news and updates on Twitter. [Justia] Contact Us | Privacy Policy | Unsubscribe [Facebook][Twitter][LinkedIn][Justia][GooglePlus] You received this email because you have subscribed to the Verdict News E-Mail Feed. Justia | 1380 Pear Ave, Suite 2B, Mountain View, CA 94043 ________________________________ ________________________________ 1 Behind me at Harvard Law School, Killer Koh was President Obama’s War Consigliere and Droner-in-Chief. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Sat Jun 17 12:29:32 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2017 12:29:32 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I trust you can all comprehend how much Evil this law school has inflicted after five years of direct and personal control by the CIA, Mossad, Moore,Hurd, and Torture. Killer Koh is only the tip of the iceberg. This Law School is a Cancer eating away at the Heart of this Campus and of our Good Community, where I have lived, taught and raised my family since July of 1978 when I first moved here from Boston.Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Friday, June 16, 2017 11:35 AM To: Karen Aram Cc: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Subject: RE: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 In other words, for five years CIA/Mossad/Torture ran this Law School and Everyone and Everything about it. So of course we ended up with Killer Koh on October 28, 2016. Plus ca change….fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Friday, June 16, 2017 11:22 AM To: Karen Aram > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: RE: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 And during the Five Year Tenure of Torture-Mongerers/CIA/Mossad/MichaelMoore/Dean HurricaneHeidiHurd, they brought onto this Faculty people as Evil as they are. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Friday, June 16, 2017 9:08 AM To: Karen Aram > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: RE: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 If you want to read all about the Criminal Dirty Work performed by Harvard Law Obama’s Harvard/Yale Law Mafia including Killary and Killer Koh you should see Charlie Savage: Power Wars (770 pages)—the Nazis had their Lawyers and their Law Professors and their Law Schools too. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 7:33 PM To: Karen Aram > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: RE: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 I was astonished over a year ago, before I’d ever heard of “Killer Koh,” to attend a lecture on “The legitimacy of targeted killing” in relation to our drone warfare, at the U of I Law School. It was clearly a charade to present drones as legitimate in spite of International law and US laws of due process. Yeah, if I remember correctly, I think that might have been the Dirty Work of Fired and Disgraced Dean Heidi Hurd’s Consort Michael Moore, who bragged that he works for the CIA and the Mossad-- and both of whom have stunk up this Campus and this Community for years by publicly advocating Torture. Moore also publicly congratulated everyone for bringing in Killer Koh after I had done everything humanly possible to stop them. As I said, this Law School is EVIL INCARNATE! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Karen Aram [mailto:karenaram at hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 7:22 PM To: Boyle, Francis A > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: Re: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 It does make sense that the law schools connected with Yale and Harvard would be “evil” given law schools are the first academic institution that the oligarchs controlling our government, would by necessity need to corrupt, in order to control the masses. I was astonished over a year ago, before I’d ever heard of “Killer Koh,” to attend a lecture on “The legitimacy of targeted killing” in relation to our drone warfare, at the U of I Law School. It was clearly a charade to present drones as legitimate in spite of International law and US laws of due process. Again, I had almost a year later, the frustration of attending a lecture by Dean Amar’s brother, a constitutional law professor from Yale, on “Freedom of Speech”, The lecture had nothing to do with freedom of speech, it was a promotion of his book and Hillary as well as local Democrats, along with an attempt to portray Obama in a good light. Then “killer Koh” Hillary’s advisor on drone warfare, being brought to the U of I as a representative of the “law” and speaking on human rights, to law students? Sometimes, too much is too much for sensible minds. On Jun 15, 2017, at 17:06, Boyle, Francis A > wrote: Well at least we all stood up against this Evil Law School on October 28. But from what Amar is saying here, I am sure we will have to do so again. So stay tuned. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Karen Aram [mailto:karenaram at hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 5:13 PM To: Boyle, Francis A > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: Re: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 Our government is evil, and if we the people don’t stop them from the wars and killings, then we are complicit in their warcrimes. On Jun 15, 2017, at 15:07, Boyle, Francis A > wrote: This Law School is EVIL! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 10:38 AM To: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; Karen Aram >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: FW: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 Sure. Let’s bring the War Criminal, Murderer, Felon, Bigot, Racist and Genocidaire Killer Koh into our Law School on October 28, 2016, hold him up as a Role Model to our Law Students, and then turn our Law Students into War Criminals, Murderers, Felons, Bigots, Racists and Genocidaires just like Killer Koh. Fab. Diss-Ode to Harold Killer Koh1 Harold Killer Koh Killing Babies where he go Muslim life is cheap you see Jewish life too for the Nazi Carl Schmitt Professor of Law At the Yale Law School Boot-licking Gene Rostow Of the infamous Rostow Brothers Who gave us Vietnam Genociding “gooks” too Obama’s War Consigliere Gene and his “kids” for LBJ Some things never change for Dems And their Elite Law School Whores Today At Harvard Law School too Where Killers Obama and Koh First dropped their pooh Along with “Judge” Davey Barron too Obama’s Droner-in-Chief Destined for a Cell in The Hague Right next to his student John Yoo A Chip off of Harold’s Old Block Cold-blooded Killers and War Criminals too Killer Koh disteaching “human rights” at N.Y.U. Supported by his gang of Dem law prof thugs Beating up on the N.Y.U. law students few With the courage, integrity, and principles to say Never again! Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Justia Verdict [mailto:verdictsupport at justia.com] Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 10:09 AM To: Boyle, Francis A > Subject: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 Illinois Law dean and professor Vikram David Amar laments recent instances of censored speech, particularly on university campuses, and reminds us that freedom of speech and academic freedom protect even those speakers whose message might be perceived odious, racist, sexist, or hateful. Amar points out that both freedom of speech and academic freedom are rooted in the principle that ideas and arguments ought to be evaluated on their substance and that the essence of both kinds of freedom is the opportunity to persuade others of the merits of one's argument, rather than the use of power to coerce or silence others. Click here to view in your browser if you are having trouble viewing this email. [Verdict - Legal Analysis and commentary from Justia.] Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom Vikram David Amar Jun 15, 2017 [https://i2.wp.com/verdict.justia.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/IMG_0590.jpg?quality=90&resize=426%2C350&strip=all&fit=1000%25&ssl=1] It distresses me to see episodes these days in which speakers who are controversial for their conservative or ultra-conservative views are prevented from delivering invited remarks at universities (including public universities) because protestors choose to violate laws designed to protect public safety. It also distresses me to see so few liberal analysts decry how illiberal these episodes of group-imposed censorship are. As I have written at length elsewhere, no matter how repressive or otherwise abhorrent a speaker’s message, the appropriate response under our Constitution is counter speech, not shouting down or physically obstructing or threatening the speaker or the speaker’s audience. To be sure, protesting a speaker’s presence—registering profound objection to a speaker’s viewpoint—is perfectly appropriate and has a rich tradition dating from even before the 1960s free speech revolution through the Occupy movement. But what we have seen over the past several months is a transition from protesting against bad speakers to preventing them from being able to speak, and that is not acceptable. An unflinching commitment to freedom of speech—even odious, racist, sexist, hateful speech—is the cornerstone of constitutional democracy in the United States. Certainly we protect freedom of speech more vigorously than any other western democracy. We also have a venerable tradition of respecting academic freedom at colleges and universities. These two principles, freedom of speech and academic freedom, overlap and are interconnected, even as they are distinct ideas. Freedom of speech is a broadly applicable right codified in the federal First Amendment and state constitutional analogues that protects speakers both on and off public campuses from unwarranted government interference with expression. Academic freedom, which may extend beyond what the Constitutionprotects, is grounded on the idea that, at least in the academy, free inquiry unburdened by the constraints of orthodoxy will lead to the development of new ideas and knowledge. Notwithstanding their different scopes, both freedom of speech and academic freedom rest on the bedrock belief that ideas and arguments ought to be evaluated on their substance. The essence of both kinds of freedom is the opportunity to persuade others of the merits of one’s argument, rather than the use of power to coerce others into acceding to the proponent’s point of view. Sometimes the heat and passion of political protests on college campuses causes these basic principles to be overlooked or ignored. When that happens, it is important for us to go back to what freedom of speech and academic freedom really mean and how easily both of these principles can be misused and misinterpreted. Governments Can and Should Prohibit Certain Obstructive Conduct The short of the matter is that blockading, obstructing, assaulting, destroying property, and making threats, are not, in any stretch of the imagination, constitutionally protected things to do, no matter what the objective behind them. These activities are conduct the government has always had the legitimate authority to proscribe because they so obviously interfere with the liberty and lawful pursuits of others. As the Supreme Court of California stated in an important free speech case,In Re Kay: [T]he state retains a legitimate concern in ensuring that some individuals unruly assertion of their rights of free expression does not imperil other citizen’s rights of free association and discussion. … Freedom of everyone to talk at once can destroy the right of anyone effectively to talk at all. Free expression can expire as tragically in the tumult of license as in the silence of censorship. Government actions to prohibit blockades or obstruction have been held to be permissible under the First Amendment too many times to count. To cite just one example, a federal law, the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act (FACE), that prohibits anyone from physically obstructing any person from obtaining or providing reproductive health services, has been upheld repeatedly against constitutional challenge, and those cases raise harder questions than do generic obstruction laws because FACE targets specific places where protestors with particular messages may be expected. Blockades and obstructions can and should be prohibited consistent with the First Amendment primarily because they are not intended to and do not persuade anyone of the merits of the protestors’ position. They are employed to coerce third parties to change their behavior, not their minds. As such, they are actually antithetical to, rather than in furtherance of, the values on which freedom of speech and academic freedom are grounded — a commitment to the power of ideas rather than the use of force to change the way that people act. Creative But Unavailing Counterarguments In recent weeks, I have heard defenders of those who obstruct conservative speakers make two novel but completely unconvincing arguments. First, the obstruction defenders try to invoke the civil rights movement by pointing out that Martin Luther King, Jr. and his supporters were often guilty of civil disobedience—that is violating duly enacted laws. But this analogy is unavailing because King and his followers were violating laws that were (in the eyes of the protestors and many others) themselves unjust, not laws that were completely unobjectionable but simply stood in the way of the desires of the violators. Another distinction between the two settings is that to the extent that civil rights protestors violated laws regulating their political activity, they were violating laws in order to be heard themselves, not in order to prevent others from being heard. But today’s obstructors cannot credibly complain that they cannot be heard; they simply want others not to be listened to. The second creative yet deeply flawed argument I’ve heard in defense of the obstructors is the idea that controversial speakers of the kind who are being suppressed are themselves not appropriate speakers to be invited to university settings because they are not sufficiently academic in character. Putting aside the fact that these speakers were invited (whether they ought to have been or not), and putting aside whether some of these speakers do have some academic bona fides (even if their ideas are often very wrong-headed), this argument mischaracterizes the kind of speakers who belong at universities. Higher education is a place not just to sharpen one’s critical thinking skills through exposure to brilliant academics who make data-informed arguments in multiple directions; it is also a place where one should learn how to become a full citizen in American society. As the Supreme Court observed in the context of high school students in Tinker v. Des Moines Independent School District, this often means that students need to engage each other on the contentious political issues of the day. And in today’s college world this sometimes means hearing and evaluating strident political advocates, some of whom even border on demagoguery. To be sure, student and faculty organizations should give some thought (perhaps more thought than they currently do) to the question of whom they invite to speak on campus—certainly not everyone should be offered a platform—but many campus speakers, on the Left as well as the Right, are not particularly grounded in rigorous theoretical or empirical analysis, and this does not mean that they are per se inappropriate speakers for college audiences. Again, colleges should be preparing young people not just to navigate the economy, but also to navigate democracy. And, for better or worse, modern democracy means having to deal with a lot of ideas that are widely held even though they don’t hold up to analytic rigor. Debunking those ideas—not shouting them down or trying to suppress their expression—is what I want my students to learn how to do. [https://justatic.com/v/20170601a/verdict/images/authors/thumbs/amar.jpg] Follow @prof_amar Vikram David Amar is the Iwan Foundation Professor of Law and the Dean at the University of Illinois College of Law. Previously, he served as the Associate Dean for Academic Affairs and Professor of Law at the University of California, Davis School of Law. He is a 1988 graduate of the Yale Law School and a former clerk to Justice Harry Blackmun. He is a co-author, along with William Cohen and Jonathan Varat, of a major constitutional law casebook, and a co-author of several volumes of the Wright & Miller treatise on federal practice and procedure. Before teaching, Professor Amar spent a few years at the firm of Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher. RECENT ARTICLES SUPREME COURT RULES THAT CITIZENSHIP MUST BE EQUALLY HERITABLE THROUGH FATHERS AND MOTHERS Cornell University law professor Michael C. Dorf comments on a recent decision by the U.S. Supreme Court on the heritability of citizenship and explains why the decision might have implications for other immigration issues, such as the “Muslim ban” executive order. Dorf argues that the precedents the Court had to distinguish to reach its conclusion might give some insight into whether and how it might defer to other political branches on immigration issues.... Read More TRUMP IS NOT READY TO DEAL WITH HIS LEGAL PROBLEMS John W. Dean, former counsel to President Nixon, reflects on the much-anticipated testimony of former FBI Director James Comey before the Senate Intelligence Committee on Thursday. Dean briefly summarizes the takeaways from Comey’s testimony and discusses the response by President Trump and his lawyer.... Read More ABSOLUTE POWER CORRUPTS ABSOLUTELY IN THE KEEPERS Marci A. Hamilton, a Fox Distinguished Scholar in the Fox Leadership Program at the University of Pennsylvania and CEO of CHILD USA, encourages everyone to watch the Netflix docuseries The Keepers, which addresses child sex abuse in the Catholic Church. Hamilton describes the progress toward justice for child sex abuse victims, including the growing awareness of the pervasiveness the problem and increasing numbers of states who extend or eliminate statutes of limitations for these types of lawsuits and prosecutions....Read More [Forward this email.] Have friends who like law? Forward this email. [Like Verdict on Facebook] Like Verdict for legal discussions on Facebook. [Follow @verdictjustia on Twitter] Follow @verdictjustia for news and updates on Twitter. [Justia] Contact Us | Privacy Policy | Unsubscribe [Facebook][Twitter][LinkedIn][Justia][GooglePlus] You received this email because you have subscribed to the Verdict News E-Mail Feed. Justia | 1380 Pear Ave, Suite 2B, Mountain View, CA 94043 ________________________________ ________________________________ 1 Behind me at Harvard Law School, Killer Koh was President Obama’s War Consigliere and Droner-in-Chief. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Sat Jun 17 12:46:10 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2017 12:46:10 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Law School Off Campus! Message-ID: A generation ago Belden and I were both Veterans of the CIA Off Campus Movement here, Belden actually being arrested by the University Police because of his act of courage, integrity and principle challenging the CIA presence on this Campus. Well I am now starting a new Movement: Law School Off Campus! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Saturday, June 17, 2017 7:30 AM To: Karen Aram Cc: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Subject: RE: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 I trust you can all comprehend how much Evil this law school has inflicted after five years of direct and personal control by the CIA, Mossad, Moore,Hurd, and Torture. Killer Koh is only the tip of the iceberg. This Law School is a Cancer eating away at the Heart of this Campus and of our Good Community, where I have lived, taught and raised my family since July of 1978 when I first moved here from Boston.Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Friday, June 16, 2017 11:35 AM To: Karen Aram > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: RE: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 In other words, for five years CIA/Mossad/Torture ran this Law School and Everyone and Everything about it. So of course we ended up with Killer Koh on October 28, 2016. Plus ca change….fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Friday, June 16, 2017 11:22 AM To: Karen Aram > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: RE: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 And during the Five Year Tenure of Torture-Mongerers/CIA/Mossad/MichaelMoore/Dean HurricaneHeidiHurd, they brought onto this Faculty people as Evil as they are. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Friday, June 16, 2017 9:08 AM To: Karen Aram > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: RE: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 If you want to read all about the Criminal Dirty Work performed by Harvard Law Obama’s Harvard/Yale Law Mafia including Killary and Killer Koh you should see Charlie Savage: Power Wars (770 pages)—the Nazis had their Lawyers and their Law Professors and their Law Schools too. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 7:33 PM To: Karen Aram > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: RE: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 I was astonished over a year ago, before I’d ever heard of “Killer Koh,” to attend a lecture on “The legitimacy of targeted killing” in relation to our drone warfare, at the U of I Law School. It was clearly a charade to present drones as legitimate in spite of International law and US laws of due process. Yeah, if I remember correctly, I think that might have been the Dirty Work of Fired and Disgraced Dean Heidi Hurd’s Consort Michael Moore, who bragged that he works for the CIA and the Mossad-- and both of whom have stunk up this Campus and this Community for years by publicly advocating Torture. Moore also publicly congratulated everyone for bringing in Killer Koh after I had done everything humanly possible to stop them. As I said, this Law School is EVIL INCARNATE! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Karen Aram [mailto:karenaram at hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 7:22 PM To: Boyle, Francis A > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: Re: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 It does make sense that the law schools connected with Yale and Harvard would be “evil” given law schools are the first academic institution that the oligarchs controlling our government, would by necessity need to corrupt, in order to control the masses. I was astonished over a year ago, before I’d ever heard of “Killer Koh,” to attend a lecture on “The legitimacy of targeted killing” in relation to our drone warfare, at the U of I Law School. It was clearly a charade to present drones as legitimate in spite of International law and US laws of due process. Again, I had almost a year later, the frustration of attending a lecture by Dean Amar’s brother, a constitutional law professor from Yale, on “Freedom of Speech”, The lecture had nothing to do with freedom of speech, it was a promotion of his book and Hillary as well as local Democrats, along with an attempt to portray Obama in a good light. Then “killer Koh” Hillary’s advisor on drone warfare, being brought to the U of I as a representative of the “law” and speaking on human rights, to law students? Sometimes, too much is too much for sensible minds. On Jun 15, 2017, at 17:06, Boyle, Francis A > wrote: Well at least we all stood up against this Evil Law School on October 28. But from what Amar is saying here, I am sure we will have to do so again. So stay tuned. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Karen Aram [mailto:karenaram at hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 5:13 PM To: Boyle, Francis A > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: Re: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 Our government is evil, and if we the people don’t stop them from the wars and killings, then we are complicit in their warcrimes. On Jun 15, 2017, at 15:07, Boyle, Francis A > wrote: This Law School is EVIL! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 10:38 AM To: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; Karen Aram >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: FW: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 Sure. Let’s bring the War Criminal, Murderer, Felon, Bigot, Racist and Genocidaire Killer Koh into our Law School on October 28, 2016, hold him up as a Role Model to our Law Students, and then turn our Law Students into War Criminals, Murderers, Felons, Bigots, Racists and Genocidaires just like Killer Koh. Fab. Diss-Ode to Harold Killer Koh1 Harold Killer Koh Killing Babies where he go Muslim life is cheap you see Jewish life too for the Nazi Carl Schmitt Professor of Law At the Yale Law School Boot-licking Gene Rostow Of the infamous Rostow Brothers Who gave us Vietnam Genociding “gooks” too Obama’s War Consigliere Gene and his “kids” for LBJ Some things never change for Dems And their Elite Law School Whores Today At Harvard Law School too Where Killers Obama and Koh First dropped their pooh Along with “Judge” Davey Barron too Obama’s Droner-in-Chief Destined for a Cell in The Hague Right next to his student John Yoo A Chip off of Harold’s Old Block Cold-blooded Killers and War Criminals too Killer Koh disteaching “human rights” at N.Y.U. Supported by his gang of Dem law prof thugs Beating up on the N.Y.U. law students few With the courage, integrity, and principles to say Never again! Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Justia Verdict [mailto:verdictsupport at justia.com] Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 10:09 AM To: Boyle, Francis A > Subject: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 Illinois Law dean and professor Vikram David Amar laments recent instances of censored speech, particularly on university campuses, and reminds us that freedom of speech and academic freedom protect even those speakers whose message might be perceived odious, racist, sexist, or hateful. Amar points out that both freedom of speech and academic freedom are rooted in the principle that ideas and arguments ought to be evaluated on their substance and that the essence of both kinds of freedom is the opportunity to persuade others of the merits of one's argument, rather than the use of power to coerce or silence others. Click here to view in your browser if you are having trouble viewing this email. [Verdict - Legal Analysis and commentary from Justia.] Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom Vikram David Amar Jun 15, 2017 [https://i2.wp.com/verdict.justia.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/IMG_0590.jpg?quality=90&resize=426%2C350&strip=all&fit=1000%25&ssl=1] It distresses me to see episodes these days in which speakers who are controversial for their conservative or ultra-conservative views are prevented from delivering invited remarks at universities (including public universities) because protestors choose to violate laws designed to protect public safety. It also distresses me to see so few liberal analysts decry how illiberal these episodes of group-imposed censorship are. As I have written at length elsewhere, no matter how repressive or otherwise abhorrent a speaker’s message, the appropriate response under our Constitution is counter speech, not shouting down or physically obstructing or threatening the speaker or the speaker’s audience. To be sure, protesting a speaker’s presence—registering profound objection to a speaker’s viewpoint—is perfectly appropriate and has a rich tradition dating from even before the 1960s free speech revolution through the Occupy movement. But what we have seen over the past several months is a transition from protesting against bad speakers to preventing them from being able to speak, and that is not acceptable. An unflinching commitment to freedom of speech—even odious, racist, sexist, hateful speech—is the cornerstone of constitutional democracy in the United States. Certainly we protect freedom of speech more vigorously than any other western democracy. We also have a venerable tradition of respecting academic freedom at colleges and universities. These two principles, freedom of speech and academic freedom, overlap and are interconnected, even as they are distinct ideas. Freedom of speech is a broadly applicable right codified in the federal First Amendment and state constitutional analogues that protects speakers both on and off public campuses from unwarranted government interference with expression. Academic freedom, which may extend beyond what the Constitutionprotects, is grounded on the idea that, at least in the academy, free inquiry unburdened by the constraints of orthodoxy will lead to the development of new ideas and knowledge. Notwithstanding their different scopes, both freedom of speech and academic freedom rest on the bedrock belief that ideas and arguments ought to be evaluated on their substance. The essence of both kinds of freedom is the opportunity to persuade others of the merits of one’s argument, rather than the use of power to coerce others into acceding to the proponent’s point of view. Sometimes the heat and passion of political protests on college campuses causes these basic principles to be overlooked or ignored. When that happens, it is important for us to go back to what freedom of speech and academic freedom really mean and how easily both of these principles can be misused and misinterpreted. Governments Can and Should Prohibit Certain Obstructive Conduct The short of the matter is that blockading, obstructing, assaulting, destroying property, and making threats, are not, in any stretch of the imagination, constitutionally protected things to do, no matter what the objective behind them. These activities are conduct the government has always had the legitimate authority to proscribe because they so obviously interfere with the liberty and lawful pursuits of others. As the Supreme Court of California stated in an important free speech case,In Re Kay: [T]he state retains a legitimate concern in ensuring that some individuals unruly assertion of their rights of free expression does not imperil other citizen’s rights of free association and discussion. … Freedom of everyone to talk at once can destroy the right of anyone effectively to talk at all. Free expression can expire as tragically in the tumult of license as in the silence of censorship. Government actions to prohibit blockades or obstruction have been held to be permissible under the First Amendment too many times to count. To cite just one example, a federal law, the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act (FACE), that prohibits anyone from physically obstructing any person from obtaining or providing reproductive health services, has been upheld repeatedly against constitutional challenge, and those cases raise harder questions than do generic obstruction laws because FACE targets specific places where protestors with particular messages may be expected. Blockades and obstructions can and should be prohibited consistent with the First Amendment primarily because they are not intended to and do not persuade anyone of the merits of the protestors’ position. They are employed to coerce third parties to change their behavior, not their minds. As such, they are actually antithetical to, rather than in furtherance of, the values on which freedom of speech and academic freedom are grounded — a commitment to the power of ideas rather than the use of force to change the way that people act. Creative But Unavailing Counterarguments In recent weeks, I have heard defenders of those who obstruct conservative speakers make two novel but completely unconvincing arguments. First, the obstruction defenders try to invoke the civil rights movement by pointing out that Martin Luther King, Jr. and his supporters were often guilty of civil disobedience—that is violating duly enacted laws. But this analogy is unavailing because King and his followers were violating laws that were (in the eyes of the protestors and many others) themselves unjust, not laws that were completely unobjectionable but simply stood in the way of the desires of the violators. Another distinction between the two settings is that to the extent that civil rights protestors violated laws regulating their political activity, they were violating laws in order to be heard themselves, not in order to prevent others from being heard. But today’s obstructors cannot credibly complain that they cannot be heard; they simply want others not to be listened to. The second creative yet deeply flawed argument I’ve heard in defense of the obstructors is the idea that controversial speakers of the kind who are being suppressed are themselves not appropriate speakers to be invited to university settings because they are not sufficiently academic in character. Putting aside the fact that these speakers were invited (whether they ought to have been or not), and putting aside whether some of these speakers do have some academic bona fides (even if their ideas are often very wrong-headed), this argument mischaracterizes the kind of speakers who belong at universities. Higher education is a place not just to sharpen one’s critical thinking skills through exposure to brilliant academics who make data-informed arguments in multiple directions; it is also a place where one should learn how to become a full citizen in American society. As the Supreme Court observed in the context of high school students in Tinker v. Des Moines Independent School District, this often means that students need to engage each other on the contentious political issues of the day. And in today’s college world this sometimes means hearing and evaluating strident political advocates, some of whom even border on demagoguery. To be sure, student and faculty organizations should give some thought (perhaps more thought than they currently do) to the question of whom they invite to speak on campus—certainly not everyone should be offered a platform—but many campus speakers, on the Left as well as the Right, are not particularly grounded in rigorous theoretical or empirical analysis, and this does not mean that they are per se inappropriate speakers for college audiences. Again, colleges should be preparing young people not just to navigate the economy, but also to navigate democracy. And, for better or worse, modern democracy means having to deal with a lot of ideas that are widely held even though they don’t hold up to analytic rigor. Debunking those ideas—not shouting them down or trying to suppress their expression—is what I want my students to learn how to do. [https://justatic.com/v/20170601a/verdict/images/authors/thumbs/amar.jpg] Follow @prof_amar Vikram David Amar is the Iwan Foundation Professor of Law and the Dean at the University of Illinois College of Law. Previously, he served as the Associate Dean for Academic Affairs and Professor of Law at the University of California, Davis School of Law. He is a 1988 graduate of the Yale Law School and a former clerk to Justice Harry Blackmun. He is a co-author, along with William Cohen and Jonathan Varat, of a major constitutional law casebook, and a co-author of several volumes of the Wright & Miller treatise on federal practice and procedure. Before teaching, Professor Amar spent a few years at the firm of Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher. RECENT ARTICLES SUPREME COURT RULES THAT CITIZENSHIP MUST BE EQUALLY HERITABLE THROUGH FATHERS AND MOTHERS Cornell University law professor Michael C. Dorf comments on a recent decision by the U.S. Supreme Court on the heritability of citizenship and explains why the decision might have implications for other immigration issues, such as the “Muslim ban” executive order. Dorf argues that the precedents the Court had to distinguish to reach its conclusion might give some insight into whether and how it might defer to other political branches on immigration issues.... Read More TRUMP IS NOT READY TO DEAL WITH HIS LEGAL PROBLEMS John W. Dean, former counsel to President Nixon, reflects on the much-anticipated testimony of former FBI Director James Comey before the Senate Intelligence Committee on Thursday. Dean briefly summarizes the takeaways from Comey’s testimony and discusses the response by President Trump and his lawyer.... Read More ABSOLUTE POWER CORRUPTS ABSOLUTELY IN THE KEEPERS Marci A. Hamilton, a Fox Distinguished Scholar in the Fox Leadership Program at the University of Pennsylvania and CEO of CHILD USA, encourages everyone to watch the Netflix docuseries The Keepers, which addresses child sex abuse in the Catholic Church. Hamilton describes the progress toward justice for child sex abuse victims, including the growing awareness of the pervasiveness the problem and increasing numbers of states who extend or eliminate statutes of limitations for these types of lawsuits and prosecutions....Read More [Forward this email.] Have friends who like law? Forward this email. [Like Verdict on Facebook] Like Verdict for legal discussions on Facebook. [Follow @verdictjustia on Twitter] Follow @verdictjustia for news and updates on Twitter. [Justia] Contact Us | Privacy Policy | Unsubscribe [Facebook][Twitter][LinkedIn][Justia][GooglePlus] You received this email because you have subscribed to the Verdict News E-Mail Feed. Justia | 1380 Pear Ave, Suite 2B, Mountain View, CA 94043 ________________________________ ________________________________ 1 Behind me at Harvard Law School, Killer Koh was President Obama’s War Consigliere and Droner-in-Chief. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Sat Jun 17 12:46:10 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2017 12:46:10 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Law School Off Campus! Message-ID: A generation ago Belden and I were both Veterans of the CIA Off Campus Movement here, Belden actually being arrested by the University Police because of his act of courage, integrity and principle challenging the CIA presence on this Campus. Well I am now starting a new Movement: Law School Off Campus! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Saturday, June 17, 2017 7:30 AM To: Karen Aram Cc: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Subject: RE: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 I trust you can all comprehend how much Evil this law school has inflicted after five years of direct and personal control by the CIA, Mossad, Moore,Hurd, and Torture. Killer Koh is only the tip of the iceberg. This Law School is a Cancer eating away at the Heart of this Campus and of our Good Community, where I have lived, taught and raised my family since July of 1978 when I first moved here from Boston.Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Friday, June 16, 2017 11:35 AM To: Karen Aram > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: RE: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 In other words, for five years CIA/Mossad/Torture ran this Law School and Everyone and Everything about it. So of course we ended up with Killer Koh on October 28, 2016. Plus ca change….fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Friday, June 16, 2017 11:22 AM To: Karen Aram > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: RE: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 And during the Five Year Tenure of Torture-Mongerers/CIA/Mossad/MichaelMoore/Dean HurricaneHeidiHurd, they brought onto this Faculty people as Evil as they are. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Friday, June 16, 2017 9:08 AM To: Karen Aram > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: RE: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 If you want to read all about the Criminal Dirty Work performed by Harvard Law Obama’s Harvard/Yale Law Mafia including Killary and Killer Koh you should see Charlie Savage: Power Wars (770 pages)—the Nazis had their Lawyers and their Law Professors and their Law Schools too. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 7:33 PM To: Karen Aram > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: RE: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 I was astonished over a year ago, before I’d ever heard of “Killer Koh,” to attend a lecture on “The legitimacy of targeted killing” in relation to our drone warfare, at the U of I Law School. It was clearly a charade to present drones as legitimate in spite of International law and US laws of due process. Yeah, if I remember correctly, I think that might have been the Dirty Work of Fired and Disgraced Dean Heidi Hurd’s Consort Michael Moore, who bragged that he works for the CIA and the Mossad-- and both of whom have stunk up this Campus and this Community for years by publicly advocating Torture. Moore also publicly congratulated everyone for bringing in Killer Koh after I had done everything humanly possible to stop them. As I said, this Law School is EVIL INCARNATE! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Karen Aram [mailto:karenaram at hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 7:22 PM To: Boyle, Francis A > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: Re: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 It does make sense that the law schools connected with Yale and Harvard would be “evil” given law schools are the first academic institution that the oligarchs controlling our government, would by necessity need to corrupt, in order to control the masses. I was astonished over a year ago, before I’d ever heard of “Killer Koh,” to attend a lecture on “The legitimacy of targeted killing” in relation to our drone warfare, at the U of I Law School. It was clearly a charade to present drones as legitimate in spite of International law and US laws of due process. Again, I had almost a year later, the frustration of attending a lecture by Dean Amar’s brother, a constitutional law professor from Yale, on “Freedom of Speech”, The lecture had nothing to do with freedom of speech, it was a promotion of his book and Hillary as well as local Democrats, along with an attempt to portray Obama in a good light. Then “killer Koh” Hillary’s advisor on drone warfare, being brought to the U of I as a representative of the “law” and speaking on human rights, to law students? Sometimes, too much is too much for sensible minds. On Jun 15, 2017, at 17:06, Boyle, Francis A > wrote: Well at least we all stood up against this Evil Law School on October 28. But from what Amar is saying here, I am sure we will have to do so again. So stay tuned. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Karen Aram [mailto:karenaram at hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 5:13 PM To: Boyle, Francis A > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: Re: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 Our government is evil, and if we the people don’t stop them from the wars and killings, then we are complicit in their warcrimes. On Jun 15, 2017, at 15:07, Boyle, Francis A > wrote: This Law School is EVIL! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 10:38 AM To: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; Karen Aram >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: FW: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 Sure. Let’s bring the War Criminal, Murderer, Felon, Bigot, Racist and Genocidaire Killer Koh into our Law School on October 28, 2016, hold him up as a Role Model to our Law Students, and then turn our Law Students into War Criminals, Murderers, Felons, Bigots, Racists and Genocidaires just like Killer Koh. Fab. Diss-Ode to Harold Killer Koh1 Harold Killer Koh Killing Babies where he go Muslim life is cheap you see Jewish life too for the Nazi Carl Schmitt Professor of Law At the Yale Law School Boot-licking Gene Rostow Of the infamous Rostow Brothers Who gave us Vietnam Genociding “gooks” too Obama’s War Consigliere Gene and his “kids” for LBJ Some things never change for Dems And their Elite Law School Whores Today At Harvard Law School too Where Killers Obama and Koh First dropped their pooh Along with “Judge” Davey Barron too Obama’s Droner-in-Chief Destined for a Cell in The Hague Right next to his student John Yoo A Chip off of Harold’s Old Block Cold-blooded Killers and War Criminals too Killer Koh disteaching “human rights” at N.Y.U. Supported by his gang of Dem law prof thugs Beating up on the N.Y.U. law students few With the courage, integrity, and principles to say Never again! Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Justia Verdict [mailto:verdictsupport at justia.com] Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 10:09 AM To: Boyle, Francis A > Subject: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 Illinois Law dean and professor Vikram David Amar laments recent instances of censored speech, particularly on university campuses, and reminds us that freedom of speech and academic freedom protect even those speakers whose message might be perceived odious, racist, sexist, or hateful. Amar points out that both freedom of speech and academic freedom are rooted in the principle that ideas and arguments ought to be evaluated on their substance and that the essence of both kinds of freedom is the opportunity to persuade others of the merits of one's argument, rather than the use of power to coerce or silence others. Click here to view in your browser if you are having trouble viewing this email. [Verdict - Legal Analysis and commentary from Justia.] Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom Vikram David Amar Jun 15, 2017 [https://i2.wp.com/verdict.justia.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/IMG_0590.jpg?quality=90&resize=426%2C350&strip=all&fit=1000%25&ssl=1] It distresses me to see episodes these days in which speakers who are controversial for their conservative or ultra-conservative views are prevented from delivering invited remarks at universities (including public universities) because protestors choose to violate laws designed to protect public safety. It also distresses me to see so few liberal analysts decry how illiberal these episodes of group-imposed censorship are. As I have written at length elsewhere, no matter how repressive or otherwise abhorrent a speaker’s message, the appropriate response under our Constitution is counter speech, not shouting down or physically obstructing or threatening the speaker or the speaker’s audience. To be sure, protesting a speaker’s presence—registering profound objection to a speaker’s viewpoint—is perfectly appropriate and has a rich tradition dating from even before the 1960s free speech revolution through the Occupy movement. But what we have seen over the past several months is a transition from protesting against bad speakers to preventing them from being able to speak, and that is not acceptable. An unflinching commitment to freedom of speech—even odious, racist, sexist, hateful speech—is the cornerstone of constitutional democracy in the United States. Certainly we protect freedom of speech more vigorously than any other western democracy. We also have a venerable tradition of respecting academic freedom at colleges and universities. These two principles, freedom of speech and academic freedom, overlap and are interconnected, even as they are distinct ideas. Freedom of speech is a broadly applicable right codified in the federal First Amendment and state constitutional analogues that protects speakers both on and off public campuses from unwarranted government interference with expression. Academic freedom, which may extend beyond what the Constitutionprotects, is grounded on the idea that, at least in the academy, free inquiry unburdened by the constraints of orthodoxy will lead to the development of new ideas and knowledge. Notwithstanding their different scopes, both freedom of speech and academic freedom rest on the bedrock belief that ideas and arguments ought to be evaluated on their substance. The essence of both kinds of freedom is the opportunity to persuade others of the merits of one’s argument, rather than the use of power to coerce others into acceding to the proponent’s point of view. Sometimes the heat and passion of political protests on college campuses causes these basic principles to be overlooked or ignored. When that happens, it is important for us to go back to what freedom of speech and academic freedom really mean and how easily both of these principles can be misused and misinterpreted. Governments Can and Should Prohibit Certain Obstructive Conduct The short of the matter is that blockading, obstructing, assaulting, destroying property, and making threats, are not, in any stretch of the imagination, constitutionally protected things to do, no matter what the objective behind them. These activities are conduct the government has always had the legitimate authority to proscribe because they so obviously interfere with the liberty and lawful pursuits of others. As the Supreme Court of California stated in an important free speech case,In Re Kay: [T]he state retains a legitimate concern in ensuring that some individuals unruly assertion of their rights of free expression does not imperil other citizen’s rights of free association and discussion. … Freedom of everyone to talk at once can destroy the right of anyone effectively to talk at all. Free expression can expire as tragically in the tumult of license as in the silence of censorship. Government actions to prohibit blockades or obstruction have been held to be permissible under the First Amendment too many times to count. To cite just one example, a federal law, the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act (FACE), that prohibits anyone from physically obstructing any person from obtaining or providing reproductive health services, has been upheld repeatedly against constitutional challenge, and those cases raise harder questions than do generic obstruction laws because FACE targets specific places where protestors with particular messages may be expected. Blockades and obstructions can and should be prohibited consistent with the First Amendment primarily because they are not intended to and do not persuade anyone of the merits of the protestors’ position. They are employed to coerce third parties to change their behavior, not their minds. As such, they are actually antithetical to, rather than in furtherance of, the values on which freedom of speech and academic freedom are grounded — a commitment to the power of ideas rather than the use of force to change the way that people act. Creative But Unavailing Counterarguments In recent weeks, I have heard defenders of those who obstruct conservative speakers make two novel but completely unconvincing arguments. First, the obstruction defenders try to invoke the civil rights movement by pointing out that Martin Luther King, Jr. and his supporters were often guilty of civil disobedience—that is violating duly enacted laws. But this analogy is unavailing because King and his followers were violating laws that were (in the eyes of the protestors and many others) themselves unjust, not laws that were completely unobjectionable but simply stood in the way of the desires of the violators. Another distinction between the two settings is that to the extent that civil rights protestors violated laws regulating their political activity, they were violating laws in order to be heard themselves, not in order to prevent others from being heard. But today’s obstructors cannot credibly complain that they cannot be heard; they simply want others not to be listened to. The second creative yet deeply flawed argument I’ve heard in defense of the obstructors is the idea that controversial speakers of the kind who are being suppressed are themselves not appropriate speakers to be invited to university settings because they are not sufficiently academic in character. Putting aside the fact that these speakers were invited (whether they ought to have been or not), and putting aside whether some of these speakers do have some academic bona fides (even if their ideas are often very wrong-headed), this argument mischaracterizes the kind of speakers who belong at universities. Higher education is a place not just to sharpen one’s critical thinking skills through exposure to brilliant academics who make data-informed arguments in multiple directions; it is also a place where one should learn how to become a full citizen in American society. As the Supreme Court observed in the context of high school students in Tinker v. Des Moines Independent School District, this often means that students need to engage each other on the contentious political issues of the day. And in today’s college world this sometimes means hearing and evaluating strident political advocates, some of whom even border on demagoguery. To be sure, student and faculty organizations should give some thought (perhaps more thought than they currently do) to the question of whom they invite to speak on campus—certainly not everyone should be offered a platform—but many campus speakers, on the Left as well as the Right, are not particularly grounded in rigorous theoretical or empirical analysis, and this does not mean that they are per se inappropriate speakers for college audiences. Again, colleges should be preparing young people not just to navigate the economy, but also to navigate democracy. And, for better or worse, modern democracy means having to deal with a lot of ideas that are widely held even though they don’t hold up to analytic rigor. Debunking those ideas—not shouting them down or trying to suppress their expression—is what I want my students to learn how to do. [https://justatic.com/v/20170601a/verdict/images/authors/thumbs/amar.jpg] Follow @prof_amar Vikram David Amar is the Iwan Foundation Professor of Law and the Dean at the University of Illinois College of Law. Previously, he served as the Associate Dean for Academic Affairs and Professor of Law at the University of California, Davis School of Law. He is a 1988 graduate of the Yale Law School and a former clerk to Justice Harry Blackmun. He is a co-author, along with William Cohen and Jonathan Varat, of a major constitutional law casebook, and a co-author of several volumes of the Wright & Miller treatise on federal practice and procedure. Before teaching, Professor Amar spent a few years at the firm of Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher. RECENT ARTICLES SUPREME COURT RULES THAT CITIZENSHIP MUST BE EQUALLY HERITABLE THROUGH FATHERS AND MOTHERS Cornell University law professor Michael C. Dorf comments on a recent decision by the U.S. Supreme Court on the heritability of citizenship and explains why the decision might have implications for other immigration issues, such as the “Muslim ban” executive order. Dorf argues that the precedents the Court had to distinguish to reach its conclusion might give some insight into whether and how it might defer to other political branches on immigration issues.... Read More TRUMP IS NOT READY TO DEAL WITH HIS LEGAL PROBLEMS John W. Dean, former counsel to President Nixon, reflects on the much-anticipated testimony of former FBI Director James Comey before the Senate Intelligence Committee on Thursday. Dean briefly summarizes the takeaways from Comey’s testimony and discusses the response by President Trump and his lawyer.... Read More ABSOLUTE POWER CORRUPTS ABSOLUTELY IN THE KEEPERS Marci A. Hamilton, a Fox Distinguished Scholar in the Fox Leadership Program at the University of Pennsylvania and CEO of CHILD USA, encourages everyone to watch the Netflix docuseries The Keepers, which addresses child sex abuse in the Catholic Church. Hamilton describes the progress toward justice for child sex abuse victims, including the growing awareness of the pervasiveness the problem and increasing numbers of states who extend or eliminate statutes of limitations for these types of lawsuits and prosecutions....Read More [Forward this email.] Have friends who like law? Forward this email. [Like Verdict on Facebook] Like Verdict for legal discussions on Facebook. [Follow @verdictjustia on Twitter] Follow @verdictjustia for news and updates on Twitter. [Justia] Contact Us | Privacy Policy | Unsubscribe [Facebook][Twitter][LinkedIn][Justia][GooglePlus] You received this email because you have subscribed to the Verdict News E-Mail Feed. Justia | 1380 Pear Ave, Suite 2B, Mountain View, CA 94043 ________________________________ ________________________________ 1 Behind me at Harvard Law School, Killer Koh was President Obama’s War Consigliere and Droner-in-Chief. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Sat Jun 17 13:02:46 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2017 13:02:46 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Law School Off Campus! Message-ID: The College of Law Building is conveniently located at the far south end of the campus and to the immediate due north of the Graveyard—which is Emblematic after the Faculty brought in Killer Koh to justify the mass murder of thousands of Muslims/Arabs/Asians of Color—Men, Women, Children and the Elderly. So fine. Let us isolate and quarantine the College of Law and its Faculty around the Graveyard where they belong. Keep them off the rest of this Campus and this Community: Law School Off Campus! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Saturday, June 17, 2017 7:46 AM To: 'Karen Aram' Cc: 'David Green' ; 'sherwoodross10 at gmail.com' ; 'peace-discuss at anti-war.net' ; 'C. G. ESTABROOK' ; 'a-fields at uiuc.edu' ; Hoffman, Valerie J ; 'Joe Lauria' ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; 'Arlene Hickory' ; 'David Swanson' ; 'peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net' ; 'abass10 at gmail.com' ; 'mickalideh at gmail.com' ; 'Lina Thorne' ; 'chicago at worldcantwait.net' ; 'Jay' ; Estabrook, Carl G ; 'Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net' ; 'David Johnson' ; Mildred O'brien ; Belden Fields Subject: Law School Off Campus! A generation ago Belden and I were both Veterans of the CIA Off Campus Movement here, Belden actually being arrested by the University Police because of his act of courage, integrity and principle challenging the CIA presence on this Campus. Well I am now starting a new Movement: Law School Off Campus! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Saturday, June 17, 2017 7:30 AM To: Karen Aram > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: RE: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 I trust you can all comprehend how much Evil this law school has inflicted after five years of direct and personal control by the CIA, Mossad, Moore,Hurd, and Torture. Killer Koh is only the tip of the iceberg. This Law School is a Cancer eating away at the Heart of this Campus and of our Good Community, where I have lived, taught and raised my family since July of 1978 when I first moved here from Boston.Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Friday, June 16, 2017 11:35 AM To: Karen Aram > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: RE: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 In other words, for five years CIA/Mossad/Torture ran this Law School and Everyone and Everything about it. So of course we ended up with Killer Koh on October 28, 2016. Plus ca change….fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Friday, June 16, 2017 11:22 AM To: Karen Aram > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: RE: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 And during the Five Year Tenure of Torture-Mongerers/CIA/Mossad/MichaelMoore/Dean HurricaneHeidiHurd, they brought onto this Faculty people as Evil as they are. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Friday, June 16, 2017 9:08 AM To: Karen Aram > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: RE: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 If you want to read all about the Criminal Dirty Work performed by Harvard Law Obama’s Harvard/Yale Law Mafia including Killary and Killer Koh you should see Charlie Savage: Power Wars (770 pages)—the Nazis had their Lawyers and their Law Professors and their Law Schools too. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 7:33 PM To: Karen Aram > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: RE: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 I was astonished over a year ago, before I’d ever heard of “Killer Koh,” to attend a lecture on “The legitimacy of targeted killing” in relation to our drone warfare, at the U of I Law School. It was clearly a charade to present drones as legitimate in spite of International law and US laws of due process. Yeah, if I remember correctly, I think that might have been the Dirty Work of Fired and Disgraced Dean Heidi Hurd’s Consort Michael Moore, who bragged that he works for the CIA and the Mossad-- and both of whom have stunk up this Campus and this Community for years by publicly advocating Torture. Moore also publicly congratulated everyone for bringing in Killer Koh after I had done everything humanly possible to stop them. As I said, this Law School is EVIL INCARNATE! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Karen Aram [mailto:karenaram at hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 7:22 PM To: Boyle, Francis A > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: Re: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 It does make sense that the law schools connected with Yale and Harvard would be “evil” given law schools are the first academic institution that the oligarchs controlling our government, would by necessity need to corrupt, in order to control the masses. I was astonished over a year ago, before I’d ever heard of “Killer Koh,” to attend a lecture on “The legitimacy of targeted killing” in relation to our drone warfare, at the U of I Law School. It was clearly a charade to present drones as legitimate in spite of International law and US laws of due process. Again, I had almost a year later, the frustration of attending a lecture by Dean Amar’s brother, a constitutional law professor from Yale, on “Freedom of Speech”, The lecture had nothing to do with freedom of speech, it was a promotion of his book and Hillary as well as local Democrats, along with an attempt to portray Obama in a good light. Then “killer Koh” Hillary’s advisor on drone warfare, being brought to the U of I as a representative of the “law” and speaking on human rights, to law students? Sometimes, too much is too much for sensible minds. On Jun 15, 2017, at 17:06, Boyle, Francis A > wrote: Well at least we all stood up against this Evil Law School on October 28. But from what Amar is saying here, I am sure we will have to do so again. So stay tuned. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Karen Aram [mailto:karenaram at hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 5:13 PM To: Boyle, Francis A > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: Re: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 Our government is evil, and if we the people don’t stop them from the wars and killings, then we are complicit in their warcrimes. On Jun 15, 2017, at 15:07, Boyle, Francis A > wrote: This Law School is EVIL! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 10:38 AM To: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; Karen Aram >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: FW: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 Sure. Let’s bring the War Criminal, Murderer, Felon, Bigot, Racist and Genocidaire Killer Koh into our Law School on October 28, 2016, hold him up as a Role Model to our Law Students, and then turn our Law Students into War Criminals, Murderers, Felons, Bigots, Racists and Genocidaires just like Killer Koh. Fab. Diss-Ode to Harold Killer Koh1 Harold Killer Koh Killing Babies where he go Muslim life is cheap you see Jewish life too for the Nazi Carl Schmitt Professor of Law At the Yale Law School Boot-licking Gene Rostow Of the infamous Rostow Brothers Who gave us Vietnam Genociding “gooks” too Obama’s War Consigliere Gene and his “kids” for LBJ Some things never change for Dems And their Elite Law School Whores Today At Harvard Law School too Where Killers Obama and Koh First dropped their pooh Along with “Judge” Davey Barron too Obama’s Droner-in-Chief Destined for a Cell in The Hague Right next to his student John Yoo A Chip off of Harold’s Old Block Cold-blooded Killers and War Criminals too Killer Koh disteaching “human rights” at N.Y.U. Supported by his gang of Dem law prof thugs Beating up on the N.Y.U. law students few With the courage, integrity, and principles to say Never again! Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Justia Verdict [mailto:verdictsupport at justia.com] Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 10:09 AM To: Boyle, Francis A > Subject: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 Illinois Law dean and professor Vikram David Amar laments recent instances of censored speech, particularly on university campuses, and reminds us that freedom of speech and academic freedom protect even those speakers whose message might be perceived odious, racist, sexist, or hateful. Amar points out that both freedom of speech and academic freedom are rooted in the principle that ideas and arguments ought to be evaluated on their substance and that the essence of both kinds of freedom is the opportunity to persuade others of the merits of one's argument, rather than the use of power to coerce or silence others. Click here to view in your browser if you are having trouble viewing this email. [Verdict - Legal Analysis and commentary from Justia.] Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom Vikram David Amar Jun 15, 2017 [https://i2.wp.com/verdict.justia.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/IMG_0590.jpg?quality=90&resize=426%2C350&strip=all&fit=1000%25&ssl=1] It distresses me to see episodes these days in which speakers who are controversial for their conservative or ultra-conservative views are prevented from delivering invited remarks at universities (including public universities) because protestors choose to violate laws designed to protect public safety. It also distresses me to see so few liberal analysts decry how illiberal these episodes of group-imposed censorship are. As I have written at length elsewhere, no matter how repressive or otherwise abhorrent a speaker’s message, the appropriate response under our Constitution is counter speech, not shouting down or physically obstructing or threatening the speaker or the speaker’s audience. To be sure, protesting a speaker’s presence—registering profound objection to a speaker’s viewpoint—is perfectly appropriate and has a rich tradition dating from even before the 1960s free speech revolution through the Occupy movement. But what we have seen over the past several months is a transition from protesting against bad speakers to preventing them from being able to speak, and that is not acceptable. An unflinching commitment to freedom of speech—even odious, racist, sexist, hateful speech—is the cornerstone of constitutional democracy in the United States. Certainly we protect freedom of speech more vigorously than any other western democracy. We also have a venerable tradition of respecting academic freedom at colleges and universities. These two principles, freedom of speech and academic freedom, overlap and are interconnected, even as they are distinct ideas. Freedom of speech is a broadly applicable right codified in the federal First Amendment and state constitutional analogues that protects speakers both on and off public campuses from unwarranted government interference with expression. Academic freedom, which may extend beyond what the Constitutionprotects, is grounded on the idea that, at least in the academy, free inquiry unburdened by the constraints of orthodoxy will lead to the development of new ideas and knowledge. Notwithstanding their different scopes, both freedom of speech and academic freedom rest on the bedrock belief that ideas and arguments ought to be evaluated on their substance. The essence of both kinds of freedom is the opportunity to persuade others of the merits of one’s argument, rather than the use of power to coerce others into acceding to the proponent’s point of view. Sometimes the heat and passion of political protests on college campuses causes these basic principles to be overlooked or ignored. When that happens, it is important for us to go back to what freedom of speech and academic freedom really mean and how easily both of these principles can be misused and misinterpreted. Governments Can and Should Prohibit Certain Obstructive Conduct The short of the matter is that blockading, obstructing, assaulting, destroying property, and making threats, are not, in any stretch of the imagination, constitutionally protected things to do, no matter what the objective behind them. These activities are conduct the government has always had the legitimate authority to proscribe because they so obviously interfere with the liberty and lawful pursuits of others. As the Supreme Court of California stated in an important free speech case,In Re Kay: [T]he state retains a legitimate concern in ensuring that some individuals unruly assertion of their rights of free expression does not imperil other citizen’s rights of free association and discussion. … Freedom of everyone to talk at once can destroy the right of anyone effectively to talk at all. Free expression can expire as tragically in the tumult of license as in the silence of censorship. Government actions to prohibit blockades or obstruction have been held to be permissible under the First Amendment too many times to count. To cite just one example, a federal law, the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act (FACE), that prohibits anyone from physically obstructing any person from obtaining or providing reproductive health services, has been upheld repeatedly against constitutional challenge, and those cases raise harder questions than do generic obstruction laws because FACE targets specific places where protestors with particular messages may be expected. Blockades and obstructions can and should be prohibited consistent with the First Amendment primarily because they are not intended to and do not persuade anyone of the merits of the protestors’ position. They are employed to coerce third parties to change their behavior, not their minds. As such, they are actually antithetical to, rather than in furtherance of, the values on which freedom of speech and academic freedom are grounded — a commitment to the power of ideas rather than the use of force to change the way that people act. Creative But Unavailing Counterarguments In recent weeks, I have heard defenders of those who obstruct conservative speakers make two novel but completely unconvincing arguments. First, the obstruction defenders try to invoke the civil rights movement by pointing out that Martin Luther King, Jr. and his supporters were often guilty of civil disobedience—that is violating duly enacted laws. But this analogy is unavailing because King and his followers were violating laws that were (in the eyes of the protestors and many others) themselves unjust, not laws that were completely unobjectionable but simply stood in the way of the desires of the violators. Another distinction between the two settings is that to the extent that civil rights protestors violated laws regulating their political activity, they were violating laws in order to be heard themselves, not in order to prevent others from being heard. But today’s obstructors cannot credibly complain that they cannot be heard; they simply want others not to be listened to. The second creative yet deeply flawed argument I’ve heard in defense of the obstructors is the idea that controversial speakers of the kind who are being suppressed are themselves not appropriate speakers to be invited to university settings because they are not sufficiently academic in character. Putting aside the fact that these speakers were invited (whether they ought to have been or not), and putting aside whether some of these speakers do have some academic bona fides (even if their ideas are often very wrong-headed), this argument mischaracterizes the kind of speakers who belong at universities. Higher education is a place not just to sharpen one’s critical thinking skills through exposure to brilliant academics who make data-informed arguments in multiple directions; it is also a place where one should learn how to become a full citizen in American society. As the Supreme Court observed in the context of high school students in Tinker v. Des Moines Independent School District, this often means that students need to engage each other on the contentious political issues of the day. And in today’s college world this sometimes means hearing and evaluating strident political advocates, some of whom even border on demagoguery. To be sure, student and faculty organizations should give some thought (perhaps more thought than they currently do) to the question of whom they invite to speak on campus—certainly not everyone should be offered a platform—but many campus speakers, on the Left as well as the Right, are not particularly grounded in rigorous theoretical or empirical analysis, and this does not mean that they are per se inappropriate speakers for college audiences. Again, colleges should be preparing young people not just to navigate the economy, but also to navigate democracy. And, for better or worse, modern democracy means having to deal with a lot of ideas that are widely held even though they don’t hold up to analytic rigor. Debunking those ideas—not shouting them down or trying to suppress their expression—is what I want my students to learn how to do. [https://justatic.com/v/20170601a/verdict/images/authors/thumbs/amar.jpg] Follow @prof_amar Vikram David Amar is the Iwan Foundation Professor of Law and the Dean at the University of Illinois College of Law. Previously, he served as the Associate Dean for Academic Affairs and Professor of Law at the University of California, Davis School of Law. He is a 1988 graduate of the Yale Law School and a former clerk to Justice Harry Blackmun. He is a co-author, along with William Cohen and Jonathan Varat, of a major constitutional law casebook, and a co-author of several volumes of the Wright & Miller treatise on federal practice and procedure. Before teaching, Professor Amar spent a few years at the firm of Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher. RECENT ARTICLES SUPREME COURT RULES THAT CITIZENSHIP MUST BE EQUALLY HERITABLE THROUGH FATHERS AND MOTHERS Cornell University law professor Michael C. Dorf comments on a recent decision by the U.S. Supreme Court on the heritability of citizenship and explains why the decision might have implications for other immigration issues, such as the “Muslim ban” executive order. Dorf argues that the precedents the Court had to distinguish to reach its conclusion might give some insight into whether and how it might defer to other political branches on immigration issues.... Read More TRUMP IS NOT READY TO DEAL WITH HIS LEGAL PROBLEMS John W. Dean, former counsel to President Nixon, reflects on the much-anticipated testimony of former FBI Director James Comey before the Senate Intelligence Committee on Thursday. Dean briefly summarizes the takeaways from Comey’s testimony and discusses the response by President Trump and his lawyer.... Read More ABSOLUTE POWER CORRUPTS ABSOLUTELY IN THE KEEPERS Marci A. Hamilton, a Fox Distinguished Scholar in the Fox Leadership Program at the University of Pennsylvania and CEO of CHILD USA, encourages everyone to watch the Netflix docuseries The Keepers, which addresses child sex abuse in the Catholic Church. Hamilton describes the progress toward justice for child sex abuse victims, including the growing awareness of the pervasiveness the problem and increasing numbers of states who extend or eliminate statutes of limitations for these types of lawsuits and prosecutions....Read More [Forward this email.] Have friends who like law? Forward this email. [Like Verdict on Facebook] Like Verdict for legal discussions on Facebook. [Follow @verdictjustia on Twitter] Follow @verdictjustia for news and updates on Twitter. [Justia] Contact Us | Privacy Policy | Unsubscribe [Facebook][Twitter][LinkedIn][Justia][GooglePlus] You received this email because you have subscribed to the Verdict News E-Mail Feed. Justia | 1380 Pear Ave, Suite 2B, Mountain View, CA 94043 ________________________________ ________________________________ 1 Behind me at Harvard Law School, Killer Koh was President Obama’s War Consigliere and Droner-in-Chief. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Sat Jun 17 13:02:46 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2017 13:02:46 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Law School Off Campus! Message-ID: The College of Law Building is conveniently located at the far south end of the campus and to the immediate due north of the Graveyard—which is Emblematic after the Faculty brought in Killer Koh to justify the mass murder of thousands of Muslims/Arabs/Asians of Color—Men, Women, Children and the Elderly. So fine. Let us isolate and quarantine the College of Law and its Faculty around the Graveyard where they belong. Keep them off the rest of this Campus and this Community: Law School Off Campus! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Saturday, June 17, 2017 7:46 AM To: 'Karen Aram' Cc: 'David Green' ; 'sherwoodross10 at gmail.com' ; 'peace-discuss at anti-war.net' ; 'C. G. ESTABROOK' ; 'a-fields at uiuc.edu' ; Hoffman, Valerie J ; 'Joe Lauria' ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; 'Arlene Hickory' ; 'David Swanson' ; 'peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net' ; 'abass10 at gmail.com' ; 'mickalideh at gmail.com' ; 'Lina Thorne' ; 'chicago at worldcantwait.net' ; 'Jay' ; Estabrook, Carl G ; 'Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net' ; 'David Johnson' ; Mildred O'brien ; Belden Fields Subject: Law School Off Campus! A generation ago Belden and I were both Veterans of the CIA Off Campus Movement here, Belden actually being arrested by the University Police because of his act of courage, integrity and principle challenging the CIA presence on this Campus. Well I am now starting a new Movement: Law School Off Campus! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Saturday, June 17, 2017 7:30 AM To: Karen Aram > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: RE: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 I trust you can all comprehend how much Evil this law school has inflicted after five years of direct and personal control by the CIA, Mossad, Moore,Hurd, and Torture. Killer Koh is only the tip of the iceberg. This Law School is a Cancer eating away at the Heart of this Campus and of our Good Community, where I have lived, taught and raised my family since July of 1978 when I first moved here from Boston.Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Friday, June 16, 2017 11:35 AM To: Karen Aram > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: RE: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 In other words, for five years CIA/Mossad/Torture ran this Law School and Everyone and Everything about it. So of course we ended up with Killer Koh on October 28, 2016. Plus ca change….fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Friday, June 16, 2017 11:22 AM To: Karen Aram > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: RE: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 And during the Five Year Tenure of Torture-Mongerers/CIA/Mossad/MichaelMoore/Dean HurricaneHeidiHurd, they brought onto this Faculty people as Evil as they are. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Friday, June 16, 2017 9:08 AM To: Karen Aram > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: RE: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 If you want to read all about the Criminal Dirty Work performed by Harvard Law Obama’s Harvard/Yale Law Mafia including Killary and Killer Koh you should see Charlie Savage: Power Wars (770 pages)—the Nazis had their Lawyers and their Law Professors and their Law Schools too. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 7:33 PM To: Karen Aram > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: RE: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 I was astonished over a year ago, before I’d ever heard of “Killer Koh,” to attend a lecture on “The legitimacy of targeted killing” in relation to our drone warfare, at the U of I Law School. It was clearly a charade to present drones as legitimate in spite of International law and US laws of due process. Yeah, if I remember correctly, I think that might have been the Dirty Work of Fired and Disgraced Dean Heidi Hurd’s Consort Michael Moore, who bragged that he works for the CIA and the Mossad-- and both of whom have stunk up this Campus and this Community for years by publicly advocating Torture. Moore also publicly congratulated everyone for bringing in Killer Koh after I had done everything humanly possible to stop them. As I said, this Law School is EVIL INCARNATE! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Karen Aram [mailto:karenaram at hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 7:22 PM To: Boyle, Francis A > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: Re: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 It does make sense that the law schools connected with Yale and Harvard would be “evil” given law schools are the first academic institution that the oligarchs controlling our government, would by necessity need to corrupt, in order to control the masses. I was astonished over a year ago, before I’d ever heard of “Killer Koh,” to attend a lecture on “The legitimacy of targeted killing” in relation to our drone warfare, at the U of I Law School. It was clearly a charade to present drones as legitimate in spite of International law and US laws of due process. Again, I had almost a year later, the frustration of attending a lecture by Dean Amar’s brother, a constitutional law professor from Yale, on “Freedom of Speech”, The lecture had nothing to do with freedom of speech, it was a promotion of his book and Hillary as well as local Democrats, along with an attempt to portray Obama in a good light. Then “killer Koh” Hillary’s advisor on drone warfare, being brought to the U of I as a representative of the “law” and speaking on human rights, to law students? Sometimes, too much is too much for sensible minds. On Jun 15, 2017, at 17:06, Boyle, Francis A > wrote: Well at least we all stood up against this Evil Law School on October 28. But from what Amar is saying here, I am sure we will have to do so again. So stay tuned. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Karen Aram [mailto:karenaram at hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 5:13 PM To: Boyle, Francis A > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: Re: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 Our government is evil, and if we the people don’t stop them from the wars and killings, then we are complicit in their warcrimes. On Jun 15, 2017, at 15:07, Boyle, Francis A > wrote: This Law School is EVIL! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 10:38 AM To: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; Karen Aram >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: FW: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 Sure. Let’s bring the War Criminal, Murderer, Felon, Bigot, Racist and Genocidaire Killer Koh into our Law School on October 28, 2016, hold him up as a Role Model to our Law Students, and then turn our Law Students into War Criminals, Murderers, Felons, Bigots, Racists and Genocidaires just like Killer Koh. Fab. Diss-Ode to Harold Killer Koh1 Harold Killer Koh Killing Babies where he go Muslim life is cheap you see Jewish life too for the Nazi Carl Schmitt Professor of Law At the Yale Law School Boot-licking Gene Rostow Of the infamous Rostow Brothers Who gave us Vietnam Genociding “gooks” too Obama’s War Consigliere Gene and his “kids” for LBJ Some things never change for Dems And their Elite Law School Whores Today At Harvard Law School too Where Killers Obama and Koh First dropped their pooh Along with “Judge” Davey Barron too Obama’s Droner-in-Chief Destined for a Cell in The Hague Right next to his student John Yoo A Chip off of Harold’s Old Block Cold-blooded Killers and War Criminals too Killer Koh disteaching “human rights” at N.Y.U. Supported by his gang of Dem law prof thugs Beating up on the N.Y.U. law students few With the courage, integrity, and principles to say Never again! Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Justia Verdict [mailto:verdictsupport at justia.com] Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 10:09 AM To: Boyle, Francis A > Subject: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 Illinois Law dean and professor Vikram David Amar laments recent instances of censored speech, particularly on university campuses, and reminds us that freedom of speech and academic freedom protect even those speakers whose message might be perceived odious, racist, sexist, or hateful. Amar points out that both freedom of speech and academic freedom are rooted in the principle that ideas and arguments ought to be evaluated on their substance and that the essence of both kinds of freedom is the opportunity to persuade others of the merits of one's argument, rather than the use of power to coerce or silence others. Click here to view in your browser if you are having trouble viewing this email. [Verdict - Legal Analysis and commentary from Justia.] Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom Vikram David Amar Jun 15, 2017 [https://i2.wp.com/verdict.justia.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/IMG_0590.jpg?quality=90&resize=426%2C350&strip=all&fit=1000%25&ssl=1] It distresses me to see episodes these days in which speakers who are controversial for their conservative or ultra-conservative views are prevented from delivering invited remarks at universities (including public universities) because protestors choose to violate laws designed to protect public safety. It also distresses me to see so few liberal analysts decry how illiberal these episodes of group-imposed censorship are. As I have written at length elsewhere, no matter how repressive or otherwise abhorrent a speaker’s message, the appropriate response under our Constitution is counter speech, not shouting down or physically obstructing or threatening the speaker or the speaker’s audience. To be sure, protesting a speaker’s presence—registering profound objection to a speaker’s viewpoint—is perfectly appropriate and has a rich tradition dating from even before the 1960s free speech revolution through the Occupy movement. But what we have seen over the past several months is a transition from protesting against bad speakers to preventing them from being able to speak, and that is not acceptable. An unflinching commitment to freedom of speech—even odious, racist, sexist, hateful speech—is the cornerstone of constitutional democracy in the United States. Certainly we protect freedom of speech more vigorously than any other western democracy. We also have a venerable tradition of respecting academic freedom at colleges and universities. These two principles, freedom of speech and academic freedom, overlap and are interconnected, even as they are distinct ideas. Freedom of speech is a broadly applicable right codified in the federal First Amendment and state constitutional analogues that protects speakers both on and off public campuses from unwarranted government interference with expression. Academic freedom, which may extend beyond what the Constitutionprotects, is grounded on the idea that, at least in the academy, free inquiry unburdened by the constraints of orthodoxy will lead to the development of new ideas and knowledge. Notwithstanding their different scopes, both freedom of speech and academic freedom rest on the bedrock belief that ideas and arguments ought to be evaluated on their substance. The essence of both kinds of freedom is the opportunity to persuade others of the merits of one’s argument, rather than the use of power to coerce others into acceding to the proponent’s point of view. Sometimes the heat and passion of political protests on college campuses causes these basic principles to be overlooked or ignored. When that happens, it is important for us to go back to what freedom of speech and academic freedom really mean and how easily both of these principles can be misused and misinterpreted. Governments Can and Should Prohibit Certain Obstructive Conduct The short of the matter is that blockading, obstructing, assaulting, destroying property, and making threats, are not, in any stretch of the imagination, constitutionally protected things to do, no matter what the objective behind them. These activities are conduct the government has always had the legitimate authority to proscribe because they so obviously interfere with the liberty and lawful pursuits of others. As the Supreme Court of California stated in an important free speech case,In Re Kay: [T]he state retains a legitimate concern in ensuring that some individuals unruly assertion of their rights of free expression does not imperil other citizen’s rights of free association and discussion. … Freedom of everyone to talk at once can destroy the right of anyone effectively to talk at all. Free expression can expire as tragically in the tumult of license as in the silence of censorship. Government actions to prohibit blockades or obstruction have been held to be permissible under the First Amendment too many times to count. To cite just one example, a federal law, the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act (FACE), that prohibits anyone from physically obstructing any person from obtaining or providing reproductive health services, has been upheld repeatedly against constitutional challenge, and those cases raise harder questions than do generic obstruction laws because FACE targets specific places where protestors with particular messages may be expected. Blockades and obstructions can and should be prohibited consistent with the First Amendment primarily because they are not intended to and do not persuade anyone of the merits of the protestors’ position. They are employed to coerce third parties to change their behavior, not their minds. As such, they are actually antithetical to, rather than in furtherance of, the values on which freedom of speech and academic freedom are grounded — a commitment to the power of ideas rather than the use of force to change the way that people act. Creative But Unavailing Counterarguments In recent weeks, I have heard defenders of those who obstruct conservative speakers make two novel but completely unconvincing arguments. First, the obstruction defenders try to invoke the civil rights movement by pointing out that Martin Luther King, Jr. and his supporters were often guilty of civil disobedience—that is violating duly enacted laws. But this analogy is unavailing because King and his followers were violating laws that were (in the eyes of the protestors and many others) themselves unjust, not laws that were completely unobjectionable but simply stood in the way of the desires of the violators. Another distinction between the two settings is that to the extent that civil rights protestors violated laws regulating their political activity, they were violating laws in order to be heard themselves, not in order to prevent others from being heard. But today’s obstructors cannot credibly complain that they cannot be heard; they simply want others not to be listened to. The second creative yet deeply flawed argument I’ve heard in defense of the obstructors is the idea that controversial speakers of the kind who are being suppressed are themselves not appropriate speakers to be invited to university settings because they are not sufficiently academic in character. Putting aside the fact that these speakers were invited (whether they ought to have been or not), and putting aside whether some of these speakers do have some academic bona fides (even if their ideas are often very wrong-headed), this argument mischaracterizes the kind of speakers who belong at universities. Higher education is a place not just to sharpen one’s critical thinking skills through exposure to brilliant academics who make data-informed arguments in multiple directions; it is also a place where one should learn how to become a full citizen in American society. As the Supreme Court observed in the context of high school students in Tinker v. Des Moines Independent School District, this often means that students need to engage each other on the contentious political issues of the day. And in today’s college world this sometimes means hearing and evaluating strident political advocates, some of whom even border on demagoguery. To be sure, student and faculty organizations should give some thought (perhaps more thought than they currently do) to the question of whom they invite to speak on campus—certainly not everyone should be offered a platform—but many campus speakers, on the Left as well as the Right, are not particularly grounded in rigorous theoretical or empirical analysis, and this does not mean that they are per se inappropriate speakers for college audiences. Again, colleges should be preparing young people not just to navigate the economy, but also to navigate democracy. And, for better or worse, modern democracy means having to deal with a lot of ideas that are widely held even though they don’t hold up to analytic rigor. Debunking those ideas—not shouting them down or trying to suppress their expression—is what I want my students to learn how to do. [https://justatic.com/v/20170601a/verdict/images/authors/thumbs/amar.jpg] Follow @prof_amar Vikram David Amar is the Iwan Foundation Professor of Law and the Dean at the University of Illinois College of Law. Previously, he served as the Associate Dean for Academic Affairs and Professor of Law at the University of California, Davis School of Law. He is a 1988 graduate of the Yale Law School and a former clerk to Justice Harry Blackmun. He is a co-author, along with William Cohen and Jonathan Varat, of a major constitutional law casebook, and a co-author of several volumes of the Wright & Miller treatise on federal practice and procedure. Before teaching, Professor Amar spent a few years at the firm of Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher. RECENT ARTICLES SUPREME COURT RULES THAT CITIZENSHIP MUST BE EQUALLY HERITABLE THROUGH FATHERS AND MOTHERS Cornell University law professor Michael C. Dorf comments on a recent decision by the U.S. Supreme Court on the heritability of citizenship and explains why the decision might have implications for other immigration issues, such as the “Muslim ban” executive order. Dorf argues that the precedents the Court had to distinguish to reach its conclusion might give some insight into whether and how it might defer to other political branches on immigration issues.... Read More TRUMP IS NOT READY TO DEAL WITH HIS LEGAL PROBLEMS John W. Dean, former counsel to President Nixon, reflects on the much-anticipated testimony of former FBI Director James Comey before the Senate Intelligence Committee on Thursday. Dean briefly summarizes the takeaways from Comey’s testimony and discusses the response by President Trump and his lawyer.... Read More ABSOLUTE POWER CORRUPTS ABSOLUTELY IN THE KEEPERS Marci A. Hamilton, a Fox Distinguished Scholar in the Fox Leadership Program at the University of Pennsylvania and CEO of CHILD USA, encourages everyone to watch the Netflix docuseries The Keepers, which addresses child sex abuse in the Catholic Church. Hamilton describes the progress toward justice for child sex abuse victims, including the growing awareness of the pervasiveness the problem and increasing numbers of states who extend or eliminate statutes of limitations for these types of lawsuits and prosecutions....Read More [Forward this email.] Have friends who like law? Forward this email. [Like Verdict on Facebook] Like Verdict for legal discussions on Facebook. [Follow @verdictjustia on Twitter] Follow @verdictjustia for news and updates on Twitter. [Justia] Contact Us | Privacy Policy | Unsubscribe [Facebook][Twitter][LinkedIn][Justia][GooglePlus] You received this email because you have subscribed to the Verdict News E-Mail Feed. Justia | 1380 Pear Ave, Suite 2B, Mountain View, CA 94043 ________________________________ ________________________________ 1 Behind me at Harvard Law School, Killer Koh was President Obama’s War Consigliere and Droner-in-Chief. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Sat Jun 17 13:45:07 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2017 13:45:07 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Law School Off Campus! Message-ID: The College of Law and the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, Department of Philosophy have been infiltrated, perverted and corrupted by CIA/Mossad/Torture/Moore/Hurd, both of whom are still teaching there. CIA Off Campus! Mossad Off Campus! Law School Off Campus! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Saturday, June 17, 2017 8:03 AM To: 'Karen Aram' Cc: 'David Green' ; 'sherwoodross10 at gmail.com' ; 'peace-discuss at anti-war.net' ; 'C. G. ESTABROOK' ; 'a-fields at uiuc.edu' ; Hoffman, Valerie J ; 'Joe Lauria' ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; 'Arlene Hickory' ; 'David Swanson' ; 'peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net' ; 'abass10 at gmail.com' ; 'mickalideh at gmail.com' ; 'Lina Thorne' ; 'chicago at worldcantwait.net' ; 'Jay' ; Estabrook, Carl G ; 'Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net' ; 'David Johnson' ; Mildred O'brien ; Belden Fields Subject: RE: Law School Off Campus! The College of Law Building is conveniently located at the far south end of the campus and to the immediate due north of the Graveyard—which is Emblematic after the Faculty brought in Killer Koh to justify the mass murder of thousands of Muslims/Arabs/Asians of Color—Men, Women, Children and the Elderly. So fine. Let us isolate and quarantine the College of Law and its Faculty around the Graveyard where they belong. Keep them off the rest of this Campus and this Community: Law School Off Campus! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Saturday, June 17, 2017 7:46 AM To: 'Karen Aram' > Cc: 'David Green' >; 'sherwoodross10 at gmail.com' >; 'peace-discuss at anti-war.net' >; 'C. G. ESTABROOK' >; 'a-fields at uiuc.edu' >; Hoffman, Valerie J >; 'Joe Lauria' >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; 'Arlene Hickory' >; 'David Swanson' >; 'peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net' >; 'abass10 at gmail.com' >; 'mickalideh at gmail.com' >; 'Lina Thorne' >; 'chicago at worldcantwait.net' >; 'Jay' >; Estabrook, Carl G >; 'Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net' >; 'David Johnson' >; Mildred O'brien >; Belden Fields > Subject: Law School Off Campus! A generation ago Belden and I were both Veterans of the CIA Off Campus Movement here, Belden actually being arrested by the University Police because of his act of courage, integrity and principle challenging the CIA presence on this Campus. Well I am now starting a new Movement: Law School Off Campus! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Saturday, June 17, 2017 7:30 AM To: Karen Aram > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: RE: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 I trust you can all comprehend how much Evil this law school has inflicted after five years of direct and personal control by the CIA, Mossad, Moore,Hurd, and Torture. Killer Koh is only the tip of the iceberg. This Law School is a Cancer eating away at the Heart of this Campus and of our Good Community, where I have lived, taught and raised my family since July of 1978 when I first moved here from Boston.Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Friday, June 16, 2017 11:35 AM To: Karen Aram > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: RE: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 In other words, for five years CIA/Mossad/Torture ran this Law School and Everyone and Everything about it. So of course we ended up with Killer Koh on October 28, 2016. Plus ca change….fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Friday, June 16, 2017 11:22 AM To: Karen Aram > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: RE: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 And during the Five Year Tenure of Torture-Mongerers/CIA/Mossad/MichaelMoore/Dean HurricaneHeidiHurd, they brought onto this Faculty people as Evil as they are. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Friday, June 16, 2017 9:08 AM To: Karen Aram > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: RE: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 If you want to read all about the Criminal Dirty Work performed by Harvard Law Obama’s Harvard/Yale Law Mafia including Killary and Killer Koh you should see Charlie Savage: Power Wars (770 pages)—the Nazis had their Lawyers and their Law Professors and their Law Schools too. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 7:33 PM To: Karen Aram > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: RE: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 I was astonished over a year ago, before I’d ever heard of “Killer Koh,” to attend a lecture on “The legitimacy of targeted killing” in relation to our drone warfare, at the U of I Law School. It was clearly a charade to present drones as legitimate in spite of International law and US laws of due process. Yeah, if I remember correctly, I think that might have been the Dirty Work of Fired and Disgraced Dean Heidi Hurd’s Consort Michael Moore, who bragged that he works for the CIA and the Mossad-- and both of whom have stunk up this Campus and this Community for years by publicly advocating Torture. Moore also publicly congratulated everyone for bringing in Killer Koh after I had done everything humanly possible to stop them. As I said, this Law School is EVIL INCARNATE! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Karen Aram [mailto:karenaram at hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 7:22 PM To: Boyle, Francis A > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: Re: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 It does make sense that the law schools connected with Yale and Harvard would be “evil” given law schools are the first academic institution that the oligarchs controlling our government, would by necessity need to corrupt, in order to control the masses. I was astonished over a year ago, before I’d ever heard of “Killer Koh,” to attend a lecture on “The legitimacy of targeted killing” in relation to our drone warfare, at the U of I Law School. It was clearly a charade to present drones as legitimate in spite of International law and US laws of due process. Again, I had almost a year later, the frustration of attending a lecture by Dean Amar’s brother, a constitutional law professor from Yale, on “Freedom of Speech”, The lecture had nothing to do with freedom of speech, it was a promotion of his book and Hillary as well as local Democrats, along with an attempt to portray Obama in a good light. Then “killer Koh” Hillary’s advisor on drone warfare, being brought to the U of I as a representative of the “law” and speaking on human rights, to law students? Sometimes, too much is too much for sensible minds. On Jun 15, 2017, at 17:06, Boyle, Francis A > wrote: Well at least we all stood up against this Evil Law School on October 28. But from what Amar is saying here, I am sure we will have to do so again. So stay tuned. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Karen Aram [mailto:karenaram at hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 5:13 PM To: Boyle, Francis A > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: Re: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 Our government is evil, and if we the people don’t stop them from the wars and killings, then we are complicit in their warcrimes. On Jun 15, 2017, at 15:07, Boyle, Francis A > wrote: This Law School is EVIL! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 10:38 AM To: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; Karen Aram >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: FW: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 Sure. Let’s bring the War Criminal, Murderer, Felon, Bigot, Racist and Genocidaire Killer Koh into our Law School on October 28, 2016, hold him up as a Role Model to our Law Students, and then turn our Law Students into War Criminals, Murderers, Felons, Bigots, Racists and Genocidaires just like Killer Koh. Fab. Diss-Ode to Harold Killer Koh1 Harold Killer Koh Killing Babies where he go Muslim life is cheap you see Jewish life too for the Nazi Carl Schmitt Professor of Law At the Yale Law School Boot-licking Gene Rostow Of the infamous Rostow Brothers Who gave us Vietnam Genociding “gooks” too Obama’s War Consigliere Gene and his “kids” for LBJ Some things never change for Dems And their Elite Law School Whores Today At Harvard Law School too Where Killers Obama and Koh First dropped their pooh Along with “Judge” Davey Barron too Obama’s Droner-in-Chief Destined for a Cell in The Hague Right next to his student John Yoo A Chip off of Harold’s Old Block Cold-blooded Killers and War Criminals too Killer Koh disteaching “human rights” at N.Y.U. Supported by his gang of Dem law prof thugs Beating up on the N.Y.U. law students few With the courage, integrity, and principles to say Never again! Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Justia Verdict [mailto:verdictsupport at justia.com] Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 10:09 AM To: Boyle, Francis A > Subject: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 Illinois Law dean and professor Vikram David Amar laments recent instances of censored speech, particularly on university campuses, and reminds us that freedom of speech and academic freedom protect even those speakers whose message might be perceived odious, racist, sexist, or hateful. Amar points out that both freedom of speech and academic freedom are rooted in the principle that ideas and arguments ought to be evaluated on their substance and that the essence of both kinds of freedom is the opportunity to persuade others of the merits of one's argument, rather than the use of power to coerce or silence others. Click here to view in your browser if you are having trouble viewing this email. [Verdict - Legal Analysis and commentary from Justia.] Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom Vikram David Amar Jun 15, 2017 [https://i2.wp.com/verdict.justia.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/IMG_0590.jpg?quality=90&resize=426%2C350&strip=all&fit=1000%25&ssl=1] It distresses me to see episodes these days in which speakers who are controversial for their conservative or ultra-conservative views are prevented from delivering invited remarks at universities (including public universities) because protestors choose to violate laws designed to protect public safety. It also distresses me to see so few liberal analysts decry how illiberal these episodes of group-imposed censorship are. As I have written at length elsewhere, no matter how repressive or otherwise abhorrent a speaker’s message, the appropriate response under our Constitution is counter speech, not shouting down or physically obstructing or threatening the speaker or the speaker’s audience. To be sure, protesting a speaker’s presence—registering profound objection to a speaker’s viewpoint—is perfectly appropriate and has a rich tradition dating from even before the 1960s free speech revolution through the Occupy movement. But what we have seen over the past several months is a transition from protesting against bad speakers to preventing them from being able to speak, and that is not acceptable. An unflinching commitment to freedom of speech—even odious, racist, sexist, hateful speech—is the cornerstone of constitutional democracy in the United States. Certainly we protect freedom of speech more vigorously than any other western democracy. We also have a venerable tradition of respecting academic freedom at colleges and universities. These two principles, freedom of speech and academic freedom, overlap and are interconnected, even as they are distinct ideas. Freedom of speech is a broadly applicable right codified in the federal First Amendment and state constitutional analogues that protects speakers both on and off public campuses from unwarranted government interference with expression. Academic freedom, which may extend beyond what the Constitutionprotects, is grounded on the idea that, at least in the academy, free inquiry unburdened by the constraints of orthodoxy will lead to the development of new ideas and knowledge. Notwithstanding their different scopes, both freedom of speech and academic freedom rest on the bedrock belief that ideas and arguments ought to be evaluated on their substance. The essence of both kinds of freedom is the opportunity to persuade others of the merits of one’s argument, rather than the use of power to coerce others into acceding to the proponent’s point of view. Sometimes the heat and passion of political protests on college campuses causes these basic principles to be overlooked or ignored. When that happens, it is important for us to go back to what freedom of speech and academic freedom really mean and how easily both of these principles can be misused and misinterpreted. Governments Can and Should Prohibit Certain Obstructive Conduct The short of the matter is that blockading, obstructing, assaulting, destroying property, and making threats, are not, in any stretch of the imagination, constitutionally protected things to do, no matter what the objective behind them. These activities are conduct the government has always had the legitimate authority to proscribe because they so obviously interfere with the liberty and lawful pursuits of others. As the Supreme Court of California stated in an important free speech case,In Re Kay: [T]he state retains a legitimate concern in ensuring that some individuals unruly assertion of their rights of free expression does not imperil other citizen’s rights of free association and discussion. … Freedom of everyone to talk at once can destroy the right of anyone effectively to talk at all. Free expression can expire as tragically in the tumult of license as in the silence of censorship. Government actions to prohibit blockades or obstruction have been held to be permissible under the First Amendment too many times to count. To cite just one example, a federal law, the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act (FACE), that prohibits anyone from physically obstructing any person from obtaining or providing reproductive health services, has been upheld repeatedly against constitutional challenge, and those cases raise harder questions than do generic obstruction laws because FACE targets specific places where protestors with particular messages may be expected. Blockades and obstructions can and should be prohibited consistent with the First Amendment primarily because they are not intended to and do not persuade anyone of the merits of the protestors’ position. They are employed to coerce third parties to change their behavior, not their minds. As such, they are actually antithetical to, rather than in furtherance of, the values on which freedom of speech and academic freedom are grounded — a commitment to the power of ideas rather than the use of force to change the way that people act. Creative But Unavailing Counterarguments In recent weeks, I have heard defenders of those who obstruct conservative speakers make two novel but completely unconvincing arguments. First, the obstruction defenders try to invoke the civil rights movement by pointing out that Martin Luther King, Jr. and his supporters were often guilty of civil disobedience—that is violating duly enacted laws. But this analogy is unavailing because King and his followers were violating laws that were (in the eyes of the protestors and many others) themselves unjust, not laws that were completely unobjectionable but simply stood in the way of the desires of the violators. Another distinction between the two settings is that to the extent that civil rights protestors violated laws regulating their political activity, they were violating laws in order to be heard themselves, not in order to prevent others from being heard. But today’s obstructors cannot credibly complain that they cannot be heard; they simply want others not to be listened to. The second creative yet deeply flawed argument I’ve heard in defense of the obstructors is the idea that controversial speakers of the kind who are being suppressed are themselves not appropriate speakers to be invited to university settings because they are not sufficiently academic in character. Putting aside the fact that these speakers were invited (whether they ought to have been or not), and putting aside whether some of these speakers do have some academic bona fides (even if their ideas are often very wrong-headed), this argument mischaracterizes the kind of speakers who belong at universities. Higher education is a place not just to sharpen one’s critical thinking skills through exposure to brilliant academics who make data-informed arguments in multiple directions; it is also a place where one should learn how to become a full citizen in American society. As the Supreme Court observed in the context of high school students in Tinker v. Des Moines Independent School District, this often means that students need to engage each other on the contentious political issues of the day. And in today’s college world this sometimes means hearing and evaluating strident political advocates, some of whom even border on demagoguery. To be sure, student and faculty organizations should give some thought (perhaps more thought than they currently do) to the question of whom they invite to speak on campus—certainly not everyone should be offered a platform—but many campus speakers, on the Left as well as the Right, are not particularly grounded in rigorous theoretical or empirical analysis, and this does not mean that they are per se inappropriate speakers for college audiences. Again, colleges should be preparing young people not just to navigate the economy, but also to navigate democracy. And, for better or worse, modern democracy means having to deal with a lot of ideas that are widely held even though they don’t hold up to analytic rigor. Debunking those ideas—not shouting them down or trying to suppress their expression—is what I want my students to learn how to do. [https://justatic.com/v/20170601a/verdict/images/authors/thumbs/amar.jpg] Follow @prof_amar Vikram David Amar is the Iwan Foundation Professor of Law and the Dean at the University of Illinois College of Law. Previously, he served as the Associate Dean for Academic Affairs and Professor of Law at the University of California, Davis School of Law. He is a 1988 graduate of the Yale Law School and a former clerk to Justice Harry Blackmun. He is a co-author, along with William Cohen and Jonathan Varat, of a major constitutional law casebook, and a co-author of several volumes of the Wright & Miller treatise on federal practice and procedure. Before teaching, Professor Amar spent a few years at the firm of Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher. RECENT ARTICLES SUPREME COURT RULES THAT CITIZENSHIP MUST BE EQUALLY HERITABLE THROUGH FATHERS AND MOTHERS Cornell University law professor Michael C. Dorf comments on a recent decision by the U.S. Supreme Court on the heritability of citizenship and explains why the decision might have implications for other immigration issues, such as the “Muslim ban” executive order. Dorf argues that the precedents the Court had to distinguish to reach its conclusion might give some insight into whether and how it might defer to other political branches on immigration issues.... Read More TRUMP IS NOT READY TO DEAL WITH HIS LEGAL PROBLEMS John W. Dean, former counsel to President Nixon, reflects on the much-anticipated testimony of former FBI Director James Comey before the Senate Intelligence Committee on Thursday. Dean briefly summarizes the takeaways from Comey’s testimony and discusses the response by President Trump and his lawyer.... Read More ABSOLUTE POWER CORRUPTS ABSOLUTELY IN THE KEEPERS Marci A. Hamilton, a Fox Distinguished Scholar in the Fox Leadership Program at the University of Pennsylvania and CEO of CHILD USA, encourages everyone to watch the Netflix docuseries The Keepers, which addresses child sex abuse in the Catholic Church. Hamilton describes the progress toward justice for child sex abuse victims, including the growing awareness of the pervasiveness the problem and increasing numbers of states who extend or eliminate statutes of limitations for these types of lawsuits and prosecutions....Read More [Forward this email.] Have friends who like law? Forward this email. [Like Verdict on Facebook] Like Verdict for legal discussions on Facebook. [Follow @verdictjustia on Twitter] Follow @verdictjustia for news and updates on Twitter. [Justia] Contact Us | Privacy Policy | Unsubscribe [Facebook][Twitter][LinkedIn][Justia][GooglePlus] You received this email because you have subscribed to the Verdict News E-Mail Feed. Justia | 1380 Pear Ave, Suite 2B, Mountain View, CA 94043 ________________________________ ________________________________ 1 Behind me at Harvard Law School, Killer Koh was President Obama’s War Consigliere and Droner-in-Chief. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Sat Jun 17 13:45:07 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2017 13:45:07 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Law School Off Campus! Message-ID: The College of Law and the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, Department of Philosophy have been infiltrated, perverted and corrupted by CIA/Mossad/Torture/Moore/Hurd, both of whom are still teaching there. CIA Off Campus! Mossad Off Campus! Law School Off Campus! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Saturday, June 17, 2017 8:03 AM To: 'Karen Aram' Cc: 'David Green' ; 'sherwoodross10 at gmail.com' ; 'peace-discuss at anti-war.net' ; 'C. G. ESTABROOK' ; 'a-fields at uiuc.edu' ; Hoffman, Valerie J ; 'Joe Lauria' ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; 'Arlene Hickory' ; 'David Swanson' ; 'peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net' ; 'abass10 at gmail.com' ; 'mickalideh at gmail.com' ; 'Lina Thorne' ; 'chicago at worldcantwait.net' ; 'Jay' ; Estabrook, Carl G ; 'Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net' ; 'David Johnson' ; Mildred O'brien ; Belden Fields Subject: RE: Law School Off Campus! The College of Law Building is conveniently located at the far south end of the campus and to the immediate due north of the Graveyard—which is Emblematic after the Faculty brought in Killer Koh to justify the mass murder of thousands of Muslims/Arabs/Asians of Color—Men, Women, Children and the Elderly. So fine. Let us isolate and quarantine the College of Law and its Faculty around the Graveyard where they belong. Keep them off the rest of this Campus and this Community: Law School Off Campus! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Saturday, June 17, 2017 7:46 AM To: 'Karen Aram' > Cc: 'David Green' >; 'sherwoodross10 at gmail.com' >; 'peace-discuss at anti-war.net' >; 'C. G. ESTABROOK' >; 'a-fields at uiuc.edu' >; Hoffman, Valerie J >; 'Joe Lauria' >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; 'Arlene Hickory' >; 'David Swanson' >; 'peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net' >; 'abass10 at gmail.com' >; 'mickalideh at gmail.com' >; 'Lina Thorne' >; 'chicago at worldcantwait.net' >; 'Jay' >; Estabrook, Carl G >; 'Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net' >; 'David Johnson' >; Mildred O'brien >; Belden Fields > Subject: Law School Off Campus! A generation ago Belden and I were both Veterans of the CIA Off Campus Movement here, Belden actually being arrested by the University Police because of his act of courage, integrity and principle challenging the CIA presence on this Campus. Well I am now starting a new Movement: Law School Off Campus! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Saturday, June 17, 2017 7:30 AM To: Karen Aram > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: RE: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 I trust you can all comprehend how much Evil this law school has inflicted after five years of direct and personal control by the CIA, Mossad, Moore,Hurd, and Torture. Killer Koh is only the tip of the iceberg. This Law School is a Cancer eating away at the Heart of this Campus and of our Good Community, where I have lived, taught and raised my family since July of 1978 when I first moved here from Boston.Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Friday, June 16, 2017 11:35 AM To: Karen Aram > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: RE: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 In other words, for five years CIA/Mossad/Torture ran this Law School and Everyone and Everything about it. So of course we ended up with Killer Koh on October 28, 2016. Plus ca change….fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Friday, June 16, 2017 11:22 AM To: Karen Aram > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: RE: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 And during the Five Year Tenure of Torture-Mongerers/CIA/Mossad/MichaelMoore/Dean HurricaneHeidiHurd, they brought onto this Faculty people as Evil as they are. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Friday, June 16, 2017 9:08 AM To: Karen Aram > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: RE: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 If you want to read all about the Criminal Dirty Work performed by Harvard Law Obama’s Harvard/Yale Law Mafia including Killary and Killer Koh you should see Charlie Savage: Power Wars (770 pages)—the Nazis had their Lawyers and their Law Professors and their Law Schools too. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 7:33 PM To: Karen Aram > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: RE: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 I was astonished over a year ago, before I’d ever heard of “Killer Koh,” to attend a lecture on “The legitimacy of targeted killing” in relation to our drone warfare, at the U of I Law School. It was clearly a charade to present drones as legitimate in spite of International law and US laws of due process. Yeah, if I remember correctly, I think that might have been the Dirty Work of Fired and Disgraced Dean Heidi Hurd’s Consort Michael Moore, who bragged that he works for the CIA and the Mossad-- and both of whom have stunk up this Campus and this Community for years by publicly advocating Torture. Moore also publicly congratulated everyone for bringing in Killer Koh after I had done everything humanly possible to stop them. As I said, this Law School is EVIL INCARNATE! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Karen Aram [mailto:karenaram at hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 7:22 PM To: Boyle, Francis A > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: Re: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 It does make sense that the law schools connected with Yale and Harvard would be “evil” given law schools are the first academic institution that the oligarchs controlling our government, would by necessity need to corrupt, in order to control the masses. I was astonished over a year ago, before I’d ever heard of “Killer Koh,” to attend a lecture on “The legitimacy of targeted killing” in relation to our drone warfare, at the U of I Law School. It was clearly a charade to present drones as legitimate in spite of International law and US laws of due process. Again, I had almost a year later, the frustration of attending a lecture by Dean Amar’s brother, a constitutional law professor from Yale, on “Freedom of Speech”, The lecture had nothing to do with freedom of speech, it was a promotion of his book and Hillary as well as local Democrats, along with an attempt to portray Obama in a good light. Then “killer Koh” Hillary’s advisor on drone warfare, being brought to the U of I as a representative of the “law” and speaking on human rights, to law students? Sometimes, too much is too much for sensible minds. On Jun 15, 2017, at 17:06, Boyle, Francis A > wrote: Well at least we all stood up against this Evil Law School on October 28. But from what Amar is saying here, I am sure we will have to do so again. So stay tuned. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Karen Aram [mailto:karenaram at hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 5:13 PM To: Boyle, Francis A > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: Re: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 Our government is evil, and if we the people don’t stop them from the wars and killings, then we are complicit in their warcrimes. On Jun 15, 2017, at 15:07, Boyle, Francis A > wrote: This Law School is EVIL! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 10:38 AM To: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; Karen Aram >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: FW: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 Sure. Let’s bring the War Criminal, Murderer, Felon, Bigot, Racist and Genocidaire Killer Koh into our Law School on October 28, 2016, hold him up as a Role Model to our Law Students, and then turn our Law Students into War Criminals, Murderers, Felons, Bigots, Racists and Genocidaires just like Killer Koh. Fab. Diss-Ode to Harold Killer Koh1 Harold Killer Koh Killing Babies where he go Muslim life is cheap you see Jewish life too for the Nazi Carl Schmitt Professor of Law At the Yale Law School Boot-licking Gene Rostow Of the infamous Rostow Brothers Who gave us Vietnam Genociding “gooks” too Obama’s War Consigliere Gene and his “kids” for LBJ Some things never change for Dems And their Elite Law School Whores Today At Harvard Law School too Where Killers Obama and Koh First dropped their pooh Along with “Judge” Davey Barron too Obama’s Droner-in-Chief Destined for a Cell in The Hague Right next to his student John Yoo A Chip off of Harold’s Old Block Cold-blooded Killers and War Criminals too Killer Koh disteaching “human rights” at N.Y.U. Supported by his gang of Dem law prof thugs Beating up on the N.Y.U. law students few With the courage, integrity, and principles to say Never again! Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Justia Verdict [mailto:verdictsupport at justia.com] Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 10:09 AM To: Boyle, Francis A > Subject: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 Illinois Law dean and professor Vikram David Amar laments recent instances of censored speech, particularly on university campuses, and reminds us that freedom of speech and academic freedom protect even those speakers whose message might be perceived odious, racist, sexist, or hateful. Amar points out that both freedom of speech and academic freedom are rooted in the principle that ideas and arguments ought to be evaluated on their substance and that the essence of both kinds of freedom is the opportunity to persuade others of the merits of one's argument, rather than the use of power to coerce or silence others. Click here to view in your browser if you are having trouble viewing this email. [Verdict - Legal Analysis and commentary from Justia.] Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom Vikram David Amar Jun 15, 2017 [https://i2.wp.com/verdict.justia.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/IMG_0590.jpg?quality=90&resize=426%2C350&strip=all&fit=1000%25&ssl=1] It distresses me to see episodes these days in which speakers who are controversial for their conservative or ultra-conservative views are prevented from delivering invited remarks at universities (including public universities) because protestors choose to violate laws designed to protect public safety. It also distresses me to see so few liberal analysts decry how illiberal these episodes of group-imposed censorship are. As I have written at length elsewhere, no matter how repressive or otherwise abhorrent a speaker’s message, the appropriate response under our Constitution is counter speech, not shouting down or physically obstructing or threatening the speaker or the speaker’s audience. To be sure, protesting a speaker’s presence—registering profound objection to a speaker’s viewpoint—is perfectly appropriate and has a rich tradition dating from even before the 1960s free speech revolution through the Occupy movement. But what we have seen over the past several months is a transition from protesting against bad speakers to preventing them from being able to speak, and that is not acceptable. An unflinching commitment to freedom of speech—even odious, racist, sexist, hateful speech—is the cornerstone of constitutional democracy in the United States. Certainly we protect freedom of speech more vigorously than any other western democracy. We also have a venerable tradition of respecting academic freedom at colleges and universities. These two principles, freedom of speech and academic freedom, overlap and are interconnected, even as they are distinct ideas. Freedom of speech is a broadly applicable right codified in the federal First Amendment and state constitutional analogues that protects speakers both on and off public campuses from unwarranted government interference with expression. Academic freedom, which may extend beyond what the Constitutionprotects, is grounded on the idea that, at least in the academy, free inquiry unburdened by the constraints of orthodoxy will lead to the development of new ideas and knowledge. Notwithstanding their different scopes, both freedom of speech and academic freedom rest on the bedrock belief that ideas and arguments ought to be evaluated on their substance. The essence of both kinds of freedom is the opportunity to persuade others of the merits of one’s argument, rather than the use of power to coerce others into acceding to the proponent’s point of view. Sometimes the heat and passion of political protests on college campuses causes these basic principles to be overlooked or ignored. When that happens, it is important for us to go back to what freedom of speech and academic freedom really mean and how easily both of these principles can be misused and misinterpreted. Governments Can and Should Prohibit Certain Obstructive Conduct The short of the matter is that blockading, obstructing, assaulting, destroying property, and making threats, are not, in any stretch of the imagination, constitutionally protected things to do, no matter what the objective behind them. These activities are conduct the government has always had the legitimate authority to proscribe because they so obviously interfere with the liberty and lawful pursuits of others. As the Supreme Court of California stated in an important free speech case,In Re Kay: [T]he state retains a legitimate concern in ensuring that some individuals unruly assertion of their rights of free expression does not imperil other citizen’s rights of free association and discussion. … Freedom of everyone to talk at once can destroy the right of anyone effectively to talk at all. Free expression can expire as tragically in the tumult of license as in the silence of censorship. Government actions to prohibit blockades or obstruction have been held to be permissible under the First Amendment too many times to count. To cite just one example, a federal law, the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act (FACE), that prohibits anyone from physically obstructing any person from obtaining or providing reproductive health services, has been upheld repeatedly against constitutional challenge, and those cases raise harder questions than do generic obstruction laws because FACE targets specific places where protestors with particular messages may be expected. Blockades and obstructions can and should be prohibited consistent with the First Amendment primarily because they are not intended to and do not persuade anyone of the merits of the protestors’ position. They are employed to coerce third parties to change their behavior, not their minds. As such, they are actually antithetical to, rather than in furtherance of, the values on which freedom of speech and academic freedom are grounded — a commitment to the power of ideas rather than the use of force to change the way that people act. Creative But Unavailing Counterarguments In recent weeks, I have heard defenders of those who obstruct conservative speakers make two novel but completely unconvincing arguments. First, the obstruction defenders try to invoke the civil rights movement by pointing out that Martin Luther King, Jr. and his supporters were often guilty of civil disobedience—that is violating duly enacted laws. But this analogy is unavailing because King and his followers were violating laws that were (in the eyes of the protestors and many others) themselves unjust, not laws that were completely unobjectionable but simply stood in the way of the desires of the violators. Another distinction between the two settings is that to the extent that civil rights protestors violated laws regulating their political activity, they were violating laws in order to be heard themselves, not in order to prevent others from being heard. But today’s obstructors cannot credibly complain that they cannot be heard; they simply want others not to be listened to. The second creative yet deeply flawed argument I’ve heard in defense of the obstructors is the idea that controversial speakers of the kind who are being suppressed are themselves not appropriate speakers to be invited to university settings because they are not sufficiently academic in character. Putting aside the fact that these speakers were invited (whether they ought to have been or not), and putting aside whether some of these speakers do have some academic bona fides (even if their ideas are often very wrong-headed), this argument mischaracterizes the kind of speakers who belong at universities. Higher education is a place not just to sharpen one’s critical thinking skills through exposure to brilliant academics who make data-informed arguments in multiple directions; it is also a place where one should learn how to become a full citizen in American society. As the Supreme Court observed in the context of high school students in Tinker v. Des Moines Independent School District, this often means that students need to engage each other on the contentious political issues of the day. And in today’s college world this sometimes means hearing and evaluating strident political advocates, some of whom even border on demagoguery. To be sure, student and faculty organizations should give some thought (perhaps more thought than they currently do) to the question of whom they invite to speak on campus—certainly not everyone should be offered a platform—but many campus speakers, on the Left as well as the Right, are not particularly grounded in rigorous theoretical or empirical analysis, and this does not mean that they are per se inappropriate speakers for college audiences. Again, colleges should be preparing young people not just to navigate the economy, but also to navigate democracy. And, for better or worse, modern democracy means having to deal with a lot of ideas that are widely held even though they don’t hold up to analytic rigor. Debunking those ideas—not shouting them down or trying to suppress their expression—is what I want my students to learn how to do. [https://justatic.com/v/20170601a/verdict/images/authors/thumbs/amar.jpg] Follow @prof_amar Vikram David Amar is the Iwan Foundation Professor of Law and the Dean at the University of Illinois College of Law. Previously, he served as the Associate Dean for Academic Affairs and Professor of Law at the University of California, Davis School of Law. He is a 1988 graduate of the Yale Law School and a former clerk to Justice Harry Blackmun. He is a co-author, along with William Cohen and Jonathan Varat, of a major constitutional law casebook, and a co-author of several volumes of the Wright & Miller treatise on federal practice and procedure. Before teaching, Professor Amar spent a few years at the firm of Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher. RECENT ARTICLES SUPREME COURT RULES THAT CITIZENSHIP MUST BE EQUALLY HERITABLE THROUGH FATHERS AND MOTHERS Cornell University law professor Michael C. Dorf comments on a recent decision by the U.S. Supreme Court on the heritability of citizenship and explains why the decision might have implications for other immigration issues, such as the “Muslim ban” executive order. Dorf argues that the precedents the Court had to distinguish to reach its conclusion might give some insight into whether and how it might defer to other political branches on immigration issues.... Read More TRUMP IS NOT READY TO DEAL WITH HIS LEGAL PROBLEMS John W. Dean, former counsel to President Nixon, reflects on the much-anticipated testimony of former FBI Director James Comey before the Senate Intelligence Committee on Thursday. Dean briefly summarizes the takeaways from Comey’s testimony and discusses the response by President Trump and his lawyer.... Read More ABSOLUTE POWER CORRUPTS ABSOLUTELY IN THE KEEPERS Marci A. Hamilton, a Fox Distinguished Scholar in the Fox Leadership Program at the University of Pennsylvania and CEO of CHILD USA, encourages everyone to watch the Netflix docuseries The Keepers, which addresses child sex abuse in the Catholic Church. Hamilton describes the progress toward justice for child sex abuse victims, including the growing awareness of the pervasiveness the problem and increasing numbers of states who extend or eliminate statutes of limitations for these types of lawsuits and prosecutions....Read More [Forward this email.] Have friends who like law? Forward this email. [Like Verdict on Facebook] Like Verdict for legal discussions on Facebook. [Follow @verdictjustia on Twitter] Follow @verdictjustia for news and updates on Twitter. [Justia] Contact Us | Privacy Policy | Unsubscribe [Facebook][Twitter][LinkedIn][Justia][GooglePlus] You received this email because you have subscribed to the Verdict News E-Mail Feed. Justia | 1380 Pear Ave, Suite 2B, Mountain View, CA 94043 ________________________________ ________________________________ 1 Behind me at Harvard Law School, Killer Koh was President Obama’s War Consigliere and Droner-in-Chief. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Sat Jun 17 14:05:22 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2017 14:05:22 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Law School Off Campus! Message-ID: And of course in the Philosophy Department where they all teach, CIA/Mossad/Torture/Moore/Hurd are perverting and corrupting the young minds of our College Students and of our Children. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Saturday, June 17, 2017 8:03 AM To: 'Karen Aram' Cc: 'David Green' ; 'sherwoodross10 at gmail.com' ; 'peace-discuss at anti-war.net' ; 'C. G. ESTABROOK' ; 'a-fields at uiuc.edu' ; Hoffman, Valerie J ; 'Joe Lauria' ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; 'Arlene Hickory' ; 'David Swanson' ; 'peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net' ; 'abass10 at gmail.com' ; 'mickalideh at gmail.com' ; 'Lina Thorne' ; 'chicago at worldcantwait.net' ; 'Jay' ; Estabrook, Carl G ; 'Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net' ; 'David Johnson' ; Mildred O'brien ; Belden Fields Subject: RE: Law School Off Campus! The College of Law Building is conveniently located at the far south end of the campus and to the immediate due north of the Graveyard—which is Emblematic after the Faculty brought in Killer Koh to justify the mass murder of thousands of Muslims/Arabs/Asians of Color—Men, Women, Children and the Elderly. So fine. Let us isolate and quarantine the College of Law and its Faculty around the Graveyard where they belong. Keep them off the rest of this Campus and this Community: Law School Off Campus! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Saturday, June 17, 2017 7:46 AM To: 'Karen Aram' > Cc: 'David Green' >; 'sherwoodross10 at gmail.com' >; 'peace-discuss at anti-war.net' >; 'C. G. ESTABROOK' >; 'a-fields at uiuc.edu' >; Hoffman, Valerie J >; 'Joe Lauria' >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; 'Arlene Hickory' >; 'David Swanson' >; 'peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net' >; 'abass10 at gmail.com' >; 'mickalideh at gmail.com' >; 'Lina Thorne' >; 'chicago at worldcantwait.net' >; 'Jay' >; Estabrook, Carl G >; 'Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net' >; 'David Johnson' >; Mildred O'brien >; Belden Fields > Subject: Law School Off Campus! A generation ago Belden and I were both Veterans of the CIA Off Campus Movement here, Belden actually being arrested by the University Police because of his act of courage, integrity and principle challenging the CIA presence on this Campus. Well I am now starting a new Movement: Law School Off Campus! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Saturday, June 17, 2017 7:30 AM To: Karen Aram > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: RE: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 I trust you can all comprehend how much Evil this law school has inflicted after five years of direct and personal control by the CIA, Mossad, Moore,Hurd, and Torture. Killer Koh is only the tip of the iceberg. This Law School is a Cancer eating away at the Heart of this Campus and of our Good Community, where I have lived, taught and raised my family since July of 1978 when I first moved here from Boston.Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Friday, June 16, 2017 11:35 AM To: Karen Aram > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: RE: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 In other words, for five years CIA/Mossad/Torture ran this Law School and Everyone and Everything about it. So of course we ended up with Killer Koh on October 28, 2016. Plus ca change….fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Friday, June 16, 2017 11:22 AM To: Karen Aram > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: RE: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 And during the Five Year Tenure of Torture-Mongerers/CIA/Mossad/MichaelMoore/Dean HurricaneHeidiHurd, they brought onto this Faculty people as Evil as they are. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Friday, June 16, 2017 9:08 AM To: Karen Aram > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: RE: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 If you want to read all about the Criminal Dirty Work performed by Harvard Law Obama’s Harvard/Yale Law Mafia including Killary and Killer Koh you should see Charlie Savage: Power Wars (770 pages)—the Nazis had their Lawyers and their Law Professors and their Law Schools too. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 7:33 PM To: Karen Aram > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: RE: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 I was astonished over a year ago, before I’d ever heard of “Killer Koh,” to attend a lecture on “The legitimacy of targeted killing” in relation to our drone warfare, at the U of I Law School. It was clearly a charade to present drones as legitimate in spite of International law and US laws of due process. Yeah, if I remember correctly, I think that might have been the Dirty Work of Fired and Disgraced Dean Heidi Hurd’s Consort Michael Moore, who bragged that he works for the CIA and the Mossad-- and both of whom have stunk up this Campus and this Community for years by publicly advocating Torture. Moore also publicly congratulated everyone for bringing in Killer Koh after I had done everything humanly possible to stop them. As I said, this Law School is EVIL INCARNATE! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Karen Aram [mailto:karenaram at hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 7:22 PM To: Boyle, Francis A > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: Re: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 It does make sense that the law schools connected with Yale and Harvard would be “evil” given law schools are the first academic institution that the oligarchs controlling our government, would by necessity need to corrupt, in order to control the masses. I was astonished over a year ago, before I’d ever heard of “Killer Koh,” to attend a lecture on “The legitimacy of targeted killing” in relation to our drone warfare, at the U of I Law School. It was clearly a charade to present drones as legitimate in spite of International law and US laws of due process. Again, I had almost a year later, the frustration of attending a lecture by Dean Amar’s brother, a constitutional law professor from Yale, on “Freedom of Speech”, The lecture had nothing to do with freedom of speech, it was a promotion of his book and Hillary as well as local Democrats, along with an attempt to portray Obama in a good light. Then “killer Koh” Hillary’s advisor on drone warfare, being brought to the U of I as a representative of the “law” and speaking on human rights, to law students? Sometimes, too much is too much for sensible minds. On Jun 15, 2017, at 17:06, Boyle, Francis A > wrote: Well at least we all stood up against this Evil Law School on October 28. But from what Amar is saying here, I am sure we will have to do so again. So stay tuned. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Karen Aram [mailto:karenaram at hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 5:13 PM To: Boyle, Francis A > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: Re: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 Our government is evil, and if we the people don’t stop them from the wars and killings, then we are complicit in their warcrimes. On Jun 15, 2017, at 15:07, Boyle, Francis A > wrote: This Law School is EVIL! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 10:38 AM To: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; Karen Aram >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: FW: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 Sure. Let’s bring the War Criminal, Murderer, Felon, Bigot, Racist and Genocidaire Killer Koh into our Law School on October 28, 2016, hold him up as a Role Model to our Law Students, and then turn our Law Students into War Criminals, Murderers, Felons, Bigots, Racists and Genocidaires just like Killer Koh. Fab. Diss-Ode to Harold Killer Koh1 Harold Killer Koh Killing Babies where he go Muslim life is cheap you see Jewish life too for the Nazi Carl Schmitt Professor of Law At the Yale Law School Boot-licking Gene Rostow Of the infamous Rostow Brothers Who gave us Vietnam Genociding “gooks” too Obama’s War Consigliere Gene and his “kids” for LBJ Some things never change for Dems And their Elite Law School Whores Today At Harvard Law School too Where Killers Obama and Koh First dropped their pooh Along with “Judge” Davey Barron too Obama’s Droner-in-Chief Destined for a Cell in The Hague Right next to his student John Yoo A Chip off of Harold’s Old Block Cold-blooded Killers and War Criminals too Killer Koh disteaching “human rights” at N.Y.U. Supported by his gang of Dem law prof thugs Beating up on the N.Y.U. law students few With the courage, integrity, and principles to say Never again! Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Justia Verdict [mailto:verdictsupport at justia.com] Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 10:09 AM To: Boyle, Francis A > Subject: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 Illinois Law dean and professor Vikram David Amar laments recent instances of censored speech, particularly on university campuses, and reminds us that freedom of speech and academic freedom protect even those speakers whose message might be perceived odious, racist, sexist, or hateful. Amar points out that both freedom of speech and academic freedom are rooted in the principle that ideas and arguments ought to be evaluated on their substance and that the essence of both kinds of freedom is the opportunity to persuade others of the merits of one's argument, rather than the use of power to coerce or silence others. Click here to view in your browser if you are having trouble viewing this email. [Verdict - Legal Analysis and commentary from Justia.] Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom Vikram David Amar Jun 15, 2017 [https://i2.wp.com/verdict.justia.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/IMG_0590.jpg?quality=90&resize=426%2C350&strip=all&fit=1000%25&ssl=1] It distresses me to see episodes these days in which speakers who are controversial for their conservative or ultra-conservative views are prevented from delivering invited remarks at universities (including public universities) because protestors choose to violate laws designed to protect public safety. It also distresses me to see so few liberal analysts decry how illiberal these episodes of group-imposed censorship are. As I have written at length elsewhere, no matter how repressive or otherwise abhorrent a speaker’s message, the appropriate response under our Constitution is counter speech, not shouting down or physically obstructing or threatening the speaker or the speaker’s audience. To be sure, protesting a speaker’s presence—registering profound objection to a speaker’s viewpoint—is perfectly appropriate and has a rich tradition dating from even before the 1960s free speech revolution through the Occupy movement. But what we have seen over the past several months is a transition from protesting against bad speakers to preventing them from being able to speak, and that is not acceptable. An unflinching commitment to freedom of speech—even odious, racist, sexist, hateful speech—is the cornerstone of constitutional democracy in the United States. Certainly we protect freedom of speech more vigorously than any other western democracy. We also have a venerable tradition of respecting academic freedom at colleges and universities. These two principles, freedom of speech and academic freedom, overlap and are interconnected, even as they are distinct ideas. Freedom of speech is a broadly applicable right codified in the federal First Amendment and state constitutional analogues that protects speakers both on and off public campuses from unwarranted government interference with expression. Academic freedom, which may extend beyond what the Constitutionprotects, is grounded on the idea that, at least in the academy, free inquiry unburdened by the constraints of orthodoxy will lead to the development of new ideas and knowledge. Notwithstanding their different scopes, both freedom of speech and academic freedom rest on the bedrock belief that ideas and arguments ought to be evaluated on their substance. The essence of both kinds of freedom is the opportunity to persuade others of the merits of one’s argument, rather than the use of power to coerce others into acceding to the proponent’s point of view. Sometimes the heat and passion of political protests on college campuses causes these basic principles to be overlooked or ignored. When that happens, it is important for us to go back to what freedom of speech and academic freedom really mean and how easily both of these principles can be misused and misinterpreted. Governments Can and Should Prohibit Certain Obstructive Conduct The short of the matter is that blockading, obstructing, assaulting, destroying property, and making threats, are not, in any stretch of the imagination, constitutionally protected things to do, no matter what the objective behind them. These activities are conduct the government has always had the legitimate authority to proscribe because they so obviously interfere with the liberty and lawful pursuits of others. As the Supreme Court of California stated in an important free speech case,In Re Kay: [T]he state retains a legitimate concern in ensuring that some individuals unruly assertion of their rights of free expression does not imperil other citizen’s rights of free association and discussion. … Freedom of everyone to talk at once can destroy the right of anyone effectively to talk at all. Free expression can expire as tragically in the tumult of license as in the silence of censorship. Government actions to prohibit blockades or obstruction have been held to be permissible under the First Amendment too many times to count. To cite just one example, a federal law, the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act (FACE), that prohibits anyone from physically obstructing any person from obtaining or providing reproductive health services, has been upheld repeatedly against constitutional challenge, and those cases raise harder questions than do generic obstruction laws because FACE targets specific places where protestors with particular messages may be expected. Blockades and obstructions can and should be prohibited consistent with the First Amendment primarily because they are not intended to and do not persuade anyone of the merits of the protestors’ position. They are employed to coerce third parties to change their behavior, not their minds. As such, they are actually antithetical to, rather than in furtherance of, the values on which freedom of speech and academic freedom are grounded — a commitment to the power of ideas rather than the use of force to change the way that people act. Creative But Unavailing Counterarguments In recent weeks, I have heard defenders of those who obstruct conservative speakers make two novel but completely unconvincing arguments. First, the obstruction defenders try to invoke the civil rights movement by pointing out that Martin Luther King, Jr. and his supporters were often guilty of civil disobedience—that is violating duly enacted laws. But this analogy is unavailing because King and his followers were violating laws that were (in the eyes of the protestors and many others) themselves unjust, not laws that were completely unobjectionable but simply stood in the way of the desires of the violators. Another distinction between the two settings is that to the extent that civil rights protestors violated laws regulating their political activity, they were violating laws in order to be heard themselves, not in order to prevent others from being heard. But today’s obstructors cannot credibly complain that they cannot be heard; they simply want others not to be listened to. The second creative yet deeply flawed argument I’ve heard in defense of the obstructors is the idea that controversial speakers of the kind who are being suppressed are themselves not appropriate speakers to be invited to university settings because they are not sufficiently academic in character. Putting aside the fact that these speakers were invited (whether they ought to have been or not), and putting aside whether some of these speakers do have some academic bona fides (even if their ideas are often very wrong-headed), this argument mischaracterizes the kind of speakers who belong at universities. Higher education is a place not just to sharpen one’s critical thinking skills through exposure to brilliant academics who make data-informed arguments in multiple directions; it is also a place where one should learn how to become a full citizen in American society. As the Supreme Court observed in the context of high school students in Tinker v. Des Moines Independent School District, this often means that students need to engage each other on the contentious political issues of the day. And in today’s college world this sometimes means hearing and evaluating strident political advocates, some of whom even border on demagoguery. To be sure, student and faculty organizations should give some thought (perhaps more thought than they currently do) to the question of whom they invite to speak on campus—certainly not everyone should be offered a platform—but many campus speakers, on the Left as well as the Right, are not particularly grounded in rigorous theoretical or empirical analysis, and this does not mean that they are per se inappropriate speakers for college audiences. Again, colleges should be preparing young people not just to navigate the economy, but also to navigate democracy. And, for better or worse, modern democracy means having to deal with a lot of ideas that are widely held even though they don’t hold up to analytic rigor. Debunking those ideas—not shouting them down or trying to suppress their expression—is what I want my students to learn how to do. [https://justatic.com/v/20170601a/verdict/images/authors/thumbs/amar.jpg] Follow @prof_amar Vikram David Amar is the Iwan Foundation Professor of Law and the Dean at the University of Illinois College of Law. Previously, he served as the Associate Dean for Academic Affairs and Professor of Law at the University of California, Davis School of Law. He is a 1988 graduate of the Yale Law School and a former clerk to Justice Harry Blackmun. He is a co-author, along with William Cohen and Jonathan Varat, of a major constitutional law casebook, and a co-author of several volumes of the Wright & Miller treatise on federal practice and procedure. Before teaching, Professor Amar spent a few years at the firm of Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher. RECENT ARTICLES SUPREME COURT RULES THAT CITIZENSHIP MUST BE EQUALLY HERITABLE THROUGH FATHERS AND MOTHERS Cornell University law professor Michael C. Dorf comments on a recent decision by the U.S. Supreme Court on the heritability of citizenship and explains why the decision might have implications for other immigration issues, such as the “Muslim ban” executive order. Dorf argues that the precedents the Court had to distinguish to reach its conclusion might give some insight into whether and how it might defer to other political branches on immigration issues.... Read More TRUMP IS NOT READY TO DEAL WITH HIS LEGAL PROBLEMS John W. Dean, former counsel to President Nixon, reflects on the much-anticipated testimony of former FBI Director James Comey before the Senate Intelligence Committee on Thursday. Dean briefly summarizes the takeaways from Comey’s testimony and discusses the response by President Trump and his lawyer.... Read More ABSOLUTE POWER CORRUPTS ABSOLUTELY IN THE KEEPERS Marci A. Hamilton, a Fox Distinguished Scholar in the Fox Leadership Program at the University of Pennsylvania and CEO of CHILD USA, encourages everyone to watch the Netflix docuseries The Keepers, which addresses child sex abuse in the Catholic Church. Hamilton describes the progress toward justice for child sex abuse victims, including the growing awareness of the pervasiveness the problem and increasing numbers of states who extend or eliminate statutes of limitations for these types of lawsuits and prosecutions....Read More [Forward this email.] Have friends who like law? Forward this email. [Like Verdict on Facebook] Like Verdict for legal discussions on Facebook. [Follow @verdictjustia on Twitter] Follow @verdictjustia for news and updates on Twitter. [Justia] Contact Us | Privacy Policy | Unsubscribe [Facebook][Twitter][LinkedIn][Justia][GooglePlus] You received this email because you have subscribed to the Verdict News E-Mail Feed. Justia | 1380 Pear Ave, Suite 2B, Mountain View, CA 94043 ________________________________ ________________________________ 1 Behind me at Harvard Law School, Killer Koh was President Obama’s War Consigliere and Droner-in-Chief. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Sat Jun 17 14:05:22 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2017 14:05:22 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Law School Off Campus! Message-ID: And of course in the Philosophy Department where they all teach, CIA/Mossad/Torture/Moore/Hurd are perverting and corrupting the young minds of our College Students and of our Children. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Saturday, June 17, 2017 8:03 AM To: 'Karen Aram' Cc: 'David Green' ; 'sherwoodross10 at gmail.com' ; 'peace-discuss at anti-war.net' ; 'C. G. ESTABROOK' ; 'a-fields at uiuc.edu' ; Hoffman, Valerie J ; 'Joe Lauria' ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; 'Arlene Hickory' ; 'David Swanson' ; 'peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net' ; 'abass10 at gmail.com' ; 'mickalideh at gmail.com' ; 'Lina Thorne' ; 'chicago at worldcantwait.net' ; 'Jay' ; Estabrook, Carl G ; 'Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net' ; 'David Johnson' ; Mildred O'brien ; Belden Fields Subject: RE: Law School Off Campus! The College of Law Building is conveniently located at the far south end of the campus and to the immediate due north of the Graveyard—which is Emblematic after the Faculty brought in Killer Koh to justify the mass murder of thousands of Muslims/Arabs/Asians of Color—Men, Women, Children and the Elderly. So fine. Let us isolate and quarantine the College of Law and its Faculty around the Graveyard where they belong. Keep them off the rest of this Campus and this Community: Law School Off Campus! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Saturday, June 17, 2017 7:46 AM To: 'Karen Aram' > Cc: 'David Green' >; 'sherwoodross10 at gmail.com' >; 'peace-discuss at anti-war.net' >; 'C. G. ESTABROOK' >; 'a-fields at uiuc.edu' >; Hoffman, Valerie J >; 'Joe Lauria' >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; 'Arlene Hickory' >; 'David Swanson' >; 'peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net' >; 'abass10 at gmail.com' >; 'mickalideh at gmail.com' >; 'Lina Thorne' >; 'chicago at worldcantwait.net' >; 'Jay' >; Estabrook, Carl G >; 'Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net' >; 'David Johnson' >; Mildred O'brien >; Belden Fields > Subject: Law School Off Campus! A generation ago Belden and I were both Veterans of the CIA Off Campus Movement here, Belden actually being arrested by the University Police because of his act of courage, integrity and principle challenging the CIA presence on this Campus. Well I am now starting a new Movement: Law School Off Campus! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Saturday, June 17, 2017 7:30 AM To: Karen Aram > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: RE: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 I trust you can all comprehend how much Evil this law school has inflicted after five years of direct and personal control by the CIA, Mossad, Moore,Hurd, and Torture. Killer Koh is only the tip of the iceberg. This Law School is a Cancer eating away at the Heart of this Campus and of our Good Community, where I have lived, taught and raised my family since July of 1978 when I first moved here from Boston.Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Friday, June 16, 2017 11:35 AM To: Karen Aram > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: RE: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 In other words, for five years CIA/Mossad/Torture ran this Law School and Everyone and Everything about it. So of course we ended up with Killer Koh on October 28, 2016. Plus ca change….fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Friday, June 16, 2017 11:22 AM To: Karen Aram > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: RE: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 And during the Five Year Tenure of Torture-Mongerers/CIA/Mossad/MichaelMoore/Dean HurricaneHeidiHurd, they brought onto this Faculty people as Evil as they are. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Friday, June 16, 2017 9:08 AM To: Karen Aram > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: RE: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 If you want to read all about the Criminal Dirty Work performed by Harvard Law Obama’s Harvard/Yale Law Mafia including Killary and Killer Koh you should see Charlie Savage: Power Wars (770 pages)—the Nazis had their Lawyers and their Law Professors and their Law Schools too. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 7:33 PM To: Karen Aram > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: RE: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 I was astonished over a year ago, before I’d ever heard of “Killer Koh,” to attend a lecture on “The legitimacy of targeted killing” in relation to our drone warfare, at the U of I Law School. It was clearly a charade to present drones as legitimate in spite of International law and US laws of due process. Yeah, if I remember correctly, I think that might have been the Dirty Work of Fired and Disgraced Dean Heidi Hurd’s Consort Michael Moore, who bragged that he works for the CIA and the Mossad-- and both of whom have stunk up this Campus and this Community for years by publicly advocating Torture. Moore also publicly congratulated everyone for bringing in Killer Koh after I had done everything humanly possible to stop them. As I said, this Law School is EVIL INCARNATE! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Karen Aram [mailto:karenaram at hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 7:22 PM To: Boyle, Francis A > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: Re: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 It does make sense that the law schools connected with Yale and Harvard would be “evil” given law schools are the first academic institution that the oligarchs controlling our government, would by necessity need to corrupt, in order to control the masses. I was astonished over a year ago, before I’d ever heard of “Killer Koh,” to attend a lecture on “The legitimacy of targeted killing” in relation to our drone warfare, at the U of I Law School. It was clearly a charade to present drones as legitimate in spite of International law and US laws of due process. Again, I had almost a year later, the frustration of attending a lecture by Dean Amar’s brother, a constitutional law professor from Yale, on “Freedom of Speech”, The lecture had nothing to do with freedom of speech, it was a promotion of his book and Hillary as well as local Democrats, along with an attempt to portray Obama in a good light. Then “killer Koh” Hillary’s advisor on drone warfare, being brought to the U of I as a representative of the “law” and speaking on human rights, to law students? Sometimes, too much is too much for sensible minds. On Jun 15, 2017, at 17:06, Boyle, Francis A > wrote: Well at least we all stood up against this Evil Law School on October 28. But from what Amar is saying here, I am sure we will have to do so again. So stay tuned. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Karen Aram [mailto:karenaram at hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 5:13 PM To: Boyle, Francis A > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: Re: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 Our government is evil, and if we the people don’t stop them from the wars and killings, then we are complicit in their warcrimes. On Jun 15, 2017, at 15:07, Boyle, Francis A > wrote: This Law School is EVIL! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 10:38 AM To: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; Karen Aram >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: FW: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 Sure. Let’s bring the War Criminal, Murderer, Felon, Bigot, Racist and Genocidaire Killer Koh into our Law School on October 28, 2016, hold him up as a Role Model to our Law Students, and then turn our Law Students into War Criminals, Murderers, Felons, Bigots, Racists and Genocidaires just like Killer Koh. Fab. Diss-Ode to Harold Killer Koh1 Harold Killer Koh Killing Babies where he go Muslim life is cheap you see Jewish life too for the Nazi Carl Schmitt Professor of Law At the Yale Law School Boot-licking Gene Rostow Of the infamous Rostow Brothers Who gave us Vietnam Genociding “gooks” too Obama’s War Consigliere Gene and his “kids” for LBJ Some things never change for Dems And their Elite Law School Whores Today At Harvard Law School too Where Killers Obama and Koh First dropped their pooh Along with “Judge” Davey Barron too Obama’s Droner-in-Chief Destined for a Cell in The Hague Right next to his student John Yoo A Chip off of Harold’s Old Block Cold-blooded Killers and War Criminals too Killer Koh disteaching “human rights” at N.Y.U. Supported by his gang of Dem law prof thugs Beating up on the N.Y.U. law students few With the courage, integrity, and principles to say Never again! Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Justia Verdict [mailto:verdictsupport at justia.com] Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 10:09 AM To: Boyle, Francis A > Subject: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 Illinois Law dean and professor Vikram David Amar laments recent instances of censored speech, particularly on university campuses, and reminds us that freedom of speech and academic freedom protect even those speakers whose message might be perceived odious, racist, sexist, or hateful. Amar points out that both freedom of speech and academic freedom are rooted in the principle that ideas and arguments ought to be evaluated on their substance and that the essence of both kinds of freedom is the opportunity to persuade others of the merits of one's argument, rather than the use of power to coerce or silence others. Click here to view in your browser if you are having trouble viewing this email. [Verdict - Legal Analysis and commentary from Justia.] Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom Vikram David Amar Jun 15, 2017 [https://i2.wp.com/verdict.justia.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/IMG_0590.jpg?quality=90&resize=426%2C350&strip=all&fit=1000%25&ssl=1] It distresses me to see episodes these days in which speakers who are controversial for their conservative or ultra-conservative views are prevented from delivering invited remarks at universities (including public universities) because protestors choose to violate laws designed to protect public safety. It also distresses me to see so few liberal analysts decry how illiberal these episodes of group-imposed censorship are. As I have written at length elsewhere, no matter how repressive or otherwise abhorrent a speaker’s message, the appropriate response under our Constitution is counter speech, not shouting down or physically obstructing or threatening the speaker or the speaker’s audience. To be sure, protesting a speaker’s presence—registering profound objection to a speaker’s viewpoint—is perfectly appropriate and has a rich tradition dating from even before the 1960s free speech revolution through the Occupy movement. But what we have seen over the past several months is a transition from protesting against bad speakers to preventing them from being able to speak, and that is not acceptable. An unflinching commitment to freedom of speech—even odious, racist, sexist, hateful speech—is the cornerstone of constitutional democracy in the United States. Certainly we protect freedom of speech more vigorously than any other western democracy. We also have a venerable tradition of respecting academic freedom at colleges and universities. These two principles, freedom of speech and academic freedom, overlap and are interconnected, even as they are distinct ideas. Freedom of speech is a broadly applicable right codified in the federal First Amendment and state constitutional analogues that protects speakers both on and off public campuses from unwarranted government interference with expression. Academic freedom, which may extend beyond what the Constitutionprotects, is grounded on the idea that, at least in the academy, free inquiry unburdened by the constraints of orthodoxy will lead to the development of new ideas and knowledge. Notwithstanding their different scopes, both freedom of speech and academic freedom rest on the bedrock belief that ideas and arguments ought to be evaluated on their substance. The essence of both kinds of freedom is the opportunity to persuade others of the merits of one’s argument, rather than the use of power to coerce others into acceding to the proponent’s point of view. Sometimes the heat and passion of political protests on college campuses causes these basic principles to be overlooked or ignored. When that happens, it is important for us to go back to what freedom of speech and academic freedom really mean and how easily both of these principles can be misused and misinterpreted. Governments Can and Should Prohibit Certain Obstructive Conduct The short of the matter is that blockading, obstructing, assaulting, destroying property, and making threats, are not, in any stretch of the imagination, constitutionally protected things to do, no matter what the objective behind them. These activities are conduct the government has always had the legitimate authority to proscribe because they so obviously interfere with the liberty and lawful pursuits of others. As the Supreme Court of California stated in an important free speech case,In Re Kay: [T]he state retains a legitimate concern in ensuring that some individuals unruly assertion of their rights of free expression does not imperil other citizen’s rights of free association and discussion. … Freedom of everyone to talk at once can destroy the right of anyone effectively to talk at all. Free expression can expire as tragically in the tumult of license as in the silence of censorship. Government actions to prohibit blockades or obstruction have been held to be permissible under the First Amendment too many times to count. To cite just one example, a federal law, the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act (FACE), that prohibits anyone from physically obstructing any person from obtaining or providing reproductive health services, has been upheld repeatedly against constitutional challenge, and those cases raise harder questions than do generic obstruction laws because FACE targets specific places where protestors with particular messages may be expected. Blockades and obstructions can and should be prohibited consistent with the First Amendment primarily because they are not intended to and do not persuade anyone of the merits of the protestors’ position. They are employed to coerce third parties to change their behavior, not their minds. As such, they are actually antithetical to, rather than in furtherance of, the values on which freedom of speech and academic freedom are grounded — a commitment to the power of ideas rather than the use of force to change the way that people act. Creative But Unavailing Counterarguments In recent weeks, I have heard defenders of those who obstruct conservative speakers make two novel but completely unconvincing arguments. First, the obstruction defenders try to invoke the civil rights movement by pointing out that Martin Luther King, Jr. and his supporters were often guilty of civil disobedience—that is violating duly enacted laws. But this analogy is unavailing because King and his followers were violating laws that were (in the eyes of the protestors and many others) themselves unjust, not laws that were completely unobjectionable but simply stood in the way of the desires of the violators. Another distinction between the two settings is that to the extent that civil rights protestors violated laws regulating their political activity, they were violating laws in order to be heard themselves, not in order to prevent others from being heard. But today’s obstructors cannot credibly complain that they cannot be heard; they simply want others not to be listened to. The second creative yet deeply flawed argument I’ve heard in defense of the obstructors is the idea that controversial speakers of the kind who are being suppressed are themselves not appropriate speakers to be invited to university settings because they are not sufficiently academic in character. Putting aside the fact that these speakers were invited (whether they ought to have been or not), and putting aside whether some of these speakers do have some academic bona fides (even if their ideas are often very wrong-headed), this argument mischaracterizes the kind of speakers who belong at universities. Higher education is a place not just to sharpen one’s critical thinking skills through exposure to brilliant academics who make data-informed arguments in multiple directions; it is also a place where one should learn how to become a full citizen in American society. As the Supreme Court observed in the context of high school students in Tinker v. Des Moines Independent School District, this often means that students need to engage each other on the contentious political issues of the day. And in today’s college world this sometimes means hearing and evaluating strident political advocates, some of whom even border on demagoguery. To be sure, student and faculty organizations should give some thought (perhaps more thought than they currently do) to the question of whom they invite to speak on campus—certainly not everyone should be offered a platform—but many campus speakers, on the Left as well as the Right, are not particularly grounded in rigorous theoretical or empirical analysis, and this does not mean that they are per se inappropriate speakers for college audiences. Again, colleges should be preparing young people not just to navigate the economy, but also to navigate democracy. And, for better or worse, modern democracy means having to deal with a lot of ideas that are widely held even though they don’t hold up to analytic rigor. Debunking those ideas—not shouting them down or trying to suppress their expression—is what I want my students to learn how to do. [https://justatic.com/v/20170601a/verdict/images/authors/thumbs/amar.jpg] Follow @prof_amar Vikram David Amar is the Iwan Foundation Professor of Law and the Dean at the University of Illinois College of Law. Previously, he served as the Associate Dean for Academic Affairs and Professor of Law at the University of California, Davis School of Law. He is a 1988 graduate of the Yale Law School and a former clerk to Justice Harry Blackmun. He is a co-author, along with William Cohen and Jonathan Varat, of a major constitutional law casebook, and a co-author of several volumes of the Wright & Miller treatise on federal practice and procedure. Before teaching, Professor Amar spent a few years at the firm of Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher. RECENT ARTICLES SUPREME COURT RULES THAT CITIZENSHIP MUST BE EQUALLY HERITABLE THROUGH FATHERS AND MOTHERS Cornell University law professor Michael C. Dorf comments on a recent decision by the U.S. Supreme Court on the heritability of citizenship and explains why the decision might have implications for other immigration issues, such as the “Muslim ban” executive order. Dorf argues that the precedents the Court had to distinguish to reach its conclusion might give some insight into whether and how it might defer to other political branches on immigration issues.... Read More TRUMP IS NOT READY TO DEAL WITH HIS LEGAL PROBLEMS John W. Dean, former counsel to President Nixon, reflects on the much-anticipated testimony of former FBI Director James Comey before the Senate Intelligence Committee on Thursday. Dean briefly summarizes the takeaways from Comey’s testimony and discusses the response by President Trump and his lawyer.... Read More ABSOLUTE POWER CORRUPTS ABSOLUTELY IN THE KEEPERS Marci A. Hamilton, a Fox Distinguished Scholar in the Fox Leadership Program at the University of Pennsylvania and CEO of CHILD USA, encourages everyone to watch the Netflix docuseries The Keepers, which addresses child sex abuse in the Catholic Church. Hamilton describes the progress toward justice for child sex abuse victims, including the growing awareness of the pervasiveness the problem and increasing numbers of states who extend or eliminate statutes of limitations for these types of lawsuits and prosecutions....Read More [Forward this email.] Have friends who like law? Forward this email. [Like Verdict on Facebook] Like Verdict for legal discussions on Facebook. [Follow @verdictjustia on Twitter] Follow @verdictjustia for news and updates on Twitter. [Justia] Contact Us | Privacy Policy | Unsubscribe [Facebook][Twitter][LinkedIn][Justia][GooglePlus] You received this email because you have subscribed to the Verdict News E-Mail Feed. Justia | 1380 Pear Ave, Suite 2B, Mountain View, CA 94043 ________________________________ ________________________________ 1 Behind me at Harvard Law School, Killer Koh was President Obama’s War Consigliere and Droner-in-Chief. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Sat Jun 17 14:28:10 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2017 14:28:10 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Law School Off Campus! Message-ID: CIA OFF CAMPUS! MOSSAD OFF CAMPUS! LAW SCHOOL OFF CAMPUS! FAB Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Saturday, June 17, 2017 8:45 AM To: 'Karen Aram' Cc: 'David Green' ; 'sherwoodross10 at gmail.com' ; 'peace-discuss at anti-war.net' ; 'C. G. ESTABROOK' ; 'a-fields at uiuc.edu' ; Hoffman, Valerie J ; 'Joe Lauria' ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; 'Arlene Hickory' ; 'David Swanson' ; 'peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net' ; 'abass10 at gmail.com' ; 'mickalideh at gmail.com' ; 'Lina Thorne' ; 'chicago at worldcantwait.net' ; 'Jay' ; Estabrook, Carl G ; 'Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net' ; 'David Johnson' ; Mildred O'brien ; Belden Fields Subject: RE: Law School Off Campus! The College of Law and the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, Department of Philosophy have been infiltrated, perverted and corrupted by CIA/Mossad/Torture/Moore/Hurd, both of whom are still teaching there. CIA Off Campus! Mossad Off Campus! Law School Off Campus! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Saturday, June 17, 2017 8:03 AM To: 'Karen Aram' > Cc: 'David Green' >; 'sherwoodross10 at gmail.com' >; 'peace-discuss at anti-war.net' >; 'C. G. ESTABROOK' >; 'a-fields at uiuc.edu' >; Hoffman, Valerie J >; 'Joe Lauria' >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; 'Arlene Hickory' >; 'David Swanson' >; 'peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net' >; 'abass10 at gmail.com' >; 'mickalideh at gmail.com' >; 'Lina Thorne' >; 'chicago at worldcantwait.net' >; 'Jay' >; Estabrook, Carl G >; 'Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net' >; 'David Johnson' >; Mildred O'brien >; Belden Fields > Subject: RE: Law School Off Campus! The College of Law Building is conveniently located at the far south end of the campus and to the immediate due north of the Graveyard—which is Emblematic after the Faculty brought in Killer Koh to justify the mass murder of thousands of Muslims/Arabs/Asians of Color—Men, Women, Children and the Elderly. So fine. Let us isolate and quarantine the College of Law and its Faculty around the Graveyard where they belong. Keep them off the rest of this Campus and this Community: Law School Off Campus! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Saturday, June 17, 2017 7:46 AM To: 'Karen Aram' > Cc: 'David Green' >; 'sherwoodross10 at gmail.com' >; 'peace-discuss at anti-war.net' >; 'C. G. ESTABROOK' >; 'a-fields at uiuc.edu' >; Hoffman, Valerie J >; 'Joe Lauria' >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; 'Arlene Hickory' >; 'David Swanson' >; 'peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net' >; 'abass10 at gmail.com' >; 'mickalideh at gmail.com' >; 'Lina Thorne' >; 'chicago at worldcantwait.net' >; 'Jay' >; Estabrook, Carl G >; 'Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net' >; 'David Johnson' >; Mildred O'brien >; Belden Fields > Subject: Law School Off Campus! A generation ago Belden and I were both Veterans of the CIA Off Campus Movement here, Belden actually being arrested by the University Police because of his act of courage, integrity and principle challenging the CIA presence on this Campus. Well I am now starting a new Movement: Law School Off Campus! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Saturday, June 17, 2017 7:30 AM To: Karen Aram > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: RE: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 I trust you can all comprehend how much Evil this law school has inflicted after five years of direct and personal control by the CIA, Mossad, Moore,Hurd, and Torture. Killer Koh is only the tip of the iceberg. This Law School is a Cancer eating away at the Heart of this Campus and of our Good Community, where I have lived, taught and raised my family since July of 1978 when I first moved here from Boston.Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Friday, June 16, 2017 11:35 AM To: Karen Aram > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: RE: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 In other words, for five years CIA/Mossad/Torture ran this Law School and Everyone and Everything about it. So of course we ended up with Killer Koh on October 28, 2016. Plus ca change….fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Friday, June 16, 2017 11:22 AM To: Karen Aram > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: RE: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 And during the Five Year Tenure of Torture-Mongerers/CIA/Mossad/MichaelMoore/Dean HurricaneHeidiHurd, they brought onto this Faculty people as Evil as they are. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Friday, June 16, 2017 9:08 AM To: Karen Aram > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: RE: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 If you want to read all about the Criminal Dirty Work performed by Harvard Law Obama’s Harvard/Yale Law Mafia including Killary and Killer Koh you should see Charlie Savage: Power Wars (770 pages)—the Nazis had their Lawyers and their Law Professors and their Law Schools too. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 7:33 PM To: Karen Aram > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: RE: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 I was astonished over a year ago, before I’d ever heard of “Killer Koh,” to attend a lecture on “The legitimacy of targeted killing” in relation to our drone warfare, at the U of I Law School. It was clearly a charade to present drones as legitimate in spite of International law and US laws of due process. Yeah, if I remember correctly, I think that might have been the Dirty Work of Fired and Disgraced Dean Heidi Hurd’s Consort Michael Moore, who bragged that he works for the CIA and the Mossad-- and both of whom have stunk up this Campus and this Community for years by publicly advocating Torture. Moore also publicly congratulated everyone for bringing in Killer Koh after I had done everything humanly possible to stop them. As I said, this Law School is EVIL INCARNATE! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Karen Aram [mailto:karenaram at hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 7:22 PM To: Boyle, Francis A > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: Re: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 It does make sense that the law schools connected with Yale and Harvard would be “evil” given law schools are the first academic institution that the oligarchs controlling our government, would by necessity need to corrupt, in order to control the masses. I was astonished over a year ago, before I’d ever heard of “Killer Koh,” to attend a lecture on “The legitimacy of targeted killing” in relation to our drone warfare, at the U of I Law School. It was clearly a charade to present drones as legitimate in spite of International law and US laws of due process. Again, I had almost a year later, the frustration of attending a lecture by Dean Amar’s brother, a constitutional law professor from Yale, on “Freedom of Speech”, The lecture had nothing to do with freedom of speech, it was a promotion of his book and Hillary as well as local Democrats, along with an attempt to portray Obama in a good light. Then “killer Koh” Hillary’s advisor on drone warfare, being brought to the U of I as a representative of the “law” and speaking on human rights, to law students? Sometimes, too much is too much for sensible minds. On Jun 15, 2017, at 17:06, Boyle, Francis A > wrote: Well at least we all stood up against this Evil Law School on October 28. But from what Amar is saying here, I am sure we will have to do so again. So stay tuned. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Karen Aram [mailto:karenaram at hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 5:13 PM To: Boyle, Francis A > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: Re: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 Our government is evil, and if we the people don’t stop them from the wars and killings, then we are complicit in their warcrimes. On Jun 15, 2017, at 15:07, Boyle, Francis A > wrote: This Law School is EVIL! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 10:38 AM To: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; Karen Aram >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: FW: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 Sure. Let’s bring the War Criminal, Murderer, Felon, Bigot, Racist and Genocidaire Killer Koh into our Law School on October 28, 2016, hold him up as a Role Model to our Law Students, and then turn our Law Students into War Criminals, Murderers, Felons, Bigots, Racists and Genocidaires just like Killer Koh. Fab. Diss-Ode to Harold Killer Koh1 Harold Killer Koh Killing Babies where he go Muslim life is cheap you see Jewish life too for the Nazi Carl Schmitt Professor of Law At the Yale Law School Boot-licking Gene Rostow Of the infamous Rostow Brothers Who gave us Vietnam Genociding “gooks” too Obama’s War Consigliere Gene and his “kids” for LBJ Some things never change for Dems And their Elite Law School Whores Today At Harvard Law School too Where Killers Obama and Koh First dropped their pooh Along with “Judge” Davey Barron too Obama’s Droner-in-Chief Destined for a Cell in The Hague Right next to his student John Yoo A Chip off of Harold’s Old Block Cold-blooded Killers and War Criminals too Killer Koh disteaching “human rights” at N.Y.U. Supported by his gang of Dem law prof thugs Beating up on the N.Y.U. law students few With the courage, integrity, and principles to say Never again! Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Justia Verdict [mailto:verdictsupport at justia.com] Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 10:09 AM To: Boyle, Francis A > Subject: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 Illinois Law dean and professor Vikram David Amar laments recent instances of censored speech, particularly on university campuses, and reminds us that freedom of speech and academic freedom protect even those speakers whose message might be perceived odious, racist, sexist, or hateful. Amar points out that both freedom of speech and academic freedom are rooted in the principle that ideas and arguments ought to be evaluated on their substance and that the essence of both kinds of freedom is the opportunity to persuade others of the merits of one's argument, rather than the use of power to coerce or silence others. Click here to view in your browser if you are having trouble viewing this email. [Verdict - Legal Analysis and commentary from Justia.] Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom Vikram David Amar Jun 15, 2017 [https://i2.wp.com/verdict.justia.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/IMG_0590.jpg?quality=90&resize=426%2C350&strip=all&fit=1000%25&ssl=1] It distresses me to see episodes these days in which speakers who are controversial for their conservative or ultra-conservative views are prevented from delivering invited remarks at universities (including public universities) because protestors choose to violate laws designed to protect public safety. It also distresses me to see so few liberal analysts decry how illiberal these episodes of group-imposed censorship are. As I have written at length elsewhere, no matter how repressive or otherwise abhorrent a speaker’s message, the appropriate response under our Constitution is counter speech, not shouting down or physically obstructing or threatening the speaker or the speaker’s audience. To be sure, protesting a speaker’s presence—registering profound objection to a speaker’s viewpoint—is perfectly appropriate and has a rich tradition dating from even before the 1960s free speech revolution through the Occupy movement. But what we have seen over the past several months is a transition from protesting against bad speakers to preventing them from being able to speak, and that is not acceptable. An unflinching commitment to freedom of speech—even odious, racist, sexist, hateful speech—is the cornerstone of constitutional democracy in the United States. Certainly we protect freedom of speech more vigorously than any other western democracy. We also have a venerable tradition of respecting academic freedom at colleges and universities. These two principles, freedom of speech and academic freedom, overlap and are interconnected, even as they are distinct ideas. Freedom of speech is a broadly applicable right codified in the federal First Amendment and state constitutional analogues that protects speakers both on and off public campuses from unwarranted government interference with expression. Academic freedom, which may extend beyond what the Constitutionprotects, is grounded on the idea that, at least in the academy, free inquiry unburdened by the constraints of orthodoxy will lead to the development of new ideas and knowledge. Notwithstanding their different scopes, both freedom of speech and academic freedom rest on the bedrock belief that ideas and arguments ought to be evaluated on their substance. The essence of both kinds of freedom is the opportunity to persuade others of the merits of one’s argument, rather than the use of power to coerce others into acceding to the proponent’s point of view. Sometimes the heat and passion of political protests on college campuses causes these basic principles to be overlooked or ignored. When that happens, it is important for us to go back to what freedom of speech and academic freedom really mean and how easily both of these principles can be misused and misinterpreted. Governments Can and Should Prohibit Certain Obstructive Conduct The short of the matter is that blockading, obstructing, assaulting, destroying property, and making threats, are not, in any stretch of the imagination, constitutionally protected things to do, no matter what the objective behind them. These activities are conduct the government has always had the legitimate authority to proscribe because they so obviously interfere with the liberty and lawful pursuits of others. As the Supreme Court of California stated in an important free speech case,In Re Kay: [T]he state retains a legitimate concern in ensuring that some individuals unruly assertion of their rights of free expression does not imperil other citizen’s rights of free association and discussion. … Freedom of everyone to talk at once can destroy the right of anyone effectively to talk at all. Free expression can expire as tragically in the tumult of license as in the silence of censorship. Government actions to prohibit blockades or obstruction have been held to be permissible under the First Amendment too many times to count. To cite just one example, a federal law, the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act (FACE), that prohibits anyone from physically obstructing any person from obtaining or providing reproductive health services, has been upheld repeatedly against constitutional challenge, and those cases raise harder questions than do generic obstruction laws because FACE targets specific places where protestors with particular messages may be expected. Blockades and obstructions can and should be prohibited consistent with the First Amendment primarily because they are not intended to and do not persuade anyone of the merits of the protestors’ position. They are employed to coerce third parties to change their behavior, not their minds. As such, they are actually antithetical to, rather than in furtherance of, the values on which freedom of speech and academic freedom are grounded — a commitment to the power of ideas rather than the use of force to change the way that people act. Creative But Unavailing Counterarguments In recent weeks, I have heard defenders of those who obstruct conservative speakers make two novel but completely unconvincing arguments. First, the obstruction defenders try to invoke the civil rights movement by pointing out that Martin Luther King, Jr. and his supporters were often guilty of civil disobedience—that is violating duly enacted laws. But this analogy is unavailing because King and his followers were violating laws that were (in the eyes of the protestors and many others) themselves unjust, not laws that were completely unobjectionable but simply stood in the way of the desires of the violators. Another distinction between the two settings is that to the extent that civil rights protestors violated laws regulating their political activity, they were violating laws in order to be heard themselves, not in order to prevent others from being heard. But today’s obstructors cannot credibly complain that they cannot be heard; they simply want others not to be listened to. The second creative yet deeply flawed argument I’ve heard in defense of the obstructors is the idea that controversial speakers of the kind who are being suppressed are themselves not appropriate speakers to be invited to university settings because they are not sufficiently academic in character. Putting aside the fact that these speakers were invited (whether they ought to have been or not), and putting aside whether some of these speakers do have some academic bona fides (even if their ideas are often very wrong-headed), this argument mischaracterizes the kind of speakers who belong at universities. Higher education is a place not just to sharpen one’s critical thinking skills through exposure to brilliant academics who make data-informed arguments in multiple directions; it is also a place where one should learn how to become a full citizen in American society. As the Supreme Court observed in the context of high school students in Tinker v. Des Moines Independent School District, this often means that students need to engage each other on the contentious political issues of the day. And in today’s college world this sometimes means hearing and evaluating strident political advocates, some of whom even border on demagoguery. To be sure, student and faculty organizations should give some thought (perhaps more thought than they currently do) to the question of whom they invite to speak on campus—certainly not everyone should be offered a platform—but many campus speakers, on the Left as well as the Right, are not particularly grounded in rigorous theoretical or empirical analysis, and this does not mean that they are per se inappropriate speakers for college audiences. Again, colleges should be preparing young people not just to navigate the economy, but also to navigate democracy. And, for better or worse, modern democracy means having to deal with a lot of ideas that are widely held even though they don’t hold up to analytic rigor. Debunking those ideas—not shouting them down or trying to suppress their expression—is what I want my students to learn how to do. [https://justatic.com/v/20170601a/verdict/images/authors/thumbs/amar.jpg] Follow @prof_amar Vikram David Amar is the Iwan Foundation Professor of Law and the Dean at the University of Illinois College of Law. Previously, he served as the Associate Dean for Academic Affairs and Professor of Law at the University of California, Davis School of Law. He is a 1988 graduate of the Yale Law School and a former clerk to Justice Harry Blackmun. He is a co-author, along with William Cohen and Jonathan Varat, of a major constitutional law casebook, and a co-author of several volumes of the Wright & Miller treatise on federal practice and procedure. Before teaching, Professor Amar spent a few years at the firm of Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher. RECENT ARTICLES SUPREME COURT RULES THAT CITIZENSHIP MUST BE EQUALLY HERITABLE THROUGH FATHERS AND MOTHERS Cornell University law professor Michael C. Dorf comments on a recent decision by the U.S. Supreme Court on the heritability of citizenship and explains why the decision might have implications for other immigration issues, such as the “Muslim ban” executive order. Dorf argues that the precedents the Court had to distinguish to reach its conclusion might give some insight into whether and how it might defer to other political branches on immigration issues.... Read More TRUMP IS NOT READY TO DEAL WITH HIS LEGAL PROBLEMS John W. Dean, former counsel to President Nixon, reflects on the much-anticipated testimony of former FBI Director James Comey before the Senate Intelligence Committee on Thursday. Dean briefly summarizes the takeaways from Comey’s testimony and discusses the response by President Trump and his lawyer.... Read More ABSOLUTE POWER CORRUPTS ABSOLUTELY IN THE KEEPERS Marci A. Hamilton, a Fox Distinguished Scholar in the Fox Leadership Program at the University of Pennsylvania and CEO of CHILD USA, encourages everyone to watch the Netflix docuseries The Keepers, which addresses child sex abuse in the Catholic Church. Hamilton describes the progress toward justice for child sex abuse victims, including the growing awareness of the pervasiveness the problem and increasing numbers of states who extend or eliminate statutes of limitations for these types of lawsuits and prosecutions....Read More [Forward this email.] Have friends who like law? Forward this email. [Like Verdict on Facebook] Like Verdict for legal discussions on Facebook. [Follow @verdictjustia on Twitter] Follow @verdictjustia for news and updates on Twitter. [Justia] Contact Us | Privacy Policy | Unsubscribe [Facebook][Twitter][LinkedIn][Justia][GooglePlus] You received this email because you have subscribed to the Verdict News E-Mail Feed. Justia | 1380 Pear Ave, Suite 2B, Mountain View, CA 94043 ________________________________ ________________________________ 1 Behind me at Harvard Law School, Killer Koh was President Obama’s War Consigliere and Droner-in-Chief. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Sat Jun 17 14:28:10 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2017 14:28:10 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Law School Off Campus! Message-ID: CIA OFF CAMPUS! MOSSAD OFF CAMPUS! LAW SCHOOL OFF CAMPUS! FAB Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Saturday, June 17, 2017 8:45 AM To: 'Karen Aram' Cc: 'David Green' ; 'sherwoodross10 at gmail.com' ; 'peace-discuss at anti-war.net' ; 'C. G. ESTABROOK' ; 'a-fields at uiuc.edu' ; Hoffman, Valerie J ; 'Joe Lauria' ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; 'Arlene Hickory' ; 'David Swanson' ; 'peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net' ; 'abass10 at gmail.com' ; 'mickalideh at gmail.com' ; 'Lina Thorne' ; 'chicago at worldcantwait.net' ; 'Jay' ; Estabrook, Carl G ; 'Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net' ; 'David Johnson' ; Mildred O'brien ; Belden Fields Subject: RE: Law School Off Campus! The College of Law and the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, Department of Philosophy have been infiltrated, perverted and corrupted by CIA/Mossad/Torture/Moore/Hurd, both of whom are still teaching there. CIA Off Campus! Mossad Off Campus! Law School Off Campus! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Saturday, June 17, 2017 8:03 AM To: 'Karen Aram' > Cc: 'David Green' >; 'sherwoodross10 at gmail.com' >; 'peace-discuss at anti-war.net' >; 'C. G. ESTABROOK' >; 'a-fields at uiuc.edu' >; Hoffman, Valerie J >; 'Joe Lauria' >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; 'Arlene Hickory' >; 'David Swanson' >; 'peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net' >; 'abass10 at gmail.com' >; 'mickalideh at gmail.com' >; 'Lina Thorne' >; 'chicago at worldcantwait.net' >; 'Jay' >; Estabrook, Carl G >; 'Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net' >; 'David Johnson' >; Mildred O'brien >; Belden Fields > Subject: RE: Law School Off Campus! The College of Law Building is conveniently located at the far south end of the campus and to the immediate due north of the Graveyard—which is Emblematic after the Faculty brought in Killer Koh to justify the mass murder of thousands of Muslims/Arabs/Asians of Color—Men, Women, Children and the Elderly. So fine. Let us isolate and quarantine the College of Law and its Faculty around the Graveyard where they belong. Keep them off the rest of this Campus and this Community: Law School Off Campus! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Saturday, June 17, 2017 7:46 AM To: 'Karen Aram' > Cc: 'David Green' >; 'sherwoodross10 at gmail.com' >; 'peace-discuss at anti-war.net' >; 'C. G. ESTABROOK' >; 'a-fields at uiuc.edu' >; Hoffman, Valerie J >; 'Joe Lauria' >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; 'Arlene Hickory' >; 'David Swanson' >; 'peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net' >; 'abass10 at gmail.com' >; 'mickalideh at gmail.com' >; 'Lina Thorne' >; 'chicago at worldcantwait.net' >; 'Jay' >; Estabrook, Carl G >; 'Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net' >; 'David Johnson' >; Mildred O'brien >; Belden Fields > Subject: Law School Off Campus! A generation ago Belden and I were both Veterans of the CIA Off Campus Movement here, Belden actually being arrested by the University Police because of his act of courage, integrity and principle challenging the CIA presence on this Campus. Well I am now starting a new Movement: Law School Off Campus! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Saturday, June 17, 2017 7:30 AM To: Karen Aram > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: RE: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 I trust you can all comprehend how much Evil this law school has inflicted after five years of direct and personal control by the CIA, Mossad, Moore,Hurd, and Torture. Killer Koh is only the tip of the iceberg. This Law School is a Cancer eating away at the Heart of this Campus and of our Good Community, where I have lived, taught and raised my family since July of 1978 when I first moved here from Boston.Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Friday, June 16, 2017 11:35 AM To: Karen Aram > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: RE: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 In other words, for five years CIA/Mossad/Torture ran this Law School and Everyone and Everything about it. So of course we ended up with Killer Koh on October 28, 2016. Plus ca change….fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Friday, June 16, 2017 11:22 AM To: Karen Aram > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: RE: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 And during the Five Year Tenure of Torture-Mongerers/CIA/Mossad/MichaelMoore/Dean HurricaneHeidiHurd, they brought onto this Faculty people as Evil as they are. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Friday, June 16, 2017 9:08 AM To: Karen Aram > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: RE: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 If you want to read all about the Criminal Dirty Work performed by Harvard Law Obama’s Harvard/Yale Law Mafia including Killary and Killer Koh you should see Charlie Savage: Power Wars (770 pages)—the Nazis had their Lawyers and their Law Professors and their Law Schools too. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 7:33 PM To: Karen Aram > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: RE: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 I was astonished over a year ago, before I’d ever heard of “Killer Koh,” to attend a lecture on “The legitimacy of targeted killing” in relation to our drone warfare, at the U of I Law School. It was clearly a charade to present drones as legitimate in spite of International law and US laws of due process. Yeah, if I remember correctly, I think that might have been the Dirty Work of Fired and Disgraced Dean Heidi Hurd’s Consort Michael Moore, who bragged that he works for the CIA and the Mossad-- and both of whom have stunk up this Campus and this Community for years by publicly advocating Torture. Moore also publicly congratulated everyone for bringing in Killer Koh after I had done everything humanly possible to stop them. As I said, this Law School is EVIL INCARNATE! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Karen Aram [mailto:karenaram at hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 7:22 PM To: Boyle, Francis A > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: Re: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 It does make sense that the law schools connected with Yale and Harvard would be “evil” given law schools are the first academic institution that the oligarchs controlling our government, would by necessity need to corrupt, in order to control the masses. I was astonished over a year ago, before I’d ever heard of “Killer Koh,” to attend a lecture on “The legitimacy of targeted killing” in relation to our drone warfare, at the U of I Law School. It was clearly a charade to present drones as legitimate in spite of International law and US laws of due process. Again, I had almost a year later, the frustration of attending a lecture by Dean Amar’s brother, a constitutional law professor from Yale, on “Freedom of Speech”, The lecture had nothing to do with freedom of speech, it was a promotion of his book and Hillary as well as local Democrats, along with an attempt to portray Obama in a good light. Then “killer Koh” Hillary’s advisor on drone warfare, being brought to the U of I as a representative of the “law” and speaking on human rights, to law students? Sometimes, too much is too much for sensible minds. On Jun 15, 2017, at 17:06, Boyle, Francis A > wrote: Well at least we all stood up against this Evil Law School on October 28. But from what Amar is saying here, I am sure we will have to do so again. So stay tuned. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Karen Aram [mailto:karenaram at hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 5:13 PM To: Boyle, Francis A > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: Re: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 Our government is evil, and if we the people don’t stop them from the wars and killings, then we are complicit in their warcrimes. On Jun 15, 2017, at 15:07, Boyle, Francis A > wrote: This Law School is EVIL! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 10:38 AM To: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; Karen Aram >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: FW: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 Sure. Let’s bring the War Criminal, Murderer, Felon, Bigot, Racist and Genocidaire Killer Koh into our Law School on October 28, 2016, hold him up as a Role Model to our Law Students, and then turn our Law Students into War Criminals, Murderers, Felons, Bigots, Racists and Genocidaires just like Killer Koh. Fab. Diss-Ode to Harold Killer Koh1 Harold Killer Koh Killing Babies where he go Muslim life is cheap you see Jewish life too for the Nazi Carl Schmitt Professor of Law At the Yale Law School Boot-licking Gene Rostow Of the infamous Rostow Brothers Who gave us Vietnam Genociding “gooks” too Obama’s War Consigliere Gene and his “kids” for LBJ Some things never change for Dems And their Elite Law School Whores Today At Harvard Law School too Where Killers Obama and Koh First dropped their pooh Along with “Judge” Davey Barron too Obama’s Droner-in-Chief Destined for a Cell in The Hague Right next to his student John Yoo A Chip off of Harold’s Old Block Cold-blooded Killers and War Criminals too Killer Koh disteaching “human rights” at N.Y.U. Supported by his gang of Dem law prof thugs Beating up on the N.Y.U. law students few With the courage, integrity, and principles to say Never again! Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Justia Verdict [mailto:verdictsupport at justia.com] Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 10:09 AM To: Boyle, Francis A > Subject: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 Illinois Law dean and professor Vikram David Amar laments recent instances of censored speech, particularly on university campuses, and reminds us that freedom of speech and academic freedom protect even those speakers whose message might be perceived odious, racist, sexist, or hateful. Amar points out that both freedom of speech and academic freedom are rooted in the principle that ideas and arguments ought to be evaluated on their substance and that the essence of both kinds of freedom is the opportunity to persuade others of the merits of one's argument, rather than the use of power to coerce or silence others. Click here to view in your browser if you are having trouble viewing this email. [Verdict - Legal Analysis and commentary from Justia.] Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom Vikram David Amar Jun 15, 2017 [https://i2.wp.com/verdict.justia.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/IMG_0590.jpg?quality=90&resize=426%2C350&strip=all&fit=1000%25&ssl=1] It distresses me to see episodes these days in which speakers who are controversial for their conservative or ultra-conservative views are prevented from delivering invited remarks at universities (including public universities) because protestors choose to violate laws designed to protect public safety. It also distresses me to see so few liberal analysts decry how illiberal these episodes of group-imposed censorship are. As I have written at length elsewhere, no matter how repressive or otherwise abhorrent a speaker’s message, the appropriate response under our Constitution is counter speech, not shouting down or physically obstructing or threatening the speaker or the speaker’s audience. To be sure, protesting a speaker’s presence—registering profound objection to a speaker’s viewpoint—is perfectly appropriate and has a rich tradition dating from even before the 1960s free speech revolution through the Occupy movement. But what we have seen over the past several months is a transition from protesting against bad speakers to preventing them from being able to speak, and that is not acceptable. An unflinching commitment to freedom of speech—even odious, racist, sexist, hateful speech—is the cornerstone of constitutional democracy in the United States. Certainly we protect freedom of speech more vigorously than any other western democracy. We also have a venerable tradition of respecting academic freedom at colleges and universities. These two principles, freedom of speech and academic freedom, overlap and are interconnected, even as they are distinct ideas. Freedom of speech is a broadly applicable right codified in the federal First Amendment and state constitutional analogues that protects speakers both on and off public campuses from unwarranted government interference with expression. Academic freedom, which may extend beyond what the Constitutionprotects, is grounded on the idea that, at least in the academy, free inquiry unburdened by the constraints of orthodoxy will lead to the development of new ideas and knowledge. Notwithstanding their different scopes, both freedom of speech and academic freedom rest on the bedrock belief that ideas and arguments ought to be evaluated on their substance. The essence of both kinds of freedom is the opportunity to persuade others of the merits of one’s argument, rather than the use of power to coerce others into acceding to the proponent’s point of view. Sometimes the heat and passion of political protests on college campuses causes these basic principles to be overlooked or ignored. When that happens, it is important for us to go back to what freedom of speech and academic freedom really mean and how easily both of these principles can be misused and misinterpreted. Governments Can and Should Prohibit Certain Obstructive Conduct The short of the matter is that blockading, obstructing, assaulting, destroying property, and making threats, are not, in any stretch of the imagination, constitutionally protected things to do, no matter what the objective behind them. These activities are conduct the government has always had the legitimate authority to proscribe because they so obviously interfere with the liberty and lawful pursuits of others. As the Supreme Court of California stated in an important free speech case,In Re Kay: [T]he state retains a legitimate concern in ensuring that some individuals unruly assertion of their rights of free expression does not imperil other citizen’s rights of free association and discussion. … Freedom of everyone to talk at once can destroy the right of anyone effectively to talk at all. Free expression can expire as tragically in the tumult of license as in the silence of censorship. Government actions to prohibit blockades or obstruction have been held to be permissible under the First Amendment too many times to count. To cite just one example, a federal law, the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act (FACE), that prohibits anyone from physically obstructing any person from obtaining or providing reproductive health services, has been upheld repeatedly against constitutional challenge, and those cases raise harder questions than do generic obstruction laws because FACE targets specific places where protestors with particular messages may be expected. Blockades and obstructions can and should be prohibited consistent with the First Amendment primarily because they are not intended to and do not persuade anyone of the merits of the protestors’ position. They are employed to coerce third parties to change their behavior, not their minds. As such, they are actually antithetical to, rather than in furtherance of, the values on which freedom of speech and academic freedom are grounded — a commitment to the power of ideas rather than the use of force to change the way that people act. Creative But Unavailing Counterarguments In recent weeks, I have heard defenders of those who obstruct conservative speakers make two novel but completely unconvincing arguments. First, the obstruction defenders try to invoke the civil rights movement by pointing out that Martin Luther King, Jr. and his supporters were often guilty of civil disobedience—that is violating duly enacted laws. But this analogy is unavailing because King and his followers were violating laws that were (in the eyes of the protestors and many others) themselves unjust, not laws that were completely unobjectionable but simply stood in the way of the desires of the violators. Another distinction between the two settings is that to the extent that civil rights protestors violated laws regulating their political activity, they were violating laws in order to be heard themselves, not in order to prevent others from being heard. But today’s obstructors cannot credibly complain that they cannot be heard; they simply want others not to be listened to. The second creative yet deeply flawed argument I’ve heard in defense of the obstructors is the idea that controversial speakers of the kind who are being suppressed are themselves not appropriate speakers to be invited to university settings because they are not sufficiently academic in character. Putting aside the fact that these speakers were invited (whether they ought to have been or not), and putting aside whether some of these speakers do have some academic bona fides (even if their ideas are often very wrong-headed), this argument mischaracterizes the kind of speakers who belong at universities. Higher education is a place not just to sharpen one’s critical thinking skills through exposure to brilliant academics who make data-informed arguments in multiple directions; it is also a place where one should learn how to become a full citizen in American society. As the Supreme Court observed in the context of high school students in Tinker v. Des Moines Independent School District, this often means that students need to engage each other on the contentious political issues of the day. And in today’s college world this sometimes means hearing and evaluating strident political advocates, some of whom even border on demagoguery. To be sure, student and faculty organizations should give some thought (perhaps more thought than they currently do) to the question of whom they invite to speak on campus—certainly not everyone should be offered a platform—but many campus speakers, on the Left as well as the Right, are not particularly grounded in rigorous theoretical or empirical analysis, and this does not mean that they are per se inappropriate speakers for college audiences. Again, colleges should be preparing young people not just to navigate the economy, but also to navigate democracy. And, for better or worse, modern democracy means having to deal with a lot of ideas that are widely held even though they don’t hold up to analytic rigor. Debunking those ideas—not shouting them down or trying to suppress their expression—is what I want my students to learn how to do. [https://justatic.com/v/20170601a/verdict/images/authors/thumbs/amar.jpg] Follow @prof_amar Vikram David Amar is the Iwan Foundation Professor of Law and the Dean at the University of Illinois College of Law. Previously, he served as the Associate Dean for Academic Affairs and Professor of Law at the University of California, Davis School of Law. He is a 1988 graduate of the Yale Law School and a former clerk to Justice Harry Blackmun. He is a co-author, along with William Cohen and Jonathan Varat, of a major constitutional law casebook, and a co-author of several volumes of the Wright & Miller treatise on federal practice and procedure. Before teaching, Professor Amar spent a few years at the firm of Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher. RECENT ARTICLES SUPREME COURT RULES THAT CITIZENSHIP MUST BE EQUALLY HERITABLE THROUGH FATHERS AND MOTHERS Cornell University law professor Michael C. Dorf comments on a recent decision by the U.S. Supreme Court on the heritability of citizenship and explains why the decision might have implications for other immigration issues, such as the “Muslim ban” executive order. Dorf argues that the precedents the Court had to distinguish to reach its conclusion might give some insight into whether and how it might defer to other political branches on immigration issues.... Read More TRUMP IS NOT READY TO DEAL WITH HIS LEGAL PROBLEMS John W. Dean, former counsel to President Nixon, reflects on the much-anticipated testimony of former FBI Director James Comey before the Senate Intelligence Committee on Thursday. Dean briefly summarizes the takeaways from Comey’s testimony and discusses the response by President Trump and his lawyer.... Read More ABSOLUTE POWER CORRUPTS ABSOLUTELY IN THE KEEPERS Marci A. Hamilton, a Fox Distinguished Scholar in the Fox Leadership Program at the University of Pennsylvania and CEO of CHILD USA, encourages everyone to watch the Netflix docuseries The Keepers, which addresses child sex abuse in the Catholic Church. Hamilton describes the progress toward justice for child sex abuse victims, including the growing awareness of the pervasiveness the problem and increasing numbers of states who extend or eliminate statutes of limitations for these types of lawsuits and prosecutions....Read More [Forward this email.] Have friends who like law? Forward this email. [Like Verdict on Facebook] Like Verdict for legal discussions on Facebook. [Follow @verdictjustia on Twitter] Follow @verdictjustia for news and updates on Twitter. [Justia] Contact Us | Privacy Policy | Unsubscribe [Facebook][Twitter][LinkedIn][Justia][GooglePlus] You received this email because you have subscribed to the Verdict News E-Mail Feed. Justia | 1380 Pear Ave, Suite 2B, Mountain View, CA 94043 ________________________________ ________________________________ 1 Behind me at Harvard Law School, Killer Koh was President Obama’s War Consigliere and Droner-in-Chief. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Sat Jun 17 14:47:31 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2017 14:47:31 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Law School Off Campus! Message-ID: TORTURE OFF CAMPUS! WAR CRIMES OFF CAMPUS! GENOCIDE OFF CAMPUS! LAW SCHOOL OFF CAMPUS! FAB. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Saturday, June 17, 2017 9:28 AM To: 'Karen Aram' Cc: 'David Green' ; 'sherwoodross10 at gmail.com' ; 'peace-discuss at anti-war.net' ; 'C. G. ESTABROOK' ; 'a-fields at uiuc.edu' ; Hoffman, Valerie J ; 'Joe Lauria' ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; 'Arlene Hickory' ; 'David Swanson' ; 'peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net' ; 'abass10 at gmail.com' ; 'mickalideh at gmail.com' ; 'Lina Thorne' ; 'chicago at worldcantwait.net' ; 'Jay' ; Estabrook, Carl G ; 'Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net' ; 'David Johnson' ; Mildred O'brien ; Belden Fields Subject: RE: Law School Off Campus! CIA OFF CAMPUS! MOSSAD OFF CAMPUS! LAW SCHOOL OFF CAMPUS! FAB Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Saturday, June 17, 2017 8:45 AM To: 'Karen Aram' > Cc: 'David Green' >; 'sherwoodross10 at gmail.com' >; 'peace-discuss at anti-war.net' >; 'C. G. ESTABROOK' >; 'a-fields at uiuc.edu' >; Hoffman, Valerie J >; 'Joe Lauria' >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; 'Arlene Hickory' >; 'David Swanson' >; 'peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net' >; 'abass10 at gmail.com' >; 'mickalideh at gmail.com' >; 'Lina Thorne' >; 'chicago at worldcantwait.net' >; 'Jay' >; Estabrook, Carl G >; 'Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net' >; 'David Johnson' >; Mildred O'brien >; Belden Fields > Subject: RE: Law School Off Campus! The College of Law and the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, Department of Philosophy have been infiltrated, perverted and corrupted by CIA/Mossad/Torture/Moore/Hurd, both of whom are still teaching there. CIA Off Campus! Mossad Off Campus! Law School Off Campus! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Saturday, June 17, 2017 8:03 AM To: 'Karen Aram' > Cc: 'David Green' >; 'sherwoodross10 at gmail.com' >; 'peace-discuss at anti-war.net' >; 'C. G. ESTABROOK' >; 'a-fields at uiuc.edu' >; Hoffman, Valerie J >; 'Joe Lauria' >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; 'Arlene Hickory' >; 'David Swanson' >; 'peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net' >; 'abass10 at gmail.com' >; 'mickalideh at gmail.com' >; 'Lina Thorne' >; 'chicago at worldcantwait.net' >; 'Jay' >; Estabrook, Carl G >; 'Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net' >; 'David Johnson' >; Mildred O'brien >; Belden Fields > Subject: RE: Law School Off Campus! The College of Law Building is conveniently located at the far south end of the campus and to the immediate due north of the Graveyard—which is Emblematic after the Faculty brought in Killer Koh to justify the mass murder of thousands of Muslims/Arabs/Asians of Color—Men, Women, Children and the Elderly. So fine. Let us isolate and quarantine the College of Law and its Faculty around the Graveyard where they belong. Keep them off the rest of this Campus and this Community: Law School Off Campus! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Saturday, June 17, 2017 7:46 AM To: 'Karen Aram' > Cc: 'David Green' >; 'sherwoodross10 at gmail.com' >; 'peace-discuss at anti-war.net' >; 'C. G. ESTABROOK' >; 'a-fields at uiuc.edu' >; Hoffman, Valerie J >; 'Joe Lauria' >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; 'Arlene Hickory' >; 'David Swanson' >; 'peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net' >; 'abass10 at gmail.com' >; 'mickalideh at gmail.com' >; 'Lina Thorne' >; 'chicago at worldcantwait.net' >; 'Jay' >; Estabrook, Carl G >; 'Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net' >; 'David Johnson' >; Mildred O'brien >; Belden Fields > Subject: Law School Off Campus! A generation ago Belden and I were both Veterans of the CIA Off Campus Movement here, Belden actually being arrested by the University Police because of his act of courage, integrity and principle challenging the CIA presence on this Campus. Well I am now starting a new Movement: Law School Off Campus! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Saturday, June 17, 2017 7:30 AM To: Karen Aram > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: RE: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 I trust you can all comprehend how much Evil this law school has inflicted after five years of direct and personal control by the CIA, Mossad, Moore,Hurd, and Torture. Killer Koh is only the tip of the iceberg. This Law School is a Cancer eating away at the Heart of this Campus and of our Good Community, where I have lived, taught and raised my family since July of 1978 when I first moved here from Boston.Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Friday, June 16, 2017 11:35 AM To: Karen Aram > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: RE: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 In other words, for five years CIA/Mossad/Torture ran this Law School and Everyone and Everything about it. So of course we ended up with Killer Koh on October 28, 2016. Plus ca change….fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Friday, June 16, 2017 11:22 AM To: Karen Aram > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: RE: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 And during the Five Year Tenure of Torture-Mongerers/CIA/Mossad/MichaelMoore/Dean HurricaneHeidiHurd, they brought onto this Faculty people as Evil as they are. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Friday, June 16, 2017 9:08 AM To: Karen Aram > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: RE: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 If you want to read all about the Criminal Dirty Work performed by Harvard Law Obama’s Harvard/Yale Law Mafia including Killary and Killer Koh you should see Charlie Savage: Power Wars (770 pages)—the Nazis had their Lawyers and their Law Professors and their Law Schools too. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 7:33 PM To: Karen Aram > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: RE: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 I was astonished over a year ago, before I’d ever heard of “Killer Koh,” to attend a lecture on “The legitimacy of targeted killing” in relation to our drone warfare, at the U of I Law School. It was clearly a charade to present drones as legitimate in spite of International law and US laws of due process. Yeah, if I remember correctly, I think that might have been the Dirty Work of Fired and Disgraced Dean Heidi Hurd’s Consort Michael Moore, who bragged that he works for the CIA and the Mossad-- and both of whom have stunk up this Campus and this Community for years by publicly advocating Torture. Moore also publicly congratulated everyone for bringing in Killer Koh after I had done everything humanly possible to stop them. As I said, this Law School is EVIL INCARNATE! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Karen Aram [mailto:karenaram at hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 7:22 PM To: Boyle, Francis A > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: Re: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 It does make sense that the law schools connected with Yale and Harvard would be “evil” given law schools are the first academic institution that the oligarchs controlling our government, would by necessity need to corrupt, in order to control the masses. I was astonished over a year ago, before I’d ever heard of “Killer Koh,” to attend a lecture on “The legitimacy of targeted killing” in relation to our drone warfare, at the U of I Law School. It was clearly a charade to present drones as legitimate in spite of International law and US laws of due process. Again, I had almost a year later, the frustration of attending a lecture by Dean Amar’s brother, a constitutional law professor from Yale, on “Freedom of Speech”, The lecture had nothing to do with freedom of speech, it was a promotion of his book and Hillary as well as local Democrats, along with an attempt to portray Obama in a good light. Then “killer Koh” Hillary’s advisor on drone warfare, being brought to the U of I as a representative of the “law” and speaking on human rights, to law students? Sometimes, too much is too much for sensible minds. On Jun 15, 2017, at 17:06, Boyle, Francis A > wrote: Well at least we all stood up against this Evil Law School on October 28. But from what Amar is saying here, I am sure we will have to do so again. So stay tuned. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Karen Aram [mailto:karenaram at hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 5:13 PM To: Boyle, Francis A > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: Re: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 Our government is evil, and if we the people don’t stop them from the wars and killings, then we are complicit in their warcrimes. On Jun 15, 2017, at 15:07, Boyle, Francis A > wrote: This Law School is EVIL! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 10:38 AM To: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; Karen Aram >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: FW: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 Sure. Let’s bring the War Criminal, Murderer, Felon, Bigot, Racist and Genocidaire Killer Koh into our Law School on October 28, 2016, hold him up as a Role Model to our Law Students, and then turn our Law Students into War Criminals, Murderers, Felons, Bigots, Racists and Genocidaires just like Killer Koh. Fab. Diss-Ode to Harold Killer Koh1 Harold Killer Koh Killing Babies where he go Muslim life is cheap you see Jewish life too for the Nazi Carl Schmitt Professor of Law At the Yale Law School Boot-licking Gene Rostow Of the infamous Rostow Brothers Who gave us Vietnam Genociding “gooks” too Obama’s War Consigliere Gene and his “kids” for LBJ Some things never change for Dems And their Elite Law School Whores Today At Harvard Law School too Where Killers Obama and Koh First dropped their pooh Along with “Judge” Davey Barron too Obama’s Droner-in-Chief Destined for a Cell in The Hague Right next to his student John Yoo A Chip off of Harold’s Old Block Cold-blooded Killers and War Criminals too Killer Koh disteaching “human rights” at N.Y.U. Supported by his gang of Dem law prof thugs Beating up on the N.Y.U. law students few With the courage, integrity, and principles to say Never again! Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Justia Verdict [mailto:verdictsupport at justia.com] Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 10:09 AM To: Boyle, Francis A > Subject: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 Illinois Law dean and professor Vikram David Amar laments recent instances of censored speech, particularly on university campuses, and reminds us that freedom of speech and academic freedom protect even those speakers whose message might be perceived odious, racist, sexist, or hateful. Amar points out that both freedom of speech and academic freedom are rooted in the principle that ideas and arguments ought to be evaluated on their substance and that the essence of both kinds of freedom is the opportunity to persuade others of the merits of one's argument, rather than the use of power to coerce or silence others. Click here to view in your browser if you are having trouble viewing this email. [Verdict - Legal Analysis and commentary from Justia.] Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom Vikram David Amar Jun 15, 2017 [https://i2.wp.com/verdict.justia.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/IMG_0590.jpg?quality=90&resize=426%2C350&strip=all&fit=1000%25&ssl=1] It distresses me to see episodes these days in which speakers who are controversial for their conservative or ultra-conservative views are prevented from delivering invited remarks at universities (including public universities) because protestors choose to violate laws designed to protect public safety. It also distresses me to see so few liberal analysts decry how illiberal these episodes of group-imposed censorship are. As I have written at length elsewhere, no matter how repressive or otherwise abhorrent a speaker’s message, the appropriate response under our Constitution is counter speech, not shouting down or physically obstructing or threatening the speaker or the speaker’s audience. To be sure, protesting a speaker’s presence—registering profound objection to a speaker’s viewpoint—is perfectly appropriate and has a rich tradition dating from even before the 1960s free speech revolution through the Occupy movement. But what we have seen over the past several months is a transition from protesting against bad speakers to preventing them from being able to speak, and that is not acceptable. An unflinching commitment to freedom of speech—even odious, racist, sexist, hateful speech—is the cornerstone of constitutional democracy in the United States. Certainly we protect freedom of speech more vigorously than any other western democracy. We also have a venerable tradition of respecting academic freedom at colleges and universities. These two principles, freedom of speech and academic freedom, overlap and are interconnected, even as they are distinct ideas. Freedom of speech is a broadly applicable right codified in the federal First Amendment and state constitutional analogues that protects speakers both on and off public campuses from unwarranted government interference with expression. Academic freedom, which may extend beyond what the Constitutionprotects, is grounded on the idea that, at least in the academy, free inquiry unburdened by the constraints of orthodoxy will lead to the development of new ideas and knowledge. Notwithstanding their different scopes, both freedom of speech and academic freedom rest on the bedrock belief that ideas and arguments ought to be evaluated on their substance. The essence of both kinds of freedom is the opportunity to persuade others of the merits of one’s argument, rather than the use of power to coerce others into acceding to the proponent’s point of view. Sometimes the heat and passion of political protests on college campuses causes these basic principles to be overlooked or ignored. When that happens, it is important for us to go back to what freedom of speech and academic freedom really mean and how easily both of these principles can be misused and misinterpreted. Governments Can and Should Prohibit Certain Obstructive Conduct The short of the matter is that blockading, obstructing, assaulting, destroying property, and making threats, are not, in any stretch of the imagination, constitutionally protected things to do, no matter what the objective behind them. These activities are conduct the government has always had the legitimate authority to proscribe because they so obviously interfere with the liberty and lawful pursuits of others. As the Supreme Court of California stated in an important free speech case,In Re Kay: [T]he state retains a legitimate concern in ensuring that some individuals unruly assertion of their rights of free expression does not imperil other citizen’s rights of free association and discussion. … Freedom of everyone to talk at once can destroy the right of anyone effectively to talk at all. Free expression can expire as tragically in the tumult of license as in the silence of censorship. Government actions to prohibit blockades or obstruction have been held to be permissible under the First Amendment too many times to count. To cite just one example, a federal law, the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act (FACE), that prohibits anyone from physically obstructing any person from obtaining or providing reproductive health services, has been upheld repeatedly against constitutional challenge, and those cases raise harder questions than do generic obstruction laws because FACE targets specific places where protestors with particular messages may be expected. Blockades and obstructions can and should be prohibited consistent with the First Amendment primarily because they are not intended to and do not persuade anyone of the merits of the protestors’ position. They are employed to coerce third parties to change their behavior, not their minds. As such, they are actually antithetical to, rather than in furtherance of, the values on which freedom of speech and academic freedom are grounded — a commitment to the power of ideas rather than the use of force to change the way that people act. Creative But Unavailing Counterarguments In recent weeks, I have heard defenders of those who obstruct conservative speakers make two novel but completely unconvincing arguments. First, the obstruction defenders try to invoke the civil rights movement by pointing out that Martin Luther King, Jr. and his supporters were often guilty of civil disobedience—that is violating duly enacted laws. But this analogy is unavailing because King and his followers were violating laws that were (in the eyes of the protestors and many others) themselves unjust, not laws that were completely unobjectionable but simply stood in the way of the desires of the violators. Another distinction between the two settings is that to the extent that civil rights protestors violated laws regulating their political activity, they were violating laws in order to be heard themselves, not in order to prevent others from being heard. But today’s obstructors cannot credibly complain that they cannot be heard; they simply want others not to be listened to. The second creative yet deeply flawed argument I’ve heard in defense of the obstructors is the idea that controversial speakers of the kind who are being suppressed are themselves not appropriate speakers to be invited to university settings because they are not sufficiently academic in character. Putting aside the fact that these speakers were invited (whether they ought to have been or not), and putting aside whether some of these speakers do have some academic bona fides (even if their ideas are often very wrong-headed), this argument mischaracterizes the kind of speakers who belong at universities. Higher education is a place not just to sharpen one’s critical thinking skills through exposure to brilliant academics who make data-informed arguments in multiple directions; it is also a place where one should learn how to become a full citizen in American society. As the Supreme Court observed in the context of high school students in Tinker v. Des Moines Independent School District, this often means that students need to engage each other on the contentious political issues of the day. And in today’s college world this sometimes means hearing and evaluating strident political advocates, some of whom even border on demagoguery. To be sure, student and faculty organizations should give some thought (perhaps more thought than they currently do) to the question of whom they invite to speak on campus—certainly not everyone should be offered a platform—but many campus speakers, on the Left as well as the Right, are not particularly grounded in rigorous theoretical or empirical analysis, and this does not mean that they are per se inappropriate speakers for college audiences. Again, colleges should be preparing young people not just to navigate the economy, but also to navigate democracy. And, for better or worse, modern democracy means having to deal with a lot of ideas that are widely held even though they don’t hold up to analytic rigor. Debunking those ideas—not shouting them down or trying to suppress their expression—is what I want my students to learn how to do. [https://justatic.com/v/20170601a/verdict/images/authors/thumbs/amar.jpg] Follow @prof_amar Vikram David Amar is the Iwan Foundation Professor of Law and the Dean at the University of Illinois College of Law. Previously, he served as the Associate Dean for Academic Affairs and Professor of Law at the University of California, Davis School of Law. He is a 1988 graduate of the Yale Law School and a former clerk to Justice Harry Blackmun. He is a co-author, along with William Cohen and Jonathan Varat, of a major constitutional law casebook, and a co-author of several volumes of the Wright & Miller treatise on federal practice and procedure. Before teaching, Professor Amar spent a few years at the firm of Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher. RECENT ARTICLES SUPREME COURT RULES THAT CITIZENSHIP MUST BE EQUALLY HERITABLE THROUGH FATHERS AND MOTHERS Cornell University law professor Michael C. Dorf comments on a recent decision by the U.S. Supreme Court on the heritability of citizenship and explains why the decision might have implications for other immigration issues, such as the “Muslim ban” executive order. Dorf argues that the precedents the Court had to distinguish to reach its conclusion might give some insight into whether and how it might defer to other political branches on immigration issues.... Read More TRUMP IS NOT READY TO DEAL WITH HIS LEGAL PROBLEMS John W. Dean, former counsel to President Nixon, reflects on the much-anticipated testimony of former FBI Director James Comey before the Senate Intelligence Committee on Thursday. Dean briefly summarizes the takeaways from Comey’s testimony and discusses the response by President Trump and his lawyer.... Read More ABSOLUTE POWER CORRUPTS ABSOLUTELY IN THE KEEPERS Marci A. Hamilton, a Fox Distinguished Scholar in the Fox Leadership Program at the University of Pennsylvania and CEO of CHILD USA, encourages everyone to watch the Netflix docuseries The Keepers, which addresses child sex abuse in the Catholic Church. Hamilton describes the progress toward justice for child sex abuse victims, including the growing awareness of the pervasiveness the problem and increasing numbers of states who extend or eliminate statutes of limitations for these types of lawsuits and prosecutions....Read More [Forward this email.] Have friends who like law? Forward this email. [Like Verdict on Facebook] Like Verdict for legal discussions on Facebook. [Follow @verdictjustia on Twitter] Follow @verdictjustia for news and updates on Twitter. [Justia] Contact Us | Privacy Policy | Unsubscribe [Facebook][Twitter][LinkedIn][Justia][GooglePlus] You received this email because you have subscribed to the Verdict News E-Mail Feed. Justia | 1380 Pear Ave, Suite 2B, Mountain View, CA 94043 ________________________________ ________________________________ 1 Behind me at Harvard Law School, Killer Koh was President Obama’s War Consigliere and Droner-in-Chief. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Sat Jun 17 14:47:31 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2017 14:47:31 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Law School Off Campus! Message-ID: TORTURE OFF CAMPUS! WAR CRIMES OFF CAMPUS! GENOCIDE OFF CAMPUS! LAW SCHOOL OFF CAMPUS! FAB. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Saturday, June 17, 2017 9:28 AM To: 'Karen Aram' Cc: 'David Green' ; 'sherwoodross10 at gmail.com' ; 'peace-discuss at anti-war.net' ; 'C. G. ESTABROOK' ; 'a-fields at uiuc.edu' ; Hoffman, Valerie J ; 'Joe Lauria' ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; 'Arlene Hickory' ; 'David Swanson' ; 'peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net' ; 'abass10 at gmail.com' ; 'mickalideh at gmail.com' ; 'Lina Thorne' ; 'chicago at worldcantwait.net' ; 'Jay' ; Estabrook, Carl G ; 'Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net' ; 'David Johnson' ; Mildred O'brien ; Belden Fields Subject: RE: Law School Off Campus! CIA OFF CAMPUS! MOSSAD OFF CAMPUS! LAW SCHOOL OFF CAMPUS! FAB Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Saturday, June 17, 2017 8:45 AM To: 'Karen Aram' > Cc: 'David Green' >; 'sherwoodross10 at gmail.com' >; 'peace-discuss at anti-war.net' >; 'C. G. ESTABROOK' >; 'a-fields at uiuc.edu' >; Hoffman, Valerie J >; 'Joe Lauria' >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; 'Arlene Hickory' >; 'David Swanson' >; 'peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net' >; 'abass10 at gmail.com' >; 'mickalideh at gmail.com' >; 'Lina Thorne' >; 'chicago at worldcantwait.net' >; 'Jay' >; Estabrook, Carl G >; 'Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net' >; 'David Johnson' >; Mildred O'brien >; Belden Fields > Subject: RE: Law School Off Campus! The College of Law and the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, Department of Philosophy have been infiltrated, perverted and corrupted by CIA/Mossad/Torture/Moore/Hurd, both of whom are still teaching there. CIA Off Campus! Mossad Off Campus! Law School Off Campus! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Saturday, June 17, 2017 8:03 AM To: 'Karen Aram' > Cc: 'David Green' >; 'sherwoodross10 at gmail.com' >; 'peace-discuss at anti-war.net' >; 'C. G. ESTABROOK' >; 'a-fields at uiuc.edu' >; Hoffman, Valerie J >; 'Joe Lauria' >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; 'Arlene Hickory' >; 'David Swanson' >; 'peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net' >; 'abass10 at gmail.com' >; 'mickalideh at gmail.com' >; 'Lina Thorne' >; 'chicago at worldcantwait.net' >; 'Jay' >; Estabrook, Carl G >; 'Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net' >; 'David Johnson' >; Mildred O'brien >; Belden Fields > Subject: RE: Law School Off Campus! The College of Law Building is conveniently located at the far south end of the campus and to the immediate due north of the Graveyard—which is Emblematic after the Faculty brought in Killer Koh to justify the mass murder of thousands of Muslims/Arabs/Asians of Color—Men, Women, Children and the Elderly. So fine. Let us isolate and quarantine the College of Law and its Faculty around the Graveyard where they belong. Keep them off the rest of this Campus and this Community: Law School Off Campus! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Saturday, June 17, 2017 7:46 AM To: 'Karen Aram' > Cc: 'David Green' >; 'sherwoodross10 at gmail.com' >; 'peace-discuss at anti-war.net' >; 'C. G. ESTABROOK' >; 'a-fields at uiuc.edu' >; Hoffman, Valerie J >; 'Joe Lauria' >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; 'Arlene Hickory' >; 'David Swanson' >; 'peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net' >; 'abass10 at gmail.com' >; 'mickalideh at gmail.com' >; 'Lina Thorne' >; 'chicago at worldcantwait.net' >; 'Jay' >; Estabrook, Carl G >; 'Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net' >; 'David Johnson' >; Mildred O'brien >; Belden Fields > Subject: Law School Off Campus! A generation ago Belden and I were both Veterans of the CIA Off Campus Movement here, Belden actually being arrested by the University Police because of his act of courage, integrity and principle challenging the CIA presence on this Campus. Well I am now starting a new Movement: Law School Off Campus! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Saturday, June 17, 2017 7:30 AM To: Karen Aram > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: RE: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 I trust you can all comprehend how much Evil this law school has inflicted after five years of direct and personal control by the CIA, Mossad, Moore,Hurd, and Torture. Killer Koh is only the tip of the iceberg. This Law School is a Cancer eating away at the Heart of this Campus and of our Good Community, where I have lived, taught and raised my family since July of 1978 when I first moved here from Boston.Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Friday, June 16, 2017 11:35 AM To: Karen Aram > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: RE: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 In other words, for five years CIA/Mossad/Torture ran this Law School and Everyone and Everything about it. So of course we ended up with Killer Koh on October 28, 2016. Plus ca change….fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Friday, June 16, 2017 11:22 AM To: Karen Aram > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: RE: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 And during the Five Year Tenure of Torture-Mongerers/CIA/Mossad/MichaelMoore/Dean HurricaneHeidiHurd, they brought onto this Faculty people as Evil as they are. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Friday, June 16, 2017 9:08 AM To: Karen Aram > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: RE: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 If you want to read all about the Criminal Dirty Work performed by Harvard Law Obama’s Harvard/Yale Law Mafia including Killary and Killer Koh you should see Charlie Savage: Power Wars (770 pages)—the Nazis had their Lawyers and their Law Professors and their Law Schools too. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 7:33 PM To: Karen Aram > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: RE: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 I was astonished over a year ago, before I’d ever heard of “Killer Koh,” to attend a lecture on “The legitimacy of targeted killing” in relation to our drone warfare, at the U of I Law School. It was clearly a charade to present drones as legitimate in spite of International law and US laws of due process. Yeah, if I remember correctly, I think that might have been the Dirty Work of Fired and Disgraced Dean Heidi Hurd’s Consort Michael Moore, who bragged that he works for the CIA and the Mossad-- and both of whom have stunk up this Campus and this Community for years by publicly advocating Torture. Moore also publicly congratulated everyone for bringing in Killer Koh after I had done everything humanly possible to stop them. As I said, this Law School is EVIL INCARNATE! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Karen Aram [mailto:karenaram at hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 7:22 PM To: Boyle, Francis A > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: Re: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 It does make sense that the law schools connected with Yale and Harvard would be “evil” given law schools are the first academic institution that the oligarchs controlling our government, would by necessity need to corrupt, in order to control the masses. I was astonished over a year ago, before I’d ever heard of “Killer Koh,” to attend a lecture on “The legitimacy of targeted killing” in relation to our drone warfare, at the U of I Law School. It was clearly a charade to present drones as legitimate in spite of International law and US laws of due process. Again, I had almost a year later, the frustration of attending a lecture by Dean Amar’s brother, a constitutional law professor from Yale, on “Freedom of Speech”, The lecture had nothing to do with freedom of speech, it was a promotion of his book and Hillary as well as local Democrats, along with an attempt to portray Obama in a good light. Then “killer Koh” Hillary’s advisor on drone warfare, being brought to the U of I as a representative of the “law” and speaking on human rights, to law students? Sometimes, too much is too much for sensible minds. On Jun 15, 2017, at 17:06, Boyle, Francis A > wrote: Well at least we all stood up against this Evil Law School on October 28. But from what Amar is saying here, I am sure we will have to do so again. So stay tuned. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Karen Aram [mailto:karenaram at hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 5:13 PM To: Boyle, Francis A > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: Re: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 Our government is evil, and if we the people don’t stop them from the wars and killings, then we are complicit in their warcrimes. On Jun 15, 2017, at 15:07, Boyle, Francis A > wrote: This Law School is EVIL! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 10:38 AM To: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; Karen Aram >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: FW: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 Sure. Let’s bring the War Criminal, Murderer, Felon, Bigot, Racist and Genocidaire Killer Koh into our Law School on October 28, 2016, hold him up as a Role Model to our Law Students, and then turn our Law Students into War Criminals, Murderers, Felons, Bigots, Racists and Genocidaires just like Killer Koh. Fab. Diss-Ode to Harold Killer Koh1 Harold Killer Koh Killing Babies where he go Muslim life is cheap you see Jewish life too for the Nazi Carl Schmitt Professor of Law At the Yale Law School Boot-licking Gene Rostow Of the infamous Rostow Brothers Who gave us Vietnam Genociding “gooks” too Obama’s War Consigliere Gene and his “kids” for LBJ Some things never change for Dems And their Elite Law School Whores Today At Harvard Law School too Where Killers Obama and Koh First dropped their pooh Along with “Judge” Davey Barron too Obama’s Droner-in-Chief Destined for a Cell in The Hague Right next to his student John Yoo A Chip off of Harold’s Old Block Cold-blooded Killers and War Criminals too Killer Koh disteaching “human rights” at N.Y.U. Supported by his gang of Dem law prof thugs Beating up on the N.Y.U. law students few With the courage, integrity, and principles to say Never again! Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Justia Verdict [mailto:verdictsupport at justia.com] Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 10:09 AM To: Boyle, Francis A > Subject: Vikram David Amar - Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom - Jun 15, 2017 Illinois Law dean and professor Vikram David Amar laments recent instances of censored speech, particularly on university campuses, and reminds us that freedom of speech and academic freedom protect even those speakers whose message might be perceived odious, racist, sexist, or hateful. Amar points out that both freedom of speech and academic freedom are rooted in the principle that ideas and arguments ought to be evaluated on their substance and that the essence of both kinds of freedom is the opportunity to persuade others of the merits of one's argument, rather than the use of power to coerce or silence others. Click here to view in your browser if you are having trouble viewing this email. [Verdict - Legal Analysis and commentary from Justia.] Remaining Faithful to Free Speech and Academic Freedom Vikram David Amar Jun 15, 2017 [https://i2.wp.com/verdict.justia.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/IMG_0590.jpg?quality=90&resize=426%2C350&strip=all&fit=1000%25&ssl=1] It distresses me to see episodes these days in which speakers who are controversial for their conservative or ultra-conservative views are prevented from delivering invited remarks at universities (including public universities) because protestors choose to violate laws designed to protect public safety. It also distresses me to see so few liberal analysts decry how illiberal these episodes of group-imposed censorship are. As I have written at length elsewhere, no matter how repressive or otherwise abhorrent a speaker’s message, the appropriate response under our Constitution is counter speech, not shouting down or physically obstructing or threatening the speaker or the speaker’s audience. To be sure, protesting a speaker’s presence—registering profound objection to a speaker’s viewpoint—is perfectly appropriate and has a rich tradition dating from even before the 1960s free speech revolution through the Occupy movement. But what we have seen over the past several months is a transition from protesting against bad speakers to preventing them from being able to speak, and that is not acceptable. An unflinching commitment to freedom of speech—even odious, racist, sexist, hateful speech—is the cornerstone of constitutional democracy in the United States. Certainly we protect freedom of speech more vigorously than any other western democracy. We also have a venerable tradition of respecting academic freedom at colleges and universities. These two principles, freedom of speech and academic freedom, overlap and are interconnected, even as they are distinct ideas. Freedom of speech is a broadly applicable right codified in the federal First Amendment and state constitutional analogues that protects speakers both on and off public campuses from unwarranted government interference with expression. Academic freedom, which may extend beyond what the Constitutionprotects, is grounded on the idea that, at least in the academy, free inquiry unburdened by the constraints of orthodoxy will lead to the development of new ideas and knowledge. Notwithstanding their different scopes, both freedom of speech and academic freedom rest on the bedrock belief that ideas and arguments ought to be evaluated on their substance. The essence of both kinds of freedom is the opportunity to persuade others of the merits of one’s argument, rather than the use of power to coerce others into acceding to the proponent’s point of view. Sometimes the heat and passion of political protests on college campuses causes these basic principles to be overlooked or ignored. When that happens, it is important for us to go back to what freedom of speech and academic freedom really mean and how easily both of these principles can be misused and misinterpreted. Governments Can and Should Prohibit Certain Obstructive Conduct The short of the matter is that blockading, obstructing, assaulting, destroying property, and making threats, are not, in any stretch of the imagination, constitutionally protected things to do, no matter what the objective behind them. These activities are conduct the government has always had the legitimate authority to proscribe because they so obviously interfere with the liberty and lawful pursuits of others. As the Supreme Court of California stated in an important free speech case,In Re Kay: [T]he state retains a legitimate concern in ensuring that some individuals unruly assertion of their rights of free expression does not imperil other citizen’s rights of free association and discussion. … Freedom of everyone to talk at once can destroy the right of anyone effectively to talk at all. Free expression can expire as tragically in the tumult of license as in the silence of censorship. Government actions to prohibit blockades or obstruction have been held to be permissible under the First Amendment too many times to count. To cite just one example, a federal law, the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act (FACE), that prohibits anyone from physically obstructing any person from obtaining or providing reproductive health services, has been upheld repeatedly against constitutional challenge, and those cases raise harder questions than do generic obstruction laws because FACE targets specific places where protestors with particular messages may be expected. Blockades and obstructions can and should be prohibited consistent with the First Amendment primarily because they are not intended to and do not persuade anyone of the merits of the protestors’ position. They are employed to coerce third parties to change their behavior, not their minds. As such, they are actually antithetical to, rather than in furtherance of, the values on which freedom of speech and academic freedom are grounded — a commitment to the power of ideas rather than the use of force to change the way that people act. Creative But Unavailing Counterarguments In recent weeks, I have heard defenders of those who obstruct conservative speakers make two novel but completely unconvincing arguments. First, the obstruction defenders try to invoke the civil rights movement by pointing out that Martin Luther King, Jr. and his supporters were often guilty of civil disobedience—that is violating duly enacted laws. But this analogy is unavailing because King and his followers were violating laws that were (in the eyes of the protestors and many others) themselves unjust, not laws that were completely unobjectionable but simply stood in the way of the desires of the violators. Another distinction between the two settings is that to the extent that civil rights protestors violated laws regulating their political activity, they were violating laws in order to be heard themselves, not in order to prevent others from being heard. But today’s obstructors cannot credibly complain that they cannot be heard; they simply want others not to be listened to. The second creative yet deeply flawed argument I’ve heard in defense of the obstructors is the idea that controversial speakers of the kind who are being suppressed are themselves not appropriate speakers to be invited to university settings because they are not sufficiently academic in character. Putting aside the fact that these speakers were invited (whether they ought to have been or not), and putting aside whether some of these speakers do have some academic bona fides (even if their ideas are often very wrong-headed), this argument mischaracterizes the kind of speakers who belong at universities. Higher education is a place not just to sharpen one’s critical thinking skills through exposure to brilliant academics who make data-informed arguments in multiple directions; it is also a place where one should learn how to become a full citizen in American society. As the Supreme Court observed in the context of high school students in Tinker v. Des Moines Independent School District, this often means that students need to engage each other on the contentious political issues of the day. And in today’s college world this sometimes means hearing and evaluating strident political advocates, some of whom even border on demagoguery. To be sure, student and faculty organizations should give some thought (perhaps more thought than they currently do) to the question of whom they invite to speak on campus—certainly not everyone should be offered a platform—but many campus speakers, on the Left as well as the Right, are not particularly grounded in rigorous theoretical or empirical analysis, and this does not mean that they are per se inappropriate speakers for college audiences. Again, colleges should be preparing young people not just to navigate the economy, but also to navigate democracy. And, for better or worse, modern democracy means having to deal with a lot of ideas that are widely held even though they don’t hold up to analytic rigor. Debunking those ideas—not shouting them down or trying to suppress their expression—is what I want my students to learn how to do. [https://justatic.com/v/20170601a/verdict/images/authors/thumbs/amar.jpg] Follow @prof_amar Vikram David Amar is the Iwan Foundation Professor of Law and the Dean at the University of Illinois College of Law. Previously, he served as the Associate Dean for Academic Affairs and Professor of Law at the University of California, Davis School of Law. He is a 1988 graduate of the Yale Law School and a former clerk to Justice Harry Blackmun. He is a co-author, along with William Cohen and Jonathan Varat, of a major constitutional law casebook, and a co-author of several volumes of the Wright & Miller treatise on federal practice and procedure. Before teaching, Professor Amar spent a few years at the firm of Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher. RECENT ARTICLES SUPREME COURT RULES THAT CITIZENSHIP MUST BE EQUALLY HERITABLE THROUGH FATHERS AND MOTHERS Cornell University law professor Michael C. Dorf comments on a recent decision by the U.S. Supreme Court on the heritability of citizenship and explains why the decision might have implications for other immigration issues, such as the “Muslim ban” executive order. Dorf argues that the precedents the Court had to distinguish to reach its conclusion might give some insight into whether and how it might defer to other political branches on immigration issues.... Read More TRUMP IS NOT READY TO DEAL WITH HIS LEGAL PROBLEMS John W. Dean, former counsel to President Nixon, reflects on the much-anticipated testimony of former FBI Director James Comey before the Senate Intelligence Committee on Thursday. Dean briefly summarizes the takeaways from Comey’s testimony and discusses the response by President Trump and his lawyer.... Read More ABSOLUTE POWER CORRUPTS ABSOLUTELY IN THE KEEPERS Marci A. Hamilton, a Fox Distinguished Scholar in the Fox Leadership Program at the University of Pennsylvania and CEO of CHILD USA, encourages everyone to watch the Netflix docuseries The Keepers, which addresses child sex abuse in the Catholic Church. Hamilton describes the progress toward justice for child sex abuse victims, including the growing awareness of the pervasiveness the problem and increasing numbers of states who extend or eliminate statutes of limitations for these types of lawsuits and prosecutions....Read More [Forward this email.] Have friends who like law? Forward this email. [Like Verdict on Facebook] Like Verdict for legal discussions on Facebook. [Follow @verdictjustia on Twitter] Follow @verdictjustia for news and updates on Twitter. [Justia] Contact Us | Privacy Policy | Unsubscribe [Facebook][Twitter][LinkedIn][Justia][GooglePlus] You received this email because you have subscribed to the Verdict News E-Mail Feed. Justia | 1380 Pear Ave, Suite 2B, Mountain View, CA 94043 ________________________________ ________________________________ 1 Behind me at Harvard Law School, Killer Koh was President Obama’s War Consigliere and Droner-in-Chief. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Sat Jun 17 15:19:18 2017 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2017 15:19:18 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] War in Africa for at least a generation Message-ID: * Print * Leaflet * Feedback * Share » US Special Forces will wage war in Africa “for at least a generation” By Thomas Gaist and Eddie Haywood 17 June 2017 The number of American commandos fighting in Africa grew by 600 percent between 2006 and 2010, and by another 1000 percent between 2010 and 2016, according to documents authored by General Donald Bolduc, head of the Pentagon’s Special Operations Command-Africa (SOCAFRICA). US Special Forces soldiers are waging over 100 missions in Africa at any given time, according to the leaked documents. AFRICOM headquarters in Stuttgart-Mohringen, Germany manages a growing empire of Special Forces bases and infrastructure, the documents show, including commands focused on the Horn of Africa, Uganda, West Africa, Trans-Sahara, as well as a “Naval Special Warfare Unit 10” and a “Joint Special Operations Air Component Africa.” In an article published in the Small Wars Journalconcurrent with the leaks, “The Gray Zone in Africa,” General Bolduc called for “at least a generation” of irregular warfare on the continent, and warned that threats to the United States from Africa may soon “surpass those from the conflicts in Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria.” Bluntly stating the real geopolitical considerations driving Washington’s intervention, Bolduc described SOCAFRICA’s mission as “adversarial competition short of armed conflict, but with a military dimension.” “Competition for strategic influence and relationships is complicated by the political, economic, military, and informational interests of China, Russia, North Korea, and Iran Everything we do for our partners in Africa today must prepare them for tomorrow’s threats and support strong political and military relationships,” he wrote. A panoply of different types of US special forces are active in Africa under SOCAFRICA’s “mission command construct,” include “Regional SOCFWDs (integrators),” “SOF teams (executors),” “Special Operations Forces Liaison Elements (synchronizers),” “logistics teams,” and “Joint Special Operations Air Component (JSOAC) groups,” according to PowerPoint slides presented by the US general. Bolduc called on the “African partners” of SOCAFRICA’s commando network to implement “integrated campaigning and coordination of their military operations in support of a broader political strategy.” The elaborate strategy concepts advanced by the SOCAFRICA chief—“comprehensive population-centric approach that blends both kinetic and non-kinetic tactics, while operating among the populace,” “nested key leader engagements at all levels,” “regional comprehensive approach”—are merely new jargon for the same aims pursued by American imperialism and the European former colonial powers during the past 150 years. The Pentagon is planning a further escalation of US power projection and war-making throughout African society. The exact scale of US activities on the continent remains shrouded from public view. AFRICOM is running “expansive and undocumented operations in at least 49 countries in Africa,” according to the Brown Political Review. In a letter to Congress published June 6, the Trump administration acknowledged deployments of at least 1,000 soldiers throughout the Lake Chad Basin countries of Niger, Nigeria, Cameroon and Chad, along with another 400 troops divided between the Congo, Uganda, South Sudan and the Central African Republic. On June 2, American military forces concluded joint war drills with 20 different national militaries at the Kofi Annan Peacekeeping Training Center in Ghana. Participants in the drills, codenamed United Accord 2017, included African units from Benin, Burkina Faso, Cape Verde, Chad, Gabon, Guinea, Guinea Bissau, Liberia, Mali, Niger, Nigeria, Senegal, Sierra Leone and Togo, as well as Austria, Belgium, Germany, Italy, The Netherlands and Britain. The exercises served as “an opportunity for regional African partners to develop relationships, enhance interoperability and hone mission command skills required to conduct peacekeeping operations in the region,” according to the Pentagon. Last month, the 101st Airborne Division deployed to Somalia in support of operations to build the new Somali National Army (SNA), whose formation was agreed at the London Conference on Somalia last month. Every day, dozens of war planes and unmanned drones fly missions out of the American base at Camp Lemonnier, in Djibouti, according to witnesses cited by African media. Throughout Africa, there are at least seven known US drone bases, in as many countries. Many of these facilities are administered by private contractors, with some operated out of secluded hangars located in African military or civil airports. At the Arba Minch airport in Ethiopia, the US Air Force spent several million dollars developing a facility hosting MQ-9 Reaper drones which carry out operations across Somalia. From an aircraft facility adjacent to Entebbe International Airport in Uganda, the US military conducts covert surveillance flights over Central Africa and beyond. Washington and its regional partners are mobilizing for war and mass repression against an African population beset by the worst social catastrophe since the World War II. As of May, Oxfam International reported that 4.9 million people are dangerously hungry in South Sudan, 7 million in Yemen, 3.2 million people in Somalia, and 4.7 million in Nigeria. Among four countries alone, this represents some 20 million people threatened with death by starvation in 2017. Millions more are classified as in crisis, emergency and famine conditions in Niger, Chad and Mali. In Somalia, tens of thousands have been stricken with curable diseases such as cholera and measles during the beginning months of the year. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Sat Jun 17 19:34:31 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2017 19:34:31 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Law School Off Campus! Message-ID: The Law School and its Deans and its Faculty have been bringing in war criminals like Yale Law Mafia Killer Koh and Wedgie to pervert and pollute this Campus and our Community since 9/11/2001. The Gitmo Kangaroo Courts violate the Geneva Conventions and are thus a war crime. If we do not stop them, the College of Law and its Faculty and its Deans will continue to pervert and pollute this Campus and this Community with Torture, War Crimes, Crimes Against Humanity and Genocide against Muslims/Arabs/Asians of Color. Torture Off Campus! War Crimes Off Campus! Crimes Against Humanity Off Campus! Genocide Off Campus! CIA Off Campus! Mossad Off Campus! Law School Off Campus! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Friday, February 27, 2015 8:37 AM To: SECTNS.aals at lists.aals.org Subject: FW: Gitmo Kangaroo Courts FAB to Wedgie: "Have you sought independent advice from a competent international criminal lawyer about your own personal criminal accountability for committing war crimes?" Wedgie refused to answer. Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) "I felt we needed to make a statement," said Boyle. "These kangaroo courts are un-American." ________________________________ [cid:image004.gif at 01D05190.D656AF10] Archives | Contacts [cid:image001.png at 01D2E776.D01574F0][cid:image005.gif at 01D05190.D656AF10] [cid:image006.gif at 01D05190.D656AF10] [cid:image007.gif at 01D05190.D656AF10] Friday, March 29, 2002 > News > News Story [ ] [Search] Speaker defends military tribunals Alina Dizik The Daily Illini [Photo (read caption below)] Brian Lambert The Daily Illini Law professor Francis Boyle (front) and "Wedgie the Kangaroo" listen to a speech on Military Tribunals given by Ruth Wedgewood on Thursday afternoon in the Law Building's Rowe Auditorium. Troubled by the "Kangaroo" courts the President ordered last year, the members of the audience came to voice their opinion, with one protester even going to the extent of wearing a kangaroo costume as a sign of protest. Yale law professor Ruth Wedgewood defended President George W. Bush's military tribunals to protesters who believed these courts violate human rights. Wedgewood helped draft proposals to prosecute about 150 detained, suspected terrorists in military tribunals rather than jury trials. She explained in a Thursday afternoon lecture that tribunals provide more options for submitting evidence. It is easier to build a case, so the process is faster than the traditional trials, Wedgewood said. Detainees cannot appeal the decision. University law professor Francis Boyle gathered students in Amnesty International and the American Civil Liberties Union to protest the lecture. A kangaroo-costumed person stood outside the Max L. Rowe Auditorium in the Law Building. They passed out flyers encouraging audience members to ask Wedgewood questions not addressed in the lecture. "I felt we needed to make a statement," said Boyle. "These kangaroo courts are un-American." Protesters argued the tribunals jump to the conclusion that the detainees are guilty and that President George W. Bush's proposed military courts will aid in the mistreatment of suspects held in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. "They are set up as a conviction conveyor belt; no one has ever been found not guilty," said law student Tony Weiner. But, Wedgewood argued against the assumptions that tribunals lead to predetermined guilt handed down by harsh military personnel. "Military people are engaging, morally concerned people," Wedgewood said. Wedgewood told the skeptical audience that the U.S. court system cannot adapt to the terrorism situation. "September 11 did not have a chance to morph federal district courts," said Wedgewood. "Military commissions give more latitude. It's the traditional way that the law has been enforced." [Photo (read caption below)] Brian Lambert The Daily Illini Yale law professor Ruth Wedgewood listens to questions Thursday in the Law Building during her speech about military tribunals ordered by President George W. Bush for non-U.S. citizens suspected of involvement with terrorism. She said military tribunals fit the nation's constantly changing view of the conflict with Islamic Fundamentalists. "We did not understand the Islamic World and didn't know the depth of anger until 9-11," said Wedgewood. She explained jurors could be in danger if they are forced to participate in verdicts against detainees because of unpredictable violence. Retired attorney George Brazitis praised Wedgewood's ability as a speaker but disagreed with the content. "She has the best possible case for the Bush administration viewpoint," Brazitis said. "President Bush would need to amend the constitution to carry out all of the wars that he is proposing." Those opposing the "kangaroo courts" say the United States is not in a war and should not try detainees in that fashion. Before Nov. 13, 2001, military tribunals were last implemented during World War II. "(Wedgewood) doesn't address major problems as to whether we even have a war, nor the violation of the constitutional provision that war can only be declared by Congress," Brazitis said. Some audience members did not have definite views, though. "I have problems with both approaches, we need to do something but I do not know the right approach," law student Adam Keser said. Related Links * NPR Polls on Military Tribunals [cid:image010.gif at 01D05190.D656AF10]Send letters to letters at dailyillini.com. [cid:image011.gif at 01D05190.D656AF10]Printer-friendly version Related Links * Krannert Museum News Stories Monks create mandala in Krannert Art Museum Anti-bioterrorism funding priority for state Speaker defends military tribunals Trustee to bow out for new board New voting system not coming to Champaign Terror warning alerts abroad students in Italy Gov. Ryan freezes pay raises Police Blotter [cid:image012.jpg at 01D05190.D656AF10] [cid:image012.jpg at 01D05190.D656AF10] [cid:image012.jpg at 01D05190.D656AF10] [cid:image013.gif at 01D05190.D656AF10] (c) 2002 Illini Media Company, all rights reserved. Illini Media: Buzz | WPGU | Illio | Technograph Contacts | Staff | Jobs | Ad Rates | DI Alumni | Privacy Policy -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image002.png Type: image/png Size: 168 bytes Desc: image002.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image003.png Type: image/png Size: 168 bytes Desc: image003.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image004.gif Type: image/gif Size: 711 bytes Desc: image004.gif URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image005.gif Type: image/gif Size: 3201 bytes Desc: image005.gif URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image006.gif Type: image/gif Size: 4283 bytes Desc: image006.gif URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image007.gif Type: image/gif Size: 5856 bytes Desc: image007.gif URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image008.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 14456 bytes Desc: image008.jpg URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image009.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 14304 bytes Desc: image009.jpg URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image010.gif Type: image/gif Size: 209 bytes Desc: image010.gif URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image011.gif Type: image/gif Size: 591 bytes Desc: image011.gif URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image012.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 3487 bytes Desc: image012.jpg URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image013.gif Type: image/gif Size: 3479 bytes Desc: image013.gif URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.png Type: image/png Size: 189 bytes Desc: image001.png URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Sat Jun 17 19:34:31 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2017 19:34:31 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Law School Off Campus! Message-ID: The Law School and its Deans and its Faculty have been bringing in war criminals like Yale Law Mafia Killer Koh and Wedgie to pervert and pollute this Campus and our Community since 9/11/2001. The Gitmo Kangaroo Courts violate the Geneva Conventions and are thus a war crime. If we do not stop them, the College of Law and its Faculty and its Deans will continue to pervert and pollute this Campus and this Community with Torture, War Crimes, Crimes Against Humanity and Genocide against Muslims/Arabs/Asians of Color. Torture Off Campus! War Crimes Off Campus! Crimes Against Humanity Off Campus! Genocide Off Campus! CIA Off Campus! Mossad Off Campus! Law School Off Campus! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Friday, February 27, 2015 8:37 AM To: SECTNS.aals at lists.aals.org Subject: FW: Gitmo Kangaroo Courts FAB to Wedgie: "Have you sought independent advice from a competent international criminal lawyer about your own personal criminal accountability for committing war crimes?" Wedgie refused to answer. Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) "I felt we needed to make a statement," said Boyle. "These kangaroo courts are un-American." ________________________________ [cid:image004.gif at 01D05190.D656AF10] Archives | Contacts [cid:image001.png at 01D2E776.D01574F0][cid:image005.gif at 01D05190.D656AF10] [cid:image006.gif at 01D05190.D656AF10] [cid:image007.gif at 01D05190.D656AF10] Friday, March 29, 2002 > News > News Story [ ] [Search] Speaker defends military tribunals Alina Dizik The Daily Illini [Photo (read caption below)] Brian Lambert The Daily Illini Law professor Francis Boyle (front) and "Wedgie the Kangaroo" listen to a speech on Military Tribunals given by Ruth Wedgewood on Thursday afternoon in the Law Building's Rowe Auditorium. Troubled by the "Kangaroo" courts the President ordered last year, the members of the audience came to voice their opinion, with one protester even going to the extent of wearing a kangaroo costume as a sign of protest. Yale law professor Ruth Wedgewood defended President George W. Bush's military tribunals to protesters who believed these courts violate human rights. Wedgewood helped draft proposals to prosecute about 150 detained, suspected terrorists in military tribunals rather than jury trials. She explained in a Thursday afternoon lecture that tribunals provide more options for submitting evidence. It is easier to build a case, so the process is faster than the traditional trials, Wedgewood said. Detainees cannot appeal the decision. University law professor Francis Boyle gathered students in Amnesty International and the American Civil Liberties Union to protest the lecture. A kangaroo-costumed person stood outside the Max L. Rowe Auditorium in the Law Building. They passed out flyers encouraging audience members to ask Wedgewood questions not addressed in the lecture. "I felt we needed to make a statement," said Boyle. "These kangaroo courts are un-American." Protesters argued the tribunals jump to the conclusion that the detainees are guilty and that President George W. Bush's proposed military courts will aid in the mistreatment of suspects held in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. "They are set up as a conviction conveyor belt; no one has ever been found not guilty," said law student Tony Weiner. But, Wedgewood argued against the assumptions that tribunals lead to predetermined guilt handed down by harsh military personnel. "Military people are engaging, morally concerned people," Wedgewood said. Wedgewood told the skeptical audience that the U.S. court system cannot adapt to the terrorism situation. "September 11 did not have a chance to morph federal district courts," said Wedgewood. "Military commissions give more latitude. It's the traditional way that the law has been enforced." [Photo (read caption below)] Brian Lambert The Daily Illini Yale law professor Ruth Wedgewood listens to questions Thursday in the Law Building during her speech about military tribunals ordered by President George W. Bush for non-U.S. citizens suspected of involvement with terrorism. She said military tribunals fit the nation's constantly changing view of the conflict with Islamic Fundamentalists. "We did not understand the Islamic World and didn't know the depth of anger until 9-11," said Wedgewood. She explained jurors could be in danger if they are forced to participate in verdicts against detainees because of unpredictable violence. Retired attorney George Brazitis praised Wedgewood's ability as a speaker but disagreed with the content. "She has the best possible case for the Bush administration viewpoint," Brazitis said. "President Bush would need to amend the constitution to carry out all of the wars that he is proposing." Those opposing the "kangaroo courts" say the United States is not in a war and should not try detainees in that fashion. Before Nov. 13, 2001, military tribunals were last implemented during World War II. "(Wedgewood) doesn't address major problems as to whether we even have a war, nor the violation of the constitutional provision that war can only be declared by Congress," Brazitis said. Some audience members did not have definite views, though. "I have problems with both approaches, we need to do something but I do not know the right approach," law student Adam Keser said. Related Links * NPR Polls on Military Tribunals [cid:image010.gif at 01D05190.D656AF10]Send letters to letters at dailyillini.com. [cid:image011.gif at 01D05190.D656AF10]Printer-friendly version Related Links * Krannert Museum News Stories Monks create mandala in Krannert Art Museum Anti-bioterrorism funding priority for state Speaker defends military tribunals Trustee to bow out for new board New voting system not coming to Champaign Terror warning alerts abroad students in Italy Gov. Ryan freezes pay raises Police Blotter [cid:image012.jpg at 01D05190.D656AF10] [cid:image012.jpg at 01D05190.D656AF10] [cid:image012.jpg at 01D05190.D656AF10] [cid:image013.gif at 01D05190.D656AF10] (c) 2002 Illini Media Company, all rights reserved. Illini Media: Buzz | WPGU | Illio | Technograph Contacts | Staff | Jobs | Ad Rates | DI Alumni | Privacy Policy -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image002.png Type: image/png Size: 168 bytes Desc: image002.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image003.png Type: image/png Size: 168 bytes Desc: image003.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image004.gif Type: image/gif Size: 711 bytes Desc: image004.gif URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image005.gif Type: image/gif Size: 3201 bytes Desc: image005.gif URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image006.gif Type: image/gif Size: 4283 bytes Desc: image006.gif URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image007.gif Type: image/gif Size: 5856 bytes Desc: image007.gif URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image008.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 14456 bytes Desc: image008.jpg URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image009.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 14304 bytes Desc: image009.jpg URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image010.gif Type: image/gif Size: 209 bytes Desc: image010.gif URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image011.gif Type: image/gif Size: 591 bytes Desc: image011.gif URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image012.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 3487 bytes Desc: image012.jpg URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image013.gif Type: image/gif Size: 3479 bytes Desc: image013.gif URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.png Type: image/png Size: 189 bytes Desc: image001.png URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Sat Jun 17 19:54:08 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2017 19:54:08 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Law School Off Campus! Message-ID: "When I returned to my office the next day, so many complaints had been filed and accumulated with numerous university officials that the then Dean of my law school issued a public statement repudiating me and then placing it on the law school's web-site. Obviously the then Dean of my law school believed that a Law Professor should advocate the Law of the Jungle instead of the Rule of Law." -------------------- Plus ca change... since 9/11/2001 at the College of Law, its Deans and its Faculty. CIA Off Campus! Mossad Off Campus! Torture Off Campus! Gitmo Kangaroo Courts Off Campus! War Crimes Off Campus! Crimes Against Humanity Off Campus! Genocide Against Muslims/Arabs/Asians of Color Off Campus! Law School Off Campus! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis Sent: Sunday, September 11, 2011 7:33 AM To: 'Killeacle' Subject: O'Reilly and the Law of the Jungle LENGTH: 3653 words HEADLINE: O'Reilly and the Law of the Jungle BYLINE: Francis A Boyle BODY:     by Francis Boyle On the morning of 13 September 2001, that is 48 hours after the terrible tragedies in New York and Washington, D.C. on September 11th, I received telephone call from a producer at Fox Television Network News in New York City. He asked me to go onto The O'Reilly Factor TV program live that evening in order to debate Bill O'Reilly on the question of war versus peace. O'Reilly would argue for the United States going to war in reaction to the terrorist attacks on 11 September, and I would argue for a peaceful resolution of this matter.    Up until then I had deliberately declined numerous requests for interviews about the terrible events of September 11 and what should be done about them because it was not clear to me precisely what was going on. But unfortunately The O'Reilly Factor had the Number One ranking in TV viewership for any news media talk program in America. I felt very strongly as a matter of principle that at least one person from the American Peace Movement had to go onto that program and argue the case directly to the American people that the United States of America must not go to war despite the terrible tragedy that had been inflicted upon us all. I had debated O'Reilly before so I was fully aware of the type of abuse to expect from him. So for the next few hours I negotiated with O'Reilly through his producer as to the terms and conditions of my appearance and our debate, which they agreed to. At the time I did not realize that O'Reilly was setting me up to be fired as he would next successfully do to Professor Sami Al-Arian soon after debating me. After our debate had concluded, I returned from the campus television studio to my office in order to shut the computer down, and then go home for what little remained of the evening. When I arrived in my office, I found that my voice mail message system had been flooded with mean, nasty, vicious complaints and threats. The same was true for my e-mail in-box. I deleted all these messages as best I could, and then finally went home to watch the rest of O'Reilly's 9/11 coverage that evening on Fox with my wife. By then he was replaying selected segments of our debate and asking for hostile commentaries from Newt Gingrich and Jeane Kirkpatrick. We turned off the TV in disgust when O'Reilly publicly accused me of being an Al Qaeda supporter. My understanding was that Fox then continued to rebroadcast a tape of this outright character assassination upon me for the rest of the night. When I returned to my office the next day, so many complaints had been filed and accumulated with numerous university officials that the then Dean of my law school issued a public statement repudiating me and then placing it on the law school's web-site. Obviously the then Dean of my law school believed that a Law Professor should advocate the Law of the Jungle instead of the Rule of Law. He is now "deaning" elsewhere, just like a previous Dean who had tried to get rid of me because of my fervid belief in the Rule of Law and public activities in support thereof. On the positive side, however, my besting of O'Reilly in the debate led to my being inundated by requests for interviews from mainstream and progressive news media sources all over the world. This plethora of interviews have continued apace until today during the course of all the terrible events that have transpired in the world since September 11: the war against Afghanistan; the global war on terrorism; massive assaults on international law, human rights, civil rights, civil liberties, and the United States Constitution; the war against Iraq; Guantanamo; kangaroo courts; the Bush Jr. torture scandal, etc. I have done the best I can to oppose this Bush Jr. juggernaut of nihilism--now continued and expanded by Obama. Ultimately it will be up to the American people to decide the future direction of the United States of America and thus indirectly, because of America's preponderant power, unfairly for the rest of the world. The present danger still remains Machiavellian power politics. The only known antidote is international law, international organizations, human rights, and the United States Constitution. In our thermonuclear age, humankind's existential choice is that stark, ominous, and compelling. As Americans, we must not hesitate to apply this imperative regimen immediately before it becomes too late for the continuation of our human species itself. The Rush to War SHOW: THE O'REILLY FACTOR (20:29) September 13, 2001 Thursday Transcript # 091303cb.256 SECTION: News; Domestic LENGTH: 3973 words HEADLINE: America Unites: How Should the U.S. Bring Terrorists to Justice? GUESTS: Sam Huessini, Francis Boyle BYLINE: Bill O'Reilly O'REILLY: While most Americans are united in their support of President Bush and the desire to bring Osama bin Laden and other terrorists to justice, there are some differing voices. Joining us now from Washington is Sam Husseini, the former spokesman for the Arab Anti -- American Anti-Discrimination Committee, and from Urbana, Illinois, is Francis Boyle, an international law professor at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.[...] O'REILLY: Cut his mike. All right, now, Mr. Boyle, Professor Boyle, let's have a little bit more of a rational discussion here. That was absurd. The United States now has to take action against certain segments in this world who we know have been harbouring people like Osama bin Laden. That's going to happen. How will you react to that? FRANCIS BOYLE, LAW PROFESSOR: Well, first I think you have to look at the law involved. Clearly what we have here, under United States domestic law and statutes, is an act of international terrorism that should be treated as such. It is not yet elevated to an act of war. For an act of war, we need proof that a foreign state actually ordered or launched an attack upon the United States of America. So far, we do not yet have that evidence. We could... O'REILLY: All right, now why are you, why are you, why are you taking this position when you know forces have attacked the United States. Now, maybe they don't have a country, but they are forces. They have attacked the United States, all right? Without warning, without provocation. Civilian targets. They've done everything that an act of war does. So, I'm saying that because we live in a different world now, where borders don't really matter, where terrorism is the weapon of choice, that you would declare war -- if I were President Bush, I would declare war on any hostile forces, notice those words, professor, hostile forces to the United States. I would have a blanket declaration of war so I could go in and kill those people. Would I be wrong? BOYLE: Well, Bill, so far you'll note Congress has been unwilling to declare war. And indeed, this matter is being debated right now. Right now, it appears that what they are seeking is not a full declaration of war, but only what we law professors call an imperfect declaration, which means a limited use of military force under the War Powers Resolution of 1973. Precisely for the problem that we don't know if any state was involved and we still do not know who was responsible for this undoubted terrorist attack upon the United States of America. O'REILLY: All right, but we have the secretary of state saying that Osama bin Laden now has been linked into and, you know, we don't have all the intelligence information, as President Bush said today. He's not going to give us, and he shouldn't, the people of America all the information that they have. But when the secretary of state gets up and says, look, we know this guy was involved to some extent, I believe him. And he's a wanted man, professor. He's been wanted for eight years. The Clinton administration didn't have the heart to get him and in the first few months the Bush administration didn't either. We now know, and you just heard the FBI agent say that Afghanistan has been involved for years harbouring and training these kinds of people. Certainly, Afghanistan, Syria, Libya, Iran, Iraq, those five countries, certainly have been hostile to the United States and given safe harbour to these terrorists. That's a fact. BOYLE: Well, let me point out, the secretary of state was very careful in the words he used. He said Osama bin Laden was a suspect. He did not accuse him. And, again, under these circumstances... O'REILLY: No, he didn't use the word suspect. He used another word. BOYLE: The account I read in, just off the wire service, said suspect. But let me continue my point. Under these circumstances, where we have 5,000 Americans dead and we could have many more Americans killed in a conflict, we have to be very careful, Congress and the American people and the president, in not to over-escalate the rhetoric, here. We have to look at this very rationally. This is a democracy. We have a right to see what the evidence is and proceed in a very slow and deliberate manner. O'REILLY: No, we don't. We do not, as a republic, we don't have the right to see what the evidence is if the evidence is of a national security situation, as you know. Now, I'm trusting my government to do the right thing, here. I am trusting. But I think it's beyond a doubt right now, beyond a reasonable doubt, which is, as you know, a court of law standard, that there are at least five, North Korea you could put in to, six states in the world that have harboured continually these terrorists. Now, we know that this was a well-coordinated effort. Our initial intelligence shows that some of the people that have been arrested have ties to Osama bin Laden. We know, as you just heard the FBI agent say, that the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center was tied in to a guy who knew bin Laden. So, bin Laden -- I agree with you, that you don't want to be a hothead. You don't want to overreact. You don't want to lob a missile at the pharmaceutical plant in the Sudan, which was terrible, and that was the one good point, or fair point, that Mr. Husseini made, you don't want to do that. But, on the other hand, professor, I think Americans are rightful, are right, to demand action against states that we know in the past have harboured these individuals and there's a warrant out for Osama bin Laden's arrest. So, if he is in Afghanistan, I would give that government a couple of days to hand him over, and if they did not, I'd go in. BOYLE: Well, again. The American people are right. We need to see the evidence. I remember people saying a generation ago, during the Vietnam war, I trusted my government. And I think people of my generation found out that that was wrong. We needed more evidence. O'REILLY: All right. Professor, let me stop you there, though. This is another point that Mr. Husseini tried to make. Just because the United States of America has made mistakes in the past, does not mean that we cannot defend ourselves now. This is a unique situation in history. We have now been attacked by forces without borders, OK? We've been attacked. And it hasn't been a military attack, it's been an attack on civilians. The reason, the sole reason a federal government exists is to protect the people of the United States. And as I said in my "Talking Points" memo, they haven't really done the job, for political reasons. But now's the time to correct those things. So, there's going to be a reckoning, Professor. You know it's going to happen. I know it's going to happen. And it's going to come down on Osama bin Laden first and maybe some of these rouge states later. Will you support that action? BOYLE: Before I support a war that will jeopardize the lives of tens of thousands of our servicemen and women, I want to see the evidence that we are relying on to justify this. So far, I do not see it. I see allegations. I see innuendo. I see winks and I see nods, but I do not see the evidence that you need under international law and the United States constitution so far to go to war. Maybe that evidence will be there, but it is not there now. My recommendation to Congress is to slow down, let's see what develops and let's see what this evidence is before we knowingly go out and not only kill large numbers of people, perhaps in Afghanistan and other countries, but undoubtedly in our own armed forces. 58,000 men of my generation will killed in Vietnam because of irresponsible behavior by the Johnson administration rushing that Tonkin Gulf resolution through Congress, exactly what we're seeing now. And we need to pull back and stop and think and ask the hard questions and demand to see the evidence first, before we march off to war. O'REILLY: All right, so it's not enough that people arrested in the bombings of the embassies in Africa testified in court that Osama bin Laden was behind and financed and coordinated those bombings. That evidence is not enough for you? BOYLE: Well, Africa is a very is a very different story than what happened in the World Trade Center. O'REILLY: No, it's not. He's wanted, he's wanted in the United States for the bombings of those two embassies. Is that evidence enough for you, professor, for the United States to go in and get this man? Is it enough? BOYLE: That, that matter was treated and handled as an act of international terrorism in accordance with the normal laws and procedures of the United States of America as a question of domestic and international law enforcement. And I am suggesting that is the way we need to proceed here... O'REILLY: Well, wait. You're dodging the question professor. BOYLE: ... unless we have evidence that... O'REILLY: Wait, professor. Professor. This is a no spin zone. Hold it. Hold it. Even out in Urbana Champagne, the no spin zone rules. You're dodging the question. There is an absolutely rock solid arrest warrant out for this man. Evidence in court, testimony by people who did the bombings that this man was behind it. Is that enough evidence for you to have the United States go in and get him now? Is it enough? BOYLE: The United States has been attempting to secure his extradition from Afghanistan. I support... O'REILLY: Yeah, that's long enough. BOYLE: I support that approach as international... O'REILLY: Come on already, I mean, eight years, we've been attempting to extradite this guy. Now's the time to tell the Afghans you've got 48 hours or 72 hours to turn him over. You don't turn him over, we're coming in and getting him. You try to stop us, and you're toast. Enough is enough, professor. BOYLE: That's vigilantism. It is not what the United States of America is supposed to stand for. We are supposed to stand... O'REILLY: No, what that is is protecting the country from terrorists who kill civilians. BOYLE: ... for rule of law. O'REILLY: It's not vigilantism. BOYLE: We are supposed to stand for rule of law, and that is clearly vigilantism. There is a Security Council, there is Congress, there are procedures and there are laws, and they are there to protect all of us here in the United States as well as... O'REILLY: So, you're telling me... BOYLE: ... as well as our servicemen and women. Look, Bill, if we allegedly, as you put it, go in, you are not going in, I am not going in. It's going to be young men and women serving in our armed forces... O'REILLY: And that's their job. To protect us. But, professor, let me, you know, what you're saying is, whoa, whoa, whoa, hold it. Hold it. Hold it. Hold it. B0YLE: ... with the constitution and the laws of the United States. O'REILLY: We're not violating any laws here, professor. No one is going to violate the law. There is going to be a state of war induced against states, states, terroristic states, who have attacked us. And what you're saying is, though, and correct me if I'm wrong, you're saying that even though there is a legitimate warrant out for Osama bin Laden's arrest, and even though most civilized nations would honor that warrant and turn him over to us, extradite him to us, the vast majority of nations on earth would do that, you still are opposed for the United States to demand that the Taliban government arrest this man and turn him over? You are opposed to that? BOYLE: During the Gulf War, President Bush father, who has far more experience that the current president Bush, got a Security Council resolution authorizing the United States of America to use force to expel Iraq from Kuwait. Second, President Bush father got a War Powers Authorization Resolution from Congress that gave him the constitutional authority to use military force to enforce that Security Council resolution. What I'm calling for here is the same adherence to international law and the United States constitution that the first President Bush adhered to in dealing with Iraq. O'REILLY: Well, you'll get that, professor. That's just a formality. There -- nobody on Capitol Hill right now, they're not going to -- there's no profile of courages up there anyway, usually. They're going to give President Bush what he wants. If he wants a War Powers Act, they're going to give it to him. He wants a declaration, they're going to give it to him. BOYLE: Actually, they're arguing about it right now... O'REILLY: They're going to give it to him. But I'm not interested in that, because it's going to happen. It's going to happen. BOYLE: The reports -- no, the reports I read was that this President Bush initially asked for a blank check, and Congress balked because they had been suckered once before... O'REILLY: All right, I'm not -- speculation is not what I'm in -- all right, professor. I don't want to speculate. I'm just going to say in my opinion he's going to have the authority to go in and get Osama bin Laden and his pals, wherever they are. He will get that authority, whether it takes a day or a week, he'll get it. And once he gets it, now, that's what I want to talk about here. Once he gets it, are you and others like you going to say, oh, no, we shouldn't do this, even though we have proof of the man's -- masterminded the bombings in Africa and the Cole,testimony in Yemen, are you going to still say, even after the authority is granted by Congress, which it will be, no, don't do it, let Afghanistan handle him? Are you going to still do that, professor? BOYLE: Second, like his father, his father also got authorization from the United States, the United Nations Security Council under chapter seven of the United Nations charter... O'REILLY: Oh, you want to go to U.N. now? You want the U.N. involved now. BOYLE: Is exactly what his father did... O'REILLY: So what? BOYLE: And that's exactly right. O'REILLY: His father made a huge mistake by not taking out Sadam Hussein when he could of. BOYLE: His father adhered to the required procedures under the United States constitution and the United Nations charter that is a treaty and the supreme law of our land. I expect the current President Bush to do exactly what his father did before he starts engaging in a massive military campaign in Iraq or against other countries... O'REILLY: All right, I don't know whether he's going to go -- I know he's not going to let the U.N. dictate. He might go for a consensus. He's already got it with Putin and all of our NATO allies, he's already go that. Whether he goes -- I think it would be a mistake to let -- empowering the U.N. in this situation. BOYLE: Then why did his father do this? O'REILLY: I'm going -- we're going to wrap this up with this. I'm going to give my last summation and then you can give yours, I'll give you the last word on it. This is a fugitive we're dealing with here. He has now been tied in by U.S. intelligence agencies, according to Attorney General Ashcroft and the secretary of state, tied into this horrendous bombing here in New York. The United States must make a response to this, and I am agreeing with you in a sense, it can't be a knee-jerk. It's got to be done in a methodical way. Congress will go along, they may debate it or whatever, but they will go along in either a War Powers, special War Powers Act or a declaration of war against forces hostile to the United States. Then they will go in and they will take him. This man you're looking at on the TV screen is a dead man. He should be a dead man. You don't do what he did and be allowed to walk around this earth. Now, I'm distressed, professor, by your reliance, reliance on the strict letter of propriety, when we've got 10,000 people laying in the street about 22 miles from me right now. I want deliberation. I want methodical discipline, but I also want action. We know who this guy is. We know the governments that are protecting him. We know the other rouge states that have terrorist camps there. They all have to be dealt with, in my opinion. I'll give you the last word. BOYLE: Sure, I agree with you, Bill. He is a fugitive from justice and this should be handled as a matter as other fugitives from justice of international law enforcement. If indeed there is evidence that a foreign state orchestrated and ordered an attack against the United States then clearly that is an act of war that should be dealt with as such... O'REILLY: What about harbouring? BOYLE: Right now... O'REILLY: Is harbouring an act of war? BOYLE: In my opinion, no. And under the current circumstances, I don't see it. O'REILLY: All right, professor. BOYLE: I think there is a distinction here. O'REILLY: OK, all right, wrap it up, if you would. BOYLE: I agree -- I agree that the -- if we go to war in a hasty manner here, we could see thousands of U.S. military personnel being killed without proper authorization by Congress or by the United Nations Security Council. O'REILLY: OK. BOYLE: Our founding fathers decided that the most awesome decision we would ever make would be to go to war, and we have to be very careful in making that decision. O'REILLY: All right, professor, I appreciate it very much. Thank you for your point of view. BOYLE: Thank you, Bill. From fboyle at illinois.edu Sat Jun 17 19:54:08 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2017 19:54:08 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Law School Off Campus! Message-ID: "When I returned to my office the next day, so many complaints had been filed and accumulated with numerous university officials that the then Dean of my law school issued a public statement repudiating me and then placing it on the law school's web-site. Obviously the then Dean of my law school believed that a Law Professor should advocate the Law of the Jungle instead of the Rule of Law." -------------------- Plus ca change... since 9/11/2001 at the College of Law, its Deans and its Faculty. CIA Off Campus! Mossad Off Campus! Torture Off Campus! Gitmo Kangaroo Courts Off Campus! War Crimes Off Campus! Crimes Against Humanity Off Campus! Genocide Against Muslims/Arabs/Asians of Color Off Campus! Law School Off Campus! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis Sent: Sunday, September 11, 2011 7:33 AM To: 'Killeacle' Subject: O'Reilly and the Law of the Jungle LENGTH: 3653 words HEADLINE: O'Reilly and the Law of the Jungle BYLINE: Francis A Boyle BODY:     by Francis Boyle On the morning of 13 September 2001, that is 48 hours after the terrible tragedies in New York and Washington, D.C. on September 11th, I received telephone call from a producer at Fox Television Network News in New York City. He asked me to go onto The O'Reilly Factor TV program live that evening in order to debate Bill O'Reilly on the question of war versus peace. O'Reilly would argue for the United States going to war in reaction to the terrorist attacks on 11 September, and I would argue for a peaceful resolution of this matter.    Up until then I had deliberately declined numerous requests for interviews about the terrible events of September 11 and what should be done about them because it was not clear to me precisely what was going on. But unfortunately The O'Reilly Factor had the Number One ranking in TV viewership for any news media talk program in America. I felt very strongly as a matter of principle that at least one person from the American Peace Movement had to go onto that program and argue the case directly to the American people that the United States of America must not go to war despite the terrible tragedy that had been inflicted upon us all. I had debated O'Reilly before so I was fully aware of the type of abuse to expect from him. So for the next few hours I negotiated with O'Reilly through his producer as to the terms and conditions of my appearance and our debate, which they agreed to. At the time I did not realize that O'Reilly was setting me up to be fired as he would next successfully do to Professor Sami Al-Arian soon after debating me. After our debate had concluded, I returned from the campus television studio to my office in order to shut the computer down, and then go home for what little remained of the evening. When I arrived in my office, I found that my voice mail message system had been flooded with mean, nasty, vicious complaints and threats. The same was true for my e-mail in-box. I deleted all these messages as best I could, and then finally went home to watch the rest of O'Reilly's 9/11 coverage that evening on Fox with my wife. By then he was replaying selected segments of our debate and asking for hostile commentaries from Newt Gingrich and Jeane Kirkpatrick. We turned off the TV in disgust when O'Reilly publicly accused me of being an Al Qaeda supporter. My understanding was that Fox then continued to rebroadcast a tape of this outright character assassination upon me for the rest of the night. When I returned to my office the next day, so many complaints had been filed and accumulated with numerous university officials that the then Dean of my law school issued a public statement repudiating me and then placing it on the law school's web-site. Obviously the then Dean of my law school believed that a Law Professor should advocate the Law of the Jungle instead of the Rule of Law. He is now "deaning" elsewhere, just like a previous Dean who had tried to get rid of me because of my fervid belief in the Rule of Law and public activities in support thereof. On the positive side, however, my besting of O'Reilly in the debate led to my being inundated by requests for interviews from mainstream and progressive news media sources all over the world. This plethora of interviews have continued apace until today during the course of all the terrible events that have transpired in the world since September 11: the war against Afghanistan; the global war on terrorism; massive assaults on international law, human rights, civil rights, civil liberties, and the United States Constitution; the war against Iraq; Guantanamo; kangaroo courts; the Bush Jr. torture scandal, etc. I have done the best I can to oppose this Bush Jr. juggernaut of nihilism--now continued and expanded by Obama. Ultimately it will be up to the American people to decide the future direction of the United States of America and thus indirectly, because of America's preponderant power, unfairly for the rest of the world. The present danger still remains Machiavellian power politics. The only known antidote is international law, international organizations, human rights, and the United States Constitution. In our thermonuclear age, humankind's existential choice is that stark, ominous, and compelling. As Americans, we must not hesitate to apply this imperative regimen immediately before it becomes too late for the continuation of our human species itself. The Rush to War SHOW: THE O'REILLY FACTOR (20:29) September 13, 2001 Thursday Transcript # 091303cb.256 SECTION: News; Domestic LENGTH: 3973 words HEADLINE: America Unites: How Should the U.S. Bring Terrorists to Justice? GUESTS: Sam Huessini, Francis Boyle BYLINE: Bill O'Reilly O'REILLY: While most Americans are united in their support of President Bush and the desire to bring Osama bin Laden and other terrorists to justice, there are some differing voices. Joining us now from Washington is Sam Husseini, the former spokesman for the Arab Anti -- American Anti-Discrimination Committee, and from Urbana, Illinois, is Francis Boyle, an international law professor at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.[...] O'REILLY: Cut his mike. All right, now, Mr. Boyle, Professor Boyle, let's have a little bit more of a rational discussion here. That was absurd. The United States now has to take action against certain segments in this world who we know have been harbouring people like Osama bin Laden. That's going to happen. How will you react to that? FRANCIS BOYLE, LAW PROFESSOR: Well, first I think you have to look at the law involved. Clearly what we have here, under United States domestic law and statutes, is an act of international terrorism that should be treated as such. It is not yet elevated to an act of war. For an act of war, we need proof that a foreign state actually ordered or launched an attack upon the United States of America. So far, we do not yet have that evidence. We could... O'REILLY: All right, now why are you, why are you, why are you taking this position when you know forces have attacked the United States. Now, maybe they don't have a country, but they are forces. They have attacked the United States, all right? Without warning, without provocation. Civilian targets. They've done everything that an act of war does. So, I'm saying that because we live in a different world now, where borders don't really matter, where terrorism is the weapon of choice, that you would declare war -- if I were President Bush, I would declare war on any hostile forces, notice those words, professor, hostile forces to the United States. I would have a blanket declaration of war so I could go in and kill those people. Would I be wrong? BOYLE: Well, Bill, so far you'll note Congress has been unwilling to declare war. And indeed, this matter is being debated right now. Right now, it appears that what they are seeking is not a full declaration of war, but only what we law professors call an imperfect declaration, which means a limited use of military force under the War Powers Resolution of 1973. Precisely for the problem that we don't know if any state was involved and we still do not know who was responsible for this undoubted terrorist attack upon the United States of America. O'REILLY: All right, but we have the secretary of state saying that Osama bin Laden now has been linked into and, you know, we don't have all the intelligence information, as President Bush said today. He's not going to give us, and he shouldn't, the people of America all the information that they have. But when the secretary of state gets up and says, look, we know this guy was involved to some extent, I believe him. And he's a wanted man, professor. He's been wanted for eight years. The Clinton administration didn't have the heart to get him and in the first few months the Bush administration didn't either. We now know, and you just heard the FBI agent say that Afghanistan has been involved for years harbouring and training these kinds of people. Certainly, Afghanistan, Syria, Libya, Iran, Iraq, those five countries, certainly have been hostile to the United States and given safe harbour to these terrorists. That's a fact. BOYLE: Well, let me point out, the secretary of state was very careful in the words he used. He said Osama bin Laden was a suspect. He did not accuse him. And, again, under these circumstances... O'REILLY: No, he didn't use the word suspect. He used another word. BOYLE: The account I read in, just off the wire service, said suspect. But let me continue my point. Under these circumstances, where we have 5,000 Americans dead and we could have many more Americans killed in a conflict, we have to be very careful, Congress and the American people and the president, in not to over-escalate the rhetoric, here. We have to look at this very rationally. This is a democracy. We have a right to see what the evidence is and proceed in a very slow and deliberate manner. O'REILLY: No, we don't. We do not, as a republic, we don't have the right to see what the evidence is if the evidence is of a national security situation, as you know. Now, I'm trusting my government to do the right thing, here. I am trusting. But I think it's beyond a doubt right now, beyond a reasonable doubt, which is, as you know, a court of law standard, that there are at least five, North Korea you could put in to, six states in the world that have harboured continually these terrorists. Now, we know that this was a well-coordinated effort. Our initial intelligence shows that some of the people that have been arrested have ties to Osama bin Laden. We know, as you just heard the FBI agent say, that the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center was tied in to a guy who knew bin Laden. So, bin Laden -- I agree with you, that you don't want to be a hothead. You don't want to overreact. You don't want to lob a missile at the pharmaceutical plant in the Sudan, which was terrible, and that was the one good point, or fair point, that Mr. Husseini made, you don't want to do that. But, on the other hand, professor, I think Americans are rightful, are right, to demand action against states that we know in the past have harboured these individuals and there's a warrant out for Osama bin Laden's arrest. So, if he is in Afghanistan, I would give that government a couple of days to hand him over, and if they did not, I'd go in. BOYLE: Well, again. The American people are right. We need to see the evidence. I remember people saying a generation ago, during the Vietnam war, I trusted my government. And I think people of my generation found out that that was wrong. We needed more evidence. O'REILLY: All right. Professor, let me stop you there, though. This is another point that Mr. Husseini tried to make. Just because the United States of America has made mistakes in the past, does not mean that we cannot defend ourselves now. This is a unique situation in history. We have now been attacked by forces without borders, OK? We've been attacked. And it hasn't been a military attack, it's been an attack on civilians. The reason, the sole reason a federal government exists is to protect the people of the United States. And as I said in my "Talking Points" memo, they haven't really done the job, for political reasons. But now's the time to correct those things. So, there's going to be a reckoning, Professor. You know it's going to happen. I know it's going to happen. And it's going to come down on Osama bin Laden first and maybe some of these rouge states later. Will you support that action? BOYLE: Before I support a war that will jeopardize the lives of tens of thousands of our servicemen and women, I want to see the evidence that we are relying on to justify this. So far, I do not see it. I see allegations. I see innuendo. I see winks and I see nods, but I do not see the evidence that you need under international law and the United States constitution so far to go to war. Maybe that evidence will be there, but it is not there now. My recommendation to Congress is to slow down, let's see what develops and let's see what this evidence is before we knowingly go out and not only kill large numbers of people, perhaps in Afghanistan and other countries, but undoubtedly in our own armed forces. 58,000 men of my generation will killed in Vietnam because of irresponsible behavior by the Johnson administration rushing that Tonkin Gulf resolution through Congress, exactly what we're seeing now. And we need to pull back and stop and think and ask the hard questions and demand to see the evidence first, before we march off to war. O'REILLY: All right, so it's not enough that people arrested in the bombings of the embassies in Africa testified in court that Osama bin Laden was behind and financed and coordinated those bombings. That evidence is not enough for you? BOYLE: Well, Africa is a very is a very different story than what happened in the World Trade Center. O'REILLY: No, it's not. He's wanted, he's wanted in the United States for the bombings of those two embassies. Is that evidence enough for you, professor, for the United States to go in and get this man? Is it enough? BOYLE: That, that matter was treated and handled as an act of international terrorism in accordance with the normal laws and procedures of the United States of America as a question of domestic and international law enforcement. And I am suggesting that is the way we need to proceed here... O'REILLY: Well, wait. You're dodging the question professor. BOYLE: ... unless we have evidence that... O'REILLY: Wait, professor. Professor. This is a no spin zone. Hold it. Hold it. Even out in Urbana Champagne, the no spin zone rules. You're dodging the question. There is an absolutely rock solid arrest warrant out for this man. Evidence in court, testimony by people who did the bombings that this man was behind it. Is that enough evidence for you to have the United States go in and get him now? Is it enough? BOYLE: The United States has been attempting to secure his extradition from Afghanistan. I support... O'REILLY: Yeah, that's long enough. BOYLE: I support that approach as international... O'REILLY: Come on already, I mean, eight years, we've been attempting to extradite this guy. Now's the time to tell the Afghans you've got 48 hours or 72 hours to turn him over. You don't turn him over, we're coming in and getting him. You try to stop us, and you're toast. Enough is enough, professor. BOYLE: That's vigilantism. It is not what the United States of America is supposed to stand for. We are supposed to stand... O'REILLY: No, what that is is protecting the country from terrorists who kill civilians. BOYLE: ... for rule of law. O'REILLY: It's not vigilantism. BOYLE: We are supposed to stand for rule of law, and that is clearly vigilantism. There is a Security Council, there is Congress, there are procedures and there are laws, and they are there to protect all of us here in the United States as well as... O'REILLY: So, you're telling me... BOYLE: ... as well as our servicemen and women. Look, Bill, if we allegedly, as you put it, go in, you are not going in, I am not going in. It's going to be young men and women serving in our armed forces... O'REILLY: And that's their job. To protect us. But, professor, let me, you know, what you're saying is, whoa, whoa, whoa, hold it. Hold it. Hold it. Hold it. B0YLE: ... with the constitution and the laws of the United States. O'REILLY: We're not violating any laws here, professor. No one is going to violate the law. There is going to be a state of war induced against states, states, terroristic states, who have attacked us. And what you're saying is, though, and correct me if I'm wrong, you're saying that even though there is a legitimate warrant out for Osama bin Laden's arrest, and even though most civilized nations would honor that warrant and turn him over to us, extradite him to us, the vast majority of nations on earth would do that, you still are opposed for the United States to demand that the Taliban government arrest this man and turn him over? You are opposed to that? BOYLE: During the Gulf War, President Bush father, who has far more experience that the current president Bush, got a Security Council resolution authorizing the United States of America to use force to expel Iraq from Kuwait. Second, President Bush father got a War Powers Authorization Resolution from Congress that gave him the constitutional authority to use military force to enforce that Security Council resolution. What I'm calling for here is the same adherence to international law and the United States constitution that the first President Bush adhered to in dealing with Iraq. O'REILLY: Well, you'll get that, professor. That's just a formality. There -- nobody on Capitol Hill right now, they're not going to -- there's no profile of courages up there anyway, usually. They're going to give President Bush what he wants. If he wants a War Powers Act, they're going to give it to him. He wants a declaration, they're going to give it to him. BOYLE: Actually, they're arguing about it right now... O'REILLY: They're going to give it to him. But I'm not interested in that, because it's going to happen. It's going to happen. BOYLE: The reports -- no, the reports I read was that this President Bush initially asked for a blank check, and Congress balked because they had been suckered once before... O'REILLY: All right, I'm not -- speculation is not what I'm in -- all right, professor. I don't want to speculate. I'm just going to say in my opinion he's going to have the authority to go in and get Osama bin Laden and his pals, wherever they are. He will get that authority, whether it takes a day or a week, he'll get it. And once he gets it, now, that's what I want to talk about here. Once he gets it, are you and others like you going to say, oh, no, we shouldn't do this, even though we have proof of the man's -- masterminded the bombings in Africa and the Cole,testimony in Yemen, are you going to still say, even after the authority is granted by Congress, which it will be, no, don't do it, let Afghanistan handle him? Are you going to still do that, professor? BOYLE: Second, like his father, his father also got authorization from the United States, the United Nations Security Council under chapter seven of the United Nations charter... O'REILLY: Oh, you want to go to U.N. now? You want the U.N. involved now. BOYLE: Is exactly what his father did... O'REILLY: So what? BOYLE: And that's exactly right. O'REILLY: His father made a huge mistake by not taking out Sadam Hussein when he could of. BOYLE: His father adhered to the required procedures under the United States constitution and the United Nations charter that is a treaty and the supreme law of our land. I expect the current President Bush to do exactly what his father did before he starts engaging in a massive military campaign in Iraq or against other countries... O'REILLY: All right, I don't know whether he's going to go -- I know he's not going to let the U.N. dictate. He might go for a consensus. He's already got it with Putin and all of our NATO allies, he's already go that. Whether he goes -- I think it would be a mistake to let -- empowering the U.N. in this situation. BOYLE: Then why did his father do this? O'REILLY: I'm going -- we're going to wrap this up with this. I'm going to give my last summation and then you can give yours, I'll give you the last word on it. This is a fugitive we're dealing with here. He has now been tied in by U.S. intelligence agencies, according to Attorney General Ashcroft and the secretary of state, tied into this horrendous bombing here in New York. The United States must make a response to this, and I am agreeing with you in a sense, it can't be a knee-jerk. It's got to be done in a methodical way. Congress will go along, they may debate it or whatever, but they will go along in either a War Powers, special War Powers Act or a declaration of war against forces hostile to the United States. Then they will go in and they will take him. This man you're looking at on the TV screen is a dead man. He should be a dead man. You don't do what he did and be allowed to walk around this earth. Now, I'm distressed, professor, by your reliance, reliance on the strict letter of propriety, when we've got 10,000 people laying in the street about 22 miles from me right now. I want deliberation. I want methodical discipline, but I also want action. We know who this guy is. We know the governments that are protecting him. We know the other rouge states that have terrorist camps there. They all have to be dealt with, in my opinion. I'll give you the last word. BOYLE: Sure, I agree with you, Bill. He is a fugitive from justice and this should be handled as a matter as other fugitives from justice of international law enforcement. If indeed there is evidence that a foreign state orchestrated and ordered an attack against the United States then clearly that is an act of war that should be dealt with as such... O'REILLY: What about harbouring? BOYLE: Right now... O'REILLY: Is harbouring an act of war? BOYLE: In my opinion, no. And under the current circumstances, I don't see it. O'REILLY: All right, professor. BOYLE: I think there is a distinction here. O'REILLY: OK, all right, wrap it up, if you would. BOYLE: I agree -- I agree that the -- if we go to war in a hasty manner here, we could see thousands of U.S. military personnel being killed without proper authorization by Congress or by the United Nations Security Council. O'REILLY: OK. BOYLE: Our founding fathers decided that the most awesome decision we would ever make would be to go to war, and we have to be very careful in making that decision. O'REILLY: All right, professor, I appreciate it very much. Thank you for your point of view. BOYLE: Thank you, Bill. From fboyle at illinois.edu Sat Jun 17 20:11:11 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2017 20:11:11 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Law School Off Campus! Message-ID: "Melissa, Jason, and Jen -- Great job so far in getting Harold Koh for the Vacketta-Piper Lecture next year. I hope you are as fortunate in filling the other lectures. Keep up the good work. Michael {CIA/Mossad/Torture Moore Consort of Dean Hurricane Heide Hurd}" CIA Off Campus! Mossad Off Campus! Torture Off Campus! Gitmo Kangaroo Courts Off Campus! War Crimes Off Campus! Crimes Against Humanity Off Campus! Genocide Against Muslims/Arabs/Asians of Color Off Campus! Law School Off Campus! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Moore, Michael Sent: Tuesday, May 19, 2015 2:43 PM To: Wasserman, Melissa F ; Law * Tenured/Track Faculty ; Law * Clinical Faculty ; Law * Legal Writing Faculty ; Law * Emeritus Faculty ; Law * Library Faculty Cc: Cook, Sally J ; Mazzone, Jason ; Robbennolt, Jennifer Kirkpatrick Subject: RE: Lectures, Workshops, and Moot Court Judges Melissa, Jason, and Jen -- Great job so far in getting Harold Koh for the Vacketta-Piper Lecture next year. I hope you are as fortunate in filling the other lectures. Keep up the good work. Michael ________________________________ From: Wasserman, Melissa F Sent: Tuesday, May 19, 2015 12:45 PM To: Law * Tenured/Track Faculty; Law * Clinical Faculty; Law * Legal Writing Faculty; Law * Emeritus Faculty; Law * Library Faculty Cc: Wasserman, Melissa F; Cook, Sally J; Mazzone, Jason; Robbennolt, Jennifer Kirkpatrick Subject: Lectures, Workshops, and Moot Court Judges Dear Colleagues: This e-mail comes in my capacity as the chair of the Lectures Committee. We will soon be in the process of putting together the faculty workshops for the 2015-16 academic year. If you have any suggestions for speakers at our noon-time Thursday faculty workshop series, please pass them along by reply e-mail. It would be helpful to have a few sentences about the person and about why they might be a good person to invite (e.g., interesting current research project, working on topics or a field related to someone's research here, a connection to Illinois, etc.). Please keep in mind, like previous years, we may be only able to invite a handful of the persons who are suggested. If you are organizing a speaker series yourself, please let me and Sally Cook know that so that we can keep track of and keep you all posted about the various series that are going on in the building. Although arrangements for your series should be made through your faculty assistant, it would be helpful if you could have that assistant let Sally know who is coming, when, and for what series. We will also be thinking about invitees for the endowed lectures for the 2016-17 academic year as well as moot court judges for the honorary moot court round that will take place in the spring of 2017. We welcome suggestions for these lectures and for moot court judges. To refresh everyone's memory, the endowed lectures for which the committee finds speakers are: * David C. Baum Memorial Lecture on Civil Liberties and Civil Rights * Paul M. Van Arsdell, Jr., Memorial Lecture on Litigation and the Legal Profession. Note, we have already locked in Harold Koh for the Vacketta-Piper lecture this coming year. More information about these endowed lectures along with a list of past speakers is available on the law school web site here: http://www.law.illinois.edu/academics/endowed-lectures. If you have ideas for either faculty workshop speakers, endowed lecturers, or moot court judges, please drop me an e-mail with your suggestions [mfwasser at illinois.edu] by next Wednesday, May 27. I will pass these suggestions along to the rest of the Lectures Committee (Jason Mazzone and Jen Robbennolt). You are welcome to copy them on your message. Best, Melissa Melissa F. Wasserman Associate Professor Richard and Anne Stockton Faculty Scholar Richard W. and Marie L. Corman Scholar University of Illinois College of Law Champaign, IL 61820 mfwasser at illinois.edu (217) 244-3960 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Sat Jun 17 20:11:11 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2017 20:11:11 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Law School Off Campus! Message-ID: "Melissa, Jason, and Jen -- Great job so far in getting Harold Koh for the Vacketta-Piper Lecture next year. I hope you are as fortunate in filling the other lectures. Keep up the good work. Michael {CIA/Mossad/Torture Moore Consort of Dean Hurricane Heide Hurd}" CIA Off Campus! Mossad Off Campus! Torture Off Campus! Gitmo Kangaroo Courts Off Campus! War Crimes Off Campus! Crimes Against Humanity Off Campus! Genocide Against Muslims/Arabs/Asians of Color Off Campus! Law School Off Campus! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Moore, Michael Sent: Tuesday, May 19, 2015 2:43 PM To: Wasserman, Melissa F ; Law * Tenured/Track Faculty ; Law * Clinical Faculty ; Law * Legal Writing Faculty ; Law * Emeritus Faculty ; Law * Library Faculty Cc: Cook, Sally J ; Mazzone, Jason ; Robbennolt, Jennifer Kirkpatrick Subject: RE: Lectures, Workshops, and Moot Court Judges Melissa, Jason, and Jen -- Great job so far in getting Harold Koh for the Vacketta-Piper Lecture next year. I hope you are as fortunate in filling the other lectures. Keep up the good work. Michael ________________________________ From: Wasserman, Melissa F Sent: Tuesday, May 19, 2015 12:45 PM To: Law * Tenured/Track Faculty; Law * Clinical Faculty; Law * Legal Writing Faculty; Law * Emeritus Faculty; Law * Library Faculty Cc: Wasserman, Melissa F; Cook, Sally J; Mazzone, Jason; Robbennolt, Jennifer Kirkpatrick Subject: Lectures, Workshops, and Moot Court Judges Dear Colleagues: This e-mail comes in my capacity as the chair of the Lectures Committee. We will soon be in the process of putting together the faculty workshops for the 2015-16 academic year. If you have any suggestions for speakers at our noon-time Thursday faculty workshop series, please pass them along by reply e-mail. It would be helpful to have a few sentences about the person and about why they might be a good person to invite (e.g., interesting current research project, working on topics or a field related to someone's research here, a connection to Illinois, etc.). Please keep in mind, like previous years, we may be only able to invite a handful of the persons who are suggested. If you are organizing a speaker series yourself, please let me and Sally Cook know that so that we can keep track of and keep you all posted about the various series that are going on in the building. Although arrangements for your series should be made through your faculty assistant, it would be helpful if you could have that assistant let Sally know who is coming, when, and for what series. We will also be thinking about invitees for the endowed lectures for the 2016-17 academic year as well as moot court judges for the honorary moot court round that will take place in the spring of 2017. We welcome suggestions for these lectures and for moot court judges. To refresh everyone's memory, the endowed lectures for which the committee finds speakers are: * David C. Baum Memorial Lecture on Civil Liberties and Civil Rights * Paul M. Van Arsdell, Jr., Memorial Lecture on Litigation and the Legal Profession. Note, we have already locked in Harold Koh for the Vacketta-Piper lecture this coming year. More information about these endowed lectures along with a list of past speakers is available on the law school web site here: http://www.law.illinois.edu/academics/endowed-lectures. If you have ideas for either faculty workshop speakers, endowed lecturers, or moot court judges, please drop me an e-mail with your suggestions [mfwasser at illinois.edu] by next Wednesday, May 27. I will pass these suggestions along to the rest of the Lectures Committee (Jason Mazzone and Jen Robbennolt). You are welcome to copy them on your message. Best, Melissa Melissa F. Wasserman Associate Professor Richard and Anne Stockton Faculty Scholar Richard W. and Marie L. Corman Scholar University of Illinois College of Law Champaign, IL 61820 mfwasser at illinois.edu (217) 244-3960 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Sun Jun 18 03:08:54 2017 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2017 03:08:54 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Panel discussion reminder Message-ID: WHAT: A panel discussion about the financial, social, and environment costs Americans bear to support and pay for the conduct of endless military interventions in Asia and Africa. WHERE: Champaign Public Library, Rooms A&B, 200 W. Green St., Champaign WHEN: Sunday, June 18, 1:30 - 3 PM PANELISTS: * Maryam Ar-Raheem, Chair, Champaign County Democrats; Racial Justice Task Force; founding member, Sister Net; fmr. Dir., A Woman’s Place; fmr. Exec. Dir., UI YWCA; ret. AFSCME union rep at- large. * Morton Brussel, Professor of Physics emeritus, UIUC, nuclear physics research, Union of Concerned Scientists * David Johnson, Host, World Labor Hour; Jobs with Justice; Industrial Workers of the World ( I.W.W.); AFL-CIO of Champaign County * Augustus Wood, UIUC PhD candidate; Co-President, Graduate Employees Organization; Black Students for Revolution; Co-Host, World Labor Hour CO-SPONSORS: Build Programs, Not Jails; Channing Murray Foundation; Central Illinois Jobs with Justice; Eco-Justice Collaborative; People Demanding Action; The People’s Agenda; Food Not Bombs; Prairie Group of Sierra Club; Peace & Service Comm. of the U-C Friends Meeting; Three Spinners. [https://scontent.ford1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-0/c0.4.733.386/p526x395/18922092_10155467631117502_218656547965845180_n.jpg?oh=fe52cee55010b574f4358645efa3a424&oe=59DF99D8] JUN18 Going Hidden Costs of War panel Sun 1:30 PM CDT · Champaign Public Library · Champaign, IL 8 Going · 54 Interested LikeShow more reactions CommentShare -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Sun Jun 18 12:01:16 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2017 12:01:16 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Sunday News Gazette Letter to the Editor: AAUP lies on Salaita! Message-ID: Kirstein at Xavier U: "The UI persecuted a professor and bought its way off the censure list with a settlement which settled nothing," Kirstein said. "Dr. Salaita does not have an academic appointment and the American Indian Studies program is gutted. From the Chief to Salaita, the war on Native American culture and studies continues. It is outrageous that the US is not censured." For sure! Ditto and a fortiori! The Zionists destroyed Salaita's career as a professor for a mere $800,000 in taxpayers money. No skin off their nose. Just like the Zionists did to my Friend Norman Finkelstein at DePaul University:They are supposed to be "Catholic"-LOL! And here Wise {sic} also destroyed our entire Native American Studies Program forever. Way to go Phyllis! A two-fer for your bigotry and racism! Speaking of "Catholics"-may you rot in Purgatory! Fab Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 6:43 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Subject: FW: News Gazette Letter to the Editor: AAUP lies on Salaita! Importance: High Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 6:42 AM To: 'Dan Corkery' >; Julie Wurth > Cc: Wise, Phyllis M > Subject: News Gazette Letter to the Editor: AAUP lies on Salaita! Importance: High A report from an AAUP representative who visited the UI in April found that the climate for academic freedom is "robust", said Anita Levy, Senior program officer for Academic Freedom,Tenure and Governance. That is a bald-faced lie by the AAUP! The bigoted and racist persecution of Steven Salaita by the entire University Administration, many Faculty and large elements of the surrounding Community has terrorized and intimidated Palestinians/Arabs/Muslims of Color on this Campus and absolutely nothing has been done to alleviate it by the University of Illinois. Likewise, the University's longstanding bigotry and racism against American Indians still remains and has never been repudiated, rectified or even apologized for. Chancellor Wise's illegal firing of Steven Salaita was a two'fer for bigotry and racism on this Campus that is still pervasive against all People of Color here. Francis A. Boyle Professor of Law Ex-AAUP Member Resigned in Protest. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Sun Jun 18 12:01:16 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2017 12:01:16 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Sunday News Gazette Letter to the Editor: AAUP lies on Salaita! Message-ID: Kirstein at Xavier U: "The UI persecuted a professor and bought its way off the censure list with a settlement which settled nothing," Kirstein said. "Dr. Salaita does not have an academic appointment and the American Indian Studies program is gutted. From the Chief to Salaita, the war on Native American culture and studies continues. It is outrageous that the US is not censured." For sure! Ditto and a fortiori! The Zionists destroyed Salaita's career as a professor for a mere $800,000 in taxpayers money. No skin off their nose. Just like the Zionists did to my Friend Norman Finkelstein at DePaul University:They are supposed to be "Catholic"-LOL! And here Wise {sic} also destroyed our entire Native American Studies Program forever. Way to go Phyllis! A two-fer for your bigotry and racism! Speaking of "Catholics"-may you rot in Purgatory! Fab Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 6:43 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Subject: FW: News Gazette Letter to the Editor: AAUP lies on Salaita! Importance: High Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 6:42 AM To: 'Dan Corkery' >; Julie Wurth > Cc: Wise, Phyllis M > Subject: News Gazette Letter to the Editor: AAUP lies on Salaita! Importance: High A report from an AAUP representative who visited the UI in April found that the climate for academic freedom is "robust", said Anita Levy, Senior program officer for Academic Freedom,Tenure and Governance. That is a bald-faced lie by the AAUP! The bigoted and racist persecution of Steven Salaita by the entire University Administration, many Faculty and large elements of the surrounding Community has terrorized and intimidated Palestinians/Arabs/Muslims of Color on this Campus and absolutely nothing has been done to alleviate it by the University of Illinois. Likewise, the University's longstanding bigotry and racism against American Indians still remains and has never been repudiated, rectified or even apologized for. Chancellor Wise's illegal firing of Steven Salaita was a two'fer for bigotry and racism on this Campus that is still pervasive against all People of Color here. Francis A. Boyle Professor of Law Ex-AAUP Member Resigned in Protest. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Sun Jun 18 12:35:18 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2017 12:35:18 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Sunday News Gazette Letter to the Editor: AAUP lies on Salaita! Message-ID: Several years ago when Norman was teaching at DePaul the Arab Law Students and I invited him to come down here and give an Address on the Middle East. I reserved the Law Auditorium for this event. Many Jewish Law Students publicly attacked Norman on the law school email system for being a "self-hating Jew." So in my Introduction of Norman to the audience I said something to the effect that Norman fits within the Prophetic Tradition of the Jewish People along the lines of Chomsky. In response to a question after the lecture, Norman stated that in his opinion the Nazis had exterminated somewhere between 5.2 to 5.4 Million Jews. That's a self-hating Jew for you? Fab Stanlingrad We got off the boat at the dock Walking into town I was asked Could I lay some flowers At the War Memorial On the Banks of the Volga? Of course I said yes Honored and pleased My Dad had fought the Japanese At Saipan and Tinian and Okinawa Nazis were not his war But We were all Allies together In the Noble Cause to Defeat Fascism As I neared the Statue On the Banks of the Volga Young Komsomol Girl appeared All dressed in white Carrying a wreath of red roses She gave to me A band was playing Joyful, not somber, but subdued Town Elders assembled Sun was shining Most beautiful day On the Banks of the Volga I lay my wreath of roses To the Defenders and Victims of Stalingrad Bowed my head in silent reflection If the Soviets had not held at Stalingrad All Europe today would be speaking German And saluting: Heil Hitler! Deutschland, Deutschland But not Uber Alles My Dad was smiling On the Banks of the Volga Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2017 7:01 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: Sunday News Gazette Letter to the Editor: AAUP lies on Salaita! Kirstein at Xavier U: "The UI persecuted a professor and bought its way off the censure list with a settlement which settled nothing," Kirstein said. "Dr. Salaita does not have an academic appointment and the American Indian Studies program is gutted. From the Chief to Salaita, the war on Native American culture and studies continues. It is outrageous that the US is not censured." For sure! Ditto and a fortiori! The Zionists destroyed Salaita's career as a professor for a mere $800,000 in taxpayers money. No skin off their nose. Just like the Zionists did to my Friend Norman Finkelstein at DePaul University:They are supposed to be "Catholic"-LOL! And here Wise {sic} also destroyed our entire Native American Studies Program forever. Way to go Phyllis! A two-fer for your bigotry and racism! Speaking of "Catholics"-may you rot in Purgatory! Fab Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 6:43 AM To: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; Karen Aram >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: FW: News Gazette Letter to the Editor: AAUP lies on Salaita! Importance: High Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 6:42 AM To: 'Dan Corkery' >; Julie Wurth > Cc: Wise, Phyllis M > Subject: News Gazette Letter to the Editor: AAUP lies on Salaita! Importance: High A report from an AAUP representative who visited the UI in April found that the climate for academic freedom is "robust", said Anita Levy, Senior program officer for Academic Freedom,Tenure and Governance. That is a bald-faced lie by the AAUP! The bigoted and racist persecution of Steven Salaita by the entire University Administration, many Faculty and large elements of the surrounding Community has terrorized and intimidated Palestinians/Arabs/Muslims of Color on this Campus and absolutely nothing has been done to alleviate it by the University of Illinois. Likewise, the University's longstanding bigotry and racism against American Indians still remains and has never been repudiated, rectified or even apologized for. Chancellor Wise's illegal firing of Steven Salaita was a two'fer for bigotry and racism on this Campus that is still pervasive against all People of Color here. Francis A. Boyle Professor of Law Ex-AAUP Member Resigned in Protest. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Sun Jun 18 12:35:18 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2017 12:35:18 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Sunday News Gazette Letter to the Editor: AAUP lies on Salaita! Message-ID: Several years ago when Norman was teaching at DePaul the Arab Law Students and I invited him to come down here and give an Address on the Middle East. I reserved the Law Auditorium for this event. Many Jewish Law Students publicly attacked Norman on the law school email system for being a "self-hating Jew." So in my Introduction of Norman to the audience I said something to the effect that Norman fits within the Prophetic Tradition of the Jewish People along the lines of Chomsky. In response to a question after the lecture, Norman stated that in his opinion the Nazis had exterminated somewhere between 5.2 to 5.4 Million Jews. That's a self-hating Jew for you? Fab Stanlingrad We got off the boat at the dock Walking into town I was asked Could I lay some flowers At the War Memorial On the Banks of the Volga? Of course I said yes Honored and pleased My Dad had fought the Japanese At Saipan and Tinian and Okinawa Nazis were not his war But We were all Allies together In the Noble Cause to Defeat Fascism As I neared the Statue On the Banks of the Volga Young Komsomol Girl appeared All dressed in white Carrying a wreath of red roses She gave to me A band was playing Joyful, not somber, but subdued Town Elders assembled Sun was shining Most beautiful day On the Banks of the Volga I lay my wreath of roses To the Defenders and Victims of Stalingrad Bowed my head in silent reflection If the Soviets had not held at Stalingrad All Europe today would be speaking German And saluting: Heil Hitler! Deutschland, Deutschland But not Uber Alles My Dad was smiling On the Banks of the Volga Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2017 7:01 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: Sunday News Gazette Letter to the Editor: AAUP lies on Salaita! Kirstein at Xavier U: "The UI persecuted a professor and bought its way off the censure list with a settlement which settled nothing," Kirstein said. "Dr. Salaita does not have an academic appointment and the American Indian Studies program is gutted. From the Chief to Salaita, the war on Native American culture and studies continues. It is outrageous that the US is not censured." For sure! Ditto and a fortiori! The Zionists destroyed Salaita's career as a professor for a mere $800,000 in taxpayers money. No skin off their nose. Just like the Zionists did to my Friend Norman Finkelstein at DePaul University:They are supposed to be "Catholic"-LOL! And here Wise {sic} also destroyed our entire Native American Studies Program forever. Way to go Phyllis! A two-fer for your bigotry and racism! Speaking of "Catholics"-may you rot in Purgatory! Fab Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 6:43 AM To: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; Karen Aram >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: FW: News Gazette Letter to the Editor: AAUP lies on Salaita! Importance: High Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 6:42 AM To: 'Dan Corkery' >; Julie Wurth > Cc: Wise, Phyllis M > Subject: News Gazette Letter to the Editor: AAUP lies on Salaita! Importance: High A report from an AAUP representative who visited the UI in April found that the climate for academic freedom is "robust", said Anita Levy, Senior program officer for Academic Freedom,Tenure and Governance. That is a bald-faced lie by the AAUP! The bigoted and racist persecution of Steven Salaita by the entire University Administration, many Faculty and large elements of the surrounding Community has terrorized and intimidated Palestinians/Arabs/Muslims of Color on this Campus and absolutely nothing has been done to alleviate it by the University of Illinois. Likewise, the University's longstanding bigotry and racism against American Indians still remains and has never been repudiated, rectified or even apologized for. Chancellor Wise's illegal firing of Steven Salaita was a two'fer for bigotry and racism on this Campus that is still pervasive against all People of Color here. Francis A. Boyle Professor of Law Ex-AAUP Member Resigned in Protest. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Sun Jun 18 12:41:23 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2017 12:41:23 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Sunday News Gazette Letter to the Editor: AAUP lies on Salaita! Message-ID: Speaking of Chomsky: The Racist Mascot: Why You Should Still Boo Illinois The self-styled "Fighting Illini" of the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign are on their way to the Jan. 1, 2008 Rose Bowl with their racist and genocidal mascot and symbol Chief Illiniwak still in tow. Although the NCAA forced the University of Illiniwaks to prevent this Little Red Sambo from desecrating at half-times everything American Indians hold dear and treasure, nevertheless Chief Illiniwak still remains the officially designated "honored symbol" of the University of Illiniwaks at Urbana-Champaign. Just recently the University of Illiniwaks resurrected Chief Illiniwak for their Fall 2007 Homecoming in order to better milk their Alumni/ae as part of their newly launched Capital Campaign, thus definitively proving their craven racism. In his Year 501: The Conquest Continues (1993) Noam Chomsky suggests an apt metaphor for such American Indian sports mascots and symbols that I will elaborate upon here in order to conform to our local and most peculiar rites on this campus: Suppose the Nazis had won the Second World War. Sixty years later, a prestigious German state university has a mascot for all of its sports teams and sports fans by the name of "The Rabbi." Basically what happens is that a student from the Hitler Youth League dresses up in an authentic costume for an Hasidic Rabbi, complete with the curl-locks and a beard. The University itself collectively call themselves "The Fighting Jews," and the school's band is called "The Marching Jews." The student newspaper is called "The Daily Jew." All the sports fans in town wear jackets and t-shirts with pictures of The Rabbi prominently displayed on them. And most cars have Rabbi stickers planted all over them. Three years ago the University's Board of Trustees ran out of town on a rail a courageous and principled Chancellor who had the temerity to publicly suggest that the time had now come to "retire" the Rabbi. So of course there was a heated campaign on among the students and alumni to "Save the Rabbi!" This German state university plays its soccer matches over at the Nuremberg Stadium in front of an audience of about 75,000 White Aryans, almost all of whom are wearing pro-Rabbi images and clothes. At half-time the Marching Jews take to the stadium floor and begin playing what they purport to be Jewish sounding music along the lines of Fiddler-on-the-Roof. Then all 75,000 White Aryans rise as one and shout in unison: "Rabbi! Rabbi! Rabbi! Rabbi!" gesticulating wildly and working themselves up into a feeding frenzy. One lone faculty member sits there in protest shouting "Racist Rabbi!" and everyone in the vicinity proceeds to throw garbage at him.1 Finally, the moment these ardent White Aryans have all waited for has arrived. The Rabbi runs out onto the arena floor from among the Marching Jews, proceeds to the center of the Nuremberg Stadium, and dances the Hava Nagila while the Marching Jews play on and march into an intricately choreographed maneuver that they all brag about and take special pride in that culminates with the band being organized into a Swastika. So the Rabbi continues to dance the Hava Nagila while the Marching Jews march themselves into a Swastika. By now all 75,000 White Aryans are hysterical, shouting, screaming and yelling: "Rabbi! Rabbi! Rabbi!" This semi-religious spectacle that the Nazis are well known for staging, especially at the Nuremberg stadium, goes on for a good twenty minutes. It all concludes with everyone joining hands to sing "Deutschland, Deutschland, Uber Alles," with the Rabbi leading all 75,000 White Aryans in the song. Then the Rabbi proceeds to dance the Hava Nagila out of the stadium followed by the Marching Jews. Everyone goes wild, clapping and cheering. This Rabbi ceremony brings tears to the eyes of many drunken alumni and students who had started several hours beforehand getting inebriated on schnapps and good German beer at pre-game tailgate parties. When it is all over, a visiting law professor from another country asks his host at the soccer match what this spectacle was all about. Without missing a beat Dean Mengele of the Law School turns to his guest and says: "We are honoring the Jews." Whom the Nazis had just exterminated 60 years ago, so of course the memory of the Jews needs to be honored by this spectacle. The Illiniwek Indians were ethnically cleansed out of Illinois about a century before that. These are the real "Little Eichmans." Be sure to "Boo!" and root against the Illiniwaks. Historically, the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, its Boards of Trustees, its Presidents, its Chancellors, its Provosts, its Deans, Directors and Department Heads, and most of its Faculty and Alumni/ae have always been the Ku Klux Klan dressed up in Caps and Gowns instead of Hoods and Sheets. Ditto for Wise {sic!}! Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2017 7:35 AM To: 'David Green' ; 'sherwoodross10 at gmail.com' ; 'peace-discuss at anti-war.net' ; 'C. G. ESTABROOK' ; 'a-fields at uiuc.edu' ; Hoffman, Valerie J ; 'Joe Lauria' ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; 'Arlene Hickory' ; 'David Swanson' ; 'Karen Aram' ; 'peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net' ; 'abass10 at gmail.com' ; 'mickalideh at gmail.com' ; 'Lina Thorne' ; 'chicago at worldcantwait.net' ; 'Jay' ; Estabrook, Carl G ; 'Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net' ; 'David Johnson' Subject: RE: Sunday News Gazette Letter to the Editor: AAUP lies on Salaita! Several years ago when Norman was teaching at DePaul the Arab Law Students and I invited him to come down here and give an Address on the Middle East. I reserved the Law Auditorium for this event. Many Jewish Law Students publicly attacked Norman on the law school email system for being a "self-hating Jew." So in my Introduction of Norman to the audience I said something to the effect that Norman fits within the Prophetic Tradition of the Jewish People along the lines of Chomsky. In response to a question after the lecture, Norman stated that in his opinion the Nazis had exterminated somewhere between 5.2 to 5.4 Million Jews. That's a self-hating Jew for you? Fab Stanlingrad We got off the boat at the dock Walking into town I was asked Could I lay some flowers At the War Memorial On the Banks of the Volga? Of course I said yes Honored and pleased My Dad had fought the Japanese At Saipan and Tinian and Okinawa Nazis were not his war But We were all Allies together In the Noble Cause to Defeat Fascism As I neared the Statue On the Banks of the Volga Young Komsomol Girl appeared All dressed in white Carrying a wreath of red roses She gave to me A band was playing Joyful, not somber, but subdued Town Elders assembled Sun was shining Most beautiful day On the Banks of the Volga I lay my wreath of roses To the Defenders and Victims of Stalingrad Bowed my head in silent reflection If the Soviets had not held at Stalingrad All Europe today would be speaking German And saluting: Heil Hitler! Deutschland, Deutschland But not Uber Alles My Dad was smiling On the Banks of the Volga Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2017 7:01 AM To: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; Karen Aram >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Cc: Wise, Phyllis M > Subject: Sunday News Gazette Letter to the Editor: AAUP lies on Salaita! Kirstein at Xavier U: "The UI persecuted a professor and bought its way off the censure list with a settlement which settled nothing," Kirstein said. "Dr. Salaita does not have an academic appointment and the American Indian Studies program is gutted. From the Chief to Salaita, the war on Native American culture and studies continues. It is outrageous that the US is not censured." For sure! Ditto and a fortiori! The Zionists destroyed Salaita's career as a professor for a mere $800,000 in taxpayers money. No skin off their nose. Just like the Zionists did to my Friend Norman Finkelstein at DePaul University:They are supposed to be "Catholic"-LOL! And here Wise {sic} also destroyed our entire Native American Studies Program forever. Way to go Phyllis! A two-fer for your bigotry and racism! Speaking of "Catholics"-may you rot in Purgatory! Fab Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 6:43 AM To: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; Karen Aram >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: FW: News Gazette Letter to the Editor: AAUP lies on Salaita! Importance: High Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 6:42 AM To: 'Dan Corkery' >; Julie Wurth > Cc: Wise, Phyllis M > Subject: News Gazette Letter to the Editor: AAUP lies on Salaita! Importance: High A report from an AAUP representative who visited the UI in April found that the climate for academic freedom is "robust", said Anita Levy, Senior program officer for Academic Freedom,Tenure and Governance. That is a bald-faced lie by the AAUP! The bigoted and racist persecution of Steven Salaita by the entire University Administration, many Faculty and large elements of the surrounding Community has terrorized and intimidated Palestinians/Arabs/Muslims of Color on this Campus and absolutely nothing has been done to alleviate it by the University of Illinois. Likewise, the University's longstanding bigotry and racism against American Indians still remains and has never been repudiated, rectified or even apologized for. Chancellor Wise's illegal firing of Steven Salaita was a two'fer for bigotry and racism on this Campus that is still pervasive against all People of Color here. Francis A. Boyle Professor of Law Ex-AAUP Member Resigned in Protest. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) ________________________________ 1 Guess who? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Sun Jun 18 12:41:23 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2017 12:41:23 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Sunday News Gazette Letter to the Editor: AAUP lies on Salaita! Message-ID: Speaking of Chomsky: The Racist Mascot: Why You Should Still Boo Illinois The self-styled "Fighting Illini" of the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign are on their way to the Jan. 1, 2008 Rose Bowl with their racist and genocidal mascot and symbol Chief Illiniwak still in tow. Although the NCAA forced the University of Illiniwaks to prevent this Little Red Sambo from desecrating at half-times everything American Indians hold dear and treasure, nevertheless Chief Illiniwak still remains the officially designated "honored symbol" of the University of Illiniwaks at Urbana-Champaign. Just recently the University of Illiniwaks resurrected Chief Illiniwak for their Fall 2007 Homecoming in order to better milk their Alumni/ae as part of their newly launched Capital Campaign, thus definitively proving their craven racism. In his Year 501: The Conquest Continues (1993) Noam Chomsky suggests an apt metaphor for such American Indian sports mascots and symbols that I will elaborate upon here in order to conform to our local and most peculiar rites on this campus: Suppose the Nazis had won the Second World War. Sixty years later, a prestigious German state university has a mascot for all of its sports teams and sports fans by the name of "The Rabbi." Basically what happens is that a student from the Hitler Youth League dresses up in an authentic costume for an Hasidic Rabbi, complete with the curl-locks and a beard. The University itself collectively call themselves "The Fighting Jews," and the school's band is called "The Marching Jews." The student newspaper is called "The Daily Jew." All the sports fans in town wear jackets and t-shirts with pictures of The Rabbi prominently displayed on them. And most cars have Rabbi stickers planted all over them. Three years ago the University's Board of Trustees ran out of town on a rail a courageous and principled Chancellor who had the temerity to publicly suggest that the time had now come to "retire" the Rabbi. So of course there was a heated campaign on among the students and alumni to "Save the Rabbi!" This German state university plays its soccer matches over at the Nuremberg Stadium in front of an audience of about 75,000 White Aryans, almost all of whom are wearing pro-Rabbi images and clothes. At half-time the Marching Jews take to the stadium floor and begin playing what they purport to be Jewish sounding music along the lines of Fiddler-on-the-Roof. Then all 75,000 White Aryans rise as one and shout in unison: "Rabbi! Rabbi! Rabbi! Rabbi!" gesticulating wildly and working themselves up into a feeding frenzy. One lone faculty member sits there in protest shouting "Racist Rabbi!" and everyone in the vicinity proceeds to throw garbage at him.1 Finally, the moment these ardent White Aryans have all waited for has arrived. The Rabbi runs out onto the arena floor from among the Marching Jews, proceeds to the center of the Nuremberg Stadium, and dances the Hava Nagila while the Marching Jews play on and march into an intricately choreographed maneuver that they all brag about and take special pride in that culminates with the band being organized into a Swastika. So the Rabbi continues to dance the Hava Nagila while the Marching Jews march themselves into a Swastika. By now all 75,000 White Aryans are hysterical, shouting, screaming and yelling: "Rabbi! Rabbi! Rabbi!" This semi-religious spectacle that the Nazis are well known for staging, especially at the Nuremberg stadium, goes on for a good twenty minutes. It all concludes with everyone joining hands to sing "Deutschland, Deutschland, Uber Alles," with the Rabbi leading all 75,000 White Aryans in the song. Then the Rabbi proceeds to dance the Hava Nagila out of the stadium followed by the Marching Jews. Everyone goes wild, clapping and cheering. This Rabbi ceremony brings tears to the eyes of many drunken alumni and students who had started several hours beforehand getting inebriated on schnapps and good German beer at pre-game tailgate parties. When it is all over, a visiting law professor from another country asks his host at the soccer match what this spectacle was all about. Without missing a beat Dean Mengele of the Law School turns to his guest and says: "We are honoring the Jews." Whom the Nazis had just exterminated 60 years ago, so of course the memory of the Jews needs to be honored by this spectacle. The Illiniwek Indians were ethnically cleansed out of Illinois about a century before that. These are the real "Little Eichmans." Be sure to "Boo!" and root against the Illiniwaks. Historically, the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, its Boards of Trustees, its Presidents, its Chancellors, its Provosts, its Deans, Directors and Department Heads, and most of its Faculty and Alumni/ae have always been the Ku Klux Klan dressed up in Caps and Gowns instead of Hoods and Sheets. Ditto for Wise {sic!}! Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2017 7:35 AM To: 'David Green' ; 'sherwoodross10 at gmail.com' ; 'peace-discuss at anti-war.net' ; 'C. G. ESTABROOK' ; 'a-fields at uiuc.edu' ; Hoffman, Valerie J ; 'Joe Lauria' ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; 'Arlene Hickory' ; 'David Swanson' ; 'Karen Aram' ; 'peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net' ; 'abass10 at gmail.com' ; 'mickalideh at gmail.com' ; 'Lina Thorne' ; 'chicago at worldcantwait.net' ; 'Jay' ; Estabrook, Carl G ; 'Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net' ; 'David Johnson' Subject: RE: Sunday News Gazette Letter to the Editor: AAUP lies on Salaita! Several years ago when Norman was teaching at DePaul the Arab Law Students and I invited him to come down here and give an Address on the Middle East. I reserved the Law Auditorium for this event. Many Jewish Law Students publicly attacked Norman on the law school email system for being a "self-hating Jew." So in my Introduction of Norman to the audience I said something to the effect that Norman fits within the Prophetic Tradition of the Jewish People along the lines of Chomsky. In response to a question after the lecture, Norman stated that in his opinion the Nazis had exterminated somewhere between 5.2 to 5.4 Million Jews. That's a self-hating Jew for you? Fab Stanlingrad We got off the boat at the dock Walking into town I was asked Could I lay some flowers At the War Memorial On the Banks of the Volga? Of course I said yes Honored and pleased My Dad had fought the Japanese At Saipan and Tinian and Okinawa Nazis were not his war But We were all Allies together In the Noble Cause to Defeat Fascism As I neared the Statue On the Banks of the Volga Young Komsomol Girl appeared All dressed in white Carrying a wreath of red roses She gave to me A band was playing Joyful, not somber, but subdued Town Elders assembled Sun was shining Most beautiful day On the Banks of the Volga I lay my wreath of roses To the Defenders and Victims of Stalingrad Bowed my head in silent reflection If the Soviets had not held at Stalingrad All Europe today would be speaking German And saluting: Heil Hitler! Deutschland, Deutschland But not Uber Alles My Dad was smiling On the Banks of the Volga Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2017 7:01 AM To: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; Karen Aram >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Cc: Wise, Phyllis M > Subject: Sunday News Gazette Letter to the Editor: AAUP lies on Salaita! Kirstein at Xavier U: "The UI persecuted a professor and bought its way off the censure list with a settlement which settled nothing," Kirstein said. "Dr. Salaita does not have an academic appointment and the American Indian Studies program is gutted. From the Chief to Salaita, the war on Native American culture and studies continues. It is outrageous that the US is not censured." For sure! Ditto and a fortiori! The Zionists destroyed Salaita's career as a professor for a mere $800,000 in taxpayers money. No skin off their nose. Just like the Zionists did to my Friend Norman Finkelstein at DePaul University:They are supposed to be "Catholic"-LOL! And here Wise {sic} also destroyed our entire Native American Studies Program forever. Way to go Phyllis! A two-fer for your bigotry and racism! Speaking of "Catholics"-may you rot in Purgatory! Fab Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 6:43 AM To: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; Karen Aram >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: FW: News Gazette Letter to the Editor: AAUP lies on Salaita! Importance: High Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 6:42 AM To: 'Dan Corkery' >; Julie Wurth > Cc: Wise, Phyllis M > Subject: News Gazette Letter to the Editor: AAUP lies on Salaita! Importance: High A report from an AAUP representative who visited the UI in April found that the climate for academic freedom is "robust", said Anita Levy, Senior program officer for Academic Freedom,Tenure and Governance. That is a bald-faced lie by the AAUP! The bigoted and racist persecution of Steven Salaita by the entire University Administration, many Faculty and large elements of the surrounding Community has terrorized and intimidated Palestinians/Arabs/Muslims of Color on this Campus and absolutely nothing has been done to alleviate it by the University of Illinois. Likewise, the University's longstanding bigotry and racism against American Indians still remains and has never been repudiated, rectified or even apologized for. Chancellor Wise's illegal firing of Steven Salaita was a two'fer for bigotry and racism on this Campus that is still pervasive against all People of Color here. Francis A. Boyle Professor of Law Ex-AAUP Member Resigned in Protest. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) ________________________________ 1 Guess who? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Sun Jun 18 12:55:36 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2017 12:55:36 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Sunday News Gazette Letter to the Editor: AAUP lies on Salaita! Message-ID: Historically, the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, its Boards of Trustees, its Presidents, its Chancellors, its Provosts, its Deans, Directors and Department Heads, and most of its Faculty and Alumni/ae have always been the Ku Klux Klan dressed up in Caps and Gowns instead of Hoods and Sheets. Ditto for Wise {sic!}! I am going to stage a new Production for a halftime show at the football games entitled: "Phyllis Wise {sic!} and the Revenge of Chief Illiniwak!" Chief! Chief! Chief! Chief! Etc. Etc. Etc. Ad Nauseam. Way to go Phyllis! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2017 7:41 AM To: 'David Green' ; 'sherwoodross10 at gmail.com' ; 'peace-discuss at anti-war.net' ; 'C. G. ESTABROOK' ; 'a-fields at uiuc.edu' ; Hoffman, Valerie J ; 'Joe Lauria' ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; 'Arlene Hickory' ; 'David Swanson' ; 'Karen Aram' ; 'peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net' ; 'abass10 at gmail.com' ; 'mickalideh at gmail.com' ; 'Lina Thorne' ; 'chicago at worldcantwait.net' ; 'Jay' ; Estabrook, Carl G ; 'Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net' ; 'David Johnson' Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: Sunday News Gazette Letter to the Editor: AAUP lies on Salaita! Speaking of Chomsky: The Racist Mascot: Why You Should Still Boo Illinois The self-styled "Fighting Illini" of the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign are on their way to the Jan. 1, 2008 Rose Bowl with their racist and genocidal mascot and symbol Chief Illiniwak still in tow. Although the NCAA forced the University of Illiniwaks to prevent this Little Red Sambo from desecrating at half-times everything American Indians hold dear and treasure, nevertheless Chief Illiniwak still remains the officially designated "honored symbol" of the University of Illiniwaks at Urbana-Champaign. Just recently the University of Illiniwaks resurrected Chief Illiniwak for their Fall 2007 Homecoming in order to better milk their Alumni/ae as part of their newly launched Capital Campaign, thus definitively proving their craven racism. In his Year 501: The Conquest Continues (1993) Noam Chomsky suggests an apt metaphor for such American Indian sports mascots and symbols that I will elaborate upon here in order to conform to our local and most peculiar rites on this campus: Suppose the Nazis had won the Second World War. Sixty years later, a prestigious German state university has a mascot for all of its sports teams and sports fans by the name of "The Rabbi." Basically what happens is that a student from the Hitler Youth League dresses up in an authentic costume for an Hasidic Rabbi, complete with the curl-locks and a beard. The University itself collectively call themselves "The Fighting Jews," and the school's band is called "The Marching Jews." The student newspaper is called "The Daily Jew." All the sports fans in town wear jackets and t-shirts with pictures of The Rabbi prominently displayed on them. And most cars have Rabbi stickers planted all over them. Three years ago the University's Board of Trustees ran out of town on a rail a courageous and principled Chancellor who had the temerity to publicly suggest that the time had now come to "retire" the Rabbi. So of course there was a heated campaign on among the students and alumni to "Save the Rabbi!" This German state university plays its soccer matches over at the Nuremberg Stadium in front of an audience of about 75,000 White Aryans, almost all of whom are wearing pro-Rabbi images and clothes. At half-time the Marching Jews take to the stadium floor and begin playing what they purport to be Jewish sounding music along the lines of Fiddler-on-the-Roof. Then all 75,000 White Aryans rise as one and shout in unison: "Rabbi! Rabbi! Rabbi! Rabbi!" gesticulating wildly and working themselves up into a feeding frenzy. One lone faculty member sits there in protest shouting "Racist Rabbi!" and everyone in the vicinity proceeds to throw garbage at him.1 Finally, the moment these ardent White Aryans have all waited for has arrived. The Rabbi runs out onto the arena floor from among the Marching Jews, proceeds to the center of the Nuremberg Stadium, and dances the Hava Nagila while the Marching Jews play on and march into an intricately choreographed maneuver that they all brag about and take special pride in that culminates with the band being organized into a Swastika. So the Rabbi continues to dance the Hava Nagila while the Marching Jews march themselves into a Swastika. By now all 75,000 White Aryans are hysterical, shouting, screaming and yelling: "Rabbi! Rabbi! Rabbi!" This semi-religious spectacle that the Nazis are well known for staging, especially at the Nuremberg stadium, goes on for a good twenty minutes. It all concludes with everyone joining hands to sing "Deutschland, Deutschland, Uber Alles," with the Rabbi leading all 75,000 White Aryans in the song. Then the Rabbi proceeds to dance the Hava Nagila out of the stadium followed by the Marching Jews. Everyone goes wild, clapping and cheering. This Rabbi ceremony brings tears to the eyes of many drunken alumni and students who had started several hours beforehand getting inebriated on schnapps and good German beer at pre-game tailgate parties. When it is all over, a visiting law professor from another country asks his host at the soccer match what this spectacle was all about. Without missing a beat Dean Mengele of the Law School turns to his guest and says: "We are honoring the Jews." Whom the Nazis had just exterminated 60 years ago, so of course the memory of the Jews needs to be honored by this spectacle. The Illiniwek Indians were ethnically cleansed out of Illinois about a century before that. These are the real "Little Eichmans." Be sure to "Boo!" and root against the Illiniwaks. Historically, the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, its Boards of Trustees, its Presidents, its Chancellors, its Provosts, its Deans, Directors and Department Heads, and most of its Faculty and Alumni/ae have always been the Ku Klux Klan dressed up in Caps and Gowns instead of Hoods and Sheets. Ditto for Wise {sic!}! Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2017 7:35 AM To: 'David Green' >; 'sherwoodross10 at gmail.com' >; 'peace-discuss at anti-war.net' >; 'C. G. ESTABROOK' >; 'a-fields at uiuc.edu' >; Hoffman, Valerie J >; 'Joe Lauria' >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; 'Arlene Hickory' >; 'David Swanson' >; 'Karen Aram' >; 'peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net' >; 'abass10 at gmail.com' >; 'mickalideh at gmail.com' >; 'Lina Thorne' >; 'chicago at worldcantwait.net' >; 'Jay' >; Estabrook, Carl G >; 'Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net' >; 'David Johnson' > Subject: RE: Sunday News Gazette Letter to the Editor: AAUP lies on Salaita! Several years ago when Norman was teaching at DePaul the Arab Law Students and I invited him to come down here and give an Address on the Middle East. I reserved the Law Auditorium for this event. Many Jewish Law Students publicly attacked Norman on the law school email system for being a "self-hating Jew." So in my Introduction of Norman to the audience I said something to the effect that Norman fits within the Prophetic Tradition of the Jewish People along the lines of Chomsky. In response to a question after the lecture, Norman stated that in his opinion the Nazis had exterminated somewhere between 5.2 to 5.4 Million Jews. That's a self-hating Jew for you? Fab Stanlingrad We got off the boat at the dock Walking into town I was asked Could I lay some flowers At the War Memorial On the Banks of the Volga? Of course I said yes Honored and pleased My Dad had fought the Japanese At Saipan and Tinian and Okinawa Nazis were not his war But We were all Allies together In the Noble Cause to Defeat Fascism As I neared the Statue On the Banks of the Volga Young Komsomol Girl appeared All dressed in white Carrying a wreath of red roses She gave to me A band was playing Joyful, not somber, but subdued Town Elders assembled Sun was shining Most beautiful day On the Banks of the Volga I lay my wreath of roses To the Defenders and Victims of Stalingrad Bowed my head in silent reflection If the Soviets had not held at Stalingrad All Europe today would be speaking German And saluting: Heil Hitler! Deutschland, Deutschland But not Uber Alles My Dad was smiling On the Banks of the Volga Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2017 7:01 AM To: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; Karen Aram >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Cc: Wise, Phyllis M > Subject: Sunday News Gazette Letter to the Editor: AAUP lies on Salaita! Kirstein at Xavier U: "The UI persecuted a professor and bought its way off the censure list with a settlement which settled nothing," Kirstein said. "Dr. Salaita does not have an academic appointment and the American Indian Studies program is gutted. From the Chief to Salaita, the war on Native American culture and studies continues. It is outrageous that the US is not censured." For sure! Ditto and a fortiori! The Zionists destroyed Salaita's career as a professor for a mere $800,000 in taxpayers money. No skin off their nose. Just like the Zionists did to my Friend Norman Finkelstein at DePaul University:They are supposed to be "Catholic"-LOL! And here Wise {sic} also destroyed our entire Native American Studies Program forever. Way to go Phyllis! A two-fer for your bigotry and racism! Speaking of "Catholics"-may you rot in Purgatory! Fab Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 6:43 AM To: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; Karen Aram >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: FW: News Gazette Letter to the Editor: AAUP lies on Salaita! Importance: High Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 6:42 AM To: 'Dan Corkery' >; Julie Wurth > Cc: Wise, Phyllis M > Subject: News Gazette Letter to the Editor: AAUP lies on Salaita! Importance: High A report from an AAUP representative who visited the UI in April found that the climate for academic freedom is "robust", said Anita Levy, Senior program officer for Academic Freedom,Tenure and Governance. That is a bald-faced lie by the AAUP! The bigoted and racist persecution of Steven Salaita by the entire University Administration, many Faculty and large elements of the surrounding Community has terrorized and intimidated Palestinians/Arabs/Muslims of Color on this Campus and absolutely nothing has been done to alleviate it by the University of Illinois. Likewise, the University's longstanding bigotry and racism against American Indians still remains and has never been repudiated, rectified or even apologized for. Chancellor Wise's illegal firing of Steven Salaita was a two'fer for bigotry and racism on this Campus that is still pervasive against all People of Color here. Francis A. Boyle Professor of Law Ex-AAUP Member Resigned in Protest. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) ________________________________ ________________________________ 1 Guess who? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Sun Jun 18 12:55:36 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2017 12:55:36 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Sunday News Gazette Letter to the Editor: AAUP lies on Salaita! Message-ID: Historically, the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, its Boards of Trustees, its Presidents, its Chancellors, its Provosts, its Deans, Directors and Department Heads, and most of its Faculty and Alumni/ae have always been the Ku Klux Klan dressed up in Caps and Gowns instead of Hoods and Sheets. Ditto for Wise {sic!}! I am going to stage a new Production for a halftime show at the football games entitled: "Phyllis Wise {sic!} and the Revenge of Chief Illiniwak!" Chief! Chief! Chief! Chief! Etc. Etc. Etc. Ad Nauseam. Way to go Phyllis! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2017 7:41 AM To: 'David Green' ; 'sherwoodross10 at gmail.com' ; 'peace-discuss at anti-war.net' ; 'C. G. ESTABROOK' ; 'a-fields at uiuc.edu' ; Hoffman, Valerie J ; 'Joe Lauria' ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; 'Arlene Hickory' ; 'David Swanson' ; 'Karen Aram' ; 'peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net' ; 'abass10 at gmail.com' ; 'mickalideh at gmail.com' ; 'Lina Thorne' ; 'chicago at worldcantwait.net' ; 'Jay' ; Estabrook, Carl G ; 'Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net' ; 'David Johnson' Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: Sunday News Gazette Letter to the Editor: AAUP lies on Salaita! Speaking of Chomsky: The Racist Mascot: Why You Should Still Boo Illinois The self-styled "Fighting Illini" of the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign are on their way to the Jan. 1, 2008 Rose Bowl with their racist and genocidal mascot and symbol Chief Illiniwak still in tow. Although the NCAA forced the University of Illiniwaks to prevent this Little Red Sambo from desecrating at half-times everything American Indians hold dear and treasure, nevertheless Chief Illiniwak still remains the officially designated "honored symbol" of the University of Illiniwaks at Urbana-Champaign. Just recently the University of Illiniwaks resurrected Chief Illiniwak for their Fall 2007 Homecoming in order to better milk their Alumni/ae as part of their newly launched Capital Campaign, thus definitively proving their craven racism. In his Year 501: The Conquest Continues (1993) Noam Chomsky suggests an apt metaphor for such American Indian sports mascots and symbols that I will elaborate upon here in order to conform to our local and most peculiar rites on this campus: Suppose the Nazis had won the Second World War. Sixty years later, a prestigious German state university has a mascot for all of its sports teams and sports fans by the name of "The Rabbi." Basically what happens is that a student from the Hitler Youth League dresses up in an authentic costume for an Hasidic Rabbi, complete with the curl-locks and a beard. The University itself collectively call themselves "The Fighting Jews," and the school's band is called "The Marching Jews." The student newspaper is called "The Daily Jew." All the sports fans in town wear jackets and t-shirts with pictures of The Rabbi prominently displayed on them. And most cars have Rabbi stickers planted all over them. Three years ago the University's Board of Trustees ran out of town on a rail a courageous and principled Chancellor who had the temerity to publicly suggest that the time had now come to "retire" the Rabbi. So of course there was a heated campaign on among the students and alumni to "Save the Rabbi!" This German state university plays its soccer matches over at the Nuremberg Stadium in front of an audience of about 75,000 White Aryans, almost all of whom are wearing pro-Rabbi images and clothes. At half-time the Marching Jews take to the stadium floor and begin playing what they purport to be Jewish sounding music along the lines of Fiddler-on-the-Roof. Then all 75,000 White Aryans rise as one and shout in unison: "Rabbi! Rabbi! Rabbi! Rabbi!" gesticulating wildly and working themselves up into a feeding frenzy. One lone faculty member sits there in protest shouting "Racist Rabbi!" and everyone in the vicinity proceeds to throw garbage at him.1 Finally, the moment these ardent White Aryans have all waited for has arrived. The Rabbi runs out onto the arena floor from among the Marching Jews, proceeds to the center of the Nuremberg Stadium, and dances the Hava Nagila while the Marching Jews play on and march into an intricately choreographed maneuver that they all brag about and take special pride in that culminates with the band being organized into a Swastika. So the Rabbi continues to dance the Hava Nagila while the Marching Jews march themselves into a Swastika. By now all 75,000 White Aryans are hysterical, shouting, screaming and yelling: "Rabbi! Rabbi! Rabbi!" This semi-religious spectacle that the Nazis are well known for staging, especially at the Nuremberg stadium, goes on for a good twenty minutes. It all concludes with everyone joining hands to sing "Deutschland, Deutschland, Uber Alles," with the Rabbi leading all 75,000 White Aryans in the song. Then the Rabbi proceeds to dance the Hava Nagila out of the stadium followed by the Marching Jews. Everyone goes wild, clapping and cheering. This Rabbi ceremony brings tears to the eyes of many drunken alumni and students who had started several hours beforehand getting inebriated on schnapps and good German beer at pre-game tailgate parties. When it is all over, a visiting law professor from another country asks his host at the soccer match what this spectacle was all about. Without missing a beat Dean Mengele of the Law School turns to his guest and says: "We are honoring the Jews." Whom the Nazis had just exterminated 60 years ago, so of course the memory of the Jews needs to be honored by this spectacle. The Illiniwek Indians were ethnically cleansed out of Illinois about a century before that. These are the real "Little Eichmans." Be sure to "Boo!" and root against the Illiniwaks. Historically, the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, its Boards of Trustees, its Presidents, its Chancellors, its Provosts, its Deans, Directors and Department Heads, and most of its Faculty and Alumni/ae have always been the Ku Klux Klan dressed up in Caps and Gowns instead of Hoods and Sheets. Ditto for Wise {sic!}! Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2017 7:35 AM To: 'David Green' >; 'sherwoodross10 at gmail.com' >; 'peace-discuss at anti-war.net' >; 'C. G. ESTABROOK' >; 'a-fields at uiuc.edu' >; Hoffman, Valerie J >; 'Joe Lauria' >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; 'Arlene Hickory' >; 'David Swanson' >; 'Karen Aram' >; 'peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net' >; 'abass10 at gmail.com' >; 'mickalideh at gmail.com' >; 'Lina Thorne' >; 'chicago at worldcantwait.net' >; 'Jay' >; Estabrook, Carl G >; 'Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net' >; 'David Johnson' > Subject: RE: Sunday News Gazette Letter to the Editor: AAUP lies on Salaita! Several years ago when Norman was teaching at DePaul the Arab Law Students and I invited him to come down here and give an Address on the Middle East. I reserved the Law Auditorium for this event. Many Jewish Law Students publicly attacked Norman on the law school email system for being a "self-hating Jew." So in my Introduction of Norman to the audience I said something to the effect that Norman fits within the Prophetic Tradition of the Jewish People along the lines of Chomsky. In response to a question after the lecture, Norman stated that in his opinion the Nazis had exterminated somewhere between 5.2 to 5.4 Million Jews. That's a self-hating Jew for you? Fab Stanlingrad We got off the boat at the dock Walking into town I was asked Could I lay some flowers At the War Memorial On the Banks of the Volga? Of course I said yes Honored and pleased My Dad had fought the Japanese At Saipan and Tinian and Okinawa Nazis were not his war But We were all Allies together In the Noble Cause to Defeat Fascism As I neared the Statue On the Banks of the Volga Young Komsomol Girl appeared All dressed in white Carrying a wreath of red roses She gave to me A band was playing Joyful, not somber, but subdued Town Elders assembled Sun was shining Most beautiful day On the Banks of the Volga I lay my wreath of roses To the Defenders and Victims of Stalingrad Bowed my head in silent reflection If the Soviets had not held at Stalingrad All Europe today would be speaking German And saluting: Heil Hitler! Deutschland, Deutschland But not Uber Alles My Dad was smiling On the Banks of the Volga Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2017 7:01 AM To: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; Karen Aram >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Cc: Wise, Phyllis M > Subject: Sunday News Gazette Letter to the Editor: AAUP lies on Salaita! Kirstein at Xavier U: "The UI persecuted a professor and bought its way off the censure list with a settlement which settled nothing," Kirstein said. "Dr. Salaita does not have an academic appointment and the American Indian Studies program is gutted. From the Chief to Salaita, the war on Native American culture and studies continues. It is outrageous that the US is not censured." For sure! Ditto and a fortiori! The Zionists destroyed Salaita's career as a professor for a mere $800,000 in taxpayers money. No skin off their nose. Just like the Zionists did to my Friend Norman Finkelstein at DePaul University:They are supposed to be "Catholic"-LOL! And here Wise {sic} also destroyed our entire Native American Studies Program forever. Way to go Phyllis! A two-fer for your bigotry and racism! Speaking of "Catholics"-may you rot in Purgatory! Fab Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 6:43 AM To: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; Karen Aram >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: FW: News Gazette Letter to the Editor: AAUP lies on Salaita! Importance: High Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 6:42 AM To: 'Dan Corkery' >; Julie Wurth > Cc: Wise, Phyllis M > Subject: News Gazette Letter to the Editor: AAUP lies on Salaita! Importance: High A report from an AAUP representative who visited the UI in April found that the climate for academic freedom is "robust", said Anita Levy, Senior program officer for Academic Freedom,Tenure and Governance. That is a bald-faced lie by the AAUP! The bigoted and racist persecution of Steven Salaita by the entire University Administration, many Faculty and large elements of the surrounding Community has terrorized and intimidated Palestinians/Arabs/Muslims of Color on this Campus and absolutely nothing has been done to alleviate it by the University of Illinois. Likewise, the University's longstanding bigotry and racism against American Indians still remains and has never been repudiated, rectified or even apologized for. Chancellor Wise's illegal firing of Steven Salaita was a two'fer for bigotry and racism on this Campus that is still pervasive against all People of Color here. Francis A. Boyle Professor of Law Ex-AAUP Member Resigned in Protest. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) ________________________________ ________________________________ 1 Guess who? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Sun Jun 18 13:15:57 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2017 13:15:57 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Sunday News Gazette Letter to the Editor: AAUP lies on Salaita! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I had filed every legal complaint I could think of against Chief Illiniwak-all to no avail-- and was on the verge of filing a federal lawsuit with the Native American Bar Association in Chicago that I had researched. But then Professor Stephen Kauffman in the Biology Department figured out the way to get rid of Our Little Red Sambo Dancing at Half Times(though Chief Illiniwak is still everywhere)--to his great credit. File a Complaint with the NCAA. Of course their Sacred Sports Programs are existentially far more important to the University of Iliniwaks than their Native American Students, Faculty, Staff and Community Members. And then Wise {sic!} destroyed our Native American Studies Program forever. We have almost no Native American Presence on this Campus that I am aware of. The Ku Klux Klan could not have done a better job ethnically cleansing Native Americans and Palestinians off of this Campus. Phyllis Wise {sic!}-AKA The Revenge of Chief Illiniwak! And a die-hard bigot and racist against Palestinians/Arabs/Muslims of Color. Good riddance to her! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2017 7:56 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: Sunday News Gazette Letter to the Editor: AAUP lies on Salaita! Historically, the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, its Boards of Trustees, its Presidents, its Chancellors, its Provosts, its Deans, Directors and Department Heads, and most of its Faculty and Alumni/ae have always been the Ku Klux Klan dressed up in Caps and Gowns instead of Hoods and Sheets. Ditto for Wise {sic!}! I am going to stage a new Production for a halftime show at the football games entitled: "Phyllis Wise {sic!} and the Revenge of Chief Illiniwak!" Chief! Chief! Chief! Chief! Etc. Etc. Etc. Ad Nauseam. Way to go Phyllis! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2017 7:41 AM To: 'David Green' >; 'sherwoodross10 at gmail.com' >; 'peace-discuss at anti-war.net' >; 'C. G. ESTABROOK' >; 'a-fields at uiuc.edu' >; Hoffman, Valerie J >; 'Joe Lauria' >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; 'Arlene Hickory' >; 'David Swanson' >; 'Karen Aram' >; 'peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net' >; 'abass10 at gmail.com' >; 'mickalideh at gmail.com' >; 'Lina Thorne' >; 'chicago at worldcantwait.net' >; 'Jay' >; Estabrook, Carl G >; 'Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net' >; 'David Johnson' > Cc: Wise, Phyllis M > Subject: RE: Sunday News Gazette Letter to the Editor: AAUP lies on Salaita! Speaking of Chomsky: The Racist Mascot: Why You Should Still Boo Illinois The self-styled "Fighting Illini" of the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign are on their way to the Jan. 1, 2008 Rose Bowl with their racist and genocidal mascot and symbol Chief Illiniwak still in tow. Although the NCAA forced the University of Illiniwaks to prevent this Little Red Sambo from desecrating at half-times everything American Indians hold dear and treasure, nevertheless Chief Illiniwak still remains the officially designated "honored symbol" of the University of Illiniwaks at Urbana-Champaign. Just recently the University of Illiniwaks resurrected Chief Illiniwak for their Fall 2007 Homecoming in order to better milk their Alumni/ae as part of their newly launched Capital Campaign, thus definitively proving their craven racism. In his Year 501: The Conquest Continues (1993) Noam Chomsky suggests an apt metaphor for such American Indian sports mascots and symbols that I will elaborate upon here in order to conform to our local and most peculiar rites on this campus: Suppose the Nazis had won the Second World War. Sixty years later, a prestigious German state university has a mascot for all of its sports teams and sports fans by the name of "The Rabbi." Basically what happens is that a student from the Hitler Youth League dresses up in an authentic costume for an Hasidic Rabbi, complete with the curl-locks and a beard. The University itself collectively call themselves "The Fighting Jews," and the school's band is called "The Marching Jews." The student newspaper is called "The Daily Jew." All the sports fans in town wear jackets and t-shirts with pictures of The Rabbi prominently displayed on them. And most cars have Rabbi stickers planted all over them. Three years ago the University's Board of Trustees ran out of town on a rail a courageous and principled Chancellor who had the temerity to publicly suggest that the time had now come to "retire" the Rabbi. So of course there was a heated campaign on among the students and alumni to "Save the Rabbi!" This German state university plays its soccer matches over at the Nuremberg Stadium in front of an audience of about 75,000 White Aryans, almost all of whom are wearing pro-Rabbi images and clothes. At half-time the Marching Jews take to the stadium floor and begin playing what they purport to be Jewish sounding music along the lines of Fiddler-on-the-Roof. Then all 75,000 White Aryans rise as one and shout in unison: "Rabbi! Rabbi! Rabbi! Rabbi!" gesticulating wildly and working themselves up into a feeding frenzy. One lone faculty member sits there in protest shouting "Racist Rabbi!" and everyone in the vicinity proceeds to throw garbage at him.1 Finally, the moment these ardent White Aryans have all waited for has arrived. The Rabbi runs out onto the arena floor from among the Marching Jews, proceeds to the center of the Nuremberg Stadium, and dances the Hava Nagila while the Marching Jews play on and march into an intricately choreographed maneuver that they all brag about and take special pride in that culminates with the band being organized into a Swastika. So the Rabbi continues to dance the Hava Nagila while the Marching Jews march themselves into a Swastika. By now all 75,000 White Aryans are hysterical, shouting, screaming and yelling: "Rabbi! Rabbi! Rabbi!" This semi-religious spectacle that the Nazis are well known for staging, especially at the Nuremberg stadium, goes on for a good twenty minutes. It all concludes with everyone joining hands to sing "Deutschland, Deutschland, Uber Alles," with the Rabbi leading all 75,000 White Aryans in the song. Then the Rabbi proceeds to dance the Hava Nagila out of the stadium followed by the Marching Jews. Everyone goes wild, clapping and cheering. This Rabbi ceremony brings tears to the eyes of many drunken alumni and students who had started several hours beforehand getting inebriated on schnapps and good German beer at pre-game tailgate parties. When it is all over, a visiting law professor from another country asks his host at the soccer match what this spectacle was all about. Without missing a beat Dean Mengele of the Law School turns to his guest and says: "We are honoring the Jews." Whom the Nazis had just exterminated 60 years ago, so of course the memory of the Jews needs to be honored by this spectacle. The Illiniwek Indians were ethnically cleansed out of Illinois about a century before that. These are the real "Little Eichmans." Be sure to "Boo!" and root against the Illiniwaks. Historically, the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, its Boards of Trustees, its Presidents, its Chancellors, its Provosts, its Deans, Directors and Department Heads, and most of its Faculty and Alumni/ae have always been the Ku Klux Klan dressed up in Caps and Gowns instead of Hoods and Sheets. Ditto for Wise {sic!}! Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2017 7:35 AM To: 'David Green' >; 'sherwoodross10 at gmail.com' >; 'peace-discuss at anti-war.net' >; 'C. G. ESTABROOK' >; 'a-fields at uiuc.edu' >; Hoffman, Valerie J >; 'Joe Lauria' >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; 'Arlene Hickory' >; 'David Swanson' >; 'Karen Aram' >; 'peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net' >; 'abass10 at gmail.com' >; 'mickalideh at gmail.com' >; 'Lina Thorne' >; 'chicago at worldcantwait.net' >; 'Jay' >; Estabrook, Carl G >; 'Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net' >; 'David Johnson' > Subject: RE: Sunday News Gazette Letter to the Editor: AAUP lies on Salaita! Several years ago when Norman was teaching at DePaul the Arab Law Students and I invited him to come down here and give an Address on the Middle East. I reserved the Law Auditorium for this event. Many Jewish Law Students publicly attacked Norman on the law school email system for being a "self-hating Jew." So in my Introduction of Norman to the audience I said something to the effect that Norman fits within the Prophetic Tradition of the Jewish People along the lines of Chomsky. In response to a question after the lecture, Norman stated that in his opinion the Nazis had exterminated somewhere between 5.2 to 5.4 Million Jews. That's a self-hating Jew for you? Fab Stanlingrad We got off the boat at the dock Walking into town I was asked Could I lay some flowers At the War Memorial On the Banks of the Volga? Of course I said yes Honored and pleased My Dad had fought the Japanese At Saipan and Tinian and Okinawa Nazis were not his war But We were all Allies together In the Noble Cause to Defeat Fascism As I neared the Statue On the Banks of the Volga Young Komsomol Girl appeared All dressed in white Carrying a wreath of red roses She gave to me A band was playing Joyful, not somber, but subdued Town Elders assembled Sun was shining Most beautiful day On the Banks of the Volga I lay my wreath of roses To the Defenders and Victims of Stalingrad Bowed my head in silent reflection If the Soviets had not held at Stalingrad All Europe today would be speaking German And saluting: Heil Hitler! Deutschland, Deutschland But not Uber Alles My Dad was smiling On the Banks of the Volga Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2017 7:01 AM To: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; Karen Aram >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Cc: Wise, Phyllis M > Subject: Sunday News Gazette Letter to the Editor: AAUP lies on Salaita! Kirstein at Xavier U: "The UI persecuted a professor and bought its way off the censure list with a settlement which settled nothing," Kirstein said. "Dr. Salaita does not have an academic appointment and the American Indian Studies program is gutted. From the Chief to Salaita, the war on Native American culture and studies continues. It is outrageous that the US is not censured." For sure! Ditto and a fortiori! The Zionists destroyed Salaita's career as a professor for a mere $800,000 in taxpayers money. No skin off their nose. Just like the Zionists did to my Friend Norman Finkelstein at DePaul University:They are supposed to be "Catholic"-LOL! And here Wise {sic} also destroyed our entire Native American Studies Program forever. Way to go Phyllis! A two-fer for your bigotry and racism! Speaking of "Catholics"-may you rot in Purgatory! Fab Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 6:43 AM To: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; Karen Aram >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: FW: News Gazette Letter to the Editor: AAUP lies on Salaita! Importance: High Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 6:42 AM To: 'Dan Corkery' >; Julie Wurth > Cc: Wise, Phyllis M > Subject: News Gazette Letter to the Editor: AAUP lies on Salaita! Importance: High A report from an AAUP representative who visited the UI in April found that the climate for academic freedom is "robust", said Anita Levy, Senior program officer for Academic Freedom,Tenure and Governance. That is a bald-faced lie by the AAUP! The bigoted and racist persecution of Steven Salaita by the entire University Administration, many Faculty and large elements of the surrounding Community has terrorized and intimidated Palestinians/Arabs/Muslims of Color on this Campus and absolutely nothing has been done to alleviate it by the University of Illinois. Likewise, the University's longstanding bigotry and racism against American Indians still remains and has never been repudiated, rectified or even apologized for. Chancellor Wise's illegal firing of Steven Salaita was a two'fer for bigotry and racism on this Campus that is still pervasive against all People of Color here. Francis A. Boyle Professor of Law Ex-AAUP Member Resigned in Protest. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) ________________________________ ________________________________ ________________________________ 1 Guess who? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Sun Jun 18 13:15:57 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2017 13:15:57 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Sunday News Gazette Letter to the Editor: AAUP lies on Salaita! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I had filed every legal complaint I could think of against Chief Illiniwak-all to no avail-- and was on the verge of filing a federal lawsuit with the Native American Bar Association in Chicago that I had researched. But then Professor Stephen Kauffman in the Biology Department figured out the way to get rid of Our Little Red Sambo Dancing at Half Times(though Chief Illiniwak is still everywhere)--to his great credit. File a Complaint with the NCAA. Of course their Sacred Sports Programs are existentially far more important to the University of Iliniwaks than their Native American Students, Faculty, Staff and Community Members. And then Wise {sic!} destroyed our Native American Studies Program forever. We have almost no Native American Presence on this Campus that I am aware of. The Ku Klux Klan could not have done a better job ethnically cleansing Native Americans and Palestinians off of this Campus. Phyllis Wise {sic!}-AKA The Revenge of Chief Illiniwak! And a die-hard bigot and racist against Palestinians/Arabs/Muslims of Color. Good riddance to her! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2017 7:56 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: Sunday News Gazette Letter to the Editor: AAUP lies on Salaita! Historically, the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, its Boards of Trustees, its Presidents, its Chancellors, its Provosts, its Deans, Directors and Department Heads, and most of its Faculty and Alumni/ae have always been the Ku Klux Klan dressed up in Caps and Gowns instead of Hoods and Sheets. Ditto for Wise {sic!}! I am going to stage a new Production for a halftime show at the football games entitled: "Phyllis Wise {sic!} and the Revenge of Chief Illiniwak!" Chief! Chief! Chief! Chief! Etc. Etc. Etc. Ad Nauseam. Way to go Phyllis! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2017 7:41 AM To: 'David Green' >; 'sherwoodross10 at gmail.com' >; 'peace-discuss at anti-war.net' >; 'C. G. ESTABROOK' >; 'a-fields at uiuc.edu' >; Hoffman, Valerie J >; 'Joe Lauria' >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; 'Arlene Hickory' >; 'David Swanson' >; 'Karen Aram' >; 'peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net' >; 'abass10 at gmail.com' >; 'mickalideh at gmail.com' >; 'Lina Thorne' >; 'chicago at worldcantwait.net' >; 'Jay' >; Estabrook, Carl G >; 'Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net' >; 'David Johnson' > Cc: Wise, Phyllis M > Subject: RE: Sunday News Gazette Letter to the Editor: AAUP lies on Salaita! Speaking of Chomsky: The Racist Mascot: Why You Should Still Boo Illinois The self-styled "Fighting Illini" of the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign are on their way to the Jan. 1, 2008 Rose Bowl with their racist and genocidal mascot and symbol Chief Illiniwak still in tow. Although the NCAA forced the University of Illiniwaks to prevent this Little Red Sambo from desecrating at half-times everything American Indians hold dear and treasure, nevertheless Chief Illiniwak still remains the officially designated "honored symbol" of the University of Illiniwaks at Urbana-Champaign. Just recently the University of Illiniwaks resurrected Chief Illiniwak for their Fall 2007 Homecoming in order to better milk their Alumni/ae as part of their newly launched Capital Campaign, thus definitively proving their craven racism. In his Year 501: The Conquest Continues (1993) Noam Chomsky suggests an apt metaphor for such American Indian sports mascots and symbols that I will elaborate upon here in order to conform to our local and most peculiar rites on this campus: Suppose the Nazis had won the Second World War. Sixty years later, a prestigious German state university has a mascot for all of its sports teams and sports fans by the name of "The Rabbi." Basically what happens is that a student from the Hitler Youth League dresses up in an authentic costume for an Hasidic Rabbi, complete with the curl-locks and a beard. The University itself collectively call themselves "The Fighting Jews," and the school's band is called "The Marching Jews." The student newspaper is called "The Daily Jew." All the sports fans in town wear jackets and t-shirts with pictures of The Rabbi prominently displayed on them. And most cars have Rabbi stickers planted all over them. Three years ago the University's Board of Trustees ran out of town on a rail a courageous and principled Chancellor who had the temerity to publicly suggest that the time had now come to "retire" the Rabbi. So of course there was a heated campaign on among the students and alumni to "Save the Rabbi!" This German state university plays its soccer matches over at the Nuremberg Stadium in front of an audience of about 75,000 White Aryans, almost all of whom are wearing pro-Rabbi images and clothes. At half-time the Marching Jews take to the stadium floor and begin playing what they purport to be Jewish sounding music along the lines of Fiddler-on-the-Roof. Then all 75,000 White Aryans rise as one and shout in unison: "Rabbi! Rabbi! Rabbi! Rabbi!" gesticulating wildly and working themselves up into a feeding frenzy. One lone faculty member sits there in protest shouting "Racist Rabbi!" and everyone in the vicinity proceeds to throw garbage at him.1 Finally, the moment these ardent White Aryans have all waited for has arrived. The Rabbi runs out onto the arena floor from among the Marching Jews, proceeds to the center of the Nuremberg Stadium, and dances the Hava Nagila while the Marching Jews play on and march into an intricately choreographed maneuver that they all brag about and take special pride in that culminates with the band being organized into a Swastika. So the Rabbi continues to dance the Hava Nagila while the Marching Jews march themselves into a Swastika. By now all 75,000 White Aryans are hysterical, shouting, screaming and yelling: "Rabbi! Rabbi! Rabbi!" This semi-religious spectacle that the Nazis are well known for staging, especially at the Nuremberg stadium, goes on for a good twenty minutes. It all concludes with everyone joining hands to sing "Deutschland, Deutschland, Uber Alles," with the Rabbi leading all 75,000 White Aryans in the song. Then the Rabbi proceeds to dance the Hava Nagila out of the stadium followed by the Marching Jews. Everyone goes wild, clapping and cheering. This Rabbi ceremony brings tears to the eyes of many drunken alumni and students who had started several hours beforehand getting inebriated on schnapps and good German beer at pre-game tailgate parties. When it is all over, a visiting law professor from another country asks his host at the soccer match what this spectacle was all about. Without missing a beat Dean Mengele of the Law School turns to his guest and says: "We are honoring the Jews." Whom the Nazis had just exterminated 60 years ago, so of course the memory of the Jews needs to be honored by this spectacle. The Illiniwek Indians were ethnically cleansed out of Illinois about a century before that. These are the real "Little Eichmans." Be sure to "Boo!" and root against the Illiniwaks. Historically, the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, its Boards of Trustees, its Presidents, its Chancellors, its Provosts, its Deans, Directors and Department Heads, and most of its Faculty and Alumni/ae have always been the Ku Klux Klan dressed up in Caps and Gowns instead of Hoods and Sheets. Ditto for Wise {sic!}! Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2017 7:35 AM To: 'David Green' >; 'sherwoodross10 at gmail.com' >; 'peace-discuss at anti-war.net' >; 'C. G. ESTABROOK' >; 'a-fields at uiuc.edu' >; Hoffman, Valerie J >; 'Joe Lauria' >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; 'Arlene Hickory' >; 'David Swanson' >; 'Karen Aram' >; 'peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net' >; 'abass10 at gmail.com' >; 'mickalideh at gmail.com' >; 'Lina Thorne' >; 'chicago at worldcantwait.net' >; 'Jay' >; Estabrook, Carl G >; 'Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net' >; 'David Johnson' > Subject: RE: Sunday News Gazette Letter to the Editor: AAUP lies on Salaita! Several years ago when Norman was teaching at DePaul the Arab Law Students and I invited him to come down here and give an Address on the Middle East. I reserved the Law Auditorium for this event. Many Jewish Law Students publicly attacked Norman on the law school email system for being a "self-hating Jew." So in my Introduction of Norman to the audience I said something to the effect that Norman fits within the Prophetic Tradition of the Jewish People along the lines of Chomsky. In response to a question after the lecture, Norman stated that in his opinion the Nazis had exterminated somewhere between 5.2 to 5.4 Million Jews. That's a self-hating Jew for you? Fab Stanlingrad We got off the boat at the dock Walking into town I was asked Could I lay some flowers At the War Memorial On the Banks of the Volga? Of course I said yes Honored and pleased My Dad had fought the Japanese At Saipan and Tinian and Okinawa Nazis were not his war But We were all Allies together In the Noble Cause to Defeat Fascism As I neared the Statue On the Banks of the Volga Young Komsomol Girl appeared All dressed in white Carrying a wreath of red roses She gave to me A band was playing Joyful, not somber, but subdued Town Elders assembled Sun was shining Most beautiful day On the Banks of the Volga I lay my wreath of roses To the Defenders and Victims of Stalingrad Bowed my head in silent reflection If the Soviets had not held at Stalingrad All Europe today would be speaking German And saluting: Heil Hitler! Deutschland, Deutschland But not Uber Alles My Dad was smiling On the Banks of the Volga Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2017 7:01 AM To: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; Karen Aram >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Cc: Wise, Phyllis M > Subject: Sunday News Gazette Letter to the Editor: AAUP lies on Salaita! Kirstein at Xavier U: "The UI persecuted a professor and bought its way off the censure list with a settlement which settled nothing," Kirstein said. "Dr. Salaita does not have an academic appointment and the American Indian Studies program is gutted. From the Chief to Salaita, the war on Native American culture and studies continues. It is outrageous that the US is not censured." For sure! Ditto and a fortiori! The Zionists destroyed Salaita's career as a professor for a mere $800,000 in taxpayers money. No skin off their nose. Just like the Zionists did to my Friend Norman Finkelstein at DePaul University:They are supposed to be "Catholic"-LOL! And here Wise {sic} also destroyed our entire Native American Studies Program forever. Way to go Phyllis! A two-fer for your bigotry and racism! Speaking of "Catholics"-may you rot in Purgatory! Fab Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 6:43 AM To: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; Karen Aram >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: FW: News Gazette Letter to the Editor: AAUP lies on Salaita! Importance: High Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 6:42 AM To: 'Dan Corkery' >; Julie Wurth > Cc: Wise, Phyllis M > Subject: News Gazette Letter to the Editor: AAUP lies on Salaita! Importance: High A report from an AAUP representative who visited the UI in April found that the climate for academic freedom is "robust", said Anita Levy, Senior program officer for Academic Freedom,Tenure and Governance. That is a bald-faced lie by the AAUP! The bigoted and racist persecution of Steven Salaita by the entire University Administration, many Faculty and large elements of the surrounding Community has terrorized and intimidated Palestinians/Arabs/Muslims of Color on this Campus and absolutely nothing has been done to alleviate it by the University of Illinois. Likewise, the University's longstanding bigotry and racism against American Indians still remains and has never been repudiated, rectified or even apologized for. Chancellor Wise's illegal firing of Steven Salaita was a two'fer for bigotry and racism on this Campus that is still pervasive against all People of Color here. Francis A. Boyle Professor of Law Ex-AAUP Member Resigned in Protest. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) ________________________________ ________________________________ ________________________________ 1 Guess who? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Sun Jun 18 13:49:49 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2017 13:49:49 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] FW: [NativeNews] Boyle's letter to U of I president Jimbo Whitey Message-ID: Because of my strident opposition to Fired and Disgraced University of Illiniwaks President Jimbo Whitey because of his support for Chief Illiniwak, Fired and Disgraced Dean Hurricane Heidi Hurd-- the Consort to CIA/Mossad/Torture/MichaelMoore-- denied me a pay raise. In any event, I have written a little dittie for Chief Illiniwak to sing to now Disgraced Professor Jimbo Whitey at the B-School where he holds the Golden Parachute Professorship of Business while Disgraced and Fired Dean Hurricane Heidi Hurd now holds the Golden Parachute Professorship of Law and Philosophy. Her Consort CIA/Mossad/Torture Michael Moore now holds the Marquis de Sade Professorship of Law and Philosophy and of the Center for Advanced Studies in Torture. Fab. Help Me Whitey! (To the Tune of Help Me Rhonda by the Beach Boys) Well since the BOT put me down Ive been out doin in my head Come in late at night and in the mornin I just lay in bed Well, Whitey you look so fine (look so fine) And I know it wouldnt take much time For you to help me Whitey Help me get them out of my heart Help me Whitey Help, help me Whitey Help me Whitey Help, help me Whitey Help me Whitey Help, help me Whitey Help me Whitey Help, help me Whitey Help me Whitey Help, help me Whitey Help me Whitey Help, help me Whitey Help me Whitey yeah Get 'em out of my heart They were gonna be my whores And I was gonna be their man But they let NCAA come between us And it ruined our plan Well, Whitey you caught my eye (caught my eye) And I can give you lotsa reasons why You gotta help me Whitey Help me get 'em out of my heart Help me Whitey Help, help me Whitey Help me Whitey Help, help me Whitey Help me Whitey Help, help me Whitey Help me Whitey Help, help me Whitey Help me Whitey Help, help me Whitey Help me Whitey Help, help me Whitey Help me Whitey yeah Get 'em out of my heart Etc. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: NatNews at yahoogroups.com [mailto:NatNews at yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Robert Schmidt Sent: Friday, February 23, 2007 7:23 PM To: Native News Subject: [NativeNews] Boyle's letter to U of I president Dear President White: You and the Board of Trustees must eradicate anything related to Indians from the sports program: "Fighting Illini", "Oskeewowow," the TomTom beats, the fake Indian Music from the 3 in 1 march and elsewhere in band performances , the war paint, the feathers, the tomahawks, the Illiniwak Logo, etc. In addition the University of Illinois must hold onto the Illiniwak Logo and not transfer it to the White Racists and Bigots on the so-called Council of Illiniwak Chiefs where they will continue to perpetrate this desecration of Indians forever . You must also indicate that you will vigorously prosecute anyone who violates your Trademark to Chief Illiniwak. You must terminate all licenses for Chief Illiniwak. And you must clear this racist Illiniwak garbage out of all University of Illinois Buildings. Little Red Sambo is finally gone--no thanks to you, the Board of Trustees, the Chancellor, the Provost and previous Board Members, Presidents, Chancellors and Provosts--except for Nancy Kantor whom you all summarily ran out of town on a rail for doing the right thing for American Indians. But now you and the Board of Trustees and the Chancellor and the Provost must concentrate on getting rid of all elements of Little Red Samboism from this campus. Based upon prior experience, I will not hold my breath. But we will keep coming after you all until you do the right thing for American Indians. Professor Francis A. Boyle cc: University of Illinois Board of Trustees Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (Voice) 217-244-1478 (Fax) __._,_.___ Messages in this topic (1) Reply (via web post) | Start a new topic Messages List info at: http://nativenewsonline.org/natnews.htm [Yahoo! Groups] Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required) Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch format to Traditional Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe Recent Activity * 2 New Members Visit Your Group Yahoo! Mail Next gen email? Try the all-new Yahoo! Mail Beta. Y! Messenger Files to share? Send up to 1GB of files in an IM. Yahoo! Photos Create your own Photo Gifts . __,_._,___ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Sun Jun 18 13:49:49 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2017 13:49:49 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] FW: [NativeNews] Boyle's letter to U of I president Jimbo Whitey Message-ID: Because of my strident opposition to Fired and Disgraced University of Illiniwaks President Jimbo Whitey because of his support for Chief Illiniwak, Fired and Disgraced Dean Hurricane Heidi Hurd-- the Consort to CIA/Mossad/Torture/MichaelMoore-- denied me a pay raise. In any event, I have written a little dittie for Chief Illiniwak to sing to now Disgraced Professor Jimbo Whitey at the B-School where he holds the Golden Parachute Professorship of Business while Disgraced and Fired Dean Hurricane Heidi Hurd now holds the Golden Parachute Professorship of Law and Philosophy. Her Consort CIA/Mossad/Torture Michael Moore now holds the Marquis de Sade Professorship of Law and Philosophy and of the Center for Advanced Studies in Torture. Fab. Help Me Whitey! (To the Tune of Help Me Rhonda by the Beach Boys) Well since the BOT put me down Ive been out doin in my head Come in late at night and in the mornin I just lay in bed Well, Whitey you look so fine (look so fine) And I know it wouldnt take much time For you to help me Whitey Help me get them out of my heart Help me Whitey Help, help me Whitey Help me Whitey Help, help me Whitey Help me Whitey Help, help me Whitey Help me Whitey Help, help me Whitey Help me Whitey Help, help me Whitey Help me Whitey Help, help me Whitey Help me Whitey yeah Get 'em out of my heart They were gonna be my whores And I was gonna be their man But they let NCAA come between us And it ruined our plan Well, Whitey you caught my eye (caught my eye) And I can give you lotsa reasons why You gotta help me Whitey Help me get 'em out of my heart Help me Whitey Help, help me Whitey Help me Whitey Help, help me Whitey Help me Whitey Help, help me Whitey Help me Whitey Help, help me Whitey Help me Whitey Help, help me Whitey Help me Whitey Help, help me Whitey Help me Whitey yeah Get 'em out of my heart Etc. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: NatNews at yahoogroups.com [mailto:NatNews at yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Robert Schmidt Sent: Friday, February 23, 2007 7:23 PM To: Native News Subject: [NativeNews] Boyle's letter to U of I president Dear President White: You and the Board of Trustees must eradicate anything related to Indians from the sports program: "Fighting Illini", "Oskeewowow," the TomTom beats, the fake Indian Music from the 3 in 1 march and elsewhere in band performances , the war paint, the feathers, the tomahawks, the Illiniwak Logo, etc. In addition the University of Illinois must hold onto the Illiniwak Logo and not transfer it to the White Racists and Bigots on the so-called Council of Illiniwak Chiefs where they will continue to perpetrate this desecration of Indians forever . You must also indicate that you will vigorously prosecute anyone who violates your Trademark to Chief Illiniwak. You must terminate all licenses for Chief Illiniwak. And you must clear this racist Illiniwak garbage out of all University of Illinois Buildings. Little Red Sambo is finally gone--no thanks to you, the Board of Trustees, the Chancellor, the Provost and previous Board Members, Presidents, Chancellors and Provosts--except for Nancy Kantor whom you all summarily ran out of town on a rail for doing the right thing for American Indians. But now you and the Board of Trustees and the Chancellor and the Provost must concentrate on getting rid of all elements of Little Red Samboism from this campus. Based upon prior experience, I will not hold my breath. But we will keep coming after you all until you do the right thing for American Indians. Professor Francis A. Boyle cc: University of Illinois Board of Trustees Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (Voice) 217-244-1478 (Fax) __._,_.___ Messages in this topic (1) Reply (via web post) | Start a new topic Messages List info at: http://nativenewsonline.org/natnews.htm [Yahoo! Groups] Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required) Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch format to Traditional Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe Recent Activity * 2 New Members Visit Your Group Yahoo! Mail Next gen email? Try the all-new Yahoo! Mail Beta. Y! Messenger Files to share? Send up to 1GB of files in an IM. Yahoo! Photos Create your own Photo Gifts . __,_._,___ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Sun Jun 18 14:42:35 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2017 14:42:35 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] FW: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide In-Reply-To: <200610092004.k99K4dXo038063@pencil.math.missouri.edu> References: <200610092004.k99K4dXo038063@pencil.math.missouri.edu> Message-ID: My pro bono publico Clients here were the American Indian Movement. Chief Illiniwak is an Indicium of Genocide.And Wise {sic!} just Ethnically Cleansed Native Americans off of this Campus. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com [mailto:nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com] Sent: Monday, October 09, 2006 3:05 PM To: undisclosed-recipients Subject: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit [Here's one of our annual Columbus Day pieces. -NYTr] sent by Francis Boyle Columbus Day Promotes Genocide Indictment of the Federal Government of the U.S. for the commission of international crimes and petition for orders mandating its proscription and dissolution as an international criminal conspiracy and criminal organization By Francis A. Boyle, Professor of International Law 18 September 1992 Introduction All citizens of the World Community have both the right and the duty under public international law to sit in judgment over a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental norms of international criminal law committed by any member state of that same World Community. Such is the case for the International Tribunal of Indigenous Peoples and Oppressed Nationalities in the United States of America that convenes in San Francisco during the weekend of October 1-4, 1992. Its weighty but important task is to examine the long history of international criminal activity that has been perpetrated by the Federal Government of the United States of America against the Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America since it was founded in 1787. Toward that end, I have the honor to present to the Members of this Tribunal the following charges against the Federal Government of the United States of America under international criminal law. In light of the gravity, severity, and longstanding nature of these international crimes and also in light of the fact that the Federal Government of the United States of America appears to be irrevocably committed to continuing down this path of lawlessness and criminality against Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America and elsewhere, I hereby petition the Members of this Tribunal to issue an Order proscribing the Federal Government of the United States of America as an International Criminal Conspiracy and a Criminal Organization under the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles as well as the other sources of public international law specified below. For that reason, I also request that the Members of this Tribunal issue an Order dissolving the Federal Government of the United States of America as a legal and political entity. Finally, I ask this Tribunal to declare that international legal sovereignty over the Territories principally inhabited by the Native American Peoples, the New Afrikan People, the Mexicano People, and the People of Puerto Rico resides in the hands of these respective Peoples Themselves. In this regard, I should point out that the final Decision of this Tribunal will qualify as a judicial decision within the meaning of article 38(1)(d) of the Statute of the International Court of Justice and will therefore constitute a subsidiary means for the determination of rules of law for international law and practice. The Statute of the International Court of Justice is an integral part of the United Nations Charter under article 92 thereof. Thus, this Tribunal's Decision can be relied upon by some future International Criminal Court or Tribunal, as well as by any People or State of the World Community that desires to initiate criminal proceedings against named individuals for the commission of the following international crimes. The Decision of this Tribunal shall serve as adequate notice to the appropriate officials in the United States Federal Government that they bear personal criminal responsibility under international law and the domestic legal systems of all Peoples and States in the World Community for designing and implementing these illegal, criminal and reprehensible policies and practices against Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America. Hereinafter, the Federal Government of the United States of America will be referred to as the Defendant. BILL OF PARTICULARS AGAINST THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA The Native American Peoples 1. The Defendant has perpetrated innumerable Crimes Against eace, Crimes Against Humanity and War Crimes against Native American Peoples as recognized by the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles. 2. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Genocide against Native American Peoples as recognized by the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. 3. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Apartheid against Native American Peoples as recognized by the 1973 International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid. 4. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of Native American Peoples as recognized by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights. 5. The Defendant has perpetrated numerous and repeated violations of the 1965 International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination against Native American Peoples. 6. The Defendant has systematically violated 371 treaties it concluded with Native American Peoples in wanton disregard of the basic principle of public international law and practice dictating pacta sunt servanda. 7. The Defendant has denied and violated the international legal right of Native American Peoples to self-determination as recognized by the 1945 United Nations Charter, the 1966 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the 1966 International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, fundamental principles of customary international law, and jus cogens. 8. The Defendant has violated the seminal United Nations Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Territories of 1960 with respect to Native American Peoples and Territories. Pursuant thereto, the Defendant has an absolute international legal obligation to decolonize Native American Territories immediately and to transfer all powers it currently exercises there to the Native American Peoples. 9. The Defendant has illegally refused to accord full-scope protections as Prisoners-of-War to captured Native American independence fighters in violation of the Third Geneva Convention of 1949 and Additional Protocol I thereto of 1977. The Defendant's treatment of captured Native American independence fighters as common criminals and terrorists constitutes a grave breach of the Geneva Accords and thus a serious war crime. 10. The Defendant has deliberately and systematically permitted, aided and abetted, solicited and conspired to commit the dumping, transportation, and location of nuclear, toxic, medical and otherwise hazardous waste materials on Native American Territories across North America and has thus created a clear and present danger to the lives, health, safety, and physical and mental well-being of Native American Peoples in gross violation of article 3 and article 2(c) of the 1948 Genocide Convention, inter alia: Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; ... The New Afrikan People 11. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Slavery upon the New Afrikan People as recognized in part by the 1926 Slavery Convention and the 1956 Supplementary Convention on the Abolition of Slavery, the Slave Trade, and Institutions and Practices Similar to Slavery. The Defendant has illegally refused to pay reparations to the New Afrikan People for the commission of the International Crime of Slavery against Them in violation of basic norms of customary international law requiring such reparations to be paid. 12. The Defendant has perpetrated innumerable Crimes Against Humanity against the New Afrikan People as recognized by the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles. 13. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of genocide against the New Afrikan People as recognized by the 1948 Genocide Convention. 14. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Apartheid against the New Afrikan People as recognized by the 1973 Apartheid Convention. 15. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of the New Afrikan People as recognized by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the two aforementioned United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966. 16. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the 1965 Racism Convention against the New Afrikan People. The Defendant is the paradigmatic example of an irremediably racist state in international relations today. 17. The Defendant has denied and violated the international legal right of the New Afrikan People to self-determination as recognized by the United Nations Charter, the two United Nations Human rights Covenants of 1966, customary international law, and jus cogens. 18. The Defendant has illegally refused to apply the United Nations Decolonization Resolution of 1960 to the New Afrikan People and to the Territories that they principally inhabit. Pursuant thereto, the Defendant has an absolute international legal obligation to decolonize New Afrikan Territories immediately and to transfer all powers it currently exercises there to the New Afrikan People. 19. The Defendant has illegally refused to accord full-scope protections as Prisoners-of-War to captured New Afrikan independence fighters in violation of the Third Geneva Convention of 1949 and Additional Protocol I thereto of 1977. The Defendant's treatment of captured New Afrikan independence fighters as common criminals and terrorists constitutes a grave breach of the Geneva Accords and thus a serious war crime. The Mexicano People 20. In 1821, Mexico obtained its independence from colonial Spain as a sovereign Mestizo State, extending from Yucatan and Chiapas in the south, to the northern territories of California and New Mexico, which areas the Defendant today calls the states of Texas, California, Arizona, Nevada, Utah, New Mexico, and Colorado. Nevertheless, in 1836 so-called settlors under the sponsorship of the Defendant began the division of the Mexicano People and State by causing the division of the Mexican state of Coahuila-Texas into the Mexican state of Coahuila and the so-called republic of Texas. 21. In 1846, the Defendant perpetrated an unjust, illegal and unjustifiable war upon the remainder of the sovereign People and State of Mexico that violated every known principle of public international law in existence at that time, including, but not limited to, the Christian Doctrine of just war, which was the then reigning standard of customary international law. As a result thereof, the Defendant illegally annexed close to 51% of the territories of the sovereign State of Mexico by means of forcing it to conclude the 1848 Treaty of Guadalupe-Hidalgo under military duress. For these reasons, this Treaty was and still is null and void ab initio as a matter of public international law. The Defendant acquired more Mexican territory through the Gadsen Treaty (Purchase) of 1854. 22. Since these 1848 and 1854 Treaties, the Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Genocide against the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories, as recognized by the 1948 Genocide Convention. 23. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Apartheid against the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories, as recognized by the 1973 Apartheid Convention. 24. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories, as recognized by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the two aforementioned United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966. 25. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the 1965 Racism Convention against the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories. 26. The Defendant has denied and violated the international legal right of the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories to self-determination, as recognized by the United Nations Charter, the two United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966, customary international law, and jus cogens. 27. Since the militarily-imposed division of the Mexican State, the Defendant and its agents have militarily occupied other portions of the Mexican State, have sought to influence the outcome of the Mexican Revolution of 1910, have practiced a consistent pattern of intervention into Mexico's internal affairs, all of which have resulted in the arresting distortion and deformation of the Mexican social and economic order. In this regard, Defendant's so-called North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) constitutes nothing more than an attempt to impose its hegemonial imperialism, economic colonialism, and human exploitation upon the People and State of Mexico. 28. The Defendant has illegally refused to apply the United Nations Decolonization Resolution of 1960 to the Mexicano People and to these occupied territories that they inhabit. Pursuant thereto, the Defendant has an absolute international legal obligation to decolonize both the Mexican occupied territories and the Republic of Mexico immediately, and to transfer all powers it currently exercises there to the Mexicano People. The People and State of Puerto Rico 29. Since its illegal invasion of Puerto Rico in 1898, the Defendant has perpetrated innumerable Crimes against Peace, Crimes against Humanity and War Crimes against the People and State of Puerto Rico as recognized by the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles. 30. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Genocide against the Puerto Rican People as recognized by the 1948 Genocide Convention. 31. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Apartheid against the Puerto Rican People as recognized by the 1973 Apartheid Convention. 32. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of the Puerto Rican People as recognized by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human rights and the two aforementioned United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966. 33. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the 1965 Racism Convention against the Puerto Rican People. 34. The Defendant has denied and violated the international legal right of the Puerto Rican People to self-determination as recognized by the United Nations Charter, the two United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966, customary international law, and jus cogens. 35. The Defendant has illegally refused to apply the United Nations Decolonization Resolution of 1960 to Puerto Rico. Pursuant thereto, the Defendant has an absolute international legal obligation to decolonize Puerto Rico immediately and to transfer all powers it currently exercises there to the Puerto Rican People. 36. The Defendant has illegally refused to accord full-scope protections as Prisoners-of-War to captured Puerto Rican independence fighters in violation of the Third Geneva Convention of 1949 and Additional Protocol I thereto of 1977. The Defendant's treatment of captured Puerto Rican independence fighters as common criminals and terrorists constitutes a grave breach of the Geneva Accords and thus a serious war crime. An International Criminal Conspiracy and a Criminal Organization 37. In light of the foregoing international crimes, the Defendant constitutes an International Criminal Conspiracy and a Criminal Organization in accordance with the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles and the other sources of public international law specified above. The Federal Government of the United States of America is legally identical to the Nazi government of World War II Germany. Indeed, the Defendant's President, George Bush, has proclaimed a so-called New World Order that sounds and looks strikingly similar to the New Order proclaimed by Adolph Hitler over fifty years ago. Conclusion Like unto a pirate, the Defendant is hostis humani generis: The enemy of all humankind! For the good of all humanity, this Tribunal must condemn and repudiate the Federal Government of the United States of America and its grotesque vision of a New World Order that is constructed upon warfare, bloodshed, violence, criminality, genocide, racism, colonialism, apartheid, massive violations of fundamental human rights, and the denial of the international legal right of self-determination to the Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America and elsewhere around the world. Consequently, this Tribunal must find the Defendant guilty as charged on all of the counts specified above beyond a reasonable doubt. This Tribunal must also issue an Order that formally proscribes the Federal Government of the United States of America as an International Criminal Conspiracy and a Criminal Organization. This Tribunal must also issue a separate Order mandating the dissolution of the Federal Government of the United States of America as a legal and political entity. Finally, this Tribunal must declare that international legal sovereignty over the Territories principally inhabited by the Native American Peoples, the New Afrikan People, the Mexicano People, and the People of Puerto Rico resides, respectively, in the hands of these Peoples Themselves. The very lives, well-being, health, welfare, and safety of the Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America and elsewhere around the world depend upon the ultimate success of your deliberations. Respectfully submitted by, FRANCIS A. BOYLE PROFESSOR OF INTERNATIONAL LAW SPECIAL PROSECUTOR Dated: September 18, 1992 University of Illinois College of Law 504 East Pennsylvania Champaign, IL 61820 217-333-7954 See USA on Trial: The International Tribunal on Indigenous Peoples'and Oppressed Nations in the United States. The Book and Verdict are available from Editorial El Coqui, 1671 N. Claremont,Chicago Illinois 60647. Or you can try calling the Puerto Rican Cultural Center in Chicago at 312-342-4295. The Video can be obtained from Mission Creek Video, PO Box 411271 San Francisco CA 941141 (phone:415-695-0931). Francis A. Boyle * ================================================================ .NY Transfer News Collective * A Service of Blythe Systems . Since 1985 - Information for the Rest of Us . .339 Lafayette St., New York, NY 10012 http://www.blythe.org .List Archives: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/pipermail/nytr/ .Subscribe: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/mailman/listinfo/nytr ================================================================ From fboyle at illinois.edu Sun Jun 18 14:42:35 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2017 14:42:35 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] FW: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide In-Reply-To: <200610092004.k99K4dXo038063@pencil.math.missouri.edu> References: <200610092004.k99K4dXo038063@pencil.math.missouri.edu> Message-ID: My pro bono publico Clients here were the American Indian Movement. Chief Illiniwak is an Indicium of Genocide.And Wise {sic!} just Ethnically Cleansed Native Americans off of this Campus. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com [mailto:nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com] Sent: Monday, October 09, 2006 3:05 PM To: undisclosed-recipients Subject: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit [Here's one of our annual Columbus Day pieces. -NYTr] sent by Francis Boyle Columbus Day Promotes Genocide Indictment of the Federal Government of the U.S. for the commission of international crimes and petition for orders mandating its proscription and dissolution as an international criminal conspiracy and criminal organization By Francis A. Boyle, Professor of International Law 18 September 1992 Introduction All citizens of the World Community have both the right and the duty under public international law to sit in judgment over a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental norms of international criminal law committed by any member state of that same World Community. Such is the case for the International Tribunal of Indigenous Peoples and Oppressed Nationalities in the United States of America that convenes in San Francisco during the weekend of October 1-4, 1992. Its weighty but important task is to examine the long history of international criminal activity that has been perpetrated by the Federal Government of the United States of America against the Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America since it was founded in 1787. Toward that end, I have the honor to present to the Members of this Tribunal the following charges against the Federal Government of the United States of America under international criminal law. In light of the gravity, severity, and longstanding nature of these international crimes and also in light of the fact that the Federal Government of the United States of America appears to be irrevocably committed to continuing down this path of lawlessness and criminality against Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America and elsewhere, I hereby petition the Members of this Tribunal to issue an Order proscribing the Federal Government of the United States of America as an International Criminal Conspiracy and a Criminal Organization under the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles as well as the other sources of public international law specified below. For that reason, I also request that the Members of this Tribunal issue an Order dissolving the Federal Government of the United States of America as a legal and political entity. Finally, I ask this Tribunal to declare that international legal sovereignty over the Territories principally inhabited by the Native American Peoples, the New Afrikan People, the Mexicano People, and the People of Puerto Rico resides in the hands of these respective Peoples Themselves. In this regard, I should point out that the final Decision of this Tribunal will qualify as a judicial decision within the meaning of article 38(1)(d) of the Statute of the International Court of Justice and will therefore constitute a subsidiary means for the determination of rules of law for international law and practice. The Statute of the International Court of Justice is an integral part of the United Nations Charter under article 92 thereof. Thus, this Tribunal's Decision can be relied upon by some future International Criminal Court or Tribunal, as well as by any People or State of the World Community that desires to initiate criminal proceedings against named individuals for the commission of the following international crimes. The Decision of this Tribunal shall serve as adequate notice to the appropriate officials in the United States Federal Government that they bear personal criminal responsibility under international law and the domestic legal systems of all Peoples and States in the World Community for designing and implementing these illegal, criminal and reprehensible policies and practices against Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America. Hereinafter, the Federal Government of the United States of America will be referred to as the Defendant. BILL OF PARTICULARS AGAINST THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA The Native American Peoples 1. The Defendant has perpetrated innumerable Crimes Against eace, Crimes Against Humanity and War Crimes against Native American Peoples as recognized by the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles. 2. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Genocide against Native American Peoples as recognized by the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. 3. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Apartheid against Native American Peoples as recognized by the 1973 International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid. 4. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of Native American Peoples as recognized by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights. 5. The Defendant has perpetrated numerous and repeated violations of the 1965 International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination against Native American Peoples. 6. The Defendant has systematically violated 371 treaties it concluded with Native American Peoples in wanton disregard of the basic principle of public international law and practice dictating pacta sunt servanda. 7. The Defendant has denied and violated the international legal right of Native American Peoples to self-determination as recognized by the 1945 United Nations Charter, the 1966 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the 1966 International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, fundamental principles of customary international law, and jus cogens. 8. The Defendant has violated the seminal United Nations Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Territories of 1960 with respect to Native American Peoples and Territories. Pursuant thereto, the Defendant has an absolute international legal obligation to decolonize Native American Territories immediately and to transfer all powers it currently exercises there to the Native American Peoples. 9. The Defendant has illegally refused to accord full-scope protections as Prisoners-of-War to captured Native American independence fighters in violation of the Third Geneva Convention of 1949 and Additional Protocol I thereto of 1977. The Defendant's treatment of captured Native American independence fighters as common criminals and terrorists constitutes a grave breach of the Geneva Accords and thus a serious war crime. 10. The Defendant has deliberately and systematically permitted, aided and abetted, solicited and conspired to commit the dumping, transportation, and location of nuclear, toxic, medical and otherwise hazardous waste materials on Native American Territories across North America and has thus created a clear and present danger to the lives, health, safety, and physical and mental well-being of Native American Peoples in gross violation of article 3 and article 2(c) of the 1948 Genocide Convention, inter alia: Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; ... The New Afrikan People 11. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Slavery upon the New Afrikan People as recognized in part by the 1926 Slavery Convention and the 1956 Supplementary Convention on the Abolition of Slavery, the Slave Trade, and Institutions and Practices Similar to Slavery. The Defendant has illegally refused to pay reparations to the New Afrikan People for the commission of the International Crime of Slavery against Them in violation of basic norms of customary international law requiring such reparations to be paid. 12. The Defendant has perpetrated innumerable Crimes Against Humanity against the New Afrikan People as recognized by the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles. 13. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of genocide against the New Afrikan People as recognized by the 1948 Genocide Convention. 14. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Apartheid against the New Afrikan People as recognized by the 1973 Apartheid Convention. 15. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of the New Afrikan People as recognized by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the two aforementioned United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966. 16. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the 1965 Racism Convention against the New Afrikan People. The Defendant is the paradigmatic example of an irremediably racist state in international relations today. 17. The Defendant has denied and violated the international legal right of the New Afrikan People to self-determination as recognized by the United Nations Charter, the two United Nations Human rights Covenants of 1966, customary international law, and jus cogens. 18. The Defendant has illegally refused to apply the United Nations Decolonization Resolution of 1960 to the New Afrikan People and to the Territories that they principally inhabit. Pursuant thereto, the Defendant has an absolute international legal obligation to decolonize New Afrikan Territories immediately and to transfer all powers it currently exercises there to the New Afrikan People. 19. The Defendant has illegally refused to accord full-scope protections as Prisoners-of-War to captured New Afrikan independence fighters in violation of the Third Geneva Convention of 1949 and Additional Protocol I thereto of 1977. The Defendant's treatment of captured New Afrikan independence fighters as common criminals and terrorists constitutes a grave breach of the Geneva Accords and thus a serious war crime. The Mexicano People 20. In 1821, Mexico obtained its independence from colonial Spain as a sovereign Mestizo State, extending from Yucatan and Chiapas in the south, to the northern territories of California and New Mexico, which areas the Defendant today calls the states of Texas, California, Arizona, Nevada, Utah, New Mexico, and Colorado. Nevertheless, in 1836 so-called settlors under the sponsorship of the Defendant began the division of the Mexicano People and State by causing the division of the Mexican state of Coahuila-Texas into the Mexican state of Coahuila and the so-called republic of Texas. 21. In 1846, the Defendant perpetrated an unjust, illegal and unjustifiable war upon the remainder of the sovereign People and State of Mexico that violated every known principle of public international law in existence at that time, including, but not limited to, the Christian Doctrine of just war, which was the then reigning standard of customary international law. As a result thereof, the Defendant illegally annexed close to 51% of the territories of the sovereign State of Mexico by means of forcing it to conclude the 1848 Treaty of Guadalupe-Hidalgo under military duress. For these reasons, this Treaty was and still is null and void ab initio as a matter of public international law. The Defendant acquired more Mexican territory through the Gadsen Treaty (Purchase) of 1854. 22. Since these 1848 and 1854 Treaties, the Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Genocide against the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories, as recognized by the 1948 Genocide Convention. 23. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Apartheid against the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories, as recognized by the 1973 Apartheid Convention. 24. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories, as recognized by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the two aforementioned United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966. 25. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the 1965 Racism Convention against the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories. 26. The Defendant has denied and violated the international legal right of the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories to self-determination, as recognized by the United Nations Charter, the two United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966, customary international law, and jus cogens. 27. Since the militarily-imposed division of the Mexican State, the Defendant and its agents have militarily occupied other portions of the Mexican State, have sought to influence the outcome of the Mexican Revolution of 1910, have practiced a consistent pattern of intervention into Mexico's internal affairs, all of which have resulted in the arresting distortion and deformation of the Mexican social and economic order. In this regard, Defendant's so-called North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) constitutes nothing more than an attempt to impose its hegemonial imperialism, economic colonialism, and human exploitation upon the People and State of Mexico. 28. The Defendant has illegally refused to apply the United Nations Decolonization Resolution of 1960 to the Mexicano People and to these occupied territories that they inhabit. Pursuant thereto, the Defendant has an absolute international legal obligation to decolonize both the Mexican occupied territories and the Republic of Mexico immediately, and to transfer all powers it currently exercises there to the Mexicano People. The People and State of Puerto Rico 29. Since its illegal invasion of Puerto Rico in 1898, the Defendant has perpetrated innumerable Crimes against Peace, Crimes against Humanity and War Crimes against the People and State of Puerto Rico as recognized by the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles. 30. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Genocide against the Puerto Rican People as recognized by the 1948 Genocide Convention. 31. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Apartheid against the Puerto Rican People as recognized by the 1973 Apartheid Convention. 32. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of the Puerto Rican People as recognized by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human rights and the two aforementioned United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966. 33. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the 1965 Racism Convention against the Puerto Rican People. 34. The Defendant has denied and violated the international legal right of the Puerto Rican People to self-determination as recognized by the United Nations Charter, the two United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966, customary international law, and jus cogens. 35. The Defendant has illegally refused to apply the United Nations Decolonization Resolution of 1960 to Puerto Rico. Pursuant thereto, the Defendant has an absolute international legal obligation to decolonize Puerto Rico immediately and to transfer all powers it currently exercises there to the Puerto Rican People. 36. The Defendant has illegally refused to accord full-scope protections as Prisoners-of-War to captured Puerto Rican independence fighters in violation of the Third Geneva Convention of 1949 and Additional Protocol I thereto of 1977. The Defendant's treatment of captured Puerto Rican independence fighters as common criminals and terrorists constitutes a grave breach of the Geneva Accords and thus a serious war crime. An International Criminal Conspiracy and a Criminal Organization 37. In light of the foregoing international crimes, the Defendant constitutes an International Criminal Conspiracy and a Criminal Organization in accordance with the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles and the other sources of public international law specified above. The Federal Government of the United States of America is legally identical to the Nazi government of World War II Germany. Indeed, the Defendant's President, George Bush, has proclaimed a so-called New World Order that sounds and looks strikingly similar to the New Order proclaimed by Adolph Hitler over fifty years ago. Conclusion Like unto a pirate, the Defendant is hostis humani generis: The enemy of all humankind! For the good of all humanity, this Tribunal must condemn and repudiate the Federal Government of the United States of America and its grotesque vision of a New World Order that is constructed upon warfare, bloodshed, violence, criminality, genocide, racism, colonialism, apartheid, massive violations of fundamental human rights, and the denial of the international legal right of self-determination to the Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America and elsewhere around the world. Consequently, this Tribunal must find the Defendant guilty as charged on all of the counts specified above beyond a reasonable doubt. This Tribunal must also issue an Order that formally proscribes the Federal Government of the United States of America as an International Criminal Conspiracy and a Criminal Organization. This Tribunal must also issue a separate Order mandating the dissolution of the Federal Government of the United States of America as a legal and political entity. Finally, this Tribunal must declare that international legal sovereignty over the Territories principally inhabited by the Native American Peoples, the New Afrikan People, the Mexicano People, and the People of Puerto Rico resides, respectively, in the hands of these Peoples Themselves. The very lives, well-being, health, welfare, and safety of the Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America and elsewhere around the world depend upon the ultimate success of your deliberations. Respectfully submitted by, FRANCIS A. BOYLE PROFESSOR OF INTERNATIONAL LAW SPECIAL PROSECUTOR Dated: September 18, 1992 University of Illinois College of Law 504 East Pennsylvania Champaign, IL 61820 217-333-7954 See USA on Trial: The International Tribunal on Indigenous Peoples'and Oppressed Nations in the United States. The Book and Verdict are available from Editorial El Coqui, 1671 N. Claremont,Chicago Illinois 60647. Or you can try calling the Puerto Rican Cultural Center in Chicago at 312-342-4295. The Video can be obtained from Mission Creek Video, PO Box 411271 San Francisco CA 941141 (phone:415-695-0931). Francis A. Boyle * ================================================================ .NY Transfer News Collective * A Service of Blythe Systems . Since 1985 - Information for the Rest of Us . .339 Lafayette St., New York, NY 10012 http://www.blythe.org .List Archives: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/pipermail/nytr/ .Subscribe: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/mailman/listinfo/nytr ================================================================ From fboyle at illinois.edu Sun Jun 18 14:50:32 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2017 14:50:32 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide In-Reply-To: References: <200610092004.k99K4dXo038063@pencil.math.missouri.edu> Message-ID: And Wise {sic!} has successfully terrorized and intimidated every Palestinian/Arab/Muslim of Color on this Campus. Nothing has changed for American Indians and Palestinians/Arabs/Muslims of Color. It is an absolute disgrace but no surprise that the rotten and corrupt and racist AAUP eliminated the die-hard Anti-Palestinian University of Illiniwaks from their Censure List. That is precisely why I quit the AAUP years ago because of their die-hard bigotry and racism against Palestinians/Arabs/Muslims of Color. And now ditto for American Indians. Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2017 9:43 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: FW: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide My pro bono publico Clients here were the American Indian Movement. Chief Illiniwak is an Indicium of Genocide.And Wise {sic!} just Ethnically Cleansed Native Americans off of this Campus. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com [mailto:nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com] Sent: Monday, October 09, 2006 3:05 PM To: undisclosed-recipients Subject: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit [Here's one of our annual Columbus Day pieces. -NYTr] sent by Francis Boyle Columbus Day Promotes Genocide Indictment of the Federal Government of the U.S. for the commission of international crimes and petition for orders mandating its proscription and dissolution as an international criminal conspiracy and criminal organization By Francis A. Boyle, Professor of International Law 18 September 1992 Introduction All citizens of the World Community have both the right and the duty under public international law to sit in judgment over a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental norms of international criminal law committed by any member state of that same World Community. Such is the case for the International Tribunal of Indigenous Peoples and Oppressed Nationalities in the United States of America that convenes in San Francisco during the weekend of October 1-4, 1992. Its weighty but important task is to examine the long history of international criminal activity that has been perpetrated by the Federal Government of the United States of America against the Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America since it was founded in 1787. Toward that end, I have the honor to present to the Members of this Tribunal the following charges against the Federal Government of the United States of America under international criminal law. In light of the gravity, severity, and longstanding nature of these international crimes and also in light of the fact that the Federal Government of the United States of America appears to be irrevocably committed to continuing down this path of lawlessness and criminality against Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America and elsewhere, I hereby petition the Members of this Tribunal to issue an Order proscribing the Federal Government of the United States of America as an International Criminal Conspiracy and a Criminal Organization under the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles as well as the other sources of public international law specified below. For that reason, I also request that the Members of this Tribunal issue an Order dissolving the Federal Government of the United States of America as a legal and political entity. Finally, I ask this Tribunal to declare that international legal sovereignty over the Territories principally inhabited by the Native American Peoples, the New Afrikan People, the Mexicano People, and the People of Puerto Rico resides in the hands of these respective Peoples Themselves. In this regard, I should point out that the final Decision of this Tribunal will qualify as a judicial decision within the meaning of article 38(1)(d) of the Statute of the International Court of Justice and will therefore constitute a subsidiary means for the determination of rules of law for international law and practice. The Statute of the International Court of Justice is an integral part of the United Nations Charter under article 92 thereof. Thus, this Tribunal's Decision can be relied upon by some future International Criminal Court or Tribunal, as well as by any People or State of the World Community that desires to initiate criminal proceedings against named individuals for the commission of the following international crimes. The Decision of this Tribunal shall serve as adequate notice to the appropriate officials in the United States Federal Government that they bear personal criminal responsibility under international law and the domestic legal systems of all Peoples and States in the World Community for designing and implementing these illegal, criminal and reprehensible policies and practices against Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America. Hereinafter, the Federal Government of the United States of America will be referred to as the Defendant. BILL OF PARTICULARS AGAINST THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA The Native American Peoples 1. The Defendant has perpetrated innumerable Crimes Against eace, Crimes Against Humanity and War Crimes against Native American Peoples as recognized by the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles. 2. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Genocide against Native American Peoples as recognized by the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. 3. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Apartheid against Native American Peoples as recognized by the 1973 International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid. 4. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of Native American Peoples as recognized by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights. 5. The Defendant has perpetrated numerous and repeated violations of the 1965 International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination against Native American Peoples. 6. The Defendant has systematically violated 371 treaties it concluded with Native American Peoples in wanton disregard of the basic principle of public international law and practice dictating pacta sunt servanda. 7. The Defendant has denied and violated the international legal right of Native American Peoples to self-determination as recognized by the 1945 United Nations Charter, the 1966 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the 1966 International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, fundamental principles of customary international law, and jus cogens. 8. The Defendant has violated the seminal United Nations Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Territories of 1960 with respect to Native American Peoples and Territories. Pursuant thereto, the Defendant has an absolute international legal obligation to decolonize Native American Territories immediately and to transfer all powers it currently exercises there to the Native American Peoples. 9. The Defendant has illegally refused to accord full-scope protections as Prisoners-of-War to captured Native American independence fighters in violation of the Third Geneva Convention of 1949 and Additional Protocol I thereto of 1977. The Defendant's treatment of captured Native American independence fighters as common criminals and terrorists constitutes a grave breach of the Geneva Accords and thus a serious war crime. 10. The Defendant has deliberately and systematically permitted, aided and abetted, solicited and conspired to commit the dumping, transportation, and location of nuclear, toxic, medical and otherwise hazardous waste materials on Native American Territories across North America and has thus created a clear and present danger to the lives, health, safety, and physical and mental well-being of Native American Peoples in gross violation of article 3 and article 2(c) of the 1948 Genocide Convention, inter alia: Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; ... The New Afrikan People 11. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Slavery upon the New Afrikan People as recognized in part by the 1926 Slavery Convention and the 1956 Supplementary Convention on the Abolition of Slavery, the Slave Trade, and Institutions and Practices Similar to Slavery. The Defendant has illegally refused to pay reparations to the New Afrikan People for the commission of the International Crime of Slavery against Them in violation of basic norms of customary international law requiring such reparations to be paid. 12. The Defendant has perpetrated innumerable Crimes Against Humanity against the New Afrikan People as recognized by the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles. 13. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of genocide against the New Afrikan People as recognized by the 1948 Genocide Convention. 14. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Apartheid against the New Afrikan People as recognized by the 1973 Apartheid Convention. 15. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of the New Afrikan People as recognized by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the two aforementioned United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966. 16. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the 1965 Racism Convention against the New Afrikan People. The Defendant is the paradigmatic example of an irremediably racist state in international relations today. 17. The Defendant has denied and violated the international legal right of the New Afrikan People to self-determination as recognized by the United Nations Charter, the two United Nations Human rights Covenants of 1966, customary international law, and jus cogens. 18. The Defendant has illegally refused to apply the United Nations Decolonization Resolution of 1960 to the New Afrikan People and to the Territories that they principally inhabit. Pursuant thereto, the Defendant has an absolute international legal obligation to decolonize New Afrikan Territories immediately and to transfer all powers it currently exercises there to the New Afrikan People. 19. The Defendant has illegally refused to accord full-scope protections as Prisoners-of-War to captured New Afrikan independence fighters in violation of the Third Geneva Convention of 1949 and Additional Protocol I thereto of 1977. The Defendant's treatment of captured New Afrikan independence fighters as common criminals and terrorists constitutes a grave breach of the Geneva Accords and thus a serious war crime. The Mexicano People 20. In 1821, Mexico obtained its independence from colonial Spain as a sovereign Mestizo State, extending from Yucatan and Chiapas in the south, to the northern territories of California and New Mexico, which areas the Defendant today calls the states of Texas, California, Arizona, Nevada, Utah, New Mexico, and Colorado. Nevertheless, in 1836 so-called settlors under the sponsorship of the Defendant began the division of the Mexicano People and State by causing the division of the Mexican state of Coahuila-Texas into the Mexican state of Coahuila and the so-called republic of Texas. 21. In 1846, the Defendant perpetrated an unjust, illegal and unjustifiable war upon the remainder of the sovereign People and State of Mexico that violated every known principle of public international law in existence at that time, including, but not limited to, the Christian Doctrine of just war, which was the then reigning standard of customary international law. As a result thereof, the Defendant illegally annexed close to 51% of the territories of the sovereign State of Mexico by means of forcing it to conclude the 1848 Treaty of Guadalupe-Hidalgo under military duress. For these reasons, this Treaty was and still is null and void ab initio as a matter of public international law. The Defendant acquired more Mexican territory through the Gadsen Treaty (Purchase) of 1854. 22. Since these 1848 and 1854 Treaties, the Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Genocide against the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories, as recognized by the 1948 Genocide Convention. 23. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Apartheid against the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories, as recognized by the 1973 Apartheid Convention. 24. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories, as recognized by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the two aforementioned United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966. 25. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the 1965 Racism Convention against the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories. 26. The Defendant has denied and violated the international legal right of the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories to self-determination, as recognized by the United Nations Charter, the two United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966, customary international law, and jus cogens. 27. Since the militarily-imposed division of the Mexican State, the Defendant and its agents have militarily occupied other portions of the Mexican State, have sought to influence the outcome of the Mexican Revolution of 1910, have practiced a consistent pattern of intervention into Mexico's internal affairs, all of which have resulted in the arresting distortion and deformation of the Mexican social and economic order. In this regard, Defendant's so-called North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) constitutes nothing more than an attempt to impose its hegemonial imperialism, economic colonialism, and human exploitation upon the People and State of Mexico. 28. The Defendant has illegally refused to apply the United Nations Decolonization Resolution of 1960 to the Mexicano People and to these occupied territories that they inhabit. Pursuant thereto, the Defendant has an absolute international legal obligation to decolonize both the Mexican occupied territories and the Republic of Mexico immediately, and to transfer all powers it currently exercises there to the Mexicano People. The People and State of Puerto Rico 29. Since its illegal invasion of Puerto Rico in 1898, the Defendant has perpetrated innumerable Crimes against Peace, Crimes against Humanity and War Crimes against the People and State of Puerto Rico as recognized by the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles. 30. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Genocide against the Puerto Rican People as recognized by the 1948 Genocide Convention. 31. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Apartheid against the Puerto Rican People as recognized by the 1973 Apartheid Convention. 32. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of the Puerto Rican People as recognized by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human rights and the two aforementioned United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966. 33. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the 1965 Racism Convention against the Puerto Rican People. 34. The Defendant has denied and violated the international legal right of the Puerto Rican People to self-determination as recognized by the United Nations Charter, the two United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966, customary international law, and jus cogens. 35. The Defendant has illegally refused to apply the United Nations Decolonization Resolution of 1960 to Puerto Rico. Pursuant thereto, the Defendant has an absolute international legal obligation to decolonize Puerto Rico immediately and to transfer all powers it currently exercises there to the Puerto Rican People. 36. The Defendant has illegally refused to accord full-scope protections as Prisoners-of-War to captured Puerto Rican independence fighters in violation of the Third Geneva Convention of 1949 and Additional Protocol I thereto of 1977. The Defendant's treatment of captured Puerto Rican independence fighters as common criminals and terrorists constitutes a grave breach of the Geneva Accords and thus a serious war crime. An International Criminal Conspiracy and a Criminal Organization 37. In light of the foregoing international crimes, the Defendant constitutes an International Criminal Conspiracy and a Criminal Organization in accordance with the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles and the other sources of public international law specified above. The Federal Government of the United States of America is legally identical to the Nazi government of World War II Germany. Indeed, the Defendant's President, George Bush, has proclaimed a so-called New World Order that sounds and looks strikingly similar to the New Order proclaimed by Adolph Hitler over fifty years ago. Conclusion Like unto a pirate, the Defendant is hostis humani generis: The enemy of all humankind! For the good of all humanity, this Tribunal must condemn and repudiate the Federal Government of the United States of America and its grotesque vision of a New World Order that is constructed upon warfare, bloodshed, violence, criminality, genocide, racism, colonialism, apartheid, massive violations of fundamental human rights, and the denial of the international legal right of self-determination to the Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America and elsewhere around the world. Consequently, this Tribunal must find the Defendant guilty as charged on all of the counts specified above beyond a reasonable doubt. This Tribunal must also issue an Order that formally proscribes the Federal Government of the United States of America as an International Criminal Conspiracy and a Criminal Organization. This Tribunal must also issue a separate Order mandating the dissolution of the Federal Government of the United States of America as a legal and political entity. Finally, this Tribunal must declare that international legal sovereignty over the Territories principally inhabited by the Native American Peoples, the New Afrikan People, the Mexicano People, and the People of Puerto Rico resides, respectively, in the hands of these Peoples Themselves. The very lives, well-being, health, welfare, and safety of the Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America and elsewhere around the world depend upon the ultimate success of your deliberations. Respectfully submitted by, FRANCIS A. BOYLE PROFESSOR OF INTERNATIONAL LAW SPECIAL PROSECUTOR Dated: September 18, 1992 University of Illinois College of Law 504 East Pennsylvania Champaign, IL 61820 217-333-7954 See USA on Trial: The International Tribunal on Indigenous Peoples'and Oppressed Nations in the United States. The Book and Verdict are available from Editorial El Coqui, 1671 N. Claremont,Chicago Illinois 60647. Or you can try calling the Puerto Rican Cultural Center in Chicago at 312-342-4295. The Video can be obtained from Mission Creek Video, PO Box 411271 San Francisco CA 941141 (phone:415-695-0931). Francis A. Boyle * ================================================================ .NY Transfer News Collective * A Service of Blythe Systems . Since 1985 - Information for the Rest of Us . .339 Lafayette St., New York, NY 10012 http://www.blythe.org .List Archives: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/pipermail/nytr/ .Subscribe: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/mailman/listinfo/nytr ================================================================ From fboyle at illinois.edu Sun Jun 18 14:50:32 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2017 14:50:32 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide In-Reply-To: References: <200610092004.k99K4dXo038063@pencil.math.missouri.edu> Message-ID: And Wise {sic!} has successfully terrorized and intimidated every Palestinian/Arab/Muslim of Color on this Campus. Nothing has changed for American Indians and Palestinians/Arabs/Muslims of Color. It is an absolute disgrace but no surprise that the rotten and corrupt and racist AAUP eliminated the die-hard Anti-Palestinian University of Illiniwaks from their Censure List. That is precisely why I quit the AAUP years ago because of their die-hard bigotry and racism against Palestinians/Arabs/Muslims of Color. And now ditto for American Indians. Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2017 9:43 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: FW: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide My pro bono publico Clients here were the American Indian Movement. Chief Illiniwak is an Indicium of Genocide.And Wise {sic!} just Ethnically Cleansed Native Americans off of this Campus. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com [mailto:nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com] Sent: Monday, October 09, 2006 3:05 PM To: undisclosed-recipients Subject: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit [Here's one of our annual Columbus Day pieces. -NYTr] sent by Francis Boyle Columbus Day Promotes Genocide Indictment of the Federal Government of the U.S. for the commission of international crimes and petition for orders mandating its proscription and dissolution as an international criminal conspiracy and criminal organization By Francis A. Boyle, Professor of International Law 18 September 1992 Introduction All citizens of the World Community have both the right and the duty under public international law to sit in judgment over a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental norms of international criminal law committed by any member state of that same World Community. Such is the case for the International Tribunal of Indigenous Peoples and Oppressed Nationalities in the United States of America that convenes in San Francisco during the weekend of October 1-4, 1992. Its weighty but important task is to examine the long history of international criminal activity that has been perpetrated by the Federal Government of the United States of America against the Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America since it was founded in 1787. Toward that end, I have the honor to present to the Members of this Tribunal the following charges against the Federal Government of the United States of America under international criminal law. In light of the gravity, severity, and longstanding nature of these international crimes and also in light of the fact that the Federal Government of the United States of America appears to be irrevocably committed to continuing down this path of lawlessness and criminality against Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America and elsewhere, I hereby petition the Members of this Tribunal to issue an Order proscribing the Federal Government of the United States of America as an International Criminal Conspiracy and a Criminal Organization under the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles as well as the other sources of public international law specified below. For that reason, I also request that the Members of this Tribunal issue an Order dissolving the Federal Government of the United States of America as a legal and political entity. Finally, I ask this Tribunal to declare that international legal sovereignty over the Territories principally inhabited by the Native American Peoples, the New Afrikan People, the Mexicano People, and the People of Puerto Rico resides in the hands of these respective Peoples Themselves. In this regard, I should point out that the final Decision of this Tribunal will qualify as a judicial decision within the meaning of article 38(1)(d) of the Statute of the International Court of Justice and will therefore constitute a subsidiary means for the determination of rules of law for international law and practice. The Statute of the International Court of Justice is an integral part of the United Nations Charter under article 92 thereof. Thus, this Tribunal's Decision can be relied upon by some future International Criminal Court or Tribunal, as well as by any People or State of the World Community that desires to initiate criminal proceedings against named individuals for the commission of the following international crimes. The Decision of this Tribunal shall serve as adequate notice to the appropriate officials in the United States Federal Government that they bear personal criminal responsibility under international law and the domestic legal systems of all Peoples and States in the World Community for designing and implementing these illegal, criminal and reprehensible policies and practices against Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America. Hereinafter, the Federal Government of the United States of America will be referred to as the Defendant. BILL OF PARTICULARS AGAINST THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA The Native American Peoples 1. The Defendant has perpetrated innumerable Crimes Against eace, Crimes Against Humanity and War Crimes against Native American Peoples as recognized by the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles. 2. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Genocide against Native American Peoples as recognized by the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. 3. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Apartheid against Native American Peoples as recognized by the 1973 International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid. 4. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of Native American Peoples as recognized by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights. 5. The Defendant has perpetrated numerous and repeated violations of the 1965 International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination against Native American Peoples. 6. The Defendant has systematically violated 371 treaties it concluded with Native American Peoples in wanton disregard of the basic principle of public international law and practice dictating pacta sunt servanda. 7. The Defendant has denied and violated the international legal right of Native American Peoples to self-determination as recognized by the 1945 United Nations Charter, the 1966 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the 1966 International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, fundamental principles of customary international law, and jus cogens. 8. The Defendant has violated the seminal United Nations Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Territories of 1960 with respect to Native American Peoples and Territories. Pursuant thereto, the Defendant has an absolute international legal obligation to decolonize Native American Territories immediately and to transfer all powers it currently exercises there to the Native American Peoples. 9. The Defendant has illegally refused to accord full-scope protections as Prisoners-of-War to captured Native American independence fighters in violation of the Third Geneva Convention of 1949 and Additional Protocol I thereto of 1977. The Defendant's treatment of captured Native American independence fighters as common criminals and terrorists constitutes a grave breach of the Geneva Accords and thus a serious war crime. 10. The Defendant has deliberately and systematically permitted, aided and abetted, solicited and conspired to commit the dumping, transportation, and location of nuclear, toxic, medical and otherwise hazardous waste materials on Native American Territories across North America and has thus created a clear and present danger to the lives, health, safety, and physical and mental well-being of Native American Peoples in gross violation of article 3 and article 2(c) of the 1948 Genocide Convention, inter alia: Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; ... The New Afrikan People 11. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Slavery upon the New Afrikan People as recognized in part by the 1926 Slavery Convention and the 1956 Supplementary Convention on the Abolition of Slavery, the Slave Trade, and Institutions and Practices Similar to Slavery. The Defendant has illegally refused to pay reparations to the New Afrikan People for the commission of the International Crime of Slavery against Them in violation of basic norms of customary international law requiring such reparations to be paid. 12. The Defendant has perpetrated innumerable Crimes Against Humanity against the New Afrikan People as recognized by the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles. 13. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of genocide against the New Afrikan People as recognized by the 1948 Genocide Convention. 14. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Apartheid against the New Afrikan People as recognized by the 1973 Apartheid Convention. 15. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of the New Afrikan People as recognized by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the two aforementioned United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966. 16. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the 1965 Racism Convention against the New Afrikan People. The Defendant is the paradigmatic example of an irremediably racist state in international relations today. 17. The Defendant has denied and violated the international legal right of the New Afrikan People to self-determination as recognized by the United Nations Charter, the two United Nations Human rights Covenants of 1966, customary international law, and jus cogens. 18. The Defendant has illegally refused to apply the United Nations Decolonization Resolution of 1960 to the New Afrikan People and to the Territories that they principally inhabit. Pursuant thereto, the Defendant has an absolute international legal obligation to decolonize New Afrikan Territories immediately and to transfer all powers it currently exercises there to the New Afrikan People. 19. The Defendant has illegally refused to accord full-scope protections as Prisoners-of-War to captured New Afrikan independence fighters in violation of the Third Geneva Convention of 1949 and Additional Protocol I thereto of 1977. The Defendant's treatment of captured New Afrikan independence fighters as common criminals and terrorists constitutes a grave breach of the Geneva Accords and thus a serious war crime. The Mexicano People 20. In 1821, Mexico obtained its independence from colonial Spain as a sovereign Mestizo State, extending from Yucatan and Chiapas in the south, to the northern territories of California and New Mexico, which areas the Defendant today calls the states of Texas, California, Arizona, Nevada, Utah, New Mexico, and Colorado. Nevertheless, in 1836 so-called settlors under the sponsorship of the Defendant began the division of the Mexicano People and State by causing the division of the Mexican state of Coahuila-Texas into the Mexican state of Coahuila and the so-called republic of Texas. 21. In 1846, the Defendant perpetrated an unjust, illegal and unjustifiable war upon the remainder of the sovereign People and State of Mexico that violated every known principle of public international law in existence at that time, including, but not limited to, the Christian Doctrine of just war, which was the then reigning standard of customary international law. As a result thereof, the Defendant illegally annexed close to 51% of the territories of the sovereign State of Mexico by means of forcing it to conclude the 1848 Treaty of Guadalupe-Hidalgo under military duress. For these reasons, this Treaty was and still is null and void ab initio as a matter of public international law. The Defendant acquired more Mexican territory through the Gadsen Treaty (Purchase) of 1854. 22. Since these 1848 and 1854 Treaties, the Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Genocide against the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories, as recognized by the 1948 Genocide Convention. 23. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Apartheid against the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories, as recognized by the 1973 Apartheid Convention. 24. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories, as recognized by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the two aforementioned United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966. 25. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the 1965 Racism Convention against the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories. 26. The Defendant has denied and violated the international legal right of the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories to self-determination, as recognized by the United Nations Charter, the two United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966, customary international law, and jus cogens. 27. Since the militarily-imposed division of the Mexican State, the Defendant and its agents have militarily occupied other portions of the Mexican State, have sought to influence the outcome of the Mexican Revolution of 1910, have practiced a consistent pattern of intervention into Mexico's internal affairs, all of which have resulted in the arresting distortion and deformation of the Mexican social and economic order. In this regard, Defendant's so-called North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) constitutes nothing more than an attempt to impose its hegemonial imperialism, economic colonialism, and human exploitation upon the People and State of Mexico. 28. The Defendant has illegally refused to apply the United Nations Decolonization Resolution of 1960 to the Mexicano People and to these occupied territories that they inhabit. Pursuant thereto, the Defendant has an absolute international legal obligation to decolonize both the Mexican occupied territories and the Republic of Mexico immediately, and to transfer all powers it currently exercises there to the Mexicano People. The People and State of Puerto Rico 29. Since its illegal invasion of Puerto Rico in 1898, the Defendant has perpetrated innumerable Crimes against Peace, Crimes against Humanity and War Crimes against the People and State of Puerto Rico as recognized by the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles. 30. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Genocide against the Puerto Rican People as recognized by the 1948 Genocide Convention. 31. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Apartheid against the Puerto Rican People as recognized by the 1973 Apartheid Convention. 32. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of the Puerto Rican People as recognized by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human rights and the two aforementioned United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966. 33. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the 1965 Racism Convention against the Puerto Rican People. 34. The Defendant has denied and violated the international legal right of the Puerto Rican People to self-determination as recognized by the United Nations Charter, the two United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966, customary international law, and jus cogens. 35. The Defendant has illegally refused to apply the United Nations Decolonization Resolution of 1960 to Puerto Rico. Pursuant thereto, the Defendant has an absolute international legal obligation to decolonize Puerto Rico immediately and to transfer all powers it currently exercises there to the Puerto Rican People. 36. The Defendant has illegally refused to accord full-scope protections as Prisoners-of-War to captured Puerto Rican independence fighters in violation of the Third Geneva Convention of 1949 and Additional Protocol I thereto of 1977. The Defendant's treatment of captured Puerto Rican independence fighters as common criminals and terrorists constitutes a grave breach of the Geneva Accords and thus a serious war crime. An International Criminal Conspiracy and a Criminal Organization 37. In light of the foregoing international crimes, the Defendant constitutes an International Criminal Conspiracy and a Criminal Organization in accordance with the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles and the other sources of public international law specified above. The Federal Government of the United States of America is legally identical to the Nazi government of World War II Germany. Indeed, the Defendant's President, George Bush, has proclaimed a so-called New World Order that sounds and looks strikingly similar to the New Order proclaimed by Adolph Hitler over fifty years ago. Conclusion Like unto a pirate, the Defendant is hostis humani generis: The enemy of all humankind! For the good of all humanity, this Tribunal must condemn and repudiate the Federal Government of the United States of America and its grotesque vision of a New World Order that is constructed upon warfare, bloodshed, violence, criminality, genocide, racism, colonialism, apartheid, massive violations of fundamental human rights, and the denial of the international legal right of self-determination to the Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America and elsewhere around the world. Consequently, this Tribunal must find the Defendant guilty as charged on all of the counts specified above beyond a reasonable doubt. This Tribunal must also issue an Order that formally proscribes the Federal Government of the United States of America as an International Criminal Conspiracy and a Criminal Organization. This Tribunal must also issue a separate Order mandating the dissolution of the Federal Government of the United States of America as a legal and political entity. Finally, this Tribunal must declare that international legal sovereignty over the Territories principally inhabited by the Native American Peoples, the New Afrikan People, the Mexicano People, and the People of Puerto Rico resides, respectively, in the hands of these Peoples Themselves. The very lives, well-being, health, welfare, and safety of the Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America and elsewhere around the world depend upon the ultimate success of your deliberations. Respectfully submitted by, FRANCIS A. BOYLE PROFESSOR OF INTERNATIONAL LAW SPECIAL PROSECUTOR Dated: September 18, 1992 University of Illinois College of Law 504 East Pennsylvania Champaign, IL 61820 217-333-7954 See USA on Trial: The International Tribunal on Indigenous Peoples'and Oppressed Nations in the United States. The Book and Verdict are available from Editorial El Coqui, 1671 N. Claremont,Chicago Illinois 60647. Or you can try calling the Puerto Rican Cultural Center in Chicago at 312-342-4295. The Video can be obtained from Mission Creek Video, PO Box 411271 San Francisco CA 941141 (phone:415-695-0931). Francis A. Boyle * ================================================================ .NY Transfer News Collective * A Service of Blythe Systems . Since 1985 - Information for the Rest of Us . .339 Lafayette St., New York, NY 10012 http://www.blythe.org .List Archives: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/pipermail/nytr/ .Subscribe: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/mailman/listinfo/nytr ================================================================ From kmedina67 at gmail.com Sun Jun 18 15:46:48 2017 From: kmedina67 at gmail.com (Karen Medina) Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2017 10:46:48 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] controlling "hate speech to incite violence" Message-ID: Dear Peace Discuss, On the radio news, I hear more and more people talking about "hate speech to incite violence" and how some people are interested in writing laws that would make some speech a punishable crime. This is not a new problem. This is not something that just started yesterday. This is as old as the first spoken word spoken. As for inciting violence, I believe that committing violence is in the hand that commits it*, not in the voice of the inciter. On a slight caveat, I do however believe that words are used to hurt others, sometimes intentionally. I do not believe that the solution is to punish the speaker of the words. I will defend the right to free speech even when it is hate speech. But do not confuse my defense of the human right with the defense of the hate. I will not give that person a bullhorn, but I also will not silence that person. To completely silence hate is to drive it into fermentation. I will not listen. But I also do not seem to have enough time to speak on the other side of the issues. I do not want to silence, but what is the answer to hate speech? Is the answer to exercise my own free speech? Or to pay money (if I have any) to support voices that I agree with? Are there any voices that I completely agree with? Let us say that I do find a group that I completely agree with. If I pay my money to a group that is speaking for me, does that mean that the guy down the street with more money has a louder voice when he financially supports the opposing group? One related question that comes to my mind quite often these days is "How should we deal with a bully?" And maybe that is really the question that should be asked instead of "How do we write laws criminalizing hate speech that incites violence?" When we are bullying, do we see it as bullying? Any law that criminalizes any type of speech will be used against the anti-war activists, no matter how peaceful we are. Even among anti-war activism there are different tactics, so we are not all just exercising our free speech. There are some peace activists that would incite violence with their speech. Then there are "peace activists" that would throw stones during a gathering. The first two are not crimes. But, if there are laws written to control hate speech, then all three of anti-war activists would be legally punished. Another conversation in my mind is isn't "silencing the hate speech" part of how the the current set of wars (the large "war on terrorism") is being sold to the citizens of the United States? Why does any person believe that silencing speech is good? -- karen medina * RE: violence is in the hand that commits the violence. A certain lesser culpability extends to sanctioned violence. I will give a few instances of varying direct contact: -- If I threaten the rich guy down the street -- If I hire someone to hurt the rich guy down the street -- If I expect the police to take action against the guy down the street but not against my family -- If I allow laws to exist that criminalizes the guy down the street but not my family -- If I pay taxes that support a government that sends my neighbor down the street off to war -- If I pay taxes to a country that develops weapons. -- If I pay taxes to a country that develops weapons that are then sold to other countries. -- If I pay taxes to a government that spends money supporting another government to develop weapons and tactics that are then shared with our police. And those tactics are so well-developed because they are being used against a race of people. -- If I allow my government to implement an action like the "Trail of Tears" -- If I allow my government to implement the internment of people of Japanese ancestry during World War II -- If I allow my neighbor to hire people to work in the fields producing food and not allow them their human rights. -- If I pay taxes to incarcerate people -- If I pay taxes to incarcerate people, sometimes including beatings. -- If I pay taxes to incarcerate people in solitary confinement. (there are acts of violence that have no visible wounds) [... and the list goes on and on ...] -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Sun Jun 18 17:27:55 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2017 17:27:55 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide In-Reply-To: References: <200610092004.k99K4dXo038063@pencil.math.missouri.edu> Message-ID: Because of the pro bono work I did for AIM, I came to understand that American Indians see the US Government the same way the Jews see the Nazis. Wise "{sic!} is a Nazi! Ditto and pari passu for what she did to the Palestinians. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2017 9:51 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide And Wise {sic!} has successfully terrorized and intimidated every Palestinian/Arab/Muslim of Color on this Campus. Nothing has changed for American Indians and Palestinians/Arabs/Muslims of Color. It is an absolute disgrace but no surprise that the rotten and corrupt and racist AAUP eliminated the die-hard Anti-Palestinian University of Illiniwaks from their Censure List. That is precisely why I quit the AAUP years ago because of their die-hard bigotry and racism against Palestinians/Arabs/Muslims of Color. And now ditto for American Indians. Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2017 9:43 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: FW: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide My pro bono publico Clients here were the American Indian Movement. Chief Illiniwak is an Indicium of Genocide.And Wise {sic!} just Ethnically Cleansed Native Americans off of this Campus. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com [mailto:nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com] Sent: Monday, October 09, 2006 3:05 PM To: undisclosed-recipients Subject: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit [Here's one of our annual Columbus Day pieces. -NYTr] sent by Francis Boyle Columbus Day Promotes Genocide Indictment of the Federal Government of the U.S. for the commission of international crimes and petition for orders mandating its proscription and dissolution as an international criminal conspiracy and criminal organization By Francis A. Boyle, Professor of International Law 18 September 1992 Introduction All citizens of the World Community have both the right and the duty under public international law to sit in judgment over a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental norms of international criminal law committed by any member state of that same World Community. Such is the case for the International Tribunal of Indigenous Peoples and Oppressed Nationalities in the United States of America that convenes in San Francisco during the weekend of October 1-4, 1992. Its weighty but important task is to examine the long history of international criminal activity that has been perpetrated by the Federal Government of the United States of America against the Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America since it was founded in 1787. Toward that end, I have the honor to present to the Members of this Tribunal the following charges against the Federal Government of the United States of America under international criminal law. In light of the gravity, severity, and longstanding nature of these international crimes and also in light of the fact that the Federal Government of the United States of America appears to be irrevocably committed to continuing down this path of lawlessness and criminality against Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America and elsewhere, I hereby petition the Members of this Tribunal to issue an Order proscribing the Federal Government of the United States of America as an International Criminal Conspiracy and a Criminal Organization under the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles as well as the other sources of public international law specified below. For that reason, I also request that the Members of this Tribunal issue an Order dissolving the Federal Government of the United States of America as a legal and political entity. Finally, I ask this Tribunal to declare that international legal sovereignty over the Territories principally inhabited by the Native American Peoples, the New Afrikan People, the Mexicano People, and the People of Puerto Rico resides in the hands of these respective Peoples Themselves. In this regard, I should point out that the final Decision of this Tribunal will qualify as a judicial decision within the meaning of article 38(1)(d) of the Statute of the International Court of Justice and will therefore constitute a subsidiary means for the determination of rules of law for international law and practice. The Statute of the International Court of Justice is an integral part of the United Nations Charter under article 92 thereof. Thus, this Tribunal's Decision can be relied upon by some future International Criminal Court or Tribunal, as well as by any People or State of the World Community that desires to initiate criminal proceedings against named individuals for the commission of the following international crimes. The Decision of this Tribunal shall serve as adequate notice to the appropriate officials in the United States Federal Government that they bear personal criminal responsibility under international law and the domestic legal systems of all Peoples and States in the World Community for designing and implementing these illegal, criminal and reprehensible policies and practices against Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America. Hereinafter, the Federal Government of the United States of America will be referred to as the Defendant. BILL OF PARTICULARS AGAINST THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA The Native American Peoples 1. The Defendant has perpetrated innumerable Crimes Against eace, Crimes Against Humanity and War Crimes against Native American Peoples as recognized by the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles. 2. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Genocide against Native American Peoples as recognized by the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. 3. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Apartheid against Native American Peoples as recognized by the 1973 International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid. 4. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of Native American Peoples as recognized by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights. 5. The Defendant has perpetrated numerous and repeated violations of the 1965 International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination against Native American Peoples. 6. The Defendant has systematically violated 371 treaties it concluded with Native American Peoples in wanton disregard of the basic principle of public international law and practice dictating pacta sunt servanda. 7. The Defendant has denied and violated the international legal right of Native American Peoples to self-determination as recognized by the 1945 United Nations Charter, the 1966 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the 1966 International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, fundamental principles of customary international law, and jus cogens. 8. The Defendant has violated the seminal United Nations Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Territories of 1960 with respect to Native American Peoples and Territories. Pursuant thereto, the Defendant has an absolute international legal obligation to decolonize Native American Territories immediately and to transfer all powers it currently exercises there to the Native American Peoples. 9. The Defendant has illegally refused to accord full-scope protections as Prisoners-of-War to captured Native American independence fighters in violation of the Third Geneva Convention of 1949 and Additional Protocol I thereto of 1977. The Defendant's treatment of captured Native American independence fighters as common criminals and terrorists constitutes a grave breach of the Geneva Accords and thus a serious war crime. 10. The Defendant has deliberately and systematically permitted, aided and abetted, solicited and conspired to commit the dumping, transportation, and location of nuclear, toxic, medical and otherwise hazardous waste materials on Native American Territories across North America and has thus created a clear and present danger to the lives, health, safety, and physical and mental well-being of Native American Peoples in gross violation of article 3 and article 2(c) of the 1948 Genocide Convention, inter alia: Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; ... The New Afrikan People 11. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Slavery upon the New Afrikan People as recognized in part by the 1926 Slavery Convention and the 1956 Supplementary Convention on the Abolition of Slavery, the Slave Trade, and Institutions and Practices Similar to Slavery. The Defendant has illegally refused to pay reparations to the New Afrikan People for the commission of the International Crime of Slavery against Them in violation of basic norms of customary international law requiring such reparations to be paid. 12. The Defendant has perpetrated innumerable Crimes Against Humanity against the New Afrikan People as recognized by the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles. 13. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of genocide against the New Afrikan People as recognized by the 1948 Genocide Convention. 14. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Apartheid against the New Afrikan People as recognized by the 1973 Apartheid Convention. 15. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of the New Afrikan People as recognized by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the two aforementioned United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966. 16. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the 1965 Racism Convention against the New Afrikan People. The Defendant is the paradigmatic example of an irremediably racist state in international relations today. 17. The Defendant has denied and violated the international legal right of the New Afrikan People to self-determination as recognized by the United Nations Charter, the two United Nations Human rights Covenants of 1966, customary international law, and jus cogens. 18. The Defendant has illegally refused to apply the United Nations Decolonization Resolution of 1960 to the New Afrikan People and to the Territories that they principally inhabit. Pursuant thereto, the Defendant has an absolute international legal obligation to decolonize New Afrikan Territories immediately and to transfer all powers it currently exercises there to the New Afrikan People. 19. The Defendant has illegally refused to accord full-scope protections as Prisoners-of-War to captured New Afrikan independence fighters in violation of the Third Geneva Convention of 1949 and Additional Protocol I thereto of 1977. The Defendant's treatment of captured New Afrikan independence fighters as common criminals and terrorists constitutes a grave breach of the Geneva Accords and thus a serious war crime. The Mexicano People 20. In 1821, Mexico obtained its independence from colonial Spain as a sovereign Mestizo State, extending from Yucatan and Chiapas in the south, to the northern territories of California and New Mexico, which areas the Defendant today calls the states of Texas, California, Arizona, Nevada, Utah, New Mexico, and Colorado. Nevertheless, in 1836 so-called settlors under the sponsorship of the Defendant began the division of the Mexicano People and State by causing the division of the Mexican state of Coahuila-Texas into the Mexican state of Coahuila and the so-called republic of Texas. 21. In 1846, the Defendant perpetrated an unjust, illegal and unjustifiable war upon the remainder of the sovereign People and State of Mexico that violated every known principle of public international law in existence at that time, including, but not limited to, the Christian Doctrine of just war, which was the then reigning standard of customary international law. As a result thereof, the Defendant illegally annexed close to 51% of the territories of the sovereign State of Mexico by means of forcing it to conclude the 1848 Treaty of Guadalupe-Hidalgo under military duress. For these reasons, this Treaty was and still is null and void ab initio as a matter of public international law. The Defendant acquired more Mexican territory through the Gadsen Treaty (Purchase) of 1854. 22. Since these 1848 and 1854 Treaties, the Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Genocide against the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories, as recognized by the 1948 Genocide Convention. 23. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Apartheid against the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories, as recognized by the 1973 Apartheid Convention. 24. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories, as recognized by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the two aforementioned United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966. 25. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the 1965 Racism Convention against the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories. 26. The Defendant has denied and violated the international legal right of the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories to self-determination, as recognized by the United Nations Charter, the two United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966, customary international law, and jus cogens. 27. Since the militarily-imposed division of the Mexican State, the Defendant and its agents have militarily occupied other portions of the Mexican State, have sought to influence the outcome of the Mexican Revolution of 1910, have practiced a consistent pattern of intervention into Mexico's internal affairs, all of which have resulted in the arresting distortion and deformation of the Mexican social and economic order. In this regard, Defendant's so-called North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) constitutes nothing more than an attempt to impose its hegemonial imperialism, economic colonialism, and human exploitation upon the People and State of Mexico. 28. The Defendant has illegally refused to apply the United Nations Decolonization Resolution of 1960 to the Mexicano People and to these occupied territories that they inhabit. Pursuant thereto, the Defendant has an absolute international legal obligation to decolonize both the Mexican occupied territories and the Republic of Mexico immediately, and to transfer all powers it currently exercises there to the Mexicano People. The People and State of Puerto Rico 29. Since its illegal invasion of Puerto Rico in 1898, the Defendant has perpetrated innumerable Crimes against Peace, Crimes against Humanity and War Crimes against the People and State of Puerto Rico as recognized by the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles. 30. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Genocide against the Puerto Rican People as recognized by the 1948 Genocide Convention. 31. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Apartheid against the Puerto Rican People as recognized by the 1973 Apartheid Convention. 32. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of the Puerto Rican People as recognized by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human rights and the two aforementioned United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966. 33. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the 1965 Racism Convention against the Puerto Rican People. 34. The Defendant has denied and violated the international legal right of the Puerto Rican People to self-determination as recognized by the United Nations Charter, the two United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966, customary international law, and jus cogens. 35. The Defendant has illegally refused to apply the United Nations Decolonization Resolution of 1960 to Puerto Rico. Pursuant thereto, the Defendant has an absolute international legal obligation to decolonize Puerto Rico immediately and to transfer all powers it currently exercises there to the Puerto Rican People. 36. The Defendant has illegally refused to accord full-scope protections as Prisoners-of-War to captured Puerto Rican independence fighters in violation of the Third Geneva Convention of 1949 and Additional Protocol I thereto of 1977. The Defendant's treatment of captured Puerto Rican independence fighters as common criminals and terrorists constitutes a grave breach of the Geneva Accords and thus a serious war crime. An International Criminal Conspiracy and a Criminal Organization 37. In light of the foregoing international crimes, the Defendant constitutes an International Criminal Conspiracy and a Criminal Organization in accordance with the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles and the other sources of public international law specified above. The Federal Government of the United States of America is legally identical to the Nazi government of World War II Germany. Indeed, the Defendant's President, George Bush, has proclaimed a so-called New World Order that sounds and looks strikingly similar to the New Order proclaimed by Adolph Hitler over fifty years ago. Conclusion Like unto a pirate, the Defendant is hostis humani generis: The enemy of all humankind! For the good of all humanity, this Tribunal must condemn and repudiate the Federal Government of the United States of America and its grotesque vision of a New World Order that is constructed upon warfare, bloodshed, violence, criminality, genocide, racism, colonialism, apartheid, massive violations of fundamental human rights, and the denial of the international legal right of self-determination to the Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America and elsewhere around the world. Consequently, this Tribunal must find the Defendant guilty as charged on all of the counts specified above beyond a reasonable doubt. This Tribunal must also issue an Order that formally proscribes the Federal Government of the United States of America as an International Criminal Conspiracy and a Criminal Organization. This Tribunal must also issue a separate Order mandating the dissolution of the Federal Government of the United States of America as a legal and political entity. Finally, this Tribunal must declare that international legal sovereignty over the Territories principally inhabited by the Native American Peoples, the New Afrikan People, the Mexicano People, and the People of Puerto Rico resides, respectively, in the hands of these Peoples Themselves. The very lives, well-being, health, welfare, and safety of the Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America and elsewhere around the world depend upon the ultimate success of your deliberations. Respectfully submitted by, FRANCIS A. BOYLE PROFESSOR OF INTERNATIONAL LAW SPECIAL PROSECUTOR Dated: September 18, 1992 University of Illinois College of Law 504 East Pennsylvania Champaign, IL 61820 217-333-7954 See USA on Trial: The International Tribunal on Indigenous Peoples'and Oppressed Nations in the United States. The Book and Verdict are available from Editorial El Coqui, 1671 N. Claremont,Chicago Illinois 60647. Or you can try calling the Puerto Rican Cultural Center in Chicago at 312-342-4295. The Video can be obtained from Mission Creek Video, PO Box 411271 San Francisco CA 941141 (phone:415-695-0931). Francis A. Boyle * ================================================================ .NY Transfer News Collective * A Service of Blythe Systems . Since 1985 - Information for the Rest of Us . .339 Lafayette St., New York, NY 10012 http://www.blythe.org .List Archives: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/pipermail/nytr/ .Subscribe: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/mailman/listinfo/nytr ================================================================ From fboyle at illinois.edu Sun Jun 18 17:27:55 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2017 17:27:55 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide In-Reply-To: References: <200610092004.k99K4dXo038063@pencil.math.missouri.edu> Message-ID: Because of the pro bono work I did for AIM, I came to understand that American Indians see the US Government the same way the Jews see the Nazis. Wise "{sic!} is a Nazi! Ditto and pari passu for what she did to the Palestinians. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2017 9:51 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide And Wise {sic!} has successfully terrorized and intimidated every Palestinian/Arab/Muslim of Color on this Campus. Nothing has changed for American Indians and Palestinians/Arabs/Muslims of Color. It is an absolute disgrace but no surprise that the rotten and corrupt and racist AAUP eliminated the die-hard Anti-Palestinian University of Illiniwaks from their Censure List. That is precisely why I quit the AAUP years ago because of their die-hard bigotry and racism against Palestinians/Arabs/Muslims of Color. And now ditto for American Indians. Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2017 9:43 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: FW: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide My pro bono publico Clients here were the American Indian Movement. Chief Illiniwak is an Indicium of Genocide.And Wise {sic!} just Ethnically Cleansed Native Americans off of this Campus. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com [mailto:nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com] Sent: Monday, October 09, 2006 3:05 PM To: undisclosed-recipients Subject: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit [Here's one of our annual Columbus Day pieces. -NYTr] sent by Francis Boyle Columbus Day Promotes Genocide Indictment of the Federal Government of the U.S. for the commission of international crimes and petition for orders mandating its proscription and dissolution as an international criminal conspiracy and criminal organization By Francis A. Boyle, Professor of International Law 18 September 1992 Introduction All citizens of the World Community have both the right and the duty under public international law to sit in judgment over a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental norms of international criminal law committed by any member state of that same World Community. Such is the case for the International Tribunal of Indigenous Peoples and Oppressed Nationalities in the United States of America that convenes in San Francisco during the weekend of October 1-4, 1992. Its weighty but important task is to examine the long history of international criminal activity that has been perpetrated by the Federal Government of the United States of America against the Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America since it was founded in 1787. Toward that end, I have the honor to present to the Members of this Tribunal the following charges against the Federal Government of the United States of America under international criminal law. In light of the gravity, severity, and longstanding nature of these international crimes and also in light of the fact that the Federal Government of the United States of America appears to be irrevocably committed to continuing down this path of lawlessness and criminality against Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America and elsewhere, I hereby petition the Members of this Tribunal to issue an Order proscribing the Federal Government of the United States of America as an International Criminal Conspiracy and a Criminal Organization under the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles as well as the other sources of public international law specified below. For that reason, I also request that the Members of this Tribunal issue an Order dissolving the Federal Government of the United States of America as a legal and political entity. Finally, I ask this Tribunal to declare that international legal sovereignty over the Territories principally inhabited by the Native American Peoples, the New Afrikan People, the Mexicano People, and the People of Puerto Rico resides in the hands of these respective Peoples Themselves. In this regard, I should point out that the final Decision of this Tribunal will qualify as a judicial decision within the meaning of article 38(1)(d) of the Statute of the International Court of Justice and will therefore constitute a subsidiary means for the determination of rules of law for international law and practice. The Statute of the International Court of Justice is an integral part of the United Nations Charter under article 92 thereof. Thus, this Tribunal's Decision can be relied upon by some future International Criminal Court or Tribunal, as well as by any People or State of the World Community that desires to initiate criminal proceedings against named individuals for the commission of the following international crimes. The Decision of this Tribunal shall serve as adequate notice to the appropriate officials in the United States Federal Government that they bear personal criminal responsibility under international law and the domestic legal systems of all Peoples and States in the World Community for designing and implementing these illegal, criminal and reprehensible policies and practices against Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America. Hereinafter, the Federal Government of the United States of America will be referred to as the Defendant. BILL OF PARTICULARS AGAINST THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA The Native American Peoples 1. The Defendant has perpetrated innumerable Crimes Against eace, Crimes Against Humanity and War Crimes against Native American Peoples as recognized by the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles. 2. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Genocide against Native American Peoples as recognized by the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. 3. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Apartheid against Native American Peoples as recognized by the 1973 International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid. 4. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of Native American Peoples as recognized by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights. 5. The Defendant has perpetrated numerous and repeated violations of the 1965 International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination against Native American Peoples. 6. The Defendant has systematically violated 371 treaties it concluded with Native American Peoples in wanton disregard of the basic principle of public international law and practice dictating pacta sunt servanda. 7. The Defendant has denied and violated the international legal right of Native American Peoples to self-determination as recognized by the 1945 United Nations Charter, the 1966 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the 1966 International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, fundamental principles of customary international law, and jus cogens. 8. The Defendant has violated the seminal United Nations Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Territories of 1960 with respect to Native American Peoples and Territories. Pursuant thereto, the Defendant has an absolute international legal obligation to decolonize Native American Territories immediately and to transfer all powers it currently exercises there to the Native American Peoples. 9. The Defendant has illegally refused to accord full-scope protections as Prisoners-of-War to captured Native American independence fighters in violation of the Third Geneva Convention of 1949 and Additional Protocol I thereto of 1977. The Defendant's treatment of captured Native American independence fighters as common criminals and terrorists constitutes a grave breach of the Geneva Accords and thus a serious war crime. 10. The Defendant has deliberately and systematically permitted, aided and abetted, solicited and conspired to commit the dumping, transportation, and location of nuclear, toxic, medical and otherwise hazardous waste materials on Native American Territories across North America and has thus created a clear and present danger to the lives, health, safety, and physical and mental well-being of Native American Peoples in gross violation of article 3 and article 2(c) of the 1948 Genocide Convention, inter alia: Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; ... The New Afrikan People 11. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Slavery upon the New Afrikan People as recognized in part by the 1926 Slavery Convention and the 1956 Supplementary Convention on the Abolition of Slavery, the Slave Trade, and Institutions and Practices Similar to Slavery. The Defendant has illegally refused to pay reparations to the New Afrikan People for the commission of the International Crime of Slavery against Them in violation of basic norms of customary international law requiring such reparations to be paid. 12. The Defendant has perpetrated innumerable Crimes Against Humanity against the New Afrikan People as recognized by the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles. 13. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of genocide against the New Afrikan People as recognized by the 1948 Genocide Convention. 14. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Apartheid against the New Afrikan People as recognized by the 1973 Apartheid Convention. 15. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of the New Afrikan People as recognized by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the two aforementioned United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966. 16. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the 1965 Racism Convention against the New Afrikan People. The Defendant is the paradigmatic example of an irremediably racist state in international relations today. 17. The Defendant has denied and violated the international legal right of the New Afrikan People to self-determination as recognized by the United Nations Charter, the two United Nations Human rights Covenants of 1966, customary international law, and jus cogens. 18. The Defendant has illegally refused to apply the United Nations Decolonization Resolution of 1960 to the New Afrikan People and to the Territories that they principally inhabit. Pursuant thereto, the Defendant has an absolute international legal obligation to decolonize New Afrikan Territories immediately and to transfer all powers it currently exercises there to the New Afrikan People. 19. The Defendant has illegally refused to accord full-scope protections as Prisoners-of-War to captured New Afrikan independence fighters in violation of the Third Geneva Convention of 1949 and Additional Protocol I thereto of 1977. The Defendant's treatment of captured New Afrikan independence fighters as common criminals and terrorists constitutes a grave breach of the Geneva Accords and thus a serious war crime. The Mexicano People 20. In 1821, Mexico obtained its independence from colonial Spain as a sovereign Mestizo State, extending from Yucatan and Chiapas in the south, to the northern territories of California and New Mexico, which areas the Defendant today calls the states of Texas, California, Arizona, Nevada, Utah, New Mexico, and Colorado. Nevertheless, in 1836 so-called settlors under the sponsorship of the Defendant began the division of the Mexicano People and State by causing the division of the Mexican state of Coahuila-Texas into the Mexican state of Coahuila and the so-called republic of Texas. 21. In 1846, the Defendant perpetrated an unjust, illegal and unjustifiable war upon the remainder of the sovereign People and State of Mexico that violated every known principle of public international law in existence at that time, including, but not limited to, the Christian Doctrine of just war, which was the then reigning standard of customary international law. As a result thereof, the Defendant illegally annexed close to 51% of the territories of the sovereign State of Mexico by means of forcing it to conclude the 1848 Treaty of Guadalupe-Hidalgo under military duress. For these reasons, this Treaty was and still is null and void ab initio as a matter of public international law. The Defendant acquired more Mexican territory through the Gadsen Treaty (Purchase) of 1854. 22. Since these 1848 and 1854 Treaties, the Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Genocide against the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories, as recognized by the 1948 Genocide Convention. 23. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Apartheid against the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories, as recognized by the 1973 Apartheid Convention. 24. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories, as recognized by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the two aforementioned United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966. 25. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the 1965 Racism Convention against the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories. 26. The Defendant has denied and violated the international legal right of the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories to self-determination, as recognized by the United Nations Charter, the two United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966, customary international law, and jus cogens. 27. Since the militarily-imposed division of the Mexican State, the Defendant and its agents have militarily occupied other portions of the Mexican State, have sought to influence the outcome of the Mexican Revolution of 1910, have practiced a consistent pattern of intervention into Mexico's internal affairs, all of which have resulted in the arresting distortion and deformation of the Mexican social and economic order. In this regard, Defendant's so-called North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) constitutes nothing more than an attempt to impose its hegemonial imperialism, economic colonialism, and human exploitation upon the People and State of Mexico. 28. The Defendant has illegally refused to apply the United Nations Decolonization Resolution of 1960 to the Mexicano People and to these occupied territories that they inhabit. Pursuant thereto, the Defendant has an absolute international legal obligation to decolonize both the Mexican occupied territories and the Republic of Mexico immediately, and to transfer all powers it currently exercises there to the Mexicano People. The People and State of Puerto Rico 29. Since its illegal invasion of Puerto Rico in 1898, the Defendant has perpetrated innumerable Crimes against Peace, Crimes against Humanity and War Crimes against the People and State of Puerto Rico as recognized by the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles. 30. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Genocide against the Puerto Rican People as recognized by the 1948 Genocide Convention. 31. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Apartheid against the Puerto Rican People as recognized by the 1973 Apartheid Convention. 32. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of the Puerto Rican People as recognized by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human rights and the two aforementioned United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966. 33. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the 1965 Racism Convention against the Puerto Rican People. 34. The Defendant has denied and violated the international legal right of the Puerto Rican People to self-determination as recognized by the United Nations Charter, the two United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966, customary international law, and jus cogens. 35. The Defendant has illegally refused to apply the United Nations Decolonization Resolution of 1960 to Puerto Rico. Pursuant thereto, the Defendant has an absolute international legal obligation to decolonize Puerto Rico immediately and to transfer all powers it currently exercises there to the Puerto Rican People. 36. The Defendant has illegally refused to accord full-scope protections as Prisoners-of-War to captured Puerto Rican independence fighters in violation of the Third Geneva Convention of 1949 and Additional Protocol I thereto of 1977. The Defendant's treatment of captured Puerto Rican independence fighters as common criminals and terrorists constitutes a grave breach of the Geneva Accords and thus a serious war crime. An International Criminal Conspiracy and a Criminal Organization 37. In light of the foregoing international crimes, the Defendant constitutes an International Criminal Conspiracy and a Criminal Organization in accordance with the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles and the other sources of public international law specified above. The Federal Government of the United States of America is legally identical to the Nazi government of World War II Germany. Indeed, the Defendant's President, George Bush, has proclaimed a so-called New World Order that sounds and looks strikingly similar to the New Order proclaimed by Adolph Hitler over fifty years ago. Conclusion Like unto a pirate, the Defendant is hostis humani generis: The enemy of all humankind! For the good of all humanity, this Tribunal must condemn and repudiate the Federal Government of the United States of America and its grotesque vision of a New World Order that is constructed upon warfare, bloodshed, violence, criminality, genocide, racism, colonialism, apartheid, massive violations of fundamental human rights, and the denial of the international legal right of self-determination to the Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America and elsewhere around the world. Consequently, this Tribunal must find the Defendant guilty as charged on all of the counts specified above beyond a reasonable doubt. This Tribunal must also issue an Order that formally proscribes the Federal Government of the United States of America as an International Criminal Conspiracy and a Criminal Organization. This Tribunal must also issue a separate Order mandating the dissolution of the Federal Government of the United States of America as a legal and political entity. Finally, this Tribunal must declare that international legal sovereignty over the Territories principally inhabited by the Native American Peoples, the New Afrikan People, the Mexicano People, and the People of Puerto Rico resides, respectively, in the hands of these Peoples Themselves. The very lives, well-being, health, welfare, and safety of the Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America and elsewhere around the world depend upon the ultimate success of your deliberations. Respectfully submitted by, FRANCIS A. BOYLE PROFESSOR OF INTERNATIONAL LAW SPECIAL PROSECUTOR Dated: September 18, 1992 University of Illinois College of Law 504 East Pennsylvania Champaign, IL 61820 217-333-7954 See USA on Trial: The International Tribunal on Indigenous Peoples'and Oppressed Nations in the United States. The Book and Verdict are available from Editorial El Coqui, 1671 N. Claremont,Chicago Illinois 60647. Or you can try calling the Puerto Rican Cultural Center in Chicago at 312-342-4295. The Video can be obtained from Mission Creek Video, PO Box 411271 San Francisco CA 941141 (phone:415-695-0931). Francis A. Boyle * ================================================================ .NY Transfer News Collective * A Service of Blythe Systems . Since 1985 - Information for the Rest of Us . .339 Lafayette St., New York, NY 10012 http://www.blythe.org .List Archives: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/pipermail/nytr/ .Subscribe: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/mailman/listinfo/nytr ================================================================ From fboyle at illinois.edu Sun Jun 18 17:37:43 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2017 17:37:43 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] FW: [ActionGreens] Dengue Sabotage in Cuba References: Message-ID: Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2017 12:37 PM To: sectns.aals at lists.aals.org Subject: FW: [ActionGreens] Dengue Sabotage in Cuba Reagan and his CIA did the exact same thing to the Nicaraguans in the Fall of 1985 when I went down there to Nicaragua in order to help them out. May the Reaganites rot in hell! Fab. Ben Linder Instead of Me Down to Nicaragua in 1985 With my Friends and Comrades-in-Arms Ramsey Clark and Len Weinglass (R.I.P.) To stop Reagan’s contra terrorist mercenary bands Tormenting, torturing, murdering, raping, pillaging, devastating Nicaragua’s long-suffering people Under a contra death threat for all Americans Subjected to CIA biowarfare by Hemorrhagic Dengue Fever For which there is no cure The three of us marched on our way anyway Instead of us lawyers Reagan and his contras murdered Ben Linder A Noble Engineer Bringing fresh water to the poor campesinos in the countryside Ripping Ben from his Family’s arms Ben was a Martyr for Peace! Reagan and his contras got Ben Linder instead of me I have led a full life But not so he Struck down in his young manhood By a gang of American criminals and their terrorists So I write this poem in Honor of Ben May Ben’s Name live forever! I know his Soul already does R.I.P.: Ben Linder Instead of me Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: ActionGreens at yahoogroups.com [mailto:ActionGreens at yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of carolina carolinacoz at gmail.com [ActionGreens] Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2017 10:48 AM To: Eco Rev >; Action Greens >; sprayno at yahoogroups.com Subject: [ActionGreens] Dengue Sabotage in Cuba http://en.granma.cu/cuba/2017-06-05/the-silent-sabotage-cuba-will-never-forget The silent sabotage Cuba will never forget On June 1, 1964, Comandante en Jefe Fidel Castro denounced, for the first time, the United States' biological war against Cuba. Granma International interviews two leading figures in the struggle against hemorrhagic dengue which had been purposefully introduced Author: Alejandra García | internet at granma.cu june 5, 2017 17:06:41 [http://en.granma.cu/file/img/2017/06/medium/f0017611.jpg] Fidel constantly visited medical centers during the hemorrhagic dengue epidemic. Photo: Archive It was a nightmare. Emergency rooms were flooded with children, and then adults, with symptoms that began with what appeared to be those of a common cold, and then worsened rapidly when treated as such. Within a few day at the end of May, 1981, all the country's hospitals and polyclinics were facing the most lethal epidemic experienced since the triumph of the Revolution, and did not know how the disease had suddenly appeared, or how to stop its spread. The first cases were reported in the Havana municipality of Boyeros, in an area close to José Martí International Airport. Over the next few months, what was discovered to be hemorrhagic dengue, introduced into Cuba by the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), affected 344,203 persons across the country. Immediately following the first cases in Boyeros, the virus spread across the capital in an almost explosive manner, according to José González Valdés, consulting professor at Havana's University of Medical Sciences, who in 1981 was the director of the Centro Habana Pediatric Hospital. Speaking with Granma International (GI), he recalled, "The symptoms of type 2 dengue, spread by the Aedes Aegypti mosquito, were becoming common among children in the area of Centro Habana and nearby municipalities: fever; retro-orbital, abdominal, and muscular pain; rash; headache; and asthenia - frequently accompanied by multiple hemorrhages with different degrees of severity. We immediately advised the highest levels of Hygiene and Epidemiology." By the first days of June, the Centro Habana Pediatric Hospital, he continued, "became the command center, one could say, to monitor the epidemic and coordinate actions to confront it. Held here were the first meetings with participants from the Ministry of Public Health, Hygiene and Epidemiology, microbiologists, researchers from the Pedro Kourí Hospital of Tropical Medicine, and other directors and professors from pediatric hospitals in the City of Havana." On a daily basis, the hospital admitted 400 to 500 sick children, "but on occasion, 1,200 to 1,300 arrived," Dr. Gonzalez said. During those months, the hospital was obliged to organize three groups of staff members who worked until 5:00pm everyday and stayed in the emergency room for the night, every other day. "Many stayed permanently," nurse Bárbara Cristina Viñet Morales told GI. At that time, she was an emergency room nurse at the "Pediatric," now assistant director of nursing, and one of the few staff members who has remained at the hospital since the 1981 epidemic. In her 47 years of experience, Bárbara said, she has never again experienced an epidemiological situation like that, "At that time, just 22 years old, the hospital was my home. As the mother I was, with two little ones, I couldn't bear to see a sick child, or not be here to help, with the families," she recalled. According to Dr. Gonzalez, "The entire medical staff at our hospital was focused on taking care of sick children and their families, in their majority of very modest means. The first to show his concern was the Comandante en Jefe. He visited the hospital unannounced nine times. He was well-informed about everything, and always went to see the children, ask them how they felt and what they would like to study when they grew up. They answered, laughed, and the families felt confident, that they could trust him and the doctors treating their little ones." Bárbara added, "This was the best experience of those days, to have been so close to Fidel. Once, when the nurses and doctors were giving the Comandante a tour of the hospital, we entered a ward with about 40 beds. All the children there emerged from the oxygen tents that we used at the time and ran to embrace him. One of them shouted: "Pioneers for Communism!" and the rest responded (as they did in school), "We will be like Che!" It was very moving." The lowest number of deaths in all the city's hospitals was recorded at the Pediatric during the epidemic, from the end of May through September, with only two. But according to the doctor, "They were very hard days for everyone. Despite saving many lives, we lost a baby and a seven-year-old girl." Bárbara explained to GI, "One of the most traumatic moments was seeing the girl die. She was from Santiago de Cuba and had come to Havana to see her aunt, who was also a nurse at the hospital. We couldn't do much for the little one. The virus had weakened her immune system too much. Remembering it still fills me with pain and powerlessness." These were not isolated events. For years, Cuba had been facing biological attacks meant to affect the people's health and deliver a blow to the nation's economy. On June 1, 1964, Comandante en Jefe Fidel Castro denounced, for the first time, the United States' bacteriological war against the country. A few days before his statement, a large number of shiny objects falling from the sky had alarmed the province of Sancti Spíritus. In his condemnation, published June 2 on the front page of the daily newspaper Revolución, Fidel stated, "Eyewitnesses, among them members of the Revolutionary Armed Forces, reported that there were balloons of different sizes… which dissolved upon contact with the earth, leaving a gelatinous substance… similar to that used (in labs) to cultivate bacteria." This was only the beginning of what was to become the "most brutal and inhumane" war, that cost lives and incalculable damage. "Imperialism's lack of scruples and impotence before the consolidation and advance of our Revolution, led them to conceive the most monstrous actions against our country," Fidel said in his statement. Over the following years, the nation was struck by porcine fever; Bovine nodular pseudo-dermatosis; brucellosis among cattle; sugar cane mold and rust; tobacco blue mold; coffee rust; poultry New Castle and infectious bronchitis; hemorrhagic conjunctivitis; dysentery; and type two dengue. Exhaustive studies carried out over the years have shown that every one of these epidemics was deliberately introduced from abroad. Among all the outbreaks, hemorrhagic dengue was the most lethal. Very few Cuban families escaped the epidemic that affected 344,203 persons across the country, leaving 158 dead, including 101 children under 15 years of age. Neither Dr. González or nurse Bárbara Viñet will ever forget that year when they saw the face of the worst attack Cuba has suffered, a biological one. "Very unlikely that there could be a more dehumanizing war than this one," the doctor concludes. “I'm for truth, no matter who tells it. I'm for justice, no matter who it is for or against. I'm a human being, first and foremost, and as such I'm for whoever and whatever benefits humanity as a whole.” ― Malcolm X __._,_.___ ________________________________ Posted by: carolina > ________________________________ _ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Sun Jun 18 17:37:43 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2017 17:37:43 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] FW: [ActionGreens] Dengue Sabotage in Cuba References: Message-ID: Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2017 12:37 PM To: sectns.aals at lists.aals.org Subject: FW: [ActionGreens] Dengue Sabotage in Cuba Reagan and his CIA did the exact same thing to the Nicaraguans in the Fall of 1985 when I went down there to Nicaragua in order to help them out. May the Reaganites rot in hell! Fab. Ben Linder Instead of Me Down to Nicaragua in 1985 With my Friends and Comrades-in-Arms Ramsey Clark and Len Weinglass (R.I.P.) To stop Reagan’s contra terrorist mercenary bands Tormenting, torturing, murdering, raping, pillaging, devastating Nicaragua’s long-suffering people Under a contra death threat for all Americans Subjected to CIA biowarfare by Hemorrhagic Dengue Fever For which there is no cure The three of us marched on our way anyway Instead of us lawyers Reagan and his contras murdered Ben Linder A Noble Engineer Bringing fresh water to the poor campesinos in the countryside Ripping Ben from his Family’s arms Ben was a Martyr for Peace! Reagan and his contras got Ben Linder instead of me I have led a full life But not so he Struck down in his young manhood By a gang of American criminals and their terrorists So I write this poem in Honor of Ben May Ben’s Name live forever! I know his Soul already does R.I.P.: Ben Linder Instead of me Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: ActionGreens at yahoogroups.com [mailto:ActionGreens at yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of carolina carolinacoz at gmail.com [ActionGreens] Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2017 10:48 AM To: Eco Rev >; Action Greens >; sprayno at yahoogroups.com Subject: [ActionGreens] Dengue Sabotage in Cuba http://en.granma.cu/cuba/2017-06-05/the-silent-sabotage-cuba-will-never-forget The silent sabotage Cuba will never forget On June 1, 1964, Comandante en Jefe Fidel Castro denounced, for the first time, the United States' biological war against Cuba. Granma International interviews two leading figures in the struggle against hemorrhagic dengue which had been purposefully introduced Author: Alejandra García | internet at granma.cu june 5, 2017 17:06:41 [http://en.granma.cu/file/img/2017/06/medium/f0017611.jpg] Fidel constantly visited medical centers during the hemorrhagic dengue epidemic. Photo: Archive It was a nightmare. Emergency rooms were flooded with children, and then adults, with symptoms that began with what appeared to be those of a common cold, and then worsened rapidly when treated as such. Within a few day at the end of May, 1981, all the country's hospitals and polyclinics were facing the most lethal epidemic experienced since the triumph of the Revolution, and did not know how the disease had suddenly appeared, or how to stop its spread. The first cases were reported in the Havana municipality of Boyeros, in an area close to José Martí International Airport. Over the next few months, what was discovered to be hemorrhagic dengue, introduced into Cuba by the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), affected 344,203 persons across the country. Immediately following the first cases in Boyeros, the virus spread across the capital in an almost explosive manner, according to José González Valdés, consulting professor at Havana's University of Medical Sciences, who in 1981 was the director of the Centro Habana Pediatric Hospital. Speaking with Granma International (GI), he recalled, "The symptoms of type 2 dengue, spread by the Aedes Aegypti mosquito, were becoming common among children in the area of Centro Habana and nearby municipalities: fever; retro-orbital, abdominal, and muscular pain; rash; headache; and asthenia - frequently accompanied by multiple hemorrhages with different degrees of severity. We immediately advised the highest levels of Hygiene and Epidemiology." By the first days of June, the Centro Habana Pediatric Hospital, he continued, "became the command center, one could say, to monitor the epidemic and coordinate actions to confront it. Held here were the first meetings with participants from the Ministry of Public Health, Hygiene and Epidemiology, microbiologists, researchers from the Pedro Kourí Hospital of Tropical Medicine, and other directors and professors from pediatric hospitals in the City of Havana." On a daily basis, the hospital admitted 400 to 500 sick children, "but on occasion, 1,200 to 1,300 arrived," Dr. Gonzalez said. During those months, the hospital was obliged to organize three groups of staff members who worked until 5:00pm everyday and stayed in the emergency room for the night, every other day. "Many stayed permanently," nurse Bárbara Cristina Viñet Morales told GI. At that time, she was an emergency room nurse at the "Pediatric," now assistant director of nursing, and one of the few staff members who has remained at the hospital since the 1981 epidemic. In her 47 years of experience, Bárbara said, she has never again experienced an epidemiological situation like that, "At that time, just 22 years old, the hospital was my home. As the mother I was, with two little ones, I couldn't bear to see a sick child, or not be here to help, with the families," she recalled. According to Dr. Gonzalez, "The entire medical staff at our hospital was focused on taking care of sick children and their families, in their majority of very modest means. The first to show his concern was the Comandante en Jefe. He visited the hospital unannounced nine times. He was well-informed about everything, and always went to see the children, ask them how they felt and what they would like to study when they grew up. They answered, laughed, and the families felt confident, that they could trust him and the doctors treating their little ones." Bárbara added, "This was the best experience of those days, to have been so close to Fidel. Once, when the nurses and doctors were giving the Comandante a tour of the hospital, we entered a ward with about 40 beds. All the children there emerged from the oxygen tents that we used at the time and ran to embrace him. One of them shouted: "Pioneers for Communism!" and the rest responded (as they did in school), "We will be like Che!" It was very moving." The lowest number of deaths in all the city's hospitals was recorded at the Pediatric during the epidemic, from the end of May through September, with only two. But according to the doctor, "They were very hard days for everyone. Despite saving many lives, we lost a baby and a seven-year-old girl." Bárbara explained to GI, "One of the most traumatic moments was seeing the girl die. She was from Santiago de Cuba and had come to Havana to see her aunt, who was also a nurse at the hospital. We couldn't do much for the little one. The virus had weakened her immune system too much. Remembering it still fills me with pain and powerlessness." These were not isolated events. For years, Cuba had been facing biological attacks meant to affect the people's health and deliver a blow to the nation's economy. On June 1, 1964, Comandante en Jefe Fidel Castro denounced, for the first time, the United States' bacteriological war against the country. A few days before his statement, a large number of shiny objects falling from the sky had alarmed the province of Sancti Spíritus. In his condemnation, published June 2 on the front page of the daily newspaper Revolución, Fidel stated, "Eyewitnesses, among them members of the Revolutionary Armed Forces, reported that there were balloons of different sizes… which dissolved upon contact with the earth, leaving a gelatinous substance… similar to that used (in labs) to cultivate bacteria." This was only the beginning of what was to become the "most brutal and inhumane" war, that cost lives and incalculable damage. "Imperialism's lack of scruples and impotence before the consolidation and advance of our Revolution, led them to conceive the most monstrous actions against our country," Fidel said in his statement. Over the following years, the nation was struck by porcine fever; Bovine nodular pseudo-dermatosis; brucellosis among cattle; sugar cane mold and rust; tobacco blue mold; coffee rust; poultry New Castle and infectious bronchitis; hemorrhagic conjunctivitis; dysentery; and type two dengue. Exhaustive studies carried out over the years have shown that every one of these epidemics was deliberately introduced from abroad. Among all the outbreaks, hemorrhagic dengue was the most lethal. Very few Cuban families escaped the epidemic that affected 344,203 persons across the country, leaving 158 dead, including 101 children under 15 years of age. Neither Dr. González or nurse Bárbara Viñet will ever forget that year when they saw the face of the worst attack Cuba has suffered, a biological one. "Very unlikely that there could be a more dehumanizing war than this one," the doctor concludes. “I'm for truth, no matter who tells it. I'm for justice, no matter who it is for or against. I'm a human being, first and foremost, and as such I'm for whoever and whatever benefits humanity as a whole.” ― Malcolm X __._,_.___ ________________________________ Posted by: carolina > ________________________________ _ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Mon Jun 19 11:47:03 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2017 11:47:03 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide In-Reply-To: References: <200610092004.k99K4dXo038063@pencil.math.missouri.edu> Message-ID: After the long years of hard work and pain and suffering and tears and agony that we all engaged in trying to get rid of Chief Illiniwak and instituting the Native American Studies Program as some sort of compensation, Wise {sic!} and her Zionists destroyed it all in the bat of an eye. I cannot think of a Greater Academic Cosmic Injustice. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2017 12:28 PM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide Because of the pro bono work I did for AIM, I came to understand that American Indians see the US Government the same way the Jews see the Nazis. Wise "{sic!} is a Nazi! Ditto and pari passu for what she did to the Palestinians. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2017 9:51 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide And Wise {sic!} has successfully terrorized and intimidated every Palestinian/Arab/Muslim of Color on this Campus. Nothing has changed for American Indians and Palestinians/Arabs/Muslims of Color. It is an absolute disgrace but no surprise that the rotten and corrupt and racist AAUP eliminated the die-hard Anti-Palestinian University of Illiniwaks from their Censure List. That is precisely why I quit the AAUP years ago because of their die-hard bigotry and racism against Palestinians/Arabs/Muslims of Color. And now ditto for American Indians. Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2017 9:43 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: FW: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide My pro bono publico Clients here were the American Indian Movement. Chief Illiniwak is an Indicium of Genocide.And Wise {sic!} just Ethnically Cleansed Native Americans off of this Campus. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com [mailto:nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com] Sent: Monday, October 09, 2006 3:05 PM To: undisclosed-recipients Subject: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit [Here's one of our annual Columbus Day pieces. -NYTr] sent by Francis Boyle Columbus Day Promotes Genocide Indictment of the Federal Government of the U.S. for the commission of international crimes and petition for orders mandating its proscription and dissolution as an international criminal conspiracy and criminal organization By Francis A. Boyle, Professor of International Law 18 September 1992 Introduction All citizens of the World Community have both the right and the duty under public international law to sit in judgment over a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental norms of international criminal law committed by any member state of that same World Community. Such is the case for the International Tribunal of Indigenous Peoples and Oppressed Nationalities in the United States of America that convenes in San Francisco during the weekend of October 1-4, 1992. Its weighty but important task is to examine the long history of international criminal activity that has been perpetrated by the Federal Government of the United States of America against the Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America since it was founded in 1787. Toward that end, I have the honor to present to the Members of this Tribunal the following charges against the Federal Government of the United States of America under international criminal law. In light of the gravity, severity, and longstanding nature of these international crimes and also in light of the fact that the Federal Government of the United States of America appears to be irrevocably committed to continuing down this path of lawlessness and criminality against Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America and elsewhere, I hereby petition the Members of this Tribunal to issue an Order proscribing the Federal Government of the United States of America as an International Criminal Conspiracy and a Criminal Organization under the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles as well as the other sources of public international law specified below. For that reason, I also request that the Members of this Tribunal issue an Order dissolving the Federal Government of the United States of America as a legal and political entity. Finally, I ask this Tribunal to declare that international legal sovereignty over the Territories principally inhabited by the Native American Peoples, the New Afrikan People, the Mexicano People, and the People of Puerto Rico resides in the hands of these respective Peoples Themselves. In this regard, I should point out that the final Decision of this Tribunal will qualify as a judicial decision within the meaning of article 38(1)(d) of the Statute of the International Court of Justice and will therefore constitute a subsidiary means for the determination of rules of law for international law and practice. The Statute of the International Court of Justice is an integral part of the United Nations Charter under article 92 thereof. Thus, this Tribunal's Decision can be relied upon by some future International Criminal Court or Tribunal, as well as by any People or State of the World Community that desires to initiate criminal proceedings against named individuals for the commission of the following international crimes. The Decision of this Tribunal shall serve as adequate notice to the appropriate officials in the United States Federal Government that they bear personal criminal responsibility under international law and the domestic legal systems of all Peoples and States in the World Community for designing and implementing these illegal, criminal and reprehensible policies and practices against Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America. Hereinafter, the Federal Government of the United States of America will be referred to as the Defendant. BILL OF PARTICULARS AGAINST THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA The Native American Peoples 1. The Defendant has perpetrated innumerable Crimes Against eace, Crimes Against Humanity and War Crimes against Native American Peoples as recognized by the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles. 2. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Genocide against Native American Peoples as recognized by the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. 3. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Apartheid against Native American Peoples as recognized by the 1973 International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid. 4. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of Native American Peoples as recognized by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights. 5. The Defendant has perpetrated numerous and repeated violations of the 1965 International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination against Native American Peoples. 6. The Defendant has systematically violated 371 treaties it concluded with Native American Peoples in wanton disregard of the basic principle of public international law and practice dictating pacta sunt servanda. 7. The Defendant has denied and violated the international legal right of Native American Peoples to self-determination as recognized by the 1945 United Nations Charter, the 1966 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the 1966 International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, fundamental principles of customary international law, and jus cogens. 8. The Defendant has violated the seminal United Nations Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Territories of 1960 with respect to Native American Peoples and Territories. Pursuant thereto, the Defendant has an absolute international legal obligation to decolonize Native American Territories immediately and to transfer all powers it currently exercises there to the Native American Peoples. 9. The Defendant has illegally refused to accord full-scope protections as Prisoners-of-War to captured Native American independence fighters in violation of the Third Geneva Convention of 1949 and Additional Protocol I thereto of 1977. The Defendant's treatment of captured Native American independence fighters as common criminals and terrorists constitutes a grave breach of the Geneva Accords and thus a serious war crime. 10. The Defendant has deliberately and systematically permitted, aided and abetted, solicited and conspired to commit the dumping, transportation, and location of nuclear, toxic, medical and otherwise hazardous waste materials on Native American Territories across North America and has thus created a clear and present danger to the lives, health, safety, and physical and mental well-being of Native American Peoples in gross violation of article 3 and article 2(c) of the 1948 Genocide Convention, inter alia: Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; ... The New Afrikan People 11. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Slavery upon the New Afrikan People as recognized in part by the 1926 Slavery Convention and the 1956 Supplementary Convention on the Abolition of Slavery, the Slave Trade, and Institutions and Practices Similar to Slavery. The Defendant has illegally refused to pay reparations to the New Afrikan People for the commission of the International Crime of Slavery against Them in violation of basic norms of customary international law requiring such reparations to be paid. 12. The Defendant has perpetrated innumerable Crimes Against Humanity against the New Afrikan People as recognized by the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles. 13. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of genocide against the New Afrikan People as recognized by the 1948 Genocide Convention. 14. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Apartheid against the New Afrikan People as recognized by the 1973 Apartheid Convention. 15. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of the New Afrikan People as recognized by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the two aforementioned United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966. 16. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the 1965 Racism Convention against the New Afrikan People. The Defendant is the paradigmatic example of an irremediably racist state in international relations today. 17. The Defendant has denied and violated the international legal right of the New Afrikan People to self-determination as recognized by the United Nations Charter, the two United Nations Human rights Covenants of 1966, customary international law, and jus cogens. 18. The Defendant has illegally refused to apply the United Nations Decolonization Resolution of 1960 to the New Afrikan People and to the Territories that they principally inhabit. Pursuant thereto, the Defendant has an absolute international legal obligation to decolonize New Afrikan Territories immediately and to transfer all powers it currently exercises there to the New Afrikan People. 19. The Defendant has illegally refused to accord full-scope protections as Prisoners-of-War to captured New Afrikan independence fighters in violation of the Third Geneva Convention of 1949 and Additional Protocol I thereto of 1977. The Defendant's treatment of captured New Afrikan independence fighters as common criminals and terrorists constitutes a grave breach of the Geneva Accords and thus a serious war crime. The Mexicano People 20. In 1821, Mexico obtained its independence from colonial Spain as a sovereign Mestizo State, extending from Yucatan and Chiapas in the south, to the northern territories of California and New Mexico, which areas the Defendant today calls the states of Texas, California, Arizona, Nevada, Utah, New Mexico, and Colorado. Nevertheless, in 1836 so-called settlors under the sponsorship of the Defendant began the division of the Mexicano People and State by causing the division of the Mexican state of Coahuila-Texas into the Mexican state of Coahuila and the so-called republic of Texas. 21. In 1846, the Defendant perpetrated an unjust, illegal and unjustifiable war upon the remainder of the sovereign People and State of Mexico that violated every known principle of public international law in existence at that time, including, but not limited to, the Christian Doctrine of just war, which was the then reigning standard of customary international law. As a result thereof, the Defendant illegally annexed close to 51% of the territories of the sovereign State of Mexico by means of forcing it to conclude the 1848 Treaty of Guadalupe-Hidalgo under military duress. For these reasons, this Treaty was and still is null and void ab initio as a matter of public international law. The Defendant acquired more Mexican territory through the Gadsen Treaty (Purchase) of 1854. 22. Since these 1848 and 1854 Treaties, the Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Genocide against the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories, as recognized by the 1948 Genocide Convention. 23. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Apartheid against the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories, as recognized by the 1973 Apartheid Convention. 24. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories, as recognized by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the two aforementioned United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966. 25. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the 1965 Racism Convention against the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories. 26. The Defendant has denied and violated the international legal right of the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories to self-determination, as recognized by the United Nations Charter, the two United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966, customary international law, and jus cogens. 27. Since the militarily-imposed division of the Mexican State, the Defendant and its agents have militarily occupied other portions of the Mexican State, have sought to influence the outcome of the Mexican Revolution of 1910, have practiced a consistent pattern of intervention into Mexico's internal affairs, all of which have resulted in the arresting distortion and deformation of the Mexican social and economic order. In this regard, Defendant's so-called North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) constitutes nothing more than an attempt to impose its hegemonial imperialism, economic colonialism, and human exploitation upon the People and State of Mexico. 28. The Defendant has illegally refused to apply the United Nations Decolonization Resolution of 1960 to the Mexicano People and to these occupied territories that they inhabit. Pursuant thereto, the Defendant has an absolute international legal obligation to decolonize both the Mexican occupied territories and the Republic of Mexico immediately, and to transfer all powers it currently exercises there to the Mexicano People. The People and State of Puerto Rico 29. Since its illegal invasion of Puerto Rico in 1898, the Defendant has perpetrated innumerable Crimes against Peace, Crimes against Humanity and War Crimes against the People and State of Puerto Rico as recognized by the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles. 30. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Genocide against the Puerto Rican People as recognized by the 1948 Genocide Convention. 31. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Apartheid against the Puerto Rican People as recognized by the 1973 Apartheid Convention. 32. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of the Puerto Rican People as recognized by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human rights and the two aforementioned United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966. 33. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the 1965 Racism Convention against the Puerto Rican People. 34. The Defendant has denied and violated the international legal right of the Puerto Rican People to self-determination as recognized by the United Nations Charter, the two United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966, customary international law, and jus cogens. 35. The Defendant has illegally refused to apply the United Nations Decolonization Resolution of 1960 to Puerto Rico. Pursuant thereto, the Defendant has an absolute international legal obligation to decolonize Puerto Rico immediately and to transfer all powers it currently exercises there to the Puerto Rican People. 36. The Defendant has illegally refused to accord full-scope protections as Prisoners-of-War to captured Puerto Rican independence fighters in violation of the Third Geneva Convention of 1949 and Additional Protocol I thereto of 1977. The Defendant's treatment of captured Puerto Rican independence fighters as common criminals and terrorists constitutes a grave breach of the Geneva Accords and thus a serious war crime. An International Criminal Conspiracy and a Criminal Organization 37. In light of the foregoing international crimes, the Defendant constitutes an International Criminal Conspiracy and a Criminal Organization in accordance with the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles and the other sources of public international law specified above. The Federal Government of the United States of America is legally identical to the Nazi government of World War II Germany. Indeed, the Defendant's President, George Bush, has proclaimed a so-called New World Order that sounds and looks strikingly similar to the New Order proclaimed by Adolph Hitler over fifty years ago. Conclusion Like unto a pirate, the Defendant is hostis humani generis: The enemy of all humankind! For the good of all humanity, this Tribunal must condemn and repudiate the Federal Government of the United States of America and its grotesque vision of a New World Order that is constructed upon warfare, bloodshed, violence, criminality, genocide, racism, colonialism, apartheid, massive violations of fundamental human rights, and the denial of the international legal right of self-determination to the Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America and elsewhere around the world. Consequently, this Tribunal must find the Defendant guilty as charged on all of the counts specified above beyond a reasonable doubt. This Tribunal must also issue an Order that formally proscribes the Federal Government of the United States of America as an International Criminal Conspiracy and a Criminal Organization. This Tribunal must also issue a separate Order mandating the dissolution of the Federal Government of the United States of America as a legal and political entity. Finally, this Tribunal must declare that international legal sovereignty over the Territories principally inhabited by the Native American Peoples, the New Afrikan People, the Mexicano People, and the People of Puerto Rico resides, respectively, in the hands of these Peoples Themselves. The very lives, well-being, health, welfare, and safety of the Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America and elsewhere around the world depend upon the ultimate success of your deliberations. Respectfully submitted by, FRANCIS A. BOYLE PROFESSOR OF INTERNATIONAL LAW SPECIAL PROSECUTOR Dated: September 18, 1992 University of Illinois College of Law 504 East Pennsylvania Champaign, IL 61820 217-333-7954 See USA on Trial: The International Tribunal on Indigenous Peoples'and Oppressed Nations in the United States. The Book and Verdict are available from Editorial El Coqui, 1671 N. Claremont,Chicago Illinois 60647. Or you can try calling the Puerto Rican Cultural Center in Chicago at 312-342-4295. The Video can be obtained from Mission Creek Video, PO Box 411271 San Francisco CA 941141 (phone:415-695-0931). Francis A. Boyle * ================================================================ .NY Transfer News Collective * A Service of Blythe Systems . Since 1985 - Information for the Rest of Us . .339 Lafayette St., New York, NY 10012 http://www.blythe.org .List Archives: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/pipermail/nytr/ .Subscribe: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/mailman/listinfo/nytr ================================================================ From fboyle at illinois.edu Mon Jun 19 11:47:03 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2017 11:47:03 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide In-Reply-To: References: <200610092004.k99K4dXo038063@pencil.math.missouri.edu> Message-ID: After the long years of hard work and pain and suffering and tears and agony that we all engaged in trying to get rid of Chief Illiniwak and instituting the Native American Studies Program as some sort of compensation, Wise {sic!} and her Zionists destroyed it all in the bat of an eye. I cannot think of a Greater Academic Cosmic Injustice. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2017 12:28 PM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide Because of the pro bono work I did for AIM, I came to understand that American Indians see the US Government the same way the Jews see the Nazis. Wise "{sic!} is a Nazi! Ditto and pari passu for what she did to the Palestinians. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2017 9:51 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide And Wise {sic!} has successfully terrorized and intimidated every Palestinian/Arab/Muslim of Color on this Campus. Nothing has changed for American Indians and Palestinians/Arabs/Muslims of Color. It is an absolute disgrace but no surprise that the rotten and corrupt and racist AAUP eliminated the die-hard Anti-Palestinian University of Illiniwaks from their Censure List. That is precisely why I quit the AAUP years ago because of their die-hard bigotry and racism against Palestinians/Arabs/Muslims of Color. And now ditto for American Indians. Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2017 9:43 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: FW: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide My pro bono publico Clients here were the American Indian Movement. Chief Illiniwak is an Indicium of Genocide.And Wise {sic!} just Ethnically Cleansed Native Americans off of this Campus. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com [mailto:nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com] Sent: Monday, October 09, 2006 3:05 PM To: undisclosed-recipients Subject: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit [Here's one of our annual Columbus Day pieces. -NYTr] sent by Francis Boyle Columbus Day Promotes Genocide Indictment of the Federal Government of the U.S. for the commission of international crimes and petition for orders mandating its proscription and dissolution as an international criminal conspiracy and criminal organization By Francis A. Boyle, Professor of International Law 18 September 1992 Introduction All citizens of the World Community have both the right and the duty under public international law to sit in judgment over a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental norms of international criminal law committed by any member state of that same World Community. Such is the case for the International Tribunal of Indigenous Peoples and Oppressed Nationalities in the United States of America that convenes in San Francisco during the weekend of October 1-4, 1992. Its weighty but important task is to examine the long history of international criminal activity that has been perpetrated by the Federal Government of the United States of America against the Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America since it was founded in 1787. Toward that end, I have the honor to present to the Members of this Tribunal the following charges against the Federal Government of the United States of America under international criminal law. In light of the gravity, severity, and longstanding nature of these international crimes and also in light of the fact that the Federal Government of the United States of America appears to be irrevocably committed to continuing down this path of lawlessness and criminality against Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America and elsewhere, I hereby petition the Members of this Tribunal to issue an Order proscribing the Federal Government of the United States of America as an International Criminal Conspiracy and a Criminal Organization under the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles as well as the other sources of public international law specified below. For that reason, I also request that the Members of this Tribunal issue an Order dissolving the Federal Government of the United States of America as a legal and political entity. Finally, I ask this Tribunal to declare that international legal sovereignty over the Territories principally inhabited by the Native American Peoples, the New Afrikan People, the Mexicano People, and the People of Puerto Rico resides in the hands of these respective Peoples Themselves. In this regard, I should point out that the final Decision of this Tribunal will qualify as a judicial decision within the meaning of article 38(1)(d) of the Statute of the International Court of Justice and will therefore constitute a subsidiary means for the determination of rules of law for international law and practice. The Statute of the International Court of Justice is an integral part of the United Nations Charter under article 92 thereof. Thus, this Tribunal's Decision can be relied upon by some future International Criminal Court or Tribunal, as well as by any People or State of the World Community that desires to initiate criminal proceedings against named individuals for the commission of the following international crimes. The Decision of this Tribunal shall serve as adequate notice to the appropriate officials in the United States Federal Government that they bear personal criminal responsibility under international law and the domestic legal systems of all Peoples and States in the World Community for designing and implementing these illegal, criminal and reprehensible policies and practices against Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America. Hereinafter, the Federal Government of the United States of America will be referred to as the Defendant. BILL OF PARTICULARS AGAINST THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA The Native American Peoples 1. The Defendant has perpetrated innumerable Crimes Against eace, Crimes Against Humanity and War Crimes against Native American Peoples as recognized by the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles. 2. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Genocide against Native American Peoples as recognized by the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. 3. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Apartheid against Native American Peoples as recognized by the 1973 International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid. 4. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of Native American Peoples as recognized by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights. 5. The Defendant has perpetrated numerous and repeated violations of the 1965 International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination against Native American Peoples. 6. The Defendant has systematically violated 371 treaties it concluded with Native American Peoples in wanton disregard of the basic principle of public international law and practice dictating pacta sunt servanda. 7. The Defendant has denied and violated the international legal right of Native American Peoples to self-determination as recognized by the 1945 United Nations Charter, the 1966 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the 1966 International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, fundamental principles of customary international law, and jus cogens. 8. The Defendant has violated the seminal United Nations Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Territories of 1960 with respect to Native American Peoples and Territories. Pursuant thereto, the Defendant has an absolute international legal obligation to decolonize Native American Territories immediately and to transfer all powers it currently exercises there to the Native American Peoples. 9. The Defendant has illegally refused to accord full-scope protections as Prisoners-of-War to captured Native American independence fighters in violation of the Third Geneva Convention of 1949 and Additional Protocol I thereto of 1977. The Defendant's treatment of captured Native American independence fighters as common criminals and terrorists constitutes a grave breach of the Geneva Accords and thus a serious war crime. 10. The Defendant has deliberately and systematically permitted, aided and abetted, solicited and conspired to commit the dumping, transportation, and location of nuclear, toxic, medical and otherwise hazardous waste materials on Native American Territories across North America and has thus created a clear and present danger to the lives, health, safety, and physical and mental well-being of Native American Peoples in gross violation of article 3 and article 2(c) of the 1948 Genocide Convention, inter alia: Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; ... The New Afrikan People 11. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Slavery upon the New Afrikan People as recognized in part by the 1926 Slavery Convention and the 1956 Supplementary Convention on the Abolition of Slavery, the Slave Trade, and Institutions and Practices Similar to Slavery. The Defendant has illegally refused to pay reparations to the New Afrikan People for the commission of the International Crime of Slavery against Them in violation of basic norms of customary international law requiring such reparations to be paid. 12. The Defendant has perpetrated innumerable Crimes Against Humanity against the New Afrikan People as recognized by the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles. 13. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of genocide against the New Afrikan People as recognized by the 1948 Genocide Convention. 14. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Apartheid against the New Afrikan People as recognized by the 1973 Apartheid Convention. 15. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of the New Afrikan People as recognized by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the two aforementioned United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966. 16. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the 1965 Racism Convention against the New Afrikan People. The Defendant is the paradigmatic example of an irremediably racist state in international relations today. 17. The Defendant has denied and violated the international legal right of the New Afrikan People to self-determination as recognized by the United Nations Charter, the two United Nations Human rights Covenants of 1966, customary international law, and jus cogens. 18. The Defendant has illegally refused to apply the United Nations Decolonization Resolution of 1960 to the New Afrikan People and to the Territories that they principally inhabit. Pursuant thereto, the Defendant has an absolute international legal obligation to decolonize New Afrikan Territories immediately and to transfer all powers it currently exercises there to the New Afrikan People. 19. The Defendant has illegally refused to accord full-scope protections as Prisoners-of-War to captured New Afrikan independence fighters in violation of the Third Geneva Convention of 1949 and Additional Protocol I thereto of 1977. The Defendant's treatment of captured New Afrikan independence fighters as common criminals and terrorists constitutes a grave breach of the Geneva Accords and thus a serious war crime. The Mexicano People 20. In 1821, Mexico obtained its independence from colonial Spain as a sovereign Mestizo State, extending from Yucatan and Chiapas in the south, to the northern territories of California and New Mexico, which areas the Defendant today calls the states of Texas, California, Arizona, Nevada, Utah, New Mexico, and Colorado. Nevertheless, in 1836 so-called settlors under the sponsorship of the Defendant began the division of the Mexicano People and State by causing the division of the Mexican state of Coahuila-Texas into the Mexican state of Coahuila and the so-called republic of Texas. 21. In 1846, the Defendant perpetrated an unjust, illegal and unjustifiable war upon the remainder of the sovereign People and State of Mexico that violated every known principle of public international law in existence at that time, including, but not limited to, the Christian Doctrine of just war, which was the then reigning standard of customary international law. As a result thereof, the Defendant illegally annexed close to 51% of the territories of the sovereign State of Mexico by means of forcing it to conclude the 1848 Treaty of Guadalupe-Hidalgo under military duress. For these reasons, this Treaty was and still is null and void ab initio as a matter of public international law. The Defendant acquired more Mexican territory through the Gadsen Treaty (Purchase) of 1854. 22. Since these 1848 and 1854 Treaties, the Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Genocide against the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories, as recognized by the 1948 Genocide Convention. 23. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Apartheid against the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories, as recognized by the 1973 Apartheid Convention. 24. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories, as recognized by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the two aforementioned United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966. 25. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the 1965 Racism Convention against the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories. 26. The Defendant has denied and violated the international legal right of the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories to self-determination, as recognized by the United Nations Charter, the two United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966, customary international law, and jus cogens. 27. Since the militarily-imposed division of the Mexican State, the Defendant and its agents have militarily occupied other portions of the Mexican State, have sought to influence the outcome of the Mexican Revolution of 1910, have practiced a consistent pattern of intervention into Mexico's internal affairs, all of which have resulted in the arresting distortion and deformation of the Mexican social and economic order. In this regard, Defendant's so-called North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) constitutes nothing more than an attempt to impose its hegemonial imperialism, economic colonialism, and human exploitation upon the People and State of Mexico. 28. The Defendant has illegally refused to apply the United Nations Decolonization Resolution of 1960 to the Mexicano People and to these occupied territories that they inhabit. Pursuant thereto, the Defendant has an absolute international legal obligation to decolonize both the Mexican occupied territories and the Republic of Mexico immediately, and to transfer all powers it currently exercises there to the Mexicano People. The People and State of Puerto Rico 29. Since its illegal invasion of Puerto Rico in 1898, the Defendant has perpetrated innumerable Crimes against Peace, Crimes against Humanity and War Crimes against the People and State of Puerto Rico as recognized by the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles. 30. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Genocide against the Puerto Rican People as recognized by the 1948 Genocide Convention. 31. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Apartheid against the Puerto Rican People as recognized by the 1973 Apartheid Convention. 32. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of the Puerto Rican People as recognized by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human rights and the two aforementioned United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966. 33. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the 1965 Racism Convention against the Puerto Rican People. 34. The Defendant has denied and violated the international legal right of the Puerto Rican People to self-determination as recognized by the United Nations Charter, the two United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966, customary international law, and jus cogens. 35. The Defendant has illegally refused to apply the United Nations Decolonization Resolution of 1960 to Puerto Rico. Pursuant thereto, the Defendant has an absolute international legal obligation to decolonize Puerto Rico immediately and to transfer all powers it currently exercises there to the Puerto Rican People. 36. The Defendant has illegally refused to accord full-scope protections as Prisoners-of-War to captured Puerto Rican independence fighters in violation of the Third Geneva Convention of 1949 and Additional Protocol I thereto of 1977. The Defendant's treatment of captured Puerto Rican independence fighters as common criminals and terrorists constitutes a grave breach of the Geneva Accords and thus a serious war crime. An International Criminal Conspiracy and a Criminal Organization 37. In light of the foregoing international crimes, the Defendant constitutes an International Criminal Conspiracy and a Criminal Organization in accordance with the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles and the other sources of public international law specified above. The Federal Government of the United States of America is legally identical to the Nazi government of World War II Germany. Indeed, the Defendant's President, George Bush, has proclaimed a so-called New World Order that sounds and looks strikingly similar to the New Order proclaimed by Adolph Hitler over fifty years ago. Conclusion Like unto a pirate, the Defendant is hostis humani generis: The enemy of all humankind! For the good of all humanity, this Tribunal must condemn and repudiate the Federal Government of the United States of America and its grotesque vision of a New World Order that is constructed upon warfare, bloodshed, violence, criminality, genocide, racism, colonialism, apartheid, massive violations of fundamental human rights, and the denial of the international legal right of self-determination to the Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America and elsewhere around the world. Consequently, this Tribunal must find the Defendant guilty as charged on all of the counts specified above beyond a reasonable doubt. This Tribunal must also issue an Order that formally proscribes the Federal Government of the United States of America as an International Criminal Conspiracy and a Criminal Organization. This Tribunal must also issue a separate Order mandating the dissolution of the Federal Government of the United States of America as a legal and political entity. Finally, this Tribunal must declare that international legal sovereignty over the Territories principally inhabited by the Native American Peoples, the New Afrikan People, the Mexicano People, and the People of Puerto Rico resides, respectively, in the hands of these Peoples Themselves. The very lives, well-being, health, welfare, and safety of the Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America and elsewhere around the world depend upon the ultimate success of your deliberations. Respectfully submitted by, FRANCIS A. BOYLE PROFESSOR OF INTERNATIONAL LAW SPECIAL PROSECUTOR Dated: September 18, 1992 University of Illinois College of Law 504 East Pennsylvania Champaign, IL 61820 217-333-7954 See USA on Trial: The International Tribunal on Indigenous Peoples'and Oppressed Nations in the United States. The Book and Verdict are available from Editorial El Coqui, 1671 N. Claremont,Chicago Illinois 60647. Or you can try calling the Puerto Rican Cultural Center in Chicago at 312-342-4295. The Video can be obtained from Mission Creek Video, PO Box 411271 San Francisco CA 941141 (phone:415-695-0931). Francis A. Boyle * ================================================================ .NY Transfer News Collective * A Service of Blythe Systems . Since 1985 - Information for the Rest of Us . .339 Lafayette St., New York, NY 10012 http://www.blythe.org .List Archives: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/pipermail/nytr/ .Subscribe: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/mailman/listinfo/nytr ================================================================ From karenaram at hotmail.com Mon Jun 19 11:54:32 2017 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2017 11:54:32 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] interview from The Real News, of Paul Jay regarding the need for urgency on war and climate crisis Message-ID: http://therealnews.com/t2/story:19354:The-Need-for-a-Sense-of-Urgency-About-War-and-the-Climate-Crisis%3A-Katie-Halper-Interviews-Paul-Jay -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Mon Jun 19 11:57:12 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2017 11:57:12 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide In-Reply-To: References: <200610092004.k99K4dXo038063@pencil.math.missouri.edu> Message-ID: And as for the Zionists on this Campus and in this Community, I hold you accountable for destroying our Native American Studies Program. Francis A. Boyle Professor of Law Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 6:47 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide After the long years of hard work and pain and suffering and tears and agony that we all engaged in trying to get rid of Chief Illiniwak and instituting the Native American Studies Program as some sort of compensation, Wise {sic!} and her Zionists destroyed it all in the bat of an eye. I cannot think of a Greater Academic Cosmic Injustice. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2017 12:28 PM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide Because of the pro bono work I did for AIM, I came to understand that American Indians see the US Government the same way the Jews see the Nazis. Wise "{sic!} is a Nazi! Ditto and pari passu for what she did to the Palestinians. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2017 9:51 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide And Wise {sic!} has successfully terrorized and intimidated every Palestinian/Arab/Muslim of Color on this Campus. Nothing has changed for American Indians and Palestinians/Arabs/Muslims of Color. It is an absolute disgrace but no surprise that the rotten and corrupt and racist AAUP eliminated the die-hard Anti-Palestinian University of Illiniwaks from their Censure List. That is precisely why I quit the AAUP years ago because of their die-hard bigotry and racism against Palestinians/Arabs/Muslims of Color. And now ditto for American Indians. Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2017 9:43 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: FW: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide My pro bono publico Clients here were the American Indian Movement. Chief Illiniwak is an Indicium of Genocide.And Wise {sic!} just Ethnically Cleansed Native Americans off of this Campus. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com [mailto:nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com] Sent: Monday, October 09, 2006 3:05 PM To: undisclosed-recipients Subject: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit [Here's one of our annual Columbus Day pieces. -NYTr] sent by Francis Boyle Columbus Day Promotes Genocide Indictment of the Federal Government of the U.S. for the commission of international crimes and petition for orders mandating its proscription and dissolution as an international criminal conspiracy and criminal organization By Francis A. Boyle, Professor of International Law 18 September 1992 Introduction All citizens of the World Community have both the right and the duty under public international law to sit in judgment over a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental norms of international criminal law committed by any member state of that same World Community. Such is the case for the International Tribunal of Indigenous Peoples and Oppressed Nationalities in the United States of America that convenes in San Francisco during the weekend of October 1-4, 1992. Its weighty but important task is to examine the long history of international criminal activity that has been perpetrated by the Federal Government of the United States of America against the Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America since it was founded in 1787. Toward that end, I have the honor to present to the Members of this Tribunal the following charges against the Federal Government of the United States of America under international criminal law. In light of the gravity, severity, and longstanding nature of these international crimes and also in light of the fact that the Federal Government of the United States of America appears to be irrevocably committed to continuing down this path of lawlessness and criminality against Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America and elsewhere, I hereby petition the Members of this Tribunal to issue an Order proscribing the Federal Government of the United States of America as an International Criminal Conspiracy and a Criminal Organization under the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles as well as the other sources of public international law specified below. For that reason, I also request that the Members of this Tribunal issue an Order dissolving the Federal Government of the United States of America as a legal and political entity. Finally, I ask this Tribunal to declare that international legal sovereignty over the Territories principally inhabited by the Native American Peoples, the New Afrikan People, the Mexicano People, and the People of Puerto Rico resides in the hands of these respective Peoples Themselves. In this regard, I should point out that the final Decision of this Tribunal will qualify as a judicial decision within the meaning of article 38(1)(d) of the Statute of the International Court of Justice and will therefore constitute a subsidiary means for the determination of rules of law for international law and practice. The Statute of the International Court of Justice is an integral part of the United Nations Charter under article 92 thereof. Thus, this Tribunal's Decision can be relied upon by some future International Criminal Court or Tribunal, as well as by any People or State of the World Community that desires to initiate criminal proceedings against named individuals for the commission of the following international crimes. The Decision of this Tribunal shall serve as adequate notice to the appropriate officials in the United States Federal Government that they bear personal criminal responsibility under international law and the domestic legal systems of all Peoples and States in the World Community for designing and implementing these illegal, criminal and reprehensible policies and practices against Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America. Hereinafter, the Federal Government of the United States of America will be referred to as the Defendant. BILL OF PARTICULARS AGAINST THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA The Native American Peoples 1. The Defendant has perpetrated innumerable Crimes Against eace, Crimes Against Humanity and War Crimes against Native American Peoples as recognized by the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles. 2. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Genocide against Native American Peoples as recognized by the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. 3. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Apartheid against Native American Peoples as recognized by the 1973 International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid. 4. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of Native American Peoples as recognized by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights. 5. The Defendant has perpetrated numerous and repeated violations of the 1965 International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination against Native American Peoples. 6. The Defendant has systematically violated 371 treaties it concluded with Native American Peoples in wanton disregard of the basic principle of public international law and practice dictating pacta sunt servanda. 7. The Defendant has denied and violated the international legal right of Native American Peoples to self-determination as recognized by the 1945 United Nations Charter, the 1966 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the 1966 International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, fundamental principles of customary international law, and jus cogens. 8. The Defendant has violated the seminal United Nations Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Territories of 1960 with respect to Native American Peoples and Territories. Pursuant thereto, the Defendant has an absolute international legal obligation to decolonize Native American Territories immediately and to transfer all powers it currently exercises there to the Native American Peoples. 9. The Defendant has illegally refused to accord full-scope protections as Prisoners-of-War to captured Native American independence fighters in violation of the Third Geneva Convention of 1949 and Additional Protocol I thereto of 1977. The Defendant's treatment of captured Native American independence fighters as common criminals and terrorists constitutes a grave breach of the Geneva Accords and thus a serious war crime. 10. The Defendant has deliberately and systematically permitted, aided and abetted, solicited and conspired to commit the dumping, transportation, and location of nuclear, toxic, medical and otherwise hazardous waste materials on Native American Territories across North America and has thus created a clear and present danger to the lives, health, safety, and physical and mental well-being of Native American Peoples in gross violation of article 3 and article 2(c) of the 1948 Genocide Convention, inter alia: Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; ... The New Afrikan People 11. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Slavery upon the New Afrikan People as recognized in part by the 1926 Slavery Convention and the 1956 Supplementary Convention on the Abolition of Slavery, the Slave Trade, and Institutions and Practices Similar to Slavery. The Defendant has illegally refused to pay reparations to the New Afrikan People for the commission of the International Crime of Slavery against Them in violation of basic norms of customary international law requiring such reparations to be paid. 12. The Defendant has perpetrated innumerable Crimes Against Humanity against the New Afrikan People as recognized by the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles. 13. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of genocide against the New Afrikan People as recognized by the 1948 Genocide Convention. 14. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Apartheid against the New Afrikan People as recognized by the 1973 Apartheid Convention. 15. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of the New Afrikan People as recognized by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the two aforementioned United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966. 16. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the 1965 Racism Convention against the New Afrikan People. The Defendant is the paradigmatic example of an irremediably racist state in international relations today. 17. The Defendant has denied and violated the international legal right of the New Afrikan People to self-determination as recognized by the United Nations Charter, the two United Nations Human rights Covenants of 1966, customary international law, and jus cogens. 18. The Defendant has illegally refused to apply the United Nations Decolonization Resolution of 1960 to the New Afrikan People and to the Territories that they principally inhabit. Pursuant thereto, the Defendant has an absolute international legal obligation to decolonize New Afrikan Territories immediately and to transfer all powers it currently exercises there to the New Afrikan People. 19. The Defendant has illegally refused to accord full-scope protections as Prisoners-of-War to captured New Afrikan independence fighters in violation of the Third Geneva Convention of 1949 and Additional Protocol I thereto of 1977. The Defendant's treatment of captured New Afrikan independence fighters as common criminals and terrorists constitutes a grave breach of the Geneva Accords and thus a serious war crime. The Mexicano People 20. In 1821, Mexico obtained its independence from colonial Spain as a sovereign Mestizo State, extending from Yucatan and Chiapas in the south, to the northern territories of California and New Mexico, which areas the Defendant today calls the states of Texas, California, Arizona, Nevada, Utah, New Mexico, and Colorado. Nevertheless, in 1836 so-called settlors under the sponsorship of the Defendant began the division of the Mexicano People and State by causing the division of the Mexican state of Coahuila-Texas into the Mexican state of Coahuila and the so-called republic of Texas. 21. In 1846, the Defendant perpetrated an unjust, illegal and unjustifiable war upon the remainder of the sovereign People and State of Mexico that violated every known principle of public international law in existence at that time, including, but not limited to, the Christian Doctrine of just war, which was the then reigning standard of customary international law. As a result thereof, the Defendant illegally annexed close to 51% of the territories of the sovereign State of Mexico by means of forcing it to conclude the 1848 Treaty of Guadalupe-Hidalgo under military duress. For these reasons, this Treaty was and still is null and void ab initio as a matter of public international law. The Defendant acquired more Mexican territory through the Gadsen Treaty (Purchase) of 1854. 22. Since these 1848 and 1854 Treaties, the Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Genocide against the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories, as recognized by the 1948 Genocide Convention. 23. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Apartheid against the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories, as recognized by the 1973 Apartheid Convention. 24. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories, as recognized by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the two aforementioned United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966. 25. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the 1965 Racism Convention against the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories. 26. The Defendant has denied and violated the international legal right of the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories to self-determination, as recognized by the United Nations Charter, the two United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966, customary international law, and jus cogens. 27. Since the militarily-imposed division of the Mexican State, the Defendant and its agents have militarily occupied other portions of the Mexican State, have sought to influence the outcome of the Mexican Revolution of 1910, have practiced a consistent pattern of intervention into Mexico's internal affairs, all of which have resulted in the arresting distortion and deformation of the Mexican social and economic order. In this regard, Defendant's so-called North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) constitutes nothing more than an attempt to impose its hegemonial imperialism, economic colonialism, and human exploitation upon the People and State of Mexico. 28. The Defendant has illegally refused to apply the United Nations Decolonization Resolution of 1960 to the Mexicano People and to these occupied territories that they inhabit. Pursuant thereto, the Defendant has an absolute international legal obligation to decolonize both the Mexican occupied territories and the Republic of Mexico immediately, and to transfer all powers it currently exercises there to the Mexicano People. The People and State of Puerto Rico 29. Since its illegal invasion of Puerto Rico in 1898, the Defendant has perpetrated innumerable Crimes against Peace, Crimes against Humanity and War Crimes against the People and State of Puerto Rico as recognized by the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles. 30. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Genocide against the Puerto Rican People as recognized by the 1948 Genocide Convention. 31. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Apartheid against the Puerto Rican People as recognized by the 1973 Apartheid Convention. 32. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of the Puerto Rican People as recognized by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human rights and the two aforementioned United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966. 33. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the 1965 Racism Convention against the Puerto Rican People. 34. The Defendant has denied and violated the international legal right of the Puerto Rican People to self-determination as recognized by the United Nations Charter, the two United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966, customary international law, and jus cogens. 35. The Defendant has illegally refused to apply the United Nations Decolonization Resolution of 1960 to Puerto Rico. Pursuant thereto, the Defendant has an absolute international legal obligation to decolonize Puerto Rico immediately and to transfer all powers it currently exercises there to the Puerto Rican People. 36. The Defendant has illegally refused to accord full-scope protections as Prisoners-of-War to captured Puerto Rican independence fighters in violation of the Third Geneva Convention of 1949 and Additional Protocol I thereto of 1977. The Defendant's treatment of captured Puerto Rican independence fighters as common criminals and terrorists constitutes a grave breach of the Geneva Accords and thus a serious war crime. An International Criminal Conspiracy and a Criminal Organization 37. In light of the foregoing international crimes, the Defendant constitutes an International Criminal Conspiracy and a Criminal Organization in accordance with the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles and the other sources of public international law specified above. The Federal Government of the United States of America is legally identical to the Nazi government of World War II Germany. Indeed, the Defendant's President, George Bush, has proclaimed a so-called New World Order that sounds and looks strikingly similar to the New Order proclaimed by Adolph Hitler over fifty years ago. Conclusion Like unto a pirate, the Defendant is hostis humani generis: The enemy of all humankind! For the good of all humanity, this Tribunal must condemn and repudiate the Federal Government of the United States of America and its grotesque vision of a New World Order that is constructed upon warfare, bloodshed, violence, criminality, genocide, racism, colonialism, apartheid, massive violations of fundamental human rights, and the denial of the international legal right of self-determination to the Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America and elsewhere around the world. Consequently, this Tribunal must find the Defendant guilty as charged on all of the counts specified above beyond a reasonable doubt. This Tribunal must also issue an Order that formally proscribes the Federal Government of the United States of America as an International Criminal Conspiracy and a Criminal Organization. This Tribunal must also issue a separate Order mandating the dissolution of the Federal Government of the United States of America as a legal and political entity. Finally, this Tribunal must declare that international legal sovereignty over the Territories principally inhabited by the Native American Peoples, the New Afrikan People, the Mexicano People, and the People of Puerto Rico resides, respectively, in the hands of these Peoples Themselves. The very lives, well-being, health, welfare, and safety of the Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America and elsewhere around the world depend upon the ultimate success of your deliberations. Respectfully submitted by, FRANCIS A. BOYLE PROFESSOR OF INTERNATIONAL LAW SPECIAL PROSECUTOR Dated: September 18, 1992 University of Illinois College of Law 504 East Pennsylvania Champaign, IL 61820 217-333-7954 See USA on Trial: The International Tribunal on Indigenous Peoples'and Oppressed Nations in the United States. The Book and Verdict are available from Editorial El Coqui, 1671 N. Claremont,Chicago Illinois 60647. Or you can try calling the Puerto Rican Cultural Center in Chicago at 312-342-4295. The Video can be obtained from Mission Creek Video, PO Box 411271 San Francisco CA 941141 (phone:415-695-0931). Francis A. Boyle * ================================================================ .NY Transfer News Collective * A Service of Blythe Systems . Since 1985 - Information for the Rest of Us . .339 Lafayette St., New York, NY 10012 http://www.blythe.org .List Archives: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/pipermail/nytr/ .Subscribe: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/mailman/listinfo/nytr ================================================================ From fboyle at illinois.edu Mon Jun 19 11:57:12 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2017 11:57:12 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide In-Reply-To: References: <200610092004.k99K4dXo038063@pencil.math.missouri.edu> Message-ID: And as for the Zionists on this Campus and in this Community, I hold you accountable for destroying our Native American Studies Program. Francis A. Boyle Professor of Law Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 6:47 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide After the long years of hard work and pain and suffering and tears and agony that we all engaged in trying to get rid of Chief Illiniwak and instituting the Native American Studies Program as some sort of compensation, Wise {sic!} and her Zionists destroyed it all in the bat of an eye. I cannot think of a Greater Academic Cosmic Injustice. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2017 12:28 PM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide Because of the pro bono work I did for AIM, I came to understand that American Indians see the US Government the same way the Jews see the Nazis. Wise "{sic!} is a Nazi! Ditto and pari passu for what she did to the Palestinians. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2017 9:51 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide And Wise {sic!} has successfully terrorized and intimidated every Palestinian/Arab/Muslim of Color on this Campus. Nothing has changed for American Indians and Palestinians/Arabs/Muslims of Color. It is an absolute disgrace but no surprise that the rotten and corrupt and racist AAUP eliminated the die-hard Anti-Palestinian University of Illiniwaks from their Censure List. That is precisely why I quit the AAUP years ago because of their die-hard bigotry and racism against Palestinians/Arabs/Muslims of Color. And now ditto for American Indians. Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2017 9:43 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: FW: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide My pro bono publico Clients here were the American Indian Movement. Chief Illiniwak is an Indicium of Genocide.And Wise {sic!} just Ethnically Cleansed Native Americans off of this Campus. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com [mailto:nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com] Sent: Monday, October 09, 2006 3:05 PM To: undisclosed-recipients Subject: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit [Here's one of our annual Columbus Day pieces. -NYTr] sent by Francis Boyle Columbus Day Promotes Genocide Indictment of the Federal Government of the U.S. for the commission of international crimes and petition for orders mandating its proscription and dissolution as an international criminal conspiracy and criminal organization By Francis A. Boyle, Professor of International Law 18 September 1992 Introduction All citizens of the World Community have both the right and the duty under public international law to sit in judgment over a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental norms of international criminal law committed by any member state of that same World Community. Such is the case for the International Tribunal of Indigenous Peoples and Oppressed Nationalities in the United States of America that convenes in San Francisco during the weekend of October 1-4, 1992. Its weighty but important task is to examine the long history of international criminal activity that has been perpetrated by the Federal Government of the United States of America against the Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America since it was founded in 1787. Toward that end, I have the honor to present to the Members of this Tribunal the following charges against the Federal Government of the United States of America under international criminal law. In light of the gravity, severity, and longstanding nature of these international crimes and also in light of the fact that the Federal Government of the United States of America appears to be irrevocably committed to continuing down this path of lawlessness and criminality against Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America and elsewhere, I hereby petition the Members of this Tribunal to issue an Order proscribing the Federal Government of the United States of America as an International Criminal Conspiracy and a Criminal Organization under the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles as well as the other sources of public international law specified below. For that reason, I also request that the Members of this Tribunal issue an Order dissolving the Federal Government of the United States of America as a legal and political entity. Finally, I ask this Tribunal to declare that international legal sovereignty over the Territories principally inhabited by the Native American Peoples, the New Afrikan People, the Mexicano People, and the People of Puerto Rico resides in the hands of these respective Peoples Themselves. In this regard, I should point out that the final Decision of this Tribunal will qualify as a judicial decision within the meaning of article 38(1)(d) of the Statute of the International Court of Justice and will therefore constitute a subsidiary means for the determination of rules of law for international law and practice. The Statute of the International Court of Justice is an integral part of the United Nations Charter under article 92 thereof. Thus, this Tribunal's Decision can be relied upon by some future International Criminal Court or Tribunal, as well as by any People or State of the World Community that desires to initiate criminal proceedings against named individuals for the commission of the following international crimes. The Decision of this Tribunal shall serve as adequate notice to the appropriate officials in the United States Federal Government that they bear personal criminal responsibility under international law and the domestic legal systems of all Peoples and States in the World Community for designing and implementing these illegal, criminal and reprehensible policies and practices against Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America. Hereinafter, the Federal Government of the United States of America will be referred to as the Defendant. BILL OF PARTICULARS AGAINST THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA The Native American Peoples 1. The Defendant has perpetrated innumerable Crimes Against eace, Crimes Against Humanity and War Crimes against Native American Peoples as recognized by the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles. 2. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Genocide against Native American Peoples as recognized by the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. 3. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Apartheid against Native American Peoples as recognized by the 1973 International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid. 4. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of Native American Peoples as recognized by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights. 5. The Defendant has perpetrated numerous and repeated violations of the 1965 International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination against Native American Peoples. 6. The Defendant has systematically violated 371 treaties it concluded with Native American Peoples in wanton disregard of the basic principle of public international law and practice dictating pacta sunt servanda. 7. The Defendant has denied and violated the international legal right of Native American Peoples to self-determination as recognized by the 1945 United Nations Charter, the 1966 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the 1966 International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, fundamental principles of customary international law, and jus cogens. 8. The Defendant has violated the seminal United Nations Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Territories of 1960 with respect to Native American Peoples and Territories. Pursuant thereto, the Defendant has an absolute international legal obligation to decolonize Native American Territories immediately and to transfer all powers it currently exercises there to the Native American Peoples. 9. The Defendant has illegally refused to accord full-scope protections as Prisoners-of-War to captured Native American independence fighters in violation of the Third Geneva Convention of 1949 and Additional Protocol I thereto of 1977. The Defendant's treatment of captured Native American independence fighters as common criminals and terrorists constitutes a grave breach of the Geneva Accords and thus a serious war crime. 10. The Defendant has deliberately and systematically permitted, aided and abetted, solicited and conspired to commit the dumping, transportation, and location of nuclear, toxic, medical and otherwise hazardous waste materials on Native American Territories across North America and has thus created a clear and present danger to the lives, health, safety, and physical and mental well-being of Native American Peoples in gross violation of article 3 and article 2(c) of the 1948 Genocide Convention, inter alia: Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; ... The New Afrikan People 11. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Slavery upon the New Afrikan People as recognized in part by the 1926 Slavery Convention and the 1956 Supplementary Convention on the Abolition of Slavery, the Slave Trade, and Institutions and Practices Similar to Slavery. The Defendant has illegally refused to pay reparations to the New Afrikan People for the commission of the International Crime of Slavery against Them in violation of basic norms of customary international law requiring such reparations to be paid. 12. The Defendant has perpetrated innumerable Crimes Against Humanity against the New Afrikan People as recognized by the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles. 13. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of genocide against the New Afrikan People as recognized by the 1948 Genocide Convention. 14. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Apartheid against the New Afrikan People as recognized by the 1973 Apartheid Convention. 15. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of the New Afrikan People as recognized by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the two aforementioned United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966. 16. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the 1965 Racism Convention against the New Afrikan People. The Defendant is the paradigmatic example of an irremediably racist state in international relations today. 17. The Defendant has denied and violated the international legal right of the New Afrikan People to self-determination as recognized by the United Nations Charter, the two United Nations Human rights Covenants of 1966, customary international law, and jus cogens. 18. The Defendant has illegally refused to apply the United Nations Decolonization Resolution of 1960 to the New Afrikan People and to the Territories that they principally inhabit. Pursuant thereto, the Defendant has an absolute international legal obligation to decolonize New Afrikan Territories immediately and to transfer all powers it currently exercises there to the New Afrikan People. 19. The Defendant has illegally refused to accord full-scope protections as Prisoners-of-War to captured New Afrikan independence fighters in violation of the Third Geneva Convention of 1949 and Additional Protocol I thereto of 1977. The Defendant's treatment of captured New Afrikan independence fighters as common criminals and terrorists constitutes a grave breach of the Geneva Accords and thus a serious war crime. The Mexicano People 20. In 1821, Mexico obtained its independence from colonial Spain as a sovereign Mestizo State, extending from Yucatan and Chiapas in the south, to the northern territories of California and New Mexico, which areas the Defendant today calls the states of Texas, California, Arizona, Nevada, Utah, New Mexico, and Colorado. Nevertheless, in 1836 so-called settlors under the sponsorship of the Defendant began the division of the Mexicano People and State by causing the division of the Mexican state of Coahuila-Texas into the Mexican state of Coahuila and the so-called republic of Texas. 21. In 1846, the Defendant perpetrated an unjust, illegal and unjustifiable war upon the remainder of the sovereign People and State of Mexico that violated every known principle of public international law in existence at that time, including, but not limited to, the Christian Doctrine of just war, which was the then reigning standard of customary international law. As a result thereof, the Defendant illegally annexed close to 51% of the territories of the sovereign State of Mexico by means of forcing it to conclude the 1848 Treaty of Guadalupe-Hidalgo under military duress. For these reasons, this Treaty was and still is null and void ab initio as a matter of public international law. The Defendant acquired more Mexican territory through the Gadsen Treaty (Purchase) of 1854. 22. Since these 1848 and 1854 Treaties, the Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Genocide against the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories, as recognized by the 1948 Genocide Convention. 23. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Apartheid against the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories, as recognized by the 1973 Apartheid Convention. 24. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories, as recognized by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the two aforementioned United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966. 25. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the 1965 Racism Convention against the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories. 26. The Defendant has denied and violated the international legal right of the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories to self-determination, as recognized by the United Nations Charter, the two United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966, customary international law, and jus cogens. 27. Since the militarily-imposed division of the Mexican State, the Defendant and its agents have militarily occupied other portions of the Mexican State, have sought to influence the outcome of the Mexican Revolution of 1910, have practiced a consistent pattern of intervention into Mexico's internal affairs, all of which have resulted in the arresting distortion and deformation of the Mexican social and economic order. In this regard, Defendant's so-called North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) constitutes nothing more than an attempt to impose its hegemonial imperialism, economic colonialism, and human exploitation upon the People and State of Mexico. 28. The Defendant has illegally refused to apply the United Nations Decolonization Resolution of 1960 to the Mexicano People and to these occupied territories that they inhabit. Pursuant thereto, the Defendant has an absolute international legal obligation to decolonize both the Mexican occupied territories and the Republic of Mexico immediately, and to transfer all powers it currently exercises there to the Mexicano People. The People and State of Puerto Rico 29. Since its illegal invasion of Puerto Rico in 1898, the Defendant has perpetrated innumerable Crimes against Peace, Crimes against Humanity and War Crimes against the People and State of Puerto Rico as recognized by the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles. 30. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Genocide against the Puerto Rican People as recognized by the 1948 Genocide Convention. 31. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Apartheid against the Puerto Rican People as recognized by the 1973 Apartheid Convention. 32. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of the Puerto Rican People as recognized by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human rights and the two aforementioned United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966. 33. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the 1965 Racism Convention against the Puerto Rican People. 34. The Defendant has denied and violated the international legal right of the Puerto Rican People to self-determination as recognized by the United Nations Charter, the two United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966, customary international law, and jus cogens. 35. The Defendant has illegally refused to apply the United Nations Decolonization Resolution of 1960 to Puerto Rico. Pursuant thereto, the Defendant has an absolute international legal obligation to decolonize Puerto Rico immediately and to transfer all powers it currently exercises there to the Puerto Rican People. 36. The Defendant has illegally refused to accord full-scope protections as Prisoners-of-War to captured Puerto Rican independence fighters in violation of the Third Geneva Convention of 1949 and Additional Protocol I thereto of 1977. The Defendant's treatment of captured Puerto Rican independence fighters as common criminals and terrorists constitutes a grave breach of the Geneva Accords and thus a serious war crime. An International Criminal Conspiracy and a Criminal Organization 37. In light of the foregoing international crimes, the Defendant constitutes an International Criminal Conspiracy and a Criminal Organization in accordance with the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles and the other sources of public international law specified above. The Federal Government of the United States of America is legally identical to the Nazi government of World War II Germany. Indeed, the Defendant's President, George Bush, has proclaimed a so-called New World Order that sounds and looks strikingly similar to the New Order proclaimed by Adolph Hitler over fifty years ago. Conclusion Like unto a pirate, the Defendant is hostis humani generis: The enemy of all humankind! For the good of all humanity, this Tribunal must condemn and repudiate the Federal Government of the United States of America and its grotesque vision of a New World Order that is constructed upon warfare, bloodshed, violence, criminality, genocide, racism, colonialism, apartheid, massive violations of fundamental human rights, and the denial of the international legal right of self-determination to the Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America and elsewhere around the world. Consequently, this Tribunal must find the Defendant guilty as charged on all of the counts specified above beyond a reasonable doubt. This Tribunal must also issue an Order that formally proscribes the Federal Government of the United States of America as an International Criminal Conspiracy and a Criminal Organization. This Tribunal must also issue a separate Order mandating the dissolution of the Federal Government of the United States of America as a legal and political entity. Finally, this Tribunal must declare that international legal sovereignty over the Territories principally inhabited by the Native American Peoples, the New Afrikan People, the Mexicano People, and the People of Puerto Rico resides, respectively, in the hands of these Peoples Themselves. The very lives, well-being, health, welfare, and safety of the Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America and elsewhere around the world depend upon the ultimate success of your deliberations. Respectfully submitted by, FRANCIS A. BOYLE PROFESSOR OF INTERNATIONAL LAW SPECIAL PROSECUTOR Dated: September 18, 1992 University of Illinois College of Law 504 East Pennsylvania Champaign, IL 61820 217-333-7954 See USA on Trial: The International Tribunal on Indigenous Peoples'and Oppressed Nations in the United States. The Book and Verdict are available from Editorial El Coqui, 1671 N. Claremont,Chicago Illinois 60647. Or you can try calling the Puerto Rican Cultural Center in Chicago at 312-342-4295. The Video can be obtained from Mission Creek Video, PO Box 411271 San Francisco CA 941141 (phone:415-695-0931). Francis A. Boyle * ================================================================ .NY Transfer News Collective * A Service of Blythe Systems . Since 1985 - Information for the Rest of Us . .339 Lafayette St., New York, NY 10012 http://www.blythe.org .List Archives: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/pipermail/nytr/ .Subscribe: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/mailman/listinfo/nytr ================================================================ From fboyle at illinois.edu Mon Jun 19 15:04:24 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2017 15:04:24 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide In-Reply-To: References: <200610092004.k99K4dXo038063@pencil.math.missouri.edu> Message-ID: The Local Zionists are mean, nasty, vicious, ruthless and unprincipled People who will stop at nothing to get their way. Hence they destroyed our Native American Studies Program and destroyed Salaita's Career as a Professor and threw Salaita, his Wife and their Baby out into the Street with no visible means of support. I cannot offhand recall a Greater Academic Cosmic Injustice since when I entered Higher Education in 1968. Francis A. Boyle Professor of Law Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 6:57 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide And as for the Zionists on this Campus and in this Community, I hold you accountable for destroying our Native American Studies Program. Francis A. Boyle Professor of Law Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 6:47 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide After the long years of hard work and pain and suffering and tears and agony that we all engaged in trying to get rid of Chief Illiniwak and instituting the Native American Studies Program as some sort of compensation, Wise {sic!} and her Zionists destroyed it all in the bat of an eye. I cannot think of a Greater Academic Cosmic Injustice. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2017 12:28 PM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide Because of the pro bono work I did for AIM, I came to understand that American Indians see the US Government the same way the Jews see the Nazis. Wise "{sic!} is a Nazi! Ditto and pari passu for what she did to the Palestinians. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2017 9:51 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide And Wise {sic!} has successfully terrorized and intimidated every Palestinian/Arab/Muslim of Color on this Campus. Nothing has changed for American Indians and Palestinians/Arabs/Muslims of Color. It is an absolute disgrace but no surprise that the rotten and corrupt and racist AAUP eliminated the die-hard Anti-Palestinian University of Illiniwaks from their Censure List. That is precisely why I quit the AAUP years ago because of their die-hard bigotry and racism against Palestinians/Arabs/Muslims of Color. And now ditto for American Indians. Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2017 9:43 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: FW: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide My pro bono publico Clients here were the American Indian Movement. Chief Illiniwak is an Indicium of Genocide.And Wise {sic!} just Ethnically Cleansed Native Americans off of this Campus. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com [mailto:nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com] Sent: Monday, October 09, 2006 3:05 PM To: undisclosed-recipients Subject: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit [Here's one of our annual Columbus Day pieces. -NYTr] sent by Francis Boyle Columbus Day Promotes Genocide Indictment of the Federal Government of the U.S. for the commission of international crimes and petition for orders mandating its proscription and dissolution as an international criminal conspiracy and criminal organization By Francis A. Boyle, Professor of International Law 18 September 1992 Introduction All citizens of the World Community have both the right and the duty under public international law to sit in judgment over a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental norms of international criminal law committed by any member state of that same World Community. Such is the case for the International Tribunal of Indigenous Peoples and Oppressed Nationalities in the United States of America that convenes in San Francisco during the weekend of October 1-4, 1992. Its weighty but important task is to examine the long history of international criminal activity that has been perpetrated by the Federal Government of the United States of America against the Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America since it was founded in 1787. Toward that end, I have the honor to present to the Members of this Tribunal the following charges against the Federal Government of the United States of America under international criminal law. In light of the gravity, severity, and longstanding nature of these international crimes and also in light of the fact that the Federal Government of the United States of America appears to be irrevocably committed to continuing down this path of lawlessness and criminality against Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America and elsewhere, I hereby petition the Members of this Tribunal to issue an Order proscribing the Federal Government of the United States of America as an International Criminal Conspiracy and a Criminal Organization under the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles as well as the other sources of public international law specified below. For that reason, I also request that the Members of this Tribunal issue an Order dissolving the Federal Government of the United States of America as a legal and political entity. Finally, I ask this Tribunal to declare that international legal sovereignty over the Territories principally inhabited by the Native American Peoples, the New Afrikan People, the Mexicano People, and the People of Puerto Rico resides in the hands of these respective Peoples Themselves. In this regard, I should point out that the final Decision of this Tribunal will qualify as a judicial decision within the meaning of article 38(1)(d) of the Statute of the International Court of Justice and will therefore constitute a subsidiary means for the determination of rules of law for international law and practice. The Statute of the International Court of Justice is an integral part of the United Nations Charter under article 92 thereof. Thus, this Tribunal's Decision can be relied upon by some future International Criminal Court or Tribunal, as well as by any People or State of the World Community that desires to initiate criminal proceedings against named individuals for the commission of the following international crimes. The Decision of this Tribunal shall serve as adequate notice to the appropriate officials in the United States Federal Government that they bear personal criminal responsibility under international law and the domestic legal systems of all Peoples and States in the World Community for designing and implementing these illegal, criminal and reprehensible policies and practices against Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America. Hereinafter, the Federal Government of the United States of America will be referred to as the Defendant. BILL OF PARTICULARS AGAINST THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA The Native American Peoples 1. The Defendant has perpetrated innumerable Crimes Against eace, Crimes Against Humanity and War Crimes against Native American Peoples as recognized by the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles. 2. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Genocide against Native American Peoples as recognized by the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. 3. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Apartheid against Native American Peoples as recognized by the 1973 International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid. 4. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of Native American Peoples as recognized by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights. 5. The Defendant has perpetrated numerous and repeated violations of the 1965 International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination against Native American Peoples. 6. The Defendant has systematically violated 371 treaties it concluded with Native American Peoples in wanton disregard of the basic principle of public international law and practice dictating pacta sunt servanda. 7. The Defendant has denied and violated the international legal right of Native American Peoples to self-determination as recognized by the 1945 United Nations Charter, the 1966 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the 1966 International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, fundamental principles of customary international law, and jus cogens. 8. The Defendant has violated the seminal United Nations Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Territories of 1960 with respect to Native American Peoples and Territories. Pursuant thereto, the Defendant has an absolute international legal obligation to decolonize Native American Territories immediately and to transfer all powers it currently exercises there to the Native American Peoples. 9. The Defendant has illegally refused to accord full-scope protections as Prisoners-of-War to captured Native American independence fighters in violation of the Third Geneva Convention of 1949 and Additional Protocol I thereto of 1977. The Defendant's treatment of captured Native American independence fighters as common criminals and terrorists constitutes a grave breach of the Geneva Accords and thus a serious war crime. 10. The Defendant has deliberately and systematically permitted, aided and abetted, solicited and conspired to commit the dumping, transportation, and location of nuclear, toxic, medical and otherwise hazardous waste materials on Native American Territories across North America and has thus created a clear and present danger to the lives, health, safety, and physical and mental well-being of Native American Peoples in gross violation of article 3 and article 2(c) of the 1948 Genocide Convention, inter alia: Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; ... The New Afrikan People 11. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Slavery upon the New Afrikan People as recognized in part by the 1926 Slavery Convention and the 1956 Supplementary Convention on the Abolition of Slavery, the Slave Trade, and Institutions and Practices Similar to Slavery. The Defendant has illegally refused to pay reparations to the New Afrikan People for the commission of the International Crime of Slavery against Them in violation of basic norms of customary international law requiring such reparations to be paid. 12. The Defendant has perpetrated innumerable Crimes Against Humanity against the New Afrikan People as recognized by the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles. 13. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of genocide against the New Afrikan People as recognized by the 1948 Genocide Convention. 14. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Apartheid against the New Afrikan People as recognized by the 1973 Apartheid Convention. 15. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of the New Afrikan People as recognized by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the two aforementioned United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966. 16. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the 1965 Racism Convention against the New Afrikan People. The Defendant is the paradigmatic example of an irremediably racist state in international relations today. 17. The Defendant has denied and violated the international legal right of the New Afrikan People to self-determination as recognized by the United Nations Charter, the two United Nations Human rights Covenants of 1966, customary international law, and jus cogens. 18. The Defendant has illegally refused to apply the United Nations Decolonization Resolution of 1960 to the New Afrikan People and to the Territories that they principally inhabit. Pursuant thereto, the Defendant has an absolute international legal obligation to decolonize New Afrikan Territories immediately and to transfer all powers it currently exercises there to the New Afrikan People. 19. The Defendant has illegally refused to accord full-scope protections as Prisoners-of-War to captured New Afrikan independence fighters in violation of the Third Geneva Convention of 1949 and Additional Protocol I thereto of 1977. The Defendant's treatment of captured New Afrikan independence fighters as common criminals and terrorists constitutes a grave breach of the Geneva Accords and thus a serious war crime. The Mexicano People 20. In 1821, Mexico obtained its independence from colonial Spain as a sovereign Mestizo State, extending from Yucatan and Chiapas in the south, to the northern territories of California and New Mexico, which areas the Defendant today calls the states of Texas, California, Arizona, Nevada, Utah, New Mexico, and Colorado. Nevertheless, in 1836 so-called settlors under the sponsorship of the Defendant began the division of the Mexicano People and State by causing the division of the Mexican state of Coahuila-Texas into the Mexican state of Coahuila and the so-called republic of Texas. 21. In 1846, the Defendant perpetrated an unjust, illegal and unjustifiable war upon the remainder of the sovereign People and State of Mexico that violated every known principle of public international law in existence at that time, including, but not limited to, the Christian Doctrine of just war, which was the then reigning standard of customary international law. As a result thereof, the Defendant illegally annexed close to 51% of the territories of the sovereign State of Mexico by means of forcing it to conclude the 1848 Treaty of Guadalupe-Hidalgo under military duress. For these reasons, this Treaty was and still is null and void ab initio as a matter of public international law. The Defendant acquired more Mexican territory through the Gadsen Treaty (Purchase) of 1854. 22. Since these 1848 and 1854 Treaties, the Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Genocide against the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories, as recognized by the 1948 Genocide Convention. 23. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Apartheid against the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories, as recognized by the 1973 Apartheid Convention. 24. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories, as recognized by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the two aforementioned United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966. 25. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the 1965 Racism Convention against the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories. 26. The Defendant has denied and violated the international legal right of the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories to self-determination, as recognized by the United Nations Charter, the two United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966, customary international law, and jus cogens. 27. Since the militarily-imposed division of the Mexican State, the Defendant and its agents have militarily occupied other portions of the Mexican State, have sought to influence the outcome of the Mexican Revolution of 1910, have practiced a consistent pattern of intervention into Mexico's internal affairs, all of which have resulted in the arresting distortion and deformation of the Mexican social and economic order. In this regard, Defendant's so-called North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) constitutes nothing more than an attempt to impose its hegemonial imperialism, economic colonialism, and human exploitation upon the People and State of Mexico. 28. The Defendant has illegally refused to apply the United Nations Decolonization Resolution of 1960 to the Mexicano People and to these occupied territories that they inhabit. Pursuant thereto, the Defendant has an absolute international legal obligation to decolonize both the Mexican occupied territories and the Republic of Mexico immediately, and to transfer all powers it currently exercises there to the Mexicano People. The People and State of Puerto Rico 29. Since its illegal invasion of Puerto Rico in 1898, the Defendant has perpetrated innumerable Crimes against Peace, Crimes against Humanity and War Crimes against the People and State of Puerto Rico as recognized by the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles. 30. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Genocide against the Puerto Rican People as recognized by the 1948 Genocide Convention. 31. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Apartheid against the Puerto Rican People as recognized by the 1973 Apartheid Convention. 32. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of the Puerto Rican People as recognized by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human rights and the two aforementioned United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966. 33. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the 1965 Racism Convention against the Puerto Rican People. 34. The Defendant has denied and violated the international legal right of the Puerto Rican People to self-determination as recognized by the United Nations Charter, the two United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966, customary international law, and jus cogens. 35. The Defendant has illegally refused to apply the United Nations Decolonization Resolution of 1960 to Puerto Rico. Pursuant thereto, the Defendant has an absolute international legal obligation to decolonize Puerto Rico immediately and to transfer all powers it currently exercises there to the Puerto Rican People. 36. The Defendant has illegally refused to accord full-scope protections as Prisoners-of-War to captured Puerto Rican independence fighters in violation of the Third Geneva Convention of 1949 and Additional Protocol I thereto of 1977. The Defendant's treatment of captured Puerto Rican independence fighters as common criminals and terrorists constitutes a grave breach of the Geneva Accords and thus a serious war crime. An International Criminal Conspiracy and a Criminal Organization 37. In light of the foregoing international crimes, the Defendant constitutes an International Criminal Conspiracy and a Criminal Organization in accordance with the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles and the other sources of public international law specified above. The Federal Government of the United States of America is legally identical to the Nazi government of World War II Germany. Indeed, the Defendant's President, George Bush, has proclaimed a so-called New World Order that sounds and looks strikingly similar to the New Order proclaimed by Adolph Hitler over fifty years ago. Conclusion Like unto a pirate, the Defendant is hostis humani generis: The enemy of all humankind! For the good of all humanity, this Tribunal must condemn and repudiate the Federal Government of the United States of America and its grotesque vision of a New World Order that is constructed upon warfare, bloodshed, violence, criminality, genocide, racism, colonialism, apartheid, massive violations of fundamental human rights, and the denial of the international legal right of self-determination to the Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America and elsewhere around the world. Consequently, this Tribunal must find the Defendant guilty as charged on all of the counts specified above beyond a reasonable doubt. This Tribunal must also issue an Order that formally proscribes the Federal Government of the United States of America as an International Criminal Conspiracy and a Criminal Organization. This Tribunal must also issue a separate Order mandating the dissolution of the Federal Government of the United States of America as a legal and political entity. Finally, this Tribunal must declare that international legal sovereignty over the Territories principally inhabited by the Native American Peoples, the New Afrikan People, the Mexicano People, and the People of Puerto Rico resides, respectively, in the hands of these Peoples Themselves. The very lives, well-being, health, welfare, and safety of the Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America and elsewhere around the world depend upon the ultimate success of your deliberations. Respectfully submitted by, FRANCIS A. BOYLE PROFESSOR OF INTERNATIONAL LAW SPECIAL PROSECUTOR Dated: September 18, 1992 University of Illinois College of Law 504 East Pennsylvania Champaign, IL 61820 217-333-7954 See USA on Trial: The International Tribunal on Indigenous Peoples'and Oppressed Nations in the United States. The Book and Verdict are available from Editorial El Coqui, 1671 N. Claremont,Chicago Illinois 60647. Or you can try calling the Puerto Rican Cultural Center in Chicago at 312-342-4295. The Video can be obtained from Mission Creek Video, PO Box 411271 San Francisco CA 941141 (phone:415-695-0931). Francis A. Boyle * ================================================================ .NY Transfer News Collective * A Service of Blythe Systems . Since 1985 - Information for the Rest of Us . .339 Lafayette St., New York, NY 10012 http://www.blythe.org .List Archives: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/pipermail/nytr/ .Subscribe: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/mailman/listinfo/nytr ================================================================ From fboyle at illinois.edu Mon Jun 19 15:04:24 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2017 15:04:24 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide In-Reply-To: References: <200610092004.k99K4dXo038063@pencil.math.missouri.edu> Message-ID: The Local Zionists are mean, nasty, vicious, ruthless and unprincipled People who will stop at nothing to get their way. Hence they destroyed our Native American Studies Program and destroyed Salaita's Career as a Professor and threw Salaita, his Wife and their Baby out into the Street with no visible means of support. I cannot offhand recall a Greater Academic Cosmic Injustice since when I entered Higher Education in 1968. Francis A. Boyle Professor of Law Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 6:57 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide And as for the Zionists on this Campus and in this Community, I hold you accountable for destroying our Native American Studies Program. Francis A. Boyle Professor of Law Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 6:47 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide After the long years of hard work and pain and suffering and tears and agony that we all engaged in trying to get rid of Chief Illiniwak and instituting the Native American Studies Program as some sort of compensation, Wise {sic!} and her Zionists destroyed it all in the bat of an eye. I cannot think of a Greater Academic Cosmic Injustice. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2017 12:28 PM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide Because of the pro bono work I did for AIM, I came to understand that American Indians see the US Government the same way the Jews see the Nazis. Wise "{sic!} is a Nazi! Ditto and pari passu for what she did to the Palestinians. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2017 9:51 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide And Wise {sic!} has successfully terrorized and intimidated every Palestinian/Arab/Muslim of Color on this Campus. Nothing has changed for American Indians and Palestinians/Arabs/Muslims of Color. It is an absolute disgrace but no surprise that the rotten and corrupt and racist AAUP eliminated the die-hard Anti-Palestinian University of Illiniwaks from their Censure List. That is precisely why I quit the AAUP years ago because of their die-hard bigotry and racism against Palestinians/Arabs/Muslims of Color. And now ditto for American Indians. Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2017 9:43 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: FW: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide My pro bono publico Clients here were the American Indian Movement. Chief Illiniwak is an Indicium of Genocide.And Wise {sic!} just Ethnically Cleansed Native Americans off of this Campus. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com [mailto:nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com] Sent: Monday, October 09, 2006 3:05 PM To: undisclosed-recipients Subject: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit [Here's one of our annual Columbus Day pieces. -NYTr] sent by Francis Boyle Columbus Day Promotes Genocide Indictment of the Federal Government of the U.S. for the commission of international crimes and petition for orders mandating its proscription and dissolution as an international criminal conspiracy and criminal organization By Francis A. Boyle, Professor of International Law 18 September 1992 Introduction All citizens of the World Community have both the right and the duty under public international law to sit in judgment over a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental norms of international criminal law committed by any member state of that same World Community. Such is the case for the International Tribunal of Indigenous Peoples and Oppressed Nationalities in the United States of America that convenes in San Francisco during the weekend of October 1-4, 1992. Its weighty but important task is to examine the long history of international criminal activity that has been perpetrated by the Federal Government of the United States of America against the Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America since it was founded in 1787. Toward that end, I have the honor to present to the Members of this Tribunal the following charges against the Federal Government of the United States of America under international criminal law. In light of the gravity, severity, and longstanding nature of these international crimes and also in light of the fact that the Federal Government of the United States of America appears to be irrevocably committed to continuing down this path of lawlessness and criminality against Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America and elsewhere, I hereby petition the Members of this Tribunal to issue an Order proscribing the Federal Government of the United States of America as an International Criminal Conspiracy and a Criminal Organization under the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles as well as the other sources of public international law specified below. For that reason, I also request that the Members of this Tribunal issue an Order dissolving the Federal Government of the United States of America as a legal and political entity. Finally, I ask this Tribunal to declare that international legal sovereignty over the Territories principally inhabited by the Native American Peoples, the New Afrikan People, the Mexicano People, and the People of Puerto Rico resides in the hands of these respective Peoples Themselves. In this regard, I should point out that the final Decision of this Tribunal will qualify as a judicial decision within the meaning of article 38(1)(d) of the Statute of the International Court of Justice and will therefore constitute a subsidiary means for the determination of rules of law for international law and practice. The Statute of the International Court of Justice is an integral part of the United Nations Charter under article 92 thereof. Thus, this Tribunal's Decision can be relied upon by some future International Criminal Court or Tribunal, as well as by any People or State of the World Community that desires to initiate criminal proceedings against named individuals for the commission of the following international crimes. The Decision of this Tribunal shall serve as adequate notice to the appropriate officials in the United States Federal Government that they bear personal criminal responsibility under international law and the domestic legal systems of all Peoples and States in the World Community for designing and implementing these illegal, criminal and reprehensible policies and practices against Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America. Hereinafter, the Federal Government of the United States of America will be referred to as the Defendant. BILL OF PARTICULARS AGAINST THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA The Native American Peoples 1. The Defendant has perpetrated innumerable Crimes Against eace, Crimes Against Humanity and War Crimes against Native American Peoples as recognized by the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles. 2. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Genocide against Native American Peoples as recognized by the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. 3. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Apartheid against Native American Peoples as recognized by the 1973 International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid. 4. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of Native American Peoples as recognized by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights. 5. The Defendant has perpetrated numerous and repeated violations of the 1965 International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination against Native American Peoples. 6. The Defendant has systematically violated 371 treaties it concluded with Native American Peoples in wanton disregard of the basic principle of public international law and practice dictating pacta sunt servanda. 7. The Defendant has denied and violated the international legal right of Native American Peoples to self-determination as recognized by the 1945 United Nations Charter, the 1966 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the 1966 International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, fundamental principles of customary international law, and jus cogens. 8. The Defendant has violated the seminal United Nations Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Territories of 1960 with respect to Native American Peoples and Territories. Pursuant thereto, the Defendant has an absolute international legal obligation to decolonize Native American Territories immediately and to transfer all powers it currently exercises there to the Native American Peoples. 9. The Defendant has illegally refused to accord full-scope protections as Prisoners-of-War to captured Native American independence fighters in violation of the Third Geneva Convention of 1949 and Additional Protocol I thereto of 1977. The Defendant's treatment of captured Native American independence fighters as common criminals and terrorists constitutes a grave breach of the Geneva Accords and thus a serious war crime. 10. The Defendant has deliberately and systematically permitted, aided and abetted, solicited and conspired to commit the dumping, transportation, and location of nuclear, toxic, medical and otherwise hazardous waste materials on Native American Territories across North America and has thus created a clear and present danger to the lives, health, safety, and physical and mental well-being of Native American Peoples in gross violation of article 3 and article 2(c) of the 1948 Genocide Convention, inter alia: Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; ... The New Afrikan People 11. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Slavery upon the New Afrikan People as recognized in part by the 1926 Slavery Convention and the 1956 Supplementary Convention on the Abolition of Slavery, the Slave Trade, and Institutions and Practices Similar to Slavery. The Defendant has illegally refused to pay reparations to the New Afrikan People for the commission of the International Crime of Slavery against Them in violation of basic norms of customary international law requiring such reparations to be paid. 12. The Defendant has perpetrated innumerable Crimes Against Humanity against the New Afrikan People as recognized by the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles. 13. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of genocide against the New Afrikan People as recognized by the 1948 Genocide Convention. 14. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Apartheid against the New Afrikan People as recognized by the 1973 Apartheid Convention. 15. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of the New Afrikan People as recognized by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the two aforementioned United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966. 16. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the 1965 Racism Convention against the New Afrikan People. The Defendant is the paradigmatic example of an irremediably racist state in international relations today. 17. The Defendant has denied and violated the international legal right of the New Afrikan People to self-determination as recognized by the United Nations Charter, the two United Nations Human rights Covenants of 1966, customary international law, and jus cogens. 18. The Defendant has illegally refused to apply the United Nations Decolonization Resolution of 1960 to the New Afrikan People and to the Territories that they principally inhabit. Pursuant thereto, the Defendant has an absolute international legal obligation to decolonize New Afrikan Territories immediately and to transfer all powers it currently exercises there to the New Afrikan People. 19. The Defendant has illegally refused to accord full-scope protections as Prisoners-of-War to captured New Afrikan independence fighters in violation of the Third Geneva Convention of 1949 and Additional Protocol I thereto of 1977. The Defendant's treatment of captured New Afrikan independence fighters as common criminals and terrorists constitutes a grave breach of the Geneva Accords and thus a serious war crime. The Mexicano People 20. In 1821, Mexico obtained its independence from colonial Spain as a sovereign Mestizo State, extending from Yucatan and Chiapas in the south, to the northern territories of California and New Mexico, which areas the Defendant today calls the states of Texas, California, Arizona, Nevada, Utah, New Mexico, and Colorado. Nevertheless, in 1836 so-called settlors under the sponsorship of the Defendant began the division of the Mexicano People and State by causing the division of the Mexican state of Coahuila-Texas into the Mexican state of Coahuila and the so-called republic of Texas. 21. In 1846, the Defendant perpetrated an unjust, illegal and unjustifiable war upon the remainder of the sovereign People and State of Mexico that violated every known principle of public international law in existence at that time, including, but not limited to, the Christian Doctrine of just war, which was the then reigning standard of customary international law. As a result thereof, the Defendant illegally annexed close to 51% of the territories of the sovereign State of Mexico by means of forcing it to conclude the 1848 Treaty of Guadalupe-Hidalgo under military duress. For these reasons, this Treaty was and still is null and void ab initio as a matter of public international law. The Defendant acquired more Mexican territory through the Gadsen Treaty (Purchase) of 1854. 22. Since these 1848 and 1854 Treaties, the Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Genocide against the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories, as recognized by the 1948 Genocide Convention. 23. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Apartheid against the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories, as recognized by the 1973 Apartheid Convention. 24. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories, as recognized by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the two aforementioned United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966. 25. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the 1965 Racism Convention against the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories. 26. The Defendant has denied and violated the international legal right of the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories to self-determination, as recognized by the United Nations Charter, the two United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966, customary international law, and jus cogens. 27. Since the militarily-imposed division of the Mexican State, the Defendant and its agents have militarily occupied other portions of the Mexican State, have sought to influence the outcome of the Mexican Revolution of 1910, have practiced a consistent pattern of intervention into Mexico's internal affairs, all of which have resulted in the arresting distortion and deformation of the Mexican social and economic order. In this regard, Defendant's so-called North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) constitutes nothing more than an attempt to impose its hegemonial imperialism, economic colonialism, and human exploitation upon the People and State of Mexico. 28. The Defendant has illegally refused to apply the United Nations Decolonization Resolution of 1960 to the Mexicano People and to these occupied territories that they inhabit. Pursuant thereto, the Defendant has an absolute international legal obligation to decolonize both the Mexican occupied territories and the Republic of Mexico immediately, and to transfer all powers it currently exercises there to the Mexicano People. The People and State of Puerto Rico 29. Since its illegal invasion of Puerto Rico in 1898, the Defendant has perpetrated innumerable Crimes against Peace, Crimes against Humanity and War Crimes against the People and State of Puerto Rico as recognized by the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles. 30. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Genocide against the Puerto Rican People as recognized by the 1948 Genocide Convention. 31. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Apartheid against the Puerto Rican People as recognized by the 1973 Apartheid Convention. 32. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of the Puerto Rican People as recognized by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human rights and the two aforementioned United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966. 33. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the 1965 Racism Convention against the Puerto Rican People. 34. The Defendant has denied and violated the international legal right of the Puerto Rican People to self-determination as recognized by the United Nations Charter, the two United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966, customary international law, and jus cogens. 35. The Defendant has illegally refused to apply the United Nations Decolonization Resolution of 1960 to Puerto Rico. Pursuant thereto, the Defendant has an absolute international legal obligation to decolonize Puerto Rico immediately and to transfer all powers it currently exercises there to the Puerto Rican People. 36. The Defendant has illegally refused to accord full-scope protections as Prisoners-of-War to captured Puerto Rican independence fighters in violation of the Third Geneva Convention of 1949 and Additional Protocol I thereto of 1977. The Defendant's treatment of captured Puerto Rican independence fighters as common criminals and terrorists constitutes a grave breach of the Geneva Accords and thus a serious war crime. An International Criminal Conspiracy and a Criminal Organization 37. In light of the foregoing international crimes, the Defendant constitutes an International Criminal Conspiracy and a Criminal Organization in accordance with the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles and the other sources of public international law specified above. The Federal Government of the United States of America is legally identical to the Nazi government of World War II Germany. Indeed, the Defendant's President, George Bush, has proclaimed a so-called New World Order that sounds and looks strikingly similar to the New Order proclaimed by Adolph Hitler over fifty years ago. Conclusion Like unto a pirate, the Defendant is hostis humani generis: The enemy of all humankind! For the good of all humanity, this Tribunal must condemn and repudiate the Federal Government of the United States of America and its grotesque vision of a New World Order that is constructed upon warfare, bloodshed, violence, criminality, genocide, racism, colonialism, apartheid, massive violations of fundamental human rights, and the denial of the international legal right of self-determination to the Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America and elsewhere around the world. Consequently, this Tribunal must find the Defendant guilty as charged on all of the counts specified above beyond a reasonable doubt. This Tribunal must also issue an Order that formally proscribes the Federal Government of the United States of America as an International Criminal Conspiracy and a Criminal Organization. This Tribunal must also issue a separate Order mandating the dissolution of the Federal Government of the United States of America as a legal and political entity. Finally, this Tribunal must declare that international legal sovereignty over the Territories principally inhabited by the Native American Peoples, the New Afrikan People, the Mexicano People, and the People of Puerto Rico resides, respectively, in the hands of these Peoples Themselves. The very lives, well-being, health, welfare, and safety of the Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America and elsewhere around the world depend upon the ultimate success of your deliberations. Respectfully submitted by, FRANCIS A. BOYLE PROFESSOR OF INTERNATIONAL LAW SPECIAL PROSECUTOR Dated: September 18, 1992 University of Illinois College of Law 504 East Pennsylvania Champaign, IL 61820 217-333-7954 See USA on Trial: The International Tribunal on Indigenous Peoples'and Oppressed Nations in the United States. The Book and Verdict are available from Editorial El Coqui, 1671 N. Claremont,Chicago Illinois 60647. Or you can try calling the Puerto Rican Cultural Center in Chicago at 312-342-4295. The Video can be obtained from Mission Creek Video, PO Box 411271 San Francisco CA 941141 (phone:415-695-0931). Francis A. Boyle * ================================================================ .NY Transfer News Collective * A Service of Blythe Systems . Since 1985 - Information for the Rest of Us . .339 Lafayette St., New York, NY 10012 http://www.blythe.org .List Archives: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/pipermail/nytr/ .Subscribe: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/mailman/listinfo/nytr ================================================================ From fboyle at illinois.edu Mon Jun 19 18:30:26 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2017 18:30:26 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide In-Reply-To: References: <200610092004.k99K4dXo038063@pencil.math.missouri.edu> Message-ID: As for the "future" of our Native American Studies Program and Department, I submit we should leave them DESTROYED as a Permanent Monument and Testament to how mean, nasty, vicious, cruel, ruthless, and unprincipled our Campus Zionists and our Community Zionists really are. Francis A. Boyle Professor of Law Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 10:04 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide The Local Zionists are mean, nasty, vicious, ruthless and unprincipled People who will stop at nothing to get their way. Hence they destroyed our Native American Studies Program and destroyed Salaita's Career as a Professor and threw Salaita, his Wife and their Baby out into the Street with no visible means of support. I cannot offhand recall a Greater Academic Cosmic Injustice since when I entered Higher Education in 1968. Francis A. Boyle Professor of Law Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 6:57 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide And as for the Zionists on this Campus and in this Community, I hold you accountable for destroying our Native American Studies Program. Francis A. Boyle Professor of Law Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 6:47 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide After the long years of hard work and pain and suffering and tears and agony that we all engaged in trying to get rid of Chief Illiniwak and instituting the Native American Studies Program as some sort of compensation, Wise {sic!} and her Zionists destroyed it all in the bat of an eye. I cannot think of a Greater Academic Cosmic Injustice. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2017 12:28 PM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide Because of the pro bono work I did for AIM, I came to understand that American Indians see the US Government the same way the Jews see the Nazis. Wise "{sic!} is a Nazi! Ditto and pari passu for what she did to the Palestinians. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2017 9:51 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide And Wise {sic!} has successfully terrorized and intimidated every Palestinian/Arab/Muslim of Color on this Campus. Nothing has changed for American Indians and Palestinians/Arabs/Muslims of Color. It is an absolute disgrace but no surprise that the rotten and corrupt and racist AAUP eliminated the die-hard Anti-Palestinian University of Illiniwaks from their Censure List. That is precisely why I quit the AAUP years ago because of their die-hard bigotry and racism against Palestinians/Arabs/Muslims of Color. And now ditto for American Indians. Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2017 9:43 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: FW: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide My pro bono publico Clients here were the American Indian Movement. Chief Illiniwak is an Indicium of Genocide.And Wise {sic!} just Ethnically Cleansed Native Americans off of this Campus. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com [mailto:nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com] Sent: Monday, October 09, 2006 3:05 PM To: undisclosed-recipients Subject: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit [Here's one of our annual Columbus Day pieces. -NYTr] sent by Francis Boyle Columbus Day Promotes Genocide Indictment of the Federal Government of the U.S. for the commission of international crimes and petition for orders mandating its proscription and dissolution as an international criminal conspiracy and criminal organization By Francis A. Boyle, Professor of International Law 18 September 1992 Introduction All citizens of the World Community have both the right and the duty under public international law to sit in judgment over a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental norms of international criminal law committed by any member state of that same World Community. Such is the case for the International Tribunal of Indigenous Peoples and Oppressed Nationalities in the United States of America that convenes in San Francisco during the weekend of October 1-4, 1992. Its weighty but important task is to examine the long history of international criminal activity that has been perpetrated by the Federal Government of the United States of America against the Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America since it was founded in 1787. Toward that end, I have the honor to present to the Members of this Tribunal the following charges against the Federal Government of the United States of America under international criminal law. In light of the gravity, severity, and longstanding nature of these international crimes and also in light of the fact that the Federal Government of the United States of America appears to be irrevocably committed to continuing down this path of lawlessness and criminality against Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America and elsewhere, I hereby petition the Members of this Tribunal to issue an Order proscribing the Federal Government of the United States of America as an International Criminal Conspiracy and a Criminal Organization under the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles as well as the other sources of public international law specified below. For that reason, I also request that the Members of this Tribunal issue an Order dissolving the Federal Government of the United States of America as a legal and political entity. Finally, I ask this Tribunal to declare that international legal sovereignty over the Territories principally inhabited by the Native American Peoples, the New Afrikan People, the Mexicano People, and the People of Puerto Rico resides in the hands of these respective Peoples Themselves. In this regard, I should point out that the final Decision of this Tribunal will qualify as a judicial decision within the meaning of article 38(1)(d) of the Statute of the International Court of Justice and will therefore constitute a subsidiary means for the determination of rules of law for international law and practice. The Statute of the International Court of Justice is an integral part of the United Nations Charter under article 92 thereof. Thus, this Tribunal's Decision can be relied upon by some future International Criminal Court or Tribunal, as well as by any People or State of the World Community that desires to initiate criminal proceedings against named individuals for the commission of the following international crimes. The Decision of this Tribunal shall serve as adequate notice to the appropriate officials in the United States Federal Government that they bear personal criminal responsibility under international law and the domestic legal systems of all Peoples and States in the World Community for designing and implementing these illegal, criminal and reprehensible policies and practices against Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America. Hereinafter, the Federal Government of the United States of America will be referred to as the Defendant. BILL OF PARTICULARS AGAINST THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA The Native American Peoples 1. The Defendant has perpetrated innumerable Crimes Against eace, Crimes Against Humanity and War Crimes against Native American Peoples as recognized by the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles. 2. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Genocide against Native American Peoples as recognized by the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. 3. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Apartheid against Native American Peoples as recognized by the 1973 International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid. 4. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of Native American Peoples as recognized by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights. 5. The Defendant has perpetrated numerous and repeated violations of the 1965 International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination against Native American Peoples. 6. The Defendant has systematically violated 371 treaties it concluded with Native American Peoples in wanton disregard of the basic principle of public international law and practice dictating pacta sunt servanda. 7. The Defendant has denied and violated the international legal right of Native American Peoples to self-determination as recognized by the 1945 United Nations Charter, the 1966 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the 1966 International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, fundamental principles of customary international law, and jus cogens. 8. The Defendant has violated the seminal United Nations Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Territories of 1960 with respect to Native American Peoples and Territories. Pursuant thereto, the Defendant has an absolute international legal obligation to decolonize Native American Territories immediately and to transfer all powers it currently exercises there to the Native American Peoples. 9. The Defendant has illegally refused to accord full-scope protections as Prisoners-of-War to captured Native American independence fighters in violation of the Third Geneva Convention of 1949 and Additional Protocol I thereto of 1977. The Defendant's treatment of captured Native American independence fighters as common criminals and terrorists constitutes a grave breach of the Geneva Accords and thus a serious war crime. 10. The Defendant has deliberately and systematically permitted, aided and abetted, solicited and conspired to commit the dumping, transportation, and location of nuclear, toxic, medical and otherwise hazardous waste materials on Native American Territories across North America and has thus created a clear and present danger to the lives, health, safety, and physical and mental well-being of Native American Peoples in gross violation of article 3 and article 2(c) of the 1948 Genocide Convention, inter alia: Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; ... The New Afrikan People 11. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Slavery upon the New Afrikan People as recognized in part by the 1926 Slavery Convention and the 1956 Supplementary Convention on the Abolition of Slavery, the Slave Trade, and Institutions and Practices Similar to Slavery. The Defendant has illegally refused to pay reparations to the New Afrikan People for the commission of the International Crime of Slavery against Them in violation of basic norms of customary international law requiring such reparations to be paid. 12. The Defendant has perpetrated innumerable Crimes Against Humanity against the New Afrikan People as recognized by the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles. 13. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of genocide against the New Afrikan People as recognized by the 1948 Genocide Convention. 14. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Apartheid against the New Afrikan People as recognized by the 1973 Apartheid Convention. 15. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of the New Afrikan People as recognized by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the two aforementioned United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966. 16. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the 1965 Racism Convention against the New Afrikan People. The Defendant is the paradigmatic example of an irremediably racist state in international relations today. 17. The Defendant has denied and violated the international legal right of the New Afrikan People to self-determination as recognized by the United Nations Charter, the two United Nations Human rights Covenants of 1966, customary international law, and jus cogens. 18. The Defendant has illegally refused to apply the United Nations Decolonization Resolution of 1960 to the New Afrikan People and to the Territories that they principally inhabit. Pursuant thereto, the Defendant has an absolute international legal obligation to decolonize New Afrikan Territories immediately and to transfer all powers it currently exercises there to the New Afrikan People. 19. The Defendant has illegally refused to accord full-scope protections as Prisoners-of-War to captured New Afrikan independence fighters in violation of the Third Geneva Convention of 1949 and Additional Protocol I thereto of 1977. The Defendant's treatment of captured New Afrikan independence fighters as common criminals and terrorists constitutes a grave breach of the Geneva Accords and thus a serious war crime. The Mexicano People 20. In 1821, Mexico obtained its independence from colonial Spain as a sovereign Mestizo State, extending from Yucatan and Chiapas in the south, to the northern territories of California and New Mexico, which areas the Defendant today calls the states of Texas, California, Arizona, Nevada, Utah, New Mexico, and Colorado. Nevertheless, in 1836 so-called settlors under the sponsorship of the Defendant began the division of the Mexicano People and State by causing the division of the Mexican state of Coahuila-Texas into the Mexican state of Coahuila and the so-called republic of Texas. 21. In 1846, the Defendant perpetrated an unjust, illegal and unjustifiable war upon the remainder of the sovereign People and State of Mexico that violated every known principle of public international law in existence at that time, including, but not limited to, the Christian Doctrine of just war, which was the then reigning standard of customary international law. As a result thereof, the Defendant illegally annexed close to 51% of the territories of the sovereign State of Mexico by means of forcing it to conclude the 1848 Treaty of Guadalupe-Hidalgo under military duress. For these reasons, this Treaty was and still is null and void ab initio as a matter of public international law. The Defendant acquired more Mexican territory through the Gadsen Treaty (Purchase) of 1854. 22. Since these 1848 and 1854 Treaties, the Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Genocide against the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories, as recognized by the 1948 Genocide Convention. 23. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Apartheid against the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories, as recognized by the 1973 Apartheid Convention. 24. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories, as recognized by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the two aforementioned United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966. 25. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the 1965 Racism Convention against the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories. 26. The Defendant has denied and violated the international legal right of the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories to self-determination, as recognized by the United Nations Charter, the two United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966, customary international law, and jus cogens. 27. Since the militarily-imposed division of the Mexican State, the Defendant and its agents have militarily occupied other portions of the Mexican State, have sought to influence the outcome of the Mexican Revolution of 1910, have practiced a consistent pattern of intervention into Mexico's internal affairs, all of which have resulted in the arresting distortion and deformation of the Mexican social and economic order. In this regard, Defendant's so-called North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) constitutes nothing more than an attempt to impose its hegemonial imperialism, economic colonialism, and human exploitation upon the People and State of Mexico. 28. The Defendant has illegally refused to apply the United Nations Decolonization Resolution of 1960 to the Mexicano People and to these occupied territories that they inhabit. Pursuant thereto, the Defendant has an absolute international legal obligation to decolonize both the Mexican occupied territories and the Republic of Mexico immediately, and to transfer all powers it currently exercises there to the Mexicano People. The People and State of Puerto Rico 29. Since its illegal invasion of Puerto Rico in 1898, the Defendant has perpetrated innumerable Crimes against Peace, Crimes against Humanity and War Crimes against the People and State of Puerto Rico as recognized by the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles. 30. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Genocide against the Puerto Rican People as recognized by the 1948 Genocide Convention. 31. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Apartheid against the Puerto Rican People as recognized by the 1973 Apartheid Convention. 32. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of the Puerto Rican People as recognized by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human rights and the two aforementioned United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966. 33. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the 1965 Racism Convention against the Puerto Rican People. 34. The Defendant has denied and violated the international legal right of the Puerto Rican People to self-determination as recognized by the United Nations Charter, the two United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966, customary international law, and jus cogens. 35. The Defendant has illegally refused to apply the United Nations Decolonization Resolution of 1960 to Puerto Rico. Pursuant thereto, the Defendant has an absolute international legal obligation to decolonize Puerto Rico immediately and to transfer all powers it currently exercises there to the Puerto Rican People. 36. The Defendant has illegally refused to accord full-scope protections as Prisoners-of-War to captured Puerto Rican independence fighters in violation of the Third Geneva Convention of 1949 and Additional Protocol I thereto of 1977. The Defendant's treatment of captured Puerto Rican independence fighters as common criminals and terrorists constitutes a grave breach of the Geneva Accords and thus a serious war crime. An International Criminal Conspiracy and a Criminal Organization 37. In light of the foregoing international crimes, the Defendant constitutes an International Criminal Conspiracy and a Criminal Organization in accordance with the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles and the other sources of public international law specified above. The Federal Government of the United States of America is legally identical to the Nazi government of World War II Germany. Indeed, the Defendant's President, George Bush, has proclaimed a so-called New World Order that sounds and looks strikingly similar to the New Order proclaimed by Adolph Hitler over fifty years ago. Conclusion Like unto a pirate, the Defendant is hostis humani generis: The enemy of all humankind! For the good of all humanity, this Tribunal must condemn and repudiate the Federal Government of the United States of America and its grotesque vision of a New World Order that is constructed upon warfare, bloodshed, violence, criminality, genocide, racism, colonialism, apartheid, massive violations of fundamental human rights, and the denial of the international legal right of self-determination to the Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America and elsewhere around the world. Consequently, this Tribunal must find the Defendant guilty as charged on all of the counts specified above beyond a reasonable doubt. This Tribunal must also issue an Order that formally proscribes the Federal Government of the United States of America as an International Criminal Conspiracy and a Criminal Organization. This Tribunal must also issue a separate Order mandating the dissolution of the Federal Government of the United States of America as a legal and political entity. Finally, this Tribunal must declare that international legal sovereignty over the Territories principally inhabited by the Native American Peoples, the New Afrikan People, the Mexicano People, and the People of Puerto Rico resides, respectively, in the hands of these Peoples Themselves. The very lives, well-being, health, welfare, and safety of the Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America and elsewhere around the world depend upon the ultimate success of your deliberations. Respectfully submitted by, FRANCIS A. BOYLE PROFESSOR OF INTERNATIONAL LAW SPECIAL PROSECUTOR Dated: September 18, 1992 University of Illinois College of Law 504 East Pennsylvania Champaign, IL 61820 217-333-7954 See USA on Trial: The International Tribunal on Indigenous Peoples'and Oppressed Nations in the United States. The Book and Verdict are available from Editorial El Coqui, 1671 N. Claremont,Chicago Illinois 60647. Or you can try calling the Puerto Rican Cultural Center in Chicago at 312-342-4295. The Video can be obtained from Mission Creek Video, PO Box 411271 San Francisco CA 941141 (phone:415-695-0931). Francis A. Boyle * ================================================================ .NY Transfer News Collective * A Service of Blythe Systems . Since 1985 - Information for the Rest of Us . .339 Lafayette St., New York, NY 10012 http://www.blythe.org .List Archives: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/pipermail/nytr/ .Subscribe: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/mailman/listinfo/nytr ================================================================ From fboyle at illinois.edu Mon Jun 19 18:30:26 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2017 18:30:26 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide In-Reply-To: References: <200610092004.k99K4dXo038063@pencil.math.missouri.edu> Message-ID: As for the "future" of our Native American Studies Program and Department, I submit we should leave them DESTROYED as a Permanent Monument and Testament to how mean, nasty, vicious, cruel, ruthless, and unprincipled our Campus Zionists and our Community Zionists really are. Francis A. Boyle Professor of Law Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 10:04 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide The Local Zionists are mean, nasty, vicious, ruthless and unprincipled People who will stop at nothing to get their way. Hence they destroyed our Native American Studies Program and destroyed Salaita's Career as a Professor and threw Salaita, his Wife and their Baby out into the Street with no visible means of support. I cannot offhand recall a Greater Academic Cosmic Injustice since when I entered Higher Education in 1968. Francis A. Boyle Professor of Law Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 6:57 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide And as for the Zionists on this Campus and in this Community, I hold you accountable for destroying our Native American Studies Program. Francis A. Boyle Professor of Law Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 6:47 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide After the long years of hard work and pain and suffering and tears and agony that we all engaged in trying to get rid of Chief Illiniwak and instituting the Native American Studies Program as some sort of compensation, Wise {sic!} and her Zionists destroyed it all in the bat of an eye. I cannot think of a Greater Academic Cosmic Injustice. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2017 12:28 PM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide Because of the pro bono work I did for AIM, I came to understand that American Indians see the US Government the same way the Jews see the Nazis. Wise "{sic!} is a Nazi! Ditto and pari passu for what she did to the Palestinians. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2017 9:51 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide And Wise {sic!} has successfully terrorized and intimidated every Palestinian/Arab/Muslim of Color on this Campus. Nothing has changed for American Indians and Palestinians/Arabs/Muslims of Color. It is an absolute disgrace but no surprise that the rotten and corrupt and racist AAUP eliminated the die-hard Anti-Palestinian University of Illiniwaks from their Censure List. That is precisely why I quit the AAUP years ago because of their die-hard bigotry and racism against Palestinians/Arabs/Muslims of Color. And now ditto for American Indians. Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2017 9:43 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: FW: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide My pro bono publico Clients here were the American Indian Movement. Chief Illiniwak is an Indicium of Genocide.And Wise {sic!} just Ethnically Cleansed Native Americans off of this Campus. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com [mailto:nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com] Sent: Monday, October 09, 2006 3:05 PM To: undisclosed-recipients Subject: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit [Here's one of our annual Columbus Day pieces. -NYTr] sent by Francis Boyle Columbus Day Promotes Genocide Indictment of the Federal Government of the U.S. for the commission of international crimes and petition for orders mandating its proscription and dissolution as an international criminal conspiracy and criminal organization By Francis A. Boyle, Professor of International Law 18 September 1992 Introduction All citizens of the World Community have both the right and the duty under public international law to sit in judgment over a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental norms of international criminal law committed by any member state of that same World Community. Such is the case for the International Tribunal of Indigenous Peoples and Oppressed Nationalities in the United States of America that convenes in San Francisco during the weekend of October 1-4, 1992. Its weighty but important task is to examine the long history of international criminal activity that has been perpetrated by the Federal Government of the United States of America against the Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America since it was founded in 1787. Toward that end, I have the honor to present to the Members of this Tribunal the following charges against the Federal Government of the United States of America under international criminal law. In light of the gravity, severity, and longstanding nature of these international crimes and also in light of the fact that the Federal Government of the United States of America appears to be irrevocably committed to continuing down this path of lawlessness and criminality against Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America and elsewhere, I hereby petition the Members of this Tribunal to issue an Order proscribing the Federal Government of the United States of America as an International Criminal Conspiracy and a Criminal Organization under the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles as well as the other sources of public international law specified below. For that reason, I also request that the Members of this Tribunal issue an Order dissolving the Federal Government of the United States of America as a legal and political entity. Finally, I ask this Tribunal to declare that international legal sovereignty over the Territories principally inhabited by the Native American Peoples, the New Afrikan People, the Mexicano People, and the People of Puerto Rico resides in the hands of these respective Peoples Themselves. In this regard, I should point out that the final Decision of this Tribunal will qualify as a judicial decision within the meaning of article 38(1)(d) of the Statute of the International Court of Justice and will therefore constitute a subsidiary means for the determination of rules of law for international law and practice. The Statute of the International Court of Justice is an integral part of the United Nations Charter under article 92 thereof. Thus, this Tribunal's Decision can be relied upon by some future International Criminal Court or Tribunal, as well as by any People or State of the World Community that desires to initiate criminal proceedings against named individuals for the commission of the following international crimes. The Decision of this Tribunal shall serve as adequate notice to the appropriate officials in the United States Federal Government that they bear personal criminal responsibility under international law and the domestic legal systems of all Peoples and States in the World Community for designing and implementing these illegal, criminal and reprehensible policies and practices against Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America. Hereinafter, the Federal Government of the United States of America will be referred to as the Defendant. BILL OF PARTICULARS AGAINST THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA The Native American Peoples 1. The Defendant has perpetrated innumerable Crimes Against eace, Crimes Against Humanity and War Crimes against Native American Peoples as recognized by the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles. 2. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Genocide against Native American Peoples as recognized by the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. 3. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Apartheid against Native American Peoples as recognized by the 1973 International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid. 4. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of Native American Peoples as recognized by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights. 5. The Defendant has perpetrated numerous and repeated violations of the 1965 International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination against Native American Peoples. 6. The Defendant has systematically violated 371 treaties it concluded with Native American Peoples in wanton disregard of the basic principle of public international law and practice dictating pacta sunt servanda. 7. The Defendant has denied and violated the international legal right of Native American Peoples to self-determination as recognized by the 1945 United Nations Charter, the 1966 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the 1966 International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, fundamental principles of customary international law, and jus cogens. 8. The Defendant has violated the seminal United Nations Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Territories of 1960 with respect to Native American Peoples and Territories. Pursuant thereto, the Defendant has an absolute international legal obligation to decolonize Native American Territories immediately and to transfer all powers it currently exercises there to the Native American Peoples. 9. The Defendant has illegally refused to accord full-scope protections as Prisoners-of-War to captured Native American independence fighters in violation of the Third Geneva Convention of 1949 and Additional Protocol I thereto of 1977. The Defendant's treatment of captured Native American independence fighters as common criminals and terrorists constitutes a grave breach of the Geneva Accords and thus a serious war crime. 10. The Defendant has deliberately and systematically permitted, aided and abetted, solicited and conspired to commit the dumping, transportation, and location of nuclear, toxic, medical and otherwise hazardous waste materials on Native American Territories across North America and has thus created a clear and present danger to the lives, health, safety, and physical and mental well-being of Native American Peoples in gross violation of article 3 and article 2(c) of the 1948 Genocide Convention, inter alia: Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; ... The New Afrikan People 11. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Slavery upon the New Afrikan People as recognized in part by the 1926 Slavery Convention and the 1956 Supplementary Convention on the Abolition of Slavery, the Slave Trade, and Institutions and Practices Similar to Slavery. The Defendant has illegally refused to pay reparations to the New Afrikan People for the commission of the International Crime of Slavery against Them in violation of basic norms of customary international law requiring such reparations to be paid. 12. The Defendant has perpetrated innumerable Crimes Against Humanity against the New Afrikan People as recognized by the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles. 13. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of genocide against the New Afrikan People as recognized by the 1948 Genocide Convention. 14. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Apartheid against the New Afrikan People as recognized by the 1973 Apartheid Convention. 15. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of the New Afrikan People as recognized by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the two aforementioned United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966. 16. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the 1965 Racism Convention against the New Afrikan People. The Defendant is the paradigmatic example of an irremediably racist state in international relations today. 17. The Defendant has denied and violated the international legal right of the New Afrikan People to self-determination as recognized by the United Nations Charter, the two United Nations Human rights Covenants of 1966, customary international law, and jus cogens. 18. The Defendant has illegally refused to apply the United Nations Decolonization Resolution of 1960 to the New Afrikan People and to the Territories that they principally inhabit. Pursuant thereto, the Defendant has an absolute international legal obligation to decolonize New Afrikan Territories immediately and to transfer all powers it currently exercises there to the New Afrikan People. 19. The Defendant has illegally refused to accord full-scope protections as Prisoners-of-War to captured New Afrikan independence fighters in violation of the Third Geneva Convention of 1949 and Additional Protocol I thereto of 1977. The Defendant's treatment of captured New Afrikan independence fighters as common criminals and terrorists constitutes a grave breach of the Geneva Accords and thus a serious war crime. The Mexicano People 20. In 1821, Mexico obtained its independence from colonial Spain as a sovereign Mestizo State, extending from Yucatan and Chiapas in the south, to the northern territories of California and New Mexico, which areas the Defendant today calls the states of Texas, California, Arizona, Nevada, Utah, New Mexico, and Colorado. Nevertheless, in 1836 so-called settlors under the sponsorship of the Defendant began the division of the Mexicano People and State by causing the division of the Mexican state of Coahuila-Texas into the Mexican state of Coahuila and the so-called republic of Texas. 21. In 1846, the Defendant perpetrated an unjust, illegal and unjustifiable war upon the remainder of the sovereign People and State of Mexico that violated every known principle of public international law in existence at that time, including, but not limited to, the Christian Doctrine of just war, which was the then reigning standard of customary international law. As a result thereof, the Defendant illegally annexed close to 51% of the territories of the sovereign State of Mexico by means of forcing it to conclude the 1848 Treaty of Guadalupe-Hidalgo under military duress. For these reasons, this Treaty was and still is null and void ab initio as a matter of public international law. The Defendant acquired more Mexican territory through the Gadsen Treaty (Purchase) of 1854. 22. Since these 1848 and 1854 Treaties, the Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Genocide against the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories, as recognized by the 1948 Genocide Convention. 23. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Apartheid against the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories, as recognized by the 1973 Apartheid Convention. 24. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories, as recognized by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the two aforementioned United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966. 25. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the 1965 Racism Convention against the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories. 26. The Defendant has denied and violated the international legal right of the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories to self-determination, as recognized by the United Nations Charter, the two United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966, customary international law, and jus cogens. 27. Since the militarily-imposed division of the Mexican State, the Defendant and its agents have militarily occupied other portions of the Mexican State, have sought to influence the outcome of the Mexican Revolution of 1910, have practiced a consistent pattern of intervention into Mexico's internal affairs, all of which have resulted in the arresting distortion and deformation of the Mexican social and economic order. In this regard, Defendant's so-called North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) constitutes nothing more than an attempt to impose its hegemonial imperialism, economic colonialism, and human exploitation upon the People and State of Mexico. 28. The Defendant has illegally refused to apply the United Nations Decolonization Resolution of 1960 to the Mexicano People and to these occupied territories that they inhabit. Pursuant thereto, the Defendant has an absolute international legal obligation to decolonize both the Mexican occupied territories and the Republic of Mexico immediately, and to transfer all powers it currently exercises there to the Mexicano People. The People and State of Puerto Rico 29. Since its illegal invasion of Puerto Rico in 1898, the Defendant has perpetrated innumerable Crimes against Peace, Crimes against Humanity and War Crimes against the People and State of Puerto Rico as recognized by the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles. 30. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Genocide against the Puerto Rican People as recognized by the 1948 Genocide Convention. 31. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Apartheid against the Puerto Rican People as recognized by the 1973 Apartheid Convention. 32. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of the Puerto Rican People as recognized by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human rights and the two aforementioned United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966. 33. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the 1965 Racism Convention against the Puerto Rican People. 34. The Defendant has denied and violated the international legal right of the Puerto Rican People to self-determination as recognized by the United Nations Charter, the two United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966, customary international law, and jus cogens. 35. The Defendant has illegally refused to apply the United Nations Decolonization Resolution of 1960 to Puerto Rico. Pursuant thereto, the Defendant has an absolute international legal obligation to decolonize Puerto Rico immediately and to transfer all powers it currently exercises there to the Puerto Rican People. 36. The Defendant has illegally refused to accord full-scope protections as Prisoners-of-War to captured Puerto Rican independence fighters in violation of the Third Geneva Convention of 1949 and Additional Protocol I thereto of 1977. The Defendant's treatment of captured Puerto Rican independence fighters as common criminals and terrorists constitutes a grave breach of the Geneva Accords and thus a serious war crime. An International Criminal Conspiracy and a Criminal Organization 37. In light of the foregoing international crimes, the Defendant constitutes an International Criminal Conspiracy and a Criminal Organization in accordance with the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles and the other sources of public international law specified above. The Federal Government of the United States of America is legally identical to the Nazi government of World War II Germany. Indeed, the Defendant's President, George Bush, has proclaimed a so-called New World Order that sounds and looks strikingly similar to the New Order proclaimed by Adolph Hitler over fifty years ago. Conclusion Like unto a pirate, the Defendant is hostis humani generis: The enemy of all humankind! For the good of all humanity, this Tribunal must condemn and repudiate the Federal Government of the United States of America and its grotesque vision of a New World Order that is constructed upon warfare, bloodshed, violence, criminality, genocide, racism, colonialism, apartheid, massive violations of fundamental human rights, and the denial of the international legal right of self-determination to the Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America and elsewhere around the world. Consequently, this Tribunal must find the Defendant guilty as charged on all of the counts specified above beyond a reasonable doubt. This Tribunal must also issue an Order that formally proscribes the Federal Government of the United States of America as an International Criminal Conspiracy and a Criminal Organization. This Tribunal must also issue a separate Order mandating the dissolution of the Federal Government of the United States of America as a legal and political entity. Finally, this Tribunal must declare that international legal sovereignty over the Territories principally inhabited by the Native American Peoples, the New Afrikan People, the Mexicano People, and the People of Puerto Rico resides, respectively, in the hands of these Peoples Themselves. The very lives, well-being, health, welfare, and safety of the Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America and elsewhere around the world depend upon the ultimate success of your deliberations. Respectfully submitted by, FRANCIS A. BOYLE PROFESSOR OF INTERNATIONAL LAW SPECIAL PROSECUTOR Dated: September 18, 1992 University of Illinois College of Law 504 East Pennsylvania Champaign, IL 61820 217-333-7954 See USA on Trial: The International Tribunal on Indigenous Peoples'and Oppressed Nations in the United States. The Book and Verdict are available from Editorial El Coqui, 1671 N. Claremont,Chicago Illinois 60647. Or you can try calling the Puerto Rican Cultural Center in Chicago at 312-342-4295. The Video can be obtained from Mission Creek Video, PO Box 411271 San Francisco CA 941141 (phone:415-695-0931). Francis A. Boyle * ================================================================ .NY Transfer News Collective * A Service of Blythe Systems . Since 1985 - Information for the Rest of Us . .339 Lafayette St., New York, NY 10012 http://www.blythe.org .List Archives: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/pipermail/nytr/ .Subscribe: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/mailman/listinfo/nytr ================================================================ From fboyle at illinois.edu Mon Jun 19 18:44:35 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2017 18:44:35 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide In-Reply-To: References: <200610092004.k99K4dXo038063@pencil.math.missouri.edu> Message-ID: And I respectfully request that everyone on this list get the Message out that no American Indian Professor, Scholar or Expert should have anything to do with this God-forsaken Campus. Ditto for Middle East Professors, Scholars and Experts. Let the University of Illinois ROT in the Bigotry, Racism and Ignorance of Zionism! Francis A. Boyle Professor of Law Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 1:30 PM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide As for the "future" of our Native American Studies Program and Department, I submit we should leave them DESTROYED as a Permanent Monument and Testament to how mean, nasty, vicious, cruel, ruthless, and unprincipled our Campus Zionists and our Community Zionists really are. Francis A. Boyle Professor of Law Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 10:04 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide The Local Zionists are mean, nasty, vicious, ruthless and unprincipled People who will stop at nothing to get their way. Hence they destroyed our Native American Studies Program and destroyed Salaita's Career as a Professor and threw Salaita, his Wife and their Baby out into the Street with no visible means of support. I cannot offhand recall a Greater Academic Cosmic Injustice since when I entered Higher Education in 1968. Francis A. Boyle Professor of Law Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 6:57 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide And as for the Zionists on this Campus and in this Community, I hold you accountable for destroying our Native American Studies Program. Francis A. Boyle Professor of Law Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 6:47 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide After the long years of hard work and pain and suffering and tears and agony that we all engaged in trying to get rid of Chief Illiniwak and instituting the Native American Studies Program as some sort of compensation, Wise {sic!} and her Zionists destroyed it all in the bat of an eye. I cannot think of a Greater Academic Cosmic Injustice. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2017 12:28 PM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide Because of the pro bono work I did for AIM, I came to understand that American Indians see the US Government the same way the Jews see the Nazis. Wise "{sic!} is a Nazi! Ditto and pari passu for what she did to the Palestinians. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2017 9:51 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide And Wise {sic!} has successfully terrorized and intimidated every Palestinian/Arab/Muslim of Color on this Campus. Nothing has changed for American Indians and Palestinians/Arabs/Muslims of Color. It is an absolute disgrace but no surprise that the rotten and corrupt and racist AAUP eliminated the die-hard Anti-Palestinian University of Illiniwaks from their Censure List. That is precisely why I quit the AAUP years ago because of their die-hard bigotry and racism against Palestinians/Arabs/Muslims of Color. And now ditto for American Indians. Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2017 9:43 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: FW: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide My pro bono publico Clients here were the American Indian Movement. Chief Illiniwak is an Indicium of Genocide.And Wise {sic!} just Ethnically Cleansed Native Americans off of this Campus. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com [mailto:nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com] Sent: Monday, October 09, 2006 3:05 PM To: undisclosed-recipients Subject: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit [Here's one of our annual Columbus Day pieces. -NYTr] sent by Francis Boyle Columbus Day Promotes Genocide Indictment of the Federal Government of the U.S. for the commission of international crimes and petition for orders mandating its proscription and dissolution as an international criminal conspiracy and criminal organization By Francis A. Boyle, Professor of International Law 18 September 1992 Introduction All citizens of the World Community have both the right and the duty under public international law to sit in judgment over a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental norms of international criminal law committed by any member state of that same World Community. Such is the case for the International Tribunal of Indigenous Peoples and Oppressed Nationalities in the United States of America that convenes in San Francisco during the weekend of October 1-4, 1992. Its weighty but important task is to examine the long history of international criminal activity that has been perpetrated by the Federal Government of the United States of America against the Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America since it was founded in 1787. Toward that end, I have the honor to present to the Members of this Tribunal the following charges against the Federal Government of the United States of America under international criminal law. In light of the gravity, severity, and longstanding nature of these international crimes and also in light of the fact that the Federal Government of the United States of America appears to be irrevocably committed to continuing down this path of lawlessness and criminality against Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America and elsewhere, I hereby petition the Members of this Tribunal to issue an Order proscribing the Federal Government of the United States of America as an International Criminal Conspiracy and a Criminal Organization under the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles as well as the other sources of public international law specified below. For that reason, I also request that the Members of this Tribunal issue an Order dissolving the Federal Government of the United States of America as a legal and political entity. Finally, I ask this Tribunal to declare that international legal sovereignty over the Territories principally inhabited by the Native American Peoples, the New Afrikan People, the Mexicano People, and the People of Puerto Rico resides in the hands of these respective Peoples Themselves. In this regard, I should point out that the final Decision of this Tribunal will qualify as a judicial decision within the meaning of article 38(1)(d) of the Statute of the International Court of Justice and will therefore constitute a subsidiary means for the determination of rules of law for international law and practice. The Statute of the International Court of Justice is an integral part of the United Nations Charter under article 92 thereof. Thus, this Tribunal's Decision can be relied upon by some future International Criminal Court or Tribunal, as well as by any People or State of the World Community that desires to initiate criminal proceedings against named individuals for the commission of the following international crimes. The Decision of this Tribunal shall serve as adequate notice to the appropriate officials in the United States Federal Government that they bear personal criminal responsibility under international law and the domestic legal systems of all Peoples and States in the World Community for designing and implementing these illegal, criminal and reprehensible policies and practices against Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America. Hereinafter, the Federal Government of the United States of America will be referred to as the Defendant. BILL OF PARTICULARS AGAINST THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA The Native American Peoples 1. The Defendant has perpetrated innumerable Crimes Against eace, Crimes Against Humanity and War Crimes against Native American Peoples as recognized by the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles. 2. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Genocide against Native American Peoples as recognized by the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. 3. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Apartheid against Native American Peoples as recognized by the 1973 International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid. 4. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of Native American Peoples as recognized by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights. 5. The Defendant has perpetrated numerous and repeated violations of the 1965 International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination against Native American Peoples. 6. The Defendant has systematically violated 371 treaties it concluded with Native American Peoples in wanton disregard of the basic principle of public international law and practice dictating pacta sunt servanda. 7. The Defendant has denied and violated the international legal right of Native American Peoples to self-determination as recognized by the 1945 United Nations Charter, the 1966 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the 1966 International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, fundamental principles of customary international law, and jus cogens. 8. The Defendant has violated the seminal United Nations Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Territories of 1960 with respect to Native American Peoples and Territories. Pursuant thereto, the Defendant has an absolute international legal obligation to decolonize Native American Territories immediately and to transfer all powers it currently exercises there to the Native American Peoples. 9. The Defendant has illegally refused to accord full-scope protections as Prisoners-of-War to captured Native American independence fighters in violation of the Third Geneva Convention of 1949 and Additional Protocol I thereto of 1977. The Defendant's treatment of captured Native American independence fighters as common criminals and terrorists constitutes a grave breach of the Geneva Accords and thus a serious war crime. 10. The Defendant has deliberately and systematically permitted, aided and abetted, solicited and conspired to commit the dumping, transportation, and location of nuclear, toxic, medical and otherwise hazardous waste materials on Native American Territories across North America and has thus created a clear and present danger to the lives, health, safety, and physical and mental well-being of Native American Peoples in gross violation of article 3 and article 2(c) of the 1948 Genocide Convention, inter alia: Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; ... The New Afrikan People 11. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Slavery upon the New Afrikan People as recognized in part by the 1926 Slavery Convention and the 1956 Supplementary Convention on the Abolition of Slavery, the Slave Trade, and Institutions and Practices Similar to Slavery. The Defendant has illegally refused to pay reparations to the New Afrikan People for the commission of the International Crime of Slavery against Them in violation of basic norms of customary international law requiring such reparations to be paid. 12. The Defendant has perpetrated innumerable Crimes Against Humanity against the New Afrikan People as recognized by the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles. 13. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of genocide against the New Afrikan People as recognized by the 1948 Genocide Convention. 14. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Apartheid against the New Afrikan People as recognized by the 1973 Apartheid Convention. 15. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of the New Afrikan People as recognized by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the two aforementioned United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966. 16. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the 1965 Racism Convention against the New Afrikan People. The Defendant is the paradigmatic example of an irremediably racist state in international relations today. 17. The Defendant has denied and violated the international legal right of the New Afrikan People to self-determination as recognized by the United Nations Charter, the two United Nations Human rights Covenants of 1966, customary international law, and jus cogens. 18. The Defendant has illegally refused to apply the United Nations Decolonization Resolution of 1960 to the New Afrikan People and to the Territories that they principally inhabit. Pursuant thereto, the Defendant has an absolute international legal obligation to decolonize New Afrikan Territories immediately and to transfer all powers it currently exercises there to the New Afrikan People. 19. The Defendant has illegally refused to accord full-scope protections as Prisoners-of-War to captured New Afrikan independence fighters in violation of the Third Geneva Convention of 1949 and Additional Protocol I thereto of 1977. The Defendant's treatment of captured New Afrikan independence fighters as common criminals and terrorists constitutes a grave breach of the Geneva Accords and thus a serious war crime. The Mexicano People 20. In 1821, Mexico obtained its independence from colonial Spain as a sovereign Mestizo State, extending from Yucatan and Chiapas in the south, to the northern territories of California and New Mexico, which areas the Defendant today calls the states of Texas, California, Arizona, Nevada, Utah, New Mexico, and Colorado. Nevertheless, in 1836 so-called settlors under the sponsorship of the Defendant began the division of the Mexicano People and State by causing the division of the Mexican state of Coahuila-Texas into the Mexican state of Coahuila and the so-called republic of Texas. 21. In 1846, the Defendant perpetrated an unjust, illegal and unjustifiable war upon the remainder of the sovereign People and State of Mexico that violated every known principle of public international law in existence at that time, including, but not limited to, the Christian Doctrine of just war, which was the then reigning standard of customary international law. As a result thereof, the Defendant illegally annexed close to 51% of the territories of the sovereign State of Mexico by means of forcing it to conclude the 1848 Treaty of Guadalupe-Hidalgo under military duress. For these reasons, this Treaty was and still is null and void ab initio as a matter of public international law. The Defendant acquired more Mexican territory through the Gadsen Treaty (Purchase) of 1854. 22. Since these 1848 and 1854 Treaties, the Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Genocide against the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories, as recognized by the 1948 Genocide Convention. 23. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Apartheid against the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories, as recognized by the 1973 Apartheid Convention. 24. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories, as recognized by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the two aforementioned United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966. 25. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the 1965 Racism Convention against the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories. 26. The Defendant has denied and violated the international legal right of the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories to self-determination, as recognized by the United Nations Charter, the two United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966, customary international law, and jus cogens. 27. Since the militarily-imposed division of the Mexican State, the Defendant and its agents have militarily occupied other portions of the Mexican State, have sought to influence the outcome of the Mexican Revolution of 1910, have practiced a consistent pattern of intervention into Mexico's internal affairs, all of which have resulted in the arresting distortion and deformation of the Mexican social and economic order. In this regard, Defendant's so-called North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) constitutes nothing more than an attempt to impose its hegemonial imperialism, economic colonialism, and human exploitation upon the People and State of Mexico. 28. The Defendant has illegally refused to apply the United Nations Decolonization Resolution of 1960 to the Mexicano People and to these occupied territories that they inhabit. Pursuant thereto, the Defendant has an absolute international legal obligation to decolonize both the Mexican occupied territories and the Republic of Mexico immediately, and to transfer all powers it currently exercises there to the Mexicano People. The People and State of Puerto Rico 29. Since its illegal invasion of Puerto Rico in 1898, the Defendant has perpetrated innumerable Crimes against Peace, Crimes against Humanity and War Crimes against the People and State of Puerto Rico as recognized by the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles. 30. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Genocide against the Puerto Rican People as recognized by the 1948 Genocide Convention. 31. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Apartheid against the Puerto Rican People as recognized by the 1973 Apartheid Convention. 32. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of the Puerto Rican People as recognized by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human rights and the two aforementioned United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966. 33. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the 1965 Racism Convention against the Puerto Rican People. 34. The Defendant has denied and violated the international legal right of the Puerto Rican People to self-determination as recognized by the United Nations Charter, the two United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966, customary international law, and jus cogens. 35. The Defendant has illegally refused to apply the United Nations Decolonization Resolution of 1960 to Puerto Rico. Pursuant thereto, the Defendant has an absolute international legal obligation to decolonize Puerto Rico immediately and to transfer all powers it currently exercises there to the Puerto Rican People. 36. The Defendant has illegally refused to accord full-scope protections as Prisoners-of-War to captured Puerto Rican independence fighters in violation of the Third Geneva Convention of 1949 and Additional Protocol I thereto of 1977. The Defendant's treatment of captured Puerto Rican independence fighters as common criminals and terrorists constitutes a grave breach of the Geneva Accords and thus a serious war crime. An International Criminal Conspiracy and a Criminal Organization 37. In light of the foregoing international crimes, the Defendant constitutes an International Criminal Conspiracy and a Criminal Organization in accordance with the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles and the other sources of public international law specified above. The Federal Government of the United States of America is legally identical to the Nazi government of World War II Germany. Indeed, the Defendant's President, George Bush, has proclaimed a so-called New World Order that sounds and looks strikingly similar to the New Order proclaimed by Adolph Hitler over fifty years ago. Conclusion Like unto a pirate, the Defendant is hostis humani generis: The enemy of all humankind! For the good of all humanity, this Tribunal must condemn and repudiate the Federal Government of the United States of America and its grotesque vision of a New World Order that is constructed upon warfare, bloodshed, violence, criminality, genocide, racism, colonialism, apartheid, massive violations of fundamental human rights, and the denial of the international legal right of self-determination to the Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America and elsewhere around the world. Consequently, this Tribunal must find the Defendant guilty as charged on all of the counts specified above beyond a reasonable doubt. This Tribunal must also issue an Order that formally proscribes the Federal Government of the United States of America as an International Criminal Conspiracy and a Criminal Organization. This Tribunal must also issue a separate Order mandating the dissolution of the Federal Government of the United States of America as a legal and political entity. Finally, this Tribunal must declare that international legal sovereignty over the Territories principally inhabited by the Native American Peoples, the New Afrikan People, the Mexicano People, and the People of Puerto Rico resides, respectively, in the hands of these Peoples Themselves. The very lives, well-being, health, welfare, and safety of the Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America and elsewhere around the world depend upon the ultimate success of your deliberations. Respectfully submitted by, FRANCIS A. BOYLE PROFESSOR OF INTERNATIONAL LAW SPECIAL PROSECUTOR Dated: September 18, 1992 University of Illinois College of Law 504 East Pennsylvania Champaign, IL 61820 217-333-7954 See USA on Trial: The International Tribunal on Indigenous Peoples'and Oppressed Nations in the United States. The Book and Verdict are available from Editorial El Coqui, 1671 N. Claremont,Chicago Illinois 60647. Or you can try calling the Puerto Rican Cultural Center in Chicago at 312-342-4295. The Video can be obtained from Mission Creek Video, PO Box 411271 San Francisco CA 941141 (phone:415-695-0931). Francis A. Boyle * ================================================================ .NY Transfer News Collective * A Service of Blythe Systems . Since 1985 - Information for the Rest of Us . .339 Lafayette St., New York, NY 10012 http://www.blythe.org .List Archives: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/pipermail/nytr/ .Subscribe: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/mailman/listinfo/nytr ================================================================ From fboyle at illinois.edu Mon Jun 19 18:44:35 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2017 18:44:35 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide In-Reply-To: References: <200610092004.k99K4dXo038063@pencil.math.missouri.edu> Message-ID: And I respectfully request that everyone on this list get the Message out that no American Indian Professor, Scholar or Expert should have anything to do with this God-forsaken Campus. Ditto for Middle East Professors, Scholars and Experts. Let the University of Illinois ROT in the Bigotry, Racism and Ignorance of Zionism! Francis A. Boyle Professor of Law Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 1:30 PM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide As for the "future" of our Native American Studies Program and Department, I submit we should leave them DESTROYED as a Permanent Monument and Testament to how mean, nasty, vicious, cruel, ruthless, and unprincipled our Campus Zionists and our Community Zionists really are. Francis A. Boyle Professor of Law Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 10:04 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide The Local Zionists are mean, nasty, vicious, ruthless and unprincipled People who will stop at nothing to get their way. Hence they destroyed our Native American Studies Program and destroyed Salaita's Career as a Professor and threw Salaita, his Wife and their Baby out into the Street with no visible means of support. I cannot offhand recall a Greater Academic Cosmic Injustice since when I entered Higher Education in 1968. Francis A. Boyle Professor of Law Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 6:57 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide And as for the Zionists on this Campus and in this Community, I hold you accountable for destroying our Native American Studies Program. Francis A. Boyle Professor of Law Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 6:47 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide After the long years of hard work and pain and suffering and tears and agony that we all engaged in trying to get rid of Chief Illiniwak and instituting the Native American Studies Program as some sort of compensation, Wise {sic!} and her Zionists destroyed it all in the bat of an eye. I cannot think of a Greater Academic Cosmic Injustice. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2017 12:28 PM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide Because of the pro bono work I did for AIM, I came to understand that American Indians see the US Government the same way the Jews see the Nazis. Wise "{sic!} is a Nazi! Ditto and pari passu for what she did to the Palestinians. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2017 9:51 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide And Wise {sic!} has successfully terrorized and intimidated every Palestinian/Arab/Muslim of Color on this Campus. Nothing has changed for American Indians and Palestinians/Arabs/Muslims of Color. It is an absolute disgrace but no surprise that the rotten and corrupt and racist AAUP eliminated the die-hard Anti-Palestinian University of Illiniwaks from their Censure List. That is precisely why I quit the AAUP years ago because of their die-hard bigotry and racism against Palestinians/Arabs/Muslims of Color. And now ditto for American Indians. Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2017 9:43 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: FW: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide My pro bono publico Clients here were the American Indian Movement. Chief Illiniwak is an Indicium of Genocide.And Wise {sic!} just Ethnically Cleansed Native Americans off of this Campus. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com [mailto:nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com] Sent: Monday, October 09, 2006 3:05 PM To: undisclosed-recipients Subject: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit [Here's one of our annual Columbus Day pieces. -NYTr] sent by Francis Boyle Columbus Day Promotes Genocide Indictment of the Federal Government of the U.S. for the commission of international crimes and petition for orders mandating its proscription and dissolution as an international criminal conspiracy and criminal organization By Francis A. Boyle, Professor of International Law 18 September 1992 Introduction All citizens of the World Community have both the right and the duty under public international law to sit in judgment over a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental norms of international criminal law committed by any member state of that same World Community. Such is the case for the International Tribunal of Indigenous Peoples and Oppressed Nationalities in the United States of America that convenes in San Francisco during the weekend of October 1-4, 1992. Its weighty but important task is to examine the long history of international criminal activity that has been perpetrated by the Federal Government of the United States of America against the Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America since it was founded in 1787. Toward that end, I have the honor to present to the Members of this Tribunal the following charges against the Federal Government of the United States of America under international criminal law. In light of the gravity, severity, and longstanding nature of these international crimes and also in light of the fact that the Federal Government of the United States of America appears to be irrevocably committed to continuing down this path of lawlessness and criminality against Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America and elsewhere, I hereby petition the Members of this Tribunal to issue an Order proscribing the Federal Government of the United States of America as an International Criminal Conspiracy and a Criminal Organization under the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles as well as the other sources of public international law specified below. For that reason, I also request that the Members of this Tribunal issue an Order dissolving the Federal Government of the United States of America as a legal and political entity. Finally, I ask this Tribunal to declare that international legal sovereignty over the Territories principally inhabited by the Native American Peoples, the New Afrikan People, the Mexicano People, and the People of Puerto Rico resides in the hands of these respective Peoples Themselves. In this regard, I should point out that the final Decision of this Tribunal will qualify as a judicial decision within the meaning of article 38(1)(d) of the Statute of the International Court of Justice and will therefore constitute a subsidiary means for the determination of rules of law for international law and practice. The Statute of the International Court of Justice is an integral part of the United Nations Charter under article 92 thereof. Thus, this Tribunal's Decision can be relied upon by some future International Criminal Court or Tribunal, as well as by any People or State of the World Community that desires to initiate criminal proceedings against named individuals for the commission of the following international crimes. The Decision of this Tribunal shall serve as adequate notice to the appropriate officials in the United States Federal Government that they bear personal criminal responsibility under international law and the domestic legal systems of all Peoples and States in the World Community for designing and implementing these illegal, criminal and reprehensible policies and practices against Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America. Hereinafter, the Federal Government of the United States of America will be referred to as the Defendant. BILL OF PARTICULARS AGAINST THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA The Native American Peoples 1. The Defendant has perpetrated innumerable Crimes Against eace, Crimes Against Humanity and War Crimes against Native American Peoples as recognized by the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles. 2. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Genocide against Native American Peoples as recognized by the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. 3. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Apartheid against Native American Peoples as recognized by the 1973 International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid. 4. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of Native American Peoples as recognized by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights. 5. The Defendant has perpetrated numerous and repeated violations of the 1965 International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination against Native American Peoples. 6. The Defendant has systematically violated 371 treaties it concluded with Native American Peoples in wanton disregard of the basic principle of public international law and practice dictating pacta sunt servanda. 7. The Defendant has denied and violated the international legal right of Native American Peoples to self-determination as recognized by the 1945 United Nations Charter, the 1966 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the 1966 International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, fundamental principles of customary international law, and jus cogens. 8. The Defendant has violated the seminal United Nations Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Territories of 1960 with respect to Native American Peoples and Territories. Pursuant thereto, the Defendant has an absolute international legal obligation to decolonize Native American Territories immediately and to transfer all powers it currently exercises there to the Native American Peoples. 9. The Defendant has illegally refused to accord full-scope protections as Prisoners-of-War to captured Native American independence fighters in violation of the Third Geneva Convention of 1949 and Additional Protocol I thereto of 1977. The Defendant's treatment of captured Native American independence fighters as common criminals and terrorists constitutes a grave breach of the Geneva Accords and thus a serious war crime. 10. The Defendant has deliberately and systematically permitted, aided and abetted, solicited and conspired to commit the dumping, transportation, and location of nuclear, toxic, medical and otherwise hazardous waste materials on Native American Territories across North America and has thus created a clear and present danger to the lives, health, safety, and physical and mental well-being of Native American Peoples in gross violation of article 3 and article 2(c) of the 1948 Genocide Convention, inter alia: Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; ... The New Afrikan People 11. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Slavery upon the New Afrikan People as recognized in part by the 1926 Slavery Convention and the 1956 Supplementary Convention on the Abolition of Slavery, the Slave Trade, and Institutions and Practices Similar to Slavery. The Defendant has illegally refused to pay reparations to the New Afrikan People for the commission of the International Crime of Slavery against Them in violation of basic norms of customary international law requiring such reparations to be paid. 12. The Defendant has perpetrated innumerable Crimes Against Humanity against the New Afrikan People as recognized by the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles. 13. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of genocide against the New Afrikan People as recognized by the 1948 Genocide Convention. 14. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Apartheid against the New Afrikan People as recognized by the 1973 Apartheid Convention. 15. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of the New Afrikan People as recognized by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the two aforementioned United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966. 16. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the 1965 Racism Convention against the New Afrikan People. The Defendant is the paradigmatic example of an irremediably racist state in international relations today. 17. The Defendant has denied and violated the international legal right of the New Afrikan People to self-determination as recognized by the United Nations Charter, the two United Nations Human rights Covenants of 1966, customary international law, and jus cogens. 18. The Defendant has illegally refused to apply the United Nations Decolonization Resolution of 1960 to the New Afrikan People and to the Territories that they principally inhabit. Pursuant thereto, the Defendant has an absolute international legal obligation to decolonize New Afrikan Territories immediately and to transfer all powers it currently exercises there to the New Afrikan People. 19. The Defendant has illegally refused to accord full-scope protections as Prisoners-of-War to captured New Afrikan independence fighters in violation of the Third Geneva Convention of 1949 and Additional Protocol I thereto of 1977. The Defendant's treatment of captured New Afrikan independence fighters as common criminals and terrorists constitutes a grave breach of the Geneva Accords and thus a serious war crime. The Mexicano People 20. In 1821, Mexico obtained its independence from colonial Spain as a sovereign Mestizo State, extending from Yucatan and Chiapas in the south, to the northern territories of California and New Mexico, which areas the Defendant today calls the states of Texas, California, Arizona, Nevada, Utah, New Mexico, and Colorado. Nevertheless, in 1836 so-called settlors under the sponsorship of the Defendant began the division of the Mexicano People and State by causing the division of the Mexican state of Coahuila-Texas into the Mexican state of Coahuila and the so-called republic of Texas. 21. In 1846, the Defendant perpetrated an unjust, illegal and unjustifiable war upon the remainder of the sovereign People and State of Mexico that violated every known principle of public international law in existence at that time, including, but not limited to, the Christian Doctrine of just war, which was the then reigning standard of customary international law. As a result thereof, the Defendant illegally annexed close to 51% of the territories of the sovereign State of Mexico by means of forcing it to conclude the 1848 Treaty of Guadalupe-Hidalgo under military duress. For these reasons, this Treaty was and still is null and void ab initio as a matter of public international law. The Defendant acquired more Mexican territory through the Gadsen Treaty (Purchase) of 1854. 22. Since these 1848 and 1854 Treaties, the Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Genocide against the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories, as recognized by the 1948 Genocide Convention. 23. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Apartheid against the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories, as recognized by the 1973 Apartheid Convention. 24. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories, as recognized by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the two aforementioned United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966. 25. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the 1965 Racism Convention against the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories. 26. The Defendant has denied and violated the international legal right of the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories to self-determination, as recognized by the United Nations Charter, the two United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966, customary international law, and jus cogens. 27. Since the militarily-imposed division of the Mexican State, the Defendant and its agents have militarily occupied other portions of the Mexican State, have sought to influence the outcome of the Mexican Revolution of 1910, have practiced a consistent pattern of intervention into Mexico's internal affairs, all of which have resulted in the arresting distortion and deformation of the Mexican social and economic order. In this regard, Defendant's so-called North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) constitutes nothing more than an attempt to impose its hegemonial imperialism, economic colonialism, and human exploitation upon the People and State of Mexico. 28. The Defendant has illegally refused to apply the United Nations Decolonization Resolution of 1960 to the Mexicano People and to these occupied territories that they inhabit. Pursuant thereto, the Defendant has an absolute international legal obligation to decolonize both the Mexican occupied territories and the Republic of Mexico immediately, and to transfer all powers it currently exercises there to the Mexicano People. The People and State of Puerto Rico 29. Since its illegal invasion of Puerto Rico in 1898, the Defendant has perpetrated innumerable Crimes against Peace, Crimes against Humanity and War Crimes against the People and State of Puerto Rico as recognized by the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles. 30. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Genocide against the Puerto Rican People as recognized by the 1948 Genocide Convention. 31. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Apartheid against the Puerto Rican People as recognized by the 1973 Apartheid Convention. 32. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of the Puerto Rican People as recognized by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human rights and the two aforementioned United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966. 33. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the 1965 Racism Convention against the Puerto Rican People. 34. The Defendant has denied and violated the international legal right of the Puerto Rican People to self-determination as recognized by the United Nations Charter, the two United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966, customary international law, and jus cogens. 35. The Defendant has illegally refused to apply the United Nations Decolonization Resolution of 1960 to Puerto Rico. Pursuant thereto, the Defendant has an absolute international legal obligation to decolonize Puerto Rico immediately and to transfer all powers it currently exercises there to the Puerto Rican People. 36. The Defendant has illegally refused to accord full-scope protections as Prisoners-of-War to captured Puerto Rican independence fighters in violation of the Third Geneva Convention of 1949 and Additional Protocol I thereto of 1977. The Defendant's treatment of captured Puerto Rican independence fighters as common criminals and terrorists constitutes a grave breach of the Geneva Accords and thus a serious war crime. An International Criminal Conspiracy and a Criminal Organization 37. In light of the foregoing international crimes, the Defendant constitutes an International Criminal Conspiracy and a Criminal Organization in accordance with the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles and the other sources of public international law specified above. The Federal Government of the United States of America is legally identical to the Nazi government of World War II Germany. Indeed, the Defendant's President, George Bush, has proclaimed a so-called New World Order that sounds and looks strikingly similar to the New Order proclaimed by Adolph Hitler over fifty years ago. Conclusion Like unto a pirate, the Defendant is hostis humani generis: The enemy of all humankind! For the good of all humanity, this Tribunal must condemn and repudiate the Federal Government of the United States of America and its grotesque vision of a New World Order that is constructed upon warfare, bloodshed, violence, criminality, genocide, racism, colonialism, apartheid, massive violations of fundamental human rights, and the denial of the international legal right of self-determination to the Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America and elsewhere around the world. Consequently, this Tribunal must find the Defendant guilty as charged on all of the counts specified above beyond a reasonable doubt. This Tribunal must also issue an Order that formally proscribes the Federal Government of the United States of America as an International Criminal Conspiracy and a Criminal Organization. This Tribunal must also issue a separate Order mandating the dissolution of the Federal Government of the United States of America as a legal and political entity. Finally, this Tribunal must declare that international legal sovereignty over the Territories principally inhabited by the Native American Peoples, the New Afrikan People, the Mexicano People, and the People of Puerto Rico resides, respectively, in the hands of these Peoples Themselves. The very lives, well-being, health, welfare, and safety of the Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America and elsewhere around the world depend upon the ultimate success of your deliberations. Respectfully submitted by, FRANCIS A. BOYLE PROFESSOR OF INTERNATIONAL LAW SPECIAL PROSECUTOR Dated: September 18, 1992 University of Illinois College of Law 504 East Pennsylvania Champaign, IL 61820 217-333-7954 See USA on Trial: The International Tribunal on Indigenous Peoples'and Oppressed Nations in the United States. The Book and Verdict are available from Editorial El Coqui, 1671 N. Claremont,Chicago Illinois 60647. Or you can try calling the Puerto Rican Cultural Center in Chicago at 312-342-4295. The Video can be obtained from Mission Creek Video, PO Box 411271 San Francisco CA 941141 (phone:415-695-0931). Francis A. Boyle * ================================================================ .NY Transfer News Collective * A Service of Blythe Systems . Since 1985 - Information for the Rest of Us . .339 Lafayette St., New York, NY 10012 http://www.blythe.org .List Archives: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/pipermail/nytr/ .Subscribe: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/mailman/listinfo/nytr ================================================================ From fboyle at illinois.edu Mon Jun 19 18:58:01 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2017 18:58:01 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] FW: Bombing Syria: * Impeachable * Carve-Up Agenda -- Interviews Available References: <1726183174.124505.1497898421864.JavaMail.www-data@mw-press-ws-01.meltwater.com> Message-ID: Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 1:56 PM To: sectns.aals at lists.aals.org Subject: FW: Bombing Syria: * Impeachable * Carve-Up Agenda -- Interviews Available Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Institute for Public Accuracy . [mailto:accuracy at accuracy.org] Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 1:51 PM To: francis.a.boyle at gmail.com Subject: Bombing Syria: * Impeachable * Carve-Up Agenda -- Interviews Available [http://app.meltwaterpress.com/mpress/statistic.html?accessCode=0fb3fb4f07380a40826a76601462ee5cd2ffc5c2&distributionId=541846&contact=francis.a.boyle at gmail.com] The New York Times reports: "Russia Warns U.S. After Downing of Syrian Warplane." This afternoon at the National Press Club, Joint Chiefs Chairman and Marine Gen. Joseph Dunford was asked a question submitted by the Institute for Public Accuracy: “What’s the legal justification for targeting Syrian government forces?" He claimed: “We are there and have legal justification under the Authorization for Use of Military Force, we are prosecuting a campaign against ISIS and Al-Qaeda in Syria.” See video. FRANCIS BOYLE, (217) 333-7954, fboyle at illinois.edu Boyle is professor of international law at the University of Illinois College of Law. He said today: "Gen. Dunford is totally incorrect. The AUMF passed after 9/11 has indeed been used to justify the bombing campaign purporting to target ISIS, but it cannot possibly be used to justify targeting the Syrian government. Those attacks are in fact clearly illegal and impeachable. "Many have put forward dubious arguments for impeaching Trump -- or arguments that they would never apply to a Democratic president. Similarly, some threatened Obama with impeachment and are not doing so now that Trump is engaging in exactly the activity they threatened Obama about. Hypocrisies and hypocrites abound. "If we care about the rule of law, the most striking thing about Trump is his flagrant violation of the War Powers Clause of the Constitution in this targeting of the Syrian government. Now, the U.S. has been violating international law in terms of its drone assassination program and various bombing campaigns, like the one purporting to target ISIS in Syria. Many of these activities are justified by attempts to invoke the Authorization for the Use of Military Force passed after the 9/11 attacks. A decade and a half after those attacks, that rationale is international legal nonsense, but it exists. "In contrast, the targeting of forces of or allied with the Syrian government has no justification whatsoever. It is obviously impeachable -- Obama's people say they were afraid of impeachment for exactly this [see below]. But pro-war Democrats don't raise it because it would put a constraint on the war-making capacities of the U.S. president -- while they pretend to care about the rule of law. "Many of the U.S. attacks on Syria have been around the so-called 'de-confliction zones.' These zones are de facto partitions of Syria in violation of its territorial sovereignty and political independence. This goes back at least to the Pentagon just after 9/11 telling retired General Wesley Clark that they wanted to target Iraq, and then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and, finishing off, Iran. "Israeli strategic interests are obviously served by a breakup of Syria; as is the case for much of the U.S. establishment. The Saudis are clearly on board. The Russians, rhetoric aside, are likely simply looking for some scraps. The big losers are the Syrians and most of the other people of the region." See recent report in the Financial Times: "Syria de-escalation deal stirs fears of carve-up by foreign powers." Also, see new report from the Wall Street Journal: "Israel Gives Secret Aid to Syrian Rebels." Earlier this year, Ben Rhodes, Obama's Deputy National Security Advisor, and foreign policy speechwriter, told Politico that President Obama feared impeachment if he targeted the Syrian government: Rhodes: "The only country in the world that was prepared to join us [in attacking the Assad government] was France. And we had no domestic legal basis. We actually had Congress warning us against taking action without congressional authorization, which we interpreted as the president could face impeachment." Politico: "Really? Was the prospect of impeachment actually a factor in your conversations?" Rhodes: "That was a factor. Go back and read the letters from Boehner, letters from the Republican members of Congress. They laid down markers that this would not be constitutional." House Speaker John Boehner wrote to Obama in 2013: “It is essential you address on what basis any use of force would be legally justified and how the justification comports with the exclusive authority of Congressional authorization under Article I of the Constitution.” Boyle was featured on an Institute for Public Accuracy news release in 2013 along with former Rep. Paul Findley: "* Key Author of War Powers Act: 'Obama has no Authority to Attack Syria' * Impeachment." For more information, contact at the Institute for Public Accuracy: Sam Husseini, (202) 347-0020; David Zupan, (541) 484-9167 June 19, 2017 Institute for Public Accuracy 980 National Press Building, Washington, D.C. 20045 (202) 347-0020 * accuracy.org * ipa at accuracy.org Disclaimer: This email was sent to francis.a.boyle at gmail.com Institute for Public Accuracy, 980 National Press Building, Washington, DC, 20045, United States [Unsubscribe] -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Mon Jun 19 18:58:01 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2017 18:58:01 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] FW: Bombing Syria: * Impeachable * Carve-Up Agenda -- Interviews Available References: <1726183174.124505.1497898421864.JavaMail.www-data@mw-press-ws-01.meltwater.com> Message-ID: Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 1:56 PM To: sectns.aals at lists.aals.org Subject: FW: Bombing Syria: * Impeachable * Carve-Up Agenda -- Interviews Available Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Institute for Public Accuracy . [mailto:accuracy at accuracy.org] Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 1:51 PM To: francis.a.boyle at gmail.com Subject: Bombing Syria: * Impeachable * Carve-Up Agenda -- Interviews Available [http://app.meltwaterpress.com/mpress/statistic.html?accessCode=0fb3fb4f07380a40826a76601462ee5cd2ffc5c2&distributionId=541846&contact=francis.a.boyle at gmail.com] The New York Times reports: "Russia Warns U.S. After Downing of Syrian Warplane." This afternoon at the National Press Club, Joint Chiefs Chairman and Marine Gen. Joseph Dunford was asked a question submitted by the Institute for Public Accuracy: “What’s the legal justification for targeting Syrian government forces?" He claimed: “We are there and have legal justification under the Authorization for Use of Military Force, we are prosecuting a campaign against ISIS and Al-Qaeda in Syria.” See video. FRANCIS BOYLE, (217) 333-7954, fboyle at illinois.edu Boyle is professor of international law at the University of Illinois College of Law. He said today: "Gen. Dunford is totally incorrect. The AUMF passed after 9/11 has indeed been used to justify the bombing campaign purporting to target ISIS, but it cannot possibly be used to justify targeting the Syrian government. Those attacks are in fact clearly illegal and impeachable. "Many have put forward dubious arguments for impeaching Trump -- or arguments that they would never apply to a Democratic president. Similarly, some threatened Obama with impeachment and are not doing so now that Trump is engaging in exactly the activity they threatened Obama about. Hypocrisies and hypocrites abound. "If we care about the rule of law, the most striking thing about Trump is his flagrant violation of the War Powers Clause of the Constitution in this targeting of the Syrian government. Now, the U.S. has been violating international law in terms of its drone assassination program and various bombing campaigns, like the one purporting to target ISIS in Syria. Many of these activities are justified by attempts to invoke the Authorization for the Use of Military Force passed after the 9/11 attacks. A decade and a half after those attacks, that rationale is international legal nonsense, but it exists. "In contrast, the targeting of forces of or allied with the Syrian government has no justification whatsoever. It is obviously impeachable -- Obama's people say they were afraid of impeachment for exactly this [see below]. But pro-war Democrats don't raise it because it would put a constraint on the war-making capacities of the U.S. president -- while they pretend to care about the rule of law. "Many of the U.S. attacks on Syria have been around the so-called 'de-confliction zones.' These zones are de facto partitions of Syria in violation of its territorial sovereignty and political independence. This goes back at least to the Pentagon just after 9/11 telling retired General Wesley Clark that they wanted to target Iraq, and then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and, finishing off, Iran. "Israeli strategic interests are obviously served by a breakup of Syria; as is the case for much of the U.S. establishment. The Saudis are clearly on board. The Russians, rhetoric aside, are likely simply looking for some scraps. The big losers are the Syrians and most of the other people of the region." See recent report in the Financial Times: "Syria de-escalation deal stirs fears of carve-up by foreign powers." Also, see new report from the Wall Street Journal: "Israel Gives Secret Aid to Syrian Rebels." Earlier this year, Ben Rhodes, Obama's Deputy National Security Advisor, and foreign policy speechwriter, told Politico that President Obama feared impeachment if he targeted the Syrian government: Rhodes: "The only country in the world that was prepared to join us [in attacking the Assad government] was France. And we had no domestic legal basis. We actually had Congress warning us against taking action without congressional authorization, which we interpreted as the president could face impeachment." Politico: "Really? Was the prospect of impeachment actually a factor in your conversations?" Rhodes: "That was a factor. Go back and read the letters from Boehner, letters from the Republican members of Congress. They laid down markers that this would not be constitutional." House Speaker John Boehner wrote to Obama in 2013: “It is essential you address on what basis any use of force would be legally justified and how the justification comports with the exclusive authority of Congressional authorization under Article I of the Constitution.” Boyle was featured on an Institute for Public Accuracy news release in 2013 along with former Rep. Paul Findley: "* Key Author of War Powers Act: 'Obama has no Authority to Attack Syria' * Impeachment." For more information, contact at the Institute for Public Accuracy: Sam Husseini, (202) 347-0020; David Zupan, (541) 484-9167 June 19, 2017 Institute for Public Accuracy 980 National Press Building, Washington, D.C. 20045 (202) 347-0020 * accuracy.org * ipa at accuracy.org Disclaimer: This email was sent to francis.a.boyle at gmail.com Institute for Public Accuracy, 980 National Press Building, Washington, DC, 20045, United States [Unsubscribe] -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From r-szoke at illinois.edu Mon Jun 19 20:08:26 2017 From: r-szoke at illinois.edu (Szoke, Ron) Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2017 20:08:26 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Why Is the U.S. Killing So Many Civilians in Syria and Iraq? References: <59481C52.00000031@pmta04.ewr1.nytimes.com> Message-ID: From: r-szoke > Subject: NYTimes.com: Why Is the U.S. Killing So Many Civilians in Syria and Iraq? Date: June 19, 2017 at 1:47:46 PM CDT To: > Reply-To: > Sent by r-szoke at illinois.edu: [http://i1.nyt.com/images/misc/nytlogo194x27.gif] [https://static01.nyt.com/images/2017/06/19/opinion/19zenkoWeb/19zenkoWeb-thumbStandard.jpg] Op-Ed Contributor Why Is the U.S. Killing So Many Civilians in Syria and Iraq? By MICAH ZENKO Since Trump took office, the number of civilian casualties in the war against the Islamic State has jumped. We need oversight now. Or, copy and paste this URL into your browser: https://nyti.ms/2tDX0g1 Not a Subscriber? To get unlimited access to all New York Times articles, subscribe today. See Options Copyright 2017 | The New York Times Company | NYTimes.com 620 Eighth Avenue New York, NY 10018 [http://p.nytimes.com/email/re?location=hdaNaYedr2/IomeWRKt0nffrak8aSGLbvtkkq/r7ihwOf5XePlpJ1w==&user_id=ee7558d54531b290bd05280f4b7d6eb4&email_type=eta&task_id=1497898066408370®i_id=0] -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Mon Jun 19 22:30:34 2017 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2017 22:30:34 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Oliver Stone's interview with Putin Message-ID: No guarantee this will work, but it’s what I have: https://pixeldra.in/u/JmSNg_ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From brussel at illinois.edu Tue Jun 20 02:38:28 2017 From: brussel at illinois.edu (Brussel, Morton K) Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2017 02:38:28 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] Oliver Stone's interview with Putin In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <17AA2880-FD99-4992-80B3-C3D7872231E0@illinois.edu> The interview, four parts separated, is available on UTube. Enlightening. —mkb On Jun 19, 2017, at 5:30 PM, Karen Aram via Peace > wrote: No guarantee this will work, but it’s what I have: https://pixeldra.in/u/JmSNg_ _______________________________________________ Peace mailing list Peace at lists.chambana.net https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From brussel at illinois.edu Tue Jun 20 03:27:49 2017 From: brussel at illinois.edu (Brussel, Morton K) Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2017 03:27:49 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Mounting dangers of nuclear weaponry Message-ID: A fine, if depressing, article by Diana Johnstone, one of the most cogent of critical writers of the world scene. https://www.counterpunch.org/2017/06/16/nuclear-weapons-ban-what-needs-to-be-banned-is-u-s-arrogance/ –Except that she is, surprisingly, dead wrong on a stray comment that the sun’s cycles is possibly due to our current climate change. This has been definitively debunked by astronomers and climate scientists. Here is her disconcerting statement: " More to the point, the degree of human responsibility in climate change is more disputed among serious scientists than the public is aware, due to the role of such contributing factors as solar variations.” —mkb -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From galliher at illinois.edu Tue Jun 20 03:35:10 2017 From: galliher at illinois.edu (Carl G. Estabrook) Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2017 22:35:10 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Mounting dangers of nuclear weaponry In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <9D5047CC-86C0-43FB-952E-97B224A847D5@illinois.edu> There’s always been a faintly contrary current at Counterpunch on climate change - owing to the late Alex Cockburn's doubts on the matter. It’s more than made up for by the ecological advocacy of the current editor, author of inter alia "Been Brown So Long it Looked Like Green to Me: The Politics of Nature” (2004). > On Jun 19, 2017, at 10:27 PM, Brussel, Morton K via Peace-discuss wrote: > > A fine, if depressing, article by Diana Johnstone, one of the most cogent of critical writers of the world scene. > > https://www.counterpunch.org/2017/06/16/nuclear-weapons-ban-what-needs-to-be-banned-is-u-s-arrogance/ > > –Except that she is, surprisingly, dead wrong on a stray comment that the sun’s cycles is possibly due to our current climate change. This has been definitively debunked by astronomers and climate scientists. > > Here is her disconcerting statement: " More to the point, the degree of human responsibility in climate change is more disputed among serious scientists than the public is aware, due to the role of such contributing factors as solar variations.” > > —mkb > > > _______________________________________________ > Peace-discuss mailing list > Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From brussel at illinois.edu Tue Jun 20 03:42:53 2017 From: brussel at illinois.edu (Brussel, Morton K) Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2017 03:42:53 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Mounting dangers of nuclear weaponry In-Reply-To: <9D5047CC-86C0-43FB-952E-97B224A847D5@illinois.edu> References: <9D5047CC-86C0-43FB-952E-97B224A847D5@illinois.edu> Message-ID: Correction, I should not have used the words “due to ”; I meant to say "responsible for” —mkb On Jun 19, 2017, at 10:35 PM, Carl G. Estabrook > wrote: There’s always been a faintly contrary current at Counterpunch on climate change - owing to the late Alex Cockburn's doubts on the matter. It’s more than made up for by the ecological advocacy of the current editor, author of inter alia "Been Brown So Long it Looked Like Green to Me: The Politics of Nature” (2004). On Jun 19, 2017, at 10:27 PM, Brussel, Morton K via Peace-discuss > wrote: A fine, if depressing, article by Diana Johnstone, one of the most cogent of critical writers of the world scene. https://www.counterpunch.org/2017/06/16/nuclear-weapons-ban-what-needs-to-be-banned-is-u-s-arrogance/ –Except that she is, surprisingly, dead wrong on a stray comment that the sun’s cycles is possibly due to our current climate change. This has been definitively debunked by astronomers and climate scientists. Here is her disconcerting statement: " More to the point, the degree of human responsibility in climate change is more disputed among serious scientists than the public is aware, due to the role of such contributing factors as solar variations.” —mkb _______________________________________________ Peace-discuss mailing list Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Tue Jun 20 09:55:49 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2017 09:55:49 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide In-Reply-To: References: <200610092004.k99K4dXo038063@pencil.math.missouri.edu> Message-ID: And just as the Zionists destroyed our Native American Studies Program and Department, so too the Zionists are now destroying Palestine and the Palestinians. Let the University of Illiniwaks rot in the bigotry and racism and ignorance of Zionism! Francis A. Boyle Professor of Law Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 1:45 PM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide And I respectfully request that everyone on this list get the Message out that no American Indian Professor, Scholar or Expert should have anything to do with this God-forsaken Campus. Ditto for Middle East Professors, Scholars and Experts. Let the University of Illinois ROT in the Bigotry, Racism and Ignorance of Zionism! Francis A. Boyle Professor of Law Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 1:30 PM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide As for the "future" of our Native American Studies Program and Department, I submit we should leave them DESTROYED as a Permanent Monument and Testament to how mean, nasty, vicious, cruel, ruthless, and unprincipled our Campus Zionists and our Community Zionists really are. Francis A. Boyle Professor of Law Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 10:04 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide The Local Zionists are mean, nasty, vicious, ruthless and unprincipled People who will stop at nothing to get their way. Hence they destroyed our Native American Studies Program and destroyed Salaita's Career as a Professor and threw Salaita, his Wife and their Baby out into the Street with no visible means of support. I cannot offhand recall a Greater Academic Cosmic Injustice since when I entered Higher Education in 1968. Francis A. Boyle Professor of Law Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 6:57 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide And as for the Zionists on this Campus and in this Community, I hold you accountable for destroying our Native American Studies Program. Francis A. Boyle Professor of Law Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 6:47 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide After the long years of hard work and pain and suffering and tears and agony that we all engaged in trying to get rid of Chief Illiniwak and instituting the Native American Studies Program as some sort of compensation, Wise {sic!} and her Zionists destroyed it all in the bat of an eye. I cannot think of a Greater Academic Cosmic Injustice. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2017 12:28 PM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide Because of the pro bono work I did for AIM, I came to understand that American Indians see the US Government the same way the Jews see the Nazis. Wise "{sic!} is a Nazi! Ditto and pari passu for what she did to the Palestinians. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2017 9:51 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide And Wise {sic!} has successfully terrorized and intimidated every Palestinian/Arab/Muslim of Color on this Campus. Nothing has changed for American Indians and Palestinians/Arabs/Muslims of Color. It is an absolute disgrace but no surprise that the rotten and corrupt and racist AAUP eliminated the die-hard Anti-Palestinian University of Illiniwaks from their Censure List. That is precisely why I quit the AAUP years ago because of their die-hard bigotry and racism against Palestinians/Arabs/Muslims of Color. And now ditto for American Indians. Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2017 9:43 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: FW: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide My pro bono publico Clients here were the American Indian Movement. Chief Illiniwak is an Indicium of Genocide.And Wise {sic!} just Ethnically Cleansed Native Americans off of this Campus. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com [mailto:nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com] Sent: Monday, October 09, 2006 3:05 PM To: undisclosed-recipients Subject: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit [Here's one of our annual Columbus Day pieces. -NYTr] sent by Francis Boyle Columbus Day Promotes Genocide Indictment of the Federal Government of the U.S. for the commission of international crimes and petition for orders mandating its proscription and dissolution as an international criminal conspiracy and criminal organization By Francis A. Boyle, Professor of International Law 18 September 1992 Introduction All citizens of the World Community have both the right and the duty under public international law to sit in judgment over a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental norms of international criminal law committed by any member state of that same World Community. Such is the case for the International Tribunal of Indigenous Peoples and Oppressed Nationalities in the United States of America that convenes in San Francisco during the weekend of October 1-4, 1992. Its weighty but important task is to examine the long history of international criminal activity that has been perpetrated by the Federal Government of the United States of America against the Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America since it was founded in 1787. Toward that end, I have the honor to present to the Members of this Tribunal the following charges against the Federal Government of the United States of America under international criminal law. In light of the gravity, severity, and longstanding nature of these international crimes and also in light of the fact that the Federal Government of the United States of America appears to be irrevocably committed to continuing down this path of lawlessness and criminality against Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America and elsewhere, I hereby petition the Members of this Tribunal to issue an Order proscribing the Federal Government of the United States of America as an International Criminal Conspiracy and a Criminal Organization under the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles as well as the other sources of public international law specified below. For that reason, I also request that the Members of this Tribunal issue an Order dissolving the Federal Government of the United States of America as a legal and political entity. Finally, I ask this Tribunal to declare that international legal sovereignty over the Territories principally inhabited by the Native American Peoples, the New Afrikan People, the Mexicano People, and the People of Puerto Rico resides in the hands of these respective Peoples Themselves. In this regard, I should point out that the final Decision of this Tribunal will qualify as a judicial decision within the meaning of article 38(1)(d) of the Statute of the International Court of Justice and will therefore constitute a subsidiary means for the determination of rules of law for international law and practice. The Statute of the International Court of Justice is an integral part of the United Nations Charter under article 92 thereof. Thus, this Tribunal's Decision can be relied upon by some future International Criminal Court or Tribunal, as well as by any People or State of the World Community that desires to initiate criminal proceedings against named individuals for the commission of the following international crimes. The Decision of this Tribunal shall serve as adequate notice to the appropriate officials in the United States Federal Government that they bear personal criminal responsibility under international law and the domestic legal systems of all Peoples and States in the World Community for designing and implementing these illegal, criminal and reprehensible policies and practices against Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America. Hereinafter, the Federal Government of the United States of America will be referred to as the Defendant. BILL OF PARTICULARS AGAINST THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA The Native American Peoples 1. The Defendant has perpetrated innumerable Crimes Against eace, Crimes Against Humanity and War Crimes against Native American Peoples as recognized by the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles. 2. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Genocide against Native American Peoples as recognized by the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. 3. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Apartheid against Native American Peoples as recognized by the 1973 International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid. 4. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of Native American Peoples as recognized by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights. 5. The Defendant has perpetrated numerous and repeated violations of the 1965 International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination against Native American Peoples. 6. The Defendant has systematically violated 371 treaties it concluded with Native American Peoples in wanton disregard of the basic principle of public international law and practice dictating pacta sunt servanda. 7. The Defendant has denied and violated the international legal right of Native American Peoples to self-determination as recognized by the 1945 United Nations Charter, the 1966 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the 1966 International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, fundamental principles of customary international law, and jus cogens. 8. The Defendant has violated the seminal United Nations Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Territories of 1960 with respect to Native American Peoples and Territories. Pursuant thereto, the Defendant has an absolute international legal obligation to decolonize Native American Territories immediately and to transfer all powers it currently exercises there to the Native American Peoples. 9. The Defendant has illegally refused to accord full-scope protections as Prisoners-of-War to captured Native American independence fighters in violation of the Third Geneva Convention of 1949 and Additional Protocol I thereto of 1977. The Defendant's treatment of captured Native American independence fighters as common criminals and terrorists constitutes a grave breach of the Geneva Accords and thus a serious war crime. 10. The Defendant has deliberately and systematically permitted, aided and abetted, solicited and conspired to commit the dumping, transportation, and location of nuclear, toxic, medical and otherwise hazardous waste materials on Native American Territories across North America and has thus created a clear and present danger to the lives, health, safety, and physical and mental well-being of Native American Peoples in gross violation of article 3 and article 2(c) of the 1948 Genocide Convention, inter alia: Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; ... The New Afrikan People 11. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Slavery upon the New Afrikan People as recognized in part by the 1926 Slavery Convention and the 1956 Supplementary Convention on the Abolition of Slavery, the Slave Trade, and Institutions and Practices Similar to Slavery. The Defendant has illegally refused to pay reparations to the New Afrikan People for the commission of the International Crime of Slavery against Them in violation of basic norms of customary international law requiring such reparations to be paid. 12. The Defendant has perpetrated innumerable Crimes Against Humanity against the New Afrikan People as recognized by the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles. 13. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of genocide against the New Afrikan People as recognized by the 1948 Genocide Convention. 14. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Apartheid against the New Afrikan People as recognized by the 1973 Apartheid Convention. 15. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of the New Afrikan People as recognized by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the two aforementioned United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966. 16. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the 1965 Racism Convention against the New Afrikan People. The Defendant is the paradigmatic example of an irremediably racist state in international relations today. 17. The Defendant has denied and violated the international legal right of the New Afrikan People to self-determination as recognized by the United Nations Charter, the two United Nations Human rights Covenants of 1966, customary international law, and jus cogens. 18. The Defendant has illegally refused to apply the United Nations Decolonization Resolution of 1960 to the New Afrikan People and to the Territories that they principally inhabit. Pursuant thereto, the Defendant has an absolute international legal obligation to decolonize New Afrikan Territories immediately and to transfer all powers it currently exercises there to the New Afrikan People. 19. The Defendant has illegally refused to accord full-scope protections as Prisoners-of-War to captured New Afrikan independence fighters in violation of the Third Geneva Convention of 1949 and Additional Protocol I thereto of 1977. The Defendant's treatment of captured New Afrikan independence fighters as common criminals and terrorists constitutes a grave breach of the Geneva Accords and thus a serious war crime. The Mexicano People 20. In 1821, Mexico obtained its independence from colonial Spain as a sovereign Mestizo State, extending from Yucatan and Chiapas in the south, to the northern territories of California and New Mexico, which areas the Defendant today calls the states of Texas, California, Arizona, Nevada, Utah, New Mexico, and Colorado. Nevertheless, in 1836 so-called settlors under the sponsorship of the Defendant began the division of the Mexicano People and State by causing the division of the Mexican state of Coahuila-Texas into the Mexican state of Coahuila and the so-called republic of Texas. 21. In 1846, the Defendant perpetrated an unjust, illegal and unjustifiable war upon the remainder of the sovereign People and State of Mexico that violated every known principle of public international law in existence at that time, including, but not limited to, the Christian Doctrine of just war, which was the then reigning standard of customary international law. As a result thereof, the Defendant illegally annexed close to 51% of the territories of the sovereign State of Mexico by means of forcing it to conclude the 1848 Treaty of Guadalupe-Hidalgo under military duress. For these reasons, this Treaty was and still is null and void ab initio as a matter of public international law. The Defendant acquired more Mexican territory through the Gadsen Treaty (Purchase) of 1854. 22. Since these 1848 and 1854 Treaties, the Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Genocide against the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories, as recognized by the 1948 Genocide Convention. 23. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Apartheid against the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories, as recognized by the 1973 Apartheid Convention. 24. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories, as recognized by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the two aforementioned United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966. 25. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the 1965 Racism Convention against the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories. 26. The Defendant has denied and violated the international legal right of the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories to self-determination, as recognized by the United Nations Charter, the two United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966, customary international law, and jus cogens. 27. Since the militarily-imposed division of the Mexican State, the Defendant and its agents have militarily occupied other portions of the Mexican State, have sought to influence the outcome of the Mexican Revolution of 1910, have practiced a consistent pattern of intervention into Mexico's internal affairs, all of which have resulted in the arresting distortion and deformation of the Mexican social and economic order. In this regard, Defendant's so-called North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) constitutes nothing more than an attempt to impose its hegemonial imperialism, economic colonialism, and human exploitation upon the People and State of Mexico. 28. The Defendant has illegally refused to apply the United Nations Decolonization Resolution of 1960 to the Mexicano People and to these occupied territories that they inhabit. Pursuant thereto, the Defendant has an absolute international legal obligation to decolonize both the Mexican occupied territories and the Republic of Mexico immediately, and to transfer all powers it currently exercises there to the Mexicano People. The People and State of Puerto Rico 29. Since its illegal invasion of Puerto Rico in 1898, the Defendant has perpetrated innumerable Crimes against Peace, Crimes against Humanity and War Crimes against the People and State of Puerto Rico as recognized by the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles. 30. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Genocide against the Puerto Rican People as recognized by the 1948 Genocide Convention. 31. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Apartheid against the Puerto Rican People as recognized by the 1973 Apartheid Convention. 32. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of the Puerto Rican People as recognized by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human rights and the two aforementioned United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966. 33. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the 1965 Racism Convention against the Puerto Rican People. 34. The Defendant has denied and violated the international legal right of the Puerto Rican People to self-determination as recognized by the United Nations Charter, the two United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966, customary international law, and jus cogens. 35. The Defendant has illegally refused to apply the United Nations Decolonization Resolution of 1960 to Puerto Rico. Pursuant thereto, the Defendant has an absolute international legal obligation to decolonize Puerto Rico immediately and to transfer all powers it currently exercises there to the Puerto Rican People. 36. The Defendant has illegally refused to accord full-scope protections as Prisoners-of-War to captured Puerto Rican independence fighters in violation of the Third Geneva Convention of 1949 and Additional Protocol I thereto of 1977. The Defendant's treatment of captured Puerto Rican independence fighters as common criminals and terrorists constitutes a grave breach of the Geneva Accords and thus a serious war crime. An International Criminal Conspiracy and a Criminal Organization 37. In light of the foregoing international crimes, the Defendant constitutes an International Criminal Conspiracy and a Criminal Organization in accordance with the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles and the other sources of public international law specified above. The Federal Government of the United States of America is legally identical to the Nazi government of World War II Germany. Indeed, the Defendant's President, George Bush, has proclaimed a so-called New World Order that sounds and looks strikingly similar to the New Order proclaimed by Adolph Hitler over fifty years ago. Conclusion Like unto a pirate, the Defendant is hostis humani generis: The enemy of all humankind! For the good of all humanity, this Tribunal must condemn and repudiate the Federal Government of the United States of America and its grotesque vision of a New World Order that is constructed upon warfare, bloodshed, violence, criminality, genocide, racism, colonialism, apartheid, massive violations of fundamental human rights, and the denial of the international legal right of self-determination to the Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America and elsewhere around the world. Consequently, this Tribunal must find the Defendant guilty as charged on all of the counts specified above beyond a reasonable doubt. This Tribunal must also issue an Order that formally proscribes the Federal Government of the United States of America as an International Criminal Conspiracy and a Criminal Organization. This Tribunal must also issue a separate Order mandating the dissolution of the Federal Government of the United States of America as a legal and political entity. Finally, this Tribunal must declare that international legal sovereignty over the Territories principally inhabited by the Native American Peoples, the New Afrikan People, the Mexicano People, and the People of Puerto Rico resides, respectively, in the hands of these Peoples Themselves. The very lives, well-being, health, welfare, and safety of the Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America and elsewhere around the world depend upon the ultimate success of your deliberations. Respectfully submitted by, FRANCIS A. BOYLE PROFESSOR OF INTERNATIONAL LAW SPECIAL PROSECUTOR Dated: September 18, 1992 University of Illinois College of Law 504 East Pennsylvania Champaign, IL 61820 217-333-7954 See USA on Trial: The International Tribunal on Indigenous Peoples'and Oppressed Nations in the United States. The Book and Verdict are available from Editorial El Coqui, 1671 N. Claremont,Chicago Illinois 60647. Or you can try calling the Puerto Rican Cultural Center in Chicago at 312-342-4295. The Video can be obtained from Mission Creek Video, PO Box 411271 San Francisco CA 941141 (phone:415-695-0931). Francis A. Boyle * ================================================================ .NY Transfer News Collective * A Service of Blythe Systems . Since 1985 - Information for the Rest of Us . .339 Lafayette St., New York, NY 10012 http://www.blythe.org .List Archives: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/pipermail/nytr/ .Subscribe: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/mailman/listinfo/nytr ================================================================ From fboyle at illinois.edu Tue Jun 20 09:55:49 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2017 09:55:49 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide In-Reply-To: References: <200610092004.k99K4dXo038063@pencil.math.missouri.edu> Message-ID: And just as the Zionists destroyed our Native American Studies Program and Department, so too the Zionists are now destroying Palestine and the Palestinians. Let the University of Illiniwaks rot in the bigotry and racism and ignorance of Zionism! Francis A. Boyle Professor of Law Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 1:45 PM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide And I respectfully request that everyone on this list get the Message out that no American Indian Professor, Scholar or Expert should have anything to do with this God-forsaken Campus. Ditto for Middle East Professors, Scholars and Experts. Let the University of Illinois ROT in the Bigotry, Racism and Ignorance of Zionism! Francis A. Boyle Professor of Law Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 1:30 PM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide As for the "future" of our Native American Studies Program and Department, I submit we should leave them DESTROYED as a Permanent Monument and Testament to how mean, nasty, vicious, cruel, ruthless, and unprincipled our Campus Zionists and our Community Zionists really are. Francis A. Boyle Professor of Law Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 10:04 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide The Local Zionists are mean, nasty, vicious, ruthless and unprincipled People who will stop at nothing to get their way. Hence they destroyed our Native American Studies Program and destroyed Salaita's Career as a Professor and threw Salaita, his Wife and their Baby out into the Street with no visible means of support. I cannot offhand recall a Greater Academic Cosmic Injustice since when I entered Higher Education in 1968. Francis A. Boyle Professor of Law Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 6:57 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide And as for the Zionists on this Campus and in this Community, I hold you accountable for destroying our Native American Studies Program. Francis A. Boyle Professor of Law Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 6:47 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide After the long years of hard work and pain and suffering and tears and agony that we all engaged in trying to get rid of Chief Illiniwak and instituting the Native American Studies Program as some sort of compensation, Wise {sic!} and her Zionists destroyed it all in the bat of an eye. I cannot think of a Greater Academic Cosmic Injustice. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2017 12:28 PM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide Because of the pro bono work I did for AIM, I came to understand that American Indians see the US Government the same way the Jews see the Nazis. Wise "{sic!} is a Nazi! Ditto and pari passu for what she did to the Palestinians. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2017 9:51 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide And Wise {sic!} has successfully terrorized and intimidated every Palestinian/Arab/Muslim of Color on this Campus. Nothing has changed for American Indians and Palestinians/Arabs/Muslims of Color. It is an absolute disgrace but no surprise that the rotten and corrupt and racist AAUP eliminated the die-hard Anti-Palestinian University of Illiniwaks from their Censure List. That is precisely why I quit the AAUP years ago because of their die-hard bigotry and racism against Palestinians/Arabs/Muslims of Color. And now ditto for American Indians. Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2017 9:43 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: FW: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide My pro bono publico Clients here were the American Indian Movement. Chief Illiniwak is an Indicium of Genocide.And Wise {sic!} just Ethnically Cleansed Native Americans off of this Campus. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com [mailto:nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com] Sent: Monday, October 09, 2006 3:05 PM To: undisclosed-recipients Subject: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit [Here's one of our annual Columbus Day pieces. -NYTr] sent by Francis Boyle Columbus Day Promotes Genocide Indictment of the Federal Government of the U.S. for the commission of international crimes and petition for orders mandating its proscription and dissolution as an international criminal conspiracy and criminal organization By Francis A. Boyle, Professor of International Law 18 September 1992 Introduction All citizens of the World Community have both the right and the duty under public international law to sit in judgment over a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental norms of international criminal law committed by any member state of that same World Community. Such is the case for the International Tribunal of Indigenous Peoples and Oppressed Nationalities in the United States of America that convenes in San Francisco during the weekend of October 1-4, 1992. Its weighty but important task is to examine the long history of international criminal activity that has been perpetrated by the Federal Government of the United States of America against the Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America since it was founded in 1787. Toward that end, I have the honor to present to the Members of this Tribunal the following charges against the Federal Government of the United States of America under international criminal law. In light of the gravity, severity, and longstanding nature of these international crimes and also in light of the fact that the Federal Government of the United States of America appears to be irrevocably committed to continuing down this path of lawlessness and criminality against Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America and elsewhere, I hereby petition the Members of this Tribunal to issue an Order proscribing the Federal Government of the United States of America as an International Criminal Conspiracy and a Criminal Organization under the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles as well as the other sources of public international law specified below. For that reason, I also request that the Members of this Tribunal issue an Order dissolving the Federal Government of the United States of America as a legal and political entity. Finally, I ask this Tribunal to declare that international legal sovereignty over the Territories principally inhabited by the Native American Peoples, the New Afrikan People, the Mexicano People, and the People of Puerto Rico resides in the hands of these respective Peoples Themselves. In this regard, I should point out that the final Decision of this Tribunal will qualify as a judicial decision within the meaning of article 38(1)(d) of the Statute of the International Court of Justice and will therefore constitute a subsidiary means for the determination of rules of law for international law and practice. The Statute of the International Court of Justice is an integral part of the United Nations Charter under article 92 thereof. Thus, this Tribunal's Decision can be relied upon by some future International Criminal Court or Tribunal, as well as by any People or State of the World Community that desires to initiate criminal proceedings against named individuals for the commission of the following international crimes. The Decision of this Tribunal shall serve as adequate notice to the appropriate officials in the United States Federal Government that they bear personal criminal responsibility under international law and the domestic legal systems of all Peoples and States in the World Community for designing and implementing these illegal, criminal and reprehensible policies and practices against Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America. Hereinafter, the Federal Government of the United States of America will be referred to as the Defendant. BILL OF PARTICULARS AGAINST THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA The Native American Peoples 1. The Defendant has perpetrated innumerable Crimes Against eace, Crimes Against Humanity and War Crimes against Native American Peoples as recognized by the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles. 2. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Genocide against Native American Peoples as recognized by the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. 3. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Apartheid against Native American Peoples as recognized by the 1973 International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid. 4. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of Native American Peoples as recognized by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights. 5. The Defendant has perpetrated numerous and repeated violations of the 1965 International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination against Native American Peoples. 6. The Defendant has systematically violated 371 treaties it concluded with Native American Peoples in wanton disregard of the basic principle of public international law and practice dictating pacta sunt servanda. 7. The Defendant has denied and violated the international legal right of Native American Peoples to self-determination as recognized by the 1945 United Nations Charter, the 1966 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the 1966 International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, fundamental principles of customary international law, and jus cogens. 8. The Defendant has violated the seminal United Nations Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Territories of 1960 with respect to Native American Peoples and Territories. Pursuant thereto, the Defendant has an absolute international legal obligation to decolonize Native American Territories immediately and to transfer all powers it currently exercises there to the Native American Peoples. 9. The Defendant has illegally refused to accord full-scope protections as Prisoners-of-War to captured Native American independence fighters in violation of the Third Geneva Convention of 1949 and Additional Protocol I thereto of 1977. The Defendant's treatment of captured Native American independence fighters as common criminals and terrorists constitutes a grave breach of the Geneva Accords and thus a serious war crime. 10. The Defendant has deliberately and systematically permitted, aided and abetted, solicited and conspired to commit the dumping, transportation, and location of nuclear, toxic, medical and otherwise hazardous waste materials on Native American Territories across North America and has thus created a clear and present danger to the lives, health, safety, and physical and mental well-being of Native American Peoples in gross violation of article 3 and article 2(c) of the 1948 Genocide Convention, inter alia: Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; ... The New Afrikan People 11. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Slavery upon the New Afrikan People as recognized in part by the 1926 Slavery Convention and the 1956 Supplementary Convention on the Abolition of Slavery, the Slave Trade, and Institutions and Practices Similar to Slavery. The Defendant has illegally refused to pay reparations to the New Afrikan People for the commission of the International Crime of Slavery against Them in violation of basic norms of customary international law requiring such reparations to be paid. 12. The Defendant has perpetrated innumerable Crimes Against Humanity against the New Afrikan People as recognized by the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles. 13. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of genocide against the New Afrikan People as recognized by the 1948 Genocide Convention. 14. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Apartheid against the New Afrikan People as recognized by the 1973 Apartheid Convention. 15. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of the New Afrikan People as recognized by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the two aforementioned United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966. 16. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the 1965 Racism Convention against the New Afrikan People. The Defendant is the paradigmatic example of an irremediably racist state in international relations today. 17. The Defendant has denied and violated the international legal right of the New Afrikan People to self-determination as recognized by the United Nations Charter, the two United Nations Human rights Covenants of 1966, customary international law, and jus cogens. 18. The Defendant has illegally refused to apply the United Nations Decolonization Resolution of 1960 to the New Afrikan People and to the Territories that they principally inhabit. Pursuant thereto, the Defendant has an absolute international legal obligation to decolonize New Afrikan Territories immediately and to transfer all powers it currently exercises there to the New Afrikan People. 19. The Defendant has illegally refused to accord full-scope protections as Prisoners-of-War to captured New Afrikan independence fighters in violation of the Third Geneva Convention of 1949 and Additional Protocol I thereto of 1977. The Defendant's treatment of captured New Afrikan independence fighters as common criminals and terrorists constitutes a grave breach of the Geneva Accords and thus a serious war crime. The Mexicano People 20. In 1821, Mexico obtained its independence from colonial Spain as a sovereign Mestizo State, extending from Yucatan and Chiapas in the south, to the northern territories of California and New Mexico, which areas the Defendant today calls the states of Texas, California, Arizona, Nevada, Utah, New Mexico, and Colorado. Nevertheless, in 1836 so-called settlors under the sponsorship of the Defendant began the division of the Mexicano People and State by causing the division of the Mexican state of Coahuila-Texas into the Mexican state of Coahuila and the so-called republic of Texas. 21. In 1846, the Defendant perpetrated an unjust, illegal and unjustifiable war upon the remainder of the sovereign People and State of Mexico that violated every known principle of public international law in existence at that time, including, but not limited to, the Christian Doctrine of just war, which was the then reigning standard of customary international law. As a result thereof, the Defendant illegally annexed close to 51% of the territories of the sovereign State of Mexico by means of forcing it to conclude the 1848 Treaty of Guadalupe-Hidalgo under military duress. For these reasons, this Treaty was and still is null and void ab initio as a matter of public international law. The Defendant acquired more Mexican territory through the Gadsen Treaty (Purchase) of 1854. 22. Since these 1848 and 1854 Treaties, the Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Genocide against the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories, as recognized by the 1948 Genocide Convention. 23. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Apartheid against the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories, as recognized by the 1973 Apartheid Convention. 24. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories, as recognized by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the two aforementioned United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966. 25. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the 1965 Racism Convention against the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories. 26. The Defendant has denied and violated the international legal right of the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories to self-determination, as recognized by the United Nations Charter, the two United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966, customary international law, and jus cogens. 27. Since the militarily-imposed division of the Mexican State, the Defendant and its agents have militarily occupied other portions of the Mexican State, have sought to influence the outcome of the Mexican Revolution of 1910, have practiced a consistent pattern of intervention into Mexico's internal affairs, all of which have resulted in the arresting distortion and deformation of the Mexican social and economic order. In this regard, Defendant's so-called North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) constitutes nothing more than an attempt to impose its hegemonial imperialism, economic colonialism, and human exploitation upon the People and State of Mexico. 28. The Defendant has illegally refused to apply the United Nations Decolonization Resolution of 1960 to the Mexicano People and to these occupied territories that they inhabit. Pursuant thereto, the Defendant has an absolute international legal obligation to decolonize both the Mexican occupied territories and the Republic of Mexico immediately, and to transfer all powers it currently exercises there to the Mexicano People. The People and State of Puerto Rico 29. Since its illegal invasion of Puerto Rico in 1898, the Defendant has perpetrated innumerable Crimes against Peace, Crimes against Humanity and War Crimes against the People and State of Puerto Rico as recognized by the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles. 30. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Genocide against the Puerto Rican People as recognized by the 1948 Genocide Convention. 31. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Apartheid against the Puerto Rican People as recognized by the 1973 Apartheid Convention. 32. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of the Puerto Rican People as recognized by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human rights and the two aforementioned United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966. 33. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the 1965 Racism Convention against the Puerto Rican People. 34. The Defendant has denied and violated the international legal right of the Puerto Rican People to self-determination as recognized by the United Nations Charter, the two United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966, customary international law, and jus cogens. 35. The Defendant has illegally refused to apply the United Nations Decolonization Resolution of 1960 to Puerto Rico. Pursuant thereto, the Defendant has an absolute international legal obligation to decolonize Puerto Rico immediately and to transfer all powers it currently exercises there to the Puerto Rican People. 36. The Defendant has illegally refused to accord full-scope protections as Prisoners-of-War to captured Puerto Rican independence fighters in violation of the Third Geneva Convention of 1949 and Additional Protocol I thereto of 1977. The Defendant's treatment of captured Puerto Rican independence fighters as common criminals and terrorists constitutes a grave breach of the Geneva Accords and thus a serious war crime. An International Criminal Conspiracy and a Criminal Organization 37. In light of the foregoing international crimes, the Defendant constitutes an International Criminal Conspiracy and a Criminal Organization in accordance with the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles and the other sources of public international law specified above. The Federal Government of the United States of America is legally identical to the Nazi government of World War II Germany. Indeed, the Defendant's President, George Bush, has proclaimed a so-called New World Order that sounds and looks strikingly similar to the New Order proclaimed by Adolph Hitler over fifty years ago. Conclusion Like unto a pirate, the Defendant is hostis humani generis: The enemy of all humankind! For the good of all humanity, this Tribunal must condemn and repudiate the Federal Government of the United States of America and its grotesque vision of a New World Order that is constructed upon warfare, bloodshed, violence, criminality, genocide, racism, colonialism, apartheid, massive violations of fundamental human rights, and the denial of the international legal right of self-determination to the Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America and elsewhere around the world. Consequently, this Tribunal must find the Defendant guilty as charged on all of the counts specified above beyond a reasonable doubt. This Tribunal must also issue an Order that formally proscribes the Federal Government of the United States of America as an International Criminal Conspiracy and a Criminal Organization. This Tribunal must also issue a separate Order mandating the dissolution of the Federal Government of the United States of America as a legal and political entity. Finally, this Tribunal must declare that international legal sovereignty over the Territories principally inhabited by the Native American Peoples, the New Afrikan People, the Mexicano People, and the People of Puerto Rico resides, respectively, in the hands of these Peoples Themselves. The very lives, well-being, health, welfare, and safety of the Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America and elsewhere around the world depend upon the ultimate success of your deliberations. Respectfully submitted by, FRANCIS A. BOYLE PROFESSOR OF INTERNATIONAL LAW SPECIAL PROSECUTOR Dated: September 18, 1992 University of Illinois College of Law 504 East Pennsylvania Champaign, IL 61820 217-333-7954 See USA on Trial: The International Tribunal on Indigenous Peoples'and Oppressed Nations in the United States. The Book and Verdict are available from Editorial El Coqui, 1671 N. Claremont,Chicago Illinois 60647. Or you can try calling the Puerto Rican Cultural Center in Chicago at 312-342-4295. The Video can be obtained from Mission Creek Video, PO Box 411271 San Francisco CA 941141 (phone:415-695-0931). Francis A. Boyle * ================================================================ .NY Transfer News Collective * A Service of Blythe Systems . Since 1985 - Information for the Rest of Us . .339 Lafayette St., New York, NY 10012 http://www.blythe.org .List Archives: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/pipermail/nytr/ .Subscribe: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/mailman/listinfo/nytr ================================================================ From cgestabrook at gmail.com Tue Jun 20 10:42:26 2017 From: cgestabrook at gmail.com (C G Estabrook) Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2017 05:42:26 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] US-Russia war, in Syria and elsewhere Message-ID: <94B9C7E2-3EE0-4DC5-93CB-A19F0BA2813E@gmail.com> The machinations of the government we’re responsible for in the Mideast are of course immensely dangerous - and therefore ill-reported in the US, for fear that the public may demand an end to the US' southwest Asian war - as it did, to US' southeast Asian war two generations ago, and US’ Latin American war a generation ago. Here’s a good short account of the situation: >. —CGE -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From davegreen84 at yahoo.com Tue Jun 20 15:31:30 2017 From: davegreen84 at yahoo.com (David Green) Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2017 15:31:30 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Peace-discuss] US-Russia war, in Syria and elsewhere In-Reply-To: <94B9C7E2-3EE0-4DC5-93CB-A19F0BA2813E@gmail.com> References: <94B9C7E2-3EE0-4DC5-93CB-A19F0BA2813E@gmail.com> Message-ID: <2097639178.3170346.1497972690539@mail.yahoo.com> And one aspect of why there is no end in in sight (transcript not yet available): Israel Secretly Aids Anti-Assad Forces in Syria Proxy War | | | | | | | | | | | Israel Secretly Aids Anti-Assad Forces in Syria Proxy War By The Real News Network Beirut-based journalist Nour Samaha has uncovered extensive Israeli government support of anti-Assad forces in s... | | | | On Tuesday, June 20, 2017 5:42 AM, C G Estabrook via Peace-discuss wrote: The machinations of the government we’re responsible for in the Mideast are of course immensely dangerous - and therefore ill-reported in the US, for fear that the public may demand an end to the US' southwest Asian war - as it did, to US' southeast Asian war two generations ago, and US’ Latin American war a generation ago. Here’s a good short account of the situation: .  —CGE_______________________________________________ Peace-discuss mailing list Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cge at shout.net Wed Jun 21 11:36:32 2017 From: cge at shout.net (C. G. Estabrook) Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2017 06:36:32 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] This week's AWARE ON THE AIR In-Reply-To: <1f26ef3688b593a338a8fbc7cd45b7a6@shout.net> References: <5880c407a1db5_222964d980682c3@asgworker-qmb2-1.nbuild.prd.useast1.3dna.io.mail> <3014b58c3080570ba473a4b2bdcb0659@shout.net> <1f26ef3688b593a338a8fbc7cd45b7a6@shout.net> Message-ID: <38dd9634ddb6d642a9e18e34d02ee607@shout.net> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o3GAS_qm2mk Karen Aram, C. G. Estabrook, and Stuart Levy discuss U.S. government war-making and how it can be opposed. AWARE on the Air - Episode #413. Produced by the Anti-War, Anti-Racism Effort of Champaign-Urbana on Urbana Public Television, From karenaram at hotmail.com Wed Jun 21 11:46:08 2017 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2017 11:46:08 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Terrific review of the film "War Machine" Message-ID: * Print * Leaflet * Feedback * Share » Netflix drama strikes a nerve … A spook comes out of the woodwork to attack Brad Pitt’s War Machine By David Walsh 21 June 2017 Does art have social consequences? Does it matter which attitude filmmakers or novelists, for example, adopt toward the big events of the day? Here’s a case that may help settle the argument or at least provides strong circumstantial evidence. Three weeks ago we reviewed War Machine, the Netflix satire about Gen. Stanley McChrystal and the bloody, neo-colonial American war effort in Afghanistan. We noted its unusually biting character. This is not a film that makes obeisance to the greatness of the US military. It presents the war in Afghanistan as “a debacle, presided over by lunatics and egomaniacs,” the WSWS review noted. [http://www.wsws.org/asset/0d10a9b5-34dd-4ed3-87ac-aae32b406d7K/image.jpg?rendition=image480]Brad Pitt and Ben Kingsley in War Machine Written and directed by Australian David Michôd, and based on the 2012 non-fiction book, The Operators: The Wild and Terrifying Inside Story of America’s War in Afghanistan, by the late American journalist Michael Hastings, War Machinesarcastically hails the US in its opening moments, “Ah, America. You beacon of composure and proportionate response. You bringer of calm and goodness to the world.” The WSWS noted that for once a film reflected some of the widespread hostility toward a quarter century of brutal war and toward the politicians and generals who have conducted it. It was only fitting that a spokesperson for those war criminals would respond. Whitney Kassel, late of the Defense Department, Special Operations in Afghanistan and Pakistan, a former member of McChrystal’s “team,” and an associate in private business of a long-time leading figure in the CIA, has written a denunciation of War Machine in Foreign Policy magazine, “Screw Brad Pitt and the ‘War Machine’ he rode in on.” The unusually frank language of the headline presumably provides some sense of Kassel’s disapproval. Indeed, she acknowledges that her initial “eye-rolling quickly gave way to expletives.” The character of Kassel’s objectivity in regard to Gen. McChrystal makes itself evident early on when she notes that Hastings (whose Rolling Stone article, later expanded into the book on which War Machine is based, essentially ended the general’s career) “took down a man I worked with during the time in question and deeply respected—one near-universally viewed as an American hero of integrity and intelligence.” McChrystal was a ruthless practitioner of counterinsurgency warfare, responsible for the killing of thousands of Iraqis. His entourage in Afghanistan, according to Hastings, was “a handpicked collection of killers, spies, geniuses, patriots, political operators and outright maniacs.” A staffer neatly describes in Hasting’s book the now infamous Gen. Michael Flynn, one of McChrystal’s toadies, as a “rat on acid.” Kassel presents the 16-year US-led intervention in Afghanistan as “a war effort that, while certainly replete with absurdities and mistakes, was and continues to be fought by men and women who are dedicated to improving the security of the United States and its allies by helping to build an Afghanistan that will not provide safe haven for al Qaeda or, more recently, the Islamic State.” [http://www.wsws.org/asset/34ae1d87-bd41-4144-b966-e6d4b5d1415L/image.jpg?rendition=image480]War Machine This is a pack of lies. The US is not in Afghanistan to protect American lives, but to advance its interests in a geopolitically strategic area. The war has led to nothing but death, destruction and misery on a vast scale. Kassel is particularly concerned that War Machine casts doubt on the legitimacy of the entire “war on terror,” the code phrase with which American imperialism has justified its drive for global hegemony since 2001. She goes on: “Likewise—and this is the part that matters today—the portrayal of the U.S. and NATO’s very presence in the country since 2001 as rooted in fantasy and an inflated sense of American prowess is disingenuous and dangerous in its mischaracterization of a war that remains, particularly in the face of escalating violence and instability, an important part of reducing global terrorism.” Kassel seems unaware that this last sentence contains an obvious contradiction. The longest war in US history has ostensibly been carried out in the name of “reducing global terrorism,” yet there is “escalating violence and instability.” War Machine is not a primer in anti-imperialist politics, but it does make clear that the war in Afghanistan is a doomed project. The film’s narrator asks in the opening moments, “What do you do when the war you're fighting just can't possibly be won in any meaningful sense?” The narrator further explains that the US military’s “counterinsurgency” strategy runs up against basic political realities: “When … you’ve just gone and invaded a place that you probably shouldn’t have, you end up fighting against just regular people in regular-people clothes. These guys are what are called insurgents. Basically, they’re just guys who picked up weapons ’cause ... so would you, if someone invaded your country. Funnily enough ... insurgencies are next to impossible to defeat.” [http://www.wsws.org/asset/4e7833ee-f38b-4a76-a68a-360b9470ed7O/image.jpg?rendition=image480]War Machine But Kassel inhabits a different political and moral universe. Her writing has the ghastly quality of the “democratic” military bureaucrat or intelligence agent, the muffled, perpetually disingenuous tone of the individual who plots bombings and murders and mass repression, but refers to such activities as “strategic options” and “the tools available for trying to turn around what was considered an urgent national security priority,” and half-believes her own obscurantism. She presents a glowing picture of the same crowd among whom Hastings placed “killers … and outright maniacs.” Kassel writes: “I found McChrystal and his team to be respectful, thoughtful … McChrystal spent endless hours with the members of the assessment team [which included Kassel—very few of whom had direct military experience—exploring the strategic options available to the United States and NATO.” Toward the end of her tirade, Kassel once again expresses anxiety about the impact of War Machine and points to “a particular hazard,” that the film will reinforce “a view of the war in Afghanistan as this generation’s Vietnam, led by men … who care only about protecting their own egos and reputations, with no sense of the sacrifices inherent in war and no strategic vision or logic behind their decisions.” She expresses nervousness about the “reworking” of the US approach to Afghanistan that Trump administration officials may be considering and asserts that “it is critical that they, and the American public to whom they report, understand how we got here, and the reasons why some elements of a counterinsurgency strategy may remain valid moving forward.” Kassel, according to the Huffington Post, for whom she writes occasionally, “spent four years at the Office of the Secretary of Defense where she focused on Special Operations, Counterterrorism, and Pakistan policy. During this time she spent a year in Pakistan working for the Office of the Defense Representative and Special Operations Command Forward. She also served as the representative of the Secretary of Defense to General Stanley McChrystal's Strategic Assessment Team in Afghanistan in 2009.” This is someone up to her neck in imperialist violence and intrigue. At one point, Kassel served “as Assistant for Counterterrorism Policy in the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special Operations, Low Intensity Conflict, and Interdependent Capabilities (ASD SO/LIC&IC) within the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy (OSD-Policy).” Kassel, a Democratic Party supporter apparently, often tweets about women’s rights and racism—and Russian aggression! Of course, how could it be otherwise? A special mention must be made of her association with the Arkin Group, the private intelligence firm, where she “served as a senior director focused on strategic analysis and risk management.” A founding partner of the Arkin Group is Jack Devine, according to the company’s website, “a 32-year veteran of the Central Intelligence Agency (‘CIA’). Mr. Devine served as both Acting Director and Associate Director of CIA’s operations outside the United States from 1993-1995, where he had supervisory authority over thousands of CIA employees involved in sensitive missions throughout the world. In addition, he served as Chief of the Latin American Division from 1992-1993 and was the principal manager of the CIA’s sensitive projects in Latin America.” In fact, Devine’s first foreign assignment was in Chile, where he arrived in August 1970. Even before being physically assigned there, he writes, “I had worked the night shift for the Chile Task Force in Langley, synthesizing cables from Santiago into a morning intelligence report for the bosses.” Devine was present in Santiago in September 1973 when the Nixon administration and the CIA organized a coup, along with the Chilean military, that brought the brutal Pinochet dictatorship to power, which tortured and murdered tens of thousands of political opponents, trade unionists and young people. The Arkin website also notes, “From 1985-1987, Mr. Devine headed the CIA’s Afghan Task Force, which successfully countered Soviet aggression in the region. In 1987, he was awarded the CIA’s Meritorious Officer Award for this accomplishment.” In other words, Devine is one of the figures criminally responsible for arming and fomenting Islamic fundamentalism in Afghanistan as part of the effort to undermine the Soviet Union. In his own words, in his autobiography, Good Hunting: An American Spymaster's Story, Devine moved “guns and ammunition across the border into Afghanistan,” aiding “the Afghan mujahideen and their determined opposition to the Soviet Union’s occupation of their country in the 1980s. I ran the last, and largest, cover operation of the Cold War.” The career of Osama bin Laden, Al Qaeda, the 9/11 terrorist attacks and ISIS itself all emerge, directly or indirectly, from this operation. Devine and Kassel have co-authored numerous articles, including “Afghanistan: Withdrawal Lessons,” in the World Policy Journal, 2013. This cynical morsel of realpolitik offered advice to the Obama administration on the best policy to pursue “in protecting U.S. interests” in the region. “Robust covert action” remained high on the list. Should the Pakistani government, for example, turn down US aid, “we should respond with appropriate covert action. This would include paramilitary activities as well as psychological operations, propaganda, and political and economic influence.” Devine also acknowledges Kassel’s assistance in the preparation of his autobiography. Devine and Kassel continued to do at Arkin what they did at the CIA and the Defense Department, respectively, defend the interests of American corporate and financial interests. The Arkin website, in its “Case Studies” section, offers the example of the work it did for an investor, “concerned about instability and uncertain about prospects for South African agriculture.” The firm “initiated a political risk analysis and market intelligence project, and also completed an investigation of political, legal, and regulatory events that could impact foreign investors, agriculture operations, and the industry of interest.” Arkin “uncovered no evidence indicating that South Africa’s leaders would reverse foreign investment-friendly policies.” In Vietnam, Arkin assessed “the future of pro-privatization initiatives” and also laid out “incentives and road blocks associated with privatization and elucidated the process by which entities become eligible for consideration.” This background has provided Ms. Kassel with the moral and intellectual high ground from which to criticize the anti-war satire, War Machine, which lifts the lid on the lethal madness of the US military and dares to call into question American foreign policy. It is entirely to the film’s credit that it has provoked an angry response from this trusted agent of American imperialism. WSWS.ORG -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Wed Jun 21 14:13:57 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2017 14:13:57 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide In-Reply-To: References: <200610092004.k99K4dXo038063@pencil.math.missouri.edu> Message-ID: And for the record: Acting Law Dean John Columbo publicly sent a perfectly bootlicking letter to Wise {sic!} fully approving her illegally firing Salaita that led to the Destruction of our Native American Studies Program and Department and the ethnic cleansing of American Indians off of this Campus. Law School Off Campus! Chief Illiniwak Off Campus! CIA Off Campus! Mossad Off Campus! Torture Off Campus! Michael Moore Off Campus! Consort Hurricane Heidi Hurd Off Campus! Gitmo Kangaroo Courts Off Campus! Etc. Etc. Etc. Ad nauseam! Francis A. Boyle Professor of Law Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2017 4:56 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide And just as the Zionists destroyed our Native American Studies Program and Department, so too the Zionists are now destroying Palestine and the Palestinians. Let the University of Illiniwaks rot in the bigotry and racism and ignorance of Zionism! Francis A. Boyle Professor of Law Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 1:45 PM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide And I respectfully request that everyone on this list get the Message out that no American Indian Professor, Scholar or Expert should have anything to do with this God-forsaken Campus. Ditto for Middle East Professors, Scholars and Experts. Let the University of Illinois ROT in the Bigotry, Racism and Ignorance of Zionism! Francis A. Boyle Professor of Law Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 1:30 PM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide As for the "future" of our Native American Studies Program and Department, I submit we should leave them DESTROYED as a Permanent Monument and Testament to how mean, nasty, vicious, cruel, ruthless, and unprincipled our Campus Zionists and our Community Zionists really are. Francis A. Boyle Professor of Law Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 10:04 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide The Local Zionists are mean, nasty, vicious, ruthless and unprincipled People who will stop at nothing to get their way. Hence they destroyed our Native American Studies Program and destroyed Salaita's Career as a Professor and threw Salaita, his Wife and their Baby out into the Street with no visible means of support. I cannot offhand recall a Greater Academic Cosmic Injustice since when I entered Higher Education in 1968. Francis A. Boyle Professor of Law Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 6:57 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide And as for the Zionists on this Campus and in this Community, I hold you accountable for destroying our Native American Studies Program. Francis A. Boyle Professor of Law Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 6:47 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide After the long years of hard work and pain and suffering and tears and agony that we all engaged in trying to get rid of Chief Illiniwak and instituting the Native American Studies Program as some sort of compensation, Wise {sic!} and her Zionists destroyed it all in the bat of an eye. I cannot think of a Greater Academic Cosmic Injustice. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2017 12:28 PM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide Because of the pro bono work I did for AIM, I came to understand that American Indians see the US Government the same way the Jews see the Nazis. Wise "{sic!} is a Nazi! Ditto and pari passu for what she did to the Palestinians. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2017 9:51 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide And Wise {sic!} has successfully terrorized and intimidated every Palestinian/Arab/Muslim of Color on this Campus. Nothing has changed for American Indians and Palestinians/Arabs/Muslims of Color. It is an absolute disgrace but no surprise that the rotten and corrupt and racist AAUP eliminated the die-hard Anti-Palestinian University of Illiniwaks from their Censure List. That is precisely why I quit the AAUP years ago because of their die-hard bigotry and racism against Palestinians/Arabs/Muslims of Color. And now ditto for American Indians. Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2017 9:43 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: FW: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide My pro bono publico Clients here were the American Indian Movement. Chief Illiniwak is an Indicium of Genocide.And Wise {sic!} just Ethnically Cleansed Native Americans off of this Campus. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com [mailto:nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com] Sent: Monday, October 09, 2006 3:05 PM To: undisclosed-recipients Subject: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit [Here's one of our annual Columbus Day pieces. -NYTr] sent by Francis Boyle Columbus Day Promotes Genocide Indictment of the Federal Government of the U.S. for the commission of international crimes and petition for orders mandating its proscription and dissolution as an international criminal conspiracy and criminal organization By Francis A. Boyle, Professor of International Law 18 September 1992 Introduction All citizens of the World Community have both the right and the duty under public international law to sit in judgment over a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental norms of international criminal law committed by any member state of that same World Community. Such is the case for the International Tribunal of Indigenous Peoples and Oppressed Nationalities in the United States of America that convenes in San Francisco during the weekend of October 1-4, 1992. Its weighty but important task is to examine the long history of international criminal activity that has been perpetrated by the Federal Government of the United States of America against the Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America since it was founded in 1787. Toward that end, I have the honor to present to the Members of this Tribunal the following charges against the Federal Government of the United States of America under international criminal law. In light of the gravity, severity, and longstanding nature of these international crimes and also in light of the fact that the Federal Government of the United States of America appears to be irrevocably committed to continuing down this path of lawlessness and criminality against Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America and elsewhere, I hereby petition the Members of this Tribunal to issue an Order proscribing the Federal Government of the United States of America as an International Criminal Conspiracy and a Criminal Organization under the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles as well as the other sources of public international law specified below. For that reason, I also request that the Members of this Tribunal issue an Order dissolving the Federal Government of the United States of America as a legal and political entity. Finally, I ask this Tribunal to declare that international legal sovereignty over the Territories principally inhabited by the Native American Peoples, the New Afrikan People, the Mexicano People, and the People of Puerto Rico resides in the hands of these respective Peoples Themselves. In this regard, I should point out that the final Decision of this Tribunal will qualify as a judicial decision within the meaning of article 38(1)(d) of the Statute of the International Court of Justice and will therefore constitute a subsidiary means for the determination of rules of law for international law and practice. The Statute of the International Court of Justice is an integral part of the United Nations Charter under article 92 thereof. Thus, this Tribunal's Decision can be relied upon by some future International Criminal Court or Tribunal, as well as by any People or State of the World Community that desires to initiate criminal proceedings against named individuals for the commission of the following international crimes. The Decision of this Tribunal shall serve as adequate notice to the appropriate officials in the United States Federal Government that they bear personal criminal responsibility under international law and the domestic legal systems of all Peoples and States in the World Community for designing and implementing these illegal, criminal and reprehensible policies and practices against Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America. Hereinafter, the Federal Government of the United States of America will be referred to as the Defendant. BILL OF PARTICULARS AGAINST THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA The Native American Peoples 1. The Defendant has perpetrated innumerable Crimes Against eace, Crimes Against Humanity and War Crimes against Native American Peoples as recognized by the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles. 2. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Genocide against Native American Peoples as recognized by the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. 3. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Apartheid against Native American Peoples as recognized by the 1973 International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid. 4. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of Native American Peoples as recognized by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights. 5. The Defendant has perpetrated numerous and repeated violations of the 1965 International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination against Native American Peoples. 6. The Defendant has systematically violated 371 treaties it concluded with Native American Peoples in wanton disregard of the basic principle of public international law and practice dictating pacta sunt servanda. 7. The Defendant has denied and violated the international legal right of Native American Peoples to self-determination as recognized by the 1945 United Nations Charter, the 1966 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the 1966 International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, fundamental principles of customary international law, and jus cogens. 8. The Defendant has violated the seminal United Nations Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Territories of 1960 with respect to Native American Peoples and Territories. Pursuant thereto, the Defendant has an absolute international legal obligation to decolonize Native American Territories immediately and to transfer all powers it currently exercises there to the Native American Peoples. 9. The Defendant has illegally refused to accord full-scope protections as Prisoners-of-War to captured Native American independence fighters in violation of the Third Geneva Convention of 1949 and Additional Protocol I thereto of 1977. The Defendant's treatment of captured Native American independence fighters as common criminals and terrorists constitutes a grave breach of the Geneva Accords and thus a serious war crime. 10. The Defendant has deliberately and systematically permitted, aided and abetted, solicited and conspired to commit the dumping, transportation, and location of nuclear, toxic, medical and otherwise hazardous waste materials on Native American Territories across North America and has thus created a clear and present danger to the lives, health, safety, and physical and mental well-being of Native American Peoples in gross violation of article 3 and article 2(c) of the 1948 Genocide Convention, inter alia: Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; ... The New Afrikan People 11. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Slavery upon the New Afrikan People as recognized in part by the 1926 Slavery Convention and the 1956 Supplementary Convention on the Abolition of Slavery, the Slave Trade, and Institutions and Practices Similar to Slavery. The Defendant has illegally refused to pay reparations to the New Afrikan People for the commission of the International Crime of Slavery against Them in violation of basic norms of customary international law requiring such reparations to be paid. 12. The Defendant has perpetrated innumerable Crimes Against Humanity against the New Afrikan People as recognized by the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles. 13. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of genocide against the New Afrikan People as recognized by the 1948 Genocide Convention. 14. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Apartheid against the New Afrikan People as recognized by the 1973 Apartheid Convention. 15. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of the New Afrikan People as recognized by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the two aforementioned United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966. 16. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the 1965 Racism Convention against the New Afrikan People. The Defendant is the paradigmatic example of an irremediably racist state in international relations today. 17. The Defendant has denied and violated the international legal right of the New Afrikan People to self-determination as recognized by the United Nations Charter, the two United Nations Human rights Covenants of 1966, customary international law, and jus cogens. 18. The Defendant has illegally refused to apply the United Nations Decolonization Resolution of 1960 to the New Afrikan People and to the Territories that they principally inhabit. Pursuant thereto, the Defendant has an absolute international legal obligation to decolonize New Afrikan Territories immediately and to transfer all powers it currently exercises there to the New Afrikan People. 19. The Defendant has illegally refused to accord full-scope protections as Prisoners-of-War to captured New Afrikan independence fighters in violation of the Third Geneva Convention of 1949 and Additional Protocol I thereto of 1977. The Defendant's treatment of captured New Afrikan independence fighters as common criminals and terrorists constitutes a grave breach of the Geneva Accords and thus a serious war crime. The Mexicano People 20. In 1821, Mexico obtained its independence from colonial Spain as a sovereign Mestizo State, extending from Yucatan and Chiapas in the south, to the northern territories of California and New Mexico, which areas the Defendant today calls the states of Texas, California, Arizona, Nevada, Utah, New Mexico, and Colorado. Nevertheless, in 1836 so-called settlors under the sponsorship of the Defendant began the division of the Mexicano People and State by causing the division of the Mexican state of Coahuila-Texas into the Mexican state of Coahuila and the so-called republic of Texas. 21. In 1846, the Defendant perpetrated an unjust, illegal and unjustifiable war upon the remainder of the sovereign People and State of Mexico that violated every known principle of public international law in existence at that time, including, but not limited to, the Christian Doctrine of just war, which was the then reigning standard of customary international law. As a result thereof, the Defendant illegally annexed close to 51% of the territories of the sovereign State of Mexico by means of forcing it to conclude the 1848 Treaty of Guadalupe-Hidalgo under military duress. For these reasons, this Treaty was and still is null and void ab initio as a matter of public international law. The Defendant acquired more Mexican territory through the Gadsen Treaty (Purchase) of 1854. 22. Since these 1848 and 1854 Treaties, the Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Genocide against the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories, as recognized by the 1948 Genocide Convention. 23. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Apartheid against the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories, as recognized by the 1973 Apartheid Convention. 24. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories, as recognized by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the two aforementioned United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966. 25. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the 1965 Racism Convention against the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories. 26. The Defendant has denied and violated the international legal right of the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories to self-determination, as recognized by the United Nations Charter, the two United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966, customary international law, and jus cogens. 27. Since the militarily-imposed division of the Mexican State, the Defendant and its agents have militarily occupied other portions of the Mexican State, have sought to influence the outcome of the Mexican Revolution of 1910, have practiced a consistent pattern of intervention into Mexico's internal affairs, all of which have resulted in the arresting distortion and deformation of the Mexican social and economic order. In this regard, Defendant's so-called North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) constitutes nothing more than an attempt to impose its hegemonial imperialism, economic colonialism, and human exploitation upon the People and State of Mexico. 28. The Defendant has illegally refused to apply the United Nations Decolonization Resolution of 1960 to the Mexicano People and to these occupied territories that they inhabit. Pursuant thereto, the Defendant has an absolute international legal obligation to decolonize both the Mexican occupied territories and the Republic of Mexico immediately, and to transfer all powers it currently exercises there to the Mexicano People. The People and State of Puerto Rico 29. Since its illegal invasion of Puerto Rico in 1898, the Defendant has perpetrated innumerable Crimes against Peace, Crimes against Humanity and War Crimes against the People and State of Puerto Rico as recognized by the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles. 30. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Genocide against the Puerto Rican People as recognized by the 1948 Genocide Convention. 31. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Apartheid against the Puerto Rican People as recognized by the 1973 Apartheid Convention. 32. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of the Puerto Rican People as recognized by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human rights and the two aforementioned United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966. 33. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the 1965 Racism Convention against the Puerto Rican People. 34. The Defendant has denied and violated the international legal right of the Puerto Rican People to self-determination as recognized by the United Nations Charter, the two United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966, customary international law, and jus cogens. 35. The Defendant has illegally refused to apply the United Nations Decolonization Resolution of 1960 to Puerto Rico. Pursuant thereto, the Defendant has an absolute international legal obligation to decolonize Puerto Rico immediately and to transfer all powers it currently exercises there to the Puerto Rican People. 36. The Defendant has illegally refused to accord full-scope protections as Prisoners-of-War to captured Puerto Rican independence fighters in violation of the Third Geneva Convention of 1949 and Additional Protocol I thereto of 1977. The Defendant's treatment of captured Puerto Rican independence fighters as common criminals and terrorists constitutes a grave breach of the Geneva Accords and thus a serious war crime. An International Criminal Conspiracy and a Criminal Organization 37. In light of the foregoing international crimes, the Defendant constitutes an International Criminal Conspiracy and a Criminal Organization in accordance with the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles and the other sources of public international law specified above. The Federal Government of the United States of America is legally identical to the Nazi government of World War II Germany. Indeed, the Defendant's President, George Bush, has proclaimed a so-called New World Order that sounds and looks strikingly similar to the New Order proclaimed by Adolph Hitler over fifty years ago. Conclusion Like unto a pirate, the Defendant is hostis humani generis: The enemy of all humankind! For the good of all humanity, this Tribunal must condemn and repudiate the Federal Government of the United States of America and its grotesque vision of a New World Order that is constructed upon warfare, bloodshed, violence, criminality, genocide, racism, colonialism, apartheid, massive violations of fundamental human rights, and the denial of the international legal right of self-determination to the Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America and elsewhere around the world. Consequently, this Tribunal must find the Defendant guilty as charged on all of the counts specified above beyond a reasonable doubt. This Tribunal must also issue an Order that formally proscribes the Federal Government of the United States of America as an International Criminal Conspiracy and a Criminal Organization. This Tribunal must also issue a separate Order mandating the dissolution of the Federal Government of the United States of America as a legal and political entity. Finally, this Tribunal must declare that international legal sovereignty over the Territories principally inhabited by the Native American Peoples, the New Afrikan People, the Mexicano People, and the People of Puerto Rico resides, respectively, in the hands of these Peoples Themselves. The very lives, well-being, health, welfare, and safety of the Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America and elsewhere around the world depend upon the ultimate success of your deliberations. Respectfully submitted by, FRANCIS A. BOYLE PROFESSOR OF INTERNATIONAL LAW SPECIAL PROSECUTOR Dated: September 18, 1992 University of Illinois College of Law 504 East Pennsylvania Champaign, IL 61820 217-333-7954 See USA on Trial: The International Tribunal on Indigenous Peoples'and Oppressed Nations in the United States. The Book and Verdict are available from Editorial El Coqui, 1671 N. Claremont,Chicago Illinois 60647. Or you can try calling the Puerto Rican Cultural Center in Chicago at 312-342-4295. The Video can be obtained from Mission Creek Video, PO Box 411271 San Francisco CA 941141 (phone:415-695-0931). Francis A. Boyle * ================================================================ .NY Transfer News Collective * A Service of Blythe Systems . Since 1985 - Information for the Rest of Us . .339 Lafayette St., New York, NY 10012 http://www.blythe.org .List Archives: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/pipermail/nytr/ .Subscribe: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/mailman/listinfo/nytr ================================================================ From fboyle at illinois.edu Wed Jun 21 14:13:57 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2017 14:13:57 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide In-Reply-To: References: <200610092004.k99K4dXo038063@pencil.math.missouri.edu> Message-ID: And for the record: Acting Law Dean John Columbo publicly sent a perfectly bootlicking letter to Wise {sic!} fully approving her illegally firing Salaita that led to the Destruction of our Native American Studies Program and Department and the ethnic cleansing of American Indians off of this Campus. Law School Off Campus! Chief Illiniwak Off Campus! CIA Off Campus! Mossad Off Campus! Torture Off Campus! Michael Moore Off Campus! Consort Hurricane Heidi Hurd Off Campus! Gitmo Kangaroo Courts Off Campus! Etc. Etc. Etc. Ad nauseam! Francis A. Boyle Professor of Law Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2017 4:56 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide And just as the Zionists destroyed our Native American Studies Program and Department, so too the Zionists are now destroying Palestine and the Palestinians. Let the University of Illiniwaks rot in the bigotry and racism and ignorance of Zionism! Francis A. Boyle Professor of Law Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 1:45 PM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide And I respectfully request that everyone on this list get the Message out that no American Indian Professor, Scholar or Expert should have anything to do with this God-forsaken Campus. Ditto for Middle East Professors, Scholars and Experts. Let the University of Illinois ROT in the Bigotry, Racism and Ignorance of Zionism! Francis A. Boyle Professor of Law Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 1:30 PM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide As for the "future" of our Native American Studies Program and Department, I submit we should leave them DESTROYED as a Permanent Monument and Testament to how mean, nasty, vicious, cruel, ruthless, and unprincipled our Campus Zionists and our Community Zionists really are. Francis A. Boyle Professor of Law Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 10:04 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide The Local Zionists are mean, nasty, vicious, ruthless and unprincipled People who will stop at nothing to get their way. Hence they destroyed our Native American Studies Program and destroyed Salaita's Career as a Professor and threw Salaita, his Wife and their Baby out into the Street with no visible means of support. I cannot offhand recall a Greater Academic Cosmic Injustice since when I entered Higher Education in 1968. Francis A. Boyle Professor of Law Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 6:57 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide And as for the Zionists on this Campus and in this Community, I hold you accountable for destroying our Native American Studies Program. Francis A. Boyle Professor of Law Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 6:47 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide After the long years of hard work and pain and suffering and tears and agony that we all engaged in trying to get rid of Chief Illiniwak and instituting the Native American Studies Program as some sort of compensation, Wise {sic!} and her Zionists destroyed it all in the bat of an eye. I cannot think of a Greater Academic Cosmic Injustice. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2017 12:28 PM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide Because of the pro bono work I did for AIM, I came to understand that American Indians see the US Government the same way the Jews see the Nazis. Wise "{sic!} is a Nazi! Ditto and pari passu for what she did to the Palestinians. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2017 9:51 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide And Wise {sic!} has successfully terrorized and intimidated every Palestinian/Arab/Muslim of Color on this Campus. Nothing has changed for American Indians and Palestinians/Arabs/Muslims of Color. It is an absolute disgrace but no surprise that the rotten and corrupt and racist AAUP eliminated the die-hard Anti-Palestinian University of Illiniwaks from their Censure List. That is precisely why I quit the AAUP years ago because of their die-hard bigotry and racism against Palestinians/Arabs/Muslims of Color. And now ditto for American Indians. Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2017 9:43 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: FW: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide My pro bono publico Clients here were the American Indian Movement. Chief Illiniwak is an Indicium of Genocide.And Wise {sic!} just Ethnically Cleansed Native Americans off of this Campus. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com [mailto:nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com] Sent: Monday, October 09, 2006 3:05 PM To: undisclosed-recipients Subject: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit [Here's one of our annual Columbus Day pieces. -NYTr] sent by Francis Boyle Columbus Day Promotes Genocide Indictment of the Federal Government of the U.S. for the commission of international crimes and petition for orders mandating its proscription and dissolution as an international criminal conspiracy and criminal organization By Francis A. Boyle, Professor of International Law 18 September 1992 Introduction All citizens of the World Community have both the right and the duty under public international law to sit in judgment over a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental norms of international criminal law committed by any member state of that same World Community. Such is the case for the International Tribunal of Indigenous Peoples and Oppressed Nationalities in the United States of America that convenes in San Francisco during the weekend of October 1-4, 1992. Its weighty but important task is to examine the long history of international criminal activity that has been perpetrated by the Federal Government of the United States of America against the Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America since it was founded in 1787. Toward that end, I have the honor to present to the Members of this Tribunal the following charges against the Federal Government of the United States of America under international criminal law. In light of the gravity, severity, and longstanding nature of these international crimes and also in light of the fact that the Federal Government of the United States of America appears to be irrevocably committed to continuing down this path of lawlessness and criminality against Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America and elsewhere, I hereby petition the Members of this Tribunal to issue an Order proscribing the Federal Government of the United States of America as an International Criminal Conspiracy and a Criminal Organization under the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles as well as the other sources of public international law specified below. For that reason, I also request that the Members of this Tribunal issue an Order dissolving the Federal Government of the United States of America as a legal and political entity. Finally, I ask this Tribunal to declare that international legal sovereignty over the Territories principally inhabited by the Native American Peoples, the New Afrikan People, the Mexicano People, and the People of Puerto Rico resides in the hands of these respective Peoples Themselves. In this regard, I should point out that the final Decision of this Tribunal will qualify as a judicial decision within the meaning of article 38(1)(d) of the Statute of the International Court of Justice and will therefore constitute a subsidiary means for the determination of rules of law for international law and practice. The Statute of the International Court of Justice is an integral part of the United Nations Charter under article 92 thereof. Thus, this Tribunal's Decision can be relied upon by some future International Criminal Court or Tribunal, as well as by any People or State of the World Community that desires to initiate criminal proceedings against named individuals for the commission of the following international crimes. The Decision of this Tribunal shall serve as adequate notice to the appropriate officials in the United States Federal Government that they bear personal criminal responsibility under international law and the domestic legal systems of all Peoples and States in the World Community for designing and implementing these illegal, criminal and reprehensible policies and practices against Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America. Hereinafter, the Federal Government of the United States of America will be referred to as the Defendant. BILL OF PARTICULARS AGAINST THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA The Native American Peoples 1. The Defendant has perpetrated innumerable Crimes Against eace, Crimes Against Humanity and War Crimes against Native American Peoples as recognized by the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles. 2. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Genocide against Native American Peoples as recognized by the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. 3. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Apartheid against Native American Peoples as recognized by the 1973 International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid. 4. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of Native American Peoples as recognized by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights. 5. The Defendant has perpetrated numerous and repeated violations of the 1965 International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination against Native American Peoples. 6. The Defendant has systematically violated 371 treaties it concluded with Native American Peoples in wanton disregard of the basic principle of public international law and practice dictating pacta sunt servanda. 7. The Defendant has denied and violated the international legal right of Native American Peoples to self-determination as recognized by the 1945 United Nations Charter, the 1966 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the 1966 International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, fundamental principles of customary international law, and jus cogens. 8. The Defendant has violated the seminal United Nations Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Territories of 1960 with respect to Native American Peoples and Territories. Pursuant thereto, the Defendant has an absolute international legal obligation to decolonize Native American Territories immediately and to transfer all powers it currently exercises there to the Native American Peoples. 9. The Defendant has illegally refused to accord full-scope protections as Prisoners-of-War to captured Native American independence fighters in violation of the Third Geneva Convention of 1949 and Additional Protocol I thereto of 1977. The Defendant's treatment of captured Native American independence fighters as common criminals and terrorists constitutes a grave breach of the Geneva Accords and thus a serious war crime. 10. The Defendant has deliberately and systematically permitted, aided and abetted, solicited and conspired to commit the dumping, transportation, and location of nuclear, toxic, medical and otherwise hazardous waste materials on Native American Territories across North America and has thus created a clear and present danger to the lives, health, safety, and physical and mental well-being of Native American Peoples in gross violation of article 3 and article 2(c) of the 1948 Genocide Convention, inter alia: Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; ... The New Afrikan People 11. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Slavery upon the New Afrikan People as recognized in part by the 1926 Slavery Convention and the 1956 Supplementary Convention on the Abolition of Slavery, the Slave Trade, and Institutions and Practices Similar to Slavery. The Defendant has illegally refused to pay reparations to the New Afrikan People for the commission of the International Crime of Slavery against Them in violation of basic norms of customary international law requiring such reparations to be paid. 12. The Defendant has perpetrated innumerable Crimes Against Humanity against the New Afrikan People as recognized by the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles. 13. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of genocide against the New Afrikan People as recognized by the 1948 Genocide Convention. 14. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Apartheid against the New Afrikan People as recognized by the 1973 Apartheid Convention. 15. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of the New Afrikan People as recognized by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the two aforementioned United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966. 16. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the 1965 Racism Convention against the New Afrikan People. The Defendant is the paradigmatic example of an irremediably racist state in international relations today. 17. The Defendant has denied and violated the international legal right of the New Afrikan People to self-determination as recognized by the United Nations Charter, the two United Nations Human rights Covenants of 1966, customary international law, and jus cogens. 18. The Defendant has illegally refused to apply the United Nations Decolonization Resolution of 1960 to the New Afrikan People and to the Territories that they principally inhabit. Pursuant thereto, the Defendant has an absolute international legal obligation to decolonize New Afrikan Territories immediately and to transfer all powers it currently exercises there to the New Afrikan People. 19. The Defendant has illegally refused to accord full-scope protections as Prisoners-of-War to captured New Afrikan independence fighters in violation of the Third Geneva Convention of 1949 and Additional Protocol I thereto of 1977. The Defendant's treatment of captured New Afrikan independence fighters as common criminals and terrorists constitutes a grave breach of the Geneva Accords and thus a serious war crime. The Mexicano People 20. In 1821, Mexico obtained its independence from colonial Spain as a sovereign Mestizo State, extending from Yucatan and Chiapas in the south, to the northern territories of California and New Mexico, which areas the Defendant today calls the states of Texas, California, Arizona, Nevada, Utah, New Mexico, and Colorado. Nevertheless, in 1836 so-called settlors under the sponsorship of the Defendant began the division of the Mexicano People and State by causing the division of the Mexican state of Coahuila-Texas into the Mexican state of Coahuila and the so-called republic of Texas. 21. In 1846, the Defendant perpetrated an unjust, illegal and unjustifiable war upon the remainder of the sovereign People and State of Mexico that violated every known principle of public international law in existence at that time, including, but not limited to, the Christian Doctrine of just war, which was the then reigning standard of customary international law. As a result thereof, the Defendant illegally annexed close to 51% of the territories of the sovereign State of Mexico by means of forcing it to conclude the 1848 Treaty of Guadalupe-Hidalgo under military duress. For these reasons, this Treaty was and still is null and void ab initio as a matter of public international law. The Defendant acquired more Mexican territory through the Gadsen Treaty (Purchase) of 1854. 22. Since these 1848 and 1854 Treaties, the Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Genocide against the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories, as recognized by the 1948 Genocide Convention. 23. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Apartheid against the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories, as recognized by the 1973 Apartheid Convention. 24. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories, as recognized by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the two aforementioned United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966. 25. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the 1965 Racism Convention against the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories. 26. The Defendant has denied and violated the international legal right of the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories to self-determination, as recognized by the United Nations Charter, the two United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966, customary international law, and jus cogens. 27. Since the militarily-imposed division of the Mexican State, the Defendant and its agents have militarily occupied other portions of the Mexican State, have sought to influence the outcome of the Mexican Revolution of 1910, have practiced a consistent pattern of intervention into Mexico's internal affairs, all of which have resulted in the arresting distortion and deformation of the Mexican social and economic order. In this regard, Defendant's so-called North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) constitutes nothing more than an attempt to impose its hegemonial imperialism, economic colonialism, and human exploitation upon the People and State of Mexico. 28. The Defendant has illegally refused to apply the United Nations Decolonization Resolution of 1960 to the Mexicano People and to these occupied territories that they inhabit. Pursuant thereto, the Defendant has an absolute international legal obligation to decolonize both the Mexican occupied territories and the Republic of Mexico immediately, and to transfer all powers it currently exercises there to the Mexicano People. The People and State of Puerto Rico 29. Since its illegal invasion of Puerto Rico in 1898, the Defendant has perpetrated innumerable Crimes against Peace, Crimes against Humanity and War Crimes against the People and State of Puerto Rico as recognized by the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles. 30. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Genocide against the Puerto Rican People as recognized by the 1948 Genocide Convention. 31. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Apartheid against the Puerto Rican People as recognized by the 1973 Apartheid Convention. 32. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of the Puerto Rican People as recognized by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human rights and the two aforementioned United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966. 33. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the 1965 Racism Convention against the Puerto Rican People. 34. The Defendant has denied and violated the international legal right of the Puerto Rican People to self-determination as recognized by the United Nations Charter, the two United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966, customary international law, and jus cogens. 35. The Defendant has illegally refused to apply the United Nations Decolonization Resolution of 1960 to Puerto Rico. Pursuant thereto, the Defendant has an absolute international legal obligation to decolonize Puerto Rico immediately and to transfer all powers it currently exercises there to the Puerto Rican People. 36. The Defendant has illegally refused to accord full-scope protections as Prisoners-of-War to captured Puerto Rican independence fighters in violation of the Third Geneva Convention of 1949 and Additional Protocol I thereto of 1977. The Defendant's treatment of captured Puerto Rican independence fighters as common criminals and terrorists constitutes a grave breach of the Geneva Accords and thus a serious war crime. An International Criminal Conspiracy and a Criminal Organization 37. In light of the foregoing international crimes, the Defendant constitutes an International Criminal Conspiracy and a Criminal Organization in accordance with the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles and the other sources of public international law specified above. The Federal Government of the United States of America is legally identical to the Nazi government of World War II Germany. Indeed, the Defendant's President, George Bush, has proclaimed a so-called New World Order that sounds and looks strikingly similar to the New Order proclaimed by Adolph Hitler over fifty years ago. Conclusion Like unto a pirate, the Defendant is hostis humani generis: The enemy of all humankind! For the good of all humanity, this Tribunal must condemn and repudiate the Federal Government of the United States of America and its grotesque vision of a New World Order that is constructed upon warfare, bloodshed, violence, criminality, genocide, racism, colonialism, apartheid, massive violations of fundamental human rights, and the denial of the international legal right of self-determination to the Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America and elsewhere around the world. Consequently, this Tribunal must find the Defendant guilty as charged on all of the counts specified above beyond a reasonable doubt. This Tribunal must also issue an Order that formally proscribes the Federal Government of the United States of America as an International Criminal Conspiracy and a Criminal Organization. This Tribunal must also issue a separate Order mandating the dissolution of the Federal Government of the United States of America as a legal and political entity. Finally, this Tribunal must declare that international legal sovereignty over the Territories principally inhabited by the Native American Peoples, the New Afrikan People, the Mexicano People, and the People of Puerto Rico resides, respectively, in the hands of these Peoples Themselves. The very lives, well-being, health, welfare, and safety of the Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America and elsewhere around the world depend upon the ultimate success of your deliberations. Respectfully submitted by, FRANCIS A. BOYLE PROFESSOR OF INTERNATIONAL LAW SPECIAL PROSECUTOR Dated: September 18, 1992 University of Illinois College of Law 504 East Pennsylvania Champaign, IL 61820 217-333-7954 See USA on Trial: The International Tribunal on Indigenous Peoples'and Oppressed Nations in the United States. The Book and Verdict are available from Editorial El Coqui, 1671 N. Claremont,Chicago Illinois 60647. Or you can try calling the Puerto Rican Cultural Center in Chicago at 312-342-4295. The Video can be obtained from Mission Creek Video, PO Box 411271 San Francisco CA 941141 (phone:415-695-0931). Francis A. Boyle * ================================================================ .NY Transfer News Collective * A Service of Blythe Systems . Since 1985 - Information for the Rest of Us . .339 Lafayette St., New York, NY 10012 http://www.blythe.org .List Archives: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/pipermail/nytr/ .Subscribe: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/mailman/listinfo/nytr ================================================================ From fboyle at illinois.edu Wed Jun 21 19:16:02 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2017 19:16:02 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] FW: Need to "Repeal the Perpetual Illegal Wars" -- Interviews Available References: <1257343715.978157.1498072183848.JavaMail.www-data@mw-press-ws-02.meltwater.com> Message-ID: When I tried to introduce my proposed course “The Constitutional Law of U.S. Foreign Affairs” into the Law School Curriculum as a regular course, it was so savagely attacked by the Curriculum Committee that I withdrew it from further consideration. Law School Off Campus! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Wednesday, June 21, 2017 2:10 PM To: sectns.aals at lists.aals.org Subject: FW: Need to "Repeal the Perpetual Illegal Wars" -- Interviews Available Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Institute for Public Accuracy . [mailto:accuracy at accuracy.org] Sent: Wednesday, June 21, 2017 2:09 PM To: francis.a.boyle at gmail.com Subject: Need to "Repeal the Perpetual Illegal Wars" -- Interviews Available [http://app.meltwaterpress.com/mpress/statistic.html?accessCode=5a2b52bd9f6854132e3bc43276481bed2b3eb442&distributionId=542308&contact=francis.a.boyle at gmail.com] Need to "Repeal the Perpetual Illegal Wars" Charlie Savage of the New York Times reports in "Senators Wrestle With Updating Law Authorizing War on Terrorist Groups" that: "Asked at a luncheon on Monday at the National Press Club in Washington what legal basis the United States had to attack Syrian government forces, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Joseph F. Dunford Jr., claimed the authority stemmed from the 2001 law because the American military presence in Syria was predicated on fighting Al Qaeda and the Islamic State there. "But on Tuesday, the ranking Democrat on the Senate committee, Senator Benjamin L. Cardin of Maryland, said, 'The most recent use of this, in regards to activities in Syria, certainly had nothing to do with the attack on our country on September the 11th.'" The question at the National Press Club to Dunford was submitted by Sam Husseini of the Institute for Public Accuracy and was featured on an IPA news release on Monday: "Bombing Syria: * Impeachable * Carve-Up Agenda." FRANCIS BOYLE Boyle is professor of international law at the University of Illinois College of Law. He said today: "What the U.S. government is getting away with here is incredible. Gen. Dunford is citing the 2001 AUMF to go after Al Qaeda as justification to go after a secular government -- Syria -- that is actually fighting Al Qaeda, as well as ISIS. "Congress should not be in the business of 'updating' any authorization of continuing these wars, which are clearly illegal under international law. Congress should be in the business of repealing these bogus domestic authorizations. No one in 1970 was working to 'update' the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution. At least no one who was not a laughing stock. Congress was working to repeal the Gulf of Tonkin resolution, to defund the war -- not to perpetuate illegal war for another generation. Congress now needs to repeal the perpetual illegal wars. The War Powers clause of the Constitution, as well as the War Powers Resolution are being flagrantly violated." Boyle was featured on an Institute for Public Accuracy news release in 2013 along with former Rep. Paul Findley: “* Key Author of War Powers Act: ‘Obama has no Authority to Attack Syria’ * Impeachment.” Boyle's books include Foundations of World Order: The Legalist Approach to International Relations (Duke University Press). -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Wed Jun 21 19:16:02 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2017 19:16:02 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] FW: Need to "Repeal the Perpetual Illegal Wars" -- Interviews Available References: <1257343715.978157.1498072183848.JavaMail.www-data@mw-press-ws-02.meltwater.com> Message-ID: When I tried to introduce my proposed course “The Constitutional Law of U.S. Foreign Affairs” into the Law School Curriculum as a regular course, it was so savagely attacked by the Curriculum Committee that I withdrew it from further consideration. Law School Off Campus! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Wednesday, June 21, 2017 2:10 PM To: sectns.aals at lists.aals.org Subject: FW: Need to "Repeal the Perpetual Illegal Wars" -- Interviews Available Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Institute for Public Accuracy . [mailto:accuracy at accuracy.org] Sent: Wednesday, June 21, 2017 2:09 PM To: francis.a.boyle at gmail.com Subject: Need to "Repeal the Perpetual Illegal Wars" -- Interviews Available [http://app.meltwaterpress.com/mpress/statistic.html?accessCode=5a2b52bd9f6854132e3bc43276481bed2b3eb442&distributionId=542308&contact=francis.a.boyle at gmail.com] Need to "Repeal the Perpetual Illegal Wars" Charlie Savage of the New York Times reports in "Senators Wrestle With Updating Law Authorizing War on Terrorist Groups" that: "Asked at a luncheon on Monday at the National Press Club in Washington what legal basis the United States had to attack Syrian government forces, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Joseph F. Dunford Jr., claimed the authority stemmed from the 2001 law because the American military presence in Syria was predicated on fighting Al Qaeda and the Islamic State there. "But on Tuesday, the ranking Democrat on the Senate committee, Senator Benjamin L. Cardin of Maryland, said, 'The most recent use of this, in regards to activities in Syria, certainly had nothing to do with the attack on our country on September the 11th.'" The question at the National Press Club to Dunford was submitted by Sam Husseini of the Institute for Public Accuracy and was featured on an IPA news release on Monday: "Bombing Syria: * Impeachable * Carve-Up Agenda." FRANCIS BOYLE Boyle is professor of international law at the University of Illinois College of Law. He said today: "What the U.S. government is getting away with here is incredible. Gen. Dunford is citing the 2001 AUMF to go after Al Qaeda as justification to go after a secular government -- Syria -- that is actually fighting Al Qaeda, as well as ISIS. "Congress should not be in the business of 'updating' any authorization of continuing these wars, which are clearly illegal under international law. Congress should be in the business of repealing these bogus domestic authorizations. No one in 1970 was working to 'update' the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution. At least no one who was not a laughing stock. Congress was working to repeal the Gulf of Tonkin resolution, to defund the war -- not to perpetuate illegal war for another generation. Congress now needs to repeal the perpetual illegal wars. The War Powers clause of the Constitution, as well as the War Powers Resolution are being flagrantly violated." Boyle was featured on an Institute for Public Accuracy news release in 2013 along with former Rep. Paul Findley: “* Key Author of War Powers Act: ‘Obama has no Authority to Attack Syria’ * Impeachment.” Boyle's books include Foundations of World Order: The Legalist Approach to International Relations (Duke University Press). -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Wed Jun 21 19:28:11 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2017 19:28:11 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Need to "Repeal the Perpetual Illegal Wars" -- Interviews Available References: <1257343715.978157.1498072183848.JavaMail.www-data@mw-press-ws-02.meltwater.com> Message-ID: Ditto for my proposed course on “International Human Rights Law.” But due to its critical importance, I swallowed my pride and carried it on to the Full Faculty who then proceeded to savage it and me. I swallowed my pride again, held out for a vote, and it was approved by the Faculty on the Condition that I not be allowed to teach it. Law School Off Campus! Chief Illiniwak Off Campus! Torture Off Campus! CIA Off Campus! Mossad Off Campus! Michael Moore Off Campus! Consort Hurricane Heidi Hurd Off Campus! War Crimes Off Campus! Crimes Against Humanity Off Campus! War Criminals Off Campus! Genocidaires against Muslims/Arabs/Asians of Color Off Campus! Etc. Etc. Etc. Ad Nauseam Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Wednesday, June 21, 2017 2:16 PM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson ; Mildred O'brien Subject: FW: Need to "Repeal the Perpetual Illegal Wars" -- Interviews Available When I tried to introduce my proposed course “The Constitutional Law of U.S. Foreign Affairs” into the Law School Curriculum as a regular course, it was so savagely attacked by the Curriculum Committee that I withdrew it from further consideration. Law School Off Campus! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Wednesday, June 21, 2017 2:10 PM To: sectns.aals at lists.aals.org Subject: FW: Need to "Repeal the Perpetual Illegal Wars" -- Interviews Available Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Institute for Public Accuracy . [mailto:accuracy at accuracy.org] Sent: Wednesday, June 21, 2017 2:09 PM To: francis.a.boyle at gmail.com Subject: Need to "Repeal the Perpetual Illegal Wars" -- Interviews Available [http://app.meltwaterpress.com/mpress/statistic.html?accessCode=5a2b52bd9f6854132e3bc43276481bed2b3eb442&distributionId=542308&contact=francis.a.boyle at gmail.com] Need to "Repeal the Perpetual Illegal Wars" Charlie Savage of the New York Times reports in "Senators Wrestle With Updating Law Authorizing War on Terrorist Groups" that: "Asked at a luncheon on Monday at the National Press Club in Washington what legal basis the United States had to attack Syrian government forces, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Joseph F. Dunford Jr., claimed the authority stemmed from the 2001 law because the American military presence in Syria was predicated on fighting Al Qaeda and the Islamic State there. "But on Tuesday, the ranking Democrat on the Senate committee, Senator Benjamin L. Cardin of Maryland, said, 'The most recent use of this, in regards to activities in Syria, certainly had nothing to do with the attack on our country on September the 11th.'" The question at the National Press Club to Dunford was submitted by Sam Husseini of the Institute for Public Accuracy and was featured on an IPA news release on Monday: "Bombing Syria: * Impeachable * Carve-Up Agenda." FRANCIS BOYLE Boyle is professor of international law at the University of Illinois College of Law. He said today: "What the U.S. government is getting away with here is incredible. Gen. Dunford is citing the 2001 AUMF to go after Al Qaeda as justification to go after a secular government -- Syria -- that is actually fighting Al Qaeda, as well as ISIS. "Congress should not be in the business of 'updating' any authorization of continuing these wars, which are clearly illegal under international law. Congress should be in the business of repealing these bogus domestic authorizations. No one in 1970 was working to 'update' the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution. At least no one who was not a laughing stock. Congress was working to repeal the Gulf of Tonkin resolution, to defund the war -- not to perpetuate illegal war for another generation. Congress now needs to repeal the perpetual illegal wars. The War Powers clause of the Constitution, as well as the War Powers Resolution are being flagrantly violated." Boyle was featured on an Institute for Public Accuracy news release in 2013 along with former Rep. Paul Findley: “* Key Author of War Powers Act: ‘Obama has no Authority to Attack Syria’ * Impeachment.” Boyle's books include Foundations of World Order: The Legalist Approach to International Relations (Duke University Press). -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Wed Jun 21 19:28:11 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2017 19:28:11 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Need to "Repeal the Perpetual Illegal Wars" -- Interviews Available References: <1257343715.978157.1498072183848.JavaMail.www-data@mw-press-ws-02.meltwater.com> Message-ID: Ditto for my proposed course on “International Human Rights Law.” But due to its critical importance, I swallowed my pride and carried it on to the Full Faculty who then proceeded to savage it and me. I swallowed my pride again, held out for a vote, and it was approved by the Faculty on the Condition that I not be allowed to teach it. Law School Off Campus! Chief Illiniwak Off Campus! Torture Off Campus! CIA Off Campus! Mossad Off Campus! Michael Moore Off Campus! Consort Hurricane Heidi Hurd Off Campus! War Crimes Off Campus! Crimes Against Humanity Off Campus! War Criminals Off Campus! Genocidaires against Muslims/Arabs/Asians of Color Off Campus! Etc. Etc. Etc. Ad Nauseam Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Wednesday, June 21, 2017 2:16 PM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson ; Mildred O'brien Subject: FW: Need to "Repeal the Perpetual Illegal Wars" -- Interviews Available When I tried to introduce my proposed course “The Constitutional Law of U.S. Foreign Affairs” into the Law School Curriculum as a regular course, it was so savagely attacked by the Curriculum Committee that I withdrew it from further consideration. Law School Off Campus! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Wednesday, June 21, 2017 2:10 PM To: sectns.aals at lists.aals.org Subject: FW: Need to "Repeal the Perpetual Illegal Wars" -- Interviews Available Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Institute for Public Accuracy . [mailto:accuracy at accuracy.org] Sent: Wednesday, June 21, 2017 2:09 PM To: francis.a.boyle at gmail.com Subject: Need to "Repeal the Perpetual Illegal Wars" -- Interviews Available [http://app.meltwaterpress.com/mpress/statistic.html?accessCode=5a2b52bd9f6854132e3bc43276481bed2b3eb442&distributionId=542308&contact=francis.a.boyle at gmail.com] Need to "Repeal the Perpetual Illegal Wars" Charlie Savage of the New York Times reports in "Senators Wrestle With Updating Law Authorizing War on Terrorist Groups" that: "Asked at a luncheon on Monday at the National Press Club in Washington what legal basis the United States had to attack Syrian government forces, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Joseph F. Dunford Jr., claimed the authority stemmed from the 2001 law because the American military presence in Syria was predicated on fighting Al Qaeda and the Islamic State there. "But on Tuesday, the ranking Democrat on the Senate committee, Senator Benjamin L. Cardin of Maryland, said, 'The most recent use of this, in regards to activities in Syria, certainly had nothing to do with the attack on our country on September the 11th.'" The question at the National Press Club to Dunford was submitted by Sam Husseini of the Institute for Public Accuracy and was featured on an IPA news release on Monday: "Bombing Syria: * Impeachable * Carve-Up Agenda." FRANCIS BOYLE Boyle is professor of international law at the University of Illinois College of Law. He said today: "What the U.S. government is getting away with here is incredible. Gen. Dunford is citing the 2001 AUMF to go after Al Qaeda as justification to go after a secular government -- Syria -- that is actually fighting Al Qaeda, as well as ISIS. "Congress should not be in the business of 'updating' any authorization of continuing these wars, which are clearly illegal under international law. Congress should be in the business of repealing these bogus domestic authorizations. No one in 1970 was working to 'update' the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution. At least no one who was not a laughing stock. Congress was working to repeal the Gulf of Tonkin resolution, to defund the war -- not to perpetuate illegal war for another generation. Congress now needs to repeal the perpetual illegal wars. The War Powers clause of the Constitution, as well as the War Powers Resolution are being flagrantly violated." Boyle was featured on an Institute for Public Accuracy news release in 2013 along with former Rep. Paul Findley: “* Key Author of War Powers Act: ‘Obama has no Authority to Attack Syria’ * Impeachment.” Boyle's books include Foundations of World Order: The Legalist Approach to International Relations (Duke University Press). -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Thu Jun 22 00:50:43 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2017 00:50:43 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide In-Reply-To: References: <200610092004.k99K4dXo038063@pencil.math.missouri.edu> Message-ID: And I also hold the Zionists on this Campus and the Zionists in this town fully responsible for Ethnically Cleansing Native Americans out of this Campus. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Wednesday, June 21, 2017 9:14 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson ; Mildred O'brien Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide And for the record: Acting Law Dean John Columbo publicly sent a perfectly bootlicking letter to Wise {sic!} fully approving her illegally firing Salaita that led to the Destruction of our Native American Studies Program and Department and the ethnic cleansing of American Indians off of this Campus. Law School Off Campus! Chief Illiniwak Off Campus! CIA Off Campus! Mossad Off Campus! Torture Off Campus! Michael Moore Off Campus! Consort Hurricane Heidi Hurd Off Campus! Gitmo Kangaroo Courts Off Campus! Etc. Etc. Etc. Ad nauseam! Francis A. Boyle Professor of Law Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2017 4:56 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide And just as the Zionists destroyed our Native American Studies Program and Department, so too the Zionists are now destroying Palestine and the Palestinians. Let the University of Illiniwaks rot in the bigotry and racism and ignorance of Zionism! Francis A. Boyle Professor of Law Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 1:45 PM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide And I respectfully request that everyone on this list get the Message out that no American Indian Professor, Scholar or Expert should have anything to do with this God-forsaken Campus. Ditto for Middle East Professors, Scholars and Experts. Let the University of Illinois ROT in the Bigotry, Racism and Ignorance of Zionism! Francis A. Boyle Professor of Law Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 1:30 PM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide As for the "future" of our Native American Studies Program and Department, I submit we should leave them DESTROYED as a Permanent Monument and Testament to how mean, nasty, vicious, cruel, ruthless, and unprincipled our Campus Zionists and our Community Zionists really are. Francis A. Boyle Professor of Law Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 10:04 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide The Local Zionists are mean, nasty, vicious, ruthless and unprincipled People who will stop at nothing to get their way. Hence they destroyed our Native American Studies Program and destroyed Salaita's Career as a Professor and threw Salaita, his Wife and their Baby out into the Street with no visible means of support. I cannot offhand recall a Greater Academic Cosmic Injustice since when I entered Higher Education in 1968. Francis A. Boyle Professor of Law Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 6:57 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide And as for the Zionists on this Campus and in this Community, I hold you accountable for destroying our Native American Studies Program. Francis A. Boyle Professor of Law Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 6:47 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide After the long years of hard work and pain and suffering and tears and agony that we all engaged in trying to get rid of Chief Illiniwak and instituting the Native American Studies Program as some sort of compensation, Wise {sic!} and her Zionists destroyed it all in the bat of an eye. I cannot think of a Greater Academic Cosmic Injustice. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2017 12:28 PM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide Because of the pro bono work I did for AIM, I came to understand that American Indians see the US Government the same way the Jews see the Nazis. Wise "{sic!} is a Nazi! Ditto and pari passu for what she did to the Palestinians. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2017 9:51 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide And Wise {sic!} has successfully terrorized and intimidated every Palestinian/Arab/Muslim of Color on this Campus. Nothing has changed for American Indians and Palestinians/Arabs/Muslims of Color. It is an absolute disgrace but no surprise that the rotten and corrupt and racist AAUP eliminated the die-hard Anti-Palestinian University of Illiniwaks from their Censure List. That is precisely why I quit the AAUP years ago because of their die-hard bigotry and racism against Palestinians/Arabs/Muslims of Color. And now ditto for American Indians. Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2017 9:43 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: FW: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide My pro bono publico Clients here were the American Indian Movement. Chief Illiniwak is an Indicium of Genocide.And Wise {sic!} just Ethnically Cleansed Native Americans off of this Campus. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com [mailto:nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com] Sent: Monday, October 09, 2006 3:05 PM To: undisclosed-recipients Subject: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit [Here's one of our annual Columbus Day pieces. -NYTr] sent by Francis Boyle Columbus Day Promotes Genocide Indictment of the Federal Government of the U.S. for the commission of international crimes and petition for orders mandating its proscription and dissolution as an international criminal conspiracy and criminal organization By Francis A. Boyle, Professor of International Law 18 September 1992 Introduction All citizens of the World Community have both the right and the duty under public international law to sit in judgment over a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental norms of international criminal law committed by any member state of that same World Community. Such is the case for the International Tribunal of Indigenous Peoples and Oppressed Nationalities in the United States of America that convenes in San Francisco during the weekend of October 1-4, 1992. Its weighty but important task is to examine the long history of international criminal activity that has been perpetrated by the Federal Government of the United States of America against the Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America since it was founded in 1787. Toward that end, I have the honor to present to the Members of this Tribunal the following charges against the Federal Government of the United States of America under international criminal law. In light of the gravity, severity, and longstanding nature of these international crimes and also in light of the fact that the Federal Government of the United States of America appears to be irrevocably committed to continuing down this path of lawlessness and criminality against Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America and elsewhere, I hereby petition the Members of this Tribunal to issue an Order proscribing the Federal Government of the United States of America as an International Criminal Conspiracy and a Criminal Organization under the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles as well as the other sources of public international law specified below. For that reason, I also request that the Members of this Tribunal issue an Order dissolving the Federal Government of the United States of America as a legal and political entity. Finally, I ask this Tribunal to declare that international legal sovereignty over the Territories principally inhabited by the Native American Peoples, the New Afrikan People, the Mexicano People, and the People of Puerto Rico resides in the hands of these respective Peoples Themselves. In this regard, I should point out that the final Decision of this Tribunal will qualify as a judicial decision within the meaning of article 38(1)(d) of the Statute of the International Court of Justice and will therefore constitute a subsidiary means for the determination of rules of law for international law and practice. The Statute of the International Court of Justice is an integral part of the United Nations Charter under article 92 thereof. Thus, this Tribunal's Decision can be relied upon by some future International Criminal Court or Tribunal, as well as by any People or State of the World Community that desires to initiate criminal proceedings against named individuals for the commission of the following international crimes. The Decision of this Tribunal shall serve as adequate notice to the appropriate officials in the United States Federal Government that they bear personal criminal responsibility under international law and the domestic legal systems of all Peoples and States in the World Community for designing and implementing these illegal, criminal and reprehensible policies and practices against Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America. Hereinafter, the Federal Government of the United States of America will be referred to as the Defendant. BILL OF PARTICULARS AGAINST THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA The Native American Peoples 1. The Defendant has perpetrated innumerable Crimes Against eace, Crimes Against Humanity and War Crimes against Native American Peoples as recognized by the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles. 2. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Genocide against Native American Peoples as recognized by the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. 3. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Apartheid against Native American Peoples as recognized by the 1973 International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid. 4. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of Native American Peoples as recognized by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights. 5. The Defendant has perpetrated numerous and repeated violations of the 1965 International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination against Native American Peoples. 6. The Defendant has systematically violated 371 treaties it concluded with Native American Peoples in wanton disregard of the basic principle of public international law and practice dictating pacta sunt servanda. 7. The Defendant has denied and violated the international legal right of Native American Peoples to self-determination as recognized by the 1945 United Nations Charter, the 1966 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the 1966 International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, fundamental principles of customary international law, and jus cogens. 8. The Defendant has violated the seminal United Nations Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Territories of 1960 with respect to Native American Peoples and Territories. Pursuant thereto, the Defendant has an absolute international legal obligation to decolonize Native American Territories immediately and to transfer all powers it currently exercises there to the Native American Peoples. 9. The Defendant has illegally refused to accord full-scope protections as Prisoners-of-War to captured Native American independence fighters in violation of the Third Geneva Convention of 1949 and Additional Protocol I thereto of 1977. The Defendant's treatment of captured Native American independence fighters as common criminals and terrorists constitutes a grave breach of the Geneva Accords and thus a serious war crime. 10. The Defendant has deliberately and systematically permitted, aided and abetted, solicited and conspired to commit the dumping, transportation, and location of nuclear, toxic, medical and otherwise hazardous waste materials on Native American Territories across North America and has thus created a clear and present danger to the lives, health, safety, and physical and mental well-being of Native American Peoples in gross violation of article 3 and article 2(c) of the 1948 Genocide Convention, inter alia: Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; ... The New Afrikan People 11. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Slavery upon the New Afrikan People as recognized in part by the 1926 Slavery Convention and the 1956 Supplementary Convention on the Abolition of Slavery, the Slave Trade, and Institutions and Practices Similar to Slavery. The Defendant has illegally refused to pay reparations to the New Afrikan People for the commission of the International Crime of Slavery against Them in violation of basic norms of customary international law requiring such reparations to be paid. 12. The Defendant has perpetrated innumerable Crimes Against Humanity against the New Afrikan People as recognized by the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles. 13. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of genocide against the New Afrikan People as recognized by the 1948 Genocide Convention. 14. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Apartheid against the New Afrikan People as recognized by the 1973 Apartheid Convention. 15. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of the New Afrikan People as recognized by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the two aforementioned United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966. 16. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the 1965 Racism Convention against the New Afrikan People. The Defendant is the paradigmatic example of an irremediably racist state in international relations today. 17. The Defendant has denied and violated the international legal right of the New Afrikan People to self-determination as recognized by the United Nations Charter, the two United Nations Human rights Covenants of 1966, customary international law, and jus cogens. 18. The Defendant has illegally refused to apply the United Nations Decolonization Resolution of 1960 to the New Afrikan People and to the Territories that they principally inhabit. Pursuant thereto, the Defendant has an absolute international legal obligation to decolonize New Afrikan Territories immediately and to transfer all powers it currently exercises there to the New Afrikan People. 19. The Defendant has illegally refused to accord full-scope protections as Prisoners-of-War to captured New Afrikan independence fighters in violation of the Third Geneva Convention of 1949 and Additional Protocol I thereto of 1977. The Defendant's treatment of captured New Afrikan independence fighters as common criminals and terrorists constitutes a grave breach of the Geneva Accords and thus a serious war crime. The Mexicano People 20. In 1821, Mexico obtained its independence from colonial Spain as a sovereign Mestizo State, extending from Yucatan and Chiapas in the south, to the northern territories of California and New Mexico, which areas the Defendant today calls the states of Texas, California, Arizona, Nevada, Utah, New Mexico, and Colorado. Nevertheless, in 1836 so-called settlors under the sponsorship of the Defendant began the division of the Mexicano People and State by causing the division of the Mexican state of Coahuila-Texas into the Mexican state of Coahuila and the so-called republic of Texas. 21. In 1846, the Defendant perpetrated an unjust, illegal and unjustifiable war upon the remainder of the sovereign People and State of Mexico that violated every known principle of public international law in existence at that time, including, but not limited to, the Christian Doctrine of just war, which was the then reigning standard of customary international law. As a result thereof, the Defendant illegally annexed close to 51% of the territories of the sovereign State of Mexico by means of forcing it to conclude the 1848 Treaty of Guadalupe-Hidalgo under military duress. For these reasons, this Treaty was and still is null and void ab initio as a matter of public international law. The Defendant acquired more Mexican territory through the Gadsen Treaty (Purchase) of 1854. 22. Since these 1848 and 1854 Treaties, the Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Genocide against the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories, as recognized by the 1948 Genocide Convention. 23. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Apartheid against the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories, as recognized by the 1973 Apartheid Convention. 24. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories, as recognized by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the two aforementioned United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966. 25. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the 1965 Racism Convention against the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories. 26. The Defendant has denied and violated the international legal right of the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories to self-determination, as recognized by the United Nations Charter, the two United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966, customary international law, and jus cogens. 27. Since the militarily-imposed division of the Mexican State, the Defendant and its agents have militarily occupied other portions of the Mexican State, have sought to influence the outcome of the Mexican Revolution of 1910, have practiced a consistent pattern of intervention into Mexico's internal affairs, all of which have resulted in the arresting distortion and deformation of the Mexican social and economic order. In this regard, Defendant's so-called North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) constitutes nothing more than an attempt to impose its hegemonial imperialism, economic colonialism, and human exploitation upon the People and State of Mexico. 28. The Defendant has illegally refused to apply the United Nations Decolonization Resolution of 1960 to the Mexicano People and to these occupied territories that they inhabit. Pursuant thereto, the Defendant has an absolute international legal obligation to decolonize both the Mexican occupied territories and the Republic of Mexico immediately, and to transfer all powers it currently exercises there to the Mexicano People. The People and State of Puerto Rico 29. Since its illegal invasion of Puerto Rico in 1898, the Defendant has perpetrated innumerable Crimes against Peace, Crimes against Humanity and War Crimes against the People and State of Puerto Rico as recognized by the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles. 30. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Genocide against the Puerto Rican People as recognized by the 1948 Genocide Convention. 31. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Apartheid against the Puerto Rican People as recognized by the 1973 Apartheid Convention. 32. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of the Puerto Rican People as recognized by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human rights and the two aforementioned United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966. 33. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the 1965 Racism Convention against the Puerto Rican People. 34. The Defendant has denied and violated the international legal right of the Puerto Rican People to self-determination as recognized by the United Nations Charter, the two United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966, customary international law, and jus cogens. 35. The Defendant has illegally refused to apply the United Nations Decolonization Resolution of 1960 to Puerto Rico. Pursuant thereto, the Defendant has an absolute international legal obligation to decolonize Puerto Rico immediately and to transfer all powers it currently exercises there to the Puerto Rican People. 36. The Defendant has illegally refused to accord full-scope protections as Prisoners-of-War to captured Puerto Rican independence fighters in violation of the Third Geneva Convention of 1949 and Additional Protocol I thereto of 1977. The Defendant's treatment of captured Puerto Rican independence fighters as common criminals and terrorists constitutes a grave breach of the Geneva Accords and thus a serious war crime. An International Criminal Conspiracy and a Criminal Organization 37. In light of the foregoing international crimes, the Defendant constitutes an International Criminal Conspiracy and a Criminal Organization in accordance with the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles and the other sources of public international law specified above. The Federal Government of the United States of America is legally identical to the Nazi government of World War II Germany. Indeed, the Defendant's President, George Bush, has proclaimed a so-called New World Order that sounds and looks strikingly similar to the New Order proclaimed by Adolph Hitler over fifty years ago. Conclusion Like unto a pirate, the Defendant is hostis humani generis: The enemy of all humankind! For the good of all humanity, this Tribunal must condemn and repudiate the Federal Government of the United States of America and its grotesque vision of a New World Order that is constructed upon warfare, bloodshed, violence, criminality, genocide, racism, colonialism, apartheid, massive violations of fundamental human rights, and the denial of the international legal right of self-determination to the Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America and elsewhere around the world. Consequently, this Tribunal must find the Defendant guilty as charged on all of the counts specified above beyond a reasonable doubt. This Tribunal must also issue an Order that formally proscribes the Federal Government of the United States of America as an International Criminal Conspiracy and a Criminal Organization. This Tribunal must also issue a separate Order mandating the dissolution of the Federal Government of the United States of America as a legal and political entity. Finally, this Tribunal must declare that international legal sovereignty over the Territories principally inhabited by the Native American Peoples, the New Afrikan People, the Mexicano People, and the People of Puerto Rico resides, respectively, in the hands of these Peoples Themselves. The very lives, well-being, health, welfare, and safety of the Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America and elsewhere around the world depend upon the ultimate success of your deliberations. Respectfully submitted by, FRANCIS A. BOYLE PROFESSOR OF INTERNATIONAL LAW SPECIAL PROSECUTOR Dated: September 18, 1992 University of Illinois College of Law 504 East Pennsylvania Champaign, IL 61820 217-333-7954 See USA on Trial: The International Tribunal on Indigenous Peoples'and Oppressed Nations in the United States. The Book and Verdict are available from Editorial El Coqui, 1671 N. Claremont,Chicago Illinois 60647. Or you can try calling the Puerto Rican Cultural Center in Chicago at 312-342-4295. The Video can be obtained from Mission Creek Video, PO Box 411271 San Francisco CA 941141 (phone:415-695-0931). Francis A. Boyle * ================================================================ .NY Transfer News Collective * A Service of Blythe Systems . Since 1985 - Information for the Rest of Us . .339 Lafayette St., New York, NY 10012 http://www.blythe.org .List Archives: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/pipermail/nytr/ .Subscribe: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/mailman/listinfo/nytr ================================================================ From fboyle at illinois.edu Thu Jun 22 00:50:43 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2017 00:50:43 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide In-Reply-To: References: <200610092004.k99K4dXo038063@pencil.math.missouri.edu> Message-ID: And I also hold the Zionists on this Campus and the Zionists in this town fully responsible for Ethnically Cleansing Native Americans out of this Campus. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Wednesday, June 21, 2017 9:14 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson ; Mildred O'brien Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide And for the record: Acting Law Dean John Columbo publicly sent a perfectly bootlicking letter to Wise {sic!} fully approving her illegally firing Salaita that led to the Destruction of our Native American Studies Program and Department and the ethnic cleansing of American Indians off of this Campus. Law School Off Campus! Chief Illiniwak Off Campus! CIA Off Campus! Mossad Off Campus! Torture Off Campus! Michael Moore Off Campus! Consort Hurricane Heidi Hurd Off Campus! Gitmo Kangaroo Courts Off Campus! Etc. Etc. Etc. Ad nauseam! Francis A. Boyle Professor of Law Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2017 4:56 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide And just as the Zionists destroyed our Native American Studies Program and Department, so too the Zionists are now destroying Palestine and the Palestinians. Let the University of Illiniwaks rot in the bigotry and racism and ignorance of Zionism! Francis A. Boyle Professor of Law Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 1:45 PM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide And I respectfully request that everyone on this list get the Message out that no American Indian Professor, Scholar or Expert should have anything to do with this God-forsaken Campus. Ditto for Middle East Professors, Scholars and Experts. Let the University of Illinois ROT in the Bigotry, Racism and Ignorance of Zionism! Francis A. Boyle Professor of Law Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 1:30 PM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide As for the "future" of our Native American Studies Program and Department, I submit we should leave them DESTROYED as a Permanent Monument and Testament to how mean, nasty, vicious, cruel, ruthless, and unprincipled our Campus Zionists and our Community Zionists really are. Francis A. Boyle Professor of Law Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 10:04 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide The Local Zionists are mean, nasty, vicious, ruthless and unprincipled People who will stop at nothing to get their way. Hence they destroyed our Native American Studies Program and destroyed Salaita's Career as a Professor and threw Salaita, his Wife and their Baby out into the Street with no visible means of support. I cannot offhand recall a Greater Academic Cosmic Injustice since when I entered Higher Education in 1968. Francis A. Boyle Professor of Law Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 6:57 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide And as for the Zionists on this Campus and in this Community, I hold you accountable for destroying our Native American Studies Program. Francis A. Boyle Professor of Law Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 6:47 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide After the long years of hard work and pain and suffering and tears and agony that we all engaged in trying to get rid of Chief Illiniwak and instituting the Native American Studies Program as some sort of compensation, Wise {sic!} and her Zionists destroyed it all in the bat of an eye. I cannot think of a Greater Academic Cosmic Injustice. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2017 12:28 PM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide Because of the pro bono work I did for AIM, I came to understand that American Indians see the US Government the same way the Jews see the Nazis. Wise "{sic!} is a Nazi! Ditto and pari passu for what she did to the Palestinians. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2017 9:51 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide And Wise {sic!} has successfully terrorized and intimidated every Palestinian/Arab/Muslim of Color on this Campus. Nothing has changed for American Indians and Palestinians/Arabs/Muslims of Color. It is an absolute disgrace but no surprise that the rotten and corrupt and racist AAUP eliminated the die-hard Anti-Palestinian University of Illiniwaks from their Censure List. That is precisely why I quit the AAUP years ago because of their die-hard bigotry and racism against Palestinians/Arabs/Muslims of Color. And now ditto for American Indians. Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2017 9:43 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: FW: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide My pro bono publico Clients here were the American Indian Movement. Chief Illiniwak is an Indicium of Genocide.And Wise {sic!} just Ethnically Cleansed Native Americans off of this Campus. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com [mailto:nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com] Sent: Monday, October 09, 2006 3:05 PM To: undisclosed-recipients Subject: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit [Here's one of our annual Columbus Day pieces. -NYTr] sent by Francis Boyle Columbus Day Promotes Genocide Indictment of the Federal Government of the U.S. for the commission of international crimes and petition for orders mandating its proscription and dissolution as an international criminal conspiracy and criminal organization By Francis A. Boyle, Professor of International Law 18 September 1992 Introduction All citizens of the World Community have both the right and the duty under public international law to sit in judgment over a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental norms of international criminal law committed by any member state of that same World Community. Such is the case for the International Tribunal of Indigenous Peoples and Oppressed Nationalities in the United States of America that convenes in San Francisco during the weekend of October 1-4, 1992. Its weighty but important task is to examine the long history of international criminal activity that has been perpetrated by the Federal Government of the United States of America against the Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America since it was founded in 1787. Toward that end, I have the honor to present to the Members of this Tribunal the following charges against the Federal Government of the United States of America under international criminal law. In light of the gravity, severity, and longstanding nature of these international crimes and also in light of the fact that the Federal Government of the United States of America appears to be irrevocably committed to continuing down this path of lawlessness and criminality against Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America and elsewhere, I hereby petition the Members of this Tribunal to issue an Order proscribing the Federal Government of the United States of America as an International Criminal Conspiracy and a Criminal Organization under the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles as well as the other sources of public international law specified below. For that reason, I also request that the Members of this Tribunal issue an Order dissolving the Federal Government of the United States of America as a legal and political entity. Finally, I ask this Tribunal to declare that international legal sovereignty over the Territories principally inhabited by the Native American Peoples, the New Afrikan People, the Mexicano People, and the People of Puerto Rico resides in the hands of these respective Peoples Themselves. In this regard, I should point out that the final Decision of this Tribunal will qualify as a judicial decision within the meaning of article 38(1)(d) of the Statute of the International Court of Justice and will therefore constitute a subsidiary means for the determination of rules of law for international law and practice. The Statute of the International Court of Justice is an integral part of the United Nations Charter under article 92 thereof. Thus, this Tribunal's Decision can be relied upon by some future International Criminal Court or Tribunal, as well as by any People or State of the World Community that desires to initiate criminal proceedings against named individuals for the commission of the following international crimes. The Decision of this Tribunal shall serve as adequate notice to the appropriate officials in the United States Federal Government that they bear personal criminal responsibility under international law and the domestic legal systems of all Peoples and States in the World Community for designing and implementing these illegal, criminal and reprehensible policies and practices against Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America. Hereinafter, the Federal Government of the United States of America will be referred to as the Defendant. BILL OF PARTICULARS AGAINST THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA The Native American Peoples 1. The Defendant has perpetrated innumerable Crimes Against eace, Crimes Against Humanity and War Crimes against Native American Peoples as recognized by the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles. 2. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Genocide against Native American Peoples as recognized by the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. 3. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Apartheid against Native American Peoples as recognized by the 1973 International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid. 4. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of Native American Peoples as recognized by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights. 5. The Defendant has perpetrated numerous and repeated violations of the 1965 International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination against Native American Peoples. 6. The Defendant has systematically violated 371 treaties it concluded with Native American Peoples in wanton disregard of the basic principle of public international law and practice dictating pacta sunt servanda. 7. The Defendant has denied and violated the international legal right of Native American Peoples to self-determination as recognized by the 1945 United Nations Charter, the 1966 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the 1966 International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, fundamental principles of customary international law, and jus cogens. 8. The Defendant has violated the seminal United Nations Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Territories of 1960 with respect to Native American Peoples and Territories. Pursuant thereto, the Defendant has an absolute international legal obligation to decolonize Native American Territories immediately and to transfer all powers it currently exercises there to the Native American Peoples. 9. The Defendant has illegally refused to accord full-scope protections as Prisoners-of-War to captured Native American independence fighters in violation of the Third Geneva Convention of 1949 and Additional Protocol I thereto of 1977. The Defendant's treatment of captured Native American independence fighters as common criminals and terrorists constitutes a grave breach of the Geneva Accords and thus a serious war crime. 10. The Defendant has deliberately and systematically permitted, aided and abetted, solicited and conspired to commit the dumping, transportation, and location of nuclear, toxic, medical and otherwise hazardous waste materials on Native American Territories across North America and has thus created a clear and present danger to the lives, health, safety, and physical and mental well-being of Native American Peoples in gross violation of article 3 and article 2(c) of the 1948 Genocide Convention, inter alia: Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; ... The New Afrikan People 11. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Slavery upon the New Afrikan People as recognized in part by the 1926 Slavery Convention and the 1956 Supplementary Convention on the Abolition of Slavery, the Slave Trade, and Institutions and Practices Similar to Slavery. The Defendant has illegally refused to pay reparations to the New Afrikan People for the commission of the International Crime of Slavery against Them in violation of basic norms of customary international law requiring such reparations to be paid. 12. The Defendant has perpetrated innumerable Crimes Against Humanity against the New Afrikan People as recognized by the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles. 13. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of genocide against the New Afrikan People as recognized by the 1948 Genocide Convention. 14. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Apartheid against the New Afrikan People as recognized by the 1973 Apartheid Convention. 15. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of the New Afrikan People as recognized by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the two aforementioned United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966. 16. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the 1965 Racism Convention against the New Afrikan People. The Defendant is the paradigmatic example of an irremediably racist state in international relations today. 17. The Defendant has denied and violated the international legal right of the New Afrikan People to self-determination as recognized by the United Nations Charter, the two United Nations Human rights Covenants of 1966, customary international law, and jus cogens. 18. The Defendant has illegally refused to apply the United Nations Decolonization Resolution of 1960 to the New Afrikan People and to the Territories that they principally inhabit. Pursuant thereto, the Defendant has an absolute international legal obligation to decolonize New Afrikan Territories immediately and to transfer all powers it currently exercises there to the New Afrikan People. 19. The Defendant has illegally refused to accord full-scope protections as Prisoners-of-War to captured New Afrikan independence fighters in violation of the Third Geneva Convention of 1949 and Additional Protocol I thereto of 1977. The Defendant's treatment of captured New Afrikan independence fighters as common criminals and terrorists constitutes a grave breach of the Geneva Accords and thus a serious war crime. The Mexicano People 20. In 1821, Mexico obtained its independence from colonial Spain as a sovereign Mestizo State, extending from Yucatan and Chiapas in the south, to the northern territories of California and New Mexico, which areas the Defendant today calls the states of Texas, California, Arizona, Nevada, Utah, New Mexico, and Colorado. Nevertheless, in 1836 so-called settlors under the sponsorship of the Defendant began the division of the Mexicano People and State by causing the division of the Mexican state of Coahuila-Texas into the Mexican state of Coahuila and the so-called republic of Texas. 21. In 1846, the Defendant perpetrated an unjust, illegal and unjustifiable war upon the remainder of the sovereign People and State of Mexico that violated every known principle of public international law in existence at that time, including, but not limited to, the Christian Doctrine of just war, which was the then reigning standard of customary international law. As a result thereof, the Defendant illegally annexed close to 51% of the territories of the sovereign State of Mexico by means of forcing it to conclude the 1848 Treaty of Guadalupe-Hidalgo under military duress. For these reasons, this Treaty was and still is null and void ab initio as a matter of public international law. The Defendant acquired more Mexican territory through the Gadsen Treaty (Purchase) of 1854. 22. Since these 1848 and 1854 Treaties, the Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Genocide against the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories, as recognized by the 1948 Genocide Convention. 23. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Apartheid against the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories, as recognized by the 1973 Apartheid Convention. 24. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories, as recognized by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the two aforementioned United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966. 25. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the 1965 Racism Convention against the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories. 26. The Defendant has denied and violated the international legal right of the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories to self-determination, as recognized by the United Nations Charter, the two United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966, customary international law, and jus cogens. 27. Since the militarily-imposed division of the Mexican State, the Defendant and its agents have militarily occupied other portions of the Mexican State, have sought to influence the outcome of the Mexican Revolution of 1910, have practiced a consistent pattern of intervention into Mexico's internal affairs, all of which have resulted in the arresting distortion and deformation of the Mexican social and economic order. In this regard, Defendant's so-called North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) constitutes nothing more than an attempt to impose its hegemonial imperialism, economic colonialism, and human exploitation upon the People and State of Mexico. 28. The Defendant has illegally refused to apply the United Nations Decolonization Resolution of 1960 to the Mexicano People and to these occupied territories that they inhabit. Pursuant thereto, the Defendant has an absolute international legal obligation to decolonize both the Mexican occupied territories and the Republic of Mexico immediately, and to transfer all powers it currently exercises there to the Mexicano People. The People and State of Puerto Rico 29. Since its illegal invasion of Puerto Rico in 1898, the Defendant has perpetrated innumerable Crimes against Peace, Crimes against Humanity and War Crimes against the People and State of Puerto Rico as recognized by the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles. 30. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Genocide against the Puerto Rican People as recognized by the 1948 Genocide Convention. 31. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Apartheid against the Puerto Rican People as recognized by the 1973 Apartheid Convention. 32. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of the Puerto Rican People as recognized by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human rights and the two aforementioned United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966. 33. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the 1965 Racism Convention against the Puerto Rican People. 34. The Defendant has denied and violated the international legal right of the Puerto Rican People to self-determination as recognized by the United Nations Charter, the two United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966, customary international law, and jus cogens. 35. The Defendant has illegally refused to apply the United Nations Decolonization Resolution of 1960 to Puerto Rico. Pursuant thereto, the Defendant has an absolute international legal obligation to decolonize Puerto Rico immediately and to transfer all powers it currently exercises there to the Puerto Rican People. 36. The Defendant has illegally refused to accord full-scope protections as Prisoners-of-War to captured Puerto Rican independence fighters in violation of the Third Geneva Convention of 1949 and Additional Protocol I thereto of 1977. The Defendant's treatment of captured Puerto Rican independence fighters as common criminals and terrorists constitutes a grave breach of the Geneva Accords and thus a serious war crime. An International Criminal Conspiracy and a Criminal Organization 37. In light of the foregoing international crimes, the Defendant constitutes an International Criminal Conspiracy and a Criminal Organization in accordance with the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles and the other sources of public international law specified above. The Federal Government of the United States of America is legally identical to the Nazi government of World War II Germany. Indeed, the Defendant's President, George Bush, has proclaimed a so-called New World Order that sounds and looks strikingly similar to the New Order proclaimed by Adolph Hitler over fifty years ago. Conclusion Like unto a pirate, the Defendant is hostis humani generis: The enemy of all humankind! For the good of all humanity, this Tribunal must condemn and repudiate the Federal Government of the United States of America and its grotesque vision of a New World Order that is constructed upon warfare, bloodshed, violence, criminality, genocide, racism, colonialism, apartheid, massive violations of fundamental human rights, and the denial of the international legal right of self-determination to the Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America and elsewhere around the world. Consequently, this Tribunal must find the Defendant guilty as charged on all of the counts specified above beyond a reasonable doubt. This Tribunal must also issue an Order that formally proscribes the Federal Government of the United States of America as an International Criminal Conspiracy and a Criminal Organization. This Tribunal must also issue a separate Order mandating the dissolution of the Federal Government of the United States of America as a legal and political entity. Finally, this Tribunal must declare that international legal sovereignty over the Territories principally inhabited by the Native American Peoples, the New Afrikan People, the Mexicano People, and the People of Puerto Rico resides, respectively, in the hands of these Peoples Themselves. The very lives, well-being, health, welfare, and safety of the Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America and elsewhere around the world depend upon the ultimate success of your deliberations. Respectfully submitted by, FRANCIS A. BOYLE PROFESSOR OF INTERNATIONAL LAW SPECIAL PROSECUTOR Dated: September 18, 1992 University of Illinois College of Law 504 East Pennsylvania Champaign, IL 61820 217-333-7954 See USA on Trial: The International Tribunal on Indigenous Peoples'and Oppressed Nations in the United States. The Book and Verdict are available from Editorial El Coqui, 1671 N. Claremont,Chicago Illinois 60647. Or you can try calling the Puerto Rican Cultural Center in Chicago at 312-342-4295. The Video can be obtained from Mission Creek Video, PO Box 411271 San Francisco CA 941141 (phone:415-695-0931). Francis A. Boyle * ================================================================ .NY Transfer News Collective * A Service of Blythe Systems . Since 1985 - Information for the Rest of Us . .339 Lafayette St., New York, NY 10012 http://www.blythe.org .List Archives: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/pipermail/nytr/ .Subscribe: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/mailman/listinfo/nytr ================================================================ From karenaram at hotmail.com Thu Jun 22 11:51:35 2017 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2017 11:51:35 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] A message from the Green Party Message-ID: It’s not about Party Politics, it’s simply about time. Let’s join together and do this. A proposal for consideration: That the Green Party of the United States take the lead in issuing a call for a national mobilization and day of protest against U.S. intervention in Syria, the Middle East and Africa. There are many political vacuums in America that need to be filled, but one that is practically screaming to be filled right now is an active peace movement, and, in particular, a major national mobilization to oppose our government's disastrous and World War III-threatening intervention in Syria and elsewhere in the Middle East and Africa. The peace movement in this country needs a god-damned wake up call. The main national peace coalitions, United For Peace and Justice, and the ANSWER Coalition, oppose U.S. intervention in Syria but UPJ just has a "Call the White House & Congress" post on its main page, from two months ago, and ANSWER seems focused on its "People's Congress of Resistance" gathering to "fight the Trump agenda" in September. That's great but if the U.S. shoots down a Russian plane, or vice-versa, we may not make it 'til September. There are some great journalists like Robert Parry, Caitlin Johnstone, Mark Crispin Miller and the gang at Counterpunch doing some pushback against our nation's current disastrous course, as are many Greens individually, but online posting and propaganda wars are only going to go so far. What do people think about the national Green Party trying to fill this void by initiating a call for a national day of protest, and then trying to build an ad hoc coalition around a national mobilization for that purpose? If the existing peace organizations aren't going to take the initiative, why not us? The need could hardly be greater, the cause could hardly be more urgent, those committed to the corporate parties clearly aren't going to do it and it's right up our alley. And by us taking the lead, we further publicize a critical distinction between ourselves and those parties, and we help build more effective congressional campaigns in 2018, accentuating our role as the only peace party. If we were to try, I bet some of the same good journalists would help us get out the word. I bet we could get UPJ and ANSWER affiliates to start signing on, and maybe get the national coalitions behind it. It could snowball. There are plenty of people out there who don't like the dangerous course our nation is on. I think the Green Party should seize the moment and lead the charge. What do you think, David Keith Cobb, Jill Stein, Bruce A. Dixon, Chris Blankenhorn, Scott McLarty, Paula Densnow,Michael J. Harrington, Karen Aram, Tamar Byczek Yager, Zerlina Smith,Howie Hawkins and other friends? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Thu Jun 22 12:13:35 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2017 12:13:35 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] A message from the Green Party In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Yeah, Phil Berrigan called me up and asked if I would go in with him on a One-Day National General Strike for Peace. I said of course. Phil said he would then do a first draft of the Appeal and send it along to me for my comments. Soon thereafter, Phil was diagnosed with the cancer that would ultimately kill him. Since I was not Phil Berrigan, I did not pursue his idea without him. RIP. But it is still an excellent idea that I would endorse and work for. fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Peace [mailto:peace-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of Karen Aram via Peace Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2017 6:52 AM To: peace ; peace-discuss ; Niloofar Shambayati ; Debra Schrishuhn Subject: [Peace] A message from the Green Party It’s not about Party Politics, it’s simply about time. Let’s join together and do this. A proposal for consideration: That the Green Party of the United States take the lead in issuing a call for a national mobilization and day of protest against U.S. intervention in Syria, the Middle East and Africa. There are many political vacuums in America that need to be filled, but one that is practically screaming to be filled right now is an active peace movement, and, in particular, a major national mobilization to oppose our government's disastrous and World War III-threatening intervention in Syria and elsewhere in the Middle East and Africa. The peace movement in this country needs a god-damned wake up call. The main national peace coalitions, United For Peace and Justice, and the ANSWER Coalition, oppose U.S. intervention in Syria but UPJ just has a "Call the White House & Congress" post on its main page, from two months ago, and ANSWER seems focused on its "People's Congress of Resistance" gathering to "fight the Trump agenda" in September. That's great but if the U.S. shoots down a Russian plane, or vice-versa, we may not make it 'til September. There are some great journalists like Robert Parry, Caitlin Johnstone, Mark Crispin Miller and the gang at Counterpunch doing some pushback against our nation's current disastrous course, as are many Greens individually, but online posting and propaganda wars are only going to go so far. What do people think about the national Green Party trying to fill this void by initiating a call for a national day of protest, and then trying to build an ad hoc coalition around a national mobilization for that purpose? If the existing peace organizations aren't going to take the initiative, why not us? The need could hardly be greater, the cause could hardly be more urgent, those committed to the corporate parties clearly aren't going to do it and it's right up our alley. And by us taking the lead, we further publicize a critical distinction between ourselves and those parties, and we help build more effective congressional campaigns in 2018, accentuating our role as the only peace party. If we were to try, I bet some of the same good journalists would help us get out the word. I bet we could get UPJ and ANSWER affiliates to start signing on, and maybe get the national coalitions behind it. It could snowball. There are plenty of people out there who don't like the dangerous course our nation is on. I think the Green Party should seize the moment and lead the charge. What do you think, David Keith Cobb, Jill Stein, Bruce A. Dixon, Chris Blankenhorn, Scott McLarty, Paula Densnow,Michael J. Harrington, Karen Aram, Tamar Byczek Yager, Zerlina Smith,Howie Hawkins and other friends? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Thu Jun 22 12:44:57 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2017 12:44:57 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] A message from the Green Party References: Message-ID: Berrigans Where’s Phil? Prayed Liz Two days after 9/11 No word from him Rotting in Federal hell hole For “Crimes” against the Empire Will see what I can do No Miracles Least I could do For those two After all they went through For all of us Late Thursday Afternoon Calls all up and down BOP and DC Messages on voice machines I want to speak to my Client Phil Berrigan! Immediately! Or else! Started in again Friday morn Same message This time delivered personally All up and down BOP and DC To U.S. gov Imperialees Got a call from Phil at noon On his way out of solitary Into general prison population He was alright Tell Liz Will call her later tonight Immediately did Great sigh of relief in her voice Do you know how much that means to me? After 9/11 Ashcroft tossed All political prisoners into solitary Including aged and infirmed Phil For Weeks Except Phil Three days Do you know how much that means to me? We all owe so much to that Family Dan, Phil, Liz Our Heroes Our Martyrs Our Saints Suffered and died To atone for Sins of the Empire For All Humanity 3 Berrigans Crucified on Cross of U.S. Imperial History To save humanity For rest of eternity Up the rebels! Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2017 7:14 AM To: 'Karen Aram' ; peace-discuss ; Niloofar Shambayati ; Debra Schrishuhn Subject: RE: A message from the Green Party Yeah, Phil Berrigan called me up and asked if I would go in with him on a One-Day National General Strike for Peace. I said of course. Phil said he would then do a first draft of the Appeal and send it along to me for my comments. Soon thereafter, Phil was diagnosed with the cancer that would ultimately kill him. Since I was not Phil Berrigan, I did not pursue his idea without him. RIP. But it is still an excellent idea that I would endorse and work for. fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Peace [mailto:peace-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of Karen Aram via Peace Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2017 6:52 AM To: peace >; peace-discuss >; Niloofar Shambayati >; Debra Schrishuhn > Subject: [Peace] A message from the Green Party It’s not about Party Politics, it’s simply about time. Let’s join together and do this. A proposal for consideration: That the Green Party of the United States take the lead in issuing a call for a national mobilization and day of protest against U.S. intervention in Syria, the Middle East and Africa. There are many political vacuums in America that need to be filled, but one that is practically screaming to be filled right now is an active peace movement, and, in particular, a major national mobilization to oppose our government's disastrous and World War III-threatening intervention in Syria and elsewhere in the Middle East and Africa. The peace movement in this country needs a god-damned wake up call. The main national peace coalitions, United For Peace and Justice, and the ANSWER Coalition, oppose U.S. intervention in Syria but UPJ just has a "Call the White House & Congress" post on its main page, from two months ago, and ANSWER seems focused on its "People's Congress of Resistance" gathering to "fight the Trump agenda" in September. That's great but if the U.S. shoots down a Russian plane, or vice-versa, we may not make it 'til September. There are some great journalists like Robert Parry, Caitlin Johnstone, Mark Crispin Miller and the gang at Counterpunch doing some pushback against our nation's current disastrous course, as are many Greens individually, but online posting and propaganda wars are only going to go so far. What do people think about the national Green Party trying to fill this void by initiating a call for a national day of protest, and then trying to build an ad hoc coalition around a national mobilization for that purpose? If the existing peace organizations aren't going to take the initiative, why not us? The need could hardly be greater, the cause could hardly be more urgent, those committed to the corporate parties clearly aren't going to do it and it's right up our alley. And by us taking the lead, we further publicize a critical distinction between ourselves and those parties, and we help build more effective congressional campaigns in 2018, accentuating our role as the only peace party. If we were to try, I bet some of the same good journalists would help us get out the word. I bet we could get UPJ and ANSWER affiliates to start signing on, and maybe get the national coalitions behind it. It could snowball. There are plenty of people out there who don't like the dangerous course our nation is on. I think the Green Party should seize the moment and lead the charge. What do you think, David Keith Cobb, Jill Stein, Bruce A. Dixon, Chris Blankenhorn, Scott McLarty, Paula Densnow,Michael J. Harrington, Karen Aram, Tamar Byczek Yager, Zerlina Smith,Howie Hawkins and other friends? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Thu Jun 22 15:32:50 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2017 15:32:50 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] =?utf-8?b?SG93IHRoZSBDLkkuQS7igJlzIFRvcnR1cmUg?= =?utf-8?q?Program_Began=3A_Law_School_Off_Campus!?= Message-ID: In a public lecture he gave before the entire College of Law Faculty, whose presence had been demanded by his Consort Dean Hurricane Heidi Hurd, and including before the COL Board of Visitors, the Marquis De Sade Professor of Law and Philosophy and of the Center for Advanced Studies in Torture Michael Moore bragged that he advised the Mossad on Torture and argued that since torture worked for the KGB, we Americans should also engage in torture. Fab Torture Off Campus! Mossad Off Campus! CIA Off Campus! Michael Moore Off Campus! Consort Hurricane Heidi Hurd Off Campus! War Crimes Off Campus! Crimes Against Humanity Off Campus! Law School Off Campus! LeVine: In my own research on war crimes committed by US forces in Iraq. I counted at least two-dozen classes of offenses systematically committed by the Occupation administration and US or US-allied military forces in the invasion and subsequent period of CPA (Coalition Provisional Authority) rule. This includes violations of articles and 17, 18, 33, and 147 of the Geneva Convention covering the killing, hostage-taking and torturing of civilians Boyle: As I just argued at Fort Stewart Georgia in the court martial proceedings for Sgt. Camilo Mejia for desertion, the accountability here goes directly up the chain of command under the terms of the US Army Field Manual 27-10. Specifically, paragraph 501 makes clear that commanders who have ordered or knew or should have known about war crimes and failed to stop it are themselves guilty of war crimes. If you look then at the public record, it is clear that Gens. Sanchez and Miller ordered war crimes and both should be relieved of command immediately: abuse of prisoners in violation of the Geneva Conventions. As for General Abizaid, the overall commander of US forces in Southwest Asia, he admitted in his Senate hearings that he should have known about the war crimes at Abu Ghraib, so basically he's already incriminated himself under the rules of the US Army Field Manual 27-10 In addition, above Abizaid you have Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz. Again my reading of the public record including the Taguba and Red Cross reports is that they either knew or should have known about all these war crimes. Indeed, if you read the ICRC report, - and as I testified under oath and under cross-examination (and was not contradicted) at the Mejia court-martial proceedings, - the widespread and systematic nature of these abuses rise to the level of crimes against humanity, going all the way up through the chain of command. Culpability also extends to Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence General William G. Boykin and Defense Undersecretary Stephen Cambone, who reports directly to Undersecretary of Defense Douglas Feith. And through this line it appears to me that Rumsfeld is culpable, because he was at Abu Ghraib last fall. Indeed, Sy Hersch's New Yorker article on Abu Ghraib claims with good substantiation that he was totally aware and even signed off on the use of techniques which are clearly torture. Rumsfeld was given a tour by Brig. General Janet Karpinski, who was supposed to be in charge of the prison-although she said nothing when she was prohibited from accessing certain areas of it-and so she's also accountable. It's important to understand that the Geneva Conventions, the Hague Regulations of 1907, the U.S. Army Field Manual, all mandate that a criminal investigation be opened. And how President Bush, as Commander in Chief would be accountable under Field Manual 27-10 precisely because he is Commander in Chief of the US armed forces under the US Constitution. We know the White House knows this because if you read White House Counsel Alberto Gonzales's memo, he specifically tries to exempt the US from the Geneva Conventions for Guantanamo and Afghanistan. You can see that Gonzalez was afraid of Bush and others being held directly accountable. Moreover, because Powell dissented, we know there was a debate about this, so Bush had to have been aware of the implications of what was being done, which is also backed up by the memos from Ashcroft. These memos have been unearthed by Newsweek. So ultimately what we have here are people at the highest levels of the chain of command guilty of ordering or not preventing torture, which is both an international crime against the Geneva Conventions and the Torture Convention and a domestic crime as well. What we have then is a conspiracy among the aforementioned individuals to commit war crimes and crimes against humanity. Let me add one more thing that's very important to remember: The principles set forth in 27-10 of personal criminal accountability for war crimes goes back to the Nuremburg Charter, Judgments and Principles derived from the post-World War II trials of Nazi war criminals. Similar principles of criminal accountability were applied by the United States to the Japanese Imperial War criminals. LeVine: In fact, President Bush has compared the war on terror to the war against the Nazis. Boyle: Then we have even more reason to bring this to people's attention: The Nuremburg Principles were in fact originally the idea of the US Government which then orchestrated the prosecutions in Nuremburg. People need to understand the pedigree and heritage here. These are very grave offenses which the US government a generation ago prosecuted and executed Nazis for committing. And Japanese war criminals too. LeVine: How can any of the people you mentioned be prosecuted? Boyle: The military could do it, or the Dept. of Justice, which would have default power to do so if the military didn't. But for this of course we'd need a special prosecutor and that law has been allowed to lapse. Attorney General Ashcroft, who is clearly part of the criminal conspiracy, would never push a war crimes investigations against his colleagues or President Bush. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) Feed: NYT > U.S. Posted on: Wednesday, June 21, 2017 4:15 AM Author: NYT > U.S. Subject: How the C.I.A.’s Torture Program Began Video depositions in a case brought by former C.I.A. detainees give an insight into the beginnings of the agency’s enhanced interrogation program. View article... -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Thu Jun 22 15:32:50 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2017 15:32:50 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] =?utf-8?b?SG93IHRoZSBDLkkuQS7igJlzIFRvcnR1cmUg?= =?utf-8?q?Program_Began=3A_Law_School_Off_Campus!?= Message-ID: In a public lecture he gave before the entire College of Law Faculty, whose presence had been demanded by his Consort Dean Hurricane Heidi Hurd, and including before the COL Board of Visitors, the Marquis De Sade Professor of Law and Philosophy and of the Center for Advanced Studies in Torture Michael Moore bragged that he advised the Mossad on Torture and argued that since torture worked for the KGB, we Americans should also engage in torture. Fab Torture Off Campus! Mossad Off Campus! CIA Off Campus! Michael Moore Off Campus! Consort Hurricane Heidi Hurd Off Campus! War Crimes Off Campus! Crimes Against Humanity Off Campus! Law School Off Campus! LeVine: In my own research on war crimes committed by US forces in Iraq. I counted at least two-dozen classes of offenses systematically committed by the Occupation administration and US or US-allied military forces in the invasion and subsequent period of CPA (Coalition Provisional Authority) rule. This includes violations of articles and 17, 18, 33, and 147 of the Geneva Convention covering the killing, hostage-taking and torturing of civilians Boyle: As I just argued at Fort Stewart Georgia in the court martial proceedings for Sgt. Camilo Mejia for desertion, the accountability here goes directly up the chain of command under the terms of the US Army Field Manual 27-10. Specifically, paragraph 501 makes clear that commanders who have ordered or knew or should have known about war crimes and failed to stop it are themselves guilty of war crimes. If you look then at the public record, it is clear that Gens. Sanchez and Miller ordered war crimes and both should be relieved of command immediately: abuse of prisoners in violation of the Geneva Conventions. As for General Abizaid, the overall commander of US forces in Southwest Asia, he admitted in his Senate hearings that he should have known about the war crimes at Abu Ghraib, so basically he's already incriminated himself under the rules of the US Army Field Manual 27-10 In addition, above Abizaid you have Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz. Again my reading of the public record including the Taguba and Red Cross reports is that they either knew or should have known about all these war crimes. Indeed, if you read the ICRC report, - and as I testified under oath and under cross-examination (and was not contradicted) at the Mejia court-martial proceedings, - the widespread and systematic nature of these abuses rise to the level of crimes against humanity, going all the way up through the chain of command. Culpability also extends to Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence General William G. Boykin and Defense Undersecretary Stephen Cambone, who reports directly to Undersecretary of Defense Douglas Feith. And through this line it appears to me that Rumsfeld is culpable, because he was at Abu Ghraib last fall. Indeed, Sy Hersch's New Yorker article on Abu Ghraib claims with good substantiation that he was totally aware and even signed off on the use of techniques which are clearly torture. Rumsfeld was given a tour by Brig. General Janet Karpinski, who was supposed to be in charge of the prison-although she said nothing when she was prohibited from accessing certain areas of it-and so she's also accountable. It's important to understand that the Geneva Conventions, the Hague Regulations of 1907, the U.S. Army Field Manual, all mandate that a criminal investigation be opened. And how President Bush, as Commander in Chief would be accountable under Field Manual 27-10 precisely because he is Commander in Chief of the US armed forces under the US Constitution. We know the White House knows this because if you read White House Counsel Alberto Gonzales's memo, he specifically tries to exempt the US from the Geneva Conventions for Guantanamo and Afghanistan. You can see that Gonzalez was afraid of Bush and others being held directly accountable. Moreover, because Powell dissented, we know there was a debate about this, so Bush had to have been aware of the implications of what was being done, which is also backed up by the memos from Ashcroft. These memos have been unearthed by Newsweek. So ultimately what we have here are people at the highest levels of the chain of command guilty of ordering or not preventing torture, which is both an international crime against the Geneva Conventions and the Torture Convention and a domestic crime as well. What we have then is a conspiracy among the aforementioned individuals to commit war crimes and crimes against humanity. Let me add one more thing that's very important to remember: The principles set forth in 27-10 of personal criminal accountability for war crimes goes back to the Nuremburg Charter, Judgments and Principles derived from the post-World War II trials of Nazi war criminals. Similar principles of criminal accountability were applied by the United States to the Japanese Imperial War criminals. LeVine: In fact, President Bush has compared the war on terror to the war against the Nazis. Boyle: Then we have even more reason to bring this to people's attention: The Nuremburg Principles were in fact originally the idea of the US Government which then orchestrated the prosecutions in Nuremburg. People need to understand the pedigree and heritage here. These are very grave offenses which the US government a generation ago prosecuted and executed Nazis for committing. And Japanese war criminals too. LeVine: How can any of the people you mentioned be prosecuted? Boyle: The military could do it, or the Dept. of Justice, which would have default power to do so if the military didn't. But for this of course we'd need a special prosecutor and that law has been allowed to lapse. Attorney General Ashcroft, who is clearly part of the criminal conspiracy, would never push a war crimes investigations against his colleagues or President Bush. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) Feed: NYT > U.S. Posted on: Wednesday, June 21, 2017 4:15 AM Author: NYT > U.S. Subject: How the C.I.A.’s Torture Program Began Video depositions in a case brought by former C.I.A. detainees give an insight into the beginnings of the agency’s enhanced interrogation program. View article... -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Thu Jun 22 16:00:34 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2017 16:00:34 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] =?utf-8?b?SG93IHRoZSBDLkkuQS7igJlzIFRvcnR1cmUg?= =?utf-8?q?Program_Began=3A_Law_School_Off_Campus!?= Message-ID: -----Original Message----- From: Institute for Public Accuracy [mailto:dcinstitute at igc.org] Sent: Monday, February 09, 2009 2:46 PM To: undisclosed-recipients Subject: Solicitor General Nominee and Torture On the web: http://accuracy.org/newsrelease.php?articleId=1924 Institute for Public Accuracy 915 National Press Building, Washington, D.C. 20045 (202) 347-0020 * http://www.accuracy.org * ipa at accuracy.org ___________________________________________________ PM Monday, February 9, 2009 Solicitor General Nominee Hired Torture Memo Writer Harvard Law School Dean Elena Kagan is scheduled to have a hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Tuesday for the position of solicitor general. She has frequently been mentioned as a possible nominee to fill Ruth Bader Ginsburg's seat on the Supreme Court. FRANCIS BOYLE, fboyle at law.uiuc.edu Professor of law at the University of Illinois, Boyle is author of "Breaking All the Rules." He said today: "As dean of the Harvard Law School, Kagan hired Bush's outgoing director of the Office of Legal Counsel, Jack Goldsmith, as a law professor. Goldsmith is regarded by myself and many others in the field as a war criminal. He wrote some of the memos that attempted to make violations of the Geneva Conventions appear legal. Kagan actually bragged about 'how proud' she was to have hired Goldsmith after one of his criminal Department of Justice memoranda was written up in the Washington Post. "Kagan is neither fit nor qualified to become solicitor general for the U.S. Department of Justice -- the proverbial 'Tenth Justice' of the U.S. Supreme Court -- and thus become a leading contender to replace the anti-totalitarian but now cancer-stricken Justice Ginsburg." Boyle is a former chair of the Harvard Law School Fund Campaign for Greater Illinois and a magna cum laude graduate of Harvard Law School. For background, see Washington Post: "Memo Lets CIA Take Detainees Out of Iraq: Practice Is Called Serious Breach of Geneva Conventions" http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A57363-2004Oct23?language=printer For more information, contact at the Institute for Public Accuracy: Sam Husseini, (202) 347-0020; or David Zupan, (541) 484-9167 _________________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: public at lists.accuracy.org To be removed from the list, send any message to: public-unsubscribe at lists.accuracy.org Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2017 10:33 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson ; Mildred O'brien Subject: How the C.I.A.’s Torture Program Began: Law School Off Campus! In a public lecture he gave before the entire College of Law Faculty, whose presence had been demanded by his Consort Dean Hurricane Heidi Hurd, and including before the COL Board of Visitors, the Marquis De Sade Professor of Law and Philosophy and of the Center for Advanced Studies in Torture Michael Moore bragged that he advised the Mossad on Torture and argued that since torture worked for the KGB, we Americans should also engage in torture. Fab Torture Off Campus! Mossad Off Campus! CIA Off Campus! Michael Moore Off Campus! Consort Hurricane Heidi Hurd Off Campus! War Crimes Off Campus! Crimes Against Humanity Off Campus! Law School Off Campus! LeVine: In my own research on war crimes committed by US forces in Iraq. I counted at least two-dozen classes of offenses systematically committed by the Occupation administration and US or US-allied military forces in the invasion and subsequent period of CPA (Coalition Provisional Authority) rule. This includes violations of articles and 17, 18, 33, and 147 of the Geneva Convention covering the killing, hostage-taking and torturing of civilians Boyle: As I just argued at Fort Stewart Georgia in the court martial proceedings for Sgt. Camilo Mejia for desertion, the accountability here goes directly up the chain of command under the terms of the US Army Field Manual 27-10. Specifically, paragraph 501 makes clear that commanders who have ordered or knew or should have known about war crimes and failed to stop it are themselves guilty of war crimes. If you look then at the public record, it is clear that Gens. Sanchez and Miller ordered war crimes and both should be relieved of command immediately: abuse of prisoners in violation of the Geneva Conventions. As for General Abizaid, the overall commander of US forces in Southwest Asia, he admitted in his Senate hearings that he should have known about the war crimes at Abu Ghraib, so basically he's already incriminated himself under the rules of the US Army Field Manual 27-10 In addition, above Abizaid you have Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz. Again my reading of the public record including the Taguba and Red Cross reports is that they either knew or should have known about all these war crimes. Indeed, if you read the ICRC report, - and as I testified under oath and under cross-examination (and was not contradicted) at the Mejia court-martial proceedings, - the widespread and systematic nature of these abuses rise to the level of crimes against humanity, going all the way up through the chain of command. Culpability also extends to Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence General William G. Boykin and Defense Undersecretary Stephen Cambone, who reports directly to Undersecretary of Defense Douglas Feith. And through this line it appears to me that Rumsfeld is culpable, because he was at Abu Ghraib last fall. Indeed, Sy Hersch's New Yorker article on Abu Ghraib claims with good substantiation that he was totally aware and even signed off on the use of techniques which are clearly torture. Rumsfeld was given a tour by Brig. General Janet Karpinski, who was supposed to be in charge of the prison-although she said nothing when she was prohibited from accessing certain areas of it-and so she's also accountable. It's important to understand that the Geneva Conventions, the Hague Regulations of 1907, the U.S. Army Field Manual, all mandate that a criminal investigation be opened. And how President Bush, as Commander in Chief would be accountable under Field Manual 27-10 precisely because he is Commander in Chief of the US armed forces under the US Constitution. We know the White House knows this because if you read White House Counsel Alberto Gonzales's memo, he specifically tries to exempt the US from the Geneva Conventions for Guantanamo and Afghanistan. You can see that Gonzalez was afraid of Bush and others being held directly accountable. Moreover, because Powell dissented, we know there was a debate about this, so Bush had to have been aware of the implications of what was being done, which is also backed up by the memos from Ashcroft. These memos have been unearthed by Newsweek. So ultimately what we have here are people at the highest levels of the chain of command guilty of ordering or not preventing torture, which is both an international crime against the Geneva Conventions and the Torture Convention and a domestic crime as well. What we have then is a conspiracy among the aforementioned individuals to commit war crimes and crimes against humanity. Let me add one more thing that's very important to remember: The principles set forth in 27-10 of personal criminal accountability for war crimes goes back to the Nuremburg Charter, Judgments and Principles derived from the post-World War II trials of Nazi war criminals. Similar principles of criminal accountability were applied by the United States to the Japanese Imperial War criminals. LeVine: In fact, President Bush has compared the war on terror to the war against the Nazis. Boyle: Then we have even more reason to bring this to people's attention: The Nuremburg Principles were in fact originally the idea of the US Government which then orchestrated the prosecutions in Nuremburg. People need to understand the pedigree and heritage here. These are very grave offenses which the US government a generation ago prosecuted and executed Nazis for committing. And Japanese war criminals too. LeVine: How can any of the people you mentioned be prosecuted? Boyle: The military could do it, or the Dept. of Justice, which would have default power to do so if the military didn't. But for this of course we'd need a special prosecutor and that law has been allowed to lapse. Attorney General Ashcroft, who is clearly part of the criminal conspiracy, would never push a war crimes investigations against his colleagues or President Bush. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) Feed: NYT > U.S. Posted on: Wednesday, June 21, 2017 4:15 AM Author: NYT > U.S. Subject: How the C.I.A.’s Torture Program Began Video depositions in a case brought by former C.I.A. detainees give an insight into the beginnings of the agency’s enhanced interrogation program. View article... -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Thu Jun 22 16:00:34 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2017 16:00:34 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] =?utf-8?b?SG93IHRoZSBDLkkuQS7igJlzIFRvcnR1cmUg?= =?utf-8?q?Program_Began=3A_Law_School_Off_Campus!?= Message-ID: -----Original Message----- From: Institute for Public Accuracy [mailto:dcinstitute at igc.org] Sent: Monday, February 09, 2009 2:46 PM To: undisclosed-recipients Subject: Solicitor General Nominee and Torture On the web: http://accuracy.org/newsrelease.php?articleId=1924 Institute for Public Accuracy 915 National Press Building, Washington, D.C. 20045 (202) 347-0020 * http://www.accuracy.org * ipa at accuracy.org ___________________________________________________ PM Monday, February 9, 2009 Solicitor General Nominee Hired Torture Memo Writer Harvard Law School Dean Elena Kagan is scheduled to have a hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Tuesday for the position of solicitor general. She has frequently been mentioned as a possible nominee to fill Ruth Bader Ginsburg's seat on the Supreme Court. FRANCIS BOYLE, fboyle at law.uiuc.edu Professor of law at the University of Illinois, Boyle is author of "Breaking All the Rules." He said today: "As dean of the Harvard Law School, Kagan hired Bush's outgoing director of the Office of Legal Counsel, Jack Goldsmith, as a law professor. Goldsmith is regarded by myself and many others in the field as a war criminal. He wrote some of the memos that attempted to make violations of the Geneva Conventions appear legal. Kagan actually bragged about 'how proud' she was to have hired Goldsmith after one of his criminal Department of Justice memoranda was written up in the Washington Post. "Kagan is neither fit nor qualified to become solicitor general for the U.S. Department of Justice -- the proverbial 'Tenth Justice' of the U.S. Supreme Court -- and thus become a leading contender to replace the anti-totalitarian but now cancer-stricken Justice Ginsburg." Boyle is a former chair of the Harvard Law School Fund Campaign for Greater Illinois and a magna cum laude graduate of Harvard Law School. For background, see Washington Post: "Memo Lets CIA Take Detainees Out of Iraq: Practice Is Called Serious Breach of Geneva Conventions" http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A57363-2004Oct23?language=printer For more information, contact at the Institute for Public Accuracy: Sam Husseini, (202) 347-0020; or David Zupan, (541) 484-9167 _________________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: public at lists.accuracy.org To be removed from the list, send any message to: public-unsubscribe at lists.accuracy.org Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2017 10:33 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson ; Mildred O'brien Subject: How the C.I.A.’s Torture Program Began: Law School Off Campus! In a public lecture he gave before the entire College of Law Faculty, whose presence had been demanded by his Consort Dean Hurricane Heidi Hurd, and including before the COL Board of Visitors, the Marquis De Sade Professor of Law and Philosophy and of the Center for Advanced Studies in Torture Michael Moore bragged that he advised the Mossad on Torture and argued that since torture worked for the KGB, we Americans should also engage in torture. Fab Torture Off Campus! Mossad Off Campus! CIA Off Campus! Michael Moore Off Campus! Consort Hurricane Heidi Hurd Off Campus! War Crimes Off Campus! Crimes Against Humanity Off Campus! Law School Off Campus! LeVine: In my own research on war crimes committed by US forces in Iraq. I counted at least two-dozen classes of offenses systematically committed by the Occupation administration and US or US-allied military forces in the invasion and subsequent period of CPA (Coalition Provisional Authority) rule. This includes violations of articles and 17, 18, 33, and 147 of the Geneva Convention covering the killing, hostage-taking and torturing of civilians Boyle: As I just argued at Fort Stewart Georgia in the court martial proceedings for Sgt. Camilo Mejia for desertion, the accountability here goes directly up the chain of command under the terms of the US Army Field Manual 27-10. Specifically, paragraph 501 makes clear that commanders who have ordered or knew or should have known about war crimes and failed to stop it are themselves guilty of war crimes. If you look then at the public record, it is clear that Gens. Sanchez and Miller ordered war crimes and both should be relieved of command immediately: abuse of prisoners in violation of the Geneva Conventions. As for General Abizaid, the overall commander of US forces in Southwest Asia, he admitted in his Senate hearings that he should have known about the war crimes at Abu Ghraib, so basically he's already incriminated himself under the rules of the US Army Field Manual 27-10 In addition, above Abizaid you have Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz. Again my reading of the public record including the Taguba and Red Cross reports is that they either knew or should have known about all these war crimes. Indeed, if you read the ICRC report, - and as I testified under oath and under cross-examination (and was not contradicted) at the Mejia court-martial proceedings, - the widespread and systematic nature of these abuses rise to the level of crimes against humanity, going all the way up through the chain of command. Culpability also extends to Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence General William G. Boykin and Defense Undersecretary Stephen Cambone, who reports directly to Undersecretary of Defense Douglas Feith. And through this line it appears to me that Rumsfeld is culpable, because he was at Abu Ghraib last fall. Indeed, Sy Hersch's New Yorker article on Abu Ghraib claims with good substantiation that he was totally aware and even signed off on the use of techniques which are clearly torture. Rumsfeld was given a tour by Brig. General Janet Karpinski, who was supposed to be in charge of the prison-although she said nothing when she was prohibited from accessing certain areas of it-and so she's also accountable. It's important to understand that the Geneva Conventions, the Hague Regulations of 1907, the U.S. Army Field Manual, all mandate that a criminal investigation be opened. And how President Bush, as Commander in Chief would be accountable under Field Manual 27-10 precisely because he is Commander in Chief of the US armed forces under the US Constitution. We know the White House knows this because if you read White House Counsel Alberto Gonzales's memo, he specifically tries to exempt the US from the Geneva Conventions for Guantanamo and Afghanistan. You can see that Gonzalez was afraid of Bush and others being held directly accountable. Moreover, because Powell dissented, we know there was a debate about this, so Bush had to have been aware of the implications of what was being done, which is also backed up by the memos from Ashcroft. These memos have been unearthed by Newsweek. So ultimately what we have here are people at the highest levels of the chain of command guilty of ordering or not preventing torture, which is both an international crime against the Geneva Conventions and the Torture Convention and a domestic crime as well. What we have then is a conspiracy among the aforementioned individuals to commit war crimes and crimes against humanity. Let me add one more thing that's very important to remember: The principles set forth in 27-10 of personal criminal accountability for war crimes goes back to the Nuremburg Charter, Judgments and Principles derived from the post-World War II trials of Nazi war criminals. Similar principles of criminal accountability were applied by the United States to the Japanese Imperial War criminals. LeVine: In fact, President Bush has compared the war on terror to the war against the Nazis. Boyle: Then we have even more reason to bring this to people's attention: The Nuremburg Principles were in fact originally the idea of the US Government which then orchestrated the prosecutions in Nuremburg. People need to understand the pedigree and heritage here. These are very grave offenses which the US government a generation ago prosecuted and executed Nazis for committing. And Japanese war criminals too. LeVine: How can any of the people you mentioned be prosecuted? Boyle: The military could do it, or the Dept. of Justice, which would have default power to do so if the military didn't. But for this of course we'd need a special prosecutor and that law has been allowed to lapse. Attorney General Ashcroft, who is clearly part of the criminal conspiracy, would never push a war crimes investigations against his colleagues or President Bush. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) Feed: NYT > U.S. Posted on: Wednesday, June 21, 2017 4:15 AM Author: NYT > U.S. Subject: How the C.I.A.’s Torture Program Began Video depositions in a case brought by former C.I.A. detainees give an insight into the beginnings of the agency’s enhanced interrogation program. View article... -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From r-szoke at illinois.edu Thu Jun 22 16:12:42 2017 From: r-szoke at illinois.edu (Szoke, Ron) Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2017 16:12:42 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] History doesn't lie, you know! References: Message-ID: <68B501A2-C0AA-4EA7-984E-5A7C43661912@illinois.edu> Learn the dark secret of our present crisis! We must turn to our great inspirational Leader in the White House! Free DVD! From: Moneynews > Subject: Qatar Eyes American Air; Amazon Jolts Fashion; Huge Telecom IPO Date: June 22, 2017 at 10:02:31 AM CDT To: "r-szoke at illinois.edu" > Reply-To: > ‌ [Breaking News from Moneynews] Breaking News from Moneynews American Airlines: Qatar Airways Seeks 10% Stake Special: Profit From Trump's Plan to Avoid a Cyclical Economic Crisis Fashion Sellers Plunge as Amazon Unveils Next Retail Target Cable Operator Altice Delivers Biggest US Telecom IPO in 17 Years Trump’s Adviser Steve Bannon: “America Faces Shocking ‘Fourth Turning’ ” The lingering aftershocks of the 2009 global financial crisis nearly triggered a massive worldwide economic collapse and in the aftermath an illegitimate leader spread his shameful brand of corruption across the land. [http://news.newsmax.com/images/124561/Generation-Zero-bannon-550.jpg]Obama put America on a collision course with a deadly historic destiny, even as it inaugurated a vital new president, Donald J. Trump. The weak were offended when President Trump talked of the carnage that’s spread across America and its lost exceptionalism. But, President Trump knows the dark secret of why America is teetering. His closest adviser, Steve Bannon, exposed the cruel reality in a powerful film he produced before going into the White House. Bannon’s film — called Generation Zero — reveals the crisis that will soon beset America . . . and why the moment may be fleeting to make dramatic changes. The big media like CNN and the major networks won’t talk about the facts that were revealed in Bannon’s documentary film — Generation Zero — but the truth cannot be silenced and the film has become a secret folk hit for its accurate predictions and stark warnings about America’s economy and future. Generation Zero says that America remains close to the brink of total calamity after years of quantitative easing, helicopter money, and our national debt doubling under Barack Obama. The horrifying implications of this are revealed powerfully and honestly in Generation Zero. Generation Zero also argues that America is in its “Fourth Turning” stage — a generational cycle that has already affected our history in amazing ways. [http://news.newsmax.com/images/124561/06-01-17%20FIR%20Generation%20zero%202.jpg]A Turning is one of four consecutive 20-year cycles. When the “Fourth Turning” strikes, calamity is close behind . . . history does not lie. America’s first Fourth Turning occurred with its war for independence, a bloody struggle that created the new nation. This was followed almost 80 years later by the Civil War — a seismic event that saw millions die. Some 80 years after that another Fourth Turning slammed us — the Great Depression and World War II. Now, in Generation Zero, Bannon says another Fourth Turning has just begun — a great calamity that will decide our fate for generations to come. [http://news.newsmax.com/images/124561/06-01-17%20FIR%20generation%20zero%203.jpg]Each time in history America has faced down such calamities, but we did so with inspirational leaders like George Washington, Lincoln and even FDR. These inspirational leaders were able to usher in a new “Awakening” that made America better and stronger. Today, Donald Trump has entered the stage as that inspirational leader. Steve Bannon believes Trump alone can defeat the economic dragons let loose by Barack Obama and the Federal Reserve. Generation Zero reveals the dark secrets and identifies the bad actors that have led America to the brink. Bannon says we still face economic Armageddon, but Donald Trump alone stands between us and the abyss. Generation Zero reveals the key signs that prove a Fourth Turning has started, and the attributes of the leader who can take America back to the Promised Land. Remember the dot-com bubble that burst in 2001? It was the biggest economic meltdown in all of history. Trillions were wiped out overnight. Then there was the 2008-2009 crisis that led to a meltdown even bigger. The solution by the swamp-dwellers? Another bubble — based on massive quantitative easing in the Federal Reserve and EVERY major central bank in the world. It was the greatest artificial creation of money mankind has ever known. Generation Zero shows that another titanic bubble has been created, the most gigantic in history. Bannon warns this is about to burst soon, unless President Trump’s policies are implemented and a new “awakening” ignited. He shows what an inspirational leader like Trump can and must do to save America. Generation Zero features appearances from Newt Gingrich, John Bolton, Lou Dobbs, Larry Kudlow, Charles Krauthammer, Tobin Smith and other important thought leaders who share their warnings! Their message has serious implications for your wealth, your family, for assets like your home, your retirement stocks, your bonds — and the value of the dollar and gold. Get Your FREE Generation Zero DVD! To Read More Breaking Financial News go to Moneynews [Facebook] [Twitter] [Google] [YouTube] [Forward to a Friend] This email is never sent unsolicited. You have received this Newsmax email because you subscribed to it or someone forwarded it to you. To opt out, see the links below. ________________________________ TO ADVERTISE ________________________________ For information on advertising, please contact Newsmax Advertising Sales via email. ________________________________ TO SUBSCRIBE ________________________________ If this email has been forwarded to you and you would like to sign up, please click here. Remove your email address from our list or modify your profile. We respect your right to privacy. View our policy. This email was sent by: Newsmax.com 1501 Northpoint Parkway, Suite 104 West Palm Beach, FL 33407 USA 1737734 trcjfyue [http://news.newsmax.com/?SKCD.Xwai6eneAQlnyk6r7.HzrbzNlvAS] -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From davegreen84 at yahoo.com Thu Jun 22 16:14:20 2017 From: davegreen84 at yahoo.com (David Green) Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2017 16:14:20 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Peace-discuss] Letter to the editor submitted References: <1807800797.648962.1498148060696.ref@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1807800797.648962.1498148060696@mail.yahoo.com>   Our neoliberal era of governmental austerity deprives our childrenof the funding they deserve and that our society can well afford at all levelsof education. Thus the need for charitable foundations for CU Schools,Parkland, and the University of Illinois.These foundations partly depend on wealthy neoliberal donorsto provide a few compensatory drops in the buckets that have been emptied bystate and federal neoliberal budgets. Such donors are effusively awarded bysaid foundations, as publicized in recent News-Gazettearticles about Jeff Hartman and George Shapland, local mega-developers.Both men are, not coincidentally, leaders of the Academy onCapitalism and Limited Government, which aspired to be a libertarian/neoliberalthink tank equivalent to Stanford’s Hoover Institution at the U of I, but whicheven the usually docile faculty eventually banished to the U of I Foundationand an office on Marketview Drive.As shabby, pseudo-intellectual, and moribund as its websitemakes the ACLG appear, its principals and supporters have the last laugh. Theyown us, our politicians, and our school administrators. Directly, they haveCozad Asset Management and Busey Bank, Wall Street in the cornfields.Indirectly, they have the support of the Koch Brothers and the nationalleadership of both major political parties; both those who deny climate change andthose who pretend they want to address it.It should be noted, however, that unlike more honorablelibertarians, the above-mentioned institutions and individuals do notincorporate an opposition to U.S. global military aggression into their notionof “limited government.” -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Thu Jun 22 18:07:40 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2017 18:07:40 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] =?utf-8?q?CIA_=26_Mossad_Infiltrated_UI_Center_fo?= =?utf-8?q?r_Advanced_Studies-How_the_C=2EI=2EA=2E=E2=80=99s_Torture_Progr?= =?utf-8?q?am_Began=3A_Law_School_Off_Campus!?= Message-ID: Michael Moore’s strident advocacy in favor of torture, his public admissions that he advises both the CIA and the Mossad on torture, and his argument that since torture works for the KGB, we Americans should also engage in torture, all qualified him for a Professorship at the University of Illinois Center for Advanced Studies. In other words, the CIA and the Mossad have infiltrated the UI Center for Advanced Studies as well as the College of Law and the Department of Philosophy. Fab. CIA Off Campus! Mossad Off Campus! Torture Off Campus! Michael Moore Off Campus! Consort Hurricane Heidi Hurd Off Campus! War Crimes Off Campus! War Criminals Off Campus! Crimes Against Humanity Off Campus! Genocidaires Against Muslims/Arabs/Asians Of Color Off Campus! Gitmo Kangaroo Courts Off Campus! Law School Off Campus! Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2017 10:33 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson ; Mildred O'brien Subject: How the C.I.A.’s Torture Program Began: Law School Off Campus! In a public lecture he gave before the entire College of Law Faculty, whose presence had been demanded by his Consort Dean Hurricane Heidi Hurd, and including before the COL Board of Visitors, the Marquis De Sade Professor of Law and Philosophy and of the Center for Advanced Studies in Torture Michael Moore bragged that he advised the Mossad on Torture and argued that since torture worked for the KGB, we Americans should also engage in torture. Fab Torture Off Campus! Mossad Off Campus! CIA Off Campus! Michael Moore Off Campus! Consort Hurricane Heidi Hurd Off Campus! War Crimes Off Campus! Crimes Against Humanity Off Campus! Law School Off Campus! LeVine: In my own research on war crimes committed by US forces in Iraq. I counted at least two-dozen classes of offenses systematically committed by the Occupation administration and US or US-allied military forces in the invasion and subsequent period of CPA (Coalition Provisional Authority) rule. This includes violations of articles and 17, 18, 33, and 147 of the Geneva Convention covering the killing, hostage-taking and torturing of civilians Boyle: As I just argued at Fort Stewart Georgia in the court martial proceedings for Sgt. Camilo Mejia for desertion, the accountability here goes directly up the chain of command under the terms of the US Army Field Manual 27-10. Specifically, paragraph 501 makes clear that commanders who have ordered or knew or should have known about war crimes and failed to stop it are themselves guilty of war crimes. If you look then at the public record, it is clear that Gens. Sanchez and Miller ordered war crimes and both should be relieved of command immediately: abuse of prisoners in violation of the Geneva Conventions. As for General Abizaid, the overall commander of US forces in Southwest Asia, he admitted in his Senate hearings that he should have known about the war crimes at Abu Ghraib, so basically he's already incriminated himself under the rules of the US Army Field Manual 27-10 In addition, above Abizaid you have Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz. Again my reading of the public record including the Taguba and Red Cross reports is that they either knew or should have known about all these war crimes. Indeed, if you read the ICRC report, - and as I testified under oath and under cross-examination (and was not contradicted) at the Mejia court-martial proceedings, - the widespread and systematic nature of these abuses rise to the level of crimes against humanity, going all the way up through the chain of command. Culpability also extends to Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence General William G. Boykin and Defense Undersecretary Stephen Cambone, who reports directly to Undersecretary of Defense Douglas Feith. And through this line it appears to me that Rumsfeld is culpable, because he was at Abu Ghraib last fall. Indeed, Sy Hersch's New Yorker article on Abu Ghraib claims with good substantiation that he was totally aware and even signed off on the use of techniques which are clearly torture. Rumsfeld was given a tour by Brig. General Janet Karpinski, who was supposed to be in charge of the prison-although she said nothing when she was prohibited from accessing certain areas of it-and so she's also accountable. It's important to understand that the Geneva Conventions, the Hague Regulations of 1907, the U.S. Army Field Manual, all mandate that a criminal investigation be opened. And how President Bush, as Commander in Chief would be accountable under Field Manual 27-10 precisely because he is Commander in Chief of the US armed forces under the US Constitution. We know the White House knows this because if you read White House Counsel Alberto Gonzales's memo, he specifically tries to exempt the US from the Geneva Conventions for Guantanamo and Afghanistan. You can see that Gonzalez was afraid of Bush and others being held directly accountable. Moreover, because Powell dissented, we know there was a debate about this, so Bush had to have been aware of the implications of what was being done, which is also backed up by the memos from Ashcroft. These memos have been unearthed by Newsweek. So ultimately what we have here are people at the highest levels of the chain of command guilty of ordering or not preventing torture, which is both an international crime against the Geneva Conventions and the Torture Convention and a domestic crime as well. What we have then is a conspiracy among the aforementioned individuals to commit war crimes and crimes against humanity. Let me add one more thing that's very important to remember: The principles set forth in 27-10 of personal criminal accountability for war crimes goes back to the Nuremburg Charter, Judgments and Principles derived from the post-World War II trials of Nazi war criminals. Similar principles of criminal accountability were applied by the United States to the Japanese Imperial War criminals. LeVine: In fact, President Bush has compared the war on terror to the war against the Nazis. Boyle: Then we have even more reason to bring this to people's attention: The Nuremburg Principles were in fact originally the idea of the US Government which then orchestrated the prosecutions in Nuremburg. People need to understand the pedigree and heritage here. These are very grave offenses which the US government a generation ago prosecuted and executed Nazis for committing. And Japanese war criminals too. LeVine: How can any of the people you mentioned be prosecuted? Boyle: The military could do it, or the Dept. of Justice, which would have default power to do so if the military didn't. But for this of course we'd need a special prosecutor and that law has been allowed to lapse. Attorney General Ashcroft, who is clearly part of the criminal conspiracy, would never push a war crimes investigations against his colleagues or President Bush. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) Feed: NYT > U.S. Posted on: Wednesday, June 21, 2017 4:15 AM Author: NYT > U.S. Subject: How the C.I.A.’s Torture Program Began Video depositions in a case brought by former C.I.A. detainees give an insight into the beginnings of the agency’s enhanced interrogation program. View article... -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Thu Jun 22 18:07:40 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2017 18:07:40 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] =?utf-8?q?CIA_=26_Mossad_Infiltrated_UI_Center_fo?= =?utf-8?q?r_Advanced_Studies-How_the_C=2EI=2EA=2E=E2=80=99s_Torture_Progr?= =?utf-8?q?am_Began=3A_Law_School_Off_Campus!?= Message-ID: Michael Moore’s strident advocacy in favor of torture, his public admissions that he advises both the CIA and the Mossad on torture, and his argument that since torture works for the KGB, we Americans should also engage in torture, all qualified him for a Professorship at the University of Illinois Center for Advanced Studies. In other words, the CIA and the Mossad have infiltrated the UI Center for Advanced Studies as well as the College of Law and the Department of Philosophy. Fab. CIA Off Campus! Mossad Off Campus! Torture Off Campus! Michael Moore Off Campus! Consort Hurricane Heidi Hurd Off Campus! War Crimes Off Campus! War Criminals Off Campus! Crimes Against Humanity Off Campus! Genocidaires Against Muslims/Arabs/Asians Of Color Off Campus! Gitmo Kangaroo Courts Off Campus! Law School Off Campus! Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2017 10:33 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson ; Mildred O'brien Subject: How the C.I.A.’s Torture Program Began: Law School Off Campus! In a public lecture he gave before the entire College of Law Faculty, whose presence had been demanded by his Consort Dean Hurricane Heidi Hurd, and including before the COL Board of Visitors, the Marquis De Sade Professor of Law and Philosophy and of the Center for Advanced Studies in Torture Michael Moore bragged that he advised the Mossad on Torture and argued that since torture worked for the KGB, we Americans should also engage in torture. Fab Torture Off Campus! Mossad Off Campus! CIA Off Campus! Michael Moore Off Campus! Consort Hurricane Heidi Hurd Off Campus! War Crimes Off Campus! Crimes Against Humanity Off Campus! Law School Off Campus! LeVine: In my own research on war crimes committed by US forces in Iraq. I counted at least two-dozen classes of offenses systematically committed by the Occupation administration and US or US-allied military forces in the invasion and subsequent period of CPA (Coalition Provisional Authority) rule. This includes violations of articles and 17, 18, 33, and 147 of the Geneva Convention covering the killing, hostage-taking and torturing of civilians Boyle: As I just argued at Fort Stewart Georgia in the court martial proceedings for Sgt. Camilo Mejia for desertion, the accountability here goes directly up the chain of command under the terms of the US Army Field Manual 27-10. Specifically, paragraph 501 makes clear that commanders who have ordered or knew or should have known about war crimes and failed to stop it are themselves guilty of war crimes. If you look then at the public record, it is clear that Gens. Sanchez and Miller ordered war crimes and both should be relieved of command immediately: abuse of prisoners in violation of the Geneva Conventions. As for General Abizaid, the overall commander of US forces in Southwest Asia, he admitted in his Senate hearings that he should have known about the war crimes at Abu Ghraib, so basically he's already incriminated himself under the rules of the US Army Field Manual 27-10 In addition, above Abizaid you have Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz. Again my reading of the public record including the Taguba and Red Cross reports is that they either knew or should have known about all these war crimes. Indeed, if you read the ICRC report, - and as I testified under oath and under cross-examination (and was not contradicted) at the Mejia court-martial proceedings, - the widespread and systematic nature of these abuses rise to the level of crimes against humanity, going all the way up through the chain of command. Culpability also extends to Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence General William G. Boykin and Defense Undersecretary Stephen Cambone, who reports directly to Undersecretary of Defense Douglas Feith. And through this line it appears to me that Rumsfeld is culpable, because he was at Abu Ghraib last fall. Indeed, Sy Hersch's New Yorker article on Abu Ghraib claims with good substantiation that he was totally aware and even signed off on the use of techniques which are clearly torture. Rumsfeld was given a tour by Brig. General Janet Karpinski, who was supposed to be in charge of the prison-although she said nothing when she was prohibited from accessing certain areas of it-and so she's also accountable. It's important to understand that the Geneva Conventions, the Hague Regulations of 1907, the U.S. Army Field Manual, all mandate that a criminal investigation be opened. And how President Bush, as Commander in Chief would be accountable under Field Manual 27-10 precisely because he is Commander in Chief of the US armed forces under the US Constitution. We know the White House knows this because if you read White House Counsel Alberto Gonzales's memo, he specifically tries to exempt the US from the Geneva Conventions for Guantanamo and Afghanistan. You can see that Gonzalez was afraid of Bush and others being held directly accountable. Moreover, because Powell dissented, we know there was a debate about this, so Bush had to have been aware of the implications of what was being done, which is also backed up by the memos from Ashcroft. These memos have been unearthed by Newsweek. So ultimately what we have here are people at the highest levels of the chain of command guilty of ordering or not preventing torture, which is both an international crime against the Geneva Conventions and the Torture Convention and a domestic crime as well. What we have then is a conspiracy among the aforementioned individuals to commit war crimes and crimes against humanity. Let me add one more thing that's very important to remember: The principles set forth in 27-10 of personal criminal accountability for war crimes goes back to the Nuremburg Charter, Judgments and Principles derived from the post-World War II trials of Nazi war criminals. Similar principles of criminal accountability were applied by the United States to the Japanese Imperial War criminals. LeVine: In fact, President Bush has compared the war on terror to the war against the Nazis. Boyle: Then we have even more reason to bring this to people's attention: The Nuremburg Principles were in fact originally the idea of the US Government which then orchestrated the prosecutions in Nuremburg. People need to understand the pedigree and heritage here. These are very grave offenses which the US government a generation ago prosecuted and executed Nazis for committing. And Japanese war criminals too. LeVine: How can any of the people you mentioned be prosecuted? Boyle: The military could do it, or the Dept. of Justice, which would have default power to do so if the military didn't. But for this of course we'd need a special prosecutor and that law has been allowed to lapse. Attorney General Ashcroft, who is clearly part of the criminal conspiracy, would never push a war crimes investigations against his colleagues or President Bush. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) Feed: NYT > U.S. Posted on: Wednesday, June 21, 2017 4:15 AM Author: NYT > U.S. Subject: How the C.I.A.’s Torture Program Began Video depositions in a case brought by former C.I.A. detainees give an insight into the beginnings of the agency’s enhanced interrogation program. View article... -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Thu Jun 22 18:31:25 2017 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2017 18:31:25 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] =?utf-8?q?CIA_=26_Mossad_Infiltrated_UI_Center_fo?= =?utf-8?q?r_Advanced_Studies-How_the_C=2EI=2EA=2E=E2=80=99s_Torture_Progr?= =?utf-8?q?am_Began=3A_Law_School_Off_Campus!?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: At some point, yes, we do need to address this issue at the U of I. The CIA and the Mossad, as organizations, are the greatest purveyors of the violence known to man within the last century, working on behalf of the United States Oligarch’s. On Jun 22, 2017, at 11:07, Boyle, Francis A > wrote: Michael Moore’s strident advocacy in favor of torture, his public admissions that he advises both the CIA and the Mossad on torture, and his argument that since torture works for the KGB, we Americans should also engage in torture, all qualified him for a Professorship at the University of Illinois Center for Advanced Studies. In other words, the CIA and the Mossad have infiltrated the UI Center for Advanced Studies as well as the College of Law and the Department of Philosophy. Fab. CIA Off Campus! Mossad Off Campus! Torture Off Campus! Michael Moore Off Campus! Consort Hurricane Heidi Hurd Off Campus! War Crimes Off Campus! War Criminals Off Campus! Crimes Against Humanity Off Campus! Genocidaires Against Muslims/Arabs/Asians Of Color Off Campus! Gitmo Kangaroo Courts Off Campus! Law School Off Campus! Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2017 10:33 AM To: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; Karen Aram >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson >; Mildred O'brien > Subject: How the C.I.A.’s Torture Program Began: Law School Off Campus! In a public lecture he gave before the entire College of Law Faculty, whose presence had been demanded by his Consort Dean Hurricane Heidi Hurd, and including before the COL Board of Visitors, the Marquis De Sade Professor of Law and Philosophy and of the Center for Advanced Studies in Torture Michael Moore bragged that he advised the Mossad on Torture and argued that since torture worked for the KGB, we Americans should also engage in torture. Fab Torture Off Campus! Mossad Off Campus! CIA Off Campus! Michael Moore Off Campus! Consort Hurricane Heidi Hurd Off Campus! War Crimes Off Campus! Crimes Against Humanity Off Campus! Law School Off Campus! LeVine: In my own research on war crimes committed by US forces in Iraq. I counted at least two-dozen classes of offenses systematically committed by the Occupation administration and US or US-allied military forces in the invasion and subsequent period of CPA (Coalition Provisional Authority) rule. This includes violations of articles and 17, 18, 33, and 147 of the Geneva Convention covering the killing, hostage-taking and torturing of civilians Boyle: As I just argued at Fort Stewart Georgia in the court martial proceedings for Sgt. Camilo Mejia for desertion, the accountability here goes directly up the chain of command under the terms of the US Army Field Manual 27-10. Specifically, paragraph 501 makes clear that commanders who have ordered or knew or should have known about war crimes and failed to stop it are themselves guilty of war crimes. If you look then at the public record, it is clear that Gens. Sanchez and Miller ordered war crimes and both should be relieved of command immediately: abuse of prisoners in violation of the Geneva Conventions. As for General Abizaid, the overall commander of US forces in Southwest Asia, he admitted in his Senate hearings that he should have known about the war crimes at Abu Ghraib, so basically he's already incriminated himself under the rules of the US Army Field Manual 27-10 In addition, above Abizaid you have Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz. Again my reading of the public record including the Taguba and Red Cross reports is that they either knew or should have known about all these war crimes. Indeed, if you read the ICRC report, - and as I testified under oath and under cross-examination (and was not contradicted) at the Mejia court-martial proceedings, - the widespread and systematic nature of these abuses rise to the level of crimes against humanity, going all the way up through the chain of command. Culpability also extends to Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence General William G. Boykin and Defense Undersecretary Stephen Cambone, who reports directly to Undersecretary of Defense Douglas Feith. And through this line it appears to me that Rumsfeld is culpable, because he was at Abu Ghraib last fall. Indeed, Sy Hersch's New Yorker article on Abu Ghraib claims with good substantiation that he was totally aware and even signed off on the use of techniques which are clearly torture. Rumsfeld was given a tour by Brig. General Janet Karpinski, who was supposed to be in charge of the prison-although she said nothing when she was prohibited from accessing certain areas of it-and so she's also accountable. It's important to understand that the Geneva Conventions, the Hague Regulations of 1907, the U.S. Army Field Manual, all mandate that a criminal investigation be opened. And how President Bush, as Commander in Chief would be accountable under Field Manual 27-10 precisely because he is Commander in Chief of the US armed forces under the US Constitution. We know the White House knows this because if you read White House Counsel Alberto Gonzales's memo, he specifically tries to exempt the US from the Geneva Conventions for Guantanamo and Afghanistan. You can see that Gonzalez was afraid of Bush and others being held directly accountable. Moreover, because Powell dissented, we know there was a debate about this, so Bush had to have been aware of the implications of what was being done, which is also backed up by the memos from Ashcroft. These memos have been unearthed by Newsweek. So ultimately what we have here are people at the highest levels of the chain of command guilty of ordering or not preventing torture, which is both an international crime against the Geneva Conventions and the Torture Convention and a domestic crime as well. What we have then is a conspiracy among the aforementioned individuals to commit war crimes and crimes against humanity. Let me add one more thing that's very important to remember: The principles set forth in 27-10 of personal criminal accountability for war crimes goes back to the Nuremburg Charter, Judgments and Principles derived from the post-World War II trials of Nazi war criminals. Similar principles of criminal accountability were applied by the United States to the Japanese Imperial War criminals. LeVine: In fact, President Bush has compared the war on terror to the war against the Nazis. Boyle: Then we have even more reason to bring this to people's attention: The Nuremburg Principles were in fact originally the idea of the US Government which then orchestrated the prosecutions in Nuremburg. People need to understand the pedigree and heritage here. These are very grave offenses which the US government a generation ago prosecuted and executed Nazis for committing. And Japanese war criminals too. LeVine: How can any of the people you mentioned be prosecuted? Boyle: The military could do it, or the Dept. of Justice, which would have default power to do so if the military didn't. But for this of course we'd need a special prosecutor and that law has been allowed to lapse. Attorney General Ashcroft, who is clearly part of the criminal conspiracy, would never push a war crimes investigations against his colleagues or President Bush. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) Feed: NYT > U.S. Posted on: Wednesday, June 21, 2017 4:15 AM Author: NYT > U.S. Subject: How the C.I.A.’s Torture Program Began Video depositions in a case brought by former C.I.A. detainees give an insight into the beginnings of the agency’s enhanced interrogation program. View article... -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Thu Jun 22 18:31:25 2017 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2017 18:31:25 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] =?utf-8?q?CIA_=26_Mossad_Infiltrated_UI_Center_fo?= =?utf-8?q?r_Advanced_Studies-How_the_C=2EI=2EA=2E=E2=80=99s_Torture_Progr?= =?utf-8?q?am_Began=3A_Law_School_Off_Campus!?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: At some point, yes, we do need to address this issue at the U of I. The CIA and the Mossad, as organizations, are the greatest purveyors of the violence known to man within the last century, working on behalf of the United States Oligarch’s. On Jun 22, 2017, at 11:07, Boyle, Francis A > wrote: Michael Moore’s strident advocacy in favor of torture, his public admissions that he advises both the CIA and the Mossad on torture, and his argument that since torture works for the KGB, we Americans should also engage in torture, all qualified him for a Professorship at the University of Illinois Center for Advanced Studies. In other words, the CIA and the Mossad have infiltrated the UI Center for Advanced Studies as well as the College of Law and the Department of Philosophy. Fab. CIA Off Campus! Mossad Off Campus! Torture Off Campus! Michael Moore Off Campus! Consort Hurricane Heidi Hurd Off Campus! War Crimes Off Campus! War Criminals Off Campus! Crimes Against Humanity Off Campus! Genocidaires Against Muslims/Arabs/Asians Of Color Off Campus! Gitmo Kangaroo Courts Off Campus! Law School Off Campus! Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2017 10:33 AM To: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; Karen Aram >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson >; Mildred O'brien > Subject: How the C.I.A.’s Torture Program Began: Law School Off Campus! In a public lecture he gave before the entire College of Law Faculty, whose presence had been demanded by his Consort Dean Hurricane Heidi Hurd, and including before the COL Board of Visitors, the Marquis De Sade Professor of Law and Philosophy and of the Center for Advanced Studies in Torture Michael Moore bragged that he advised the Mossad on Torture and argued that since torture worked for the KGB, we Americans should also engage in torture. Fab Torture Off Campus! Mossad Off Campus! CIA Off Campus! Michael Moore Off Campus! Consort Hurricane Heidi Hurd Off Campus! War Crimes Off Campus! Crimes Against Humanity Off Campus! Law School Off Campus! LeVine: In my own research on war crimes committed by US forces in Iraq. I counted at least two-dozen classes of offenses systematically committed by the Occupation administration and US or US-allied military forces in the invasion and subsequent period of CPA (Coalition Provisional Authority) rule. This includes violations of articles and 17, 18, 33, and 147 of the Geneva Convention covering the killing, hostage-taking and torturing of civilians Boyle: As I just argued at Fort Stewart Georgia in the court martial proceedings for Sgt. Camilo Mejia for desertion, the accountability here goes directly up the chain of command under the terms of the US Army Field Manual 27-10. Specifically, paragraph 501 makes clear that commanders who have ordered or knew or should have known about war crimes and failed to stop it are themselves guilty of war crimes. If you look then at the public record, it is clear that Gens. Sanchez and Miller ordered war crimes and both should be relieved of command immediately: abuse of prisoners in violation of the Geneva Conventions. As for General Abizaid, the overall commander of US forces in Southwest Asia, he admitted in his Senate hearings that he should have known about the war crimes at Abu Ghraib, so basically he's already incriminated himself under the rules of the US Army Field Manual 27-10 In addition, above Abizaid you have Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz. Again my reading of the public record including the Taguba and Red Cross reports is that they either knew or should have known about all these war crimes. Indeed, if you read the ICRC report, - and as I testified under oath and under cross-examination (and was not contradicted) at the Mejia court-martial proceedings, - the widespread and systematic nature of these abuses rise to the level of crimes against humanity, going all the way up through the chain of command. Culpability also extends to Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence General William G. Boykin and Defense Undersecretary Stephen Cambone, who reports directly to Undersecretary of Defense Douglas Feith. And through this line it appears to me that Rumsfeld is culpable, because he was at Abu Ghraib last fall. Indeed, Sy Hersch's New Yorker article on Abu Ghraib claims with good substantiation that he was totally aware and even signed off on the use of techniques which are clearly torture. Rumsfeld was given a tour by Brig. General Janet Karpinski, who was supposed to be in charge of the prison-although she said nothing when she was prohibited from accessing certain areas of it-and so she's also accountable. It's important to understand that the Geneva Conventions, the Hague Regulations of 1907, the U.S. Army Field Manual, all mandate that a criminal investigation be opened. And how President Bush, as Commander in Chief would be accountable under Field Manual 27-10 precisely because he is Commander in Chief of the US armed forces under the US Constitution. We know the White House knows this because if you read White House Counsel Alberto Gonzales's memo, he specifically tries to exempt the US from the Geneva Conventions for Guantanamo and Afghanistan. You can see that Gonzalez was afraid of Bush and others being held directly accountable. Moreover, because Powell dissented, we know there was a debate about this, so Bush had to have been aware of the implications of what was being done, which is also backed up by the memos from Ashcroft. These memos have been unearthed by Newsweek. So ultimately what we have here are people at the highest levels of the chain of command guilty of ordering or not preventing torture, which is both an international crime against the Geneva Conventions and the Torture Convention and a domestic crime as well. What we have then is a conspiracy among the aforementioned individuals to commit war crimes and crimes against humanity. Let me add one more thing that's very important to remember: The principles set forth in 27-10 of personal criminal accountability for war crimes goes back to the Nuremburg Charter, Judgments and Principles derived from the post-World War II trials of Nazi war criminals. Similar principles of criminal accountability were applied by the United States to the Japanese Imperial War criminals. LeVine: In fact, President Bush has compared the war on terror to the war against the Nazis. Boyle: Then we have even more reason to bring this to people's attention: The Nuremburg Principles were in fact originally the idea of the US Government which then orchestrated the prosecutions in Nuremburg. People need to understand the pedigree and heritage here. These are very grave offenses which the US government a generation ago prosecuted and executed Nazis for committing. And Japanese war criminals too. LeVine: How can any of the people you mentioned be prosecuted? Boyle: The military could do it, or the Dept. of Justice, which would have default power to do so if the military didn't. But for this of course we'd need a special prosecutor and that law has been allowed to lapse. Attorney General Ashcroft, who is clearly part of the criminal conspiracy, would never push a war crimes investigations against his colleagues or President Bush. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) Feed: NYT > U.S. Posted on: Wednesday, June 21, 2017 4:15 AM Author: NYT > U.S. Subject: How the C.I.A.’s Torture Program Began Video depositions in a case brought by former C.I.A. detainees give an insight into the beginnings of the agency’s enhanced interrogation program. View article... -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Thu Jun 22 19:09:06 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2017 19:09:06 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] =?utf-8?q?CIA_=26_Mossad_Infiltrated_UI_Center_fo?= =?utf-8?q?r_Advanced_Studies-How_the_C=2EI=2EA=2E=E2=80=99s_Torture_Progr?= =?utf-8?q?am_Began=3A_Law_School_Off_Campus!?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Well again back in the 1980s we did have a Movement: CIA OFF CAMPUS! Belden and I were quite active in it. Michael Moore Off Campus! Consort Hurricane Heidi Hurd Off Campus! Law School Off Campus! Fab. That the CIA is a terrorist organization was upheld in the famous “CIA On Trial” case in Northampton, Mass., in 1987, when a jury acquitted 14 protestors who tried to stop CIA recruitment on campus, according to Francis Boyle, the University of Illinois international law authority who defended the group. The defense charged the CIA was “an organized criminal conspiracy like the SS and the Gestapo.” Boyle said, “You would not let the SS or the Gestapo recruit on campus at the University of Massachusetts at Amherst, so you would not permit the CIA to recruit on campus either.” ) [home] Abolish the CIA, America. Sherwood Ross. CIA Torture Report. December 9, 2014 9:01 pm 2 Comments The CIA, the KKK and the USA By Sherwood Ross Global Research, October 15, 2010 15 October 2010 [The CIA, the KKK and the USA] By assigning covert action roles to the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), it is as if the White House and Congress had legitimized the Ku Klux Klan to operate globally. That’s because the CIA today resembles nothing so much as the “Invisible Empire” of the KKK that once spread terror across the South and Midwest. Fiery crosses aside, this is what the CIA is doing globally. The CIA today is committing many of the same sort of gruesome crimes against foreigners that the KKK once inflicted on Americans of color. The principal difference is that the KKK consisted of self-appointed vigilantes who regarded themselves as both outside and above the law when they perpetrated their crimes. By contrast, the CIA acts as the agent of the American government, often at the highest levels, and at times at the direction of the White House. Its crimes typically are committed in contravention of the highest established international law such as the Charter of the United Nations as well as the U.S. Constitution. What’s more, the “Agency,” as it is known, derives its funding largely from an imperialist-minded Congress; additionally, it has no qualms about fattening its budget from drug money and other illegal sources. It is a mirror-image of the lawless entity the U.S. has become since achieving superpower status. And it is incredible that the White House grants license to this violent Agency to commit its crimes with no accountability. The Ku Klux Klan was founded shortly after the end of the U.S. Civil War. Klansman concealed their identities behind flowing white robes and white hoods as they terrorized the newly emancipated blacks to keep them from voting or to drive them from their property. Allowing it to operate in secret literally gives the CIA the mythical Ring of Gyges. In Plato’s Republic, the owner of the ring had the power to become invisible at will. As Wikipedia puts it, Plato “discusses whether a typical person would be moral if he did not have to fear the consequences of his actions.” The ancient Greeks made the argument, Wikipedia says, that “No man would keep his hands off what was not his own when he could safely take what he liked out of the market, go into houses and lie with any one at his pleasure, kill or release from prison whom he would, and in all respects be like a god among men.” The CIA, like Hitler’s Gestapo and Stalin’s NKVD before it, has provided modern man the answer to this question. Its actions illuminate why all criminal entities, from rapists and bank robbers, to Ponzi scheme swindlers and murderers, cloak themselves in secrecy. There are innumerable examples of how American presidents have authorized criminal acts without public discussion that the preponderant majority of Americans would find reprehensible. Example: it was President Lyndon Johnson who ordered the CIA to meddle in Chile’s election to help Eduardo Frei become president. If they had known, U.S. taxpayers might have objected to such a use of their hard-earned money to influence the outcome of another country’s elections. But the public is rarely let in on such illegal foreign policy decisions. Where the KKK after the Civil War terrorized blacks to keep them from voting, the CIA has worked to influence the outcome of elections all over the world through bribery and vote-buying, dirty tricks, and worse. According to investigative reporter William Blum in “Rogue State”(Common Courage Press), the CIA has perverted elections in Italy, Lebanon, Indonesia, The Philippines, Japan, Nepal, Laos, Brazil, Bolivia, Chile, Portugal, Australia, Jamaica, Panama, Nicaragua, Haiti, among other countries. If they had known, taxpayers might also object to the CIA’s numerous overthrows of foreign governments by force and violence—such as was done in Iran in 1953 by President Eisenhower and Chile in 1973 by President Nixon. Both overthrows precipitated bloodbaths that cost tens of thousands of innocent civilians their lives. Blum also lists the countries the CIA has attempted to overthrow or has actually overthrown. His list includes Greece, The Philippines, East Germany, Iran, Guatemala, Indonesia, Iraq, Viet Nam, Laos, Ecuador, The Congo, France, Cuba, Ghana, Chile, South Africa, Bolivia, Portugal, and Nicaragua, to cite a few. As I write, today, October 11th, 2010, Nobel Peace Prize winner Adolfo Perez Esquivel of Argentina called on President Obama to revise U.S. (imperialist) policies toward Latin America. He questioned why the U.S. continues to plant its military bases across the region. That’s an excellent question. If the U.S. is a peace-loving nation, why does it need 800 bases the world over in addition to 1,000 on its own soil? Americans might recoil in disgust if they knew of the CIA’s numerous assassinations of the elected officials of other nations. Is it any wonder Americans so often ask the question, “Why do they hate us?” As historian Arnold Toynbee wrote in 1961, “America is today the leader of a world-wide anti-revolutionary movement in the defence of vested interests. She now stands for what Rome stood for. Rome consistently supported the rich against the poor in all foreign communities that fell under her sway; and, since the poor, so far, have always and everywhere been more numerous than the rich, Rome’s policy made for inequality, for injustice, and for the least happiness of the greatest number.” The CIA’s protective secrecy resembles nothing so much as the KKK, which proudly proclaimed itself “the Invisible Empire” and whose thugs killed citizens having the courage to identify hooded Klansmen to law enforcement officials. Today, it is our highest public officials that protect this criminal force, said to number about 25,000 employees. It is actually a Federal offense to reveal the identity of a CIA undercover agent—unless, of course, you happen to be I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby, and are employed by Vice President Dick Cheney. Libby leaked the identity of CIA agent Valerie Plame to punish her husband Joseph Wilson for publishing a report that undercut the White House lie that Saddam Hussein had purchased “yellowcake” from Niger to fuel WMD. Today, high public officials direct the CIA’s criminal policies and protect its agents’ identities the better to enable them to commit their crimes. According to journalist Fred Cook in his book “Ku Klux Klan: America’s Recurring Nightmare”(Messner), “The Klan was inherently a vigilante organization. It could commit the most atrocious acts under the guise of high principle andperpetrators of those acts would be hidden behind white masks and protected by Klan secrecy… (The Klan) set itself up as judge, jury and executioner”—a policy adopted by the CIA today. CIA spies have conducted their criminal operations masquerading as officials of U.S. aid programs, business executives, or journalists. Example: The San Diego-based Copley News Service’s staff of foreign correspondents allegedly was created to provide cover to CIA spies, compromising legitimate American journalists trying to do their jobs. While the murders committed by the KKK likely ran into the many thousands, the CIA has killed on a far grander scale and managed to keep its role largely secret. As Tim Weiner, who covered the CIA for the New York Times noted in his book “Legacy of Ashes: The History of the CIA” (Anchor): “In Guatemala, 200,000 civilians had died during forty years of struggle following the agency’s(CIA) 1954 coup against an elected president.” Weiner adds, “the CIA’s officers in Guatemala still went to great lengths to conceal the nature of their close relations with the military and to suppress reports that Guatemalan officers on its payroll were murderers, torturers, and thieves.” When it comes to murder, the CIA makes the KKK look like Boy Scouts. Like the KKK, CIA terrorists operate above the law. KKK members committed thousands of lynchings yet rarely were its members punished for them. In 2009 at a speech at CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia, President Obama revealed he was not intent on punishing CIA agents for their crimes but would rather “look forward.” This seemingly charitable philosophy may be driven by the fact that Obama worked for Business International Corporation, a CIA front, at least in 1983 and perhaps longer, and allegedly is the son of a mother and father both of whom also worked for the CIA, as did Obama’s grandmother! I could find none of this in Obama’s biography when he ran for the presidency, when a gullible American public elected a CIA “mole” to the White House. Consider this, too: an agency President Truman feared would become “an American Gestapo” when he signed the enabling legislation into law in 1947 has become just that, and it casts a lengthy shadow over the White House. Ominously, it has in Barack Obama one of its own former employees sitting in the Oval Office—a man who, according to news reports, has vastly expanded the frequency of the CIA’s assassinations by drone aircraft in Pakistan and who illegally claims the “right” to assassinate any American citizen abroad as well. What’s more, from 1989 to 1993 George Bush Sr., the CIA’s own former Director, sat in the White House. Additionally, from 2001 to 2009, the CIA had that Director’s son, George W. Bush, in the Oval Office giving the CIA a blank check after the 9/11 massacre. Bush Jr., according to The New York Times, in the summer of 1974 worked for Alaska International Industries, which did contract work for the CIA. The Times noted that this job did not appear in his biography when he ran for the White House in 2000, terming it “The Missing Chapter in the Bush Bio.” Thus, two presidential candidates with CIA ties—Bush Jr. and Obama—both neglected to mention them. And in Bill Clinton, who presided from 1993 to 2001, the CIA had a go-along president who satisfied the Agency’s blood-lust when he authorized the first illegal “rendition,” a euphemism for what KKK thugs once knew as kidnapping and torture. Is there any question that the Agency has not played an influential, behind-the-scenes or even a direct role in the operations of the U.S. government at its highest level? It may indeed be a stretch to argue that the CIA is running the country but it is no stretch to say that year after year our presidents reflect the criminal philosophy of the Agency. Other parallels with the KKK are striking. As Richmond Flowers, the Attorney General of Alabama stated in 1966, “I’ve found the Klan more than just another secret society… It resembles a shadow government, making its own laws, manipulating local politics, burrowing into some of our local law-enforcement agencies…When a pitiable misfit puts on his $15 sheet, society can no longer ignore him.” Yet the descendants of those misfits have moved up today where they feel comfortable as operatives in the shadow government run by the White House. One of the CIA’s illicit duties has been to serve as a conduit for funneling U.S. taxpayer dollars to corrupt dictators and strongmen bent on suppressing the popular will of their citizenry. As Noam Chomsky wrote in “Failed States”(Metropolitan/Owl), in Honduras, “military officers in charge of the battalion (3-16) were on the CIA payroll.” This elite unit, he says, “organized and trained by the United States and Argentine neo-Nazis,” was “the most barbaric of the Latin American killers that Washington had been supporting.” Like the KKK, the CIA kidnaps many of its victims with no thought ever of legal procedure. It exhibits utter disdain for the rights of those individuals, the sovereignty of foreign nations, or respect for international law. At least hundreds of foreigners, mostly from the Middle East, have been the victims of “renditions” just as the KKK kidnapped and flogged and lynched blacks, labor leaders, Catholics, Jews, or wayward wives whom it felt to be morally lacking. In September, 1921, The New York World ran a series exposing the KKK. It pointed out that, among other things, the KKK was violating the Bill of Rights wholesale. This included the Fourth amendment against “unreasonable searches and seizures,” the Fifth and the Sixth amendments, guaranteeing that no one may be held without a grand jury indictment or punished without a fair trial. And these rights today are similarly trampled by the CIA against American citizens, not just foreigners. Apparently, only foreign courts care to rein in the CIA. The 23 CIA agents that it took to render one “suspect” in Italy are wanted there by the magistrates. (The spooks, by the way, ran up some fabulous bills in luxury hotels on taxpayers’ dollars in that escapade.) Former President Jimmy Carter wrote in his book “Our Endangered Values”(Simon & Schuster), the CIA transferred some of those it kidnapped to countries that included Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Morocco, Jordan, and Uzbekistan where “the techniques of torture are almost indescribably terrible, including, as a U.S. ambassador to one of the recipient countries reported, ‘partial boiling of a hand or an arm,’ with at least two prisoners boiled to death.” The KKK’s methods of punishment were often as ugly: the brutal flogging of blacks in front of vicious crowds, followed by castration and burning their victims alive, and then lynching of the corpses. As for the CIA, “Why?” asks investigative reporter William Blum, “are these men rendered in the first place if not to be tortured? Does the United States not have any speakers in foreign languages to conduct interrogations?” That the CIA is a terrorist organization was upheld in the famous “CIA On Trial” case in Northampton, Mass., in 1987, when a jury acquitted 14 protestors who tried to stop CIA recruitment on campus, according to Francis Boyle, the University of Illinois international law authority who defended the group. The defense charged the CIA was “an organized criminal conspiracy like the SS and the Gestapo.” Boyle said, “You would not let the SS or the Gestapo recruit on campus at the University of Massachusetts at Amherst, so you would not permit the CIA to recruit on campus either.” Another shared characteristic of the KKK and CIA is greed, the desire to loot the hard-earned wealth of others. Often, Klansmen terrorized African-Americans who had amassed property to frighten them off their land. Law-abiding black citizens who had pulled themselves up by the proverbial bootstraps were cheated out of their homes and acreage by the night riders. Similarly, the CIA across Latin America has aligned itself with the well-to-do ruling class at every opportunity. It has cooperated with the elite to punish and murder labor leaders and clergy who espoused economic opportunity for the poor. The notion that allowing the poor to enrich themselves fairly will also create more wealth for an entire society generally, including the rich, has not permeated CIA thinking. I emphasize what historian Toynbee noted: “America is today the leader of a world-wide anti-revolutionary movement in the defence of vested interests. She now stands for what Rome stood for.”(Italics added.) In sum, by adopting the terrorist philosophy of the KKK and elevating it to the operations of government at the highest level, the imperial Obama administration, like its predecessors, is showing the world the worst possible face of America. Foreigners do not see the goodness inherent in the American people—most of whom only want a good day’s pay for a good day’s work and to educate their children and live at peace with the world. Every adult American has a solemn obligation to demand that its government live up to international law, punish the CIA criminals in its midst, and become a respected citizen of the world. This will not come to pass until Congress abolishes the CIA, putting an end to its KKK-style terrorism which threatens Americans as well as humankind everywhere. Sherwood Ross is an American who has worked as a reporter for the Chicago Daily News, a columnist for wire services and as the News Director of a national civil rights organization. He currently operates the Anti-War News Service from Miami, Florida. To contribute to his work or reach him, email sherwoodross10 at gmail.com Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Karen Aram [mailto:karenaram at hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2017 1:31 PM To: Boyle, Francis A Cc: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Subject: Re: CIA & Mossad Infiltrated UI Center for Advanced Studies-How the C.I.A.’s Torture Program Began: Law School Off Campus! At some point, yes, we do need to address this issue at the U of I. The CIA and the Mossad, as organizations, are the greatest purveyors of the violence known to man within the last century, working on behalf of the United States Oligarch’s. On Jun 22, 2017, at 11:07, Boyle, Francis A > wrote: Michael Moore’s strident advocacy in favor of torture, his public admissions that he advises both the CIA and the Mossad on torture, and his argument that since torture works for the KGB, we Americans should also engage in torture, all qualified him for a Professorship at the University of Illinois Center for Advanced Studies. In other words, the CIA and the Mossad have infiltrated the UI Center for Advanced Studies as well as the College of Law and the Department of Philosophy. Fab. CIA Off Campus! Mossad Off Campus! Torture Off Campus! Michael Moore Off Campus! Consort Hurricane Heidi Hurd Off Campus! War Crimes Off Campus! War Criminals Off Campus! Crimes Against Humanity Off Campus! Genocidaires Against Muslims/Arabs/Asians Of Color Off Campus! Gitmo Kangaroo Courts Off Campus! Law School Off Campus! Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2017 10:33 AM To: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; Karen Aram >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson >; Mildred O'brien > Subject: How the C.I.A.’s Torture Program Began: Law School Off Campus! In a public lecture he gave before the entire College of Law Faculty, whose presence had been demanded by his Consort Dean Hurricane Heidi Hurd, and including before the COL Board of Visitors, the Marquis De Sade Professor of Law and Philosophy and of the Center for Advanced Studies in Torture Michael Moore bragged that he advised the Mossad on Torture and argued that since torture worked for the KGB, we Americans should also engage in torture. Fab Torture Off Campus! Mossad Off Campus! CIA Off Campus! Michael Moore Off Campus! Consort Hurricane Heidi Hurd Off Campus! War Crimes Off Campus! Crimes Against Humanity Off Campus! Law School Off Campus! LeVine: In my own research on war crimes committed by US forces in Iraq. I counted at least two-dozen classes of offenses systematically committed by the Occupation administration and US or US-allied military forces in the invasion and subsequent period of CPA (Coalition Provisional Authority) rule. This includes violations of articles and 17, 18, 33, and 147 of the Geneva Convention covering the killing, hostage-taking and torturing of civilians Boyle: As I just argued at Fort Stewart Georgia in the court martial proceedings for Sgt. Camilo Mejia for desertion, the accountability here goes directly up the chain of command under the terms of the US Army Field Manual 27-10. Specifically, paragraph 501 makes clear that commanders who have ordered or knew or should have known about war crimes and failed to stop it are themselves guilty of war crimes. If you look then at the public record, it is clear that Gens. Sanchez and Miller ordered war crimes and both should be relieved of command immediately: abuse of prisoners in violation of the Geneva Conventions. As for General Abizaid, the overall commander of US forces in Southwest Asia, he admitted in his Senate hearings that he should have known about the war crimes at Abu Ghraib, so basically he's already incriminated himself under the rules of the US Army Field Manual 27-10 In addition, above Abizaid you have Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz. Again my reading of the public record including the Taguba and Red Cross reports is that they either knew or should have known about all these war crimes. Indeed, if you read the ICRC report, - and as I testified under oath and under cross-examination (and was not contradicted) at the Mejia court-martial proceedings, - the widespread and systematic nature of these abuses rise to the level of crimes against humanity, going all the way up through the chain of command. Culpability also extends to Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence General William G. Boykin and Defense Undersecretary Stephen Cambone, who reports directly to Undersecretary of Defense Douglas Feith. And through this line it appears to me that Rumsfeld is culpable, because he was at Abu Ghraib last fall. Indeed, Sy Hersch's New Yorker article on Abu Ghraib claims with good substantiation that he was totally aware and even signed off on the use of techniques which are clearly torture. Rumsfeld was given a tour by Brig. General Janet Karpinski, who was supposed to be in charge of the prison-although she said nothing when she was prohibited from accessing certain areas of it-and so she's also accountable. It's important to understand that the Geneva Conventions, the Hague Regulations of 1907, the U.S. Army Field Manual, all mandate that a criminal investigation be opened. And how President Bush, as Commander in Chief would be accountable under Field Manual 27-10 precisely because he is Commander in Chief of the US armed forces under the US Constitution. We know the White House knows this because if you read White House Counsel Alberto Gonzales's memo, he specifically tries to exempt the US from the Geneva Conventions for Guantanamo and Afghanistan. You can see that Gonzalez was afraid of Bush and others being held directly accountable. Moreover, because Powell dissented, we know there was a debate about this, so Bush had to have been aware of the implications of what was being done, which is also backed up by the memos from Ashcroft. These memos have been unearthed by Newsweek. So ultimately what we have here are people at the highest levels of the chain of command guilty of ordering or not preventing torture, which is both an international crime against the Geneva Conventions and the Torture Convention and a domestic crime as well. What we have then is a conspiracy among the aforementioned individuals to commit war crimes and crimes against humanity. Let me add one more thing that's very important to remember: The principles set forth in 27-10 of personal criminal accountability for war crimes goes back to the Nuremburg Charter, Judgments and Principles derived from the post-World War II trials of Nazi war criminals. Similar principles of criminal accountability were applied by the United States to the Japanese Imperial War criminals. LeVine: In fact, President Bush has compared the war on terror to the war against the Nazis. Boyle: Then we have even more reason to bring this to people's attention: The Nuremburg Principles were in fact originally the idea of the US Government which then orchestrated the prosecutions in Nuremburg. People need to understand the pedigree and heritage here. These are very grave offenses which the US government a generation ago prosecuted and executed Nazis for committing. And Japanese war criminals too. LeVine: How can any of the people you mentioned be prosecuted? Boyle: The military could do it, or the Dept. of Justice, which would have default power to do so if the military didn't. But for this of course we'd need a special prosecutor and that law has been allowed to lapse. Attorney General Ashcroft, who is clearly part of the criminal conspiracy, would never push a war crimes investigations against his colleagues or President Bush. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) Feed: NYT > U.S. Posted on: Wednesday, June 21, 2017 4:15 AM Author: NYT > U.S. Subject: How the C.I.A.’s Torture Program Began Video depositions in a case brought by former C.I.A. detainees give an insight into the beginnings of the agency’s enhanced interrogation program. View article... -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Thu Jun 22 19:09:06 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2017 19:09:06 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] =?utf-8?q?CIA_=26_Mossad_Infiltrated_UI_Center_fo?= =?utf-8?q?r_Advanced_Studies-How_the_C=2EI=2EA=2E=E2=80=99s_Torture_Progr?= =?utf-8?q?am_Began=3A_Law_School_Off_Campus!?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Well again back in the 1980s we did have a Movement: CIA OFF CAMPUS! Belden and I were quite active in it. Michael Moore Off Campus! Consort Hurricane Heidi Hurd Off Campus! Law School Off Campus! Fab. That the CIA is a terrorist organization was upheld in the famous “CIA On Trial” case in Northampton, Mass., in 1987, when a jury acquitted 14 protestors who tried to stop CIA recruitment on campus, according to Francis Boyle, the University of Illinois international law authority who defended the group. The defense charged the CIA was “an organized criminal conspiracy like the SS and the Gestapo.” Boyle said, “You would not let the SS or the Gestapo recruit on campus at the University of Massachusetts at Amherst, so you would not permit the CIA to recruit on campus either.” ) [home] Abolish the CIA, America. Sherwood Ross. CIA Torture Report. December 9, 2014 9:01 pm 2 Comments The CIA, the KKK and the USA By Sherwood Ross Global Research, October 15, 2010 15 October 2010 [The CIA, the KKK and the USA] By assigning covert action roles to the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), it is as if the White House and Congress had legitimized the Ku Klux Klan to operate globally. That’s because the CIA today resembles nothing so much as the “Invisible Empire” of the KKK that once spread terror across the South and Midwest. Fiery crosses aside, this is what the CIA is doing globally. The CIA today is committing many of the same sort of gruesome crimes against foreigners that the KKK once inflicted on Americans of color. The principal difference is that the KKK consisted of self-appointed vigilantes who regarded themselves as both outside and above the law when they perpetrated their crimes. By contrast, the CIA acts as the agent of the American government, often at the highest levels, and at times at the direction of the White House. Its crimes typically are committed in contravention of the highest established international law such as the Charter of the United Nations as well as the U.S. Constitution. What’s more, the “Agency,” as it is known, derives its funding largely from an imperialist-minded Congress; additionally, it has no qualms about fattening its budget from drug money and other illegal sources. It is a mirror-image of the lawless entity the U.S. has become since achieving superpower status. And it is incredible that the White House grants license to this violent Agency to commit its crimes with no accountability. The Ku Klux Klan was founded shortly after the end of the U.S. Civil War. Klansman concealed their identities behind flowing white robes and white hoods as they terrorized the newly emancipated blacks to keep them from voting or to drive them from their property. Allowing it to operate in secret literally gives the CIA the mythical Ring of Gyges. In Plato’s Republic, the owner of the ring had the power to become invisible at will. As Wikipedia puts it, Plato “discusses whether a typical person would be moral if he did not have to fear the consequences of his actions.” The ancient Greeks made the argument, Wikipedia says, that “No man would keep his hands off what was not his own when he could safely take what he liked out of the market, go into houses and lie with any one at his pleasure, kill or release from prison whom he would, and in all respects be like a god among men.” The CIA, like Hitler’s Gestapo and Stalin’s NKVD before it, has provided modern man the answer to this question. Its actions illuminate why all criminal entities, from rapists and bank robbers, to Ponzi scheme swindlers and murderers, cloak themselves in secrecy. There are innumerable examples of how American presidents have authorized criminal acts without public discussion that the preponderant majority of Americans would find reprehensible. Example: it was President Lyndon Johnson who ordered the CIA to meddle in Chile’s election to help Eduardo Frei become president. If they had known, U.S. taxpayers might have objected to such a use of their hard-earned money to influence the outcome of another country’s elections. But the public is rarely let in on such illegal foreign policy decisions. Where the KKK after the Civil War terrorized blacks to keep them from voting, the CIA has worked to influence the outcome of elections all over the world through bribery and vote-buying, dirty tricks, and worse. According to investigative reporter William Blum in “Rogue State”(Common Courage Press), the CIA has perverted elections in Italy, Lebanon, Indonesia, The Philippines, Japan, Nepal, Laos, Brazil, Bolivia, Chile, Portugal, Australia, Jamaica, Panama, Nicaragua, Haiti, among other countries. If they had known, taxpayers might also object to the CIA’s numerous overthrows of foreign governments by force and violence—such as was done in Iran in 1953 by President Eisenhower and Chile in 1973 by President Nixon. Both overthrows precipitated bloodbaths that cost tens of thousands of innocent civilians their lives. Blum also lists the countries the CIA has attempted to overthrow or has actually overthrown. His list includes Greece, The Philippines, East Germany, Iran, Guatemala, Indonesia, Iraq, Viet Nam, Laos, Ecuador, The Congo, France, Cuba, Ghana, Chile, South Africa, Bolivia, Portugal, and Nicaragua, to cite a few. As I write, today, October 11th, 2010, Nobel Peace Prize winner Adolfo Perez Esquivel of Argentina called on President Obama to revise U.S. (imperialist) policies toward Latin America. He questioned why the U.S. continues to plant its military bases across the region. That’s an excellent question. If the U.S. is a peace-loving nation, why does it need 800 bases the world over in addition to 1,000 on its own soil? Americans might recoil in disgust if they knew of the CIA’s numerous assassinations of the elected officials of other nations. Is it any wonder Americans so often ask the question, “Why do they hate us?” As historian Arnold Toynbee wrote in 1961, “America is today the leader of a world-wide anti-revolutionary movement in the defence of vested interests. She now stands for what Rome stood for. Rome consistently supported the rich against the poor in all foreign communities that fell under her sway; and, since the poor, so far, have always and everywhere been more numerous than the rich, Rome’s policy made for inequality, for injustice, and for the least happiness of the greatest number.” The CIA’s protective secrecy resembles nothing so much as the KKK, which proudly proclaimed itself “the Invisible Empire” and whose thugs killed citizens having the courage to identify hooded Klansmen to law enforcement officials. Today, it is our highest public officials that protect this criminal force, said to number about 25,000 employees. It is actually a Federal offense to reveal the identity of a CIA undercover agent—unless, of course, you happen to be I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby, and are employed by Vice President Dick Cheney. Libby leaked the identity of CIA agent Valerie Plame to punish her husband Joseph Wilson for publishing a report that undercut the White House lie that Saddam Hussein had purchased “yellowcake” from Niger to fuel WMD. Today, high public officials direct the CIA’s criminal policies and protect its agents’ identities the better to enable them to commit their crimes. According to journalist Fred Cook in his book “Ku Klux Klan: America’s Recurring Nightmare”(Messner), “The Klan was inherently a vigilante organization. It could commit the most atrocious acts under the guise of high principle andperpetrators of those acts would be hidden behind white masks and protected by Klan secrecy… (The Klan) set itself up as judge, jury and executioner”—a policy adopted by the CIA today. CIA spies have conducted their criminal operations masquerading as officials of U.S. aid programs, business executives, or journalists. Example: The San Diego-based Copley News Service’s staff of foreign correspondents allegedly was created to provide cover to CIA spies, compromising legitimate American journalists trying to do their jobs. While the murders committed by the KKK likely ran into the many thousands, the CIA has killed on a far grander scale and managed to keep its role largely secret. As Tim Weiner, who covered the CIA for the New York Times noted in his book “Legacy of Ashes: The History of the CIA” (Anchor): “In Guatemala, 200,000 civilians had died during forty years of struggle following the agency’s(CIA) 1954 coup against an elected president.” Weiner adds, “the CIA’s officers in Guatemala still went to great lengths to conceal the nature of their close relations with the military and to suppress reports that Guatemalan officers on its payroll were murderers, torturers, and thieves.” When it comes to murder, the CIA makes the KKK look like Boy Scouts. Like the KKK, CIA terrorists operate above the law. KKK members committed thousands of lynchings yet rarely were its members punished for them. In 2009 at a speech at CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia, President Obama revealed he was not intent on punishing CIA agents for their crimes but would rather “look forward.” This seemingly charitable philosophy may be driven by the fact that Obama worked for Business International Corporation, a CIA front, at least in 1983 and perhaps longer, and allegedly is the son of a mother and father both of whom also worked for the CIA, as did Obama’s grandmother! I could find none of this in Obama’s biography when he ran for the presidency, when a gullible American public elected a CIA “mole” to the White House. Consider this, too: an agency President Truman feared would become “an American Gestapo” when he signed the enabling legislation into law in 1947 has become just that, and it casts a lengthy shadow over the White House. Ominously, it has in Barack Obama one of its own former employees sitting in the Oval Office—a man who, according to news reports, has vastly expanded the frequency of the CIA’s assassinations by drone aircraft in Pakistan and who illegally claims the “right” to assassinate any American citizen abroad as well. What’s more, from 1989 to 1993 George Bush Sr., the CIA’s own former Director, sat in the White House. Additionally, from 2001 to 2009, the CIA had that Director’s son, George W. Bush, in the Oval Office giving the CIA a blank check after the 9/11 massacre. Bush Jr., according to The New York Times, in the summer of 1974 worked for Alaska International Industries, which did contract work for the CIA. The Times noted that this job did not appear in his biography when he ran for the White House in 2000, terming it “The Missing Chapter in the Bush Bio.” Thus, two presidential candidates with CIA ties—Bush Jr. and Obama—both neglected to mention them. And in Bill Clinton, who presided from 1993 to 2001, the CIA had a go-along president who satisfied the Agency’s blood-lust when he authorized the first illegal “rendition,” a euphemism for what KKK thugs once knew as kidnapping and torture. Is there any question that the Agency has not played an influential, behind-the-scenes or even a direct role in the operations of the U.S. government at its highest level? It may indeed be a stretch to argue that the CIA is running the country but it is no stretch to say that year after year our presidents reflect the criminal philosophy of the Agency. Other parallels with the KKK are striking. As Richmond Flowers, the Attorney General of Alabama stated in 1966, “I’ve found the Klan more than just another secret society… It resembles a shadow government, making its own laws, manipulating local politics, burrowing into some of our local law-enforcement agencies…When a pitiable misfit puts on his $15 sheet, society can no longer ignore him.” Yet the descendants of those misfits have moved up today where they feel comfortable as operatives in the shadow government run by the White House. One of the CIA’s illicit duties has been to serve as a conduit for funneling U.S. taxpayer dollars to corrupt dictators and strongmen bent on suppressing the popular will of their citizenry. As Noam Chomsky wrote in “Failed States”(Metropolitan/Owl), in Honduras, “military officers in charge of the battalion (3-16) were on the CIA payroll.” This elite unit, he says, “organized and trained by the United States and Argentine neo-Nazis,” was “the most barbaric of the Latin American killers that Washington had been supporting.” Like the KKK, the CIA kidnaps many of its victims with no thought ever of legal procedure. It exhibits utter disdain for the rights of those individuals, the sovereignty of foreign nations, or respect for international law. At least hundreds of foreigners, mostly from the Middle East, have been the victims of “renditions” just as the KKK kidnapped and flogged and lynched blacks, labor leaders, Catholics, Jews, or wayward wives whom it felt to be morally lacking. In September, 1921, The New York World ran a series exposing the KKK. It pointed out that, among other things, the KKK was violating the Bill of Rights wholesale. This included the Fourth amendment against “unreasonable searches and seizures,” the Fifth and the Sixth amendments, guaranteeing that no one may be held without a grand jury indictment or punished without a fair trial. And these rights today are similarly trampled by the CIA against American citizens, not just foreigners. Apparently, only foreign courts care to rein in the CIA. The 23 CIA agents that it took to render one “suspect” in Italy are wanted there by the magistrates. (The spooks, by the way, ran up some fabulous bills in luxury hotels on taxpayers’ dollars in that escapade.) Former President Jimmy Carter wrote in his book “Our Endangered Values”(Simon & Schuster), the CIA transferred some of those it kidnapped to countries that included Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Morocco, Jordan, and Uzbekistan where “the techniques of torture are almost indescribably terrible, including, as a U.S. ambassador to one of the recipient countries reported, ‘partial boiling of a hand or an arm,’ with at least two prisoners boiled to death.” The KKK’s methods of punishment were often as ugly: the brutal flogging of blacks in front of vicious crowds, followed by castration and burning their victims alive, and then lynching of the corpses. As for the CIA, “Why?” asks investigative reporter William Blum, “are these men rendered in the first place if not to be tortured? Does the United States not have any speakers in foreign languages to conduct interrogations?” That the CIA is a terrorist organization was upheld in the famous “CIA On Trial” case in Northampton, Mass., in 1987, when a jury acquitted 14 protestors who tried to stop CIA recruitment on campus, according to Francis Boyle, the University of Illinois international law authority who defended the group. The defense charged the CIA was “an organized criminal conspiracy like the SS and the Gestapo.” Boyle said, “You would not let the SS or the Gestapo recruit on campus at the University of Massachusetts at Amherst, so you would not permit the CIA to recruit on campus either.” Another shared characteristic of the KKK and CIA is greed, the desire to loot the hard-earned wealth of others. Often, Klansmen terrorized African-Americans who had amassed property to frighten them off their land. Law-abiding black citizens who had pulled themselves up by the proverbial bootstraps were cheated out of their homes and acreage by the night riders. Similarly, the CIA across Latin America has aligned itself with the well-to-do ruling class at every opportunity. It has cooperated with the elite to punish and murder labor leaders and clergy who espoused economic opportunity for the poor. The notion that allowing the poor to enrich themselves fairly will also create more wealth for an entire society generally, including the rich, has not permeated CIA thinking. I emphasize what historian Toynbee noted: “America is today the leader of a world-wide anti-revolutionary movement in the defence of vested interests. She now stands for what Rome stood for.”(Italics added.) In sum, by adopting the terrorist philosophy of the KKK and elevating it to the operations of government at the highest level, the imperial Obama administration, like its predecessors, is showing the world the worst possible face of America. Foreigners do not see the goodness inherent in the American people—most of whom only want a good day’s pay for a good day’s work and to educate their children and live at peace with the world. Every adult American has a solemn obligation to demand that its government live up to international law, punish the CIA criminals in its midst, and become a respected citizen of the world. This will not come to pass until Congress abolishes the CIA, putting an end to its KKK-style terrorism which threatens Americans as well as humankind everywhere. Sherwood Ross is an American who has worked as a reporter for the Chicago Daily News, a columnist for wire services and as the News Director of a national civil rights organization. He currently operates the Anti-War News Service from Miami, Florida. To contribute to his work or reach him, email sherwoodross10 at gmail.com Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Karen Aram [mailto:karenaram at hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2017 1:31 PM To: Boyle, Francis A Cc: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Subject: Re: CIA & Mossad Infiltrated UI Center for Advanced Studies-How the C.I.A.’s Torture Program Began: Law School Off Campus! At some point, yes, we do need to address this issue at the U of I. The CIA and the Mossad, as organizations, are the greatest purveyors of the violence known to man within the last century, working on behalf of the United States Oligarch’s. On Jun 22, 2017, at 11:07, Boyle, Francis A > wrote: Michael Moore’s strident advocacy in favor of torture, his public admissions that he advises both the CIA and the Mossad on torture, and his argument that since torture works for the KGB, we Americans should also engage in torture, all qualified him for a Professorship at the University of Illinois Center for Advanced Studies. In other words, the CIA and the Mossad have infiltrated the UI Center for Advanced Studies as well as the College of Law and the Department of Philosophy. Fab. CIA Off Campus! Mossad Off Campus! Torture Off Campus! Michael Moore Off Campus! Consort Hurricane Heidi Hurd Off Campus! War Crimes Off Campus! War Criminals Off Campus! Crimes Against Humanity Off Campus! Genocidaires Against Muslims/Arabs/Asians Of Color Off Campus! Gitmo Kangaroo Courts Off Campus! Law School Off Campus! Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2017 10:33 AM To: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; Karen Aram >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson >; Mildred O'brien > Subject: How the C.I.A.’s Torture Program Began: Law School Off Campus! In a public lecture he gave before the entire College of Law Faculty, whose presence had been demanded by his Consort Dean Hurricane Heidi Hurd, and including before the COL Board of Visitors, the Marquis De Sade Professor of Law and Philosophy and of the Center for Advanced Studies in Torture Michael Moore bragged that he advised the Mossad on Torture and argued that since torture worked for the KGB, we Americans should also engage in torture. Fab Torture Off Campus! Mossad Off Campus! CIA Off Campus! Michael Moore Off Campus! Consort Hurricane Heidi Hurd Off Campus! War Crimes Off Campus! Crimes Against Humanity Off Campus! Law School Off Campus! LeVine: In my own research on war crimes committed by US forces in Iraq. I counted at least two-dozen classes of offenses systematically committed by the Occupation administration and US or US-allied military forces in the invasion and subsequent period of CPA (Coalition Provisional Authority) rule. This includes violations of articles and 17, 18, 33, and 147 of the Geneva Convention covering the killing, hostage-taking and torturing of civilians Boyle: As I just argued at Fort Stewart Georgia in the court martial proceedings for Sgt. Camilo Mejia for desertion, the accountability here goes directly up the chain of command under the terms of the US Army Field Manual 27-10. Specifically, paragraph 501 makes clear that commanders who have ordered or knew or should have known about war crimes and failed to stop it are themselves guilty of war crimes. If you look then at the public record, it is clear that Gens. Sanchez and Miller ordered war crimes and both should be relieved of command immediately: abuse of prisoners in violation of the Geneva Conventions. As for General Abizaid, the overall commander of US forces in Southwest Asia, he admitted in his Senate hearings that he should have known about the war crimes at Abu Ghraib, so basically he's already incriminated himself under the rules of the US Army Field Manual 27-10 In addition, above Abizaid you have Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz. Again my reading of the public record including the Taguba and Red Cross reports is that they either knew or should have known about all these war crimes. Indeed, if you read the ICRC report, - and as I testified under oath and under cross-examination (and was not contradicted) at the Mejia court-martial proceedings, - the widespread and systematic nature of these abuses rise to the level of crimes against humanity, going all the way up through the chain of command. Culpability also extends to Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence General William G. Boykin and Defense Undersecretary Stephen Cambone, who reports directly to Undersecretary of Defense Douglas Feith. And through this line it appears to me that Rumsfeld is culpable, because he was at Abu Ghraib last fall. Indeed, Sy Hersch's New Yorker article on Abu Ghraib claims with good substantiation that he was totally aware and even signed off on the use of techniques which are clearly torture. Rumsfeld was given a tour by Brig. General Janet Karpinski, who was supposed to be in charge of the prison-although she said nothing when she was prohibited from accessing certain areas of it-and so she's also accountable. It's important to understand that the Geneva Conventions, the Hague Regulations of 1907, the U.S. Army Field Manual, all mandate that a criminal investigation be opened. And how President Bush, as Commander in Chief would be accountable under Field Manual 27-10 precisely because he is Commander in Chief of the US armed forces under the US Constitution. We know the White House knows this because if you read White House Counsel Alberto Gonzales's memo, he specifically tries to exempt the US from the Geneva Conventions for Guantanamo and Afghanistan. You can see that Gonzalez was afraid of Bush and others being held directly accountable. Moreover, because Powell dissented, we know there was a debate about this, so Bush had to have been aware of the implications of what was being done, which is also backed up by the memos from Ashcroft. These memos have been unearthed by Newsweek. So ultimately what we have here are people at the highest levels of the chain of command guilty of ordering or not preventing torture, which is both an international crime against the Geneva Conventions and the Torture Convention and a domestic crime as well. What we have then is a conspiracy among the aforementioned individuals to commit war crimes and crimes against humanity. Let me add one more thing that's very important to remember: The principles set forth in 27-10 of personal criminal accountability for war crimes goes back to the Nuremburg Charter, Judgments and Principles derived from the post-World War II trials of Nazi war criminals. Similar principles of criminal accountability were applied by the United States to the Japanese Imperial War criminals. LeVine: In fact, President Bush has compared the war on terror to the war against the Nazis. Boyle: Then we have even more reason to bring this to people's attention: The Nuremburg Principles were in fact originally the idea of the US Government which then orchestrated the prosecutions in Nuremburg. People need to understand the pedigree and heritage here. These are very grave offenses which the US government a generation ago prosecuted and executed Nazis for committing. And Japanese war criminals too. LeVine: How can any of the people you mentioned be prosecuted? Boyle: The military could do it, or the Dept. of Justice, which would have default power to do so if the military didn't. But for this of course we'd need a special prosecutor and that law has been allowed to lapse. Attorney General Ashcroft, who is clearly part of the criminal conspiracy, would never push a war crimes investigations against his colleagues or President Bush. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) Feed: NYT > U.S. Posted on: Wednesday, June 21, 2017 4:15 AM Author: NYT > U.S. Subject: How the C.I.A.’s Torture Program Began Video depositions in a case brought by former C.I.A. detainees give an insight into the beginnings of the agency’s enhanced interrogation program. View article... -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Thu Jun 22 19:18:36 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2017 19:18:36 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] =?utf-8?q?CIA_=26_Mossad_Infiltrated_UI_Center_fo?= =?utf-8?q?r_Advanced_Studies-How_the_C=2EI=2EA=2E=E2=80=99s_Torture_Progr?= =?utf-8?q?am_Began=3A_Law_School_Off_Campus!?= References: Message-ID: The CIA and the Mossad, as organizations, are the greatest purveyors of the violence known to man within the last century… ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- And let us not leave out the KGB. Moore has publicly argued that since torture works for the KGB, we Americans should mimic the KGB and thus engage in torture. Fab TORTURE OFF CAMPUS! CIA OFF CAMPUS! MOSSAD OFF CAMPUS! MICHAEL MOORE OFF CAMPUS! CONSORT HURRICANE HEIDI HURD OFF CAMPUS! LAW SCHOOL OFF CAMPUS! Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2017 2:09 PM To: 'Karen Aram' Cc: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson ; Mildred O'brien Subject: RE: CIA & Mossad Infiltrated UI Center for Advanced Studies-How the C.I.A.’s Torture Program Began: Law School Off Campus! Well again back in the 1980s we did have a Movement: CIA OFF CAMPUS! Belden and I were quite active in it. Michael Moore Off Campus! Consort Hurricane Heidi Hurd Off Campus! Law School Off Campus! Fab. That the CIA is a terrorist organization was upheld in the famous “CIA On Trial” case in Northampton, Mass., in 1987, when a jury acquitted 14 protestors who tried to stop CIA recruitment on campus, according to Francis Boyle, the University of Illinois international law authority who defended the group. The defense charged the CIA was “an organized criminal conspiracy like the SS and the Gestapo.” Boyle said, “You would not let the SS or the Gestapo recruit on campus at the University of Massachusetts at Amherst, so you would not permit the CIA to recruit on campus either.” ) [home] Abolish the CIA, America. Sherwood Ross. CIA Torture Report. December 9, 2014 9:01 pm 2 Comments The CIA, the KKK and the USA By Sherwood Ross Global Research, October 15, 2010 15 October 2010 [The CIA, the KKK and the USA] By assigning covert action roles to the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), it is as if the White House and Congress had legitimized the Ku Klux Klan to operate globally. That’s because the CIA today resembles nothing so much as the “Invisible Empire” of the KKK that once spread terror across the South and Midwest. Fiery crosses aside, this is what the CIA is doing globally. The CIA today is committing many of the same sort of gruesome crimes against foreigners that the KKK once inflicted on Americans of color. The principal difference is that the KKK consisted of self-appointed vigilantes who regarded themselves as both outside and above the law when they perpetrated their crimes. By contrast, the CIA acts as the agent of the American government, often at the highest levels, and at times at the direction of the White House. Its crimes typically are committed in contravention of the highest established international law such as the Charter of the United Nations as well as the U.S. Constitution. What’s more, the “Agency,” as it is known, derives its funding largely from an imperialist-minded Congress; additionally, it has no qualms about fattening its budget from drug money and other illegal sources. It is a mirror-image of the lawless entity the U.S. has become since achieving superpower status. And it is incredible that the White House grants license to this violent Agency to commit its crimes with no accountability. The Ku Klux Klan was founded shortly after the end of the U.S. Civil War. Klansman concealed their identities behind flowing white robes and white hoods as they terrorized the newly emancipated blacks to keep them from voting or to drive them from their property. Allowing it to operate in secret literally gives the CIA the mythical Ring of Gyges. In Plato’s Republic, the owner of the ring had the power to become invisible at will. As Wikipedia puts it, Plato “discusses whether a typical person would be moral if he did not have to fear the consequences of his actions.” The ancient Greeks made the argument, Wikipedia says, that “No man would keep his hands off what was not his own when he could safely take what he liked out of the market, go into houses and lie with any one at his pleasure, kill or release from prison whom he would, and in all respects be like a god among men.” The CIA, like Hitler’s Gestapo and Stalin’s NKVD before it, has provided modern man the answer to this question. Its actions illuminate why all criminal entities, from rapists and bank robbers, to Ponzi scheme swindlers and murderers, cloak themselves in secrecy. There are innumerable examples of how American presidents have authorized criminal acts without public discussion that the preponderant majority of Americans would find reprehensible. Example: it was President Lyndon Johnson who ordered the CIA to meddle in Chile’s election to help Eduardo Frei become president. If they had known, U.S. taxpayers might have objected to such a use of their hard-earned money to influence the outcome of another country’s elections. But the public is rarely let in on such illegal foreign policy decisions. Where the KKK after the Civil War terrorized blacks to keep them from voting, the CIA has worked to influence the outcome of elections all over the world through bribery and vote-buying, dirty tricks, and worse. According to investigative reporter William Blum in “Rogue State”(Common Courage Press), the CIA has perverted elections in Italy, Lebanon, Indonesia, The Philippines, Japan, Nepal, Laos, Brazil, Bolivia, Chile, Portugal, Australia, Jamaica, Panama, Nicaragua, Haiti, among other countries. If they had known, taxpayers might also object to the CIA’s numerous overthrows of foreign governments by force and violence—such as was done in Iran in 1953 by President Eisenhower and Chile in 1973 by President Nixon. Both overthrows precipitated bloodbaths that cost tens of thousands of innocent civilians their lives. Blum also lists the countries the CIA has attempted to overthrow or has actually overthrown. His list includes Greece, The Philippines, East Germany, Iran, Guatemala, Indonesia, Iraq, Viet Nam, Laos, Ecuador, The Congo, France, Cuba, Ghana, Chile, South Africa, Bolivia, Portugal, and Nicaragua, to cite a few. As I write, today, October 11th, 2010, Nobel Peace Prize winner Adolfo Perez Esquivel of Argentina called on President Obama to revise U.S. (imperialist) policies toward Latin America. He questioned why the U.S. continues to plant its military bases across the region. That’s an excellent question. If the U.S. is a peace-loving nation, why does it need 800 bases the world over in addition to 1,000 on its own soil? Americans might recoil in disgust if they knew of the CIA’s numerous assassinations of the elected officials of other nations. Is it any wonder Americans so often ask the question, “Why do they hate us?” As historian Arnold Toynbee wrote in 1961, “America is today the leader of a world-wide anti-revolutionary movement in the defence of vested interests. She now stands for what Rome stood for. Rome consistently supported the rich against the poor in all foreign communities that fell under her sway; and, since the poor, so far, have always and everywhere been more numerous than the rich, Rome’s policy made for inequality, for injustice, and for the least happiness of the greatest number.” The CIA’s protective secrecy resembles nothing so much as the KKK, which proudly proclaimed itself “the Invisible Empire” and whose thugs killed citizens having the courage to identify hooded Klansmen to law enforcement officials. Today, it is our highest public officials that protect this criminal force, said to number about 25,000 employees. It is actually a Federal offense to reveal the identity of a CIA undercover agent—unless, of course, you happen to be I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby, and are employed by Vice President Dick Cheney. Libby leaked the identity of CIA agent Valerie Plame to punish her husband Joseph Wilson for publishing a report that undercut the White House lie that Saddam Hussein had purchased “yellowcake” from Niger to fuel WMD. Today, high public officials direct the CIA’s criminal policies and protect its agents’ identities the better to enable them to commit their crimes. According to journalist Fred Cook in his book “Ku Klux Klan: America’s Recurring Nightmare”(Messner), “The Klan was inherently a vigilante organization. It could commit the most atrocious acts under the guise of high principle andperpetrators of those acts would be hidden behind white masks and protected by Klan secrecy… (The Klan) set itself up as judge, jury and executioner”—a policy adopted by the CIA today. CIA spies have conducted their criminal operations masquerading as officials of U.S. aid programs, business executives, or journalists. Example: The San Diego-based Copley News Service’s staff of foreign correspondents allegedly was created to provide cover to CIA spies, compromising legitimate American journalists trying to do their jobs. While the murders committed by the KKK likely ran into the many thousands, the CIA has killed on a far grander scale and managed to keep its role largely secret. As Tim Weiner, who covered the CIA for the New York Times noted in his book “Legacy of Ashes: The History of the CIA” (Anchor): “In Guatemala, 200,000 civilians had died during forty years of struggle following the agency’s(CIA) 1954 coup against an elected president.” Weiner adds, “the CIA’s officers in Guatemala still went to great lengths to conceal the nature of their close relations with the military and to suppress reports that Guatemalan officers on its payroll were murderers, torturers, and thieves.” When it comes to murder, the CIA makes the KKK look like Boy Scouts. Like the KKK, CIA terrorists operate above the law. KKK members committed thousands of lynchings yet rarely were its members punished for them. In 2009 at a speech at CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia, President Obama revealed he was not intent on punishing CIA agents for their crimes but would rather “look forward.” This seemingly charitable philosophy may be driven by the fact that Obama worked for Business International Corporation, a CIA front, at least in 1983 and perhaps longer, and allegedly is the son of a mother and father both of whom also worked for the CIA, as did Obama’s grandmother! I could find none of this in Obama’s biography when he ran for the presidency, when a gullible American public elected a CIA “mole” to the White House. Consider this, too: an agency President Truman feared would become “an American Gestapo” when he signed the enabling legislation into law in 1947 has become just that, and it casts a lengthy shadow over the White House. Ominously, it has in Barack Obama one of its own former employees sitting in the Oval Office—a man who, according to news reports, has vastly expanded the frequency of the CIA’s assassinations by drone aircraft in Pakistan and who illegally claims the “right” to assassinate any American citizen abroad as well. What’s more, from 1989 to 1993 George Bush Sr., the CIA’s own former Director, sat in the White House. Additionally, from 2001 to 2009, the CIA had that Director’s son, George W. Bush, in the Oval Office giving the CIA a blank check after the 9/11 massacre. Bush Jr., according to The New York Times, in the summer of 1974 worked for Alaska International Industries, which did contract work for the CIA. The Times noted that this job did not appear in his biography when he ran for the White House in 2000, terming it “The Missing Chapter in the Bush Bio.” Thus, two presidential candidates with CIA ties—Bush Jr. and Obama—both neglected to mention them. And in Bill Clinton, who presided from 1993 to 2001, the CIA had a go-along president who satisfied the Agency’s blood-lust when he authorized the first illegal “rendition,” a euphemism for what KKK thugs once knew as kidnapping and torture. Is there any question that the Agency has not played an influential, behind-the-scenes or even a direct role in the operations of the U.S. government at its highest level? It may indeed be a stretch to argue that the CIA is running the country but it is no stretch to say that year after year our presidents reflect the criminal philosophy of the Agency. Other parallels with the KKK are striking. As Richmond Flowers, the Attorney General of Alabama stated in 1966, “I’ve found the Klan more than just another secret society… It resembles a shadow government, making its own laws, manipulating local politics, burrowing into some of our local law-enforcement agencies…When a pitiable misfit puts on his $15 sheet, society can no longer ignore him.” Yet the descendants of those misfits have moved up today where they feel comfortable as operatives in the shadow government run by the White House. One of the CIA’s illicit duties has been to serve as a conduit for funneling U.S. taxpayer dollars to corrupt dictators and strongmen bent on suppressing the popular will of their citizenry. As Noam Chomsky wrote in “Failed States”(Metropolitan/Owl), in Honduras, “military officers in charge of the battalion (3-16) were on the CIA payroll.” This elite unit, he says, “organized and trained by the United States and Argentine neo-Nazis,” was “the most barbaric of the Latin American killers that Washington had been supporting.” Like the KKK, the CIA kidnaps many of its victims with no thought ever of legal procedure. It exhibits utter disdain for the rights of those individuals, the sovereignty of foreign nations, or respect for international law. At least hundreds of foreigners, mostly from the Middle East, have been the victims of “renditions” just as the KKK kidnapped and flogged and lynched blacks, labor leaders, Catholics, Jews, or wayward wives whom it felt to be morally lacking. In September, 1921, The New York World ran a series exposing the KKK. It pointed out that, among other things, the KKK was violating the Bill of Rights wholesale. This included the Fourth amendment against “unreasonable searches and seizures,” the Fifth and the Sixth amendments, guaranteeing that no one may be held without a grand jury indictment or punished without a fair trial. And these rights today are similarly trampled by the CIA against American citizens, not just foreigners. Apparently, only foreign courts care to rein in the CIA. The 23 CIA agents that it took to render one “suspect” in Italy are wanted there by the magistrates. (The spooks, by the way, ran up some fabulous bills in luxury hotels on taxpayers’ dollars in that escapade.) Former President Jimmy Carter wrote in his book “Our Endangered Values”(Simon & Schuster), the CIA transferred some of those it kidnapped to countries that included Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Morocco, Jordan, and Uzbekistan where “the techniques of torture are almost indescribably terrible, including, as a U.S. ambassador to one of the recipient countries reported, ‘partial boiling of a hand or an arm,’ with at least two prisoners boiled to death.” The KKK’s methods of punishment were often as ugly: the brutal flogging of blacks in front of vicious crowds, followed by castration and burning their victims alive, and then lynching of the corpses. As for the CIA, “Why?” asks investigative reporter William Blum, “are these men rendered in the first place if not to be tortured? Does the United States not have any speakers in foreign languages to conduct interrogations?” That the CIA is a terrorist organization was upheld in the famous “CIA On Trial” case in Northampton, Mass., in 1987, when a jury acquitted 14 protestors who tried to stop CIA recruitment on campus, according to Francis Boyle, the University of Illinois international law authority who defended the group. The defense charged the CIA was “an organized criminal conspiracy like the SS and the Gestapo.” Boyle said, “You would not let the SS or the Gestapo recruit on campus at the University of Massachusetts at Amherst, so you would not permit the CIA to recruit on campus either.” Another shared characteristic of the KKK and CIA is greed, the desire to loot the hard-earned wealth of others. Often, Klansmen terrorized African-Americans who had amassed property to frighten them off their land. Law-abiding black citizens who had pulled themselves up by the proverbial bootstraps were cheated out of their homes and acreage by the night riders. Similarly, the CIA across Latin America has aligned itself with the well-to-do ruling class at every opportunity. It has cooperated with the elite to punish and murder labor leaders and clergy who espoused economic opportunity for the poor. The notion that allowing the poor to enrich themselves fairly will also create more wealth for an entire society generally, including the rich, has not permeated CIA thinking. I emphasize what historian Toynbee noted: “America is today the leader of a world-wide anti-revolutionary movement in the defence of vested interests. She now stands for what Rome stood for.”(Italics added.) In sum, by adopting the terrorist philosophy of the KKK and elevating it to the operations of government at the highest level, the imperial Obama administration, like its predecessors, is showing the world the worst possible face of America. Foreigners do not see the goodness inherent in the American people—most of whom only want a good day’s pay for a good day’s work and to educate their children and live at peace with the world. Every adult American has a solemn obligation to demand that its government live up to international law, punish the CIA criminals in its midst, and become a respected citizen of the world. This will not come to pass until Congress abolishes the CIA, putting an end to its KKK-style terrorism which threatens Americans as well as humankind everywhere. Sherwood Ross is an American who has worked as a reporter for the Chicago Daily News, a columnist for wire services and as the News Director of a national civil rights organization. He currently operates the Anti-War News Service from Miami, Florida. To contribute to his work or reach him, email sherwoodross10 at gmail.com Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Karen Aram [mailto:karenaram at hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2017 1:31 PM To: Boyle, Francis A > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: Re: CIA & Mossad Infiltrated UI Center for Advanced Studies-How the C.I.A.’s Torture Program Began: Law School Off Campus! At some point, yes, we do need to address this issue at the U of I. The CIA and the Mossad, as organizations, are the greatest purveyors of the violence known to man within the last century, working on behalf of the United States Oligarch’s. On Jun 22, 2017, at 11:07, Boyle, Francis A > wrote: Michael Moore’s strident advocacy in favor of torture, his public admissions that he advises both the CIA and the Mossad on torture, and his argument that since torture works for the KGB, we Americans should also engage in torture, all qualified him for a Professorship at the University of Illinois Center for Advanced Studies. In other words, the CIA and the Mossad have infiltrated the UI Center for Advanced Studies as well as the College of Law and the Department of Philosophy. Fab. CIA Off Campus! Mossad Off Campus! Torture Off Campus! Michael Moore Off Campus! Consort Hurricane Heidi Hurd Off Campus! War Crimes Off Campus! War Criminals Off Campus! Crimes Against Humanity Off Campus! Genocidaires Against Muslims/Arabs/Asians Of Color Off Campus! Gitmo Kangaroo Courts Off Campus! Law School Off Campus! Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2017 10:33 AM To: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; Karen Aram >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson >; Mildred O'brien > Subject: How the C.I.A.’s Torture Program Began: Law School Off Campus! In a public lecture he gave before the entire College of Law Faculty, whose presence had been demanded by his Consort Dean Hurricane Heidi Hurd, and including before the COL Board of Visitors, the Marquis De Sade Professor of Law and Philosophy and of the Center for Advanced Studies in Torture Michael Moore bragged that he advised the Mossad on Torture and argued that since torture worked for the KGB, we Americans should also engage in torture. Fab Torture Off Campus! Mossad Off Campus! CIA Off Campus! Michael Moore Off Campus! Consort Hurricane Heidi Hurd Off Campus! War Crimes Off Campus! Crimes Against Humanity Off Campus! Law School Off Campus! LeVine: In my own research on war crimes committed by US forces in Iraq. I counted at least two-dozen classes of offenses systematically committed by the Occupation administration and US or US-allied military forces in the invasion and subsequent period of CPA (Coalition Provisional Authority) rule. This includes violations of articles and 17, 18, 33, and 147 of the Geneva Convention covering the killing, hostage-taking and torturing of civilians Boyle: As I just argued at Fort Stewart Georgia in the court martial proceedings for Sgt. Camilo Mejia for desertion, the accountability here goes directly up the chain of command under the terms of the US Army Field Manual 27-10. Specifically, paragraph 501 makes clear that commanders who have ordered or knew or should have known about war crimes and failed to stop it are themselves guilty of war crimes. If you look then at the public record, it is clear that Gens. Sanchez and Miller ordered war crimes and both should be relieved of command immediately: abuse of prisoners in violation of the Geneva Conventions. As for General Abizaid, the overall commander of US forces in Southwest Asia, he admitted in his Senate hearings that he should have known about the war crimes at Abu Ghraib, so basically he's already incriminated himself under the rules of the US Army Field Manual 27-10 In addition, above Abizaid you have Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz. Again my reading of the public record including the Taguba and Red Cross reports is that they either knew or should have known about all these war crimes. Indeed, if you read the ICRC report, - and as I testified under oath and under cross-examination (and was not contradicted) at the Mejia court-martial proceedings, - the widespread and systematic nature of these abuses rise to the level of crimes against humanity, going all the way up through the chain of command. Culpability also extends to Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence General William G. Boykin and Defense Undersecretary Stephen Cambone, who reports directly to Undersecretary of Defense Douglas Feith. And through this line it appears to me that Rumsfeld is culpable, because he was at Abu Ghraib last fall. Indeed, Sy Hersch's New Yorker article on Abu Ghraib claims with good substantiation that he was totally aware and even signed off on the use of techniques which are clearly torture. Rumsfeld was given a tour by Brig. General Janet Karpinski, who was supposed to be in charge of the prison-although she said nothing when she was prohibited from accessing certain areas of it-and so she's also accountable. It's important to understand that the Geneva Conventions, the Hague Regulations of 1907, the U.S. Army Field Manual, all mandate that a criminal investigation be opened. And how President Bush, as Commander in Chief would be accountable under Field Manual 27-10 precisely because he is Commander in Chief of the US armed forces under the US Constitution. We know the White House knows this because if you read White House Counsel Alberto Gonzales's memo, he specifically tries to exempt the US from the Geneva Conventions for Guantanamo and Afghanistan. You can see that Gonzalez was afraid of Bush and others being held directly accountable. Moreover, because Powell dissented, we know there was a debate about this, so Bush had to have been aware of the implications of what was being done, which is also backed up by the memos from Ashcroft. These memos have been unearthed by Newsweek. So ultimately what we have here are people at the highest levels of the chain of command guilty of ordering or not preventing torture, which is both an international crime against the Geneva Conventions and the Torture Convention and a domestic crime as well. What we have then is a conspiracy among the aforementioned individuals to commit war crimes and crimes against humanity. Let me add one more thing that's very important to remember: The principles set forth in 27-10 of personal criminal accountability for war crimes goes back to the Nuremburg Charter, Judgments and Principles derived from the post-World War II trials of Nazi war criminals. Similar principles of criminal accountability were applied by the United States to the Japanese Imperial War criminals. LeVine: In fact, President Bush has compared the war on terror to the war against the Nazis. Boyle: Then we have even more reason to bring this to people's attention: The Nuremburg Principles were in fact originally the idea of the US Government which then orchestrated the prosecutions in Nuremburg. People need to understand the pedigree and heritage here. These are very grave offenses which the US government a generation ago prosecuted and executed Nazis for committing. And Japanese war criminals too. LeVine: How can any of the people you mentioned be prosecuted? Boyle: The military could do it, or the Dept. of Justice, which would have default power to do so if the military didn't. But for this of course we'd need a special prosecutor and that law has been allowed to lapse. Attorney General Ashcroft, who is clearly part of the criminal conspiracy, would never push a war crimes investigations against his colleagues or President Bush. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) Feed: NYT > U.S. Posted on: Wednesday, June 21, 2017 4:15 AM Author: NYT > U.S. Subject: How the C.I.A.’s Torture Program Began Video depositions in a case brought by former C.I.A. detainees give an insight into the beginnings of the agency’s enhanced interrogation program. View article... -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Thu Jun 22 19:18:36 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2017 19:18:36 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] =?utf-8?q?CIA_=26_Mossad_Infiltrated_UI_Center_fo?= =?utf-8?q?r_Advanced_Studies-How_the_C=2EI=2EA=2E=E2=80=99s_Torture_Progr?= =?utf-8?q?am_Began=3A_Law_School_Off_Campus!?= References: Message-ID: The CIA and the Mossad, as organizations, are the greatest purveyors of the violence known to man within the last century… ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- And let us not leave out the KGB. Moore has publicly argued that since torture works for the KGB, we Americans should mimic the KGB and thus engage in torture. Fab TORTURE OFF CAMPUS! CIA OFF CAMPUS! MOSSAD OFF CAMPUS! MICHAEL MOORE OFF CAMPUS! CONSORT HURRICANE HEIDI HURD OFF CAMPUS! LAW SCHOOL OFF CAMPUS! Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2017 2:09 PM To: 'Karen Aram' Cc: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson ; Mildred O'brien Subject: RE: CIA & Mossad Infiltrated UI Center for Advanced Studies-How the C.I.A.’s Torture Program Began: Law School Off Campus! Well again back in the 1980s we did have a Movement: CIA OFF CAMPUS! Belden and I were quite active in it. Michael Moore Off Campus! Consort Hurricane Heidi Hurd Off Campus! Law School Off Campus! Fab. That the CIA is a terrorist organization was upheld in the famous “CIA On Trial” case in Northampton, Mass., in 1987, when a jury acquitted 14 protestors who tried to stop CIA recruitment on campus, according to Francis Boyle, the University of Illinois international law authority who defended the group. The defense charged the CIA was “an organized criminal conspiracy like the SS and the Gestapo.” Boyle said, “You would not let the SS or the Gestapo recruit on campus at the University of Massachusetts at Amherst, so you would not permit the CIA to recruit on campus either.” ) [home] Abolish the CIA, America. Sherwood Ross. CIA Torture Report. December 9, 2014 9:01 pm 2 Comments The CIA, the KKK and the USA By Sherwood Ross Global Research, October 15, 2010 15 October 2010 [The CIA, the KKK and the USA] By assigning covert action roles to the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), it is as if the White House and Congress had legitimized the Ku Klux Klan to operate globally. That’s because the CIA today resembles nothing so much as the “Invisible Empire” of the KKK that once spread terror across the South and Midwest. Fiery crosses aside, this is what the CIA is doing globally. The CIA today is committing many of the same sort of gruesome crimes against foreigners that the KKK once inflicted on Americans of color. The principal difference is that the KKK consisted of self-appointed vigilantes who regarded themselves as both outside and above the law when they perpetrated their crimes. By contrast, the CIA acts as the agent of the American government, often at the highest levels, and at times at the direction of the White House. Its crimes typically are committed in contravention of the highest established international law such as the Charter of the United Nations as well as the U.S. Constitution. What’s more, the “Agency,” as it is known, derives its funding largely from an imperialist-minded Congress; additionally, it has no qualms about fattening its budget from drug money and other illegal sources. It is a mirror-image of the lawless entity the U.S. has become since achieving superpower status. And it is incredible that the White House grants license to this violent Agency to commit its crimes with no accountability. The Ku Klux Klan was founded shortly after the end of the U.S. Civil War. Klansman concealed their identities behind flowing white robes and white hoods as they terrorized the newly emancipated blacks to keep them from voting or to drive them from their property. Allowing it to operate in secret literally gives the CIA the mythical Ring of Gyges. In Plato’s Republic, the owner of the ring had the power to become invisible at will. As Wikipedia puts it, Plato “discusses whether a typical person would be moral if he did not have to fear the consequences of his actions.” The ancient Greeks made the argument, Wikipedia says, that “No man would keep his hands off what was not his own when he could safely take what he liked out of the market, go into houses and lie with any one at his pleasure, kill or release from prison whom he would, and in all respects be like a god among men.” The CIA, like Hitler’s Gestapo and Stalin’s NKVD before it, has provided modern man the answer to this question. Its actions illuminate why all criminal entities, from rapists and bank robbers, to Ponzi scheme swindlers and murderers, cloak themselves in secrecy. There are innumerable examples of how American presidents have authorized criminal acts without public discussion that the preponderant majority of Americans would find reprehensible. Example: it was President Lyndon Johnson who ordered the CIA to meddle in Chile’s election to help Eduardo Frei become president. If they had known, U.S. taxpayers might have objected to such a use of their hard-earned money to influence the outcome of another country’s elections. But the public is rarely let in on such illegal foreign policy decisions. Where the KKK after the Civil War terrorized blacks to keep them from voting, the CIA has worked to influence the outcome of elections all over the world through bribery and vote-buying, dirty tricks, and worse. According to investigative reporter William Blum in “Rogue State”(Common Courage Press), the CIA has perverted elections in Italy, Lebanon, Indonesia, The Philippines, Japan, Nepal, Laos, Brazil, Bolivia, Chile, Portugal, Australia, Jamaica, Panama, Nicaragua, Haiti, among other countries. If they had known, taxpayers might also object to the CIA’s numerous overthrows of foreign governments by force and violence—such as was done in Iran in 1953 by President Eisenhower and Chile in 1973 by President Nixon. Both overthrows precipitated bloodbaths that cost tens of thousands of innocent civilians their lives. Blum also lists the countries the CIA has attempted to overthrow or has actually overthrown. His list includes Greece, The Philippines, East Germany, Iran, Guatemala, Indonesia, Iraq, Viet Nam, Laos, Ecuador, The Congo, France, Cuba, Ghana, Chile, South Africa, Bolivia, Portugal, and Nicaragua, to cite a few. As I write, today, October 11th, 2010, Nobel Peace Prize winner Adolfo Perez Esquivel of Argentina called on President Obama to revise U.S. (imperialist) policies toward Latin America. He questioned why the U.S. continues to plant its military bases across the region. That’s an excellent question. If the U.S. is a peace-loving nation, why does it need 800 bases the world over in addition to 1,000 on its own soil? Americans might recoil in disgust if they knew of the CIA’s numerous assassinations of the elected officials of other nations. Is it any wonder Americans so often ask the question, “Why do they hate us?” As historian Arnold Toynbee wrote in 1961, “America is today the leader of a world-wide anti-revolutionary movement in the defence of vested interests. She now stands for what Rome stood for. Rome consistently supported the rich against the poor in all foreign communities that fell under her sway; and, since the poor, so far, have always and everywhere been more numerous than the rich, Rome’s policy made for inequality, for injustice, and for the least happiness of the greatest number.” The CIA’s protective secrecy resembles nothing so much as the KKK, which proudly proclaimed itself “the Invisible Empire” and whose thugs killed citizens having the courage to identify hooded Klansmen to law enforcement officials. Today, it is our highest public officials that protect this criminal force, said to number about 25,000 employees. It is actually a Federal offense to reveal the identity of a CIA undercover agent—unless, of course, you happen to be I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby, and are employed by Vice President Dick Cheney. Libby leaked the identity of CIA agent Valerie Plame to punish her husband Joseph Wilson for publishing a report that undercut the White House lie that Saddam Hussein had purchased “yellowcake” from Niger to fuel WMD. Today, high public officials direct the CIA’s criminal policies and protect its agents’ identities the better to enable them to commit their crimes. According to journalist Fred Cook in his book “Ku Klux Klan: America’s Recurring Nightmare”(Messner), “The Klan was inherently a vigilante organization. It could commit the most atrocious acts under the guise of high principle andperpetrators of those acts would be hidden behind white masks and protected by Klan secrecy… (The Klan) set itself up as judge, jury and executioner”—a policy adopted by the CIA today. CIA spies have conducted their criminal operations masquerading as officials of U.S. aid programs, business executives, or journalists. Example: The San Diego-based Copley News Service’s staff of foreign correspondents allegedly was created to provide cover to CIA spies, compromising legitimate American journalists trying to do their jobs. While the murders committed by the KKK likely ran into the many thousands, the CIA has killed on a far grander scale and managed to keep its role largely secret. As Tim Weiner, who covered the CIA for the New York Times noted in his book “Legacy of Ashes: The History of the CIA” (Anchor): “In Guatemala, 200,000 civilians had died during forty years of struggle following the agency’s(CIA) 1954 coup against an elected president.” Weiner adds, “the CIA’s officers in Guatemala still went to great lengths to conceal the nature of their close relations with the military and to suppress reports that Guatemalan officers on its payroll were murderers, torturers, and thieves.” When it comes to murder, the CIA makes the KKK look like Boy Scouts. Like the KKK, CIA terrorists operate above the law. KKK members committed thousands of lynchings yet rarely were its members punished for them. In 2009 at a speech at CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia, President Obama revealed he was not intent on punishing CIA agents for their crimes but would rather “look forward.” This seemingly charitable philosophy may be driven by the fact that Obama worked for Business International Corporation, a CIA front, at least in 1983 and perhaps longer, and allegedly is the son of a mother and father both of whom also worked for the CIA, as did Obama’s grandmother! I could find none of this in Obama’s biography when he ran for the presidency, when a gullible American public elected a CIA “mole” to the White House. Consider this, too: an agency President Truman feared would become “an American Gestapo” when he signed the enabling legislation into law in 1947 has become just that, and it casts a lengthy shadow over the White House. Ominously, it has in Barack Obama one of its own former employees sitting in the Oval Office—a man who, according to news reports, has vastly expanded the frequency of the CIA’s assassinations by drone aircraft in Pakistan and who illegally claims the “right” to assassinate any American citizen abroad as well. What’s more, from 1989 to 1993 George Bush Sr., the CIA’s own former Director, sat in the White House. Additionally, from 2001 to 2009, the CIA had that Director’s son, George W. Bush, in the Oval Office giving the CIA a blank check after the 9/11 massacre. Bush Jr., according to The New York Times, in the summer of 1974 worked for Alaska International Industries, which did contract work for the CIA. The Times noted that this job did not appear in his biography when he ran for the White House in 2000, terming it “The Missing Chapter in the Bush Bio.” Thus, two presidential candidates with CIA ties—Bush Jr. and Obama—both neglected to mention them. And in Bill Clinton, who presided from 1993 to 2001, the CIA had a go-along president who satisfied the Agency’s blood-lust when he authorized the first illegal “rendition,” a euphemism for what KKK thugs once knew as kidnapping and torture. Is there any question that the Agency has not played an influential, behind-the-scenes or even a direct role in the operations of the U.S. government at its highest level? It may indeed be a stretch to argue that the CIA is running the country but it is no stretch to say that year after year our presidents reflect the criminal philosophy of the Agency. Other parallels with the KKK are striking. As Richmond Flowers, the Attorney General of Alabama stated in 1966, “I’ve found the Klan more than just another secret society… It resembles a shadow government, making its own laws, manipulating local politics, burrowing into some of our local law-enforcement agencies…When a pitiable misfit puts on his $15 sheet, society can no longer ignore him.” Yet the descendants of those misfits have moved up today where they feel comfortable as operatives in the shadow government run by the White House. One of the CIA’s illicit duties has been to serve as a conduit for funneling U.S. taxpayer dollars to corrupt dictators and strongmen bent on suppressing the popular will of their citizenry. As Noam Chomsky wrote in “Failed States”(Metropolitan/Owl), in Honduras, “military officers in charge of the battalion (3-16) were on the CIA payroll.” This elite unit, he says, “organized and trained by the United States and Argentine neo-Nazis,” was “the most barbaric of the Latin American killers that Washington had been supporting.” Like the KKK, the CIA kidnaps many of its victims with no thought ever of legal procedure. It exhibits utter disdain for the rights of those individuals, the sovereignty of foreign nations, or respect for international law. At least hundreds of foreigners, mostly from the Middle East, have been the victims of “renditions” just as the KKK kidnapped and flogged and lynched blacks, labor leaders, Catholics, Jews, or wayward wives whom it felt to be morally lacking. In September, 1921, The New York World ran a series exposing the KKK. It pointed out that, among other things, the KKK was violating the Bill of Rights wholesale. This included the Fourth amendment against “unreasonable searches and seizures,” the Fifth and the Sixth amendments, guaranteeing that no one may be held without a grand jury indictment or punished without a fair trial. And these rights today are similarly trampled by the CIA against American citizens, not just foreigners. Apparently, only foreign courts care to rein in the CIA. The 23 CIA agents that it took to render one “suspect” in Italy are wanted there by the magistrates. (The spooks, by the way, ran up some fabulous bills in luxury hotels on taxpayers’ dollars in that escapade.) Former President Jimmy Carter wrote in his book “Our Endangered Values”(Simon & Schuster), the CIA transferred some of those it kidnapped to countries that included Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Morocco, Jordan, and Uzbekistan where “the techniques of torture are almost indescribably terrible, including, as a U.S. ambassador to one of the recipient countries reported, ‘partial boiling of a hand or an arm,’ with at least two prisoners boiled to death.” The KKK’s methods of punishment were often as ugly: the brutal flogging of blacks in front of vicious crowds, followed by castration and burning their victims alive, and then lynching of the corpses. As for the CIA, “Why?” asks investigative reporter William Blum, “are these men rendered in the first place if not to be tortured? Does the United States not have any speakers in foreign languages to conduct interrogations?” That the CIA is a terrorist organization was upheld in the famous “CIA On Trial” case in Northampton, Mass., in 1987, when a jury acquitted 14 protestors who tried to stop CIA recruitment on campus, according to Francis Boyle, the University of Illinois international law authority who defended the group. The defense charged the CIA was “an organized criminal conspiracy like the SS and the Gestapo.” Boyle said, “You would not let the SS or the Gestapo recruit on campus at the University of Massachusetts at Amherst, so you would not permit the CIA to recruit on campus either.” Another shared characteristic of the KKK and CIA is greed, the desire to loot the hard-earned wealth of others. Often, Klansmen terrorized African-Americans who had amassed property to frighten them off their land. Law-abiding black citizens who had pulled themselves up by the proverbial bootstraps were cheated out of their homes and acreage by the night riders. Similarly, the CIA across Latin America has aligned itself with the well-to-do ruling class at every opportunity. It has cooperated with the elite to punish and murder labor leaders and clergy who espoused economic opportunity for the poor. The notion that allowing the poor to enrich themselves fairly will also create more wealth for an entire society generally, including the rich, has not permeated CIA thinking. I emphasize what historian Toynbee noted: “America is today the leader of a world-wide anti-revolutionary movement in the defence of vested interests. She now stands for what Rome stood for.”(Italics added.) In sum, by adopting the terrorist philosophy of the KKK and elevating it to the operations of government at the highest level, the imperial Obama administration, like its predecessors, is showing the world the worst possible face of America. Foreigners do not see the goodness inherent in the American people—most of whom only want a good day’s pay for a good day’s work and to educate their children and live at peace with the world. Every adult American has a solemn obligation to demand that its government live up to international law, punish the CIA criminals in its midst, and become a respected citizen of the world. This will not come to pass until Congress abolishes the CIA, putting an end to its KKK-style terrorism which threatens Americans as well as humankind everywhere. Sherwood Ross is an American who has worked as a reporter for the Chicago Daily News, a columnist for wire services and as the News Director of a national civil rights organization. He currently operates the Anti-War News Service from Miami, Florida. To contribute to his work or reach him, email sherwoodross10 at gmail.com Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Karen Aram [mailto:karenaram at hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2017 1:31 PM To: Boyle, Francis A > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: Re: CIA & Mossad Infiltrated UI Center for Advanced Studies-How the C.I.A.’s Torture Program Began: Law School Off Campus! At some point, yes, we do need to address this issue at the U of I. The CIA and the Mossad, as organizations, are the greatest purveyors of the violence known to man within the last century, working on behalf of the United States Oligarch’s. On Jun 22, 2017, at 11:07, Boyle, Francis A > wrote: Michael Moore’s strident advocacy in favor of torture, his public admissions that he advises both the CIA and the Mossad on torture, and his argument that since torture works for the KGB, we Americans should also engage in torture, all qualified him for a Professorship at the University of Illinois Center for Advanced Studies. In other words, the CIA and the Mossad have infiltrated the UI Center for Advanced Studies as well as the College of Law and the Department of Philosophy. Fab. CIA Off Campus! Mossad Off Campus! Torture Off Campus! Michael Moore Off Campus! Consort Hurricane Heidi Hurd Off Campus! War Crimes Off Campus! War Criminals Off Campus! Crimes Against Humanity Off Campus! Genocidaires Against Muslims/Arabs/Asians Of Color Off Campus! Gitmo Kangaroo Courts Off Campus! Law School Off Campus! Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2017 10:33 AM To: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; Karen Aram >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson >; Mildred O'brien > Subject: How the C.I.A.’s Torture Program Began: Law School Off Campus! In a public lecture he gave before the entire College of Law Faculty, whose presence had been demanded by his Consort Dean Hurricane Heidi Hurd, and including before the COL Board of Visitors, the Marquis De Sade Professor of Law and Philosophy and of the Center for Advanced Studies in Torture Michael Moore bragged that he advised the Mossad on Torture and argued that since torture worked for the KGB, we Americans should also engage in torture. Fab Torture Off Campus! Mossad Off Campus! CIA Off Campus! Michael Moore Off Campus! Consort Hurricane Heidi Hurd Off Campus! War Crimes Off Campus! Crimes Against Humanity Off Campus! Law School Off Campus! LeVine: In my own research on war crimes committed by US forces in Iraq. I counted at least two-dozen classes of offenses systematically committed by the Occupation administration and US or US-allied military forces in the invasion and subsequent period of CPA (Coalition Provisional Authority) rule. This includes violations of articles and 17, 18, 33, and 147 of the Geneva Convention covering the killing, hostage-taking and torturing of civilians Boyle: As I just argued at Fort Stewart Georgia in the court martial proceedings for Sgt. Camilo Mejia for desertion, the accountability here goes directly up the chain of command under the terms of the US Army Field Manual 27-10. Specifically, paragraph 501 makes clear that commanders who have ordered or knew or should have known about war crimes and failed to stop it are themselves guilty of war crimes. If you look then at the public record, it is clear that Gens. Sanchez and Miller ordered war crimes and both should be relieved of command immediately: abuse of prisoners in violation of the Geneva Conventions. As for General Abizaid, the overall commander of US forces in Southwest Asia, he admitted in his Senate hearings that he should have known about the war crimes at Abu Ghraib, so basically he's already incriminated himself under the rules of the US Army Field Manual 27-10 In addition, above Abizaid you have Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz. Again my reading of the public record including the Taguba and Red Cross reports is that they either knew or should have known about all these war crimes. Indeed, if you read the ICRC report, - and as I testified under oath and under cross-examination (and was not contradicted) at the Mejia court-martial proceedings, - the widespread and systematic nature of these abuses rise to the level of crimes against humanity, going all the way up through the chain of command. Culpability also extends to Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence General William G. Boykin and Defense Undersecretary Stephen Cambone, who reports directly to Undersecretary of Defense Douglas Feith. And through this line it appears to me that Rumsfeld is culpable, because he was at Abu Ghraib last fall. Indeed, Sy Hersch's New Yorker article on Abu Ghraib claims with good substantiation that he was totally aware and even signed off on the use of techniques which are clearly torture. Rumsfeld was given a tour by Brig. General Janet Karpinski, who was supposed to be in charge of the prison-although she said nothing when she was prohibited from accessing certain areas of it-and so she's also accountable. It's important to understand that the Geneva Conventions, the Hague Regulations of 1907, the U.S. Army Field Manual, all mandate that a criminal investigation be opened. And how President Bush, as Commander in Chief would be accountable under Field Manual 27-10 precisely because he is Commander in Chief of the US armed forces under the US Constitution. We know the White House knows this because if you read White House Counsel Alberto Gonzales's memo, he specifically tries to exempt the US from the Geneva Conventions for Guantanamo and Afghanistan. You can see that Gonzalez was afraid of Bush and others being held directly accountable. Moreover, because Powell dissented, we know there was a debate about this, so Bush had to have been aware of the implications of what was being done, which is also backed up by the memos from Ashcroft. These memos have been unearthed by Newsweek. So ultimately what we have here are people at the highest levels of the chain of command guilty of ordering or not preventing torture, which is both an international crime against the Geneva Conventions and the Torture Convention and a domestic crime as well. What we have then is a conspiracy among the aforementioned individuals to commit war crimes and crimes against humanity. Let me add one more thing that's very important to remember: The principles set forth in 27-10 of personal criminal accountability for war crimes goes back to the Nuremburg Charter, Judgments and Principles derived from the post-World War II trials of Nazi war criminals. Similar principles of criminal accountability were applied by the United States to the Japanese Imperial War criminals. LeVine: In fact, President Bush has compared the war on terror to the war against the Nazis. Boyle: Then we have even more reason to bring this to people's attention: The Nuremburg Principles were in fact originally the idea of the US Government which then orchestrated the prosecutions in Nuremburg. People need to understand the pedigree and heritage here. These are very grave offenses which the US government a generation ago prosecuted and executed Nazis for committing. And Japanese war criminals too. LeVine: How can any of the people you mentioned be prosecuted? Boyle: The military could do it, or the Dept. of Justice, which would have default power to do so if the military didn't. But for this of course we'd need a special prosecutor and that law has been allowed to lapse. Attorney General Ashcroft, who is clearly part of the criminal conspiracy, would never push a war crimes investigations against his colleagues or President Bush. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) Feed: NYT > U.S. Posted on: Wednesday, June 21, 2017 4:15 AM Author: NYT > U.S. Subject: How the C.I.A.’s Torture Program Began Video depositions in a case brought by former C.I.A. detainees give an insight into the beginnings of the agency’s enhanced interrogation program. View article... -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Thu Jun 22 19:24:01 2017 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2017 19:24:01 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] =?utf-8?q?CIA_=26_Mossad_Infiltrated_UI_Center_fo?= =?utf-8?q?r_Advanced_Studies-How_the_C=2EI=2EA=2E=E2=80=99s_Torture_Progr?= =?utf-8?q?am_Began=3A_Law_School_Off_Campus!?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: We should leave out the KGB, because they aren’t our responsibility and Moore during the “Legitimacy of Targeted Killing” gave examples of KGB tactics, as an excuse to use drones against “our enemy’s,” Islamic terrorists today, Russians tomorrow.” He was already using the USG propaganda against Russians to promote war in Eurasia and our expansion of Nato. On Jun 22, 2017, at 12:18, Boyle, Francis A > wrote: The CIA and the Mossad, as organizations, are the greatest purveyors of the violence known to man within the last century… ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- And let us not leave out the KGB. Moore has publicly argued that since torture works for the KGB, we Americans should mimic the KGB and thus engage in torture. Fab TORTURE OFF CAMPUS! CIA OFF CAMPUS! MOSSAD OFF CAMPUS! MICHAEL MOORE OFF CAMPUS! CONSORT HURRICANE HEIDI HURD OFF CAMPUS! LAW SCHOOL OFF CAMPUS! Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2017 2:09 PM To: 'Karen Aram' > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson >; Mildred O'brien > Subject: RE: CIA & Mossad Infiltrated UI Center for Advanced Studies-How the C.I.A.’s Torture Program Began: Law School Off Campus! Well again back in the 1980s we did have a Movement: CIA OFF CAMPUS! Belden and I were quite active in it. Michael Moore Off Campus! Consort Hurricane Heidi Hurd Off Campus! Law School Off Campus! Fab. That the CIA is a terrorist organization was upheld in the famous “CIA On Trial” case in Northampton, Mass., in 1987, when a jury acquitted 14 protestors who tried to stop CIA recruitment on campus, according to Francis Boyle, the University of Illinois international law authority who defended the group. The defense charged the CIA was “an organized criminal conspiracy like the SS and the Gestapo.” Boyle said, “You would not let the SS or the Gestapo recruit on campus at the University of Massachusetts at Amherst, so you would not permit the CIA to recruit on campus either.” ) [home] Abolish the CIA, America. Sherwood Ross. CIA Torture Report. December 9, 2014 9:01 pm 2 Comments The CIA, the KKK and the USA By Sherwood Ross Global Research, October 15, 2010 15 October 2010 [The CIA, the KKK and the USA] By assigning covert action roles to the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), it is as if the White House and Congress had legitimized the Ku Klux Klan to operate globally. That’s because the CIA today resembles nothing so much as the “Invisible Empire” of the KKK that once spread terror across the South and Midwest. Fiery crosses aside, this is what the CIA is doing globally. The CIA today is committing many of the same sort of gruesome crimes against foreigners that the KKK once inflicted on Americans of color. The principal difference is that the KKK consisted of self-appointed vigilantes who regarded themselves as both outside and above the law when they perpetrated their crimes. By contrast, the CIA acts as the agent of the American government, often at the highest levels, and at times at the direction of the White House. Its crimes typically are committed in contravention of the highest established international law such as the Charter of the United Nations as well as the U.S. Constitution. What’s more, the “Agency,” as it is known, derives its funding largely from an imperialist-minded Congress; additionally, it has no qualms about fattening its budget from drug money and other illegal sources. It is a mirror-image of the lawless entity the U.S. has become since achieving superpower status. And it is incredible that the White House grants license to this violent Agency to commit its crimes with no accountability. The Ku Klux Klan was founded shortly after the end of the U.S. Civil War. Klansman concealed their identities behind flowing white robes and white hoods as they terrorized the newly emancipated blacks to keep them from voting or to drive them from their property. Allowing it to operate in secret literally gives the CIA the mythical Ring of Gyges. In Plato’s Republic, the owner of the ring had the power to become invisible at will. As Wikipedia puts it, Plato “discusses whether a typical person would be moral if he did not have to fear the consequences of his actions.” The ancient Greeks made the argument, Wikipedia says, that “No man would keep his hands off what was not his own when he could safely take what he liked out of the market, go into houses and lie with any one at his pleasure, kill or release from prison whom he would, and in all respects be like a god among men.” The CIA, like Hitler’s Gestapo and Stalin’s NKVD before it, has provided modern man the answer to this question. Its actions illuminate why all criminal entities, from rapists and bank robbers, to Ponzi scheme swindlers and murderers, cloak themselves in secrecy. There are innumerable examples of how American presidents have authorized criminal acts without public discussion that the preponderant majority of Americans would find reprehensible. Example: it was President Lyndon Johnson who ordered the CIA to meddle in Chile’s election to help Eduardo Frei become president. If they had known, U.S. taxpayers might have objected to such a use of their hard-earned money to influence the outcome of another country’s elections. But the public is rarely let in on such illegal foreign policy decisions. Where the KKK after the Civil War terrorized blacks to keep them from voting, the CIA has worked to influence the outcome of elections all over the world through bribery and vote-buying, dirty tricks, and worse. According to investigative reporter William Blum in “Rogue State”(Common Courage Press), the CIA has perverted elections in Italy, Lebanon, Indonesia, The Philippines, Japan, Nepal, Laos, Brazil, Bolivia, Chile, Portugal, Australia, Jamaica, Panama, Nicaragua, Haiti, among other countries. If they had known, taxpayers might also object to the CIA’s numerous overthrows of foreign governments by force and violence—such as was done in Iran in 1953 by President Eisenhower and Chile in 1973 by President Nixon. Both overthrows precipitated bloodbaths that cost tens of thousands of innocent civilians their lives. Blum also lists the countries the CIA has attempted to overthrow or has actually overthrown. His list includes Greece, The Philippines, East Germany, Iran, Guatemala, Indonesia, Iraq, Viet Nam, Laos, Ecuador, The Congo, France, Cuba, Ghana, Chile, South Africa, Bolivia, Portugal, and Nicaragua, to cite a few. As I write, today, October 11th, 2010, Nobel Peace Prize winner Adolfo Perez Esquivel of Argentina called on President Obama to revise U.S. (imperialist) policies toward Latin America. He questioned why the U.S. continues to plant its military bases across the region. That’s an excellent question. If the U.S. is a peace-loving nation, why does it need 800 bases the world over in addition to 1,000 on its own soil? Americans might recoil in disgust if they knew of the CIA’s numerous assassinations of the elected officials of other nations. Is it any wonder Americans so often ask the question, “Why do they hate us?” As historian Arnold Toynbee wrote in 1961, “America is today the leader of a world-wide anti-revolutionary movement in the defence of vested interests. She now stands for what Rome stood for. Rome consistently supported the rich against the poor in all foreign communities that fell under her sway; and, since the poor, so far, have always and everywhere been more numerous than the rich, Rome’s policy made for inequality, for injustice, and for the least happiness of the greatest number.” The CIA’s protective secrecy resembles nothing so much as the KKK, which proudly proclaimed itself “the Invisible Empire” and whose thugs killed citizens having the courage to identify hooded Klansmen to law enforcement officials. Today, it is our highest public officials that protect this criminal force, said to number about 25,000 employees. It is actually a Federal offense to reveal the identity of a CIA undercover agent—unless, of course, you happen to be I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby, and are employed by Vice President Dick Cheney. Libby leaked the identity of CIA agent Valerie Plame to punish her husband Joseph Wilson for publishing a report that undercut the White House lie that Saddam Hussein had purchased “yellowcake” from Niger to fuel WMD. Today, high public officials direct the CIA’s criminal policies and protect its agents’ identities the better to enable them to commit their crimes. According to journalist Fred Cook in his book “Ku Klux Klan: America’s Recurring Nightmare”(Messner), “The Klan was inherently a vigilante organization. It could commit the most atrocious acts under the guise of high principle andperpetrators of those acts would be hidden behind white masks and protected by Klan secrecy… (The Klan) set itself up as judge, jury and executioner”—a policy adopted by the CIA today. CIA spies have conducted their criminal operations masquerading as officials of U.S. aid programs, business executives, or journalists. Example: The San Diego-based Copley News Service’s staff of foreign correspondents allegedly was created to provide cover to CIA spies, compromising legitimate American journalists trying to do their jobs. While the murders committed by the KKK likely ran into the many thousands, the CIA has killed on a far grander scale and managed to keep its role largely secret. As Tim Weiner, who covered the CIA for the New York Times noted in his book “Legacy of Ashes: The History of the CIA” (Anchor): “In Guatemala, 200,000 civilians had died during forty years of struggle following the agency’s(CIA) 1954 coup against an elected president.” Weiner adds, “the CIA’s officers in Guatemala still went to great lengths to conceal the nature of their close relations with the military and to suppress reports that Guatemalan officers on its payroll were murderers, torturers, and thieves.” When it comes to murder, the CIA makes the KKK look like Boy Scouts. Like the KKK, CIA terrorists operate above the law. KKK members committed thousands of lynchings yet rarely were its members punished for them. In 2009 at a speech at CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia, President Obama revealed he was not intent on punishing CIA agents for their crimes but would rather “look forward.” This seemingly charitable philosophy may be driven by the fact that Obama worked for Business International Corporation, a CIA front, at least in 1983 and perhaps longer, and allegedly is the son of a mother and father both of whom also worked for the CIA, as did Obama’s grandmother! I could find none of this in Obama’s biography when he ran for the presidency, when a gullible American public elected a CIA “mole” to the White House. Consider this, too: an agency President Truman feared would become “an American Gestapo” when he signed the enabling legislation into law in 1947 has become just that, and it casts a lengthy shadow over the White House. Ominously, it has in Barack Obama one of its own former employees sitting in the Oval Office—a man who, according to news reports, has vastly expanded the frequency of the CIA’s assassinations by drone aircraft in Pakistan and who illegally claims the “right” to assassinate any American citizen abroad as well. What’s more, from 1989 to 1993 George Bush Sr., the CIA’s own former Director, sat in the White House. Additionally, from 2001 to 2009, the CIA had that Director’s son, George W. Bush, in the Oval Office giving the CIA a blank check after the 9/11 massacre. Bush Jr., according to The New York Times, in the summer of 1974 worked for Alaska International Industries, which did contract work for the CIA. The Times noted that this job did not appear in his biography when he ran for the White House in 2000, terming it “The Missing Chapter in the Bush Bio.” Thus, two presidential candidates with CIA ties—Bush Jr. and Obama—both neglected to mention them. And in Bill Clinton, who presided from 1993 to 2001, the CIA had a go-along president who satisfied the Agency’s blood-lust when he authorized the first illegal “rendition,” a euphemism for what KKK thugs once knew as kidnapping and torture. Is there any question that the Agency has not played an influential, behind-the-scenes or even a direct role in the operations of the U.S. government at its highest level? It may indeed be a stretch to argue that the CIA is running the country but it is no stretch to say that year after year our presidents reflect the criminal philosophy of the Agency. Other parallels with the KKK are striking. As Richmond Flowers, the Attorney General of Alabama stated in 1966, “I’ve found the Klan more than just another secret society… It resembles a shadow government, making its own laws, manipulating local politics, burrowing into some of our local law-enforcement agencies…When a pitiable misfit puts on his $15 sheet, society can no longer ignore him.” Yet the descendants of those misfits have moved up today where they feel comfortable as operatives in the shadow government run by the White House. One of the CIA’s illicit duties has been to serve as a conduit for funneling U.S. taxpayer dollars to corrupt dictators and strongmen bent on suppressing the popular will of their citizenry. As Noam Chomsky wrote in “Failed States”(Metropolitan/Owl), in Honduras, “military officers in charge of the battalion (3-16) were on the CIA payroll.” This elite unit, he says, “organized and trained by the United States and Argentine neo-Nazis,” was “the most barbaric of the Latin American killers that Washington had been supporting.” Like the KKK, the CIA kidnaps many of its victims with no thought ever of legal procedure. It exhibits utter disdain for the rights of those individuals, the sovereignty of foreign nations, or respect for international law. At least hundreds of foreigners, mostly from the Middle East, have been the victims of “renditions” just as the KKK kidnapped and flogged and lynched blacks, labor leaders, Catholics, Jews, or wayward wives whom it felt to be morally lacking. In September, 1921, The New York World ran a series exposing the KKK. It pointed out that, among other things, the KKK was violating the Bill of Rights wholesale. This included the Fourth amendment against “unreasonable searches and seizures,” the Fifth and the Sixth amendments, guaranteeing that no one may be held without a grand jury indictment or punished without a fair trial. And these rights today are similarly trampled by the CIA against American citizens, not just foreigners. Apparently, only foreign courts care to rein in the CIA. The 23 CIA agents that it took to render one “suspect” in Italy are wanted there by the magistrates. (The spooks, by the way, ran up some fabulous bills in luxury hotels on taxpayers’ dollars in that escapade.) Former President Jimmy Carter wrote in his book “Our Endangered Values”(Simon & Schuster), the CIA transferred some of those it kidnapped to countries that included Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Morocco, Jordan, and Uzbekistan where “the techniques of torture are almost indescribably terrible, including, as a U.S. ambassador to one of the recipient countries reported, ‘partial boiling of a hand or an arm,’ with at least two prisoners boiled to death.” The KKK’s methods of punishment were often as ugly: the brutal flogging of blacks in front of vicious crowds, followed by castration and burning their victims alive, and then lynching of the corpses. As for the CIA, “Why?” asks investigative reporter William Blum, “are these men rendered in the first place if not to be tortured? Does the United States not have any speakers in foreign languages to conduct interrogations?” That the CIA is a terrorist organization was upheld in the famous “CIA On Trial” case in Northampton, Mass., in 1987, when a jury acquitted 14 protestors who tried to stop CIA recruitment on campus, according to Francis Boyle, the University of Illinois international law authority who defended the group. The defense charged the CIA was “an organized criminal conspiracy like the SS and the Gestapo.” Boyle said, “You would not let the SS or the Gestapo recruit on campus at the University of Massachusetts at Amherst, so you would not permit the CIA to recruit on campus either.” Another shared characteristic of the KKK and CIA is greed, the desire to loot the hard-earned wealth of others. Often, Klansmen terrorized African-Americans who had amassed property to frighten them off their land. Law-abiding black citizens who had pulled themselves up by the proverbial bootstraps were cheated out of their homes and acreage by the night riders. Similarly, the CIA across Latin America has aligned itself with the well-to-do ruling class at every opportunity. It has cooperated with the elite to punish and murder labor leaders and clergy who espoused economic opportunity for the poor. The notion that allowing the poor to enrich themselves fairly will also create more wealth for an entire society generally, including the rich, has not permeated CIA thinking. I emphasize what historian Toynbee noted: “America is today the leader of a world-wide anti-revolutionary movement in the defence of vested interests. She now stands for what Rome stood for.”(Italics added.) In sum, by adopting the terrorist philosophy of the KKK and elevating it to the operations of government at the highest level, the imperial Obama administration, like its predecessors, is showing the world the worst possible face of America. Foreigners do not see the goodness inherent in the American people—most of whom only want a good day’s pay for a good day’s work and to educate their children and live at peace with the world. Every adult American has a solemn obligation to demand that its government live up to international law, punish the CIA criminals in its midst, and become a respected citizen of the world. This will not come to pass until Congress abolishes the CIA, putting an end to its KKK-style terrorism which threatens Americans as well as humankind everywhere. Sherwood Ross is an American who has worked as a reporter for the Chicago Daily News, a columnist for wire services and as the News Director of a national civil rights organization. He currently operates the Anti-War News Service from Miami, Florida. To contribute to his work or reach him, email sherwoodross10 at gmail.com Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Karen Aram [mailto:karenaram at hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2017 1:31 PM To: Boyle, Francis A > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: Re: CIA & Mossad Infiltrated UI Center for Advanced Studies-How the C.I.A.’s Torture Program Began: Law School Off Campus! At some point, yes, we do need to address this issue at the U of I. The CIA and the Mossad, as organizations, are the greatest purveyors of the violence known to man within the last century, working on behalf of the United States Oligarch’s. On Jun 22, 2017, at 11:07, Boyle, Francis A > wrote: Michael Moore’s strident advocacy in favor of torture, his public admissions that he advises both the CIA and the Mossad on torture, and his argument that since torture works for the KGB, we Americans should also engage in torture, all qualified him for a Professorship at the University of Illinois Center for Advanced Studies. In other words, the CIA and the Mossad have infiltrated the UI Center for Advanced Studies as well as the College of Law and the Department of Philosophy. Fab. CIA Off Campus! Mossad Off Campus! Torture Off Campus! Michael Moore Off Campus! Consort Hurricane Heidi Hurd Off Campus! War Crimes Off Campus! War Criminals Off Campus! Crimes Against Humanity Off Campus! Genocidaires Against Muslims/Arabs/Asians Of Color Off Campus! Gitmo Kangaroo Courts Off Campus! Law School Off Campus! Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2017 10:33 AM To: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; Karen Aram >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson >; Mildred O'brien > Subject: How the C.I.A.’s Torture Program Began: Law School Off Campus! In a public lecture he gave before the entire College of Law Faculty, whose presence had been demanded by his Consort Dean Hurricane Heidi Hurd, and including before the COL Board of Visitors, the Marquis De Sade Professor of Law and Philosophy and of the Center for Advanced Studies in Torture Michael Moore bragged that he advised the Mossad on Torture and argued that since torture worked for the KGB, we Americans should also engage in torture. Fab Torture Off Campus! Mossad Off Campus! CIA Off Campus! Michael Moore Off Campus! Consort Hurricane Heidi Hurd Off Campus! War Crimes Off Campus! Crimes Against Humanity Off Campus! Law School Off Campus! LeVine: In my own research on war crimes committed by US forces in Iraq. I counted at least two-dozen classes of offenses systematically committed by the Occupation administration and US or US-allied military forces in the invasion and subsequent period of CPA (Coalition Provisional Authority) rule. This includes violations of articles and 17, 18, 33, and 147 of the Geneva Convention covering the killing, hostage-taking and torturing of civilians Boyle: As I just argued at Fort Stewart Georgia in the court martial proceedings for Sgt. Camilo Mejia for desertion, the accountability here goes directly up the chain of command under the terms of the US Army Field Manual 27-10. Specifically, paragraph 501 makes clear that commanders who have ordered or knew or should have known about war crimes and failed to stop it are themselves guilty of war crimes. If you look then at the public record, it is clear that Gens. Sanchez and Miller ordered war crimes and both should be relieved of command immediately: abuse of prisoners in violation of the Geneva Conventions. As for General Abizaid, the overall commander of US forces in Southwest Asia, he admitted in his Senate hearings that he should have known about the war crimes at Abu Ghraib, so basically he's already incriminated himself under the rules of the US Army Field Manual 27-10 In addition, above Abizaid you have Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz. Again my reading of the public record including the Taguba and Red Cross reports is that they either knew or should have known about all these war crimes. Indeed, if you read the ICRC report, - and as I testified under oath and under cross-examination (and was not contradicted) at the Mejia court-martial proceedings, - the widespread and systematic nature of these abuses rise to the level of crimes against humanity, going all the way up through the chain of command. Culpability also extends to Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence General William G. Boykin and Defense Undersecretary Stephen Cambone, who reports directly to Undersecretary of Defense Douglas Feith. And through this line it appears to me that Rumsfeld is culpable, because he was at Abu Ghraib last fall. Indeed, Sy Hersch's New Yorker article on Abu Ghraib claims with good substantiation that he was totally aware and even signed off on the use of techniques which are clearly torture. Rumsfeld was given a tour by Brig. General Janet Karpinski, who was supposed to be in charge of the prison-although she said nothing when she was prohibited from accessing certain areas of it-and so she's also accountable. It's important to understand that the Geneva Conventions, the Hague Regulations of 1907, the U.S. Army Field Manual, all mandate that a criminal investigation be opened. And how President Bush, as Commander in Chief would be accountable under Field Manual 27-10 precisely because he is Commander in Chief of the US armed forces under the US Constitution. We know the White House knows this because if you read White House Counsel Alberto Gonzales's memo, he specifically tries to exempt the US from the Geneva Conventions for Guantanamo and Afghanistan. You can see that Gonzalez was afraid of Bush and others being held directly accountable. Moreover, because Powell dissented, we know there was a debate about this, so Bush had to have been aware of the implications of what was being done, which is also backed up by the memos from Ashcroft. These memos have been unearthed by Newsweek. So ultimately what we have here are people at the highest levels of the chain of command guilty of ordering or not preventing torture, which is both an international crime against the Geneva Conventions and the Torture Convention and a domestic crime as well. What we have then is a conspiracy among the aforementioned individuals to commit war crimes and crimes against humanity. Let me add one more thing that's very important to remember: The principles set forth in 27-10 of personal criminal accountability for war crimes goes back to the Nuremburg Charter, Judgments and Principles derived from the post-World War II trials of Nazi war criminals. Similar principles of criminal accountability were applied by the United States to the Japanese Imperial War criminals. LeVine: In fact, President Bush has compared the war on terror to the war against the Nazis. Boyle: Then we have even more reason to bring this to people's attention: The Nuremburg Principles were in fact originally the idea of the US Government which then orchestrated the prosecutions in Nuremburg. People need to understand the pedigree and heritage here. These are very grave offenses which the US government a generation ago prosecuted and executed Nazis for committing. And Japanese war criminals too. LeVine: How can any of the people you mentioned be prosecuted? Boyle: The military could do it, or the Dept. of Justice, which would have default power to do so if the military didn't. But for this of course we'd need a special prosecutor and that law has been allowed to lapse. Attorney General Ashcroft, who is clearly part of the criminal conspiracy, would never push a war crimes investigations against his colleagues or President Bush. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) Feed: NYT > U.S. Posted on: Wednesday, June 21, 2017 4:15 AM Author: NYT > U.S. Subject: How the C.I.A.’s Torture Program Began Video depositions in a case brought by former C.I.A. detainees give an insight into the beginnings of the agency’s enhanced interrogation program. View article... -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Thu Jun 22 19:24:01 2017 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2017 19:24:01 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] =?utf-8?q?CIA_=26_Mossad_Infiltrated_UI_Center_fo?= =?utf-8?q?r_Advanced_Studies-How_the_C=2EI=2EA=2E=E2=80=99s_Torture_Progr?= =?utf-8?q?am_Began=3A_Law_School_Off_Campus!?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: We should leave out the KGB, because they aren’t our responsibility and Moore during the “Legitimacy of Targeted Killing” gave examples of KGB tactics, as an excuse to use drones against “our enemy’s,” Islamic terrorists today, Russians tomorrow.” He was already using the USG propaganda against Russians to promote war in Eurasia and our expansion of Nato. On Jun 22, 2017, at 12:18, Boyle, Francis A > wrote: The CIA and the Mossad, as organizations, are the greatest purveyors of the violence known to man within the last century… ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- And let us not leave out the KGB. Moore has publicly argued that since torture works for the KGB, we Americans should mimic the KGB and thus engage in torture. Fab TORTURE OFF CAMPUS! CIA OFF CAMPUS! MOSSAD OFF CAMPUS! MICHAEL MOORE OFF CAMPUS! CONSORT HURRICANE HEIDI HURD OFF CAMPUS! LAW SCHOOL OFF CAMPUS! Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2017 2:09 PM To: 'Karen Aram' > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson >; Mildred O'brien > Subject: RE: CIA & Mossad Infiltrated UI Center for Advanced Studies-How the C.I.A.’s Torture Program Began: Law School Off Campus! Well again back in the 1980s we did have a Movement: CIA OFF CAMPUS! Belden and I were quite active in it. Michael Moore Off Campus! Consort Hurricane Heidi Hurd Off Campus! Law School Off Campus! Fab. That the CIA is a terrorist organization was upheld in the famous “CIA On Trial” case in Northampton, Mass., in 1987, when a jury acquitted 14 protestors who tried to stop CIA recruitment on campus, according to Francis Boyle, the University of Illinois international law authority who defended the group. The defense charged the CIA was “an organized criminal conspiracy like the SS and the Gestapo.” Boyle said, “You would not let the SS or the Gestapo recruit on campus at the University of Massachusetts at Amherst, so you would not permit the CIA to recruit on campus either.” ) [home] Abolish the CIA, America. Sherwood Ross. CIA Torture Report. December 9, 2014 9:01 pm 2 Comments The CIA, the KKK and the USA By Sherwood Ross Global Research, October 15, 2010 15 October 2010 [The CIA, the KKK and the USA] By assigning covert action roles to the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), it is as if the White House and Congress had legitimized the Ku Klux Klan to operate globally. That’s because the CIA today resembles nothing so much as the “Invisible Empire” of the KKK that once spread terror across the South and Midwest. Fiery crosses aside, this is what the CIA is doing globally. The CIA today is committing many of the same sort of gruesome crimes against foreigners that the KKK once inflicted on Americans of color. The principal difference is that the KKK consisted of self-appointed vigilantes who regarded themselves as both outside and above the law when they perpetrated their crimes. By contrast, the CIA acts as the agent of the American government, often at the highest levels, and at times at the direction of the White House. Its crimes typically are committed in contravention of the highest established international law such as the Charter of the United Nations as well as the U.S. Constitution. What’s more, the “Agency,” as it is known, derives its funding largely from an imperialist-minded Congress; additionally, it has no qualms about fattening its budget from drug money and other illegal sources. It is a mirror-image of the lawless entity the U.S. has become since achieving superpower status. And it is incredible that the White House grants license to this violent Agency to commit its crimes with no accountability. The Ku Klux Klan was founded shortly after the end of the U.S. Civil War. Klansman concealed their identities behind flowing white robes and white hoods as they terrorized the newly emancipated blacks to keep them from voting or to drive them from their property. Allowing it to operate in secret literally gives the CIA the mythical Ring of Gyges. In Plato’s Republic, the owner of the ring had the power to become invisible at will. As Wikipedia puts it, Plato “discusses whether a typical person would be moral if he did not have to fear the consequences of his actions.” The ancient Greeks made the argument, Wikipedia says, that “No man would keep his hands off what was not his own when he could safely take what he liked out of the market, go into houses and lie with any one at his pleasure, kill or release from prison whom he would, and in all respects be like a god among men.” The CIA, like Hitler’s Gestapo and Stalin’s NKVD before it, has provided modern man the answer to this question. Its actions illuminate why all criminal entities, from rapists and bank robbers, to Ponzi scheme swindlers and murderers, cloak themselves in secrecy. There are innumerable examples of how American presidents have authorized criminal acts without public discussion that the preponderant majority of Americans would find reprehensible. Example: it was President Lyndon Johnson who ordered the CIA to meddle in Chile’s election to help Eduardo Frei become president. If they had known, U.S. taxpayers might have objected to such a use of their hard-earned money to influence the outcome of another country’s elections. But the public is rarely let in on such illegal foreign policy decisions. Where the KKK after the Civil War terrorized blacks to keep them from voting, the CIA has worked to influence the outcome of elections all over the world through bribery and vote-buying, dirty tricks, and worse. According to investigative reporter William Blum in “Rogue State”(Common Courage Press), the CIA has perverted elections in Italy, Lebanon, Indonesia, The Philippines, Japan, Nepal, Laos, Brazil, Bolivia, Chile, Portugal, Australia, Jamaica, Panama, Nicaragua, Haiti, among other countries. If they had known, taxpayers might also object to the CIA’s numerous overthrows of foreign governments by force and violence—such as was done in Iran in 1953 by President Eisenhower and Chile in 1973 by President Nixon. Both overthrows precipitated bloodbaths that cost tens of thousands of innocent civilians their lives. Blum also lists the countries the CIA has attempted to overthrow or has actually overthrown. His list includes Greece, The Philippines, East Germany, Iran, Guatemala, Indonesia, Iraq, Viet Nam, Laos, Ecuador, The Congo, France, Cuba, Ghana, Chile, South Africa, Bolivia, Portugal, and Nicaragua, to cite a few. As I write, today, October 11th, 2010, Nobel Peace Prize winner Adolfo Perez Esquivel of Argentina called on President Obama to revise U.S. (imperialist) policies toward Latin America. He questioned why the U.S. continues to plant its military bases across the region. That’s an excellent question. If the U.S. is a peace-loving nation, why does it need 800 bases the world over in addition to 1,000 on its own soil? Americans might recoil in disgust if they knew of the CIA’s numerous assassinations of the elected officials of other nations. Is it any wonder Americans so often ask the question, “Why do they hate us?” As historian Arnold Toynbee wrote in 1961, “America is today the leader of a world-wide anti-revolutionary movement in the defence of vested interests. She now stands for what Rome stood for. Rome consistently supported the rich against the poor in all foreign communities that fell under her sway; and, since the poor, so far, have always and everywhere been more numerous than the rich, Rome’s policy made for inequality, for injustice, and for the least happiness of the greatest number.” The CIA’s protective secrecy resembles nothing so much as the KKK, which proudly proclaimed itself “the Invisible Empire” and whose thugs killed citizens having the courage to identify hooded Klansmen to law enforcement officials. Today, it is our highest public officials that protect this criminal force, said to number about 25,000 employees. It is actually a Federal offense to reveal the identity of a CIA undercover agent—unless, of course, you happen to be I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby, and are employed by Vice President Dick Cheney. Libby leaked the identity of CIA agent Valerie Plame to punish her husband Joseph Wilson for publishing a report that undercut the White House lie that Saddam Hussein had purchased “yellowcake” from Niger to fuel WMD. Today, high public officials direct the CIA’s criminal policies and protect its agents’ identities the better to enable them to commit their crimes. According to journalist Fred Cook in his book “Ku Klux Klan: America’s Recurring Nightmare”(Messner), “The Klan was inherently a vigilante organization. It could commit the most atrocious acts under the guise of high principle andperpetrators of those acts would be hidden behind white masks and protected by Klan secrecy… (The Klan) set itself up as judge, jury and executioner”—a policy adopted by the CIA today. CIA spies have conducted their criminal operations masquerading as officials of U.S. aid programs, business executives, or journalists. Example: The San Diego-based Copley News Service’s staff of foreign correspondents allegedly was created to provide cover to CIA spies, compromising legitimate American journalists trying to do their jobs. While the murders committed by the KKK likely ran into the many thousands, the CIA has killed on a far grander scale and managed to keep its role largely secret. As Tim Weiner, who covered the CIA for the New York Times noted in his book “Legacy of Ashes: The History of the CIA” (Anchor): “In Guatemala, 200,000 civilians had died during forty years of struggle following the agency’s(CIA) 1954 coup against an elected president.” Weiner adds, “the CIA’s officers in Guatemala still went to great lengths to conceal the nature of their close relations with the military and to suppress reports that Guatemalan officers on its payroll were murderers, torturers, and thieves.” When it comes to murder, the CIA makes the KKK look like Boy Scouts. Like the KKK, CIA terrorists operate above the law. KKK members committed thousands of lynchings yet rarely were its members punished for them. In 2009 at a speech at CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia, President Obama revealed he was not intent on punishing CIA agents for their crimes but would rather “look forward.” This seemingly charitable philosophy may be driven by the fact that Obama worked for Business International Corporation, a CIA front, at least in 1983 and perhaps longer, and allegedly is the son of a mother and father both of whom also worked for the CIA, as did Obama’s grandmother! I could find none of this in Obama’s biography when he ran for the presidency, when a gullible American public elected a CIA “mole” to the White House. Consider this, too: an agency President Truman feared would become “an American Gestapo” when he signed the enabling legislation into law in 1947 has become just that, and it casts a lengthy shadow over the White House. Ominously, it has in Barack Obama one of its own former employees sitting in the Oval Office—a man who, according to news reports, has vastly expanded the frequency of the CIA’s assassinations by drone aircraft in Pakistan and who illegally claims the “right” to assassinate any American citizen abroad as well. What’s more, from 1989 to 1993 George Bush Sr., the CIA’s own former Director, sat in the White House. Additionally, from 2001 to 2009, the CIA had that Director’s son, George W. Bush, in the Oval Office giving the CIA a blank check after the 9/11 massacre. Bush Jr., according to The New York Times, in the summer of 1974 worked for Alaska International Industries, which did contract work for the CIA. The Times noted that this job did not appear in his biography when he ran for the White House in 2000, terming it “The Missing Chapter in the Bush Bio.” Thus, two presidential candidates with CIA ties—Bush Jr. and Obama—both neglected to mention them. And in Bill Clinton, who presided from 1993 to 2001, the CIA had a go-along president who satisfied the Agency’s blood-lust when he authorized the first illegal “rendition,” a euphemism for what KKK thugs once knew as kidnapping and torture. Is there any question that the Agency has not played an influential, behind-the-scenes or even a direct role in the operations of the U.S. government at its highest level? It may indeed be a stretch to argue that the CIA is running the country but it is no stretch to say that year after year our presidents reflect the criminal philosophy of the Agency. Other parallels with the KKK are striking. As Richmond Flowers, the Attorney General of Alabama stated in 1966, “I’ve found the Klan more than just another secret society… It resembles a shadow government, making its own laws, manipulating local politics, burrowing into some of our local law-enforcement agencies…When a pitiable misfit puts on his $15 sheet, society can no longer ignore him.” Yet the descendants of those misfits have moved up today where they feel comfortable as operatives in the shadow government run by the White House. One of the CIA’s illicit duties has been to serve as a conduit for funneling U.S. taxpayer dollars to corrupt dictators and strongmen bent on suppressing the popular will of their citizenry. As Noam Chomsky wrote in “Failed States”(Metropolitan/Owl), in Honduras, “military officers in charge of the battalion (3-16) were on the CIA payroll.” This elite unit, he says, “organized and trained by the United States and Argentine neo-Nazis,” was “the most barbaric of the Latin American killers that Washington had been supporting.” Like the KKK, the CIA kidnaps many of its victims with no thought ever of legal procedure. It exhibits utter disdain for the rights of those individuals, the sovereignty of foreign nations, or respect for international law. At least hundreds of foreigners, mostly from the Middle East, have been the victims of “renditions” just as the KKK kidnapped and flogged and lynched blacks, labor leaders, Catholics, Jews, or wayward wives whom it felt to be morally lacking. In September, 1921, The New York World ran a series exposing the KKK. It pointed out that, among other things, the KKK was violating the Bill of Rights wholesale. This included the Fourth amendment against “unreasonable searches and seizures,” the Fifth and the Sixth amendments, guaranteeing that no one may be held without a grand jury indictment or punished without a fair trial. And these rights today are similarly trampled by the CIA against American citizens, not just foreigners. Apparently, only foreign courts care to rein in the CIA. The 23 CIA agents that it took to render one “suspect” in Italy are wanted there by the magistrates. (The spooks, by the way, ran up some fabulous bills in luxury hotels on taxpayers’ dollars in that escapade.) Former President Jimmy Carter wrote in his book “Our Endangered Values”(Simon & Schuster), the CIA transferred some of those it kidnapped to countries that included Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Morocco, Jordan, and Uzbekistan where “the techniques of torture are almost indescribably terrible, including, as a U.S. ambassador to one of the recipient countries reported, ‘partial boiling of a hand or an arm,’ with at least two prisoners boiled to death.” The KKK’s methods of punishment were often as ugly: the brutal flogging of blacks in front of vicious crowds, followed by castration and burning their victims alive, and then lynching of the corpses. As for the CIA, “Why?” asks investigative reporter William Blum, “are these men rendered in the first place if not to be tortured? Does the United States not have any speakers in foreign languages to conduct interrogations?” That the CIA is a terrorist organization was upheld in the famous “CIA On Trial” case in Northampton, Mass., in 1987, when a jury acquitted 14 protestors who tried to stop CIA recruitment on campus, according to Francis Boyle, the University of Illinois international law authority who defended the group. The defense charged the CIA was “an organized criminal conspiracy like the SS and the Gestapo.” Boyle said, “You would not let the SS or the Gestapo recruit on campus at the University of Massachusetts at Amherst, so you would not permit the CIA to recruit on campus either.” Another shared characteristic of the KKK and CIA is greed, the desire to loot the hard-earned wealth of others. Often, Klansmen terrorized African-Americans who had amassed property to frighten them off their land. Law-abiding black citizens who had pulled themselves up by the proverbial bootstraps were cheated out of their homes and acreage by the night riders. Similarly, the CIA across Latin America has aligned itself with the well-to-do ruling class at every opportunity. It has cooperated with the elite to punish and murder labor leaders and clergy who espoused economic opportunity for the poor. The notion that allowing the poor to enrich themselves fairly will also create more wealth for an entire society generally, including the rich, has not permeated CIA thinking. I emphasize what historian Toynbee noted: “America is today the leader of a world-wide anti-revolutionary movement in the defence of vested interests. She now stands for what Rome stood for.”(Italics added.) In sum, by adopting the terrorist philosophy of the KKK and elevating it to the operations of government at the highest level, the imperial Obama administration, like its predecessors, is showing the world the worst possible face of America. Foreigners do not see the goodness inherent in the American people—most of whom only want a good day’s pay for a good day’s work and to educate their children and live at peace with the world. Every adult American has a solemn obligation to demand that its government live up to international law, punish the CIA criminals in its midst, and become a respected citizen of the world. This will not come to pass until Congress abolishes the CIA, putting an end to its KKK-style terrorism which threatens Americans as well as humankind everywhere. Sherwood Ross is an American who has worked as a reporter for the Chicago Daily News, a columnist for wire services and as the News Director of a national civil rights organization. He currently operates the Anti-War News Service from Miami, Florida. To contribute to his work or reach him, email sherwoodross10 at gmail.com Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Karen Aram [mailto:karenaram at hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2017 1:31 PM To: Boyle, Francis A > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: Re: CIA & Mossad Infiltrated UI Center for Advanced Studies-How the C.I.A.’s Torture Program Began: Law School Off Campus! At some point, yes, we do need to address this issue at the U of I. The CIA and the Mossad, as organizations, are the greatest purveyors of the violence known to man within the last century, working on behalf of the United States Oligarch’s. On Jun 22, 2017, at 11:07, Boyle, Francis A > wrote: Michael Moore’s strident advocacy in favor of torture, his public admissions that he advises both the CIA and the Mossad on torture, and his argument that since torture works for the KGB, we Americans should also engage in torture, all qualified him for a Professorship at the University of Illinois Center for Advanced Studies. In other words, the CIA and the Mossad have infiltrated the UI Center for Advanced Studies as well as the College of Law and the Department of Philosophy. Fab. CIA Off Campus! Mossad Off Campus! Torture Off Campus! Michael Moore Off Campus! Consort Hurricane Heidi Hurd Off Campus! War Crimes Off Campus! War Criminals Off Campus! Crimes Against Humanity Off Campus! Genocidaires Against Muslims/Arabs/Asians Of Color Off Campus! Gitmo Kangaroo Courts Off Campus! Law School Off Campus! Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2017 10:33 AM To: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; Karen Aram >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson >; Mildred O'brien > Subject: How the C.I.A.’s Torture Program Began: Law School Off Campus! In a public lecture he gave before the entire College of Law Faculty, whose presence had been demanded by his Consort Dean Hurricane Heidi Hurd, and including before the COL Board of Visitors, the Marquis De Sade Professor of Law and Philosophy and of the Center for Advanced Studies in Torture Michael Moore bragged that he advised the Mossad on Torture and argued that since torture worked for the KGB, we Americans should also engage in torture. Fab Torture Off Campus! Mossad Off Campus! CIA Off Campus! Michael Moore Off Campus! Consort Hurricane Heidi Hurd Off Campus! War Crimes Off Campus! Crimes Against Humanity Off Campus! Law School Off Campus! LeVine: In my own research on war crimes committed by US forces in Iraq. I counted at least two-dozen classes of offenses systematically committed by the Occupation administration and US or US-allied military forces in the invasion and subsequent period of CPA (Coalition Provisional Authority) rule. This includes violations of articles and 17, 18, 33, and 147 of the Geneva Convention covering the killing, hostage-taking and torturing of civilians Boyle: As I just argued at Fort Stewart Georgia in the court martial proceedings for Sgt. Camilo Mejia for desertion, the accountability here goes directly up the chain of command under the terms of the US Army Field Manual 27-10. Specifically, paragraph 501 makes clear that commanders who have ordered or knew or should have known about war crimes and failed to stop it are themselves guilty of war crimes. If you look then at the public record, it is clear that Gens. Sanchez and Miller ordered war crimes and both should be relieved of command immediately: abuse of prisoners in violation of the Geneva Conventions. As for General Abizaid, the overall commander of US forces in Southwest Asia, he admitted in his Senate hearings that he should have known about the war crimes at Abu Ghraib, so basically he's already incriminated himself under the rules of the US Army Field Manual 27-10 In addition, above Abizaid you have Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz. Again my reading of the public record including the Taguba and Red Cross reports is that they either knew or should have known about all these war crimes. Indeed, if you read the ICRC report, - and as I testified under oath and under cross-examination (and was not contradicted) at the Mejia court-martial proceedings, - the widespread and systematic nature of these abuses rise to the level of crimes against humanity, going all the way up through the chain of command. Culpability also extends to Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence General William G. Boykin and Defense Undersecretary Stephen Cambone, who reports directly to Undersecretary of Defense Douglas Feith. And through this line it appears to me that Rumsfeld is culpable, because he was at Abu Ghraib last fall. Indeed, Sy Hersch's New Yorker article on Abu Ghraib claims with good substantiation that he was totally aware and even signed off on the use of techniques which are clearly torture. Rumsfeld was given a tour by Brig. General Janet Karpinski, who was supposed to be in charge of the prison-although she said nothing when she was prohibited from accessing certain areas of it-and so she's also accountable. It's important to understand that the Geneva Conventions, the Hague Regulations of 1907, the U.S. Army Field Manual, all mandate that a criminal investigation be opened. And how President Bush, as Commander in Chief would be accountable under Field Manual 27-10 precisely because he is Commander in Chief of the US armed forces under the US Constitution. We know the White House knows this because if you read White House Counsel Alberto Gonzales's memo, he specifically tries to exempt the US from the Geneva Conventions for Guantanamo and Afghanistan. You can see that Gonzalez was afraid of Bush and others being held directly accountable. Moreover, because Powell dissented, we know there was a debate about this, so Bush had to have been aware of the implications of what was being done, which is also backed up by the memos from Ashcroft. These memos have been unearthed by Newsweek. So ultimately what we have here are people at the highest levels of the chain of command guilty of ordering or not preventing torture, which is both an international crime against the Geneva Conventions and the Torture Convention and a domestic crime as well. What we have then is a conspiracy among the aforementioned individuals to commit war crimes and crimes against humanity. Let me add one more thing that's very important to remember: The principles set forth in 27-10 of personal criminal accountability for war crimes goes back to the Nuremburg Charter, Judgments and Principles derived from the post-World War II trials of Nazi war criminals. Similar principles of criminal accountability were applied by the United States to the Japanese Imperial War criminals. LeVine: In fact, President Bush has compared the war on terror to the war against the Nazis. Boyle: Then we have even more reason to bring this to people's attention: The Nuremburg Principles were in fact originally the idea of the US Government which then orchestrated the prosecutions in Nuremburg. People need to understand the pedigree and heritage here. These are very grave offenses which the US government a generation ago prosecuted and executed Nazis for committing. And Japanese war criminals too. LeVine: How can any of the people you mentioned be prosecuted? Boyle: The military could do it, or the Dept. of Justice, which would have default power to do so if the military didn't. But for this of course we'd need a special prosecutor and that law has been allowed to lapse. Attorney General Ashcroft, who is clearly part of the criminal conspiracy, would never push a war crimes investigations against his colleagues or President Bush. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) Feed: NYT > U.S. Posted on: Wednesday, June 21, 2017 4:15 AM Author: NYT > U.S. Subject: How the C.I.A.’s Torture Program Began Video depositions in a case brought by former C.I.A. detainees give an insight into the beginnings of the agency’s enhanced interrogation program. View article... -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Thu Jun 22 19:30:06 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2017 19:30:06 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] =?utf-8?q?CIA_=26_Mossad_Infiltrated_UI_Center_fo?= =?utf-8?q?r_Advanced_Studies-How_the_C=2EI=2EA=2E=E2=80=99s_Torture_Progr?= =?utf-8?q?am_Began=3A_Law_School_Off_Campus!?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I understand. I am just citing Moore’s emulation of the KGB in favor of torture as a further example of his absolute degradation and moral bankruptcy along with his working for the CIA and Mossad. But the CIA and Mossad have infiltrated The College of Law, the Center for Advanced Studies and the LAS Department of Philosophy. fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Karen Aram [mailto:karenaram at hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2017 2:24 PM To: Boyle, Francis A Cc: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson ; Mildred O'brien Subject: Re: CIA & Mossad Infiltrated UI Center for Advanced Studies-How the C.I.A.’s Torture Program Began: Law School Off Campus! We should leave out the KGB, because they aren’t our responsibility and Moore during the “Legitimacy of Targeted Killing” gave examples of KGB tactics, as an excuse to use drones against “our enemy’s,” Islamic terrorists today, Russians tomorrow.” He was already using the USG propaganda against Russians to promote war in Eurasia and our expansion of Nato. On Jun 22, 2017, at 12:18, Boyle, Francis A > wrote: The CIA and the Mossad, as organizations, are the greatest purveyors of the violence known to man within the last century… ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- And let us not leave out the KGB. Moore has publicly argued that since torture works for the KGB, we Americans should mimic the KGB and thus engage in torture. Fab TORTURE OFF CAMPUS! CIA OFF CAMPUS! MOSSAD OFF CAMPUS! MICHAEL MOORE OFF CAMPUS! CONSORT HURRICANE HEIDI HURD OFF CAMPUS! LAW SCHOOL OFF CAMPUS! Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2017 2:09 PM To: 'Karen Aram' > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson >; Mildred O'brien > Subject: RE: CIA & Mossad Infiltrated UI Center for Advanced Studies-How the C.I.A.’s Torture Program Began: Law School Off Campus! Well again back in the 1980s we did have a Movement: CIA OFF CAMPUS! Belden and I were quite active in it. Michael Moore Off Campus! Consort Hurricane Heidi Hurd Off Campus! Law School Off Campus! Fab. That the CIA is a terrorist organization was upheld in the famous “CIA On Trial” case in Northampton, Mass., in 1987, when a jury acquitted 14 protestors who tried to stop CIA recruitment on campus, according to Francis Boyle, the University of Illinois international law authority who defended the group. The defense charged the CIA was “an organized criminal conspiracy like the SS and the Gestapo.” Boyle said, “You would not let the SS or the Gestapo recruit on campus at the University of Massachusetts at Amherst, so you would not permit the CIA to recruit on campus either.” ) [home] Abolish the CIA, America. Sherwood Ross. CIA Torture Report. December 9, 2014 9:01 pm 2 Comments The CIA, the KKK and the USA By Sherwood Ross Global Research, October 15, 2010 15 October 2010 [The CIA, the KKK and the USA] By assigning covert action roles to the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), it is as if the White House and Congress had legitimized the Ku Klux Klan to operate globally. That’s because the CIA today resembles nothing so much as the “Invisible Empire” of the KKK that once spread terror across the South and Midwest. Fiery crosses aside, this is what the CIA is doing globally. The CIA today is committing many of the same sort of gruesome crimes against foreigners that the KKK once inflicted on Americans of color. The principal difference is that the KKK consisted of self-appointed vigilantes who regarded themselves as both outside and above the law when they perpetrated their crimes. By contrast, the CIA acts as the agent of the American government, often at the highest levels, and at times at the direction of the White House. Its crimes typically are committed in contravention of the highest established international law such as the Charter of the United Nations as well as the U.S. Constitution. What’s more, the “Agency,” as it is known, derives its funding largely from an imperialist-minded Congress; additionally, it has no qualms about fattening its budget from drug money and other illegal sources. It is a mirror-image of the lawless entity the U.S. has become since achieving superpower status. And it is incredible that the White House grants license to this violent Agency to commit its crimes with no accountability. The Ku Klux Klan was founded shortly after the end of the U.S. Civil War. Klansman concealed their identities behind flowing white robes and white hoods as they terrorized the newly emancipated blacks to keep them from voting or to drive them from their property. Allowing it to operate in secret literally gives the CIA the mythical Ring of Gyges. In Plato’s Republic, the owner of the ring had the power to become invisible at will. As Wikipedia puts it, Plato “discusses whether a typical person would be moral if he did not have to fear the consequences of his actions.” The ancient Greeks made the argument, Wikipedia says, that “No man would keep his hands off what was not his own when he could safely take what he liked out of the market, go into houses and lie with any one at his pleasure, kill or release from prison whom he would, and in all respects be like a god among men.” The CIA, like Hitler’s Gestapo and Stalin’s NKVD before it, has provided modern man the answer to this question. Its actions illuminate why all criminal entities, from rapists and bank robbers, to Ponzi scheme swindlers and murderers, cloak themselves in secrecy. There are innumerable examples of how American presidents have authorized criminal acts without public discussion that the preponderant majority of Americans would find reprehensible. Example: it was President Lyndon Johnson who ordered the CIA to meddle in Chile’s election to help Eduardo Frei become president. If they had known, U.S. taxpayers might have objected to such a use of their hard-earned money to influence the outcome of another country’s elections. But the public is rarely let in on such illegal foreign policy decisions. Where the KKK after the Civil War terrorized blacks to keep them from voting, the CIA has worked to influence the outcome of elections all over the world through bribery and vote-buying, dirty tricks, and worse. According to investigative reporter William Blum in “Rogue State”(Common Courage Press), the CIA has perverted elections in Italy, Lebanon, Indonesia, The Philippines, Japan, Nepal, Laos, Brazil, Bolivia, Chile, Portugal, Australia, Jamaica, Panama, Nicaragua, Haiti, among other countries. If they had known, taxpayers might also object to the CIA’s numerous overthrows of foreign governments by force and violence—such as was done in Iran in 1953 by President Eisenhower and Chile in 1973 by President Nixon. Both overthrows precipitated bloodbaths that cost tens of thousands of innocent civilians their lives. Blum also lists the countries the CIA has attempted to overthrow or has actually overthrown. His list includes Greece, The Philippines, East Germany, Iran, Guatemala, Indonesia, Iraq, Viet Nam, Laos, Ecuador, The Congo, France, Cuba, Ghana, Chile, South Africa, Bolivia, Portugal, and Nicaragua, to cite a few. As I write, today, October 11th, 2010, Nobel Peace Prize winner Adolfo Perez Esquivel of Argentina called on President Obama to revise U.S. (imperialist) policies toward Latin America. He questioned why the U.S. continues to plant its military bases across the region. That’s an excellent question. If the U.S. is a peace-loving nation, why does it need 800 bases the world over in addition to 1,000 on its own soil? Americans might recoil in disgust if they knew of the CIA’s numerous assassinations of the elected officials of other nations. Is it any wonder Americans so often ask the question, “Why do they hate us?” As historian Arnold Toynbee wrote in 1961, “America is today the leader of a world-wide anti-revolutionary movement in the defence of vested interests. She now stands for what Rome stood for. Rome consistently supported the rich against the poor in all foreign communities that fell under her sway; and, since the poor, so far, have always and everywhere been more numerous than the rich, Rome’s policy made for inequality, for injustice, and for the least happiness of the greatest number.” The CIA’s protective secrecy resembles nothing so much as the KKK, which proudly proclaimed itself “the Invisible Empire” and whose thugs killed citizens having the courage to identify hooded Klansmen to law enforcement officials. Today, it is our highest public officials that protect this criminal force, said to number about 25,000 employees. It is actually a Federal offense to reveal the identity of a CIA undercover agent—unless, of course, you happen to be I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby, and are employed by Vice President Dick Cheney. Libby leaked the identity of CIA agent Valerie Plame to punish her husband Joseph Wilson for publishing a report that undercut the White House lie that Saddam Hussein had purchased “yellowcake” from Niger to fuel WMD. Today, high public officials direct the CIA’s criminal policies and protect its agents’ identities the better to enable them to commit their crimes. According to journalist Fred Cook in his book “Ku Klux Klan: America’s Recurring Nightmare”(Messner), “The Klan was inherently a vigilante organization. It could commit the most atrocious acts under the guise of high principle andperpetrators of those acts would be hidden behind white masks and protected by Klan secrecy… (The Klan) set itself up as judge, jury and executioner”—a policy adopted by the CIA today. CIA spies have conducted their criminal operations masquerading as officials of U.S. aid programs, business executives, or journalists. Example: The San Diego-based Copley News Service’s staff of foreign correspondents allegedly was created to provide cover to CIA spies, compromising legitimate American journalists trying to do their jobs. While the murders committed by the KKK likely ran into the many thousands, the CIA has killed on a far grander scale and managed to keep its role largely secret. As Tim Weiner, who covered the CIA for the New York Times noted in his book “Legacy of Ashes: The History of the CIA” (Anchor): “In Guatemala, 200,000 civilians had died during forty years of struggle following the agency’s(CIA) 1954 coup against an elected president.” Weiner adds, “the CIA’s officers in Guatemala still went to great lengths to conceal the nature of their close relations with the military and to suppress reports that Guatemalan officers on its payroll were murderers, torturers, and thieves.” When it comes to murder, the CIA makes the KKK look like Boy Scouts. Like the KKK, CIA terrorists operate above the law. KKK members committed thousands of lynchings yet rarely were its members punished for them. In 2009 at a speech at CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia, President Obama revealed he was not intent on punishing CIA agents for their crimes but would rather “look forward.” This seemingly charitable philosophy may be driven by the fact that Obama worked for Business International Corporation, a CIA front, at least in 1983 and perhaps longer, and allegedly is the son of a mother and father both of whom also worked for the CIA, as did Obama’s grandmother! I could find none of this in Obama’s biography when he ran for the presidency, when a gullible American public elected a CIA “mole” to the White House. Consider this, too: an agency President Truman feared would become “an American Gestapo” when he signed the enabling legislation into law in 1947 has become just that, and it casts a lengthy shadow over the White House. Ominously, it has in Barack Obama one of its own former employees sitting in the Oval Office—a man who, according to news reports, has vastly expanded the frequency of the CIA’s assassinations by drone aircraft in Pakistan and who illegally claims the “right” to assassinate any American citizen abroad as well. What’s more, from 1989 to 1993 George Bush Sr., the CIA’s own former Director, sat in the White House. Additionally, from 2001 to 2009, the CIA had that Director’s son, George W. Bush, in the Oval Office giving the CIA a blank check after the 9/11 massacre. Bush Jr., according to The New York Times, in the summer of 1974 worked for Alaska International Industries, which did contract work for the CIA. The Times noted that this job did not appear in his biography when he ran for the White House in 2000, terming it “The Missing Chapter in the Bush Bio.” Thus, two presidential candidates with CIA ties—Bush Jr. and Obama—both neglected to mention them. And in Bill Clinton, who presided from 1993 to 2001, the CIA had a go-along president who satisfied the Agency’s blood-lust when he authorized the first illegal “rendition,” a euphemism for what KKK thugs once knew as kidnapping and torture. Is there any question that the Agency has not played an influential, behind-the-scenes or even a direct role in the operations of the U.S. government at its highest level? It may indeed be a stretch to argue that the CIA is running the country but it is no stretch to say that year after year our presidents reflect the criminal philosophy of the Agency. Other parallels with the KKK are striking. As Richmond Flowers, the Attorney General of Alabama stated in 1966, “I’ve found the Klan more than just another secret society… It resembles a shadow government, making its own laws, manipulating local politics, burrowing into some of our local law-enforcement agencies…When a pitiable misfit puts on his $15 sheet, society can no longer ignore him.” Yet the descendants of those misfits have moved up today where they feel comfortable as operatives in the shadow government run by the White House. One of the CIA’s illicit duties has been to serve as a conduit for funneling U.S. taxpayer dollars to corrupt dictators and strongmen bent on suppressing the popular will of their citizenry. As Noam Chomsky wrote in “Failed States”(Metropolitan/Owl), in Honduras, “military officers in charge of the battalion (3-16) were on the CIA payroll.” This elite unit, he says, “organized and trained by the United States and Argentine neo-Nazis,” was “the most barbaric of the Latin American killers that Washington had been supporting.” Like the KKK, the CIA kidnaps many of its victims with no thought ever of legal procedure. It exhibits utter disdain for the rights of those individuals, the sovereignty of foreign nations, or respect for international law. At least hundreds of foreigners, mostly from the Middle East, have been the victims of “renditions” just as the KKK kidnapped and flogged and lynched blacks, labor leaders, Catholics, Jews, or wayward wives whom it felt to be morally lacking. In September, 1921, The New York World ran a series exposing the KKK. It pointed out that, among other things, the KKK was violating the Bill of Rights wholesale. This included the Fourth amendment against “unreasonable searches and seizures,” the Fifth and the Sixth amendments, guaranteeing that no one may be held without a grand jury indictment or punished without a fair trial. And these rights today are similarly trampled by the CIA against American citizens, not just foreigners. Apparently, only foreign courts care to rein in the CIA. The 23 CIA agents that it took to render one “suspect” in Italy are wanted there by the magistrates. (The spooks, by the way, ran up some fabulous bills in luxury hotels on taxpayers’ dollars in that escapade.) Former President Jimmy Carter wrote in his book “Our Endangered Values”(Simon & Schuster), the CIA transferred some of those it kidnapped to countries that included Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Morocco, Jordan, and Uzbekistan where “the techniques of torture are almost indescribably terrible, including, as a U.S. ambassador to one of the recipient countries reported, ‘partial boiling of a hand or an arm,’ with at least two prisoners boiled to death.” The KKK’s methods of punishment were often as ugly: the brutal flogging of blacks in front of vicious crowds, followed by castration and burning their victims alive, and then lynching of the corpses. As for the CIA, “Why?” asks investigative reporter William Blum, “are these men rendered in the first place if not to be tortured? Does the United States not have any speakers in foreign languages to conduct interrogations?” That the CIA is a terrorist organization was upheld in the famous “CIA On Trial” case in Northampton, Mass., in 1987, when a jury acquitted 14 protestors who tried to stop CIA recruitment on campus, according to Francis Boyle, the University of Illinois international law authority who defended the group. The defense charged the CIA was “an organized criminal conspiracy like the SS and the Gestapo.” Boyle said, “You would not let the SS or the Gestapo recruit on campus at the University of Massachusetts at Amherst, so you would not permit the CIA to recruit on campus either.” Another shared characteristic of the KKK and CIA is greed, the desire to loot the hard-earned wealth of others. Often, Klansmen terrorized African-Americans who had amassed property to frighten them off their land. Law-abiding black citizens who had pulled themselves up by the proverbial bootstraps were cheated out of their homes and acreage by the night riders. Similarly, the CIA across Latin America has aligned itself with the well-to-do ruling class at every opportunity. It has cooperated with the elite to punish and murder labor leaders and clergy who espoused economic opportunity for the poor. The notion that allowing the poor to enrich themselves fairly will also create more wealth for an entire society generally, including the rich, has not permeated CIA thinking. I emphasize what historian Toynbee noted: “America is today the leader of a world-wide anti-revolutionary movement in the defence of vested interests. She now stands for what Rome stood for.”(Italics added.) In sum, by adopting the terrorist philosophy of the KKK and elevating it to the operations of government at the highest level, the imperial Obama administration, like its predecessors, is showing the world the worst possible face of America. Foreigners do not see the goodness inherent in the American people—most of whom only want a good day’s pay for a good day’s work and to educate their children and live at peace with the world. Every adult American has a solemn obligation to demand that its government live up to international law, punish the CIA criminals in its midst, and become a respected citizen of the world. This will not come to pass until Congress abolishes the CIA, putting an end to its KKK-style terrorism which threatens Americans as well as humankind everywhere. Sherwood Ross is an American who has worked as a reporter for the Chicago Daily News, a columnist for wire services and as the News Director of a national civil rights organization. He currently operates the Anti-War News Service from Miami, Florida. To contribute to his work or reach him, email sherwoodross10 at gmail.com Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Karen Aram [mailto:karenaram at hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2017 1:31 PM To: Boyle, Francis A > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: Re: CIA & Mossad Infiltrated UI Center for Advanced Studies-How the C.I.A.’s Torture Program Began: Law School Off Campus! At some point, yes, we do need to address this issue at the U of I. The CIA and the Mossad, as organizations, are the greatest purveyors of the violence known to man within the last century, working on behalf of the United States Oligarch’s. On Jun 22, 2017, at 11:07, Boyle, Francis A > wrote: Michael Moore’s strident advocacy in favor of torture, his public admissions that he advises both the CIA and the Mossad on torture, and his argument that since torture works for the KGB, we Americans should also engage in torture, all qualified him for a Professorship at the University of Illinois Center for Advanced Studies. In other words, the CIA and the Mossad have infiltrated the UI Center for Advanced Studies as well as the College of Law and the Department of Philosophy. Fab. CIA Off Campus! Mossad Off Campus! Torture Off Campus! Michael Moore Off Campus! Consort Hurricane Heidi Hurd Off Campus! War Crimes Off Campus! War Criminals Off Campus! Crimes Against Humanity Off Campus! Genocidaires Against Muslims/Arabs/Asians Of Color Off Campus! Gitmo Kangaroo Courts Off Campus! Law School Off Campus! Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2017 10:33 AM To: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; Karen Aram >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson >; Mildred O'brien > Subject: How the C.I.A.’s Torture Program Began: Law School Off Campus! In a public lecture he gave before the entire College of Law Faculty, whose presence had been demanded by his Consort Dean Hurricane Heidi Hurd, and including before the COL Board of Visitors, the Marquis De Sade Professor of Law and Philosophy and of the Center for Advanced Studies in Torture Michael Moore bragged that he advised the Mossad on Torture and argued that since torture worked for the KGB, we Americans should also engage in torture. Fab Torture Off Campus! Mossad Off Campus! CIA Off Campus! Michael Moore Off Campus! Consort Hurricane Heidi Hurd Off Campus! War Crimes Off Campus! Crimes Against Humanity Off Campus! Law School Off Campus! LeVine: In my own research on war crimes committed by US forces in Iraq. I counted at least two-dozen classes of offenses systematically committed by the Occupation administration and US or US-allied military forces in the invasion and subsequent period of CPA (Coalition Provisional Authority) rule. This includes violations of articles and 17, 18, 33, and 147 of the Geneva Convention covering the killing, hostage-taking and torturing of civilians Boyle: As I just argued at Fort Stewart Georgia in the court martial proceedings for Sgt. Camilo Mejia for desertion, the accountability here goes directly up the chain of command under the terms of the US Army Field Manual 27-10. Specifically, paragraph 501 makes clear that commanders who have ordered or knew or should have known about war crimes and failed to stop it are themselves guilty of war crimes. If you look then at the public record, it is clear that Gens. Sanchez and Miller ordered war crimes and both should be relieved of command immediately: abuse of prisoners in violation of the Geneva Conventions. As for General Abizaid, the overall commander of US forces in Southwest Asia, he admitted in his Senate hearings that he should have known about the war crimes at Abu Ghraib, so basically he's already incriminated himself under the rules of the US Army Field Manual 27-10 In addition, above Abizaid you have Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz. Again my reading of the public record including the Taguba and Red Cross reports is that they either knew or should have known about all these war crimes. Indeed, if you read the ICRC report, - and as I testified under oath and under cross-examination (and was not contradicted) at the Mejia court-martial proceedings, - the widespread and systematic nature of these abuses rise to the level of crimes against humanity, going all the way up through the chain of command. Culpability also extends to Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence General William G. Boykin and Defense Undersecretary Stephen Cambone, who reports directly to Undersecretary of Defense Douglas Feith. And through this line it appears to me that Rumsfeld is culpable, because he was at Abu Ghraib last fall. Indeed, Sy Hersch's New Yorker article on Abu Ghraib claims with good substantiation that he was totally aware and even signed off on the use of techniques which are clearly torture. Rumsfeld was given a tour by Brig. General Janet Karpinski, who was supposed to be in charge of the prison-although she said nothing when she was prohibited from accessing certain areas of it-and so she's also accountable. It's important to understand that the Geneva Conventions, the Hague Regulations of 1907, the U.S. Army Field Manual, all mandate that a criminal investigation be opened. And how President Bush, as Commander in Chief would be accountable under Field Manual 27-10 precisely because he is Commander in Chief of the US armed forces under the US Constitution. We know the White House knows this because if you read White House Counsel Alberto Gonzales's memo, he specifically tries to exempt the US from the Geneva Conventions for Guantanamo and Afghanistan. You can see that Gonzalez was afraid of Bush and others being held directly accountable. Moreover, because Powell dissented, we know there was a debate about this, so Bush had to have been aware of the implications of what was being done, which is also backed up by the memos from Ashcroft. These memos have been unearthed by Newsweek. So ultimately what we have here are people at the highest levels of the chain of command guilty of ordering or not preventing torture, which is both an international crime against the Geneva Conventions and the Torture Convention and a domestic crime as well. What we have then is a conspiracy among the aforementioned individuals to commit war crimes and crimes against humanity. Let me add one more thing that's very important to remember: The principles set forth in 27-10 of personal criminal accountability for war crimes goes back to the Nuremburg Charter, Judgments and Principles derived from the post-World War II trials of Nazi war criminals. Similar principles of criminal accountability were applied by the United States to the Japanese Imperial War criminals. LeVine: In fact, President Bush has compared the war on terror to the war against the Nazis. Boyle: Then we have even more reason to bring this to people's attention: The Nuremburg Principles were in fact originally the idea of the US Government which then orchestrated the prosecutions in Nuremburg. People need to understand the pedigree and heritage here. These are very grave offenses which the US government a generation ago prosecuted and executed Nazis for committing. And Japanese war criminals too. LeVine: How can any of the people you mentioned be prosecuted? Boyle: The military could do it, or the Dept. of Justice, which would have default power to do so if the military didn't. But for this of course we'd need a special prosecutor and that law has been allowed to lapse. Attorney General Ashcroft, who is clearly part of the criminal conspiracy, would never push a war crimes investigations against his colleagues or President Bush. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) Feed: NYT > U.S. Posted on: Wednesday, June 21, 2017 4:15 AM Author: NYT > U.S. Subject: How the C.I.A.’s Torture Program Began Video depositions in a case brought by former C.I.A. detainees give an insight into the beginnings of the agency’s enhanced interrogation program. View article... -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Thu Jun 22 19:30:06 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2017 19:30:06 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] =?utf-8?q?CIA_=26_Mossad_Infiltrated_UI_Center_fo?= =?utf-8?q?r_Advanced_Studies-How_the_C=2EI=2EA=2E=E2=80=99s_Torture_Progr?= =?utf-8?q?am_Began=3A_Law_School_Off_Campus!?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I understand. I am just citing Moore’s emulation of the KGB in favor of torture as a further example of his absolute degradation and moral bankruptcy along with his working for the CIA and Mossad. But the CIA and Mossad have infiltrated The College of Law, the Center for Advanced Studies and the LAS Department of Philosophy. fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Karen Aram [mailto:karenaram at hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2017 2:24 PM To: Boyle, Francis A Cc: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson ; Mildred O'brien Subject: Re: CIA & Mossad Infiltrated UI Center for Advanced Studies-How the C.I.A.’s Torture Program Began: Law School Off Campus! We should leave out the KGB, because they aren’t our responsibility and Moore during the “Legitimacy of Targeted Killing” gave examples of KGB tactics, as an excuse to use drones against “our enemy’s,” Islamic terrorists today, Russians tomorrow.” He was already using the USG propaganda against Russians to promote war in Eurasia and our expansion of Nato. On Jun 22, 2017, at 12:18, Boyle, Francis A > wrote: The CIA and the Mossad, as organizations, are the greatest purveyors of the violence known to man within the last century… ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- And let us not leave out the KGB. Moore has publicly argued that since torture works for the KGB, we Americans should mimic the KGB and thus engage in torture. Fab TORTURE OFF CAMPUS! CIA OFF CAMPUS! MOSSAD OFF CAMPUS! MICHAEL MOORE OFF CAMPUS! CONSORT HURRICANE HEIDI HURD OFF CAMPUS! LAW SCHOOL OFF CAMPUS! Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2017 2:09 PM To: 'Karen Aram' > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson >; Mildred O'brien > Subject: RE: CIA & Mossad Infiltrated UI Center for Advanced Studies-How the C.I.A.’s Torture Program Began: Law School Off Campus! Well again back in the 1980s we did have a Movement: CIA OFF CAMPUS! Belden and I were quite active in it. Michael Moore Off Campus! Consort Hurricane Heidi Hurd Off Campus! Law School Off Campus! Fab. That the CIA is a terrorist organization was upheld in the famous “CIA On Trial” case in Northampton, Mass., in 1987, when a jury acquitted 14 protestors who tried to stop CIA recruitment on campus, according to Francis Boyle, the University of Illinois international law authority who defended the group. The defense charged the CIA was “an organized criminal conspiracy like the SS and the Gestapo.” Boyle said, “You would not let the SS or the Gestapo recruit on campus at the University of Massachusetts at Amherst, so you would not permit the CIA to recruit on campus either.” ) [home] Abolish the CIA, America. Sherwood Ross. CIA Torture Report. December 9, 2014 9:01 pm 2 Comments The CIA, the KKK and the USA By Sherwood Ross Global Research, October 15, 2010 15 October 2010 [The CIA, the KKK and the USA] By assigning covert action roles to the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), it is as if the White House and Congress had legitimized the Ku Klux Klan to operate globally. That’s because the CIA today resembles nothing so much as the “Invisible Empire” of the KKK that once spread terror across the South and Midwest. Fiery crosses aside, this is what the CIA is doing globally. The CIA today is committing many of the same sort of gruesome crimes against foreigners that the KKK once inflicted on Americans of color. The principal difference is that the KKK consisted of self-appointed vigilantes who regarded themselves as both outside and above the law when they perpetrated their crimes. By contrast, the CIA acts as the agent of the American government, often at the highest levels, and at times at the direction of the White House. Its crimes typically are committed in contravention of the highest established international law such as the Charter of the United Nations as well as the U.S. Constitution. What’s more, the “Agency,” as it is known, derives its funding largely from an imperialist-minded Congress; additionally, it has no qualms about fattening its budget from drug money and other illegal sources. It is a mirror-image of the lawless entity the U.S. has become since achieving superpower status. And it is incredible that the White House grants license to this violent Agency to commit its crimes with no accountability. The Ku Klux Klan was founded shortly after the end of the U.S. Civil War. Klansman concealed their identities behind flowing white robes and white hoods as they terrorized the newly emancipated blacks to keep them from voting or to drive them from their property. Allowing it to operate in secret literally gives the CIA the mythical Ring of Gyges. In Plato’s Republic, the owner of the ring had the power to become invisible at will. As Wikipedia puts it, Plato “discusses whether a typical person would be moral if he did not have to fear the consequences of his actions.” The ancient Greeks made the argument, Wikipedia says, that “No man would keep his hands off what was not his own when he could safely take what he liked out of the market, go into houses and lie with any one at his pleasure, kill or release from prison whom he would, and in all respects be like a god among men.” The CIA, like Hitler’s Gestapo and Stalin’s NKVD before it, has provided modern man the answer to this question. Its actions illuminate why all criminal entities, from rapists and bank robbers, to Ponzi scheme swindlers and murderers, cloak themselves in secrecy. There are innumerable examples of how American presidents have authorized criminal acts without public discussion that the preponderant majority of Americans would find reprehensible. Example: it was President Lyndon Johnson who ordered the CIA to meddle in Chile’s election to help Eduardo Frei become president. If they had known, U.S. taxpayers might have objected to such a use of their hard-earned money to influence the outcome of another country’s elections. But the public is rarely let in on such illegal foreign policy decisions. Where the KKK after the Civil War terrorized blacks to keep them from voting, the CIA has worked to influence the outcome of elections all over the world through bribery and vote-buying, dirty tricks, and worse. According to investigative reporter William Blum in “Rogue State”(Common Courage Press), the CIA has perverted elections in Italy, Lebanon, Indonesia, The Philippines, Japan, Nepal, Laos, Brazil, Bolivia, Chile, Portugal, Australia, Jamaica, Panama, Nicaragua, Haiti, among other countries. If they had known, taxpayers might also object to the CIA’s numerous overthrows of foreign governments by force and violence—such as was done in Iran in 1953 by President Eisenhower and Chile in 1973 by President Nixon. Both overthrows precipitated bloodbaths that cost tens of thousands of innocent civilians their lives. Blum also lists the countries the CIA has attempted to overthrow or has actually overthrown. His list includes Greece, The Philippines, East Germany, Iran, Guatemala, Indonesia, Iraq, Viet Nam, Laos, Ecuador, The Congo, France, Cuba, Ghana, Chile, South Africa, Bolivia, Portugal, and Nicaragua, to cite a few. As I write, today, October 11th, 2010, Nobel Peace Prize winner Adolfo Perez Esquivel of Argentina called on President Obama to revise U.S. (imperialist) policies toward Latin America. He questioned why the U.S. continues to plant its military bases across the region. That’s an excellent question. If the U.S. is a peace-loving nation, why does it need 800 bases the world over in addition to 1,000 on its own soil? Americans might recoil in disgust if they knew of the CIA’s numerous assassinations of the elected officials of other nations. Is it any wonder Americans so often ask the question, “Why do they hate us?” As historian Arnold Toynbee wrote in 1961, “America is today the leader of a world-wide anti-revolutionary movement in the defence of vested interests. She now stands for what Rome stood for. Rome consistently supported the rich against the poor in all foreign communities that fell under her sway; and, since the poor, so far, have always and everywhere been more numerous than the rich, Rome’s policy made for inequality, for injustice, and for the least happiness of the greatest number.” The CIA’s protective secrecy resembles nothing so much as the KKK, which proudly proclaimed itself “the Invisible Empire” and whose thugs killed citizens having the courage to identify hooded Klansmen to law enforcement officials. Today, it is our highest public officials that protect this criminal force, said to number about 25,000 employees. It is actually a Federal offense to reveal the identity of a CIA undercover agent—unless, of course, you happen to be I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby, and are employed by Vice President Dick Cheney. Libby leaked the identity of CIA agent Valerie Plame to punish her husband Joseph Wilson for publishing a report that undercut the White House lie that Saddam Hussein had purchased “yellowcake” from Niger to fuel WMD. Today, high public officials direct the CIA’s criminal policies and protect its agents’ identities the better to enable them to commit their crimes. According to journalist Fred Cook in his book “Ku Klux Klan: America’s Recurring Nightmare”(Messner), “The Klan was inherently a vigilante organization. It could commit the most atrocious acts under the guise of high principle andperpetrators of those acts would be hidden behind white masks and protected by Klan secrecy… (The Klan) set itself up as judge, jury and executioner”—a policy adopted by the CIA today. CIA spies have conducted their criminal operations masquerading as officials of U.S. aid programs, business executives, or journalists. Example: The San Diego-based Copley News Service’s staff of foreign correspondents allegedly was created to provide cover to CIA spies, compromising legitimate American journalists trying to do their jobs. While the murders committed by the KKK likely ran into the many thousands, the CIA has killed on a far grander scale and managed to keep its role largely secret. As Tim Weiner, who covered the CIA for the New York Times noted in his book “Legacy of Ashes: The History of the CIA” (Anchor): “In Guatemala, 200,000 civilians had died during forty years of struggle following the agency’s(CIA) 1954 coup against an elected president.” Weiner adds, “the CIA’s officers in Guatemala still went to great lengths to conceal the nature of their close relations with the military and to suppress reports that Guatemalan officers on its payroll were murderers, torturers, and thieves.” When it comes to murder, the CIA makes the KKK look like Boy Scouts. Like the KKK, CIA terrorists operate above the law. KKK members committed thousands of lynchings yet rarely were its members punished for them. In 2009 at a speech at CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia, President Obama revealed he was not intent on punishing CIA agents for their crimes but would rather “look forward.” This seemingly charitable philosophy may be driven by the fact that Obama worked for Business International Corporation, a CIA front, at least in 1983 and perhaps longer, and allegedly is the son of a mother and father both of whom also worked for the CIA, as did Obama’s grandmother! I could find none of this in Obama’s biography when he ran for the presidency, when a gullible American public elected a CIA “mole” to the White House. Consider this, too: an agency President Truman feared would become “an American Gestapo” when he signed the enabling legislation into law in 1947 has become just that, and it casts a lengthy shadow over the White House. Ominously, it has in Barack Obama one of its own former employees sitting in the Oval Office—a man who, according to news reports, has vastly expanded the frequency of the CIA’s assassinations by drone aircraft in Pakistan and who illegally claims the “right” to assassinate any American citizen abroad as well. What’s more, from 1989 to 1993 George Bush Sr., the CIA’s own former Director, sat in the White House. Additionally, from 2001 to 2009, the CIA had that Director’s son, George W. Bush, in the Oval Office giving the CIA a blank check after the 9/11 massacre. Bush Jr., according to The New York Times, in the summer of 1974 worked for Alaska International Industries, which did contract work for the CIA. The Times noted that this job did not appear in his biography when he ran for the White House in 2000, terming it “The Missing Chapter in the Bush Bio.” Thus, two presidential candidates with CIA ties—Bush Jr. and Obama—both neglected to mention them. And in Bill Clinton, who presided from 1993 to 2001, the CIA had a go-along president who satisfied the Agency’s blood-lust when he authorized the first illegal “rendition,” a euphemism for what KKK thugs once knew as kidnapping and torture. Is there any question that the Agency has not played an influential, behind-the-scenes or even a direct role in the operations of the U.S. government at its highest level? It may indeed be a stretch to argue that the CIA is running the country but it is no stretch to say that year after year our presidents reflect the criminal philosophy of the Agency. Other parallels with the KKK are striking. As Richmond Flowers, the Attorney General of Alabama stated in 1966, “I’ve found the Klan more than just another secret society… It resembles a shadow government, making its own laws, manipulating local politics, burrowing into some of our local law-enforcement agencies…When a pitiable misfit puts on his $15 sheet, society can no longer ignore him.” Yet the descendants of those misfits have moved up today where they feel comfortable as operatives in the shadow government run by the White House. One of the CIA’s illicit duties has been to serve as a conduit for funneling U.S. taxpayer dollars to corrupt dictators and strongmen bent on suppressing the popular will of their citizenry. As Noam Chomsky wrote in “Failed States”(Metropolitan/Owl), in Honduras, “military officers in charge of the battalion (3-16) were on the CIA payroll.” This elite unit, he says, “organized and trained by the United States and Argentine neo-Nazis,” was “the most barbaric of the Latin American killers that Washington had been supporting.” Like the KKK, the CIA kidnaps many of its victims with no thought ever of legal procedure. It exhibits utter disdain for the rights of those individuals, the sovereignty of foreign nations, or respect for international law. At least hundreds of foreigners, mostly from the Middle East, have been the victims of “renditions” just as the KKK kidnapped and flogged and lynched blacks, labor leaders, Catholics, Jews, or wayward wives whom it felt to be morally lacking. In September, 1921, The New York World ran a series exposing the KKK. It pointed out that, among other things, the KKK was violating the Bill of Rights wholesale. This included the Fourth amendment against “unreasonable searches and seizures,” the Fifth and the Sixth amendments, guaranteeing that no one may be held without a grand jury indictment or punished without a fair trial. And these rights today are similarly trampled by the CIA against American citizens, not just foreigners. Apparently, only foreign courts care to rein in the CIA. The 23 CIA agents that it took to render one “suspect” in Italy are wanted there by the magistrates. (The spooks, by the way, ran up some fabulous bills in luxury hotels on taxpayers’ dollars in that escapade.) Former President Jimmy Carter wrote in his book “Our Endangered Values”(Simon & Schuster), the CIA transferred some of those it kidnapped to countries that included Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Morocco, Jordan, and Uzbekistan where “the techniques of torture are almost indescribably terrible, including, as a U.S. ambassador to one of the recipient countries reported, ‘partial boiling of a hand or an arm,’ with at least two prisoners boiled to death.” The KKK’s methods of punishment were often as ugly: the brutal flogging of blacks in front of vicious crowds, followed by castration and burning their victims alive, and then lynching of the corpses. As for the CIA, “Why?” asks investigative reporter William Blum, “are these men rendered in the first place if not to be tortured? Does the United States not have any speakers in foreign languages to conduct interrogations?” That the CIA is a terrorist organization was upheld in the famous “CIA On Trial” case in Northampton, Mass., in 1987, when a jury acquitted 14 protestors who tried to stop CIA recruitment on campus, according to Francis Boyle, the University of Illinois international law authority who defended the group. The defense charged the CIA was “an organized criminal conspiracy like the SS and the Gestapo.” Boyle said, “You would not let the SS or the Gestapo recruit on campus at the University of Massachusetts at Amherst, so you would not permit the CIA to recruit on campus either.” Another shared characteristic of the KKK and CIA is greed, the desire to loot the hard-earned wealth of others. Often, Klansmen terrorized African-Americans who had amassed property to frighten them off their land. Law-abiding black citizens who had pulled themselves up by the proverbial bootstraps were cheated out of their homes and acreage by the night riders. Similarly, the CIA across Latin America has aligned itself with the well-to-do ruling class at every opportunity. It has cooperated with the elite to punish and murder labor leaders and clergy who espoused economic opportunity for the poor. The notion that allowing the poor to enrich themselves fairly will also create more wealth for an entire society generally, including the rich, has not permeated CIA thinking. I emphasize what historian Toynbee noted: “America is today the leader of a world-wide anti-revolutionary movement in the defence of vested interests. She now stands for what Rome stood for.”(Italics added.) In sum, by adopting the terrorist philosophy of the KKK and elevating it to the operations of government at the highest level, the imperial Obama administration, like its predecessors, is showing the world the worst possible face of America. Foreigners do not see the goodness inherent in the American people—most of whom only want a good day’s pay for a good day’s work and to educate their children and live at peace with the world. Every adult American has a solemn obligation to demand that its government live up to international law, punish the CIA criminals in its midst, and become a respected citizen of the world. This will not come to pass until Congress abolishes the CIA, putting an end to its KKK-style terrorism which threatens Americans as well as humankind everywhere. Sherwood Ross is an American who has worked as a reporter for the Chicago Daily News, a columnist for wire services and as the News Director of a national civil rights organization. He currently operates the Anti-War News Service from Miami, Florida. To contribute to his work or reach him, email sherwoodross10 at gmail.com Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Karen Aram [mailto:karenaram at hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2017 1:31 PM To: Boyle, Francis A > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: Re: CIA & Mossad Infiltrated UI Center for Advanced Studies-How the C.I.A.’s Torture Program Began: Law School Off Campus! At some point, yes, we do need to address this issue at the U of I. The CIA and the Mossad, as organizations, are the greatest purveyors of the violence known to man within the last century, working on behalf of the United States Oligarch’s. On Jun 22, 2017, at 11:07, Boyle, Francis A > wrote: Michael Moore’s strident advocacy in favor of torture, his public admissions that he advises both the CIA and the Mossad on torture, and his argument that since torture works for the KGB, we Americans should also engage in torture, all qualified him for a Professorship at the University of Illinois Center for Advanced Studies. In other words, the CIA and the Mossad have infiltrated the UI Center for Advanced Studies as well as the College of Law and the Department of Philosophy. Fab. CIA Off Campus! Mossad Off Campus! Torture Off Campus! Michael Moore Off Campus! Consort Hurricane Heidi Hurd Off Campus! War Crimes Off Campus! War Criminals Off Campus! Crimes Against Humanity Off Campus! Genocidaires Against Muslims/Arabs/Asians Of Color Off Campus! Gitmo Kangaroo Courts Off Campus! Law School Off Campus! Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2017 10:33 AM To: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; Karen Aram >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson >; Mildred O'brien > Subject: How the C.I.A.’s Torture Program Began: Law School Off Campus! In a public lecture he gave before the entire College of Law Faculty, whose presence had been demanded by his Consort Dean Hurricane Heidi Hurd, and including before the COL Board of Visitors, the Marquis De Sade Professor of Law and Philosophy and of the Center for Advanced Studies in Torture Michael Moore bragged that he advised the Mossad on Torture and argued that since torture worked for the KGB, we Americans should also engage in torture. Fab Torture Off Campus! Mossad Off Campus! CIA Off Campus! Michael Moore Off Campus! Consort Hurricane Heidi Hurd Off Campus! War Crimes Off Campus! Crimes Against Humanity Off Campus! Law School Off Campus! LeVine: In my own research on war crimes committed by US forces in Iraq. I counted at least two-dozen classes of offenses systematically committed by the Occupation administration and US or US-allied military forces in the invasion and subsequent period of CPA (Coalition Provisional Authority) rule. This includes violations of articles and 17, 18, 33, and 147 of the Geneva Convention covering the killing, hostage-taking and torturing of civilians Boyle: As I just argued at Fort Stewart Georgia in the court martial proceedings for Sgt. Camilo Mejia for desertion, the accountability here goes directly up the chain of command under the terms of the US Army Field Manual 27-10. Specifically, paragraph 501 makes clear that commanders who have ordered or knew or should have known about war crimes and failed to stop it are themselves guilty of war crimes. If you look then at the public record, it is clear that Gens. Sanchez and Miller ordered war crimes and both should be relieved of command immediately: abuse of prisoners in violation of the Geneva Conventions. As for General Abizaid, the overall commander of US forces in Southwest Asia, he admitted in his Senate hearings that he should have known about the war crimes at Abu Ghraib, so basically he's already incriminated himself under the rules of the US Army Field Manual 27-10 In addition, above Abizaid you have Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz. Again my reading of the public record including the Taguba and Red Cross reports is that they either knew or should have known about all these war crimes. Indeed, if you read the ICRC report, - and as I testified under oath and under cross-examination (and was not contradicted) at the Mejia court-martial proceedings, - the widespread and systematic nature of these abuses rise to the level of crimes against humanity, going all the way up through the chain of command. Culpability also extends to Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence General William G. Boykin and Defense Undersecretary Stephen Cambone, who reports directly to Undersecretary of Defense Douglas Feith. And through this line it appears to me that Rumsfeld is culpable, because he was at Abu Ghraib last fall. Indeed, Sy Hersch's New Yorker article on Abu Ghraib claims with good substantiation that he was totally aware and even signed off on the use of techniques which are clearly torture. Rumsfeld was given a tour by Brig. General Janet Karpinski, who was supposed to be in charge of the prison-although she said nothing when she was prohibited from accessing certain areas of it-and so she's also accountable. It's important to understand that the Geneva Conventions, the Hague Regulations of 1907, the U.S. Army Field Manual, all mandate that a criminal investigation be opened. And how President Bush, as Commander in Chief would be accountable under Field Manual 27-10 precisely because he is Commander in Chief of the US armed forces under the US Constitution. We know the White House knows this because if you read White House Counsel Alberto Gonzales's memo, he specifically tries to exempt the US from the Geneva Conventions for Guantanamo and Afghanistan. You can see that Gonzalez was afraid of Bush and others being held directly accountable. Moreover, because Powell dissented, we know there was a debate about this, so Bush had to have been aware of the implications of what was being done, which is also backed up by the memos from Ashcroft. These memos have been unearthed by Newsweek. So ultimately what we have here are people at the highest levels of the chain of command guilty of ordering or not preventing torture, which is both an international crime against the Geneva Conventions and the Torture Convention and a domestic crime as well. What we have then is a conspiracy among the aforementioned individuals to commit war crimes and crimes against humanity. Let me add one more thing that's very important to remember: The principles set forth in 27-10 of personal criminal accountability for war crimes goes back to the Nuremburg Charter, Judgments and Principles derived from the post-World War II trials of Nazi war criminals. Similar principles of criminal accountability were applied by the United States to the Japanese Imperial War criminals. LeVine: In fact, President Bush has compared the war on terror to the war against the Nazis. Boyle: Then we have even more reason to bring this to people's attention: The Nuremburg Principles were in fact originally the idea of the US Government which then orchestrated the prosecutions in Nuremburg. People need to understand the pedigree and heritage here. These are very grave offenses which the US government a generation ago prosecuted and executed Nazis for committing. And Japanese war criminals too. LeVine: How can any of the people you mentioned be prosecuted? Boyle: The military could do it, or the Dept. of Justice, which would have default power to do so if the military didn't. But for this of course we'd need a special prosecutor and that law has been allowed to lapse. Attorney General Ashcroft, who is clearly part of the criminal conspiracy, would never push a war crimes investigations against his colleagues or President Bush. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) Feed: NYT > U.S. Posted on: Wednesday, June 21, 2017 4:15 AM Author: NYT > U.S. Subject: How the C.I.A.’s Torture Program Began Video depositions in a case brought by former C.I.A. detainees give an insight into the beginnings of the agency’s enhanced interrogation program. View article... -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Thu Jun 22 19:39:53 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2017 19:39:53 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] =?utf-8?q?CIA_=26_Mossad_Infiltrated_UI_Center_fo?= =?utf-8?q?r_Advanced_Studies-How_the_C=2EI=2EA=2E=E2=80=99s_Torture_Progr?= =?utf-8?q?am_Began=3A_Law_School_Off_Campus!?= References: Message-ID: absolute degradation and moral bankruptcy.. Ditto for the College of Law---as manifested most recently by Killer Koh. LAW SCHOOL OFF CAMPUS! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2017 2:30 PM To: 'Karen Aram' Cc: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson ; Mildred O'brien Subject: RE: CIA & Mossad Infiltrated UI Center for Advanced Studies-How the C.I.A.’s Torture Program Began: Law School Off Campus! I understand. I am just citing Moore’s emulation of the KGB in favor of torture as a further example of his absolute degradation and moral bankruptcy along with his working for the CIA and Mossad. But the CIA and Mossad have infiltrated The College of Law, the Center for Advanced Studies and the LAS Department of Philosophy. fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Karen Aram [mailto:karenaram at hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2017 2:24 PM To: Boyle, Francis A > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson >; Mildred O'brien > Subject: Re: CIA & Mossad Infiltrated UI Center for Advanced Studies-How the C.I.A.’s Torture Program Began: Law School Off Campus! We should leave out the KGB, because they aren’t our responsibility and Moore during the “Legitimacy of Targeted Killing” gave examples of KGB tactics, as an excuse to use drones against “our enemy’s,” Islamic terrorists today, Russians tomorrow.” He was already using the USG propaganda against Russians to promote war in Eurasia and our expansion of Nato. On Jun 22, 2017, at 12:18, Boyle, Francis A > wrote: The CIA and the Mossad, as organizations, are the greatest purveyors of the violence known to man within the last century… ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- And let us not leave out the KGB. Moore has publicly argued that since torture works for the KGB, we Americans should mimic the KGB and thus engage in torture. Fab TORTURE OFF CAMPUS! CIA OFF CAMPUS! MOSSAD OFF CAMPUS! MICHAEL MOORE OFF CAMPUS! CONSORT HURRICANE HEIDI HURD OFF CAMPUS! LAW SCHOOL OFF CAMPUS! Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2017 2:09 PM To: 'Karen Aram' > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson >; Mildred O'brien > Subject: RE: CIA & Mossad Infiltrated UI Center for Advanced Studies-How the C.I.A.’s Torture Program Began: Law School Off Campus! Well again back in the 1980s we did have a Movement: CIA OFF CAMPUS! Belden and I were quite active in it. Michael Moore Off Campus! Consort Hurricane Heidi Hurd Off Campus! Law School Off Campus! Fab. That the CIA is a terrorist organization was upheld in the famous “CIA On Trial” case in Northampton, Mass., in 1987, when a jury acquitted 14 protestors who tried to stop CIA recruitment on campus, according to Francis Boyle, the University of Illinois international law authority who defended the group. The defense charged the CIA was “an organized criminal conspiracy like the SS and the Gestapo.” Boyle said, “You would not let the SS or the Gestapo recruit on campus at the University of Massachusetts at Amherst, so you would not permit the CIA to recruit on campus either.” ) [home] Abolish the CIA, America. Sherwood Ross. CIA Torture Report. December 9, 2014 9:01 pm 2 Comments The CIA, the KKK and the USA By Sherwood Ross Global Research, October 15, 2010 15 October 2010 [The CIA, the KKK and the USA] By assigning covert action roles to the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), it is as if the White House and Congress had legitimized the Ku Klux Klan to operate globally. That’s because the CIA today resembles nothing so much as the “Invisible Empire” of the KKK that once spread terror across the South and Midwest. Fiery crosses aside, this is what the CIA is doing globally. The CIA today is committing many of the same sort of gruesome crimes against foreigners that the KKK once inflicted on Americans of color. The principal difference is that the KKK consisted of self-appointed vigilantes who regarded themselves as both outside and above the law when they perpetrated their crimes. By contrast, the CIA acts as the agent of the American government, often at the highest levels, and at times at the direction of the White House. Its crimes typically are committed in contravention of the highest established international law such as the Charter of the United Nations as well as the U.S. Constitution. What’s more, the “Agency,” as it is known, derives its funding largely from an imperialist-minded Congress; additionally, it has no qualms about fattening its budget from drug money and other illegal sources. It is a mirror-image of the lawless entity the U.S. has become since achieving superpower status. And it is incredible that the White House grants license to this violent Agency to commit its crimes with no accountability. The Ku Klux Klan was founded shortly after the end of the U.S. Civil War. Klansman concealed their identities behind flowing white robes and white hoods as they terrorized the newly emancipated blacks to keep them from voting or to drive them from their property. Allowing it to operate in secret literally gives the CIA the mythical Ring of Gyges. In Plato’s Republic, the owner of the ring had the power to become invisible at will. As Wikipedia puts it, Plato “discusses whether a typical person would be moral if he did not have to fear the consequences of his actions.” The ancient Greeks made the argument, Wikipedia says, that “No man would keep his hands off what was not his own when he could safely take what he liked out of the market, go into houses and lie with any one at his pleasure, kill or release from prison whom he would, and in all respects be like a god among men.” The CIA, like Hitler’s Gestapo and Stalin’s NKVD before it, has provided modern man the answer to this question. Its actions illuminate why all criminal entities, from rapists and bank robbers, to Ponzi scheme swindlers and murderers, cloak themselves in secrecy. There are innumerable examples of how American presidents have authorized criminal acts without public discussion that the preponderant majority of Americans would find reprehensible. Example: it was President Lyndon Johnson who ordered the CIA to meddle in Chile’s election to help Eduardo Frei become president. If they had known, U.S. taxpayers might have objected to such a use of their hard-earned money to influence the outcome of another country’s elections. But the public is rarely let in on such illegal foreign policy decisions. Where the KKK after the Civil War terrorized blacks to keep them from voting, the CIA has worked to influence the outcome of elections all over the world through bribery and vote-buying, dirty tricks, and worse. According to investigative reporter William Blum in “Rogue State”(Common Courage Press), the CIA has perverted elections in Italy, Lebanon, Indonesia, The Philippines, Japan, Nepal, Laos, Brazil, Bolivia, Chile, Portugal, Australia, Jamaica, Panama, Nicaragua, Haiti, among other countries. If they had known, taxpayers might also object to the CIA’s numerous overthrows of foreign governments by force and violence—such as was done in Iran in 1953 by President Eisenhower and Chile in 1973 by President Nixon. Both overthrows precipitated bloodbaths that cost tens of thousands of innocent civilians their lives. Blum also lists the countries the CIA has attempted to overthrow or has actually overthrown. His list includes Greece, The Philippines, East Germany, Iran, Guatemala, Indonesia, Iraq, Viet Nam, Laos, Ecuador, The Congo, France, Cuba, Ghana, Chile, South Africa, Bolivia, Portugal, and Nicaragua, to cite a few. As I write, today, October 11th, 2010, Nobel Peace Prize winner Adolfo Perez Esquivel of Argentina called on President Obama to revise U.S. (imperialist) policies toward Latin America. He questioned why the U.S. continues to plant its military bases across the region. That’s an excellent question. If the U.S. is a peace-loving nation, why does it need 800 bases the world over in addition to 1,000 on its own soil? Americans might recoil in disgust if they knew of the CIA’s numerous assassinations of the elected officials of other nations. Is it any wonder Americans so often ask the question, “Why do they hate us?” As historian Arnold Toynbee wrote in 1961, “America is today the leader of a world-wide anti-revolutionary movement in the defence of vested interests. She now stands for what Rome stood for. Rome consistently supported the rich against the poor in all foreign communities that fell under her sway; and, since the poor, so far, have always and everywhere been more numerous than the rich, Rome’s policy made for inequality, for injustice, and for the least happiness of the greatest number.” The CIA’s protective secrecy resembles nothing so much as the KKK, which proudly proclaimed itself “the Invisible Empire” and whose thugs killed citizens having the courage to identify hooded Klansmen to law enforcement officials. Today, it is our highest public officials that protect this criminal force, said to number about 25,000 employees. It is actually a Federal offense to reveal the identity of a CIA undercover agent—unless, of course, you happen to be I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby, and are employed by Vice President Dick Cheney. Libby leaked the identity of CIA agent Valerie Plame to punish her husband Joseph Wilson for publishing a report that undercut the White House lie that Saddam Hussein had purchased “yellowcake” from Niger to fuel WMD. Today, high public officials direct the CIA’s criminal policies and protect its agents’ identities the better to enable them to commit their crimes. According to journalist Fred Cook in his book “Ku Klux Klan: America’s Recurring Nightmare”(Messner), “The Klan was inherently a vigilante organization. It could commit the most atrocious acts under the guise of high principle andperpetrators of those acts would be hidden behind white masks and protected by Klan secrecy… (The Klan) set itself up as judge, jury and executioner”—a policy adopted by the CIA today. CIA spies have conducted their criminal operations masquerading as officials of U.S. aid programs, business executives, or journalists. Example: The San Diego-based Copley News Service’s staff of foreign correspondents allegedly was created to provide cover to CIA spies, compromising legitimate American journalists trying to do their jobs. While the murders committed by the KKK likely ran into the many thousands, the CIA has killed on a far grander scale and managed to keep its role largely secret. As Tim Weiner, who covered the CIA for the New York Times noted in his book “Legacy of Ashes: The History of the CIA” (Anchor): “In Guatemala, 200,000 civilians had died during forty years of struggle following the agency’s(CIA) 1954 coup against an elected president.” Weiner adds, “the CIA’s officers in Guatemala still went to great lengths to conceal the nature of their close relations with the military and to suppress reports that Guatemalan officers on its payroll were murderers, torturers, and thieves.” When it comes to murder, the CIA makes the KKK look like Boy Scouts. Like the KKK, CIA terrorists operate above the law. KKK members committed thousands of lynchings yet rarely were its members punished for them. In 2009 at a speech at CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia, President Obama revealed he was not intent on punishing CIA agents for their crimes but would rather “look forward.” This seemingly charitable philosophy may be driven by the fact that Obama worked for Business International Corporation, a CIA front, at least in 1983 and perhaps longer, and allegedly is the son of a mother and father both of whom also worked for the CIA, as did Obama’s grandmother! I could find none of this in Obama’s biography when he ran for the presidency, when a gullible American public elected a CIA “mole” to the White House. Consider this, too: an agency President Truman feared would become “an American Gestapo” when he signed the enabling legislation into law in 1947 has become just that, and it casts a lengthy shadow over the White House. Ominously, it has in Barack Obama one of its own former employees sitting in the Oval Office—a man who, according to news reports, has vastly expanded the frequency of the CIA’s assassinations by drone aircraft in Pakistan and who illegally claims the “right” to assassinate any American citizen abroad as well. What’s more, from 1989 to 1993 George Bush Sr., the CIA’s own former Director, sat in the White House. Additionally, from 2001 to 2009, the CIA had that Director’s son, George W. Bush, in the Oval Office giving the CIA a blank check after the 9/11 massacre. Bush Jr., according to The New York Times, in the summer of 1974 worked for Alaska International Industries, which did contract work for the CIA. The Times noted that this job did not appear in his biography when he ran for the White House in 2000, terming it “The Missing Chapter in the Bush Bio.” Thus, two presidential candidates with CIA ties—Bush Jr. and Obama—both neglected to mention them. And in Bill Clinton, who presided from 1993 to 2001, the CIA had a go-along president who satisfied the Agency’s blood-lust when he authorized the first illegal “rendition,” a euphemism for what KKK thugs once knew as kidnapping and torture. Is there any question that the Agency has not played an influential, behind-the-scenes or even a direct role in the operations of the U.S. government at its highest level? It may indeed be a stretch to argue that the CIA is running the country but it is no stretch to say that year after year our presidents reflect the criminal philosophy of the Agency. Other parallels with the KKK are striking. As Richmond Flowers, the Attorney General of Alabama stated in 1966, “I’ve found the Klan more than just another secret society… It resembles a shadow government, making its own laws, manipulating local politics, burrowing into some of our local law-enforcement agencies…When a pitiable misfit puts on his $15 sheet, society can no longer ignore him.” Yet the descendants of those misfits have moved up today where they feel comfortable as operatives in the shadow government run by the White House. One of the CIA’s illicit duties has been to serve as a conduit for funneling U.S. taxpayer dollars to corrupt dictators and strongmen bent on suppressing the popular will of their citizenry. As Noam Chomsky wrote in “Failed States”(Metropolitan/Owl), in Honduras, “military officers in charge of the battalion (3-16) were on the CIA payroll.” This elite unit, he says, “organized and trained by the United States and Argentine neo-Nazis,” was “the most barbaric of the Latin American killers that Washington had been supporting.” Like the KKK, the CIA kidnaps many of its victims with no thought ever of legal procedure. It exhibits utter disdain for the rights of those individuals, the sovereignty of foreign nations, or respect for international law. At least hundreds of foreigners, mostly from the Middle East, have been the victims of “renditions” just as the KKK kidnapped and flogged and lynched blacks, labor leaders, Catholics, Jews, or wayward wives whom it felt to be morally lacking. In September, 1921, The New York World ran a series exposing the KKK. It pointed out that, among other things, the KKK was violating the Bill of Rights wholesale. This included the Fourth amendment against “unreasonable searches and seizures,” the Fifth and the Sixth amendments, guaranteeing that no one may be held without a grand jury indictment or punished without a fair trial. And these rights today are similarly trampled by the CIA against American citizens, not just foreigners. Apparently, only foreign courts care to rein in the CIA. The 23 CIA agents that it took to render one “suspect” in Italy are wanted there by the magistrates. (The spooks, by the way, ran up some fabulous bills in luxury hotels on taxpayers’ dollars in that escapade.) Former President Jimmy Carter wrote in his book “Our Endangered Values”(Simon & Schuster), the CIA transferred some of those it kidnapped to countries that included Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Morocco, Jordan, and Uzbekistan where “the techniques of torture are almost indescribably terrible, including, as a U.S. ambassador to one of the recipient countries reported, ‘partial boiling of a hand or an arm,’ with at least two prisoners boiled to death.” The KKK’s methods of punishment were often as ugly: the brutal flogging of blacks in front of vicious crowds, followed by castration and burning their victims alive, and then lynching of the corpses. As for the CIA, “Why?” asks investigative reporter William Blum, “are these men rendered in the first place if not to be tortured? Does the United States not have any speakers in foreign languages to conduct interrogations?” That the CIA is a terrorist organization was upheld in the famous “CIA On Trial” case in Northampton, Mass., in 1987, when a jury acquitted 14 protestors who tried to stop CIA recruitment on campus, according to Francis Boyle, the University of Illinois international law authority who defended the group. The defense charged the CIA was “an organized criminal conspiracy like the SS and the Gestapo.” Boyle said, “You would not let the SS or the Gestapo recruit on campus at the University of Massachusetts at Amherst, so you would not permit the CIA to recruit on campus either.” Another shared characteristic of the KKK and CIA is greed, the desire to loot the hard-earned wealth of others. Often, Klansmen terrorized African-Americans who had amassed property to frighten them off their land. Law-abiding black citizens who had pulled themselves up by the proverbial bootstraps were cheated out of their homes and acreage by the night riders. Similarly, the CIA across Latin America has aligned itself with the well-to-do ruling class at every opportunity. It has cooperated with the elite to punish and murder labor leaders and clergy who espoused economic opportunity for the poor. The notion that allowing the poor to enrich themselves fairly will also create more wealth for an entire society generally, including the rich, has not permeated CIA thinking. I emphasize what historian Toynbee noted: “America is today the leader of a world-wide anti-revolutionary movement in the defence of vested interests. She now stands for what Rome stood for.”(Italics added.) In sum, by adopting the terrorist philosophy of the KKK and elevating it to the operations of government at the highest level, the imperial Obama administration, like its predecessors, is showing the world the worst possible face of America. Foreigners do not see the goodness inherent in the American people—most of whom only want a good day’s pay for a good day’s work and to educate their children and live at peace with the world. Every adult American has a solemn obligation to demand that its government live up to international law, punish the CIA criminals in its midst, and become a respected citizen of the world. This will not come to pass until Congress abolishes the CIA, putting an end to its KKK-style terrorism which threatens Americans as well as humankind everywhere. Sherwood Ross is an American who has worked as a reporter for the Chicago Daily News, a columnist for wire services and as the News Director of a national civil rights organization. He currently operates the Anti-War News Service from Miami, Florida. To contribute to his work or reach him, email sherwoodross10 at gmail.com Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Karen Aram [mailto:karenaram at hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2017 1:31 PM To: Boyle, Francis A > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: Re: CIA & Mossad Infiltrated UI Center for Advanced Studies-How the C.I.A.’s Torture Program Began: Law School Off Campus! At some point, yes, we do need to address this issue at the U of I. The CIA and the Mossad, as organizations, are the greatest purveyors of the violence known to man within the last century, working on behalf of the United States Oligarch’s. On Jun 22, 2017, at 11:07, Boyle, Francis A > wrote: Michael Moore’s strident advocacy in favor of torture, his public admissions that he advises both the CIA and the Mossad on torture, and his argument that since torture works for the KGB, we Americans should also engage in torture, all qualified him for a Professorship at the University of Illinois Center for Advanced Studies. In other words, the CIA and the Mossad have infiltrated the UI Center for Advanced Studies as well as the College of Law and the Department of Philosophy. Fab. CIA Off Campus! Mossad Off Campus! Torture Off Campus! Michael Moore Off Campus! Consort Hurricane Heidi Hurd Off Campus! War Crimes Off Campus! War Criminals Off Campus! Crimes Against Humanity Off Campus! Genocidaires Against Muslims/Arabs/Asians Of Color Off Campus! Gitmo Kangaroo Courts Off Campus! Law School Off Campus! Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2017 10:33 AM To: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; Karen Aram >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson >; Mildred O'brien > Subject: How the C.I.A.’s Torture Program Began: Law School Off Campus! In a public lecture he gave before the entire College of Law Faculty, whose presence had been demanded by his Consort Dean Hurricane Heidi Hurd, and including before the COL Board of Visitors, the Marquis De Sade Professor of Law and Philosophy and of the Center for Advanced Studies in Torture Michael Moore bragged that he advised the Mossad on Torture and argued that since torture worked for the KGB, we Americans should also engage in torture. Fab Torture Off Campus! Mossad Off Campus! CIA Off Campus! Michael Moore Off Campus! Consort Hurricane Heidi Hurd Off Campus! War Crimes Off Campus! Crimes Against Humanity Off Campus! Law School Off Campus! LeVine: In my own research on war crimes committed by US forces in Iraq. I counted at least two-dozen classes of offenses systematically committed by the Occupation administration and US or US-allied military forces in the invasion and subsequent period of CPA (Coalition Provisional Authority) rule. This includes violations of articles and 17, 18, 33, and 147 of the Geneva Convention covering the killing, hostage-taking and torturing of civilians Boyle: As I just argued at Fort Stewart Georgia in the court martial proceedings for Sgt. Camilo Mejia for desertion, the accountability here goes directly up the chain of command under the terms of the US Army Field Manual 27-10. Specifically, paragraph 501 makes clear that commanders who have ordered or knew or should have known about war crimes and failed to stop it are themselves guilty of war crimes. If you look then at the public record, it is clear that Gens. Sanchez and Miller ordered war crimes and both should be relieved of command immediately: abuse of prisoners in violation of the Geneva Conventions. As for General Abizaid, the overall commander of US forces in Southwest Asia, he admitted in his Senate hearings that he should have known about the war crimes at Abu Ghraib, so basically he's already incriminated himself under the rules of the US Army Field Manual 27-10 In addition, above Abizaid you have Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz. Again my reading of the public record including the Taguba and Red Cross reports is that they either knew or should have known about all these war crimes. Indeed, if you read the ICRC report, - and as I testified under oath and under cross-examination (and was not contradicted) at the Mejia court-martial proceedings, - the widespread and systematic nature of these abuses rise to the level of crimes against humanity, going all the way up through the chain of command. Culpability also extends to Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence General William G. Boykin and Defense Undersecretary Stephen Cambone, who reports directly to Undersecretary of Defense Douglas Feith. And through this line it appears to me that Rumsfeld is culpable, because he was at Abu Ghraib last fall. Indeed, Sy Hersch's New Yorker article on Abu Ghraib claims with good substantiation that he was totally aware and even signed off on the use of techniques which are clearly torture. Rumsfeld was given a tour by Brig. General Janet Karpinski, who was supposed to be in charge of the prison-although she said nothing when she was prohibited from accessing certain areas of it-and so she's also accountable. It's important to understand that the Geneva Conventions, the Hague Regulations of 1907, the U.S. Army Field Manual, all mandate that a criminal investigation be opened. And how President Bush, as Commander in Chief would be accountable under Field Manual 27-10 precisely because he is Commander in Chief of the US armed forces under the US Constitution. We know the White House knows this because if you read White House Counsel Alberto Gonzales's memo, he specifically tries to exempt the US from the Geneva Conventions for Guantanamo and Afghanistan. You can see that Gonzalez was afraid of Bush and others being held directly accountable. Moreover, because Powell dissented, we know there was a debate about this, so Bush had to have been aware of the implications of what was being done, which is also backed up by the memos from Ashcroft. These memos have been unearthed by Newsweek. So ultimately what we have here are people at the highest levels of the chain of command guilty of ordering or not preventing torture, which is both an international crime against the Geneva Conventions and the Torture Convention and a domestic crime as well. What we have then is a conspiracy among the aforementioned individuals to commit war crimes and crimes against humanity. Let me add one more thing that's very important to remember: The principles set forth in 27-10 of personal criminal accountability for war crimes goes back to the Nuremburg Charter, Judgments and Principles derived from the post-World War II trials of Nazi war criminals. Similar principles of criminal accountability were applied by the United States to the Japanese Imperial War criminals. LeVine: In fact, President Bush has compared the war on terror to the war against the Nazis. Boyle: Then we have even more reason to bring this to people's attention: The Nuremburg Principles were in fact originally the idea of the US Government which then orchestrated the prosecutions in Nuremburg. People need to understand the pedigree and heritage here. These are very grave offenses which the US government a generation ago prosecuted and executed Nazis for committing. And Japanese war criminals too. LeVine: How can any of the people you mentioned be prosecuted? Boyle: The military could do it, or the Dept. of Justice, which would have default power to do so if the military didn't. But for this of course we'd need a special prosecutor and that law has been allowed to lapse. Attorney General Ashcroft, who is clearly part of the criminal conspiracy, would never push a war crimes investigations against his colleagues or President Bush. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) Feed: NYT > U.S. Posted on: Wednesday, June 21, 2017 4:15 AM Author: NYT > U.S. Subject: How the C.I.A.’s Torture Program Began Video depositions in a case brought by former C.I.A. detainees give an insight into the beginnings of the agency’s enhanced interrogation program. View article... -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Thu Jun 22 19:39:53 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2017 19:39:53 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] =?utf-8?q?CIA_=26_Mossad_Infiltrated_UI_Center_fo?= =?utf-8?q?r_Advanced_Studies-How_the_C=2EI=2EA=2E=E2=80=99s_Torture_Progr?= =?utf-8?q?am_Began=3A_Law_School_Off_Campus!?= References: Message-ID: absolute degradation and moral bankruptcy.. Ditto for the College of Law---as manifested most recently by Killer Koh. LAW SCHOOL OFF CAMPUS! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2017 2:30 PM To: 'Karen Aram' Cc: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson ; Mildred O'brien Subject: RE: CIA & Mossad Infiltrated UI Center for Advanced Studies-How the C.I.A.’s Torture Program Began: Law School Off Campus! I understand. I am just citing Moore’s emulation of the KGB in favor of torture as a further example of his absolute degradation and moral bankruptcy along with his working for the CIA and Mossad. But the CIA and Mossad have infiltrated The College of Law, the Center for Advanced Studies and the LAS Department of Philosophy. fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Karen Aram [mailto:karenaram at hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2017 2:24 PM To: Boyle, Francis A > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson >; Mildred O'brien > Subject: Re: CIA & Mossad Infiltrated UI Center for Advanced Studies-How the C.I.A.’s Torture Program Began: Law School Off Campus! We should leave out the KGB, because they aren’t our responsibility and Moore during the “Legitimacy of Targeted Killing” gave examples of KGB tactics, as an excuse to use drones against “our enemy’s,” Islamic terrorists today, Russians tomorrow.” He was already using the USG propaganda against Russians to promote war in Eurasia and our expansion of Nato. On Jun 22, 2017, at 12:18, Boyle, Francis A > wrote: The CIA and the Mossad, as organizations, are the greatest purveyors of the violence known to man within the last century… ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- And let us not leave out the KGB. Moore has publicly argued that since torture works for the KGB, we Americans should mimic the KGB and thus engage in torture. Fab TORTURE OFF CAMPUS! CIA OFF CAMPUS! MOSSAD OFF CAMPUS! MICHAEL MOORE OFF CAMPUS! CONSORT HURRICANE HEIDI HURD OFF CAMPUS! LAW SCHOOL OFF CAMPUS! Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2017 2:09 PM To: 'Karen Aram' > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson >; Mildred O'brien > Subject: RE: CIA & Mossad Infiltrated UI Center for Advanced Studies-How the C.I.A.’s Torture Program Began: Law School Off Campus! Well again back in the 1980s we did have a Movement: CIA OFF CAMPUS! Belden and I were quite active in it. Michael Moore Off Campus! Consort Hurricane Heidi Hurd Off Campus! Law School Off Campus! Fab. That the CIA is a terrorist organization was upheld in the famous “CIA On Trial” case in Northampton, Mass., in 1987, when a jury acquitted 14 protestors who tried to stop CIA recruitment on campus, according to Francis Boyle, the University of Illinois international law authority who defended the group. The defense charged the CIA was “an organized criminal conspiracy like the SS and the Gestapo.” Boyle said, “You would not let the SS or the Gestapo recruit on campus at the University of Massachusetts at Amherst, so you would not permit the CIA to recruit on campus either.” ) [home] Abolish the CIA, America. Sherwood Ross. CIA Torture Report. December 9, 2014 9:01 pm 2 Comments The CIA, the KKK and the USA By Sherwood Ross Global Research, October 15, 2010 15 October 2010 [The CIA, the KKK and the USA] By assigning covert action roles to the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), it is as if the White House and Congress had legitimized the Ku Klux Klan to operate globally. That’s because the CIA today resembles nothing so much as the “Invisible Empire” of the KKK that once spread terror across the South and Midwest. Fiery crosses aside, this is what the CIA is doing globally. The CIA today is committing many of the same sort of gruesome crimes against foreigners that the KKK once inflicted on Americans of color. The principal difference is that the KKK consisted of self-appointed vigilantes who regarded themselves as both outside and above the law when they perpetrated their crimes. By contrast, the CIA acts as the agent of the American government, often at the highest levels, and at times at the direction of the White House. Its crimes typically are committed in contravention of the highest established international law such as the Charter of the United Nations as well as the U.S. Constitution. What’s more, the “Agency,” as it is known, derives its funding largely from an imperialist-minded Congress; additionally, it has no qualms about fattening its budget from drug money and other illegal sources. It is a mirror-image of the lawless entity the U.S. has become since achieving superpower status. And it is incredible that the White House grants license to this violent Agency to commit its crimes with no accountability. The Ku Klux Klan was founded shortly after the end of the U.S. Civil War. Klansman concealed their identities behind flowing white robes and white hoods as they terrorized the newly emancipated blacks to keep them from voting or to drive them from their property. Allowing it to operate in secret literally gives the CIA the mythical Ring of Gyges. In Plato’s Republic, the owner of the ring had the power to become invisible at will. As Wikipedia puts it, Plato “discusses whether a typical person would be moral if he did not have to fear the consequences of his actions.” The ancient Greeks made the argument, Wikipedia says, that “No man would keep his hands off what was not his own when he could safely take what he liked out of the market, go into houses and lie with any one at his pleasure, kill or release from prison whom he would, and in all respects be like a god among men.” The CIA, like Hitler’s Gestapo and Stalin’s NKVD before it, has provided modern man the answer to this question. Its actions illuminate why all criminal entities, from rapists and bank robbers, to Ponzi scheme swindlers and murderers, cloak themselves in secrecy. There are innumerable examples of how American presidents have authorized criminal acts without public discussion that the preponderant majority of Americans would find reprehensible. Example: it was President Lyndon Johnson who ordered the CIA to meddle in Chile’s election to help Eduardo Frei become president. If they had known, U.S. taxpayers might have objected to such a use of their hard-earned money to influence the outcome of another country’s elections. But the public is rarely let in on such illegal foreign policy decisions. Where the KKK after the Civil War terrorized blacks to keep them from voting, the CIA has worked to influence the outcome of elections all over the world through bribery and vote-buying, dirty tricks, and worse. According to investigative reporter William Blum in “Rogue State”(Common Courage Press), the CIA has perverted elections in Italy, Lebanon, Indonesia, The Philippines, Japan, Nepal, Laos, Brazil, Bolivia, Chile, Portugal, Australia, Jamaica, Panama, Nicaragua, Haiti, among other countries. If they had known, taxpayers might also object to the CIA’s numerous overthrows of foreign governments by force and violence—such as was done in Iran in 1953 by President Eisenhower and Chile in 1973 by President Nixon. Both overthrows precipitated bloodbaths that cost tens of thousands of innocent civilians their lives. Blum also lists the countries the CIA has attempted to overthrow or has actually overthrown. His list includes Greece, The Philippines, East Germany, Iran, Guatemala, Indonesia, Iraq, Viet Nam, Laos, Ecuador, The Congo, France, Cuba, Ghana, Chile, South Africa, Bolivia, Portugal, and Nicaragua, to cite a few. As I write, today, October 11th, 2010, Nobel Peace Prize winner Adolfo Perez Esquivel of Argentina called on President Obama to revise U.S. (imperialist) policies toward Latin America. He questioned why the U.S. continues to plant its military bases across the region. That’s an excellent question. If the U.S. is a peace-loving nation, why does it need 800 bases the world over in addition to 1,000 on its own soil? Americans might recoil in disgust if they knew of the CIA’s numerous assassinations of the elected officials of other nations. Is it any wonder Americans so often ask the question, “Why do they hate us?” As historian Arnold Toynbee wrote in 1961, “America is today the leader of a world-wide anti-revolutionary movement in the defence of vested interests. She now stands for what Rome stood for. Rome consistently supported the rich against the poor in all foreign communities that fell under her sway; and, since the poor, so far, have always and everywhere been more numerous than the rich, Rome’s policy made for inequality, for injustice, and for the least happiness of the greatest number.” The CIA’s protective secrecy resembles nothing so much as the KKK, which proudly proclaimed itself “the Invisible Empire” and whose thugs killed citizens having the courage to identify hooded Klansmen to law enforcement officials. Today, it is our highest public officials that protect this criminal force, said to number about 25,000 employees. It is actually a Federal offense to reveal the identity of a CIA undercover agent—unless, of course, you happen to be I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby, and are employed by Vice President Dick Cheney. Libby leaked the identity of CIA agent Valerie Plame to punish her husband Joseph Wilson for publishing a report that undercut the White House lie that Saddam Hussein had purchased “yellowcake” from Niger to fuel WMD. Today, high public officials direct the CIA’s criminal policies and protect its agents’ identities the better to enable them to commit their crimes. According to journalist Fred Cook in his book “Ku Klux Klan: America’s Recurring Nightmare”(Messner), “The Klan was inherently a vigilante organization. It could commit the most atrocious acts under the guise of high principle andperpetrators of those acts would be hidden behind white masks and protected by Klan secrecy… (The Klan) set itself up as judge, jury and executioner”—a policy adopted by the CIA today. CIA spies have conducted their criminal operations masquerading as officials of U.S. aid programs, business executives, or journalists. Example: The San Diego-based Copley News Service’s staff of foreign correspondents allegedly was created to provide cover to CIA spies, compromising legitimate American journalists trying to do their jobs. While the murders committed by the KKK likely ran into the many thousands, the CIA has killed on a far grander scale and managed to keep its role largely secret. As Tim Weiner, who covered the CIA for the New York Times noted in his book “Legacy of Ashes: The History of the CIA” (Anchor): “In Guatemala, 200,000 civilians had died during forty years of struggle following the agency’s(CIA) 1954 coup against an elected president.” Weiner adds, “the CIA’s officers in Guatemala still went to great lengths to conceal the nature of their close relations with the military and to suppress reports that Guatemalan officers on its payroll were murderers, torturers, and thieves.” When it comes to murder, the CIA makes the KKK look like Boy Scouts. Like the KKK, CIA terrorists operate above the law. KKK members committed thousands of lynchings yet rarely were its members punished for them. In 2009 at a speech at CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia, President Obama revealed he was not intent on punishing CIA agents for their crimes but would rather “look forward.” This seemingly charitable philosophy may be driven by the fact that Obama worked for Business International Corporation, a CIA front, at least in 1983 and perhaps longer, and allegedly is the son of a mother and father both of whom also worked for the CIA, as did Obama’s grandmother! I could find none of this in Obama’s biography when he ran for the presidency, when a gullible American public elected a CIA “mole” to the White House. Consider this, too: an agency President Truman feared would become “an American Gestapo” when he signed the enabling legislation into law in 1947 has become just that, and it casts a lengthy shadow over the White House. Ominously, it has in Barack Obama one of its own former employees sitting in the Oval Office—a man who, according to news reports, has vastly expanded the frequency of the CIA’s assassinations by drone aircraft in Pakistan and who illegally claims the “right” to assassinate any American citizen abroad as well. What’s more, from 1989 to 1993 George Bush Sr., the CIA’s own former Director, sat in the White House. Additionally, from 2001 to 2009, the CIA had that Director’s son, George W. Bush, in the Oval Office giving the CIA a blank check after the 9/11 massacre. Bush Jr., according to The New York Times, in the summer of 1974 worked for Alaska International Industries, which did contract work for the CIA. The Times noted that this job did not appear in his biography when he ran for the White House in 2000, terming it “The Missing Chapter in the Bush Bio.” Thus, two presidential candidates with CIA ties—Bush Jr. and Obama—both neglected to mention them. And in Bill Clinton, who presided from 1993 to 2001, the CIA had a go-along president who satisfied the Agency’s blood-lust when he authorized the first illegal “rendition,” a euphemism for what KKK thugs once knew as kidnapping and torture. Is there any question that the Agency has not played an influential, behind-the-scenes or even a direct role in the operations of the U.S. government at its highest level? It may indeed be a stretch to argue that the CIA is running the country but it is no stretch to say that year after year our presidents reflect the criminal philosophy of the Agency. Other parallels with the KKK are striking. As Richmond Flowers, the Attorney General of Alabama stated in 1966, “I’ve found the Klan more than just another secret society… It resembles a shadow government, making its own laws, manipulating local politics, burrowing into some of our local law-enforcement agencies…When a pitiable misfit puts on his $15 sheet, society can no longer ignore him.” Yet the descendants of those misfits have moved up today where they feel comfortable as operatives in the shadow government run by the White House. One of the CIA’s illicit duties has been to serve as a conduit for funneling U.S. taxpayer dollars to corrupt dictators and strongmen bent on suppressing the popular will of their citizenry. As Noam Chomsky wrote in “Failed States”(Metropolitan/Owl), in Honduras, “military officers in charge of the battalion (3-16) were on the CIA payroll.” This elite unit, he says, “organized and trained by the United States and Argentine neo-Nazis,” was “the most barbaric of the Latin American killers that Washington had been supporting.” Like the KKK, the CIA kidnaps many of its victims with no thought ever of legal procedure. It exhibits utter disdain for the rights of those individuals, the sovereignty of foreign nations, or respect for international law. At least hundreds of foreigners, mostly from the Middle East, have been the victims of “renditions” just as the KKK kidnapped and flogged and lynched blacks, labor leaders, Catholics, Jews, or wayward wives whom it felt to be morally lacking. In September, 1921, The New York World ran a series exposing the KKK. It pointed out that, among other things, the KKK was violating the Bill of Rights wholesale. This included the Fourth amendment against “unreasonable searches and seizures,” the Fifth and the Sixth amendments, guaranteeing that no one may be held without a grand jury indictment or punished without a fair trial. And these rights today are similarly trampled by the CIA against American citizens, not just foreigners. Apparently, only foreign courts care to rein in the CIA. The 23 CIA agents that it took to render one “suspect” in Italy are wanted there by the magistrates. (The spooks, by the way, ran up some fabulous bills in luxury hotels on taxpayers’ dollars in that escapade.) Former President Jimmy Carter wrote in his book “Our Endangered Values”(Simon & Schuster), the CIA transferred some of those it kidnapped to countries that included Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Morocco, Jordan, and Uzbekistan where “the techniques of torture are almost indescribably terrible, including, as a U.S. ambassador to one of the recipient countries reported, ‘partial boiling of a hand or an arm,’ with at least two prisoners boiled to death.” The KKK’s methods of punishment were often as ugly: the brutal flogging of blacks in front of vicious crowds, followed by castration and burning their victims alive, and then lynching of the corpses. As for the CIA, “Why?” asks investigative reporter William Blum, “are these men rendered in the first place if not to be tortured? Does the United States not have any speakers in foreign languages to conduct interrogations?” That the CIA is a terrorist organization was upheld in the famous “CIA On Trial” case in Northampton, Mass., in 1987, when a jury acquitted 14 protestors who tried to stop CIA recruitment on campus, according to Francis Boyle, the University of Illinois international law authority who defended the group. The defense charged the CIA was “an organized criminal conspiracy like the SS and the Gestapo.” Boyle said, “You would not let the SS or the Gestapo recruit on campus at the University of Massachusetts at Amherst, so you would not permit the CIA to recruit on campus either.” Another shared characteristic of the KKK and CIA is greed, the desire to loot the hard-earned wealth of others. Often, Klansmen terrorized African-Americans who had amassed property to frighten them off their land. Law-abiding black citizens who had pulled themselves up by the proverbial bootstraps were cheated out of their homes and acreage by the night riders. Similarly, the CIA across Latin America has aligned itself with the well-to-do ruling class at every opportunity. It has cooperated with the elite to punish and murder labor leaders and clergy who espoused economic opportunity for the poor. The notion that allowing the poor to enrich themselves fairly will also create more wealth for an entire society generally, including the rich, has not permeated CIA thinking. I emphasize what historian Toynbee noted: “America is today the leader of a world-wide anti-revolutionary movement in the defence of vested interests. She now stands for what Rome stood for.”(Italics added.) In sum, by adopting the terrorist philosophy of the KKK and elevating it to the operations of government at the highest level, the imperial Obama administration, like its predecessors, is showing the world the worst possible face of America. Foreigners do not see the goodness inherent in the American people—most of whom only want a good day’s pay for a good day’s work and to educate their children and live at peace with the world. Every adult American has a solemn obligation to demand that its government live up to international law, punish the CIA criminals in its midst, and become a respected citizen of the world. This will not come to pass until Congress abolishes the CIA, putting an end to its KKK-style terrorism which threatens Americans as well as humankind everywhere. Sherwood Ross is an American who has worked as a reporter for the Chicago Daily News, a columnist for wire services and as the News Director of a national civil rights organization. He currently operates the Anti-War News Service from Miami, Florida. To contribute to his work or reach him, email sherwoodross10 at gmail.com Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Karen Aram [mailto:karenaram at hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2017 1:31 PM To: Boyle, Francis A > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: Re: CIA & Mossad Infiltrated UI Center for Advanced Studies-How the C.I.A.’s Torture Program Began: Law School Off Campus! At some point, yes, we do need to address this issue at the U of I. The CIA and the Mossad, as organizations, are the greatest purveyors of the violence known to man within the last century, working on behalf of the United States Oligarch’s. On Jun 22, 2017, at 11:07, Boyle, Francis A > wrote: Michael Moore’s strident advocacy in favor of torture, his public admissions that he advises both the CIA and the Mossad on torture, and his argument that since torture works for the KGB, we Americans should also engage in torture, all qualified him for a Professorship at the University of Illinois Center for Advanced Studies. In other words, the CIA and the Mossad have infiltrated the UI Center for Advanced Studies as well as the College of Law and the Department of Philosophy. Fab. CIA Off Campus! Mossad Off Campus! Torture Off Campus! Michael Moore Off Campus! Consort Hurricane Heidi Hurd Off Campus! War Crimes Off Campus! War Criminals Off Campus! Crimes Against Humanity Off Campus! Genocidaires Against Muslims/Arabs/Asians Of Color Off Campus! Gitmo Kangaroo Courts Off Campus! Law School Off Campus! Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2017 10:33 AM To: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; Karen Aram >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson >; Mildred O'brien > Subject: How the C.I.A.’s Torture Program Began: Law School Off Campus! In a public lecture he gave before the entire College of Law Faculty, whose presence had been demanded by his Consort Dean Hurricane Heidi Hurd, and including before the COL Board of Visitors, the Marquis De Sade Professor of Law and Philosophy and of the Center for Advanced Studies in Torture Michael Moore bragged that he advised the Mossad on Torture and argued that since torture worked for the KGB, we Americans should also engage in torture. Fab Torture Off Campus! Mossad Off Campus! CIA Off Campus! Michael Moore Off Campus! Consort Hurricane Heidi Hurd Off Campus! War Crimes Off Campus! Crimes Against Humanity Off Campus! Law School Off Campus! LeVine: In my own research on war crimes committed by US forces in Iraq. I counted at least two-dozen classes of offenses systematically committed by the Occupation administration and US or US-allied military forces in the invasion and subsequent period of CPA (Coalition Provisional Authority) rule. This includes violations of articles and 17, 18, 33, and 147 of the Geneva Convention covering the killing, hostage-taking and torturing of civilians Boyle: As I just argued at Fort Stewart Georgia in the court martial proceedings for Sgt. Camilo Mejia for desertion, the accountability here goes directly up the chain of command under the terms of the US Army Field Manual 27-10. Specifically, paragraph 501 makes clear that commanders who have ordered or knew or should have known about war crimes and failed to stop it are themselves guilty of war crimes. If you look then at the public record, it is clear that Gens. Sanchez and Miller ordered war crimes and both should be relieved of command immediately: abuse of prisoners in violation of the Geneva Conventions. As for General Abizaid, the overall commander of US forces in Southwest Asia, he admitted in his Senate hearings that he should have known about the war crimes at Abu Ghraib, so basically he's already incriminated himself under the rules of the US Army Field Manual 27-10 In addition, above Abizaid you have Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz. Again my reading of the public record including the Taguba and Red Cross reports is that they either knew or should have known about all these war crimes. Indeed, if you read the ICRC report, - and as I testified under oath and under cross-examination (and was not contradicted) at the Mejia court-martial proceedings, - the widespread and systematic nature of these abuses rise to the level of crimes against humanity, going all the way up through the chain of command. Culpability also extends to Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence General William G. Boykin and Defense Undersecretary Stephen Cambone, who reports directly to Undersecretary of Defense Douglas Feith. And through this line it appears to me that Rumsfeld is culpable, because he was at Abu Ghraib last fall. Indeed, Sy Hersch's New Yorker article on Abu Ghraib claims with good substantiation that he was totally aware and even signed off on the use of techniques which are clearly torture. Rumsfeld was given a tour by Brig. General Janet Karpinski, who was supposed to be in charge of the prison-although she said nothing when she was prohibited from accessing certain areas of it-and so she's also accountable. It's important to understand that the Geneva Conventions, the Hague Regulations of 1907, the U.S. Army Field Manual, all mandate that a criminal investigation be opened. And how President Bush, as Commander in Chief would be accountable under Field Manual 27-10 precisely because he is Commander in Chief of the US armed forces under the US Constitution. We know the White House knows this because if you read White House Counsel Alberto Gonzales's memo, he specifically tries to exempt the US from the Geneva Conventions for Guantanamo and Afghanistan. You can see that Gonzalez was afraid of Bush and others being held directly accountable. Moreover, because Powell dissented, we know there was a debate about this, so Bush had to have been aware of the implications of what was being done, which is also backed up by the memos from Ashcroft. These memos have been unearthed by Newsweek. So ultimately what we have here are people at the highest levels of the chain of command guilty of ordering or not preventing torture, which is both an international crime against the Geneva Conventions and the Torture Convention and a domestic crime as well. What we have then is a conspiracy among the aforementioned individuals to commit war crimes and crimes against humanity. Let me add one more thing that's very important to remember: The principles set forth in 27-10 of personal criminal accountability for war crimes goes back to the Nuremburg Charter, Judgments and Principles derived from the post-World War II trials of Nazi war criminals. Similar principles of criminal accountability were applied by the United States to the Japanese Imperial War criminals. LeVine: In fact, President Bush has compared the war on terror to the war against the Nazis. Boyle: Then we have even more reason to bring this to people's attention: The Nuremburg Principles were in fact originally the idea of the US Government which then orchestrated the prosecutions in Nuremburg. People need to understand the pedigree and heritage here. These are very grave offenses which the US government a generation ago prosecuted and executed Nazis for committing. And Japanese war criminals too. LeVine: How can any of the people you mentioned be prosecuted? Boyle: The military could do it, or the Dept. of Justice, which would have default power to do so if the military didn't. But for this of course we'd need a special prosecutor and that law has been allowed to lapse. Attorney General Ashcroft, who is clearly part of the criminal conspiracy, would never push a war crimes investigations against his colleagues or President Bush. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) Feed: NYT > U.S. Posted on: Wednesday, June 21, 2017 4:15 AM Author: NYT > U.S. Subject: How the C.I.A.’s Torture Program Began Video depositions in a case brought by former C.I.A. detainees give an insight into the beginnings of the agency’s enhanced interrogation program. View article... -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Thu Jun 22 19:51:30 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2017 19:51:30 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] =?utf-8?q?CIA_=26_Mossad_Infiltrated_UI_Center_fo?= =?utf-8?q?r_Advanced_Studies-How_the_C=2EI=2EA=2E=E2=80=99s_Torture_Progr?= =?utf-8?q?am_Began=3A_Law_School_Off_Campus!?= References: Message-ID: Ever since 9/11/2001, the College of Law, its Deans and its Faculty have perpetrated one atrocity after another against International Law, Human Rights, and the United States Constitution—as manifested most recently and most graphically with Killer Koh. Law School Off Campus! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2017 2:40 PM To: 'Karen Aram' Cc: 'David Green' ; 'sherwoodross10 at gmail.com' ; 'peace-discuss at anti-war.net' ; 'C. G. ESTABROOK' ; 'a-fields at uiuc.edu' ; Hoffman, Valerie J ; 'Joe Lauria' ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; 'Arlene Hickory' ; 'David Swanson' ; 'peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net' ; 'abass10 at gmail.com' ; 'mickalideh at gmail.com' ; 'Lina Thorne' ; 'chicago at worldcantwait.net' ; 'Jay' ; Estabrook, Carl G ; 'Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net' ; 'David Johnson' ; 'Mildred O'brien' Subject: RE: CIA & Mossad Infiltrated UI Center for Advanced Studies-How the C.I.A.’s Torture Program Began: Law School Off Campus! absolute degradation and moral bankruptcy.. Ditto for the College of Law---as manifested most recently by Killer Koh. LAW SCHOOL OFF CAMPUS! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2017 2:30 PM To: 'Karen Aram' > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson >; Mildred O'brien > Subject: RE: CIA & Mossad Infiltrated UI Center for Advanced Studies-How the C.I.A.’s Torture Program Began: Law School Off Campus! I understand. I am just citing Moore’s emulation of the KGB in favor of torture as a further example of his absolute degradation and moral bankruptcy along with his working for the CIA and Mossad. But the CIA and Mossad have infiltrated The College of Law, the Center for Advanced Studies and the LAS Department of Philosophy. fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Karen Aram [mailto:karenaram at hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2017 2:24 PM To: Boyle, Francis A > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson >; Mildred O'brien > Subject: Re: CIA & Mossad Infiltrated UI Center for Advanced Studies-How the C.I.A.’s Torture Program Began: Law School Off Campus! We should leave out the KGB, because they aren’t our responsibility and Moore during the “Legitimacy of Targeted Killing” gave examples of KGB tactics, as an excuse to use drones against “our enemy’s,” Islamic terrorists today, Russians tomorrow.” He was already using the USG propaganda against Russians to promote war in Eurasia and our expansion of Nato. On Jun 22, 2017, at 12:18, Boyle, Francis A > wrote: The CIA and the Mossad, as organizations, are the greatest purveyors of the violence known to man within the last century… ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- And let us not leave out the KGB. Moore has publicly argued that since torture works for the KGB, we Americans should mimic the KGB and thus engage in torture. Fab TORTURE OFF CAMPUS! CIA OFF CAMPUS! MOSSAD OFF CAMPUS! MICHAEL MOORE OFF CAMPUS! CONSORT HURRICANE HEIDI HURD OFF CAMPUS! LAW SCHOOL OFF CAMPUS! Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2017 2:09 PM To: 'Karen Aram' > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson >; Mildred O'brien > Subject: RE: CIA & Mossad Infiltrated UI Center for Advanced Studies-How the C.I.A.’s Torture Program Began: Law School Off Campus! Well again back in the 1980s we did have a Movement: CIA OFF CAMPUS! Belden and I were quite active in it. Michael Moore Off Campus! Consort Hurricane Heidi Hurd Off Campus! Law School Off Campus! Fab. That the CIA is a terrorist organization was upheld in the famous “CIA On Trial” case in Northampton, Mass., in 1987, when a jury acquitted 14 protestors who tried to stop CIA recruitment on campus, according to Francis Boyle, the University of Illinois international law authority who defended the group. The defense charged the CIA was “an organized criminal conspiracy like the SS and the Gestapo.” Boyle said, “You would not let the SS or the Gestapo recruit on campus at the University of Massachusetts at Amherst, so you would not permit the CIA to recruit on campus either.” ) [home] Abolish the CIA, America. Sherwood Ross. CIA Torture Report. December 9, 2014 9:01 pm 2 Comments The CIA, the KKK and the USA By Sherwood Ross Global Research, October 15, 2010 15 October 2010 [The CIA, the KKK and the USA] By assigning covert action roles to the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), it is as if the White House and Congress had legitimized the Ku Klux Klan to operate globally. That’s because the CIA today resembles nothing so much as the “Invisible Empire” of the KKK that once spread terror across the South and Midwest. Fiery crosses aside, this is what the CIA is doing globally. The CIA today is committing many of the same sort of gruesome crimes against foreigners that the KKK once inflicted on Americans of color. The principal difference is that the KKK consisted of self-appointed vigilantes who regarded themselves as both outside and above the law when they perpetrated their crimes. By contrast, the CIA acts as the agent of the American government, often at the highest levels, and at times at the direction of the White House. Its crimes typically are committed in contravention of the highest established international law such as the Charter of the United Nations as well as the U.S. Constitution. What’s more, the “Agency,” as it is known, derives its funding largely from an imperialist-minded Congress; additionally, it has no qualms about fattening its budget from drug money and other illegal sources. It is a mirror-image of the lawless entity the U.S. has become since achieving superpower status. And it is incredible that the White House grants license to this violent Agency to commit its crimes with no accountability. The Ku Klux Klan was founded shortly after the end of the U.S. Civil War. Klansman concealed their identities behind flowing white robes and white hoods as they terrorized the newly emancipated blacks to keep them from voting or to drive them from their property. Allowing it to operate in secret literally gives the CIA the mythical Ring of Gyges. In Plato’s Republic, the owner of the ring had the power to become invisible at will. As Wikipedia puts it, Plato “discusses whether a typical person would be moral if he did not have to fear the consequences of his actions.” The ancient Greeks made the argument, Wikipedia says, that “No man would keep his hands off what was not his own when he could safely take what he liked out of the market, go into houses and lie with any one at his pleasure, kill or release from prison whom he would, and in all respects be like a god among men.” The CIA, like Hitler’s Gestapo and Stalin’s NKVD before it, has provided modern man the answer to this question. Its actions illuminate why all criminal entities, from rapists and bank robbers, to Ponzi scheme swindlers and murderers, cloak themselves in secrecy. There are innumerable examples of how American presidents have authorized criminal acts without public discussion that the preponderant majority of Americans would find reprehensible. Example: it was President Lyndon Johnson who ordered the CIA to meddle in Chile’s election to help Eduardo Frei become president. If they had known, U.S. taxpayers might have objected to such a use of their hard-earned money to influence the outcome of another country’s elections. But the public is rarely let in on such illegal foreign policy decisions. Where the KKK after the Civil War terrorized blacks to keep them from voting, the CIA has worked to influence the outcome of elections all over the world through bribery and vote-buying, dirty tricks, and worse. According to investigative reporter William Blum in “Rogue State”(Common Courage Press), the CIA has perverted elections in Italy, Lebanon, Indonesia, The Philippines, Japan, Nepal, Laos, Brazil, Bolivia, Chile, Portugal, Australia, Jamaica, Panama, Nicaragua, Haiti, among other countries. If they had known, taxpayers might also object to the CIA’s numerous overthrows of foreign governments by force and violence—such as was done in Iran in 1953 by President Eisenhower and Chile in 1973 by President Nixon. Both overthrows precipitated bloodbaths that cost tens of thousands of innocent civilians their lives. Blum also lists the countries the CIA has attempted to overthrow or has actually overthrown. His list includes Greece, The Philippines, East Germany, Iran, Guatemala, Indonesia, Iraq, Viet Nam, Laos, Ecuador, The Congo, France, Cuba, Ghana, Chile, South Africa, Bolivia, Portugal, and Nicaragua, to cite a few. As I write, today, October 11th, 2010, Nobel Peace Prize winner Adolfo Perez Esquivel of Argentina called on President Obama to revise U.S. (imperialist) policies toward Latin America. He questioned why the U.S. continues to plant its military bases across the region. That’s an excellent question. If the U.S. is a peace-loving nation, why does it need 800 bases the world over in addition to 1,000 on its own soil? Americans might recoil in disgust if they knew of the CIA’s numerous assassinations of the elected officials of other nations. Is it any wonder Americans so often ask the question, “Why do they hate us?” As historian Arnold Toynbee wrote in 1961, “America is today the leader of a world-wide anti-revolutionary movement in the defence of vested interests. She now stands for what Rome stood for. Rome consistently supported the rich against the poor in all foreign communities that fell under her sway; and, since the poor, so far, have always and everywhere been more numerous than the rich, Rome’s policy made for inequality, for injustice, and for the least happiness of the greatest number.” The CIA’s protective secrecy resembles nothing so much as the KKK, which proudly proclaimed itself “the Invisible Empire” and whose thugs killed citizens having the courage to identify hooded Klansmen to law enforcement officials. Today, it is our highest public officials that protect this criminal force, said to number about 25,000 employees. It is actually a Federal offense to reveal the identity of a CIA undercover agent—unless, of course, you happen to be I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby, and are employed by Vice President Dick Cheney. Libby leaked the identity of CIA agent Valerie Plame to punish her husband Joseph Wilson for publishing a report that undercut the White House lie that Saddam Hussein had purchased “yellowcake” from Niger to fuel WMD. Today, high public officials direct the CIA’s criminal policies and protect its agents’ identities the better to enable them to commit their crimes. According to journalist Fred Cook in his book “Ku Klux Klan: America’s Recurring Nightmare”(Messner), “The Klan was inherently a vigilante organization. It could commit the most atrocious acts under the guise of high principle andperpetrators of those acts would be hidden behind white masks and protected by Klan secrecy… (The Klan) set itself up as judge, jury and executioner”—a policy adopted by the CIA today. CIA spies have conducted their criminal operations masquerading as officials of U.S. aid programs, business executives, or journalists. Example: The San Diego-based Copley News Service’s staff of foreign correspondents allegedly was created to provide cover to CIA spies, compromising legitimate American journalists trying to do their jobs. While the murders committed by the KKK likely ran into the many thousands, the CIA has killed on a far grander scale and managed to keep its role largely secret. As Tim Weiner, who covered the CIA for the New York Times noted in his book “Legacy of Ashes: The History of the CIA” (Anchor): “In Guatemala, 200,000 civilians had died during forty years of struggle following the agency’s(CIA) 1954 coup against an elected president.” Weiner adds, “the CIA’s officers in Guatemala still went to great lengths to conceal the nature of their close relations with the military and to suppress reports that Guatemalan officers on its payroll were murderers, torturers, and thieves.” When it comes to murder, the CIA makes the KKK look like Boy Scouts. Like the KKK, CIA terrorists operate above the law. KKK members committed thousands of lynchings yet rarely were its members punished for them. In 2009 at a speech at CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia, President Obama revealed he was not intent on punishing CIA agents for their crimes but would rather “look forward.” This seemingly charitable philosophy may be driven by the fact that Obama worked for Business International Corporation, a CIA front, at least in 1983 and perhaps longer, and allegedly is the son of a mother and father both of whom also worked for the CIA, as did Obama’s grandmother! I could find none of this in Obama’s biography when he ran for the presidency, when a gullible American public elected a CIA “mole” to the White House. Consider this, too: an agency President Truman feared would become “an American Gestapo” when he signed the enabling legislation into law in 1947 has become just that, and it casts a lengthy shadow over the White House. Ominously, it has in Barack Obama one of its own former employees sitting in the Oval Office—a man who, according to news reports, has vastly expanded the frequency of the CIA’s assassinations by drone aircraft in Pakistan and who illegally claims the “right” to assassinate any American citizen abroad as well. What’s more, from 1989 to 1993 George Bush Sr., the CIA’s own former Director, sat in the White House. Additionally, from 2001 to 2009, the CIA had that Director’s son, George W. Bush, in the Oval Office giving the CIA a blank check after the 9/11 massacre. Bush Jr., according to The New York Times, in the summer of 1974 worked for Alaska International Industries, which did contract work for the CIA. The Times noted that this job did not appear in his biography when he ran for the White House in 2000, terming it “The Missing Chapter in the Bush Bio.” Thus, two presidential candidates with CIA ties—Bush Jr. and Obama—both neglected to mention them. And in Bill Clinton, who presided from 1993 to 2001, the CIA had a go-along president who satisfied the Agency’s blood-lust when he authorized the first illegal “rendition,” a euphemism for what KKK thugs once knew as kidnapping and torture. Is there any question that the Agency has not played an influential, behind-the-scenes or even a direct role in the operations of the U.S. government at its highest level? It may indeed be a stretch to argue that the CIA is running the country but it is no stretch to say that year after year our presidents reflect the criminal philosophy of the Agency. Other parallels with the KKK are striking. As Richmond Flowers, the Attorney General of Alabama stated in 1966, “I’ve found the Klan more than just another secret society… It resembles a shadow government, making its own laws, manipulating local politics, burrowing into some of our local law-enforcement agencies…When a pitiable misfit puts on his $15 sheet, society can no longer ignore him.” Yet the descendants of those misfits have moved up today where they feel comfortable as operatives in the shadow government run by the White House. One of the CIA’s illicit duties has been to serve as a conduit for funneling U.S. taxpayer dollars to corrupt dictators and strongmen bent on suppressing the popular will of their citizenry. As Noam Chomsky wrote in “Failed States”(Metropolitan/Owl), in Honduras, “military officers in charge of the battalion (3-16) were on the CIA payroll.” This elite unit, he says, “organized and trained by the United States and Argentine neo-Nazis,” was “the most barbaric of the Latin American killers that Washington had been supporting.” Like the KKK, the CIA kidnaps many of its victims with no thought ever of legal procedure. It exhibits utter disdain for the rights of those individuals, the sovereignty of foreign nations, or respect for international law. At least hundreds of foreigners, mostly from the Middle East, have been the victims of “renditions” just as the KKK kidnapped and flogged and lynched blacks, labor leaders, Catholics, Jews, or wayward wives whom it felt to be morally lacking. In September, 1921, The New York World ran a series exposing the KKK. It pointed out that, among other things, the KKK was violating the Bill of Rights wholesale. This included the Fourth amendment against “unreasonable searches and seizures,” the Fifth and the Sixth amendments, guaranteeing that no one may be held without a grand jury indictment or punished without a fair trial. And these rights today are similarly trampled by the CIA against American citizens, not just foreigners. Apparently, only foreign courts care to rein in the CIA. The 23 CIA agents that it took to render one “suspect” in Italy are wanted there by the magistrates. (The spooks, by the way, ran up some fabulous bills in luxury hotels on taxpayers’ dollars in that escapade.) Former President Jimmy Carter wrote in his book “Our Endangered Values”(Simon & Schuster), the CIA transferred some of those it kidnapped to countries that included Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Morocco, Jordan, and Uzbekistan where “the techniques of torture are almost indescribably terrible, including, as a U.S. ambassador to one of the recipient countries reported, ‘partial boiling of a hand or an arm,’ with at least two prisoners boiled to death.” The KKK’s methods of punishment were often as ugly: the brutal flogging of blacks in front of vicious crowds, followed by castration and burning their victims alive, and then lynching of the corpses. As for the CIA, “Why?” asks investigative reporter William Blum, “are these men rendered in the first place if not to be tortured? Does the United States not have any speakers in foreign languages to conduct interrogations?” That the CIA is a terrorist organization was upheld in the famous “CIA On Trial” case in Northampton, Mass., in 1987, when a jury acquitted 14 protestors who tried to stop CIA recruitment on campus, according to Francis Boyle, the University of Illinois international law authority who defended the group. The defense charged the CIA was “an organized criminal conspiracy like the SS and the Gestapo.” Boyle said, “You would not let the SS or the Gestapo recruit on campus at the University of Massachusetts at Amherst, so you would not permit the CIA to recruit on campus either.” Another shared characteristic of the KKK and CIA is greed, the desire to loot the hard-earned wealth of others. Often, Klansmen terrorized African-Americans who had amassed property to frighten them off their land. Law-abiding black citizens who had pulled themselves up by the proverbial bootstraps were cheated out of their homes and acreage by the night riders. Similarly, the CIA across Latin America has aligned itself with the well-to-do ruling class at every opportunity. It has cooperated with the elite to punish and murder labor leaders and clergy who espoused economic opportunity for the poor. The notion that allowing the poor to enrich themselves fairly will also create more wealth for an entire society generally, including the rich, has not permeated CIA thinking. I emphasize what historian Toynbee noted: “America is today the leader of a world-wide anti-revolutionary movement in the defence of vested interests. She now stands for what Rome stood for.”(Italics added.) In sum, by adopting the terrorist philosophy of the KKK and elevating it to the operations of government at the highest level, the imperial Obama administration, like its predecessors, is showing the world the worst possible face of America. Foreigners do not see the goodness inherent in the American people—most of whom only want a good day’s pay for a good day’s work and to educate their children and live at peace with the world. Every adult American has a solemn obligation to demand that its government live up to international law, punish the CIA criminals in its midst, and become a respected citizen of the world. This will not come to pass until Congress abolishes the CIA, putting an end to its KKK-style terrorism which threatens Americans as well as humankind everywhere. Sherwood Ross is an American who has worked as a reporter for the Chicago Daily News, a columnist for wire services and as the News Director of a national civil rights organization. He currently operates the Anti-War News Service from Miami, Florida. To contribute to his work or reach him, email sherwoodross10 at gmail.com Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Karen Aram [mailto:karenaram at hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2017 1:31 PM To: Boyle, Francis A > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: Re: CIA & Mossad Infiltrated UI Center for Advanced Studies-How the C.I.A.’s Torture Program Began: Law School Off Campus! At some point, yes, we do need to address this issue at the U of I. The CIA and the Mossad, as organizations, are the greatest purveyors of the violence known to man within the last century, working on behalf of the United States Oligarch’s. On Jun 22, 2017, at 11:07, Boyle, Francis A > wrote: Michael Moore’s strident advocacy in favor of torture, his public admissions that he advises both the CIA and the Mossad on torture, and his argument that since torture works for the KGB, we Americans should also engage in torture, all qualified him for a Professorship at the University of Illinois Center for Advanced Studies. In other words, the CIA and the Mossad have infiltrated the UI Center for Advanced Studies as well as the College of Law and the Department of Philosophy. Fab. CIA Off Campus! Mossad Off Campus! Torture Off Campus! Michael Moore Off Campus! Consort Hurricane Heidi Hurd Off Campus! War Crimes Off Campus! War Criminals Off Campus! Crimes Against Humanity Off Campus! Genocidaires Against Muslims/Arabs/Asians Of Color Off Campus! Gitmo Kangaroo Courts Off Campus! Law School Off Campus! Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2017 10:33 AM To: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; Karen Aram >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson >; Mildred O'brien > Subject: How the C.I.A.’s Torture Program Began: Law School Off Campus! In a public lecture he gave before the entire College of Law Faculty, whose presence had been demanded by his Consort Dean Hurricane Heidi Hurd, and including before the COL Board of Visitors, the Marquis De Sade Professor of Law and Philosophy and of the Center for Advanced Studies in Torture Michael Moore bragged that he advised the Mossad on Torture and argued that since torture worked for the KGB, we Americans should also engage in torture. Fab Torture Off Campus! Mossad Off Campus! CIA Off Campus! Michael Moore Off Campus! Consort Hurricane Heidi Hurd Off Campus! War Crimes Off Campus! Crimes Against Humanity Off Campus! Law School Off Campus! LeVine: In my own research on war crimes committed by US forces in Iraq. I counted at least two-dozen classes of offenses systematically committed by the Occupation administration and US or US-allied military forces in the invasion and subsequent period of CPA (Coalition Provisional Authority) rule. This includes violations of articles and 17, 18, 33, and 147 of the Geneva Convention covering the killing, hostage-taking and torturing of civilians Boyle: As I just argued at Fort Stewart Georgia in the court martial proceedings for Sgt. Camilo Mejia for desertion, the accountability here goes directly up the chain of command under the terms of the US Army Field Manual 27-10. Specifically, paragraph 501 makes clear that commanders who have ordered or knew or should have known about war crimes and failed to stop it are themselves guilty of war crimes. If you look then at the public record, it is clear that Gens. Sanchez and Miller ordered war crimes and both should be relieved of command immediately: abuse of prisoners in violation of the Geneva Conventions. As for General Abizaid, the overall commander of US forces in Southwest Asia, he admitted in his Senate hearings that he should have known about the war crimes at Abu Ghraib, so basically he's already incriminated himself under the rules of the US Army Field Manual 27-10 In addition, above Abizaid you have Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz. Again my reading of the public record including the Taguba and Red Cross reports is that they either knew or should have known about all these war crimes. Indeed, if you read the ICRC report, - and as I testified under oath and under cross-examination (and was not contradicted) at the Mejia court-martial proceedings, - the widespread and systematic nature of these abuses rise to the level of crimes against humanity, going all the way up through the chain of command. Culpability also extends to Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence General William G. Boykin and Defense Undersecretary Stephen Cambone, who reports directly to Undersecretary of Defense Douglas Feith. And through this line it appears to me that Rumsfeld is culpable, because he was at Abu Ghraib last fall. Indeed, Sy Hersch's New Yorker article on Abu Ghraib claims with good substantiation that he was totally aware and even signed off on the use of techniques which are clearly torture. Rumsfeld was given a tour by Brig. General Janet Karpinski, who was supposed to be in charge of the prison-although she said nothing when she was prohibited from accessing certain areas of it-and so she's also accountable. It's important to understand that the Geneva Conventions, the Hague Regulations of 1907, the U.S. Army Field Manual, all mandate that a criminal investigation be opened. And how President Bush, as Commander in Chief would be accountable under Field Manual 27-10 precisely because he is Commander in Chief of the US armed forces under the US Constitution. We know the White House knows this because if you read White House Counsel Alberto Gonzales's memo, he specifically tries to exempt the US from the Geneva Conventions for Guantanamo and Afghanistan. You can see that Gonzalez was afraid of Bush and others being held directly accountable. Moreover, because Powell dissented, we know there was a debate about this, so Bush had to have been aware of the implications of what was being done, which is also backed up by the memos from Ashcroft. These memos have been unearthed by Newsweek. So ultimately what we have here are people at the highest levels of the chain of command guilty of ordering or not preventing torture, which is both an international crime against the Geneva Conventions and the Torture Convention and a domestic crime as well. What we have then is a conspiracy among the aforementioned individuals to commit war crimes and crimes against humanity. Let me add one more thing that's very important to remember: The principles set forth in 27-10 of personal criminal accountability for war crimes goes back to the Nuremburg Charter, Judgments and Principles derived from the post-World War II trials of Nazi war criminals. Similar principles of criminal accountability were applied by the United States to the Japanese Imperial War criminals. LeVine: In fact, President Bush has compared the war on terror to the war against the Nazis. Boyle: Then we have even more reason to bring this to people's attention: The Nuremburg Principles were in fact originally the idea of the US Government which then orchestrated the prosecutions in Nuremburg. People need to understand the pedigree and heritage here. These are very grave offenses which the US government a generation ago prosecuted and executed Nazis for committing. And Japanese war criminals too. LeVine: How can any of the people you mentioned be prosecuted? Boyle: The military could do it, or the Dept. of Justice, which would have default power to do so if the military didn't. But for this of course we'd need a special prosecutor and that law has been allowed to lapse. Attorney General Ashcroft, who is clearly part of the criminal conspiracy, would never push a war crimes investigations against his colleagues or President Bush. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) Feed: NYT > U.S. Posted on: Wednesday, June 21, 2017 4:15 AM Author: NYT > U.S. Subject: How the C.I.A.’s Torture Program Began Video depositions in a case brought by former C.I.A. detainees give an insight into the beginnings of the agency’s enhanced interrogation program. View article... -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Thu Jun 22 19:51:30 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2017 19:51:30 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] =?utf-8?q?CIA_=26_Mossad_Infiltrated_UI_Center_fo?= =?utf-8?q?r_Advanced_Studies-How_the_C=2EI=2EA=2E=E2=80=99s_Torture_Progr?= =?utf-8?q?am_Began=3A_Law_School_Off_Campus!?= References: Message-ID: Ever since 9/11/2001, the College of Law, its Deans and its Faculty have perpetrated one atrocity after another against International Law, Human Rights, and the United States Constitution—as manifested most recently and most graphically with Killer Koh. Law School Off Campus! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2017 2:40 PM To: 'Karen Aram' Cc: 'David Green' ; 'sherwoodross10 at gmail.com' ; 'peace-discuss at anti-war.net' ; 'C. G. ESTABROOK' ; 'a-fields at uiuc.edu' ; Hoffman, Valerie J ; 'Joe Lauria' ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; 'Arlene Hickory' ; 'David Swanson' ; 'peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net' ; 'abass10 at gmail.com' ; 'mickalideh at gmail.com' ; 'Lina Thorne' ; 'chicago at worldcantwait.net' ; 'Jay' ; Estabrook, Carl G ; 'Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net' ; 'David Johnson' ; 'Mildred O'brien' Subject: RE: CIA & Mossad Infiltrated UI Center for Advanced Studies-How the C.I.A.’s Torture Program Began: Law School Off Campus! absolute degradation and moral bankruptcy.. Ditto for the College of Law---as manifested most recently by Killer Koh. LAW SCHOOL OFF CAMPUS! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2017 2:30 PM To: 'Karen Aram' > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson >; Mildred O'brien > Subject: RE: CIA & Mossad Infiltrated UI Center for Advanced Studies-How the C.I.A.’s Torture Program Began: Law School Off Campus! I understand. I am just citing Moore’s emulation of the KGB in favor of torture as a further example of his absolute degradation and moral bankruptcy along with his working for the CIA and Mossad. But the CIA and Mossad have infiltrated The College of Law, the Center for Advanced Studies and the LAS Department of Philosophy. fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Karen Aram [mailto:karenaram at hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2017 2:24 PM To: Boyle, Francis A > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson >; Mildred O'brien > Subject: Re: CIA & Mossad Infiltrated UI Center for Advanced Studies-How the C.I.A.’s Torture Program Began: Law School Off Campus! We should leave out the KGB, because they aren’t our responsibility and Moore during the “Legitimacy of Targeted Killing” gave examples of KGB tactics, as an excuse to use drones against “our enemy’s,” Islamic terrorists today, Russians tomorrow.” He was already using the USG propaganda against Russians to promote war in Eurasia and our expansion of Nato. On Jun 22, 2017, at 12:18, Boyle, Francis A > wrote: The CIA and the Mossad, as organizations, are the greatest purveyors of the violence known to man within the last century… ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- And let us not leave out the KGB. Moore has publicly argued that since torture works for the KGB, we Americans should mimic the KGB and thus engage in torture. Fab TORTURE OFF CAMPUS! CIA OFF CAMPUS! MOSSAD OFF CAMPUS! MICHAEL MOORE OFF CAMPUS! CONSORT HURRICANE HEIDI HURD OFF CAMPUS! LAW SCHOOL OFF CAMPUS! Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2017 2:09 PM To: 'Karen Aram' > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson >; Mildred O'brien > Subject: RE: CIA & Mossad Infiltrated UI Center for Advanced Studies-How the C.I.A.’s Torture Program Began: Law School Off Campus! Well again back in the 1980s we did have a Movement: CIA OFF CAMPUS! Belden and I were quite active in it. Michael Moore Off Campus! Consort Hurricane Heidi Hurd Off Campus! Law School Off Campus! Fab. That the CIA is a terrorist organization was upheld in the famous “CIA On Trial” case in Northampton, Mass., in 1987, when a jury acquitted 14 protestors who tried to stop CIA recruitment on campus, according to Francis Boyle, the University of Illinois international law authority who defended the group. The defense charged the CIA was “an organized criminal conspiracy like the SS and the Gestapo.” Boyle said, “You would not let the SS or the Gestapo recruit on campus at the University of Massachusetts at Amherst, so you would not permit the CIA to recruit on campus either.” ) [home] Abolish the CIA, America. Sherwood Ross. CIA Torture Report. December 9, 2014 9:01 pm 2 Comments The CIA, the KKK and the USA By Sherwood Ross Global Research, October 15, 2010 15 October 2010 [The CIA, the KKK and the USA] By assigning covert action roles to the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), it is as if the White House and Congress had legitimized the Ku Klux Klan to operate globally. That’s because the CIA today resembles nothing so much as the “Invisible Empire” of the KKK that once spread terror across the South and Midwest. Fiery crosses aside, this is what the CIA is doing globally. The CIA today is committing many of the same sort of gruesome crimes against foreigners that the KKK once inflicted on Americans of color. The principal difference is that the KKK consisted of self-appointed vigilantes who regarded themselves as both outside and above the law when they perpetrated their crimes. By contrast, the CIA acts as the agent of the American government, often at the highest levels, and at times at the direction of the White House. Its crimes typically are committed in contravention of the highest established international law such as the Charter of the United Nations as well as the U.S. Constitution. What’s more, the “Agency,” as it is known, derives its funding largely from an imperialist-minded Congress; additionally, it has no qualms about fattening its budget from drug money and other illegal sources. It is a mirror-image of the lawless entity the U.S. has become since achieving superpower status. And it is incredible that the White House grants license to this violent Agency to commit its crimes with no accountability. The Ku Klux Klan was founded shortly after the end of the U.S. Civil War. Klansman concealed their identities behind flowing white robes and white hoods as they terrorized the newly emancipated blacks to keep them from voting or to drive them from their property. Allowing it to operate in secret literally gives the CIA the mythical Ring of Gyges. In Plato’s Republic, the owner of the ring had the power to become invisible at will. As Wikipedia puts it, Plato “discusses whether a typical person would be moral if he did not have to fear the consequences of his actions.” The ancient Greeks made the argument, Wikipedia says, that “No man would keep his hands off what was not his own when he could safely take what he liked out of the market, go into houses and lie with any one at his pleasure, kill or release from prison whom he would, and in all respects be like a god among men.” The CIA, like Hitler’s Gestapo and Stalin’s NKVD before it, has provided modern man the answer to this question. Its actions illuminate why all criminal entities, from rapists and bank robbers, to Ponzi scheme swindlers and murderers, cloak themselves in secrecy. There are innumerable examples of how American presidents have authorized criminal acts without public discussion that the preponderant majority of Americans would find reprehensible. Example: it was President Lyndon Johnson who ordered the CIA to meddle in Chile’s election to help Eduardo Frei become president. If they had known, U.S. taxpayers might have objected to such a use of their hard-earned money to influence the outcome of another country’s elections. But the public is rarely let in on such illegal foreign policy decisions. Where the KKK after the Civil War terrorized blacks to keep them from voting, the CIA has worked to influence the outcome of elections all over the world through bribery and vote-buying, dirty tricks, and worse. According to investigative reporter William Blum in “Rogue State”(Common Courage Press), the CIA has perverted elections in Italy, Lebanon, Indonesia, The Philippines, Japan, Nepal, Laos, Brazil, Bolivia, Chile, Portugal, Australia, Jamaica, Panama, Nicaragua, Haiti, among other countries. If they had known, taxpayers might also object to the CIA’s numerous overthrows of foreign governments by force and violence—such as was done in Iran in 1953 by President Eisenhower and Chile in 1973 by President Nixon. Both overthrows precipitated bloodbaths that cost tens of thousands of innocent civilians their lives. Blum also lists the countries the CIA has attempted to overthrow or has actually overthrown. His list includes Greece, The Philippines, East Germany, Iran, Guatemala, Indonesia, Iraq, Viet Nam, Laos, Ecuador, The Congo, France, Cuba, Ghana, Chile, South Africa, Bolivia, Portugal, and Nicaragua, to cite a few. As I write, today, October 11th, 2010, Nobel Peace Prize winner Adolfo Perez Esquivel of Argentina called on President Obama to revise U.S. (imperialist) policies toward Latin America. He questioned why the U.S. continues to plant its military bases across the region. That’s an excellent question. If the U.S. is a peace-loving nation, why does it need 800 bases the world over in addition to 1,000 on its own soil? Americans might recoil in disgust if they knew of the CIA’s numerous assassinations of the elected officials of other nations. Is it any wonder Americans so often ask the question, “Why do they hate us?” As historian Arnold Toynbee wrote in 1961, “America is today the leader of a world-wide anti-revolutionary movement in the defence of vested interests. She now stands for what Rome stood for. Rome consistently supported the rich against the poor in all foreign communities that fell under her sway; and, since the poor, so far, have always and everywhere been more numerous than the rich, Rome’s policy made for inequality, for injustice, and for the least happiness of the greatest number.” The CIA’s protective secrecy resembles nothing so much as the KKK, which proudly proclaimed itself “the Invisible Empire” and whose thugs killed citizens having the courage to identify hooded Klansmen to law enforcement officials. Today, it is our highest public officials that protect this criminal force, said to number about 25,000 employees. It is actually a Federal offense to reveal the identity of a CIA undercover agent—unless, of course, you happen to be I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby, and are employed by Vice President Dick Cheney. Libby leaked the identity of CIA agent Valerie Plame to punish her husband Joseph Wilson for publishing a report that undercut the White House lie that Saddam Hussein had purchased “yellowcake” from Niger to fuel WMD. Today, high public officials direct the CIA’s criminal policies and protect its agents’ identities the better to enable them to commit their crimes. According to journalist Fred Cook in his book “Ku Klux Klan: America’s Recurring Nightmare”(Messner), “The Klan was inherently a vigilante organization. It could commit the most atrocious acts under the guise of high principle andperpetrators of those acts would be hidden behind white masks and protected by Klan secrecy… (The Klan) set itself up as judge, jury and executioner”—a policy adopted by the CIA today. CIA spies have conducted their criminal operations masquerading as officials of U.S. aid programs, business executives, or journalists. Example: The San Diego-based Copley News Service’s staff of foreign correspondents allegedly was created to provide cover to CIA spies, compromising legitimate American journalists trying to do their jobs. While the murders committed by the KKK likely ran into the many thousands, the CIA has killed on a far grander scale and managed to keep its role largely secret. As Tim Weiner, who covered the CIA for the New York Times noted in his book “Legacy of Ashes: The History of the CIA” (Anchor): “In Guatemala, 200,000 civilians had died during forty years of struggle following the agency’s(CIA) 1954 coup against an elected president.” Weiner adds, “the CIA’s officers in Guatemala still went to great lengths to conceal the nature of their close relations with the military and to suppress reports that Guatemalan officers on its payroll were murderers, torturers, and thieves.” When it comes to murder, the CIA makes the KKK look like Boy Scouts. Like the KKK, CIA terrorists operate above the law. KKK members committed thousands of lynchings yet rarely were its members punished for them. In 2009 at a speech at CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia, President Obama revealed he was not intent on punishing CIA agents for their crimes but would rather “look forward.” This seemingly charitable philosophy may be driven by the fact that Obama worked for Business International Corporation, a CIA front, at least in 1983 and perhaps longer, and allegedly is the son of a mother and father both of whom also worked for the CIA, as did Obama’s grandmother! I could find none of this in Obama’s biography when he ran for the presidency, when a gullible American public elected a CIA “mole” to the White House. Consider this, too: an agency President Truman feared would become “an American Gestapo” when he signed the enabling legislation into law in 1947 has become just that, and it casts a lengthy shadow over the White House. Ominously, it has in Barack Obama one of its own former employees sitting in the Oval Office—a man who, according to news reports, has vastly expanded the frequency of the CIA’s assassinations by drone aircraft in Pakistan and who illegally claims the “right” to assassinate any American citizen abroad as well. What’s more, from 1989 to 1993 George Bush Sr., the CIA’s own former Director, sat in the White House. Additionally, from 2001 to 2009, the CIA had that Director’s son, George W. Bush, in the Oval Office giving the CIA a blank check after the 9/11 massacre. Bush Jr., according to The New York Times, in the summer of 1974 worked for Alaska International Industries, which did contract work for the CIA. The Times noted that this job did not appear in his biography when he ran for the White House in 2000, terming it “The Missing Chapter in the Bush Bio.” Thus, two presidential candidates with CIA ties—Bush Jr. and Obama—both neglected to mention them. And in Bill Clinton, who presided from 1993 to 2001, the CIA had a go-along president who satisfied the Agency’s blood-lust when he authorized the first illegal “rendition,” a euphemism for what KKK thugs once knew as kidnapping and torture. Is there any question that the Agency has not played an influential, behind-the-scenes or even a direct role in the operations of the U.S. government at its highest level? It may indeed be a stretch to argue that the CIA is running the country but it is no stretch to say that year after year our presidents reflect the criminal philosophy of the Agency. Other parallels with the KKK are striking. As Richmond Flowers, the Attorney General of Alabama stated in 1966, “I’ve found the Klan more than just another secret society… It resembles a shadow government, making its own laws, manipulating local politics, burrowing into some of our local law-enforcement agencies…When a pitiable misfit puts on his $15 sheet, society can no longer ignore him.” Yet the descendants of those misfits have moved up today where they feel comfortable as operatives in the shadow government run by the White House. One of the CIA’s illicit duties has been to serve as a conduit for funneling U.S. taxpayer dollars to corrupt dictators and strongmen bent on suppressing the popular will of their citizenry. As Noam Chomsky wrote in “Failed States”(Metropolitan/Owl), in Honduras, “military officers in charge of the battalion (3-16) were on the CIA payroll.” This elite unit, he says, “organized and trained by the United States and Argentine neo-Nazis,” was “the most barbaric of the Latin American killers that Washington had been supporting.” Like the KKK, the CIA kidnaps many of its victims with no thought ever of legal procedure. It exhibits utter disdain for the rights of those individuals, the sovereignty of foreign nations, or respect for international law. At least hundreds of foreigners, mostly from the Middle East, have been the victims of “renditions” just as the KKK kidnapped and flogged and lynched blacks, labor leaders, Catholics, Jews, or wayward wives whom it felt to be morally lacking. In September, 1921, The New York World ran a series exposing the KKK. It pointed out that, among other things, the KKK was violating the Bill of Rights wholesale. This included the Fourth amendment against “unreasonable searches and seizures,” the Fifth and the Sixth amendments, guaranteeing that no one may be held without a grand jury indictment or punished without a fair trial. And these rights today are similarly trampled by the CIA against American citizens, not just foreigners. Apparently, only foreign courts care to rein in the CIA. The 23 CIA agents that it took to render one “suspect” in Italy are wanted there by the magistrates. (The spooks, by the way, ran up some fabulous bills in luxury hotels on taxpayers’ dollars in that escapade.) Former President Jimmy Carter wrote in his book “Our Endangered Values”(Simon & Schuster), the CIA transferred some of those it kidnapped to countries that included Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Morocco, Jordan, and Uzbekistan where “the techniques of torture are almost indescribably terrible, including, as a U.S. ambassador to one of the recipient countries reported, ‘partial boiling of a hand or an arm,’ with at least two prisoners boiled to death.” The KKK’s methods of punishment were often as ugly: the brutal flogging of blacks in front of vicious crowds, followed by castration and burning their victims alive, and then lynching of the corpses. As for the CIA, “Why?” asks investigative reporter William Blum, “are these men rendered in the first place if not to be tortured? Does the United States not have any speakers in foreign languages to conduct interrogations?” That the CIA is a terrorist organization was upheld in the famous “CIA On Trial” case in Northampton, Mass., in 1987, when a jury acquitted 14 protestors who tried to stop CIA recruitment on campus, according to Francis Boyle, the University of Illinois international law authority who defended the group. The defense charged the CIA was “an organized criminal conspiracy like the SS and the Gestapo.” Boyle said, “You would not let the SS or the Gestapo recruit on campus at the University of Massachusetts at Amherst, so you would not permit the CIA to recruit on campus either.” Another shared characteristic of the KKK and CIA is greed, the desire to loot the hard-earned wealth of others. Often, Klansmen terrorized African-Americans who had amassed property to frighten them off their land. Law-abiding black citizens who had pulled themselves up by the proverbial bootstraps were cheated out of their homes and acreage by the night riders. Similarly, the CIA across Latin America has aligned itself with the well-to-do ruling class at every opportunity. It has cooperated with the elite to punish and murder labor leaders and clergy who espoused economic opportunity for the poor. The notion that allowing the poor to enrich themselves fairly will also create more wealth for an entire society generally, including the rich, has not permeated CIA thinking. I emphasize what historian Toynbee noted: “America is today the leader of a world-wide anti-revolutionary movement in the defence of vested interests. She now stands for what Rome stood for.”(Italics added.) In sum, by adopting the terrorist philosophy of the KKK and elevating it to the operations of government at the highest level, the imperial Obama administration, like its predecessors, is showing the world the worst possible face of America. Foreigners do not see the goodness inherent in the American people—most of whom only want a good day’s pay for a good day’s work and to educate their children and live at peace with the world. Every adult American has a solemn obligation to demand that its government live up to international law, punish the CIA criminals in its midst, and become a respected citizen of the world. This will not come to pass until Congress abolishes the CIA, putting an end to its KKK-style terrorism which threatens Americans as well as humankind everywhere. Sherwood Ross is an American who has worked as a reporter for the Chicago Daily News, a columnist for wire services and as the News Director of a national civil rights organization. He currently operates the Anti-War News Service from Miami, Florida. To contribute to his work or reach him, email sherwoodross10 at gmail.com Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Karen Aram [mailto:karenaram at hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2017 1:31 PM To: Boyle, Francis A > Cc: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson > Subject: Re: CIA & Mossad Infiltrated UI Center for Advanced Studies-How the C.I.A.’s Torture Program Began: Law School Off Campus! At some point, yes, we do need to address this issue at the U of I. The CIA and the Mossad, as organizations, are the greatest purveyors of the violence known to man within the last century, working on behalf of the United States Oligarch’s. On Jun 22, 2017, at 11:07, Boyle, Francis A > wrote: Michael Moore’s strident advocacy in favor of torture, his public admissions that he advises both the CIA and the Mossad on torture, and his argument that since torture works for the KGB, we Americans should also engage in torture, all qualified him for a Professorship at the University of Illinois Center for Advanced Studies. In other words, the CIA and the Mossad have infiltrated the UI Center for Advanced Studies as well as the College of Law and the Department of Philosophy. Fab. CIA Off Campus! Mossad Off Campus! Torture Off Campus! Michael Moore Off Campus! Consort Hurricane Heidi Hurd Off Campus! War Crimes Off Campus! War Criminals Off Campus! Crimes Against Humanity Off Campus! Genocidaires Against Muslims/Arabs/Asians Of Color Off Campus! Gitmo Kangaroo Courts Off Campus! Law School Off Campus! Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2017 10:33 AM To: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; Karen Aram >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson >; Mildred O'brien > Subject: How the C.I.A.’s Torture Program Began: Law School Off Campus! In a public lecture he gave before the entire College of Law Faculty, whose presence had been demanded by his Consort Dean Hurricane Heidi Hurd, and including before the COL Board of Visitors, the Marquis De Sade Professor of Law and Philosophy and of the Center for Advanced Studies in Torture Michael Moore bragged that he advised the Mossad on Torture and argued that since torture worked for the KGB, we Americans should also engage in torture. Fab Torture Off Campus! Mossad Off Campus! CIA Off Campus! Michael Moore Off Campus! Consort Hurricane Heidi Hurd Off Campus! War Crimes Off Campus! Crimes Against Humanity Off Campus! Law School Off Campus! LeVine: In my own research on war crimes committed by US forces in Iraq. I counted at least two-dozen classes of offenses systematically committed by the Occupation administration and US or US-allied military forces in the invasion and subsequent period of CPA (Coalition Provisional Authority) rule. This includes violations of articles and 17, 18, 33, and 147 of the Geneva Convention covering the killing, hostage-taking and torturing of civilians Boyle: As I just argued at Fort Stewart Georgia in the court martial proceedings for Sgt. Camilo Mejia for desertion, the accountability here goes directly up the chain of command under the terms of the US Army Field Manual 27-10. Specifically, paragraph 501 makes clear that commanders who have ordered or knew or should have known about war crimes and failed to stop it are themselves guilty of war crimes. If you look then at the public record, it is clear that Gens. Sanchez and Miller ordered war crimes and both should be relieved of command immediately: abuse of prisoners in violation of the Geneva Conventions. As for General Abizaid, the overall commander of US forces in Southwest Asia, he admitted in his Senate hearings that he should have known about the war crimes at Abu Ghraib, so basically he's already incriminated himself under the rules of the US Army Field Manual 27-10 In addition, above Abizaid you have Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz. Again my reading of the public record including the Taguba and Red Cross reports is that they either knew or should have known about all these war crimes. Indeed, if you read the ICRC report, - and as I testified under oath and under cross-examination (and was not contradicted) at the Mejia court-martial proceedings, - the widespread and systematic nature of these abuses rise to the level of crimes against humanity, going all the way up through the chain of command. Culpability also extends to Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence General William G. Boykin and Defense Undersecretary Stephen Cambone, who reports directly to Undersecretary of Defense Douglas Feith. And through this line it appears to me that Rumsfeld is culpable, because he was at Abu Ghraib last fall. Indeed, Sy Hersch's New Yorker article on Abu Ghraib claims with good substantiation that he was totally aware and even signed off on the use of techniques which are clearly torture. Rumsfeld was given a tour by Brig. General Janet Karpinski, who was supposed to be in charge of the prison-although she said nothing when she was prohibited from accessing certain areas of it-and so she's also accountable. It's important to understand that the Geneva Conventions, the Hague Regulations of 1907, the U.S. Army Field Manual, all mandate that a criminal investigation be opened. And how President Bush, as Commander in Chief would be accountable under Field Manual 27-10 precisely because he is Commander in Chief of the US armed forces under the US Constitution. We know the White House knows this because if you read White House Counsel Alberto Gonzales's memo, he specifically tries to exempt the US from the Geneva Conventions for Guantanamo and Afghanistan. You can see that Gonzalez was afraid of Bush and others being held directly accountable. Moreover, because Powell dissented, we know there was a debate about this, so Bush had to have been aware of the implications of what was being done, which is also backed up by the memos from Ashcroft. These memos have been unearthed by Newsweek. So ultimately what we have here are people at the highest levels of the chain of command guilty of ordering or not preventing torture, which is both an international crime against the Geneva Conventions and the Torture Convention and a domestic crime as well. What we have then is a conspiracy among the aforementioned individuals to commit war crimes and crimes against humanity. Let me add one more thing that's very important to remember: The principles set forth in 27-10 of personal criminal accountability for war crimes goes back to the Nuremburg Charter, Judgments and Principles derived from the post-World War II trials of Nazi war criminals. Similar principles of criminal accountability were applied by the United States to the Japanese Imperial War criminals. LeVine: In fact, President Bush has compared the war on terror to the war against the Nazis. Boyle: Then we have even more reason to bring this to people's attention: The Nuremburg Principles were in fact originally the idea of the US Government which then orchestrated the prosecutions in Nuremburg. People need to understand the pedigree and heritage here. These are very grave offenses which the US government a generation ago prosecuted and executed Nazis for committing. And Japanese war criminals too. LeVine: How can any of the people you mentioned be prosecuted? Boyle: The military could do it, or the Dept. of Justice, which would have default power to do so if the military didn't. But for this of course we'd need a special prosecutor and that law has been allowed to lapse. Attorney General Ashcroft, who is clearly part of the criminal conspiracy, would never push a war crimes investigations against his colleagues or President Bush. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) Feed: NYT > U.S. Posted on: Wednesday, June 21, 2017 4:15 AM Author: NYT > U.S. Subject: How the C.I.A.’s Torture Program Began Video depositions in a case brought by former C.I.A. detainees give an insight into the beginnings of the agency’s enhanced interrogation program. View article... -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Thu Jun 22 22:25:19 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2017 22:25:19 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] FW: Defending Civil Resistance Under International Law In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: That the CIA is a terrorist organization was upheld in the famous “CIA On Trial” case in Northampton, Mass., in 1987, when a jury acquitted 14 protestors who tried to stop CIA recruitment on campus, according to Francis Boyle, the University of Illinois international law authority who defended the group. The defense charged the CIA was “an organized criminal conspiracy like the SS and the Gestapo.” Boyle said, “You would not let the SS or the Gestapo recruit on campus at the University of Massachusetts at Amherst, so you would not permit the CIA to recruit on campus either.” How we successfully defended the “ CIA On Trial” Civil Resisters is explained in my book. So why are we letting CIA/Mossad/Torture/MichaelMoore/SS/Gestapo on this Campus together with his Consort Hurricane Heidi Hurd? LAW SCHOOL OFF CAMPUS! Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) Feed: "Francis Boyle" - BingNews Posted on: Saturday, January 21, 2017 6:12 PM Author: "Francis Boyle" - BingNews Subject: Defending Civil Resistance Under International Law Dr. Francis Boyle’s landmark book tells you how to run your own legal defense of civil resistance actions. This book is a must for any person who has taken part in a civil resistance action, or who has contemplated doing so. See how this defense can not ... View article... -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Thu Jun 22 22:25:19 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2017 22:25:19 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] FW: Defending Civil Resistance Under International Law In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: That the CIA is a terrorist organization was upheld in the famous “CIA On Trial” case in Northampton, Mass., in 1987, when a jury acquitted 14 protestors who tried to stop CIA recruitment on campus, according to Francis Boyle, the University of Illinois international law authority who defended the group. The defense charged the CIA was “an organized criminal conspiracy like the SS and the Gestapo.” Boyle said, “You would not let the SS or the Gestapo recruit on campus at the University of Massachusetts at Amherst, so you would not permit the CIA to recruit on campus either.” How we successfully defended the “ CIA On Trial” Civil Resisters is explained in my book. So why are we letting CIA/Mossad/Torture/MichaelMoore/SS/Gestapo on this Campus together with his Consort Hurricane Heidi Hurd? LAW SCHOOL OFF CAMPUS! Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) Feed: "Francis Boyle" - BingNews Posted on: Saturday, January 21, 2017 6:12 PM Author: "Francis Boyle" - BingNews Subject: Defending Civil Resistance Under International Law Dr. Francis Boyle’s landmark book tells you how to run your own legal defense of civil resistance actions. This book is a must for any person who has taken part in a civil resistance action, or who has contemplated doing so. See how this defense can not ... View article... -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Fri Jun 23 11:04:46 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2017 11:04:46 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Waffen-SS Law School Off Campus! Message-ID: As I had argued to the entire College of Law Faculty beforehand to prevent their speaking invitation to him, Killer Koh worked for Reagan from 1983 to 1985 justifying every hideous atrocity Reagan had inflicted on everyone around the world as well as upon international law, human rights and the United States Constitution, pursuant to the so-called Reagan Doctrine of 1985: The Reagan/Bitburg Doctrine ...Here Kirkpatrick and Gerson quite correctly (though perhaps unwittingly) pointed out that on May 5, 1985 Reagan took the opportunity to publicly announce his so-called doctrine at Bitburg, West Germany (p. 22). There Reagan laid a memorial wreath at a cemetery that he knew contained the remains of dead Nazi Waffen SS stormtroopers despite the vigorous protestations of the justifiably outraged American Jewish community and U.S. veterans organizations, among others. As I argued in a general debate with none other than Gerson himself, inter alia, before the annual convention of the American Society of International Law held shortly beforehand in New York City on April 26: "It is the Reagan administration's Machiavellian approach to foreign affairs that sponsored the Israeli invasion of Lebanon. It is the Reagan administration that brought you the United States invasion of Grenada. It was the Reagan administration that brought you the U.S. invasion of Nicaragua, which still goes on today. It is the Reagan administration's policy of constructive engagement that has encouraged the South African invasion of Angola. It is the Reagan administration which has launched an all-out vicious assault on the integrity of the International Court of Justice. And it is now the Reagan administration that is going to be paying tribute to 39 SS soldiers at a cemetery in West Germany. I think nothing could be a more eloquent and symbolic statement of what motivates the foreign policy of this administration than that act." The Faculty and Dean of the College of Law enthusiastically had Killer Koh come out here anyway because they fully support what Killer Koh stands for, including Reagan's Waffen-SS. "I think nothing could be a more eloquent and symbolic statement of what motivates the {College of Law Faculty and Dean} than that act." Waffen-SS Law School Off Campus! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Fri Jun 23 11:04:46 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2017 11:04:46 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Waffen-SS Law School Off Campus! Message-ID: As I had argued to the entire College of Law Faculty beforehand to prevent their speaking invitation to him, Killer Koh worked for Reagan from 1983 to 1985 justifying every hideous atrocity Reagan had inflicted on everyone around the world as well as upon international law, human rights and the United States Constitution, pursuant to the so-called Reagan Doctrine of 1985: The Reagan/Bitburg Doctrine ...Here Kirkpatrick and Gerson quite correctly (though perhaps unwittingly) pointed out that on May 5, 1985 Reagan took the opportunity to publicly announce his so-called doctrine at Bitburg, West Germany (p. 22). There Reagan laid a memorial wreath at a cemetery that he knew contained the remains of dead Nazi Waffen SS stormtroopers despite the vigorous protestations of the justifiably outraged American Jewish community and U.S. veterans organizations, among others. As I argued in a general debate with none other than Gerson himself, inter alia, before the annual convention of the American Society of International Law held shortly beforehand in New York City on April 26: "It is the Reagan administration's Machiavellian approach to foreign affairs that sponsored the Israeli invasion of Lebanon. It is the Reagan administration that brought you the United States invasion of Grenada. It was the Reagan administration that brought you the U.S. invasion of Nicaragua, which still goes on today. It is the Reagan administration's policy of constructive engagement that has encouraged the South African invasion of Angola. It is the Reagan administration which has launched an all-out vicious assault on the integrity of the International Court of Justice. And it is now the Reagan administration that is going to be paying tribute to 39 SS soldiers at a cemetery in West Germany. I think nothing could be a more eloquent and symbolic statement of what motivates the foreign policy of this administration than that act." The Faculty and Dean of the College of Law enthusiastically had Killer Koh come out here anyway because they fully support what Killer Koh stands for, including Reagan's Waffen-SS. "I think nothing could be a more eloquent and symbolic statement of what motivates the {College of Law Faculty and Dean} than that act." Waffen-SS Law School Off Campus! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Fri Jun 23 12:53:10 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2017 12:53:10 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Waffen-SS Law School Off Campus! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Stanlingrad We got off the boat at the dock Walking into town I was asked Could I lay some flowers At the War Memorial On the Banks of the Volga? Of course I said yes Honored and pleased My Dad had fought the Japanese At Saipan and Tinian and Okinawa Nazis were not his war But We were all Allies together In the Noble Cause to Defeat Fascism As I neared the Statue On the Banks of the Volga Young Komsomol Girl appeared All dressed in white Carrying a wreath of red roses She gave to me A band was playing Joyful, not somber, but subdued Town Elders assembled Sun was shining Most beautiful day On the Banks of the Volga I lay my wreath of roses To the Defenders and Victims of Stalingrad Bowed my head in silent reflection If the Soviets had not held at Stalingrad All Europe today would be speaking German And saluting: Heil Hitler! Deutschland, Deutschland But not Uber Alles My Dad was smiling On the Banks of the Volga Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Friday, June 23, 2017 6:05 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson ; Mildred O'brien Subject: Waffen-SS Law School Off Campus! As I had argued to the entire College of Law Faculty beforehand to prevent their speaking invitation to him, Killer Koh worked for Reagan from 1983 to 1985 justifying every hideous atrocity Reagan had inflicted on everyone around the world as well as upon international law, human rights and the United States Constitution, pursuant to the so-called Reagan Doctrine of 1985: The Reagan/Bitburg Doctrine ...Here Kirkpatrick and Gerson quite correctly (though perhaps unwittingly) pointed out that on May 5, 1985 Reagan took the opportunity to publicly announce his so-called doctrine at Bitburg, West Germany (p. 22). There Reagan laid a memorial wreath at a cemetery that he knew contained the remains of dead Nazi Waffen SS stormtroopers despite the vigorous protestations of the justifiably outraged American Jewish community and U.S. veterans organizations, among others. As I argued in a general debate with none other than Gerson himself, inter alia, before the annual convention of the American Society of International Law held shortly beforehand in New York City on April 26: "It is the Reagan administration's Machiavellian approach to foreign affairs that sponsored the Israeli invasion of Lebanon. It is the Reagan administration that brought you the United States invasion of Grenada. It was the Reagan administration that brought you the U.S. invasion of Nicaragua, which still goes on today. It is the Reagan administration's policy of constructive engagement that has encouraged the South African invasion of Angola. It is the Reagan administration which has launched an all-out vicious assault on the integrity of the International Court of Justice. And it is now the Reagan administration that is going to be paying tribute to 39 SS soldiers at a cemetery in West Germany. I think nothing could be a more eloquent and symbolic statement of what motivates the foreign policy of this administration than that act." The Faculty and Dean of the College of Law enthusiastically had Killer Koh come out here anyway because they fully support what Killer Koh stands for, including Reagan's Waffen-SS. "I think nothing could be a more eloquent and symbolic statement of what motivates the {College of Law Faculty and Dean} than that act." Waffen-SS Law School Off Campus! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Fri Jun 23 12:53:10 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2017 12:53:10 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Waffen-SS Law School Off Campus! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Stanlingrad We got off the boat at the dock Walking into town I was asked Could I lay some flowers At the War Memorial On the Banks of the Volga? Of course I said yes Honored and pleased My Dad had fought the Japanese At Saipan and Tinian and Okinawa Nazis were not his war But We were all Allies together In the Noble Cause to Defeat Fascism As I neared the Statue On the Banks of the Volga Young Komsomol Girl appeared All dressed in white Carrying a wreath of red roses She gave to me A band was playing Joyful, not somber, but subdued Town Elders assembled Sun was shining Most beautiful day On the Banks of the Volga I lay my wreath of roses To the Defenders and Victims of Stalingrad Bowed my head in silent reflection If the Soviets had not held at Stalingrad All Europe today would be speaking German And saluting: Heil Hitler! Deutschland, Deutschland But not Uber Alles My Dad was smiling On the Banks of the Volga Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Friday, June 23, 2017 6:05 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson ; Mildred O'brien Subject: Waffen-SS Law School Off Campus! As I had argued to the entire College of Law Faculty beforehand to prevent their speaking invitation to him, Killer Koh worked for Reagan from 1983 to 1985 justifying every hideous atrocity Reagan had inflicted on everyone around the world as well as upon international law, human rights and the United States Constitution, pursuant to the so-called Reagan Doctrine of 1985: The Reagan/Bitburg Doctrine ...Here Kirkpatrick and Gerson quite correctly (though perhaps unwittingly) pointed out that on May 5, 1985 Reagan took the opportunity to publicly announce his so-called doctrine at Bitburg, West Germany (p. 22). There Reagan laid a memorial wreath at a cemetery that he knew contained the remains of dead Nazi Waffen SS stormtroopers despite the vigorous protestations of the justifiably outraged American Jewish community and U.S. veterans organizations, among others. As I argued in a general debate with none other than Gerson himself, inter alia, before the annual convention of the American Society of International Law held shortly beforehand in New York City on April 26: "It is the Reagan administration's Machiavellian approach to foreign affairs that sponsored the Israeli invasion of Lebanon. It is the Reagan administration that brought you the United States invasion of Grenada. It was the Reagan administration that brought you the U.S. invasion of Nicaragua, which still goes on today. It is the Reagan administration's policy of constructive engagement that has encouraged the South African invasion of Angola. It is the Reagan administration which has launched an all-out vicious assault on the integrity of the International Court of Justice. And it is now the Reagan administration that is going to be paying tribute to 39 SS soldiers at a cemetery in West Germany. I think nothing could be a more eloquent and symbolic statement of what motivates the foreign policy of this administration than that act." The Faculty and Dean of the College of Law enthusiastically had Killer Koh come out here anyway because they fully support what Killer Koh stands for, including Reagan's Waffen-SS. "I think nothing could be a more eloquent and symbolic statement of what motivates the {College of Law Faculty and Dean} than that act." Waffen-SS Law School Off Campus! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Fri Jun 23 13:07:28 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2017 13:07:28 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Waffen-SS Law School Off Campus! References: Message-ID: The sheer savagery of the German Army at Stalingrad literally took my breath away. By comparison, despite my best efforts to prevent them, the College of Law Faculty and its Dean deliberately brought in Killer Koh who was a Lawyer for Reagan and his Waffen-SS because they fully support what Killer Koh stands for when he worked for Reagan and then for Obama/Clinton. Waffen-SS Law School Off Campus! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Friday, June 23, 2017 7:53 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson ; Mildred O'brien Subject: Waffen-SS Law School Off Campus! Stanlingrad We got off the boat at the dock Walking into town I was asked Could I lay some flowers At the War Memorial On the Banks of the Volga? Of course I said yes Honored and pleased My Dad had fought the Japanese At Saipan and Tinian and Okinawa Nazis were not his war But We were all Allies together In the Noble Cause to Defeat Fascism As I neared the Statue On the Banks of the Volga Young Komsomol Girl appeared All dressed in white Carrying a wreath of red roses She gave to me A band was playing Joyful, not somber, but subdued Town Elders assembled Sun was shining Most beautiful day On the Banks of the Volga I lay my wreath of roses To the Defenders and Victims of Stalingrad Bowed my head in silent reflection If the Soviets had not held at Stalingrad All Europe today would be speaking German And saluting: Heil Hitler! Deutschland, Deutschland But not Uber Alles My Dad was smiling On the Banks of the Volga Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Friday, June 23, 2017 6:05 AM To: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; Karen Aram >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson >; Mildred O'brien > Subject: Waffen-SS Law School Off Campus! As I had argued to the entire College of Law Faculty beforehand to prevent their speaking invitation to him, Killer Koh worked for Reagan from 1983 to 1985 justifying every hideous atrocity Reagan had inflicted on everyone around the world as well as upon international law, human rights and the United States Constitution, pursuant to the so-called Reagan Doctrine of 1985: The Reagan/Bitburg Doctrine ...Here Kirkpatrick and Gerson quite correctly (though perhaps unwittingly) pointed out that on May 5, 1985 Reagan took the opportunity to publicly announce his so-called doctrine at Bitburg, West Germany (p. 22). There Reagan laid a memorial wreath at a cemetery that he knew contained the remains of dead Nazi Waffen SS stormtroopers despite the vigorous protestations of the justifiably outraged American Jewish community and U.S. veterans organizations, among others. As I argued in a general debate with none other than Gerson himself, inter alia, before the annual convention of the American Society of International Law held shortly beforehand in New York City on April 26: "It is the Reagan administration's Machiavellian approach to foreign affairs that sponsored the Israeli invasion of Lebanon. It is the Reagan administration that brought you the United States invasion of Grenada. It was the Reagan administration that brought you the U.S. invasion of Nicaragua, which still goes on today. It is the Reagan administration's policy of constructive engagement that has encouraged the South African invasion of Angola. It is the Reagan administration which has launched an all-out vicious assault on the integrity of the International Court of Justice. And it is now the Reagan administration that is going to be paying tribute to 39 SS soldiers at a cemetery in West Germany. I think nothing could be a more eloquent and symbolic statement of what motivates the foreign policy of this administration than that act." The Faculty and Dean of the College of Law enthusiastically had Killer Koh come out here anyway because they fully support what Killer Koh stands for, including Reagan's Waffen-SS. "I think nothing could be a more eloquent and symbolic statement of what motivates the {College of Law Faculty and Dean} than that act." Waffen-SS Law School Off Campus! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Fri Jun 23 13:07:28 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2017 13:07:28 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Waffen-SS Law School Off Campus! References: Message-ID: The sheer savagery of the German Army at Stalingrad literally took my breath away. By comparison, despite my best efforts to prevent them, the College of Law Faculty and its Dean deliberately brought in Killer Koh who was a Lawyer for Reagan and his Waffen-SS because they fully support what Killer Koh stands for when he worked for Reagan and then for Obama/Clinton. Waffen-SS Law School Off Campus! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Friday, June 23, 2017 7:53 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson ; Mildred O'brien Subject: Waffen-SS Law School Off Campus! Stanlingrad We got off the boat at the dock Walking into town I was asked Could I lay some flowers At the War Memorial On the Banks of the Volga? Of course I said yes Honored and pleased My Dad had fought the Japanese At Saipan and Tinian and Okinawa Nazis were not his war But We were all Allies together In the Noble Cause to Defeat Fascism As I neared the Statue On the Banks of the Volga Young Komsomol Girl appeared All dressed in white Carrying a wreath of red roses She gave to me A band was playing Joyful, not somber, but subdued Town Elders assembled Sun was shining Most beautiful day On the Banks of the Volga I lay my wreath of roses To the Defenders and Victims of Stalingrad Bowed my head in silent reflection If the Soviets had not held at Stalingrad All Europe today would be speaking German And saluting: Heil Hitler! Deutschland, Deutschland But not Uber Alles My Dad was smiling On the Banks of the Volga Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Friday, June 23, 2017 6:05 AM To: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; Karen Aram >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson >; Mildred O'brien > Subject: Waffen-SS Law School Off Campus! As I had argued to the entire College of Law Faculty beforehand to prevent their speaking invitation to him, Killer Koh worked for Reagan from 1983 to 1985 justifying every hideous atrocity Reagan had inflicted on everyone around the world as well as upon international law, human rights and the United States Constitution, pursuant to the so-called Reagan Doctrine of 1985: The Reagan/Bitburg Doctrine ...Here Kirkpatrick and Gerson quite correctly (though perhaps unwittingly) pointed out that on May 5, 1985 Reagan took the opportunity to publicly announce his so-called doctrine at Bitburg, West Germany (p. 22). There Reagan laid a memorial wreath at a cemetery that he knew contained the remains of dead Nazi Waffen SS stormtroopers despite the vigorous protestations of the justifiably outraged American Jewish community and U.S. veterans organizations, among others. As I argued in a general debate with none other than Gerson himself, inter alia, before the annual convention of the American Society of International Law held shortly beforehand in New York City on April 26: "It is the Reagan administration's Machiavellian approach to foreign affairs that sponsored the Israeli invasion of Lebanon. It is the Reagan administration that brought you the United States invasion of Grenada. It was the Reagan administration that brought you the U.S. invasion of Nicaragua, which still goes on today. It is the Reagan administration's policy of constructive engagement that has encouraged the South African invasion of Angola. It is the Reagan administration which has launched an all-out vicious assault on the integrity of the International Court of Justice. And it is now the Reagan administration that is going to be paying tribute to 39 SS soldiers at a cemetery in West Germany. I think nothing could be a more eloquent and symbolic statement of what motivates the foreign policy of this administration than that act." The Faculty and Dean of the College of Law enthusiastically had Killer Koh come out here anyway because they fully support what Killer Koh stands for, including Reagan's Waffen-SS. "I think nothing could be a more eloquent and symbolic statement of what motivates the {College of Law Faculty and Dean} than that act." Waffen-SS Law School Off Campus! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Fri Jun 23 13:11:25 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2017 13:11:25 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Waffen-SS Law School Off Campus! Message-ID: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waffen-SS From fboyle at illinois.edu Fri Jun 23 13:11:25 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2017 13:11:25 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Waffen-SS Law School Off Campus! Message-ID: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waffen-SS From fboyle at illinois.edu Fri Jun 23 14:33:55 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2017 14:33:55 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] WAFFEN-SS LAW SCHOOL OFF CAMPUS!Nuremberg & Reagan & Harold Killer Koh, Joan of Arc, President Obama, and The Dark Ages Message-ID: As you can see I sent this Message among many others to the entire Faculty of the College of Law to prevent Killer Koh from coming over two years ago. To the contrary, as far as this Waffen-SS Law Faculty were concerned, all these Reaganite Nazi atrocities that Killer Koh justified from 1983 to 1985 qualified Killer Koh to come. Ditto for Killer Koh’s Nazi Atrocities for Obama/Clinton. Waffen-SS Law School Off Campus! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Saturday, May 30, 2015 8:06 PM To: Moore, Michael ; Wasserman, Melissa F ; Law * Tenured/Track Faculty ; Law * Clinical Faculty ; Law * Legal Writing Faculty ; Law * Emeritus Faculty ; Law * Library Faculty ; Cook, Sally J ; Mazzone, Jason ; Robbennolt, Jennifer Kirkpatrick Subject: Nuremberg & Reagan & Harold Killer Koh, Joan of Arc, President Obama, and The Dark Ages Hon. Mary M. Kaufman (U.S.A.), attorney-at-law, prosecuting attorney at the Nuremberg War Crimes Trial against I.G. Farben …. Mary Kaufman Francis A. Boyle, Chairman ….. My Colleague and Friend Mary Kaufman prosecuted IG Farben at Nuremberg. The Nazis had their lawyers too—just like Harold Killer Koh. Some of them were prosecuted and convicted at Nuremberg in the Justice Case. RIP: Mary Kaufman Fab. …. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Saturday, May 30, 2015 4:36 PM To: Moore, Michael; Wasserman, Melissa F; Law * Tenured/Track Faculty; Law * Clinical Faculty; Law * Legal Writing Faculty; Law * Emeritus Faculty; Law * Library Faculty; Cook, Sally J; Mazzone, Jason; Robbennolt, Jennifer Kirkpatrick Subject: Reagan & Harold Killer Koh, Joan of Arc, President Obama, and The Dark Ages In 1983, Harold Killer Koh went to work for the Reagan administration in its Department of “Justice” Office of Legal Counsel, justifying every hideous atrocity Reagan was inflicting on international law, human rights, and the United States Constitution. Later, Killer Koh would brag to his Yale Law Students that he authored the Opinion Letter justifying Reagan’s criminal and unconstitutional invasion of Grenada. Fab. Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit Conclusions and Judgment of Brussels Tribunal on Reagan's Foreign Policy (September 30, 1984) The International Conference on the Reagan administration's foreign policy convened in Brussels from 28-30 September, 1984 under the auspices of the International Progress Organization. Reports were submitted by international jurists and foreign policy specialists on the various aspects of the Reagan administration's foreign policy. Among the participants of the conference were Sean McBride (Nobel Laureate, Ireland), Prof. George Wald (Nobel Laureate, Harvard University), General Edgardo Mercado Jarrin (Peru), General Nino Pasti (former Deputy Supreme Commander of NATO) and Hortensia Bussi de Allende (Chile). The reports were presented before a panel of jurists consisting of Hon. Farouk Abu-Eissa (Sudan), attorney, former foreign minister, secretary-general of the Arab Lawyers Union; Prof. Francis A. Boyle (U.S.A.), professor of international law from the University of Illinois, Chairman; Dr. Hans Goeran Franck (Sweden), attorney, member of the Swedish Parliament; Hon. Mirza Gholam Hafiz (Bangladesh), former Speaker of the Bangladesh Parliament and currently a senior advocate of the Bangladesh Supreme Court; Hon. Mary M. Kaufman (U.S.A.), attorney-at-law, prosecuting attorney at the Nuremberg War Crimes Trial against I.G. Farben; Dr. Jean-Claude Njem (Cameroon), assistant-professor at the Faculty of Law, Uppsala University and a consultant of the government; Prof. Alberto Ruiz-Eldredge (Peru), professor of law, former president of the National Council of Justice; and Dr. Muemlaz Soysal (Turkey), professor of constitutional law, University of Ankara. An accusation against the international legality of the Reagan Administration's foreign policy was delivered by the Honorable Ramsey Clark, former U.S. Attorney General. The defense was presented by a legal expert of the Reagan Administration. Based upon all the reports and documents submitted and the arguments by the advocates, the Brussels Panel of Jurists hereby renders the following conclusions concerning the compatibility of the Reagan Administration's foreign policy with the requirements of international law. A. Introduction 1. General Introduction. The Reagan administration's foreign policy constitutes a gross violation of the fundamental principles of international law enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations Organization, as well as the basic rules of customary international law set forth in the UN General Assembly's Declaration on the Inadmissibility of Intervention in the Domestic Affairs of States and the Protection of Their Independence and Sovereignty (1965), its Declaration on the Principles of International Law Concerning Friendly Relations and Cooperation Among States in Accordance with the Charter of the United Nations (1970), and its Definition of Aggression (1974), among others. In addition, the Reagan administration is responsible for complicity in the commission of crimes against peace, crimes against humanity, war crimes and grave breaches of the Third and Fourth Geneva Conventions of 1949. B. Western Hemisphere 2. Grenada. The Reagan administration's 1983 invasion of Grenada was a clear-cut violation of the UN Charter articles 2(3), 2(4), and 33 as well as of articles 18, 20, and 21 of the Revised OAS Charter for which there was no valid excuse or justification under international law. As such, it constituted an act of aggression within the meaning of article 39 of the United Nation's Charter. 3. Threat of U.S. Intervention. In direct violation of the basic requirement of international law mandating the peaceful settlement of international disputes, the Reagan administration has implemented a foreign policy towards Central American that constitutes a great danger of escalation in military hostilities to the point of precipitating armed intervention by U.S. troops into combat against both the insurgents in El Salvador and the legitimate government of Nicaragua. 4. El Salvador. The Reagan administration's illegal intervention inot El Salvador's civil war contravenes the international legal right of self-determination of peoples as recognized by article 1(2) of the United Nations Charter. The Reagan administration has provided enormous amounts of military assistance to an oppressive regime that has used it to perpetrate a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of the people of El Salvador. 5. Nicaragua. The Reagan administration's policy of organizing and participating in military operations by opposition contra groups for the purpose of overthrowing the legitimate government of Nicaragua violates the terms of both the UN and OAS. Charters prohibiting the threat or use of force against the political independence of a state. The Reagan administration has flouted its obligation to terminate immediately its support for the opposition contra groups in accordance with the Interim Order of Protection issued by the International Court of Justice on 10 May 1984. 6. The International Court of Justice. The Panel denounces the patently bogus attempt by the Reagan administration to withdraw from the compulsory jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice in the suit brought against it by Nicaragua for the purpose of avoiding a peaceful settlement of this dispute by the World Court in order to pursue instead a policy based upon military intervention, lawless violence and destabilization of the legitimate government of Nicaragua. 7. Mining Nicaraguan Harbors. The Reagan administration's mining of Nicaraguan harbors violates the rules of international law set forth in the 1907 Hague Convention on the laying of Submarine Mines, to which both Nicaragua and the United States are parties. C. Nuclear Weapons Policies 8. Arms Control Treaties. The Reagan administration has refused to support the ratification of the Threshold Test Ban Treaty of 1974, the Peaceful Nuclear Explosions Treaty of 1976, and the SALT II Treaty of 1979. In addition to renouncing the longstanding objective of the U.S. government to renegotiate a comprehensive test ban treaty. As such the Reagan administration has failed to pursue negotiations in good faith on effective measures relating to cessation of the nuclear arms race at an early date and to nuclear disarmament as required by article 6 of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty of 1968. Similarly, the Reagan administration's "Strategic Defense Initiative" of 1983 threatens to breach the Anti-Ballistic Missile Systems Treaty of 1972. 9. Pershing 2 Missiles. The deployment of the offensive, first-strike, counterforce strategic nuclear weapons system known as the Pershing 2 missile in the Federal Republic of Germany violates the non-circumvention clause found in article 12 of the SALT II Treaty. The Reagan administration is bound to obey this prohibition pursuant to the rule of customary international law enunciated in article 18 of the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties to the effect that a signatory to a treaty is obliged to refrain from acts that would defeat the object and purpose of a treaty until it has made its intention clear not to become a party. 10. The MX Missile. The MX missile is an offensive, first-strike, counterforce, strategic nuclear weapons system that can serve no legitimate defensive purpose under UN Charter article 51 and the international laws of humanitarian armed conflict. 11. No-First-Use. In accordance with UN General Assembly Resolution 1553 of 24 November 1961, the Panel denounces the refusal by the Reagan administration to adopt a policy mandating the no-first-use of nuclear weapons in the event of a conventional attack as required by the basic rule of international law dictating proportionality in the use of force even for the purposes of legitimate self-defense. 12. ASAT Treaty. The Panel calls upon both the United States and the Soviet Union to negotiate unconditionally over the conclusion of an anti-satellite weapons treaty. D. Middle East 13. Lebanon. For the part it played in the planning, preparation and initiation of the 1982 Israeli invasion of Lebanon, the Reagan administration has committed a crime against peace as defined by the Nuremberg Principles. Likewise, under the Nuremberg Principles, the Reagan administration becomes an accomplice to the crimes against humanity, war crimes and grave breaches of the Third and Fourth Geneva Conventions of 1949 that have been committed or condoned by Israel and its allied Phalange and Haddad militia forces in Lebanon. Such complicity includes the savage massacre of genocidal character of hundreds of innocent Palestinians and Lebanese civilians by organized unites of the Phalangist militia at the Sabra and Shatila refugee camps located in West Beirut that were then subject to control by the occupying Israeli army. The Reagan administration has totally failed to discharge its obligation to obtain Israel's immediate and unconditional withdrawal from all parts of Lebanon as required by UN Security Council Resolutions 508 and 509 (1982), both of which are legally binding in Israel and the United States under UN Charter article 28. This includes Israeli evacuation of southern Lebanon. 14. The Palestinian Question. The Reagan administration's policy toward the Palestinian people as well as the Reagan "Peace Plan" of 1 September 1982 violates the international legal right of the Palestinian people to self-determination as recognized by UN Charter article 1(2). As recognized by numerous General Assembly resolutions, the Palestinian people have an international legal right to create and independent and sovereign state. The Palestinian Liberation Organization has been recognized as the legitimate representative of the Palestinian people by both the United Nations General Assembly and the League of Arab States. The Reagan administration's nonrecognition of the PLO and its attempt to brand the PLO a "terrorist" group contravene the Palestinian people's right to liberation. The panel denounces the negative attitude of the Reagan Administration towards the call by the United Nations' Secretary General for the convocation of an international conference under the auspices of the United Nations, with the United States and the Soviet Union as co-chairmen, and with the participation of all parties involved in the conflict including the PLO, for the purpose of obtaining a just and lasting peace in the Middle East. 15. Israeli Settlements. The Reagan administration's declared position that Israeli settlements in the Occupied Territories are "not illegal" is a violation of U.S. obligations under article 1 of the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949 to ensure respect for the terms of the Convention (here article 49) by other High Contracting Parties such as Israel. 16. Libya. The Reagan administration's dispatch of the U.S. Sixth Fleet into the Gulf of Sidra for the purpose of precipitating armed conflict with the Libyan government constitutes a breach fo the peace under Article 39 of the UN Charter. The Reagan administration's policy to attempt to destabilize the government of Libya violates the terms of the United Nations Charter article 2(4) prohibiting the threat or use of force directed against the political independence of a state. E. Africa, Asia and the Indian Ocean 17. Apartheid. The Panel denounces the Reagan administration's so-called policy of "constructive engagement" toward the apartheid regime in South Africa. This specious policy encourages discrimination and oppression against the majority of the people of South Africa; it hampers effective action by the international community against apartheid and facilitates aggressive conduct by the South African apartheid regime against neighbor states in violation of the UN Charter. As such, the Reagan administration has become an accomplice to the commission of the international crime of apartheid as recognized by the universally accepted International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid of 1973. The Panel also denounces the cooperation between the Reagan administration and South Africa in military and nuclear matters. 18. Namibia. The Reagan administration has refused to carry out its obligations under Security Council Resolution 435 (1978) providing for the independence of Namibia, as required by article 25 of the UN Charter. The right of the Namibian people to self-determination had been firmly established under international law long before the outbreak of the Angolan civil war. The Reagan administration has no right to obstruct the achievement of Namibian independence by conditioning it or "linking" it to the withdrawal of Cuban troops from Angola in any way. Both the UN General Assembly and the Organization of African Unity have recognized SWAPI as the legitimate representative of the Namibian people and the Reagan administration is obligated to negotiate with it as such. 19. Angola. Cuban troops are in Angola at the request of the legitimate government of Angola in order to protect it from overt and covert aggression mounted by the South African apartheid regime from Namibia. There is absolutely no international legal justification for South African aggression against Angola in order to maintain and consolidate its reprehensible occupation of Namibia. The Angolan government has repeatedly stated that when South Africa leaves Namibia it will request the withdrawal of Cuban troops, and Cuba has agreed to withdraw its troops whenever so requested by Angola. According to the relevant rules of international law, that is the proper sequence of events to be followed. The Reagan administration's "linkage" of the presence of the Cuban troops in Angola with the independence of Namibia encourages South African aggression against Angola, and thus it must share in the responsibility for South Africa's genocidal acts against the people of Angola. 20. Indian Ocean. The Reagan administration's continued military occupation of the island of Diego Garcia violates the international right of self-determination of the people of Mauritius as recognized by the United Nations Charter. The Reagan administration has accelerated the rapid militarization of the U.S. naval base on Diego Garcia as part of its plan to create a jumping-off point for intervention by the Rapid Deployment Force into the Persian Gulf. As such the Reagan administration 's foreign policy towards the Indian Ocean has violated the terms of the UN General Assembly's Declaration of the Indian Ocean as a Zone of Peace (1971). F. Conclusion 21. United Nations Action. From the foregoing, it is clear that the Reagan administration has substituted force for the rule of international law in its conduct of foreign policy around the world. It has thus created a serious threat to the maintenance of international peace and security under article 39 of the United Nations Charter that calls for the imposition of enforcement measures by the UN Security Council under articles 41 and 42. In the event the Reagan administration exercises its veto power against the adoption of such measures by the Security Council, the matter should be turned over the to UN General assembly for action in accordance with the procedures set forth in the Uniting for Peace Resolution of 1950. In this way the Reagan administration's grievous international transgressions could be effectively opposed by all members of the world community in a manner consistent with the requirements of international law. Both the Security Council and the General Assembly should also take into account the numerous interventionist measures taken by the Reagan Administration, whether direct or indirect, seeking to impose financial and economic policies which are contrary to the sovereign independence of states, especially in the developing world, and which severely damage the quality of life for all peoples. Farouk Abu-Eissa Mary Kaufman Francis A. Boyle, Chairman Jean-Claude Njem Hans Goeran Franck Alberto Ruiz-Eldredge Mirza Gholam Hafiz Muemlaz Soysal Brussels, Belgium 30 September 1984. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (voice) 217-244-1478 (fax) * To subscribe or unsubscribe or change your settings via the web, visit: http://olm.blythe-systems.com/mailman/listinfo/nytr Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Saturday, May 30, 2015 3:55 PM To: Moore, Michael; Wasserman, Melissa F; Law * Tenured/Track Faculty; Law * Clinical Faculty; Law * Legal Writing Faculty; Law * Emeritus Faculty; Law * Library Faculty; Cook, Sally J; Mazzone, Jason; Robbennolt, Jennifer Kirkpatrick Subject: Harold Killer Koh, Joan of Arc, President Obama, and The Dark Ages As for the right of President Obama to murder people, which is the correct description of what he is doing, Professor Francis Boyle of the University of Illinois and Magna Cum Laude graduate of Harvard Law School, says: "The 'honors' graduate of Harvard Law School President Obama has set himself up as the sole Judge, Jury and Executioner of thousands of human beings in violation of international law, human rights law, the laws of war and the United States Constitution. Harvard Law School taught me that makes Obama a felon and a war criminal and impeachable." ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ditto for Harold Killer Koh. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) Feed: "Francis Boyle" - Bing News Posted on: Saturday, May 30, 2015 3:17 AM Author: "Francis Boyle" - Bing News Subject: Joan of Arc, President Obama, and The Dark Ages As for the right of President Obama to murder people, which is the correct description of what he is doing, Professor Francis Boyle of the University of Illinois and Magna Cum Laude graduate of Harvard Law School, says: "The 'honors' graduate of Harvard ... View article... -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Fri Jun 23 14:33:55 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2017 14:33:55 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] WAFFEN-SS LAW SCHOOL OFF CAMPUS!Nuremberg & Reagan & Harold Killer Koh, Joan of Arc, President Obama, and The Dark Ages Message-ID: As you can see I sent this Message among many others to the entire Faculty of the College of Law to prevent Killer Koh from coming over two years ago. To the contrary, as far as this Waffen-SS Law Faculty were concerned, all these Reaganite Nazi atrocities that Killer Koh justified from 1983 to 1985 qualified Killer Koh to come. Ditto for Killer Koh’s Nazi Atrocities for Obama/Clinton. Waffen-SS Law School Off Campus! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Saturday, May 30, 2015 8:06 PM To: Moore, Michael ; Wasserman, Melissa F ; Law * Tenured/Track Faculty ; Law * Clinical Faculty ; Law * Legal Writing Faculty ; Law * Emeritus Faculty ; Law * Library Faculty ; Cook, Sally J ; Mazzone, Jason ; Robbennolt, Jennifer Kirkpatrick Subject: Nuremberg & Reagan & Harold Killer Koh, Joan of Arc, President Obama, and The Dark Ages Hon. Mary M. Kaufman (U.S.A.), attorney-at-law, prosecuting attorney at the Nuremberg War Crimes Trial against I.G. Farben …. Mary Kaufman Francis A. Boyle, Chairman ….. My Colleague and Friend Mary Kaufman prosecuted IG Farben at Nuremberg. The Nazis had their lawyers too—just like Harold Killer Koh. Some of them were prosecuted and convicted at Nuremberg in the Justice Case. RIP: Mary Kaufman Fab. …. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Saturday, May 30, 2015 4:36 PM To: Moore, Michael; Wasserman, Melissa F; Law * Tenured/Track Faculty; Law * Clinical Faculty; Law * Legal Writing Faculty; Law * Emeritus Faculty; Law * Library Faculty; Cook, Sally J; Mazzone, Jason; Robbennolt, Jennifer Kirkpatrick Subject: Reagan & Harold Killer Koh, Joan of Arc, President Obama, and The Dark Ages In 1983, Harold Killer Koh went to work for the Reagan administration in its Department of “Justice” Office of Legal Counsel, justifying every hideous atrocity Reagan was inflicting on international law, human rights, and the United States Constitution. Later, Killer Koh would brag to his Yale Law Students that he authored the Opinion Letter justifying Reagan’s criminal and unconstitutional invasion of Grenada. Fab. Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit Conclusions and Judgment of Brussels Tribunal on Reagan's Foreign Policy (September 30, 1984) The International Conference on the Reagan administration's foreign policy convened in Brussels from 28-30 September, 1984 under the auspices of the International Progress Organization. Reports were submitted by international jurists and foreign policy specialists on the various aspects of the Reagan administration's foreign policy. Among the participants of the conference were Sean McBride (Nobel Laureate, Ireland), Prof. George Wald (Nobel Laureate, Harvard University), General Edgardo Mercado Jarrin (Peru), General Nino Pasti (former Deputy Supreme Commander of NATO) and Hortensia Bussi de Allende (Chile). The reports were presented before a panel of jurists consisting of Hon. Farouk Abu-Eissa (Sudan), attorney, former foreign minister, secretary-general of the Arab Lawyers Union; Prof. Francis A. Boyle (U.S.A.), professor of international law from the University of Illinois, Chairman; Dr. Hans Goeran Franck (Sweden), attorney, member of the Swedish Parliament; Hon. Mirza Gholam Hafiz (Bangladesh), former Speaker of the Bangladesh Parliament and currently a senior advocate of the Bangladesh Supreme Court; Hon. Mary M. Kaufman (U.S.A.), attorney-at-law, prosecuting attorney at the Nuremberg War Crimes Trial against I.G. Farben; Dr. Jean-Claude Njem (Cameroon), assistant-professor at the Faculty of Law, Uppsala University and a consultant of the government; Prof. Alberto Ruiz-Eldredge (Peru), professor of law, former president of the National Council of Justice; and Dr. Muemlaz Soysal (Turkey), professor of constitutional law, University of Ankara. An accusation against the international legality of the Reagan Administration's foreign policy was delivered by the Honorable Ramsey Clark, former U.S. Attorney General. The defense was presented by a legal expert of the Reagan Administration. Based upon all the reports and documents submitted and the arguments by the advocates, the Brussels Panel of Jurists hereby renders the following conclusions concerning the compatibility of the Reagan Administration's foreign policy with the requirements of international law. A. Introduction 1. General Introduction. The Reagan administration's foreign policy constitutes a gross violation of the fundamental principles of international law enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations Organization, as well as the basic rules of customary international law set forth in the UN General Assembly's Declaration on the Inadmissibility of Intervention in the Domestic Affairs of States and the Protection of Their Independence and Sovereignty (1965), its Declaration on the Principles of International Law Concerning Friendly Relations and Cooperation Among States in Accordance with the Charter of the United Nations (1970), and its Definition of Aggression (1974), among others. In addition, the Reagan administration is responsible for complicity in the commission of crimes against peace, crimes against humanity, war crimes and grave breaches of the Third and Fourth Geneva Conventions of 1949. B. Western Hemisphere 2. Grenada. The Reagan administration's 1983 invasion of Grenada was a clear-cut violation of the UN Charter articles 2(3), 2(4), and 33 as well as of articles 18, 20, and 21 of the Revised OAS Charter for which there was no valid excuse or justification under international law. As such, it constituted an act of aggression within the meaning of article 39 of the United Nation's Charter. 3. Threat of U.S. Intervention. In direct violation of the basic requirement of international law mandating the peaceful settlement of international disputes, the Reagan administration has implemented a foreign policy towards Central American that constitutes a great danger of escalation in military hostilities to the point of precipitating armed intervention by U.S. troops into combat against both the insurgents in El Salvador and the legitimate government of Nicaragua. 4. El Salvador. The Reagan administration's illegal intervention inot El Salvador's civil war contravenes the international legal right of self-determination of peoples as recognized by article 1(2) of the United Nations Charter. The Reagan administration has provided enormous amounts of military assistance to an oppressive regime that has used it to perpetrate a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of the people of El Salvador. 5. Nicaragua. The Reagan administration's policy of organizing and participating in military operations by opposition contra groups for the purpose of overthrowing the legitimate government of Nicaragua violates the terms of both the UN and OAS. Charters prohibiting the threat or use of force against the political independence of a state. The Reagan administration has flouted its obligation to terminate immediately its support for the opposition contra groups in accordance with the Interim Order of Protection issued by the International Court of Justice on 10 May 1984. 6. The International Court of Justice. The Panel denounces the patently bogus attempt by the Reagan administration to withdraw from the compulsory jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice in the suit brought against it by Nicaragua for the purpose of avoiding a peaceful settlement of this dispute by the World Court in order to pursue instead a policy based upon military intervention, lawless violence and destabilization of the legitimate government of Nicaragua. 7. Mining Nicaraguan Harbors. The Reagan administration's mining of Nicaraguan harbors violates the rules of international law set forth in the 1907 Hague Convention on the laying of Submarine Mines, to which both Nicaragua and the United States are parties. C. Nuclear Weapons Policies 8. Arms Control Treaties. The Reagan administration has refused to support the ratification of the Threshold Test Ban Treaty of 1974, the Peaceful Nuclear Explosions Treaty of 1976, and the SALT II Treaty of 1979. In addition to renouncing the longstanding objective of the U.S. government to renegotiate a comprehensive test ban treaty. As such the Reagan administration has failed to pursue negotiations in good faith on effective measures relating to cessation of the nuclear arms race at an early date and to nuclear disarmament as required by article 6 of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty of 1968. Similarly, the Reagan administration's "Strategic Defense Initiative" of 1983 threatens to breach the Anti-Ballistic Missile Systems Treaty of 1972. 9. Pershing 2 Missiles. The deployment of the offensive, first-strike, counterforce strategic nuclear weapons system known as the Pershing 2 missile in the Federal Republic of Germany violates the non-circumvention clause found in article 12 of the SALT II Treaty. The Reagan administration is bound to obey this prohibition pursuant to the rule of customary international law enunciated in article 18 of the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties to the effect that a signatory to a treaty is obliged to refrain from acts that would defeat the object and purpose of a treaty until it has made its intention clear not to become a party. 10. The MX Missile. The MX missile is an offensive, first-strike, counterforce, strategic nuclear weapons system that can serve no legitimate defensive purpose under UN Charter article 51 and the international laws of humanitarian armed conflict. 11. No-First-Use. In accordance with UN General Assembly Resolution 1553 of 24 November 1961, the Panel denounces the refusal by the Reagan administration to adopt a policy mandating the no-first-use of nuclear weapons in the event of a conventional attack as required by the basic rule of international law dictating proportionality in the use of force even for the purposes of legitimate self-defense. 12. ASAT Treaty. The Panel calls upon both the United States and the Soviet Union to negotiate unconditionally over the conclusion of an anti-satellite weapons treaty. D. Middle East 13. Lebanon. For the part it played in the planning, preparation and initiation of the 1982 Israeli invasion of Lebanon, the Reagan administration has committed a crime against peace as defined by the Nuremberg Principles. Likewise, under the Nuremberg Principles, the Reagan administration becomes an accomplice to the crimes against humanity, war crimes and grave breaches of the Third and Fourth Geneva Conventions of 1949 that have been committed or condoned by Israel and its allied Phalange and Haddad militia forces in Lebanon. Such complicity includes the savage massacre of genocidal character of hundreds of innocent Palestinians and Lebanese civilians by organized unites of the Phalangist militia at the Sabra and Shatila refugee camps located in West Beirut that were then subject to control by the occupying Israeli army. The Reagan administration has totally failed to discharge its obligation to obtain Israel's immediate and unconditional withdrawal from all parts of Lebanon as required by UN Security Council Resolutions 508 and 509 (1982), both of which are legally binding in Israel and the United States under UN Charter article 28. This includes Israeli evacuation of southern Lebanon. 14. The Palestinian Question. The Reagan administration's policy toward the Palestinian people as well as the Reagan "Peace Plan" of 1 September 1982 violates the international legal right of the Palestinian people to self-determination as recognized by UN Charter article 1(2). As recognized by numerous General Assembly resolutions, the Palestinian people have an international legal right to create and independent and sovereign state. The Palestinian Liberation Organization has been recognized as the legitimate representative of the Palestinian people by both the United Nations General Assembly and the League of Arab States. The Reagan administration's nonrecognition of the PLO and its attempt to brand the PLO a "terrorist" group contravene the Palestinian people's right to liberation. The panel denounces the negative attitude of the Reagan Administration towards the call by the United Nations' Secretary General for the convocation of an international conference under the auspices of the United Nations, with the United States and the Soviet Union as co-chairmen, and with the participation of all parties involved in the conflict including the PLO, for the purpose of obtaining a just and lasting peace in the Middle East. 15. Israeli Settlements. The Reagan administration's declared position that Israeli settlements in the Occupied Territories are "not illegal" is a violation of U.S. obligations under article 1 of the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949 to ensure respect for the terms of the Convention (here article 49) by other High Contracting Parties such as Israel. 16. Libya. The Reagan administration's dispatch of the U.S. Sixth Fleet into the Gulf of Sidra for the purpose of precipitating armed conflict with the Libyan government constitutes a breach fo the peace under Article 39 of the UN Charter. The Reagan administration's policy to attempt to destabilize the government of Libya violates the terms of the United Nations Charter article 2(4) prohibiting the threat or use of force directed against the political independence of a state. E. Africa, Asia and the Indian Ocean 17. Apartheid. The Panel denounces the Reagan administration's so-called policy of "constructive engagement" toward the apartheid regime in South Africa. This specious policy encourages discrimination and oppression against the majority of the people of South Africa; it hampers effective action by the international community against apartheid and facilitates aggressive conduct by the South African apartheid regime against neighbor states in violation of the UN Charter. As such, the Reagan administration has become an accomplice to the commission of the international crime of apartheid as recognized by the universally accepted International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid of 1973. The Panel also denounces the cooperation between the Reagan administration and South Africa in military and nuclear matters. 18. Namibia. The Reagan administration has refused to carry out its obligations under Security Council Resolution 435 (1978) providing for the independence of Namibia, as required by article 25 of the UN Charter. The right of the Namibian people to self-determination had been firmly established under international law long before the outbreak of the Angolan civil war. The Reagan administration has no right to obstruct the achievement of Namibian independence by conditioning it or "linking" it to the withdrawal of Cuban troops from Angola in any way. Both the UN General Assembly and the Organization of African Unity have recognized SWAPI as the legitimate representative of the Namibian people and the Reagan administration is obligated to negotiate with it as such. 19. Angola. Cuban troops are in Angola at the request of the legitimate government of Angola in order to protect it from overt and covert aggression mounted by the South African apartheid regime from Namibia. There is absolutely no international legal justification for South African aggression against Angola in order to maintain and consolidate its reprehensible occupation of Namibia. The Angolan government has repeatedly stated that when South Africa leaves Namibia it will request the withdrawal of Cuban troops, and Cuba has agreed to withdraw its troops whenever so requested by Angola. According to the relevant rules of international law, that is the proper sequence of events to be followed. The Reagan administration's "linkage" of the presence of the Cuban troops in Angola with the independence of Namibia encourages South African aggression against Angola, and thus it must share in the responsibility for South Africa's genocidal acts against the people of Angola. 20. Indian Ocean. The Reagan administration's continued military occupation of the island of Diego Garcia violates the international right of self-determination of the people of Mauritius as recognized by the United Nations Charter. The Reagan administration has accelerated the rapid militarization of the U.S. naval base on Diego Garcia as part of its plan to create a jumping-off point for intervention by the Rapid Deployment Force into the Persian Gulf. As such the Reagan administration 's foreign policy towards the Indian Ocean has violated the terms of the UN General Assembly's Declaration of the Indian Ocean as a Zone of Peace (1971). F. Conclusion 21. United Nations Action. From the foregoing, it is clear that the Reagan administration has substituted force for the rule of international law in its conduct of foreign policy around the world. It has thus created a serious threat to the maintenance of international peace and security under article 39 of the United Nations Charter that calls for the imposition of enforcement measures by the UN Security Council under articles 41 and 42. In the event the Reagan administration exercises its veto power against the adoption of such measures by the Security Council, the matter should be turned over the to UN General assembly for action in accordance with the procedures set forth in the Uniting for Peace Resolution of 1950. In this way the Reagan administration's grievous international transgressions could be effectively opposed by all members of the world community in a manner consistent with the requirements of international law. Both the Security Council and the General Assembly should also take into account the numerous interventionist measures taken by the Reagan Administration, whether direct or indirect, seeking to impose financial and economic policies which are contrary to the sovereign independence of states, especially in the developing world, and which severely damage the quality of life for all peoples. Farouk Abu-Eissa Mary Kaufman Francis A. Boyle, Chairman Jean-Claude Njem Hans Goeran Franck Alberto Ruiz-Eldredge Mirza Gholam Hafiz Muemlaz Soysal Brussels, Belgium 30 September 1984. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (voice) 217-244-1478 (fax) * To subscribe or unsubscribe or change your settings via the web, visit: http://olm.blythe-systems.com/mailman/listinfo/nytr Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Saturday, May 30, 2015 3:55 PM To: Moore, Michael; Wasserman, Melissa F; Law * Tenured/Track Faculty; Law * Clinical Faculty; Law * Legal Writing Faculty; Law * Emeritus Faculty; Law * Library Faculty; Cook, Sally J; Mazzone, Jason; Robbennolt, Jennifer Kirkpatrick Subject: Harold Killer Koh, Joan of Arc, President Obama, and The Dark Ages As for the right of President Obama to murder people, which is the correct description of what he is doing, Professor Francis Boyle of the University of Illinois and Magna Cum Laude graduate of Harvard Law School, says: "The 'honors' graduate of Harvard Law School President Obama has set himself up as the sole Judge, Jury and Executioner of thousands of human beings in violation of international law, human rights law, the laws of war and the United States Constitution. Harvard Law School taught me that makes Obama a felon and a war criminal and impeachable." ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ditto for Harold Killer Koh. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) Feed: "Francis Boyle" - Bing News Posted on: Saturday, May 30, 2015 3:17 AM Author: "Francis Boyle" - Bing News Subject: Joan of Arc, President Obama, and The Dark Ages As for the right of President Obama to murder people, which is the correct description of what he is doing, Professor Francis Boyle of the University of Illinois and Magna Cum Laude graduate of Harvard Law School, says: "The 'honors' graduate of Harvard ... View article... -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Fri Jun 23 16:08:20 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2017 16:08:20 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] WAFFEN-SS LAW SCHOOL OFF CAMPUS!Nuremberg & Reagan & Harold Killer Koh, Joan of Arc, President Obama, and The Dark Ages In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: And notice: Instead of bringing out Killer Koh in the 2015-2016 Academic Year, this Waffen-SS Law Faculty deliberately waited to bring Killer Koh out on October 28, 2016 during the 2016-2017 Academic Year precisely in order to get Killary elected President ten days later. Waffen-SS Law School Off Campus! Fab. From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Saturday, May 30, 2015 8:06 PM To: Moore, Michael >; Wasserman, Melissa F >; Law * Tenured/Track Faculty >; Law * Clinical Faculty >; Law * Legal Writing Faculty >; Law * Emeritus Faculty >; Law * Library Faculty >; Cook, Sally J >; Mazzone, Jason >; Robbennolt, Jennifer Kirkpatrick > Subject: Nuremberg & Reagan & Harold Killer Koh, Joan of Arc, President Obama, and The Dark Ages Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Friday, June 23, 2017 9:34 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson ; Mildred O'brien Subject: WAFFEN-SS LAW SCHOOL OFF CAMPUS!Nuremberg & Reagan & Harold Killer Koh, Joan of Arc, President Obama, and The Dark Ages As you can see I sent this Message among many others to the entire Faculty of the College of Law to prevent Killer Koh from coming over two years ago. To the contrary, as far as this Waffen-SS Law Faculty were concerned, all these Reaganite Nazi atrocities that Killer Koh justified from 1983 to 1985 qualified Killer Koh to come. Ditto for Killer Koh’s Nazi Atrocities for Obama/Clinton. Waffen-SS Law School Off Campus! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Saturday, May 30, 2015 8:06 PM To: Moore, Michael >; Wasserman, Melissa F >; Law * Tenured/Track Faculty >; Law * Clinical Faculty >; Law * Legal Writing Faculty >; Law * Emeritus Faculty >; Law * Library Faculty >; Cook, Sally J >; Mazzone, Jason >; Robbennolt, Jennifer Kirkpatrick > Subject: Nuremberg & Reagan & Harold Killer Koh, Joan of Arc, President Obama, and The Dark Ages Hon. Mary M. Kaufman (U.S.A.), attorney-at-law, prosecuting attorney at the Nuremberg War Crimes Trial against I.G. Farben …. Mary Kaufman Francis A. Boyle, Chairman ….. My Colleague and Friend Mary Kaufman prosecuted IG Farben at Nuremberg. The Nazis had their lawyers too—just like Harold Killer Koh. Some of them were prosecuted and convicted at Nuremberg in the Justice Case. RIP: Mary Kaufman Fab. …. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Saturday, May 30, 2015 4:36 PM To: Moore, Michael; Wasserman, Melissa F; Law * Tenured/Track Faculty; Law * Clinical Faculty; Law * Legal Writing Faculty; Law * Emeritus Faculty; Law * Library Faculty; Cook, Sally J; Mazzone, Jason; Robbennolt, Jennifer Kirkpatrick Subject: Reagan & Harold Killer Koh, Joan of Arc, President Obama, and The Dark Ages In 1983, Harold Killer Koh went to work for the Reagan administration in its Department of “Justice” Office of Legal Counsel, justifying every hideous atrocity Reagan was inflicting on international law, human rights, and the United States Constitution. Later, Killer Koh would brag to his Yale Law Students that he authored the Opinion Letter justifying Reagan’s criminal and unconstitutional invasion of Grenada. Fab. Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit Conclusions and Judgment of Brussels Tribunal on Reagan's Foreign Policy (September 30, 1984) The International Conference on the Reagan administration's foreign policy convened in Brussels from 28-30 September, 1984 under the auspices of the International Progress Organization. Reports were submitted by international jurists and foreign policy specialists on the various aspects of the Reagan administration's foreign policy. Among the participants of the conference were Sean McBride (Nobel Laureate, Ireland), Prof. George Wald (Nobel Laureate, Harvard University), General Edgardo Mercado Jarrin (Peru), General Nino Pasti (former Deputy Supreme Commander of NATO) and Hortensia Bussi de Allende (Chile). The reports were presented before a panel of jurists consisting of Hon. Farouk Abu-Eissa (Sudan), attorney, former foreign minister, secretary-general of the Arab Lawyers Union; Prof. Francis A. Boyle (U.S.A.), professor of international law from the University of Illinois, Chairman; Dr. Hans Goeran Franck (Sweden), attorney, member of the Swedish Parliament; Hon. Mirza Gholam Hafiz (Bangladesh), former Speaker of the Bangladesh Parliament and currently a senior advocate of the Bangladesh Supreme Court; Hon. Mary M. Kaufman (U.S.A.), attorney-at-law, prosecuting attorney at the Nuremberg War Crimes Trial against I.G. Farben; Dr. Jean-Claude Njem (Cameroon), assistant-professor at the Faculty of Law, Uppsala University and a consultant of the government; Prof. Alberto Ruiz-Eldredge (Peru), professor of law, former president of the National Council of Justice; and Dr. Muemlaz Soysal (Turkey), professor of constitutional law, University of Ankara. An accusation against the international legality of the Reagan Administration's foreign policy was delivered by the Honorable Ramsey Clark, former U.S. Attorney General. The defense was presented by a legal expert of the Reagan Administration. Based upon all the reports and documents submitted and the arguments by the advocates, the Brussels Panel of Jurists hereby renders the following conclusions concerning the compatibility of the Reagan Administration's foreign policy with the requirements of international law. A. Introduction 1. General Introduction. The Reagan administration's foreign policy constitutes a gross violation of the fundamental principles of international law enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations Organization, as well as the basic rules of customary international law set forth in the UN General Assembly's Declaration on the Inadmissibility of Intervention in the Domestic Affairs of States and the Protection of Their Independence and Sovereignty (1965), its Declaration on the Principles of International Law Concerning Friendly Relations and Cooperation Among States in Accordance with the Charter of the United Nations (1970), and its Definition of Aggression (1974), among others. In addition, the Reagan administration is responsible for complicity in the commission of crimes against peace, crimes against humanity, war crimes and grave breaches of the Third and Fourth Geneva Conventions of 1949. B. Western Hemisphere 2. Grenada. The Reagan administration's 1983 invasion of Grenada was a clear-cut violation of the UN Charter articles 2(3), 2(4), and 33 as well as of articles 18, 20, and 21 of the Revised OAS Charter for which there was no valid excuse or justification under international law. As such, it constituted an act of aggression within the meaning of article 39 of the United Nation's Charter. 3. Threat of U.S. Intervention. In direct violation of the basic requirement of international law mandating the peaceful settlement of international disputes, the Reagan administration has implemented a foreign policy towards Central American that constitutes a great danger of escalation in military hostilities to the point of precipitating armed intervention by U.S. troops into combat against both the insurgents in El Salvador and the legitimate government of Nicaragua. 4. El Salvador. The Reagan administration's illegal intervention inot El Salvador's civil war contravenes the international legal right of self-determination of peoples as recognized by article 1(2) of the United Nations Charter. The Reagan administration has provided enormous amounts of military assistance to an oppressive regime that has used it to perpetrate a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of the people of El Salvador. 5. Nicaragua. The Reagan administration's policy of organizing and participating in military operations by opposition contra groups for the purpose of overthrowing the legitimate government of Nicaragua violates the terms of both the UN and OAS. Charters prohibiting the threat or use of force against the political independence of a state. The Reagan administration has flouted its obligation to terminate immediately its support for the opposition contra groups in accordance with the Interim Order of Protection issued by the International Court of Justice on 10 May 1984. 6. The International Court of Justice. The Panel denounces the patently bogus attempt by the Reagan administration to withdraw from the compulsory jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice in the suit brought against it by Nicaragua for the purpose of avoiding a peaceful settlement of this dispute by the World Court in order to pursue instead a policy based upon military intervention, lawless violence and destabilization of the legitimate government of Nicaragua. 7. Mining Nicaraguan Harbors. The Reagan administration's mining of Nicaraguan harbors violates the rules of international law set forth in the 1907 Hague Convention on the laying of Submarine Mines, to which both Nicaragua and the United States are parties. C. Nuclear Weapons Policies 8. Arms Control Treaties. The Reagan administration has refused to support the ratification of the Threshold Test Ban Treaty of 1974, the Peaceful Nuclear Explosions Treaty of 1976, and the SALT II Treaty of 1979. In addition to renouncing the longstanding objective of the U.S. government to renegotiate a comprehensive test ban treaty. As such the Reagan administration has failed to pursue negotiations in good faith on effective measures relating to cessation of the nuclear arms race at an early date and to nuclear disarmament as required by article 6 of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty of 1968. Similarly, the Reagan administration's "Strategic Defense Initiative" of 1983 threatens to breach the Anti-Ballistic Missile Systems Treaty of 1972. 9. Pershing 2 Missiles. The deployment of the offensive, first-strike, counterforce strategic nuclear weapons system known as the Pershing 2 missile in the Federal Republic of Germany violates the non-circumvention clause found in article 12 of the SALT II Treaty. The Reagan administration is bound to obey this prohibition pursuant to the rule of customary international law enunciated in article 18 of the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties to the effect that a signatory to a treaty is obliged to refrain from acts that would defeat the object and purpose of a treaty until it has made its intention clear not to become a party. 10. The MX Missile. The MX missile is an offensive, first-strike, counterforce, strategic nuclear weapons system that can serve no legitimate defensive purpose under UN Charter article 51 and the international laws of humanitarian armed conflict. 11. No-First-Use. In accordance with UN General Assembly Resolution 1553 of 24 November 1961, the Panel denounces the refusal by the Reagan administration to adopt a policy mandating the no-first-use of nuclear weapons in the event of a conventional attack as required by the basic rule of international law dictating proportionality in the use of force even for the purposes of legitimate self-defense. 12. ASAT Treaty. The Panel calls upon both the United States and the Soviet Union to negotiate unconditionally over the conclusion of an anti-satellite weapons treaty. D. Middle East 13. Lebanon. For the part it played in the planning, preparation and initiation of the 1982 Israeli invasion of Lebanon, the Reagan administration has committed a crime against peace as defined by the Nuremberg Principles. Likewise, under the Nuremberg Principles, the Reagan administration becomes an accomplice to the crimes against humanity, war crimes and grave breaches of the Third and Fourth Geneva Conventions of 1949 that have been committed or condoned by Israel and its allied Phalange and Haddad militia forces in Lebanon. Such complicity includes the savage massacre of genocidal character of hundreds of innocent Palestinians and Lebanese civilians by organized unites of the Phalangist militia at the Sabra and Shatila refugee camps located in West Beirut that were then subject to control by the occupying Israeli army. The Reagan administration has totally failed to discharge its obligation to obtain Israel's immediate and unconditional withdrawal from all parts of Lebanon as required by UN Security Council Resolutions 508 and 509 (1982), both of which are legally binding in Israel and the United States under UN Charter article 28. This includes Israeli evacuation of southern Lebanon. 14. The Palestinian Question. The Reagan administration's policy toward the Palestinian people as well as the Reagan "Peace Plan" of 1 September 1982 violates the international legal right of the Palestinian people to self-determination as recognized by UN Charter article 1(2). As recognized by numerous General Assembly resolutions, the Palestinian people have an international legal right to create and independent and sovereign state. The Palestinian Liberation Organization has been recognized as the legitimate representative of the Palestinian people by both the United Nations General Assembly and the League of Arab States. The Reagan administration's nonrecognition of the PLO and its attempt to brand the PLO a "terrorist" group contravene the Palestinian people's right to liberation. The panel denounces the negative attitude of the Reagan Administration towards the call by the United Nations' Secretary General for the convocation of an international conference under the auspices of the United Nations, with the United States and the Soviet Union as co-chairmen, and with the participation of all parties involved in the conflict including the PLO, for the purpose of obtaining a just and lasting peace in the Middle East. 15. Israeli Settlements. The Reagan administration's declared position that Israeli settlements in the Occupied Territories are "not illegal" is a violation of U.S. obligations under article 1 of the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949 to ensure respect for the terms of the Convention (here article 49) by other High Contracting Parties such as Israel. 16. Libya. The Reagan administration's dispatch of the U.S. Sixth Fleet into the Gulf of Sidra for the purpose of precipitating armed conflict with the Libyan government constitutes a breach fo the peace under Article 39 of the UN Charter. The Reagan administration's policy to attempt to destabilize the government of Libya violates the terms of the United Nations Charter article 2(4) prohibiting the threat or use of force directed against the political independence of a state. E. Africa, Asia and the Indian Ocean 17. Apartheid. The Panel denounces the Reagan administration's so-called policy of "constructive engagement" toward the apartheid regime in South Africa. This specious policy encourages discrimination and oppression against the majority of the people of South Africa; it hampers effective action by the international community against apartheid and facilitates aggressive conduct by the South African apartheid regime against neighbor states in violation of the UN Charter. As such, the Reagan administration has become an accomplice to the commission of the international crime of apartheid as recognized by the universally accepted International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid of 1973. The Panel also denounces the cooperation between the Reagan administration and South Africa in military and nuclear matters. 18. Namibia. The Reagan administration has refused to carry out its obligations under Security Council Resolution 435 (1978) providing for the independence of Namibia, as required by article 25 of the UN Charter. The right of the Namibian people to self-determination had been firmly established under international law long before the outbreak of the Angolan civil war. The Reagan administration has no right to obstruct the achievement of Namibian independence by conditioning it or "linking" it to the withdrawal of Cuban troops from Angola in any way. Both the UN General Assembly and the Organization of African Unity have recognized SWAPI as the legitimate representative of the Namibian people and the Reagan administration is obligated to negotiate with it as such. 19. Angola. Cuban troops are in Angola at the request of the legitimate government of Angola in order to protect it from overt and covert aggression mounted by the South African apartheid regime from Namibia. There is absolutely no international legal justification for South African aggression against Angola in order to maintain and consolidate its reprehensible occupation of Namibia. The Angolan government has repeatedly stated that when South Africa leaves Namibia it will request the withdrawal of Cuban troops, and Cuba has agreed to withdraw its troops whenever so requested by Angola. According to the relevant rules of international law, that is the proper sequence of events to be followed. The Reagan administration's "linkage" of the presence of the Cuban troops in Angola with the independence of Namibia encourages South African aggression against Angola, and thus it must share in the responsibility for South Africa's genocidal acts against the people of Angola. 20. Indian Ocean. The Reagan administration's continued military occupation of the island of Diego Garcia violates the international right of self-determination of the people of Mauritius as recognized by the United Nations Charter. The Reagan administration has accelerated the rapid militarization of the U.S. naval base on Diego Garcia as part of its plan to create a jumping-off point for intervention by the Rapid Deployment Force into the Persian Gulf. As such the Reagan administration 's foreign policy towards the Indian Ocean has violated the terms of the UN General Assembly's Declaration of the Indian Ocean as a Zone of Peace (1971). F. Conclusion 21. United Nations Action. From the foregoing, it is clear that the Reagan administration has substituted force for the rule of international law in its conduct of foreign policy around the world. It has thus created a serious threat to the maintenance of international peace and security under article 39 of the United Nations Charter that calls for the imposition of enforcement measures by the UN Security Council under articles 41 and 42. In the event the Reagan administration exercises its veto power against the adoption of such measures by the Security Council, the matter should be turned over the to UN General assembly for action in accordance with the procedures set forth in the Uniting for Peace Resolution of 1950. In this way the Reagan administration's grievous international transgressions could be effectively opposed by all members of the world community in a manner consistent with the requirements of international law. Both the Security Council and the General Assembly should also take into account the numerous interventionist measures taken by the Reagan Administration, whether direct or indirect, seeking to impose financial and economic policies which are contrary to the sovereign independence of states, especially in the developing world, and which severely damage the quality of life for all peoples. Farouk Abu-Eissa Mary Kaufman Francis A. Boyle, Chairman Jean-Claude Njem Hans Goeran Franck Alberto Ruiz-Eldredge Mirza Gholam Hafiz Muemlaz Soysal Brussels, Belgium 30 September 1984. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (voice) 217-244-1478 (fax) * To subscribe or unsubscribe or change your settings via the web, visit: http://olm.blythe-systems.com/mailman/listinfo/nytr Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Saturday, May 30, 2015 3:55 PM To: Moore, Michael; Wasserman, Melissa F; Law * Tenured/Track Faculty; Law * Clinical Faculty; Law * Legal Writing Faculty; Law * Emeritus Faculty; Law * Library Faculty; Cook, Sally J; Mazzone, Jason; Robbennolt, Jennifer Kirkpatrick Subject: Harold Killer Koh, Joan of Arc, President Obama, and The Dark Ages As for the right of President Obama to murder people, which is the correct description of what he is doing, Professor Francis Boyle of the University of Illinois and Magna Cum Laude graduate of Harvard Law School, says: "The 'honors' graduate of Harvard Law School President Obama has set himself up as the sole Judge, Jury and Executioner of thousands of human beings in violation of international law, human rights law, the laws of war and the United States Constitution. Harvard Law School taught me that makes Obama a felon and a war criminal and impeachable." ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ditto for Harold Killer Koh. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) Feed: "Francis Boyle" - Bing News Posted on: Saturday, May 30, 2015 3:17 AM Author: "Francis Boyle" - Bing News Subject: Joan of Arc, President Obama, and The Dark Ages As for the right of President Obama to murder people, which is the correct description of what he is doing, Professor Francis Boyle of the University of Illinois and Magna Cum Laude graduate of Harvard Law School, says: "The 'honors' graduate of Harvard ... View article... -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Fri Jun 23 16:08:20 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2017 16:08:20 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] WAFFEN-SS LAW SCHOOL OFF CAMPUS!Nuremberg & Reagan & Harold Killer Koh, Joan of Arc, President Obama, and The Dark Ages In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: And notice: Instead of bringing out Killer Koh in the 2015-2016 Academic Year, this Waffen-SS Law Faculty deliberately waited to bring Killer Koh out on October 28, 2016 during the 2016-2017 Academic Year precisely in order to get Killary elected President ten days later. Waffen-SS Law School Off Campus! Fab. From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Saturday, May 30, 2015 8:06 PM To: Moore, Michael >; Wasserman, Melissa F >; Law * Tenured/Track Faculty >; Law * Clinical Faculty >; Law * Legal Writing Faculty >; Law * Emeritus Faculty >; Law * Library Faculty >; Cook, Sally J >; Mazzone, Jason >; Robbennolt, Jennifer Kirkpatrick > Subject: Nuremberg & Reagan & Harold Killer Koh, Joan of Arc, President Obama, and The Dark Ages Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Friday, June 23, 2017 9:34 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson ; Mildred O'brien Subject: WAFFEN-SS LAW SCHOOL OFF CAMPUS!Nuremberg & Reagan & Harold Killer Koh, Joan of Arc, President Obama, and The Dark Ages As you can see I sent this Message among many others to the entire Faculty of the College of Law to prevent Killer Koh from coming over two years ago. To the contrary, as far as this Waffen-SS Law Faculty were concerned, all these Reaganite Nazi atrocities that Killer Koh justified from 1983 to 1985 qualified Killer Koh to come. Ditto for Killer Koh’s Nazi Atrocities for Obama/Clinton. Waffen-SS Law School Off Campus! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Saturday, May 30, 2015 8:06 PM To: Moore, Michael >; Wasserman, Melissa F >; Law * Tenured/Track Faculty >; Law * Clinical Faculty >; Law * Legal Writing Faculty >; Law * Emeritus Faculty >; Law * Library Faculty >; Cook, Sally J >; Mazzone, Jason >; Robbennolt, Jennifer Kirkpatrick > Subject: Nuremberg & Reagan & Harold Killer Koh, Joan of Arc, President Obama, and The Dark Ages Hon. Mary M. Kaufman (U.S.A.), attorney-at-law, prosecuting attorney at the Nuremberg War Crimes Trial against I.G. Farben …. Mary Kaufman Francis A. Boyle, Chairman ….. My Colleague and Friend Mary Kaufman prosecuted IG Farben at Nuremberg. The Nazis had their lawyers too—just like Harold Killer Koh. Some of them were prosecuted and convicted at Nuremberg in the Justice Case. RIP: Mary Kaufman Fab. …. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Saturday, May 30, 2015 4:36 PM To: Moore, Michael; Wasserman, Melissa F; Law * Tenured/Track Faculty; Law * Clinical Faculty; Law * Legal Writing Faculty; Law * Emeritus Faculty; Law * Library Faculty; Cook, Sally J; Mazzone, Jason; Robbennolt, Jennifer Kirkpatrick Subject: Reagan & Harold Killer Koh, Joan of Arc, President Obama, and The Dark Ages In 1983, Harold Killer Koh went to work for the Reagan administration in its Department of “Justice” Office of Legal Counsel, justifying every hideous atrocity Reagan was inflicting on international law, human rights, and the United States Constitution. Later, Killer Koh would brag to his Yale Law Students that he authored the Opinion Letter justifying Reagan’s criminal and unconstitutional invasion of Grenada. Fab. Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit Conclusions and Judgment of Brussels Tribunal on Reagan's Foreign Policy (September 30, 1984) The International Conference on the Reagan administration's foreign policy convened in Brussels from 28-30 September, 1984 under the auspices of the International Progress Organization. Reports were submitted by international jurists and foreign policy specialists on the various aspects of the Reagan administration's foreign policy. Among the participants of the conference were Sean McBride (Nobel Laureate, Ireland), Prof. George Wald (Nobel Laureate, Harvard University), General Edgardo Mercado Jarrin (Peru), General Nino Pasti (former Deputy Supreme Commander of NATO) and Hortensia Bussi de Allende (Chile). The reports were presented before a panel of jurists consisting of Hon. Farouk Abu-Eissa (Sudan), attorney, former foreign minister, secretary-general of the Arab Lawyers Union; Prof. Francis A. Boyle (U.S.A.), professor of international law from the University of Illinois, Chairman; Dr. Hans Goeran Franck (Sweden), attorney, member of the Swedish Parliament; Hon. Mirza Gholam Hafiz (Bangladesh), former Speaker of the Bangladesh Parliament and currently a senior advocate of the Bangladesh Supreme Court; Hon. Mary M. Kaufman (U.S.A.), attorney-at-law, prosecuting attorney at the Nuremberg War Crimes Trial against I.G. Farben; Dr. Jean-Claude Njem (Cameroon), assistant-professor at the Faculty of Law, Uppsala University and a consultant of the government; Prof. Alberto Ruiz-Eldredge (Peru), professor of law, former president of the National Council of Justice; and Dr. Muemlaz Soysal (Turkey), professor of constitutional law, University of Ankara. An accusation against the international legality of the Reagan Administration's foreign policy was delivered by the Honorable Ramsey Clark, former U.S. Attorney General. The defense was presented by a legal expert of the Reagan Administration. Based upon all the reports and documents submitted and the arguments by the advocates, the Brussels Panel of Jurists hereby renders the following conclusions concerning the compatibility of the Reagan Administration's foreign policy with the requirements of international law. A. Introduction 1. General Introduction. The Reagan administration's foreign policy constitutes a gross violation of the fundamental principles of international law enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations Organization, as well as the basic rules of customary international law set forth in the UN General Assembly's Declaration on the Inadmissibility of Intervention in the Domestic Affairs of States and the Protection of Their Independence and Sovereignty (1965), its Declaration on the Principles of International Law Concerning Friendly Relations and Cooperation Among States in Accordance with the Charter of the United Nations (1970), and its Definition of Aggression (1974), among others. In addition, the Reagan administration is responsible for complicity in the commission of crimes against peace, crimes against humanity, war crimes and grave breaches of the Third and Fourth Geneva Conventions of 1949. B. Western Hemisphere 2. Grenada. The Reagan administration's 1983 invasion of Grenada was a clear-cut violation of the UN Charter articles 2(3), 2(4), and 33 as well as of articles 18, 20, and 21 of the Revised OAS Charter for which there was no valid excuse or justification under international law. As such, it constituted an act of aggression within the meaning of article 39 of the United Nation's Charter. 3. Threat of U.S. Intervention. In direct violation of the basic requirement of international law mandating the peaceful settlement of international disputes, the Reagan administration has implemented a foreign policy towards Central American that constitutes a great danger of escalation in military hostilities to the point of precipitating armed intervention by U.S. troops into combat against both the insurgents in El Salvador and the legitimate government of Nicaragua. 4. El Salvador. The Reagan administration's illegal intervention inot El Salvador's civil war contravenes the international legal right of self-determination of peoples as recognized by article 1(2) of the United Nations Charter. The Reagan administration has provided enormous amounts of military assistance to an oppressive regime that has used it to perpetrate a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of the people of El Salvador. 5. Nicaragua. The Reagan administration's policy of organizing and participating in military operations by opposition contra groups for the purpose of overthrowing the legitimate government of Nicaragua violates the terms of both the UN and OAS. Charters prohibiting the threat or use of force against the political independence of a state. The Reagan administration has flouted its obligation to terminate immediately its support for the opposition contra groups in accordance with the Interim Order of Protection issued by the International Court of Justice on 10 May 1984. 6. The International Court of Justice. The Panel denounces the patently bogus attempt by the Reagan administration to withdraw from the compulsory jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice in the suit brought against it by Nicaragua for the purpose of avoiding a peaceful settlement of this dispute by the World Court in order to pursue instead a policy based upon military intervention, lawless violence and destabilization of the legitimate government of Nicaragua. 7. Mining Nicaraguan Harbors. The Reagan administration's mining of Nicaraguan harbors violates the rules of international law set forth in the 1907 Hague Convention on the laying of Submarine Mines, to which both Nicaragua and the United States are parties. C. Nuclear Weapons Policies 8. Arms Control Treaties. The Reagan administration has refused to support the ratification of the Threshold Test Ban Treaty of 1974, the Peaceful Nuclear Explosions Treaty of 1976, and the SALT II Treaty of 1979. In addition to renouncing the longstanding objective of the U.S. government to renegotiate a comprehensive test ban treaty. As such the Reagan administration has failed to pursue negotiations in good faith on effective measures relating to cessation of the nuclear arms race at an early date and to nuclear disarmament as required by article 6 of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty of 1968. Similarly, the Reagan administration's "Strategic Defense Initiative" of 1983 threatens to breach the Anti-Ballistic Missile Systems Treaty of 1972. 9. Pershing 2 Missiles. The deployment of the offensive, first-strike, counterforce strategic nuclear weapons system known as the Pershing 2 missile in the Federal Republic of Germany violates the non-circumvention clause found in article 12 of the SALT II Treaty. The Reagan administration is bound to obey this prohibition pursuant to the rule of customary international law enunciated in article 18 of the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties to the effect that a signatory to a treaty is obliged to refrain from acts that would defeat the object and purpose of a treaty until it has made its intention clear not to become a party. 10. The MX Missile. The MX missile is an offensive, first-strike, counterforce, strategic nuclear weapons system that can serve no legitimate defensive purpose under UN Charter article 51 and the international laws of humanitarian armed conflict. 11. No-First-Use. In accordance with UN General Assembly Resolution 1553 of 24 November 1961, the Panel denounces the refusal by the Reagan administration to adopt a policy mandating the no-first-use of nuclear weapons in the event of a conventional attack as required by the basic rule of international law dictating proportionality in the use of force even for the purposes of legitimate self-defense. 12. ASAT Treaty. The Panel calls upon both the United States and the Soviet Union to negotiate unconditionally over the conclusion of an anti-satellite weapons treaty. D. Middle East 13. Lebanon. For the part it played in the planning, preparation and initiation of the 1982 Israeli invasion of Lebanon, the Reagan administration has committed a crime against peace as defined by the Nuremberg Principles. Likewise, under the Nuremberg Principles, the Reagan administration becomes an accomplice to the crimes against humanity, war crimes and grave breaches of the Third and Fourth Geneva Conventions of 1949 that have been committed or condoned by Israel and its allied Phalange and Haddad militia forces in Lebanon. Such complicity includes the savage massacre of genocidal character of hundreds of innocent Palestinians and Lebanese civilians by organized unites of the Phalangist militia at the Sabra and Shatila refugee camps located in West Beirut that were then subject to control by the occupying Israeli army. The Reagan administration has totally failed to discharge its obligation to obtain Israel's immediate and unconditional withdrawal from all parts of Lebanon as required by UN Security Council Resolutions 508 and 509 (1982), both of which are legally binding in Israel and the United States under UN Charter article 28. This includes Israeli evacuation of southern Lebanon. 14. The Palestinian Question. The Reagan administration's policy toward the Palestinian people as well as the Reagan "Peace Plan" of 1 September 1982 violates the international legal right of the Palestinian people to self-determination as recognized by UN Charter article 1(2). As recognized by numerous General Assembly resolutions, the Palestinian people have an international legal right to create and independent and sovereign state. The Palestinian Liberation Organization has been recognized as the legitimate representative of the Palestinian people by both the United Nations General Assembly and the League of Arab States. The Reagan administration's nonrecognition of the PLO and its attempt to brand the PLO a "terrorist" group contravene the Palestinian people's right to liberation. The panel denounces the negative attitude of the Reagan Administration towards the call by the United Nations' Secretary General for the convocation of an international conference under the auspices of the United Nations, with the United States and the Soviet Union as co-chairmen, and with the participation of all parties involved in the conflict including the PLO, for the purpose of obtaining a just and lasting peace in the Middle East. 15. Israeli Settlements. The Reagan administration's declared position that Israeli settlements in the Occupied Territories are "not illegal" is a violation of U.S. obligations under article 1 of the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949 to ensure respect for the terms of the Convention (here article 49) by other High Contracting Parties such as Israel. 16. Libya. The Reagan administration's dispatch of the U.S. Sixth Fleet into the Gulf of Sidra for the purpose of precipitating armed conflict with the Libyan government constitutes a breach fo the peace under Article 39 of the UN Charter. The Reagan administration's policy to attempt to destabilize the government of Libya violates the terms of the United Nations Charter article 2(4) prohibiting the threat or use of force directed against the political independence of a state. E. Africa, Asia and the Indian Ocean 17. Apartheid. The Panel denounces the Reagan administration's so-called policy of "constructive engagement" toward the apartheid regime in South Africa. This specious policy encourages discrimination and oppression against the majority of the people of South Africa; it hampers effective action by the international community against apartheid and facilitates aggressive conduct by the South African apartheid regime against neighbor states in violation of the UN Charter. As such, the Reagan administration has become an accomplice to the commission of the international crime of apartheid as recognized by the universally accepted International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid of 1973. The Panel also denounces the cooperation between the Reagan administration and South Africa in military and nuclear matters. 18. Namibia. The Reagan administration has refused to carry out its obligations under Security Council Resolution 435 (1978) providing for the independence of Namibia, as required by article 25 of the UN Charter. The right of the Namibian people to self-determination had been firmly established under international law long before the outbreak of the Angolan civil war. The Reagan administration has no right to obstruct the achievement of Namibian independence by conditioning it or "linking" it to the withdrawal of Cuban troops from Angola in any way. Both the UN General Assembly and the Organization of African Unity have recognized SWAPI as the legitimate representative of the Namibian people and the Reagan administration is obligated to negotiate with it as such. 19. Angola. Cuban troops are in Angola at the request of the legitimate government of Angola in order to protect it from overt and covert aggression mounted by the South African apartheid regime from Namibia. There is absolutely no international legal justification for South African aggression against Angola in order to maintain and consolidate its reprehensible occupation of Namibia. The Angolan government has repeatedly stated that when South Africa leaves Namibia it will request the withdrawal of Cuban troops, and Cuba has agreed to withdraw its troops whenever so requested by Angola. According to the relevant rules of international law, that is the proper sequence of events to be followed. The Reagan administration's "linkage" of the presence of the Cuban troops in Angola with the independence of Namibia encourages South African aggression against Angola, and thus it must share in the responsibility for South Africa's genocidal acts against the people of Angola. 20. Indian Ocean. The Reagan administration's continued military occupation of the island of Diego Garcia violates the international right of self-determination of the people of Mauritius as recognized by the United Nations Charter. The Reagan administration has accelerated the rapid militarization of the U.S. naval base on Diego Garcia as part of its plan to create a jumping-off point for intervention by the Rapid Deployment Force into the Persian Gulf. As such the Reagan administration 's foreign policy towards the Indian Ocean has violated the terms of the UN General Assembly's Declaration of the Indian Ocean as a Zone of Peace (1971). F. Conclusion 21. United Nations Action. From the foregoing, it is clear that the Reagan administration has substituted force for the rule of international law in its conduct of foreign policy around the world. It has thus created a serious threat to the maintenance of international peace and security under article 39 of the United Nations Charter that calls for the imposition of enforcement measures by the UN Security Council under articles 41 and 42. In the event the Reagan administration exercises its veto power against the adoption of such measures by the Security Council, the matter should be turned over the to UN General assembly for action in accordance with the procedures set forth in the Uniting for Peace Resolution of 1950. In this way the Reagan administration's grievous international transgressions could be effectively opposed by all members of the world community in a manner consistent with the requirements of international law. Both the Security Council and the General Assembly should also take into account the numerous interventionist measures taken by the Reagan Administration, whether direct or indirect, seeking to impose financial and economic policies which are contrary to the sovereign independence of states, especially in the developing world, and which severely damage the quality of life for all peoples. Farouk Abu-Eissa Mary Kaufman Francis A. Boyle, Chairman Jean-Claude Njem Hans Goeran Franck Alberto Ruiz-Eldredge Mirza Gholam Hafiz Muemlaz Soysal Brussels, Belgium 30 September 1984. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (voice) 217-244-1478 (fax) * To subscribe or unsubscribe or change your settings via the web, visit: http://olm.blythe-systems.com/mailman/listinfo/nytr Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Saturday, May 30, 2015 3:55 PM To: Moore, Michael; Wasserman, Melissa F; Law * Tenured/Track Faculty; Law * Clinical Faculty; Law * Legal Writing Faculty; Law * Emeritus Faculty; Law * Library Faculty; Cook, Sally J; Mazzone, Jason; Robbennolt, Jennifer Kirkpatrick Subject: Harold Killer Koh, Joan of Arc, President Obama, and The Dark Ages As for the right of President Obama to murder people, which is the correct description of what he is doing, Professor Francis Boyle of the University of Illinois and Magna Cum Laude graduate of Harvard Law School, says: "The 'honors' graduate of Harvard Law School President Obama has set himself up as the sole Judge, Jury and Executioner of thousands of human beings in violation of international law, human rights law, the laws of war and the United States Constitution. Harvard Law School taught me that makes Obama a felon and a war criminal and impeachable." ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ditto for Harold Killer Koh. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) Feed: "Francis Boyle" - Bing News Posted on: Saturday, May 30, 2015 3:17 AM Author: "Francis Boyle" - Bing News Subject: Joan of Arc, President Obama, and The Dark Ages As for the right of President Obama to murder people, which is the correct description of what he is doing, Professor Francis Boyle of the University of Illinois and Magna Cum Laude graduate of Harvard Law School, says: "The 'honors' graduate of Harvard ... View article... -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Fri Jun 23 18:01:34 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2017 18:01:34 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] WAFFEN-SS LAW SCHOOL OFF CAMPUS!Nuremberg & Reagan & Harold Killer Koh, Joan of Arc, President Obama, and The Dark Ages In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Saturday, May 30, 2015 8:06 PM To: Moore, Michael >; Wasserman, Melissa F >; Law * Tenured/Track Faculty >; Law * Clinical Faculty >; Law * Legal Writing Faculty >; Law * Emeritus Faculty >; Law * Library Faculty >; Cook, Sally J >; Mazzone, Jason >; Robbennolt, Jennifer Kirkpatrick > Subject: Nuremberg & Reagan & Harold Killer Koh, Joan of Arc, President Obama, and The Dark Ages One further point before I let you go for the weekend. As you can see from the above, I sent this Message and many others like it to the ENTIRE Law School Faculty. Not one of them supported me against Killer Koh! These People are sick and demented! Waffen-SS Law School of Campus! Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Friday, June 23, 2017 11:08 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson ; Mildred O'brien Subject: RE: WAFFEN-SS LAW SCHOOL OFF CAMPUS!Nuremberg & Reagan & Harold Killer Koh, Joan of Arc, President Obama, and The Dark Ages And notice: Instead of bringing out Killer Koh in the 2015-2016 Academic Year, this Waffen-SS Law Faculty deliberately waited to bring Killer Koh out on October 28, 2016 during the 2016-2017 Academic Year precisely in order to get Killary elected President ten days later. Waffen-SS Law School Off Campus! Fab. From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Saturday, May 30, 2015 8:06 PM To: Moore, Michael >; Wasserman, Melissa F >; Law * Tenured/Track Faculty >; Law * Clinical Faculty >; Law * Legal Writing Faculty >; Law * Emeritus Faculty >; Law * Library Faculty >; Cook, Sally J >; Mazzone, Jason >; Robbennolt, Jennifer Kirkpatrick > Subject: Nuremberg & Reagan & Harold Killer Koh, Joan of Arc, President Obama, and The Dark Ages Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Friday, June 23, 2017 9:34 AM To: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; Karen Aram >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson >; Mildred O'brien > Subject: WAFFEN-SS LAW SCHOOL OFF CAMPUS!Nuremberg & Reagan & Harold Killer Koh, Joan of Arc, President Obama, and The Dark Ages As you can see I sent this Message among many others to the entire Faculty of the College of Law to prevent Killer Koh from coming over two years ago. To the contrary, as far as this Waffen-SS Law Faculty were concerned, all these Reaganite Nazi atrocities that Killer Koh justified from 1983 to 1985 qualified Killer Koh to come. Ditto for Killer Koh’s Nazi Atrocities for Obama/Clinton. Waffen-SS Law School Off Campus! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Saturday, May 30, 2015 8:06 PM To: Moore, Michael >; Wasserman, Melissa F >; Law * Tenured/Track Faculty >; Law * Clinical Faculty >; Law * Legal Writing Faculty >; Law * Emeritus Faculty >; Law * Library Faculty >; Cook, Sally J >; Mazzone, Jason >; Robbennolt, Jennifer Kirkpatrick > Subject: Nuremberg & Reagan & Harold Killer Koh, Joan of Arc, President Obama, and The Dark Ages Hon. Mary M. Kaufman (U.S.A.), attorney-at-law, prosecuting attorney at the Nuremberg War Crimes Trial against I.G. Farben …. Mary Kaufman Francis A. Boyle, Chairman ….. My Colleague and Friend Mary Kaufman prosecuted IG Farben at Nuremberg. The Nazis had their lawyers too—just like Harold Killer Koh. Some of them were prosecuted and convicted at Nuremberg in the Justice Case. RIP: Mary Kaufman Fab. …. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Saturday, May 30, 2015 4:36 PM To: Moore, Michael; Wasserman, Melissa F; Law * Tenured/Track Faculty; Law * Clinical Faculty; Law * Legal Writing Faculty; Law * Emeritus Faculty; Law * Library Faculty; Cook, Sally J; Mazzone, Jason; Robbennolt, Jennifer Kirkpatrick Subject: Reagan & Harold Killer Koh, Joan of Arc, President Obama, and The Dark Ages In 1983, Harold Killer Koh went to work for the Reagan administration in its Department of “Justice” Office of Legal Counsel, justifying every hideous atrocity Reagan was inflicting on international law, human rights, and the United States Constitution. Later, Killer Koh would brag to his Yale Law Students that he authored the Opinion Letter justifying Reagan’s criminal and unconstitutional invasion of Grenada. Fab. Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit Conclusions and Judgment of Brussels Tribunal on Reagan's Foreign Policy (September 30, 1984) The International Conference on the Reagan administration's foreign policy convened in Brussels from 28-30 September, 1984 under the auspices of the International Progress Organization. Reports were submitted by international jurists and foreign policy specialists on the various aspects of the Reagan administration's foreign policy. Among the participants of the conference were Sean McBride (Nobel Laureate, Ireland), Prof. George Wald (Nobel Laureate, Harvard University), General Edgardo Mercado Jarrin (Peru), General Nino Pasti (former Deputy Supreme Commander of NATO) and Hortensia Bussi de Allende (Chile). The reports were presented before a panel of jurists consisting of Hon. Farouk Abu-Eissa (Sudan), attorney, former foreign minister, secretary-general of the Arab Lawyers Union; Prof. Francis A. Boyle (U.S.A.), professor of international law from the University of Illinois, Chairman; Dr. Hans Goeran Franck (Sweden), attorney, member of the Swedish Parliament; Hon. Mirza Gholam Hafiz (Bangladesh), former Speaker of the Bangladesh Parliament and currently a senior advocate of the Bangladesh Supreme Court; Hon. Mary M. Kaufman (U.S.A.), attorney-at-law, prosecuting attorney at the Nuremberg War Crimes Trial against I.G. Farben; Dr. Jean-Claude Njem (Cameroon), assistant-professor at the Faculty of Law, Uppsala University and a consultant of the government; Prof. Alberto Ruiz-Eldredge (Peru), professor of law, former president of the National Council of Justice; and Dr. Muemlaz Soysal (Turkey), professor of constitutional law, University of Ankara. An accusation against the international legality of the Reagan Administration's foreign policy was delivered by the Honorable Ramsey Clark, former U.S. Attorney General. The defense was presented by a legal expert of the Reagan Administration. Based upon all the reports and documents submitted and the arguments by the advocates, the Brussels Panel of Jurists hereby renders the following conclusions concerning the compatibility of the Reagan Administration's foreign policy with the requirements of international law. A. Introduction 1. General Introduction. The Reagan administration's foreign policy constitutes a gross violation of the fundamental principles of international law enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations Organization, as well as the basic rules of customary international law set forth in the UN General Assembly's Declaration on the Inadmissibility of Intervention in the Domestic Affairs of States and the Protection of Their Independence and Sovereignty (1965), its Declaration on the Principles of International Law Concerning Friendly Relations and Cooperation Among States in Accordance with the Charter of the United Nations (1970), and its Definition of Aggression (1974), among others. In addition, the Reagan administration is responsible for complicity in the commission of crimes against peace, crimes against humanity, war crimes and grave breaches of the Third and Fourth Geneva Conventions of 1949. B. Western Hemisphere 2. Grenada. The Reagan administration's 1983 invasion of Grenada was a clear-cut violation of the UN Charter articles 2(3), 2(4), and 33 as well as of articles 18, 20, and 21 of the Revised OAS Charter for which there was no valid excuse or justification under international law. As such, it constituted an act of aggression within the meaning of article 39 of the United Nation's Charter. 3. Threat of U.S. Intervention. In direct violation of the basic requirement of international law mandating the peaceful settlement of international disputes, the Reagan administration has implemented a foreign policy towards Central American that constitutes a great danger of escalation in military hostilities to the point of precipitating armed intervention by U.S. troops into combat against both the insurgents in El Salvador and the legitimate government of Nicaragua. 4. El Salvador. The Reagan administration's illegal intervention inot El Salvador's civil war contravenes the international legal right of self-determination of peoples as recognized by article 1(2) of the United Nations Charter. The Reagan administration has provided enormous amounts of military assistance to an oppressive regime that has used it to perpetrate a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of the people of El Salvador. 5. Nicaragua. The Reagan administration's policy of organizing and participating in military operations by opposition contra groups for the purpose of overthrowing the legitimate government of Nicaragua violates the terms of both the UN and OAS. Charters prohibiting the threat or use of force against the political independence of a state. The Reagan administration has flouted its obligation to terminate immediately its support for the opposition contra groups in accordance with the Interim Order of Protection issued by the International Court of Justice on 10 May 1984. 6. The International Court of Justice. The Panel denounces the patently bogus attempt by the Reagan administration to withdraw from the compulsory jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice in the suit brought against it by Nicaragua for the purpose of avoiding a peaceful settlement of this dispute by the World Court in order to pursue instead a policy based upon military intervention, lawless violence and destabilization of the legitimate government of Nicaragua. 7. Mining Nicaraguan Harbors. The Reagan administration's mining of Nicaraguan harbors violates the rules of international law set forth in the 1907 Hague Convention on the laying of Submarine Mines, to which both Nicaragua and the United States are parties. C. Nuclear Weapons Policies 8. Arms Control Treaties. The Reagan administration has refused to support the ratification of the Threshold Test Ban Treaty of 1974, the Peaceful Nuclear Explosions Treaty of 1976, and the SALT II Treaty of 1979. In addition to renouncing the longstanding objective of the U.S. government to renegotiate a comprehensive test ban treaty. As such the Reagan administration has failed to pursue negotiations in good faith on effective measures relating to cessation of the nuclear arms race at an early date and to nuclear disarmament as required by article 6 of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty of 1968. Similarly, the Reagan administration's "Strategic Defense Initiative" of 1983 threatens to breach the Anti-Ballistic Missile Systems Treaty of 1972. 9. Pershing 2 Missiles. The deployment of the offensive, first-strike, counterforce strategic nuclear weapons system known as the Pershing 2 missile in the Federal Republic of Germany violates the non-circumvention clause found in article 12 of the SALT II Treaty. The Reagan administration is bound to obey this prohibition pursuant to the rule of customary international law enunciated in article 18 of the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties to the effect that a signatory to a treaty is obliged to refrain from acts that would defeat the object and purpose of a treaty until it has made its intention clear not to become a party. 10. The MX Missile. The MX missile is an offensive, first-strike, counterforce, strategic nuclear weapons system that can serve no legitimate defensive purpose under UN Charter article 51 and the international laws of humanitarian armed conflict. 11. No-First-Use. In accordance with UN General Assembly Resolution 1553 of 24 November 1961, the Panel denounces the refusal by the Reagan administration to adopt a policy mandating the no-first-use of nuclear weapons in the event of a conventional attack as required by the basic rule of international law dictating proportionality in the use of force even for the purposes of legitimate self-defense. 12. ASAT Treaty. The Panel calls upon both the United States and the Soviet Union to negotiate unconditionally over the conclusion of an anti-satellite weapons treaty. D. Middle East 13. Lebanon. For the part it played in the planning, preparation and initiation of the 1982 Israeli invasion of Lebanon, the Reagan administration has committed a crime against peace as defined by the Nuremberg Principles. Likewise, under the Nuremberg Principles, the Reagan administration becomes an accomplice to the crimes against humanity, war crimes and grave breaches of the Third and Fourth Geneva Conventions of 1949 that have been committed or condoned by Israel and its allied Phalange and Haddad militia forces in Lebanon. Such complicity includes the savage massacre of genocidal character of hundreds of innocent Palestinians and Lebanese civilians by organized unites of the Phalangist militia at the Sabra and Shatila refugee camps located in West Beirut that were then subject to control by the occupying Israeli army. The Reagan administration has totally failed to discharge its obligation to obtain Israel's immediate and unconditional withdrawal from all parts of Lebanon as required by UN Security Council Resolutions 508 and 509 (1982), both of which are legally binding in Israel and the United States under UN Charter article 28. This includes Israeli evacuation of southern Lebanon. 14. The Palestinian Question. The Reagan administration's policy toward the Palestinian people as well as the Reagan "Peace Plan" of 1 September 1982 violates the international legal right of the Palestinian people to self-determination as recognized by UN Charter article 1(2). As recognized by numerous General Assembly resolutions, the Palestinian people have an international legal right to create and independent and sovereign state. The Palestinian Liberation Organization has been recognized as the legitimate representative of the Palestinian people by both the United Nations General Assembly and the League of Arab States. The Reagan administration's nonrecognition of the PLO and its attempt to brand the PLO a "terrorist" group contravene the Palestinian people's right to liberation. The panel denounces the negative attitude of the Reagan Administration towards the call by the United Nations' Secretary General for the convocation of an international conference under the auspices of the United Nations, with the United States and the Soviet Union as co-chairmen, and with the participation of all parties involved in the conflict including the PLO, for the purpose of obtaining a just and lasting peace in the Middle East. 15. Israeli Settlements. The Reagan administration's declared position that Israeli settlements in the Occupied Territories are "not illegal" is a violation of U.S. obligations under article 1 of the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949 to ensure respect for the terms of the Convention (here article 49) by other High Contracting Parties such as Israel. 16. Libya. The Reagan administration's dispatch of the U.S. Sixth Fleet into the Gulf of Sidra for the purpose of precipitating armed conflict with the Libyan government constitutes a breach fo the peace under Article 39 of the UN Charter. The Reagan administration's policy to attempt to destabilize the government of Libya violates the terms of the United Nations Charter article 2(4) prohibiting the threat or use of force directed against the political independence of a state. E. Africa, Asia and the Indian Ocean 17. Apartheid. The Panel denounces the Reagan administration's so-called policy of "constructive engagement" toward the apartheid regime in South Africa. This specious policy encourages discrimination and oppression against the majority of the people of South Africa; it hampers effective action by the international community against apartheid and facilitates aggressive conduct by the South African apartheid regime against neighbor states in violation of the UN Charter. As such, the Reagan administration has become an accomplice to the commission of the international crime of apartheid as recognized by the universally accepted International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid of 1973. The Panel also denounces the cooperation between the Reagan administration and South Africa in military and nuclear matters. 18. Namibia. The Reagan administration has refused to carry out its obligations under Security Council Resolution 435 (1978) providing for the independence of Namibia, as required by article 25 of the UN Charter. The right of the Namibian people to self-determination had been firmly established under international law long before the outbreak of the Angolan civil war. The Reagan administration has no right to obstruct the achievement of Namibian independence by conditioning it or "linking" it to the withdrawal of Cuban troops from Angola in any way. Both the UN General Assembly and the Organization of African Unity have recognized SWAPI as the legitimate representative of the Namibian people and the Reagan administration is obligated to negotiate with it as such. 19. Angola. Cuban troops are in Angola at the request of the legitimate government of Angola in order to protect it from overt and covert aggression mounted by the South African apartheid regime from Namibia. There is absolutely no international legal justification for South African aggression against Angola in order to maintain and consolidate its reprehensible occupation of Namibia. The Angolan government has repeatedly stated that when South Africa leaves Namibia it will request the withdrawal of Cuban troops, and Cuba has agreed to withdraw its troops whenever so requested by Angola. According to the relevant rules of international law, that is the proper sequence of events to be followed. The Reagan administration's "linkage" of the presence of the Cuban troops in Angola with the independence of Namibia encourages South African aggression against Angola, and thus it must share in the responsibility for South Africa's genocidal acts against the people of Angola. 20. Indian Ocean. The Reagan administration's continued military occupation of the island of Diego Garcia violates the international right of self-determination of the people of Mauritius as recognized by the United Nations Charter. The Reagan administration has accelerated the rapid militarization of the U.S. naval base on Diego Garcia as part of its plan to create a jumping-off point for intervention by the Rapid Deployment Force into the Persian Gulf. As such the Reagan administration 's foreign policy towards the Indian Ocean has violated the terms of the UN General Assembly's Declaration of the Indian Ocean as a Zone of Peace (1971). F. Conclusion 21. United Nations Action. From the foregoing, it is clear that the Reagan administration has substituted force for the rule of international law in its conduct of foreign policy around the world. It has thus created a serious threat to the maintenance of international peace and security under article 39 of the United Nations Charter that calls for the imposition of enforcement measures by the UN Security Council under articles 41 and 42. In the event the Reagan administration exercises its veto power against the adoption of such measures by the Security Council, the matter should be turned over the to UN General assembly for action in accordance with the procedures set forth in the Uniting for Peace Resolution of 1950. In this way the Reagan administration's grievous international transgressions could be effectively opposed by all members of the world community in a manner consistent with the requirements of international law. Both the Security Council and the General Assembly should also take into account the numerous interventionist measures taken by the Reagan Administration, whether direct or indirect, seeking to impose financial and economic policies which are contrary to the sovereign independence of states, especially in the developing world, and which severely damage the quality of life for all peoples. Farouk Abu-Eissa Mary Kaufman Francis A. Boyle, Chairman Jean-Claude Njem Hans Goeran Franck Alberto Ruiz-Eldredge Mirza Gholam Hafiz Muemlaz Soysal Brussels, Belgium 30 September 1984. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (voice) 217-244-1478 (fax) * To subscribe or unsubscribe or change your settings via the web, visit: http://olm.blythe-systems.com/mailman/listinfo/nytr Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Saturday, May 30, 2015 3:55 PM To: Moore, Michael; Wasserman, Melissa F; Law * Tenured/Track Faculty; Law * Clinical Faculty; Law * Legal Writing Faculty; Law * Emeritus Faculty; Law * Library Faculty; Cook, Sally J; Mazzone, Jason; Robbennolt, Jennifer Kirkpatrick Subject: Harold Killer Koh, Joan of Arc, President Obama, and The Dark Ages As for the right of President Obama to murder people, which is the correct description of what he is doing, Professor Francis Boyle of the University of Illinois and Magna Cum Laude graduate of Harvard Law School, says: "The 'honors' graduate of Harvard Law School President Obama has set himself up as the sole Judge, Jury and Executioner of thousands of human beings in violation of international law, human rights law, the laws of war and the United States Constitution. Harvard Law School taught me that makes Obama a felon and a war criminal and impeachable." ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ditto for Harold Killer Koh. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) Feed: "Francis Boyle" - Bing News Posted on: Saturday, May 30, 2015 3:17 AM Author: "Francis Boyle" - Bing News Subject: Joan of Arc, President Obama, and The Dark Ages As for the right of President Obama to murder people, which is the correct description of what he is doing, Professor Francis Boyle of the University of Illinois and Magna Cum Laude graduate of Harvard Law School, says: "The 'honors' graduate of Harvard ... View article... -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Fri Jun 23 18:01:34 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2017 18:01:34 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] WAFFEN-SS LAW SCHOOL OFF CAMPUS!Nuremberg & Reagan & Harold Killer Koh, Joan of Arc, President Obama, and The Dark Ages In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Saturday, May 30, 2015 8:06 PM To: Moore, Michael >; Wasserman, Melissa F >; Law * Tenured/Track Faculty >; Law * Clinical Faculty >; Law * Legal Writing Faculty >; Law * Emeritus Faculty >; Law * Library Faculty >; Cook, Sally J >; Mazzone, Jason >; Robbennolt, Jennifer Kirkpatrick > Subject: Nuremberg & Reagan & Harold Killer Koh, Joan of Arc, President Obama, and The Dark Ages One further point before I let you go for the weekend. As you can see from the above, I sent this Message and many others like it to the ENTIRE Law School Faculty. Not one of them supported me against Killer Koh! These People are sick and demented! Waffen-SS Law School of Campus! Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Friday, June 23, 2017 11:08 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson ; Mildred O'brien Subject: RE: WAFFEN-SS LAW SCHOOL OFF CAMPUS!Nuremberg & Reagan & Harold Killer Koh, Joan of Arc, President Obama, and The Dark Ages And notice: Instead of bringing out Killer Koh in the 2015-2016 Academic Year, this Waffen-SS Law Faculty deliberately waited to bring Killer Koh out on October 28, 2016 during the 2016-2017 Academic Year precisely in order to get Killary elected President ten days later. Waffen-SS Law School Off Campus! Fab. From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Saturday, May 30, 2015 8:06 PM To: Moore, Michael >; Wasserman, Melissa F >; Law * Tenured/Track Faculty >; Law * Clinical Faculty >; Law * Legal Writing Faculty >; Law * Emeritus Faculty >; Law * Library Faculty >; Cook, Sally J >; Mazzone, Jason >; Robbennolt, Jennifer Kirkpatrick > Subject: Nuremberg & Reagan & Harold Killer Koh, Joan of Arc, President Obama, and The Dark Ages Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Friday, June 23, 2017 9:34 AM To: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; Karen Aram >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson >; Mildred O'brien > Subject: WAFFEN-SS LAW SCHOOL OFF CAMPUS!Nuremberg & Reagan & Harold Killer Koh, Joan of Arc, President Obama, and The Dark Ages As you can see I sent this Message among many others to the entire Faculty of the College of Law to prevent Killer Koh from coming over two years ago. To the contrary, as far as this Waffen-SS Law Faculty were concerned, all these Reaganite Nazi atrocities that Killer Koh justified from 1983 to 1985 qualified Killer Koh to come. Ditto for Killer Koh’s Nazi Atrocities for Obama/Clinton. Waffen-SS Law School Off Campus! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Saturday, May 30, 2015 8:06 PM To: Moore, Michael >; Wasserman, Melissa F >; Law * Tenured/Track Faculty >; Law * Clinical Faculty >; Law * Legal Writing Faculty >; Law * Emeritus Faculty >; Law * Library Faculty >; Cook, Sally J >; Mazzone, Jason >; Robbennolt, Jennifer Kirkpatrick > Subject: Nuremberg & Reagan & Harold Killer Koh, Joan of Arc, President Obama, and The Dark Ages Hon. Mary M. Kaufman (U.S.A.), attorney-at-law, prosecuting attorney at the Nuremberg War Crimes Trial against I.G. Farben …. Mary Kaufman Francis A. Boyle, Chairman ….. My Colleague and Friend Mary Kaufman prosecuted IG Farben at Nuremberg. The Nazis had their lawyers too—just like Harold Killer Koh. Some of them were prosecuted and convicted at Nuremberg in the Justice Case. RIP: Mary Kaufman Fab. …. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Saturday, May 30, 2015 4:36 PM To: Moore, Michael; Wasserman, Melissa F; Law * Tenured/Track Faculty; Law * Clinical Faculty; Law * Legal Writing Faculty; Law * Emeritus Faculty; Law * Library Faculty; Cook, Sally J; Mazzone, Jason; Robbennolt, Jennifer Kirkpatrick Subject: Reagan & Harold Killer Koh, Joan of Arc, President Obama, and The Dark Ages In 1983, Harold Killer Koh went to work for the Reagan administration in its Department of “Justice” Office of Legal Counsel, justifying every hideous atrocity Reagan was inflicting on international law, human rights, and the United States Constitution. Later, Killer Koh would brag to his Yale Law Students that he authored the Opinion Letter justifying Reagan’s criminal and unconstitutional invasion of Grenada. Fab. Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit Conclusions and Judgment of Brussels Tribunal on Reagan's Foreign Policy (September 30, 1984) The International Conference on the Reagan administration's foreign policy convened in Brussels from 28-30 September, 1984 under the auspices of the International Progress Organization. Reports were submitted by international jurists and foreign policy specialists on the various aspects of the Reagan administration's foreign policy. Among the participants of the conference were Sean McBride (Nobel Laureate, Ireland), Prof. George Wald (Nobel Laureate, Harvard University), General Edgardo Mercado Jarrin (Peru), General Nino Pasti (former Deputy Supreme Commander of NATO) and Hortensia Bussi de Allende (Chile). The reports were presented before a panel of jurists consisting of Hon. Farouk Abu-Eissa (Sudan), attorney, former foreign minister, secretary-general of the Arab Lawyers Union; Prof. Francis A. Boyle (U.S.A.), professor of international law from the University of Illinois, Chairman; Dr. Hans Goeran Franck (Sweden), attorney, member of the Swedish Parliament; Hon. Mirza Gholam Hafiz (Bangladesh), former Speaker of the Bangladesh Parliament and currently a senior advocate of the Bangladesh Supreme Court; Hon. Mary M. Kaufman (U.S.A.), attorney-at-law, prosecuting attorney at the Nuremberg War Crimes Trial against I.G. Farben; Dr. Jean-Claude Njem (Cameroon), assistant-professor at the Faculty of Law, Uppsala University and a consultant of the government; Prof. Alberto Ruiz-Eldredge (Peru), professor of law, former president of the National Council of Justice; and Dr. Muemlaz Soysal (Turkey), professor of constitutional law, University of Ankara. An accusation against the international legality of the Reagan Administration's foreign policy was delivered by the Honorable Ramsey Clark, former U.S. Attorney General. The defense was presented by a legal expert of the Reagan Administration. Based upon all the reports and documents submitted and the arguments by the advocates, the Brussels Panel of Jurists hereby renders the following conclusions concerning the compatibility of the Reagan Administration's foreign policy with the requirements of international law. A. Introduction 1. General Introduction. The Reagan administration's foreign policy constitutes a gross violation of the fundamental principles of international law enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations Organization, as well as the basic rules of customary international law set forth in the UN General Assembly's Declaration on the Inadmissibility of Intervention in the Domestic Affairs of States and the Protection of Their Independence and Sovereignty (1965), its Declaration on the Principles of International Law Concerning Friendly Relations and Cooperation Among States in Accordance with the Charter of the United Nations (1970), and its Definition of Aggression (1974), among others. In addition, the Reagan administration is responsible for complicity in the commission of crimes against peace, crimes against humanity, war crimes and grave breaches of the Third and Fourth Geneva Conventions of 1949. B. Western Hemisphere 2. Grenada. The Reagan administration's 1983 invasion of Grenada was a clear-cut violation of the UN Charter articles 2(3), 2(4), and 33 as well as of articles 18, 20, and 21 of the Revised OAS Charter for which there was no valid excuse or justification under international law. As such, it constituted an act of aggression within the meaning of article 39 of the United Nation's Charter. 3. Threat of U.S. Intervention. In direct violation of the basic requirement of international law mandating the peaceful settlement of international disputes, the Reagan administration has implemented a foreign policy towards Central American that constitutes a great danger of escalation in military hostilities to the point of precipitating armed intervention by U.S. troops into combat against both the insurgents in El Salvador and the legitimate government of Nicaragua. 4. El Salvador. The Reagan administration's illegal intervention inot El Salvador's civil war contravenes the international legal right of self-determination of peoples as recognized by article 1(2) of the United Nations Charter. The Reagan administration has provided enormous amounts of military assistance to an oppressive regime that has used it to perpetrate a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of the people of El Salvador. 5. Nicaragua. The Reagan administration's policy of organizing and participating in military operations by opposition contra groups for the purpose of overthrowing the legitimate government of Nicaragua violates the terms of both the UN and OAS. Charters prohibiting the threat or use of force against the political independence of a state. The Reagan administration has flouted its obligation to terminate immediately its support for the opposition contra groups in accordance with the Interim Order of Protection issued by the International Court of Justice on 10 May 1984. 6. The International Court of Justice. The Panel denounces the patently bogus attempt by the Reagan administration to withdraw from the compulsory jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice in the suit brought against it by Nicaragua for the purpose of avoiding a peaceful settlement of this dispute by the World Court in order to pursue instead a policy based upon military intervention, lawless violence and destabilization of the legitimate government of Nicaragua. 7. Mining Nicaraguan Harbors. The Reagan administration's mining of Nicaraguan harbors violates the rules of international law set forth in the 1907 Hague Convention on the laying of Submarine Mines, to which both Nicaragua and the United States are parties. C. Nuclear Weapons Policies 8. Arms Control Treaties. The Reagan administration has refused to support the ratification of the Threshold Test Ban Treaty of 1974, the Peaceful Nuclear Explosions Treaty of 1976, and the SALT II Treaty of 1979. In addition to renouncing the longstanding objective of the U.S. government to renegotiate a comprehensive test ban treaty. As such the Reagan administration has failed to pursue negotiations in good faith on effective measures relating to cessation of the nuclear arms race at an early date and to nuclear disarmament as required by article 6 of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty of 1968. Similarly, the Reagan administration's "Strategic Defense Initiative" of 1983 threatens to breach the Anti-Ballistic Missile Systems Treaty of 1972. 9. Pershing 2 Missiles. The deployment of the offensive, first-strike, counterforce strategic nuclear weapons system known as the Pershing 2 missile in the Federal Republic of Germany violates the non-circumvention clause found in article 12 of the SALT II Treaty. The Reagan administration is bound to obey this prohibition pursuant to the rule of customary international law enunciated in article 18 of the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties to the effect that a signatory to a treaty is obliged to refrain from acts that would defeat the object and purpose of a treaty until it has made its intention clear not to become a party. 10. The MX Missile. The MX missile is an offensive, first-strike, counterforce, strategic nuclear weapons system that can serve no legitimate defensive purpose under UN Charter article 51 and the international laws of humanitarian armed conflict. 11. No-First-Use. In accordance with UN General Assembly Resolution 1553 of 24 November 1961, the Panel denounces the refusal by the Reagan administration to adopt a policy mandating the no-first-use of nuclear weapons in the event of a conventional attack as required by the basic rule of international law dictating proportionality in the use of force even for the purposes of legitimate self-defense. 12. ASAT Treaty. The Panel calls upon both the United States and the Soviet Union to negotiate unconditionally over the conclusion of an anti-satellite weapons treaty. D. Middle East 13. Lebanon. For the part it played in the planning, preparation and initiation of the 1982 Israeli invasion of Lebanon, the Reagan administration has committed a crime against peace as defined by the Nuremberg Principles. Likewise, under the Nuremberg Principles, the Reagan administration becomes an accomplice to the crimes against humanity, war crimes and grave breaches of the Third and Fourth Geneva Conventions of 1949 that have been committed or condoned by Israel and its allied Phalange and Haddad militia forces in Lebanon. Such complicity includes the savage massacre of genocidal character of hundreds of innocent Palestinians and Lebanese civilians by organized unites of the Phalangist militia at the Sabra and Shatila refugee camps located in West Beirut that were then subject to control by the occupying Israeli army. The Reagan administration has totally failed to discharge its obligation to obtain Israel's immediate and unconditional withdrawal from all parts of Lebanon as required by UN Security Council Resolutions 508 and 509 (1982), both of which are legally binding in Israel and the United States under UN Charter article 28. This includes Israeli evacuation of southern Lebanon. 14. The Palestinian Question. The Reagan administration's policy toward the Palestinian people as well as the Reagan "Peace Plan" of 1 September 1982 violates the international legal right of the Palestinian people to self-determination as recognized by UN Charter article 1(2). As recognized by numerous General Assembly resolutions, the Palestinian people have an international legal right to create and independent and sovereign state. The Palestinian Liberation Organization has been recognized as the legitimate representative of the Palestinian people by both the United Nations General Assembly and the League of Arab States. The Reagan administration's nonrecognition of the PLO and its attempt to brand the PLO a "terrorist" group contravene the Palestinian people's right to liberation. The panel denounces the negative attitude of the Reagan Administration towards the call by the United Nations' Secretary General for the convocation of an international conference under the auspices of the United Nations, with the United States and the Soviet Union as co-chairmen, and with the participation of all parties involved in the conflict including the PLO, for the purpose of obtaining a just and lasting peace in the Middle East. 15. Israeli Settlements. The Reagan administration's declared position that Israeli settlements in the Occupied Territories are "not illegal" is a violation of U.S. obligations under article 1 of the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949 to ensure respect for the terms of the Convention (here article 49) by other High Contracting Parties such as Israel. 16. Libya. The Reagan administration's dispatch of the U.S. Sixth Fleet into the Gulf of Sidra for the purpose of precipitating armed conflict with the Libyan government constitutes a breach fo the peace under Article 39 of the UN Charter. The Reagan administration's policy to attempt to destabilize the government of Libya violates the terms of the United Nations Charter article 2(4) prohibiting the threat or use of force directed against the political independence of a state. E. Africa, Asia and the Indian Ocean 17. Apartheid. The Panel denounces the Reagan administration's so-called policy of "constructive engagement" toward the apartheid regime in South Africa. This specious policy encourages discrimination and oppression against the majority of the people of South Africa; it hampers effective action by the international community against apartheid and facilitates aggressive conduct by the South African apartheid regime against neighbor states in violation of the UN Charter. As such, the Reagan administration has become an accomplice to the commission of the international crime of apartheid as recognized by the universally accepted International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid of 1973. The Panel also denounces the cooperation between the Reagan administration and South Africa in military and nuclear matters. 18. Namibia. The Reagan administration has refused to carry out its obligations under Security Council Resolution 435 (1978) providing for the independence of Namibia, as required by article 25 of the UN Charter. The right of the Namibian people to self-determination had been firmly established under international law long before the outbreak of the Angolan civil war. The Reagan administration has no right to obstruct the achievement of Namibian independence by conditioning it or "linking" it to the withdrawal of Cuban troops from Angola in any way. Both the UN General Assembly and the Organization of African Unity have recognized SWAPI as the legitimate representative of the Namibian people and the Reagan administration is obligated to negotiate with it as such. 19. Angola. Cuban troops are in Angola at the request of the legitimate government of Angola in order to protect it from overt and covert aggression mounted by the South African apartheid regime from Namibia. There is absolutely no international legal justification for South African aggression against Angola in order to maintain and consolidate its reprehensible occupation of Namibia. The Angolan government has repeatedly stated that when South Africa leaves Namibia it will request the withdrawal of Cuban troops, and Cuba has agreed to withdraw its troops whenever so requested by Angola. According to the relevant rules of international law, that is the proper sequence of events to be followed. The Reagan administration's "linkage" of the presence of the Cuban troops in Angola with the independence of Namibia encourages South African aggression against Angola, and thus it must share in the responsibility for South Africa's genocidal acts against the people of Angola. 20. Indian Ocean. The Reagan administration's continued military occupation of the island of Diego Garcia violates the international right of self-determination of the people of Mauritius as recognized by the United Nations Charter. The Reagan administration has accelerated the rapid militarization of the U.S. naval base on Diego Garcia as part of its plan to create a jumping-off point for intervention by the Rapid Deployment Force into the Persian Gulf. As such the Reagan administration 's foreign policy towards the Indian Ocean has violated the terms of the UN General Assembly's Declaration of the Indian Ocean as a Zone of Peace (1971). F. Conclusion 21. United Nations Action. From the foregoing, it is clear that the Reagan administration has substituted force for the rule of international law in its conduct of foreign policy around the world. It has thus created a serious threat to the maintenance of international peace and security under article 39 of the United Nations Charter that calls for the imposition of enforcement measures by the UN Security Council under articles 41 and 42. In the event the Reagan administration exercises its veto power against the adoption of such measures by the Security Council, the matter should be turned over the to UN General assembly for action in accordance with the procedures set forth in the Uniting for Peace Resolution of 1950. In this way the Reagan administration's grievous international transgressions could be effectively opposed by all members of the world community in a manner consistent with the requirements of international law. Both the Security Council and the General Assembly should also take into account the numerous interventionist measures taken by the Reagan Administration, whether direct or indirect, seeking to impose financial and economic policies which are contrary to the sovereign independence of states, especially in the developing world, and which severely damage the quality of life for all peoples. Farouk Abu-Eissa Mary Kaufman Francis A. Boyle, Chairman Jean-Claude Njem Hans Goeran Franck Alberto Ruiz-Eldredge Mirza Gholam Hafiz Muemlaz Soysal Brussels, Belgium 30 September 1984. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (voice) 217-244-1478 (fax) * To subscribe or unsubscribe or change your settings via the web, visit: http://olm.blythe-systems.com/mailman/listinfo/nytr Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Saturday, May 30, 2015 3:55 PM To: Moore, Michael; Wasserman, Melissa F; Law * Tenured/Track Faculty; Law * Clinical Faculty; Law * Legal Writing Faculty; Law * Emeritus Faculty; Law * Library Faculty; Cook, Sally J; Mazzone, Jason; Robbennolt, Jennifer Kirkpatrick Subject: Harold Killer Koh, Joan of Arc, President Obama, and The Dark Ages As for the right of President Obama to murder people, which is the correct description of what he is doing, Professor Francis Boyle of the University of Illinois and Magna Cum Laude graduate of Harvard Law School, says: "The 'honors' graduate of Harvard Law School President Obama has set himself up as the sole Judge, Jury and Executioner of thousands of human beings in violation of international law, human rights law, the laws of war and the United States Constitution. Harvard Law School taught me that makes Obama a felon and a war criminal and impeachable." ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ditto for Harold Killer Koh. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) Feed: "Francis Boyle" - Bing News Posted on: Saturday, May 30, 2015 3:17 AM Author: "Francis Boyle" - Bing News Subject: Joan of Arc, President Obama, and The Dark Ages As for the right of President Obama to murder people, which is the correct description of what he is doing, Professor Francis Boyle of the University of Illinois and Magna Cum Laude graduate of Harvard Law School, says: "The 'honors' graduate of Harvard ... View article... -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Sat Jun 24 12:57:36 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Sat, 24 Jun 2017 12:57:36 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] The Torturers Speak at UIUC:CIA/MOSSAD/MOORE/HURD OFF CAMPUS! Message-ID: Many people bear responsibility for the depravity of the torture program,….. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) Feed: NYT > Editorials Posted on: Friday, June 23, 2017 8:18 PM Author: By THE EDITORIAL BOARD Subject: The Torturers Speak [http://static01.nyt.com/images/2017/06/24/opinion/24sat1web/24sat1web-thumbStandard.jpg]The deposition videos of two former military psychologists who ran the C.I.A.’s enhanced-interrogation program are chilling.... View article... -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Sat Jun 24 12:57:36 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Sat, 24 Jun 2017 12:57:36 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] The Torturers Speak at UIUC:CIA/MOSSAD/MOORE/HURD OFF CAMPUS! Message-ID: Many people bear responsibility for the depravity of the torture program,….. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) Feed: NYT > Editorials Posted on: Friday, June 23, 2017 8:18 PM Author: By THE EDITORIAL BOARD Subject: The Torturers Speak [http://static01.nyt.com/images/2017/06/24/opinion/24sat1web/24sat1web-thumbStandard.jpg]The deposition videos of two former military psychologists who ran the C.I.A.’s enhanced-interrogation program are chilling.... View article... -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Sat Jun 24 13:15:25 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Sat, 24 Jun 2017 13:15:25 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] The Torturers Speak at UIUC:CIA/MOSSAD/MOORE/HURD OFF CAMPUS! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: CIA/Mossad/Moore/Hurd should be placed upon Indefinite Paid Administrative Leave so that they cannot turn our Law Students into Torturers, War Criminals and Felons. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Saturday, June 24, 2017 7:58 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson ; Mildred O'brien Subject: The Torturers Speak at UIUC:CIA/MOSSAD/MOORE/HURD OFF CAMPUS! Many people bear responsibility for the depravity of the torture program,….. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) Feed: NYT > Editorials Posted on: Friday, June 23, 2017 8:18 PM Author: By THE EDITORIAL BOARD Subject: The Torturers Speak [http://static01.nyt.com/images/2017/06/24/opinion/24sat1web/24sat1web-thumbStandard.jpg]The deposition videos of two former military psychologists who ran the C.I.A.’s enhanced-interrogation program are chilling.... View article... -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Sat Jun 24 13:15:25 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Sat, 24 Jun 2017 13:15:25 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] The Torturers Speak at UIUC:CIA/MOSSAD/MOORE/HURD OFF CAMPUS! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: CIA/Mossad/Moore/Hurd should be placed upon Indefinite Paid Administrative Leave so that they cannot turn our Law Students into Torturers, War Criminals and Felons. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Saturday, June 24, 2017 7:58 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson ; Mildred O'brien Subject: The Torturers Speak at UIUC:CIA/MOSSAD/MOORE/HURD OFF CAMPUS! Many people bear responsibility for the depravity of the torture program,….. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) Feed: NYT > Editorials Posted on: Friday, June 23, 2017 8:18 PM Author: By THE EDITORIAL BOARD Subject: The Torturers Speak [http://static01.nyt.com/images/2017/06/24/opinion/24sat1web/24sat1web-thumbStandard.jpg]The deposition videos of two former military psychologists who ran the C.I.A.’s enhanced-interrogation program are chilling.... View article... -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Sun Jun 25 11:25:49 2017 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Sun, 25 Jun 2017 11:25:49 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Oliver Stone speaks out at the Screen Writers Guild, short and to the point. Message-ID: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UY6yuHF3dG0&feature=youtu.be -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cge at shout.net Sun Jun 25 11:58:23 2017 From: cge at shout.net (C. G. Estabrook) Date: Sun, 25 Jun 2017 06:58:23 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] News-Gazette area history, June 24, 2017 In-Reply-To: <38dd9634ddb6d642a9e18e34d02ee607@shout.net> References: <5880c407a1db5_222964d980682c3@asgworker-qmb2-1.nbuild.prd.useast1.3dna.io.mail> <3014b58c3080570ba473a4b2bdcb0659@shout.net> <1f26ef3688b593a338a8fbc7cd45b7a6@shout.net> <38dd9634ddb6d642a9e18e34d02ee607@shout.net> Message-ID: <11a3e6f7cbc9fa68332a0079c6684e49@shout.net> http://www.news-gazette.com/news/local/2017-06-24/area-history-june-24-2017.html In the words of my coeval, Mick Jagger, it's a gas, gas gas... --CGE From rwhelbig at gmail.com Sun Jun 25 12:12:39 2017 From: rwhelbig at gmail.com (Roger Helbig) Date: Sun, 25 Jun 2017 05:12:39 -0700 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Election Results for 2002 Message-ID: 15TH CONGRESS Candidate NamePartyVotes% of Votes TIMOTHY V. JOHNSON REPUBLICAN 134650 65.2% JOSHUA T. HARTKE DEMOCRATIC 64131 31.0% CARL ESTABROOK ILLINOIS GREEN 7836 3.8% from https://www.elections.il.gov/ElectionResults.aspx?ID=zSlj0mHwIc8%3d -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Sun Jun 25 12:41:32 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Sun, 25 Jun 2017 12:41:32 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] News-Gazette area history, June 24, 2017 In-Reply-To: <11a3e6f7cbc9fa68332a0079c6684e49@shout.net> References: <5880c407a1db5_222964d980682c3@asgworker-qmb2-1.nbuild.prd.useast1.3dna.io.mail> <3014b58c3080570ba473a4b2bdcb0659@shout.net> <1f26ef3688b593a338a8fbc7cd45b7a6@shout.net> <38dd9634ddb6d642a9e18e34d02ee607@shout.net> <11a3e6f7cbc9fa68332a0079c6684e49@shout.net> Message-ID: I was honored and pleased to have come to the Rally on the Quad to endorse Carl for Congress. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Peace [mailto:peace-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of C. G. Estabrook via Peace Sent: Sunday, June 25, 2017 6:58 AM To: prairiegreens at lists.chambana.net; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; peace at lists.chambana.net Subject: [Peace] News-Gazette area history, June 24, 2017 http://www.news-gazette.com/news/local/2017-06-24/area-history-june-24-2017.html In the words of my coeval, Mick Jagger, it's a gas, gas gas... --CGE _______________________________________________ Peace mailing list Peace at lists.chambana.net https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace From galliher at illinois.edu Sun Jun 25 14:20:54 2017 From: galliher at illinois.edu (Carl G. Estabrook) Date: Sun, 25 Jun 2017 09:20:54 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Election Results for 2002 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4C58445B-DB09-4946-90AA-D17CF9289F20@illinois.edu> And now I lecture in Tim Johnson’s politics classes at UIUC, and Josh Hartke (I think) writes novels. Before leaving Congress, Tim changed his mind on US war-making and even joined other US representatives in a suit against the shameful Obama-Clinton attack on Libya. I like to think I had something to do with that. Americans' revolt against the US government’s attack on SE Asia - in the military, which ended the draft, and at home - took almost a decade, after JFK’s invasion of S. Vietnam. The revolt against the US government’s attack on SW Asia has taken even longer, owing to what the goverenmet learnt in the 1960s about misleading the public about war. That’s what President Bush I meant about defeating the "Vietnam syndrome” ( = the public’s aversion to killing people in Asia for the one percent’s profits). See the duplicitous account of the Vietnam war in Obama’s "The Audacity of Hope: Thoughts on Reclaiming the American Dream,” 2007. He became the first president to be at war throughout two terms (while pretending not to). Regards, CGE > On Jun 25, 2017, at 7:12 AM, Roger Helbig via Peace-discuss wrote: > > 15TH CONGRESS > Candidate Name Party Votes % of Votes > TIMOTHY V. JOHNSON REPUBLICAN 134650 65.2% > JOSHUA T. HARTKE DEMOCRATIC 64131 31.0% > CARL ESTABROOK ILLINOIS GREEN 7836 3.8% > > from https://www.elections.il.gov/ElectionResults.aspx?ID=zSlj0mHwIc8%3d > > _______________________________________________ > Peace-discuss mailing list > Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Sun Jun 25 17:24:52 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Sun, 25 Jun 2017 17:24:52 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] =?windows-1252?q?FW=3A_A_Baseless_Justification_f?= =?windows-1252?q?or_War_in_Syria_=96_Consortiumnews?= Message-ID: Waffen-SS Law School Off Campus! Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Sunday, June 25, 2017 12:21 PM To: sectns.aals at lists.aals.org Subject: A Baseless Justification for War in Syria – Consortiumnews https://consortiumnews.com/2017/06/25/a-baseless-justification-for-war-in-syria/ A Baseless Justification for War in Syria June 25, 2017 For almost 16 years, the U.S. government has stretched the military force authorization against Al Qaeda to justify a wide-ranging “war on terror” but now has gone further, attacking the Syrian military inside Syria, notes Dennis J Bernstein. By Dennis J Bernstein U.S. government officials, including Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Joseph F. Dunford Jr., claim the current U.S. authority to mount military operations in Iraq and Syria is legally based on the Authorization for the Use of Military Force [AUMF] declaration to go after Al Qaeda and related terror groups after the 9/11 attacks in 2001. But how does that cover the recent U.S. attacks on Syrian government forces that have been battling both Al Qaeda and its spinoff, Islamic State? Marine Corps Gen. Joe Dunford, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, meets with members of the coalition at a forward operating base near Qayyarah West, Iraq, April 4, 2017. (DoD Photo by Navy Petty Officer 2nd Class Dominique A. Pineiro) Francis Boyle, professor of international law at the University of Illinois College of Law, asserts that the recent U.S. shoot-down of a Syrian government jet inside Syria on June 18 was not only illegal under international law but amounts to an impeachable act by President Trump. In an interview with Flashpoints’ Dennis J. Bernstein, Professor Boyle said, “What the U.S. government is getting away with here is incredible.” Boyle also talked to Bernstein about the questionable Russia-gate investigation and the darker history behind Special Prosecutor Robert Swan Mueller III, the former Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Dennis Bernstein: Will Syria’s hot war and the recent U.S. bombings there lead us into a hot war with Russia? Well, the generals are saying this shoot-down in Syria is legal. You want to jump into this? Francis Boyle: You know Dunford doesn’t have a law degree that I’m aware of. But, of course, still the Pentagon is going to try to justify whatever war crimes it can. They always do. Clearly the U.S. invasion, which we have done, and now repeated military attacks against Syria constitutes a Nuremberg crime against peace, and in violation of the Nuremberg charter, judgment and principles, and, of course, a violation of the United Nations’ charter. [It is] an act of aggression as defined by, oh even the new element of the Rome Statute for the International Criminal Court that is not yet in force. But it has a definition based upon the 1974 definition of aggression which the World Court found to be customary international law in the very famous Nicaraguan case when it applied it against Nicaragua. Indeed, it’s very interesting, you know, if you go back and read the Nicaragua case, and change Syria for Nicaragua, pretty much the law, the illegalities remain the same. Likewise, the United States Congress has never authorized any act of war against Syria. So, this violates the War Powers clause of the United States Constitution, the War Powers Resolution of 1973, and is clearly an impeachable act against President Trump. This is a slam dunk. We don’t have time to go through all the other arguments being made on impeachment here, but for the most part, all those are being made by these totally hypocritical Democratic lawyers who never applied the same impeachable arguments against President Obama. So, I’m not going to waste time with them. And, finally, this is existentially dangerous, what is going on right now in Syria. But Russia is there with the consent of the legitimate government of Syria. They’re not violating international law. The United States is in clear cut violation, as I have explained. And, now, Russia … has said that they are going to begin to target U.S. planes and drones. And, the problem is, of course, when you target planes, that triggers their radar and they fire back. So, we’re pretty much on a hair trigger right now in Syria for war between the United States and Russia. And given the massive war mongering campaign we’re seeing being waged against Russia by almost all the mainstream news media, the Democrats, the whole Democratic Party, the Hillary Clinton people, etc. and sort of neo-McCarthyism against Russia, Putin and everyone else, I shudder to think what would happen if Russia were to shoot down an American pilot under these circumstances. In my lifetime, Dennis, my political lifetime, I don’t think we’ve been in such a dangerous situation since the Cuban Missile Crisis. I mean, anything could go wrong here, soon. And, even if it’s not deliberate, as President Kennedy said when the Soviet Union shot down a U-2 spy plane at the heart of the Cuban Missile Crisis that could have resulted in World War III, he said something like, “Well, there’s always some son-of-a-bitch down the line who doesn’t get the message.” So, anything could go wrong here. And we could end up being at war with Russia momentarily. Bombed out vehicles in Aleppo during the Syrian civil war. 6 October 2012 (Wikipedia) DB: You want to talk a little bit about the so-called deconfliction zones, that are really conflict zones and a potential for war? FB: Yeah, it’s clear, Dennis, and indeed [the] Financial Times now has an article on this, but I’ve said this for a while, these deconfliction zones are really de-facto partition zones for Russia and the United States. And what we’re seeing here is effectively all these surrounding states are going into Syria and grabbing a chunk of their territory. It’s like jackals descending on a wounded animal. Iran is in there, Hezbollah is in there, Turkey is in there, the Kurds are in there, the U.S. is in there. We have our proxy terrorist groups in there. The best analogy would be a pack of jackals descending upon and eating away at a wounded animal. And the so-called deconfliction zones are just part of the de-facto carve up of Syria, in violation of Syria’s territorial integrity and political independence guaranteed by the United Nations’ charter. DB: Well, as you say, these are incredibly dangerous times, and very, very difficult policies. Who loses, who gains on this kind of response to Syria, and bombing of Syria? FB: Well, the United States government believes it gains because they are out — and have always been out — to overthrow the Assad government, and put a puppet in power. And, you know, continue to achieve their objectives there in the Middle East, going back for quite some time, preparing the way for future action against Iran and Russia, for sure. So, they believe that this is to their advantage: the Pentagon, the CIA, the White House, the so-called Power Ministries, the Deep State. Call them whatever you want. They could be tragically short-sighted. I mean, this is the way the First World War and the Second World War began. What can I say, Dennis? It’s a tinder box, already. DB: And how would you characterize Israel’s interest and their role in this policy? Do you think they’re a driving force in it? FB: Of course. That’s got reported […] in the Wall Street Journal. I guess I should say Israel wants its chunk of Syria, too. They’ve already stolen the Golan Heights, in 1967. And they’ve been arming, equipping and supplying these terrorist organizations since the outset of the uprising in Syria. And, indeed, they’ve now carved out a further buffer zone in Syria. So, they’re in to get their share of Syria, as well, along with everyone else. I’m not saying they’re any better or any worse than anyone else. But they’re doing exactly the same thing everyone else is doing. As I said, it’s this pack of hyenas going in there to gnaw away, and eat the flesh of Syria. And Israel is getting its pound of flesh, as it sees it. DB: And this, you think, could easily unravel. These are perhaps, would you say, the most dangerous times of our life time, or close to it? FB: Well, when you have Russia saying it is going to target so-called paint U.S. jet fighters, and jet fighters bombers, and their standard operating procedure when they get painted is to destroy the source that is targeting them. Yes. As I said, we could have war, at least in Syria, between the United States and Russia. And given the anti-Russian warmongering and hysteria, and neo-McCarthyism in this country that has been deliberately orchestrated by the Clinton campaign and the Democrats and their fellow travelers in the mainstream news media since the Democratic Convention last summer, if a U.S. pilot gets killed, we could see Congress going into session, and declaring war against Russia. Sure. It’s a catastrophe, Dennis. I mean, anything could happen here. I shudder to think of the consequences. DB: Amazing. But I do want to, just before we let you go, I want to ask you to weigh in. Because we’ve seen this amazing, as you call it, McCarthyite attack. People don’t like Trump, they find him very difficult. And it’s not hard to find him difficult. How would you describe what is happening against him in terms of … people refer to it as the Deep State, or an intelligence coup? How would you unpack that? FB: Right, well, first of all, let me say I did not vote for either Clinton or Trump. As I saw it, it was a choice between the cholera and the plague. And I decided not to have anything to do with either of them. But I think if Clinton had been elected we’d probably be at war with Russia, right now. I think what we’re seeing is the elements in the Obama administration that was being run by [Zbigniew] Brzezinski, this ex-patriot Pole who hated the Russians with a passion, and the CIA, the FBI, the Pentagon, all moving further in the direction of a direct conflict with Russia, and especially over Ukraine. President Barack Obama delivers a statement on the situation in Ukraine, on the South Lawn of the White House, July 29, 2014. (Official White House Photo by Lawrence Jackson) As we know, it was the Obama administration, Assistant Secretary of State [Victoria] Nuland, a neo-con holdover from the Bush administration, who admitted, we had put $5 billion in there to overthrow the democratically elected government of Ukraine. Which we did. It was a standard textbook CIA coup d’etat, that followed the manual going back to the original CIA overthrow of the Mossadegh government in Iran. Trump seemed to indicate that he was going to take a different approach, and not continue with this agenda. And so, now what we’re seeing is all the forces that had been lined up to steal Ukraine, to confront Russia, are furiously fighting back. Now, I’m not saying Trump is a good guy here, but what I am saying, if you’re watching the mainstream news media, none of the people involved here are good guys. No one wears a white hat. And it’s an extremely dangerous situation. [James] Comey, the FBI Director… well, first look at Wesley Swearingen, a decorated retired FBI agent, in his book FBI Secrets, has repeatedly called the FBI “the American Gestapo.” And, of course, you and I and your listening audience certainly know that, Dennis. Certainly African-Americans know the FBI is the American Gestapo. Arabs know it. Muslims know it. Communists know it. I know it since they put me on all the government’s terrorism watch lists here, because I refused to become an informant for them and the CIA on my Arab and Muslim clients. So, Comey is no great hero here. And, indeed, when he worked for Bush Jr. he was Deputy Attorney General. He was up to his eye balls in every hideous atrocity Bush Jr. inflicted on everyone, both abroad and here at home, including the 1,100 Muslims that they summarily rounded up. Many of them were beaten up, and a few died. As for Mueller, again, former Director of the FBI, the American Gestapo, Mueller, when he was Assistant Attorney General of the Criminal Division, Mueller was in charge of fixing the case against Libya and Gaddafi, for the Lockerbie bombing. When everyone knows Libya had absolutely nothing to do with the Lockerbie bombing. Indeed, we had been told that the Lockerbie bombing effectively was revenge by Iran for the destruction of the Iran air jet by the USS Vincennes in the Persian Gulf, with the loss of all that innocent human life. And the Reagan administration refused to apologize, refused to accept responsibility, decorated the captain of the Vincennes that killed close to 270 completely innocent human beings. Robert Mueller with President George W. Bush on July 5, 2001, as Bush nominated Mueller to be FBI Director. (White House photo) But, in the run up to the Bush Sr.’s war against Iraq to steal Persian Gulf oil, he wanted and needed support of Iran, and also, Syria. There’s evidence Lockerbie might have been staged out of Syria. I don’t know if that’s true or it isn’t. So, we cut a deal that all of a sudden Iran, Syria, whatever the responsibility, they would be let off the hook, in return for Iran and Syria supporting the United States’ war against Iraq. And, all of a sudden, out of nowhere, Libya gets blamed. Mueller was behind all of that. He fixed all that evidence that prevented us, the American people, from finding out who really was behind the Lockerbie bombing. I can’t recall the number there was [270 total people killed], [187] American civilians were killed. Mueller is truly evil. [For more on the Lockerbie bombing, see Consortiumnews “The Crumbling Lockerbie Case”] And then, in addition, Mueller was head of the FBI, and he was in charge of the cover up of the anthrax attacks of October 2001. At the time, I had given interviews right after these attacks pointing out that this was super weapons grade anthrax that could only be manufactured in a U.S. government lab, or one affiliated, working for the United States government. And, indeed, I informed the FBI of this, given my expertise on biological warfare. And the FBI, then under Mueller, sent a team out there to the Ames Repository for Anthrax, in Ames, Iowa — where we keep our weapons strains — and destroyed them all, attempting to cover up the U.S. government’s origins of the anthrax attack. That was all done while Mueller was head of the FBI, and under his direct supervision. So, this so-called special council that we see now is just a “fix-it man” for the CIA, the Pentagon, the military industrial complex, despite what you’re reading in the newspaper about character and integrity. This man is a criminal, he should be prosecuted and put in jail, certainly for what he did on Lockerbie, and what he did on the anthrax attacks. And I won’t go through the rest of his record here. So, this is a real scheme by, as I see it, the power ministries, what they used to call it in the Soviet Union, to continue our confrontation with Russia, and in Ukraine, in the Baltics, and also in Syria. And in my read of the situation, that’s what’s going on. This is not to say Trump is a good guy, except to say, if Clinton had been elected I think we’d be at war with Russia. We dodged a bullet on November 8th. But I don’t know how much longer we will be able to continue to dodge the bullet. And, again, we have to remember, Dennis, that for eight years under the Obama administration… Obama’s mentor was Zbigniew Brzezinski. Brzezinski and I went through the exact same PhD program at Harvard, the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences, Department of Government, not the Kennedy School, which is basically a front organization for the CIA, and the Department of Defense. But the same program that produces professors of political science, like Brzezinski, like [Henry] Kissinger, and like me, like [Samuel P.] Huntington. And Brzezinski is an ex-patriot Pole who hates the Soviet Union, and Russia, and the Russians with a passion. Former U.S. National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski Remember, it was Brzezinski who convinced President Carter to unleash Al-Qaeda [known at the time as the mujahideen] against the Soviet Union in Afghanistan, in order to bring about, as he saw it, the Vietnam for the Soviet Union. And he was Obama’s mentor, at Columbia. And when Obama decided to run for president, he brought in Brzezinski to be in charge of his entire foreign affairs and defense operation, during the campaign. And then, once Obama became president, Brzezinski stacked the Obama administration with his proteges, all up and down the State Department, the Department of Defense, and the White House, and the CIA and everywhere else he could have. So, that is what we saw for eight years of Obama. And Clinton was just continuing along those lines. DB: Wow. Well, we just have a couple of minutes left. Today happens to be the fifth year that, shall we say, Julian Assange is trapped in the Ecuadorean embassy [in London]. What do you think U.S. and British intelligence officials are so afraid of when it comes to WikiLeaks? FB: The truth. That’s what they’re afraid of. Well, Dennis, WikiLeaks, as far as I can tell, so far, I haven’t read all of these dispatches and everything, but I’ve read the accounts, is simply telling the truth. And we here live in a democracy. And, we, the American people are entitled to the truth. You know, all this diddly squat about classifications and security is all baloney. We live in a democracy. We’re entitled to everything so that we can make informed decisions. And the government refuses to do it. The NSA spies on all of us, every one of us. When the CIA and the FBI came into my office to try to interrogate me for an hour, which they did, the first question they asked me is, well, why are you giving these interviews all over the world, if you can believe that. And then they tried to get me to become an informant, on my Arab and Muslim clients. So, it’s the truth that the United States government cannot stand, and cannot withstand. And so far as I see it, Assange and WikiLeaks have tried to get the truth out. And, remember, Mr. Justice [Louis] Brandeis of the United States Supreme Court said quite some time ago, “Sunlight is the best disinfectant.” And WikiLeaks has been consistently providing sunlight to us Americans, to try and disinfect our own government. DB: Wow. Professor Boyle we appreciate always your stand, your information, and your willingness to be forthright in taking on the powers that be. We thank you so much, again, for joining us on Flashpoints. FB: Well, thanks again, Dennis. And, remember, John Yoo to jail. [John Yoo is author of the “Torture Memos,” which advised the CIA, Department of Defense, and president on the use of torture techniques after September 11.] John Yoo, former legal adviser to President George W. Bush DB: John Yoo, he’s still there teaching those kids. And he’s been cleansed. FB: The sick, demented Berkeley Law faculty gave him their most prestigious endowed chair. And that means that the Berkeley Law faculty have become accessories after the fact to the use of torture, war crimes and felonies. That’s right. They knew exactly what they were doing. And I wouldn’t send my dog to the Berkeley Law School, these days. And I say that in sadness because the late, great dean there, Frank Newman, who taught international law and human rights, was a good friend of mine, and supported me at the beginning of my career. And then later he was on the California Supreme Court. And Yoo is now desecrating his slot there at Berkeley Law with the full cooperation of the sick and demented Berkeley Law faculties. So I certainly would not go there for any reason. I had a son who could have gone to any top law school in the country and I said, “Don’t go to Harvard Law School, they hired a war criminal. Don’t go to Yale Law School, they have hired and still have war criminals. Don’t go to Berkeley Law School, they have a war criminal. Don’t go to the University of Chicago Law School, where I was an undergraduate, because they have a torture monger on there,” and I went right down the list. DB: So where does he go? There’s nowhere to go. FB: Well, he eventually went to work for the high tech business. What can I say? I lost my son… my dad was a lawyer, and I lost this boy to the law. But, regretfully, you just could see the total perversion of the American legal academy after 9/11, 2001. I regret to say that. So, what can I say? DB: Well, we thank you for the frankness and for the information, Professor Francis Boyle, professor of international law at the University of Illinois, College of Law. Thanks again for joining us on Flashpoints. Dennis J Bernstein is a host of “Flashpoints” on the Pacifica radio network and the author of Special Ed: Voices from a Hidden Classroom. You can access the audio archives at www.flashpoints.net. image_pdfimage_print Tags: Dennis J. Bernstein Francis Boyle John Yoo Lockerbie Bombing Robert Mueller Syria Zbigniew Brzezinski From fboyle at illinois.edu Sun Jun 25 17:24:52 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Sun, 25 Jun 2017 17:24:52 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] =?windows-1252?q?FW=3A_A_Baseless_Justification_f?= =?windows-1252?q?or_War_in_Syria_=96_Consortiumnews?= Message-ID: Waffen-SS Law School Off Campus! Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Sunday, June 25, 2017 12:21 PM To: sectns.aals at lists.aals.org Subject: A Baseless Justification for War in Syria – Consortiumnews https://consortiumnews.com/2017/06/25/a-baseless-justification-for-war-in-syria/ A Baseless Justification for War in Syria June 25, 2017 For almost 16 years, the U.S. government has stretched the military force authorization against Al Qaeda to justify a wide-ranging “war on terror” but now has gone further, attacking the Syrian military inside Syria, notes Dennis J Bernstein. By Dennis J Bernstein U.S. government officials, including Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Joseph F. Dunford Jr., claim the current U.S. authority to mount military operations in Iraq and Syria is legally based on the Authorization for the Use of Military Force [AUMF] declaration to go after Al Qaeda and related terror groups after the 9/11 attacks in 2001. But how does that cover the recent U.S. attacks on Syrian government forces that have been battling both Al Qaeda and its spinoff, Islamic State? Marine Corps Gen. Joe Dunford, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, meets with members of the coalition at a forward operating base near Qayyarah West, Iraq, April 4, 2017. (DoD Photo by Navy Petty Officer 2nd Class Dominique A. Pineiro) Francis Boyle, professor of international law at the University of Illinois College of Law, asserts that the recent U.S. shoot-down of a Syrian government jet inside Syria on June 18 was not only illegal under international law but amounts to an impeachable act by President Trump. In an interview with Flashpoints’ Dennis J. Bernstein, Professor Boyle said, “What the U.S. government is getting away with here is incredible.” Boyle also talked to Bernstein about the questionable Russia-gate investigation and the darker history behind Special Prosecutor Robert Swan Mueller III, the former Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Dennis Bernstein: Will Syria’s hot war and the recent U.S. bombings there lead us into a hot war with Russia? Well, the generals are saying this shoot-down in Syria is legal. You want to jump into this? Francis Boyle: You know Dunford doesn’t have a law degree that I’m aware of. But, of course, still the Pentagon is going to try to justify whatever war crimes it can. They always do. Clearly the U.S. invasion, which we have done, and now repeated military attacks against Syria constitutes a Nuremberg crime against peace, and in violation of the Nuremberg charter, judgment and principles, and, of course, a violation of the United Nations’ charter. [It is] an act of aggression as defined by, oh even the new element of the Rome Statute for the International Criminal Court that is not yet in force. But it has a definition based upon the 1974 definition of aggression which the World Court found to be customary international law in the very famous Nicaraguan case when it applied it against Nicaragua. Indeed, it’s very interesting, you know, if you go back and read the Nicaragua case, and change Syria for Nicaragua, pretty much the law, the illegalities remain the same. Likewise, the United States Congress has never authorized any act of war against Syria. So, this violates the War Powers clause of the United States Constitution, the War Powers Resolution of 1973, and is clearly an impeachable act against President Trump. This is a slam dunk. We don’t have time to go through all the other arguments being made on impeachment here, but for the most part, all those are being made by these totally hypocritical Democratic lawyers who never applied the same impeachable arguments against President Obama. So, I’m not going to waste time with them. And, finally, this is existentially dangerous, what is going on right now in Syria. But Russia is there with the consent of the legitimate government of Syria. They’re not violating international law. The United States is in clear cut violation, as I have explained. And, now, Russia … has said that they are going to begin to target U.S. planes and drones. And, the problem is, of course, when you target planes, that triggers their radar and they fire back. So, we’re pretty much on a hair trigger right now in Syria for war between the United States and Russia. And given the massive war mongering campaign we’re seeing being waged against Russia by almost all the mainstream news media, the Democrats, the whole Democratic Party, the Hillary Clinton people, etc. and sort of neo-McCarthyism against Russia, Putin and everyone else, I shudder to think what would happen if Russia were to shoot down an American pilot under these circumstances. In my lifetime, Dennis, my political lifetime, I don’t think we’ve been in such a dangerous situation since the Cuban Missile Crisis. I mean, anything could go wrong here, soon. And, even if it’s not deliberate, as President Kennedy said when the Soviet Union shot down a U-2 spy plane at the heart of the Cuban Missile Crisis that could have resulted in World War III, he said something like, “Well, there’s always some son-of-a-bitch down the line who doesn’t get the message.” So, anything could go wrong here. And we could end up being at war with Russia momentarily. Bombed out vehicles in Aleppo during the Syrian civil war. 6 October 2012 (Wikipedia) DB: You want to talk a little bit about the so-called deconfliction zones, that are really conflict zones and a potential for war? FB: Yeah, it’s clear, Dennis, and indeed [the] Financial Times now has an article on this, but I’ve said this for a while, these deconfliction zones are really de-facto partition zones for Russia and the United States. And what we’re seeing here is effectively all these surrounding states are going into Syria and grabbing a chunk of their territory. It’s like jackals descending on a wounded animal. Iran is in there, Hezbollah is in there, Turkey is in there, the Kurds are in there, the U.S. is in there. We have our proxy terrorist groups in there. The best analogy would be a pack of jackals descending upon and eating away at a wounded animal. And the so-called deconfliction zones are just part of the de-facto carve up of Syria, in violation of Syria’s territorial integrity and political independence guaranteed by the United Nations’ charter. DB: Well, as you say, these are incredibly dangerous times, and very, very difficult policies. Who loses, who gains on this kind of response to Syria, and bombing of Syria? FB: Well, the United States government believes it gains because they are out — and have always been out — to overthrow the Assad government, and put a puppet in power. And, you know, continue to achieve their objectives there in the Middle East, going back for quite some time, preparing the way for future action against Iran and Russia, for sure. So, they believe that this is to their advantage: the Pentagon, the CIA, the White House, the so-called Power Ministries, the Deep State. Call them whatever you want. They could be tragically short-sighted. I mean, this is the way the First World War and the Second World War began. What can I say, Dennis? It’s a tinder box, already. DB: And how would you characterize Israel’s interest and their role in this policy? Do you think they’re a driving force in it? FB: Of course. That’s got reported […] in the Wall Street Journal. I guess I should say Israel wants its chunk of Syria, too. They’ve already stolen the Golan Heights, in 1967. And they’ve been arming, equipping and supplying these terrorist organizations since the outset of the uprising in Syria. And, indeed, they’ve now carved out a further buffer zone in Syria. So, they’re in to get their share of Syria, as well, along with everyone else. I’m not saying they’re any better or any worse than anyone else. But they’re doing exactly the same thing everyone else is doing. As I said, it’s this pack of hyenas going in there to gnaw away, and eat the flesh of Syria. And Israel is getting its pound of flesh, as it sees it. DB: And this, you think, could easily unravel. These are perhaps, would you say, the most dangerous times of our life time, or close to it? FB: Well, when you have Russia saying it is going to target so-called paint U.S. jet fighters, and jet fighters bombers, and their standard operating procedure when they get painted is to destroy the source that is targeting them. Yes. As I said, we could have war, at least in Syria, between the United States and Russia. And given the anti-Russian warmongering and hysteria, and neo-McCarthyism in this country that has been deliberately orchestrated by the Clinton campaign and the Democrats and their fellow travelers in the mainstream news media since the Democratic Convention last summer, if a U.S. pilot gets killed, we could see Congress going into session, and declaring war against Russia. Sure. It’s a catastrophe, Dennis. I mean, anything could happen here. I shudder to think of the consequences. DB: Amazing. But I do want to, just before we let you go, I want to ask you to weigh in. Because we’ve seen this amazing, as you call it, McCarthyite attack. People don’t like Trump, they find him very difficult. And it’s not hard to find him difficult. How would you describe what is happening against him in terms of … people refer to it as the Deep State, or an intelligence coup? How would you unpack that? FB: Right, well, first of all, let me say I did not vote for either Clinton or Trump. As I saw it, it was a choice between the cholera and the plague. And I decided not to have anything to do with either of them. But I think if Clinton had been elected we’d probably be at war with Russia, right now. I think what we’re seeing is the elements in the Obama administration that was being run by [Zbigniew] Brzezinski, this ex-patriot Pole who hated the Russians with a passion, and the CIA, the FBI, the Pentagon, all moving further in the direction of a direct conflict with Russia, and especially over Ukraine. President Barack Obama delivers a statement on the situation in Ukraine, on the South Lawn of the White House, July 29, 2014. (Official White House Photo by Lawrence Jackson) As we know, it was the Obama administration, Assistant Secretary of State [Victoria] Nuland, a neo-con holdover from the Bush administration, who admitted, we had put $5 billion in there to overthrow the democratically elected government of Ukraine. Which we did. It was a standard textbook CIA coup d’etat, that followed the manual going back to the original CIA overthrow of the Mossadegh government in Iran. Trump seemed to indicate that he was going to take a different approach, and not continue with this agenda. And so, now what we’re seeing is all the forces that had been lined up to steal Ukraine, to confront Russia, are furiously fighting back. Now, I’m not saying Trump is a good guy here, but what I am saying, if you’re watching the mainstream news media, none of the people involved here are good guys. No one wears a white hat. And it’s an extremely dangerous situation. [James] Comey, the FBI Director… well, first look at Wesley Swearingen, a decorated retired FBI agent, in his book FBI Secrets, has repeatedly called the FBI “the American Gestapo.” And, of course, you and I and your listening audience certainly know that, Dennis. Certainly African-Americans know the FBI is the American Gestapo. Arabs know it. Muslims know it. Communists know it. I know it since they put me on all the government’s terrorism watch lists here, because I refused to become an informant for them and the CIA on my Arab and Muslim clients. So, Comey is no great hero here. And, indeed, when he worked for Bush Jr. he was Deputy Attorney General. He was up to his eye balls in every hideous atrocity Bush Jr. inflicted on everyone, both abroad and here at home, including the 1,100 Muslims that they summarily rounded up. Many of them were beaten up, and a few died. As for Mueller, again, former Director of the FBI, the American Gestapo, Mueller, when he was Assistant Attorney General of the Criminal Division, Mueller was in charge of fixing the case against Libya and Gaddafi, for the Lockerbie bombing. When everyone knows Libya had absolutely nothing to do with the Lockerbie bombing. Indeed, we had been told that the Lockerbie bombing effectively was revenge by Iran for the destruction of the Iran air jet by the USS Vincennes in the Persian Gulf, with the loss of all that innocent human life. And the Reagan administration refused to apologize, refused to accept responsibility, decorated the captain of the Vincennes that killed close to 270 completely innocent human beings. Robert Mueller with President George W. Bush on July 5, 2001, as Bush nominated Mueller to be FBI Director. (White House photo) But, in the run up to the Bush Sr.’s war against Iraq to steal Persian Gulf oil, he wanted and needed support of Iran, and also, Syria. There’s evidence Lockerbie might have been staged out of Syria. I don’t know if that’s true or it isn’t. So, we cut a deal that all of a sudden Iran, Syria, whatever the responsibility, they would be let off the hook, in return for Iran and Syria supporting the United States’ war against Iraq. And, all of a sudden, out of nowhere, Libya gets blamed. Mueller was behind all of that. He fixed all that evidence that prevented us, the American people, from finding out who really was behind the Lockerbie bombing. I can’t recall the number there was [270 total people killed], [187] American civilians were killed. Mueller is truly evil. [For more on the Lockerbie bombing, see Consortiumnews “The Crumbling Lockerbie Case”] And then, in addition, Mueller was head of the FBI, and he was in charge of the cover up of the anthrax attacks of October 2001. At the time, I had given interviews right after these attacks pointing out that this was super weapons grade anthrax that could only be manufactured in a U.S. government lab, or one affiliated, working for the United States government. And, indeed, I informed the FBI of this, given my expertise on biological warfare. And the FBI, then under Mueller, sent a team out there to the Ames Repository for Anthrax, in Ames, Iowa — where we keep our weapons strains — and destroyed them all, attempting to cover up the U.S. government’s origins of the anthrax attack. That was all done while Mueller was head of the FBI, and under his direct supervision. So, this so-called special council that we see now is just a “fix-it man” for the CIA, the Pentagon, the military industrial complex, despite what you’re reading in the newspaper about character and integrity. This man is a criminal, he should be prosecuted and put in jail, certainly for what he did on Lockerbie, and what he did on the anthrax attacks. And I won’t go through the rest of his record here. So, this is a real scheme by, as I see it, the power ministries, what they used to call it in the Soviet Union, to continue our confrontation with Russia, and in Ukraine, in the Baltics, and also in Syria. And in my read of the situation, that’s what’s going on. This is not to say Trump is a good guy, except to say, if Clinton had been elected I think we’d be at war with Russia. We dodged a bullet on November 8th. But I don’t know how much longer we will be able to continue to dodge the bullet. And, again, we have to remember, Dennis, that for eight years under the Obama administration… Obama’s mentor was Zbigniew Brzezinski. Brzezinski and I went through the exact same PhD program at Harvard, the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences, Department of Government, not the Kennedy School, which is basically a front organization for the CIA, and the Department of Defense. But the same program that produces professors of political science, like Brzezinski, like [Henry] Kissinger, and like me, like [Samuel P.] Huntington. And Brzezinski is an ex-patriot Pole who hates the Soviet Union, and Russia, and the Russians with a passion. Former U.S. National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski Remember, it was Brzezinski who convinced President Carter to unleash Al-Qaeda [known at the time as the mujahideen] against the Soviet Union in Afghanistan, in order to bring about, as he saw it, the Vietnam for the Soviet Union. And he was Obama’s mentor, at Columbia. And when Obama decided to run for president, he brought in Brzezinski to be in charge of his entire foreign affairs and defense operation, during the campaign. And then, once Obama became president, Brzezinski stacked the Obama administration with his proteges, all up and down the State Department, the Department of Defense, and the White House, and the CIA and everywhere else he could have. So, that is what we saw for eight years of Obama. And Clinton was just continuing along those lines. DB: Wow. Well, we just have a couple of minutes left. Today happens to be the fifth year that, shall we say, Julian Assange is trapped in the Ecuadorean embassy [in London]. What do you think U.S. and British intelligence officials are so afraid of when it comes to WikiLeaks? FB: The truth. That’s what they’re afraid of. Well, Dennis, WikiLeaks, as far as I can tell, so far, I haven’t read all of these dispatches and everything, but I’ve read the accounts, is simply telling the truth. And we here live in a democracy. And, we, the American people are entitled to the truth. You know, all this diddly squat about classifications and security is all baloney. We live in a democracy. We’re entitled to everything so that we can make informed decisions. And the government refuses to do it. The NSA spies on all of us, every one of us. When the CIA and the FBI came into my office to try to interrogate me for an hour, which they did, the first question they asked me is, well, why are you giving these interviews all over the world, if you can believe that. And then they tried to get me to become an informant, on my Arab and Muslim clients. So, it’s the truth that the United States government cannot stand, and cannot withstand. And so far as I see it, Assange and WikiLeaks have tried to get the truth out. And, remember, Mr. Justice [Louis] Brandeis of the United States Supreme Court said quite some time ago, “Sunlight is the best disinfectant.” And WikiLeaks has been consistently providing sunlight to us Americans, to try and disinfect our own government. DB: Wow. Professor Boyle we appreciate always your stand, your information, and your willingness to be forthright in taking on the powers that be. We thank you so much, again, for joining us on Flashpoints. FB: Well, thanks again, Dennis. And, remember, John Yoo to jail. [John Yoo is author of the “Torture Memos,” which advised the CIA, Department of Defense, and president on the use of torture techniques after September 11.] John Yoo, former legal adviser to President George W. Bush DB: John Yoo, he’s still there teaching those kids. And he’s been cleansed. FB: The sick, demented Berkeley Law faculty gave him their most prestigious endowed chair. And that means that the Berkeley Law faculty have become accessories after the fact to the use of torture, war crimes and felonies. That’s right. They knew exactly what they were doing. And I wouldn’t send my dog to the Berkeley Law School, these days. And I say that in sadness because the late, great dean there, Frank Newman, who taught international law and human rights, was a good friend of mine, and supported me at the beginning of my career. And then later he was on the California Supreme Court. And Yoo is now desecrating his slot there at Berkeley Law with the full cooperation of the sick and demented Berkeley Law faculties. So I certainly would not go there for any reason. I had a son who could have gone to any top law school in the country and I said, “Don’t go to Harvard Law School, they hired a war criminal. Don’t go to Yale Law School, they have hired and still have war criminals. Don’t go to Berkeley Law School, they have a war criminal. Don’t go to the University of Chicago Law School, where I was an undergraduate, because they have a torture monger on there,” and I went right down the list. DB: So where does he go? There’s nowhere to go. FB: Well, he eventually went to work for the high tech business. What can I say? I lost my son… my dad was a lawyer, and I lost this boy to the law. But, regretfully, you just could see the total perversion of the American legal academy after 9/11, 2001. I regret to say that. So, what can I say? DB: Well, we thank you for the frankness and for the information, Professor Francis Boyle, professor of international law at the University of Illinois, College of Law. Thanks again for joining us on Flashpoints. Dennis J Bernstein is a host of “Flashpoints” on the Pacifica radio network and the author of Special Ed: Voices from a Hidden Classroom. You can access the audio archives at www.flashpoints.net. image_pdfimage_print Tags: Dennis J. Bernstein Francis Boyle John Yoo Lockerbie Bombing Robert Mueller Syria Zbigniew Brzezinski From galliher at illinois.edu Sun Jun 25 18:11:07 2017 From: galliher at illinois.edu (Carl G. Estabrook) Date: Sun, 25 Jun 2017 13:11:07 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] News-Gazette area history, June 24, 2017 In-Reply-To: References: <5880c407a1db5_222964d980682c3@asgworker-qmb2-1.nbuild.prd.useast1.3dna.io.mail> <3014b58c3080570ba473a4b2bdcb0659@shout.net> <1f26ef3688b593a338a8fbc7cd45b7a6@shout.net> <38dd9634ddb6d642a9e18e34d02ee607@shout.net> <11a3e6f7cbc9fa68332a0079c6684e49@shout.net> Message-ID: <069FEA05-4E2F-44DB-B41B-204C60160A4B@illinois.edu> Thank you, Francis. I appreciated it at the time, and since. Especially since many local soi-disant progressives preferred a conventional Democrat to an anti-war Green at the time. —CGE > On Jun 25, 2017, at 7:41 AM, Boyle, Francis A via Peace-discuss wrote: > > I was honored and pleased to have come to the Rally on the Quad to endorse Carl for Congress. Fab. > > Francis A. Boyle > Law Building > 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. > Champaign IL 61820 USA > 217-333-7954 (phone) > 217-244-1478 (fax) > (personal comments only) > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Peace [mailto:peace-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of C. G. Estabrook via Peace > Sent: Sunday, June 25, 2017 6:58 AM > To: prairiegreens at lists.chambana.net; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; peace at lists.chambana.net > Subject: [Peace] News-Gazette area history, June 24, 2017 > > http://www.news-gazette.com/news/local/2017-06-24/area-history-june-24-2017.html > > In the words of my coeval, Mick Jagger, it's a gas, gas gas... > > --CGE > _______________________________________________ > Peace mailing list > Peace at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace > _______________________________________________ > Peace-discuss mailing list > Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss From fboyle at illinois.edu Sun Jun 25 18:13:48 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Sun, 25 Jun 2017 18:13:48 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] FW: A Baseless Justification for War in Syria Message-ID: Waffen-SS Law School Off Campus! fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) Feed: "Francis Boyle" - BingNews Posted on: Sunday, June 25, 2017 3:35 AM Author: "Francis Boyle" - BingNews Subject: A Baseless Justification for War in Syria Francis Boyle, professor of international law at the University of Illinois College of Law, asserts that the recent U.S. shoot-down of a Syrian government jet inside Syria on June 18 was not only illegal under international law but amounts to an ... View article... -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jbw292002 at gmail.com Sun Jun 25 19:46:27 2017 From: jbw292002 at gmail.com (John W.) Date: Sun, 25 Jun 2017 14:46:27 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] News-Gazette area history, June 24, 2017 In-Reply-To: <11a3e6f7cbc9fa68332a0079c6684e49@shout.net> References: <5880c407a1db5_222964d980682c3@asgworker-qmb2-1.nbuild.prd.useast1.3dna.io.mail> <3014b58c3080570ba473a4b2bdcb0659@shout.net> <1f26ef3688b593a338a8fbc7cd45b7a6@shout.net> <38dd9634ddb6d642a9e18e34d02ee607@shout.net> <11a3e6f7cbc9fa68332a0079c6684e49@shout.net> Message-ID: And what has Green Party candidate Carl Estabrook done for us lately? :-) On Sun, Jun 25, 2017 at 6:58 AM, C. G. Estabrook via Peace < peace at lists.chambana.net> wrote: http://www.news-gazette.com/news/local/2017-06-24/area-histo > ry-june-24-2017.html > > In the words of my coeval, Mick Jagger, it's a gas, gas gas... > > --CGE > _______________________________________________ > Peace mailing list > Peace at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace > Virus-free. www.avg.com <#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cge at shout.net Sun Jun 25 20:05:07 2017 From: cge at shout.net (C. G. Estabrook) Date: Sun, 25 Jun 2017 15:05:07 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [Prairiegreens] [Peace] News-Gazette area history, June 24, 2017 In-Reply-To: References: <5880c407a1db5_222964d980682c3@asgworker-qmb2-1.nbuild.prd.useast1.3dna.io.mail> <3014b58c3080570ba473a4b2bdcb0659@shout.net> <1f26ef3688b593a338a8fbc7cd45b7a6@shout.net> <38dd9634ddb6d642a9e18e34d02ee607@shout.net> <11a3e6f7cbc9fa68332a0079c6684e49@shout.net> Message-ID: Pray. On 2017-06-25 14:46, John W. wrote: > And what has Green Party candidate Carl Estabrook done for us lately? > :-) > > On Sun, Jun 25, 2017 at 6:58 AM, C. G. Estabrook via Peace > wrote: > >> > http://www.news-gazette.com/news/local/2017-06-24/area-history-june-24-2017.html >> [1] >> >> In the words of my coeval, Mick Jagger, it's a gas, gas gas... >> >> --CGE >> _______________________________________________ >> Peace mailing list >> Peace at lists.chambana.net >> https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace [2] > > [3] > Virus-free. www.avg.com [3] > > > > Links: > ------ > [1] > http://www.news-gazette.com/news/local/2017-06-24/area-history-june-24-2017.html > [2] https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace > [3] > http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail > > _______________________________________________ > Prairiegreens mailing list > Prairiegreens at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/prairiegreens > http://www.prairienet.org/greens/ From r-szoke at illinois.edu Mon Jun 26 00:05:20 2017 From: r-szoke at illinois.edu (Szoke, Ron) Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2017 00:05:20 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] The West Can't Smell What Eurasia is Cooking Message-ID: Shared from sputniknews.com The West Can't Smell What Eurasia is Cooking https://sputniknews.com/columnists/201706161054701807-west-cannot-smell-what-eurasia-cooking/ From galliher at illinois.edu Mon Jun 26 01:14:54 2017 From: galliher at illinois.edu (Carl G. Estabrook) Date: Sun, 25 Jun 2017 20:14:54 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] The West Can't Smell What Eurasia is Cooking In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <232CCED0-2CE1-41C1-8599-33357AB4BC3F@illinois.edu> This is important. The US government is killing a lot of people - and prepared to kill a lot more - to prevent Eurasia integration. The US 1% sees Eurasian economic integration - and especially rapprochement between Russia and China - as a threat to its world-wide economic hegemony, which has been declining relatively since WWII. Now even neoliberal Europe threatens to do independent deals with Russia and China. The US (whoever is president) will threaten war - and mean it - to prevent that, as the last administration did. And US war-mongering probably can’t be stopped by Russia and China - only by an aroused US public. But Russia and China are strong enough to oppose US attacks - at great cost to both sides - if hostilities occur. An anti-war movement - against our own government - has never been more important. > On Jun 25, 2017, at 7:05 PM, Szoke, Ron via Peace-discuss wrote: > > Shared from sputniknews.com > > The West Can't Smell What Eurasia is Cooking > https://sputniknews.com/columnists/201706161054701807-west-cannot-smell-what-eurasia-cooking/ > _______________________________________________ > Peace-discuss mailing list > Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss From fboyle at illinois.edu Mon Jun 26 11:39:03 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2017 11:39:03 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] News Gazette:Wise {sic!} & Zionists Ethnically Cleansed Native Americans Out of UIUC! Message-ID: Today's News Gazette: "Levy {AAUP} found the academic climate for academic freedom to be 'robust.' That was no great surprise. It almost always is." Oh really? Now that Wise {sic!} and the Zionists have Ethnically Cleansed Native Americans off of the UIUC Campus, who speaks for them? Certainly, Native Americans can no longer speak for themselves. Thanks to Wise {sic!} and the Zionists. Fab Ex-AAUP Member Resigned in Protest. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Wednesday, June 21, 2017 7:51 PM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson ; Mildred O'brien Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide And I also hold the Zionists on this Campus and the Zionists in this town fully responsible for Ethnically Cleansing Native Americans out of this Campus. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Wednesday, June 21, 2017 9:14 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson ; Mildred O'brien Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide And for the record: Acting Law Dean John Columbo publicly sent a perfectly bootlicking letter to Wise {sic!} fully approving her illegally firing Salaita that led to the Destruction of our Native American Studies Program and Department and the ethnic cleansing of American Indians off of this Campus. Law School Off Campus! Chief Illiniwak Off Campus! CIA Off Campus! Mossad Off Campus! Torture Off Campus! Michael Moore Off Campus! Consort Hurricane Heidi Hurd Off Campus! Gitmo Kangaroo Courts Off Campus! Etc. Etc. Etc. Ad nauseam! Francis A. Boyle Professor of Law Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2017 4:56 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide And just as the Zionists destroyed our Native American Studies Program and Department, so too the Zionists are now destroying Palestine and the Palestinians. Let the University of Illiniwaks rot in the bigotry and racism and ignorance of Zionism! Francis A. Boyle Professor of Law Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 1:45 PM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide And I respectfully request that everyone on this list get the Message out that no American Indian Professor, Scholar or Expert should have anything to do with this God-forsaken Campus. Ditto for Middle East Professors, Scholars and Experts. Let the University of Illinois ROT in the Bigotry, Racism and Ignorance of Zionism! Francis A. Boyle Professor of Law Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 1:30 PM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide As for the "future" of our Native American Studies Program and Department, I submit we should leave them DESTROYED as a Permanent Monument and Testament to how mean, nasty, vicious, cruel, ruthless, and unprincipled our Campus Zionists and our Community Zionists really are. Francis A. Boyle Professor of Law Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 10:04 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide The Local Zionists are mean, nasty, vicious, ruthless and unprincipled People who will stop at nothing to get their way. Hence they destroyed our Native American Studies Program and destroyed Salaita's Career as a Professor and threw Salaita, his Wife and their Baby out into the Street with no visible means of support. I cannot offhand recall a Greater Academic Cosmic Injustice since when I entered Higher Education in 1968. Francis A. Boyle Professor of Law Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 6:57 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide And as for the Zionists on this Campus and in this Community, I hold you accountable for destroying our Native American Studies Program. Francis A. Boyle Professor of Law Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 6:47 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide After the long years of hard work and pain and suffering and tears and agony that we all engaged in trying to get rid of Chief Illiniwak and instituting the Native American Studies Program as some sort of compensation, Wise {sic!} and her Zionists destroyed it all in the bat of an eye. I cannot think of a Greater Academic Cosmic Injustice. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2017 12:28 PM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide Because of the pro bono work I did for AIM, I came to understand that American Indians see the US Government the same way the Jews see the Nazis. Wise "{sic!} is a Nazi! Ditto and pari passu for what she did to the Palestinians. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2017 9:51 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide And Wise {sic!} has successfully terrorized and intimidated every Palestinian/Arab/Muslim of Color on this Campus. Nothing has changed for American Indians and Palestinians/Arabs/Muslims of Color. It is an absolute disgrace but no surprise that the rotten and corrupt and racist AAUP eliminated the die-hard Anti-Palestinian University of Illiniwaks from their Censure List. That is precisely why I quit the AAUP years ago because of their die-hard bigotry and racism against Palestinians/Arabs/Muslims of Color. And now ditto for American Indians. Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2017 9:43 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: FW: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide My pro bono publico Clients here were the American Indian Movement. Chief Illiniwak is an Indicium of Genocide.And Wise {sic!} just Ethnically Cleansed Native Americans off of this Campus. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com [mailto:nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com] Sent: Monday, October 09, 2006 3:05 PM To: undisclosed-recipients Subject: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit [Here's one of our annual Columbus Day pieces. -NYTr] sent by Francis Boyle Columbus Day Promotes Genocide Indictment of the Federal Government of the U.S. for the commission of international crimes and petition for orders mandating its proscription and dissolution as an international criminal conspiracy and criminal organization By Francis A. Boyle, Professor of International Law 18 September 1992 Introduction All citizens of the World Community have both the right and the duty under public international law to sit in judgment over a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental norms of international criminal law committed by any member state of that same World Community. Such is the case for the International Tribunal of Indigenous Peoples and Oppressed Nationalities in the United States of America that convenes in San Francisco during the weekend of October 1-4, 1992. Its weighty but important task is to examine the long history of international criminal activity that has been perpetrated by the Federal Government of the United States of America against the Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America since it was founded in 1787. Toward that end, I have the honor to present to the Members of this Tribunal the following charges against the Federal Government of the United States of America under international criminal law. In light of the gravity, severity, and longstanding nature of these international crimes and also in light of the fact that the Federal Government of the United States of America appears to be irrevocably committed to continuing down this path of lawlessness and criminality against Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America and elsewhere, I hereby petition the Members of this Tribunal to issue an Order proscribing the Federal Government of the United States of America as an International Criminal Conspiracy and a Criminal Organization under the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles as well as the other sources of public international law specified below. For that reason, I also request that the Members of this Tribunal issue an Order dissolving the Federal Government of the United States of America as a legal and political entity. Finally, I ask this Tribunal to declare that international legal sovereignty over the Territories principally inhabited by the Native American Peoples, the New Afrikan People, the Mexicano People, and the People of Puerto Rico resides in the hands of these respective Peoples Themselves. In this regard, I should point out that the final Decision of this Tribunal will qualify as a judicial decision within the meaning of article 38(1)(d) of the Statute of the International Court of Justice and will therefore constitute a subsidiary means for the determination of rules of law for international law and practice. The Statute of the International Court of Justice is an integral part of the United Nations Charter under article 92 thereof. Thus, this Tribunal's Decision can be relied upon by some future International Criminal Court or Tribunal, as well as by any People or State of the World Community that desires to initiate criminal proceedings against named individuals for the commission of the following international crimes. The Decision of this Tribunal shall serve as adequate notice to the appropriate officials in the United States Federal Government that they bear personal criminal responsibility under international law and the domestic legal systems of all Peoples and States in the World Community for designing and implementing these illegal, criminal and reprehensible policies and practices against Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America. Hereinafter, the Federal Government of the United States of America will be referred to as the Defendant. BILL OF PARTICULARS AGAINST THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA The Native American Peoples 1. The Defendant has perpetrated innumerable Crimes Against eace, Crimes Against Humanity and War Crimes against Native American Peoples as recognized by the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles. 2. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Genocide against Native American Peoples as recognized by the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. 3. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Apartheid against Native American Peoples as recognized by the 1973 International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid. 4. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of Native American Peoples as recognized by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights. 5. The Defendant has perpetrated numerous and repeated violations of the 1965 International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination against Native American Peoples. 6. The Defendant has systematically violated 371 treaties it concluded with Native American Peoples in wanton disregard of the basic principle of public international law and practice dictating pacta sunt servanda. 7. The Defendant has denied and violated the international legal right of Native American Peoples to self-determination as recognized by the 1945 United Nations Charter, the 1966 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the 1966 International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, fundamental principles of customary international law, and jus cogens. 8. The Defendant has violated the seminal United Nations Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Territories of 1960 with respect to Native American Peoples and Territories. Pursuant thereto, the Defendant has an absolute international legal obligation to decolonize Native American Territories immediately and to transfer all powers it currently exercises there to the Native American Peoples. 9. The Defendant has illegally refused to accord full-scope protections as Prisoners-of-War to captured Native American independence fighters in violation of the Third Geneva Convention of 1949 and Additional Protocol I thereto of 1977. The Defendant's treatment of captured Native American independence fighters as common criminals and terrorists constitutes a grave breach of the Geneva Accords and thus a serious war crime. 10. The Defendant has deliberately and systematically permitted, aided and abetted, solicited and conspired to commit the dumping, transportation, and location of nuclear, toxic, medical and otherwise hazardous waste materials on Native American Territories across North America and has thus created a clear and present danger to the lives, health, safety, and physical and mental well-being of Native American Peoples in gross violation of article 3 and article 2(c) of the 1948 Genocide Convention, inter alia: Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; ... The New Afrikan People 11. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Slavery upon the New Afrikan People as recognized in part by the 1926 Slavery Convention and the 1956 Supplementary Convention on the Abolition of Slavery, the Slave Trade, and Institutions and Practices Similar to Slavery. The Defendant has illegally refused to pay reparations to the New Afrikan People for the commission of the International Crime of Slavery against Them in violation of basic norms of customary international law requiring such reparations to be paid. 12. The Defendant has perpetrated innumerable Crimes Against Humanity against the New Afrikan People as recognized by the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles. 13. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of genocide against the New Afrikan People as recognized by the 1948 Genocide Convention. 14. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Apartheid against the New Afrikan People as recognized by the 1973 Apartheid Convention. 15. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of the New Afrikan People as recognized by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the two aforementioned United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966. 16. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the 1965 Racism Convention against the New Afrikan People. The Defendant is the paradigmatic example of an irremediably racist state in international relations today. 17. The Defendant has denied and violated the international legal right of the New Afrikan People to self-determination as recognized by the United Nations Charter, the two United Nations Human rights Covenants of 1966, customary international law, and jus cogens. 18. The Defendant has illegally refused to apply the United Nations Decolonization Resolution of 1960 to the New Afrikan People and to the Territories that they principally inhabit. Pursuant thereto, the Defendant has an absolute international legal obligation to decolonize New Afrikan Territories immediately and to transfer all powers it currently exercises there to the New Afrikan People. 19. The Defendant has illegally refused to accord full-scope protections as Prisoners-of-War to captured New Afrikan independence fighters in violation of the Third Geneva Convention of 1949 and Additional Protocol I thereto of 1977. The Defendant's treatment of captured New Afrikan independence fighters as common criminals and terrorists constitutes a grave breach of the Geneva Accords and thus a serious war crime. The Mexicano People 20. In 1821, Mexico obtained its independence from colonial Spain as a sovereign Mestizo State, extending from Yucatan and Chiapas in the south, to the northern territories of California and New Mexico, which areas the Defendant today calls the states of Texas, California, Arizona, Nevada, Utah, New Mexico, and Colorado. Nevertheless, in 1836 so-called settlors under the sponsorship of the Defendant began the division of the Mexicano People and State by causing the division of the Mexican state of Coahuila-Texas into the Mexican state of Coahuila and the so-called republic of Texas. 21. In 1846, the Defendant perpetrated an unjust, illegal and unjustifiable war upon the remainder of the sovereign People and State of Mexico that violated every known principle of public international law in existence at that time, including, but not limited to, the Christian Doctrine of just war, which was the then reigning standard of customary international law. As a result thereof, the Defendant illegally annexed close to 51% of the territories of the sovereign State of Mexico by means of forcing it to conclude the 1848 Treaty of Guadalupe-Hidalgo under military duress. For these reasons, this Treaty was and still is null and void ab initio as a matter of public international law. The Defendant acquired more Mexican territory through the Gadsen Treaty (Purchase) of 1854. 22. Since these 1848 and 1854 Treaties, the Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Genocide against the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories, as recognized by the 1948 Genocide Convention. 23. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Apartheid against the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories, as recognized by the 1973 Apartheid Convention. 24. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories, as recognized by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the two aforementioned United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966. 25. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the 1965 Racism Convention against the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories. 26. The Defendant has denied and violated the international legal right of the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories to self-determination, as recognized by the United Nations Charter, the two United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966, customary international law, and jus cogens. 27. Since the militarily-imposed division of the Mexican State, the Defendant and its agents have militarily occupied other portions of the Mexican State, have sought to influence the outcome of the Mexican Revolution of 1910, have practiced a consistent pattern of intervention into Mexico's internal affairs, all of which have resulted in the arresting distortion and deformation of the Mexican social and economic order. In this regard, Defendant's so-called North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) constitutes nothing more than an attempt to impose its hegemonial imperialism, economic colonialism, and human exploitation upon the People and State of Mexico. 28. The Defendant has illegally refused to apply the United Nations Decolonization Resolution of 1960 to the Mexicano People and to these occupied territories that they inhabit. Pursuant thereto, the Defendant has an absolute international legal obligation to decolonize both the Mexican occupied territories and the Republic of Mexico immediately, and to transfer all powers it currently exercises there to the Mexicano People. The People and State of Puerto Rico 29. Since its illegal invasion of Puerto Rico in 1898, the Defendant has perpetrated innumerable Crimes against Peace, Crimes against Humanity and War Crimes against the People and State of Puerto Rico as recognized by the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles. 30. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Genocide against the Puerto Rican People as recognized by the 1948 Genocide Convention. 31. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Apartheid against the Puerto Rican People as recognized by the 1973 Apartheid Convention. 32. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of the Puerto Rican People as recognized by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human rights and the two aforementioned United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966. 33. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the 1965 Racism Convention against the Puerto Rican People. 34. The Defendant has denied and violated the international legal right of the Puerto Rican People to self-determination as recognized by the United Nations Charter, the two United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966, customary international law, and jus cogens. 35. The Defendant has illegally refused to apply the United Nations Decolonization Resolution of 1960 to Puerto Rico. Pursuant thereto, the Defendant has an absolute international legal obligation to decolonize Puerto Rico immediately and to transfer all powers it currently exercises there to the Puerto Rican People. 36. The Defendant has illegally refused to accord full-scope protections as Prisoners-of-War to captured Puerto Rican independence fighters in violation of the Third Geneva Convention of 1949 and Additional Protocol I thereto of 1977. The Defendant's treatment of captured Puerto Rican independence fighters as common criminals and terrorists constitutes a grave breach of the Geneva Accords and thus a serious war crime. An International Criminal Conspiracy and a Criminal Organization 37. In light of the foregoing international crimes, the Defendant constitutes an International Criminal Conspiracy and a Criminal Organization in accordance with the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles and the other sources of public international law specified above. The Federal Government of the United States of America is legally identical to the Nazi government of World War II Germany. Indeed, the Defendant's President, George Bush, has proclaimed a so-called New World Order that sounds and looks strikingly similar to the New Order proclaimed by Adolph Hitler over fifty years ago. Conclusion Like unto a pirate, the Defendant is hostis humani generis: The enemy of all humankind! For the good of all humanity, this Tribunal must condemn and repudiate the Federal Government of the United States of America and its grotesque vision of a New World Order that is constructed upon warfare, bloodshed, violence, criminality, genocide, racism, colonialism, apartheid, massive violations of fundamental human rights, and the denial of the international legal right of self-determination to the Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America and elsewhere around the world. Consequently, this Tribunal must find the Defendant guilty as charged on all of the counts specified above beyond a reasonable doubt. This Tribunal must also issue an Order that formally proscribes the Federal Government of the United States of America as an International Criminal Conspiracy and a Criminal Organization. This Tribunal must also issue a separate Order mandating the dissolution of the Federal Government of the United States of America as a legal and political entity. Finally, this Tribunal must declare that international legal sovereignty over the Territories principally inhabited by the Native American Peoples, the New Afrikan People, the Mexicano People, and the People of Puerto Rico resides, respectively, in the hands of these Peoples Themselves. The very lives, well-being, health, welfare, and safety of the Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America and elsewhere around the world depend upon the ultimate success of your deliberations. Respectfully submitted by, FRANCIS A. BOYLE PROFESSOR OF INTERNATIONAL LAW SPECIAL PROSECUTOR Dated: September 18, 1992 University of Illinois College of Law 504 East Pennsylvania Champaign, IL 61820 217-333-7954 See USA on Trial: The International Tribunal on Indigenous Peoples'and Oppressed Nations in the United States. The Book and Verdict are available from Editorial El Coqui, 1671 N. Claremont,Chicago Illinois 60647. Or you can try calling the Puerto Rican Cultural Center in Chicago at 312-342-4295. The Video can be obtained from Mission Creek Video, PO Box 411271 San Francisco CA 941141 (phone:415-695-0931). Francis A. Boyle * ================================================================ .NY Transfer News Collective * A Service of Blythe Systems . Since 1985 - Information for the Rest of Us . .339 Lafayette St., New York, NY 10012 http://www.blythe.org .List Archives: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/pipermail/nytr/ .Subscribe: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/mailman/listinfo/nytr ================================================================ From fboyle at illinois.edu Mon Jun 26 11:39:03 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2017 11:39:03 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] News Gazette:Wise {sic!} & Zionists Ethnically Cleansed Native Americans Out of UIUC! Message-ID: Today's News Gazette: "Levy {AAUP} found the academic climate for academic freedom to be 'robust.' That was no great surprise. It almost always is." Oh really? Now that Wise {sic!} and the Zionists have Ethnically Cleansed Native Americans off of the UIUC Campus, who speaks for them? Certainly, Native Americans can no longer speak for themselves. Thanks to Wise {sic!} and the Zionists. Fab Ex-AAUP Member Resigned in Protest. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Wednesday, June 21, 2017 7:51 PM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson ; Mildred O'brien Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide And I also hold the Zionists on this Campus and the Zionists in this town fully responsible for Ethnically Cleansing Native Americans out of this Campus. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Wednesday, June 21, 2017 9:14 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson ; Mildred O'brien Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide And for the record: Acting Law Dean John Columbo publicly sent a perfectly bootlicking letter to Wise {sic!} fully approving her illegally firing Salaita that led to the Destruction of our Native American Studies Program and Department and the ethnic cleansing of American Indians off of this Campus. Law School Off Campus! Chief Illiniwak Off Campus! CIA Off Campus! Mossad Off Campus! Torture Off Campus! Michael Moore Off Campus! Consort Hurricane Heidi Hurd Off Campus! Gitmo Kangaroo Courts Off Campus! Etc. Etc. Etc. Ad nauseam! Francis A. Boyle Professor of Law Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2017 4:56 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide And just as the Zionists destroyed our Native American Studies Program and Department, so too the Zionists are now destroying Palestine and the Palestinians. Let the University of Illiniwaks rot in the bigotry and racism and ignorance of Zionism! Francis A. Boyle Professor of Law Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 1:45 PM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide And I respectfully request that everyone on this list get the Message out that no American Indian Professor, Scholar or Expert should have anything to do with this God-forsaken Campus. Ditto for Middle East Professors, Scholars and Experts. Let the University of Illinois ROT in the Bigotry, Racism and Ignorance of Zionism! Francis A. Boyle Professor of Law Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 1:30 PM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide As for the "future" of our Native American Studies Program and Department, I submit we should leave them DESTROYED as a Permanent Monument and Testament to how mean, nasty, vicious, cruel, ruthless, and unprincipled our Campus Zionists and our Community Zionists really are. Francis A. Boyle Professor of Law Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 10:04 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide The Local Zionists are mean, nasty, vicious, ruthless and unprincipled People who will stop at nothing to get their way. Hence they destroyed our Native American Studies Program and destroyed Salaita's Career as a Professor and threw Salaita, his Wife and their Baby out into the Street with no visible means of support. I cannot offhand recall a Greater Academic Cosmic Injustice since when I entered Higher Education in 1968. Francis A. Boyle Professor of Law Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 6:57 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide And as for the Zionists on this Campus and in this Community, I hold you accountable for destroying our Native American Studies Program. Francis A. Boyle Professor of Law Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 6:47 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide After the long years of hard work and pain and suffering and tears and agony that we all engaged in trying to get rid of Chief Illiniwak and instituting the Native American Studies Program as some sort of compensation, Wise {sic!} and her Zionists destroyed it all in the bat of an eye. I cannot think of a Greater Academic Cosmic Injustice. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2017 12:28 PM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide Because of the pro bono work I did for AIM, I came to understand that American Indians see the US Government the same way the Jews see the Nazis. Wise "{sic!} is a Nazi! Ditto and pari passu for what she did to the Palestinians. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2017 9:51 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: RE: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide And Wise {sic!} has successfully terrorized and intimidated every Palestinian/Arab/Muslim of Color on this Campus. Nothing has changed for American Indians and Palestinians/Arabs/Muslims of Color. It is an absolute disgrace but no surprise that the rotten and corrupt and racist AAUP eliminated the die-hard Anti-Palestinian University of Illiniwaks from their Censure List. That is precisely why I quit the AAUP years ago because of their die-hard bigotry and racism against Palestinians/Arabs/Muslims of Color. And now ditto for American Indians. Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2017 9:43 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson Cc: Wise, Phyllis M Subject: FW: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide My pro bono publico Clients here were the American Indian Movement. Chief Illiniwak is an Indicium of Genocide.And Wise {sic!} just Ethnically Cleansed Native Americans off of this Campus. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com [mailto:nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com] Sent: Monday, October 09, 2006 3:05 PM To: undisclosed-recipients Subject: [NYTr] Columbus Day Promotes Genocide Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit [Here's one of our annual Columbus Day pieces. -NYTr] sent by Francis Boyle Columbus Day Promotes Genocide Indictment of the Federal Government of the U.S. for the commission of international crimes and petition for orders mandating its proscription and dissolution as an international criminal conspiracy and criminal organization By Francis A. Boyle, Professor of International Law 18 September 1992 Introduction All citizens of the World Community have both the right and the duty under public international law to sit in judgment over a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental norms of international criminal law committed by any member state of that same World Community. Such is the case for the International Tribunal of Indigenous Peoples and Oppressed Nationalities in the United States of America that convenes in San Francisco during the weekend of October 1-4, 1992. Its weighty but important task is to examine the long history of international criminal activity that has been perpetrated by the Federal Government of the United States of America against the Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America since it was founded in 1787. Toward that end, I have the honor to present to the Members of this Tribunal the following charges against the Federal Government of the United States of America under international criminal law. In light of the gravity, severity, and longstanding nature of these international crimes and also in light of the fact that the Federal Government of the United States of America appears to be irrevocably committed to continuing down this path of lawlessness and criminality against Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America and elsewhere, I hereby petition the Members of this Tribunal to issue an Order proscribing the Federal Government of the United States of America as an International Criminal Conspiracy and a Criminal Organization under the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles as well as the other sources of public international law specified below. For that reason, I also request that the Members of this Tribunal issue an Order dissolving the Federal Government of the United States of America as a legal and political entity. Finally, I ask this Tribunal to declare that international legal sovereignty over the Territories principally inhabited by the Native American Peoples, the New Afrikan People, the Mexicano People, and the People of Puerto Rico resides in the hands of these respective Peoples Themselves. In this regard, I should point out that the final Decision of this Tribunal will qualify as a judicial decision within the meaning of article 38(1)(d) of the Statute of the International Court of Justice and will therefore constitute a subsidiary means for the determination of rules of law for international law and practice. The Statute of the International Court of Justice is an integral part of the United Nations Charter under article 92 thereof. Thus, this Tribunal's Decision can be relied upon by some future International Criminal Court or Tribunal, as well as by any People or State of the World Community that desires to initiate criminal proceedings against named individuals for the commission of the following international crimes. The Decision of this Tribunal shall serve as adequate notice to the appropriate officials in the United States Federal Government that they bear personal criminal responsibility under international law and the domestic legal systems of all Peoples and States in the World Community for designing and implementing these illegal, criminal and reprehensible policies and practices against Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America. Hereinafter, the Federal Government of the United States of America will be referred to as the Defendant. BILL OF PARTICULARS AGAINST THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA The Native American Peoples 1. The Defendant has perpetrated innumerable Crimes Against eace, Crimes Against Humanity and War Crimes against Native American Peoples as recognized by the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles. 2. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Genocide against Native American Peoples as recognized by the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. 3. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Apartheid against Native American Peoples as recognized by the 1973 International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid. 4. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of Native American Peoples as recognized by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights. 5. The Defendant has perpetrated numerous and repeated violations of the 1965 International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination against Native American Peoples. 6. The Defendant has systematically violated 371 treaties it concluded with Native American Peoples in wanton disregard of the basic principle of public international law and practice dictating pacta sunt servanda. 7. The Defendant has denied and violated the international legal right of Native American Peoples to self-determination as recognized by the 1945 United Nations Charter, the 1966 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the 1966 International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, fundamental principles of customary international law, and jus cogens. 8. The Defendant has violated the seminal United Nations Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Territories of 1960 with respect to Native American Peoples and Territories. Pursuant thereto, the Defendant has an absolute international legal obligation to decolonize Native American Territories immediately and to transfer all powers it currently exercises there to the Native American Peoples. 9. The Defendant has illegally refused to accord full-scope protections as Prisoners-of-War to captured Native American independence fighters in violation of the Third Geneva Convention of 1949 and Additional Protocol I thereto of 1977. The Defendant's treatment of captured Native American independence fighters as common criminals and terrorists constitutes a grave breach of the Geneva Accords and thus a serious war crime. 10. The Defendant has deliberately and systematically permitted, aided and abetted, solicited and conspired to commit the dumping, transportation, and location of nuclear, toxic, medical and otherwise hazardous waste materials on Native American Territories across North America and has thus created a clear and present danger to the lives, health, safety, and physical and mental well-being of Native American Peoples in gross violation of article 3 and article 2(c) of the 1948 Genocide Convention, inter alia: Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; ... The New Afrikan People 11. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Slavery upon the New Afrikan People as recognized in part by the 1926 Slavery Convention and the 1956 Supplementary Convention on the Abolition of Slavery, the Slave Trade, and Institutions and Practices Similar to Slavery. The Defendant has illegally refused to pay reparations to the New Afrikan People for the commission of the International Crime of Slavery against Them in violation of basic norms of customary international law requiring such reparations to be paid. 12. The Defendant has perpetrated innumerable Crimes Against Humanity against the New Afrikan People as recognized by the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles. 13. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of genocide against the New Afrikan People as recognized by the 1948 Genocide Convention. 14. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Apartheid against the New Afrikan People as recognized by the 1973 Apartheid Convention. 15. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of the New Afrikan People as recognized by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the two aforementioned United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966. 16. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the 1965 Racism Convention against the New Afrikan People. The Defendant is the paradigmatic example of an irremediably racist state in international relations today. 17. The Defendant has denied and violated the international legal right of the New Afrikan People to self-determination as recognized by the United Nations Charter, the two United Nations Human rights Covenants of 1966, customary international law, and jus cogens. 18. The Defendant has illegally refused to apply the United Nations Decolonization Resolution of 1960 to the New Afrikan People and to the Territories that they principally inhabit. Pursuant thereto, the Defendant has an absolute international legal obligation to decolonize New Afrikan Territories immediately and to transfer all powers it currently exercises there to the New Afrikan People. 19. The Defendant has illegally refused to accord full-scope protections as Prisoners-of-War to captured New Afrikan independence fighters in violation of the Third Geneva Convention of 1949 and Additional Protocol I thereto of 1977. The Defendant's treatment of captured New Afrikan independence fighters as common criminals and terrorists constitutes a grave breach of the Geneva Accords and thus a serious war crime. The Mexicano People 20. In 1821, Mexico obtained its independence from colonial Spain as a sovereign Mestizo State, extending from Yucatan and Chiapas in the south, to the northern territories of California and New Mexico, which areas the Defendant today calls the states of Texas, California, Arizona, Nevada, Utah, New Mexico, and Colorado. Nevertheless, in 1836 so-called settlors under the sponsorship of the Defendant began the division of the Mexicano People and State by causing the division of the Mexican state of Coahuila-Texas into the Mexican state of Coahuila and the so-called republic of Texas. 21. In 1846, the Defendant perpetrated an unjust, illegal and unjustifiable war upon the remainder of the sovereign People and State of Mexico that violated every known principle of public international law in existence at that time, including, but not limited to, the Christian Doctrine of just war, which was the then reigning standard of customary international law. As a result thereof, the Defendant illegally annexed close to 51% of the territories of the sovereign State of Mexico by means of forcing it to conclude the 1848 Treaty of Guadalupe-Hidalgo under military duress. For these reasons, this Treaty was and still is null and void ab initio as a matter of public international law. The Defendant acquired more Mexican territory through the Gadsen Treaty (Purchase) of 1854. 22. Since these 1848 and 1854 Treaties, the Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Genocide against the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories, as recognized by the 1948 Genocide Convention. 23. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Apartheid against the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories, as recognized by the 1973 Apartheid Convention. 24. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories, as recognized by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the two aforementioned United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966. 25. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the 1965 Racism Convention against the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories. 26. The Defendant has denied and violated the international legal right of the Mexicano People living within these occupied territories to self-determination, as recognized by the United Nations Charter, the two United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966, customary international law, and jus cogens. 27. Since the militarily-imposed division of the Mexican State, the Defendant and its agents have militarily occupied other portions of the Mexican State, have sought to influence the outcome of the Mexican Revolution of 1910, have practiced a consistent pattern of intervention into Mexico's internal affairs, all of which have resulted in the arresting distortion and deformation of the Mexican social and economic order. In this regard, Defendant's so-called North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) constitutes nothing more than an attempt to impose its hegemonial imperialism, economic colonialism, and human exploitation upon the People and State of Mexico. 28. The Defendant has illegally refused to apply the United Nations Decolonization Resolution of 1960 to the Mexicano People and to these occupied territories that they inhabit. Pursuant thereto, the Defendant has an absolute international legal obligation to decolonize both the Mexican occupied territories and the Republic of Mexico immediately, and to transfer all powers it currently exercises there to the Mexicano People. The People and State of Puerto Rico 29. Since its illegal invasion of Puerto Rico in 1898, the Defendant has perpetrated innumerable Crimes against Peace, Crimes against Humanity and War Crimes against the People and State of Puerto Rico as recognized by the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles. 30. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Genocide against the Puerto Rican People as recognized by the 1948 Genocide Convention. 31. The Defendant has perpetrated the International Crime of Apartheid against the Puerto Rican People as recognized by the 1973 Apartheid Convention. 32. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the most fundamental human rights of the Puerto Rican People as recognized by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human rights and the two aforementioned United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966. 33. The Defendant has perpetrated a gross and consistent pattern of violations of the 1965 Racism Convention against the Puerto Rican People. 34. The Defendant has denied and violated the international legal right of the Puerto Rican People to self-determination as recognized by the United Nations Charter, the two United Nations Human Rights Covenants of 1966, customary international law, and jus cogens. 35. The Defendant has illegally refused to apply the United Nations Decolonization Resolution of 1960 to Puerto Rico. Pursuant thereto, the Defendant has an absolute international legal obligation to decolonize Puerto Rico immediately and to transfer all powers it currently exercises there to the Puerto Rican People. 36. The Defendant has illegally refused to accord full-scope protections as Prisoners-of-War to captured Puerto Rican independence fighters in violation of the Third Geneva Convention of 1949 and Additional Protocol I thereto of 1977. The Defendant's treatment of captured Puerto Rican independence fighters as common criminals and terrorists constitutes a grave breach of the Geneva Accords and thus a serious war crime. An International Criminal Conspiracy and a Criminal Organization 37. In light of the foregoing international crimes, the Defendant constitutes an International Criminal Conspiracy and a Criminal Organization in accordance with the Nuremberg Charter, Judgment, and Principles and the other sources of public international law specified above. The Federal Government of the United States of America is legally identical to the Nazi government of World War II Germany. Indeed, the Defendant's President, George Bush, has proclaimed a so-called New World Order that sounds and looks strikingly similar to the New Order proclaimed by Adolph Hitler over fifty years ago. Conclusion Like unto a pirate, the Defendant is hostis humani generis: The enemy of all humankind! For the good of all humanity, this Tribunal must condemn and repudiate the Federal Government of the United States of America and its grotesque vision of a New World Order that is constructed upon warfare, bloodshed, violence, criminality, genocide, racism, colonialism, apartheid, massive violations of fundamental human rights, and the denial of the international legal right of self-determination to the Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America and elsewhere around the world. Consequently, this Tribunal must find the Defendant guilty as charged on all of the counts specified above beyond a reasonable doubt. This Tribunal must also issue an Order that formally proscribes the Federal Government of the United States of America as an International Criminal Conspiracy and a Criminal Organization. This Tribunal must also issue a separate Order mandating the dissolution of the Federal Government of the United States of America as a legal and political entity. Finally, this Tribunal must declare that international legal sovereignty over the Territories principally inhabited by the Native American Peoples, the New Afrikan People, the Mexicano People, and the People of Puerto Rico resides, respectively, in the hands of these Peoples Themselves. The very lives, well-being, health, welfare, and safety of the Indigenous Peoples and Peoples of Color living in North America and elsewhere around the world depend upon the ultimate success of your deliberations. Respectfully submitted by, FRANCIS A. BOYLE PROFESSOR OF INTERNATIONAL LAW SPECIAL PROSECUTOR Dated: September 18, 1992 University of Illinois College of Law 504 East Pennsylvania Champaign, IL 61820 217-333-7954 See USA on Trial: The International Tribunal on Indigenous Peoples'and Oppressed Nations in the United States. The Book and Verdict are available from Editorial El Coqui, 1671 N. Claremont,Chicago Illinois 60647. Or you can try calling the Puerto Rican Cultural Center in Chicago at 312-342-4295. The Video can be obtained from Mission Creek Video, PO Box 411271 San Francisco CA 941141 (phone:415-695-0931). Francis A. Boyle * ================================================================ .NY Transfer News Collective * A Service of Blythe Systems . Since 1985 - Information for the Rest of Us . .339 Lafayette St., New York, NY 10012 http://www.blythe.org .List Archives: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/pipermail/nytr/ .Subscribe: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/mailman/listinfo/nytr ================================================================ From stephenf1113 at yahoo.com Mon Jun 26 13:55:19 2017 From: stephenf1113 at yahoo.com (Stephen Francis) Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2017 13:55:19 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Peace-discuss] Peace-discuss Digest, Vol 161, Issue 165 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1945448046.2645428.1498485319706@mail.yahoo.com> Are your OK Professor Boyle...You beginning to sound like Stephen Francis On Saturday, June 24, 2017 8:15 AM, "peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net" wrote: Send Peace-discuss mailing list submissions to     peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit     https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to     peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net You can reach the person managing the list at     peace-discuss-owner at lists.chambana.net When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of Peace-discuss digest..." Today's Topics:   1. Re: The Torturers Speak at    UIUC:CIA/MOSSAD/MOORE/HURD OFF       CAMPUS! (Boyle, Francis A)   2. Re: The Torturers Speak at    UIUC:CIA/MOSSAD/MOORE/HURD OFF       CAMPUS! (Boyle, Francis A) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Sat, 24 Jun 2017 13:15:25 +0000 From: "Boyle, Francis A" To: David Green , "sherwoodross10 at gmail.com"     , "peace-discuss at anti-war.net"     , "C. G. ESTABROOK"     , "a-fields at uiuc.edu" ,     "Hoffman, Valerie J" , Joe Lauria     , "Miller, Joseph Thomas"     , "Szoke, Ron" , Arlene     Hickory , David Swanson ,     Karen Aram ,     "peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net"     , "abass10 at gmail.com"     , "mickalideh at gmail.com" ,     "Lina Thorne" , "chicago at worldcantwait.net"     , Jay , "Estabrook,     Carl G" , "Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net"     , David Johnson     , "Mildred O'brien" Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] The Torturers Speak at     UIUC:CIA/MOSSAD/MOORE/HURD OFF CAMPUS! Message-ID:     Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" CIA/Mossad/Moore/Hurd should be placed upon Indefinite Paid Administrative Leave so that they cannot  turn our Law Students into Torturers, War Criminals and Felons. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Saturday, June 24, 2017 7:58 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson ; Mildred O'brien Subject: The Torturers Speak at UIUC:CIA/MOSSAD/MOORE/HURD OFF CAMPUS! Many people bear responsibility for the depravity of the torture program,….. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) Feed: NYT > Editorials Posted on: Friday, June 23, 2017 8:18 PM Author: By THE EDITORIAL BOARD Subject: The Torturers Speak [http://static01.nyt.com/images/2017/06/24/opinion/24sat1web/24sat1web-thumbStandard.jpg]The deposition videos of two former military psychologists who ran the C.I.A.’s enhanced-interrogation program are chilling.... View article... -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: ------------------------------ Message: 2 Date: Sat, 24 Jun 2017 13:15:25 +0000 From: "Boyle, Francis A" To: David Green , "sherwoodross10 at gmail.com"     , "peace-discuss at anti-war.net"     , "C. G. ESTABROOK"     , "a-fields at uiuc.edu" ,     "Hoffman, Valerie J" , Joe Lauria     , "Miller, Joseph Thomas"     , "Szoke, Ron" , Arlene     Hickory , David Swanson ,     Karen Aram ,     "peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net"     , "abass10 at gmail.com"     , "mickalideh at gmail.com" ,     "Lina Thorne" , "chicago at worldcantwait.net"     , Jay , "Estabrook,     Carl G" , "Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net"     , David Johnson     , "Mildred O'brien" Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] The Torturers Speak at     UIUC:CIA/MOSSAD/MOORE/HURD OFF CAMPUS! Message-ID:     Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" CIA/Mossad/Moore/Hurd should be placed upon Indefinite Paid Administrative Leave so that they cannot  turn our Law Students into Torturers, War Criminals and Felons. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Saturday, June 24, 2017 7:58 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson ; Mildred O'brien Subject: The Torturers Speak at UIUC:CIA/MOSSAD/MOORE/HURD OFF CAMPUS! Many people bear responsibility for the depravity of the torture program,….. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) Feed: NYT > Editorials Posted on: Friday, June 23, 2017 8:18 PM Author: By THE EDITORIAL BOARD Subject: The Torturers Speak [http://static01.nyt.com/images/2017/06/24/opinion/24sat1web/24sat1web-thumbStandard.jpg]The deposition videos of two former military psychologists who ran the C.I.A.’s enhanced-interrogation program are chilling.... View article... -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: ------------------------------ Subject: Digest Footer _______________________________________________ Peace-discuss mailing list Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss ------------------------------ End of Peace-discuss Digest, Vol 161, Issue 165 *********************************************** -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From stephenf1113 at yahoo.com Mon Jun 26 13:59:15 2017 From: stephenf1113 at yahoo.com (Stephen Francis) Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2017 13:59:15 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Peace-discuss] Peace-discuss Digest, Vol 161, Issue 171 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <705900959.2645487.1498485555823@mail.yahoo.com> oops, didn't check my sentences correction: Are you OK Professor Boyle?You're beginning to sound like Stephen Francis On Monday, June 26, 2017 8:55 AM, "peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net" wrote: Send Peace-discuss mailing list submissions to     peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit     https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to     peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net You can reach the person managing the list at     peace-discuss-owner at lists.chambana.net When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of Peace-discuss digest..." Today's Topics:   1. Re: Peace-discuss Digest, Vol 161, Issue 165 (Stephen Francis) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2017 13:55:19 +0000 (UTC) From: Stephen Francis To: "peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net"     Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Peace-discuss Digest, Vol 161, Issue 165 Message-ID: <1945448046.2645428.1498485319706 at mail.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Are your OK Professor Boyle...You beginning to sound like Stephen Francis     On Saturday, June 24, 2017 8:15 AM, "peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net" wrote: Send Peace-discuss mailing list submissions to     peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit     https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to     peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net You can reach the person managing the list at     peace-discuss-owner at lists.chambana.net When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of Peace-discuss digest..." Today's Topics:   1. Re: The Torturers Speak at    UIUC:CIA/MOSSAD/MOORE/HURD OFF       CAMPUS! (Boyle, Francis A)   2. Re: The Torturers Speak at    UIUC:CIA/MOSSAD/MOORE/HURD OFF       CAMPUS! (Boyle, Francis A) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Sat, 24 Jun 2017 13:15:25 +0000 From: "Boyle, Francis A" To: David Green , "sherwoodross10 at gmail.com"     , "peace-discuss at anti-war.net"     , "C. G. ESTABROOK"     , "a-fields at uiuc.edu" ,     "Hoffman, Valerie J" , Joe Lauria     , "Miller, Joseph Thomas"     , "Szoke, Ron" , Arlene     Hickory , David Swanson ,     Karen Aram ,     "peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net"     , "abass10 at gmail.com"     , "mickalideh at gmail.com" ,     "Lina Thorne" , "chicago at worldcantwait.net"     , Jay , "Estabrook,     Carl G" , "Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net"     , David Johnson     , "Mildred O'brien" Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] The Torturers Speak at     UIUC:CIA/MOSSAD/MOORE/HURD OFF CAMPUS! Message-ID:     Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" CIA/Mossad/Moore/Hurd should be placed upon Indefinite Paid Administrative Leave so that they cannot  turn our Law Students into Torturers, War Criminals and Felons. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Saturday, June 24, 2017 7:58 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson ; Mildred O'brien Subject: The Torturers Speak at UIUC:CIA/MOSSAD/MOORE/HURD OFF CAMPUS! Many people bear responsibility for the depravity of the torture program,….. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) Feed: NYT > Editorials Posted on: Friday, June 23, 2017 8:18 PM Author: By THE EDITORIAL BOARD Subject: The Torturers Speak [http://static01.nyt.com/images/2017/06/24/opinion/24sat1web/24sat1web-thumbStandard.jpg]The deposition videos of two former military psychologists who ran the C.I.A.’s enhanced-interrogation program are chilling.... View article... -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: ------------------------------ Message: 2 Date: Sat, 24 Jun 2017 13:15:25 +0000 From: "Boyle, Francis A" To: David Green , "sherwoodross10 at gmail.com"     , "peace-discuss at anti-war.net"     , "C. G. ESTABROOK"     , "a-fields at uiuc.edu" ,     "Hoffman, Valerie J" , Joe Lauria     , "Miller, Joseph Thomas"     , "Szoke, Ron" , Arlene     Hickory , David Swanson ,     Karen Aram ,     "peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net"     , "abass10 at gmail.com"     , "mickalideh at gmail.com" ,     "Lina Thorne" , "chicago at worldcantwait.net"     , Jay , "Estabrook,     Carl G" , "Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net"     , David Johnson     , "Mildred O'brien" Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] The Torturers Speak at     UIUC:CIA/MOSSAD/MOORE/HURD OFF CAMPUS! Message-ID:     Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" CIA/Mossad/Moore/Hurd should be placed upon Indefinite Paid Administrative Leave so that they cannot  turn our Law Students into Torturers, War Criminals and Felons. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Saturday, June 24, 2017 7:58 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson ; Mildred O'brien Subject: The Torturers Speak at UIUC:CIA/MOSSAD/MOORE/HURD OFF CAMPUS! Many people bear responsibility for the depravity of the torture program,….. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) Feed: NYT > Editorials Posted on: Friday, June 23, 2017 8:18 PM Author: By THE EDITORIAL BOARD Subject: The Torturers Speak [http://static01.nyt.com/images/2017/06/24/opinion/24sat1web/24sat1web-thumbStandard.jpg]The deposition videos of two former military psychologists who ran the C.I.A.’s enhanced-interrogation program are chilling.... View article... -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: ------------------------------ Subject: Digest Footer _______________________________________________ Peace-discuss mailing list Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss ------------------------------ End of Peace-discuss Digest, Vol 161, Issue 165 ***********************************************   -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: ------------------------------ Subject: Digest Footer _______________________________________________ Peace-discuss mailing list Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss ------------------------------ End of Peace-discuss Digest, Vol 161, Issue 171 *********************************************** -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Mon Jun 26 20:34:55 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2017 20:34:55 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] No more torture from UIUC Law School! Message-ID: CIA/MOSSAD/MOORE/HURD OFF CAMPUS! Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: pruiz=soaw.org at mail.salsalabs.net [mailto:pruiz=soaw.org at mail.salsalabs.net] On Behalf Of SOA Watch Sent: Monday, June 26, 2017 3:25 PM To: Boyle, Francis A Subject: No more torture! [http://www.soaw.org/img/colorbanner1.gif] Supporter, [http://org.salsalabs.com/o/727/images/13943/10731045_10152660717971130_7175212497626303488_n.jpg]On June 26th, the world commemorates International Day of Support for Victims of Torture, which was established in 1997 by the United Nations. The United Nations has from its founding condemned the practice of torture, as being one of the most abhorrent acts that human beings would commit against their fellow humans. Torture is considered a crime under international law. Under all international statutes, torture is absolutely prohibited and cannot be justified under any circumstances. The systematic and widespread practice of torture is a crime against humanity. In light of the above, we the undersigned in this declaration: 1. Reaffirm that thousands and thousands of persons who were tortured under dictatorships and who continue suffering torture should be able to count on the the support of their government for their psychological and physical recuperation, and should receive reparation measures as established under these same United Nations guidelines, including a guarantee to not repeat any form of torture against survivors. 2. Reaffirm that in all of Latin America and also in the United States there should be an end to the practice of torture, which agents of state have nonetheless repeated and which many times has resulted in executions and the forced disappearance of persons. 3. Reaffirm that there should be no impunity for these crimes, and that state agents who have committed torture, executions and forced disappearances no longer continue to enjoy impunity. 4. Reaffirm that the training of police and military personnel from Latin America in the new "School of the Americas" (now known as WHINSEC, the Western Hemispheres Institute for Security Cooperation), should be ended. Whether this training is given at WHINSEC or by Mobile Training Teams (MTT) in the receiving countries, or whether the training is provided through other US military or police institutions, such training has continued promoting the use of violence and repression for the defense of "national security," and needs to end. 5. We call on all national governments, including that of the United States, to put an end to torture and to the criminalization of social protest, and an end to the repression experienced by students, indigenous communities, campesinos, communities of color, human rights protectors, environmentalists and those working against extractionism and mega-projects, and all who legitimately struggle in defense of their own rights and the rights of the environment. 6. Finally, we express our solidarity with all survivors of instruments of torture, who up to and including this very day struggle to move beyond the traumatic consequences which torture represents in their lives. You can add your name to this petition here ________________________________ SOA Watch [http://www.soaw.org/presente/images/facebookicon.jpg] [Follow SOA Watch on twitter] [https://org.salsalabs.com/o/727/images/flickr.jpg] [https://org.salsalabs.com/o/727/images/new%20instagram%20logo-1.jpg] [Donate] The movement to close the SOA is a community, and all ideas are welcome. SOA Watch, 733 Euclid Street NW, Washington, DC 20001 If you like the work of SOA Watch, you can donate here: http://SOAW.org/donate -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Mon Jun 26 20:34:55 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2017 20:34:55 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] No more torture from UIUC Law School! Message-ID: CIA/MOSSAD/MOORE/HURD OFF CAMPUS! Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: pruiz=soaw.org at mail.salsalabs.net [mailto:pruiz=soaw.org at mail.salsalabs.net] On Behalf Of SOA Watch Sent: Monday, June 26, 2017 3:25 PM To: Boyle, Francis A Subject: No more torture! [http://www.soaw.org/img/colorbanner1.gif] Supporter, [http://org.salsalabs.com/o/727/images/13943/10731045_10152660717971130_7175212497626303488_n.jpg]On June 26th, the world commemorates International Day of Support for Victims of Torture, which was established in 1997 by the United Nations. The United Nations has from its founding condemned the practice of torture, as being one of the most abhorrent acts that human beings would commit against their fellow humans. Torture is considered a crime under international law. Under all international statutes, torture is absolutely prohibited and cannot be justified under any circumstances. The systematic and widespread practice of torture is a crime against humanity. In light of the above, we the undersigned in this declaration: 1. Reaffirm that thousands and thousands of persons who were tortured under dictatorships and who continue suffering torture should be able to count on the the support of their government for their psychological and physical recuperation, and should receive reparation measures as established under these same United Nations guidelines, including a guarantee to not repeat any form of torture against survivors. 2. Reaffirm that in all of Latin America and also in the United States there should be an end to the practice of torture, which agents of state have nonetheless repeated and which many times has resulted in executions and the forced disappearance of persons. 3. Reaffirm that there should be no impunity for these crimes, and that state agents who have committed torture, executions and forced disappearances no longer continue to enjoy impunity. 4. Reaffirm that the training of police and military personnel from Latin America in the new "School of the Americas" (now known as WHINSEC, the Western Hemispheres Institute for Security Cooperation), should be ended. Whether this training is given at WHINSEC or by Mobile Training Teams (MTT) in the receiving countries, or whether the training is provided through other US military or police institutions, such training has continued promoting the use of violence and repression for the defense of "national security," and needs to end. 5. We call on all national governments, including that of the United States, to put an end to torture and to the criminalization of social protest, and an end to the repression experienced by students, indigenous communities, campesinos, communities of color, human rights protectors, environmentalists and those working against extractionism and mega-projects, and all who legitimately struggle in defense of their own rights and the rights of the environment. 6. Finally, we express our solidarity with all survivors of instruments of torture, who up to and including this very day struggle to move beyond the traumatic consequences which torture represents in their lives. You can add your name to this petition here ________________________________ SOA Watch [http://www.soaw.org/presente/images/facebookicon.jpg] [Follow SOA Watch on twitter] [https://org.salsalabs.com/o/727/images/flickr.jpg] [https://org.salsalabs.com/o/727/images/new%20instagram%20logo-1.jpg] [Donate] The movement to close the SOA is a community, and all ideas are welcome. SOA Watch, 733 Euclid Street NW, Washington, DC 20001 If you like the work of SOA Watch, you can donate here: http://SOAW.org/donate -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Mon Jun 26 23:32:07 2017 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2017 23:32:07 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] CIA details long hidden role in Iran Coup for those unaware Message-ID: ________________________________ June 25, 2017 64 Years Later, CIA Details Long-Hidden Role in Iran Coup The quiet release of long-awaited and long-hidden CIA documents offers key details on how the U.S. and Britain overthrew Iran’s democratic government in 1953, says the National Security Archives’ Malcolm………… See: http://therealnews.com/t2/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=31&Itemid=74&jumival=19382 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cge at shout.net Tue Jun 27 00:04:53 2017 From: cge at shout.net (C. G. Estabrook) Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2017 19:04:53 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] A Debate on the US in the Mideast In-Reply-To: <11a3e6f7cbc9fa68332a0079c6684e49@shout.net> References: <5880c407a1db5_222964d980682c3@asgworker-qmb2-1.nbuild.prd.useast1.3dna.io.mail> <3014b58c3080570ba473a4b2bdcb0659@shout.net> <1f26ef3688b593a338a8fbc7cd45b7a6@shout.net> <38dd9634ddb6d642a9e18e34d02ee607@shout.net> <11a3e6f7cbc9fa68332a0079c6684e49@shout.net> Message-ID: AWARE, the Anti-War Anti-Racism Effort of Champaign-Urbana, wishes to sponsor a debate in the fall semester on the current American wars in SW Asia and N Africa - Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Pakistan, Somalia, Syria, and Yemen. Members of the university and the community are invited to participate in a formal debate on the resolution - RESOLVED: THE US SHOULD WITHDRAW TROOPS AND WEAPONS FROM MENA (MIDEAST & NORTH AFRICA) Each side (affirmative and negative) will be afforded two opening ‘constructive’ speeches, and two closing ‘rebuttal’ speeches, for a total of eight talks, each of five minutes - followed by questions and comments from the audience. If you wish to participate in this debate - or have suggestions for those who might - contact . ============================ Two generations ago, in 1967, Americans first began to object to the US government’s war in SE Asia, five years after it had begun with President Kennedy’s invasion of South Vietnam, in 1962. Today, in 2017, we are more than fifteen years into the US government’s wars in SW Asia. The Obama administration - the first administration in US history to be at war throughout two presidential terms - was able largely to distract Americans from the Mideast killing for which they were responsible. But debate about US wars in the Mideast was raised again by the Trump administration. We Americans - in the academy and in general - should consider what we are doing. ### From karenaram at hotmail.com Tue Jun 27 00:05:58 2017 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2017 00:05:58 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] =?utf-8?q?_The_Big_Corporate_Money_That=E2=80=99s?= =?utf-8?q?_Fighting_Single-Payer?= Message-ID: From the International Business Times POLITICAL CAPITAL Democrats Help Corporate Donors Block California Health Care Measure, And Progressives Lose Again BY DAVID SIROTA @DAVIDSIROTA ON 06/26/17 AT 4:06 PM ''"Until Rendon’s move, things seemed to be looking up for Democratic single-payer proponents in deep blue California, which has been hammered by insurance premium increases. There, the Democratic Party — which originally created Medicare — just added a legislative supermajority to a Democratic-controlled state government that oversees the world’s sixth largest economy. That 2016 election victory came as a poll showed nearly two-thirds of Californians support the creation of a taxpayer-funded universal health care system in a state whose population is roughly the size of Canada — which already has such a system. California’s highest-profile federal Democratic lawmaker recently endorsed state efforts to create single-payer systems, and 25 members of its congressional delegation had signed on to sponsor a federal single-payer bill. Meanwhile, after Republican Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger had twice vetoed state single-payer legislation, California in 2010 elected a governor who had previously campaigned for president on a pledge to support such a system. Other statewide elected officials had also declared their support for single-payer, including the current lieutenant governor, who promised to enact a universal health care program if he is wins the governorship in 2018. .... None of that, though, made the difference: Late Friday, Rendon announced that even though a single-payer bill had passed the Democratic-controlled state senate, he would not permit the bill to be voted on by the Assembly this year. ... Since 2012, Rendon has taken in more than $82,000 from business groups and healthcare corporations that are listed in state documents opposed the measure, according to an International Business Times review of data amassed by the National Institute on Money In State Politics. In all, he has received more than $101,000 from pharmaceutical companies and another $50,000 from major health insurers. In the same time, the California Democratic Party has received more than $1.2 million from the specific groups opposing the bill, and more than $2.2 million from pharmaceutical and health insurance industry donors. That includes a $100,000 infusion of cash from Blue Shield of California in the waning days of the 2016 election — just before state records show the insurer began lobbying against the single-payer bill. ...The episode in California was the latest defeat for single-payer health care advocates, who have faced a string of losses at the hands of Democrats whose party has continued to attract significant cash from the health care industries that benefit from the current system." -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From frankknow at gmail.com Tue Jun 27 00:47:45 2017 From: frankknow at gmail.com (Frank Knowles) Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2017 19:47:45 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [Prairiegreens] A Debate on the US in the Mideast In-Reply-To: References: <5880c407a1db5_222964d980682c3@asgworker-qmb2-1.nbuild.prd.useast1.3dna.io.mail> <3014b58c3080570ba473a4b2bdcb0659@shout.net> <1f26ef3688b593a338a8fbc7cd45b7a6@shout.net> <38dd9634ddb6d642a9e18e34d02ee607@shout.net> <11a3e6f7cbc9fa68332a0079c6684e49@shout.net> Message-ID: Would Francis Boyle be interested? On Mon, Jun 26, 2017 at 7:04 PM, C. G. Estabrook wrote: > AWARE, the Anti-War Anti-Racism Effort of Champaign-Urbana, wishes to > sponsor a debate in the fall semester on the current American wars in SW > Asia and N Africa - Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Pakistan, Somalia, Syria, and > Yemen. > > Members of the university and the community are invited to participate in > a formal debate on the resolution - > RESOLVED: THE US SHOULD WITHDRAW TROOPS AND WEAPONS FROM MENA (MIDEAST & > NORTH AFRICA) > > Each side (affirmative and negative) will be afforded two opening > ‘constructive’ speeches, and two closing ‘rebuttal’ speeches, for a total > of eight talks, each of five minutes - followed by questions and comments > from the audience. > > If you wish to participate in this debate - or have suggestions for those > who might - contact . > > ============================ > Two generations ago, in 1967, Americans first began to object to the US > government’s war in SE Asia, five years after it had begun with President > Kennedy’s invasion of South Vietnam, in 1962. > > Today, in 2017, we are more than fifteen years into the US government’s > wars in SW Asia. The Obama administration - the first administration in US > history to be at war throughout two presidential terms - was able largely > to distract Americans from the Mideast killing for which they were > responsible. But debate about US wars in the Mideast was raised again by > the Trump administration. We Americans - in the academy and in general - > should consider what we are doing. > > ### > _______________________________________________ > Prairiegreens mailing list > Prairiegreens at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/prairiegreens > http://www.prairienet.org/greens/ > -- hh -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From deb.pdamerica at gmail.com Tue Jun 27 11:37:40 2017 From: deb.pdamerica at gmail.com (Debra Schrishuhn) Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2017 06:37:40 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] =?utf-8?q?=5BPeace=5D__The_Big_Corporate_Money_Th?= =?utf-8?q?at=E2=80=99s_Fighting_Single-Payer?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Situation in CA is bad but not hopeless. We have until Thursday to get the Speaker to change his mind. Activists are demonstrating across the state, especially in LA today and boarding buses to go to Sacramento Wednesday. If you have friends or family in CA, urge them to call Speaker Rendon. This situation underlines the dual need to get big money out of politics and to support truly progressive candidates for office from the top of the ballot to the bottom Deb Sent from my iPhone > On Jun 26, 2017, at 7:05 PM, Karen Aram via Peace wrote: > > From the International Business Times > > POLITICAL CAPITAL > Democrats Help Corporate Donors Block California Health Care Measure, And Progressives Lose Again > BY DAVID SIROTA @DAVIDSIROTA ON 06/26/17 AT 4:06 PM > > ''"Until Rendon’s move, things seemed to be looking up for Democratic single-payer proponents in deep blue California, which has been hammered by insurance premium increases. There, the Democratic Party — which originally created Medicare — just added a legislative supermajority to a Democratic-controlled state government that oversees the world’s sixth largest economy. That 2016 election victory came as a poll showed nearly two-thirds of Californians support the creation of a taxpayer-funded universal health care system in a state whose population is roughly the size of Canada — which already has such a system. > California’s highest-profile federal Democratic lawmaker recently endorsed state efforts to create single-payer systems, and 25 members of its congressional delegation had signed on to sponsor a federal single-payer bill. > Meanwhile, after Republican Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger had twice vetoed state single-payer legislation, California in 2010 elected a governor who had previously campaigned for president on a pledge to support such a system. Other statewide elected officials had also declared their support for single-payer, including the current lieutenant governor, who promised to enact a universal health care program if he is wins the governorship in 2018. > .... None of that, though, made the difference: Late Friday, Rendon announced that even though a single-payer bill had passed the Democratic-controlled state senate, he would not permit the bill to be voted on by the Assembly this year. > ... Since 2012, Rendon has taken in more than $82,000 from business groups and healthcare corporations that are listed in state documents opposed the measure, according to an International Business Times review of data amassed by the National Institute on Money In State Politics. In all, he has received more than $101,000 from pharmaceutical companies and another $50,000 from major health insurers. > In the same time, the California Democratic Party has received more than $1.2 million from the specific groups opposing the bill, and more than $2.2 million from pharmaceutical and health insurance industry donors. That includes a $100,000 infusion of cash from Blue Shield of California in the waning days of the 2016 election — just before state records show the insurer began lobbying against the single-payer bill. > ...The episode in California was the latest defeat for single-payer health care advocates, who have faced a string of losses at the hands of Democrats whose party has continued to attract significant cash from the health care industries that benefit from the current system." > _______________________________________________ > Peace mailing list > Peace at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From deb.pdamerica at gmail.com Tue Jun 27 11:45:05 2017 From: deb.pdamerica at gmail.com (Debra Schrishuhn) Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2017 06:45:05 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Call Sens Durbin and Duckworth Message-ID: <291D4AC2-389B-40FE-8D4B-D110AA77C284@gmail.com> Ask them to use every tool to slow down and oppose vote on deadly Senate health care bill. Sen Durbin 202-224-2152 Sen Duckworth 202-224-2854 Thanks Deb Sent from my iPhone From fboyle at illinois.edu Tue Jun 27 11:48:18 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2017 11:48:18 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] News Gazoo for Feddie Yale Law Mafia Killer Koh Mazzone Message-ID: Sure. Yale Law Mafia Mazzone was on the Committee that invited Yale Law Mafia Killer Koh to come out here and pollute and poison our Good Community despite my best efforts to stop them. Yale Law Mafia Mazzone is also a Member of the Federalist Society, Hijacking Justice Everyday. 1. The Supremes upheld Trump's Muslim Ban in violation of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. 2. The Supremes have further eroded the Separation of Church and State in violation of the First Amendment. And it appears the Supremes are going to tolerate public bigotry and discrimination against LGBT in the name of "religious freedom" despite the fact we would never permit this to be done against Blacks, Jews, Catholics, etc except here on Campus where Wise {sic!} and the Zionists Ethnically Cleansed Native Americans out of UIUC. 3. We are all going to be up the proverbial creek without a paddle if Kennedy retires and Trump gets to replace him with another hard-line, doctrinaire religious fundamentalist Federalist Society Member like Gorsuch-Hijacking Justice every day along with Mazzone who "teaches" Conned Law at our Waffen-SS Law School. Fab. -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis [mailto:FBOYLE at law.uiuc.edu] Sent: Friday, September 17, 1999 6:35 PM To: undisclosed-recipients Subject: HIJACKING JUSTICE:FEDDIES S P E C I A L R E P O R T H I J A C K I N G J U S T I C E The Federalist Society, a Right-wing network of lawyers, judges and supporters, is undoing civil rights and other gains made through the courts BY GEORGE E. CURRY & TREVOR W. COLEMAN EMERGE, OCTOBER 1999 WHEN BROWN VS. BOARD OF EDUCATION WAS BEING ARGUED, a clerk to U.S. Supreme Court Justice Robert Jackson suggested that the court should rule against the plaintiffs in the landmark school desegregation case. While making the case for maintaining segregated schools, the clerk sent a memo to his boss saying, "It is about time the Court faced the fact that white people in the South don't like the colored people." That clerk was William Rehnquist, now chief justice of the United States Supreme Court. Seeking to put his own ultraconservatives on the Supreme Court with Rehnquist, President Ronald Reagan -- who had appointed more than half of the sitting federal judges by the time he left office -- considered nominating Lino A. Graglia, a controversial University of Texas law professor, as a federal appeals court judge for the 5th Circuit. But the nomination, which had been backed by Attorney General Edwin Meese III, was jettisoned after Graglia acknowledged that he had referred to African-Americans as "pickaninnies." The American Bar Association found the law professor "not qualified" to serve on the federal bench. Reagan did nominate Robert H. Bork, a former Yale law professor, who was on the U.S. Court of Appeals in Washington, D.C. Bork had opposed the 1964 Civil Rights Act, calling it "an unwanted intrusion on the right of individuals to choose with whom to associate." After bitter debate, the Senate rejected his nomination in 1987 by a vote of 58 to 42. Far from fading into the background, Bork, Meese, and to a lesser extent, Graglia, are key players in the Federalist Society, a powerful Right-wing network intent on restricting the power of courts, often at the expense of African-Americans and other people of color, the poor, women and the disadvantaged. The organization actively seeks to limit "judicial activism" and reverse Supreme Court landmark rulings since the New Deal, especially those issued in the 1960s and '70s. Special targets include the 1966 Miranda decision that provides certain rights for suspected criminals, the 1973 Roe vs. Wade ruling legalizing abortion and recent civil rights legislation. Founded in 1982 by three law students, the Federalist Society has grown into one of the most influential institutions in America. Four of the nine members of the U.S. Supreme Court -- Clarence Thomas, William H. Rehnquist, Antonin Scalia and Anthony M. Kennedy -- are close affiliates of the Federalist Society. So are Donald P. Hodel, former president of the Christina Coalition, and special prosecutor Kenneth Starr. The Federalist Society's board of trustees is co-chaired by Bork and U.S. Sen. Orrin Hatch -- one of the most conservative members on Capitol Hill. Other trustees include former Attorney General Meese, William Bradford Reynolds, who was assistant attorney general for civil rights in the Reagan Administration, sought to have court-ordered affirmative action programs overturned, and C. Boyden Gray, former President Bush's chief White House attorney, who opposed the Civil Rights Act of 1991. In a world being reshaped by the Federalist Society, conservative law students have formed chapters on campuses across the nation. After graduation, they clerk for conservative judges and then go on to become high-ranking government officials, partners in major law firms, prosecutors, law school professors and judges at the local, state and federal level. In short, the Federalist Society is on the verge of hijacking the judicial system. "This is more than an attack on affirmative action being spear-headed by the Federalist Society lawyers," observes Francis A. Boyle, a law professor at the University of Illinois. "They want to go beyond getting rid of affirmative action. They want to go back to Brown vs. Board of Education. "We have Justice Antonin Scalia (who advised the Federalist Society at its inception and later hired two of its three founders as his law clerks), who two years ago gave a public lecture at Columbia Law School where he stated if Brown vs. Board of Education was to be presented to him today, he would rule against the plaintiff. In other words, this was a threat that if Brown vs. Board of Education was voted on before the Supreme Court, he would overturn it." That type of thinking disturbs Lawrence E. Walsh. Before becoming president of the American Bar Association in 1975, Walsh chaired an ABA panel that approved President Nixon's choices of federal appeals judges, Clement Haynesworth and G. Harold Carswell, to serve on the Supreme Court. In 1969, the Senate rejected Haynesworth because of conflict-of-interest fears. The following year, Carswell was rejected by the Senate after it was disclosed that he had given a speech as a lawyer expressing his "vigorous belief in the principles of White supremacy." "My concern is there is going to be a cleavage in the courts between the Federalist Society members and nonmembers," says Walsh, a former federal judge. "Anything that perpetuates that kind of ideological cleavage is not good for the unity of the court system. Ideally, it seems to me that judges should avoid memberships [in politically and substantively motivated organizations] but, of course, they don't do that." In fact, the ABA, in one of its publications on judicial independence, concludes: "A judge's impartiality and ability to interpret and apply the laws fairly are integral to the administration of justice." But a judge's membership in an organization -- whether it's the American Civil Liberties Union on the Left or the Federalist Society on the Right -- can influence whether a judge is perceived as being unbiased, a critical element in a judicial system that prides itself on being fair. Harold D. Pope, president of the National Bar Association, says: "People who are opposing the expansion of rights and opportunities for all people in this society we feel are working against America's best interest. We would hope that all jurists, no matter what their prior political persuasion, would deal objectively with the facts of law as they come before them, as they were sworn to do so when they first sat on the bench." The expansion of the Federalist Society, which has adopted a silhouette of James Madison as its symbol, comes at a time when the legal community is worried about a loss of public confidence. An ABA special committee on judicial independence issued a report in August titled "Protecting the Bulwark of the Republic: Ensuring Public Support of the Judicial Process." The report states, "According to the ABA survey, only about half of the respondents believed that our justice system treats men and women equally. Even fewer believed that courts treat members of different ethnic groups or wealthy and poor people the same." The report continues, "As [former] ABA President [Philip S.] Anderson recently stated: "We must work on this problem for as long as it takes to make our profession equally open and our system of justice equally responsive to all members of our society, regardless of color. This is the ultimate challenge to the integrity of the rule of law in America.'" But the Federalist Society is interested in a challenge of a different kind. To its credit, the organization operates with an open and very public agenda. On its web page, for example, it lays out its conservative agenda. "The Federalist Society for Law and Public Policy Studies is a group of conservatives and libertarians interested in the current state of the legal order. It is founded on the principles that the state exists to preserve freedom, that the separation of governmental powers is central to our Constitution, and that it is emphatically the province and duty of the judiciary to say what the law is, not what it should be. The Society seeks both to promote an awareness of these principles and to further their application through its activities." Even conservative write Michael Lind would call this 19th-century view "the Confederate theory of the Constitution." Speakers at one national Federalist Society-sponsored lawyers convention proposed far-reaching judicial reforms that included the abolition of judicial review, limiting the powers of federal courts and stripping the Supreme Court of jurisdiction over certain matters. Mary Frances Berry, chair of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, is worried about more than theory. "What is scary about the Federalist Society is that it is antiquated and atavistic," she says. "Their views on natural law, libertarianism and the limited power of government to respond when people are being discriminated against is scary -- for African-Americans, especially. The more people you have who expose those views on the court, the more dangerous it becomes for every one of our lives." In this book, Firewall: The Iran-Contra Conspiracy and Cover Up, Walsh writes: "In calling for the narrow construction of constitutional grants of governmental power, the Federalist Society seemed to speak for right-wing Republicans. I was especially troubled that one of White House Counsel Boyden Gray's assistants had openly declared that no one who was not a member of the Federalist Society had received a judicial appointment from President Bush." Brian W. Jones, a San Francisco lawyer and member of the Federalist Society, believes that his group is being maligned. "I reject out of hand that Federalists are hostile to civil rights," says Jones, an African-American who was deputy legal affairs secretary to California Gov. Pete Wilson and former counsel to Hatch's Senate Judiciary Committee. "Most members of the Federalist Society would agree that the government has no business making racial distinctions of any kind among its citizens. I would argue that is a very credible view of civil rights. "On civil rights and civil liberty issues, Federalist Society judges tend to have a more limited view of the federal government's authority to respond to a whole range of questions. For conservatives, the first question with any inquiry into responding to social problems is: Where does the authority lie, with the federal government or state and local governments?" Another African-American, Gerald Reynolds, is vice chairman of membership for the Federalist Society. "There are some people who embrace this principle of racial neutrality," says the Kansas City, Mo., lawyer. "This debate flows from principles and not from animosity toward Blacks." The national office of the Federalist Society in Washington, D.C., refused to provide the names of judges on its membership list. However, some of the organization's records were obtained by Emerge from other sources. An examination of Federalist Society documents for 1997 and 1998, the most current information available at press time, reveals the extent that the group has penetrated the courts. When looking at the board of directors of local chapters, officers, their advisory panels and membership lists, it is clear that when one goes to court seeking justice, he or she is increasingly likely to have a judge affiliated with the Federalist Society handling the case. During the period studied, that was true whether one was entering a courtroom in New York, Michigan or Alabama. (The titles of persons listed hereafter reflect the positions they held at the time the records were compiled by the Federalist Society; some of the judges have since been elevated to a higher court.) In New York state, judges serving as officers, directors or advisers to the local chapters included Thomas P. Griesa, chief judge of the U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York, as well as District Judges Shirley Wohl Kram, Lawrence M. McKenna and John E. Sprizzo. A U.S. Appeals Court Judge for the Second Circuit, Dennis G. Jacobs, was also among that group. The Long Island advisory board included U.S. District Judge Michael Fiechter, U.S. Court of International Trade Judge Gregory W. Carman and State Supreme Court Judges Jack Dunne and Ute Lally. In Michigan, judges aligned with the Federalist Society included James L. Ryan and Richard F. Suhreinrich of the U.S. Court of Appeals; Federal District Judges Paul V. Gadola, David W. McKeague, Gerald E. Rosen and Lawrence P. Zatkoff; and U.S. Magistrate Judge Virginia M. Morgan. State Supreme Court Justices Clifford W. Taylor and Elizabeth A. Weaver were listed as advisers to the Detroit chapter. So were Maura D. Corrigan, chief judge of the Michigan Court of Appeals, along with fellow judges Stephen J. Markman, Henry W. Saad, and Robert Young Jr. (an African-American who has since been elevated to the Michigan Supreme Court). The chief judge of the Washtenaw County Circuit Court in Grand Rapids, Kurtis T. Wilder (another African-Americana who is now on the Michigan Court of Appeals), and Wayne County Circuit Judges Sean Cox, Michael J. Talbot and Brian Zahra helped complete the list. Local chapters in Alabama were advised by Perry O. Hooper Sr., chief justice of the Supreme Court of Alabama, along with Associate Justices J. Gorman Houston, Harold See and A. Hugh Maddox. U.S. Sen. Jefferson B. Sessions III also supported the organization. (Sessions was nominated to become a federal judge in 1986 but was blocked when it was disclosed that he had called the NAACP and the American Civil Liberties Union "un-American" and "communist-inspired," and said they "force civil rights down the throats of people." Referring to the Ku Klux Klan, he reportedly said, "I used to think they're OK," until he learned that some Klansmen were "pot smokers." Sessions contended the remarks were either made in jest or had been misinterpreted.) Additional supporters listed included Randall T. Shepard, chief justice of the Indiana Supreme Court; Craig Enoch, chief justice of the Texas Supreme Court; South Carolina Attorney General Charles Molony Condon; Alabama Attorney General William Pryor (who has links on his web page to the Federalist Society and the conservative Washington Legal Foundation), Pennsylvania Attorney General D. Michael Fisher; Indianapolis Mayor Stephen Goldsmith and Clarence Thomas' wife, Virginia, a former aide to House majority leader Richard Armey, and who now works for the Heritage Foundation. As the presiding officials in courts, judges wield broad power. For example, U.S. District Judge Neal B. Biggers Jr., who sits on the advisory board of the Mississippi chapter of the Federalist Society, presided over the Ayers desegregation case. In 1975, Jake Ayers Sr., a Mississippi sharecropper, sued the state on behalf of his son, charging that the state's higher education system discriminated against African-Americans and historically Black colleges. In 1987, Biggers upheld the state College Board's contention that Mississippi's higher education system was no longer racially discriminatory. The Supreme Court reversed Biggers in 1991 and ordered him to remove any vestiges of past discrimination. The power of the Federalist Society is not limited to the judiciary, which would be concern enough. Its tentacles extend deep into corporate America. Listed members of its business advisory council included John Stewart Bryan, III, chairman, president and C.E.O. of Media General Cable; John G. Medlin Jr., board chair of Wachovia Corp., an interstate bank holding company; Geneva Steel C.E.O. Joseph Cannon and Robert L. Strickland, chairman of Lowe's Companies. Also affiliated with the Federalist Society are Brian J. Brille and David Panton of Morgan Stanley financial services in New York; William Haraf of Bank of America in San Francisco; Chris Ekren of Sony Corp. in San Jose, Calif.; Frank Blake of General Electric in Schenechtedy, N.Y.; Philip R. Lochner Jr., senior vice president, Time Warner Inc. in New York; William Kemp of General Motors in Warren, Mich.; Edward Whelan of GTE Corp.'s Washington office; David Askin of Exxon Co. in Baytown, Texas; Marsha Rabiteau of Dow Chemical in Midland, Mich.; F. James Tennies, chief administrative officer at Legg Mason for asset management in Baltimore; Jodi Balsam, counsel for operations and litigation for the National Football League and Tom Donahue of Metropolitan Life. Even federal employees in the Clinton administration were included in Federalist Society documents: Paul-Noel Chretien of the Justice Department; Theodore Cooperstein of the FBI; Carol Crawford of the International Trade Commission; Kevin Martin of the Federal Communications Commission and Christopher Holleman of the U.S. Small Business Administration. William Saunders of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights also backs the Society. Many of the nation's blue-chip law firms have attorneys associated with the Federalist Society. Those listed included lawyers in the Washington, D.C. law firms of Arnold and Porter; Covington & Burling; Steptoe & Johnson; Hogan & Hartson; Patton, Boaggs & Blow; and Wilmer, Cutler & Pickering. New York law firms with lawyers associated with the Federalist Society include: Cravath, Swaine & Moore; White & Case and Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison. In Boston, one law firm -- Hale and Door -- has at least 10 attorneys affiliated with the Federalist Society. The list of law professors associated with the society included Ronald A. Cass, dean of Boston University's law school; Michael Young of Columbia University; John Yoo of the University of California at Berkeley; Eugene Volokh of UCLA; Northwestern University professors Gary Lawson, Daniel D. Polsby and Stephen B. Presser; Robert P. George of Princeton; Gerard Bradley of Notre Dame; Gordon B. Baldwin of the University of Wisconsin, Olan B. Lowry of Temple; Johathan Macey and Richard Painter of Cornell; Ronald D. Rotunda of the University of Illinois; Gerald T. Dunn of St. Louis University and Thomas Morgan of George Washington University. The University of Virginia, one of the best law schools in the nation, has quite a few Federalist Society professors or sympathizers on its faculty, including John Norton Moore, Robert Turner, Erika Worth Harris and Lillian BeVier. "People have to understand, whether they like lawyers or not, law schools have an enormous amount of power, whether it's power for good or evil. Unfortunately, what we are seeing under the Federalist Society is law schools and legal education being used to promote racism, bigotry and Right-wing politics. These people believe in the Bell Curve," says Prof. Boyle of the University of Illinois, referring to a controversial theory by Charles Murray and Richard J. Herrnstein about the supposed low intelligence level of some non-Whites. "You have to understand that. Just as the Federalist Society did to the federal judiciary, they are now trying to do to law schools." Boyle and others say this is done by establishing well-endowed law professorships and speaking tours for the true believers. "Where they once were scholars with Right-wing foundations like the Heritage Foundation, American Enterprise Institute and the Cato Institute, they are now getting credentialed as law professors," he notes. No comparable movement exists among progressives, which may explain why civil rights groups and liberals are doing such a feeble job defending affirmative action. "We've got to realize that while we have been dillydallying in law schools with critical race theories and penetrating the Law Review, all this is chump change to [Federalists]," observes Berry, of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights. "It's like we were out playing whiffle ball while they were exercising power." The Federalist Society was founded 17 years ago by Yale Law School student Steven G. Calabresi and two counterparts at the University of Chicago School of Law, Lee Liberman and David McIntosh. All three were undergraduates together at Yale. Upset with what they perceived as liberal bias, the three decided to form an organization for conservative law students. Yale professors Robert H. Bork and Ralph K. Winter, both of whom would be appointed to the federal bench by Ronald Reagan, served as advisers to the Yale chapter. In Chicago, future U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia served in a similar capacity. The contacts the three made as students have proven to be invaluable. Calabresi, in addition to clerking for Bork and Winter, clerked for Scalia at the Supreme Court. He is now a law professor at Northwestern University. Liberman gave up a post in the Justice Department also to clerk for Scalia. She is now Lee Liberman Otis and is chief counsel for Sen. Spencer Abraham (R-Mich.), who founded a Federalist Society chapter at Harvard. McIntosh was a special assistant to Ed Meese when he was Reagan's attorney general; he is a three-term Republican Congressman who's considering running for governor of Indiana. In addition to a board of trustees, the society has a board of directors, co-chaired by Calabresi and McIntosh. The Federalist pipeline is a well-oiled old boy -- and sometimes girl -- network. For example, Brent O. Hatch, the son of Sen. Orrin Hatch, clerked for Robert Bork when he was a federal judge in Washington, D.C. After working in the Justice Department, young Hatch was appointed general counsel of the National Endowment for the Humanities at the age of 28. He is treasurer of the Federalist Society's board of directors. The organization has been funded by wealthy conservatives, such as Richard Mellon Scaife, who is vice chair of the Heritage Foundation's board, and another board member, Holland Coors, a member of the conservative Coors family. Many contributions are made through foundations that give to Right-wing causes, including the John M. Olin Foundation in New York, the Sarah Scaife Foundation in Pittsburgh, the Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation of Milwaukee and the Deer Creek Foundation in St. Louis. The Federalists have direct ties to Right-wing think tanks seeking to dismantle affirmative action at the local, state and federal levels. The Center for Individual Rights, which successfully argued the Hopwood case that banned affirmative action at the University of Texas, represents plaintiffs in a lawsuit pending against the University of Michigan and were lawyers for supporters of Proposition 209, the anti-affirmative action measure in California. The Washington Legal Foundation sued the University of Maryland, forcing it to drop its Benjamin Banneker scholarships for African-American scholars; the Southeastern Legal Foundation is leading an all-out assault on affirmative action in Atlanta, and the Institute for Justice led the attack on Lani Guinier, then a University of Pennsylvania law professor, who was President Clinton's first choice to be assistant U.S. attorney general for civil rights. Clint Bolick, the group's vice president, dismissed Guinier as a "quota queen," and the eventual nominee, Deval L. Patrick, as a "quota king." He also led the opposition to the appointment of Bill Lann Lee, who was later named acting assistant attorney general for civil rights. When first lady Hillary Rodham Clinton said that there was a "vast Right-wing conspiracy" afoot that had been hounding her husband since he first announced for president, some Right-wingers almost laughingly dismissed her charges. Special Prosecutor Ken Starr called the comments "nonsense." And Boston Herald columnist Joe Fitzgerald said the first lady had "wandered into paranoia." But information developed by the Institute for Democracy Studies, a nonprofit research and education organization in New York, confirms that the first lady was on the mark. In the executive summary of its report, "The Assault on Affirmative Action: An Organized Challenge to Racial and Gender Justice," the organization notes, "Once a month at the Heritage Foundation, representatives of the nation's leading conservative law groups get together for a 'luncheon.' This so-called Public Interest Legal Group meeting is just one of several monthly gatherings that right-wing law groups hold." The report continues: "These meetings serve the purpose of avoiding duplication of effort, airing future plans, and providing guidance for an appropriate organizational division of labor." In an interview with Emerge, Todd G. Young, director of research and communications for the Atlanta-based Southeastern Legal Foundation, confirms that Right-wing groups collaborate. "We read each other's briefs (as they are filed) and when there are updates published by other groups," he says. "Although we are separate entities, we share some common understandings about the Constitutions and our (mission) statements are really almost identical for the organizations." Of its recent lawsuit against Atlanta's affirmative action program, Young notes: "We're refining the definition of what it means to enjoy equal protection under the law and the first step is to end any government-sanctioned discrimination, such as affirmative action programs or racial preference programs. It's philosophically inconsistent to say it was bad then [in the 1950s and 1960s] but it's OK now." Atlanta Mayor Bill Campbell says it's not OK to discard programs devised to address discrimination against African-Americans. "Conservative legal interest groups, such as the Center for Individual Rights and the Southeastern Legal Foundation, are striking at the very heart of the civil rights gains of the '50s and '60s," explains Campbell. "These groups are, in essence, a homogenized version of the Klan. They may have traded in their sheets for suits and use different language, but it's the same old racism -- just old wine in new bottles." The Federalist Society takes its name from The Federalist papers, 85 articles originally published in New York newspapers between 1787 and 1788. The authors -- Alexander Hamilton, John Jay and James Madison -- were attempting to gain popular support for the adoption of a new Constitution. "Is The Federalist the key to what the Constitution's framers and adopters intended it to mean and how they expected it to function?" asked R. B. Bernstein, a constitutional historian who wrote the foreword to The Federalist, a recent reissue of the papers. "This subset of the original-intent controversy tends to pit many historians, who remain dubious about original-intent arguments, against many legal scholars, who seek a way to limit judicial discretion by anchoring constitutional interpretation in the Constitution's origins." Bernstein argued that the public should not look at the essays, all written under one pen name, as the definitive word on how the Constitution should be interpreted. "Jay was not a delegate to the Federal Convention, which framed the Constitution...[Hamilton] left the Convention in July, not returning until two weeks before its close in September. And Madison...found himself outvoted on a host of major issues," Bernstein noted. Moreover, as The Federalist papers became the classic commentary on the Constitution, the three men publicly identified themselves as the authors. Even that was not without controversy. Before his ill-fated duel with Aaron Burr, Hamilton tried to take credit for writing papers 18-20, 49-58 and 62-63. Madison made an identical claim of authorship, which was verified through a computer analysis in 1964. The most damning fact about today's Federalists is that they advocate a limited role for the federal government, while the early founders were interested in establishing a strong central government. Some civil rights leaders, including Theodore M. Shaw, associate director-counsel of the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund Inc., view the rhetoric of the modern-day Federalists as smokescreen for an assault on civil rights. "It's ideologically out of the mainstream and a part of the radically conservative agenda and the radically conservative agenda has never served the interest of African-Americans," Shaw says. Hilary O. Shelton, Washington bureau chief of the NAACP, is less charitable: "They are not conservative. They are very consistent with the Council of Conservative Citizens," a White supremacy group that has featured Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott (R-Miss.) and Rep. Bob Barr (R-Ga.) as speakers. Surprisingly, some of the harshest criticism of Federalist Society members has come from Republicans. For example, former Attorney General Meese, a main player in the Federalist movement, has been criticized by some of his colleagues in the Reagan administration. According to The Washington Post, James A. Baker III and Michael K. Deaver referred to Meese as the "Big Bigot," and conservatives referred to his top assistant, T. Kenneth Cribb Jr., as the "Baby Bigot." Cribb sits on the board of directors of the Federalist Society and is a trustee of the Scaife Foundation, a major contributor to the Federalist Society and other Right-wing causes. Graglia, who has taught at the University of Texas since 1966, touched off a controversy two years ago, when he said, "Blacks and Mexican Americans are not academically competitive with Whites in selective institutions." According to Graglia, "It is the result primarily of cultural effects. Failure is not looked upon with disgrace." He maintains his membership in the Federalist Society. "They certainly are unenthusiastic about civil rights laws," he says of his organization. "Richard Epstein [a law professor at the University of Chicago] thinks we will be better off if civil rights laws were all repealed. These people do believe, as I believe, that so-called civil rights have gone too far and are not civil rights at all." Because so many of the Federalist Society members are seen as opposing civil rights, some people are not quick to accept their professed interest in color-blind justice. U.S. Appeals Court Judge Stephen Reinhardt of the 9th Circuit observes, "We had the Civil War over states' rights. There is no question we are going back to the pre-Civil War view of governments." Former federal Judge Lawrence Walsh puts it more bluntly. "The impression I have is they are trying to return to the 18th century and undo the work of the Supreme Court since the New Deal," Walsh says. "And I think it is wrong to put someone on the court who has a pre-commitment with a political dogma, whether it's the Ku Klux Klan or the Federalist Society." -- Additional reporting by Lottie L. Joiner Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Tue Jun 27 11:48:18 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2017 11:48:18 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] News Gazoo for Feddie Yale Law Mafia Killer Koh Mazzone Message-ID: Sure. Yale Law Mafia Mazzone was on the Committee that invited Yale Law Mafia Killer Koh to come out here and pollute and poison our Good Community despite my best efforts to stop them. Yale Law Mafia Mazzone is also a Member of the Federalist Society, Hijacking Justice Everyday. 1. The Supremes upheld Trump's Muslim Ban in violation of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. 2. The Supremes have further eroded the Separation of Church and State in violation of the First Amendment. And it appears the Supremes are going to tolerate public bigotry and discrimination against LGBT in the name of "religious freedom" despite the fact we would never permit this to be done against Blacks, Jews, Catholics, etc except here on Campus where Wise {sic!} and the Zionists Ethnically Cleansed Native Americans out of UIUC. 3. We are all going to be up the proverbial creek without a paddle if Kennedy retires and Trump gets to replace him with another hard-line, doctrinaire religious fundamentalist Federalist Society Member like Gorsuch-Hijacking Justice every day along with Mazzone who "teaches" Conned Law at our Waffen-SS Law School. Fab. -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis [mailto:FBOYLE at law.uiuc.edu] Sent: Friday, September 17, 1999 6:35 PM To: undisclosed-recipients Subject: HIJACKING JUSTICE:FEDDIES S P E C I A L R E P O R T H I J A C K I N G J U S T I C E The Federalist Society, a Right-wing network of lawyers, judges and supporters, is undoing civil rights and other gains made through the courts BY GEORGE E. CURRY & TREVOR W. COLEMAN EMERGE, OCTOBER 1999 WHEN BROWN VS. BOARD OF EDUCATION WAS BEING ARGUED, a clerk to U.S. Supreme Court Justice Robert Jackson suggested that the court should rule against the plaintiffs in the landmark school desegregation case. While making the case for maintaining segregated schools, the clerk sent a memo to his boss saying, "It is about time the Court faced the fact that white people in the South don't like the colored people." That clerk was William Rehnquist, now chief justice of the United States Supreme Court. Seeking to put his own ultraconservatives on the Supreme Court with Rehnquist, President Ronald Reagan -- who had appointed more than half of the sitting federal judges by the time he left office -- considered nominating Lino A. Graglia, a controversial University of Texas law professor, as a federal appeals court judge for the 5th Circuit. But the nomination, which had been backed by Attorney General Edwin Meese III, was jettisoned after Graglia acknowledged that he had referred to African-Americans as "pickaninnies." The American Bar Association found the law professor "not qualified" to serve on the federal bench. Reagan did nominate Robert H. Bork, a former Yale law professor, who was on the U.S. Court of Appeals in Washington, D.C. Bork had opposed the 1964 Civil Rights Act, calling it "an unwanted intrusion on the right of individuals to choose with whom to associate." After bitter debate, the Senate rejected his nomination in 1987 by a vote of 58 to 42. Far from fading into the background, Bork, Meese, and to a lesser extent, Graglia, are key players in the Federalist Society, a powerful Right-wing network intent on restricting the power of courts, often at the expense of African-Americans and other people of color, the poor, women and the disadvantaged. The organization actively seeks to limit "judicial activism" and reverse Supreme Court landmark rulings since the New Deal, especially those issued in the 1960s and '70s. Special targets include the 1966 Miranda decision that provides certain rights for suspected criminals, the 1973 Roe vs. Wade ruling legalizing abortion and recent civil rights legislation. Founded in 1982 by three law students, the Federalist Society has grown into one of the most influential institutions in America. Four of the nine members of the U.S. Supreme Court -- Clarence Thomas, William H. Rehnquist, Antonin Scalia and Anthony M. Kennedy -- are close affiliates of the Federalist Society. So are Donald P. Hodel, former president of the Christina Coalition, and special prosecutor Kenneth Starr. The Federalist Society's board of trustees is co-chaired by Bork and U.S. Sen. Orrin Hatch -- one of the most conservative members on Capitol Hill. Other trustees include former Attorney General Meese, William Bradford Reynolds, who was assistant attorney general for civil rights in the Reagan Administration, sought to have court-ordered affirmative action programs overturned, and C. Boyden Gray, former President Bush's chief White House attorney, who opposed the Civil Rights Act of 1991. In a world being reshaped by the Federalist Society, conservative law students have formed chapters on campuses across the nation. After graduation, they clerk for conservative judges and then go on to become high-ranking government officials, partners in major law firms, prosecutors, law school professors and judges at the local, state and federal level. In short, the Federalist Society is on the verge of hijacking the judicial system. "This is more than an attack on affirmative action being spear-headed by the Federalist Society lawyers," observes Francis A. Boyle, a law professor at the University of Illinois. "They want to go beyond getting rid of affirmative action. They want to go back to Brown vs. Board of Education. "We have Justice Antonin Scalia (who advised the Federalist Society at its inception and later hired two of its three founders as his law clerks), who two years ago gave a public lecture at Columbia Law School where he stated if Brown vs. Board of Education was to be presented to him today, he would rule against the plaintiff. In other words, this was a threat that if Brown vs. Board of Education was voted on before the Supreme Court, he would overturn it." That type of thinking disturbs Lawrence E. Walsh. Before becoming president of the American Bar Association in 1975, Walsh chaired an ABA panel that approved President Nixon's choices of federal appeals judges, Clement Haynesworth and G. Harold Carswell, to serve on the Supreme Court. In 1969, the Senate rejected Haynesworth because of conflict-of-interest fears. The following year, Carswell was rejected by the Senate after it was disclosed that he had given a speech as a lawyer expressing his "vigorous belief in the principles of White supremacy." "My concern is there is going to be a cleavage in the courts between the Federalist Society members and nonmembers," says Walsh, a former federal judge. "Anything that perpetuates that kind of ideological cleavage is not good for the unity of the court system. Ideally, it seems to me that judges should avoid memberships [in politically and substantively motivated organizations] but, of course, they don't do that." In fact, the ABA, in one of its publications on judicial independence, concludes: "A judge's impartiality and ability to interpret and apply the laws fairly are integral to the administration of justice." But a judge's membership in an organization -- whether it's the American Civil Liberties Union on the Left or the Federalist Society on the Right -- can influence whether a judge is perceived as being unbiased, a critical element in a judicial system that prides itself on being fair. Harold D. Pope, president of the National Bar Association, says: "People who are opposing the expansion of rights and opportunities for all people in this society we feel are working against America's best interest. We would hope that all jurists, no matter what their prior political persuasion, would deal objectively with the facts of law as they come before them, as they were sworn to do so when they first sat on the bench." The expansion of the Federalist Society, which has adopted a silhouette of James Madison as its symbol, comes at a time when the legal community is worried about a loss of public confidence. An ABA special committee on judicial independence issued a report in August titled "Protecting the Bulwark of the Republic: Ensuring Public Support of the Judicial Process." The report states, "According to the ABA survey, only about half of the respondents believed that our justice system treats men and women equally. Even fewer believed that courts treat members of different ethnic groups or wealthy and poor people the same." The report continues, "As [former] ABA President [Philip S.] Anderson recently stated: "We must work on this problem for as long as it takes to make our profession equally open and our system of justice equally responsive to all members of our society, regardless of color. This is the ultimate challenge to the integrity of the rule of law in America.'" But the Federalist Society is interested in a challenge of a different kind. To its credit, the organization operates with an open and very public agenda. On its web page, for example, it lays out its conservative agenda. "The Federalist Society for Law and Public Policy Studies is a group of conservatives and libertarians interested in the current state of the legal order. It is founded on the principles that the state exists to preserve freedom, that the separation of governmental powers is central to our Constitution, and that it is emphatically the province and duty of the judiciary to say what the law is, not what it should be. The Society seeks both to promote an awareness of these principles and to further their application through its activities." Even conservative write Michael Lind would call this 19th-century view "the Confederate theory of the Constitution." Speakers at one national Federalist Society-sponsored lawyers convention proposed far-reaching judicial reforms that included the abolition of judicial review, limiting the powers of federal courts and stripping the Supreme Court of jurisdiction over certain matters. Mary Frances Berry, chair of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, is worried about more than theory. "What is scary about the Federalist Society is that it is antiquated and atavistic," she says. "Their views on natural law, libertarianism and the limited power of government to respond when people are being discriminated against is scary -- for African-Americans, especially. The more people you have who expose those views on the court, the more dangerous it becomes for every one of our lives." In this book, Firewall: The Iran-Contra Conspiracy and Cover Up, Walsh writes: "In calling for the narrow construction of constitutional grants of governmental power, the Federalist Society seemed to speak for right-wing Republicans. I was especially troubled that one of White House Counsel Boyden Gray's assistants had openly declared that no one who was not a member of the Federalist Society had received a judicial appointment from President Bush." Brian W. Jones, a San Francisco lawyer and member of the Federalist Society, believes that his group is being maligned. "I reject out of hand that Federalists are hostile to civil rights," says Jones, an African-American who was deputy legal affairs secretary to California Gov. Pete Wilson and former counsel to Hatch's Senate Judiciary Committee. "Most members of the Federalist Society would agree that the government has no business making racial distinctions of any kind among its citizens. I would argue that is a very credible view of civil rights. "On civil rights and civil liberty issues, Federalist Society judges tend to have a more limited view of the federal government's authority to respond to a whole range of questions. For conservatives, the first question with any inquiry into responding to social problems is: Where does the authority lie, with the federal government or state and local governments?" Another African-American, Gerald Reynolds, is vice chairman of membership for the Federalist Society. "There are some people who embrace this principle of racial neutrality," says the Kansas City, Mo., lawyer. "This debate flows from principles and not from animosity toward Blacks." The national office of the Federalist Society in Washington, D.C., refused to provide the names of judges on its membership list. However, some of the organization's records were obtained by Emerge from other sources. An examination of Federalist Society documents for 1997 and 1998, the most current information available at press time, reveals the extent that the group has penetrated the courts. When looking at the board of directors of local chapters, officers, their advisory panels and membership lists, it is clear that when one goes to court seeking justice, he or she is increasingly likely to have a judge affiliated with the Federalist Society handling the case. During the period studied, that was true whether one was entering a courtroom in New York, Michigan or Alabama. (The titles of persons listed hereafter reflect the positions they held at the time the records were compiled by the Federalist Society; some of the judges have since been elevated to a higher court.) In New York state, judges serving as officers, directors or advisers to the local chapters included Thomas P. Griesa, chief judge of the U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York, as well as District Judges Shirley Wohl Kram, Lawrence M. McKenna and John E. Sprizzo. A U.S. Appeals Court Judge for the Second Circuit, Dennis G. Jacobs, was also among that group. The Long Island advisory board included U.S. District Judge Michael Fiechter, U.S. Court of International Trade Judge Gregory W. Carman and State Supreme Court Judges Jack Dunne and Ute Lally. In Michigan, judges aligned with the Federalist Society included James L. Ryan and Richard F. Suhreinrich of the U.S. Court of Appeals; Federal District Judges Paul V. Gadola, David W. McKeague, Gerald E. Rosen and Lawrence P. Zatkoff; and U.S. Magistrate Judge Virginia M. Morgan. State Supreme Court Justices Clifford W. Taylor and Elizabeth A. Weaver were listed as advisers to the Detroit chapter. So were Maura D. Corrigan, chief judge of the Michigan Court of Appeals, along with fellow judges Stephen J. Markman, Henry W. Saad, and Robert Young Jr. (an African-American who has since been elevated to the Michigan Supreme Court). The chief judge of the Washtenaw County Circuit Court in Grand Rapids, Kurtis T. Wilder (another African-Americana who is now on the Michigan Court of Appeals), and Wayne County Circuit Judges Sean Cox, Michael J. Talbot and Brian Zahra helped complete the list. Local chapters in Alabama were advised by Perry O. Hooper Sr., chief justice of the Supreme Court of Alabama, along with Associate Justices J. Gorman Houston, Harold See and A. Hugh Maddox. U.S. Sen. Jefferson B. Sessions III also supported the organization. (Sessions was nominated to become a federal judge in 1986 but was blocked when it was disclosed that he had called the NAACP and the American Civil Liberties Union "un-American" and "communist-inspired," and said they "force civil rights down the throats of people." Referring to the Ku Klux Klan, he reportedly said, "I used to think they're OK," until he learned that some Klansmen were "pot smokers." Sessions contended the remarks were either made in jest or had been misinterpreted.) Additional supporters listed included Randall T. Shepard, chief justice of the Indiana Supreme Court; Craig Enoch, chief justice of the Texas Supreme Court; South Carolina Attorney General Charles Molony Condon; Alabama Attorney General William Pryor (who has links on his web page to the Federalist Society and the conservative Washington Legal Foundation), Pennsylvania Attorney General D. Michael Fisher; Indianapolis Mayor Stephen Goldsmith and Clarence Thomas' wife, Virginia, a former aide to House majority leader Richard Armey, and who now works for the Heritage Foundation. As the presiding officials in courts, judges wield broad power. For example, U.S. District Judge Neal B. Biggers Jr., who sits on the advisory board of the Mississippi chapter of the Federalist Society, presided over the Ayers desegregation case. In 1975, Jake Ayers Sr., a Mississippi sharecropper, sued the state on behalf of his son, charging that the state's higher education system discriminated against African-Americans and historically Black colleges. In 1987, Biggers upheld the state College Board's contention that Mississippi's higher education system was no longer racially discriminatory. The Supreme Court reversed Biggers in 1991 and ordered him to remove any vestiges of past discrimination. The power of the Federalist Society is not limited to the judiciary, which would be concern enough. Its tentacles extend deep into corporate America. Listed members of its business advisory council included John Stewart Bryan, III, chairman, president and C.E.O. of Media General Cable; John G. Medlin Jr., board chair of Wachovia Corp., an interstate bank holding company; Geneva Steel C.E.O. Joseph Cannon and Robert L. Strickland, chairman of Lowe's Companies. Also affiliated with the Federalist Society are Brian J. Brille and David Panton of Morgan Stanley financial services in New York; William Haraf of Bank of America in San Francisco; Chris Ekren of Sony Corp. in San Jose, Calif.; Frank Blake of General Electric in Schenechtedy, N.Y.; Philip R. Lochner Jr., senior vice president, Time Warner Inc. in New York; William Kemp of General Motors in Warren, Mich.; Edward Whelan of GTE Corp.'s Washington office; David Askin of Exxon Co. in Baytown, Texas; Marsha Rabiteau of Dow Chemical in Midland, Mich.; F. James Tennies, chief administrative officer at Legg Mason for asset management in Baltimore; Jodi Balsam, counsel for operations and litigation for the National Football League and Tom Donahue of Metropolitan Life. Even federal employees in the Clinton administration were included in Federalist Society documents: Paul-Noel Chretien of the Justice Department; Theodore Cooperstein of the FBI; Carol Crawford of the International Trade Commission; Kevin Martin of the Federal Communications Commission and Christopher Holleman of the U.S. Small Business Administration. William Saunders of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights also backs the Society. Many of the nation's blue-chip law firms have attorneys associated with the Federalist Society. Those listed included lawyers in the Washington, D.C. law firms of Arnold and Porter; Covington & Burling; Steptoe & Johnson; Hogan & Hartson; Patton, Boaggs & Blow; and Wilmer, Cutler & Pickering. New York law firms with lawyers associated with the Federalist Society include: Cravath, Swaine & Moore; White & Case and Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison. In Boston, one law firm -- Hale and Door -- has at least 10 attorneys affiliated with the Federalist Society. The list of law professors associated with the society included Ronald A. Cass, dean of Boston University's law school; Michael Young of Columbia University; John Yoo of the University of California at Berkeley; Eugene Volokh of UCLA; Northwestern University professors Gary Lawson, Daniel D. Polsby and Stephen B. Presser; Robert P. George of Princeton; Gerard Bradley of Notre Dame; Gordon B. Baldwin of the University of Wisconsin, Olan B. Lowry of Temple; Johathan Macey and Richard Painter of Cornell; Ronald D. Rotunda of the University of Illinois; Gerald T. Dunn of St. Louis University and Thomas Morgan of George Washington University. The University of Virginia, one of the best law schools in the nation, has quite a few Federalist Society professors or sympathizers on its faculty, including John Norton Moore, Robert Turner, Erika Worth Harris and Lillian BeVier. "People have to understand, whether they like lawyers or not, law schools have an enormous amount of power, whether it's power for good or evil. Unfortunately, what we are seeing under the Federalist Society is law schools and legal education being used to promote racism, bigotry and Right-wing politics. These people believe in the Bell Curve," says Prof. Boyle of the University of Illinois, referring to a controversial theory by Charles Murray and Richard J. Herrnstein about the supposed low intelligence level of some non-Whites. "You have to understand that. Just as the Federalist Society did to the federal judiciary, they are now trying to do to law schools." Boyle and others say this is done by establishing well-endowed law professorships and speaking tours for the true believers. "Where they once were scholars with Right-wing foundations like the Heritage Foundation, American Enterprise Institute and the Cato Institute, they are now getting credentialed as law professors," he notes. No comparable movement exists among progressives, which may explain why civil rights groups and liberals are doing such a feeble job defending affirmative action. "We've got to realize that while we have been dillydallying in law schools with critical race theories and penetrating the Law Review, all this is chump change to [Federalists]," observes Berry, of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights. "It's like we were out playing whiffle ball while they were exercising power." The Federalist Society was founded 17 years ago by Yale Law School student Steven G. Calabresi and two counterparts at the University of Chicago School of Law, Lee Liberman and David McIntosh. All three were undergraduates together at Yale. Upset with what they perceived as liberal bias, the three decided to form an organization for conservative law students. Yale professors Robert H. Bork and Ralph K. Winter, both of whom would be appointed to the federal bench by Ronald Reagan, served as advisers to the Yale chapter. In Chicago, future U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia served in a similar capacity. The contacts the three made as students have proven to be invaluable. Calabresi, in addition to clerking for Bork and Winter, clerked for Scalia at the Supreme Court. He is now a law professor at Northwestern University. Liberman gave up a post in the Justice Department also to clerk for Scalia. She is now Lee Liberman Otis and is chief counsel for Sen. Spencer Abraham (R-Mich.), who founded a Federalist Society chapter at Harvard. McIntosh was a special assistant to Ed Meese when he was Reagan's attorney general; he is a three-term Republican Congressman who's considering running for governor of Indiana. In addition to a board of trustees, the society has a board of directors, co-chaired by Calabresi and McIntosh. The Federalist pipeline is a well-oiled old boy -- and sometimes girl -- network. For example, Brent O. Hatch, the son of Sen. Orrin Hatch, clerked for Robert Bork when he was a federal judge in Washington, D.C. After working in the Justice Department, young Hatch was appointed general counsel of the National Endowment for the Humanities at the age of 28. He is treasurer of the Federalist Society's board of directors. The organization has been funded by wealthy conservatives, such as Richard Mellon Scaife, who is vice chair of the Heritage Foundation's board, and another board member, Holland Coors, a member of the conservative Coors family. Many contributions are made through foundations that give to Right-wing causes, including the John M. Olin Foundation in New York, the Sarah Scaife Foundation in Pittsburgh, the Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation of Milwaukee and the Deer Creek Foundation in St. Louis. The Federalists have direct ties to Right-wing think tanks seeking to dismantle affirmative action at the local, state and federal levels. The Center for Individual Rights, which successfully argued the Hopwood case that banned affirmative action at the University of Texas, represents plaintiffs in a lawsuit pending against the University of Michigan and were lawyers for supporters of Proposition 209, the anti-affirmative action measure in California. The Washington Legal Foundation sued the University of Maryland, forcing it to drop its Benjamin Banneker scholarships for African-American scholars; the Southeastern Legal Foundation is leading an all-out assault on affirmative action in Atlanta, and the Institute for Justice led the attack on Lani Guinier, then a University of Pennsylvania law professor, who was President Clinton's first choice to be assistant U.S. attorney general for civil rights. Clint Bolick, the group's vice president, dismissed Guinier as a "quota queen," and the eventual nominee, Deval L. Patrick, as a "quota king." He also led the opposition to the appointment of Bill Lann Lee, who was later named acting assistant attorney general for civil rights. When first lady Hillary Rodham Clinton said that there was a "vast Right-wing conspiracy" afoot that had been hounding her husband since he first announced for president, some Right-wingers almost laughingly dismissed her charges. Special Prosecutor Ken Starr called the comments "nonsense." And Boston Herald columnist Joe Fitzgerald said the first lady had "wandered into paranoia." But information developed by the Institute for Democracy Studies, a nonprofit research and education organization in New York, confirms that the first lady was on the mark. In the executive summary of its report, "The Assault on Affirmative Action: An Organized Challenge to Racial and Gender Justice," the organization notes, "Once a month at the Heritage Foundation, representatives of the nation's leading conservative law groups get together for a 'luncheon.' This so-called Public Interest Legal Group meeting is just one of several monthly gatherings that right-wing law groups hold." The report continues: "These meetings serve the purpose of avoiding duplication of effort, airing future plans, and providing guidance for an appropriate organizational division of labor." In an interview with Emerge, Todd G. Young, director of research and communications for the Atlanta-based Southeastern Legal Foundation, confirms that Right-wing groups collaborate. "We read each other's briefs (as they are filed) and when there are updates published by other groups," he says. "Although we are separate entities, we share some common understandings about the Constitutions and our (mission) statements are really almost identical for the organizations." Of its recent lawsuit against Atlanta's affirmative action program, Young notes: "We're refining the definition of what it means to enjoy equal protection under the law and the first step is to end any government-sanctioned discrimination, such as affirmative action programs or racial preference programs. It's philosophically inconsistent to say it was bad then [in the 1950s and 1960s] but it's OK now." Atlanta Mayor Bill Campbell says it's not OK to discard programs devised to address discrimination against African-Americans. "Conservative legal interest groups, such as the Center for Individual Rights and the Southeastern Legal Foundation, are striking at the very heart of the civil rights gains of the '50s and '60s," explains Campbell. "These groups are, in essence, a homogenized version of the Klan. They may have traded in their sheets for suits and use different language, but it's the same old racism -- just old wine in new bottles." The Federalist Society takes its name from The Federalist papers, 85 articles originally published in New York newspapers between 1787 and 1788. The authors -- Alexander Hamilton, John Jay and James Madison -- were attempting to gain popular support for the adoption of a new Constitution. "Is The Federalist the key to what the Constitution's framers and adopters intended it to mean and how they expected it to function?" asked R. B. Bernstein, a constitutional historian who wrote the foreword to The Federalist, a recent reissue of the papers. "This subset of the original-intent controversy tends to pit many historians, who remain dubious about original-intent arguments, against many legal scholars, who seek a way to limit judicial discretion by anchoring constitutional interpretation in the Constitution's origins." Bernstein argued that the public should not look at the essays, all written under one pen name, as the definitive word on how the Constitution should be interpreted. "Jay was not a delegate to the Federal Convention, which framed the Constitution...[Hamilton] left the Convention in July, not returning until two weeks before its close in September. And Madison...found himself outvoted on a host of major issues," Bernstein noted. Moreover, as The Federalist papers became the classic commentary on the Constitution, the three men publicly identified themselves as the authors. Even that was not without controversy. Before his ill-fated duel with Aaron Burr, Hamilton tried to take credit for writing papers 18-20, 49-58 and 62-63. Madison made an identical claim of authorship, which was verified through a computer analysis in 1964. The most damning fact about today's Federalists is that they advocate a limited role for the federal government, while the early founders were interested in establishing a strong central government. Some civil rights leaders, including Theodore M. Shaw, associate director-counsel of the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund Inc., view the rhetoric of the modern-day Federalists as smokescreen for an assault on civil rights. "It's ideologically out of the mainstream and a part of the radically conservative agenda and the radically conservative agenda has never served the interest of African-Americans," Shaw says. Hilary O. Shelton, Washington bureau chief of the NAACP, is less charitable: "They are not conservative. They are very consistent with the Council of Conservative Citizens," a White supremacy group that has featured Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott (R-Miss.) and Rep. Bob Barr (R-Ga.) as speakers. Surprisingly, some of the harshest criticism of Federalist Society members has come from Republicans. For example, former Attorney General Meese, a main player in the Federalist movement, has been criticized by some of his colleagues in the Reagan administration. According to The Washington Post, James A. Baker III and Michael K. Deaver referred to Meese as the "Big Bigot," and conservatives referred to his top assistant, T. Kenneth Cribb Jr., as the "Baby Bigot." Cribb sits on the board of directors of the Federalist Society and is a trustee of the Scaife Foundation, a major contributor to the Federalist Society and other Right-wing causes. Graglia, who has taught at the University of Texas since 1966, touched off a controversy two years ago, when he said, "Blacks and Mexican Americans are not academically competitive with Whites in selective institutions." According to Graglia, "It is the result primarily of cultural effects. Failure is not looked upon with disgrace." He maintains his membership in the Federalist Society. "They certainly are unenthusiastic about civil rights laws," he says of his organization. "Richard Epstein [a law professor at the University of Chicago] thinks we will be better off if civil rights laws were all repealed. These people do believe, as I believe, that so-called civil rights have gone too far and are not civil rights at all." Because so many of the Federalist Society members are seen as opposing civil rights, some people are not quick to accept their professed interest in color-blind justice. U.S. Appeals Court Judge Stephen Reinhardt of the 9th Circuit observes, "We had the Civil War over states' rights. There is no question we are going back to the pre-Civil War view of governments." Former federal Judge Lawrence Walsh puts it more bluntly. "The impression I have is they are trying to return to the 18th century and undo the work of the Supreme Court since the New Deal," Walsh says. "And I think it is wrong to put someone on the court who has a pre-commitment with a political dogma, whether it's the Ku Klux Klan or the Federalist Society." -- Additional reporting by Lottie L. Joiner Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Tue Jun 27 12:06:24 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2017 12:06:24 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] News Gazoo for Feddie Yale Law Mafia Killer Koh Mazzone Message-ID: "The impression I have is they are trying to return to the 18th century and undo the work of the Supreme Court since the New Deal," Walsh says. "And I think it is wrong to put someone on the court who has a pre-commitment with a political dogma, whether it's the Ku Klux Klan or the Federalist Society." Yeah, the Feddie Mazzone teaching Conned Law at our Waffen-SS Law School and inviting Killer Koh to come out here and pollute and poison our Good Community. Judge Lawrence Walsh was Independent Counsel/Prosecutor in the Iran-Contra Scandal by appointment of President Reagan; prosecuted the Mob with Dewey in New York; Deputy Attorney General under Eisenhower; Pillar of the Republican Party; President of the American Bar Association; Federal District Judge; Partner in the New York Law Firm of Davis, Polk & Wardwell, etc. RIP. fab Walsh on Federalist Society According to the conventional wisdom, we were in a double bind: The judges appointed by Democratic presidents were supposedly most concerned with protecting the constitutional rights of persons prosecuted for crimes, while most of the other judges owed their appointments to Ronald Reagan or George Bush, who had stated publicly and emphatically that they hoped that North would not be convicted. Over the years, I had often found such simplistic views to be wrong. Most judges overcome the prejudices and alliances they had when appointed to the federal bench. During my three and one-half years on the federal district court in New York, I had experienced the merging process by which new judges are absorbed into their courts. My hard-line political and professional views had moderated during lunchroom conversations with Learned Hand, Jerome Frank, and Harold Medina and had dissolved after a couple of my decisions had been reversed on appeal. But I was concerned about the continuing political allegiance of Republican judges as manifested in the Federalist Society. Although the organization was not openly partisan, its dogma was political. It reminded me of the communist front groups of the 1940s and l950s, whose members were committed to the communist cause and subject to communist direction but were not card-carrying members of the Communist Party. In calling for the narrow construction of constitutional grants of governmental power, the Federalist Society seemed to speak for right-wing Republicans. I was especially troubled that one of White House Counsel Boyden Gray's assistants had openly declared that no one who was not a member of the Federalist Society had received a judicial appointment from President Bush. walsh.fed >From Iran-contra Independent Counsel Lawrence Walsh, Firewall. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2017 6:48 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson ; Mildred O'brien Subject: News Gazoo for Feddie Yale Law Mafia Killer Koh Mazzone Sure. Yale Law Mafia Mazzone was on the Committee that invited Yale Law Mafia Killer Koh to come out here and pollute and poison our Good Community despite my best efforts to stop them. Yale Law Mafia Mazzone is also a Member of the Federalist Society, Hijacking Justice Everyday. 1. The Supremes upheld Trump's Muslim Ban in violation of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. 2. The Supremes have further eroded the Separation of Church and State in violation of the First Amendment. And it appears the Supremes are going to tolerate public bigotry and discrimination against LGBT in the name of "religious freedom" despite the fact we would never permit this to be done against Blacks, Jews, Catholics, etc except here on Campus where Wise {sic!} and the Zionists Ethnically Cleansed Native Americans out of UIUC. 3. We are all going to be up the proverbial creek without a paddle if Kennedy retires and Trump gets to replace him with another hard-line, doctrinaire religious fundamentalist Federalist Society Member like Gorsuch-Hijacking Justice every day along with Mazzone who "teaches" Conned Law at our Waffen-SS Law School. Fab. -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis [mailto:FBOYLE at law.uiuc.edu] Sent: Friday, September 17, 1999 6:35 PM To: undisclosed-recipients Subject: HIJACKING JUSTICE:FEDDIES S P E C I A L R E P O R T H I J A C K I N G J U S T I C E The Federalist Society, a Right-wing network of lawyers, judges and supporters, is undoing civil rights and other gains made through the courts BY GEORGE E. CURRY & TREVOR W. COLEMAN EMERGE, OCTOBER 1999 WHEN BROWN VS. BOARD OF EDUCATION WAS BEING ARGUED, a clerk to U.S. Supreme Court Justice Robert Jackson suggested that the court should rule against the plaintiffs in the landmark school desegregation case. While making the case for maintaining segregated schools, the clerk sent a memo to his boss saying, "It is about time the Court faced the fact that white people in the South don't like the colored people." That clerk was William Rehnquist, now chief justice of the United States Supreme Court. Seeking to put his own ultraconservatives on the Supreme Court with Rehnquist, President Ronald Reagan -- who had appointed more than half of the sitting federal judges by the time he left office -- considered nominating Lino A. Graglia, a controversial University of Texas law professor, as a federal appeals court judge for the 5th Circuit. But the nomination, which had been backed by Attorney General Edwin Meese III, was jettisoned after Graglia acknowledged that he had referred to African-Americans as "pickaninnies." The American Bar Association found the law professor "not qualified" to serve on the federal bench. Reagan did nominate Robert H. Bork, a former Yale law professor, who was on the U.S. Court of Appeals in Washington, D.C. Bork had opposed the 1964 Civil Rights Act, calling it "an unwanted intrusion on the right of individuals to choose with whom to associate." After bitter debate, the Senate rejected his nomination in 1987 by a vote of 58 to 42. Far from fading into the background, Bork, Meese, and to a lesser extent, Graglia, are key players in the Federalist Society, a powerful Right-wing network intent on restricting the power of courts, often at the expense of African-Americans and other people of color, the poor, women and the disadvantaged. The organization actively seeks to limit "judicial activism" and reverse Supreme Court landmark rulings since the New Deal, especially those issued in the 1960s and '70s. Special targets include the 1966 Miranda decision that provides certain rights for suspected criminals, the 1973 Roe vs. Wade ruling legalizing abortion and recent civil rights legislation. Founded in 1982 by three law students, the Federalist Society has grown into one of the most influential institutions in America. Four of the nine members of the U.S. Supreme Court -- Clarence Thomas, William H. Rehnquist, Antonin Scalia and Anthony M. Kennedy -- are close affiliates of the Federalist Society. So are Donald P. Hodel, former president of the Christina Coalition, and special prosecutor Kenneth Starr. The Federalist Society's board of trustees is co-chaired by Bork and U.S. Sen. Orrin Hatch -- one of the most conservative members on Capitol Hill. Other trustees include former Attorney General Meese, William Bradford Reynolds, who was assistant attorney general for civil rights in the Reagan Administration, sought to have court-ordered affirmative action programs overturned, and C. Boyden Gray, former President Bush's chief White House attorney, who opposed the Civil Rights Act of 1991. In a world being reshaped by the Federalist Society, conservative law students have formed chapters on campuses across the nation. After graduation, they clerk for conservative judges and then go on to become high-ranking government officials, partners in major law firms, prosecutors, law school professors and judges at the local, state and federal level. In short, the Federalist Society is on the verge of hijacking the judicial system. "This is more than an attack on affirmative action being spear-headed by the Federalist Society lawyers," observes Francis A. Boyle, a law professor at the University of Illinois. "They want to go beyond getting rid of affirmative action. They want to go back to Brown vs. Board of Education. "We have Justice Antonin Scalia (who advised the Federalist Society at its inception and later hired two of its three founders as his law clerks), who two years ago gave a public lecture at Columbia Law School where he stated if Brown vs. Board of Education was to be presented to him today, he would rule against the plaintiff. In other words, this was a threat that if Brown vs. Board of Education was voted on before the Supreme Court, he would overturn it." That type of thinking disturbs Lawrence E. Walsh. Before becoming president of the American Bar Association in 1975, Walsh chaired an ABA panel that approved President Nixon's choices of federal appeals judges, Clement Haynesworth and G. Harold Carswell, to serve on the Supreme Court. In 1969, the Senate rejected Haynesworth because of conflict-of-interest fears. The following year, Carswell was rejected by the Senate after it was disclosed that he had given a speech as a lawyer expressing his "vigorous belief in the principles of White supremacy." "My concern is there is going to be a cleavage in the courts between the Federalist Society members and nonmembers," says Walsh, a former federal judge. "Anything that perpetuates that kind of ideological cleavage is not good for the unity of the court system. Ideally, it seems to me that judges should avoid memberships [in politically and substantively motivated organizations] but, of course, they don't do that." In fact, the ABA, in one of its publications on judicial independence, concludes: "A judge's impartiality and ability to interpret and apply the laws fairly are integral to the administration of justice." But a judge's membership in an organization -- whether it's the American Civil Liberties Union on the Left or the Federalist Society on the Right -- can influence whether a judge is perceived as being unbiased, a critical element in a judicial system that prides itself on being fair. Harold D. Pope, president of the National Bar Association, says: "People who are opposing the expansion of rights and opportunities for all people in this society we feel are working against America's best interest. We would hope that all jurists, no matter what their prior political persuasion, would deal objectively with the facts of law as they come before them, as they were sworn to do so when they first sat on the bench." The expansion of the Federalist Society, which has adopted a silhouette of James Madison as its symbol, comes at a time when the legal community is worried about a loss of public confidence. An ABA special committee on judicial independence issued a report in August titled "Protecting the Bulwark of the Republic: Ensuring Public Support of the Judicial Process." The report states, "According to the ABA survey, only about half of the respondents believed that our justice system treats men and women equally. Even fewer believed that courts treat members of different ethnic groups or wealthy and poor people the same." The report continues, "As [former] ABA President [Philip S.] Anderson recently stated: "We must work on this problem for as long as it takes to make our profession equally open and our system of justice equally responsive to all members of our society, regardless of color. This is the ultimate challenge to the integrity of the rule of law in America.'" But the Federalist Society is interested in a challenge of a different kind. To its credit, the organization operates with an open and very public agenda. On its web page, for example, it lays out its conservative agenda. "The Federalist Society for Law and Public Policy Studies is a group of conservatives and libertarians interested in the current state of the legal order. It is founded on the principles that the state exists to preserve freedom, that the separation of governmental powers is central to our Constitution, and that it is emphatically the province and duty of the judiciary to say what the law is, not what it should be. The Society seeks both to promote an awareness of these principles and to further their application through its activities." Even conservative write Michael Lind would call this 19th-century view "the Confederate theory of the Constitution." Speakers at one national Federalist Society-sponsored lawyers convention proposed far-reaching judicial reforms that included the abolition of judicial review, limiting the powers of federal courts and stripping the Supreme Court of jurisdiction over certain matters. Mary Frances Berry, chair of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, is worried about more than theory. "What is scary about the Federalist Society is that it is antiquated and atavistic," she says. "Their views on natural law, libertarianism and the limited power of government to respond when people are being discriminated against is scary -- for African-Americans, especially. The more people you have who expose those views on the court, the more dangerous it becomes for every one of our lives." In this book, Firewall: The Iran-Contra Conspiracy and Cover Up, Walsh writes: "In calling for the narrow construction of constitutional grants of governmental power, the Federalist Society seemed to speak for right-wing Republicans. I was especially troubled that one of White House Counsel Boyden Gray's assistants had openly declared that no one who was not a member of the Federalist Society had received a judicial appointment from President Bush." Brian W. Jones, a San Francisco lawyer and member of the Federalist Society, believes that his group is being maligned. "I reject out of hand that Federalists are hostile to civil rights," says Jones, an African-American who was deputy legal affairs secretary to California Gov. Pete Wilson and former counsel to Hatch's Senate Judiciary Committee. "Most members of the Federalist Society would agree that the government has no business making racial distinctions of any kind among its citizens. I would argue that is a very credible view of civil rights. "On civil rights and civil liberty issues, Federalist Society judges tend to have a more limited view of the federal government's authority to respond to a whole range of questions. For conservatives, the first question with any inquiry into responding to social problems is: Where does the authority lie, with the federal government or state and local governments?" Another African-American, Gerald Reynolds, is vice chairman of membership for the Federalist Society. "There are some people who embrace this principle of racial neutrality," says the Kansas City, Mo., lawyer. "This debate flows from principles and not from animosity toward Blacks." The national office of the Federalist Society in Washington, D.C., refused to provide the names of judges on its membership list. However, some of the organization's records were obtained by Emerge from other sources. An examination of Federalist Society documents for 1997 and 1998, the most current information available at press time, reveals the extent that the group has penetrated the courts. When looking at the board of directors of local chapters, officers, their advisory panels and membership lists, it is clear that when one goes to court seeking justice, he or she is increasingly likely to have a judge affiliated with the Federalist Society handling the case. During the period studied, that was true whether one was entering a courtroom in New York, Michigan or Alabama. (The titles of persons listed hereafter reflect the positions they held at the time the records were compiled by the Federalist Society; some of the judges have since been elevated to a higher court.) In New York state, judges serving as officers, directors or advisers to the local chapters included Thomas P. Griesa, chief judge of the U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York, as well as District Judges Shirley Wohl Kram, Lawrence M. McKenna and John E. Sprizzo. A U.S. Appeals Court Judge for the Second Circuit, Dennis G. Jacobs, was also among that group. The Long Island advisory board included U.S. District Judge Michael Fiechter, U.S. Court of International Trade Judge Gregory W. Carman and State Supreme Court Judges Jack Dunne and Ute Lally. In Michigan, judges aligned with the Federalist Society included James L. Ryan and Richard F. Suhreinrich of the U.S. Court of Appeals; Federal District Judges Paul V. Gadola, David W. McKeague, Gerald E. Rosen and Lawrence P. Zatkoff; and U.S. Magistrate Judge Virginia M. Morgan. State Supreme Court Justices Clifford W. Taylor and Elizabeth A. Weaver were listed as advisers to the Detroit chapter. So were Maura D. Corrigan, chief judge of the Michigan Court of Appeals, along with fellow judges Stephen J. Markman, Henry W. Saad, and Robert Young Jr. (an African-American who has since been elevated to the Michigan Supreme Court). The chief judge of the Washtenaw County Circuit Court in Grand Rapids, Kurtis T. Wilder (another African-Americana who is now on the Michigan Court of Appeals), and Wayne County Circuit Judges Sean Cox, Michael J. Talbot and Brian Zahra helped complete the list. Local chapters in Alabama were advised by Perry O. Hooper Sr., chief justice of the Supreme Court of Alabama, along with Associate Justices J. Gorman Houston, Harold See and A. Hugh Maddox. U.S. Sen. Jefferson B. Sessions III also supported the organization. (Sessions was nominated to become a federal judge in 1986 but was blocked when it was disclosed that he had called the NAACP and the American Civil Liberties Union "un-American" and "communist-inspired," and said they "force civil rights down the throats of people." Referring to the Ku Klux Klan, he reportedly said, "I used to think they're OK," until he learned that some Klansmen were "pot smokers." Sessions contended the remarks were either made in jest or had been misinterpreted.) Additional supporters listed included Randall T. Shepard, chief justice of the Indiana Supreme Court; Craig Enoch, chief justice of the Texas Supreme Court; South Carolina Attorney General Charles Molony Condon; Alabama Attorney General William Pryor (who has links on his web page to the Federalist Society and the conservative Washington Legal Foundation), Pennsylvania Attorney General D. Michael Fisher; Indianapolis Mayor Stephen Goldsmith and Clarence Thomas' wife, Virginia, a former aide to House majority leader Richard Armey, and who now works for the Heritage Foundation. As the presiding officials in courts, judges wield broad power. For example, U.S. District Judge Neal B. Biggers Jr., who sits on the advisory board of the Mississippi chapter of the Federalist Society, presided over the Ayers desegregation case. In 1975, Jake Ayers Sr., a Mississippi sharecropper, sued the state on behalf of his son, charging that the state's higher education system discriminated against African-Americans and historically Black colleges. In 1987, Biggers upheld the state College Board's contention that Mississippi's higher education system was no longer racially discriminatory. The Supreme Court reversed Biggers in 1991 and ordered him to remove any vestiges of past discrimination. The power of the Federalist Society is not limited to the judiciary, which would be concern enough. Its tentacles extend deep into corporate America. Listed members of its business advisory council included John Stewart Bryan, III, chairman, president and C.E.O. of Media General Cable; John G. Medlin Jr., board chair of Wachovia Corp., an interstate bank holding company; Geneva Steel C.E.O. Joseph Cannon and Robert L. Strickland, chairman of Lowe's Companies. Also affiliated with the Federalist Society are Brian J. Brille and David Panton of Morgan Stanley financial services in New York; William Haraf of Bank of America in San Francisco; Chris Ekren of Sony Corp. in San Jose, Calif.; Frank Blake of General Electric in Schenechtedy, N.Y.; Philip R. Lochner Jr., senior vice president, Time Warner Inc. in New York; William Kemp of General Motors in Warren, Mich.; Edward Whelan of GTE Corp.'s Washington office; David Askin of Exxon Co. in Baytown, Texas; Marsha Rabiteau of Dow Chemical in Midland, Mich.; F. James Tennies, chief administrative officer at Legg Mason for asset management in Baltimore; Jodi Balsam, counsel for operations and litigation for the National Football League and Tom Donahue of Metropolitan Life. Even federal employees in the Clinton administration were included in Federalist Society documents: Paul-Noel Chretien of the Justice Department; Theodore Cooperstein of the FBI; Carol Crawford of the International Trade Commission; Kevin Martin of the Federal Communications Commission and Christopher Holleman of the U.S. Small Business Administration. William Saunders of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights also backs the Society. Many of the nation's blue-chip law firms have attorneys associated with the Federalist Society. Those listed included lawyers in the Washington, D.C. law firms of Arnold and Porter; Covington & Burling; Steptoe & Johnson; Hogan & Hartson; Patton, Boaggs & Blow; and Wilmer, Cutler & Pickering. New York law firms with lawyers associated with the Federalist Society include: Cravath, Swaine & Moore; White & Case and Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison. In Boston, one law firm -- Hale and Door -- has at least 10 attorneys affiliated with the Federalist Society. The list of law professors associated with the society included Ronald A. Cass, dean of Boston University's law school; Michael Young of Columbia University; John Yoo of the University of California at Berkeley; Eugene Volokh of UCLA; Northwestern University professors Gary Lawson, Daniel D. Polsby and Stephen B. Presser; Robert P. George of Princeton; Gerard Bradley of Notre Dame; Gordon B. Baldwin of the University of Wisconsin, Olan B. Lowry of Temple; Johathan Macey and Richard Painter of Cornell; Ronald D. Rotunda of the University of Illinois; Gerald T. Dunn of St. Louis University and Thomas Morgan of George Washington University. The University of Virginia, one of the best law schools in the nation, has quite a few Federalist Society professors or sympathizers on its faculty, including John Norton Moore, Robert Turner, Erika Worth Harris and Lillian BeVier. "People have to understand, whether they like lawyers or not, law schools have an enormous amount of power, whether it's power for good or evil. Unfortunately, what we are seeing under the Federalist Society is law schools and legal education being used to promote racism, bigotry and Right-wing politics. These people believe in the Bell Curve," says Prof. Boyle of the University of Illinois, referring to a controversial theory by Charles Murray and Richard J. Herrnstein about the supposed low intelligence level of some non-Whites. "You have to understand that. Just as the Federalist Society did to the federal judiciary, they are now trying to do to law schools." Boyle and others say this is done by establishing well-endowed law professorships and speaking tours for the true believers. "Where they once were scholars with Right-wing foundations like the Heritage Foundation, American Enterprise Institute and the Cato Institute, they are now getting credentialed as law professors," he notes. No comparable movement exists among progressives, which may explain why civil rights groups and liberals are doing such a feeble job defending affirmative action. "We've got to realize that while we have been dillydallying in law schools with critical race theories and penetrating the Law Review, all this is chump change to [Federalists]," observes Berry, of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights. "It's like we were out playing whiffle ball while they were exercising power." The Federalist Society was founded 17 years ago by Yale Law School student Steven G. Calabresi and two counterparts at the University of Chicago School of Law, Lee Liberman and David McIntosh. All three were undergraduates together at Yale. Upset with what they perceived as liberal bias, the three decided to form an organization for conservative law students. Yale professors Robert H. Bork and Ralph K. Winter, both of whom would be appointed to the federal bench by Ronald Reagan, served as advisers to the Yale chapter. In Chicago, future U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia served in a similar capacity. The contacts the three made as students have proven to be invaluable. Calabresi, in addition to clerking for Bork and Winter, clerked for Scalia at the Supreme Court. He is now a law professor at Northwestern University. Liberman gave up a post in the Justice Department also to clerk for Scalia. She is now Lee Liberman Otis and is chief counsel for Sen. Spencer Abraham (R-Mich.), who founded a Federalist Society chapter at Harvard. McIntosh was a special assistant to Ed Meese when he was Reagan's attorney general; he is a three-term Republican Congressman who's considering running for governor of Indiana. In addition to a board of trustees, the society has a board of directors, co-chaired by Calabresi and McIntosh. The Federalist pipeline is a well-oiled old boy -- and sometimes girl -- network. For example, Brent O. Hatch, the son of Sen. Orrin Hatch, clerked for Robert Bork when he was a federal judge in Washington, D.C. After working in the Justice Department, young Hatch was appointed general counsel of the National Endowment for the Humanities at the age of 28. He is treasurer of the Federalist Society's board of directors. The organization has been funded by wealthy conservatives, such as Richard Mellon Scaife, who is vice chair of the Heritage Foundation's board, and another board member, Holland Coors, a member of the conservative Coors family. Many contributions are made through foundations that give to Right-wing causes, including the John M. Olin Foundation in New York, the Sarah Scaife Foundation in Pittsburgh, the Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation of Milwaukee and the Deer Creek Foundation in St. Louis. The Federalists have direct ties to Right-wing think tanks seeking to dismantle affirmative action at the local, state and federal levels. The Center for Individual Rights, which successfully argued the Hopwood case that banned affirmative action at the University of Texas, represents plaintiffs in a lawsuit pending against the University of Michigan and were lawyers for supporters of Proposition 209, the anti-affirmative action measure in California. The Washington Legal Foundation sued the University of Maryland, forcing it to drop its Benjamin Banneker scholarships for African-American scholars; the Southeastern Legal Foundation is leading an all-out assault on affirmative action in Atlanta, and the Institute for Justice led the attack on Lani Guinier, then a University of Pennsylvania law professor, who was President Clinton's first choice to be assistant U.S. attorney general for civil rights. Clint Bolick, the group's vice president, dismissed Guinier as a "quota queen," and the eventual nominee, Deval L. Patrick, as a "quota king." He also led the opposition to the appointment of Bill Lann Lee, who was later named acting assistant attorney general for civil rights. When first lady Hillary Rodham Clinton said that there was a "vast Right-wing conspiracy" afoot that had been hounding her husband since he first announced for president, some Right-wingers almost laughingly dismissed her charges. Special Prosecutor Ken Starr called the comments "nonsense." And Boston Herald columnist Joe Fitzgerald said the first lady had "wandered into paranoia." But information developed by the Institute for Democracy Studies, a nonprofit research and education organization in New York, confirms that the first lady was on the mark. In the executive summary of its report, "The Assault on Affirmative Action: An Organized Challenge to Racial and Gender Justice," the organization notes, "Once a month at the Heritage Foundation, representatives of the nation's leading conservative law groups get together for a 'luncheon.' This so-called Public Interest Legal Group meeting is just one of several monthly gatherings that right-wing law groups hold." The report continues: "These meetings serve the purpose of avoiding duplication of effort, airing future plans, and providing guidance for an appropriate organizational division of labor." In an interview with Emerge, Todd G. Young, director of research and communications for the Atlanta-based Southeastern Legal Foundation, confirms that Right-wing groups collaborate. "We read each other's briefs (as they are filed) and when there are updates published by other groups," he says. "Although we are separate entities, we share some common understandings about the Constitutions and our (mission) statements are really almost identical for the organizations." Of its recent lawsuit against Atlanta's affirmative action program, Young notes: "We're refining the definition of what it means to enjoy equal protection under the law and the first step is to end any government-sanctioned discrimination, such as affirmative action programs or racial preference programs. It's philosophically inconsistent to say it was bad then [in the 1950s and 1960s] but it's OK now." Atlanta Mayor Bill Campbell says it's not OK to discard programs devised to address discrimination against African-Americans. "Conservative legal interest groups, such as the Center for Individual Rights and the Southeastern Legal Foundation, are striking at the very heart of the civil rights gains of the '50s and '60s," explains Campbell. "These groups are, in essence, a homogenized version of the Klan. They may have traded in their sheets for suits and use different language, but it's the same old racism -- just old wine in new bottles." The Federalist Society takes its name from The Federalist papers, 85 articles originally published in New York newspapers between 1787 and 1788. The authors -- Alexander Hamilton, John Jay and James Madison -- were attempting to gain popular support for the adoption of a new Constitution. "Is The Federalist the key to what the Constitution's framers and adopters intended it to mean and how they expected it to function?" asked R. B. Bernstein, a constitutional historian who wrote the foreword to The Federalist, a recent reissue of the papers. "This subset of the original-intent controversy tends to pit many historians, who remain dubious about original-intent arguments, against many legal scholars, who seek a way to limit judicial discretion by anchoring constitutional interpretation in the Constitution's origins." Bernstein argued that the public should not look at the essays, all written under one pen name, as the definitive word on how the Constitution should be interpreted. "Jay was not a delegate to the Federal Convention, which framed the Constitution...[Hamilton] left the Convention in July, not returning until two weeks before its close in September. And Madison...found himself outvoted on a host of major issues," Bernstein noted. Moreover, as The Federalist papers became the classic commentary on the Constitution, the three men publicly identified themselves as the authors. Even that was not without controversy. Before his ill-fated duel with Aaron Burr, Hamilton tried to take credit for writing papers 18-20, 49-58 and 62-63. Madison made an identical claim of authorship, which was verified through a computer analysis in 1964. The most damning fact about today's Federalists is that they advocate a limited role for the federal government, while the early founders were interested in establishing a strong central government. Some civil rights leaders, including Theodore M. Shaw, associate director-counsel of the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund Inc., view the rhetoric of the modern-day Federalists as smokescreen for an assault on civil rights. "It's ideologically out of the mainstream and a part of the radically conservative agenda and the radically conservative agenda has never served the interest of African-Americans," Shaw says. Hilary O. Shelton, Washington bureau chief of the NAACP, is less charitable: "They are not conservative. They are very consistent with the Council of Conservative Citizens," a White supremacy group that has featured Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott (R-Miss.) and Rep. Bob Barr (R-Ga.) as speakers. Surprisingly, some of the harshest criticism of Federalist Society members has come from Republicans. For example, former Attorney General Meese, a main player in the Federalist movement, has been criticized by some of his colleagues in the Reagan administration. According to The Washington Post, James A. Baker III and Michael K. Deaver referred to Meese as the "Big Bigot," and conservatives referred to his top assistant, T. Kenneth Cribb Jr., as the "Baby Bigot." Cribb sits on the board of directors of the Federalist Society and is a trustee of the Scaife Foundation, a major contributor to the Federalist Society and other Right-wing causes. Graglia, who has taught at the University of Texas since 1966, touched off a controversy two years ago, when he said, "Blacks and Mexican Americans are not academically competitive with Whites in selective institutions." According to Graglia, "It is the result primarily of cultural effects. Failure is not looked upon with disgrace." He maintains his membership in the Federalist Society. "They certainly are unenthusiastic about civil rights laws," he says of his organization. "Richard Epstein [a law professor at the University of Chicago] thinks we will be better off if civil rights laws were all repealed. These people do believe, as I believe, that so-called civil rights have gone too far and are not civil rights at all." Because so many of the Federalist Society members are seen as opposing civil rights, some people are not quick to accept their professed interest in color-blind justice. U.S. Appeals Court Judge Stephen Reinhardt of the 9th Circuit observes, "We had the Civil War over states' rights. There is no question we are going back to the pre-Civil War view of governments." Former federal Judge Lawrence Walsh puts it more bluntly. "The impression I have is they are trying to return to the 18th century and undo the work of the Supreme Court since the New Deal," Walsh says. "And I think it is wrong to put someone on the court who has a pre-commitment with a political dogma, whether it's the Ku Klux Klan or the Federalist Society." -- Additional reporting by Lottie L. Joiner Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Tue Jun 27 12:06:24 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2017 12:06:24 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] News Gazoo for Feddie Yale Law Mafia Killer Koh Mazzone Message-ID: "The impression I have is they are trying to return to the 18th century and undo the work of the Supreme Court since the New Deal," Walsh says. "And I think it is wrong to put someone on the court who has a pre-commitment with a political dogma, whether it's the Ku Klux Klan or the Federalist Society." Yeah, the Feddie Mazzone teaching Conned Law at our Waffen-SS Law School and inviting Killer Koh to come out here and pollute and poison our Good Community. Judge Lawrence Walsh was Independent Counsel/Prosecutor in the Iran-Contra Scandal by appointment of President Reagan; prosecuted the Mob with Dewey in New York; Deputy Attorney General under Eisenhower; Pillar of the Republican Party; President of the American Bar Association; Federal District Judge; Partner in the New York Law Firm of Davis, Polk & Wardwell, etc. RIP. fab Walsh on Federalist Society According to the conventional wisdom, we were in a double bind: The judges appointed by Democratic presidents were supposedly most concerned with protecting the constitutional rights of persons prosecuted for crimes, while most of the other judges owed their appointments to Ronald Reagan or George Bush, who had stated publicly and emphatically that they hoped that North would not be convicted. Over the years, I had often found such simplistic views to be wrong. Most judges overcome the prejudices and alliances they had when appointed to the federal bench. During my three and one-half years on the federal district court in New York, I had experienced the merging process by which new judges are absorbed into their courts. My hard-line political and professional views had moderated during lunchroom conversations with Learned Hand, Jerome Frank, and Harold Medina and had dissolved after a couple of my decisions had been reversed on appeal. But I was concerned about the continuing political allegiance of Republican judges as manifested in the Federalist Society. Although the organization was not openly partisan, its dogma was political. It reminded me of the communist front groups of the 1940s and l950s, whose members were committed to the communist cause and subject to communist direction but were not card-carrying members of the Communist Party. In calling for the narrow construction of constitutional grants of governmental power, the Federalist Society seemed to speak for right-wing Republicans. I was especially troubled that one of White House Counsel Boyden Gray's assistants had openly declared that no one who was not a member of the Federalist Society had received a judicial appointment from President Bush. walsh.fed >From Iran-contra Independent Counsel Lawrence Walsh, Firewall. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2017 6:48 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson ; Mildred O'brien Subject: News Gazoo for Feddie Yale Law Mafia Killer Koh Mazzone Sure. Yale Law Mafia Mazzone was on the Committee that invited Yale Law Mafia Killer Koh to come out here and pollute and poison our Good Community despite my best efforts to stop them. Yale Law Mafia Mazzone is also a Member of the Federalist Society, Hijacking Justice Everyday. 1. The Supremes upheld Trump's Muslim Ban in violation of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. 2. The Supremes have further eroded the Separation of Church and State in violation of the First Amendment. And it appears the Supremes are going to tolerate public bigotry and discrimination against LGBT in the name of "religious freedom" despite the fact we would never permit this to be done against Blacks, Jews, Catholics, etc except here on Campus where Wise {sic!} and the Zionists Ethnically Cleansed Native Americans out of UIUC. 3. We are all going to be up the proverbial creek without a paddle if Kennedy retires and Trump gets to replace him with another hard-line, doctrinaire religious fundamentalist Federalist Society Member like Gorsuch-Hijacking Justice every day along with Mazzone who "teaches" Conned Law at our Waffen-SS Law School. Fab. -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis [mailto:FBOYLE at law.uiuc.edu] Sent: Friday, September 17, 1999 6:35 PM To: undisclosed-recipients Subject: HIJACKING JUSTICE:FEDDIES S P E C I A L R E P O R T H I J A C K I N G J U S T I C E The Federalist Society, a Right-wing network of lawyers, judges and supporters, is undoing civil rights and other gains made through the courts BY GEORGE E. CURRY & TREVOR W. COLEMAN EMERGE, OCTOBER 1999 WHEN BROWN VS. BOARD OF EDUCATION WAS BEING ARGUED, a clerk to U.S. Supreme Court Justice Robert Jackson suggested that the court should rule against the plaintiffs in the landmark school desegregation case. While making the case for maintaining segregated schools, the clerk sent a memo to his boss saying, "It is about time the Court faced the fact that white people in the South don't like the colored people." That clerk was William Rehnquist, now chief justice of the United States Supreme Court. Seeking to put his own ultraconservatives on the Supreme Court with Rehnquist, President Ronald Reagan -- who had appointed more than half of the sitting federal judges by the time he left office -- considered nominating Lino A. Graglia, a controversial University of Texas law professor, as a federal appeals court judge for the 5th Circuit. But the nomination, which had been backed by Attorney General Edwin Meese III, was jettisoned after Graglia acknowledged that he had referred to African-Americans as "pickaninnies." The American Bar Association found the law professor "not qualified" to serve on the federal bench. Reagan did nominate Robert H. Bork, a former Yale law professor, who was on the U.S. Court of Appeals in Washington, D.C. Bork had opposed the 1964 Civil Rights Act, calling it "an unwanted intrusion on the right of individuals to choose with whom to associate." After bitter debate, the Senate rejected his nomination in 1987 by a vote of 58 to 42. Far from fading into the background, Bork, Meese, and to a lesser extent, Graglia, are key players in the Federalist Society, a powerful Right-wing network intent on restricting the power of courts, often at the expense of African-Americans and other people of color, the poor, women and the disadvantaged. The organization actively seeks to limit "judicial activism" and reverse Supreme Court landmark rulings since the New Deal, especially those issued in the 1960s and '70s. Special targets include the 1966 Miranda decision that provides certain rights for suspected criminals, the 1973 Roe vs. Wade ruling legalizing abortion and recent civil rights legislation. Founded in 1982 by three law students, the Federalist Society has grown into one of the most influential institutions in America. Four of the nine members of the U.S. Supreme Court -- Clarence Thomas, William H. Rehnquist, Antonin Scalia and Anthony M. Kennedy -- are close affiliates of the Federalist Society. So are Donald P. Hodel, former president of the Christina Coalition, and special prosecutor Kenneth Starr. The Federalist Society's board of trustees is co-chaired by Bork and U.S. Sen. Orrin Hatch -- one of the most conservative members on Capitol Hill. Other trustees include former Attorney General Meese, William Bradford Reynolds, who was assistant attorney general for civil rights in the Reagan Administration, sought to have court-ordered affirmative action programs overturned, and C. Boyden Gray, former President Bush's chief White House attorney, who opposed the Civil Rights Act of 1991. In a world being reshaped by the Federalist Society, conservative law students have formed chapters on campuses across the nation. After graduation, they clerk for conservative judges and then go on to become high-ranking government officials, partners in major law firms, prosecutors, law school professors and judges at the local, state and federal level. In short, the Federalist Society is on the verge of hijacking the judicial system. "This is more than an attack on affirmative action being spear-headed by the Federalist Society lawyers," observes Francis A. Boyle, a law professor at the University of Illinois. "They want to go beyond getting rid of affirmative action. They want to go back to Brown vs. Board of Education. "We have Justice Antonin Scalia (who advised the Federalist Society at its inception and later hired two of its three founders as his law clerks), who two years ago gave a public lecture at Columbia Law School where he stated if Brown vs. Board of Education was to be presented to him today, he would rule against the plaintiff. In other words, this was a threat that if Brown vs. Board of Education was voted on before the Supreme Court, he would overturn it." That type of thinking disturbs Lawrence E. Walsh. Before becoming president of the American Bar Association in 1975, Walsh chaired an ABA panel that approved President Nixon's choices of federal appeals judges, Clement Haynesworth and G. Harold Carswell, to serve on the Supreme Court. In 1969, the Senate rejected Haynesworth because of conflict-of-interest fears. The following year, Carswell was rejected by the Senate after it was disclosed that he had given a speech as a lawyer expressing his "vigorous belief in the principles of White supremacy." "My concern is there is going to be a cleavage in the courts between the Federalist Society members and nonmembers," says Walsh, a former federal judge. "Anything that perpetuates that kind of ideological cleavage is not good for the unity of the court system. Ideally, it seems to me that judges should avoid memberships [in politically and substantively motivated organizations] but, of course, they don't do that." In fact, the ABA, in one of its publications on judicial independence, concludes: "A judge's impartiality and ability to interpret and apply the laws fairly are integral to the administration of justice." But a judge's membership in an organization -- whether it's the American Civil Liberties Union on the Left or the Federalist Society on the Right -- can influence whether a judge is perceived as being unbiased, a critical element in a judicial system that prides itself on being fair. Harold D. Pope, president of the National Bar Association, says: "People who are opposing the expansion of rights and opportunities for all people in this society we feel are working against America's best interest. We would hope that all jurists, no matter what their prior political persuasion, would deal objectively with the facts of law as they come before them, as they were sworn to do so when they first sat on the bench." The expansion of the Federalist Society, which has adopted a silhouette of James Madison as its symbol, comes at a time when the legal community is worried about a loss of public confidence. An ABA special committee on judicial independence issued a report in August titled "Protecting the Bulwark of the Republic: Ensuring Public Support of the Judicial Process." The report states, "According to the ABA survey, only about half of the respondents believed that our justice system treats men and women equally. Even fewer believed that courts treat members of different ethnic groups or wealthy and poor people the same." The report continues, "As [former] ABA President [Philip S.] Anderson recently stated: "We must work on this problem for as long as it takes to make our profession equally open and our system of justice equally responsive to all members of our society, regardless of color. This is the ultimate challenge to the integrity of the rule of law in America.'" But the Federalist Society is interested in a challenge of a different kind. To its credit, the organization operates with an open and very public agenda. On its web page, for example, it lays out its conservative agenda. "The Federalist Society for Law and Public Policy Studies is a group of conservatives and libertarians interested in the current state of the legal order. It is founded on the principles that the state exists to preserve freedom, that the separation of governmental powers is central to our Constitution, and that it is emphatically the province and duty of the judiciary to say what the law is, not what it should be. The Society seeks both to promote an awareness of these principles and to further their application through its activities." Even conservative write Michael Lind would call this 19th-century view "the Confederate theory of the Constitution." Speakers at one national Federalist Society-sponsored lawyers convention proposed far-reaching judicial reforms that included the abolition of judicial review, limiting the powers of federal courts and stripping the Supreme Court of jurisdiction over certain matters. Mary Frances Berry, chair of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, is worried about more than theory. "What is scary about the Federalist Society is that it is antiquated and atavistic," she says. "Their views on natural law, libertarianism and the limited power of government to respond when people are being discriminated against is scary -- for African-Americans, especially. The more people you have who expose those views on the court, the more dangerous it becomes for every one of our lives." In this book, Firewall: The Iran-Contra Conspiracy and Cover Up, Walsh writes: "In calling for the narrow construction of constitutional grants of governmental power, the Federalist Society seemed to speak for right-wing Republicans. I was especially troubled that one of White House Counsel Boyden Gray's assistants had openly declared that no one who was not a member of the Federalist Society had received a judicial appointment from President Bush." Brian W. Jones, a San Francisco lawyer and member of the Federalist Society, believes that his group is being maligned. "I reject out of hand that Federalists are hostile to civil rights," says Jones, an African-American who was deputy legal affairs secretary to California Gov. Pete Wilson and former counsel to Hatch's Senate Judiciary Committee. "Most members of the Federalist Society would agree that the government has no business making racial distinctions of any kind among its citizens. I would argue that is a very credible view of civil rights. "On civil rights and civil liberty issues, Federalist Society judges tend to have a more limited view of the federal government's authority to respond to a whole range of questions. For conservatives, the first question with any inquiry into responding to social problems is: Where does the authority lie, with the federal government or state and local governments?" Another African-American, Gerald Reynolds, is vice chairman of membership for the Federalist Society. "There are some people who embrace this principle of racial neutrality," says the Kansas City, Mo., lawyer. "This debate flows from principles and not from animosity toward Blacks." The national office of the Federalist Society in Washington, D.C., refused to provide the names of judges on its membership list. However, some of the organization's records were obtained by Emerge from other sources. An examination of Federalist Society documents for 1997 and 1998, the most current information available at press time, reveals the extent that the group has penetrated the courts. When looking at the board of directors of local chapters, officers, their advisory panels and membership lists, it is clear that when one goes to court seeking justice, he or she is increasingly likely to have a judge affiliated with the Federalist Society handling the case. During the period studied, that was true whether one was entering a courtroom in New York, Michigan or Alabama. (The titles of persons listed hereafter reflect the positions they held at the time the records were compiled by the Federalist Society; some of the judges have since been elevated to a higher court.) In New York state, judges serving as officers, directors or advisers to the local chapters included Thomas P. Griesa, chief judge of the U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York, as well as District Judges Shirley Wohl Kram, Lawrence M. McKenna and John E. Sprizzo. A U.S. Appeals Court Judge for the Second Circuit, Dennis G. Jacobs, was also among that group. The Long Island advisory board included U.S. District Judge Michael Fiechter, U.S. Court of International Trade Judge Gregory W. Carman and State Supreme Court Judges Jack Dunne and Ute Lally. In Michigan, judges aligned with the Federalist Society included James L. Ryan and Richard F. Suhreinrich of the U.S. Court of Appeals; Federal District Judges Paul V. Gadola, David W. McKeague, Gerald E. Rosen and Lawrence P. Zatkoff; and U.S. Magistrate Judge Virginia M. Morgan. State Supreme Court Justices Clifford W. Taylor and Elizabeth A. Weaver were listed as advisers to the Detroit chapter. So were Maura D. Corrigan, chief judge of the Michigan Court of Appeals, along with fellow judges Stephen J. Markman, Henry W. Saad, and Robert Young Jr. (an African-American who has since been elevated to the Michigan Supreme Court). The chief judge of the Washtenaw County Circuit Court in Grand Rapids, Kurtis T. Wilder (another African-Americana who is now on the Michigan Court of Appeals), and Wayne County Circuit Judges Sean Cox, Michael J. Talbot and Brian Zahra helped complete the list. Local chapters in Alabama were advised by Perry O. Hooper Sr., chief justice of the Supreme Court of Alabama, along with Associate Justices J. Gorman Houston, Harold See and A. Hugh Maddox. U.S. Sen. Jefferson B. Sessions III also supported the organization. (Sessions was nominated to become a federal judge in 1986 but was blocked when it was disclosed that he had called the NAACP and the American Civil Liberties Union "un-American" and "communist-inspired," and said they "force civil rights down the throats of people." Referring to the Ku Klux Klan, he reportedly said, "I used to think they're OK," until he learned that some Klansmen were "pot smokers." Sessions contended the remarks were either made in jest or had been misinterpreted.) Additional supporters listed included Randall T. Shepard, chief justice of the Indiana Supreme Court; Craig Enoch, chief justice of the Texas Supreme Court; South Carolina Attorney General Charles Molony Condon; Alabama Attorney General William Pryor (who has links on his web page to the Federalist Society and the conservative Washington Legal Foundation), Pennsylvania Attorney General D. Michael Fisher; Indianapolis Mayor Stephen Goldsmith and Clarence Thomas' wife, Virginia, a former aide to House majority leader Richard Armey, and who now works for the Heritage Foundation. As the presiding officials in courts, judges wield broad power. For example, U.S. District Judge Neal B. Biggers Jr., who sits on the advisory board of the Mississippi chapter of the Federalist Society, presided over the Ayers desegregation case. In 1975, Jake Ayers Sr., a Mississippi sharecropper, sued the state on behalf of his son, charging that the state's higher education system discriminated against African-Americans and historically Black colleges. In 1987, Biggers upheld the state College Board's contention that Mississippi's higher education system was no longer racially discriminatory. The Supreme Court reversed Biggers in 1991 and ordered him to remove any vestiges of past discrimination. The power of the Federalist Society is not limited to the judiciary, which would be concern enough. Its tentacles extend deep into corporate America. Listed members of its business advisory council included John Stewart Bryan, III, chairman, president and C.E.O. of Media General Cable; John G. Medlin Jr., board chair of Wachovia Corp., an interstate bank holding company; Geneva Steel C.E.O. Joseph Cannon and Robert L. Strickland, chairman of Lowe's Companies. Also affiliated with the Federalist Society are Brian J. Brille and David Panton of Morgan Stanley financial services in New York; William Haraf of Bank of America in San Francisco; Chris Ekren of Sony Corp. in San Jose, Calif.; Frank Blake of General Electric in Schenechtedy, N.Y.; Philip R. Lochner Jr., senior vice president, Time Warner Inc. in New York; William Kemp of General Motors in Warren, Mich.; Edward Whelan of GTE Corp.'s Washington office; David Askin of Exxon Co. in Baytown, Texas; Marsha Rabiteau of Dow Chemical in Midland, Mich.; F. James Tennies, chief administrative officer at Legg Mason for asset management in Baltimore; Jodi Balsam, counsel for operations and litigation for the National Football League and Tom Donahue of Metropolitan Life. Even federal employees in the Clinton administration were included in Federalist Society documents: Paul-Noel Chretien of the Justice Department; Theodore Cooperstein of the FBI; Carol Crawford of the International Trade Commission; Kevin Martin of the Federal Communications Commission and Christopher Holleman of the U.S. Small Business Administration. William Saunders of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights also backs the Society. Many of the nation's blue-chip law firms have attorneys associated with the Federalist Society. Those listed included lawyers in the Washington, D.C. law firms of Arnold and Porter; Covington & Burling; Steptoe & Johnson; Hogan & Hartson; Patton, Boaggs & Blow; and Wilmer, Cutler & Pickering. New York law firms with lawyers associated with the Federalist Society include: Cravath, Swaine & Moore; White & Case and Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison. In Boston, one law firm -- Hale and Door -- has at least 10 attorneys affiliated with the Federalist Society. The list of law professors associated with the society included Ronald A. Cass, dean of Boston University's law school; Michael Young of Columbia University; John Yoo of the University of California at Berkeley; Eugene Volokh of UCLA; Northwestern University professors Gary Lawson, Daniel D. Polsby and Stephen B. Presser; Robert P. George of Princeton; Gerard Bradley of Notre Dame; Gordon B. Baldwin of the University of Wisconsin, Olan B. Lowry of Temple; Johathan Macey and Richard Painter of Cornell; Ronald D. Rotunda of the University of Illinois; Gerald T. Dunn of St. Louis University and Thomas Morgan of George Washington University. The University of Virginia, one of the best law schools in the nation, has quite a few Federalist Society professors or sympathizers on its faculty, including John Norton Moore, Robert Turner, Erika Worth Harris and Lillian BeVier. "People have to understand, whether they like lawyers or not, law schools have an enormous amount of power, whether it's power for good or evil. Unfortunately, what we are seeing under the Federalist Society is law schools and legal education being used to promote racism, bigotry and Right-wing politics. These people believe in the Bell Curve," says Prof. Boyle of the University of Illinois, referring to a controversial theory by Charles Murray and Richard J. Herrnstein about the supposed low intelligence level of some non-Whites. "You have to understand that. Just as the Federalist Society did to the federal judiciary, they are now trying to do to law schools." Boyle and others say this is done by establishing well-endowed law professorships and speaking tours for the true believers. "Where they once were scholars with Right-wing foundations like the Heritage Foundation, American Enterprise Institute and the Cato Institute, they are now getting credentialed as law professors," he notes. No comparable movement exists among progressives, which may explain why civil rights groups and liberals are doing such a feeble job defending affirmative action. "We've got to realize that while we have been dillydallying in law schools with critical race theories and penetrating the Law Review, all this is chump change to [Federalists]," observes Berry, of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights. "It's like we were out playing whiffle ball while they were exercising power." The Federalist Society was founded 17 years ago by Yale Law School student Steven G. Calabresi and two counterparts at the University of Chicago School of Law, Lee Liberman and David McIntosh. All three were undergraduates together at Yale. Upset with what they perceived as liberal bias, the three decided to form an organization for conservative law students. Yale professors Robert H. Bork and Ralph K. Winter, both of whom would be appointed to the federal bench by Ronald Reagan, served as advisers to the Yale chapter. In Chicago, future U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia served in a similar capacity. The contacts the three made as students have proven to be invaluable. Calabresi, in addition to clerking for Bork and Winter, clerked for Scalia at the Supreme Court. He is now a law professor at Northwestern University. Liberman gave up a post in the Justice Department also to clerk for Scalia. She is now Lee Liberman Otis and is chief counsel for Sen. Spencer Abraham (R-Mich.), who founded a Federalist Society chapter at Harvard. McIntosh was a special assistant to Ed Meese when he was Reagan's attorney general; he is a three-term Republican Congressman who's considering running for governor of Indiana. In addition to a board of trustees, the society has a board of directors, co-chaired by Calabresi and McIntosh. The Federalist pipeline is a well-oiled old boy -- and sometimes girl -- network. For example, Brent O. Hatch, the son of Sen. Orrin Hatch, clerked for Robert Bork when he was a federal judge in Washington, D.C. After working in the Justice Department, young Hatch was appointed general counsel of the National Endowment for the Humanities at the age of 28. He is treasurer of the Federalist Society's board of directors. The organization has been funded by wealthy conservatives, such as Richard Mellon Scaife, who is vice chair of the Heritage Foundation's board, and another board member, Holland Coors, a member of the conservative Coors family. Many contributions are made through foundations that give to Right-wing causes, including the John M. Olin Foundation in New York, the Sarah Scaife Foundation in Pittsburgh, the Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation of Milwaukee and the Deer Creek Foundation in St. Louis. The Federalists have direct ties to Right-wing think tanks seeking to dismantle affirmative action at the local, state and federal levels. The Center for Individual Rights, which successfully argued the Hopwood case that banned affirmative action at the University of Texas, represents plaintiffs in a lawsuit pending against the University of Michigan and were lawyers for supporters of Proposition 209, the anti-affirmative action measure in California. The Washington Legal Foundation sued the University of Maryland, forcing it to drop its Benjamin Banneker scholarships for African-American scholars; the Southeastern Legal Foundation is leading an all-out assault on affirmative action in Atlanta, and the Institute for Justice led the attack on Lani Guinier, then a University of Pennsylvania law professor, who was President Clinton's first choice to be assistant U.S. attorney general for civil rights. Clint Bolick, the group's vice president, dismissed Guinier as a "quota queen," and the eventual nominee, Deval L. Patrick, as a "quota king." He also led the opposition to the appointment of Bill Lann Lee, who was later named acting assistant attorney general for civil rights. When first lady Hillary Rodham Clinton said that there was a "vast Right-wing conspiracy" afoot that had been hounding her husband since he first announced for president, some Right-wingers almost laughingly dismissed her charges. Special Prosecutor Ken Starr called the comments "nonsense." And Boston Herald columnist Joe Fitzgerald said the first lady had "wandered into paranoia." But information developed by the Institute for Democracy Studies, a nonprofit research and education organization in New York, confirms that the first lady was on the mark. In the executive summary of its report, "The Assault on Affirmative Action: An Organized Challenge to Racial and Gender Justice," the organization notes, "Once a month at the Heritage Foundation, representatives of the nation's leading conservative law groups get together for a 'luncheon.' This so-called Public Interest Legal Group meeting is just one of several monthly gatherings that right-wing law groups hold." The report continues: "These meetings serve the purpose of avoiding duplication of effort, airing future plans, and providing guidance for an appropriate organizational division of labor." In an interview with Emerge, Todd G. Young, director of research and communications for the Atlanta-based Southeastern Legal Foundation, confirms that Right-wing groups collaborate. "We read each other's briefs (as they are filed) and when there are updates published by other groups," he says. "Although we are separate entities, we share some common understandings about the Constitutions and our (mission) statements are really almost identical for the organizations." Of its recent lawsuit against Atlanta's affirmative action program, Young notes: "We're refining the definition of what it means to enjoy equal protection under the law and the first step is to end any government-sanctioned discrimination, such as affirmative action programs or racial preference programs. It's philosophically inconsistent to say it was bad then [in the 1950s and 1960s] but it's OK now." Atlanta Mayor Bill Campbell says it's not OK to discard programs devised to address discrimination against African-Americans. "Conservative legal interest groups, such as the Center for Individual Rights and the Southeastern Legal Foundation, are striking at the very heart of the civil rights gains of the '50s and '60s," explains Campbell. "These groups are, in essence, a homogenized version of the Klan. They may have traded in their sheets for suits and use different language, but it's the same old racism -- just old wine in new bottles." The Federalist Society takes its name from The Federalist papers, 85 articles originally published in New York newspapers between 1787 and 1788. The authors -- Alexander Hamilton, John Jay and James Madison -- were attempting to gain popular support for the adoption of a new Constitution. "Is The Federalist the key to what the Constitution's framers and adopters intended it to mean and how they expected it to function?" asked R. B. Bernstein, a constitutional historian who wrote the foreword to The Federalist, a recent reissue of the papers. "This subset of the original-intent controversy tends to pit many historians, who remain dubious about original-intent arguments, against many legal scholars, who seek a way to limit judicial discretion by anchoring constitutional interpretation in the Constitution's origins." Bernstein argued that the public should not look at the essays, all written under one pen name, as the definitive word on how the Constitution should be interpreted. "Jay was not a delegate to the Federal Convention, which framed the Constitution...[Hamilton] left the Convention in July, not returning until two weeks before its close in September. And Madison...found himself outvoted on a host of major issues," Bernstein noted. Moreover, as The Federalist papers became the classic commentary on the Constitution, the three men publicly identified themselves as the authors. Even that was not without controversy. Before his ill-fated duel with Aaron Burr, Hamilton tried to take credit for writing papers 18-20, 49-58 and 62-63. Madison made an identical claim of authorship, which was verified through a computer analysis in 1964. The most damning fact about today's Federalists is that they advocate a limited role for the federal government, while the early founders were interested in establishing a strong central government. Some civil rights leaders, including Theodore M. Shaw, associate director-counsel of the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund Inc., view the rhetoric of the modern-day Federalists as smokescreen for an assault on civil rights. "It's ideologically out of the mainstream and a part of the radically conservative agenda and the radically conservative agenda has never served the interest of African-Americans," Shaw says. Hilary O. Shelton, Washington bureau chief of the NAACP, is less charitable: "They are not conservative. They are very consistent with the Council of Conservative Citizens," a White supremacy group that has featured Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott (R-Miss.) and Rep. Bob Barr (R-Ga.) as speakers. Surprisingly, some of the harshest criticism of Federalist Society members has come from Republicans. For example, former Attorney General Meese, a main player in the Federalist movement, has been criticized by some of his colleagues in the Reagan administration. According to The Washington Post, James A. Baker III and Michael K. Deaver referred to Meese as the "Big Bigot," and conservatives referred to his top assistant, T. Kenneth Cribb Jr., as the "Baby Bigot." Cribb sits on the board of directors of the Federalist Society and is a trustee of the Scaife Foundation, a major contributor to the Federalist Society and other Right-wing causes. Graglia, who has taught at the University of Texas since 1966, touched off a controversy two years ago, when he said, "Blacks and Mexican Americans are not academically competitive with Whites in selective institutions." According to Graglia, "It is the result primarily of cultural effects. Failure is not looked upon with disgrace." He maintains his membership in the Federalist Society. "They certainly are unenthusiastic about civil rights laws," he says of his organization. "Richard Epstein [a law professor at the University of Chicago] thinks we will be better off if civil rights laws were all repealed. These people do believe, as I believe, that so-called civil rights have gone too far and are not civil rights at all." Because so many of the Federalist Society members are seen as opposing civil rights, some people are not quick to accept their professed interest in color-blind justice. U.S. Appeals Court Judge Stephen Reinhardt of the 9th Circuit observes, "We had the Civil War over states' rights. There is no question we are going back to the pre-Civil War view of governments." Former federal Judge Lawrence Walsh puts it more bluntly. "The impression I have is they are trying to return to the 18th century and undo the work of the Supreme Court since the New Deal," Walsh says. "And I think it is wrong to put someone on the court who has a pre-commitment with a political dogma, whether it's the Ku Klux Klan or the Federalist Society." -- Additional reporting by Lottie L. Joiner Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Tue Jun 27 12:12:16 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2017 12:12:16 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] News Gazoo for Feddie Yale Law Mafia Killer Koh Mazzone In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: The University of Illinois College of Law-Hijacking Justice Everyday. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2017 7:06 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson ; Mildred O'brien Subject: RE: News Gazoo for Feddie Yale Law Mafia Killer Koh Mazzone "The impression I have is they are trying to return to the 18th century and undo the work of the Supreme Court since the New Deal," Walsh says. "And I think it is wrong to put someone on the court who has a pre-commitment with a political dogma, whether it's the Ku Klux Klan or the Federalist Society." Yeah, the Feddie Mazzone teaching Conned Law at our Waffen-SS Law School and inviting Killer Koh to come out here and pollute and poison our Good Community. Judge Lawrence Walsh was Independent Counsel/Prosecutor in the Iran-Contra Scandal by appointment of President Reagan; prosecuted the Mob with Dewey in New York; Deputy Attorney General under Eisenhower; Pillar of the Republican Party; President of the American Bar Association; Federal District Judge; Partner in the New York Law Firm of Davis, Polk & Wardwell, etc. RIP. fab Walsh on Federalist Society According to the conventional wisdom, we were in a double bind: The judges appointed by Democratic presidents were supposedly most concerned with protecting the constitutional rights of persons prosecuted for crimes, while most of the other judges owed their appointments to Ronald Reagan or George Bush, who had stated publicly and emphatically that they hoped that North would not be convicted. Over the years, I had often found such simplistic views to be wrong. Most judges overcome the prejudices and alliances they had when appointed to the federal bench. During my three and one-half years on the federal district court in New York, I had experienced the merging process by which new judges are absorbed into their courts. My hard-line political and professional views had moderated during lunchroom conversations with Learned Hand, Jerome Frank, and Harold Medina and had dissolved after a couple of my decisions had been reversed on appeal. But I was concerned about the continuing political allegiance of Republican judges as manifested in the Federalist Society. Although the organization was not openly partisan, its dogma was political. It reminded me of the communist front groups of the 1940s and l950s, whose members were committed to the communist cause and subject to communist direction but were not card-carrying members of the Communist Party. In calling for the narrow construction of constitutional grants of governmental power, the Federalist Society seemed to speak for right-wing Republicans. I was especially troubled that one of White House Counsel Boyden Gray's assistants had openly declared that no one who was not a member of the Federalist Society had received a judicial appointment from President Bush. walsh.fed >From Iran-contra Independent Counsel Lawrence Walsh, Firewall. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2017 6:48 AM To: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; Karen Aram >; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson >; Mildred O'brien > Subject: News Gazoo for Feddie Yale Law Mafia Killer Koh Mazzone Sure. Yale Law Mafia Mazzone was on the Committee that invited Yale Law Mafia Killer Koh to come out here and pollute and poison our Good Community despite my best efforts to stop them. Yale Law Mafia Mazzone is also a Member of the Federalist Society, Hijacking Justice Everyday. 1. The Supremes upheld Trump's Muslim Ban in violation of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. 2. The Supremes have further eroded the Separation of Church and State in violation of the First Amendment. And it appears the Supremes are going to tolerate public bigotry and discrimination against LGBT in the name of "religious freedom" despite the fact we would never permit this to be done against Blacks, Jews, Catholics, etc except here on Campus where Wise {sic!} and the Zionists Ethnically Cleansed Native Americans out of UIUC. 3. We are all going to be up the proverbial creek without a paddle if Kennedy retires and Trump gets to replace him with another hard-line, doctrinaire religious fundamentalist Federalist Society Member like Gorsuch-Hijacking Justice every day along with Mazzone who "teaches" Conned Law at our Waffen-SS Law School. Fab. -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis [mailto:FBOYLE at law.uiuc.edu] Sent: Friday, September 17, 1999 6:35 PM To: undisclosed-recipients Subject: HIJACKING JUSTICE:FEDDIES S P E C I A L R E P O R T H I J A C K I N G J U S T I C E The Federalist Society, a Right-wing network of lawyers, judges and supporters, is undoing civil rights and other gains made through the courts BY GEORGE E. CURRY & TREVOR W. COLEMAN EMERGE, OCTOBER 1999 WHEN BROWN VS. BOARD OF EDUCATION WAS BEING ARGUED, a clerk to U.S. Supreme Court Justice Robert Jackson suggested that the court should rule against the plaintiffs in the landmark school desegregation case. While making the case for maintaining segregated schools, the clerk sent a memo to his boss saying, "It is about time the Court faced the fact that white people in the South don't like the colored people." That clerk was William Rehnquist, now chief justice of the United States Supreme Court. Seeking to put his own ultraconservatives on the Supreme Court with Rehnquist, President Ronald Reagan -- who had appointed more than half of the sitting federal judges by the time he left office -- considered nominating Lino A. Graglia, a controversial University of Texas law professor, as a federal appeals court judge for the 5th Circuit. But the nomination, which had been backed by Attorney General Edwin Meese III, was jettisoned after Graglia acknowledged that he had referred to African-Americans as "pickaninnies." The American Bar Association found the law professor "not qualified" to serve on the federal bench. Reagan did nominate Robert H. Bork, a former Yale law professor, who was on the U.S. Court of Appeals in Washington, D.C. Bork had opposed the 1964 Civil Rights Act, calling it "an unwanted intrusion on the right of individuals to choose with whom to associate." After bitter debate, the Senate rejected his nomination in 1987 by a vote of 58 to 42. Far from fading into the background, Bork, Meese, and to a lesser extent, Graglia, are key players in the Federalist Society, a powerful Right-wing network intent on restricting the power of courts, often at the expense of African-Americans and other people of color, the poor, women and the disadvantaged. The organization actively seeks to limit "judicial activism" and reverse Supreme Court landmark rulings since the New Deal, especially those issued in the 1960s and '70s. Special targets include the 1966 Miranda decision that provides certain rights for suspected criminals, the 1973 Roe vs. Wade ruling legalizing abortion and recent civil rights legislation. Founded in 1982 by three law students, the Federalist Society has grown into one of the most influential institutions in America. Four of the nine members of the U.S. Supreme Court -- Clarence Thomas, William H. Rehnquist, Antonin Scalia and Anthony M. Kennedy -- are close affiliates of the Federalist Society. So are Donald P. Hodel, former president of the Christina Coalition, and special prosecutor Kenneth Starr. The Federalist Society's board of trustees is co-chaired by Bork and U.S. Sen. Orrin Hatch -- one of the most conservative members on Capitol Hill. Other trustees include former Attorney General Meese, William Bradford Reynolds, who was assistant attorney general for civil rights in the Reagan Administration, sought to have court-ordered affirmative action programs overturned, and C. Boyden Gray, former President Bush's chief White House attorney, who opposed the Civil Rights Act of 1991. In a world being reshaped by the Federalist Society, conservative law students have formed chapters on campuses across the nation. After graduation, they clerk for conservative judges and then go on to become high-ranking government officials, partners in major law firms, prosecutors, law school professors and judges at the local, state and federal level. In short, the Federalist Society is on the verge of hijacking the judicial system. "This is more than an attack on affirmative action being spear-headed by the Federalist Society lawyers," observes Francis A. Boyle, a law professor at the University of Illinois. "They want to go beyond getting rid of affirmative action. They want to go back to Brown vs. Board of Education. "We have Justice Antonin Scalia (who advised the Federalist Society at its inception and later hired two of its three founders as his law clerks), who two years ago gave a public lecture at Columbia Law School where he stated if Brown vs. Board of Education was to be presented to him today, he would rule against the plaintiff. In other words, this was a threat that if Brown vs. Board of Education was voted on before the Supreme Court, he would overturn it." That type of thinking disturbs Lawrence E. Walsh. Before becoming president of the American Bar Association in 1975, Walsh chaired an ABA panel that approved President Nixon's choices of federal appeals judges, Clement Haynesworth and G. Harold Carswell, to serve on the Supreme Court. In 1969, the Senate rejected Haynesworth because of conflict-of-interest fears. The following year, Carswell was rejected by the Senate after it was disclosed that he had given a speech as a lawyer expressing his "vigorous belief in the principles of White supremacy." "My concern is there is going to be a cleavage in the courts between the Federalist Society members and nonmembers," says Walsh, a former federal judge. "Anything that perpetuates that kind of ideological cleavage is not good for the unity of the court system. Ideally, it seems to me that judges should avoid memberships [in politically and substantively motivated organizations] but, of course, they don't do that." In fact, the ABA, in one of its publications on judicial independence, concludes: "A judge's impartiality and ability to interpret and apply the laws fairly are integral to the administration of justice." But a judge's membership in an organization -- whether it's the American Civil Liberties Union on the Left or the Federalist Society on the Right -- can influence whether a judge is perceived as being unbiased, a critical element in a judicial system that prides itself on being fair. Harold D. Pope, president of the National Bar Association, says: "People who are opposing the expansion of rights and opportunities for all people in this society we feel are working against America's best interest. We would hope that all jurists, no matter what their prior political persuasion, would deal objectively with the facts of law as they come before them, as they were sworn to do so when they first sat on the bench." The expansion of the Federalist Society, which has adopted a silhouette of James Madison as its symbol, comes at a time when the legal community is worried about a loss of public confidence. An ABA special committee on judicial independence issued a report in August titled "Protecting the Bulwark of the Republic: Ensuring Public Support of the Judicial Process." The report states, "According to the ABA survey, only about half of the respondents believed that our justice system treats men and women equally. Even fewer believed that courts treat members of different ethnic groups or wealthy and poor people the same." The report continues, "As [former] ABA President [Philip S.] Anderson recently stated: "We must work on this problem for as long as it takes to make our profession equally open and our system of justice equally responsive to all members of our society, regardless of color. This is the ultimate challenge to the integrity of the rule of law in America.'" But the Federalist Society is interested in a challenge of a different kind. To its credit, the organization operates with an open and very public agenda. On its web page, for example, it lays out its conservative agenda. "The Federalist Society for Law and Public Policy Studies is a group of conservatives and libertarians interested in the current state of the legal order. It is founded on the principles that the state exists to preserve freedom, that the separation of governmental powers is central to our Constitution, and that it is emphatically the province and duty of the judiciary to say what the law is, not what it should be. The Society seeks both to promote an awareness of these principles and to further their application through its activities." Even conservative write Michael Lind would call this 19th-century view "the Confederate theory of the Constitution." Speakers at one national Federalist Society-sponsored lawyers convention proposed far-reaching judicial reforms that included the abolition of judicial review, limiting the powers of federal courts and stripping the Supreme Court of jurisdiction over certain matters. Mary Frances Berry, chair of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, is worried about more than theory. "What is scary about the Federalist Society is that it is antiquated and atavistic," she says. "Their views on natural law, libertarianism and the limited power of government to respond when people are being discriminated against is scary -- for African-Americans, especially. The more people you have who expose those views on the court, the more dangerous it becomes for every one of our lives." In this book, Firewall: The Iran-Contra Conspiracy and Cover Up, Walsh writes: "In calling for the narrow construction of constitutional grants of governmental power, the Federalist Society seemed to speak for right-wing Republicans. I was especially troubled that one of White House Counsel Boyden Gray's assistants had openly declared that no one who was not a member of the Federalist Society had received a judicial appointment from President Bush." Brian W. Jones, a San Francisco lawyer and member of the Federalist Society, believes that his group is being maligned. "I reject out of hand that Federalists are hostile to civil rights," says Jones, an African-American who was deputy legal affairs secretary to California Gov. Pete Wilson and former counsel to Hatch's Senate Judiciary Committee. "Most members of the Federalist Society would agree that the government has no business making racial distinctions of any kind among its citizens. I would argue that is a very credible view of civil rights. "On civil rights and civil liberty issues, Federalist Society judges tend to have a more limited view of the federal government's authority to respond to a whole range of questions. For conservatives, the first question with any inquiry into responding to social problems is: Where does the authority lie, with the federal government or state and local governments?" Another African-American, Gerald Reynolds, is vice chairman of membership for the Federalist Society. "There are some people who embrace this principle of racial neutrality," says the Kansas City, Mo., lawyer. "This debate flows from principles and not from animosity toward Blacks." The national office of the Federalist Society in Washington, D.C., refused to provide the names of judges on its membership list. However, some of the organization's records were obtained by Emerge from other sources. An examination of Federalist Society documents for 1997 and 1998, the most current information available at press time, reveals the extent that the group has penetrated the courts. When looking at the board of directors of local chapters, officers, their advisory panels and membership lists, it is clear that when one goes to court seeking justice, he or she is increasingly likely to have a judge affiliated with the Federalist Society handling the case. During the period studied, that was true whether one was entering a courtroom in New York, Michigan or Alabama. (The titles of persons listed hereafter reflect the positions they held at the time the records were compiled by the Federalist Society; some of the judges have since been elevated to a higher court.) In New York state, judges serving as officers, directors or advisers to the local chapters included Thomas P. Griesa, chief judge of the U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York, as well as District Judges Shirley Wohl Kram, Lawrence M. McKenna and John E. Sprizzo. A U.S. Appeals Court Judge for the Second Circuit, Dennis G. Jacobs, was also among that group. The Long Island advisory board included U.S. District Judge Michael Fiechter, U.S. Court of International Trade Judge Gregory W. Carman and State Supreme Court Judges Jack Dunne and Ute Lally. In Michigan, judges aligned with the Federalist Society included James L. Ryan and Richard F. Suhreinrich of the U.S. Court of Appeals; Federal District Judges Paul V. Gadola, David W. McKeague, Gerald E. Rosen and Lawrence P. Zatkoff; and U.S. Magistrate Judge Virginia M. Morgan. State Supreme Court Justices Clifford W. Taylor and Elizabeth A. Weaver were listed as advisers to the Detroit chapter. So were Maura D. Corrigan, chief judge of the Michigan Court of Appeals, along with fellow judges Stephen J. Markman, Henry W. Saad, and Robert Young Jr. (an African-American who has since been elevated to the Michigan Supreme Court). The chief judge of the Washtenaw County Circuit Court in Grand Rapids, Kurtis T. Wilder (another African-Americana who is now on the Michigan Court of Appeals), and Wayne County Circuit Judges Sean Cox, Michael J. Talbot and Brian Zahra helped complete the list. Local chapters in Alabama were advised by Perry O. Hooper Sr., chief justice of the Supreme Court of Alabama, along with Associate Justices J. Gorman Houston, Harold See and A. Hugh Maddox. U.S. Sen. Jefferson B. Sessions III also supported the organization. (Sessions was nominated to become a federal judge in 1986 but was blocked when it was disclosed that he had called the NAACP and the American Civil Liberties Union "un-American" and "communist-inspired," and said they "force civil rights down the throats of people." Referring to the Ku Klux Klan, he reportedly said, "I used to think they're OK," until he learned that some Klansmen were "pot smokers." Sessions contended the remarks were either made in jest or had been misinterpreted.) Additional supporters listed included Randall T. Shepard, chief justice of the Indiana Supreme Court; Craig Enoch, chief justice of the Texas Supreme Court; South Carolina Attorney General Charles Molony Condon; Alabama Attorney General William Pryor (who has links on his web page to the Federalist Society and the conservative Washington Legal Foundation), Pennsylvania Attorney General D. Michael Fisher; Indianapolis Mayor Stephen Goldsmith and Clarence Thomas' wife, Virginia, a former aide to House majority leader Richard Armey, and who now works for the Heritage Foundation. As the presiding officials in courts, judges wield broad power. For example, U.S. District Judge Neal B. Biggers Jr., who sits on the advisory board of the Mississippi chapter of the Federalist Society, presided over the Ayers desegregation case. In 1975, Jake Ayers Sr., a Mississippi sharecropper, sued the state on behalf of his son, charging that the state's higher education system discriminated against African-Americans and historically Black colleges. In 1987, Biggers upheld the state College Board's contention that Mississippi's higher education system was no longer racially discriminatory. The Supreme Court reversed Biggers in 1991 and ordered him to remove any vestiges of past discrimination. The power of the Federalist Society is not limited to the judiciary, which would be concern enough. Its tentacles extend deep into corporate America. Listed members of its business advisory council included John Stewart Bryan, III, chairman, president and C.E.O. of Media General Cable; John G. Medlin Jr., board chair of Wachovia Corp., an interstate bank holding company; Geneva Steel C.E.O. Joseph Cannon and Robert L. Strickland, chairman of Lowe's Companies. Also affiliated with the Federalist Society are Brian J. Brille and David Panton of Morgan Stanley financial services in New York; William Haraf of Bank of America in San Francisco; Chris Ekren of Sony Corp. in San Jose, Calif.; Frank Blake of General Electric in Schenechtedy, N.Y.; Philip R. Lochner Jr., senior vice president, Time Warner Inc. in New York; William Kemp of General Motors in Warren, Mich.; Edward Whelan of GTE Corp.'s Washington office; David Askin of Exxon Co. in Baytown, Texas; Marsha Rabiteau of Dow Chemical in Midland, Mich.; F. James Tennies, chief administrative officer at Legg Mason for asset management in Baltimore; Jodi Balsam, counsel for operations and litigation for the National Football League and Tom Donahue of Metropolitan Life. Even federal employees in the Clinton administration were included in Federalist Society documents: Paul-Noel Chretien of the Justice Department; Theodore Cooperstein of the FBI; Carol Crawford of the International Trade Commission; Kevin Martin of the Federal Communications Commission and Christopher Holleman of the U.S. Small Business Administration. William Saunders of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights also backs the Society. Many of the nation's blue-chip law firms have attorneys associated with the Federalist Society. Those listed included lawyers in the Washington, D.C. law firms of Arnold and Porter; Covington & Burling; Steptoe & Johnson; Hogan & Hartson; Patton, Boaggs & Blow; and Wilmer, Cutler & Pickering. New York law firms with lawyers associated with the Federalist Society include: Cravath, Swaine & Moore; White & Case and Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison. In Boston, one law firm -- Hale and Door -- has at least 10 attorneys affiliated with the Federalist Society. The list of law professors associated with the society included Ronald A. Cass, dean of Boston University's law school; Michael Young of Columbia University; John Yoo of the University of California at Berkeley; Eugene Volokh of UCLA; Northwestern University professors Gary Lawson, Daniel D. Polsby and Stephen B. Presser; Robert P. George of Princeton; Gerard Bradley of Notre Dame; Gordon B. Baldwin of the University of Wisconsin, Olan B. Lowry of Temple; Johathan Macey and Richard Painter of Cornell; Ronald D. Rotunda of the University of Illinois; Gerald T. Dunn of St. Louis University and Thomas Morgan of George Washington University. The University of Virginia, one of the best law schools in the nation, has quite a few Federalist Society professors or sympathizers on its faculty, including John Norton Moore, Robert Turner, Erika Worth Harris and Lillian BeVier. "People have to understand, whether they like lawyers or not, law schools have an enormous amount of power, whether it's power for good or evil. Unfortunately, what we are seeing under the Federalist Society is law schools and legal education being used to promote racism, bigotry and Right-wing politics. These people believe in the Bell Curve," says Prof. Boyle of the University of Illinois, referring to a controversial theory by Charles Murray and Richard J. Herrnstein about the supposed low intelligence level of some non-Whites. "You have to understand that. Just as the Federalist Society did to the federal judiciary, they are now trying to do to law schools." Boyle and others say this is done by establishing well-endowed law professorships and speaking tours for the true believers. "Where they once were scholars with Right-wing foundations like the Heritage Foundation, American Enterprise Institute and the Cato Institute, they are now getting credentialed as law professors," he notes. No comparable movement exists among progressives, which may explain why civil rights groups and liberals are doing such a feeble job defending affirmative action. "We've got to realize that while we have been dillydallying in law schools with critical race theories and penetrating the Law Review, all this is chump change to [Federalists]," observes Berry, of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights. "It's like we were out playing whiffle ball while they were exercising power." The Federalist Society was founded 17 years ago by Yale Law School student Steven G. Calabresi and two counterparts at the University of Chicago School of Law, Lee Liberman and David McIntosh. All three were undergraduates together at Yale. Upset with what they perceived as liberal bias, the three decided to form an organization for conservative law students. Yale professors Robert H. Bork and Ralph K. Winter, both of whom would be appointed to the federal bench by Ronald Reagan, served as advisers to the Yale chapter. In Chicago, future U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia served in a similar capacity. The contacts the three made as students have proven to be invaluable. Calabresi, in addition to clerking for Bork and Winter, clerked for Scalia at the Supreme Court. He is now a law professor at Northwestern University. Liberman gave up a post in the Justice Department also to clerk for Scalia. She is now Lee Liberman Otis and is chief counsel for Sen. Spencer Abraham (R-Mich.), who founded a Federalist Society chapter at Harvard. McIntosh was a special assistant to Ed Meese when he was Reagan's attorney general; he is a three-term Republican Congressman who's considering running for governor of Indiana. In addition to a board of trustees, the society has a board of directors, co-chaired by Calabresi and McIntosh. The Federalist pipeline is a well-oiled old boy -- and sometimes girl -- network. For example, Brent O. Hatch, the son of Sen. Orrin Hatch, clerked for Robert Bork when he was a federal judge in Washington, D.C. After working in the Justice Department, young Hatch was appointed general counsel of the National Endowment for the Humanities at the age of 28. He is treasurer of the Federalist Society's board of directors. The organization has been funded by wealthy conservatives, such as Richard Mellon Scaife, who is vice chair of the Heritage Foundation's board, and another board member, Holland Coors, a member of the conservative Coors family. Many contributions are made through foundations that give to Right-wing causes, including the John M. Olin Foundation in New York, the Sarah Scaife Foundation in Pittsburgh, the Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation of Milwaukee and the Deer Creek Foundation in St. Louis. The Federalists have direct ties to Right-wing think tanks seeking to dismantle affirmative action at the local, state and federal levels. The Center for Individual Rights, which successfully argued the Hopwood case that banned affirmative action at the University of Texas, represents plaintiffs in a lawsuit pending against the University of Michigan and were lawyers for supporters of Proposition 209, the anti-affirmative action measure in California. The Washington Legal Foundation sued the University of Maryland, forcing it to drop its Benjamin Banneker scholarships for African-American scholars; the Southeastern Legal Foundation is leading an all-out assault on affirmative action in Atlanta, and the Institute for Justice led the attack on Lani Guinier, then a University of Pennsylvania law professor, who was President Clinton's first choice to be assistant U.S. attorney general for civil rights. Clint Bolick, the group's vice president, dismissed Guinier as a "quota queen," and the eventual nominee, Deval L. Patrick, as a "quota king." He also led the opposition to the appointment of Bill Lann Lee, who was later named acting assistant attorney general for civil rights. When first lady Hillary Rodham Clinton said that there was a "vast Right-wing conspiracy" afoot that had been hounding her husband since he first announced for president, some Right-wingers almost laughingly dismissed her charges. Special Prosecutor Ken Starr called the comments "nonsense." And Boston Herald columnist Joe Fitzgerald said the first lady had "wandered into paranoia." But information developed by the Institute for Democracy Studies, a nonprofit research and education organization in New York, confirms that the first lady was on the mark. In the executive summary of its report, "The Assault on Affirmative Action: An Organized Challenge to Racial and Gender Justice," the organization notes, "Once a month at the Heritage Foundation, representatives of the nation's leading conservative law groups get together for a 'luncheon.' This so-called Public Interest Legal Group meeting is just one of several monthly gatherings that right-wing law groups hold." The report continues: "These meetings serve the purpose of avoiding duplication of effort, airing future plans, and providing guidance for an appropriate organizational division of labor." In an interview with Emerge, Todd G. Young, director of research and communications for the Atlanta-based Southeastern Legal Foundation, confirms that Right-wing groups collaborate. "We read each other's briefs (as they are filed) and when there are updates published by other groups," he says. "Although we are separate entities, we share some common understandings about the Constitutions and our (mission) statements are really almost identical for the organizations." Of its recent lawsuit against Atlanta's affirmative action program, Young notes: "We're refining the definition of what it means to enjoy equal protection under the law and the first step is to end any government-sanctioned discrimination, such as affirmative action programs or racial preference programs. It's philosophically inconsistent to say it was bad then [in the 1950s and 1960s] but it's OK now." Atlanta Mayor Bill Campbell says it's not OK to discard programs devised to address discrimination against African-Americans. "Conservative legal interest groups, such as the Center for Individual Rights and the Southeastern Legal Foundation, are striking at the very heart of the civil rights gains of the '50s and '60s," explains Campbell. "These groups are, in essence, a homogenized version of the Klan. They may have traded in their sheets for suits and use different language, but it's the same old racism -- just old wine in new bottles." The Federalist Society takes its name from The Federalist papers, 85 articles originally published in New York newspapers between 1787 and 1788. The authors -- Alexander Hamilton, John Jay and James Madison -- were attempting to gain popular support for the adoption of a new Constitution. "Is The Federalist the key to what the Constitution's framers and adopters intended it to mean and how they expected it to function?" asked R. B. Bernstein, a constitutional historian who wrote the foreword to The Federalist, a recent reissue of the papers. "This subset of the original-intent controversy tends to pit many historians, who remain dubious about original-intent arguments, against many legal scholars, who seek a way to limit judicial discretion by anchoring constitutional interpretation in the Constitution's origins." Bernstein argued that the public should not look at the essays, all written under one pen name, as the definitive word on how the Constitution should be interpreted. "Jay was not a delegate to the Federal Convention, which framed the Constitution...[Hamilton] left the Convention in July, not returning until two weeks before its close in September. And Madison...found himself outvoted on a host of major issues," Bernstein noted. Moreover, as The Federalist papers became the classic commentary on the Constitution, the three men publicly identified themselves as the authors. Even that was not without controversy. Before his ill-fated duel with Aaron Burr, Hamilton tried to take credit for writing papers 18-20, 49-58 and 62-63. Madison made an identical claim of authorship, which was verified through a computer analysis in 1964. The most damning fact about today's Federalists is that they advocate a limited role for the federal government, while the early founders were interested in establishing a strong central government. Some civil rights leaders, including Theodore M. Shaw, associate director-counsel of the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund Inc., view the rhetoric of the modern-day Federalists as smokescreen for an assault on civil rights. "It's ideologically out of the mainstream and a part of the radically conservative agenda and the radically conservative agenda has never served the interest of African-Americans," Shaw says. Hilary O. Shelton, Washington bureau chief of the NAACP, is less charitable: "They are not conservative. They are very consistent with the Council of Conservative Citizens," a White supremacy group that has featured Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott (R-Miss.) and Rep. Bob Barr (R-Ga.) as speakers. Surprisingly, some of the harshest criticism of Federalist Society members has come from Republicans. For example, former Attorney General Meese, a main player in the Federalist movement, has been criticized by some of his colleagues in the Reagan administration. According to The Washington Post, James A. Baker III and Michael K. Deaver referred to Meese as the "Big Bigot," and conservatives referred to his top assistant, T. Kenneth Cribb Jr., as the "Baby Bigot." Cribb sits on the board of directors of the Federalist Society and is a trustee of the Scaife Foundation, a major contributor to the Federalist Society and other Right-wing causes. Graglia, who has taught at the University of Texas since 1966, touched off a controversy two years ago, when he said, "Blacks and Mexican Americans are not academically competitive with Whites in selective institutions." According to Graglia, "It is the result primarily of cultural effects. Failure is not looked upon with disgrace." He maintains his membership in the Federalist Society. "They certainly are unenthusiastic about civil rights laws," he says of his organization. "Richard Epstein [a law professor at the University of Chicago] thinks we will be better off if civil rights laws were all repealed. These people do believe, as I believe, that so-called civil rights have gone too far and are not civil rights at all." Because so many of the Federalist Society members are seen as opposing civil rights, some people are not quick to accept their professed interest in color-blind justice. U.S. Appeals Court Judge Stephen Reinhardt of the 9th Circuit observes, "We had the Civil War over states' rights. There is no question we are going back to the pre-Civil War view of governments." Former federal Judge Lawrence Walsh puts it more bluntly. "The impression I have is they are trying to return to the 18th century and undo the work of the Supreme Court since the New Deal," Walsh says. "And I think it is wrong to put someone on the court who has a pre-commitment with a political dogma, whether it's the Ku Klux Klan or the Federalist Society." -- Additional reporting by Lottie L. Joiner Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Tue Jun 27 12:12:16 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2017 12:12:16 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] News Gazoo for Feddie Yale Law Mafia Killer Koh Mazzone In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: The University of Illinois College of Law-Hijacking Justice Everyday. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2017 7:06 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson ; Mildred O'brien Subject: RE: News Gazoo for Feddie Yale Law Mafia Killer Koh Mazzone "The impression I have is they are trying to return to the 18th century and undo the work of the Supreme Court since the New Deal," Walsh says. "And I think it is wrong to put someone on the court who has a pre-commitment with a political dogma, whether it's the Ku Klux Klan or the Federalist Society." Yeah, the Feddie Mazzone teaching Conned Law at our Waffen-SS Law School and inviting Killer Koh to come out here and pollute and poison our Good Community. Judge Lawrence Walsh was Independent Counsel/Prosecutor in the Iran-Contra Scandal by appointment of President Reagan; prosecuted the Mob with Dewey in New York; Deputy Attorney General under Eisenhower; Pillar of the Republican Party; President of the American Bar Association; Federal District Judge; Partner in the New York Law Firm of Davis, Polk & Wardwell, etc. RIP. fab Walsh on Federalist Society According to the conventional wisdom, we were in a double bind: The judges appointed by Democratic presidents were supposedly most concerned with protecting the constitutional rights of persons prosecuted for crimes, while most of the other judges owed their appointments to Ronald Reagan or George Bush, who had stated publicly and emphatically that they hoped that North would not be convicted. Over the years, I had often found such simplistic views to be wrong. Most judges overcome the prejudices and alliances they had when appointed to the federal bench. During my three and one-half years on the federal district court in New York, I had experienced the merging process by which new judges are absorbed into their courts. My hard-line political and professional views had moderated during lunchroom conversations with Learned Hand, Jerome Frank, and Harold Medina and had dissolved after a couple of my decisions had been reversed on appeal. But I was concerned about the continuing political allegiance of Republican judges as manifested in the Federalist Society. Although the organization was not openly partisan, its dogma was political. It reminded me of the communist front groups of the 1940s and l950s, whose members were committed to the communist cause and subject to communist direction but were not card-carrying members of the Communist Party. In calling for the narrow construction of constitutional grants of governmental power, the Federalist Society seemed to speak for right-wing Republicans. I was especially troubled that one of White House Counsel Boyden Gray's assistants had openly declared that no one who was not a member of the Federalist Society had received a judicial appointment from President Bush. walsh.fed >From Iran-contra Independent Counsel Lawrence Walsh, Firewall. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2017 6:48 AM To: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; Karen Aram >; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson >; Mildred O'brien > Subject: News Gazoo for Feddie Yale Law Mafia Killer Koh Mazzone Sure. Yale Law Mafia Mazzone was on the Committee that invited Yale Law Mafia Killer Koh to come out here and pollute and poison our Good Community despite my best efforts to stop them. Yale Law Mafia Mazzone is also a Member of the Federalist Society, Hijacking Justice Everyday. 1. The Supremes upheld Trump's Muslim Ban in violation of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. 2. The Supremes have further eroded the Separation of Church and State in violation of the First Amendment. And it appears the Supremes are going to tolerate public bigotry and discrimination against LGBT in the name of "religious freedom" despite the fact we would never permit this to be done against Blacks, Jews, Catholics, etc except here on Campus where Wise {sic!} and the Zionists Ethnically Cleansed Native Americans out of UIUC. 3. We are all going to be up the proverbial creek without a paddle if Kennedy retires and Trump gets to replace him with another hard-line, doctrinaire religious fundamentalist Federalist Society Member like Gorsuch-Hijacking Justice every day along with Mazzone who "teaches" Conned Law at our Waffen-SS Law School. Fab. -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis [mailto:FBOYLE at law.uiuc.edu] Sent: Friday, September 17, 1999 6:35 PM To: undisclosed-recipients Subject: HIJACKING JUSTICE:FEDDIES S P E C I A L R E P O R T H I J A C K I N G J U S T I C E The Federalist Society, a Right-wing network of lawyers, judges and supporters, is undoing civil rights and other gains made through the courts BY GEORGE E. CURRY & TREVOR W. COLEMAN EMERGE, OCTOBER 1999 WHEN BROWN VS. BOARD OF EDUCATION WAS BEING ARGUED, a clerk to U.S. Supreme Court Justice Robert Jackson suggested that the court should rule against the plaintiffs in the landmark school desegregation case. While making the case for maintaining segregated schools, the clerk sent a memo to his boss saying, "It is about time the Court faced the fact that white people in the South don't like the colored people." That clerk was William Rehnquist, now chief justice of the United States Supreme Court. Seeking to put his own ultraconservatives on the Supreme Court with Rehnquist, President Ronald Reagan -- who had appointed more than half of the sitting federal judges by the time he left office -- considered nominating Lino A. Graglia, a controversial University of Texas law professor, as a federal appeals court judge for the 5th Circuit. But the nomination, which had been backed by Attorney General Edwin Meese III, was jettisoned after Graglia acknowledged that he had referred to African-Americans as "pickaninnies." The American Bar Association found the law professor "not qualified" to serve on the federal bench. Reagan did nominate Robert H. Bork, a former Yale law professor, who was on the U.S. Court of Appeals in Washington, D.C. Bork had opposed the 1964 Civil Rights Act, calling it "an unwanted intrusion on the right of individuals to choose with whom to associate." After bitter debate, the Senate rejected his nomination in 1987 by a vote of 58 to 42. Far from fading into the background, Bork, Meese, and to a lesser extent, Graglia, are key players in the Federalist Society, a powerful Right-wing network intent on restricting the power of courts, often at the expense of African-Americans and other people of color, the poor, women and the disadvantaged. The organization actively seeks to limit "judicial activism" and reverse Supreme Court landmark rulings since the New Deal, especially those issued in the 1960s and '70s. Special targets include the 1966 Miranda decision that provides certain rights for suspected criminals, the 1973 Roe vs. Wade ruling legalizing abortion and recent civil rights legislation. Founded in 1982 by three law students, the Federalist Society has grown into one of the most influential institutions in America. Four of the nine members of the U.S. Supreme Court -- Clarence Thomas, William H. Rehnquist, Antonin Scalia and Anthony M. Kennedy -- are close affiliates of the Federalist Society. So are Donald P. Hodel, former president of the Christina Coalition, and special prosecutor Kenneth Starr. The Federalist Society's board of trustees is co-chaired by Bork and U.S. Sen. Orrin Hatch -- one of the most conservative members on Capitol Hill. Other trustees include former Attorney General Meese, William Bradford Reynolds, who was assistant attorney general for civil rights in the Reagan Administration, sought to have court-ordered affirmative action programs overturned, and C. Boyden Gray, former President Bush's chief White House attorney, who opposed the Civil Rights Act of 1991. In a world being reshaped by the Federalist Society, conservative law students have formed chapters on campuses across the nation. After graduation, they clerk for conservative judges and then go on to become high-ranking government officials, partners in major law firms, prosecutors, law school professors and judges at the local, state and federal level. In short, the Federalist Society is on the verge of hijacking the judicial system. "This is more than an attack on affirmative action being spear-headed by the Federalist Society lawyers," observes Francis A. Boyle, a law professor at the University of Illinois. "They want to go beyond getting rid of affirmative action. They want to go back to Brown vs. Board of Education. "We have Justice Antonin Scalia (who advised the Federalist Society at its inception and later hired two of its three founders as his law clerks), who two years ago gave a public lecture at Columbia Law School where he stated if Brown vs. Board of Education was to be presented to him today, he would rule against the plaintiff. In other words, this was a threat that if Brown vs. Board of Education was voted on before the Supreme Court, he would overturn it." That type of thinking disturbs Lawrence E. Walsh. Before becoming president of the American Bar Association in 1975, Walsh chaired an ABA panel that approved President Nixon's choices of federal appeals judges, Clement Haynesworth and G. Harold Carswell, to serve on the Supreme Court. In 1969, the Senate rejected Haynesworth because of conflict-of-interest fears. The following year, Carswell was rejected by the Senate after it was disclosed that he had given a speech as a lawyer expressing his "vigorous belief in the principles of White supremacy." "My concern is there is going to be a cleavage in the courts between the Federalist Society members and nonmembers," says Walsh, a former federal judge. "Anything that perpetuates that kind of ideological cleavage is not good for the unity of the court system. Ideally, it seems to me that judges should avoid memberships [in politically and substantively motivated organizations] but, of course, they don't do that." In fact, the ABA, in one of its publications on judicial independence, concludes: "A judge's impartiality and ability to interpret and apply the laws fairly are integral to the administration of justice." But a judge's membership in an organization -- whether it's the American Civil Liberties Union on the Left or the Federalist Society on the Right -- can influence whether a judge is perceived as being unbiased, a critical element in a judicial system that prides itself on being fair. Harold D. Pope, president of the National Bar Association, says: "People who are opposing the expansion of rights and opportunities for all people in this society we feel are working against America's best interest. We would hope that all jurists, no matter what their prior political persuasion, would deal objectively with the facts of law as they come before them, as they were sworn to do so when they first sat on the bench." The expansion of the Federalist Society, which has adopted a silhouette of James Madison as its symbol, comes at a time when the legal community is worried about a loss of public confidence. An ABA special committee on judicial independence issued a report in August titled "Protecting the Bulwark of the Republic: Ensuring Public Support of the Judicial Process." The report states, "According to the ABA survey, only about half of the respondents believed that our justice system treats men and women equally. Even fewer believed that courts treat members of different ethnic groups or wealthy and poor people the same." The report continues, "As [former] ABA President [Philip S.] Anderson recently stated: "We must work on this problem for as long as it takes to make our profession equally open and our system of justice equally responsive to all members of our society, regardless of color. This is the ultimate challenge to the integrity of the rule of law in America.'" But the Federalist Society is interested in a challenge of a different kind. To its credit, the organization operates with an open and very public agenda. On its web page, for example, it lays out its conservative agenda. "The Federalist Society for Law and Public Policy Studies is a group of conservatives and libertarians interested in the current state of the legal order. It is founded on the principles that the state exists to preserve freedom, that the separation of governmental powers is central to our Constitution, and that it is emphatically the province and duty of the judiciary to say what the law is, not what it should be. The Society seeks both to promote an awareness of these principles and to further their application through its activities." Even conservative write Michael Lind would call this 19th-century view "the Confederate theory of the Constitution." Speakers at one national Federalist Society-sponsored lawyers convention proposed far-reaching judicial reforms that included the abolition of judicial review, limiting the powers of federal courts and stripping the Supreme Court of jurisdiction over certain matters. Mary Frances Berry, chair of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, is worried about more than theory. "What is scary about the Federalist Society is that it is antiquated and atavistic," she says. "Their views on natural law, libertarianism and the limited power of government to respond when people are being discriminated against is scary -- for African-Americans, especially. The more people you have who expose those views on the court, the more dangerous it becomes for every one of our lives." In this book, Firewall: The Iran-Contra Conspiracy and Cover Up, Walsh writes: "In calling for the narrow construction of constitutional grants of governmental power, the Federalist Society seemed to speak for right-wing Republicans. I was especially troubled that one of White House Counsel Boyden Gray's assistants had openly declared that no one who was not a member of the Federalist Society had received a judicial appointment from President Bush." Brian W. Jones, a San Francisco lawyer and member of the Federalist Society, believes that his group is being maligned. "I reject out of hand that Federalists are hostile to civil rights," says Jones, an African-American who was deputy legal affairs secretary to California Gov. Pete Wilson and former counsel to Hatch's Senate Judiciary Committee. "Most members of the Federalist Society would agree that the government has no business making racial distinctions of any kind among its citizens. I would argue that is a very credible view of civil rights. "On civil rights and civil liberty issues, Federalist Society judges tend to have a more limited view of the federal government's authority to respond to a whole range of questions. For conservatives, the first question with any inquiry into responding to social problems is: Where does the authority lie, with the federal government or state and local governments?" Another African-American, Gerald Reynolds, is vice chairman of membership for the Federalist Society. "There are some people who embrace this principle of racial neutrality," says the Kansas City, Mo., lawyer. "This debate flows from principles and not from animosity toward Blacks." The national office of the Federalist Society in Washington, D.C., refused to provide the names of judges on its membership list. However, some of the organization's records were obtained by Emerge from other sources. An examination of Federalist Society documents for 1997 and 1998, the most current information available at press time, reveals the extent that the group has penetrated the courts. When looking at the board of directors of local chapters, officers, their advisory panels and membership lists, it is clear that when one goes to court seeking justice, he or she is increasingly likely to have a judge affiliated with the Federalist Society handling the case. During the period studied, that was true whether one was entering a courtroom in New York, Michigan or Alabama. (The titles of persons listed hereafter reflect the positions they held at the time the records were compiled by the Federalist Society; some of the judges have since been elevated to a higher court.) In New York state, judges serving as officers, directors or advisers to the local chapters included Thomas P. Griesa, chief judge of the U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York, as well as District Judges Shirley Wohl Kram, Lawrence M. McKenna and John E. Sprizzo. A U.S. Appeals Court Judge for the Second Circuit, Dennis G. Jacobs, was also among that group. The Long Island advisory board included U.S. District Judge Michael Fiechter, U.S. Court of International Trade Judge Gregory W. Carman and State Supreme Court Judges Jack Dunne and Ute Lally. In Michigan, judges aligned with the Federalist Society included James L. Ryan and Richard F. Suhreinrich of the U.S. Court of Appeals; Federal District Judges Paul V. Gadola, David W. McKeague, Gerald E. Rosen and Lawrence P. Zatkoff; and U.S. Magistrate Judge Virginia M. Morgan. State Supreme Court Justices Clifford W. Taylor and Elizabeth A. Weaver were listed as advisers to the Detroit chapter. So were Maura D. Corrigan, chief judge of the Michigan Court of Appeals, along with fellow judges Stephen J. Markman, Henry W. Saad, and Robert Young Jr. (an African-American who has since been elevated to the Michigan Supreme Court). The chief judge of the Washtenaw County Circuit Court in Grand Rapids, Kurtis T. Wilder (another African-Americana who is now on the Michigan Court of Appeals), and Wayne County Circuit Judges Sean Cox, Michael J. Talbot and Brian Zahra helped complete the list. Local chapters in Alabama were advised by Perry O. Hooper Sr., chief justice of the Supreme Court of Alabama, along with Associate Justices J. Gorman Houston, Harold See and A. Hugh Maddox. U.S. Sen. Jefferson B. Sessions III also supported the organization. (Sessions was nominated to become a federal judge in 1986 but was blocked when it was disclosed that he had called the NAACP and the American Civil Liberties Union "un-American" and "communist-inspired," and said they "force civil rights down the throats of people." Referring to the Ku Klux Klan, he reportedly said, "I used to think they're OK," until he learned that some Klansmen were "pot smokers." Sessions contended the remarks were either made in jest or had been misinterpreted.) Additional supporters listed included Randall T. Shepard, chief justice of the Indiana Supreme Court; Craig Enoch, chief justice of the Texas Supreme Court; South Carolina Attorney General Charles Molony Condon; Alabama Attorney General William Pryor (who has links on his web page to the Federalist Society and the conservative Washington Legal Foundation), Pennsylvania Attorney General D. Michael Fisher; Indianapolis Mayor Stephen Goldsmith and Clarence Thomas' wife, Virginia, a former aide to House majority leader Richard Armey, and who now works for the Heritage Foundation. As the presiding officials in courts, judges wield broad power. For example, U.S. District Judge Neal B. Biggers Jr., who sits on the advisory board of the Mississippi chapter of the Federalist Society, presided over the Ayers desegregation case. In 1975, Jake Ayers Sr., a Mississippi sharecropper, sued the state on behalf of his son, charging that the state's higher education system discriminated against African-Americans and historically Black colleges. In 1987, Biggers upheld the state College Board's contention that Mississippi's higher education system was no longer racially discriminatory. The Supreme Court reversed Biggers in 1991 and ordered him to remove any vestiges of past discrimination. The power of the Federalist Society is not limited to the judiciary, which would be concern enough. Its tentacles extend deep into corporate America. Listed members of its business advisory council included John Stewart Bryan, III, chairman, president and C.E.O. of Media General Cable; John G. Medlin Jr., board chair of Wachovia Corp., an interstate bank holding company; Geneva Steel C.E.O. Joseph Cannon and Robert L. Strickland, chairman of Lowe's Companies. Also affiliated with the Federalist Society are Brian J. Brille and David Panton of Morgan Stanley financial services in New York; William Haraf of Bank of America in San Francisco; Chris Ekren of Sony Corp. in San Jose, Calif.; Frank Blake of General Electric in Schenechtedy, N.Y.; Philip R. Lochner Jr., senior vice president, Time Warner Inc. in New York; William Kemp of General Motors in Warren, Mich.; Edward Whelan of GTE Corp.'s Washington office; David Askin of Exxon Co. in Baytown, Texas; Marsha Rabiteau of Dow Chemical in Midland, Mich.; F. James Tennies, chief administrative officer at Legg Mason for asset management in Baltimore; Jodi Balsam, counsel for operations and litigation for the National Football League and Tom Donahue of Metropolitan Life. Even federal employees in the Clinton administration were included in Federalist Society documents: Paul-Noel Chretien of the Justice Department; Theodore Cooperstein of the FBI; Carol Crawford of the International Trade Commission; Kevin Martin of the Federal Communications Commission and Christopher Holleman of the U.S. Small Business Administration. William Saunders of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights also backs the Society. Many of the nation's blue-chip law firms have attorneys associated with the Federalist Society. Those listed included lawyers in the Washington, D.C. law firms of Arnold and Porter; Covington & Burling; Steptoe & Johnson; Hogan & Hartson; Patton, Boaggs & Blow; and Wilmer, Cutler & Pickering. New York law firms with lawyers associated with the Federalist Society include: Cravath, Swaine & Moore; White & Case and Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison. In Boston, one law firm -- Hale and Door -- has at least 10 attorneys affiliated with the Federalist Society. The list of law professors associated with the society included Ronald A. Cass, dean of Boston University's law school; Michael Young of Columbia University; John Yoo of the University of California at Berkeley; Eugene Volokh of UCLA; Northwestern University professors Gary Lawson, Daniel D. Polsby and Stephen B. Presser; Robert P. George of Princeton; Gerard Bradley of Notre Dame; Gordon B. Baldwin of the University of Wisconsin, Olan B. Lowry of Temple; Johathan Macey and Richard Painter of Cornell; Ronald D. Rotunda of the University of Illinois; Gerald T. Dunn of St. Louis University and Thomas Morgan of George Washington University. The University of Virginia, one of the best law schools in the nation, has quite a few Federalist Society professors or sympathizers on its faculty, including John Norton Moore, Robert Turner, Erika Worth Harris and Lillian BeVier. "People have to understand, whether they like lawyers or not, law schools have an enormous amount of power, whether it's power for good or evil. Unfortunately, what we are seeing under the Federalist Society is law schools and legal education being used to promote racism, bigotry and Right-wing politics. These people believe in the Bell Curve," says Prof. Boyle of the University of Illinois, referring to a controversial theory by Charles Murray and Richard J. Herrnstein about the supposed low intelligence level of some non-Whites. "You have to understand that. Just as the Federalist Society did to the federal judiciary, they are now trying to do to law schools." Boyle and others say this is done by establishing well-endowed law professorships and speaking tours for the true believers. "Where they once were scholars with Right-wing foundations like the Heritage Foundation, American Enterprise Institute and the Cato Institute, they are now getting credentialed as law professors," he notes. No comparable movement exists among progressives, which may explain why civil rights groups and liberals are doing such a feeble job defending affirmative action. "We've got to realize that while we have been dillydallying in law schools with critical race theories and penetrating the Law Review, all this is chump change to [Federalists]," observes Berry, of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights. "It's like we were out playing whiffle ball while they were exercising power." The Federalist Society was founded 17 years ago by Yale Law School student Steven G. Calabresi and two counterparts at the University of Chicago School of Law, Lee Liberman and David McIntosh. All three were undergraduates together at Yale. Upset with what they perceived as liberal bias, the three decided to form an organization for conservative law students. Yale professors Robert H. Bork and Ralph K. Winter, both of whom would be appointed to the federal bench by Ronald Reagan, served as advisers to the Yale chapter. In Chicago, future U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia served in a similar capacity. The contacts the three made as students have proven to be invaluable. Calabresi, in addition to clerking for Bork and Winter, clerked for Scalia at the Supreme Court. He is now a law professor at Northwestern University. Liberman gave up a post in the Justice Department also to clerk for Scalia. She is now Lee Liberman Otis and is chief counsel for Sen. Spencer Abraham (R-Mich.), who founded a Federalist Society chapter at Harvard. McIntosh was a special assistant to Ed Meese when he was Reagan's attorney general; he is a three-term Republican Congressman who's considering running for governor of Indiana. In addition to a board of trustees, the society has a board of directors, co-chaired by Calabresi and McIntosh. The Federalist pipeline is a well-oiled old boy -- and sometimes girl -- network. For example, Brent O. Hatch, the son of Sen. Orrin Hatch, clerked for Robert Bork when he was a federal judge in Washington, D.C. After working in the Justice Department, young Hatch was appointed general counsel of the National Endowment for the Humanities at the age of 28. He is treasurer of the Federalist Society's board of directors. The organization has been funded by wealthy conservatives, such as Richard Mellon Scaife, who is vice chair of the Heritage Foundation's board, and another board member, Holland Coors, a member of the conservative Coors family. Many contributions are made through foundations that give to Right-wing causes, including the John M. Olin Foundation in New York, the Sarah Scaife Foundation in Pittsburgh, the Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation of Milwaukee and the Deer Creek Foundation in St. Louis. The Federalists have direct ties to Right-wing think tanks seeking to dismantle affirmative action at the local, state and federal levels. The Center for Individual Rights, which successfully argued the Hopwood case that banned affirmative action at the University of Texas, represents plaintiffs in a lawsuit pending against the University of Michigan and were lawyers for supporters of Proposition 209, the anti-affirmative action measure in California. The Washington Legal Foundation sued the University of Maryland, forcing it to drop its Benjamin Banneker scholarships for African-American scholars; the Southeastern Legal Foundation is leading an all-out assault on affirmative action in Atlanta, and the Institute for Justice led the attack on Lani Guinier, then a University of Pennsylvania law professor, who was President Clinton's first choice to be assistant U.S. attorney general for civil rights. Clint Bolick, the group's vice president, dismissed Guinier as a "quota queen," and the eventual nominee, Deval L. Patrick, as a "quota king." He also led the opposition to the appointment of Bill Lann Lee, who was later named acting assistant attorney general for civil rights. When first lady Hillary Rodham Clinton said that there was a "vast Right-wing conspiracy" afoot that had been hounding her husband since he first announced for president, some Right-wingers almost laughingly dismissed her charges. Special Prosecutor Ken Starr called the comments "nonsense." And Boston Herald columnist Joe Fitzgerald said the first lady had "wandered into paranoia." But information developed by the Institute for Democracy Studies, a nonprofit research and education organization in New York, confirms that the first lady was on the mark. In the executive summary of its report, "The Assault on Affirmative Action: An Organized Challenge to Racial and Gender Justice," the organization notes, "Once a month at the Heritage Foundation, representatives of the nation's leading conservative law groups get together for a 'luncheon.' This so-called Public Interest Legal Group meeting is just one of several monthly gatherings that right-wing law groups hold." The report continues: "These meetings serve the purpose of avoiding duplication of effort, airing future plans, and providing guidance for an appropriate organizational division of labor." In an interview with Emerge, Todd G. Young, director of research and communications for the Atlanta-based Southeastern Legal Foundation, confirms that Right-wing groups collaborate. "We read each other's briefs (as they are filed) and when there are updates published by other groups," he says. "Although we are separate entities, we share some common understandings about the Constitutions and our (mission) statements are really almost identical for the organizations." Of its recent lawsuit against Atlanta's affirmative action program, Young notes: "We're refining the definition of what it means to enjoy equal protection under the law and the first step is to end any government-sanctioned discrimination, such as affirmative action programs or racial preference programs. It's philosophically inconsistent to say it was bad then [in the 1950s and 1960s] but it's OK now." Atlanta Mayor Bill Campbell says it's not OK to discard programs devised to address discrimination against African-Americans. "Conservative legal interest groups, such as the Center for Individual Rights and the Southeastern Legal Foundation, are striking at the very heart of the civil rights gains of the '50s and '60s," explains Campbell. "These groups are, in essence, a homogenized version of the Klan. They may have traded in their sheets for suits and use different language, but it's the same old racism -- just old wine in new bottles." The Federalist Society takes its name from The Federalist papers, 85 articles originally published in New York newspapers between 1787 and 1788. The authors -- Alexander Hamilton, John Jay and James Madison -- were attempting to gain popular support for the adoption of a new Constitution. "Is The Federalist the key to what the Constitution's framers and adopters intended it to mean and how they expected it to function?" asked R. B. Bernstein, a constitutional historian who wrote the foreword to The Federalist, a recent reissue of the papers. "This subset of the original-intent controversy tends to pit many historians, who remain dubious about original-intent arguments, against many legal scholars, who seek a way to limit judicial discretion by anchoring constitutional interpretation in the Constitution's origins." Bernstein argued that the public should not look at the essays, all written under one pen name, as the definitive word on how the Constitution should be interpreted. "Jay was not a delegate to the Federal Convention, which framed the Constitution...[Hamilton] left the Convention in July, not returning until two weeks before its close in September. And Madison...found himself outvoted on a host of major issues," Bernstein noted. Moreover, as The Federalist papers became the classic commentary on the Constitution, the three men publicly identified themselves as the authors. Even that was not without controversy. Before his ill-fated duel with Aaron Burr, Hamilton tried to take credit for writing papers 18-20, 49-58 and 62-63. Madison made an identical claim of authorship, which was verified through a computer analysis in 1964. The most damning fact about today's Federalists is that they advocate a limited role for the federal government, while the early founders were interested in establishing a strong central government. Some civil rights leaders, including Theodore M. Shaw, associate director-counsel of the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund Inc., view the rhetoric of the modern-day Federalists as smokescreen for an assault on civil rights. "It's ideologically out of the mainstream and a part of the radically conservative agenda and the radically conservative agenda has never served the interest of African-Americans," Shaw says. Hilary O. Shelton, Washington bureau chief of the NAACP, is less charitable: "They are not conservative. They are very consistent with the Council of Conservative Citizens," a White supremacy group that has featured Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott (R-Miss.) and Rep. Bob Barr (R-Ga.) as speakers. Surprisingly, some of the harshest criticism of Federalist Society members has come from Republicans. For example, former Attorney General Meese, a main player in the Federalist movement, has been criticized by some of his colleagues in the Reagan administration. According to The Washington Post, James A. Baker III and Michael K. Deaver referred to Meese as the "Big Bigot," and conservatives referred to his top assistant, T. Kenneth Cribb Jr., as the "Baby Bigot." Cribb sits on the board of directors of the Federalist Society and is a trustee of the Scaife Foundation, a major contributor to the Federalist Society and other Right-wing causes. Graglia, who has taught at the University of Texas since 1966, touched off a controversy two years ago, when he said, "Blacks and Mexican Americans are not academically competitive with Whites in selective institutions." According to Graglia, "It is the result primarily of cultural effects. Failure is not looked upon with disgrace." He maintains his membership in the Federalist Society. "They certainly are unenthusiastic about civil rights laws," he says of his organization. "Richard Epstein [a law professor at the University of Chicago] thinks we will be better off if civil rights laws were all repealed. These people do believe, as I believe, that so-called civil rights have gone too far and are not civil rights at all." Because so many of the Federalist Society members are seen as opposing civil rights, some people are not quick to accept their professed interest in color-blind justice. U.S. Appeals Court Judge Stephen Reinhardt of the 9th Circuit observes, "We had the Civil War over states' rights. There is no question we are going back to the pre-Civil War view of governments." Former federal Judge Lawrence Walsh puts it more bluntly. "The impression I have is they are trying to return to the 18th century and undo the work of the Supreme Court since the New Deal," Walsh says. "And I think it is wrong to put someone on the court who has a pre-commitment with a political dogma, whether it's the Ku Klux Klan or the Federalist Society." -- Additional reporting by Lottie L. Joiner Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Tue Jun 27 13:42:31 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2017 13:42:31 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] News Gazoo for Feddie Yale Law Mafia Killer Koh Mazzone In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: LAW 604-1: Criminal Law Fall 2015 - Moore CONNED LAW is a required course here at the Waffen-SS Law School. So is Criminal Law brainwashed by our Resident CIA/MOSSAD/Torture-Mongerer Michael Moore-Truly Orwellian!-who publicly congratulated CONNED LAW Mazzone et al for bringing in Killer Koh. Teaching here at the Waffen-SS Law School since August 1978 has been like working in a combination of Orwell's 1984 and Conrad's Heart of Darkness-The Horror! The Horror! CIA/MOSSAD/TORTURE/MOORE/HURD OFF CAMPUS! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2017 7:12 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson ; Mildred O'brien Subject: RE: News Gazoo for Feddie Yale Law Mafia Killer Koh Mazzone The University of Illinois College of Law-Hijacking Justice Everyday. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2017 7:06 AM To: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; Karen Aram >; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson >; Mildred O'brien > Subject: RE: News Gazoo for Feddie Yale Law Mafia Killer Koh Mazzone "The impression I have is they are trying to return to the 18th century and undo the work of the Supreme Court since the New Deal," Walsh says. "And I think it is wrong to put someone on the court who has a pre-commitment with a political dogma, whether it's the Ku Klux Klan or the Federalist Society." Yeah, the Feddie Mazzone teaching Conned Law at our Waffen-SS Law School and inviting Killer Koh to come out here and pollute and poison our Good Community. Judge Lawrence Walsh was Independent Counsel/Prosecutor in the Iran-Contra Scandal by appointment of President Reagan; prosecuted the Mob with Dewey in New York; Deputy Attorney General under Eisenhower; Pillar of the Republican Party; President of the American Bar Association; Federal District Judge; Partner in the New York Law Firm of Davis, Polk & Wardwell, etc. RIP. fab Walsh on Federalist Society According to the conventional wisdom, we were in a double bind: The judges appointed by Democratic presidents were supposedly most concerned with protecting the constitutional rights of persons prosecuted for crimes, while most of the other judges owed their appointments to Ronald Reagan or George Bush, who had stated publicly and emphatically that they hoped that North would not be convicted. Over the years, I had often found such simplistic views to be wrong. Most judges overcome the prejudices and alliances they had when appointed to the federal bench. During my three and one-half years on the federal district court in New York, I had experienced the merging process by which new judges are absorbed into their courts. My hard-line political and professional views had moderated during lunchroom conversations with Learned Hand, Jerome Frank, and Harold Medina and had dissolved after a couple of my decisions had been reversed on appeal. But I was concerned about the continuing political allegiance of Republican judges as manifested in the Federalist Society. Although the organization was not openly partisan, its dogma was political. It reminded me of the communist front groups of the 1940s and l950s, whose members were committed to the communist cause and subject to communist direction but were not card-carrying members of the Communist Party. In calling for the narrow construction of constitutional grants of governmental power, the Federalist Society seemed to speak for right-wing Republicans. I was especially troubled that one of White House Counsel Boyden Gray's assistants had openly declared that no one who was not a member of the Federalist Society had received a judicial appointment from President Bush. walsh.fed >From Iran-contra Independent Counsel Lawrence Walsh, Firewall. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2017 6:48 AM To: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; Karen Aram >; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson >; Mildred O'brien > Subject: News Gazoo for Feddie Yale Law Mafia Killer Koh Mazzone Sure. Yale Law Mafia Mazzone was on the Committee that invited Yale Law Mafia Killer Koh to come out here and pollute and poison our Good Community despite my best efforts to stop them. Yale Law Mafia Mazzone is also a Member of the Federalist Society, Hijacking Justice Everyday. 1. The Supremes upheld Trump's Muslim Ban in violation of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. 2. The Supremes have further eroded the Separation of Church and State in violation of the First Amendment. And it appears the Supremes are going to tolerate public bigotry and discrimination against LGBT in the name of "religious freedom" despite the fact we would never permit this to be done against Blacks, Jews, Catholics, etc except here on Campus where Wise {sic!} and the Zionists Ethnically Cleansed Native Americans out of UIUC. 3. We are all going to be up the proverbial creek without a paddle if Kennedy retires and Trump gets to replace him with another hard-line, doctrinaire religious fundamentalist Federalist Society Member like Gorsuch-Hijacking Justice every day along with Mazzone who "teaches" Conned Law at our Waffen-SS Law School. Fab. -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis [mailto:FBOYLE at law.uiuc.edu] Sent: Friday, September 17, 1999 6:35 PM To: undisclosed-recipients Subject: HIJACKING JUSTICE:FEDDIES S P E C I A L R E P O R T H I J A C K I N G J U S T I C E The Federalist Society, a Right-wing network of lawyers, judges and supporters, is undoing civil rights and other gains made through the courts BY GEORGE E. CURRY & TREVOR W. COLEMAN EMERGE, OCTOBER 1999 WHEN BROWN VS. BOARD OF EDUCATION WAS BEING ARGUED, a clerk to U.S. Supreme Court Justice Robert Jackson suggested that the court should rule against the plaintiffs in the landmark school desegregation case. While making the case for maintaining segregated schools, the clerk sent a memo to his boss saying, "It is about time the Court faced the fact that white people in the South don't like the colored people." That clerk was William Rehnquist, now chief justice of the United States Supreme Court. Seeking to put his own ultraconservatives on the Supreme Court with Rehnquist, President Ronald Reagan -- who had appointed more than half of the sitting federal judges by the time he left office -- considered nominating Lino A. Graglia, a controversial University of Texas law professor, as a federal appeals court judge for the 5th Circuit. But the nomination, which had been backed by Attorney General Edwin Meese III, was jettisoned after Graglia acknowledged that he had referred to African-Americans as "pickaninnies." The American Bar Association found the law professor "not qualified" to serve on the federal bench. Reagan did nominate Robert H. Bork, a former Yale law professor, who was on the U.S. Court of Appeals in Washington, D.C. Bork had opposed the 1964 Civil Rights Act, calling it "an unwanted intrusion on the right of individuals to choose with whom to associate." After bitter debate, the Senate rejected his nomination in 1987 by a vote of 58 to 42. Far from fading into the background, Bork, Meese, and to a lesser extent, Graglia, are key players in the Federalist Society, a powerful Right-wing network intent on restricting the power of courts, often at the expense of African-Americans and other people of color, the poor, women and the disadvantaged. The organization actively seeks to limit "judicial activism" and reverse Supreme Court landmark rulings since the New Deal, especially those issued in the 1960s and '70s. Special targets include the 1966 Miranda decision that provides certain rights for suspected criminals, the 1973 Roe vs. Wade ruling legalizing abortion and recent civil rights legislation. Founded in 1982 by three law students, the Federalist Society has grown into one of the most influential institutions in America. Four of the nine members of the U.S. Supreme Court -- Clarence Thomas, William H. Rehnquist, Antonin Scalia and Anthony M. Kennedy -- are close affiliates of the Federalist Society. So are Donald P. Hodel, former president of the Christina Coalition, and special prosecutor Kenneth Starr. The Federalist Society's board of trustees is co-chaired by Bork and U.S. Sen. Orrin Hatch -- one of the most conservative members on Capitol Hill. Other trustees include former Attorney General Meese, William Bradford Reynolds, who was assistant attorney general for civil rights in the Reagan Administration, sought to have court-ordered affirmative action programs overturned, and C. Boyden Gray, former President Bush's chief White House attorney, who opposed the Civil Rights Act of 1991. In a world being reshaped by the Federalist Society, conservative law students have formed chapters on campuses across the nation. After graduation, they clerk for conservative judges and then go on to become high-ranking government officials, partners in major law firms, prosecutors, law school professors and judges at the local, state and federal level. In short, the Federalist Society is on the verge of hijacking the judicial system. "This is more than an attack on affirmative action being spear-headed by the Federalist Society lawyers," observes Francis A. Boyle, a law professor at the University of Illinois. "They want to go beyond getting rid of affirmative action. They want to go back to Brown vs. Board of Education. "We have Justice Antonin Scalia (who advised the Federalist Society at its inception and later hired two of its three founders as his law clerks), who two years ago gave a public lecture at Columbia Law School where he stated if Brown vs. Board of Education was to be presented to him today, he would rule against the plaintiff. In other words, this was a threat that if Brown vs. Board of Education was voted on before the Supreme Court, he would overturn it." That type of thinking disturbs Lawrence E. Walsh. Before becoming president of the American Bar Association in 1975, Walsh chaired an ABA panel that approved President Nixon's choices of federal appeals judges, Clement Haynesworth and G. Harold Carswell, to serve on the Supreme Court. In 1969, the Senate rejected Haynesworth because of conflict-of-interest fears. The following year, Carswell was rejected by the Senate after it was disclosed that he had given a speech as a lawyer expressing his "vigorous belief in the principles of White supremacy." "My concern is there is going to be a cleavage in the courts between the Federalist Society members and nonmembers," says Walsh, a former federal judge. "Anything that perpetuates that kind of ideological cleavage is not good for the unity of the court system. Ideally, it seems to me that judges should avoid memberships [in politically and substantively motivated organizations] but, of course, they don't do that." In fact, the ABA, in one of its publications on judicial independence, concludes: "A judge's impartiality and ability to interpret and apply the laws fairly are integral to the administration of justice." But a judge's membership in an organization -- whether it's the American Civil Liberties Union on the Left or the Federalist Society on the Right -- can influence whether a judge is perceived as being unbiased, a critical element in a judicial system that prides itself on being fair. Harold D. Pope, president of the National Bar Association, says: "People who are opposing the expansion of rights and opportunities for all people in this society we feel are working against America's best interest. We would hope that all jurists, no matter what their prior political persuasion, would deal objectively with the facts of law as they come before them, as they were sworn to do so when they first sat on the bench." The expansion of the Federalist Society, which has adopted a silhouette of James Madison as its symbol, comes at a time when the legal community is worried about a loss of public confidence. An ABA special committee on judicial independence issued a report in August titled "Protecting the Bulwark of the Republic: Ensuring Public Support of the Judicial Process." The report states, "According to the ABA survey, only about half of the respondents believed that our justice system treats men and women equally. Even fewer believed that courts treat members of different ethnic groups or wealthy and poor people the same." The report continues, "As [former] ABA President [Philip S.] Anderson recently stated: "We must work on this problem for as long as it takes to make our profession equally open and our system of justice equally responsive to all members of our society, regardless of color. This is the ultimate challenge to the integrity of the rule of law in America.'" But the Federalist Society is interested in a challenge of a different kind. To its credit, the organization operates with an open and very public agenda. On its web page, for example, it lays out its conservative agenda. "The Federalist Society for Law and Public Policy Studies is a group of conservatives and libertarians interested in the current state of the legal order. It is founded on the principles that the state exists to preserve freedom, that the separation of governmental powers is central to our Constitution, and that it is emphatically the province and duty of the judiciary to say what the law is, not what it should be. The Society seeks both to promote an awareness of these principles and to further their application through its activities." Even conservative write Michael Lind would call this 19th-century view "the Confederate theory of the Constitution." Speakers at one national Federalist Society-sponsored lawyers convention proposed far-reaching judicial reforms that included the abolition of judicial review, limiting the powers of federal courts and stripping the Supreme Court of jurisdiction over certain matters. Mary Frances Berry, chair of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, is worried about more than theory. "What is scary about the Federalist Society is that it is antiquated and atavistic," she says. "Their views on natural law, libertarianism and the limited power of government to respond when people are being discriminated against is scary -- for African-Americans, especially. The more people you have who expose those views on the court, the more dangerous it becomes for every one of our lives." In this book, Firewall: The Iran-Contra Conspiracy and Cover Up, Walsh writes: "In calling for the narrow construction of constitutional grants of governmental power, the Federalist Society seemed to speak for right-wing Republicans. I was especially troubled that one of White House Counsel Boyden Gray's assistants had openly declared that no one who was not a member of the Federalist Society had received a judicial appointment from President Bush." Brian W. Jones, a San Francisco lawyer and member of the Federalist Society, believes that his group is being maligned. "I reject out of hand that Federalists are hostile to civil rights," says Jones, an African-American who was deputy legal affairs secretary to California Gov. Pete Wilson and former counsel to Hatch's Senate Judiciary Committee. "Most members of the Federalist Society would agree that the government has no business making racial distinctions of any kind among its citizens. I would argue that is a very credible view of civil rights. "On civil rights and civil liberty issues, Federalist Society judges tend to have a more limited view of the federal government's authority to respond to a whole range of questions. For conservatives, the first question with any inquiry into responding to social problems is: Where does the authority lie, with the federal government or state and local governments?" Another African-American, Gerald Reynolds, is vice chairman of membership for the Federalist Society. "There are some people who embrace this principle of racial neutrality," says the Kansas City, Mo., lawyer. "This debate flows from principles and not from animosity toward Blacks." The national office of the Federalist Society in Washington, D.C., refused to provide the names of judges on its membership list. However, some of the organization's records were obtained by Emerge from other sources. An examination of Federalist Society documents for 1997 and 1998, the most current information available at press time, reveals the extent that the group has penetrated the courts. When looking at the board of directors of local chapters, officers, their advisory panels and membership lists, it is clear that when one goes to court seeking justice, he or she is increasingly likely to have a judge affiliated with the Federalist Society handling the case. During the period studied, that was true whether one was entering a courtroom in New York, Michigan or Alabama. (The titles of persons listed hereafter reflect the positions they held at the time the records were compiled by the Federalist Society; some of the judges have since been elevated to a higher court.) In New York state, judges serving as officers, directors or advisers to the local chapters included Thomas P. Griesa, chief judge of the U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York, as well as District Judges Shirley Wohl Kram, Lawrence M. McKenna and John E. Sprizzo. A U.S. Appeals Court Judge for the Second Circuit, Dennis G. Jacobs, was also among that group. The Long Island advisory board included U.S. District Judge Michael Fiechter, U.S. Court of International Trade Judge Gregory W. Carman and State Supreme Court Judges Jack Dunne and Ute Lally. In Michigan, judges aligned with the Federalist Society included James L. Ryan and Richard F. Suhreinrich of the U.S. Court of Appeals; Federal District Judges Paul V. Gadola, David W. McKeague, Gerald E. Rosen and Lawrence P. Zatkoff; and U.S. Magistrate Judge Virginia M. Morgan. State Supreme Court Justices Clifford W. Taylor and Elizabeth A. Weaver were listed as advisers to the Detroit chapter. So were Maura D. Corrigan, chief judge of the Michigan Court of Appeals, along with fellow judges Stephen J. Markman, Henry W. Saad, and Robert Young Jr. (an African-American who has since been elevated to the Michigan Supreme Court). The chief judge of the Washtenaw County Circuit Court in Grand Rapids, Kurtis T. Wilder (another African-Americana who is now on the Michigan Court of Appeals), and Wayne County Circuit Judges Sean Cox, Michael J. Talbot and Brian Zahra helped complete the list. Local chapters in Alabama were advised by Perry O. Hooper Sr., chief justice of the Supreme Court of Alabama, along with Associate Justices J. Gorman Houston, Harold See and A. Hugh Maddox. U.S. Sen. Jefferson B. Sessions III also supported the organization. (Sessions was nominated to become a federal judge in 1986 but was blocked when it was disclosed that he had called the NAACP and the American Civil Liberties Union "un-American" and "communist-inspired," and said they "force civil rights down the throats of people." Referring to the Ku Klux Klan, he reportedly said, "I used to think they're OK," until he learned that some Klansmen were "pot smokers." Sessions contended the remarks were either made in jest or had been misinterpreted.) Additional supporters listed included Randall T. Shepard, chief justice of the Indiana Supreme Court; Craig Enoch, chief justice of the Texas Supreme Court; South Carolina Attorney General Charles Molony Condon; Alabama Attorney General William Pryor (who has links on his web page to the Federalist Society and the conservative Washington Legal Foundation), Pennsylvania Attorney General D. Michael Fisher; Indianapolis Mayor Stephen Goldsmith and Clarence Thomas' wife, Virginia, a former aide to House majority leader Richard Armey, and who now works for the Heritage Foundation. As the presiding officials in courts, judges wield broad power. For example, U.S. District Judge Neal B. Biggers Jr., who sits on the advisory board of the Mississippi chapter of the Federalist Society, presided over the Ayers desegregation case. In 1975, Jake Ayers Sr., a Mississippi sharecropper, sued the state on behalf of his son, charging that the state's higher education system discriminated against African-Americans and historically Black colleges. In 1987, Biggers upheld the state College Board's contention that Mississippi's higher education system was no longer racially discriminatory. The Supreme Court reversed Biggers in 1991 and ordered him to remove any vestiges of past discrimination. The power of the Federalist Society is not limited to the judiciary, which would be concern enough. Its tentacles extend deep into corporate America. Listed members of its business advisory council included John Stewart Bryan, III, chairman, president and C.E.O. of Media General Cable; John G. Medlin Jr., board chair of Wachovia Corp., an interstate bank holding company; Geneva Steel C.E.O. Joseph Cannon and Robert L. Strickland, chairman of Lowe's Companies. Also affiliated with the Federalist Society are Brian J. Brille and David Panton of Morgan Stanley financial services in New York; William Haraf of Bank of America in San Francisco; Chris Ekren of Sony Corp. in San Jose, Calif.; Frank Blake of General Electric in Schenechtedy, N.Y.; Philip R. Lochner Jr., senior vice president, Time Warner Inc. in New York; William Kemp of General Motors in Warren, Mich.; Edward Whelan of GTE Corp.'s Washington office; David Askin of Exxon Co. in Baytown, Texas; Marsha Rabiteau of Dow Chemical in Midland, Mich.; F. James Tennies, chief administrative officer at Legg Mason for asset management in Baltimore; Jodi Balsam, counsel for operations and litigation for the National Football League and Tom Donahue of Metropolitan Life. Even federal employees in the Clinton administration were included in Federalist Society documents: Paul-Noel Chretien of the Justice Department; Theodore Cooperstein of the FBI; Carol Crawford of the International Trade Commission; Kevin Martin of the Federal Communications Commission and Christopher Holleman of the U.S. Small Business Administration. William Saunders of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights also backs the Society. Many of the nation's blue-chip law firms have attorneys associated with the Federalist Society. Those listed included lawyers in the Washington, D.C. law firms of Arnold and Porter; Covington & Burling; Steptoe & Johnson; Hogan & Hartson; Patton, Boaggs & Blow; and Wilmer, Cutler & Pickering. New York law firms with lawyers associated with the Federalist Society include: Cravath, Swaine & Moore; White & Case and Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison. In Boston, one law firm -- Hale and Door -- has at least 10 attorneys affiliated with the Federalist Society. The list of law professors associated with the society included Ronald A. Cass, dean of Boston University's law school; Michael Young of Columbia University; John Yoo of the University of California at Berkeley; Eugene Volokh of UCLA; Northwestern University professors Gary Lawson, Daniel D. Polsby and Stephen B. Presser; Robert P. George of Princeton; Gerard Bradley of Notre Dame; Gordon B. Baldwin of the University of Wisconsin, Olan B. Lowry of Temple; Johathan Macey and Richard Painter of Cornell; Ronald D. Rotunda of the University of Illinois; Gerald T. Dunn of St. Louis University and Thomas Morgan of George Washington University. The University of Virginia, one of the best law schools in the nation, has quite a few Federalist Society professors or sympathizers on its faculty, including John Norton Moore, Robert Turner, Erika Worth Harris and Lillian BeVier. "People have to understand, whether they like lawyers or not, law schools have an enormous amount of power, whether it's power for good or evil. Unfortunately, what we are seeing under the Federalist Society is law schools and legal education being used to promote racism, bigotry and Right-wing politics. These people believe in the Bell Curve," says Prof. Boyle of the University of Illinois, referring to a controversial theory by Charles Murray and Richard J. Herrnstein about the supposed low intelligence level of some non-Whites. "You have to understand that. Just as the Federalist Society did to the federal judiciary, they are now trying to do to law schools." Boyle and others say this is done by establishing well-endowed law professorships and speaking tours for the true believers. "Where they once were scholars with Right-wing foundations like the Heritage Foundation, American Enterprise Institute and the Cato Institute, they are now getting credentialed as law professors," he notes. No comparable movement exists among progressives, which may explain why civil rights groups and liberals are doing such a feeble job defending affirmative action. "We've got to realize that while we have been dillydallying in law schools with critical race theories and penetrating the Law Review, all this is chump change to [Federalists]," observes Berry, of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights. "It's like we were out playing whiffle ball while they were exercising power." The Federalist Society was founded 17 years ago by Yale Law School student Steven G. Calabresi and two counterparts at the University of Chicago School of Law, Lee Liberman and David McIntosh. All three were undergraduates together at Yale. Upset with what they perceived as liberal bias, the three decided to form an organization for conservative law students. Yale professors Robert H. Bork and Ralph K. Winter, both of whom would be appointed to the federal bench by Ronald Reagan, served as advisers to the Yale chapter. In Chicago, future U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia served in a similar capacity. The contacts the three made as students have proven to be invaluable. Calabresi, in addition to clerking for Bork and Winter, clerked for Scalia at the Supreme Court. He is now a law professor at Northwestern University. Liberman gave up a post in the Justice Department also to clerk for Scalia. She is now Lee Liberman Otis and is chief counsel for Sen. Spencer Abraham (R-Mich.), who founded a Federalist Society chapter at Harvard. McIntosh was a special assistant to Ed Meese when he was Reagan's attorney general; he is a three-term Republican Congressman who's considering running for governor of Indiana. In addition to a board of trustees, the society has a board of directors, co-chaired by Calabresi and McIntosh. The Federalist pipeline is a well-oiled old boy -- and sometimes girl -- network. For example, Brent O. Hatch, the son of Sen. Orrin Hatch, clerked for Robert Bork when he was a federal judge in Washington, D.C. After working in the Justice Department, young Hatch was appointed general counsel of the National Endowment for the Humanities at the age of 28. He is treasurer of the Federalist Society's board of directors. The organization has been funded by wealthy conservatives, such as Richard Mellon Scaife, who is vice chair of the Heritage Foundation's board, and another board member, Holland Coors, a member of the conservative Coors family. Many contributions are made through foundations that give to Right-wing causes, including the John M. Olin Foundation in New York, the Sarah Scaife Foundation in Pittsburgh, the Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation of Milwaukee and the Deer Creek Foundation in St. Louis. The Federalists have direct ties to Right-wing think tanks seeking to dismantle affirmative action at the local, state and federal levels. The Center for Individual Rights, which successfully argued the Hopwood case that banned affirmative action at the University of Texas, represents plaintiffs in a lawsuit pending against the University of Michigan and were lawyers for supporters of Proposition 209, the anti-affirmative action measure in California. The Washington Legal Foundation sued the University of Maryland, forcing it to drop its Benjamin Banneker scholarships for African-American scholars; the Southeastern Legal Foundation is leading an all-out assault on affirmative action in Atlanta, and the Institute for Justice led the attack on Lani Guinier, then a University of Pennsylvania law professor, who was President Clinton's first choice to be assistant U.S. attorney general for civil rights. Clint Bolick, the group's vice president, dismissed Guinier as a "quota queen," and the eventual nominee, Deval L. Patrick, as a "quota king." He also led the opposition to the appointment of Bill Lann Lee, who was later named acting assistant attorney general for civil rights. When first lady Hillary Rodham Clinton said that there was a "vast Right-wing conspiracy" afoot that had been hounding her husband since he first announced for president, some Right-wingers almost laughingly dismissed her charges. Special Prosecutor Ken Starr called the comments "nonsense." And Boston Herald columnist Joe Fitzgerald said the first lady had "wandered into paranoia." But information developed by the Institute for Democracy Studies, a nonprofit research and education organization in New York, confirms that the first lady was on the mark. In the executive summary of its report, "The Assault on Affirmative Action: An Organized Challenge to Racial and Gender Justice," the organization notes, "Once a month at the Heritage Foundation, representatives of the nation's leading conservative law groups get together for a 'luncheon.' This so-called Public Interest Legal Group meeting is just one of several monthly gatherings that right-wing law groups hold." The report continues: "These meetings serve the purpose of avoiding duplication of effort, airing future plans, and providing guidance for an appropriate organizational division of labor." In an interview with Emerge, Todd G. Young, director of research and communications for the Atlanta-based Southeastern Legal Foundation, confirms that Right-wing groups collaborate. "We read each other's briefs (as they are filed) and when there are updates published by other groups," he says. "Although we are separate entities, we share some common understandings about the Constitutions and our (mission) statements are really almost identical for the organizations." Of its recent lawsuit against Atlanta's affirmative action program, Young notes: "We're refining the definition of what it means to enjoy equal protection under the law and the first step is to end any government-sanctioned discrimination, such as affirmative action programs or racial preference programs. It's philosophically inconsistent to say it was bad then [in the 1950s and 1960s] but it's OK now." Atlanta Mayor Bill Campbell says it's not OK to discard programs devised to address discrimination against African-Americans. "Conservative legal interest groups, such as the Center for Individual Rights and the Southeastern Legal Foundation, are striking at the very heart of the civil rights gains of the '50s and '60s," explains Campbell. "These groups are, in essence, a homogenized version of the Klan. They may have traded in their sheets for suits and use different language, but it's the same old racism -- just old wine in new bottles." The Federalist Society takes its name from The Federalist papers, 85 articles originally published in New York newspapers between 1787 and 1788. The authors -- Alexander Hamilton, John Jay and James Madison -- were attempting to gain popular support for the adoption of a new Constitution. "Is The Federalist the key to what the Constitution's framers and adopters intended it to mean and how they expected it to function?" asked R. B. Bernstein, a constitutional historian who wrote the foreword to The Federalist, a recent reissue of the papers. "This subset of the original-intent controversy tends to pit many historians, who remain dubious about original-intent arguments, against many legal scholars, who seek a way to limit judicial discretion by anchoring constitutional interpretation in the Constitution's origins." Bernstein argued that the public should not look at the essays, all written under one pen name, as the definitive word on how the Constitution should be interpreted. "Jay was not a delegate to the Federal Convention, which framed the Constitution...[Hamilton] left the Convention in July, not returning until two weeks before its close in September. And Madison...found himself outvoted on a host of major issues," Bernstein noted. Moreover, as The Federalist papers became the classic commentary on the Constitution, the three men publicly identified themselves as the authors. Even that was not without controversy. Before his ill-fated duel with Aaron Burr, Hamilton tried to take credit for writing papers 18-20, 49-58 and 62-63. Madison made an identical claim of authorship, which was verified through a computer analysis in 1964. The most damning fact about today's Federalists is that they advocate a limited role for the federal government, while the early founders were interested in establishing a strong central government. Some civil rights leaders, including Theodore M. Shaw, associate director-counsel of the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund Inc., view the rhetoric of the modern-day Federalists as smokescreen for an assault on civil rights. "It's ideologically out of the mainstream and a part of the radically conservative agenda and the radically conservative agenda has never served the interest of African-Americans," Shaw says. Hilary O. Shelton, Washington bureau chief of the NAACP, is less charitable: "They are not conservative. They are very consistent with the Council of Conservative Citizens," a White supremacy group that has featured Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott (R-Miss.) and Rep. Bob Barr (R-Ga.) as speakers. Surprisingly, some of the harshest criticism of Federalist Society members has come from Republicans. For example, former Attorney General Meese, a main player in the Federalist movement, has been criticized by some of his colleagues in the Reagan administration. According to The Washington Post, James A. Baker III and Michael K. Deaver referred to Meese as the "Big Bigot," and conservatives referred to his top assistant, T. Kenneth Cribb Jr., as the "Baby Bigot." Cribb sits on the board of directors of the Federalist Society and is a trustee of the Scaife Foundation, a major contributor to the Federalist Society and other Right-wing causes. Graglia, who has taught at the University of Texas since 1966, touched off a controversy two years ago, when he said, "Blacks and Mexican Americans are not academically competitive with Whites in selective institutions." According to Graglia, "It is the result primarily of cultural effects. Failure is not looked upon with disgrace." He maintains his membership in the Federalist Society. "They certainly are unenthusiastic about civil rights laws," he says of his organization. "Richard Epstein [a law professor at the University of Chicago] thinks we will be better off if civil rights laws were all repealed. These people do believe, as I believe, that so-called civil rights have gone too far and are not civil rights at all." Because so many of the Federalist Society members are seen as opposing civil rights, some people are not quick to accept their professed interest in color-blind justice. U.S. Appeals Court Judge Stephen Reinhardt of the 9th Circuit observes, "We had the Civil War over states' rights. There is no question we are going back to the pre-Civil War view of governments." Former federal Judge Lawrence Walsh puts it more bluntly. "The impression I have is they are trying to return to the 18th century and undo the work of the Supreme Court since the New Deal," Walsh says. "And I think it is wrong to put someone on the court who has a pre-commitment with a political dogma, whether it's the Ku Klux Klan or the Federalist Society." -- Additional reporting by Lottie L. Joiner Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Tue Jun 27 13:42:31 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2017 13:42:31 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] News Gazoo for Feddie Yale Law Mafia Killer Koh Mazzone In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: LAW 604-1: Criminal Law Fall 2015 - Moore CONNED LAW is a required course here at the Waffen-SS Law School. So is Criminal Law brainwashed by our Resident CIA/MOSSAD/Torture-Mongerer Michael Moore-Truly Orwellian!-who publicly congratulated CONNED LAW Mazzone et al for bringing in Killer Koh. Teaching here at the Waffen-SS Law School since August 1978 has been like working in a combination of Orwell's 1984 and Conrad's Heart of Darkness-The Horror! The Horror! CIA/MOSSAD/TORTURE/MOORE/HURD OFF CAMPUS! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2017 7:12 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson ; Mildred O'brien Subject: RE: News Gazoo for Feddie Yale Law Mafia Killer Koh Mazzone The University of Illinois College of Law-Hijacking Justice Everyday. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2017 7:06 AM To: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; Karen Aram >; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson >; Mildred O'brien > Subject: RE: News Gazoo for Feddie Yale Law Mafia Killer Koh Mazzone "The impression I have is they are trying to return to the 18th century and undo the work of the Supreme Court since the New Deal," Walsh says. "And I think it is wrong to put someone on the court who has a pre-commitment with a political dogma, whether it's the Ku Klux Klan or the Federalist Society." Yeah, the Feddie Mazzone teaching Conned Law at our Waffen-SS Law School and inviting Killer Koh to come out here and pollute and poison our Good Community. Judge Lawrence Walsh was Independent Counsel/Prosecutor in the Iran-Contra Scandal by appointment of President Reagan; prosecuted the Mob with Dewey in New York; Deputy Attorney General under Eisenhower; Pillar of the Republican Party; President of the American Bar Association; Federal District Judge; Partner in the New York Law Firm of Davis, Polk & Wardwell, etc. RIP. fab Walsh on Federalist Society According to the conventional wisdom, we were in a double bind: The judges appointed by Democratic presidents were supposedly most concerned with protecting the constitutional rights of persons prosecuted for crimes, while most of the other judges owed their appointments to Ronald Reagan or George Bush, who had stated publicly and emphatically that they hoped that North would not be convicted. Over the years, I had often found such simplistic views to be wrong. Most judges overcome the prejudices and alliances they had when appointed to the federal bench. During my three and one-half years on the federal district court in New York, I had experienced the merging process by which new judges are absorbed into their courts. My hard-line political and professional views had moderated during lunchroom conversations with Learned Hand, Jerome Frank, and Harold Medina and had dissolved after a couple of my decisions had been reversed on appeal. But I was concerned about the continuing political allegiance of Republican judges as manifested in the Federalist Society. Although the organization was not openly partisan, its dogma was political. It reminded me of the communist front groups of the 1940s and l950s, whose members were committed to the communist cause and subject to communist direction but were not card-carrying members of the Communist Party. In calling for the narrow construction of constitutional grants of governmental power, the Federalist Society seemed to speak for right-wing Republicans. I was especially troubled that one of White House Counsel Boyden Gray's assistants had openly declared that no one who was not a member of the Federalist Society had received a judicial appointment from President Bush. walsh.fed >From Iran-contra Independent Counsel Lawrence Walsh, Firewall. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2017 6:48 AM To: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; Karen Aram >; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson >; Mildred O'brien > Subject: News Gazoo for Feddie Yale Law Mafia Killer Koh Mazzone Sure. Yale Law Mafia Mazzone was on the Committee that invited Yale Law Mafia Killer Koh to come out here and pollute and poison our Good Community despite my best efforts to stop them. Yale Law Mafia Mazzone is also a Member of the Federalist Society, Hijacking Justice Everyday. 1. The Supremes upheld Trump's Muslim Ban in violation of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. 2. The Supremes have further eroded the Separation of Church and State in violation of the First Amendment. And it appears the Supremes are going to tolerate public bigotry and discrimination against LGBT in the name of "religious freedom" despite the fact we would never permit this to be done against Blacks, Jews, Catholics, etc except here on Campus where Wise {sic!} and the Zionists Ethnically Cleansed Native Americans out of UIUC. 3. We are all going to be up the proverbial creek without a paddle if Kennedy retires and Trump gets to replace him with another hard-line, doctrinaire religious fundamentalist Federalist Society Member like Gorsuch-Hijacking Justice every day along with Mazzone who "teaches" Conned Law at our Waffen-SS Law School. Fab. -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis [mailto:FBOYLE at law.uiuc.edu] Sent: Friday, September 17, 1999 6:35 PM To: undisclosed-recipients Subject: HIJACKING JUSTICE:FEDDIES S P E C I A L R E P O R T H I J A C K I N G J U S T I C E The Federalist Society, a Right-wing network of lawyers, judges and supporters, is undoing civil rights and other gains made through the courts BY GEORGE E. CURRY & TREVOR W. COLEMAN EMERGE, OCTOBER 1999 WHEN BROWN VS. BOARD OF EDUCATION WAS BEING ARGUED, a clerk to U.S. Supreme Court Justice Robert Jackson suggested that the court should rule against the plaintiffs in the landmark school desegregation case. While making the case for maintaining segregated schools, the clerk sent a memo to his boss saying, "It is about time the Court faced the fact that white people in the South don't like the colored people." That clerk was William Rehnquist, now chief justice of the United States Supreme Court. Seeking to put his own ultraconservatives on the Supreme Court with Rehnquist, President Ronald Reagan -- who had appointed more than half of the sitting federal judges by the time he left office -- considered nominating Lino A. Graglia, a controversial University of Texas law professor, as a federal appeals court judge for the 5th Circuit. But the nomination, which had been backed by Attorney General Edwin Meese III, was jettisoned after Graglia acknowledged that he had referred to African-Americans as "pickaninnies." The American Bar Association found the law professor "not qualified" to serve on the federal bench. Reagan did nominate Robert H. Bork, a former Yale law professor, who was on the U.S. Court of Appeals in Washington, D.C. Bork had opposed the 1964 Civil Rights Act, calling it "an unwanted intrusion on the right of individuals to choose with whom to associate." After bitter debate, the Senate rejected his nomination in 1987 by a vote of 58 to 42. Far from fading into the background, Bork, Meese, and to a lesser extent, Graglia, are key players in the Federalist Society, a powerful Right-wing network intent on restricting the power of courts, often at the expense of African-Americans and other people of color, the poor, women and the disadvantaged. The organization actively seeks to limit "judicial activism" and reverse Supreme Court landmark rulings since the New Deal, especially those issued in the 1960s and '70s. Special targets include the 1966 Miranda decision that provides certain rights for suspected criminals, the 1973 Roe vs. Wade ruling legalizing abortion and recent civil rights legislation. Founded in 1982 by three law students, the Federalist Society has grown into one of the most influential institutions in America. Four of the nine members of the U.S. Supreme Court -- Clarence Thomas, William H. Rehnquist, Antonin Scalia and Anthony M. Kennedy -- are close affiliates of the Federalist Society. So are Donald P. Hodel, former president of the Christina Coalition, and special prosecutor Kenneth Starr. The Federalist Society's board of trustees is co-chaired by Bork and U.S. Sen. Orrin Hatch -- one of the most conservative members on Capitol Hill. Other trustees include former Attorney General Meese, William Bradford Reynolds, who was assistant attorney general for civil rights in the Reagan Administration, sought to have court-ordered affirmative action programs overturned, and C. Boyden Gray, former President Bush's chief White House attorney, who opposed the Civil Rights Act of 1991. In a world being reshaped by the Federalist Society, conservative law students have formed chapters on campuses across the nation. After graduation, they clerk for conservative judges and then go on to become high-ranking government officials, partners in major law firms, prosecutors, law school professors and judges at the local, state and federal level. In short, the Federalist Society is on the verge of hijacking the judicial system. "This is more than an attack on affirmative action being spear-headed by the Federalist Society lawyers," observes Francis A. Boyle, a law professor at the University of Illinois. "They want to go beyond getting rid of affirmative action. They want to go back to Brown vs. Board of Education. "We have Justice Antonin Scalia (who advised the Federalist Society at its inception and later hired two of its three founders as his law clerks), who two years ago gave a public lecture at Columbia Law School where he stated if Brown vs. Board of Education was to be presented to him today, he would rule against the plaintiff. In other words, this was a threat that if Brown vs. Board of Education was voted on before the Supreme Court, he would overturn it." That type of thinking disturbs Lawrence E. Walsh. Before becoming president of the American Bar Association in 1975, Walsh chaired an ABA panel that approved President Nixon's choices of federal appeals judges, Clement Haynesworth and G. Harold Carswell, to serve on the Supreme Court. In 1969, the Senate rejected Haynesworth because of conflict-of-interest fears. The following year, Carswell was rejected by the Senate after it was disclosed that he had given a speech as a lawyer expressing his "vigorous belief in the principles of White supremacy." "My concern is there is going to be a cleavage in the courts between the Federalist Society members and nonmembers," says Walsh, a former federal judge. "Anything that perpetuates that kind of ideological cleavage is not good for the unity of the court system. Ideally, it seems to me that judges should avoid memberships [in politically and substantively motivated organizations] but, of course, they don't do that." In fact, the ABA, in one of its publications on judicial independence, concludes: "A judge's impartiality and ability to interpret and apply the laws fairly are integral to the administration of justice." But a judge's membership in an organization -- whether it's the American Civil Liberties Union on the Left or the Federalist Society on the Right -- can influence whether a judge is perceived as being unbiased, a critical element in a judicial system that prides itself on being fair. Harold D. Pope, president of the National Bar Association, says: "People who are opposing the expansion of rights and opportunities for all people in this society we feel are working against America's best interest. We would hope that all jurists, no matter what their prior political persuasion, would deal objectively with the facts of law as they come before them, as they were sworn to do so when they first sat on the bench." The expansion of the Federalist Society, which has adopted a silhouette of James Madison as its symbol, comes at a time when the legal community is worried about a loss of public confidence. An ABA special committee on judicial independence issued a report in August titled "Protecting the Bulwark of the Republic: Ensuring Public Support of the Judicial Process." The report states, "According to the ABA survey, only about half of the respondents believed that our justice system treats men and women equally. Even fewer believed that courts treat members of different ethnic groups or wealthy and poor people the same." The report continues, "As [former] ABA President [Philip S.] Anderson recently stated: "We must work on this problem for as long as it takes to make our profession equally open and our system of justice equally responsive to all members of our society, regardless of color. This is the ultimate challenge to the integrity of the rule of law in America.'" But the Federalist Society is interested in a challenge of a different kind. To its credit, the organization operates with an open and very public agenda. On its web page, for example, it lays out its conservative agenda. "The Federalist Society for Law and Public Policy Studies is a group of conservatives and libertarians interested in the current state of the legal order. It is founded on the principles that the state exists to preserve freedom, that the separation of governmental powers is central to our Constitution, and that it is emphatically the province and duty of the judiciary to say what the law is, not what it should be. The Society seeks both to promote an awareness of these principles and to further their application through its activities." Even conservative write Michael Lind would call this 19th-century view "the Confederate theory of the Constitution." Speakers at one national Federalist Society-sponsored lawyers convention proposed far-reaching judicial reforms that included the abolition of judicial review, limiting the powers of federal courts and stripping the Supreme Court of jurisdiction over certain matters. Mary Frances Berry, chair of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, is worried about more than theory. "What is scary about the Federalist Society is that it is antiquated and atavistic," she says. "Their views on natural law, libertarianism and the limited power of government to respond when people are being discriminated against is scary -- for African-Americans, especially. The more people you have who expose those views on the court, the more dangerous it becomes for every one of our lives." In this book, Firewall: The Iran-Contra Conspiracy and Cover Up, Walsh writes: "In calling for the narrow construction of constitutional grants of governmental power, the Federalist Society seemed to speak for right-wing Republicans. I was especially troubled that one of White House Counsel Boyden Gray's assistants had openly declared that no one who was not a member of the Federalist Society had received a judicial appointment from President Bush." Brian W. Jones, a San Francisco lawyer and member of the Federalist Society, believes that his group is being maligned. "I reject out of hand that Federalists are hostile to civil rights," says Jones, an African-American who was deputy legal affairs secretary to California Gov. Pete Wilson and former counsel to Hatch's Senate Judiciary Committee. "Most members of the Federalist Society would agree that the government has no business making racial distinctions of any kind among its citizens. I would argue that is a very credible view of civil rights. "On civil rights and civil liberty issues, Federalist Society judges tend to have a more limited view of the federal government's authority to respond to a whole range of questions. For conservatives, the first question with any inquiry into responding to social problems is: Where does the authority lie, with the federal government or state and local governments?" Another African-American, Gerald Reynolds, is vice chairman of membership for the Federalist Society. "There are some people who embrace this principle of racial neutrality," says the Kansas City, Mo., lawyer. "This debate flows from principles and not from animosity toward Blacks." The national office of the Federalist Society in Washington, D.C., refused to provide the names of judges on its membership list. However, some of the organization's records were obtained by Emerge from other sources. An examination of Federalist Society documents for 1997 and 1998, the most current information available at press time, reveals the extent that the group has penetrated the courts. When looking at the board of directors of local chapters, officers, their advisory panels and membership lists, it is clear that when one goes to court seeking justice, he or she is increasingly likely to have a judge affiliated with the Federalist Society handling the case. During the period studied, that was true whether one was entering a courtroom in New York, Michigan or Alabama. (The titles of persons listed hereafter reflect the positions they held at the time the records were compiled by the Federalist Society; some of the judges have since been elevated to a higher court.) In New York state, judges serving as officers, directors or advisers to the local chapters included Thomas P. Griesa, chief judge of the U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York, as well as District Judges Shirley Wohl Kram, Lawrence M. McKenna and John E. Sprizzo. A U.S. Appeals Court Judge for the Second Circuit, Dennis G. Jacobs, was also among that group. The Long Island advisory board included U.S. District Judge Michael Fiechter, U.S. Court of International Trade Judge Gregory W. Carman and State Supreme Court Judges Jack Dunne and Ute Lally. In Michigan, judges aligned with the Federalist Society included James L. Ryan and Richard F. Suhreinrich of the U.S. Court of Appeals; Federal District Judges Paul V. Gadola, David W. McKeague, Gerald E. Rosen and Lawrence P. Zatkoff; and U.S. Magistrate Judge Virginia M. Morgan. State Supreme Court Justices Clifford W. Taylor and Elizabeth A. Weaver were listed as advisers to the Detroit chapter. So were Maura D. Corrigan, chief judge of the Michigan Court of Appeals, along with fellow judges Stephen J. Markman, Henry W. Saad, and Robert Young Jr. (an African-American who has since been elevated to the Michigan Supreme Court). The chief judge of the Washtenaw County Circuit Court in Grand Rapids, Kurtis T. Wilder (another African-Americana who is now on the Michigan Court of Appeals), and Wayne County Circuit Judges Sean Cox, Michael J. Talbot and Brian Zahra helped complete the list. Local chapters in Alabama were advised by Perry O. Hooper Sr., chief justice of the Supreme Court of Alabama, along with Associate Justices J. Gorman Houston, Harold See and A. Hugh Maddox. U.S. Sen. Jefferson B. Sessions III also supported the organization. (Sessions was nominated to become a federal judge in 1986 but was blocked when it was disclosed that he had called the NAACP and the American Civil Liberties Union "un-American" and "communist-inspired," and said they "force civil rights down the throats of people." Referring to the Ku Klux Klan, he reportedly said, "I used to think they're OK," until he learned that some Klansmen were "pot smokers." Sessions contended the remarks were either made in jest or had been misinterpreted.) Additional supporters listed included Randall T. Shepard, chief justice of the Indiana Supreme Court; Craig Enoch, chief justice of the Texas Supreme Court; South Carolina Attorney General Charles Molony Condon; Alabama Attorney General William Pryor (who has links on his web page to the Federalist Society and the conservative Washington Legal Foundation), Pennsylvania Attorney General D. Michael Fisher; Indianapolis Mayor Stephen Goldsmith and Clarence Thomas' wife, Virginia, a former aide to House majority leader Richard Armey, and who now works for the Heritage Foundation. As the presiding officials in courts, judges wield broad power. For example, U.S. District Judge Neal B. Biggers Jr., who sits on the advisory board of the Mississippi chapter of the Federalist Society, presided over the Ayers desegregation case. In 1975, Jake Ayers Sr., a Mississippi sharecropper, sued the state on behalf of his son, charging that the state's higher education system discriminated against African-Americans and historically Black colleges. In 1987, Biggers upheld the state College Board's contention that Mississippi's higher education system was no longer racially discriminatory. The Supreme Court reversed Biggers in 1991 and ordered him to remove any vestiges of past discrimination. The power of the Federalist Society is not limited to the judiciary, which would be concern enough. Its tentacles extend deep into corporate America. Listed members of its business advisory council included John Stewart Bryan, III, chairman, president and C.E.O. of Media General Cable; John G. Medlin Jr., board chair of Wachovia Corp., an interstate bank holding company; Geneva Steel C.E.O. Joseph Cannon and Robert L. Strickland, chairman of Lowe's Companies. Also affiliated with the Federalist Society are Brian J. Brille and David Panton of Morgan Stanley financial services in New York; William Haraf of Bank of America in San Francisco; Chris Ekren of Sony Corp. in San Jose, Calif.; Frank Blake of General Electric in Schenechtedy, N.Y.; Philip R. Lochner Jr., senior vice president, Time Warner Inc. in New York; William Kemp of General Motors in Warren, Mich.; Edward Whelan of GTE Corp.'s Washington office; David Askin of Exxon Co. in Baytown, Texas; Marsha Rabiteau of Dow Chemical in Midland, Mich.; F. James Tennies, chief administrative officer at Legg Mason for asset management in Baltimore; Jodi Balsam, counsel for operations and litigation for the National Football League and Tom Donahue of Metropolitan Life. Even federal employees in the Clinton administration were included in Federalist Society documents: Paul-Noel Chretien of the Justice Department; Theodore Cooperstein of the FBI; Carol Crawford of the International Trade Commission; Kevin Martin of the Federal Communications Commission and Christopher Holleman of the U.S. Small Business Administration. William Saunders of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights also backs the Society. Many of the nation's blue-chip law firms have attorneys associated with the Federalist Society. Those listed included lawyers in the Washington, D.C. law firms of Arnold and Porter; Covington & Burling; Steptoe & Johnson; Hogan & Hartson; Patton, Boaggs & Blow; and Wilmer, Cutler & Pickering. New York law firms with lawyers associated with the Federalist Society include: Cravath, Swaine & Moore; White & Case and Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison. In Boston, one law firm -- Hale and Door -- has at least 10 attorneys affiliated with the Federalist Society. The list of law professors associated with the society included Ronald A. Cass, dean of Boston University's law school; Michael Young of Columbia University; John Yoo of the University of California at Berkeley; Eugene Volokh of UCLA; Northwestern University professors Gary Lawson, Daniel D. Polsby and Stephen B. Presser; Robert P. George of Princeton; Gerard Bradley of Notre Dame; Gordon B. Baldwin of the University of Wisconsin, Olan B. Lowry of Temple; Johathan Macey and Richard Painter of Cornell; Ronald D. Rotunda of the University of Illinois; Gerald T. Dunn of St. Louis University and Thomas Morgan of George Washington University. The University of Virginia, one of the best law schools in the nation, has quite a few Federalist Society professors or sympathizers on its faculty, including John Norton Moore, Robert Turner, Erika Worth Harris and Lillian BeVier. "People have to understand, whether they like lawyers or not, law schools have an enormous amount of power, whether it's power for good or evil. Unfortunately, what we are seeing under the Federalist Society is law schools and legal education being used to promote racism, bigotry and Right-wing politics. These people believe in the Bell Curve," says Prof. Boyle of the University of Illinois, referring to a controversial theory by Charles Murray and Richard J. Herrnstein about the supposed low intelligence level of some non-Whites. "You have to understand that. Just as the Federalist Society did to the federal judiciary, they are now trying to do to law schools." Boyle and others say this is done by establishing well-endowed law professorships and speaking tours for the true believers. "Where they once were scholars with Right-wing foundations like the Heritage Foundation, American Enterprise Institute and the Cato Institute, they are now getting credentialed as law professors," he notes. No comparable movement exists among progressives, which may explain why civil rights groups and liberals are doing such a feeble job defending affirmative action. "We've got to realize that while we have been dillydallying in law schools with critical race theories and penetrating the Law Review, all this is chump change to [Federalists]," observes Berry, of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights. "It's like we were out playing whiffle ball while they were exercising power." The Federalist Society was founded 17 years ago by Yale Law School student Steven G. Calabresi and two counterparts at the University of Chicago School of Law, Lee Liberman and David McIntosh. All three were undergraduates together at Yale. Upset with what they perceived as liberal bias, the three decided to form an organization for conservative law students. Yale professors Robert H. Bork and Ralph K. Winter, both of whom would be appointed to the federal bench by Ronald Reagan, served as advisers to the Yale chapter. In Chicago, future U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia served in a similar capacity. The contacts the three made as students have proven to be invaluable. Calabresi, in addition to clerking for Bork and Winter, clerked for Scalia at the Supreme Court. He is now a law professor at Northwestern University. Liberman gave up a post in the Justice Department also to clerk for Scalia. She is now Lee Liberman Otis and is chief counsel for Sen. Spencer Abraham (R-Mich.), who founded a Federalist Society chapter at Harvard. McIntosh was a special assistant to Ed Meese when he was Reagan's attorney general; he is a three-term Republican Congressman who's considering running for governor of Indiana. In addition to a board of trustees, the society has a board of directors, co-chaired by Calabresi and McIntosh. The Federalist pipeline is a well-oiled old boy -- and sometimes girl -- network. For example, Brent O. Hatch, the son of Sen. Orrin Hatch, clerked for Robert Bork when he was a federal judge in Washington, D.C. After working in the Justice Department, young Hatch was appointed general counsel of the National Endowment for the Humanities at the age of 28. He is treasurer of the Federalist Society's board of directors. The organization has been funded by wealthy conservatives, such as Richard Mellon Scaife, who is vice chair of the Heritage Foundation's board, and another board member, Holland Coors, a member of the conservative Coors family. Many contributions are made through foundations that give to Right-wing causes, including the John M. Olin Foundation in New York, the Sarah Scaife Foundation in Pittsburgh, the Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation of Milwaukee and the Deer Creek Foundation in St. Louis. The Federalists have direct ties to Right-wing think tanks seeking to dismantle affirmative action at the local, state and federal levels. The Center for Individual Rights, which successfully argued the Hopwood case that banned affirmative action at the University of Texas, represents plaintiffs in a lawsuit pending against the University of Michigan and were lawyers for supporters of Proposition 209, the anti-affirmative action measure in California. The Washington Legal Foundation sued the University of Maryland, forcing it to drop its Benjamin Banneker scholarships for African-American scholars; the Southeastern Legal Foundation is leading an all-out assault on affirmative action in Atlanta, and the Institute for Justice led the attack on Lani Guinier, then a University of Pennsylvania law professor, who was President Clinton's first choice to be assistant U.S. attorney general for civil rights. Clint Bolick, the group's vice president, dismissed Guinier as a "quota queen," and the eventual nominee, Deval L. Patrick, as a "quota king." He also led the opposition to the appointment of Bill Lann Lee, who was later named acting assistant attorney general for civil rights. When first lady Hillary Rodham Clinton said that there was a "vast Right-wing conspiracy" afoot that had been hounding her husband since he first announced for president, some Right-wingers almost laughingly dismissed her charges. Special Prosecutor Ken Starr called the comments "nonsense." And Boston Herald columnist Joe Fitzgerald said the first lady had "wandered into paranoia." But information developed by the Institute for Democracy Studies, a nonprofit research and education organization in New York, confirms that the first lady was on the mark. In the executive summary of its report, "The Assault on Affirmative Action: An Organized Challenge to Racial and Gender Justice," the organization notes, "Once a month at the Heritage Foundation, representatives of the nation's leading conservative law groups get together for a 'luncheon.' This so-called Public Interest Legal Group meeting is just one of several monthly gatherings that right-wing law groups hold." The report continues: "These meetings serve the purpose of avoiding duplication of effort, airing future plans, and providing guidance for an appropriate organizational division of labor." In an interview with Emerge, Todd G. Young, director of research and communications for the Atlanta-based Southeastern Legal Foundation, confirms that Right-wing groups collaborate. "We read each other's briefs (as they are filed) and when there are updates published by other groups," he says. "Although we are separate entities, we share some common understandings about the Constitutions and our (mission) statements are really almost identical for the organizations." Of its recent lawsuit against Atlanta's affirmative action program, Young notes: "We're refining the definition of what it means to enjoy equal protection under the law and the first step is to end any government-sanctioned discrimination, such as affirmative action programs or racial preference programs. It's philosophically inconsistent to say it was bad then [in the 1950s and 1960s] but it's OK now." Atlanta Mayor Bill Campbell says it's not OK to discard programs devised to address discrimination against African-Americans. "Conservative legal interest groups, such as the Center for Individual Rights and the Southeastern Legal Foundation, are striking at the very heart of the civil rights gains of the '50s and '60s," explains Campbell. "These groups are, in essence, a homogenized version of the Klan. They may have traded in their sheets for suits and use different language, but it's the same old racism -- just old wine in new bottles." The Federalist Society takes its name from The Federalist papers, 85 articles originally published in New York newspapers between 1787 and 1788. The authors -- Alexander Hamilton, John Jay and James Madison -- were attempting to gain popular support for the adoption of a new Constitution. "Is The Federalist the key to what the Constitution's framers and adopters intended it to mean and how they expected it to function?" asked R. B. Bernstein, a constitutional historian who wrote the foreword to The Federalist, a recent reissue of the papers. "This subset of the original-intent controversy tends to pit many historians, who remain dubious about original-intent arguments, against many legal scholars, who seek a way to limit judicial discretion by anchoring constitutional interpretation in the Constitution's origins." Bernstein argued that the public should not look at the essays, all written under one pen name, as the definitive word on how the Constitution should be interpreted. "Jay was not a delegate to the Federal Convention, which framed the Constitution...[Hamilton] left the Convention in July, not returning until two weeks before its close in September. And Madison...found himself outvoted on a host of major issues," Bernstein noted. Moreover, as The Federalist papers became the classic commentary on the Constitution, the three men publicly identified themselves as the authors. Even that was not without controversy. Before his ill-fated duel with Aaron Burr, Hamilton tried to take credit for writing papers 18-20, 49-58 and 62-63. Madison made an identical claim of authorship, which was verified through a computer analysis in 1964. The most damning fact about today's Federalists is that they advocate a limited role for the federal government, while the early founders were interested in establishing a strong central government. Some civil rights leaders, including Theodore M. Shaw, associate director-counsel of the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund Inc., view the rhetoric of the modern-day Federalists as smokescreen for an assault on civil rights. "It's ideologically out of the mainstream and a part of the radically conservative agenda and the radically conservative agenda has never served the interest of African-Americans," Shaw says. Hilary O. Shelton, Washington bureau chief of the NAACP, is less charitable: "They are not conservative. They are very consistent with the Council of Conservative Citizens," a White supremacy group that has featured Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott (R-Miss.) and Rep. Bob Barr (R-Ga.) as speakers. Surprisingly, some of the harshest criticism of Federalist Society members has come from Republicans. For example, former Attorney General Meese, a main player in the Federalist movement, has been criticized by some of his colleagues in the Reagan administration. According to The Washington Post, James A. Baker III and Michael K. Deaver referred to Meese as the "Big Bigot," and conservatives referred to his top assistant, T. Kenneth Cribb Jr., as the "Baby Bigot." Cribb sits on the board of directors of the Federalist Society and is a trustee of the Scaife Foundation, a major contributor to the Federalist Society and other Right-wing causes. Graglia, who has taught at the University of Texas since 1966, touched off a controversy two years ago, when he said, "Blacks and Mexican Americans are not academically competitive with Whites in selective institutions." According to Graglia, "It is the result primarily of cultural effects. Failure is not looked upon with disgrace." He maintains his membership in the Federalist Society. "They certainly are unenthusiastic about civil rights laws," he says of his organization. "Richard Epstein [a law professor at the University of Chicago] thinks we will be better off if civil rights laws were all repealed. These people do believe, as I believe, that so-called civil rights have gone too far and are not civil rights at all." Because so many of the Federalist Society members are seen as opposing civil rights, some people are not quick to accept their professed interest in color-blind justice. U.S. Appeals Court Judge Stephen Reinhardt of the 9th Circuit observes, "We had the Civil War over states' rights. There is no question we are going back to the pre-Civil War view of governments." Former federal Judge Lawrence Walsh puts it more bluntly. "The impression I have is they are trying to return to the 18th century and undo the work of the Supreme Court since the New Deal," Walsh says. "And I think it is wrong to put someone on the court who has a pre-commitment with a political dogma, whether it's the Ku Klux Klan or the Federalist Society." -- Additional reporting by Lottie L. Joiner Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Tue Jun 27 14:19:06 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2017 14:19:06 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] News Gazoo for Feddie Yale Law Mafia Killer Koh Mazzone In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: My Mom-RIP-- was very proud when I told her that I was publicly attacked by a Low Life Like Borked in a Mass-Mailing Fund-raising Letter he sent to his 25,000 Feddies. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E.Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, Illinois 61820 Phone: 217-333-7954 Fax: 217-244-1478 fboyle at law.uiuc.edu 9 September 1997 Memorandum TO: Robert H. Bork Federalist Society Dear Bob: Concerning your fund-raising letter of 28 August that just came to my attention, I want to thank you from the bottom of my heart for publicly associating me with a Lawyer and a Judge who has the principles, courage and integrity of Lawrence Walsh. For your information, that message and others like out were sent out all over the internet, not just to 30 professors, together with the full text of Judge Walsh's attack on the Federalist Society. Out of respect for Judge Walsh, I certainly do hope that my professorial colleagues will pay the most serious attention to what he had to say about the Federalist Society. After all, Judge Walsh is a pillar of the American Legal Establishment and of the Republican Party. As for myself, I have always been a political independent and resent your implication that I am a member of the Democrat Party. Be that as it may, it seems to me that you have only (once again!) made a fool of yourself by publicly attacking a Lawyer and a Judge with the courage, integrity and principles of Judge Walsh--characteristics that you yourself were not noted for as Solicitor General (when you fired Archie Cox, the first Special Prosecutor), during your tenure on the bench, or during your Supreme Court nomination hearings. Rather than publicly attacking Judge Walsh, I suggest that you personally as well as the Federalist Society institutionally should be giving the most serious consideration to what he had to say. Yours very truly, Francis A. Boyle Professor of Law cc: Judge Lawrence Walsh Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, Ill. 61820 Phone: 217-333-7954 Fax: 217-244-1478 Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2017 8:43 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson ; Mildred O'brien Subject: RE: News Gazoo for Feddie Yale Law Mafia Killer Koh Mazzone LAW 604-1: Criminal Law Fall 2015 - Moore CONNED LAW is a required course here at the Waffen-SS Law School. So is Criminal Law brainwashed by our Resident CIA/MOSSAD/Torture-Mongerer Michael Moore-Truly Orwellian!-who publicly congratulated CONNED LAW Mazzone et al for bringing in Killer Koh. Teaching here at the Waffen-SS Law School since August 1978 has been like working in a combination of Orwell's 1984 and Conrad's Heart of Darkness-The Horror! The Horror! CIA/MOSSAD/TORTURE/MOORE/HURD OFF CAMPUS! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2017 7:12 AM To: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; Karen Aram >; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson >; Mildred O'brien > Subject: RE: News Gazoo for Feddie Yale Law Mafia Killer Koh Mazzone The University of Illinois College of Law-Hijacking Justice Everyday. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2017 7:06 AM To: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; Karen Aram >; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson >; Mildred O'brien > Subject: RE: News Gazoo for Feddie Yale Law Mafia Killer Koh Mazzone "The impression I have is they are trying to return to the 18th century and undo the work of the Supreme Court since the New Deal," Walsh says. "And I think it is wrong to put someone on the court who has a pre-commitment with a political dogma, whether it's the Ku Klux Klan or the Federalist Society." Yeah, the Feddie Mazzone teaching Conned Law at our Waffen-SS Law School and inviting Killer Koh to come out here and pollute and poison our Good Community. Judge Lawrence Walsh was Independent Counsel/Prosecutor in the Iran-Contra Scandal by appointment of President Reagan; prosecuted the Mob with Dewey in New York; Deputy Attorney General under Eisenhower; Pillar of the Republican Party; President of the American Bar Association; Federal District Judge; Partner in the New York Law Firm of Davis, Polk & Wardwell, etc. RIP. fab Walsh on Federalist Society According to the conventional wisdom, we were in a double bind: The judges appointed by Democratic presidents were supposedly most concerned with protecting the constitutional rights of persons prosecuted for crimes, while most of the other judges owed their appointments to Ronald Reagan or George Bush, who had stated publicly and emphatically that they hoped that North would not be convicted. Over the years, I had often found such simplistic views to be wrong. Most judges overcome the prejudices and alliances they had when appointed to the federal bench. During my three and one-half years on the federal district court in New York, I had experienced the merging process by which new judges are absorbed into their courts. My hard-line political and professional views had moderated during lunchroom conversations with Learned Hand, Jerome Frank, and Harold Medina and had dissolved after a couple of my decisions had been reversed on appeal. But I was concerned about the continuing political allegiance of Republican judges as manifested in the Federalist Society. Although the organization was not openly partisan, its dogma was political. It reminded me of the communist front groups of the 1940s and l950s, whose members were committed to the communist cause and subject to communist direction but were not card-carrying members of the Communist Party. In calling for the narrow construction of constitutional grants of governmental power, the Federalist Society seemed to speak for right-wing Republicans. I was especially troubled that one of White House Counsel Boyden Gray's assistants had openly declared that no one who was not a member of the Federalist Society had received a judicial appointment from President Bush. walsh.fed >From Iran-contra Independent Counsel Lawrence Walsh, Firewall. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2017 6:48 AM To: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; Karen Aram >; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson >; Mildred O'brien > Subject: News Gazoo for Feddie Yale Law Mafia Killer Koh Mazzone Sure. Yale Law Mafia Mazzone was on the Committee that invited Yale Law Mafia Killer Koh to come out here and pollute and poison our Good Community despite my best efforts to stop them. Yale Law Mafia Mazzone is also a Member of the Federalist Society, Hijacking Justice Everyday. 1. The Supremes upheld Trump's Muslim Ban in violation of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. 2. The Supremes have further eroded the Separation of Church and State in violation of the First Amendment. And it appears the Supremes are going to tolerate public bigotry and discrimination against LGBT in the name of "religious freedom" despite the fact we would never permit this to be done against Blacks, Jews, Catholics, etc except here on Campus where Wise {sic!} and the Zionists Ethnically Cleansed Native Americans out of UIUC. 3. We are all going to be up the proverbial creek without a paddle if Kennedy retires and Trump gets to replace him with another hard-line, doctrinaire religious fundamentalist Federalist Society Member like Gorsuch-Hijacking Justice every day along with Mazzone who "teaches" Conned Law at our Waffen-SS Law School. Fab. -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis [mailto:FBOYLE at law.uiuc.edu] Sent: Friday, September 17, 1999 6:35 PM To: undisclosed-recipients Subject: HIJACKING JUSTICE:FEDDIES S P E C I A L R E P O R T H I J A C K I N G J U S T I C E The Federalist Society, a Right-wing network of lawyers, judges and supporters, is undoing civil rights and other gains made through the courts BY GEORGE E. CURRY & TREVOR W. COLEMAN EMERGE, OCTOBER 1999 WHEN BROWN VS. BOARD OF EDUCATION WAS BEING ARGUED, a clerk to U.S. Supreme Court Justice Robert Jackson suggested that the court should rule against the plaintiffs in the landmark school desegregation case. While making the case for maintaining segregated schools, the clerk sent a memo to his boss saying, "It is about time the Court faced the fact that white people in the South don't like the colored people." That clerk was William Rehnquist, now chief justice of the United States Supreme Court. Seeking to put his own ultraconservatives on the Supreme Court with Rehnquist, President Ronald Reagan -- who had appointed more than half of the sitting federal judges by the time he left office -- considered nominating Lino A. Graglia, a controversial University of Texas law professor, as a federal appeals court judge for the 5th Circuit. But the nomination, which had been backed by Attorney General Edwin Meese III, was jettisoned after Graglia acknowledged that he had referred to African-Americans as "pickaninnies." The American Bar Association found the law professor "not qualified" to serve on the federal bench. Reagan did nominate Robert H. Bork, a former Yale law professor, who was on the U.S. Court of Appeals in Washington, D.C. Bork had opposed the 1964 Civil Rights Act, calling it "an unwanted intrusion on the right of individuals to choose with whom to associate." After bitter debate, the Senate rejected his nomination in 1987 by a vote of 58 to 42. Far from fading into the background, Bork, Meese, and to a lesser extent, Graglia, are key players in the Federalist Society, a powerful Right-wing network intent on restricting the power of courts, often at the expense of African-Americans and other people of color, the poor, women and the disadvantaged. The organization actively seeks to limit "judicial activism" and reverse Supreme Court landmark rulings since the New Deal, especially those issued in the 1960s and '70s. Special targets include the 1966 Miranda decision that provides certain rights for suspected criminals, the 1973 Roe vs. Wade ruling legalizing abortion and recent civil rights legislation. Founded in 1982 by three law students, the Federalist Society has grown into one of the most influential institutions in America. Four of the nine members of the U.S. Supreme Court -- Clarence Thomas, William H. Rehnquist, Antonin Scalia and Anthony M. Kennedy -- are close affiliates of the Federalist Society. So are Donald P. Hodel, former president of the Christina Coalition, and special prosecutor Kenneth Starr. The Federalist Society's board of trustees is co-chaired by Bork and U.S. Sen. Orrin Hatch -- one of the most conservative members on Capitol Hill. Other trustees include former Attorney General Meese, William Bradford Reynolds, who was assistant attorney general for civil rights in the Reagan Administration, sought to have court-ordered affirmative action programs overturned, and C. Boyden Gray, former President Bush's chief White House attorney, who opposed the Civil Rights Act of 1991. In a world being reshaped by the Federalist Society, conservative law students have formed chapters on campuses across the nation. After graduation, they clerk for conservative judges and then go on to become high-ranking government officials, partners in major law firms, prosecutors, law school professors and judges at the local, state and federal level. In short, the Federalist Society is on the verge of hijacking the judicial system. "This is more than an attack on affirmative action being spear-headed by the Federalist Society lawyers," observes Francis A. Boyle, a law professor at the University of Illinois. "They want to go beyond getting rid of affirmative action. They want to go back to Brown vs. Board of Education. "We have Justice Antonin Scalia (who advised the Federalist Society at its inception and later hired two of its three founders as his law clerks), who two years ago gave a public lecture at Columbia Law School where he stated if Brown vs. Board of Education was to be presented to him today, he would rule against the plaintiff. In other words, this was a threat that if Brown vs. Board of Education was voted on before the Supreme Court, he would overturn it." That type of thinking disturbs Lawrence E. Walsh. Before becoming president of the American Bar Association in 1975, Walsh chaired an ABA panel that approved President Nixon's choices of federal appeals judges, Clement Haynesworth and G. Harold Carswell, to serve on the Supreme Court. In 1969, the Senate rejected Haynesworth because of conflict-of-interest fears. The following year, Carswell was rejected by the Senate after it was disclosed that he had given a speech as a lawyer expressing his "vigorous belief in the principles of White supremacy." "My concern is there is going to be a cleavage in the courts between the Federalist Society members and nonmembers," says Walsh, a former federal judge. "Anything that perpetuates that kind of ideological cleavage is not good for the unity of the court system. Ideally, it seems to me that judges should avoid memberships [in politically and substantively motivated organizations] but, of course, they don't do that." In fact, the ABA, in one of its publications on judicial independence, concludes: "A judge's impartiality and ability to interpret and apply the laws fairly are integral to the administration of justice." But a judge's membership in an organization -- whether it's the American Civil Liberties Union on the Left or the Federalist Society on the Right -- can influence whether a judge is perceived as being unbiased, a critical element in a judicial system that prides itself on being fair. Harold D. Pope, president of the National Bar Association, says: "People who are opposing the expansion of rights and opportunities for all people in this society we feel are working against America's best interest. We would hope that all jurists, no matter what their prior political persuasion, would deal objectively with the facts of law as they come before them, as they were sworn to do so when they first sat on the bench." The expansion of the Federalist Society, which has adopted a silhouette of James Madison as its symbol, comes at a time when the legal community is worried about a loss of public confidence. An ABA special committee on judicial independence issued a report in August titled "Protecting the Bulwark of the Republic: Ensuring Public Support of the Judicial Process." The report states, "According to the ABA survey, only about half of the respondents believed that our justice system treats men and women equally. Even fewer believed that courts treat members of different ethnic groups or wealthy and poor people the same." The report continues, "As [former] ABA President [Philip S.] Anderson recently stated: "We must work on this problem for as long as it takes to make our profession equally open and our system of justice equally responsive to all members of our society, regardless of color. This is the ultimate challenge to the integrity of the rule of law in America.'" But the Federalist Society is interested in a challenge of a different kind. To its credit, the organization operates with an open and very public agenda. On its web page, for example, it lays out its conservative agenda. "The Federalist Society for Law and Public Policy Studies is a group of conservatives and libertarians interested in the current state of the legal order. It is founded on the principles that the state exists to preserve freedom, that the separation of governmental powers is central to our Constitution, and that it is emphatically the province and duty of the judiciary to say what the law is, not what it should be. The Society seeks both to promote an awareness of these principles and to further their application through its activities." Even conservative write Michael Lind would call this 19th-century view "the Confederate theory of the Constitution." Speakers at one national Federalist Society-sponsored lawyers convention proposed far-reaching judicial reforms that included the abolition of judicial review, limiting the powers of federal courts and stripping the Supreme Court of jurisdiction over certain matters. Mary Frances Berry, chair of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, is worried about more than theory. "What is scary about the Federalist Society is that it is antiquated and atavistic," she says. "Their views on natural law, libertarianism and the limited power of government to respond when people are being discriminated against is scary -- for African-Americans, especially. The more people you have who expose those views on the court, the more dangerous it becomes for every one of our lives." In this book, Firewall: The Iran-Contra Conspiracy and Cover Up, Walsh writes: "In calling for the narrow construction of constitutional grants of governmental power, the Federalist Society seemed to speak for right-wing Republicans. I was especially troubled that one of White House Counsel Boyden Gray's assistants had openly declared that no one who was not a member of the Federalist Society had received a judicial appointment from President Bush." Brian W. Jones, a San Francisco lawyer and member of the Federalist Society, believes that his group is being maligned. "I reject out of hand that Federalists are hostile to civil rights," says Jones, an African-American who was deputy legal affairs secretary to California Gov. Pete Wilson and former counsel to Hatch's Senate Judiciary Committee. "Most members of the Federalist Society would agree that the government has no business making racial distinctions of any kind among its citizens. I would argue that is a very credible view of civil rights. "On civil rights and civil liberty issues, Federalist Society judges tend to have a more limited view of the federal government's authority to respond to a whole range of questions. For conservatives, the first question with any inquiry into responding to social problems is: Where does the authority lie, with the federal government or state and local governments?" Another African-American, Gerald Reynolds, is vice chairman of membership for the Federalist Society. "There are some people who embrace this principle of racial neutrality," says the Kansas City, Mo., lawyer. "This debate flows from principles and not from animosity toward Blacks." The national office of the Federalist Society in Washington, D.C., refused to provide the names of judges on its membership list. However, some of the organization's records were obtained by Emerge from other sources. An examination of Federalist Society documents for 1997 and 1998, the most current information available at press time, reveals the extent that the group has penetrated the courts. When looking at the board of directors of local chapters, officers, their advisory panels and membership lists, it is clear that when one goes to court seeking justice, he or she is increasingly likely to have a judge affiliated with the Federalist Society handling the case. During the period studied, that was true whether one was entering a courtroom in New York, Michigan or Alabama. (The titles of persons listed hereafter reflect the positions they held at the time the records were compiled by the Federalist Society; some of the judges have since been elevated to a higher court.) In New York state, judges serving as officers, directors or advisers to the local chapters included Thomas P. Griesa, chief judge of the U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York, as well as District Judges Shirley Wohl Kram, Lawrence M. McKenna and John E. Sprizzo. A U.S. Appeals Court Judge for the Second Circuit, Dennis G. Jacobs, was also among that group. The Long Island advisory board included U.S. District Judge Michael Fiechter, U.S. Court of International Trade Judge Gregory W. Carman and State Supreme Court Judges Jack Dunne and Ute Lally. In Michigan, judges aligned with the Federalist Society included James L. Ryan and Richard F. Suhreinrich of the U.S. Court of Appeals; Federal District Judges Paul V. Gadola, David W. McKeague, Gerald E. Rosen and Lawrence P. Zatkoff; and U.S. Magistrate Judge Virginia M. Morgan. State Supreme Court Justices Clifford W. Taylor and Elizabeth A. Weaver were listed as advisers to the Detroit chapter. So were Maura D. Corrigan, chief judge of the Michigan Court of Appeals, along with fellow judges Stephen J. Markman, Henry W. Saad, and Robert Young Jr. (an African-American who has since been elevated to the Michigan Supreme Court). The chief judge of the Washtenaw County Circuit Court in Grand Rapids, Kurtis T. Wilder (another African-Americana who is now on the Michigan Court of Appeals), and Wayne County Circuit Judges Sean Cox, Michael J. Talbot and Brian Zahra helped complete the list. Local chapters in Alabama were advised by Perry O. Hooper Sr., chief justice of the Supreme Court of Alabama, along with Associate Justices J. Gorman Houston, Harold See and A. Hugh Maddox. U.S. Sen. Jefferson B. Sessions III also supported the organization. (Sessions was nominated to become a federal judge in 1986 but was blocked when it was disclosed that he had called the NAACP and the American Civil Liberties Union "un-American" and "communist-inspired," and said they "force civil rights down the throats of people." Referring to the Ku Klux Klan, he reportedly said, "I used to think they're OK," until he learned that some Klansmen were "pot smokers." Sessions contended the remarks were either made in jest or had been misinterpreted.) Additional supporters listed included Randall T. Shepard, chief justice of the Indiana Supreme Court; Craig Enoch, chief justice of the Texas Supreme Court; South Carolina Attorney General Charles Molony Condon; Alabama Attorney General William Pryor (who has links on his web page to the Federalist Society and the conservative Washington Legal Foundation), Pennsylvania Attorney General D. Michael Fisher; Indianapolis Mayor Stephen Goldsmith and Clarence Thomas' wife, Virginia, a former aide to House majority leader Richard Armey, and who now works for the Heritage Foundation. As the presiding officials in courts, judges wield broad power. For example, U.S. District Judge Neal B. Biggers Jr., who sits on the advisory board of the Mississippi chapter of the Federalist Society, presided over the Ayers desegregation case. In 1975, Jake Ayers Sr., a Mississippi sharecropper, sued the state on behalf of his son, charging that the state's higher education system discriminated against African-Americans and historically Black colleges. In 1987, Biggers upheld the state College Board's contention that Mississippi's higher education system was no longer racially discriminatory. The Supreme Court reversed Biggers in 1991 and ordered him to remove any vestiges of past discrimination. The power of the Federalist Society is not limited to the judiciary, which would be concern enough. Its tentacles extend deep into corporate America. Listed members of its business advisory council included John Stewart Bryan, III, chairman, president and C.E.O. of Media General Cable; John G. Medlin Jr., board chair of Wachovia Corp., an interstate bank holding company; Geneva Steel C.E.O. Joseph Cannon and Robert L. Strickland, chairman of Lowe's Companies. Also affiliated with the Federalist Society are Brian J. Brille and David Panton of Morgan Stanley financial services in New York; William Haraf of Bank of America in San Francisco; Chris Ekren of Sony Corp. in San Jose, Calif.; Frank Blake of General Electric in Schenechtedy, N.Y.; Philip R. Lochner Jr., senior vice president, Time Warner Inc. in New York; William Kemp of General Motors in Warren, Mich.; Edward Whelan of GTE Corp.'s Washington office; David Askin of Exxon Co. in Baytown, Texas; Marsha Rabiteau of Dow Chemical in Midland, Mich.; F. James Tennies, chief administrative officer at Legg Mason for asset management in Baltimore; Jodi Balsam, counsel for operations and litigation for the National Football League and Tom Donahue of Metropolitan Life. Even federal employees in the Clinton administration were included in Federalist Society documents: Paul-Noel Chretien of the Justice Department; Theodore Cooperstein of the FBI; Carol Crawford of the International Trade Commission; Kevin Martin of the Federal Communications Commission and Christopher Holleman of the U.S. Small Business Administration. William Saunders of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights also backs the Society. Many of the nation's blue-chip law firms have attorneys associated with the Federalist Society. Those listed included lawyers in the Washington, D.C. law firms of Arnold and Porter; Covington & Burling; Steptoe & Johnson; Hogan & Hartson; Patton, Boaggs & Blow; and Wilmer, Cutler & Pickering. New York law firms with lawyers associated with the Federalist Society include: Cravath, Swaine & Moore; White & Case and Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison. In Boston, one law firm -- Hale and Door -- has at least 10 attorneys affiliated with the Federalist Society. The list of law professors associated with the society included Ronald A. Cass, dean of Boston University's law school; Michael Young of Columbia University; John Yoo of the University of California at Berkeley; Eugene Volokh of UCLA; Northwestern University professors Gary Lawson, Daniel D. Polsby and Stephen B. Presser; Robert P. George of Princeton; Gerard Bradley of Notre Dame; Gordon B. Baldwin of the University of Wisconsin, Olan B. Lowry of Temple; Johathan Macey and Richard Painter of Cornell; Ronald D. Rotunda of the University of Illinois; Gerald T. Dunn of St. Louis University and Thomas Morgan of George Washington University. The University of Virginia, one of the best law schools in the nation, has quite a few Federalist Society professors or sympathizers on its faculty, including John Norton Moore, Robert Turner, Erika Worth Harris and Lillian BeVier. "People have to understand, whether they like lawyers or not, law schools have an enormous amount of power, whether it's power for good or evil. Unfortunately, what we are seeing under the Federalist Society is law schools and legal education being used to promote racism, bigotry and Right-wing politics. These people believe in the Bell Curve," says Prof. Boyle of the University of Illinois, referring to a controversial theory by Charles Murray and Richard J. Herrnstein about the supposed low intelligence level of some non-Whites. "You have to understand that. Just as the Federalist Society did to the federal judiciary, they are now trying to do to law schools." Boyle and others say this is done by establishing well-endowed law professorships and speaking tours for the true believers. "Where they once were scholars with Right-wing foundations like the Heritage Foundation, American Enterprise Institute and the Cato Institute, they are now getting credentialed as law professors," he notes. No comparable movement exists among progressives, which may explain why civil rights groups and liberals are doing such a feeble job defending affirmative action. "We've got to realize that while we have been dillydallying in law schools with critical race theories and penetrating the Law Review, all this is chump change to [Federalists]," observes Berry, of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights. "It's like we were out playing whiffle ball while they were exercising power." The Federalist Society was founded 17 years ago by Yale Law School student Steven G. Calabresi and two counterparts at the University of Chicago School of Law, Lee Liberman and David McIntosh. All three were undergraduates together at Yale. Upset with what they perceived as liberal bias, the three decided to form an organization for conservative law students. Yale professors Robert H. Bork and Ralph K. Winter, both of whom would be appointed to the federal bench by Ronald Reagan, served as advisers to the Yale chapter. In Chicago, future U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia served in a similar capacity. The contacts the three made as students have proven to be invaluable. Calabresi, in addition to clerking for Bork and Winter, clerked for Scalia at the Supreme Court. He is now a law professor at Northwestern University. Liberman gave up a post in the Justice Department also to clerk for Scalia. She is now Lee Liberman Otis and is chief counsel for Sen. Spencer Abraham (R-Mich.), who founded a Federalist Society chapter at Harvard. McIntosh was a special assistant to Ed Meese when he was Reagan's attorney general; he is a three-term Republican Congressman who's considering running for governor of Indiana. In addition to a board of trustees, the society has a board of directors, co-chaired by Calabresi and McIntosh. The Federalist pipeline is a well-oiled old boy -- and sometimes girl -- network. For example, Brent O. Hatch, the son of Sen. Orrin Hatch, clerked for Robert Bork when he was a federal judge in Washington, D.C. After working in the Justice Department, young Hatch was appointed general counsel of the National Endowment for the Humanities at the age of 28. He is treasurer of the Federalist Society's board of directors. The organization has been funded by wealthy conservatives, such as Richard Mellon Scaife, who is vice chair of the Heritage Foundation's board, and another board member, Holland Coors, a member of the conservative Coors family. Many contributions are made through foundations that give to Right-wing causes, including the John M. Olin Foundation in New York, the Sarah Scaife Foundation in Pittsburgh, the Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation of Milwaukee and the Deer Creek Foundation in St. Louis. The Federalists have direct ties to Right-wing think tanks seeking to dismantle affirmative action at the local, state and federal levels. The Center for Individual Rights, which successfully argued the Hopwood case that banned affirmative action at the University of Texas, represents plaintiffs in a lawsuit pending against the University of Michigan and were lawyers for supporters of Proposition 209, the anti-affirmative action measure in California. The Washington Legal Foundation sued the University of Maryland, forcing it to drop its Benjamin Banneker scholarships for African-American scholars; the Southeastern Legal Foundation is leading an all-out assault on affirmative action in Atlanta, and the Institute for Justice led the attack on Lani Guinier, then a University of Pennsylvania law professor, who was President Clinton's first choice to be assistant U.S. attorney general for civil rights. Clint Bolick, the group's vice president, dismissed Guinier as a "quota queen," and the eventual nominee, Deval L. Patrick, as a "quota king." He also led the opposition to the appointment of Bill Lann Lee, who was later named acting assistant attorney general for civil rights. When first lady Hillary Rodham Clinton said that there was a "vast Right-wing conspiracy" afoot that had been hounding her husband since he first announced for president, some Right-wingers almost laughingly dismissed her charges. Special Prosecutor Ken Starr called the comments "nonsense." And Boston Herald columnist Joe Fitzgerald said the first lady had "wandered into paranoia." But information developed by the Institute for Democracy Studies, a nonprofit research and education organization in New York, confirms that the first lady was on the mark. In the executive summary of its report, "The Assault on Affirmative Action: An Organized Challenge to Racial and Gender Justice," the organization notes, "Once a month at the Heritage Foundation, representatives of the nation's leading conservative law groups get together for a 'luncheon.' This so-called Public Interest Legal Group meeting is just one of several monthly gatherings that right-wing law groups hold." The report continues: "These meetings serve the purpose of avoiding duplication of effort, airing future plans, and providing guidance for an appropriate organizational division of labor." In an interview with Emerge, Todd G. Young, director of research and communications for the Atlanta-based Southeastern Legal Foundation, confirms that Right-wing groups collaborate. "We read each other's briefs (as they are filed) and when there are updates published by other groups," he says. "Although we are separate entities, we share some common understandings about the Constitutions and our (mission) statements are really almost identical for the organizations." Of its recent lawsuit against Atlanta's affirmative action program, Young notes: "We're refining the definition of what it means to enjoy equal protection under the law and the first step is to end any government-sanctioned discrimination, such as affirmative action programs or racial preference programs. It's philosophically inconsistent to say it was bad then [in the 1950s and 1960s] but it's OK now." Atlanta Mayor Bill Campbell says it's not OK to discard programs devised to address discrimination against African-Americans. "Conservative legal interest groups, such as the Center for Individual Rights and the Southeastern Legal Foundation, are striking at the very heart of the civil rights gains of the '50s and '60s," explains Campbell. "These groups are, in essence, a homogenized version of the Klan. They may have traded in their sheets for suits and use different language, but it's the same old racism -- just old wine in new bottles." The Federalist Society takes its name from The Federalist papers, 85 articles originally published in New York newspapers between 1787 and 1788. The authors -- Alexander Hamilton, John Jay and James Madison -- were attempting to gain popular support for the adoption of a new Constitution. "Is The Federalist the key to what the Constitution's framers and adopters intended it to mean and how they expected it to function?" asked R. B. Bernstein, a constitutional historian who wrote the foreword to The Federalist, a recent reissue of the papers. "This subset of the original-intent controversy tends to pit many historians, who remain dubious about original-intent arguments, against many legal scholars, who seek a way to limit judicial discretion by anchoring constitutional interpretation in the Constitution's origins." Bernstein argued that the public should not look at the essays, all written under one pen name, as the definitive word on how the Constitution should be interpreted. "Jay was not a delegate to the Federal Convention, which framed the Constitution...[Hamilton] left the Convention in July, not returning until two weeks before its close in September. And Madison...found himself outvoted on a host of major issues," Bernstein noted. Moreover, as The Federalist papers became the classic commentary on the Constitution, the three men publicly identified themselves as the authors. Even that was not without controversy. Before his ill-fated duel with Aaron Burr, Hamilton tried to take credit for writing papers 18-20, 49-58 and 62-63. Madison made an identical claim of authorship, which was verified through a computer analysis in 1964. The most damning fact about today's Federalists is that they advocate a limited role for the federal government, while the early founders were interested in establishing a strong central government. Some civil rights leaders, including Theodore M. Shaw, associate director-counsel of the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund Inc., view the rhetoric of the modern-day Federalists as smokescreen for an assault on civil rights. "It's ideologically out of the mainstream and a part of the radically conservative agenda and the radically conservative agenda has never served the interest of African-Americans," Shaw says. Hilary O. Shelton, Washington bureau chief of the NAACP, is less charitable: "They are not conservative. They are very consistent with the Council of Conservative Citizens," a White supremacy group that has featured Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott (R-Miss.) and Rep. Bob Barr (R-Ga.) as speakers. Surprisingly, some of the harshest criticism of Federalist Society members has come from Republicans. For example, former Attorney General Meese, a main player in the Federalist movement, has been criticized by some of his colleagues in the Reagan administration. According to The Washington Post, James A. Baker III and Michael K. Deaver referred to Meese as the "Big Bigot," and conservatives referred to his top assistant, T. Kenneth Cribb Jr., as the "Baby Bigot." Cribb sits on the board of directors of the Federalist Society and is a trustee of the Scaife Foundation, a major contributor to the Federalist Society and other Right-wing causes. Graglia, who has taught at the University of Texas since 1966, touched off a controversy two years ago, when he said, "Blacks and Mexican Americans are not academically competitive with Whites in selective institutions." According to Graglia, "It is the result primarily of cultural effects. Failure is not looked upon with disgrace." He maintains his membership in the Federalist Society. "They certainly are unenthusiastic about civil rights laws," he says of his organization. "Richard Epstein [a law professor at the University of Chicago] thinks we will be better off if civil rights laws were all repealed. These people do believe, as I believe, that so-called civil rights have gone too far and are not civil rights at all." Because so many of the Federalist Society members are seen as opposing civil rights, some people are not quick to accept their professed interest in color-blind justice. U.S. Appeals Court Judge Stephen Reinhardt of the 9th Circuit observes, "We had the Civil War over states' rights. There is no question we are going back to the pre-Civil War view of governments." Former federal Judge Lawrence Walsh puts it more bluntly. "The impression I have is they are trying to return to the 18th century and undo the work of the Supreme Court since the New Deal," Walsh says. "And I think it is wrong to put someone on the court who has a pre-commitment with a political dogma, whether it's the Ku Klux Klan or the Federalist Society." -- Additional reporting by Lottie L. Joiner Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Tue Jun 27 14:19:06 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2017 14:19:06 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] News Gazoo for Feddie Yale Law Mafia Killer Koh Mazzone In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: My Mom-RIP-- was very proud when I told her that I was publicly attacked by a Low Life Like Borked in a Mass-Mailing Fund-raising Letter he sent to his 25,000 Feddies. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E.Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, Illinois 61820 Phone: 217-333-7954 Fax: 217-244-1478 fboyle at law.uiuc.edu 9 September 1997 Memorandum TO: Robert H. Bork Federalist Society Dear Bob: Concerning your fund-raising letter of 28 August that just came to my attention, I want to thank you from the bottom of my heart for publicly associating me with a Lawyer and a Judge who has the principles, courage and integrity of Lawrence Walsh. For your information, that message and others like out were sent out all over the internet, not just to 30 professors, together with the full text of Judge Walsh's attack on the Federalist Society. Out of respect for Judge Walsh, I certainly do hope that my professorial colleagues will pay the most serious attention to what he had to say about the Federalist Society. After all, Judge Walsh is a pillar of the American Legal Establishment and of the Republican Party. As for myself, I have always been a political independent and resent your implication that I am a member of the Democrat Party. Be that as it may, it seems to me that you have only (once again!) made a fool of yourself by publicly attacking a Lawyer and a Judge with the courage, integrity and principles of Judge Walsh--characteristics that you yourself were not noted for as Solicitor General (when you fired Archie Cox, the first Special Prosecutor), during your tenure on the bench, or during your Supreme Court nomination hearings. Rather than publicly attacking Judge Walsh, I suggest that you personally as well as the Federalist Society institutionally should be giving the most serious consideration to what he had to say. Yours very truly, Francis A. Boyle Professor of Law cc: Judge Lawrence Walsh Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, Ill. 61820 Phone: 217-333-7954 Fax: 217-244-1478 Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2017 8:43 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson ; Mildred O'brien Subject: RE: News Gazoo for Feddie Yale Law Mafia Killer Koh Mazzone LAW 604-1: Criminal Law Fall 2015 - Moore CONNED LAW is a required course here at the Waffen-SS Law School. So is Criminal Law brainwashed by our Resident CIA/MOSSAD/Torture-Mongerer Michael Moore-Truly Orwellian!-who publicly congratulated CONNED LAW Mazzone et al for bringing in Killer Koh. Teaching here at the Waffen-SS Law School since August 1978 has been like working in a combination of Orwell's 1984 and Conrad's Heart of Darkness-The Horror! The Horror! CIA/MOSSAD/TORTURE/MOORE/HURD OFF CAMPUS! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2017 7:12 AM To: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; Karen Aram >; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson >; Mildred O'brien > Subject: RE: News Gazoo for Feddie Yale Law Mafia Killer Koh Mazzone The University of Illinois College of Law-Hijacking Justice Everyday. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2017 7:06 AM To: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; Karen Aram >; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson >; Mildred O'brien > Subject: RE: News Gazoo for Feddie Yale Law Mafia Killer Koh Mazzone "The impression I have is they are trying to return to the 18th century and undo the work of the Supreme Court since the New Deal," Walsh says. "And I think it is wrong to put someone on the court who has a pre-commitment with a political dogma, whether it's the Ku Klux Klan or the Federalist Society." Yeah, the Feddie Mazzone teaching Conned Law at our Waffen-SS Law School and inviting Killer Koh to come out here and pollute and poison our Good Community. Judge Lawrence Walsh was Independent Counsel/Prosecutor in the Iran-Contra Scandal by appointment of President Reagan; prosecuted the Mob with Dewey in New York; Deputy Attorney General under Eisenhower; Pillar of the Republican Party; President of the American Bar Association; Federal District Judge; Partner in the New York Law Firm of Davis, Polk & Wardwell, etc. RIP. fab Walsh on Federalist Society According to the conventional wisdom, we were in a double bind: The judges appointed by Democratic presidents were supposedly most concerned with protecting the constitutional rights of persons prosecuted for crimes, while most of the other judges owed their appointments to Ronald Reagan or George Bush, who had stated publicly and emphatically that they hoped that North would not be convicted. Over the years, I had often found such simplistic views to be wrong. Most judges overcome the prejudices and alliances they had when appointed to the federal bench. During my three and one-half years on the federal district court in New York, I had experienced the merging process by which new judges are absorbed into their courts. My hard-line political and professional views had moderated during lunchroom conversations with Learned Hand, Jerome Frank, and Harold Medina and had dissolved after a couple of my decisions had been reversed on appeal. But I was concerned about the continuing political allegiance of Republican judges as manifested in the Federalist Society. Although the organization was not openly partisan, its dogma was political. It reminded me of the communist front groups of the 1940s and l950s, whose members were committed to the communist cause and subject to communist direction but were not card-carrying members of the Communist Party. In calling for the narrow construction of constitutional grants of governmental power, the Federalist Society seemed to speak for right-wing Republicans. I was especially troubled that one of White House Counsel Boyden Gray's assistants had openly declared that no one who was not a member of the Federalist Society had received a judicial appointment from President Bush. walsh.fed >From Iran-contra Independent Counsel Lawrence Walsh, Firewall. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2017 6:48 AM To: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; Karen Aram >; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson >; Mildred O'brien > Subject: News Gazoo for Feddie Yale Law Mafia Killer Koh Mazzone Sure. Yale Law Mafia Mazzone was on the Committee that invited Yale Law Mafia Killer Koh to come out here and pollute and poison our Good Community despite my best efforts to stop them. Yale Law Mafia Mazzone is also a Member of the Federalist Society, Hijacking Justice Everyday. 1. The Supremes upheld Trump's Muslim Ban in violation of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. 2. The Supremes have further eroded the Separation of Church and State in violation of the First Amendment. And it appears the Supremes are going to tolerate public bigotry and discrimination against LGBT in the name of "religious freedom" despite the fact we would never permit this to be done against Blacks, Jews, Catholics, etc except here on Campus where Wise {sic!} and the Zionists Ethnically Cleansed Native Americans out of UIUC. 3. We are all going to be up the proverbial creek without a paddle if Kennedy retires and Trump gets to replace him with another hard-line, doctrinaire religious fundamentalist Federalist Society Member like Gorsuch-Hijacking Justice every day along with Mazzone who "teaches" Conned Law at our Waffen-SS Law School. Fab. -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis [mailto:FBOYLE at law.uiuc.edu] Sent: Friday, September 17, 1999 6:35 PM To: undisclosed-recipients Subject: HIJACKING JUSTICE:FEDDIES S P E C I A L R E P O R T H I J A C K I N G J U S T I C E The Federalist Society, a Right-wing network of lawyers, judges and supporters, is undoing civil rights and other gains made through the courts BY GEORGE E. CURRY & TREVOR W. COLEMAN EMERGE, OCTOBER 1999 WHEN BROWN VS. BOARD OF EDUCATION WAS BEING ARGUED, a clerk to U.S. Supreme Court Justice Robert Jackson suggested that the court should rule against the plaintiffs in the landmark school desegregation case. While making the case for maintaining segregated schools, the clerk sent a memo to his boss saying, "It is about time the Court faced the fact that white people in the South don't like the colored people." That clerk was William Rehnquist, now chief justice of the United States Supreme Court. Seeking to put his own ultraconservatives on the Supreme Court with Rehnquist, President Ronald Reagan -- who had appointed more than half of the sitting federal judges by the time he left office -- considered nominating Lino A. Graglia, a controversial University of Texas law professor, as a federal appeals court judge for the 5th Circuit. But the nomination, which had been backed by Attorney General Edwin Meese III, was jettisoned after Graglia acknowledged that he had referred to African-Americans as "pickaninnies." The American Bar Association found the law professor "not qualified" to serve on the federal bench. Reagan did nominate Robert H. Bork, a former Yale law professor, who was on the U.S. Court of Appeals in Washington, D.C. Bork had opposed the 1964 Civil Rights Act, calling it "an unwanted intrusion on the right of individuals to choose with whom to associate." After bitter debate, the Senate rejected his nomination in 1987 by a vote of 58 to 42. Far from fading into the background, Bork, Meese, and to a lesser extent, Graglia, are key players in the Federalist Society, a powerful Right-wing network intent on restricting the power of courts, often at the expense of African-Americans and other people of color, the poor, women and the disadvantaged. The organization actively seeks to limit "judicial activism" and reverse Supreme Court landmark rulings since the New Deal, especially those issued in the 1960s and '70s. Special targets include the 1966 Miranda decision that provides certain rights for suspected criminals, the 1973 Roe vs. Wade ruling legalizing abortion and recent civil rights legislation. Founded in 1982 by three law students, the Federalist Society has grown into one of the most influential institutions in America. Four of the nine members of the U.S. Supreme Court -- Clarence Thomas, William H. Rehnquist, Antonin Scalia and Anthony M. Kennedy -- are close affiliates of the Federalist Society. So are Donald P. Hodel, former president of the Christina Coalition, and special prosecutor Kenneth Starr. The Federalist Society's board of trustees is co-chaired by Bork and U.S. Sen. Orrin Hatch -- one of the most conservative members on Capitol Hill. Other trustees include former Attorney General Meese, William Bradford Reynolds, who was assistant attorney general for civil rights in the Reagan Administration, sought to have court-ordered affirmative action programs overturned, and C. Boyden Gray, former President Bush's chief White House attorney, who opposed the Civil Rights Act of 1991. In a world being reshaped by the Federalist Society, conservative law students have formed chapters on campuses across the nation. After graduation, they clerk for conservative judges and then go on to become high-ranking government officials, partners in major law firms, prosecutors, law school professors and judges at the local, state and federal level. In short, the Federalist Society is on the verge of hijacking the judicial system. "This is more than an attack on affirmative action being spear-headed by the Federalist Society lawyers," observes Francis A. Boyle, a law professor at the University of Illinois. "They want to go beyond getting rid of affirmative action. They want to go back to Brown vs. Board of Education. "We have Justice Antonin Scalia (who advised the Federalist Society at its inception and later hired two of its three founders as his law clerks), who two years ago gave a public lecture at Columbia Law School where he stated if Brown vs. Board of Education was to be presented to him today, he would rule against the plaintiff. In other words, this was a threat that if Brown vs. Board of Education was voted on before the Supreme Court, he would overturn it." That type of thinking disturbs Lawrence E. Walsh. Before becoming president of the American Bar Association in 1975, Walsh chaired an ABA panel that approved President Nixon's choices of federal appeals judges, Clement Haynesworth and G. Harold Carswell, to serve on the Supreme Court. In 1969, the Senate rejected Haynesworth because of conflict-of-interest fears. The following year, Carswell was rejected by the Senate after it was disclosed that he had given a speech as a lawyer expressing his "vigorous belief in the principles of White supremacy." "My concern is there is going to be a cleavage in the courts between the Federalist Society members and nonmembers," says Walsh, a former federal judge. "Anything that perpetuates that kind of ideological cleavage is not good for the unity of the court system. Ideally, it seems to me that judges should avoid memberships [in politically and substantively motivated organizations] but, of course, they don't do that." In fact, the ABA, in one of its publications on judicial independence, concludes: "A judge's impartiality and ability to interpret and apply the laws fairly are integral to the administration of justice." But a judge's membership in an organization -- whether it's the American Civil Liberties Union on the Left or the Federalist Society on the Right -- can influence whether a judge is perceived as being unbiased, a critical element in a judicial system that prides itself on being fair. Harold D. Pope, president of the National Bar Association, says: "People who are opposing the expansion of rights and opportunities for all people in this society we feel are working against America's best interest. We would hope that all jurists, no matter what their prior political persuasion, would deal objectively with the facts of law as they come before them, as they were sworn to do so when they first sat on the bench." The expansion of the Federalist Society, which has adopted a silhouette of James Madison as its symbol, comes at a time when the legal community is worried about a loss of public confidence. An ABA special committee on judicial independence issued a report in August titled "Protecting the Bulwark of the Republic: Ensuring Public Support of the Judicial Process." The report states, "According to the ABA survey, only about half of the respondents believed that our justice system treats men and women equally. Even fewer believed that courts treat members of different ethnic groups or wealthy and poor people the same." The report continues, "As [former] ABA President [Philip S.] Anderson recently stated: "We must work on this problem for as long as it takes to make our profession equally open and our system of justice equally responsive to all members of our society, regardless of color. This is the ultimate challenge to the integrity of the rule of law in America.'" But the Federalist Society is interested in a challenge of a different kind. To its credit, the organization operates with an open and very public agenda. On its web page, for example, it lays out its conservative agenda. "The Federalist Society for Law and Public Policy Studies is a group of conservatives and libertarians interested in the current state of the legal order. It is founded on the principles that the state exists to preserve freedom, that the separation of governmental powers is central to our Constitution, and that it is emphatically the province and duty of the judiciary to say what the law is, not what it should be. The Society seeks both to promote an awareness of these principles and to further their application through its activities." Even conservative write Michael Lind would call this 19th-century view "the Confederate theory of the Constitution." Speakers at one national Federalist Society-sponsored lawyers convention proposed far-reaching judicial reforms that included the abolition of judicial review, limiting the powers of federal courts and stripping the Supreme Court of jurisdiction over certain matters. Mary Frances Berry, chair of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, is worried about more than theory. "What is scary about the Federalist Society is that it is antiquated and atavistic," she says. "Their views on natural law, libertarianism and the limited power of government to respond when people are being discriminated against is scary -- for African-Americans, especially. The more people you have who expose those views on the court, the more dangerous it becomes for every one of our lives." In this book, Firewall: The Iran-Contra Conspiracy and Cover Up, Walsh writes: "In calling for the narrow construction of constitutional grants of governmental power, the Federalist Society seemed to speak for right-wing Republicans. I was especially troubled that one of White House Counsel Boyden Gray's assistants had openly declared that no one who was not a member of the Federalist Society had received a judicial appointment from President Bush." Brian W. Jones, a San Francisco lawyer and member of the Federalist Society, believes that his group is being maligned. "I reject out of hand that Federalists are hostile to civil rights," says Jones, an African-American who was deputy legal affairs secretary to California Gov. Pete Wilson and former counsel to Hatch's Senate Judiciary Committee. "Most members of the Federalist Society would agree that the government has no business making racial distinctions of any kind among its citizens. I would argue that is a very credible view of civil rights. "On civil rights and civil liberty issues, Federalist Society judges tend to have a more limited view of the federal government's authority to respond to a whole range of questions. For conservatives, the first question with any inquiry into responding to social problems is: Where does the authority lie, with the federal government or state and local governments?" Another African-American, Gerald Reynolds, is vice chairman of membership for the Federalist Society. "There are some people who embrace this principle of racial neutrality," says the Kansas City, Mo., lawyer. "This debate flows from principles and not from animosity toward Blacks." The national office of the Federalist Society in Washington, D.C., refused to provide the names of judges on its membership list. However, some of the organization's records were obtained by Emerge from other sources. An examination of Federalist Society documents for 1997 and 1998, the most current information available at press time, reveals the extent that the group has penetrated the courts. When looking at the board of directors of local chapters, officers, their advisory panels and membership lists, it is clear that when one goes to court seeking justice, he or she is increasingly likely to have a judge affiliated with the Federalist Society handling the case. During the period studied, that was true whether one was entering a courtroom in New York, Michigan or Alabama. (The titles of persons listed hereafter reflect the positions they held at the time the records were compiled by the Federalist Society; some of the judges have since been elevated to a higher court.) In New York state, judges serving as officers, directors or advisers to the local chapters included Thomas P. Griesa, chief judge of the U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York, as well as District Judges Shirley Wohl Kram, Lawrence M. McKenna and John E. Sprizzo. A U.S. Appeals Court Judge for the Second Circuit, Dennis G. Jacobs, was also among that group. The Long Island advisory board included U.S. District Judge Michael Fiechter, U.S. Court of International Trade Judge Gregory W. Carman and State Supreme Court Judges Jack Dunne and Ute Lally. In Michigan, judges aligned with the Federalist Society included James L. Ryan and Richard F. Suhreinrich of the U.S. Court of Appeals; Federal District Judges Paul V. Gadola, David W. McKeague, Gerald E. Rosen and Lawrence P. Zatkoff; and U.S. Magistrate Judge Virginia M. Morgan. State Supreme Court Justices Clifford W. Taylor and Elizabeth A. Weaver were listed as advisers to the Detroit chapter. So were Maura D. Corrigan, chief judge of the Michigan Court of Appeals, along with fellow judges Stephen J. Markman, Henry W. Saad, and Robert Young Jr. (an African-American who has since been elevated to the Michigan Supreme Court). The chief judge of the Washtenaw County Circuit Court in Grand Rapids, Kurtis T. Wilder (another African-Americana who is now on the Michigan Court of Appeals), and Wayne County Circuit Judges Sean Cox, Michael J. Talbot and Brian Zahra helped complete the list. Local chapters in Alabama were advised by Perry O. Hooper Sr., chief justice of the Supreme Court of Alabama, along with Associate Justices J. Gorman Houston, Harold See and A. Hugh Maddox. U.S. Sen. Jefferson B. Sessions III also supported the organization. (Sessions was nominated to become a federal judge in 1986 but was blocked when it was disclosed that he had called the NAACP and the American Civil Liberties Union "un-American" and "communist-inspired," and said they "force civil rights down the throats of people." Referring to the Ku Klux Klan, he reportedly said, "I used to think they're OK," until he learned that some Klansmen were "pot smokers." Sessions contended the remarks were either made in jest or had been misinterpreted.) Additional supporters listed included Randall T. Shepard, chief justice of the Indiana Supreme Court; Craig Enoch, chief justice of the Texas Supreme Court; South Carolina Attorney General Charles Molony Condon; Alabama Attorney General William Pryor (who has links on his web page to the Federalist Society and the conservative Washington Legal Foundation), Pennsylvania Attorney General D. Michael Fisher; Indianapolis Mayor Stephen Goldsmith and Clarence Thomas' wife, Virginia, a former aide to House majority leader Richard Armey, and who now works for the Heritage Foundation. As the presiding officials in courts, judges wield broad power. For example, U.S. District Judge Neal B. Biggers Jr., who sits on the advisory board of the Mississippi chapter of the Federalist Society, presided over the Ayers desegregation case. In 1975, Jake Ayers Sr., a Mississippi sharecropper, sued the state on behalf of his son, charging that the state's higher education system discriminated against African-Americans and historically Black colleges. In 1987, Biggers upheld the state College Board's contention that Mississippi's higher education system was no longer racially discriminatory. The Supreme Court reversed Biggers in 1991 and ordered him to remove any vestiges of past discrimination. The power of the Federalist Society is not limited to the judiciary, which would be concern enough. Its tentacles extend deep into corporate America. Listed members of its business advisory council included John Stewart Bryan, III, chairman, president and C.E.O. of Media General Cable; John G. Medlin Jr., board chair of Wachovia Corp., an interstate bank holding company; Geneva Steel C.E.O. Joseph Cannon and Robert L. Strickland, chairman of Lowe's Companies. Also affiliated with the Federalist Society are Brian J. Brille and David Panton of Morgan Stanley financial services in New York; William Haraf of Bank of America in San Francisco; Chris Ekren of Sony Corp. in San Jose, Calif.; Frank Blake of General Electric in Schenechtedy, N.Y.; Philip R. Lochner Jr., senior vice president, Time Warner Inc. in New York; William Kemp of General Motors in Warren, Mich.; Edward Whelan of GTE Corp.'s Washington office; David Askin of Exxon Co. in Baytown, Texas; Marsha Rabiteau of Dow Chemical in Midland, Mich.; F. James Tennies, chief administrative officer at Legg Mason for asset management in Baltimore; Jodi Balsam, counsel for operations and litigation for the National Football League and Tom Donahue of Metropolitan Life. Even federal employees in the Clinton administration were included in Federalist Society documents: Paul-Noel Chretien of the Justice Department; Theodore Cooperstein of the FBI; Carol Crawford of the International Trade Commission; Kevin Martin of the Federal Communications Commission and Christopher Holleman of the U.S. Small Business Administration. William Saunders of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights also backs the Society. Many of the nation's blue-chip law firms have attorneys associated with the Federalist Society. Those listed included lawyers in the Washington, D.C. law firms of Arnold and Porter; Covington & Burling; Steptoe & Johnson; Hogan & Hartson; Patton, Boaggs & Blow; and Wilmer, Cutler & Pickering. New York law firms with lawyers associated with the Federalist Society include: Cravath, Swaine & Moore; White & Case and Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison. In Boston, one law firm -- Hale and Door -- has at least 10 attorneys affiliated with the Federalist Society. The list of law professors associated with the society included Ronald A. Cass, dean of Boston University's law school; Michael Young of Columbia University; John Yoo of the University of California at Berkeley; Eugene Volokh of UCLA; Northwestern University professors Gary Lawson, Daniel D. Polsby and Stephen B. Presser; Robert P. George of Princeton; Gerard Bradley of Notre Dame; Gordon B. Baldwin of the University of Wisconsin, Olan B. Lowry of Temple; Johathan Macey and Richard Painter of Cornell; Ronald D. Rotunda of the University of Illinois; Gerald T. Dunn of St. Louis University and Thomas Morgan of George Washington University. The University of Virginia, one of the best law schools in the nation, has quite a few Federalist Society professors or sympathizers on its faculty, including John Norton Moore, Robert Turner, Erika Worth Harris and Lillian BeVier. "People have to understand, whether they like lawyers or not, law schools have an enormous amount of power, whether it's power for good or evil. Unfortunately, what we are seeing under the Federalist Society is law schools and legal education being used to promote racism, bigotry and Right-wing politics. These people believe in the Bell Curve," says Prof. Boyle of the University of Illinois, referring to a controversial theory by Charles Murray and Richard J. Herrnstein about the supposed low intelligence level of some non-Whites. "You have to understand that. Just as the Federalist Society did to the federal judiciary, they are now trying to do to law schools." Boyle and others say this is done by establishing well-endowed law professorships and speaking tours for the true believers. "Where they once were scholars with Right-wing foundations like the Heritage Foundation, American Enterprise Institute and the Cato Institute, they are now getting credentialed as law professors," he notes. No comparable movement exists among progressives, which may explain why civil rights groups and liberals are doing such a feeble job defending affirmative action. "We've got to realize that while we have been dillydallying in law schools with critical race theories and penetrating the Law Review, all this is chump change to [Federalists]," observes Berry, of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights. "It's like we were out playing whiffle ball while they were exercising power." The Federalist Society was founded 17 years ago by Yale Law School student Steven G. Calabresi and two counterparts at the University of Chicago School of Law, Lee Liberman and David McIntosh. All three were undergraduates together at Yale. Upset with what they perceived as liberal bias, the three decided to form an organization for conservative law students. Yale professors Robert H. Bork and Ralph K. Winter, both of whom would be appointed to the federal bench by Ronald Reagan, served as advisers to the Yale chapter. In Chicago, future U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia served in a similar capacity. The contacts the three made as students have proven to be invaluable. Calabresi, in addition to clerking for Bork and Winter, clerked for Scalia at the Supreme Court. He is now a law professor at Northwestern University. Liberman gave up a post in the Justice Department also to clerk for Scalia. She is now Lee Liberman Otis and is chief counsel for Sen. Spencer Abraham (R-Mich.), who founded a Federalist Society chapter at Harvard. McIntosh was a special assistant to Ed Meese when he was Reagan's attorney general; he is a three-term Republican Congressman who's considering running for governor of Indiana. In addition to a board of trustees, the society has a board of directors, co-chaired by Calabresi and McIntosh. The Federalist pipeline is a well-oiled old boy -- and sometimes girl -- network. For example, Brent O. Hatch, the son of Sen. Orrin Hatch, clerked for Robert Bork when he was a federal judge in Washington, D.C. After working in the Justice Department, young Hatch was appointed general counsel of the National Endowment for the Humanities at the age of 28. He is treasurer of the Federalist Society's board of directors. The organization has been funded by wealthy conservatives, such as Richard Mellon Scaife, who is vice chair of the Heritage Foundation's board, and another board member, Holland Coors, a member of the conservative Coors family. Many contributions are made through foundations that give to Right-wing causes, including the John M. Olin Foundation in New York, the Sarah Scaife Foundation in Pittsburgh, the Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation of Milwaukee and the Deer Creek Foundation in St. Louis. The Federalists have direct ties to Right-wing think tanks seeking to dismantle affirmative action at the local, state and federal levels. The Center for Individual Rights, which successfully argued the Hopwood case that banned affirmative action at the University of Texas, represents plaintiffs in a lawsuit pending against the University of Michigan and were lawyers for supporters of Proposition 209, the anti-affirmative action measure in California. The Washington Legal Foundation sued the University of Maryland, forcing it to drop its Benjamin Banneker scholarships for African-American scholars; the Southeastern Legal Foundation is leading an all-out assault on affirmative action in Atlanta, and the Institute for Justice led the attack on Lani Guinier, then a University of Pennsylvania law professor, who was President Clinton's first choice to be assistant U.S. attorney general for civil rights. Clint Bolick, the group's vice president, dismissed Guinier as a "quota queen," and the eventual nominee, Deval L. Patrick, as a "quota king." He also led the opposition to the appointment of Bill Lann Lee, who was later named acting assistant attorney general for civil rights. When first lady Hillary Rodham Clinton said that there was a "vast Right-wing conspiracy" afoot that had been hounding her husband since he first announced for president, some Right-wingers almost laughingly dismissed her charges. Special Prosecutor Ken Starr called the comments "nonsense." And Boston Herald columnist Joe Fitzgerald said the first lady had "wandered into paranoia." But information developed by the Institute for Democracy Studies, a nonprofit research and education organization in New York, confirms that the first lady was on the mark. In the executive summary of its report, "The Assault on Affirmative Action: An Organized Challenge to Racial and Gender Justice," the organization notes, "Once a month at the Heritage Foundation, representatives of the nation's leading conservative law groups get together for a 'luncheon.' This so-called Public Interest Legal Group meeting is just one of several monthly gatherings that right-wing law groups hold." The report continues: "These meetings serve the purpose of avoiding duplication of effort, airing future plans, and providing guidance for an appropriate organizational division of labor." In an interview with Emerge, Todd G. Young, director of research and communications for the Atlanta-based Southeastern Legal Foundation, confirms that Right-wing groups collaborate. "We read each other's briefs (as they are filed) and when there are updates published by other groups," he says. "Although we are separate entities, we share some common understandings about the Constitutions and our (mission) statements are really almost identical for the organizations." Of its recent lawsuit against Atlanta's affirmative action program, Young notes: "We're refining the definition of what it means to enjoy equal protection under the law and the first step is to end any government-sanctioned discrimination, such as affirmative action programs or racial preference programs. It's philosophically inconsistent to say it was bad then [in the 1950s and 1960s] but it's OK now." Atlanta Mayor Bill Campbell says it's not OK to discard programs devised to address discrimination against African-Americans. "Conservative legal interest groups, such as the Center for Individual Rights and the Southeastern Legal Foundation, are striking at the very heart of the civil rights gains of the '50s and '60s," explains Campbell. "These groups are, in essence, a homogenized version of the Klan. They may have traded in their sheets for suits and use different language, but it's the same old racism -- just old wine in new bottles." The Federalist Society takes its name from The Federalist papers, 85 articles originally published in New York newspapers between 1787 and 1788. The authors -- Alexander Hamilton, John Jay and James Madison -- were attempting to gain popular support for the adoption of a new Constitution. "Is The Federalist the key to what the Constitution's framers and adopters intended it to mean and how they expected it to function?" asked R. B. Bernstein, a constitutional historian who wrote the foreword to The Federalist, a recent reissue of the papers. "This subset of the original-intent controversy tends to pit many historians, who remain dubious about original-intent arguments, against many legal scholars, who seek a way to limit judicial discretion by anchoring constitutional interpretation in the Constitution's origins." Bernstein argued that the public should not look at the essays, all written under one pen name, as the definitive word on how the Constitution should be interpreted. "Jay was not a delegate to the Federal Convention, which framed the Constitution...[Hamilton] left the Convention in July, not returning until two weeks before its close in September. And Madison...found himself outvoted on a host of major issues," Bernstein noted. Moreover, as The Federalist papers became the classic commentary on the Constitution, the three men publicly identified themselves as the authors. Even that was not without controversy. Before his ill-fated duel with Aaron Burr, Hamilton tried to take credit for writing papers 18-20, 49-58 and 62-63. Madison made an identical claim of authorship, which was verified through a computer analysis in 1964. The most damning fact about today's Federalists is that they advocate a limited role for the federal government, while the early founders were interested in establishing a strong central government. Some civil rights leaders, including Theodore M. Shaw, associate director-counsel of the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund Inc., view the rhetoric of the modern-day Federalists as smokescreen for an assault on civil rights. "It's ideologically out of the mainstream and a part of the radically conservative agenda and the radically conservative agenda has never served the interest of African-Americans," Shaw says. Hilary O. Shelton, Washington bureau chief of the NAACP, is less charitable: "They are not conservative. They are very consistent with the Council of Conservative Citizens," a White supremacy group that has featured Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott (R-Miss.) and Rep. Bob Barr (R-Ga.) as speakers. Surprisingly, some of the harshest criticism of Federalist Society members has come from Republicans. For example, former Attorney General Meese, a main player in the Federalist movement, has been criticized by some of his colleagues in the Reagan administration. According to The Washington Post, James A. Baker III and Michael K. Deaver referred to Meese as the "Big Bigot," and conservatives referred to his top assistant, T. Kenneth Cribb Jr., as the "Baby Bigot." Cribb sits on the board of directors of the Federalist Society and is a trustee of the Scaife Foundation, a major contributor to the Federalist Society and other Right-wing causes. Graglia, who has taught at the University of Texas since 1966, touched off a controversy two years ago, when he said, "Blacks and Mexican Americans are not academically competitive with Whites in selective institutions." According to Graglia, "It is the result primarily of cultural effects. Failure is not looked upon with disgrace." He maintains his membership in the Federalist Society. "They certainly are unenthusiastic about civil rights laws," he says of his organization. "Richard Epstein [a law professor at the University of Chicago] thinks we will be better off if civil rights laws were all repealed. These people do believe, as I believe, that so-called civil rights have gone too far and are not civil rights at all." Because so many of the Federalist Society members are seen as opposing civil rights, some people are not quick to accept their professed interest in color-blind justice. U.S. Appeals Court Judge Stephen Reinhardt of the 9th Circuit observes, "We had the Civil War over states' rights. There is no question we are going back to the pre-Civil War view of governments." Former federal Judge Lawrence Walsh puts it more bluntly. "The impression I have is they are trying to return to the 18th century and undo the work of the Supreme Court since the New Deal," Walsh says. "And I think it is wrong to put someone on the court who has a pre-commitment with a political dogma, whether it's the Ku Klux Klan or the Federalist Society." -- Additional reporting by Lottie L. Joiner Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Tue Jun 27 14:29:17 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2017 14:29:17 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] FW: Are Claims About Syrian Sarin Attacks Propaganda Leading to More War? -- Interviews Available Message-ID: This Waffen-SS College of Law Is Pathetic! Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2017 9:27 AM To: sectns.aals at lists.aals.org Subject: Are Claims About Syrian Sarin Attacks Propaganda Leading to More War? -- Interviews Available FRANCIS BOYLE, (217) 333-7954, fboyle at illinois.edu Boyle is professor of international law at the University of Illinois College of Law. See his recent interview with Dennis Bernstein at Consortium News: "A Baseless Justification for War in Syria." He said today: "The current posture of U.S., French and perhaps British policy in Syria is basically an invitation for some jihadist group to stage a chemical weapons attack in Syria. That would get blamed on Assad and the U.S. would bomb him. This is an intolerable, incredibly dangerous situation brought on by constant illegal U.S. meddling." Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Institute for Public Accuracy . [mailto:accuracy at accuracy.org] Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2017 9:20 AM To: francis.a.boyle at gmail.com Subject: Are Claims About Syrian Sarin Attacks Propaganda Leading to More War? -- Interviews Available [http://app.meltwaterpress.com/mpress/statistic.html?accessCode=0aca5159edbd15675e94ae4fa7bd8c3d5d1d5f25&distributionId=542953&contact=francis.a.boyle at gmail.com] Are Claims About Syrian Sarin Attacks Propaganda Leading to More War? BuzzFeed reports: "Syria appears to be preparing a new chemical weapons attack against its citizens, the White House said Monday, warning that if the weapons are again used, the U.S. will make the Syrian government 'pay a heavy price.' ... Five U.S. defense officials reached by BuzzFeed News said they did not know where the potential chemical attack would come from, including one U.S. Central Command official who had 'no idea' about its origin." From RT: "U.S. threats to Syria’s legitimate government unacceptable -- Kremlin." See new interview with investigative journalist Seymour Hersh: "Trump Ignored Intel Before Bombing Syria" with The Real News. On Sunday, Hersh's piece "Trump‘s Red Line" was published in the German newspaper Welt am Sonntag. Hersh wrote: "On April 6, United States President Donald Trump authorized an early morning Tomahawk missile strike on Shayrat Air Base in central Syria in retaliation for what he said was a deadly nerve agent attack carried out by the Syrian government two days earlier in the rebel-held town of Khan Sheikhoun. Trump issued the order despite having been warned by the U.S. intelligence community that it had found no evidence that the Syrians had used a chemical weapon. ... "'The Salafists and jihadists got everything they wanted out of their hyped-up Syrian nerve gas ploy,' the senior adviser to the U.S. intelligence community told me, referring to the flare up of tensions between Syria, Russia and America. 'The issue is, what if there’s another false flag sarin attack credited to hated Syria? Trump has upped the ante and painted himself into a corner with his decision to bomb. And do not think these guys are not planning the next faked attack. Trump will have no choice but to bomb again, and harder. He’s incapable of saying he made a mistake.'" THEODORE A. POSTOL, postol at mit.edu Postol is professor emeritus of science, technology, and national security policy at MIT. Last month, he appeared on an Institute for Public Accuracy news release: "NYT Claims on Syria Attack Unsupported." He said today: "The White House took unjustified actions -- and is now creating another set of reasons for more such actions. Chances of an unpredictable escalation are significant. Trump is pushing the Russians to extreme positions and he's undermining the effort to destroy the Islamic State." FRANCIS BOYLE, (217) 333-7954, fboyle at illinois.edu Boyle is professor of international law at the University of Illinois College of Law. See his recent interview with Dennis Bernstein at Consortium News: "A Baseless Justification for War in Syria." He said today: "The current posture of U.S., French and perhaps British policy in Syria is basically an invitation for some jihadist group to stage a chemical weapons attack in Syria. That would get blamed on Assad and the U.S. would bomb him. This is an intolerable, incredibly dangerous situation brought on by constant illegal U.S. meddling." CNN recently reported: "Macron vows retaliation if chemical weapons used in Syria." For more information, contact at the Institute for Public Accuracy: Sam Husseini, (202) 347-0020; David Zupan, (541) 484-9167 June 27, 2017 Institute for Public Accuracy 980 National Press Building, Washington, D.C. 20045 (202) 347-0020 * accuracy.org * ipa at accuracy.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Tue Jun 27 14:29:17 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2017 14:29:17 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] FW: Are Claims About Syrian Sarin Attacks Propaganda Leading to More War? -- Interviews Available Message-ID: This Waffen-SS College of Law Is Pathetic! Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2017 9:27 AM To: sectns.aals at lists.aals.org Subject: Are Claims About Syrian Sarin Attacks Propaganda Leading to More War? -- Interviews Available FRANCIS BOYLE, (217) 333-7954, fboyle at illinois.edu Boyle is professor of international law at the University of Illinois College of Law. See his recent interview with Dennis Bernstein at Consortium News: "A Baseless Justification for War in Syria." He said today: "The current posture of U.S., French and perhaps British policy in Syria is basically an invitation for some jihadist group to stage a chemical weapons attack in Syria. That would get blamed on Assad and the U.S. would bomb him. This is an intolerable, incredibly dangerous situation brought on by constant illegal U.S. meddling." Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Institute for Public Accuracy . [mailto:accuracy at accuracy.org] Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2017 9:20 AM To: francis.a.boyle at gmail.com Subject: Are Claims About Syrian Sarin Attacks Propaganda Leading to More War? -- Interviews Available [http://app.meltwaterpress.com/mpress/statistic.html?accessCode=0aca5159edbd15675e94ae4fa7bd8c3d5d1d5f25&distributionId=542953&contact=francis.a.boyle at gmail.com] Are Claims About Syrian Sarin Attacks Propaganda Leading to More War? BuzzFeed reports: "Syria appears to be preparing a new chemical weapons attack against its citizens, the White House said Monday, warning that if the weapons are again used, the U.S. will make the Syrian government 'pay a heavy price.' ... Five U.S. defense officials reached by BuzzFeed News said they did not know where the potential chemical attack would come from, including one U.S. Central Command official who had 'no idea' about its origin." From RT: "U.S. threats to Syria’s legitimate government unacceptable -- Kremlin." See new interview with investigative journalist Seymour Hersh: "Trump Ignored Intel Before Bombing Syria" with The Real News. On Sunday, Hersh's piece "Trump‘s Red Line" was published in the German newspaper Welt am Sonntag. Hersh wrote: "On April 6, United States President Donald Trump authorized an early morning Tomahawk missile strike on Shayrat Air Base in central Syria in retaliation for what he said was a deadly nerve agent attack carried out by the Syrian government two days earlier in the rebel-held town of Khan Sheikhoun. Trump issued the order despite having been warned by the U.S. intelligence community that it had found no evidence that the Syrians had used a chemical weapon. ... "'The Salafists and jihadists got everything they wanted out of their hyped-up Syrian nerve gas ploy,' the senior adviser to the U.S. intelligence community told me, referring to the flare up of tensions between Syria, Russia and America. 'The issue is, what if there’s another false flag sarin attack credited to hated Syria? Trump has upped the ante and painted himself into a corner with his decision to bomb. And do not think these guys are not planning the next faked attack. Trump will have no choice but to bomb again, and harder. He’s incapable of saying he made a mistake.'" THEODORE A. POSTOL, postol at mit.edu Postol is professor emeritus of science, technology, and national security policy at MIT. Last month, he appeared on an Institute for Public Accuracy news release: "NYT Claims on Syria Attack Unsupported." He said today: "The White House took unjustified actions -- and is now creating another set of reasons for more such actions. Chances of an unpredictable escalation are significant. Trump is pushing the Russians to extreme positions and he's undermining the effort to destroy the Islamic State." FRANCIS BOYLE, (217) 333-7954, fboyle at illinois.edu Boyle is professor of international law at the University of Illinois College of Law. See his recent interview with Dennis Bernstein at Consortium News: "A Baseless Justification for War in Syria." He said today: "The current posture of U.S., French and perhaps British policy in Syria is basically an invitation for some jihadist group to stage a chemical weapons attack in Syria. That would get blamed on Assad and the U.S. would bomb him. This is an intolerable, incredibly dangerous situation brought on by constant illegal U.S. meddling." CNN recently reported: "Macron vows retaliation if chemical weapons used in Syria." For more information, contact at the Institute for Public Accuracy: Sam Husseini, (202) 347-0020; David Zupan, (541) 484-9167 June 27, 2017 Institute for Public Accuracy 980 National Press Building, Washington, D.C. 20045 (202) 347-0020 * accuracy.org * ipa at accuracy.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From futureup2us at gmail.com Tue Jun 27 15:11:20 2017 From: futureup2us at gmail.com (Jay) Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2017 10:11:20 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Are Claims About Syrian Sarin Attacks Propaganda Leading to More War? -- Interviews Available In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <24061E4A-41C7-41EC-BD75-20580F1CF34B@gmail.com> Thank you, sharing! Jay > On Jun 27, 2017, at 09:29, Boyle, Francis A wrote: > > This Waffen-SS College of Law Is Pathetic! Fab. > > Francis A. Boyle > Law Building > 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. > Champaign, IL 61820 USA > 217-333-7954 (phone) > 217-244-1478 (fax) > (personal comments only) > > From: Boyle, Francis A > Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2017 9:27 AM > To: sectns.aals at lists.aals.org > Subject: Are Claims About Syrian Sarin Attacks Propaganda Leading to More War? -- Interviews Available > > FRANCIS BOYLE, (217) 333-7954 , fboyle at illinois.edu > Boyle is professor of international law at the University of Illinois College of Law. See his recent interview with Dennis Bernstein at Consortium News: "A Baseless Justification for War in Syria ." He said today: "The current posture of U.S., French and perhaps British policy in Syria is basically an invitation for some jihadist group to stage a chemical weapons attack in Syria. That would get blamed on Assad and the U.S. would bomb him. This is an intolerable, incredibly dangerous situation brought on by constant illegal U.S. meddling." > > Francis A. Boyle > Law Building > 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. > Champaign, IL 61820 USA > 217-333-7954 (phone) > 217-244-1478 (fax) > (personal comments only) > > From: Institute for Public Accuracy . [mailto:accuracy at accuracy.org ] > Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2017 9:20 AM > To: francis.a.boyle at gmail.com > Subject: Are Claims About Syrian Sarin Attacks Propaganda Leading to More War? -- Interviews Available > > > Are Claims About Syrian Sarin Attacks Propaganda Leading to More War? > BuzzFeed reports : "Syria appears to be preparing a new chemical weapons attack against its citizens, the White House said Monday, warning that if the weapons are again used, the U.S. will make the Syrian government 'pay a heavy price.' ... Five U.S. defense officials reached by BuzzFeed News said they did not know where the potential chemical attack would come from, including one U.S. Central Command official who had 'no idea' about its origin." > > From RT: "U.S. threats to Syria’s legitimate government unacceptable -- Kremlin ." > > See new interview with investigative journalist Seymour Hersh: "Trump Ignored Intel Before Bombing Syria " with The Real News. On Sunday, Hersh's piece "Trump‘s Red Line " was published in the German newspaper Welt am Sonntag. Hersh wrote: "On April 6, United States President Donald Trump authorized an early morning Tomahawk missile strike on Shayrat Air Base in central Syria in retaliation for what he said was a deadly nerve agent attack carried out by the Syrian government two days earlier in the rebel-held town of Khan Sheikhoun. Trump issued the order despite having been warned by the U.S. intelligence community that it had found no evidence that the Syrians had used a chemical weapon. ... > > "'The Salafists and jihadists got everything they wanted out of their hyped-up Syrian nerve gas ploy,' the senior adviser to the U.S. intelligence community told me, referring to the flare up of tensions between Syria, Russia and America. 'The issue is, what if there’s another false flag sarin attack credited to hated Syria? Trump has upped the ante and painted himself into a corner with his decision to bomb. And do not think these guys are not planning the next faked attack. Trump will have no choice but to bomb again, and harder. He’s incapable of saying he made a mistake.'" > > THEODORE A. POSTOL, postol at mit.edu > Postol is professor emeritus of science, technology, and national security policy at MIT. Last month, he appeared on an Institute for Public Accuracy news release: "NYT Claims on Syria Attack Unsupported ." He said today: "The White House took unjustified actions -- and is now creating another set of reasons for more such actions. Chances of an unpredictable escalation are significant. Trump is pushing the Russians to extreme positions and he's undermining the effort to destroy the Islamic State." > > FRANCIS BOYLE, (217) 333-7954 , fboyle at illinois.edu > Boyle is professor of international law at the University of Illinois College of Law. See his recent interview with Dennis Bernstein at Consortium News: "A Baseless Justification for War in Syria ." He said today: "The current posture of U.S., French and perhaps British policy in Syria is basically an invitation for some jihadist group to stage a chemical weapons attack in Syria. That would get blamed on Assad and the U.S. would bomb him. This is an intolerable, incredibly dangerous situation brought on by constant illegal U.S. meddling." > > CNN recently reported: "Macron vows retaliation if chemical weapons used in Syria ." > > For more information, contact at the Institute for Public Accuracy: > Sam Husseini, (202) 347-0020 ; David Zupan, (541) 484-9167 > > June 27, 2017 > > Institute for Public Accuracy > 980 National Press Building, Washington, D.C. 20045 > (202) 347-0020 * accuracy.org * ipa at accuracy.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From futureup2us at gmail.com Tue Jun 27 15:11:20 2017 From: futureup2us at gmail.com (Jay) Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2017 10:11:20 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Are Claims About Syrian Sarin Attacks Propaganda Leading to More War? -- Interviews Available In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <24061E4A-41C7-41EC-BD75-20580F1CF34B@gmail.com> Thank you, sharing! Jay > On Jun 27, 2017, at 09:29, Boyle, Francis A wrote: > > This Waffen-SS College of Law Is Pathetic! Fab. > > Francis A. Boyle > Law Building > 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. > Champaign, IL 61820 USA > 217-333-7954 (phone) > 217-244-1478 (fax) > (personal comments only) > > From: Boyle, Francis A > Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2017 9:27 AM > To: sectns.aals at lists.aals.org > Subject: Are Claims About Syrian Sarin Attacks Propaganda Leading to More War? -- Interviews Available > > FRANCIS BOYLE, (217) 333-7954 , fboyle at illinois.edu > Boyle is professor of international law at the University of Illinois College of Law. See his recent interview with Dennis Bernstein at Consortium News: "A Baseless Justification for War in Syria ." He said today: "The current posture of U.S., French and perhaps British policy in Syria is basically an invitation for some jihadist group to stage a chemical weapons attack in Syria. That would get blamed on Assad and the U.S. would bomb him. This is an intolerable, incredibly dangerous situation brought on by constant illegal U.S. meddling." > > Francis A. Boyle > Law Building > 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. > Champaign, IL 61820 USA > 217-333-7954 (phone) > 217-244-1478 (fax) > (personal comments only) > > From: Institute for Public Accuracy . [mailto:accuracy at accuracy.org ] > Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2017 9:20 AM > To: francis.a.boyle at gmail.com > Subject: Are Claims About Syrian Sarin Attacks Propaganda Leading to More War? -- Interviews Available > > > Are Claims About Syrian Sarin Attacks Propaganda Leading to More War? > BuzzFeed reports : "Syria appears to be preparing a new chemical weapons attack against its citizens, the White House said Monday, warning that if the weapons are again used, the U.S. will make the Syrian government 'pay a heavy price.' ... Five U.S. defense officials reached by BuzzFeed News said they did not know where the potential chemical attack would come from, including one U.S. Central Command official who had 'no idea' about its origin." > > From RT: "U.S. threats to Syria’s legitimate government unacceptable -- Kremlin ." > > See new interview with investigative journalist Seymour Hersh: "Trump Ignored Intel Before Bombing Syria " with The Real News. On Sunday, Hersh's piece "Trump‘s Red Line " was published in the German newspaper Welt am Sonntag. Hersh wrote: "On April 6, United States President Donald Trump authorized an early morning Tomahawk missile strike on Shayrat Air Base in central Syria in retaliation for what he said was a deadly nerve agent attack carried out by the Syrian government two days earlier in the rebel-held town of Khan Sheikhoun. Trump issued the order despite having been warned by the U.S. intelligence community that it had found no evidence that the Syrians had used a chemical weapon. ... > > "'The Salafists and jihadists got everything they wanted out of their hyped-up Syrian nerve gas ploy,' the senior adviser to the U.S. intelligence community told me, referring to the flare up of tensions between Syria, Russia and America. 'The issue is, what if there’s another false flag sarin attack credited to hated Syria? Trump has upped the ante and painted himself into a corner with his decision to bomb. And do not think these guys are not planning the next faked attack. Trump will have no choice but to bomb again, and harder. He’s incapable of saying he made a mistake.'" > > THEODORE A. POSTOL, postol at mit.edu > Postol is professor emeritus of science, technology, and national security policy at MIT. Last month, he appeared on an Institute for Public Accuracy news release: "NYT Claims on Syria Attack Unsupported ." He said today: "The White House took unjustified actions -- and is now creating another set of reasons for more such actions. Chances of an unpredictable escalation are significant. Trump is pushing the Russians to extreme positions and he's undermining the effort to destroy the Islamic State." > > FRANCIS BOYLE, (217) 333-7954 , fboyle at illinois.edu > Boyle is professor of international law at the University of Illinois College of Law. See his recent interview with Dennis Bernstein at Consortium News: "A Baseless Justification for War in Syria ." He said today: "The current posture of U.S., French and perhaps British policy in Syria is basically an invitation for some jihadist group to stage a chemical weapons attack in Syria. That would get blamed on Assad and the U.S. would bomb him. This is an intolerable, incredibly dangerous situation brought on by constant illegal U.S. meddling." > > CNN recently reported: "Macron vows retaliation if chemical weapons used in Syria ." > > For more information, contact at the Institute for Public Accuracy: > Sam Husseini, (202) 347-0020 ; David Zupan, (541) 484-9167 > > June 27, 2017 > > Institute for Public Accuracy > 980 National Press Building, Washington, D.C. 20045 > (202) 347-0020 * accuracy.org * ipa at accuracy.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Tue Jun 27 15:13:37 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2017 15:13:37 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Are Claims About Syrian Sarin Attacks Propaganda Leading to More War? -- Interviews Available Message-ID: Killer Koh was up to his eyeballs in the criminal and unconstitutional Obama/Clinton War against Syria—now being continued by Trump. Ditto for Libya. This Waffen-SS Law School is pathetic! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2017 9:29 AM To: 'David Green' ; 'sherwoodross10 at gmail.com' ; 'peace-discuss at anti-war.net' ; 'C. G. ESTABROOK' ; 'a-fields at uiuc.edu' ; Hoffman, Valerie J ; 'Joe Lauria' ; 'peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net' ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; 'Arlene Hickory' ; 'David Swanson' ; 'Karen Aram' ; 'abass10 at gmail.com' ; 'mickalideh at gmail.com' ; 'Lina Thorne' ; 'chicago at worldcantwait.net' ; 'Jay' ; Estabrook, Carl G ; 'Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net' ; 'David Johnson' ; 'Mildred O'brien' Subject: FW: Are Claims About Syrian Sarin Attacks Propaganda Leading to More War? -- Interviews Available This Waffen-SS College of Law Is Pathetic! Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2017 9:27 AM To: sectns.aals at lists.aals.org Subject: Are Claims About Syrian Sarin Attacks Propaganda Leading to More War? -- Interviews Available FRANCIS BOYLE, (217) 333-7954, fboyle at illinois.edu Boyle is professor of international law at the University of Illinois College of Law. See his recent interview with Dennis Bernstein at Consortium News: "A Baseless Justification for War in Syria." He said today: "The current posture of U.S., French and perhaps British policy in Syria is basically an invitation for some jihadist group to stage a chemical weapons attack in Syria. That would get blamed on Assad and the U.S. would bomb him. This is an intolerable, incredibly dangerous situation brought on by constant illegal U.S. meddling." Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Institute for Public Accuracy . [mailto:accuracy at accuracy.org] Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2017 9:20 AM To: francis.a.boyle at gmail.com Subject: Are Claims About Syrian Sarin Attacks Propaganda Leading to More War? -- Interviews Available [http://app.meltwaterpress.com/mpress/statistic.html?accessCode=0aca5159edbd15675e94ae4fa7bd8c3d5d1d5f25&distributionId=542953&contact=francis.a.boyle at gmail.com] Are Claims About Syrian Sarin Attacks Propaganda Leading to More War? BuzzFeed reports: "Syria appears to be preparing a new chemical weapons attack against its citizens, the White House said Monday, warning that if the weapons are again used, the U.S. will make the Syrian government 'pay a heavy price.' ... Five U.S. defense officials reached by BuzzFeed News said they did not know where the potential chemical attack would come from, including one U.S. Central Command official who had 'no idea' about its origin." From RT: "U.S. threats to Syria’s legitimate government unacceptable -- Kremlin." See new interview with investigative journalist Seymour Hersh: "Trump Ignored Intel Before Bombing Syria" with The Real News. On Sunday, Hersh's piece "Trump‘s Red Line" was published in the German newspaper Welt am Sonntag. Hersh wrote: "On April 6, United States President Donald Trump authorized an early morning Tomahawk missile strike on Shayrat Air Base in central Syria in retaliation for what he said was a deadly nerve agent attack carried out by the Syrian government two days earlier in the rebel-held town of Khan Sheikhoun. Trump issued the order despite having been warned by the U.S. intelligence community that it had found no evidence that the Syrians had used a chemical weapon. ... "'The Salafists and jihadists got everything they wanted out of their hyped-up Syrian nerve gas ploy,' the senior adviser to the U.S. intelligence community told me, referring to the flare up of tensions between Syria, Russia and America. 'The issue is, what if there’s another false flag sarin attack credited to hated Syria? Trump has upped the ante and painted himself into a corner with his decision to bomb. And do not think these guys are not planning the next faked attack. Trump will have no choice but to bomb again, and harder. He’s incapable of saying he made a mistake.'" THEODORE A. POSTOL, postol at mit.edu Postol is professor emeritus of science, technology, and national security policy at MIT. Last month, he appeared on an Institute for Public Accuracy news release: "NYT Claims on Syria Attack Unsupported." He said today: "The White House took unjustified actions -- and is now creating another set of reasons for more such actions. Chances of an unpredictable escalation are significant. Trump is pushing the Russians to extreme positions and he's undermining the effort to destroy the Islamic State." FRANCIS BOYLE, (217) 333-7954, fboyle at illinois.edu Boyle is professor of international law at the University of Illinois College of Law. See his recent interview with Dennis Bernstein at Consortium News: "A Baseless Justification for War in Syria." He said today: "The current posture of U.S., French and perhaps British policy in Syria is basically an invitation for some jihadist group to stage a chemical weapons attack in Syria. That would get blamed on Assad and the U.S. would bomb him. This is an intolerable, incredibly dangerous situation brought on by constant illegal U.S. meddling." CNN recently reported: "Macron vows retaliation if chemical weapons used in Syria." For more information, contact at the Institute for Public Accuracy: Sam Husseini, (202) 347-0020; David Zupan, (541) 484-9167 June 27, 2017 Institute for Public Accuracy 980 National Press Building, Washington, D.C. 20045 (202) 347-0020 * accuracy.org * ipa at accuracy.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Tue Jun 27 15:13:37 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2017 15:13:37 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Are Claims About Syrian Sarin Attacks Propaganda Leading to More War? -- Interviews Available Message-ID: Killer Koh was up to his eyeballs in the criminal and unconstitutional Obama/Clinton War against Syria—now being continued by Trump. Ditto for Libya. This Waffen-SS Law School is pathetic! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2017 9:29 AM To: 'David Green' ; 'sherwoodross10 at gmail.com' ; 'peace-discuss at anti-war.net' ; 'C. G. ESTABROOK' ; 'a-fields at uiuc.edu' ; Hoffman, Valerie J ; 'Joe Lauria' ; 'peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net' ; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; 'Arlene Hickory' ; 'David Swanson' ; 'Karen Aram' ; 'abass10 at gmail.com' ; 'mickalideh at gmail.com' ; 'Lina Thorne' ; 'chicago at worldcantwait.net' ; 'Jay' ; Estabrook, Carl G ; 'Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net' ; 'David Johnson' ; 'Mildred O'brien' Subject: FW: Are Claims About Syrian Sarin Attacks Propaganda Leading to More War? -- Interviews Available This Waffen-SS College of Law Is Pathetic! Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2017 9:27 AM To: sectns.aals at lists.aals.org Subject: Are Claims About Syrian Sarin Attacks Propaganda Leading to More War? -- Interviews Available FRANCIS BOYLE, (217) 333-7954, fboyle at illinois.edu Boyle is professor of international law at the University of Illinois College of Law. See his recent interview with Dennis Bernstein at Consortium News: "A Baseless Justification for War in Syria." He said today: "The current posture of U.S., French and perhaps British policy in Syria is basically an invitation for some jihadist group to stage a chemical weapons attack in Syria. That would get blamed on Assad and the U.S. would bomb him. This is an intolerable, incredibly dangerous situation brought on by constant illegal U.S. meddling." Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Institute for Public Accuracy . [mailto:accuracy at accuracy.org] Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2017 9:20 AM To: francis.a.boyle at gmail.com Subject: Are Claims About Syrian Sarin Attacks Propaganda Leading to More War? -- Interviews Available [http://app.meltwaterpress.com/mpress/statistic.html?accessCode=0aca5159edbd15675e94ae4fa7bd8c3d5d1d5f25&distributionId=542953&contact=francis.a.boyle at gmail.com] Are Claims About Syrian Sarin Attacks Propaganda Leading to More War? BuzzFeed reports: "Syria appears to be preparing a new chemical weapons attack against its citizens, the White House said Monday, warning that if the weapons are again used, the U.S. will make the Syrian government 'pay a heavy price.' ... Five U.S. defense officials reached by BuzzFeed News said they did not know where the potential chemical attack would come from, including one U.S. Central Command official who had 'no idea' about its origin." From RT: "U.S. threats to Syria’s legitimate government unacceptable -- Kremlin." See new interview with investigative journalist Seymour Hersh: "Trump Ignored Intel Before Bombing Syria" with The Real News. On Sunday, Hersh's piece "Trump‘s Red Line" was published in the German newspaper Welt am Sonntag. Hersh wrote: "On April 6, United States President Donald Trump authorized an early morning Tomahawk missile strike on Shayrat Air Base in central Syria in retaliation for what he said was a deadly nerve agent attack carried out by the Syrian government two days earlier in the rebel-held town of Khan Sheikhoun. Trump issued the order despite having been warned by the U.S. intelligence community that it had found no evidence that the Syrians had used a chemical weapon. ... "'The Salafists and jihadists got everything they wanted out of their hyped-up Syrian nerve gas ploy,' the senior adviser to the U.S. intelligence community told me, referring to the flare up of tensions between Syria, Russia and America. 'The issue is, what if there’s another false flag sarin attack credited to hated Syria? Trump has upped the ante and painted himself into a corner with his decision to bomb. And do not think these guys are not planning the next faked attack. Trump will have no choice but to bomb again, and harder. He’s incapable of saying he made a mistake.'" THEODORE A. POSTOL, postol at mit.edu Postol is professor emeritus of science, technology, and national security policy at MIT. Last month, he appeared on an Institute for Public Accuracy news release: "NYT Claims on Syria Attack Unsupported." He said today: "The White House took unjustified actions -- and is now creating another set of reasons for more such actions. Chances of an unpredictable escalation are significant. Trump is pushing the Russians to extreme positions and he's undermining the effort to destroy the Islamic State." FRANCIS BOYLE, (217) 333-7954, fboyle at illinois.edu Boyle is professor of international law at the University of Illinois College of Law. See his recent interview with Dennis Bernstein at Consortium News: "A Baseless Justification for War in Syria." He said today: "The current posture of U.S., French and perhaps British policy in Syria is basically an invitation for some jihadist group to stage a chemical weapons attack in Syria. That would get blamed on Assad and the U.S. would bomb him. This is an intolerable, incredibly dangerous situation brought on by constant illegal U.S. meddling." CNN recently reported: "Macron vows retaliation if chemical weapons used in Syria." For more information, contact at the Institute for Public Accuracy: Sam Husseini, (202) 347-0020; David Zupan, (541) 484-9167 June 27, 2017 Institute for Public Accuracy 980 National Press Building, Washington, D.C. 20045 (202) 347-0020 * accuracy.org * ipa at accuracy.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Tue Jun 27 15:15:09 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2017 15:15:09 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Are Claims About Syrian Sarin Attacks Propaganda Leading to More War? -- Interviews Available In-Reply-To: <24061E4A-41C7-41EC-BD75-20580F1CF34B@gmail.com> References: <24061E4A-41C7-41EC-BD75-20580F1CF34B@gmail.com> Message-ID: BBC reports that Trump is considering a Decapitation Strike on Syria along the lines described by Sy Hersh below. This Waffen-SS Law School is pathetic! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Jay [mailto:futureup2us at gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2017 10:11 AM To: Boyle, Francis A Cc: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson ; Mildred O'brien Subject: Re: Are Claims About Syrian Sarin Attacks Propaganda Leading to More War? -- Interviews Available Thank you, sharing! Jay On Jun 27, 2017, at 09:29, Boyle, Francis A > wrote: This Waffen-SS College of Law Is Pathetic! Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2017 9:27 AM To: sectns.aals at lists.aals.org Subject: Are Claims About Syrian Sarin Attacks Propaganda Leading to More War? -- Interviews Available FRANCIS BOYLE, (217) 333-7954, fboyle at illinois.edu Boyle is professor of international law at the University of Illinois College of Law. See his recent interview with Dennis Bernstein at Consortium News: "A Baseless Justification for War in Syria." He said today: "The current posture of U.S., French and perhaps British policy in Syria is basically an invitation for some jihadist group to stage a chemical weapons attack in Syria. That would get blamed on Assad and the U.S. would bomb him. This is an intolerable, incredibly dangerous situation brought on by constant illegal U.S. meddling." Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Institute for Public Accuracy . [mailto:accuracy at accuracy.org] Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2017 9:20 AM To: francis.a.boyle at gmail.com Subject: Are Claims About Syrian Sarin Attacks Propaganda Leading to More War? -- Interviews Available [http://app.meltwaterpress.com/mpress/statistic.html?accessCode=0aca5159edbd15675e94ae4fa7bd8c3d5d1d5f25&distributionId=542953&contact=francis.a.boyle at gmail.com] Are Claims About Syrian Sarin Attacks Propaganda Leading to More War? BuzzFeed reports: "Syria appears to be preparing a new chemical weapons attack against its citizens, the White House said Monday, warning that if the weapons are again used, the U.S. will make the Syrian government 'pay a heavy price.' ... Five U.S. defense officials reached by BuzzFeed News said they did not know where the potential chemical attack would come from, including one U.S. Central Command official who had 'no idea' about its origin." From RT: "U.S. threats to Syria’s legitimate government unacceptable -- Kremlin." See new interview with investigative journalist Seymour Hersh: "Trump Ignored Intel Before Bombing Syria" with The Real News. On Sunday, Hersh's piece "Trump‘s Red Line" was published in the German newspaper Welt am Sonntag. Hersh wrote: "On April 6, United States President Donald Trump authorized an early morning Tomahawk missile strike on Shayrat Air Base in central Syria in retaliation for what he said was a deadly nerve agent attack carried out by the Syrian government two days earlier in the rebel-held town of Khan Sheikhoun. Trump issued the order despite having been warned by the U.S. intelligence community that it had found no evidence that the Syrians had used a chemical weapon. ... "'The Salafists and jihadists got everything they wanted out of their hyped-up Syrian nerve gas ploy,' the senior adviser to the U.S. intelligence community told me, referring to the flare up of tensions between Syria, Russia and America. 'The issue is, what if there’s another false flag sarin attack credited to hated Syria? Trump has upped the ante and painted himself into a corner with his decision to bomb. And do not think these guys are not planning the next faked attack. Trump will have no choice but to bomb again, and harder. He’s incapable of saying he made a mistake.'" THEODORE A. POSTOL, postol at mit.edu Postol is professor emeritus of science, technology, and national security policy at MIT. Last month, he appeared on an Institute for Public Accuracy news release: "NYT Claims on Syria Attack Unsupported." He said today: "The White House took unjustified actions -- and is now creating another set of reasons for more such actions. Chances of an unpredictable escalation are significant. Trump is pushing the Russians to extreme positions and he's undermining the effort to destroy the Islamic State." FRANCIS BOYLE, (217) 333-7954, fboyle at illinois.edu Boyle is professor of international law at the University of Illinois College of Law. See his recent interview with Dennis Bernstein at Consortium News: "A Baseless Justification for War in Syria." He said today: "The current posture of U.S., French and perhaps British policy in Syria is basically an invitation for some jihadist group to stage a chemical weapons attack in Syria. That would get blamed on Assad and the U.S. would bomb him. This is an intolerable, incredibly dangerous situation brought on by constant illegal U.S. meddling." CNN recently reported: "Macron vows retaliation if chemical weapons used in Syria." For more information, contact at the Institute for Public Accuracy: Sam Husseini, (202) 347-0020; David Zupan, (541) 484-9167 June 27, 2017 Institute for Public Accuracy 980 National Press Building, Washington, D.C. 20045 (202) 347-0020 * accuracy.org * ipa at accuracy.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Tue Jun 27 15:15:09 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2017 15:15:09 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Are Claims About Syrian Sarin Attacks Propaganda Leading to More War? -- Interviews Available In-Reply-To: <24061E4A-41C7-41EC-BD75-20580F1CF34B@gmail.com> References: <24061E4A-41C7-41EC-BD75-20580F1CF34B@gmail.com> Message-ID: BBC reports that Trump is considering a Decapitation Strike on Syria along the lines described by Sy Hersh below. This Waffen-SS Law School is pathetic! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Jay [mailto:futureup2us at gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2017 10:11 AM To: Boyle, Francis A Cc: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson ; Mildred O'brien Subject: Re: Are Claims About Syrian Sarin Attacks Propaganda Leading to More War? -- Interviews Available Thank you, sharing! Jay On Jun 27, 2017, at 09:29, Boyle, Francis A > wrote: This Waffen-SS College of Law Is Pathetic! Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2017 9:27 AM To: sectns.aals at lists.aals.org Subject: Are Claims About Syrian Sarin Attacks Propaganda Leading to More War? -- Interviews Available FRANCIS BOYLE, (217) 333-7954, fboyle at illinois.edu Boyle is professor of international law at the University of Illinois College of Law. See his recent interview with Dennis Bernstein at Consortium News: "A Baseless Justification for War in Syria." He said today: "The current posture of U.S., French and perhaps British policy in Syria is basically an invitation for some jihadist group to stage a chemical weapons attack in Syria. That would get blamed on Assad and the U.S. would bomb him. This is an intolerable, incredibly dangerous situation brought on by constant illegal U.S. meddling." Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Institute for Public Accuracy . [mailto:accuracy at accuracy.org] Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2017 9:20 AM To: francis.a.boyle at gmail.com Subject: Are Claims About Syrian Sarin Attacks Propaganda Leading to More War? -- Interviews Available [http://app.meltwaterpress.com/mpress/statistic.html?accessCode=0aca5159edbd15675e94ae4fa7bd8c3d5d1d5f25&distributionId=542953&contact=francis.a.boyle at gmail.com] Are Claims About Syrian Sarin Attacks Propaganda Leading to More War? BuzzFeed reports: "Syria appears to be preparing a new chemical weapons attack against its citizens, the White House said Monday, warning that if the weapons are again used, the U.S. will make the Syrian government 'pay a heavy price.' ... Five U.S. defense officials reached by BuzzFeed News said they did not know where the potential chemical attack would come from, including one U.S. Central Command official who had 'no idea' about its origin." From RT: "U.S. threats to Syria’s legitimate government unacceptable -- Kremlin." See new interview with investigative journalist Seymour Hersh: "Trump Ignored Intel Before Bombing Syria" with The Real News. On Sunday, Hersh's piece "Trump‘s Red Line" was published in the German newspaper Welt am Sonntag. Hersh wrote: "On April 6, United States President Donald Trump authorized an early morning Tomahawk missile strike on Shayrat Air Base in central Syria in retaliation for what he said was a deadly nerve agent attack carried out by the Syrian government two days earlier in the rebel-held town of Khan Sheikhoun. Trump issued the order despite having been warned by the U.S. intelligence community that it had found no evidence that the Syrians had used a chemical weapon. ... "'The Salafists and jihadists got everything they wanted out of their hyped-up Syrian nerve gas ploy,' the senior adviser to the U.S. intelligence community told me, referring to the flare up of tensions between Syria, Russia and America. 'The issue is, what if there’s another false flag sarin attack credited to hated Syria? Trump has upped the ante and painted himself into a corner with his decision to bomb. And do not think these guys are not planning the next faked attack. Trump will have no choice but to bomb again, and harder. He’s incapable of saying he made a mistake.'" THEODORE A. POSTOL, postol at mit.edu Postol is professor emeritus of science, technology, and national security policy at MIT. Last month, he appeared on an Institute for Public Accuracy news release: "NYT Claims on Syria Attack Unsupported." He said today: "The White House took unjustified actions -- and is now creating another set of reasons for more such actions. Chances of an unpredictable escalation are significant. Trump is pushing the Russians to extreme positions and he's undermining the effort to destroy the Islamic State." FRANCIS BOYLE, (217) 333-7954, fboyle at illinois.edu Boyle is professor of international law at the University of Illinois College of Law. See his recent interview with Dennis Bernstein at Consortium News: "A Baseless Justification for War in Syria." He said today: "The current posture of U.S., French and perhaps British policy in Syria is basically an invitation for some jihadist group to stage a chemical weapons attack in Syria. That would get blamed on Assad and the U.S. would bomb him. This is an intolerable, incredibly dangerous situation brought on by constant illegal U.S. meddling." CNN recently reported: "Macron vows retaliation if chemical weapons used in Syria." For more information, contact at the Institute for Public Accuracy: Sam Husseini, (202) 347-0020; David Zupan, (541) 484-9167 June 27, 2017 Institute for Public Accuracy 980 National Press Building, Washington, D.C. 20045 (202) 347-0020 * accuracy.org * ipa at accuracy.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bjornsona at ameritech.net Tue Jun 27 18:38:43 2017 From: bjornsona at ameritech.net (Anne Parkinson) Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2017 18:38:43 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Peace-discuss] FW: Are Claims About Syrian Sarin Attacks Propaganda Leading to More War? -- Interviews Available In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1667766993.3821893.1498588723727@mail.yahoo.com> thank you for article. I kept hearing this horrid news on the radio and came straight to my email. I knew I could count on Aware for news! Does anyone have any idea on who I can contact to publicize this more or to protest more? So horrible to see it coming and not know what to do. (I will not be in town on Saturday though if that is the traditional protest, I am sorry.) Anne Parkinson On Tuesday, June 27, 2017 9:29 AM, "Boyle, Francis A via Peace-discuss" wrote: Are Claims About Syrian Sarin Attacks Propaganda Leading to More War? -- Interviews AvailableThis Waffen-SS College of Law Is Pathetic! Fab.   Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only)   From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2017 9:27 AM To: sectns.aals at lists.aals.org Subject: Are Claims About Syrian Sarin Attacks Propaganda Leading to More War? -- Interviews Available   FRANCIS BOYLE, (217) 333-7954, fboyle at illinois.edu     Boyle is professor of international law at the University of Illinois College of Law. See his recent interview with Dennis Bernstein at Consortium News: "A Baseless Justification for War in Syria." He said today: "The current posture of U.S., French and perhaps British policy in Syria is basically an invitation for some jihadist group to stage a chemical weapons attack in Syria. That would get blamed on Assad and the U.S. would bomb him. This is an intolerable, incredibly dangerous situation brought on by constant illegal U.S. meddling."    Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only)   From: Institute for Public Accuracy . [mailto:accuracy at accuracy.org] Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2017 9:20 AM To: francis.a.boyle at gmail.com Subject: Are Claims About Syrian Sarin Attacks Propaganda Leading to More War? -- Interviews Available   Are Claims About Syrian Sarin Attacks Propaganda Leading to More War? BuzzFeed reports: "Syria appears to be preparing a new chemical weapons attack against its citizens, the White House said Monday, warning that if the weapons are again used, the U.S. will make the Syrian government 'pay a heavy price.' ... Five U.S. defense officials reached by BuzzFeed News said they did not know where the potential chemical attack would come from, including one U.S. Central Command official who had 'no idea' about its origin." From RT: "U.S. threats to Syria’s legitimate government unacceptable -- Kremlin."  See new interview with investigative journalist Seymour Hersh: "Trump Ignored Intel Before Bombing Syria" with The Real News. On Sunday, Hersh's piece "Trump‘s Red Line" was published in the German newspaper Welt am Sonntag. Hersh wrote: "On April 6, United States President Donald Trump authorized an early morning Tomahawk missile strike on Shayrat Air Base in central Syria in retaliation for what he said was a deadly nerve agent attack carried out by the Syrian government two days earlier in the rebel-held town of Khan Sheikhoun. Trump issued the order despite having been warned by the U.S. intelligence community that it had found no evidence that the Syrians had used a chemical weapon. ... "'The Salafists and jihadists got everything they wanted out of their hyped-up Syrian nerve gas ploy,' the senior adviser to the U.S. intelligence community told me, referring to the flare up of tensions between Syria, Russia and America. 'The issue is, what if there’s another false flag sarin attack credited to hated Syria? Trump has upped the ante and painted himself into a corner with his decision to bomb. And do not think these guys are not planning the next faked attack. Trump will have no choice but to bomb again, and harder. He’s incapable of saying he made a mistake.'" THEODORE A. POSTOL, postol at mit.edu     Postol is professor emeritus of science, technology, and national security policy at MIT. Last month, he appeared on an Institute for Public Accuracy news release: "NYT Claims on Syria Attack Unsupported." He said today: "The White House took unjustified actions -- and is now creating another set of reasons for more such actions. Chances of an unpredictable escalation are significant. Trump is pushing the Russians to extreme positions and he's undermining the effort to destroy the Islamic State."  FRANCIS BOYLE, (217) 333-7954, fboyle at illinois.edu     Boyle is professor of international law at the University of Illinois College of Law. See his recent interview with Dennis Bernstein at Consortium News: "A Baseless Justification for War in Syria." He said today: "The current posture of U.S., French and perhaps British policy in Syria is basically an invitation for some jihadist group to stage a chemical weapons attack in Syria. That would get blamed on Assad and the U.S. would bomb him. This is an intolerable, incredibly dangerous situation brought on by constant illegal U.S. meddling."  CNN recently reported: "Macron vows retaliation if chemical weapons used in Syria."  For more information, contact at the Institute for Public Accuracy: Sam Husseini, (202) 347-0020; David Zupan, (541) 484-9167 June 27, 2017 Institute for Public Accuracy 980 National Press Building, Washington, D.C. 20045 (202) 347-0020 * accuracy.org * ipa at accuracy.org _______________________________________________ Peace-discuss mailing list Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bjornsona at ameritech.net Tue Jun 27 18:38:43 2017 From: bjornsona at ameritech.net (Anne Parkinson) Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2017 18:38:43 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Peace-discuss] FW: Are Claims About Syrian Sarin Attacks Propaganda Leading to More War? -- Interviews Available In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1667766993.3821893.1498588723727@mail.yahoo.com> thank you for article. I kept hearing this horrid news on the radio and came straight to my email. I knew I could count on Aware for news! Does anyone have any idea on who I can contact to publicize this more or to protest more? So horrible to see it coming and not know what to do. (I will not be in town on Saturday though if that is the traditional protest, I am sorry.) Anne Parkinson On Tuesday, June 27, 2017 9:29 AM, "Boyle, Francis A via Peace-discuss" wrote: Are Claims About Syrian Sarin Attacks Propaganda Leading to More War? -- Interviews AvailableThis Waffen-SS College of Law Is Pathetic! Fab.   Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only)   From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2017 9:27 AM To: sectns.aals at lists.aals.org Subject: Are Claims About Syrian Sarin Attacks Propaganda Leading to More War? -- Interviews Available   FRANCIS BOYLE, (217) 333-7954, fboyle at illinois.edu     Boyle is professor of international law at the University of Illinois College of Law. See his recent interview with Dennis Bernstein at Consortium News: "A Baseless Justification for War in Syria." He said today: "The current posture of U.S., French and perhaps British policy in Syria is basically an invitation for some jihadist group to stage a chemical weapons attack in Syria. That would get blamed on Assad and the U.S. would bomb him. This is an intolerable, incredibly dangerous situation brought on by constant illegal U.S. meddling."    Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only)   From: Institute for Public Accuracy . [mailto:accuracy at accuracy.org] Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2017 9:20 AM To: francis.a.boyle at gmail.com Subject: Are Claims About Syrian Sarin Attacks Propaganda Leading to More War? -- Interviews Available   Are Claims About Syrian Sarin Attacks Propaganda Leading to More War? BuzzFeed reports: "Syria appears to be preparing a new chemical weapons attack against its citizens, the White House said Monday, warning that if the weapons are again used, the U.S. will make the Syrian government 'pay a heavy price.' ... Five U.S. defense officials reached by BuzzFeed News said they did not know where the potential chemical attack would come from, including one U.S. Central Command official who had 'no idea' about its origin." From RT: "U.S. threats to Syria’s legitimate government unacceptable -- Kremlin."  See new interview with investigative journalist Seymour Hersh: "Trump Ignored Intel Before Bombing Syria" with The Real News. On Sunday, Hersh's piece "Trump‘s Red Line" was published in the German newspaper Welt am Sonntag. Hersh wrote: "On April 6, United States President Donald Trump authorized an early morning Tomahawk missile strike on Shayrat Air Base in central Syria in retaliation for what he said was a deadly nerve agent attack carried out by the Syrian government two days earlier in the rebel-held town of Khan Sheikhoun. Trump issued the order despite having been warned by the U.S. intelligence community that it had found no evidence that the Syrians had used a chemical weapon. ... "'The Salafists and jihadists got everything they wanted out of their hyped-up Syrian nerve gas ploy,' the senior adviser to the U.S. intelligence community told me, referring to the flare up of tensions between Syria, Russia and America. 'The issue is, what if there’s another false flag sarin attack credited to hated Syria? Trump has upped the ante and painted himself into a corner with his decision to bomb. And do not think these guys are not planning the next faked attack. Trump will have no choice but to bomb again, and harder. He’s incapable of saying he made a mistake.'" THEODORE A. POSTOL, postol at mit.edu     Postol is professor emeritus of science, technology, and national security policy at MIT. Last month, he appeared on an Institute for Public Accuracy news release: "NYT Claims on Syria Attack Unsupported." He said today: "The White House took unjustified actions -- and is now creating another set of reasons for more such actions. Chances of an unpredictable escalation are significant. Trump is pushing the Russians to extreme positions and he's undermining the effort to destroy the Islamic State."  FRANCIS BOYLE, (217) 333-7954, fboyle at illinois.edu     Boyle is professor of international law at the University of Illinois College of Law. See his recent interview with Dennis Bernstein at Consortium News: "A Baseless Justification for War in Syria." He said today: "The current posture of U.S., French and perhaps British policy in Syria is basically an invitation for some jihadist group to stage a chemical weapons attack in Syria. That would get blamed on Assad and the U.S. would bomb him. This is an intolerable, incredibly dangerous situation brought on by constant illegal U.S. meddling."  CNN recently reported: "Macron vows retaliation if chemical weapons used in Syria."  For more information, contact at the Institute for Public Accuracy: Sam Husseini, (202) 347-0020; David Zupan, (541) 484-9167 June 27, 2017 Institute for Public Accuracy 980 National Press Building, Washington, D.C. 20045 (202) 347-0020 * accuracy.org * ipa at accuracy.org _______________________________________________ Peace-discuss mailing list Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From r-szoke at illinois.edu Wed Jun 28 04:14:04 2017 From: r-szoke at illinois.edu (Szoke, Ron) Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2017 04:14:04 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Adam Kinzinger, R, IL-16 Message-ID: Adam Kinzinger From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Adam Kinzinger [Adam Kinzinger official congressional photo.jpg] Member of the U.S. House of Representatives from Illinois's 16th district Incumbent Assumed office January 3, 2013 Preceded by Don Manzullo Member of the U.S. House of Representatives from Illinois's 11th district In office January 3, 2011 – January 3, 2013 Preceded by Debbie Halvorson Succeeded by Bill Foster Personal details Born Adam Daniel Kinzinger February 27, 1978 (age 39) Kankakee, Illinois, U.S. Political party Republican Education Illinois State University (BA) Military service Allegiance [cid:93538FD5-3DE1-4734-8E52-1484195B9C06] United States Service/branch [cid:B7163098-4DD3-44CE-BB4C-28ACAB7C70E6] United States Air Force Years of service 2003–present Rank [US-O4 insignia.svg] Major Battles/wars Operation Iraqi Freedom War in Afghanistan Adam Daniel Kinzinger[1] /ˈkɪnzɪŋər/ (born February 27, 1978)[2] is the U.S. Representative for Illinois's 16th congressional district. He is a member of the Republican Party. He was first elected to Congress in 2010, winning election to represent Illinois's 11th congressional district. After redistricting, he was re-elected to Congress in both 2012 and 2014 to represent Illinois's 16th congressional district. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 220px-Adam_Kinzinger_official_congressional_photo.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 16995 bytes Desc: 220px-Adam_Kinzinger_official_congressional_photo.jpg URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 23px-Flag_of_the_United_States.svg.png Type: image/png Size: 360 bytes Desc: 23px-Flag_of_the_United_States.svg.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 23px-Flag_of_the_United_States_Air_Force.svg.png Type: image/png Size: 407 bytes Desc: 23px-Flag_of_the_United_States_Air_Force.svg.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 20px-US-O4_insignia.svg.png Type: image/png Size: 1190 bytes Desc: 20px-US-O4_insignia.svg.png URL: From galliher at illinois.edu Wed Jun 28 04:25:22 2017 From: galliher at illinois.edu (Carl G. Estabrook) Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2017 23:25:22 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Adam Kinzinger, R, IL-16 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <30FF5ACE-0C8C-4B33-A8F9-432677261EDE@illinois.edu> Ron Paul: Seymour Hersh Reporting Trump Knew Latest Syria Chemical Attack Was False Flag; Bombed Assad Anyway; "A Shame" <> <> <> Former Congressman Ron Paul discusses a new Seymour Hersh article out this week showing that the US knew Syrian President Bashar al-Assad was not responsible for the chemical attack in April, but President Trump decided to bomb anyway. Paul also singles out Rep. Adam Kinzinger for being a hawk who is "determined to stir up super-antagonism towards Russia" and criticizes Trump for allowing himself to be influenced. RON PAUL: Somebody did a special interview this week , and he's getting to be well-known, someone who is not 40 years old yet... Rep. Adam Kinzinger from Illinois. He is determined to stir up super-antagonism towards Russia. And he can not stand the fact that there might be a softer aproach, and he doesn't like Trump We're not Trump champions, but [Kinzinger opposes Trump] for this reason: He's not hawkish enough! He did point out that Trump's positions [on foreign policy] are actually not that bad. When he sends 59 Tomahawk [missiles] into Syria, and sorts of things like that. [Kinzinger] likes that. Of course, there is this issue of gas - whether it was actually gas released in April, and we've had some people looking into this. And this is ongoing, but there may be signs that the monolith against Russia and Assad --symbolized by 97-2 vote [in the Senate] could be starting to crack... He really doesn't like Putin because 'he's killing his own people.' Well, I don't know exactly what he's referring to. I know Putin is no angel, but when you think of how many people our foreign policy kills, we talk about that so often... This is just such hypocrisy, but it is mainly to promote a hawkish policy, back to 'Assad has to go.' To me, it is amazing how the liberal Democrats, who are supposed to be anti-war like they were in the 1960s, they are now, it looks like, maybe more hawkish than the Republicans... It is amazing, [Hersh] had an article over the weekend, and everyone is talking about it today. It is a blockbuster article, it absolutely damages Trump completely, but it also damages the pro-war narrative. Nobody in the Washington Post or New York Times -- here is a blockbuster from a Pullitzer Prize-winning reporter and he had to go to Germany to get it published. Nobody in the U.S. will touch it. The article essentially says based on his intelligence contacts that the U.S. knew --President Trump knew-- this was not a chemical attack in April, and he fired the Tomahawks anyway, and it is a blockbuster. And think about it. Nobody wants to touch it. An article like that! Isn't strange how Trump is so back-and-forth [on foreign affairs]. I think that is the worst position to be... But Trump is criticized mostly by the Kinzingers and the others in the Senate for being too soft on Russia. But then he comes, and he is too aggressive from our view point. He is dropping bombs willy nilly, and it scares us that he will fdo that, he will be influenced by that. And now what we're seeing is, it wasn't ignorance, there was material out there. So it sort of reminds me of what was available to us that we could find before the Iraq War. It was there by reputable people, but it is lost in politics. It is a shame... > On Jun 27, 2017, at 11:14 PM, Szoke, Ron via Peace-discuss wrote: > > Adam Kinzinger > From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia > > Adam Kinzinger > <220px-Adam_Kinzinger_official_congressional_photo.jpg> > Member of the U.S. House of Representatives > from Illinois 's 16th district > Incumbent > Assumed office > January 3, 2013 > Preceded by Don Manzullo > Member of the U.S. House of Representatives > from Illinois 's 11th district > In office > January 3, 2011 – January 3, 2013 > Preceded by Debbie Halvorson > Succeeded by Bill Foster > Personal details > Born Adam Daniel Kinzinger > February 27, 1978 (age 39) > Kankakee , Illinois , U.S. > Political party Republican > Education Illinois State University (BA ) > Military service > Allegiance <23px-Flag_of_the_United_States.svg.png> United States > Service/branch <23px-Flag_of_the_United_States_Air_Force.svg.png> United States Air Force > Years of service 2003–present > Rank <20px-US-O4_insignia.svg.png> Major > Battles/wars Operation Iraqi Freedom > War in Afghanistan > Adam Daniel Kinzinger[1] /ˈkɪnzɪŋər/ (born February 27, 1978)[2] is the U.S. Representative for Illinois's 16th congressional district . He is a member of the Republican Party . He was first elected to Congress in 2010, winning election to represent Illinois's 11th congressional district . After redistricting, he was re-elected to Congress in both 2012 and 2014 to represent Illinois's 16th congressional district . > _______________________________________________ > Peace-discuss mailing list > Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Wed Jun 28 12:42:26 2017 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2017 12:42:26 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Putting it all in "perspective." Message-ID: * Print * Leaflet * Feedback * Share » Trump’s Syrian chemical weapons claims: A house of cards 28 June 2017 In the latest season of the Netflix drama House of Cards, the fictional administration of President Francis Underwood and Vice President Claire Underwood, facing a domestic political crisis, uses a manufactured chemical weapons attack in Syria to declare war on the country. In a case of politics following art, the Trump administration has accused the Syrian government of “preparing” to use chemical weapons against the civilian population. No evidence has been presented to back up the concocted threat. On Monday, Press Secretary Sean Spicer declared that the US had “identified potential preparations for another chemical weapons attack by the Assad regime that would likely result in the mass murder of civilians, including innocent children.” If Syrian President Bashar al-Assad “conducts another mass murder attack using chemical weapons,” the statement continued, “he and his military will pay a heavy price.” Washington’s ambassador to the UN, Nikki Haley, added Tuesday, “The goal is at this point not just to send Assad a message, but to send Russia and Iran a message… That if this happens again, we are putting you on notice.” In other words, any alleged chemical weapons attack in Syria could be used to justify war against Iran and Russia. Pressed to substantiate the White House’s allegation, Pentagon spokesman Jeff Davis refused to produce any evidence. He said the alleged intelligence was from “the past day or two” and regarded “specific aircraft in a specific hangar, both of which we know to be associated with chemical weapons use.” This was a reference to the Shayrat airfield, which the US targeted with a cruise missile strike on April 6. Some military officials said they had “no idea” what the White House was referring to. British defense officials said they had not seen the evidence, but would support US military escalation regardless—meaning they do not care whether the allegations are true or false. The White House statement followed by just one day the publication of a detailed article in Die Welt by Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Seymour Hersh, the reporter who exposed the My Lai massacre during the Vietnam War, which demonstrated that the allegations used by the Trump administration to justify the April 6 missile attack on Syria were entirely unsubstantiated. Drawing on background interviews with military and intelligence personnel, Hersh wrote that the administration possessed no evidence to back up its claims that the Syrian government had launched a sarin gas attack on April 4. The false allegations of a chemical attack and subsequent bombardment of the Syrian airbase were so brazen that they provoked opposition from within sections of the military/intelligence apparatus. “None of this makes any sense,” Hersh cited one officer as saying. “We KNOW that there was no chemical attack...” At the time, Trump was under immense pressure from the Democratic Party and intelligence agencies to shift to a more aggressive stance against the Syrian government. Just days before, the Senate Intelligence Committee had held a hearing at which it was alleged that Trump had effectively collaborated with Russian efforts to undermine the 2016 US election. Columnists and pundits painted the president as little more than an agent of the Kremlin. But that all changed—at least for a few days—after the attack. As Hersh put it, “The next few days were his most successful as president. America rallied around its commander in chief, as it always does in times of war... One prominent TV anchorman, Brian Williams of MSNBC, used the word ‘beautiful’ to describe the images of the Tomahawks being launched at sea. Speaking on CNN, Fareed Zakaria said: ‘I think Donald Trump became president of the United States.’ A review of the top 100 American newspapers showed that 39 of them published editorials supporting the bombing in its aftermath, including the New York Times, Washington Post and Wall Street Journal.” At the time, no major US news publication even raised the question of whether the White House’s allegations were credible. They were simply accepted as good coin, demonstrating that the media’s role as a propaganda organ for war had not abated. Indeed, Hersh was unable to find a news source to publish his most recent article in the United States. The story was also rejected by the UK’s London Review of Books, which published earlier investigative reports by Hersh, forcing him to turn to the German newspaper. As shown by the latest fabricated Syrian “atrocity”—this time, supposedly in “preparation”—nothing has changed in regard to the media’s readiness to serve as a sounding board for government propaganda. But the media’s acceptance of the administration’s concocted claims about weapons of mass destruction in Syria cannot hide the fact that they are, in fact, concocted. In what has become standard operating procedure, the administration has not attempted to present a shred of evidence, making only the most general allegations, which the American population is expected to swallow whole. Fourteen years ago, the Bush administration used lies about weapons of mass destruction to start a war in Iraq that led to the deaths of millions. Now the Trump administration, with the full support of the media and the entire political establishment, is using equally groundless claims to escalate a war that could result in a nuclear exchange between the United States and Russia, the world’s second biggest nuclear power. Far from opposing the escalation of war, the Democratic Party has made this its central demand since the election of Trump and the focus of its opposition to his administration. In an article published this month in Foreign A ffairs, Tim Kaine, Hillary Clinton’s running mate, spelled out the aggressive foreign policy aims that underpinned Clinton’s candidacy and are at the center of the present hysterical campaign over Trump’s alleged “collusion” with Russian President Putin. Kaine pilloried the Obama administration’s foreign policy, declaring that Obama’s “unwillingness to forcefully intervene early in the Syrian civil war will come to haunt the United States in the future.” He excoriated Obama’s “lackadaisical response to Russia’s cyberattacks and its unprecedented interference in the 2016 election,” concluding, “The United States must always send a clear message to those who mean Americans harm: don’t mess with us.” As a recent article in the Washington Post makes clear, the Obama administration had expected to transfer power to a Clinton White House that would immediately begin preparing a major escalation in Syria, entailing a possible clash with Russia. Trump’s surprise election victory disrupted these plans, which were well advanced. Hence the ferocity of the efforts by the Democrats and the intelligence agencies to pressure Trump to carry out a shift to a more aggressive and more anti-Russian foreign policy—efforts that appear to be succeeding. The deepening tensions between the US and Russia over Syria pose an existential danger to humanity. The only way to avert the catastrophe to which the US political establishment is rushing is for the working class to intervene independently, on the basis of its own socialist, internationalist and revolutionary program. Andre Damon WSWS.ORG -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Wed Jun 28 22:58:03 2017 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2017 22:58:03 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Listen to David Swanson of World Beyond War's interview with Ajamu Baraka Message-ID: https://soundcloud.com/davidcnswanson/talk-nation-radio-ajamu-baraka-on-the-black-alliance-for-peace -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Wed Jun 28 23:23:38 2017 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2017 23:23:38 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Fwd: Listen to David Swanson of World Beyond War's interview with Ajamu Baraka References: <3EC688B7-492B-44D1-8973-D5828BC7159C@hotmail.com> Message-ID: Subject: Listen to David Swanson of World Beyond War's interview with Ajamu Baraka Date: June 28, 2017 at 15:58:01 PDT https://soundcloud.com/davidcnswanson/talk-nation-radio-ajamu-baraka-on-the-black-alliance-for-peace -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Thu Jun 29 01:38:18 2017 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2017 01:38:18 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Jeffrey St.Clair of Counterpunch: Message-ID: Jeffrey St Clair writes: I used to believe that rightwing militarism would be countered by a liberated and reanimated anti-war movement that had refused to confront liberal wars. But where is it now? Where are the mass protests against Trump's expanding wars in Syria, Yemen, Somalia and the new re-surge in Afghanistan? Where are the protest against the rising slaughter of civilians? Where indeed. The liberal antiwar movement has morphed into an anti-Russia movement, aligning itself fatally with some of the most bloodthirsty hawks on the Hill and in doing so is abetting every drone strike, Cruise missile and MOAB bomb Trump drops. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From galliher at illinois.edu Thu Jun 29 02:11:34 2017 From: galliher at illinois.edu (Carl G. Estabrook) Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2017 21:11:34 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Jeffrey St.Clair of Counterpunch: In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: The Democrats have co-opted and eviscerated the anti-war movement for two generations, from Johnson (“no wider war’) to Obama (“no dumb wars”) - while they expanded the killing. The Democrat war party is responsible for the duplicitous and fantastical anti-Russia movement - "aligning itself fatally with some of the most bloodthirsty hawks on the Hill and in doing so … abetting every drone strike, Cruise missile and MOAB bomb…” The anti-war movement should have nothing to do with them, unless they agree to demand all US troops (and weapons) be brought home. —CGE > On Jun 28, 2017, at 8:38 PM, Karen Aram via Peace-discuss wrote: > > Jeffrey St Clair writes: > I used to believe that rightwing militarism would be countered by a liberated and reanimated anti-war movement that had refused to confront liberal wars. But where is it now? Where are the mass protests against Trump's expanding wars in Syria, Yemen, Somalia and the new re-surge in Afghanistan? Where are the protest against the rising slaughter of civilians? Where indeed. The liberal antiwar movement has morphed into an anti-Russia movement, aligning itself fatally with some of the most bloodthirsty hawks on the Hill and in doing so is abetting every drone strike, Cruise missile and MOAB bomb Trump drops. > _______________________________________________ > Peace-discuss mailing list > Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss From karenaram at hotmail.com Thu Jun 29 02:38:41 2017 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2017 02:38:41 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Jeffrey St.Clair of Counterpunch: In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: True, but the Republicans haven’t exactly, led, the anti-war movement either, now have they? Johnson escalated it, until his Advisors told him to stop. We then got Nixon who was responsible for the secret bombing of Cambodia, in which we dropped more bombs than on any nation ever, as of 2007 according to Chomsky. Cambodia, Laos destroyed, along with Chile, during Nixon's reign. It doesn’t matter who is in the White House, our foreign policy of death and imperialism continues unabated, under both Party’s. The American people tended to sleep during the 8 years of Obama, now perhaps they will awaken, because Trump’s domestic policies are killing us. And, it is on Trump’s plate now, no excuses. > On Jun 28, 2017, at 19:11, Carl G. Estabrook wrote: > > The Democrats have co-opted and eviscerated the anti-war movement for two generations, from Johnson (“no wider war’) to Obama (“no dumb wars”) - while they expanded the killing. > > The Democrat war party is responsible for the duplicitous and fantastical anti-Russia movement - "aligning itself fatally with some of the most bloodthirsty hawks on the Hill and in doing so … abetting every drone strike, Cruise missile and MOAB bomb…” > > The anti-war movement should have nothing to do with them, unless they agree to demand all US troops (and weapons) be brought home. > > —CGE > >> On Jun 28, 2017, at 8:38 PM, Karen Aram via Peace-discuss wrote: >> >> Jeffrey St Clair writes: >> I used to believe that rightwing militarism would be countered by a liberated and reanimated anti-war movement that had refused to confront liberal wars. But where is it now? Where are the mass protests against Trump's expanding wars in Syria, Yemen, Somalia and the new re-surge in Afghanistan? Where are the protest against the rising slaughter of civilians? Where indeed. The liberal antiwar movement has morphed into an anti-Russia movement, aligning itself fatally with some of the most bloodthirsty hawks on the Hill and in doing so is abetting every drone strike, Cruise missile and MOAB bomb Trump drops. >> _______________________________________________ >> Peace-discuss mailing list >> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net >> https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss > From fboyle at illinois.edu Thu Jun 29 11:39:02 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2017 11:39:02 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] Jeffrey St.Clair of Counterpunch: In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: abetting every drone strike --------------- Yeah, just like the entire College of Law Faculty did here by bringing in Killer Koh, Obama's Droner in Chief. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Peace [mailto:peace-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of Carl G. Estabrook via Peace Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2017 9:12 PM To: Karen Aram ; Jeffrey St Clair Cc: peace ; peace-discuss Subject: Re: [Peace] [Peace-discuss] Jeffrey St.Clair of Counterpunch: The Democrats have co-opted and eviscerated the anti-war movement for two generations, from Johnson (“no wider war’) to Obama (“no dumb wars”) - while they expanded the killing. The Democrat war party is responsible for the duplicitous and fantastical anti-Russia movement - "aligning itself fatally with some of the most bloodthirsty hawks on the Hill and in doing so … abetting every drone strike, Cruise missile and MOAB bomb…” The anti-war movement should have nothing to do with them, unless they agree to demand all US troops (and weapons) be brought home. —CGE > On Jun 28, 2017, at 8:38 PM, Karen Aram via Peace-discuss wrote: > > Jeffrey St Clair writes: > I used to believe that rightwing militarism would be countered by a liberated and reanimated anti-war movement that had refused to confront liberal wars. But where is it now? Where are the mass protests against Trump's expanding wars in Syria, Yemen, Somalia and the new re-surge in Afghanistan? Where are the protest against the rising slaughter of civilians? Where indeed. The liberal antiwar movement has morphed into an anti-Russia movement, aligning itself fatally with some of the most bloodthirsty hawks on the Hill and in doing so is abetting every drone strike, Cruise missile and MOAB bomb Trump drops. > _______________________________________________ > Peace-discuss mailing list > Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss _______________________________________________ Peace mailing list Peace at lists.chambana.net https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace From fboyle at illinois.edu Thu Jun 29 12:42:47 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2017 12:42:47 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] UILAW Robbenolt: A Wolf in Sheep's Clothing! Message-ID: In addition to Yale Law Mafia Feddie Mazzone, Robbenolt was on the Law Committee who invited Killer Koh in here despite my doing everything humanly possible to stop them. Robbenolt is a wolf in sheep's clothing! She knew full well that Killer Koh was up to his eyeballs and dripping in blood from all the war crimes, crimes against peace, crimes against humanity and genocide that Killer Koh had committed for Obama/Clinton and before that for Reagan from 1983 to 1985 because I told her so with abundant documentation along with the rest of the Faculty. To the contrary, as Robbenolt and the COL Faculty saw it, these atrocities qualified Killer Koh to give his endowed lecture about why he is a Role Model for Lawyers in Government Service. Robbenolt became an Accessory After the Fact to all of Killer Koh's Crimes. And if any of our lawyers become war criminals and genocidaires like Killer Koh, it will be on Robbenolt's Head for the rest of Eternity. Perversely, but not surprisingly, Robbenolt was promoted to become Associate Dean for Faculty Research-research on how they can all aid and abet and promote war crimes, crimes against peace, crimes against humanity and genocide against Muslims/Arabs/Asians of Color. Caveat emptor! Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2017 9:19 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson ; Mildred O'brien Subject: RE: News Gazoo for Feddie Yale Law Mafia Killer Koh Mazzone My Mom-RIP-- was very proud when I told her that I was publicly attacked by a Low Life Like Borked in a Mass-Mailing Fund-raising Letter he sent to his 25,000 Feddies. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E.Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, Illinois 61820 Phone: 217-333-7954 Fax: 217-244-1478 fboyle at law.uiuc.edu 9 September 1997 Memorandum TO: Robert H. Bork Federalist Society Dear Bob: Concerning your fund-raising letter of 28 August that just came to my attention, I want to thank you from the bottom of my heart for publicly associating me with a Lawyer and a Judge who has the principles, courage and integrity of Lawrence Walsh. For your information, that message and others like out were sent out all over the internet, not just to 30 professors, together with the full text of Judge Walsh's attack on the Federalist Society. Out of respect for Judge Walsh, I certainly do hope that my professorial colleagues will pay the most serious attention to what he had to say about the Federalist Society. After all, Judge Walsh is a pillar of the American Legal Establishment and of the Republican Party. As for myself, I have always been a political independent and resent your implication that I am a member of the Democrat Party. Be that as it may, it seems to me that you have only (once again!) made a fool of yourself by publicly attacking a Lawyer and a Judge with the courage, integrity and principles of Judge Walsh--characteristics that you yourself were not noted for as Solicitor General (when you fired Archie Cox, the first Special Prosecutor), during your tenure on the bench, or during your Supreme Court nomination hearings. Rather than publicly attacking Judge Walsh, I suggest that you personally as well as the Federalist Society institutionally should be giving the most serious consideration to what he had to say. Yours very truly, Francis A. Boyle Professor of Law cc: Judge Lawrence Walsh Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, Ill. 61820 Phone: 217-333-7954 Fax: 217-244-1478 Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2017 8:43 AM To: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; Karen Aram >; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson >; Mildred O'brien > Subject: RE: News Gazoo for Feddie Yale Law Mafia Killer Koh Mazzone LAW 604-1: Criminal Law Fall 2015 - Moore CONNED LAW is a required course here at the Waffen-SS Law School. So is Criminal Law brainwashed by our Resident CIA/MOSSAD/Torture-Mongerer Michael Moore-Truly Orwellian!-who publicly congratulated CONNED LAW Mazzone et al for bringing in Killer Koh. Teaching here at the Waffen-SS Law School since August 1978 has been like working in a combination of Orwell's 1984 and Conrad's Heart of Darkness-The Horror! The Horror! CIA/MOSSAD/TORTURE/MOORE/HURD OFF CAMPUS! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2017 7:12 AM To: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; Karen Aram >; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson >; Mildred O'brien > Subject: RE: News Gazoo for Feddie Yale Law Mafia Killer Koh Mazzone The University of Illinois College of Law-Hijacking Justice Everyday. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2017 7:06 AM To: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; Karen Aram >; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson >; Mildred O'brien > Subject: RE: News Gazoo for Feddie Yale Law Mafia Killer Koh Mazzone "The impression I have is they are trying to return to the 18th century and undo the work of the Supreme Court since the New Deal," Walsh says. "And I think it is wrong to put someone on the court who has a pre-commitment with a political dogma, whether it's the Ku Klux Klan or the Federalist Society." Yeah, the Feddie Mazzone teaching Conned Law at our Waffen-SS Law School and inviting Killer Koh to come out here and pollute and poison our Good Community. Judge Lawrence Walsh was Independent Counsel/Prosecutor in the Iran-Contra Scandal by appointment of President Reagan; prosecuted the Mob with Dewey in New York; Deputy Attorney General under Eisenhower; Pillar of the Republican Party; President of the American Bar Association; Federal District Judge; Partner in the New York Law Firm of Davis, Polk & Wardwell, etc. RIP. fab Walsh on Federalist Society According to the conventional wisdom, we were in a double bind: The judges appointed by Democratic presidents were supposedly most concerned with protecting the constitutional rights of persons prosecuted for crimes, while most of the other judges owed their appointments to Ronald Reagan or George Bush, who had stated publicly and emphatically that they hoped that North would not be convicted. Over the years, I had often found such simplistic views to be wrong. Most judges overcome the prejudices and alliances they had when appointed to the federal bench. During my three and one-half years on the federal district court in New York, I had experienced the merging process by which new judges are absorbed into their courts. My hard-line political and professional views had moderated during lunchroom conversations with Learned Hand, Jerome Frank, and Harold Medina and had dissolved after a couple of my decisions had been reversed on appeal. But I was concerned about the continuing political allegiance of Republican judges as manifested in the Federalist Society. Although the organization was not openly partisan, its dogma was political. It reminded me of the communist front groups of the 1940s and l950s, whose members were committed to the communist cause and subject to communist direction but were not card-carrying members of the Communist Party. In calling for the narrow construction of constitutional grants of governmental power, the Federalist Society seemed to speak for right-wing Republicans. I was especially troubled that one of White House Counsel Boyden Gray's assistants had openly declared that no one who was not a member of the Federalist Society had received a judicial appointment from President Bush. walsh.fed >From Iran-contra Independent Counsel Lawrence Walsh, Firewall. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2017 6:48 AM To: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; Karen Aram >; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson >; Mildred O'brien > Subject: News Gazoo for Feddie Yale Law Mafia Killer Koh Mazzone Sure. Yale Law Mafia Mazzone was on the Committee that invited Yale Law Mafia Killer Koh to come out here and pollute and poison our Good Community despite my best efforts to stop them. Yale Law Mafia Mazzone is also a Member of the Federalist Society, Hijacking Justice Everyday. 1. The Supremes upheld Trump's Muslim Ban in violation of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. 2. The Supremes have further eroded the Separation of Church and State in violation of the First Amendment. And it appears the Supremes are going to tolerate public bigotry and discrimination against LGBT in the name of "religious freedom" despite the fact we would never permit this to be done against Blacks, Jews, Catholics, etc except here on Campus where Wise {sic!} and the Zionists Ethnically Cleansed Native Americans out of UIUC. 3. We are all going to be up the proverbial creek without a paddle if Kennedy retires and Trump gets to replace him with another hard-line, doctrinaire religious fundamentalist Federalist Society Member like Gorsuch-Hijacking Justice every day along with Mazzone who "teaches" Conned Law at our Waffen-SS Law School. Fab. -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis [mailto:FBOYLE at law.uiuc.edu] Sent: Friday, September 17, 1999 6:35 PM To: undisclosed-recipients Subject: HIJACKING JUSTICE:FEDDIES S P E C I A L R E P O R T H I J A C K I N G J U S T I C E The Federalist Society, a Right-wing network of lawyers, judges and supporters, is undoing civil rights and other gains made through the courts BY GEORGE E. CURRY & TREVOR W. COLEMAN EMERGE, OCTOBER 1999 WHEN BROWN VS. BOARD OF EDUCATION WAS BEING ARGUED, a clerk to U.S. Supreme Court Justice Robert Jackson suggested that the court should rule against the plaintiffs in the landmark school desegregation case. While making the case for maintaining segregated schools, the clerk sent a memo to his boss saying, "It is about time the Court faced the fact that white people in the South don't like the colored people." That clerk was William Rehnquist, now chief justice of the United States Supreme Court. Seeking to put his own ultraconservatives on the Supreme Court with Rehnquist, President Ronald Reagan -- who had appointed more than half of the sitting federal judges by the time he left office -- considered nominating Lino A. Graglia, a controversial University of Texas law professor, as a federal appeals court judge for the 5th Circuit. But the nomination, which had been backed by Attorney General Edwin Meese III, was jettisoned after Graglia acknowledged that he had referred to African-Americans as "pickaninnies." The American Bar Association found the law professor "not qualified" to serve on the federal bench. Reagan did nominate Robert H. Bork, a former Yale law professor, who was on the U.S. Court of Appeals in Washington, D.C. Bork had opposed the 1964 Civil Rights Act, calling it "an unwanted intrusion on the right of individuals to choose with whom to associate." After bitter debate, the Senate rejected his nomination in 1987 by a vote of 58 to 42. Far from fading into the background, Bork, Meese, and to a lesser extent, Graglia, are key players in the Federalist Society, a powerful Right-wing network intent on restricting the power of courts, often at the expense of African-Americans and other people of color, the poor, women and the disadvantaged. The organization actively seeks to limit "judicial activism" and reverse Supreme Court landmark rulings since the New Deal, especially those issued in the 1960s and '70s. Special targets include the 1966 Miranda decision that provides certain rights for suspected criminals, the 1973 Roe vs. Wade ruling legalizing abortion and recent civil rights legislation. Founded in 1982 by three law students, the Federalist Society has grown into one of the most influential institutions in America. Four of the nine members of the U.S. Supreme Court -- Clarence Thomas, William H. Rehnquist, Antonin Scalia and Anthony M. Kennedy -- are close affiliates of the Federalist Society. So are Donald P. Hodel, former president of the Christina Coalition, and special prosecutor Kenneth Starr. The Federalist Society's board of trustees is co-chaired by Bork and U.S. Sen. Orrin Hatch -- one of the most conservative members on Capitol Hill. Other trustees include former Attorney General Meese, William Bradford Reynolds, who was assistant attorney general for civil rights in the Reagan Administration, sought to have court-ordered affirmative action programs overturned, and C. Boyden Gray, former President Bush's chief White House attorney, who opposed the Civil Rights Act of 1991. In a world being reshaped by the Federalist Society, conservative law students have formed chapters on campuses across the nation. After graduation, they clerk for conservative judges and then go on to become high-ranking government officials, partners in major law firms, prosecutors, law school professors and judges at the local, state and federal level. In short, the Federalist Society is on the verge of hijacking the judicial system. "This is more than an attack on affirmative action being spear-headed by the Federalist Society lawyers," observes Francis A. Boyle, a law professor at the University of Illinois. "They want to go beyond getting rid of affirmative action. They want to go back to Brown vs. Board of Education. "We have Justice Antonin Scalia (who advised the Federalist Society at its inception and later hired two of its three founders as his law clerks), who two years ago gave a public lecture at Columbia Law School where he stated if Brown vs. Board of Education was to be presented to him today, he would rule against the plaintiff. In other words, this was a threat that if Brown vs. Board of Education was voted on before the Supreme Court, he would overturn it." That type of thinking disturbs Lawrence E. Walsh. Before becoming president of the American Bar Association in 1975, Walsh chaired an ABA panel that approved President Nixon's choices of federal appeals judges, Clement Haynesworth and G. Harold Carswell, to serve on the Supreme Court. In 1969, the Senate rejected Haynesworth because of conflict-of-interest fears. The following year, Carswell was rejected by the Senate after it was disclosed that he had given a speech as a lawyer expressing his "vigorous belief in the principles of White supremacy." "My concern is there is going to be a cleavage in the courts between the Federalist Society members and nonmembers," says Walsh, a former federal judge. "Anything that perpetuates that kind of ideological cleavage is not good for the unity of the court system. Ideally, it seems to me that judges should avoid memberships [in politically and substantively motivated organizations] but, of course, they don't do that." In fact, the ABA, in one of its publications on judicial independence, concludes: "A judge's impartiality and ability to interpret and apply the laws fairly are integral to the administration of justice." But a judge's membership in an organization -- whether it's the American Civil Liberties Union on the Left or the Federalist Society on the Right -- can influence whether a judge is perceived as being unbiased, a critical element in a judicial system that prides itself on being fair. Harold D. Pope, president of the National Bar Association, says: "People who are opposing the expansion of rights and opportunities for all people in this society we feel are working against America's best interest. We would hope that all jurists, no matter what their prior political persuasion, would deal objectively with the facts of law as they come before them, as they were sworn to do so when they first sat on the bench." The expansion of the Federalist Society, which has adopted a silhouette of James Madison as its symbol, comes at a time when the legal community is worried about a loss of public confidence. An ABA special committee on judicial independence issued a report in August titled "Protecting the Bulwark of the Republic: Ensuring Public Support of the Judicial Process." The report states, "According to the ABA survey, only about half of the respondents believed that our justice system treats men and women equally. Even fewer believed that courts treat members of different ethnic groups or wealthy and poor people the same." The report continues, "As [former] ABA President [Philip S.] Anderson recently stated: "We must work on this problem for as long as it takes to make our profession equally open and our system of justice equally responsive to all members of our society, regardless of color. This is the ultimate challenge to the integrity of the rule of law in America.'" But the Federalist Society is interested in a challenge of a different kind. To its credit, the organization operates with an open and very public agenda. On its web page, for example, it lays out its conservative agenda. "The Federalist Society for Law and Public Policy Studies is a group of conservatives and libertarians interested in the current state of the legal order. It is founded on the principles that the state exists to preserve freedom, that the separation of governmental powers is central to our Constitution, and that it is emphatically the province and duty of the judiciary to say what the law is, not what it should be. The Society seeks both to promote an awareness of these principles and to further their application through its activities." Even conservative write Michael Lind would call this 19th-century view "the Confederate theory of the Constitution." Speakers at one national Federalist Society-sponsored lawyers convention proposed far-reaching judicial reforms that included the abolition of judicial review, limiting the powers of federal courts and stripping the Supreme Court of jurisdiction over certain matters. Mary Frances Berry, chair of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, is worried about more than theory. "What is scary about the Federalist Society is that it is antiquated and atavistic," she says. "Their views on natural law, libertarianism and the limited power of government to respond when people are being discriminated against is scary -- for African-Americans, especially. The more people you have who expose those views on the court, the more dangerous it becomes for every one of our lives." In this book, Firewall: The Iran-Contra Conspiracy and Cover Up, Walsh writes: "In calling for the narrow construction of constitutional grants of governmental power, the Federalist Society seemed to speak for right-wing Republicans. I was especially troubled that one of White House Counsel Boyden Gray's assistants had openly declared that no one who was not a member of the Federalist Society had received a judicial appointment from President Bush." Brian W. Jones, a San Francisco lawyer and member of the Federalist Society, believes that his group is being maligned. "I reject out of hand that Federalists are hostile to civil rights," says Jones, an African-American who was deputy legal affairs secretary to California Gov. Pete Wilson and former counsel to Hatch's Senate Judiciary Committee. "Most members of the Federalist Society would agree that the government has no business making racial distinctions of any kind among its citizens. I would argue that is a very credible view of civil rights. "On civil rights and civil liberty issues, Federalist Society judges tend to have a more limited view of the federal government's authority to respond to a whole range of questions. For conservatives, the first question with any inquiry into responding to social problems is: Where does the authority lie, with the federal government or state and local governments?" Another African-American, Gerald Reynolds, is vice chairman of membership for the Federalist Society. "There are some people who embrace this principle of racial neutrality," says the Kansas City, Mo., lawyer. "This debate flows from principles and not from animosity toward Blacks." The national office of the Federalist Society in Washington, D.C., refused to provide the names of judges on its membership list. However, some of the organization's records were obtained by Emerge from other sources. An examination of Federalist Society documents for 1997 and 1998, the most current information available at press time, reveals the extent that the group has penetrated the courts. When looking at the board of directors of local chapters, officers, their advisory panels and membership lists, it is clear that when one goes to court seeking justice, he or she is increasingly likely to have a judge affiliated with the Federalist Society handling the case. During the period studied, that was true whether one was entering a courtroom in New York, Michigan or Alabama. (The titles of persons listed hereafter reflect the positions they held at the time the records were compiled by the Federalist Society; some of the judges have since been elevated to a higher court.) In New York state, judges serving as officers, directors or advisers to the local chapters included Thomas P. Griesa, chief judge of the U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York, as well as District Judges Shirley Wohl Kram, Lawrence M. McKenna and John E. Sprizzo. A U.S. Appeals Court Judge for the Second Circuit, Dennis G. Jacobs, was also among that group. The Long Island advisory board included U.S. District Judge Michael Fiechter, U.S. Court of International Trade Judge Gregory W. Carman and State Supreme Court Judges Jack Dunne and Ute Lally. In Michigan, judges aligned with the Federalist Society included James L. Ryan and Richard F. Suhreinrich of the U.S. Court of Appeals; Federal District Judges Paul V. Gadola, David W. McKeague, Gerald E. Rosen and Lawrence P. Zatkoff; and U.S. Magistrate Judge Virginia M. Morgan. State Supreme Court Justices Clifford W. Taylor and Elizabeth A. Weaver were listed as advisers to the Detroit chapter. So were Maura D. Corrigan, chief judge of the Michigan Court of Appeals, along with fellow judges Stephen J. Markman, Henry W. Saad, and Robert Young Jr. (an African-American who has since been elevated to the Michigan Supreme Court). The chief judge of the Washtenaw County Circuit Court in Grand Rapids, Kurtis T. Wilder (another African-Americana who is now on the Michigan Court of Appeals), and Wayne County Circuit Judges Sean Cox, Michael J. Talbot and Brian Zahra helped complete the list. Local chapters in Alabama were advised by Perry O. Hooper Sr., chief justice of the Supreme Court of Alabama, along with Associate Justices J. Gorman Houston, Harold See and A. Hugh Maddox. U.S. Sen. Jefferson B. Sessions III also supported the organization. (Sessions was nominated to become a federal judge in 1986 but was blocked when it was disclosed that he had called the NAACP and the American Civil Liberties Union "un-American" and "communist-inspired," and said they "force civil rights down the throats of people." Referring to the Ku Klux Klan, he reportedly said, "I used to think they're OK," until he learned that some Klansmen were "pot smokers." Sessions contended the remarks were either made in jest or had been misinterpreted.) Additional supporters listed included Randall T. Shepard, chief justice of the Indiana Supreme Court; Craig Enoch, chief justice of the Texas Supreme Court; South Carolina Attorney General Charles Molony Condon; Alabama Attorney General William Pryor (who has links on his web page to the Federalist Society and the conservative Washington Legal Foundation), Pennsylvania Attorney General D. Michael Fisher; Indianapolis Mayor Stephen Goldsmith and Clarence Thomas' wife, Virginia, a former aide to House majority leader Richard Armey, and who now works for the Heritage Foundation. As the presiding officials in courts, judges wield broad power. For example, U.S. District Judge Neal B. Biggers Jr., who sits on the advisory board of the Mississippi chapter of the Federalist Society, presided over the Ayers desegregation case. In 1975, Jake Ayers Sr., a Mississippi sharecropper, sued the state on behalf of his son, charging that the state's higher education system discriminated against African-Americans and historically Black colleges. In 1987, Biggers upheld the state College Board's contention that Mississippi's higher education system was no longer racially discriminatory. The Supreme Court reversed Biggers in 1991 and ordered him to remove any vestiges of past discrimination. The power of the Federalist Society is not limited to the judiciary, which would be concern enough. Its tentacles extend deep into corporate America. Listed members of its business advisory council included John Stewart Bryan, III, chairman, president and C.E.O. of Media General Cable; John G. Medlin Jr., board chair of Wachovia Corp., an interstate bank holding company; Geneva Steel C.E.O. Joseph Cannon and Robert L. Strickland, chairman of Lowe's Companies. Also affiliated with the Federalist Society are Brian J. Brille and David Panton of Morgan Stanley financial services in New York; William Haraf of Bank of America in San Francisco; Chris Ekren of Sony Corp. in San Jose, Calif.; Frank Blake of General Electric in Schenechtedy, N.Y.; Philip R. Lochner Jr., senior vice president, Time Warner Inc. in New York; William Kemp of General Motors in Warren, Mich.; Edward Whelan of GTE Corp.'s Washington office; David Askin of Exxon Co. in Baytown, Texas; Marsha Rabiteau of Dow Chemical in Midland, Mich.; F. James Tennies, chief administrative officer at Legg Mason for asset management in Baltimore; Jodi Balsam, counsel for operations and litigation for the National Football League and Tom Donahue of Metropolitan Life. Even federal employees in the Clinton administration were included in Federalist Society documents: Paul-Noel Chretien of the Justice Department; Theodore Cooperstein of the FBI; Carol Crawford of the International Trade Commission; Kevin Martin of the Federal Communications Commission and Christopher Holleman of the U.S. Small Business Administration. William Saunders of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights also backs the Society. Many of the nation's blue-chip law firms have attorneys associated with the Federalist Society. Those listed included lawyers in the Washington, D.C. law firms of Arnold and Porter; Covington & Burling; Steptoe & Johnson; Hogan & Hartson; Patton, Boaggs & Blow; and Wilmer, Cutler & Pickering. New York law firms with lawyers associated with the Federalist Society include: Cravath, Swaine & Moore; White & Case and Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison. In Boston, one law firm -- Hale and Door -- has at least 10 attorneys affiliated with the Federalist Society. The list of law professors associated with the society included Ronald A. Cass, dean of Boston University's law school; Michael Young of Columbia University; John Yoo of the University of California at Berkeley; Eugene Volokh of UCLA; Northwestern University professors Gary Lawson, Daniel D. Polsby and Stephen B. Presser; Robert P. George of Princeton; Gerard Bradley of Notre Dame; Gordon B. Baldwin of the University of Wisconsin, Olan B. Lowry of Temple; Johathan Macey and Richard Painter of Cornell; Ronald D. Rotunda of the University of Illinois; Gerald T. Dunn of St. Louis University and Thomas Morgan of George Washington University. The University of Virginia, one of the best law schools in the nation, has quite a few Federalist Society professors or sympathizers on its faculty, including John Norton Moore, Robert Turner, Erika Worth Harris and Lillian BeVier. "People have to understand, whether they like lawyers or not, law schools have an enormous amount of power, whether it's power for good or evil. Unfortunately, what we are seeing under the Federalist Society is law schools and legal education being used to promote racism, bigotry and Right-wing politics. These people believe in the Bell Curve," says Prof. Boyle of the University of Illinois, referring to a controversial theory by Charles Murray and Richard J. Herrnstein about the supposed low intelligence level of some non-Whites. "You have to understand that. Just as the Federalist Society did to the federal judiciary, they are now trying to do to law schools." Boyle and others say this is done by establishing well-endowed law professorships and speaking tours for the true believers. "Where they once were scholars with Right-wing foundations like the Heritage Foundation, American Enterprise Institute and the Cato Institute, they are now getting credentialed as law professors," he notes. No comparable movement exists among progressives, which may explain why civil rights groups and liberals are doing such a feeble job defending affirmative action. "We've got to realize that while we have been dillydallying in law schools with critical race theories and penetrating the Law Review, all this is chump change to [Federalists]," observes Berry, of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights. "It's like we were out playing whiffle ball while they were exercising power." The Federalist Society was founded 17 years ago by Yale Law School student Steven G. Calabresi and two counterparts at the University of Chicago School of Law, Lee Liberman and David McIntosh. All three were undergraduates together at Yale. Upset with what they perceived as liberal bias, the three decided to form an organization for conservative law students. Yale professors Robert H. Bork and Ralph K. Winter, both of whom would be appointed to the federal bench by Ronald Reagan, served as advisers to the Yale chapter. In Chicago, future U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia served in a similar capacity. The contacts the three made as students have proven to be invaluable. Calabresi, in addition to clerking for Bork and Winter, clerked for Scalia at the Supreme Court. He is now a law professor at Northwestern University. Liberman gave up a post in the Justice Department also to clerk for Scalia. She is now Lee Liberman Otis and is chief counsel for Sen. Spencer Abraham (R-Mich.), who founded a Federalist Society chapter at Harvard. McIntosh was a special assistant to Ed Meese when he was Reagan's attorney general; he is a three-term Republican Congressman who's considering running for governor of Indiana. In addition to a board of trustees, the society has a board of directors, co-chaired by Calabresi and McIntosh. The Federalist pipeline is a well-oiled old boy -- and sometimes girl -- network. For example, Brent O. Hatch, the son of Sen. Orrin Hatch, clerked for Robert Bork when he was a federal judge in Washington, D.C. After working in the Justice Department, young Hatch was appointed general counsel of the National Endowment for the Humanities at the age of 28. He is treasurer of the Federalist Society's board of directors. The organization has been funded by wealthy conservatives, such as Richard Mellon Scaife, who is vice chair of the Heritage Foundation's board, and another board member, Holland Coors, a member of the conservative Coors family. Many contributions are made through foundations that give to Right-wing causes, including the John M. Olin Foundation in New York, the Sarah Scaife Foundation in Pittsburgh, the Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation of Milwaukee and the Deer Creek Foundation in St. Louis. The Federalists have direct ties to Right-wing think tanks seeking to dismantle affirmative action at the local, state and federal levels. The Center for Individual Rights, which successfully argued the Hopwood case that banned affirmative action at the University of Texas, represents plaintiffs in a lawsuit pending against the University of Michigan and were lawyers for supporters of Proposition 209, the anti-affirmative action measure in California. The Washington Legal Foundation sued the University of Maryland, forcing it to drop its Benjamin Banneker scholarships for African-American scholars; the Southeastern Legal Foundation is leading an all-out assault on affirmative action in Atlanta, and the Institute for Justice led the attack on Lani Guinier, then a University of Pennsylvania law professor, who was President Clinton's first choice to be assistant U.S. attorney general for civil rights. Clint Bolick, the group's vice president, dismissed Guinier as a "quota queen," and the eventual nominee, Deval L. Patrick, as a "quota king." He also led the opposition to the appointment of Bill Lann Lee, who was later named acting assistant attorney general for civil rights. When first lady Hillary Rodham Clinton said that there was a "vast Right-wing conspiracy" afoot that had been hounding her husband since he first announced for president, some Right-wingers almost laughingly dismissed her charges. Special Prosecutor Ken Starr called the comments "nonsense." And Boston Herald columnist Joe Fitzgerald said the first lady had "wandered into paranoia." But information developed by the Institute for Democracy Studies, a nonprofit research and education organization in New York, confirms that the first lady was on the mark. In the executive summary of its report, "The Assault on Affirmative Action: An Organized Challenge to Racial and Gender Justice," the organization notes, "Once a month at the Heritage Foundation, representatives of the nation's leading conservative law groups get together for a 'luncheon.' This so-called Public Interest Legal Group meeting is just one of several monthly gatherings that right-wing law groups hold." The report continues: "These meetings serve the purpose of avoiding duplication of effort, airing future plans, and providing guidance for an appropriate organizational division of labor." In an interview with Emerge, Todd G. Young, director of research and communications for the Atlanta-based Southeastern Legal Foundation, confirms that Right-wing groups collaborate. "We read each other's briefs (as they are filed) and when there are updates published by other groups," he says. "Although we are separate entities, we share some common understandings about the Constitutions and our (mission) statements are really almost identical for the organizations." Of its recent lawsuit against Atlanta's affirmative action program, Young notes: "We're refining the definition of what it means to enjoy equal protection under the law and the first step is to end any government-sanctioned discrimination, such as affirmative action programs or racial preference programs. It's philosophically inconsistent to say it was bad then [in the 1950s and 1960s] but it's OK now." Atlanta Mayor Bill Campbell says it's not OK to discard programs devised to address discrimination against African-Americans. "Conservative legal interest groups, such as the Center for Individual Rights and the Southeastern Legal Foundation, are striking at the very heart of the civil rights gains of the '50s and '60s," explains Campbell. "These groups are, in essence, a homogenized version of the Klan. They may have traded in their sheets for suits and use different language, but it's the same old racism -- just old wine in new bottles." The Federalist Society takes its name from The Federalist papers, 85 articles originally published in New York newspapers between 1787 and 1788. The authors -- Alexander Hamilton, John Jay and James Madison -- were attempting to gain popular support for the adoption of a new Constitution. "Is The Federalist the key to what the Constitution's framers and adopters intended it to mean and how they expected it to function?" asked R. B. Bernstein, a constitutional historian who wrote the foreword to The Federalist, a recent reissue of the papers. "This subset of the original-intent controversy tends to pit many historians, who remain dubious about original-intent arguments, against many legal scholars, who seek a way to limit judicial discretion by anchoring constitutional interpretation in the Constitution's origins." Bernstein argued that the public should not look at the essays, all written under one pen name, as the definitive word on how the Constitution should be interpreted. "Jay was not a delegate to the Federal Convention, which framed the Constitution...[Hamilton] left the Convention in July, not returning until two weeks before its close in September. And Madison...found himself outvoted on a host of major issues," Bernstein noted. Moreover, as The Federalist papers became the classic commentary on the Constitution, the three men publicly identified themselves as the authors. Even that was not without controversy. Before his ill-fated duel with Aaron Burr, Hamilton tried to take credit for writing papers 18-20, 49-58 and 62-63. Madison made an identical claim of authorship, which was verified through a computer analysis in 1964. The most damning fact about today's Federalists is that they advocate a limited role for the federal government, while the early founders were interested in establishing a strong central government. Some civil rights leaders, including Theodore M. Shaw, associate director-counsel of the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund Inc., view the rhetoric of the modern-day Federalists as smokescreen for an assault on civil rights. "It's ideologically out of the mainstream and a part of the radically conservative agenda and the radically conservative agenda has never served the interest of African-Americans," Shaw says. Hilary O. Shelton, Washington bureau chief of the NAACP, is less charitable: "They are not conservative. They are very consistent with the Council of Conservative Citizens," a White supremacy group that has featured Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott (R-Miss.) and Rep. Bob Barr (R-Ga.) as speakers. Surprisingly, some of the harshest criticism of Federalist Society members has come from Republicans. For example, former Attorney General Meese, a main player in the Federalist movement, has been criticized by some of his colleagues in the Reagan administration. According to The Washington Post, James A. Baker III and Michael K. Deaver referred to Meese as the "Big Bigot," and conservatives referred to his top assistant, T. Kenneth Cribb Jr., as the "Baby Bigot." Cribb sits on the board of directors of the Federalist Society and is a trustee of the Scaife Foundation, a major contributor to the Federalist Society and other Right-wing causes. Graglia, who has taught at the University of Texas since 1966, touched off a controversy two years ago, when he said, "Blacks and Mexican Americans are not academically competitive with Whites in selective institutions." According to Graglia, "It is the result primarily of cultural effects. Failure is not looked upon with disgrace." He maintains his membership in the Federalist Society. "They certainly are unenthusiastic about civil rights laws," he says of his organization. "Richard Epstein [a law professor at the University of Chicago] thinks we will be better off if civil rights laws were all repealed. These people do believe, as I believe, that so-called civil rights have gone too far and are not civil rights at all." Because so many of the Federalist Society members are seen as opposing civil rights, some people are not quick to accept their professed interest in color-blind justice. U.S. Appeals Court Judge Stephen Reinhardt of the 9th Circuit observes, "We had the Civil War over states' rights. There is no question we are going back to the pre-Civil War view of governments." Former federal Judge Lawrence Walsh puts it more bluntly. "The impression I have is they are trying to return to the 18th century and undo the work of the Supreme Court since the New Deal," Walsh says. "And I think it is wrong to put someone on the court who has a pre-commitment with a political dogma, whether it's the Ku Klux Klan or the Federalist Society." -- Additional reporting by Lottie L. Joiner Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Thu Jun 29 12:42:47 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2017 12:42:47 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] UILAW Robbenolt: A Wolf in Sheep's Clothing! Message-ID: In addition to Yale Law Mafia Feddie Mazzone, Robbenolt was on the Law Committee who invited Killer Koh in here despite my doing everything humanly possible to stop them. Robbenolt is a wolf in sheep's clothing! She knew full well that Killer Koh was up to his eyeballs and dripping in blood from all the war crimes, crimes against peace, crimes against humanity and genocide that Killer Koh had committed for Obama/Clinton and before that for Reagan from 1983 to 1985 because I told her so with abundant documentation along with the rest of the Faculty. To the contrary, as Robbenolt and the COL Faculty saw it, these atrocities qualified Killer Koh to give his endowed lecture about why he is a Role Model for Lawyers in Government Service. Robbenolt became an Accessory After the Fact to all of Killer Koh's Crimes. And if any of our lawyers become war criminals and genocidaires like Killer Koh, it will be on Robbenolt's Head for the rest of Eternity. Perversely, but not surprisingly, Robbenolt was promoted to become Associate Dean for Faculty Research-research on how they can all aid and abet and promote war crimes, crimes against peace, crimes against humanity and genocide against Muslims/Arabs/Asians of Color. Caveat emptor! Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2017 9:19 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson ; Mildred O'brien Subject: RE: News Gazoo for Feddie Yale Law Mafia Killer Koh Mazzone My Mom-RIP-- was very proud when I told her that I was publicly attacked by a Low Life Like Borked in a Mass-Mailing Fund-raising Letter he sent to his 25,000 Feddies. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E.Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, Illinois 61820 Phone: 217-333-7954 Fax: 217-244-1478 fboyle at law.uiuc.edu 9 September 1997 Memorandum TO: Robert H. Bork Federalist Society Dear Bob: Concerning your fund-raising letter of 28 August that just came to my attention, I want to thank you from the bottom of my heart for publicly associating me with a Lawyer and a Judge who has the principles, courage and integrity of Lawrence Walsh. For your information, that message and others like out were sent out all over the internet, not just to 30 professors, together with the full text of Judge Walsh's attack on the Federalist Society. Out of respect for Judge Walsh, I certainly do hope that my professorial colleagues will pay the most serious attention to what he had to say about the Federalist Society. After all, Judge Walsh is a pillar of the American Legal Establishment and of the Republican Party. As for myself, I have always been a political independent and resent your implication that I am a member of the Democrat Party. Be that as it may, it seems to me that you have only (once again!) made a fool of yourself by publicly attacking a Lawyer and a Judge with the courage, integrity and principles of Judge Walsh--characteristics that you yourself were not noted for as Solicitor General (when you fired Archie Cox, the first Special Prosecutor), during your tenure on the bench, or during your Supreme Court nomination hearings. Rather than publicly attacking Judge Walsh, I suggest that you personally as well as the Federalist Society institutionally should be giving the most serious consideration to what he had to say. Yours very truly, Francis A. Boyle Professor of Law cc: Judge Lawrence Walsh Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, Ill. 61820 Phone: 217-333-7954 Fax: 217-244-1478 Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2017 8:43 AM To: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; Karen Aram >; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson >; Mildred O'brien > Subject: RE: News Gazoo for Feddie Yale Law Mafia Killer Koh Mazzone LAW 604-1: Criminal Law Fall 2015 - Moore CONNED LAW is a required course here at the Waffen-SS Law School. So is Criminal Law brainwashed by our Resident CIA/MOSSAD/Torture-Mongerer Michael Moore-Truly Orwellian!-who publicly congratulated CONNED LAW Mazzone et al for bringing in Killer Koh. Teaching here at the Waffen-SS Law School since August 1978 has been like working in a combination of Orwell's 1984 and Conrad's Heart of Darkness-The Horror! The Horror! CIA/MOSSAD/TORTURE/MOORE/HURD OFF CAMPUS! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2017 7:12 AM To: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; Karen Aram >; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson >; Mildred O'brien > Subject: RE: News Gazoo for Feddie Yale Law Mafia Killer Koh Mazzone The University of Illinois College of Law-Hijacking Justice Everyday. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2017 7:06 AM To: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; Karen Aram >; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson >; Mildred O'brien > Subject: RE: News Gazoo for Feddie Yale Law Mafia Killer Koh Mazzone "The impression I have is they are trying to return to the 18th century and undo the work of the Supreme Court since the New Deal," Walsh says. "And I think it is wrong to put someone on the court who has a pre-commitment with a political dogma, whether it's the Ku Klux Klan or the Federalist Society." Yeah, the Feddie Mazzone teaching Conned Law at our Waffen-SS Law School and inviting Killer Koh to come out here and pollute and poison our Good Community. Judge Lawrence Walsh was Independent Counsel/Prosecutor in the Iran-Contra Scandal by appointment of President Reagan; prosecuted the Mob with Dewey in New York; Deputy Attorney General under Eisenhower; Pillar of the Republican Party; President of the American Bar Association; Federal District Judge; Partner in the New York Law Firm of Davis, Polk & Wardwell, etc. RIP. fab Walsh on Federalist Society According to the conventional wisdom, we were in a double bind: The judges appointed by Democratic presidents were supposedly most concerned with protecting the constitutional rights of persons prosecuted for crimes, while most of the other judges owed their appointments to Ronald Reagan or George Bush, who had stated publicly and emphatically that they hoped that North would not be convicted. Over the years, I had often found such simplistic views to be wrong. Most judges overcome the prejudices and alliances they had when appointed to the federal bench. During my three and one-half years on the federal district court in New York, I had experienced the merging process by which new judges are absorbed into their courts. My hard-line political and professional views had moderated during lunchroom conversations with Learned Hand, Jerome Frank, and Harold Medina and had dissolved after a couple of my decisions had been reversed on appeal. But I was concerned about the continuing political allegiance of Republican judges as manifested in the Federalist Society. Although the organization was not openly partisan, its dogma was political. It reminded me of the communist front groups of the 1940s and l950s, whose members were committed to the communist cause and subject to communist direction but were not card-carrying members of the Communist Party. In calling for the narrow construction of constitutional grants of governmental power, the Federalist Society seemed to speak for right-wing Republicans. I was especially troubled that one of White House Counsel Boyden Gray's assistants had openly declared that no one who was not a member of the Federalist Society had received a judicial appointment from President Bush. walsh.fed >From Iran-contra Independent Counsel Lawrence Walsh, Firewall. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2017 6:48 AM To: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; Karen Aram >; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; David Johnson >; Mildred O'brien > Subject: News Gazoo for Feddie Yale Law Mafia Killer Koh Mazzone Sure. Yale Law Mafia Mazzone was on the Committee that invited Yale Law Mafia Killer Koh to come out here and pollute and poison our Good Community despite my best efforts to stop them. Yale Law Mafia Mazzone is also a Member of the Federalist Society, Hijacking Justice Everyday. 1. The Supremes upheld Trump's Muslim Ban in violation of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. 2. The Supremes have further eroded the Separation of Church and State in violation of the First Amendment. And it appears the Supremes are going to tolerate public bigotry and discrimination against LGBT in the name of "religious freedom" despite the fact we would never permit this to be done against Blacks, Jews, Catholics, etc except here on Campus where Wise {sic!} and the Zionists Ethnically Cleansed Native Americans out of UIUC. 3. We are all going to be up the proverbial creek without a paddle if Kennedy retires and Trump gets to replace him with another hard-line, doctrinaire religious fundamentalist Federalist Society Member like Gorsuch-Hijacking Justice every day along with Mazzone who "teaches" Conned Law at our Waffen-SS Law School. Fab. -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis [mailto:FBOYLE at law.uiuc.edu] Sent: Friday, September 17, 1999 6:35 PM To: undisclosed-recipients Subject: HIJACKING JUSTICE:FEDDIES S P E C I A L R E P O R T H I J A C K I N G J U S T I C E The Federalist Society, a Right-wing network of lawyers, judges and supporters, is undoing civil rights and other gains made through the courts BY GEORGE E. CURRY & TREVOR W. COLEMAN EMERGE, OCTOBER 1999 WHEN BROWN VS. BOARD OF EDUCATION WAS BEING ARGUED, a clerk to U.S. Supreme Court Justice Robert Jackson suggested that the court should rule against the plaintiffs in the landmark school desegregation case. While making the case for maintaining segregated schools, the clerk sent a memo to his boss saying, "It is about time the Court faced the fact that white people in the South don't like the colored people." That clerk was William Rehnquist, now chief justice of the United States Supreme Court. Seeking to put his own ultraconservatives on the Supreme Court with Rehnquist, President Ronald Reagan -- who had appointed more than half of the sitting federal judges by the time he left office -- considered nominating Lino A. Graglia, a controversial University of Texas law professor, as a federal appeals court judge for the 5th Circuit. But the nomination, which had been backed by Attorney General Edwin Meese III, was jettisoned after Graglia acknowledged that he had referred to African-Americans as "pickaninnies." The American Bar Association found the law professor "not qualified" to serve on the federal bench. Reagan did nominate Robert H. Bork, a former Yale law professor, who was on the U.S. Court of Appeals in Washington, D.C. Bork had opposed the 1964 Civil Rights Act, calling it "an unwanted intrusion on the right of individuals to choose with whom to associate." After bitter debate, the Senate rejected his nomination in 1987 by a vote of 58 to 42. Far from fading into the background, Bork, Meese, and to a lesser extent, Graglia, are key players in the Federalist Society, a powerful Right-wing network intent on restricting the power of courts, often at the expense of African-Americans and other people of color, the poor, women and the disadvantaged. The organization actively seeks to limit "judicial activism" and reverse Supreme Court landmark rulings since the New Deal, especially those issued in the 1960s and '70s. Special targets include the 1966 Miranda decision that provides certain rights for suspected criminals, the 1973 Roe vs. Wade ruling legalizing abortion and recent civil rights legislation. Founded in 1982 by three law students, the Federalist Society has grown into one of the most influential institutions in America. Four of the nine members of the U.S. Supreme Court -- Clarence Thomas, William H. Rehnquist, Antonin Scalia and Anthony M. Kennedy -- are close affiliates of the Federalist Society. So are Donald P. Hodel, former president of the Christina Coalition, and special prosecutor Kenneth Starr. The Federalist Society's board of trustees is co-chaired by Bork and U.S. Sen. Orrin Hatch -- one of the most conservative members on Capitol Hill. Other trustees include former Attorney General Meese, William Bradford Reynolds, who was assistant attorney general for civil rights in the Reagan Administration, sought to have court-ordered affirmative action programs overturned, and C. Boyden Gray, former President Bush's chief White House attorney, who opposed the Civil Rights Act of 1991. In a world being reshaped by the Federalist Society, conservative law students have formed chapters on campuses across the nation. After graduation, they clerk for conservative judges and then go on to become high-ranking government officials, partners in major law firms, prosecutors, law school professors and judges at the local, state and federal level. In short, the Federalist Society is on the verge of hijacking the judicial system. "This is more than an attack on affirmative action being spear-headed by the Federalist Society lawyers," observes Francis A. Boyle, a law professor at the University of Illinois. "They want to go beyond getting rid of affirmative action. They want to go back to Brown vs. Board of Education. "We have Justice Antonin Scalia (who advised the Federalist Society at its inception and later hired two of its three founders as his law clerks), who two years ago gave a public lecture at Columbia Law School where he stated if Brown vs. Board of Education was to be presented to him today, he would rule against the plaintiff. In other words, this was a threat that if Brown vs. Board of Education was voted on before the Supreme Court, he would overturn it." That type of thinking disturbs Lawrence E. Walsh. Before becoming president of the American Bar Association in 1975, Walsh chaired an ABA panel that approved President Nixon's choices of federal appeals judges, Clement Haynesworth and G. Harold Carswell, to serve on the Supreme Court. In 1969, the Senate rejected Haynesworth because of conflict-of-interest fears. The following year, Carswell was rejected by the Senate after it was disclosed that he had given a speech as a lawyer expressing his "vigorous belief in the principles of White supremacy." "My concern is there is going to be a cleavage in the courts between the Federalist Society members and nonmembers," says Walsh, a former federal judge. "Anything that perpetuates that kind of ideological cleavage is not good for the unity of the court system. Ideally, it seems to me that judges should avoid memberships [in politically and substantively motivated organizations] but, of course, they don't do that." In fact, the ABA, in one of its publications on judicial independence, concludes: "A judge's impartiality and ability to interpret and apply the laws fairly are integral to the administration of justice." But a judge's membership in an organization -- whether it's the American Civil Liberties Union on the Left or the Federalist Society on the Right -- can influence whether a judge is perceived as being unbiased, a critical element in a judicial system that prides itself on being fair. Harold D. Pope, president of the National Bar Association, says: "People who are opposing the expansion of rights and opportunities for all people in this society we feel are working against America's best interest. We would hope that all jurists, no matter what their prior political persuasion, would deal objectively with the facts of law as they come before them, as they were sworn to do so when they first sat on the bench." The expansion of the Federalist Society, which has adopted a silhouette of James Madison as its symbol, comes at a time when the legal community is worried about a loss of public confidence. An ABA special committee on judicial independence issued a report in August titled "Protecting the Bulwark of the Republic: Ensuring Public Support of the Judicial Process." The report states, "According to the ABA survey, only about half of the respondents believed that our justice system treats men and women equally. Even fewer believed that courts treat members of different ethnic groups or wealthy and poor people the same." The report continues, "As [former] ABA President [Philip S.] Anderson recently stated: "We must work on this problem for as long as it takes to make our profession equally open and our system of justice equally responsive to all members of our society, regardless of color. This is the ultimate challenge to the integrity of the rule of law in America.'" But the Federalist Society is interested in a challenge of a different kind. To its credit, the organization operates with an open and very public agenda. On its web page, for example, it lays out its conservative agenda. "The Federalist Society for Law and Public Policy Studies is a group of conservatives and libertarians interested in the current state of the legal order. It is founded on the principles that the state exists to preserve freedom, that the separation of governmental powers is central to our Constitution, and that it is emphatically the province and duty of the judiciary to say what the law is, not what it should be. The Society seeks both to promote an awareness of these principles and to further their application through its activities." Even conservative write Michael Lind would call this 19th-century view "the Confederate theory of the Constitution." Speakers at one national Federalist Society-sponsored lawyers convention proposed far-reaching judicial reforms that included the abolition of judicial review, limiting the powers of federal courts and stripping the Supreme Court of jurisdiction over certain matters. Mary Frances Berry, chair of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, is worried about more than theory. "What is scary about the Federalist Society is that it is antiquated and atavistic," she says. "Their views on natural law, libertarianism and the limited power of government to respond when people are being discriminated against is scary -- for African-Americans, especially. The more people you have who expose those views on the court, the more dangerous it becomes for every one of our lives." In this book, Firewall: The Iran-Contra Conspiracy and Cover Up, Walsh writes: "In calling for the narrow construction of constitutional grants of governmental power, the Federalist Society seemed to speak for right-wing Republicans. I was especially troubled that one of White House Counsel Boyden Gray's assistants had openly declared that no one who was not a member of the Federalist Society had received a judicial appointment from President Bush." Brian W. Jones, a San Francisco lawyer and member of the Federalist Society, believes that his group is being maligned. "I reject out of hand that Federalists are hostile to civil rights," says Jones, an African-American who was deputy legal affairs secretary to California Gov. Pete Wilson and former counsel to Hatch's Senate Judiciary Committee. "Most members of the Federalist Society would agree that the government has no business making racial distinctions of any kind among its citizens. I would argue that is a very credible view of civil rights. "On civil rights and civil liberty issues, Federalist Society judges tend to have a more limited view of the federal government's authority to respond to a whole range of questions. For conservatives, the first question with any inquiry into responding to social problems is: Where does the authority lie, with the federal government or state and local governments?" Another African-American, Gerald Reynolds, is vice chairman of membership for the Federalist Society. "There are some people who embrace this principle of racial neutrality," says the Kansas City, Mo., lawyer. "This debate flows from principles and not from animosity toward Blacks." The national office of the Federalist Society in Washington, D.C., refused to provide the names of judges on its membership list. However, some of the organization's records were obtained by Emerge from other sources. An examination of Federalist Society documents for 1997 and 1998, the most current information available at press time, reveals the extent that the group has penetrated the courts. When looking at the board of directors of local chapters, officers, their advisory panels and membership lists, it is clear that when one goes to court seeking justice, he or she is increasingly likely to have a judge affiliated with the Federalist Society handling the case. During the period studied, that was true whether one was entering a courtroom in New York, Michigan or Alabama. (The titles of persons listed hereafter reflect the positions they held at the time the records were compiled by the Federalist Society; some of the judges have since been elevated to a higher court.) In New York state, judges serving as officers, directors or advisers to the local chapters included Thomas P. Griesa, chief judge of the U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York, as well as District Judges Shirley Wohl Kram, Lawrence M. McKenna and John E. Sprizzo. A U.S. Appeals Court Judge for the Second Circuit, Dennis G. Jacobs, was also among that group. The Long Island advisory board included U.S. District Judge Michael Fiechter, U.S. Court of International Trade Judge Gregory W. Carman and State Supreme Court Judges Jack Dunne and Ute Lally. In Michigan, judges aligned with the Federalist Society included James L. Ryan and Richard F. Suhreinrich of the U.S. Court of Appeals; Federal District Judges Paul V. Gadola, David W. McKeague, Gerald E. Rosen and Lawrence P. Zatkoff; and U.S. Magistrate Judge Virginia M. Morgan. State Supreme Court Justices Clifford W. Taylor and Elizabeth A. Weaver were listed as advisers to the Detroit chapter. So were Maura D. Corrigan, chief judge of the Michigan Court of Appeals, along with fellow judges Stephen J. Markman, Henry W. Saad, and Robert Young Jr. (an African-American who has since been elevated to the Michigan Supreme Court). The chief judge of the Washtenaw County Circuit Court in Grand Rapids, Kurtis T. Wilder (another African-Americana who is now on the Michigan Court of Appeals), and Wayne County Circuit Judges Sean Cox, Michael J. Talbot and Brian Zahra helped complete the list. Local chapters in Alabama were advised by Perry O. Hooper Sr., chief justice of the Supreme Court of Alabama, along with Associate Justices J. Gorman Houston, Harold See and A. Hugh Maddox. U.S. Sen. Jefferson B. Sessions III also supported the organization. (Sessions was nominated to become a federal judge in 1986 but was blocked when it was disclosed that he had called the NAACP and the American Civil Liberties Union "un-American" and "communist-inspired," and said they "force civil rights down the throats of people." Referring to the Ku Klux Klan, he reportedly said, "I used to think they're OK," until he learned that some Klansmen were "pot smokers." Sessions contended the remarks were either made in jest or had been misinterpreted.) Additional supporters listed included Randall T. Shepard, chief justice of the Indiana Supreme Court; Craig Enoch, chief justice of the Texas Supreme Court; South Carolina Attorney General Charles Molony Condon; Alabama Attorney General William Pryor (who has links on his web page to the Federalist Society and the conservative Washington Legal Foundation), Pennsylvania Attorney General D. Michael Fisher; Indianapolis Mayor Stephen Goldsmith and Clarence Thomas' wife, Virginia, a former aide to House majority leader Richard Armey, and who now works for the Heritage Foundation. As the presiding officials in courts, judges wield broad power. For example, U.S. District Judge Neal B. Biggers Jr., who sits on the advisory board of the Mississippi chapter of the Federalist Society, presided over the Ayers desegregation case. In 1975, Jake Ayers Sr., a Mississippi sharecropper, sued the state on behalf of his son, charging that the state's higher education system discriminated against African-Americans and historically Black colleges. In 1987, Biggers upheld the state College Board's contention that Mississippi's higher education system was no longer racially discriminatory. The Supreme Court reversed Biggers in 1991 and ordered him to remove any vestiges of past discrimination. The power of the Federalist Society is not limited to the judiciary, which would be concern enough. Its tentacles extend deep into corporate America. Listed members of its business advisory council included John Stewart Bryan, III, chairman, president and C.E.O. of Media General Cable; John G. Medlin Jr., board chair of Wachovia Corp., an interstate bank holding company; Geneva Steel C.E.O. Joseph Cannon and Robert L. Strickland, chairman of Lowe's Companies. Also affiliated with the Federalist Society are Brian J. Brille and David Panton of Morgan Stanley financial services in New York; William Haraf of Bank of America in San Francisco; Chris Ekren of Sony Corp. in San Jose, Calif.; Frank Blake of General Electric in Schenechtedy, N.Y.; Philip R. Lochner Jr., senior vice president, Time Warner Inc. in New York; William Kemp of General Motors in Warren, Mich.; Edward Whelan of GTE Corp.'s Washington office; David Askin of Exxon Co. in Baytown, Texas; Marsha Rabiteau of Dow Chemical in Midland, Mich.; F. James Tennies, chief administrative officer at Legg Mason for asset management in Baltimore; Jodi Balsam, counsel for operations and litigation for the National Football League and Tom Donahue of Metropolitan Life. Even federal employees in the Clinton administration were included in Federalist Society documents: Paul-Noel Chretien of the Justice Department; Theodore Cooperstein of the FBI; Carol Crawford of the International Trade Commission; Kevin Martin of the Federal Communications Commission and Christopher Holleman of the U.S. Small Business Administration. William Saunders of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights also backs the Society. Many of the nation's blue-chip law firms have attorneys associated with the Federalist Society. Those listed included lawyers in the Washington, D.C. law firms of Arnold and Porter; Covington & Burling; Steptoe & Johnson; Hogan & Hartson; Patton, Boaggs & Blow; and Wilmer, Cutler & Pickering. New York law firms with lawyers associated with the Federalist Society include: Cravath, Swaine & Moore; White & Case and Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison. In Boston, one law firm -- Hale and Door -- has at least 10 attorneys affiliated with the Federalist Society. The list of law professors associated with the society included Ronald A. Cass, dean of Boston University's law school; Michael Young of Columbia University; John Yoo of the University of California at Berkeley; Eugene Volokh of UCLA; Northwestern University professors Gary Lawson, Daniel D. Polsby and Stephen B. Presser; Robert P. George of Princeton; Gerard Bradley of Notre Dame; Gordon B. Baldwin of the University of Wisconsin, Olan B. Lowry of Temple; Johathan Macey and Richard Painter of Cornell; Ronald D. Rotunda of the University of Illinois; Gerald T. Dunn of St. Louis University and Thomas Morgan of George Washington University. The University of Virginia, one of the best law schools in the nation, has quite a few Federalist Society professors or sympathizers on its faculty, including John Norton Moore, Robert Turner, Erika Worth Harris and Lillian BeVier. "People have to understand, whether they like lawyers or not, law schools have an enormous amount of power, whether it's power for good or evil. Unfortunately, what we are seeing under the Federalist Society is law schools and legal education being used to promote racism, bigotry and Right-wing politics. These people believe in the Bell Curve," says Prof. Boyle of the University of Illinois, referring to a controversial theory by Charles Murray and Richard J. Herrnstein about the supposed low intelligence level of some non-Whites. "You have to understand that. Just as the Federalist Society did to the federal judiciary, they are now trying to do to law schools." Boyle and others say this is done by establishing well-endowed law professorships and speaking tours for the true believers. "Where they once were scholars with Right-wing foundations like the Heritage Foundation, American Enterprise Institute and the Cato Institute, they are now getting credentialed as law professors," he notes. No comparable movement exists among progressives, which may explain why civil rights groups and liberals are doing such a feeble job defending affirmative action. "We've got to realize that while we have been dillydallying in law schools with critical race theories and penetrating the Law Review, all this is chump change to [Federalists]," observes Berry, of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights. "It's like we were out playing whiffle ball while they were exercising power." The Federalist Society was founded 17 years ago by Yale Law School student Steven G. Calabresi and two counterparts at the University of Chicago School of Law, Lee Liberman and David McIntosh. All three were undergraduates together at Yale. Upset with what they perceived as liberal bias, the three decided to form an organization for conservative law students. Yale professors Robert H. Bork and Ralph K. Winter, both of whom would be appointed to the federal bench by Ronald Reagan, served as advisers to the Yale chapter. In Chicago, future U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia served in a similar capacity. The contacts the three made as students have proven to be invaluable. Calabresi, in addition to clerking for Bork and Winter, clerked for Scalia at the Supreme Court. He is now a law professor at Northwestern University. Liberman gave up a post in the Justice Department also to clerk for Scalia. She is now Lee Liberman Otis and is chief counsel for Sen. Spencer Abraham (R-Mich.), who founded a Federalist Society chapter at Harvard. McIntosh was a special assistant to Ed Meese when he was Reagan's attorney general; he is a three-term Republican Congressman who's considering running for governor of Indiana. In addition to a board of trustees, the society has a board of directors, co-chaired by Calabresi and McIntosh. The Federalist pipeline is a well-oiled old boy -- and sometimes girl -- network. For example, Brent O. Hatch, the son of Sen. Orrin Hatch, clerked for Robert Bork when he was a federal judge in Washington, D.C. After working in the Justice Department, young Hatch was appointed general counsel of the National Endowment for the Humanities at the age of 28. He is treasurer of the Federalist Society's board of directors. The organization has been funded by wealthy conservatives, such as Richard Mellon Scaife, who is vice chair of the Heritage Foundation's board, and another board member, Holland Coors, a member of the conservative Coors family. Many contributions are made through foundations that give to Right-wing causes, including the John M. Olin Foundation in New York, the Sarah Scaife Foundation in Pittsburgh, the Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation of Milwaukee and the Deer Creek Foundation in St. Louis. The Federalists have direct ties to Right-wing think tanks seeking to dismantle affirmative action at the local, state and federal levels. The Center for Individual Rights, which successfully argued the Hopwood case that banned affirmative action at the University of Texas, represents plaintiffs in a lawsuit pending against the University of Michigan and were lawyers for supporters of Proposition 209, the anti-affirmative action measure in California. The Washington Legal Foundation sued the University of Maryland, forcing it to drop its Benjamin Banneker scholarships for African-American scholars; the Southeastern Legal Foundation is leading an all-out assault on affirmative action in Atlanta, and the Institute for Justice led the attack on Lani Guinier, then a University of Pennsylvania law professor, who was President Clinton's first choice to be assistant U.S. attorney general for civil rights. Clint Bolick, the group's vice president, dismissed Guinier as a "quota queen," and the eventual nominee, Deval L. Patrick, as a "quota king." He also led the opposition to the appointment of Bill Lann Lee, who was later named acting assistant attorney general for civil rights. When first lady Hillary Rodham Clinton said that there was a "vast Right-wing conspiracy" afoot that had been hounding her husband since he first announced for president, some Right-wingers almost laughingly dismissed her charges. Special Prosecutor Ken Starr called the comments "nonsense." And Boston Herald columnist Joe Fitzgerald said the first lady had "wandered into paranoia." But information developed by the Institute for Democracy Studies, a nonprofit research and education organization in New York, confirms that the first lady was on the mark. In the executive summary of its report, "The Assault on Affirmative Action: An Organized Challenge to Racial and Gender Justice," the organization notes, "Once a month at the Heritage Foundation, representatives of the nation's leading conservative law groups get together for a 'luncheon.' This so-called Public Interest Legal Group meeting is just one of several monthly gatherings that right-wing law groups hold." The report continues: "These meetings serve the purpose of avoiding duplication of effort, airing future plans, and providing guidance for an appropriate organizational division of labor." In an interview with Emerge, Todd G. Young, director of research and communications for the Atlanta-based Southeastern Legal Foundation, confirms that Right-wing groups collaborate. "We read each other's briefs (as they are filed) and when there are updates published by other groups," he says. "Although we are separate entities, we share some common understandings about the Constitutions and our (mission) statements are really almost identical for the organizations." Of its recent lawsuit against Atlanta's affirmative action program, Young notes: "We're refining the definition of what it means to enjoy equal protection under the law and the first step is to end any government-sanctioned discrimination, such as affirmative action programs or racial preference programs. It's philosophically inconsistent to say it was bad then [in the 1950s and 1960s] but it's OK now." Atlanta Mayor Bill Campbell says it's not OK to discard programs devised to address discrimination against African-Americans. "Conservative legal interest groups, such as the Center for Individual Rights and the Southeastern Legal Foundation, are striking at the very heart of the civil rights gains of the '50s and '60s," explains Campbell. "These groups are, in essence, a homogenized version of the Klan. They may have traded in their sheets for suits and use different language, but it's the same old racism -- just old wine in new bottles." The Federalist Society takes its name from The Federalist papers, 85 articles originally published in New York newspapers between 1787 and 1788. The authors -- Alexander Hamilton, John Jay and James Madison -- were attempting to gain popular support for the adoption of a new Constitution. "Is The Federalist the key to what the Constitution's framers and adopters intended it to mean and how they expected it to function?" asked R. B. Bernstein, a constitutional historian who wrote the foreword to The Federalist, a recent reissue of the papers. "This subset of the original-intent controversy tends to pit many historians, who remain dubious about original-intent arguments, against many legal scholars, who seek a way to limit judicial discretion by anchoring constitutional interpretation in the Constitution's origins." Bernstein argued that the public should not look at the essays, all written under one pen name, as the definitive word on how the Constitution should be interpreted. "Jay was not a delegate to the Federal Convention, which framed the Constitution...[Hamilton] left the Convention in July, not returning until two weeks before its close in September. And Madison...found himself outvoted on a host of major issues," Bernstein noted. Moreover, as The Federalist papers became the classic commentary on the Constitution, the three men publicly identified themselves as the authors. Even that was not without controversy. Before his ill-fated duel with Aaron Burr, Hamilton tried to take credit for writing papers 18-20, 49-58 and 62-63. Madison made an identical claim of authorship, which was verified through a computer analysis in 1964. The most damning fact about today's Federalists is that they advocate a limited role for the federal government, while the early founders were interested in establishing a strong central government. Some civil rights leaders, including Theodore M. Shaw, associate director-counsel of the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund Inc., view the rhetoric of the modern-day Federalists as smokescreen for an assault on civil rights. "It's ideologically out of the mainstream and a part of the radically conservative agenda and the radically conservative agenda has never served the interest of African-Americans," Shaw says. Hilary O. Shelton, Washington bureau chief of the NAACP, is less charitable: "They are not conservative. They are very consistent with the Council of Conservative Citizens," a White supremacy group that has featured Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott (R-Miss.) and Rep. Bob Barr (R-Ga.) as speakers. Surprisingly, some of the harshest criticism of Federalist Society members has come from Republicans. For example, former Attorney General Meese, a main player in the Federalist movement, has been criticized by some of his colleagues in the Reagan administration. According to The Washington Post, James A. Baker III and Michael K. Deaver referred to Meese as the "Big Bigot," and conservatives referred to his top assistant, T. Kenneth Cribb Jr., as the "Baby Bigot." Cribb sits on the board of directors of the Federalist Society and is a trustee of the Scaife Foundation, a major contributor to the Federalist Society and other Right-wing causes. Graglia, who has taught at the University of Texas since 1966, touched off a controversy two years ago, when he said, "Blacks and Mexican Americans are not academically competitive with Whites in selective institutions." According to Graglia, "It is the result primarily of cultural effects. Failure is not looked upon with disgrace." He maintains his membership in the Federalist Society. "They certainly are unenthusiastic about civil rights laws," he says of his organization. "Richard Epstein [a law professor at the University of Chicago] thinks we will be better off if civil rights laws were all repealed. These people do believe, as I believe, that so-called civil rights have gone too far and are not civil rights at all." Because so many of the Federalist Society members are seen as opposing civil rights, some people are not quick to accept their professed interest in color-blind justice. U.S. Appeals Court Judge Stephen Reinhardt of the 9th Circuit observes, "We had the Civil War over states' rights. There is no question we are going back to the pre-Civil War view of governments." Former federal Judge Lawrence Walsh puts it more bluntly. "The impression I have is they are trying to return to the 18th century and undo the work of the Supreme Court since the New Deal," Walsh says. "And I think it is wrong to put someone on the court who has a pre-commitment with a political dogma, whether it's the Ku Klux Klan or the Federalist Society." -- Additional reporting by Lottie L. Joiner Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Thu Jun 29 15:53:24 2017 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2017 15:53:24 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] Jeffrey St.Clair of Counterpunch: In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I just realized that attempting to convince “socialists,” especially those affiliated with the ISO, that support for so called rebels in Syria is support for US imperialism, is a lost cause. I have provided many with Rick Sterlings excellent and comprehensive article in Counterpunch dated September, 2016 critiquing Ashley Smith of the ISO. Those who have been with the ISO seem to be robotic in their responses, asking what is meant by “elected” without going any further into the article to examine the evidence, of US support for the so-called rebels. I knew there was something wrong with the ISO during my seven months with them in 2011. The way they conduct their meetings, which isn’t conducive to conversation or any brain storming, and the way they assign books to be read and discussed, all books are of course Hay Market, which is fine, but there was little analysis of the readings, unlike that which we had at the Reading Groups that Carl held. Little focus was on anything up to date, and our extended group in support of international uprisings, supported the uprisings in Libya against the government, without any information or background. I left both groups, about that time, for various reasons. One of the members returned to Egypt, after a brief stint at Georgetown U. International Relations Dept., which raised a red flag with me, and shortly there after she was urging support for the coup against the Muslim Brotherhood candidate who had been democratically elected after the removal of Mubarak. Having lived out of the country for so long, I missed a lot of what was happening in the US, but I think the answer to Jeffrey’s question, “what happened to the left anti-war movement,” is that socialist and left groups who in the past were the initiators of the anti-war movement have been infiltrated by government lackey’s over the years, in an effort to lobotomize potential, young left leaning anti-war protestors. I suspect the largest mass movement against war after 9/11 was conducted by the Democrat Party, just as they were behind the ladies with their pink pussy hats at the Trump inaugural. These lobotomized people, won’t make a move without “recognized leadership” and the Democrats have the funds to make it happen. I now understand why we can get 3,000 people out to protest something Trump said, but do nothing when he bombs and continues war. The original feminist movement should have ended years ago, the LGBT movement should have ended when Gays were given the right to marry. Gender neutral bathrooms cause more problems than they eliminate, see Chris Hedges latest interview “On Contact,” and are trivial in the scheme of things. I have to ask myself why did I return to this nation of war and hegemony, high cost of healthcare, millions of disenfranchised and homeless, domestic shootings daily, and crappy food, even big Mac’s are better in China. > On Jun 29, 2017, at 04:39, Boyle, Francis A wrote: > > abetting every drone strike > --------------- > Yeah, just like the entire College of Law Faculty did here by bringing in Killer Koh, Obama's Droner in Chief. > Fab. > > Francis A. Boyle > Law Building > 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. > Champaign IL 61820 USA > 217-333-7954 (phone) > 217-244-1478 (fax) > (personal comments only) > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Peace [mailto:peace-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of Carl G. Estabrook via Peace > Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2017 9:12 PM > To: Karen Aram ; Jeffrey St Clair > Cc: peace ; peace-discuss > Subject: Re: [Peace] [Peace-discuss] Jeffrey St.Clair of Counterpunch: > > The Democrats have co-opted and eviscerated the anti-war movement for two generations, from Johnson (“no wider war’) to Obama (“no dumb wars”) - while they expanded the killing. > > The Democrat war party is responsible for the duplicitous and fantastical anti-Russia movement - "aligning itself fatally with some of the most bloodthirsty hawks on the Hill and in doing so … abetting every drone strike, Cruise missile and MOAB bomb…” > > The anti-war movement should have nothing to do with them, unless they agree to demand all US troops (and weapons) be brought home. > > —CGE > >> On Jun 28, 2017, at 8:38 PM, Karen Aram via Peace-discuss wrote: >> >> Jeffrey St Clair writes: >> I used to believe that rightwing militarism would be countered by a liberated and reanimated anti-war movement that had refused to confront liberal wars. But where is it now? Where are the mass protests against Trump's expanding wars in Syria, Yemen, Somalia and the new re-surge in Afghanistan? Where are the protest against the rising slaughter of civilians? Where indeed. The liberal antiwar movement has morphed into an anti-Russia movement, aligning itself fatally with some of the most bloodthirsty hawks on the Hill and in doing so is abetting every drone strike, Cruise missile and MOAB bomb Trump drops. >> _______________________________________________ >> Peace-discuss mailing list >> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net >> https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss > > _______________________________________________ > Peace mailing list > Peace at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace From galliher at illinois.edu Thu Jun 29 16:33:15 2017 From: galliher at illinois.edu (Carl G. Estabrook) Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2017 11:33:15 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] Jeffrey St.Clair of Counterpunch: In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <0EB7054A-DC2C-4C65-B284-37855B9E8352@illinois.edu> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Thu Jun 29 16:39:34 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2017 16:39:34 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] Jeffrey St.Clair of Counterpunch: In-Reply-To: <0EB7054A-DC2C-4C65-B284-37855B9E8352@illinois.edu> References: <0EB7054A-DC2C-4C65-B284-37855B9E8352@illinois.edu> Message-ID: Obama and the Dems coopted everyone. They summarily threw me off Uniting for Peace and Justice when I began to argue that Obama should be impeached because of his criminal war against Libya and the Libyans. Obviously they were and still are a Dem Front Organization—a Controlled Opposition. Among so many others. Remember the CIA perfected that Black Art back in the 1950s with the Ramparts Expose and the CIA putting the entire Left on their payroll using the Ford Foundation as their cut-out. Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Carl G. Estabrook [mailto:galliher at illinois.edu] Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2017 11:33 AM To: Karen Aram Cc: Boyle, Francis A ; Jeffrey St Clair ; peace-discuss Subject: Re: [Peace] [Peace-discuss] Jeffrey St.Clair of Counterpunch: I think the anti-war demonstrations before the invasion of Iraq - the largest in history, here and abroad - were largely spontaneous and owed little to the Democratic party. Alex Cockburn once said that the US ruling class could be taken by surprise about once every ten years: after 2003, they worked hard to see that it would not happen again - or as it had 40 years before. In the vanguard of the ant-anti-war movement was the cooptive Obama presidential campaign. (See Obama’s ‘even-handed’ account of 'the sixties’ in 'The Audacity of Hope.’) Its success (and the fiction that the Democrats were an anti-war party) put paid to the attempt to construct a popular movement against the US attacks on SW Asia, as there had once been a poular movement against the US attacks on SE Asia. We should work while there is light, with the surmise that the dark is coming, is which no one can work... —CGE On Jun 29, 2017, at 10:53 AM, Karen Aram > wrote: I just realized that attempting to convince “socialists,” especially those affiliated with the ISO, that support for so called rebels in Syria is support for US imperialism, is a lost cause. I have provided many with Rick Sterlings excellent and comprehensive article in Counterpunch dated September, 2016 critiquing Ashley Smith of the ISO. Those who have been with the ISO seem to be robotic in their responses, asking what is meant by “elected” without going any further into the article to examine the evidence, of US support for the so-called rebels. I knew there was something wrong with the ISO during my seven months with them in 2011. The way they conduct their meetings, which isn’t conducive to conversation or any brain storming, and the way they assign books to be read and discussed, all books are of course Hay Market, which is fine, but there was little analysis of the readings, unlike that which we had at the Reading Groups that Carl held. Little focus was on anything up to date, and our extended group in support of international uprisings, supported the uprisings in Libya against the government, without any information or background. I left both groups, about that time, for various reasons. One of the members returned to Egypt, after a brief stint at Georgetown U. International Relations Dept., which raised a red flag with me, and shortly there after she was urging support for the coup against the Muslim Brotherhood candidate who had been democratically elected after the removal of Mubarak. Having lived out of the country for so long, I missed a lot of what was happening in the US, but I think the answer to Jeffrey’s question, “what happened to the left anti-war movement,” is that socialist and left groups who in the past were the initiators of the anti-war movement have been infiltrated by government lackey’s over the years, in an effort to lobotomize potential, young left leaning anti-war protestors. I suspect the largest mass movement against war after 9/11 was conducted by the Democrat Party, just as they were behind the ladies with their pink pussy hats at the Trump inaugural. These lobotomized people, won’t make a move without “recognized leadership” and the Democrats have the funds to make it happen. I now understand why we can get 3,000 people out to protest something Trump said, but do nothing when he bombs and continues war. The original feminist movement should have ended years ago, the LGBT movement should have ended when Gays were given the right to marry. Gender neutral bathrooms cause more problems than they eliminate, see Chris Hedges latest interview “On Contact,” and are trivial in the scheme of things. I have to ask myself why did I return to this nation of war and hegemony, high cost of healthcare, millions of disenfranchised and homeless, domestic shootings daily, and crappy food, even big Mac’s are better in China. On Jun 29, 2017, at 04:39, Boyle, Francis A > wrote: abetting every drone strike --------------- Yeah, just like the entire College of Law Faculty did here by bringing in Killer Koh, Obama's Droner in Chief. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Peace [mailto:peace-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of Carl G. Estabrook via Peace Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2017 9:12 PM To: Karen Aram >; Jeffrey St Clair > Cc: peace >; peace-discuss > Subject: Re: [Peace] [Peace-discuss] Jeffrey St.Clair of Counterpunch: The Democrats have co-opted and eviscerated the anti-war movement for two generations, from Johnson (“no wider war’) to Obama (“no dumb wars”) - while they expanded the killing. The Democrat war party is responsible for the duplicitous and fantastical anti-Russia movement - "aligning itself fatally with some of the most bloodthirsty hawks on the Hill and in doing so … abetting every drone strike, Cruise missile and MOAB bomb…” The anti-war movement should have nothing to do with them, unless they agree to demand all US troops (and weapons) be brought home. —CGE On Jun 28, 2017, at 8:38 PM, Karen Aram via Peace-discuss > wrote: Jeffrey St Clair writes: I used to believe that rightwing militarism would be countered by a liberated and reanimated anti-war movement that had refused to confront liberal wars. But where is it now? Where are the mass protests against Trump's expanding wars in Syria, Yemen, Somalia and the new re-surge in Afghanistan? Where are the protest against the rising slaughter of civilians? Where indeed. The liberal antiwar movement has morphed into an anti-Russia movement, aligning itself fatally with some of the most bloodthirsty hawks on the Hill and in doing so is abetting every drone strike, Cruise missile and MOAB bomb Trump drops. _______________________________________________ Peace-discuss mailing list Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss _______________________________________________ Peace mailing list Peace at lists.chambana.net https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From stuartnlevy at gmail.com Thu Jun 29 16:44:07 2017 From: stuartnlevy at gmail.com (Stuart Levy) Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2017 11:44:07 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Fwd: Corbyn Defied Media Rules by Linking UK Wars to Terrorism In-Reply-To: <8c573daa3ad72f4a095505b58.690cba8393.20170629161340.d75abdd10c.3ed650d7@mail210.atl81.rsgsv.net> References: <8c573daa3ad72f4a095505b58.690cba8393.20170629161340.d75abdd10c.3ed650d7@mail210.atl81.rsgsv.net> Message-ID: <9e593800-90d5-1d63-96a4-41884f2574ac@gmail.com> Good comments as ever from FAIR. Where in the US media did we hear Jeremy Corbyn linking the UK's participation in the war-on-terror nonsense, to the recent acts of terror in the UK? -------- Forwarded Message -------- Subject: Corbyn Defied Media Rules by Linking UK Wars to Terrorism Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2017 16:14:53 +0000 From: FAIR Reply-To: FAIR To: stuartnlevy at gmail.com Corbyn Defied Media Rules by Linking UK Wars to Terrorism Is this email not displaying correctly? View it in your browser . Corbyn Defied Media Rules by Linking UK Wars to Terrorism When a terrorist killed 22 at a May 22 concert filled with young people in England’s Manchester, most journalists—especially US ones—assumed it would help the struggling Conservative Party and its standard-bearer, Prime Minister Theresa May, win the snap election she had called for June 8, just 17 days ahead. NYT: Manchester Bombing Shifts Political Narrative as U.K. Election Looms /The *New York Times* (5/24/17 ) thought the Manchester bombing would let Teresa May “reassert herself as Britain’s reassuring grown-up, a trusted pair of hands on security issues — especially in contrast with her main rival, the Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn.”/ That is, after all, the conventional wisdom: In times of crisis, like a terror attack, the public looks to its leaders for tough talk and dramatic action. *New York Times* correspondent Steven Erlanger (5/24/17) , noting that May’s “easy glide” to re-election had run into trouble prior to the bombing, wrote an article on how the attack “Shifts Political Narrative as UK Election Looms”: If the Manchester bombing was a horrible tragedy for Britain, it was a political boon, however unwanted, for Prime Minister Theresa May. Monday’s terrorist attack has changed the narrative of Britain’s election, just two weeks away — and in her favor. As the incumbent prime minister, Mrs. May inevitably speaks both to and for the nation from 10 Downing Street. And having been home secretary for six years before becoming prime minister, she is knowledgeable and comfortable with the issues of security, policing and terrorism. Erlanger went on to report that May’s opponent, leftist Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn, was seen to have a “weakness” on security, citing his “old sympathies with Sinn Fein and the Irish Republican Army.” Erlanger quoted a historian’s view that “there can only be more questions” for Corbyn after the bombing, which opened him to attacks from right-wing media for being “soft on terror.” But Corbyn took a bold and unusual stand after the Manchester horror. On March 26, just four days after the suicide bombing, he gave a speech on foreign policy and terrorism that criticized May’s role as home secretary under former PM David Cameron. Noting that she had overseen cuts in public safety funding that had furloughed 20,000 police officers, Corbyn said, “You cannot protect the public on the cheap.” Democracy Now!: U.K. Labour Leader Jeremy Corbyn: The War on Terror Is Not Working /Jeremy Corbyn’s anti-war speech made headlines on *Democracy Now!* and *Common Dreams*, but not in the *New York Times*./ More importantly, Corbyn went on to say, “We must be brave enough to admit the war on terror is simply not working.” A life-long anti-war activist and critic of British participation in US-led wars, even under his own party’s leaders, Corbyn charged that British interventions, particularly in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and Syria, had made the country less rather than more safe, saying: Many experts, including professionals in our intelligence and security services, have pointed to the connections between wars our government has supported or fought in other countries, such as Libya, and terrorism here at home. While Corbyn’s dramatic words were widely reported in the British media, mostly in the context of scathing criticism, one struggled to find them mentioned in the US media—especially on the TV news—despite the heavy attention being paid to the bombing, and to a later truck attack on London Bridge. Apparently, when it comes to the US news media, talking about such notions is something to be left to alternative outlets like *Common Dreams* (5/26/17 ) and *Democracy Now!* (5/26/17 ), and to the more radical elements of the US peace movement. Although it’s hard to imagine a presidential or congressional candidate of either major US party making a similar speech following a terror attack, Corbyn’s views have been a non-story in the view of most American news editors. A*USA Today* piece (5/26/17 ) had a one-paragraph preview of Corbyn’s speech, making sure to mention that his “party is expected to perform poorly in the June 8 vote.” *Bloomberg News* (5/26/17 ) had a longer report on Corbyn’s speech, though it gave the last word to Conservative critics who said that Corbyn came from “an extreme and ideological world that is too quick to make excuses for the actions of our enemies and too willing to oppose the measures and people that keep us safe”—though polling found the British public largely in agreement with his view that the “War on Terror” had made them less safe. Only the *Washington Post* (5/27/17) suggested the possibility that Corbyn might benefit by linking the Manchester terror bombing to British policies in the Middle East, at least if his intention was to “galvanize his base.” In an article headlined “Manchester Bombing Makes Terrorism Central Campaign Issue in June Elections,” *Post* correspondents Karla Adam and Michael Birnbaum quoted Tim Bale, a politics professor at Queen Mary University in London. He said while the Corbyn speech would predictably outrage Conservatives, “If his aim is to mobilize his core left liberal vote, then it could work,” adding, “Now, how that will play with the majority of voters is another matter.” Katie Hopkins on Twitter /The expert the *New York Times* turned to for a take on Corbyn’s speech./ As for the *New York Times*, it largely ignored Corbyn’s remarkable speech, though one article (5/26/17 ) cited his quote about security officials seeing a link between UK military actions and domestic terror attacks. (The *Times* then cited British Defense Minister Michael Fallon retorting that his speech showed Corbyn was “unfit to be prime minister.”) There was also a second-hand reference the same day: An article (5/26/17 ) about right-wing *Daily Mail* columnist Katie Hopkins quoted her saying Corbyn had given a “rancid speech” calling the war on terror a “failure.” That was it. Although the *Times*’ bureau in London surely must have noticed after the speech in question that Corbyn and his Labour Party continued their rise in the polls, they filed no article discussing the phenomenon or the speech itself. In “Theresa May Doesn’t Crack and Jeremy Corbyn Keeps His Cool in UK Debate,”(5/29/17) , the *Times*’ Erlanger and colleague Stephen Castle reported on a pseudo-debate between May and Corbyn. (May had refused to share the stage with Corbyn, so each candidate instead faced questions alone with the moderator.) The two journalists wrote only that Corbyn in the debate was “challenged over his comment that the war on terror was ‘not working,’” failing to note that that line had been not a “comment” but rather part of a major foreign policy speech analyzing the roots of terrorism in the country, and how to combat it. When the voting was over, US media had to report the obvious: that Corbyn and Labour, though failing to best May and the Conservatives, had actually come out ahead in the election, defying pundit predictions to gain 32 seats and knocking the Conservatives out of a majority in Parliament. As the *Times* story’s headline read (6/9/17 ): “Jeremy Corbyn Lost UK Election, but Is Still Its Biggest Winner.” But like most of the US media coverage in that and succeeding days, *Times* journalists Castle and Katrin Bennhold attributed Corbyn’s success to his being a better, more people-friendly campaigner than the “wooden, robotic” May, to his “Sanders-like” appeal to young voters, and to his party’s socialist manifesto, which called for better funding for the National Health Service, re-nationalization of public transit and free college tuition, among other measures. (Of course, before the election, the *Times*‘ pages were describing this same manifesto as a “proto-Marxist program” that would doom Labour to the political wilderness—*New York Times*, 6/3/17 ; *FAIR.org*, 6/8/17 .) No doubt Corbyn’s personality and domestic policies were factors in his strong electoral performance, but there’s also no doubt that his contrarian stand on terrorism, laying much of the blame on Britain’s militarist foreign policy and intervention in Middle East conflicts, was critical. Yet this got no mention at all. Writing for the news site *Nation of Change* (6/25/17 ), Canadian journalist Derek Royden ventured to say what no journalist in corporate US media has: Unlike most of the leaders of major Western political parties, Jeremy Corbyn chose to be honest rather than treating citizens like children, and to the surprise of many he gained support. In the end, his party picked up 32 seats and a larger “government in waiting” role in a hung parliament. It also turned out that the Labor leader was correct in pointing to the war in Libya as a more important factor than the concerns articulated by May [about excessive internet freedom and too much concern for human rights]. Spaniards demonstrating against war and terrorism (cc photo: kippelboy/Wikimedia) /In Spain, the public responded to a terror attack by rejecting the policies that promote terrorism. (cc photo: kippelboy/Wikimedia)/ This isn’t the first time voters have defied the conventional wisdom about how they are supposed to respond to crises. After the Pulse nightclub attack in Orlando in June 2016, *NPR* “counterterrorism correspondent” Dina Temple-Raston speculated that the attack might affect the US elections, since, she said, after a major bombing in Madrid just before the 2004 elections, “the more conservative candidate ended up winning.” The problem with this analysis? The conservative People’s Party actually lost that election to the Socialists, who had campaigned on a platform of withdrawing Spanish troops from Iraq (*FAIR.org*,6/15/16 ). /Read the original post here ./ FAIR's Website FAIR counts on your support to do this work — please donate today . Follow on Twitter | Friend on Facebook <#> | Forward to a Friend /Copyright © 2017 Fairness & Accuracy In Reporting, All rights reserved./ You are receiving this email because you signed up for email alerts from Fairness & Accuracy In Reporting. *Our mailing address is:* Fairness & Accuracy In Reporting 124 W. 30th Street, Suite 201 New York, NY 10001 Add us to your address book unsubscribe from this list | update subscription preferences | view email in browser -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From brussel at illinois.edu Thu Jun 29 16:45:43 2017 From: brussel at illinois.edu (Brussel, Morton K) Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2017 16:45:43 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] Jeffrey St.Clair of Counterpunch: In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <107B4842-91D0-42A6-B067-29BBA5EF7283@illinois.edu> I attended a Left?, Socialist, Conference near Chicago O’Hare a couple of years ago, essentially run by the ISO. I was turned off by their attempts to convince attendees that the US should intervene in Syria. They would brook no disagreements on this, and tried to shut me down as I raised questions in their sessions. I’ve since shunned Ashley Smith and his ISO ilk. —mkb > On Jun 29, 2017, at 10:53 AM, Karen Aram via Peace-discuss wrote: > > > I just realized that attempting to convince “socialists,” especially those affiliated with the ISO, that support for so called rebels in Syria is support for US imperialism, is a lost cause. I have provided many with Rick Sterlings excellent and comprehensive article in Counterpunch dated September, 2016 critiquing Ashley Smith of the ISO. Those who have been with the ISO seem to be robotic in their responses, asking what is meant by “elected” without going any further into the article to examine the evidence, of US support for the so-called rebels. > > I knew there was something wrong with the ISO during my seven months with them in 2011. The way they conduct their meetings, which isn’t conducive to conversation or any brain storming, and the way they assign books to be read and discussed, all books are of course Hay Market, which is fine, but there was little analysis of the readings, unlike that which we had at the Reading Groups that Carl held. > > Little focus was on anything up to date, and our extended group in support of international uprisings, supported the uprisings in Libya against the government, without any information or background. I left both groups, about that time, for various reasons. One of the members returned to Egypt, after a brief stint at Georgetown U. International Relations Dept., which raised a red flag with me, and shortly there after she was urging support for the coup against the Muslim Brotherhood candidate who had been democratically elected after the removal of Mubarak. > > Having lived out of the country for so long, I missed a lot of what was happening in the US, but I think the answer to Jeffrey’s question, “what happened to the left anti-war movement,” is that socialist and left groups who in the past were the initiators of the anti-war movement have been infiltrated by government lackey’s over the years, in an effort to lobotomize potential, young left leaning anti-war protestors. > > I suspect the largest mass movement against war after 9/11 was conducted by the Democrat Party, just as they were behind the ladies with their pink pussy hats at the Trump inaugural. These lobotomized people, won’t make a move without “recognized leadership” and the Democrats have the funds to make it happen. I now understand why we can get 3,000 people out to protest something Trump said, but do nothing when he bombs and continues war. > > The original feminist movement should have ended years ago, the LGBT movement should have ended when Gays were given the right to marry. Gender neutral bathrooms cause more problems than they eliminate, see Chris Hedges latest interview “On Contact,” and are trivial in the scheme of things. > > I have to ask myself why did I return to this nation of war and hegemony, high cost of healthcare, millions of disenfranchised and homeless, domestic shootings daily, and crappy food, even big Mac’s are better in China. > >> On Jun 29, 2017, at 04:39, Boyle, Francis A wrote: >> >> abetting every drone strike >> --------------- >> Yeah, just like the entire College of Law Faculty did here by bringing in Killer Koh, Obama's Droner in Chief. >> Fab. >> >> Francis A. Boyle >> Law Building >> 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. >> Champaign IL 61820 USA >> 217-333-7954 (phone) >> 217-244-1478 (fax) >> (personal comments only) >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Peace [mailto:peace-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of Carl G. Estabrook via Peace >> Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2017 9:12 PM >> To: Karen Aram ; Jeffrey St Clair >> Cc: peace ; peace-discuss >> Subject: Re: [Peace] [Peace-discuss] Jeffrey St.Clair of Counterpunch: >> >> The Democrats have co-opted and eviscerated the anti-war movement for two generations, from Johnson (“no wider war’) to Obama (“no dumb wars”) - while they expanded the killing. >> >> The Democrat war party is responsible for the duplicitous and fantastical anti-Russia movement - "aligning itself fatally with some of the most bloodthirsty hawks on the Hill and in doing so … abetting every drone strike, Cruise missile and MOAB bomb…” >> >> The anti-war movement should have nothing to do with them, unless they agree to demand all US troops (and weapons) be brought home. >> >> —CGE >> >>> On Jun 28, 2017, at 8:38 PM, Karen Aram via Peace-discuss wrote: >>> >>> Jeffrey St Clair writes: >>> I used to believe that rightwing militarism would be countered by a liberated and reanimated anti-war movement that had refused to confront liberal wars. But where is it now? Where are the mass protests against Trump's expanding wars in Syria, Yemen, Somalia and the new re-surge in Afghanistan? Where are the protest against the rising slaughter of civilians? Where indeed. The liberal antiwar movement has morphed into an anti-Russia movement, aligning itself fatally with some of the most bloodthirsty hawks on the Hill and in doing so is abetting every drone strike, Cruise missile and MOAB bomb Trump drops. >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Peace-discuss mailing list >>> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net >>> https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Peace mailing list >> Peace at lists.chambana.net >> https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace > > _______________________________________________ > Peace-discuss mailing list > Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss From fboyle at illinois.edu Thu Jun 29 16:53:01 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2017 16:53:01 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] Jeffrey St.Clair of Counterpunch: In-Reply-To: <107B4842-91D0-42A6-B067-29BBA5EF7283@illinois.edu> References: <107B4842-91D0-42A6-B067-29BBA5EF7283@illinois.edu> Message-ID: Yeah there is a list of so-called Leftists who publicly called upon Obama to bomb Syria back in August of 2013, publicly outing themselves as Reactionary Imperialists. Will never trust any of them again. At the time I said the chemical weapons allegations against the Assad government were bogus just based upon the facts in the public record. Any idiot could have figured that out. Later on Sy Hersh confirmed it in his expose in the London Review of Books. Ditto for all those who supported Obama's Criminal War against Libya and the Libyans--including Uniting for Peace and Justice by summarily terminating my dissent. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Brussel, Morton K Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2017 11:46 AM To: Karen Aram Cc: Boyle, Francis A ; peace-discuss ; Jeffrey St Clair Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] Jeffrey St.Clair of Counterpunch: I attended a Left?, Socialist, Conference near Chicago O’Hare a couple of years ago, essentially run by the ISO. I was turned off by their attempts to convince attendees that the US should intervene in Syria. They would brook no disagreements on this, and tried to shut me down as I raised questions in their sessions. I’ve since shunned Ashley Smith and his ISO ilk. —mkb > On Jun 29, 2017, at 10:53 AM, Karen Aram via Peace-discuss wrote: > > > I just realized that attempting to convince “socialists,” especially those affiliated with the ISO, that support for so called rebels in Syria is support for US imperialism, is a lost cause. I have provided many with Rick Sterlings excellent and comprehensive article in Counterpunch dated September, 2016 critiquing Ashley Smith of the ISO. Those who have been with the ISO seem to be robotic in their responses, asking what is meant by “elected” without going any further into the article to examine the evidence, of US support for the so-called rebels. > > I knew there was something wrong with the ISO during my seven months with them in 2011. The way they conduct their meetings, which isn’t conducive to conversation or any brain storming, and the way they assign books to be read and discussed, all books are of course Hay Market, which is fine, but there was little analysis of the readings, unlike that which we had at the Reading Groups that Carl held. > > Little focus was on anything up to date, and our extended group in support of international uprisings, supported the uprisings in Libya against the government, without any information or background. I left both groups, about that time, for various reasons. One of the members returned to Egypt, after a brief stint at Georgetown U. International Relations Dept., which raised a red flag with me, and shortly there after she was urging support for the coup against the Muslim Brotherhood candidate who had been democratically elected after the removal of Mubarak. > > Having lived out of the country for so long, I missed a lot of what was happening in the US, but I think the answer to Jeffrey’s question, “what happened to the left anti-war movement,” is that socialist and left groups who in the past were the initiators of the anti-war movement have been infiltrated by government lackey’s over the years, in an effort to lobotomize potential, young left leaning anti-war protestors. > > I suspect the largest mass movement against war after 9/11 was conducted by the Democrat Party, just as they were behind the ladies with their pink pussy hats at the Trump inaugural. These lobotomized people, won’t make a move without “recognized leadership” and the Democrats have the funds to make it happen. I now understand why we can get 3,000 people out to protest something Trump said, but do nothing when he bombs and continues war. > > The original feminist movement should have ended years ago, the LGBT movement should have ended when Gays were given the right to marry. Gender neutral bathrooms cause more problems than they eliminate, see Chris Hedges latest interview “On Contact,” and are trivial in the scheme of things. > > I have to ask myself why did I return to this nation of war and hegemony, high cost of healthcare, millions of disenfranchised and homeless, domestic shootings daily, and crappy food, even big Mac’s are better in China. > >> On Jun 29, 2017, at 04:39, Boyle, Francis A wrote: >> >> abetting every drone strike >> --------------- >> Yeah, just like the entire College of Law Faculty did here by bringing in Killer Koh, Obama's Droner in Chief. >> Fab. >> >> Francis A. Boyle >> Law Building >> 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. >> Champaign IL 61820 USA >> 217-333-7954 (phone) >> 217-244-1478 (fax) >> (personal comments only) >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Peace [mailto:peace-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of Carl G. Estabrook via Peace >> Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2017 9:12 PM >> To: Karen Aram ; Jeffrey St Clair >> Cc: peace ; peace-discuss >> Subject: Re: [Peace] [Peace-discuss] Jeffrey St.Clair of Counterpunch: >> >> The Democrats have co-opted and eviscerated the anti-war movement for two generations, from Johnson (“no wider war’) to Obama (“no dumb wars”) - while they expanded the killing. >> >> The Democrat war party is responsible for the duplicitous and fantastical anti-Russia movement - "aligning itself fatally with some of the most bloodthirsty hawks on the Hill and in doing so … abetting every drone strike, Cruise missile and MOAB bomb…” >> >> The anti-war movement should have nothing to do with them, unless they agree to demand all US troops (and weapons) be brought home. >> >> —CGE >> >>> On Jun 28, 2017, at 8:38 PM, Karen Aram via Peace-discuss wrote: >>> >>> Jeffrey St Clair writes: >>> I used to believe that rightwing militarism would be countered by a liberated and reanimated anti-war movement that had refused to confront liberal wars. But where is it now? Where are the mass protests against Trump's expanding wars in Syria, Yemen, Somalia and the new re-surge in Afghanistan? Where are the protest against the rising slaughter of civilians? Where indeed. The liberal antiwar movement has morphed into an anti-Russia movement, aligning itself fatally with some of the most bloodthirsty hawks on the Hill and in doing so is abetting every drone strike, Cruise missile and MOAB bomb Trump drops. >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Peace-discuss mailing list >>> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net >>> https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Peace mailing list >> Peace at lists.chambana.net >> https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace > > _______________________________________________ > Peace-discuss mailing list > Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss From bjornsona at ameritech.net Thu Jun 29 17:00:37 2017 From: bjornsona at ameritech.net (bjornsona at ameritech.net) Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2017 12:00:37 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] Jeffrey St.Clair of Counterpunch: Message-ID: <6bll1c05d16m2l31ojbachlp.1498755031818@email.lge.com> Some of us are having our eyes opened to controlled opposition. I might guess particularly the younger ones who had hope for Occupy, listened to Young Turks, sent hard-earned $ money to Bernie and watched the DNC steal the primary,  watched the DNC "lose" these recent elections. And kill single payer in California, Utah, Nevada. Among so many other betrayals. Some read global news sources, have friends around the globe, have eyes open while in the military. One major problem is what to do about it even if one is beginning to understand the problem? I think that is part of the issue- the previous solutions, as you say, have been tried and have been co-opted. Sent from my LG Phoenix 2, an AT&T 4G LTE smartphone ------ Original message------From: Brussel, Morton K via Peace-discussDate: Thu, Jun 29, 2017 11:46 AMTo: Karen Aram;Cc: Boyle, Francis A;peace-discuss;Jeffrey St Clair;Subject:Re: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] Jeffrey St.Clair of Counterpunch: I attended a Left?, Socialist, Conference near Chicago O’Hare a couple of years ago, essentially run by the ISO. I was turned off by their attempts to convince attendees that the US should intervene in Syria. They would brook no disagreements on this, and tried to shut me down as I raised questions in their sessions. I’ve since shunned Ashley Smith and his ISO ilk. —mkb > On Jun 29, 2017, at 10:53 AM, Karen Aram via Peace-discuss wrote: > > > I just realized that attempting to convince “socialists,” especially those affiliated with the ISO, that support for so called rebels in Syria is support for US imperialism, is a lost cause. I have provided many with Rick Sterlings excellent and comprehensive article in Counterpunch dated September, 2016 critiquing Ashley Smith of the ISO. Those who have been with the ISO seem to be robotic in their responses, asking what is meant by “elected” without going any further into the article to examine the evidence, of US support for the so-called rebels. > > I knew there was something wrong with the ISO during my seven months with them in 2011. The way they conduct their meetings, which isn’t conducive to conversation or any brain storming, and the way they assign books to be read and discussed, all books are of course Hay Market, which is fine, but there was little analysis of the readings, unlike that which we had at the Reading Groups that Carl held. > > Little focus was on anything up to date, and our extended group in support of international uprisings, supported the uprisings in Libya against the government, without any information or background. I left both groups, about that time, for various reasons. One of the members returned to Egypt, after a brief stint at Georgetown U. International Relations Dept., which raised a red flag with me, and shortly there after she was urging support for the coup against the Muslim Brotherhood candidate who had been democratically elected after the removal of Mubarak. > > Having lived out of the country for so long, I missed a lot of what was happening in the US, but I think the answer to Jeffrey’s question, “what happened to the left anti-war movement,” is that socialist and left groups who in the past were the initiators of the anti-war movement have been infiltrated by government lackey’s over the years, in an effort to lobotomize potential, young left leaning anti-war protestors. > > I suspect the largest mass movement against war after 9/11 was conducted by the Democrat Party, just as they were behind the ladies with their pink pussy hats at the Trump inaugural. These lobotomized people, won’t make a move without “recognized leadership” and the Democrats have the funds to make it happen. I now understand why we can get 3,000 people out to protest something Trump said, but do nothing when he bombs and continues war. > > The original feminist movement should have ended years ago, the LGBT movement should have ended when Gays were given the right to marry. Gender neutral bathrooms cause more problems than they eliminate, see Chris Hedges latest interview “On Contact,” and are trivial in the scheme of things. > > I have to ask myself why did I return to this nation of war and hegemony, high cost of healthcare, millions of disenfranchised and homeless, domestic shootings daily, and crappy food, even big Mac’s are better in China. > >> On Jun 29, 2017, at 04:39, Boyle, Francis A wrote: >> >> abetting every drone strike >> --------------- >> Yeah, just like the entire College of Law Faculty did here by bringing in Killer Koh, Obama's Droner in Chief. >> Fab. >> >> Francis A. Boyle >> Law Building >> 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. >> Champaign IL 61820 USA >> 217-333-7954 (phone) >> 217-244-1478 (fax) >> (personal comments only) >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Peace [mailto:peace-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of Carl G. Estabrook via Peace >> Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2017 9:12 PM >> To: Karen Aram ; Jeffrey St Clair >> Cc: peace ; peace-discuss >> Subject: Re: [Peace] [Peace-discuss] Jeffrey St.Clair of Counterpunch: >> >> The Democrats have co-opted and eviscerated the anti-war movement for two generations, from Johnson (“no wider war’) to Obama (“no dumb wars”) - while they expanded the killing. >> >> The Democrat war party is responsible for the duplicitous and fantastical anti-Russia movement - "aligning itself fatally with some of the most bloodthirsty hawks on the Hill and in doing so … abetting every drone strike, Cruise missile and MOAB bomb…” >> >> The anti-war movement should have nothing to do with them, unless they agree to demand all US troops (and weapons) be brought home. >> >> —CGE >> >>> On Jun 28, 2017, at 8:38 PM, Karen Aram via Peace-discuss wrote: >>> >>> Jeffrey St Clair writes: >>> I used to believe that rightwing militarism would be countered by a liberated and reanimated anti-war movement that had refused to confront liberal wars. But where is it now? Where are the mass protests against Trump's expanding wars in Syria, Yemen, Somalia and the new re-surge in Afghanistan? Where are the protest against the rising slaughter of civilians? Where indeed. The liberal antiwar movement has morphed into an anti-Russia movement, aligning itself fatally with some of the most bloodthirsty hawks on the Hill and in doing so is abetting every drone strike, Cruise missile and MOAB bomb Trump drops. >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Peace-discuss mailing list >>> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net >>> https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Peace mailing list >> Peace at lists.chambana.net >> https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace > > _______________________________________________ > Peace-discuss mailing list > Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss _______________________________________________ Peace-discuss mailing list Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bjornsona at ameritech.net Thu Jun 29 17:03:07 2017 From: bjornsona at ameritech.net (bjornsona at ameritech.net) Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2017 12:03:07 -0500 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] Jeffrey St.Clair of Counterpunch: Message-ID: <39m9efbvfususktp30n9dp8v.1498755679754@email.lge.com> I agree I did not get a good feeling from ISO based on one conversation only at their recruiting table at a protest in Chicago. Way too rigid- their way only Sent from my LG Phoenix 2, an AT&T 4G LTE smartphone ------ Original message------From: Boyle, Francis A via Peace-discussDate: Thu, Jun 29, 2017 11:53 AMTo: Brussel, Morton K;Karen Aram;Cc: peace-discuss;Jeffrey St Clair;Subject:Re: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] Jeffrey St.Clair of Counterpunch: Yeah there is a list of so-called Leftists who publicly called upon Obama to bomb Syria back in August of 2013, publicly outing themselves as Reactionary Imperialists. Will never trust any of them again. At the time I said the chemical weapons allegations against the Assad government were bogus just based upon the facts in the public record. Any idiot could have figured that out. Later on Sy Hersh confirmed it in his expose in the London Review of Books. Ditto for all those who supported Obama's Criminal War against Libya and the Libyans--including Uniting for Peace and Justice by summarily terminating my dissent. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Brussel, Morton K Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2017 11:46 AM To: Karen Aram Cc: Boyle, Francis A ; peace-discuss ; Jeffrey St Clair Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] Jeffrey St.Clair of Counterpunch: I attended a Left?, Socialist, Conference near Chicago O’Hare a couple of years ago, essentially run by the ISO. I was turned off by their attempts to convince attendees that the US should intervene in Syria. They would brook no disagreements on this, and tried to shut me down as I raised questions in their sessions. I’ve since shunned Ashley Smith and his ISO ilk. —mkb > On Jun 29, 2017, at 10:53 AM, Karen Aram via Peace-discuss wrote: > > > I just realized that attempting to convince “socialists,” especially those affiliated with the ISO, that support for so called rebels in Syria is support for US imperialism, is a lost cause. I have provided many with Rick Sterlings excellent and comprehensive article in Counterpunch dated September, 2016 critiquing Ashley Smith of the ISO. Those who have been with the ISO seem to be robotic in their responses, asking what is meant by “elected” without going any further into the article to examine the evidence, of US support for the so-called rebels. > > I knew there was something wrong with the ISO during my seven months with them in 2011. The way they conduct their meetings, which isn’t conducive to conversation or any brain storming, and the way they assign books to be read and discussed, all books are of course Hay Market, which is fine, but there was little analysis of the readings, unlike that which we had at the Reading Groups that Carl held. > > Little focus was on anything up to date, and our extended group in support of international uprisings, supported the uprisings in Libya against the government, without any information or background. I left both groups, about that time, for various reasons. One of the members returned to Egypt, after a brief stint at Georgetown U. International Relations Dept., which raised a red flag with me, and shortly there after she was urging support for the coup against the Muslim Brotherhood candidate who had been democratically elected after the removal of Mubarak. > > Having lived out of the country for so long, I missed a lot of what was happening in the US, but I think the answer to Jeffrey’s question, “what happened to the left anti-war movement,” is that socialist and left groups who in the past were the initiators of the anti-war movement have been infiltrated by government lackey’s over the years, in an effort to lobotomize potential, young left leaning anti-war protestors. > > I suspect the largest mass movement against war after 9/11 was conducted by the Democrat Party, just as they were behind the ladies with their pink pussy hats at the Trump inaugural. These lobotomized people, won’t make a move without “recognized leadership” and the Democrats have the funds to make it happen. I now understand why we can get 3,000 people out to protest something Trump said, but do nothing when he bombs and continues war. > > The original feminist movement should have ended years ago, the LGBT movement should have ended when Gays were given the right to marry. Gender neutral bathrooms cause more problems than they eliminate, see Chris Hedges latest interview “On Contact,” and are trivial in the scheme of things. > > I have to ask myself why did I return to this nation of war and hegemony, high cost of healthcare, millions of disenfranchised and homeless, domestic shootings daily, and crappy food, even big Mac’s are better in China. > >> On Jun 29, 2017, at 04:39, Boyle, Francis A wrote: >> >> abetting every drone strike >> --------------- >> Yeah, just like the entire College of Law Faculty did here by bringing in Killer Koh, Obama's Droner in Chief. >> Fab. >> >> Francis A. Boyle >> Law Building >> 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. >> Champaign IL 61820 USA >> 217-333-7954 (phone) >> 217-244-1478 (fax) >> (personal comments only) >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Peace [mailto:peace-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of Carl G. Estabrook via Peace >> Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2017 9:12 PM >> To: Karen Aram ; Jeffrey St Clair >> Cc: peace ; peace-discuss >> Subject: Re: [Peace] [Peace-discuss] Jeffrey St.Clair of Counterpunch: >> >> The Democrats have co-opted and eviscerated the anti-war movement for two generations, from Johnson (“no wider war’) to Obama (“no dumb wars”) - while they expanded the killing. >> >> The Democrat war party is responsible for the duplicitous and fantastical anti-Russia movement - "aligning itself fatally with some of the most bloodthirsty hawks on the Hill and in doing so … abetting every drone strike, Cruise missile and MOAB bomb…” >> >> The anti-war movement should have nothing to do with them, unless they agree to demand all US troops (and weapons) be brought home. >> >> —CGE >> >>> On Jun 28, 2017, at 8:38 PM, Karen Aram via Peace-discuss wrote: >>> >>> Jeffrey St Clair writes: >>> I used to believe that rightwing militarism would be countered by a liberated and reanimated anti-war movement that had refused to confront liberal wars. But where is it now? Where are the mass protests against Trump's expanding wars in Syria, Yemen, Somalia and the new re-surge in Afghanistan? Where are the protest against the rising slaughter of civilians? Where indeed. The liberal antiwar movement has morphed into an anti-Russia movement, aligning itself fatally with some of the most bloodthirsty hawks on the Hill and in doing so is abetting every drone strike, Cruise missile and MOAB bomb Trump drops. >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Peace-discuss mailing list >>> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net >>> https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Peace mailing list >> Peace at lists.chambana.net >> https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace > > _______________________________________________ > Peace-discuss mailing list > Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss _______________________________________________ Peace-discuss mailing list Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Thu Jun 29 18:05:31 2017 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2017 18:05:31 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] Jeffrey St.Clair of Counterpunch: In-Reply-To: <0EB7054A-DC2C-4C65-B284-37855B9E8352@illinois.edu> References: <0EB7054A-DC2C-4C65-B284-37855B9E8352@illinois.edu> Message-ID: Carl, I doubt they were really spontaneous. Even spontaneous demonstrations take a lot of work on the part of activists. While I have no doubt the many anti-war groups were organizing, I have no doubt the Democratic Party had a hand in it as well. Buses transporting people to the city’s cost at least $1,000 each, not many anti-war groups have the funds to manage as many as 50 buses. This info. courtesy of Kevin Zeese. Flyers, information, communication it all takes effort and funds to happen. Did the media report them? I’m curious as to whether CNN reported any of it. I was in Manila, my friends were all Muslims from places such as Pakistan, Uzbekistan, Bangladesh, etc. they read Al Jazeera, I watched CNN International every evening and mornings. No mention of any anti-war movement, and we were very concerned. I did have one Supervisor, Malaysian Chinese, who had very close connections with the US Embassy, who informed me January 2002, that there was no stopping US intervention in Iraq, the Pentagon had already made their moves. As Francis Boyle has reported when he, Ramsey Clark, and John Conyers suggested Impeachment of Bush, and Cheney, in DC, to prevent intervention in Iraq, they were told by John Podesta of the DNC No, because they the Democrats wanted to use the war issue for the next election. I leave it to Francis to edit or correct my quote. My point is, the Democratic Party wanted to give the appearance of being “anti-war” by orchestrating a mass demonstration as they did against Trump during his inaugural. They had no fear it would be effective, given all that was taking place with their support. > On Jun 29, 2017, at 09:33, Carl G. Estabrook wrote: > > I think the anti-war demonstrations before the invasion of Iraq - the largest in history, here and abroad - were largely spontaneous and owed little to the Democratic party. > > Alex Cockburn once said that the US ruling class could be taken by surprise about once every ten years: after 2003, they worked hard to see that it would not happen again - or as it had 40 years before. In the vanguard of the ant-anti-war movement was the cooptive Obama presidential campaign. (See Obama’s ‘even-handed’ account of 'the sixties’ in 'The Audacity of Hope.’) Its success (and the fiction that the Democrats were an anti-war party) put paid to the attempt to construct a popular movement against the US attacks on SW Asia, as there had once been a poular movement against the US attacks on SE Asia. > > We should work while there is light, with the surmise that the dark is coming, is which no one can work... > > —CGE > >> On Jun 29, 2017, at 10:53 AM, Karen Aram wrote: >> >> >> I just realized that attempting to convince “socialists,” especially those affiliated with the ISO, that support for so called rebels in Syria is support for US imperialism, is a lost cause. I have provided many with Rick Sterlings excellent and comprehensive article in Counterpunch dated September, 2016 critiquing Ashley Smith of the ISO. Those who have been with the ISO seem to be robotic in their responses, asking what is meant by “elected” without going any further into the article to examine the evidence, of US support for the so-called rebels. >> >> I knew there was something wrong with the ISO during my seven months with them in 2011. The way they conduct their meetings, which isn’t conducive to conversation or any brain storming, and the way they assign books to be read and discussed, all books are of course Hay Market, which is fine, but there was little analysis of the readings, unlike that which we had at the Reading Groups that Carl held. >> >> Little focus was on anything up to date, and our extended group in support of international uprisings, supported the uprisings in Libya against the government, without any information or background. I left both groups, about that time, for various reasons. One of the members returned to Egypt, after a brief stint at Georgetown U. International Relations Dept., which raised a red flag with me, and shortly there after she was urging support for the coup against the Muslim Brotherhood candidate who had been democratically elected after the removal of Mubarak. >> >> Having lived out of the country for so long, I missed a lot of what was happening in the US, but I think the answer to Jeffrey’s question, “what happened to the left anti-war movement,” is that socialist and left groups who in the past were the initiators of the anti-war movement have been infiltrated by government lackey’s over the years, in an effort to lobotomize potential, young left leaning anti-war protestors. >> >> I suspect the largest mass movement against war after 9/11 was conducted by the Democrat Party, just as they were behind the ladies with their pink pussy hats at the Trump inaugural. These lobotomized people, won’t make a move without “recognized leadership” and the Democrats have the funds to make it happen. I now understand why we can get 3,000 people out to protest something Trump said, but do nothing when he bombs and continues war. >> >> The original feminist movement should have ended years ago, the LGBT movement should have ended when Gays were given the right to marry. Gender neutral bathrooms cause more problems than they eliminate, see Chris Hedges latest interview “On Contact,” and are trivial in the scheme of things. >> >> I have to ask myself why did I return to this nation of war and hegemony, high cost of healthcare, millions of disenfranchised and homeless, domestic shootings daily, and crappy food, even big Mac’s are better in China. >> >>> On Jun 29, 2017, at 04:39, Boyle, Francis A wrote: >>> >>> abetting every drone strike >>> --------------- >>> Yeah, just like the entire College of Law Faculty did here by bringing in Killer Koh, Obama's Droner in Chief. >>> Fab. >>> >>> Francis A. Boyle >>> Law Building >>> 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. >>> Champaign IL 61820 USA >>> 217-333-7954 (phone) >>> 217-244-1478 (fax) >>> (personal comments only) >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Peace [mailto:peace-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of Carl G. Estabrook via Peace >>> Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2017 9:12 PM >>> To: Karen Aram ; Jeffrey St Clair >>> Cc: peace ; peace-discuss >>> Subject: Re: [Peace] [Peace-discuss] Jeffrey St.Clair of Counterpunch: >>> >>> The Democrats have co-opted and eviscerated the anti-war movement for two generations, from Johnson (“no wider war’) to Obama (“no dumb wars”) - while they expanded the killing. >>> >>> The Democrat war party is responsible for the duplicitous and fantastical anti-Russia movement - "aligning itself fatally with some of the most bloodthirsty hawks on the Hill and in doing so … abetting every drone strike, Cruise missile and MOAB bomb…” >>> >>> The anti-war movement should have nothing to do with them, unless they agree to demand all US troops (and weapons) be brought home. >>> >>> —CGE >>> >>>> On Jun 28, 2017, at 8:38 PM, Karen Aram via Peace-discuss wrote: >>>> >>>> Jeffrey St Clair writes: >>>> I used to believe that rightwing militarism would be countered by a liberated and reanimated anti-war movement that had refused to confront liberal wars. But where is it now? Where are the mass protests against Trump's expanding wars in Syria, Yemen, Somalia and the new re-surge in Afghanistan? Where are the protest against the rising slaughter of civilians? Where indeed. The liberal antiwar movement has morphed into an anti-Russia movement, aligning itself fatally with some of the most bloodthirsty hawks on the Hill and in doing so is abetting every drone strike, Cruise missile and MOAB bomb Trump drops. >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Peace-discuss mailing list >>>> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net >>>> https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Peace mailing list >>> Peace at lists.chambana.net >>> https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace >> > From fboyle at illinois.edu Thu Jun 29 18:07:18 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2017 18:07:18 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] Jeffrey St.Clair of Counterpunch: In-Reply-To: References: <0EB7054A-DC2C-4C65-B284-37855B9E8352@illinois.edu> Message-ID: That's correct. Fab. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Karen Aram [mailto:karenaram at hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2017 1:06 PM To: Estabrook, Carl G Cc: Boyle, Francis A ; Jeffrey St Clair ; peace-discuss Subject: Re: [Peace] [Peace-discuss] Jeffrey St.Clair of Counterpunch: Carl, I doubt they were really spontaneous. Even spontaneous demonstrations take a lot of work on the part of activists. While I have no doubt the many anti-war groups were organizing, I have no doubt the Democratic Party had a hand in it as well. Buses transporting people to the city’s cost at least $1,000 each, not many anti-war groups have the funds to manage as many as 50 buses. This info. courtesy of Kevin Zeese. Flyers, information, communication it all takes effort and funds to happen. Did the media report them? I’m curious as to whether CNN reported any of it. I was in Manila, my friends were all Muslims from places such as Pakistan, Uzbekistan, Bangladesh, etc. they read Al Jazeera, I watched CNN International every evening and mornings. No mention of any anti-war movement, and we were very concerned. I did have one Supervisor, Malaysian Chinese, who had very close connections with the US Embassy, who informed me January 2002, that there was no stopping US intervention in Iraq, the Pentagon had already made their moves. As Francis Boyle has reported when he, Ramsey Clark, and John Conyers suggested Impeachment of Bush, and Cheney, in DC, to prevent intervention in Iraq, they were told by John Podesta of the DNC No, because they the Democrats wanted to use the war issue for the next election. I leave it to Francis to edit or correct my quote. My point is, the Democratic Party wanted to give the appearance of being “anti-war” by orchestrating a mass demonstration as they did against Trump during his inaugural. They had no fear it would be effective, given all that was taking place with their support. > On Jun 29, 2017, at 09:33, Carl G. Estabrook wrote: > > I think the anti-war demonstrations before the invasion of Iraq - the largest in history, here and abroad - were largely spontaneous and owed little to the Democratic party. > > Alex Cockburn once said that the US ruling class could be taken by surprise about once every ten years: after 2003, they worked hard to see that it would not happen again - or as it had 40 years before. In the vanguard of the ant-anti-war movement was the cooptive Obama presidential campaign. (See Obama’s ‘even-handed’ account of 'the sixties’ in 'The Audacity of Hope.’) Its success (and the fiction that the Democrats were an anti-war party) put paid to the attempt to construct a popular movement against the US attacks on SW Asia, as there had once been a poular movement against the US attacks on SE Asia. > > We should work while there is light, with the surmise that the dark is coming, is which no one can work... > > —CGE > >> On Jun 29, 2017, at 10:53 AM, Karen Aram wrote: >> >> >> I just realized that attempting to convince “socialists,” especially those affiliated with the ISO, that support for so called rebels in Syria is support for US imperialism, is a lost cause. I have provided many with Rick Sterlings excellent and comprehensive article in Counterpunch dated September, 2016 critiquing Ashley Smith of the ISO. Those who have been with the ISO seem to be robotic in their responses, asking what is meant by “elected” without going any further into the article to examine the evidence, of US support for the so-called rebels. >> >> I knew there was something wrong with the ISO during my seven months with them in 2011. The way they conduct their meetings, which isn’t conducive to conversation or any brain storming, and the way they assign books to be read and discussed, all books are of course Hay Market, which is fine, but there was little analysis of the readings, unlike that which we had at the Reading Groups that Carl held. >> >> Little focus was on anything up to date, and our extended group in support of international uprisings, supported the uprisings in Libya against the government, without any information or background. I left both groups, about that time, for various reasons. One of the members returned to Egypt, after a brief stint at Georgetown U. International Relations Dept., which raised a red flag with me, and shortly there after she was urging support for the coup against the Muslim Brotherhood candidate who had been democratically elected after the removal of Mubarak. >> >> Having lived out of the country for so long, I missed a lot of what was happening in the US, but I think the answer to Jeffrey’s question, “what happened to the left anti-war movement,” is that socialist and left groups who in the past were the initiators of the anti-war movement have been infiltrated by government lackey’s over the years, in an effort to lobotomize potential, young left leaning anti-war protestors. >> >> I suspect the largest mass movement against war after 9/11 was conducted by the Democrat Party, just as they were behind the ladies with their pink pussy hats at the Trump inaugural. These lobotomized people, won’t make a move without “recognized leadership” and the Democrats have the funds to make it happen. I now understand why we can get 3,000 people out to protest something Trump said, but do nothing when he bombs and continues war. >> >> The original feminist movement should have ended years ago, the LGBT movement should have ended when Gays were given the right to marry. Gender neutral bathrooms cause more problems than they eliminate, see Chris Hedges latest interview “On Contact,” and are trivial in the scheme of things. >> >> I have to ask myself why did I return to this nation of war and hegemony, high cost of healthcare, millions of disenfranchised and homeless, domestic shootings daily, and crappy food, even big Mac’s are better in China. >> >>> On Jun 29, 2017, at 04:39, Boyle, Francis A wrote: >>> >>> abetting every drone strike >>> --------------- >>> Yeah, just like the entire College of Law Faculty did here by bringing in Killer Koh, Obama's Droner in Chief. >>> Fab. >>> >>> Francis A. Boyle >>> Law Building >>> 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. >>> Champaign IL 61820 USA >>> 217-333-7954 (phone) >>> 217-244-1478 (fax) >>> (personal comments only) >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Peace [mailto:peace-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of Carl G. Estabrook via Peace >>> Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2017 9:12 PM >>> To: Karen Aram ; Jeffrey St Clair >>> Cc: peace ; peace-discuss >>> Subject: Re: [Peace] [Peace-discuss] Jeffrey St.Clair of Counterpunch: >>> >>> The Democrats have co-opted and eviscerated the anti-war movement for two generations, from Johnson (“no wider war’) to Obama (“no dumb wars”) - while they expanded the killing. >>> >>> The Democrat war party is responsible for the duplicitous and fantastical anti-Russia movement - "aligning itself fatally with some of the most bloodthirsty hawks on the Hill and in doing so … abetting every drone strike, Cruise missile and MOAB bomb…” >>> >>> The anti-war movement should have nothing to do with them, unless they agree to demand all US troops (and weapons) be brought home. >>> >>> —CGE >>> >>>> On Jun 28, 2017, at 8:38 PM, Karen Aram via Peace-discuss wrote: >>>> >>>> Jeffrey St Clair writes: >>>> I used to believe that rightwing militarism would be countered by a liberated and reanimated anti-war movement that had refused to confront liberal wars. But where is it now? Where are the mass protests against Trump's expanding wars in Syria, Yemen, Somalia and the new re-surge in Afghanistan? Where are the protest against the rising slaughter of civilians? Where indeed. The liberal antiwar movement has morphed into an anti-Russia movement, aligning itself fatally with some of the most bloodthirsty hawks on the Hill and in doing so is abetting every drone strike, Cruise missile and MOAB bomb Trump drops. >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Peace-discuss mailing list >>>> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net >>>> https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Peace mailing list >>> Peace at lists.chambana.net >>> https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace >> > From fboyle at illinois.edu Thu Jun 29 22:21:38 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2017 22:21:38 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] =?windows-1252?q?FW=3A_Sojourner_Truth_Radio=3A_J?= =?windows-1252?q?une_29th_=96_Portugal=27s_Eucalyptus_Fires_=7C_Trump=2C_?= =?windows-1252?q?Syria_and_=22Sarin_Attacks=22_by_sojournertruthradio?= Message-ID: Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2017 5:19 PM To: sectns.aals at lists.aals.org Subject: Sojourner Truth Radio: June 29th – Portugal's Eucalyptus Fires | Trump, Syria and "Sarin Attacks" by sojournertruthradio https://soundcloud.com/sojournertruthradio/sojourner-truth-radio-june-29th-portugals-eucalyptus-fires-trump-syria-and-sarin-attacks The Trump administration is doubling down on its aggression in Syria and claimed this week that the Assad government was planning another chemical attack "though a new investigative report released this week suggest the Syrian government was not responsible for the use chemical weapons in an initial attack this April. What is the story behind these so-named chemical attacks? Who are the forces involved in the proxy war in Syria? Are recent U.S. military actions in Syria in breach of U.S. and international law? Our guest is Francis Boyle, professor of international law at the University of Illinois College of Law. From fboyle at illinois.edu Thu Jun 29 22:21:38 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2017 22:21:38 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] =?windows-1252?q?FW=3A_Sojourner_Truth_Radio=3A_J?= =?windows-1252?q?une_29th_=96_Portugal=27s_Eucalyptus_Fires_=7C_Trump=2C_?= =?windows-1252?q?Syria_and_=22Sarin_Attacks=22_by_sojournertruthradio?= Message-ID: Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2017 5:19 PM To: sectns.aals at lists.aals.org Subject: Sojourner Truth Radio: June 29th – Portugal's Eucalyptus Fires | Trump, Syria and "Sarin Attacks" by sojournertruthradio https://soundcloud.com/sojournertruthradio/sojourner-truth-radio-june-29th-portugals-eucalyptus-fires-trump-syria-and-sarin-attacks The Trump administration is doubling down on its aggression in Syria and claimed this week that the Assad government was planning another chemical attack "though a new investigative report released this week suggest the Syrian government was not responsible for the use chemical weapons in an initial attack this April. What is the story behind these so-named chemical attacks? Who are the forces involved in the proxy war in Syria? Are recent U.S. military actions in Syria in breach of U.S. and international law? Our guest is Francis Boyle, professor of international law at the University of Illinois College of Law. From fboyle at illinois.edu Fri Jun 30 15:39:07 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2017 15:39:07 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Hiding Drone Murders: Killer Koh & Illinois Nazi Law Faculty Message-ID: May this Drone Murder Extermination Campaign against Muslims/Arabs/Asians of Color be upon the Heads of the entire Illinois Nazi Law Faculty for the rest of Eternity! fab https://static.theintercept.com/amp/drone-strikes-columbia-law-human-rights-yemen.html Murtaza Hussain, The Intercept OVER THE PAST DECADE, the United States has claimed broad authority to carry out drone strikes across the world, even in places far from the battlefield. Under President Barack Obama, the U.S. acknowledged killing between 2,867 and 3,138 people in strikes that took place in countries like Somalia, Yemen, and Pakistan. Although in the waning days of his presidency, Obama took some steps to improve transparency about drone strikes, including providing the total estimated death toll, a new report by the Columbia Law School Human Rights Clinic and the Sana'a Center for Strategic Studies says that the U.S. is still lagging in providing a full accounting of its drone program. Among other failures, the report, titled "Out of the Shadows: Recommendations to Advance Transparency in the Use of Lethal Force," says that the U.S. has only acknowledged approximately 20 precent of its reported drone strikes - failing to claim responsibility or provide details in the vast majority of cases. Meanwhile, the drone program is intensifying. Since President Donald Trump took office earlier this year, the rate of drone strikes per month has increased by almost four times Obama's average. Yemen in particular has been a target of many of these operations, with between nine and 11 strikes hitting the country this year, along with 81 other covert attacks by U.S. forces, according to statistics compiled by the Bureau of Investigative Journalism. The authors of the new report say that the government's failure to provide information or legal rationales for its strikes is making it impossible to understand the full scope of the government's targeted killing program, as well as its impact on civilians. "For years, the only way we knew anything about individual strikes was from media reports or individual statements about strikes from government officials," said Alex Moorehead, of the Columbia Law School's Human Rights Institute, highlighting the failure of the government to provide details about cases in which drones have been used for targeted killings. "When we talk about official acknowledgment, we are talking about specific information about individual strikes, which is what matters to people who have had loved ones killed." The estimated number of civilians killed in U.S. drone strikes varies widely, with some independent estimates recording hundreds of civilian deaths, while the U.S. government often claims that figures run only into the dozens. The U.S. military has also been criticized for policies like "signature strikes," in which individuals have been killed based on their status as "military-age males" in areas where U.S. drones are operating. These policies are alleged to be responsible for cases in which weddings, funerals, and other communal gatherings have been bombed in Yemen, Pakistan, and Somalia. "There is a difference in how Western civilians are treated versus non-Western civilians," Moorehead said. "Of all the civilians who have been killed in these strikes, only the two Westerners who were killed in a 2016 strike have ever received any formal acknowledgement, apology, and compensation from the government." Locals in Yemen have alleged that, in recent months, drone strikes carried out by the Trump administration killed civilians on numerous occasions. One strike reported last month in Yemen's Shabwah Province allegedly targeted a car full of men with no existing links to terrorist groups, as well as several innocent bystanders. Despite such incidents, Trump has promised measures that would further loosen targeting standards for drone operators, likely putting civilians in even greater danger. Many Yemenis say that the anger and grief inflicted by these strikes is outweighing any perceived counterterrorism benefit - and even driving some local people into the arms of Al Qaeda. "The drone program in Yemen has inflicted a lot of civilian deaths that have not been investigated, acknowledged, or even taken into consideration by the U.S. government," said Waleed Alhariri, director of the Sana'a Center's U.S. office and one of the co-authors of the report. "In some cases weddings have been targeted, which has resulted in a lot of public anger from ordinary people towards the United States and has helped recruitment for al Qaeda." The secrecy of the drone program has made it difficult for civil liberties organizations in the U.S. to provide a full accounting of its impact. More importantly, this secrecy has also made it harder for civilians directly impacted by drones to even understand why they have been targeted. Lacking any ability to find out the details about cases in which they or their loved ones were harmed, Yemeni civilians are generally unable to even obtain recognition, let alone compensation, for the life-changing consequences of these attacks. That those targeted often come from poor and remote regions of the country only makes it harder for them to obtain justice. "The U.S. public is not aware what is happening in this program. They need more transparency and they need to know the truth," said Alhariri. "But Yemenis who have been impacted also need to know why they've been targeted. People have died, lost the ability to work and lost family members they relied on. They've been ignored and they feel helpless in the face of U.S. military policy in Yemen." Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Fri Jun 30 15:39:07 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2017 15:39:07 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Hiding Drone Murders: Killer Koh & Illinois Nazi Law Faculty Message-ID: May this Drone Murder Extermination Campaign against Muslims/Arabs/Asians of Color be upon the Heads of the entire Illinois Nazi Law Faculty for the rest of Eternity! fab https://static.theintercept.com/amp/drone-strikes-columbia-law-human-rights-yemen.html Murtaza Hussain, The Intercept OVER THE PAST DECADE, the United States has claimed broad authority to carry out drone strikes across the world, even in places far from the battlefield. Under President Barack Obama, the U.S. acknowledged killing between 2,867 and 3,138 people in strikes that took place in countries like Somalia, Yemen, and Pakistan. Although in the waning days of his presidency, Obama took some steps to improve transparency about drone strikes, including providing the total estimated death toll, a new report by the Columbia Law School Human Rights Clinic and the Sana'a Center for Strategic Studies says that the U.S. is still lagging in providing a full accounting of its drone program. Among other failures, the report, titled "Out of the Shadows: Recommendations to Advance Transparency in the Use of Lethal Force," says that the U.S. has only acknowledged approximately 20 precent of its reported drone strikes - failing to claim responsibility or provide details in the vast majority of cases. Meanwhile, the drone program is intensifying. Since President Donald Trump took office earlier this year, the rate of drone strikes per month has increased by almost four times Obama's average. Yemen in particular has been a target of many of these operations, with between nine and 11 strikes hitting the country this year, along with 81 other covert attacks by U.S. forces, according to statistics compiled by the Bureau of Investigative Journalism. The authors of the new report say that the government's failure to provide information or legal rationales for its strikes is making it impossible to understand the full scope of the government's targeted killing program, as well as its impact on civilians. "For years, the only way we knew anything about individual strikes was from media reports or individual statements about strikes from government officials," said Alex Moorehead, of the Columbia Law School's Human Rights Institute, highlighting the failure of the government to provide details about cases in which drones have been used for targeted killings. "When we talk about official acknowledgment, we are talking about specific information about individual strikes, which is what matters to people who have had loved ones killed." The estimated number of civilians killed in U.S. drone strikes varies widely, with some independent estimates recording hundreds of civilian deaths, while the U.S. government often claims that figures run only into the dozens. The U.S. military has also been criticized for policies like "signature strikes," in which individuals have been killed based on their status as "military-age males" in areas where U.S. drones are operating. These policies are alleged to be responsible for cases in which weddings, funerals, and other communal gatherings have been bombed in Yemen, Pakistan, and Somalia. "There is a difference in how Western civilians are treated versus non-Western civilians," Moorehead said. "Of all the civilians who have been killed in these strikes, only the two Westerners who were killed in a 2016 strike have ever received any formal acknowledgement, apology, and compensation from the government." Locals in Yemen have alleged that, in recent months, drone strikes carried out by the Trump administration killed civilians on numerous occasions. One strike reported last month in Yemen's Shabwah Province allegedly targeted a car full of men with no existing links to terrorist groups, as well as several innocent bystanders. Despite such incidents, Trump has promised measures that would further loosen targeting standards for drone operators, likely putting civilians in even greater danger. Many Yemenis say that the anger and grief inflicted by these strikes is outweighing any perceived counterterrorism benefit - and even driving some local people into the arms of Al Qaeda. "The drone program in Yemen has inflicted a lot of civilian deaths that have not been investigated, acknowledged, or even taken into consideration by the U.S. government," said Waleed Alhariri, director of the Sana'a Center's U.S. office and one of the co-authors of the report. "In some cases weddings have been targeted, which has resulted in a lot of public anger from ordinary people towards the United States and has helped recruitment for al Qaeda." The secrecy of the drone program has made it difficult for civil liberties organizations in the U.S. to provide a full accounting of its impact. More importantly, this secrecy has also made it harder for civilians directly impacted by drones to even understand why they have been targeted. Lacking any ability to find out the details about cases in which they or their loved ones were harmed, Yemeni civilians are generally unable to even obtain recognition, let alone compensation, for the life-changing consequences of these attacks. That those targeted often come from poor and remote regions of the country only makes it harder for them to obtain justice. "The U.S. public is not aware what is happening in this program. They need more transparency and they need to know the truth," said Alhariri. "But Yemenis who have been impacted also need to know why they've been targeted. People have died, lost the ability to work and lost family members they relied on. They've been ignored and they feel helpless in the face of U.S. military policy in Yemen." Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Fri Jun 30 18:02:17 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2017 18:02:17 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Hiding Drone Murders: Killer Koh & Illinois Nazi Law Faculty In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: It was Obama and Killer Koh who institutionalized their drone murder extermination Campaign against Muslims/Arabs/Asians of Color-then turned their Genocidal Machinery over to Trump. And Killer Koh did not just give any old "lecture" here at the College of Law. Rather, the Illinois Nazi Law Faculty specifically chose Killer Koh to give an Endowed Lecture in a Series for Lawyer Role Models in Government Service. Law School Off Campus! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Friday, June 30, 2017 10:39 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; David Johnson ; Mildred O'brien Subject: Hiding Drone Murders: Killer Koh & Illinois Nazi Law Faculty May this Drone Murder Extermination Campaign against Muslims/Arabs/Asians of Color be upon the Heads of the entire Illinois Nazi Law Faculty for the rest of Eternity! fab https://static.theintercept.com/amp/drone-strikes-columbia-law-human-rights-yemen.html Murtaza Hussain, The Intercept OVER THE PAST DECADE, the United States has claimed broad authority to carry out drone strikes across the world, even in places far from the battlefield. Under President Barack Obama, the U.S. acknowledged killing between 2,867 and 3,138 people in strikes that took place in countries like Somalia, Yemen, and Pakistan. Although in the waning days of his presidency, Obama took some steps to improve transparency about drone strikes, including providing the total estimated death toll, a new report by the Columbia Law School Human Rights Clinic and the Sana'a Center for Strategic Studies says that the U.S. is still lagging in providing a full accounting of its drone program. Among other failures, the report, titled "Out of the Shadows: Recommendations to Advance Transparency in the Use of Lethal Force," says that the U.S. has only acknowledged approximately 20 precent of its reported drone strikes - failing to claim responsibility or provide details in the vast majority of cases. Meanwhile, the drone program is intensifying. Since President Donald Trump took office earlier this year, the rate of drone strikes per month has increased by almost four times Obama's average. Yemen in particular has been a target of many of these operations, with between nine and 11 strikes hitting the country this year, along with 81 other covert attacks by U.S. forces, according to statistics compiled by the Bureau of Investigative Journalism. The authors of the new report say that the government's failure to provide information or legal rationales for its strikes is making it impossible to understand the full scope of the government's targeted killing program, as well as its impact on civilians. "For years, the only way we knew anything about individual strikes was from media reports or individual statements about strikes from government officials," said Alex Moorehead, of the Columbia Law School's Human Rights Institute, highlighting the failure of the government to provide details about cases in which drones have been used for targeted killings. "When we talk about official acknowledgment, we are talking about specific information about individual strikes, which is what matters to people who have had loved ones killed." The estimated number of civilians killed in U.S. drone strikes varies widely, with some independent estimates recording hundreds of civilian deaths, while the U.S. government often claims that figures run only into the dozens. The U.S. military has also been criticized for policies like "signature strikes," in which individuals have been killed based on their status as "military-age males" in areas where U.S. drones are operating. These policies are alleged to be responsible for cases in which weddings, funerals, and other communal gatherings have been bombed in Yemen, Pakistan, and Somalia. "There is a difference in how Western civilians are treated versus non-Western civilians," Moorehead said. "Of all the civilians who have been killed in these strikes, only the two Westerners who were killed in a 2016 strike have ever received any formal acknowledgement, apology, and compensation from the government." Locals in Yemen have alleged that, in recent months, drone strikes carried out by the Trump administration killed civilians on numerous occasions. One strike reported last month in Yemen's Shabwah Province allegedly targeted a car full of men with no existing links to terrorist groups, as well as several innocent bystanders. Despite such incidents, Trump has promised measures that would further loosen targeting standards for drone operators, likely putting civilians in even greater danger. Many Yemenis say that the anger and grief inflicted by these strikes is outweighing any perceived counterterrorism benefit - and even driving some local people into the arms of Al Qaeda. "The drone program in Yemen has inflicted a lot of civilian deaths that have not been investigated, acknowledged, or even taken into consideration by the U.S. government," said Waleed Alhariri, director of the Sana'a Center's U.S. office and one of the co-authors of the report. "In some cases weddings have been targeted, which has resulted in a lot of public anger from ordinary people towards the United States and has helped recruitment for al Qaeda." The secrecy of the drone program has made it difficult for civil liberties organizations in the U.S. to provide a full accounting of its impact. More importantly, this secrecy has also made it harder for civilians directly impacted by drones to even understand why they have been targeted. Lacking any ability to find out the details about cases in which they or their loved ones were harmed, Yemeni civilians are generally unable to even obtain recognition, let alone compensation, for the life-changing consequences of these attacks. That those targeted often come from poor and remote regions of the country only makes it harder for them to obtain justice. "The U.S. public is not aware what is happening in this program. They need more transparency and they need to know the truth," said Alhariri. "But Yemenis who have been impacted also need to know why they've been targeted. People have died, lost the ability to work and lost family members they relied on. They've been ignored and they feel helpless in the face of U.S. military policy in Yemen." Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Fri Jun 30 18:02:17 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2017 18:02:17 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Hiding Drone Murders: Killer Koh & Illinois Nazi Law Faculty In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: It was Obama and Killer Koh who institutionalized their drone murder extermination Campaign against Muslims/Arabs/Asians of Color-then turned their Genocidal Machinery over to Trump. And Killer Koh did not just give any old "lecture" here at the College of Law. Rather, the Illinois Nazi Law Faculty specifically chose Killer Koh to give an Endowed Lecture in a Series for Lawyer Role Models in Government Service. Law School Off Campus! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Friday, June 30, 2017 10:39 AM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; David Johnson ; Mildred O'brien Subject: Hiding Drone Murders: Killer Koh & Illinois Nazi Law Faculty May this Drone Murder Extermination Campaign against Muslims/Arabs/Asians of Color be upon the Heads of the entire Illinois Nazi Law Faculty for the rest of Eternity! fab https://static.theintercept.com/amp/drone-strikes-columbia-law-human-rights-yemen.html Murtaza Hussain, The Intercept OVER THE PAST DECADE, the United States has claimed broad authority to carry out drone strikes across the world, even in places far from the battlefield. Under President Barack Obama, the U.S. acknowledged killing between 2,867 and 3,138 people in strikes that took place in countries like Somalia, Yemen, and Pakistan. Although in the waning days of his presidency, Obama took some steps to improve transparency about drone strikes, including providing the total estimated death toll, a new report by the Columbia Law School Human Rights Clinic and the Sana'a Center for Strategic Studies says that the U.S. is still lagging in providing a full accounting of its drone program. Among other failures, the report, titled "Out of the Shadows: Recommendations to Advance Transparency in the Use of Lethal Force," says that the U.S. has only acknowledged approximately 20 precent of its reported drone strikes - failing to claim responsibility or provide details in the vast majority of cases. Meanwhile, the drone program is intensifying. Since President Donald Trump took office earlier this year, the rate of drone strikes per month has increased by almost four times Obama's average. Yemen in particular has been a target of many of these operations, with between nine and 11 strikes hitting the country this year, along with 81 other covert attacks by U.S. forces, according to statistics compiled by the Bureau of Investigative Journalism. The authors of the new report say that the government's failure to provide information or legal rationales for its strikes is making it impossible to understand the full scope of the government's targeted killing program, as well as its impact on civilians. "For years, the only way we knew anything about individual strikes was from media reports or individual statements about strikes from government officials," said Alex Moorehead, of the Columbia Law School's Human Rights Institute, highlighting the failure of the government to provide details about cases in which drones have been used for targeted killings. "When we talk about official acknowledgment, we are talking about specific information about individual strikes, which is what matters to people who have had loved ones killed." The estimated number of civilians killed in U.S. drone strikes varies widely, with some independent estimates recording hundreds of civilian deaths, while the U.S. government often claims that figures run only into the dozens. The U.S. military has also been criticized for policies like "signature strikes," in which individuals have been killed based on their status as "military-age males" in areas where U.S. drones are operating. These policies are alleged to be responsible for cases in which weddings, funerals, and other communal gatherings have been bombed in Yemen, Pakistan, and Somalia. "There is a difference in how Western civilians are treated versus non-Western civilians," Moorehead said. "Of all the civilians who have been killed in these strikes, only the two Westerners who were killed in a 2016 strike have ever received any formal acknowledgement, apology, and compensation from the government." Locals in Yemen have alleged that, in recent months, drone strikes carried out by the Trump administration killed civilians on numerous occasions. One strike reported last month in Yemen's Shabwah Province allegedly targeted a car full of men with no existing links to terrorist groups, as well as several innocent bystanders. Despite such incidents, Trump has promised measures that would further loosen targeting standards for drone operators, likely putting civilians in even greater danger. Many Yemenis say that the anger and grief inflicted by these strikes is outweighing any perceived counterterrorism benefit - and even driving some local people into the arms of Al Qaeda. "The drone program in Yemen has inflicted a lot of civilian deaths that have not been investigated, acknowledged, or even taken into consideration by the U.S. government," said Waleed Alhariri, director of the Sana'a Center's U.S. office and one of the co-authors of the report. "In some cases weddings have been targeted, which has resulted in a lot of public anger from ordinary people towards the United States and has helped recruitment for al Qaeda." The secrecy of the drone program has made it difficult for civil liberties organizations in the U.S. to provide a full accounting of its impact. More importantly, this secrecy has also made it harder for civilians directly impacted by drones to even understand why they have been targeted. Lacking any ability to find out the details about cases in which they or their loved ones were harmed, Yemeni civilians are generally unable to even obtain recognition, let alone compensation, for the life-changing consequences of these attacks. That those targeted often come from poor and remote regions of the country only makes it harder for them to obtain justice. "The U.S. public is not aware what is happening in this program. They need more transparency and they need to know the truth," said Alhariri. "But Yemenis who have been impacted also need to know why they've been targeted. People have died, lost the ability to work and lost family members they relied on. They've been ignored and they feel helpless in the face of U.S. military policy in Yemen." Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Fri Jun 30 18:55:39 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2017 18:55:39 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Hiding Drone Murders: Killer Koh & Illinois Nazi Law Faculty References: Message-ID: Once we made it clear that we were going to mount our Demonstration during Killer Koh's Endowed Lecture at Noon, the Illinois Nazi Law Faculty immediately organized an additional early morning lecture for Killer Koh so that he could better justify himself. The Illinois Nazi Law Faculty never made any effort to organize a debate between him and me. Rather the Illinois Nazi Law Faculty spent an entire day maliciously ramming Killer Koh down the throats of everyone in this Good Community as a Role Model for Lawyers in Government Service. Law School Off Campus! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Friday, June 30, 2017 1:02 PM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; David Johnson ; Mildred O'brien Subject: RE: Hiding Drone Murders: Killer Koh & Illinois Nazi Law Faculty It was Obama and Killer Koh who institutionalized their drone murder extermination Campaign against Muslims/Arabs/Asians of Color-then turned their Genocidal Machinery over to Trump. And Killer Koh did not just give any old "lecture" here at the College of Law. Rather, the Illinois Nazi Law Faculty specifically chose Killer Koh to give an Endowed Lecture in a Series for Lawyer Role Models in Government Service. Law School Off Campus! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Friday, June 30, 2017 10:39 AM To: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; Karen Aram >; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; David Johnson >; Mildred O'brien > Subject: Hiding Drone Murders: Killer Koh & Illinois Nazi Law Faculty May this Drone Murder Extermination Campaign against Muslims/Arabs/Asians of Color be upon the Heads of the entire Illinois Nazi Law Faculty for the rest of Eternity! fab https://static.theintercept.com/amp/drone-strikes-columbia-law-human-rights-yemen.html Murtaza Hussain, The Intercept OVER THE PAST DECADE, the United States has claimed broad authority to carry out drone strikes across the world, even in places far from the battlefield. Under President Barack Obama, the U.S. acknowledged killing between 2,867 and 3,138 people in strikes that took place in countries like Somalia, Yemen, and Pakistan. Although in the waning days of his presidency, Obama took some steps to improve transparency about drone strikes, including providing the total estimated death toll, a new report by the Columbia Law School Human Rights Clinic and the Sana'a Center for Strategic Studies says that the U.S. is still lagging in providing a full accounting of its drone program. Among other failures, the report, titled "Out of the Shadows: Recommendations to Advance Transparency in the Use of Lethal Force," says that the U.S. has only acknowledged approximately 20 precent of its reported drone strikes - failing to claim responsibility or provide details in the vast majority of cases. Meanwhile, the drone program is intensifying. Since President Donald Trump took office earlier this year, the rate of drone strikes per month has increased by almost four times Obama's average. Yemen in particular has been a target of many of these operations, with between nine and 11 strikes hitting the country this year, along with 81 other covert attacks by U.S. forces, according to statistics compiled by the Bureau of Investigative Journalism. The authors of the new report say that the government's failure to provide information or legal rationales for its strikes is making it impossible to understand the full scope of the government's targeted killing program, as well as its impact on civilians. "For years, the only way we knew anything about individual strikes was from media reports or individual statements about strikes from government officials," said Alex Moorehead, of the Columbia Law School's Human Rights Institute, highlighting the failure of the government to provide details about cases in which drones have been used for targeted killings. "When we talk about official acknowledgment, we are talking about specific information about individual strikes, which is what matters to people who have had loved ones killed." The estimated number of civilians killed in U.S. drone strikes varies widely, with some independent estimates recording hundreds of civilian deaths, while the U.S. government often claims that figures run only into the dozens. The U.S. military has also been criticized for policies like "signature strikes," in which individuals have been killed based on their status as "military-age males" in areas where U.S. drones are operating. These policies are alleged to be responsible for cases in which weddings, funerals, and other communal gatherings have been bombed in Yemen, Pakistan, and Somalia. "There is a difference in how Western civilians are treated versus non-Western civilians," Moorehead said. "Of all the civilians who have been killed in these strikes, only the two Westerners who were killed in a 2016 strike have ever received any formal acknowledgement, apology, and compensation from the government." Locals in Yemen have alleged that, in recent months, drone strikes carried out by the Trump administration killed civilians on numerous occasions. One strike reported last month in Yemen's Shabwah Province allegedly targeted a car full of men with no existing links to terrorist groups, as well as several innocent bystanders. Despite such incidents, Trump has promised measures that would further loosen targeting standards for drone operators, likely putting civilians in even greater danger. Many Yemenis say that the anger and grief inflicted by these strikes is outweighing any perceived counterterrorism benefit - and even driving some local people into the arms of Al Qaeda. "The drone program in Yemen has inflicted a lot of civilian deaths that have not been investigated, acknowledged, or even taken into consideration by the U.S. government," said Waleed Alhariri, director of the Sana'a Center's U.S. office and one of the co-authors of the report. "In some cases weddings have been targeted, which has resulted in a lot of public anger from ordinary people towards the United States and has helped recruitment for al Qaeda." The secrecy of the drone program has made it difficult for civil liberties organizations in the U.S. to provide a full accounting of its impact. More importantly, this secrecy has also made it harder for civilians directly impacted by drones to even understand why they have been targeted. Lacking any ability to find out the details about cases in which they or their loved ones were harmed, Yemeni civilians are generally unable to even obtain recognition, let alone compensation, for the life-changing consequences of these attacks. That those targeted often come from poor and remote regions of the country only makes it harder for them to obtain justice. "The U.S. public is not aware what is happening in this program. They need more transparency and they need to know the truth," said Alhariri. "But Yemenis who have been impacted also need to know why they've been targeted. People have died, lost the ability to work and lost family members they relied on. They've been ignored and they feel helpless in the face of U.S. military policy in Yemen." Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Fri Jun 30 18:55:39 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2017 18:55:39 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Hiding Drone Murders: Killer Koh & Illinois Nazi Law Faculty References: Message-ID: Once we made it clear that we were going to mount our Demonstration during Killer Koh's Endowed Lecture at Noon, the Illinois Nazi Law Faculty immediately organized an additional early morning lecture for Killer Koh so that he could better justify himself. The Illinois Nazi Law Faculty never made any effort to organize a debate between him and me. Rather the Illinois Nazi Law Faculty spent an entire day maliciously ramming Killer Koh down the throats of everyone in this Good Community as a Role Model for Lawyers in Government Service. Law School Off Campus! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Friday, June 30, 2017 1:02 PM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; David Johnson ; Mildred O'brien Subject: RE: Hiding Drone Murders: Killer Koh & Illinois Nazi Law Faculty It was Obama and Killer Koh who institutionalized their drone murder extermination Campaign against Muslims/Arabs/Asians of Color-then turned their Genocidal Machinery over to Trump. And Killer Koh did not just give any old "lecture" here at the College of Law. Rather, the Illinois Nazi Law Faculty specifically chose Killer Koh to give an Endowed Lecture in a Series for Lawyer Role Models in Government Service. Law School Off Campus! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Friday, June 30, 2017 10:39 AM To: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; Karen Aram >; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; David Johnson >; Mildred O'brien > Subject: Hiding Drone Murders: Killer Koh & Illinois Nazi Law Faculty May this Drone Murder Extermination Campaign against Muslims/Arabs/Asians of Color be upon the Heads of the entire Illinois Nazi Law Faculty for the rest of Eternity! fab https://static.theintercept.com/amp/drone-strikes-columbia-law-human-rights-yemen.html Murtaza Hussain, The Intercept OVER THE PAST DECADE, the United States has claimed broad authority to carry out drone strikes across the world, even in places far from the battlefield. Under President Barack Obama, the U.S. acknowledged killing between 2,867 and 3,138 people in strikes that took place in countries like Somalia, Yemen, and Pakistan. Although in the waning days of his presidency, Obama took some steps to improve transparency about drone strikes, including providing the total estimated death toll, a new report by the Columbia Law School Human Rights Clinic and the Sana'a Center for Strategic Studies says that the U.S. is still lagging in providing a full accounting of its drone program. Among other failures, the report, titled "Out of the Shadows: Recommendations to Advance Transparency in the Use of Lethal Force," says that the U.S. has only acknowledged approximately 20 precent of its reported drone strikes - failing to claim responsibility or provide details in the vast majority of cases. Meanwhile, the drone program is intensifying. Since President Donald Trump took office earlier this year, the rate of drone strikes per month has increased by almost four times Obama's average. Yemen in particular has been a target of many of these operations, with between nine and 11 strikes hitting the country this year, along with 81 other covert attacks by U.S. forces, according to statistics compiled by the Bureau of Investigative Journalism. The authors of the new report say that the government's failure to provide information or legal rationales for its strikes is making it impossible to understand the full scope of the government's targeted killing program, as well as its impact on civilians. "For years, the only way we knew anything about individual strikes was from media reports or individual statements about strikes from government officials," said Alex Moorehead, of the Columbia Law School's Human Rights Institute, highlighting the failure of the government to provide details about cases in which drones have been used for targeted killings. "When we talk about official acknowledgment, we are talking about specific information about individual strikes, which is what matters to people who have had loved ones killed." The estimated number of civilians killed in U.S. drone strikes varies widely, with some independent estimates recording hundreds of civilian deaths, while the U.S. government often claims that figures run only into the dozens. The U.S. military has also been criticized for policies like "signature strikes," in which individuals have been killed based on their status as "military-age males" in areas where U.S. drones are operating. These policies are alleged to be responsible for cases in which weddings, funerals, and other communal gatherings have been bombed in Yemen, Pakistan, and Somalia. "There is a difference in how Western civilians are treated versus non-Western civilians," Moorehead said. "Of all the civilians who have been killed in these strikes, only the two Westerners who were killed in a 2016 strike have ever received any formal acknowledgement, apology, and compensation from the government." Locals in Yemen have alleged that, in recent months, drone strikes carried out by the Trump administration killed civilians on numerous occasions. One strike reported last month in Yemen's Shabwah Province allegedly targeted a car full of men with no existing links to terrorist groups, as well as several innocent bystanders. Despite such incidents, Trump has promised measures that would further loosen targeting standards for drone operators, likely putting civilians in even greater danger. Many Yemenis say that the anger and grief inflicted by these strikes is outweighing any perceived counterterrorism benefit - and even driving some local people into the arms of Al Qaeda. "The drone program in Yemen has inflicted a lot of civilian deaths that have not been investigated, acknowledged, or even taken into consideration by the U.S. government," said Waleed Alhariri, director of the Sana'a Center's U.S. office and one of the co-authors of the report. "In some cases weddings have been targeted, which has resulted in a lot of public anger from ordinary people towards the United States and has helped recruitment for al Qaeda." The secrecy of the drone program has made it difficult for civil liberties organizations in the U.S. to provide a full accounting of its impact. More importantly, this secrecy has also made it harder for civilians directly impacted by drones to even understand why they have been targeted. Lacking any ability to find out the details about cases in which they or their loved ones were harmed, Yemeni civilians are generally unable to even obtain recognition, let alone compensation, for the life-changing consequences of these attacks. That those targeted often come from poor and remote regions of the country only makes it harder for them to obtain justice. "The U.S. public is not aware what is happening in this program. They need more transparency and they need to know the truth," said Alhariri. "But Yemenis who have been impacted also need to know why they've been targeted. People have died, lost the ability to work and lost family members they relied on. They've been ignored and they feel helpless in the face of U.S. military policy in Yemen." Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Fri Jun 30 22:30:06 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2017 22:30:06 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Hiding Drone Murders: Killer Koh & Illinois Nazi Law Faculty--LAW SCHOOL OFF CAMPUS! Message-ID: FOUR CITIZEN ACTIVISTS ARRESTED AT VOLK FIELD AS THEY ATTEMPT TO IDENTIFY THE BASE AS A CRIME SCENE by Joy First Wisconsin Coalition to Ground the Drones and End the Wars has held monthly vigils against drones at the gates of Volk Field for over five years. This Wisconsin Air National Guard Base is a critical component of the whole drone warfare program being conducted by the US government in a number of countries in the Middle East and Africa. At Volk Field personnel are trained to operate the RQ-7 Shadow Drone, which has been used for reconnaissance, surveillance, and target acquisition. However, now there is the likelihood that the RQ-7 is also weaponized. See http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/7914/was-a-new-type-of-drone-launched-weapon-used-to-kill-al-qaedas-2-man There is a savagery in drone warfare as whole communities in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iran, Iraq, Yemen, Somalia, and other places in the Middle East and Africa suffer from PTSD from drones constantly flying overhead, as wedding parties and funerals are hit, as rescuers are hit by a second attack, as grandmothers working in the field are killed, as children sleeping in their beds are murdered. A number of credible sources tell us that only 1 out of 10 people killed by drones are the intended target. Wisconsin activists join others at military bases across the country, including California, Nevada, Missouri, Iowa, Arizona, Pennsylvania, New York and Virginia, who are standing up and speaking out against the horrors of drone warfare. Members of the Wisconsin Coalition have sent numerous letters to the base commander asking to talk to him about their concerns, but the letters go unanswered. Several times we have attempted to walk onto the base to share the letters in person and have been arrested. So, on June 27 we again planned to go onto the base to put up crime scene tape and to deliver an indictment for war crimes. As we met at a park near the base for a planning meeting, two cars from the Juneau County Sheriff's department drove up, one of the cars being with the canine unit. They arrested Brian Terrell of the Chicago based Voices for Creative Nonviolence. We were surprised that they came and arrested Brian before the action, but it was not totally unexpected as there was a warrant pending for Brian's arrest. Brian was arrested at the base in February 2016, and after being found guilty of trespass, he refused to pay the fine. After Brian's arrest, we continued to discuss our plan and then processed to the gates of Volk Field. The Sheriff obviously knew we were going to be risking arrest and we expected the gates to be closed, but were surprised to see they were open with about ten deputies waiting for us. Father Jim Murphy and I walked to the gate with the crime scene tape and it was snatched from our hands. The captain said that the base commander didn't want any tape on "his" fence. I started reading the indictment while standing two steps onto the base and was immediately arrested. Jim walked onto the base and was arrested, and then Phil Runkel walked onto the base and was arrested. The three of us were cuffed in front and taken to the Juneau County jail where we were charged with trespassing and disorderly conduct and then released. We have an initial hearing on August 9. Brian will be held at the jail until Friday or Saturday and then released. While in office Obama used drones to murder thousands of innocent people, including children. Drone strikes are increasing even more under Trump, with even more innocent people suffering and dying. Our government tries to keep us in the dark about what is going on, and so we must go to other credible sources of information to be informed. It is up to us, the people, to do everything we can to bring an end to drone warfare. Please join us at the gates of Volk Field on the 4th Tuesday of the month. For more information, contact joyfirst5 at gmail.com Brian's arrest http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZgXClrHfuk0&t=9s Arrests at the gate http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-azM2G5rgpc Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Friday, June 30, 2017 1:56 PM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; David Johnson ; Mildred O'brien Subject: RE: Hiding Drone Murders: Killer Koh & Illinois Nazi Law Faculty Once we made it clear that we were going to mount our Demonstration during Killer Koh's Endowed Lecture at Noon, the Illinois Nazi Law Faculty immediately organized an additional early morning lecture for Killer Koh so that he could better justify himself. The Illinois Nazi Law Faculty never made any effort to organize a debate between him and me. Rather the Illinois Nazi Law Faculty spent an entire day maliciously ramming Killer Koh down the throats of everyone in this Good Community as a Role Model for Lawyers in Government Service. Law School Off Campus! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Friday, June 30, 2017 1:02 PM To: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; Karen Aram >; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; David Johnson >; Mildred O'brien > Subject: RE: Hiding Drone Murders: Killer Koh & Illinois Nazi Law Faculty It was Obama and Killer Koh who institutionalized their drone murder extermination Campaign against Muslims/Arabs/Asians of Color-then turned their Genocidal Machinery over to Trump. And Killer Koh did not just give any old "lecture" here at the College of Law. Rather, the Illinois Nazi Law Faculty specifically chose Killer Koh to give an Endowed Lecture in a Series for Lawyer Role Models in Government Service. Law School Off Campus! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Friday, June 30, 2017 10:39 AM To: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; Karen Aram >; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; David Johnson >; Mildred O'brien > Subject: Hiding Drone Murders: Killer Koh & Illinois Nazi Law Faculty May this Drone Murder Extermination Campaign against Muslims/Arabs/Asians of Color be upon the Heads of the entire Illinois Nazi Law Faculty for the rest of Eternity! fab https://static.theintercept.com/amp/drone-strikes-columbia-law-human-rights-yemen.html Murtaza Hussain, The Intercept OVER THE PAST DECADE, the United States has claimed broad authority to carry out drone strikes across the world, even in places far from the battlefield. Under President Barack Obama, the U.S. acknowledged killing between 2,867 and 3,138 people in strikes that took place in countries like Somalia, Yemen, and Pakistan. Although in the waning days of his presidency, Obama took some steps to improve transparency about drone strikes, including providing the total estimated death toll, a new report by the Columbia Law School Human Rights Clinic and the Sana'a Center for Strategic Studies says that the U.S. is still lagging in providing a full accounting of its drone program. Among other failures, the report, titled "Out of the Shadows: Recommendations to Advance Transparency in the Use of Lethal Force," says that the U.S. has only acknowledged approximately 20 precent of its reported drone strikes - failing to claim responsibility or provide details in the vast majority of cases. Meanwhile, the drone program is intensifying. Since President Donald Trump took office earlier this year, the rate of drone strikes per month has increased by almost four times Obama's average. Yemen in particular has been a target of many of these operations, with between nine and 11 strikes hitting the country this year, along with 81 other covert attacks by U.S. forces, according to statistics compiled by the Bureau of Investigative Journalism. The authors of the new report say that the government's failure to provide information or legal rationales for its strikes is making it impossible to understand the full scope of the government's targeted killing program, as well as its impact on civilians. "For years, the only way we knew anything about individual strikes was from media reports or individual statements about strikes from government officials," said Alex Moorehead, of the Columbia Law School's Human Rights Institute, highlighting the failure of the government to provide details about cases in which drones have been used for targeted killings. "When we talk about official acknowledgment, we are talking about specific information about individual strikes, which is what matters to people who have had loved ones killed." The estimated number of civilians killed in U.S. drone strikes varies widely, with some independent estimates recording hundreds of civilian deaths, while the U.S. government often claims that figures run only into the dozens. The U.S. military has also been criticized for policies like "signature strikes," in which individuals have been killed based on their status as "military-age males" in areas where U.S. drones are operating. These policies are alleged to be responsible for cases in which weddings, funerals, and other communal gatherings have been bombed in Yemen, Pakistan, and Somalia. "There is a difference in how Western civilians are treated versus non-Western civilians," Moorehead said. "Of all the civilians who have been killed in these strikes, only the two Westerners who were killed in a 2016 strike have ever received any formal acknowledgement, apology, and compensation from the government." Locals in Yemen have alleged that, in recent months, drone strikes carried out by the Trump administration killed civilians on numerous occasions. One strike reported last month in Yemen's Shabwah Province allegedly targeted a car full of men with no existing links to terrorist groups, as well as several innocent bystanders. Despite such incidents, Trump has promised measures that would further loosen targeting standards for drone operators, likely putting civilians in even greater danger. Many Yemenis say that the anger and grief inflicted by these strikes is outweighing any perceived counterterrorism benefit - and even driving some local people into the arms of Al Qaeda. "The drone program in Yemen has inflicted a lot of civilian deaths that have not been investigated, acknowledged, or even taken into consideration by the U.S. government," said Waleed Alhariri, director of the Sana'a Center's U.S. office and one of the co-authors of the report. "In some cases weddings have been targeted, which has resulted in a lot of public anger from ordinary people towards the United States and has helped recruitment for al Qaeda." The secrecy of the drone program has made it difficult for civil liberties organizations in the U.S. to provide a full accounting of its impact. More importantly, this secrecy has also made it harder for civilians directly impacted by drones to even understand why they have been targeted. Lacking any ability to find out the details about cases in which they or their loved ones were harmed, Yemeni civilians are generally unable to even obtain recognition, let alone compensation, for the life-changing consequences of these attacks. That those targeted often come from poor and remote regions of the country only makes it harder for them to obtain justice. "The U.S. public is not aware what is happening in this program. They need more transparency and they need to know the truth," said Alhariri. "But Yemenis who have been impacted also need to know why they've been targeted. People have died, lost the ability to work and lost family members they relied on. They've been ignored and they feel helpless in the face of U.S. military policy in Yemen." Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Fri Jun 30 22:30:06 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2017 22:30:06 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Hiding Drone Murders: Killer Koh & Illinois Nazi Law Faculty--LAW SCHOOL OFF CAMPUS! Message-ID: FOUR CITIZEN ACTIVISTS ARRESTED AT VOLK FIELD AS THEY ATTEMPT TO IDENTIFY THE BASE AS A CRIME SCENE by Joy First Wisconsin Coalition to Ground the Drones and End the Wars has held monthly vigils against drones at the gates of Volk Field for over five years. This Wisconsin Air National Guard Base is a critical component of the whole drone warfare program being conducted by the US government in a number of countries in the Middle East and Africa. At Volk Field personnel are trained to operate the RQ-7 Shadow Drone, which has been used for reconnaissance, surveillance, and target acquisition. However, now there is the likelihood that the RQ-7 is also weaponized. See http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/7914/was-a-new-type-of-drone-launched-weapon-used-to-kill-al-qaedas-2-man There is a savagery in drone warfare as whole communities in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iran, Iraq, Yemen, Somalia, and other places in the Middle East and Africa suffer from PTSD from drones constantly flying overhead, as wedding parties and funerals are hit, as rescuers are hit by a second attack, as grandmothers working in the field are killed, as children sleeping in their beds are murdered. A number of credible sources tell us that only 1 out of 10 people killed by drones are the intended target. Wisconsin activists join others at military bases across the country, including California, Nevada, Missouri, Iowa, Arizona, Pennsylvania, New York and Virginia, who are standing up and speaking out against the horrors of drone warfare. Members of the Wisconsin Coalition have sent numerous letters to the base commander asking to talk to him about their concerns, but the letters go unanswered. Several times we have attempted to walk onto the base to share the letters in person and have been arrested. So, on June 27 we again planned to go onto the base to put up crime scene tape and to deliver an indictment for war crimes. As we met at a park near the base for a planning meeting, two cars from the Juneau County Sheriff's department drove up, one of the cars being with the canine unit. They arrested Brian Terrell of the Chicago based Voices for Creative Nonviolence. We were surprised that they came and arrested Brian before the action, but it was not totally unexpected as there was a warrant pending for Brian's arrest. Brian was arrested at the base in February 2016, and after being found guilty of trespass, he refused to pay the fine. After Brian's arrest, we continued to discuss our plan and then processed to the gates of Volk Field. The Sheriff obviously knew we were going to be risking arrest and we expected the gates to be closed, but were surprised to see they were open with about ten deputies waiting for us. Father Jim Murphy and I walked to the gate with the crime scene tape and it was snatched from our hands. The captain said that the base commander didn't want any tape on "his" fence. I started reading the indictment while standing two steps onto the base and was immediately arrested. Jim walked onto the base and was arrested, and then Phil Runkel walked onto the base and was arrested. The three of us were cuffed in front and taken to the Juneau County jail where we were charged with trespassing and disorderly conduct and then released. We have an initial hearing on August 9. Brian will be held at the jail until Friday or Saturday and then released. While in office Obama used drones to murder thousands of innocent people, including children. Drone strikes are increasing even more under Trump, with even more innocent people suffering and dying. Our government tries to keep us in the dark about what is going on, and so we must go to other credible sources of information to be informed. It is up to us, the people, to do everything we can to bring an end to drone warfare. Please join us at the gates of Volk Field on the 4th Tuesday of the month. For more information, contact joyfirst5 at gmail.com Brian's arrest http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZgXClrHfuk0&t=9s Arrests at the gate http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-azM2G5rgpc Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Friday, June 30, 2017 1:56 PM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; David Johnson ; Mildred O'brien Subject: RE: Hiding Drone Murders: Killer Koh & Illinois Nazi Law Faculty Once we made it clear that we were going to mount our Demonstration during Killer Koh's Endowed Lecture at Noon, the Illinois Nazi Law Faculty immediately organized an additional early morning lecture for Killer Koh so that he could better justify himself. The Illinois Nazi Law Faculty never made any effort to organize a debate between him and me. Rather the Illinois Nazi Law Faculty spent an entire day maliciously ramming Killer Koh down the throats of everyone in this Good Community as a Role Model for Lawyers in Government Service. Law School Off Campus! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Friday, June 30, 2017 1:02 PM To: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; Karen Aram >; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; David Johnson >; Mildred O'brien > Subject: RE: Hiding Drone Murders: Killer Koh & Illinois Nazi Law Faculty It was Obama and Killer Koh who institutionalized their drone murder extermination Campaign against Muslims/Arabs/Asians of Color-then turned their Genocidal Machinery over to Trump. And Killer Koh did not just give any old "lecture" here at the College of Law. Rather, the Illinois Nazi Law Faculty specifically chose Killer Koh to give an Endowed Lecture in a Series for Lawyer Role Models in Government Service. Law School Off Campus! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Friday, June 30, 2017 10:39 AM To: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; Karen Aram >; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; David Johnson >; Mildred O'brien > Subject: Hiding Drone Murders: Killer Koh & Illinois Nazi Law Faculty May this Drone Murder Extermination Campaign against Muslims/Arabs/Asians of Color be upon the Heads of the entire Illinois Nazi Law Faculty for the rest of Eternity! fab https://static.theintercept.com/amp/drone-strikes-columbia-law-human-rights-yemen.html Murtaza Hussain, The Intercept OVER THE PAST DECADE, the United States has claimed broad authority to carry out drone strikes across the world, even in places far from the battlefield. Under President Barack Obama, the U.S. acknowledged killing between 2,867 and 3,138 people in strikes that took place in countries like Somalia, Yemen, and Pakistan. Although in the waning days of his presidency, Obama took some steps to improve transparency about drone strikes, including providing the total estimated death toll, a new report by the Columbia Law School Human Rights Clinic and the Sana'a Center for Strategic Studies says that the U.S. is still lagging in providing a full accounting of its drone program. Among other failures, the report, titled "Out of the Shadows: Recommendations to Advance Transparency in the Use of Lethal Force," says that the U.S. has only acknowledged approximately 20 precent of its reported drone strikes - failing to claim responsibility or provide details in the vast majority of cases. Meanwhile, the drone program is intensifying. Since President Donald Trump took office earlier this year, the rate of drone strikes per month has increased by almost four times Obama's average. Yemen in particular has been a target of many of these operations, with between nine and 11 strikes hitting the country this year, along with 81 other covert attacks by U.S. forces, according to statistics compiled by the Bureau of Investigative Journalism. The authors of the new report say that the government's failure to provide information or legal rationales for its strikes is making it impossible to understand the full scope of the government's targeted killing program, as well as its impact on civilians. "For years, the only way we knew anything about individual strikes was from media reports or individual statements about strikes from government officials," said Alex Moorehead, of the Columbia Law School's Human Rights Institute, highlighting the failure of the government to provide details about cases in which drones have been used for targeted killings. "When we talk about official acknowledgment, we are talking about specific information about individual strikes, which is what matters to people who have had loved ones killed." The estimated number of civilians killed in U.S. drone strikes varies widely, with some independent estimates recording hundreds of civilian deaths, while the U.S. government often claims that figures run only into the dozens. The U.S. military has also been criticized for policies like "signature strikes," in which individuals have been killed based on their status as "military-age males" in areas where U.S. drones are operating. These policies are alleged to be responsible for cases in which weddings, funerals, and other communal gatherings have been bombed in Yemen, Pakistan, and Somalia. "There is a difference in how Western civilians are treated versus non-Western civilians," Moorehead said. "Of all the civilians who have been killed in these strikes, only the two Westerners who were killed in a 2016 strike have ever received any formal acknowledgement, apology, and compensation from the government." Locals in Yemen have alleged that, in recent months, drone strikes carried out by the Trump administration killed civilians on numerous occasions. One strike reported last month in Yemen's Shabwah Province allegedly targeted a car full of men with no existing links to terrorist groups, as well as several innocent bystanders. Despite such incidents, Trump has promised measures that would further loosen targeting standards for drone operators, likely putting civilians in even greater danger. Many Yemenis say that the anger and grief inflicted by these strikes is outweighing any perceived counterterrorism benefit - and even driving some local people into the arms of Al Qaeda. "The drone program in Yemen has inflicted a lot of civilian deaths that have not been investigated, acknowledged, or even taken into consideration by the U.S. government," said Waleed Alhariri, director of the Sana'a Center's U.S. office and one of the co-authors of the report. "In some cases weddings have been targeted, which has resulted in a lot of public anger from ordinary people towards the United States and has helped recruitment for al Qaeda." The secrecy of the drone program has made it difficult for civil liberties organizations in the U.S. to provide a full accounting of its impact. More importantly, this secrecy has also made it harder for civilians directly impacted by drones to even understand why they have been targeted. Lacking any ability to find out the details about cases in which they or their loved ones were harmed, Yemeni civilians are generally unable to even obtain recognition, let alone compensation, for the life-changing consequences of these attacks. That those targeted often come from poor and remote regions of the country only makes it harder for them to obtain justice. "The U.S. public is not aware what is happening in this program. They need more transparency and they need to know the truth," said Alhariri. "But Yemenis who have been impacted also need to know why they've been targeted. People have died, lost the ability to work and lost family members they relied on. They've been ignored and they feel helpless in the face of U.S. military policy in Yemen." Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Fri Jun 30 22:33:38 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2017 22:33:38 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Hiding Drone Murders: Killer Koh & Illinois Nazi Law Faculty--LAW SCHOOL OFF CAMPUS! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Resistance actions continue at Des Moines Drone Command Center Four peace activists were arrested on Wednesday morning, June 28 after they chained themselves to three concrete blocks they placed in the road leading into a drone base in Des Moines, Iowa. The road was blocked for hours while fire crews cut through the concrete barriers. Jesse Horne, Spencer Kaaz, Jessica Reznicek and Ruby Montoya were charged with interference with official acts and obstructing a public way. Appearing in front of a jail judge after a night behind bars, they all pled guilty, were given fines and released. The protest is part of a campaign started six weeks earlier by the Des Moines Catholic Worker and the Des Moines chapter of Veterans for Peace to bring attention to the mission of the Des Moines Drone Command Center. Activists have maintained a regular presence there, with multiple actions that have resulted in arrests and some jail time for repeat protester Frank Cordaro. Read more here. On Saturday, June 10, seven drone protesters gathered at the gate of the main entrance of the Des Moines, Iowa Drone Command Center. The gate had already been closed by Air National Guard security, who soon warned the activists that they had to leave or would be arrested. Al Burney and Mark Kenney were arrested when they refused to do so. When Frank Cordaro was leaving, a Des Moines police officer informed him that he was under arrest for violating his recently received "ban and bar" letter from the base. Read more here. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Friday, June 30, 2017 5:30 PM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; David Johnson ; Mildred O'brien Subject: RE: Hiding Drone Murders: Killer Koh & Illinois Nazi Law Faculty--LAW SCHOOL OFF CAMPUS! FOUR CITIZEN ACTIVISTS ARRESTED AT VOLK FIELD AS THEY ATTEMPT TO IDENTIFY THE BASE AS A CRIME SCENE by Joy First Wisconsin Coalition to Ground the Drones and End the Wars has held monthly vigils against drones at the gates of Volk Field for over five years. This Wisconsin Air National Guard Base is a critical component of the whole drone warfare program being conducted by the US government in a number of countries in the Middle East and Africa. At Volk Field personnel are trained to operate the RQ-7 Shadow Drone, which has been used for reconnaissance, surveillance, and target acquisition. However, now there is the likelihood that the RQ-7 is also weaponized. See http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/7914/was-a-new-type-of-drone-launched-weapon-used-to-kill-al-qaedas-2-man There is a savagery in drone warfare as whole communities in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iran, Iraq, Yemen, Somalia, and other places in the Middle East and Africa suffer from PTSD from drones constantly flying overhead, as wedding parties and funerals are hit, as rescuers are hit by a second attack, as grandmothers working in the field are killed, as children sleeping in their beds are murdered. A number of credible sources tell us that only 1 out of 10 people killed by drones are the intended target. Wisconsin activists join others at military bases across the country, including California, Nevada, Missouri, Iowa, Arizona, Pennsylvania, New York and Virginia, who are standing up and speaking out against the horrors of drone warfare. Members of the Wisconsin Coalition have sent numerous letters to the base commander asking to talk to him about their concerns, but the letters go unanswered. Several times we have attempted to walk onto the base to share the letters in person and have been arrested. So, on June 27 we again planned to go onto the base to put up crime scene tape and to deliver an indictment for war crimes. As we met at a park near the base for a planning meeting, two cars from the Juneau County Sheriff's department drove up, one of the cars being with the canine unit. They arrested Brian Terrell of the Chicago based Voices for Creative Nonviolence. We were surprised that they came and arrested Brian before the action, but it was not totally unexpected as there was a warrant pending for Brian's arrest. Brian was arrested at the base in February 2016, and after being found guilty of trespass, he refused to pay the fine. After Brian's arrest, we continued to discuss our plan and then processed to the gates of Volk Field. The Sheriff obviously knew we were going to be risking arrest and we expected the gates to be closed, but were surprised to see they were open with about ten deputies waiting for us. Father Jim Murphy and I walked to the gate with the crime scene tape and it was snatched from our hands. The captain said that the base commander didn't want any tape on "his" fence. I started reading the indictment while standing two steps onto the base and was immediately arrested. Jim walked onto the base and was arrested, and then Phil Runkel walked onto the base and was arrested. The three of us were cuffed in front and taken to the Juneau County jail where we were charged with trespassing and disorderly conduct and then released. We have an initial hearing on August 9. Brian will be held at the jail until Friday or Saturday and then released. While in office Obama used drones to murder thousands of innocent people, including children. Drone strikes are increasing even more under Trump, with even more innocent people suffering and dying. Our government tries to keep us in the dark about what is going on, and so we must go to other credible sources of information to be informed. It is up to us, the people, to do everything we can to bring an end to drone warfare. Please join us at the gates of Volk Field on the 4th Tuesday of the month. For more information, contact joyfirst5 at gmail.com Brian's arrest http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZgXClrHfuk0&t=9s Arrests at the gate http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-azM2G5rgpc Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Friday, June 30, 2017 1:56 PM To: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; Karen Aram >; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; David Johnson >; Mildred O'brien > Subject: RE: Hiding Drone Murders: Killer Koh & Illinois Nazi Law Faculty Once we made it clear that we were going to mount our Demonstration during Killer Koh's Endowed Lecture at Noon, the Illinois Nazi Law Faculty immediately organized an additional early morning lecture for Killer Koh so that he could better justify himself. The Illinois Nazi Law Faculty never made any effort to organize a debate between him and me. Rather the Illinois Nazi Law Faculty spent an entire day maliciously ramming Killer Koh down the throats of everyone in this Good Community as a Role Model for Lawyers in Government Service. Law School Off Campus! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Friday, June 30, 2017 1:02 PM To: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; Karen Aram >; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; David Johnson >; Mildred O'brien > Subject: RE: Hiding Drone Murders: Killer Koh & Illinois Nazi Law Faculty It was Obama and Killer Koh who institutionalized their drone murder extermination Campaign against Muslims/Arabs/Asians of Color-then turned their Genocidal Machinery over to Trump. And Killer Koh did not just give any old "lecture" here at the College of Law. Rather, the Illinois Nazi Law Faculty specifically chose Killer Koh to give an Endowed Lecture in a Series for Lawyer Role Models in Government Service. Law School Off Campus! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Friday, June 30, 2017 10:39 AM To: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; Karen Aram >; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; David Johnson >; Mildred O'brien > Subject: Hiding Drone Murders: Killer Koh & Illinois Nazi Law Faculty May this Drone Murder Extermination Campaign against Muslims/Arabs/Asians of Color be upon the Heads of the entire Illinois Nazi Law Faculty for the rest of Eternity! fab https://static.theintercept.com/amp/drone-strikes-columbia-law-human-rights-yemen.html Murtaza Hussain, The Intercept OVER THE PAST DECADE, the United States has claimed broad authority to carry out drone strikes across the world, even in places far from the battlefield. Under President Barack Obama, the U.S. acknowledged killing between 2,867 and 3,138 people in strikes that took place in countries like Somalia, Yemen, and Pakistan. Although in the waning days of his presidency, Obama took some steps to improve transparency about drone strikes, including providing the total estimated death toll, a new report by the Columbia Law School Human Rights Clinic and the Sana'a Center for Strategic Studies says that the U.S. is still lagging in providing a full accounting of its drone program. Among other failures, the report, titled "Out of the Shadows: Recommendations to Advance Transparency in the Use of Lethal Force," says that the U.S. has only acknowledged approximately 20 precent of its reported drone strikes - failing to claim responsibility or provide details in the vast majority of cases. Meanwhile, the drone program is intensifying. Since President Donald Trump took office earlier this year, the rate of drone strikes per month has increased by almost four times Obama's average. Yemen in particular has been a target of many of these operations, with between nine and 11 strikes hitting the country this year, along with 81 other covert attacks by U.S. forces, according to statistics compiled by the Bureau of Investigative Journalism. The authors of the new report say that the government's failure to provide information or legal rationales for its strikes is making it impossible to understand the full scope of the government's targeted killing program, as well as its impact on civilians. "For years, the only way we knew anything about individual strikes was from media reports or individual statements about strikes from government officials," said Alex Moorehead, of the Columbia Law School's Human Rights Institute, highlighting the failure of the government to provide details about cases in which drones have been used for targeted killings. "When we talk about official acknowledgment, we are talking about specific information about individual strikes, which is what matters to people who have had loved ones killed." The estimated number of civilians killed in U.S. drone strikes varies widely, with some independent estimates recording hundreds of civilian deaths, while the U.S. government often claims that figures run only into the dozens. The U.S. military has also been criticized for policies like "signature strikes," in which individuals have been killed based on their status as "military-age males" in areas where U.S. drones are operating. These policies are alleged to be responsible for cases in which weddings, funerals, and other communal gatherings have been bombed in Yemen, Pakistan, and Somalia. "There is a difference in how Western civilians are treated versus non-Western civilians," Moorehead said. "Of all the civilians who have been killed in these strikes, only the two Westerners who were killed in a 2016 strike have ever received any formal acknowledgement, apology, and compensation from the government." Locals in Yemen have alleged that, in recent months, drone strikes carried out by the Trump administration killed civilians on numerous occasions. One strike reported last month in Yemen's Shabwah Province allegedly targeted a car full of men with no existing links to terrorist groups, as well as several innocent bystanders. Despite such incidents, Trump has promised measures that would further loosen targeting standards for drone operators, likely putting civilians in even greater danger. Many Yemenis say that the anger and grief inflicted by these strikes is outweighing any perceived counterterrorism benefit - and even driving some local people into the arms of Al Qaeda. "The drone program in Yemen has inflicted a lot of civilian deaths that have not been investigated, acknowledged, or even taken into consideration by the U.S. government," said Waleed Alhariri, director of the Sana'a Center's U.S. office and one of the co-authors of the report. "In some cases weddings have been targeted, which has resulted in a lot of public anger from ordinary people towards the United States and has helped recruitment for al Qaeda." The secrecy of the drone program has made it difficult for civil liberties organizations in the U.S. to provide a full accounting of its impact. More importantly, this secrecy has also made it harder for civilians directly impacted by drones to even understand why they have been targeted. Lacking any ability to find out the details about cases in which they or their loved ones were harmed, Yemeni civilians are generally unable to even obtain recognition, let alone compensation, for the life-changing consequences of these attacks. That those targeted often come from poor and remote regions of the country only makes it harder for them to obtain justice. "The U.S. public is not aware what is happening in this program. They need more transparency and they need to know the truth," said Alhariri. "But Yemenis who have been impacted also need to know why they've been targeted. People have died, lost the ability to work and lost family members they relied on. They've been ignored and they feel helpless in the face of U.S. military policy in Yemen." Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fboyle at illinois.edu Fri Jun 30 22:33:38 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2017 22:33:38 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Hiding Drone Murders: Killer Koh & Illinois Nazi Law Faculty--LAW SCHOOL OFF CAMPUS! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Resistance actions continue at Des Moines Drone Command Center Four peace activists were arrested on Wednesday morning, June 28 after they chained themselves to three concrete blocks they placed in the road leading into a drone base in Des Moines, Iowa. The road was blocked for hours while fire crews cut through the concrete barriers. Jesse Horne, Spencer Kaaz, Jessica Reznicek and Ruby Montoya were charged with interference with official acts and obstructing a public way. Appearing in front of a jail judge after a night behind bars, they all pled guilty, were given fines and released. The protest is part of a campaign started six weeks earlier by the Des Moines Catholic Worker and the Des Moines chapter of Veterans for Peace to bring attention to the mission of the Des Moines Drone Command Center. Activists have maintained a regular presence there, with multiple actions that have resulted in arrests and some jail time for repeat protester Frank Cordaro. Read more here. On Saturday, June 10, seven drone protesters gathered at the gate of the main entrance of the Des Moines, Iowa Drone Command Center. The gate had already been closed by Air National Guard security, who soon warned the activists that they had to leave or would be arrested. Al Burney and Mark Kenney were arrested when they refused to do so. When Frank Cordaro was leaving, a Des Moines police officer informed him that he was under arrest for violating his recently received "ban and bar" letter from the base. Read more here. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Friday, June 30, 2017 5:30 PM To: David Green ; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK ; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J ; Joe Lauria ; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; Miller, Joseph Thomas ; Szoke, Ron ; Arlene Hickory ; David Swanson ; Karen Aram ; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne ; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay ; Estabrook, Carl G ; David Johnson ; Mildred O'brien Subject: RE: Hiding Drone Murders: Killer Koh & Illinois Nazi Law Faculty--LAW SCHOOL OFF CAMPUS! FOUR CITIZEN ACTIVISTS ARRESTED AT VOLK FIELD AS THEY ATTEMPT TO IDENTIFY THE BASE AS A CRIME SCENE by Joy First Wisconsin Coalition to Ground the Drones and End the Wars has held monthly vigils against drones at the gates of Volk Field for over five years. This Wisconsin Air National Guard Base is a critical component of the whole drone warfare program being conducted by the US government in a number of countries in the Middle East and Africa. At Volk Field personnel are trained to operate the RQ-7 Shadow Drone, which has been used for reconnaissance, surveillance, and target acquisition. However, now there is the likelihood that the RQ-7 is also weaponized. See http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/7914/was-a-new-type-of-drone-launched-weapon-used-to-kill-al-qaedas-2-man There is a savagery in drone warfare as whole communities in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iran, Iraq, Yemen, Somalia, and other places in the Middle East and Africa suffer from PTSD from drones constantly flying overhead, as wedding parties and funerals are hit, as rescuers are hit by a second attack, as grandmothers working in the field are killed, as children sleeping in their beds are murdered. A number of credible sources tell us that only 1 out of 10 people killed by drones are the intended target. Wisconsin activists join others at military bases across the country, including California, Nevada, Missouri, Iowa, Arizona, Pennsylvania, New York and Virginia, who are standing up and speaking out against the horrors of drone warfare. Members of the Wisconsin Coalition have sent numerous letters to the base commander asking to talk to him about their concerns, but the letters go unanswered. Several times we have attempted to walk onto the base to share the letters in person and have been arrested. So, on June 27 we again planned to go onto the base to put up crime scene tape and to deliver an indictment for war crimes. As we met at a park near the base for a planning meeting, two cars from the Juneau County Sheriff's department drove up, one of the cars being with the canine unit. They arrested Brian Terrell of the Chicago based Voices for Creative Nonviolence. We were surprised that they came and arrested Brian before the action, but it was not totally unexpected as there was a warrant pending for Brian's arrest. Brian was arrested at the base in February 2016, and after being found guilty of trespass, he refused to pay the fine. After Brian's arrest, we continued to discuss our plan and then processed to the gates of Volk Field. The Sheriff obviously knew we were going to be risking arrest and we expected the gates to be closed, but were surprised to see they were open with about ten deputies waiting for us. Father Jim Murphy and I walked to the gate with the crime scene tape and it was snatched from our hands. The captain said that the base commander didn't want any tape on "his" fence. I started reading the indictment while standing two steps onto the base and was immediately arrested. Jim walked onto the base and was arrested, and then Phil Runkel walked onto the base and was arrested. The three of us were cuffed in front and taken to the Juneau County jail where we were charged with trespassing and disorderly conduct and then released. We have an initial hearing on August 9. Brian will be held at the jail until Friday or Saturday and then released. While in office Obama used drones to murder thousands of innocent people, including children. Drone strikes are increasing even more under Trump, with even more innocent people suffering and dying. Our government tries to keep us in the dark about what is going on, and so we must go to other credible sources of information to be informed. It is up to us, the people, to do everything we can to bring an end to drone warfare. Please join us at the gates of Volk Field on the 4th Tuesday of the month. For more information, contact joyfirst5 at gmail.com Brian's arrest http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZgXClrHfuk0&t=9s Arrests at the gate http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-azM2G5rgpc Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Friday, June 30, 2017 1:56 PM To: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; Karen Aram >; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; David Johnson >; Mildred O'brien > Subject: RE: Hiding Drone Murders: Killer Koh & Illinois Nazi Law Faculty Once we made it clear that we were going to mount our Demonstration during Killer Koh's Endowed Lecture at Noon, the Illinois Nazi Law Faculty immediately organized an additional early morning lecture for Killer Koh so that he could better justify himself. The Illinois Nazi Law Faculty never made any effort to organize a debate between him and me. Rather the Illinois Nazi Law Faculty spent an entire day maliciously ramming Killer Koh down the throats of everyone in this Good Community as a Role Model for Lawyers in Government Service. Law School Off Campus! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Friday, June 30, 2017 1:02 PM To: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; Karen Aram >; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; David Johnson >; Mildred O'brien > Subject: RE: Hiding Drone Murders: Killer Koh & Illinois Nazi Law Faculty It was Obama and Killer Koh who institutionalized their drone murder extermination Campaign against Muslims/Arabs/Asians of Color-then turned their Genocidal Machinery over to Trump. And Killer Koh did not just give any old "lecture" here at the College of Law. Rather, the Illinois Nazi Law Faculty specifically chose Killer Koh to give an Endowed Lecture in a Series for Lawyer Role Models in Government Service. Law School Off Campus! Fab Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Friday, June 30, 2017 10:39 AM To: David Green >; sherwoodross10 at gmail.com; peace-discuss at anti-war.net; C. G. ESTABROOK >; a-fields at uiuc.edu; Hoffman, Valerie J >; Joe Lauria >; Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net; peace-discuss-request at lists.chambana.net; Miller, Joseph Thomas >; Szoke, Ron >; Arlene Hickory >; David Swanson >; Karen Aram >; abass10 at gmail.com; mickalideh at gmail.com; Lina Thorne >; chicago at worldcantwait.net; Jay >; Estabrook, Carl G >; David Johnson >; Mildred O'brien > Subject: Hiding Drone Murders: Killer Koh & Illinois Nazi Law Faculty May this Drone Murder Extermination Campaign against Muslims/Arabs/Asians of Color be upon the Heads of the entire Illinois Nazi Law Faculty for the rest of Eternity! fab https://static.theintercept.com/amp/drone-strikes-columbia-law-human-rights-yemen.html Murtaza Hussain, The Intercept OVER THE PAST DECADE, the United States has claimed broad authority to carry out drone strikes across the world, even in places far from the battlefield. Under President Barack Obama, the U.S. acknowledged killing between 2,867 and 3,138 people in strikes that took place in countries like Somalia, Yemen, and Pakistan. Although in the waning days of his presidency, Obama took some steps to improve transparency about drone strikes, including providing the total estimated death toll, a new report by the Columbia Law School Human Rights Clinic and the Sana'a Center for Strategic Studies says that the U.S. is still lagging in providing a full accounting of its drone program. Among other failures, the report, titled "Out of the Shadows: Recommendations to Advance Transparency in the Use of Lethal Force," says that the U.S. has only acknowledged approximately 20 precent of its reported drone strikes - failing to claim responsibility or provide details in the vast majority of cases. Meanwhile, the drone program is intensifying. Since President Donald Trump took office earlier this year, the rate of drone strikes per month has increased by almost four times Obama's average. Yemen in particular has been a target of many of these operations, with between nine and 11 strikes hitting the country this year, along with 81 other covert attacks by U.S. forces, according to statistics compiled by the Bureau of Investigative Journalism. The authors of the new report say that the government's failure to provide information or legal rationales for its strikes is making it impossible to understand the full scope of the government's targeted killing program, as well as its impact on civilians. "For years, the only way we knew anything about individual strikes was from media reports or individual statements about strikes from government officials," said Alex Moorehead, of the Columbia Law School's Human Rights Institute, highlighting the failure of the government to provide details about cases in which drones have been used for targeted killings. "When we talk about official acknowledgment, we are talking about specific information about individual strikes, which is what matters to people who have had loved ones killed." The estimated number of civilians killed in U.S. drone strikes varies widely, with some independent estimates recording hundreds of civilian deaths, while the U.S. government often claims that figures run only into the dozens. The U.S. military has also been criticized for policies like "signature strikes," in which individuals have been killed based on their status as "military-age males" in areas where U.S. drones are operating. These policies are alleged to be responsible for cases in which weddings, funerals, and other communal gatherings have been bombed in Yemen, Pakistan, and Somalia. "There is a difference in how Western civilians are treated versus non-Western civilians," Moorehead said. "Of all the civilians who have been killed in these strikes, only the two Westerners who were killed in a 2016 strike have ever received any formal acknowledgement, apology, and compensation from the government." Locals in Yemen have alleged that, in recent months, drone strikes carried out by the Trump administration killed civilians on numerous occasions. One strike reported last month in Yemen's Shabwah Province allegedly targeted a car full of men with no existing links to terrorist groups, as well as several innocent bystanders. Despite such incidents, Trump has promised measures that would further loosen targeting standards for drone operators, likely putting civilians in even greater danger. Many Yemenis say that the anger and grief inflicted by these strikes is outweighing any perceived counterterrorism benefit - and even driving some local people into the arms of Al Qaeda. "The drone program in Yemen has inflicted a lot of civilian deaths that have not been investigated, acknowledged, or even taken into consideration by the U.S. government," said Waleed Alhariri, director of the Sana'a Center's U.S. office and one of the co-authors of the report. "In some cases weddings have been targeted, which has resulted in a lot of public anger from ordinary people towards the United States and has helped recruitment for al Qaeda." The secrecy of the drone program has made it difficult for civil liberties organizations in the U.S. to provide a full accounting of its impact. More importantly, this secrecy has also made it harder for civilians directly impacted by drones to even understand why they have been targeted. Lacking any ability to find out the details about cases in which they or their loved ones were harmed, Yemeni civilians are generally unable to even obtain recognition, let alone compensation, for the life-changing consequences of these attacks. That those targeted often come from poor and remote regions of the country only makes it harder for them to obtain justice. "The U.S. public is not aware what is happening in this program. They need more transparency and they need to know the truth," said Alhariri. "But Yemenis who have been impacted also need to know why they've been targeted. People have died, lost the ability to work and lost family members they relied on. They've been ignored and they feel helpless in the face of U.S. military policy in Yemen." Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karenaram at hotmail.com Fri Jun 30 23:26:09 2017 From: karenaram at hotmail.com (Karen Aram) Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2017 23:26:09 +0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] Anti-war Demonstration Message-ID: For those who hate war, and want to do “something” to protest the killing: Please join AWARE for our monthly demonstration downtown Champaign, Saturday July 1st. at (2:00pm - 4:00pm) on the corners of Church and Neil Streets. We have signs available, or bring your own. All are welcome. From fboyle at illinois.edu Thu Jun 15 10:53:16 2017 From: fboyle at illinois.edu (Boyle, Francis A) Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2017 10:53:16 -0000 Subject: [Peace-discuss] FW: Iranian Nuclear Deal:UK Radio Interview (Tuesday) Message-ID: Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -----Original Message----- From: Boyle, Francis A Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 5:30 AM To: 'globenet at yahoogroups.com' Subject: Iranian Nuclear Deal:UK Radio Interview (Tuesday) Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954 (phone) 217-244-1478 (fax) (personal comments only) -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Iran.mp3 Type: audio/mpeg Size: 19660375 bytes Desc: Iran.mp3 URL: